Back to AtD Zeta functions

[Mark Kohut]

A...and, adds some weight to the notion of Inconvenience in Pynchon, yes? 


From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
To: pynchon-l at waste.org 
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: Back to AtD Zeta functions


On 7/16/2012 8:36 AM, Mark Kohut wrote:

The Annie Liebowitz reminder was wonderfully ironic about a solid woman thinker/writer who was NOT as ironic as TRP, imho.
> 
>And, short Wittgenstein answer is we need a longer answer and time but that TRP might use the ideas creatively, metaphorically, as
>he does the concepts of entropy and other concepts is still possible. 
Prashant's characterization of "i" as a "convenience" reminds me that's how Poikler describes delta t to Leni.

"The important thing is taking a function to its limit.  Delta t is just a convenience, so that it can happen."

Leni thinks it's just his way of removing all the excitement from things . . . .

p 159

P

From: Paul Mackin mailto:mackin.paul at verizon.net
>To: pynchon-l at waste.org 
>Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 6:57 AM
>Subject: Re: Back to AtD Zeta functions
>
>
>On 7/16/2012 12:08 AM, Prashant Kumar wrote:
>
>So actually the imaginary numbers used in representing voltage don't represent real or measurable quantities. It's just a mathematical convenience. The salient point is this: we can't directly measure anything with an i. 
>>
>>
>>
>>Strangely, physical entities with imaginary components do exist, such as the wavefunction of a quantum mechanical system. There was a result in Nature recently that proved that the wavefunction is not just a statement of knowledge, it represents more than just probabilities. If anyone is interested I can go into this, but the short answer is Witt was wrong
>Thanks, Prashant.  I withdraw my voltage example.
>
>Luddy wrong too.  I'm in such good company.
>
>P
>
>
>>
>>On 16 July 2012 11:01, Lemuel Underwing <luunderwing at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>As someone who suffers from an inability to properly understand maths I thank you, 'twas certainly helpful.
>>>
>>>It is hard for me to imagine who any of this has to do with Annie Leibovitz... I take it some folks have a hard time figuring out what is just White Noise in Pynchon...? 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Prashant Kumar <siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>First we're gonna need complex numbers, made of a real part (normal numbers) plus an imaginary part. Imaginary numbers are defined by multiples of i=squareroot(-1). Imagine a 2D graph, the vertical axis marked with multiples of i and the horizontal axis with real numbers. So on this 2D graph we can define a complex number as a point. Call such a point s = \sigma + \rho, \sigma and \rho being real and imaginary numbers resp.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Since it takes real and imaginary inputs, and we plot the output in the third dimension, the Riemann Zeta function can be visualised as a surface sitting above the complex number graph; that's what you saw, Mark (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_zeta_function for the same thing with magnitude represented as colour).  If I have a RZ function, writing R as a function of s as R(s), the zeroes are the values of s for which R(s)=0.  The Riemann Hypothesis (unproven) states that the zeroes of the RZ function have real part 1/2. Formally, R(1/2 + \rho) = 0. This gives you a line on the surface of the RZ function (known as the critical line) along which the zeroes are hypothesised to lie. That wasn't too bad, right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Verifying this hypothesis is notoriously hard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 15 July 2012 21:27, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Except that this one's horizontal and drawn on a grid of latitude and longitude,
>>>>>instead of rel vs imaginary values---where Riemann said that all the zeroes of the
>>>>>Beta function will be found."
>>>>> 
>>>>>p. 937 Don't know enough math to have a feel for Zeta functions but Wolfram's
>>>>>maths guide online shows Beta functions kinda graphed in three dimensions,
>>>>>with raised sections, waves, folds etc....
>>>>> 
>>>>>And all I can associate at the moment are the raised maps, showing land formations,
>>>>>and the phrase
>>>>> 
>>>>>History is a step-function.
>>>>> 
>>>>>Anyone, anyone? Bueller? 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120716/3a6322e7/attachment.html>