WEBVTT

00:00:01.458 --> 00:00:06.260
Imagine you're in a bar, or a club,

00:00:06.910 --> 00:00:09.591
and you start talking to a woman,

00:00:09.951 --> 00:00:14.542
and after a while this question comes up:
"So, what do you do for work?"

00:00:14.553 --> 00:00:17.867
And since you think
your job is interesting you say:

00:00:17.867 --> 00:00:19.706
"I'm a mathematician."

00:00:19.706 --> 00:00:21.725
(Laughter)

00:00:22.355 --> 00:00:25.617
33.51% of women,

00:00:25.617 --> 00:00:26.889
(Laughter)

00:00:26.889 --> 00:00:30.772
in that moment, pretend
to get an urgent call and leave.

00:00:30.772 --> 00:00:32.495
(Laughter)

00:00:32.495 --> 00:00:35.806
And 64.69% of women

00:00:36.266 --> 00:00:40.077
desperately try to change the subject
and leave.

00:00:40.077 --> 00:00:41.269
(Laughter)

00:00:41.269 --> 00:00:44.494
Another 0.8%, which are your cousin,
your girlfriend and your mom,

00:00:44.494 --> 00:00:45.629
(Laughter)

00:00:45.629 --> 00:00:49.694
know that you work in something weird
but don't remember what it is. (Laughter)

00:00:49.694 --> 00:00:52.815
And then there's 1%,
who actually follow the conversation.

00:00:52.815 --> 00:00:55.080
And inevitably, during that conversation

00:00:55.080 --> 00:00:58.630
one of these two phrases come up:

00:00:58.630 --> 00:01:02.195
A: "I was terrible at math,
but it wasn't my fault.

00:01:02.195 --> 00:01:05.614
It's because the teacher
was awful." (Laughter)

00:01:05.614 --> 00:01:08.582
Or B: "But what is math really for?"

00:01:08.582 --> 00:01:09.610
(Laughter)

00:01:09.610 --> 00:01:11.955
I'll address case B.

00:01:11.955 --> 00:01:13.510
(Laughter)

00:01:13.510 --> 00:01:18.354
When someone asks you what math is for,
they're not asking you

00:01:18.354 --> 00:01:21.203
about applications
of mathematical science.

00:01:21.203 --> 00:01:22.554
They're asking you:

00:01:22.554 --> 00:01:26.485
"Why did I have to study that bullshit
I never used in my life again?" (Laughter)

00:01:26.485 --> 00:01:28.924
That's what they're actually asking.

00:01:28.924 --> 00:01:33.124
So when mathematicians are asked
what math is for,

00:01:33.124 --> 00:01:35.404
they tend to fall into two groups:

00:01:35.404 --> 00:01:40.739
54.51% of mathematicians
will assume an attacking position,

00:01:41.609 --> 00:01:46.559
and 44.77% of mathematicians
will take a defensive position.

00:01:46.559 --> 00:01:50.068
There's a strange 0.8%,
among which I include myself.

00:01:50.068 --> 00:01:52.155
Who are the ones that attack?

00:01:52.155 --> 00:01:54.902
The attacking ones are mathematicians
who would tell you:

00:01:54.902 --> 00:01:56.849
"This question makes no sense,

00:01:56.849 --> 00:01:59.597
because mathematics
have a meaning all their own--

00:01:59.597 --> 00:02:02.144
a beautiful edifice with its own logic--

00:02:02.144 --> 00:02:04.011
and that there's no point

00:02:04.011 --> 00:02:06.688
in constantly searching
for all possible applications.

00:02:06.688 --> 00:02:08.847
What's the use of poetry?
What's the use of love?

00:02:08.847 --> 00:02:11.908
What's the use of life itself? 
What kind of question is that?"

00:02:11.908 --> 00:02:13.529
(Laughter)

00:02:13.529 --> 00:02:17.296
Hardy, for instance, was an exponent
of this type of attack.

00:02:17.296 --> 00:02:19.242
And those who stand in defense tell you:

00:02:19.242 --> 00:02:24.082
"Even if you don't realize it, buddy,
math is behind everything."

00:02:24.082 --> 00:02:25.562
(Laughter)

00:02:25.562 --> 00:02:27.724
They always--

00:02:27.724 --> 00:02:31.246
always bring up bridges and computers.

00:02:31.246 --> 00:02:33.841
"If you don't know math,
your bridge will collapse."

00:02:33.841 --> 00:02:35.286
(Laughter)

00:02:35.286 --> 00:02:38.523
It's true, computers are all about math.

00:02:38.523 --> 00:02:41.008
And now these guys
have also started saying

00:02:41.013 --> 00:02:46.050
that behind information security
and credit cards are prime numbers.

00:02:46.710 --> 00:02:50.379
These are the answers your math teacher
would give you if you asked him.

00:02:50.379 --> 00:02:52.544
He's one of the defensive ones.

00:02:52.544 --> 00:02:54.384
Okay, but, who's right then?

00:02:54.384 --> 00:02:56.990
Those who say that math
doesn't need to have a purpose,

00:02:56.990 --> 00:02:59.849
or those who say that math
is behind everything we do?

00:02:59.849 --> 00:03:01.520
Actually, both are right.

00:03:01.520 --> 00:03:03.183
But remember I told you

00:03:03.183 --> 00:03:06.726
I belong to that strange 0.8%
claiming something else.

00:03:06.726 --> 00:03:09.929
So, go ahead, ask me what math is for.

00:03:09.929 --> 00:03:12.858
Audience: What is math for?

00:03:12.858 --> 00:03:17.183
Okay, so 76.34% of you
asked the question,

00:03:17.783 --> 00:03:20.600
23.41% didn't say anything,

00:03:20.600 --> 00:03:21.827
and the 0.8% ...

00:03:21.827 --> 00:03:24.675
I'm not sure what those guys are doing.

00:03:24.675 --> 00:03:26.985
Well, to my dear 76.31% --

00:03:29.035 --> 00:03:32.815
it's true that math doesn't need
to serve a purpose,

00:03:32.815 --> 00:03:35.685
it's true that it's
a beautiful edifice, a logical one,

00:03:35.685 --> 00:03:38.537
probably one
of the greatest collective efforts

00:03:38.537 --> 00:03:40.633
ever achieved in human history.

00:03:40.633 --> 00:03:42.732
But it's also true that there,

00:03:42.732 --> 00:03:47.331
where scientists and technicians
are looking for mathematical theories

00:03:47.331 --> 00:03:49.641
that allow them to advance,

00:03:49.641 --> 00:03:53.438
they're within the structure of math,
which permeates everything.

00:03:53.438 --> 00:03:56.585
It's true that we have to go
somewhat deeper,

00:03:56.585 --> 00:03:58.308
to see what's behind science.

00:03:58.308 --> 00:04:01.858
Science operates on intuition, creativity.

00:04:02.348 --> 00:04:05.772
Math controls intuition
and tames creativity.

00:04:06.747 --> 00:04:08.937
Almost everyone
who hasn't heard this before

00:04:08.937 --> 00:04:11.647
is surprised when they hear
that if you take

00:04:11.647 --> 00:04:16.187
a 0.1 mm thick sheet of paper--
the size we normally use--

00:04:16.187 --> 00:04:19.505
and, if it were big enough,
fold it 50 times,

00:04:19.505 --> 00:04:25.205
the thickness of that pile would extend
the distance from the Earth to the Sun.

00:04:25.600 --> 00:04:28.201
Your intuition tells you it's impossible.

00:04:28.201 --> 00:04:30.622
Do the math and you'll see it's right.

00:04:30.622 --> 00:04:33.135
That's what math is for.

00:04:33.135 --> 00:04:36.917
It's true that science, all types
of science, only makes sense

00:04:36.917 --> 00:04:40.288
because it makes us better understand
this beautiful world we live in.

00:04:40.288 --> 00:04:41.669
And in doing that,

00:04:41.669 --> 00:04:45.179
it helps us avoid the traps
of this painful world we live in.

00:04:45.179 --> 00:04:48.657
There are sciences that help us
in this way quite directly.

00:04:48.657 --> 00:04:50.413
Oncological science, for example.

00:04:50.413 --> 00:04:53.905
And there are others we look at from afar,
with envy sometimes,

00:04:53.905 --> 00:04:56.464
but knowing that we are
what supports them.

00:04:56.464 --> 00:04:59.213
All the basic sciences
support them,

00:04:59.213 --> 00:05:01.649
including math.

00:05:01.649 --> 00:05:05.366
All that makes science, science,
is the rigor of math.

00:05:05.366 --> 00:05:10.062
And that rigor factors in
because its results are eternal.

00:05:10.062 --> 00:05:12.757
You probably said or were told
at some point,

00:05:12.757 --> 00:05:15.708
that diamonds are forever, right?

00:05:17.178 --> 00:05:19.392
That depends on
your definition of "forever"!

00:05:19.392 --> 00:05:21.883
A theorem-- that really is forever!

00:05:21.883 --> 00:05:23.134
(Laughter)

00:05:23.134 --> 00:05:26.486
The Pythagorean theorem is still true

00:05:26.486 --> 00:05:29.431
even though Pythagoras is dead,
I assure it's true. (Laughter)

00:05:29.431 --> 00:05:30.946
Even if the world collapsed

00:05:30.946 --> 00:05:33.391
the Pythagorean theorem
would still be true.

00:05:33.391 --> 00:05:37.452
Wherever any two triangle sides
and a good hypotenuse get together

00:05:37.452 --> 00:05:38.673
(Laughter)

00:05:38.673 --> 00:05:41.534
the Pythagorean theorem goes all out.
It works like crazy.

00:05:41.534 --> 00:05:44.355
(Applause)

00:05:48.535 --> 00:05:52.407
Well, we mathematicians devote ourselves
to come up with theorems.

00:05:52.407 --> 00:05:54.143
Eternal truths.

00:05:54.143 --> 00:05:58.139
But it isn't always easy to know
the difference between

00:05:58.139 --> 00:06:00.045
an eternal truth, or theorem,
and a mere conjecture.

00:06:00.045 --> 00:06:02.829
You need proof.

00:06:02.829 --> 00:06:04.596
For example,

00:06:04.596 --> 00:06:09.423
imagine you have a big,
enormous, infinite field.

00:06:09.423 --> 00:06:13.132
I want to cover it with equal pieces,
without leaving any gaps.

00:06:13.132 --> 00:06:15.256
I could use squares, right?

00:06:15.256 --> 00:06:19.222
I could use triangles.
Not circles, those leave little gaps.

00:06:19.777 --> 00:06:22.134
Which is the best shape to use?

00:06:22.134 --> 00:06:26.687
One that covers the same surface,
but has a smaller border.

00:06:26.687 --> 00:06:31.396
In the year 300, Pappus of Alexandria
said the best is to use hexagons,

00:06:31.396 --> 00:06:33.243
just like bees do.

00:06:33.243 --> 00:06:34.990
But he didn't prove it.

00:06:34.990 --> 00:06:37.688
The guy said, "Hexagons, great!
Let's go with hexagons!"

00:06:37.688 --> 00:06:40.656
He didn't prove it,
it remained a conjecture.

00:06:40.656 --> 00:06:42.334
"Hexagons!"

00:06:42.334 --> 00:06:45.964
And the world, as you know,
split into Pappists and anti-Pappists,

00:06:45.964 --> 00:06:49.713
until 1700 years later

00:06:49.713 --> 00:06:51.892
-- 1700 years later --

00:06:51.892 --> 00:06:56.497
in 1999, Thomas Hales proved

00:06:57.047 --> 00:07:01.641
that Pappus and the bees were right,
the best shape to use was the hexagon.

00:07:01.641 --> 00:07:04.123
And that became a theorem,
the honeycomb theorem,

00:07:04.123 --> 00:07:06.183
that will be true forever and ever,

00:07:06.183 --> 00:07:09.224
for longer than any diamond
you may have. (Laughter)

00:07:09.229 --> 00:07:12.033
But what happens if we go to 3 dimensions?

00:07:12.033 --> 00:07:15.944
If I want to fill the space,
with equal pieces,

00:07:16.464 --> 00:07:18.065
without leaving any gaps,

00:07:18.065 --> 00:07:19.638
I can use cubes, right?

00:07:19.638 --> 00:07:23.019
Not spheres, those leave little gaps.
(Laughter)

00:07:23.054 --> 00:07:25.957
What is the best piece I can use?

00:07:25.957 --> 00:07:27.727
Lord Kelvin, of the famous
Kelvin degrees and all,

00:07:30.607 --> 00:07:34.451
said that the best was to use
a truncated octahedron

00:07:36.511 --> 00:07:38.425
(Laughter)

00:07:38.425 --> 00:07:40.507
which as you all know

00:07:40.507 --> 00:07:42.035
(Laughter)

00:07:42.035 --> 00:07:43.814
is this thing over here!

00:07:43.814 --> 00:07:46.753
(Applause)

00:07:49.948 --> 00:07:51.395
Come on!

00:07:51.395 --> 00:07:54.182
Who doesn't have a truncated
octahedron at home? (Laughter)

00:07:54.182 --> 00:07:55.299
Even if it's plastic.

00:07:55.299 --> 00:07:57.766
"Kid, get the truncated octahedron,
we're having guests."

00:07:57.766 --> 00:07:59.680
Everybody has one! (Laughter)

00:07:59.680 --> 00:08:01.614
But Kelvin didn't prove it.

00:08:01.614 --> 00:08:05.670
It remained a conjecture--
Kelvin's conjecture.

00:08:05.705 --> 00:08:11.177
The world, as you know, split into
Kelvinists and anti-Kelvinists

00:08:11.177 --> 00:08:12.909
(Laughter)

00:08:12.909 --> 00:08:16.496
until a hundred-and-something years later,

00:08:17.216 --> 00:08:19.653
a hundred-and-something years later,

00:08:19.653 --> 00:08:23.072
someone found a better structure.

00:08:24.097 --> 00:08:29.026
Weaire and Phelan
found this little thing over here,

00:08:29.026 --> 00:08:30.665
(Laughter)

00:08:30.665 --> 00:08:34.209
this structure to which they gave
the imaginative name

00:08:34.209 --> 00:08:36.375
of the Weaire-Phelan structure.

00:08:36.375 --> 00:08:39.041
(Laughter)

00:08:39.041 --> 00:08:41.768
It looks like a strange object,
but it isn't so strange,

00:08:41.768 --> 00:08:43.389
it also exists in nature.

00:08:43.389 --> 00:08:45.844
It's very interesting that this structure,

00:08:45.844 --> 00:08:48.037
because of its geometric properties,

00:08:48.037 --> 00:08:53.229
was used to build the Aquatics Center
for the Beijing Olympic Games.

00:08:53.969 --> 00:08:57.089
There, Michael Phelps
won eight gold medals,

00:08:57.124 --> 00:08:59.875
and became the best swimmer of all time.

00:08:59.875 --> 00:09:03.616
Well, until someone better
comes along, right?

00:09:03.616 --> 00:09:06.016
As it may happen
to the Weaire-Phelan structure.

00:09:06.016 --> 00:09:08.633
It's the best
until something better shows up.

00:09:08.633 --> 00:09:13.225
But be careful, because this one
really has the chance

00:09:13.225 --> 00:09:18.205
that in a hundred or so years,
or even if it's in 1700 years,

00:09:18.205 --> 00:09:23.603
that someone proves
that it's the best possible piece.

00:09:23.978 --> 00:09:28.348
It will then become a theorem,
a truth, forever and ever.

00:09:28.348 --> 00:09:31.552
For longer than any diamond.

00:09:32.057 --> 00:09:35.637
So, if you want to tell someone

00:09:36.777 --> 00:09:39.293
that you will love them forever

00:09:39.293 --> 00:09:40.699
(Laughter)

00:09:40.699 --> 00:09:42.430
you can give them a diamond,

00:09:42.430 --> 00:09:45.571
but if you want to tell them
that you'll love them forever and ever,

00:09:45.571 --> 00:09:47.172
give them a theorem!

00:09:47.172 --> 00:09:48.683
(Laughter)

00:09:48.683 --> 00:09:50.883
However,

00:09:51.783 --> 00:09:57.403
you'll have to prove it,
so your love doesn't remain a conjecture.

00:09:57.403 --> 00:10:00.543
(Applause)