James Freeman on mon 28 may 12
Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics,
and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on a
clay forum!). There has also been a thread involving the idea of ignoring
received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. Yesterday, came news
quite apropos to both discussions.
300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that calculus
had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
solutions were available. A 16 year old boy from India has changed this.
The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). The family moved to
Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of German
at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
early. He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on a class
project. He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivety."
"When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought to
myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond anything
he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of himself (and
obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!). Much as Newton
invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvable problem, this
young man has created a new approach to mathematics which will have
profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was dumb enough
to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. As a side note, the young man
also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem that was posed
over 100 years ago.
Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
All the best.
...James
James Freeman
"Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
-Euripides
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on tue 29 may 12
Hi James, all...
Do you have any Links to these mentions?
It seems to me that one of the greatest problems we face, are the
limitaitons
which have occurred to Learning, and to our ability to Learn, that arise
from the consequences of what we have been taught.
I see this everywhere, every day, and I have been seeing it since childhood=
.
I suffer from it, and, I regret it constantly.
We have no way of assaying how many 'solutions' to erstwhile or seemingly
insoluable 'problems' of all sorts, have been found or could be found, by
people who are not part of the melieu who insists to own the Territory in
which the 'problem' is upheld or preserved...or, who in effect, are the
reason
for the 'problem' being or remaining a 'problem' in he first place.
I am not sure I even find the term 'problem' to have any value whatever, as
a word used to denote what is actually some deficit of the observer.
Whatever it's meaning may originally have been, it has long since acquired
far too much 'Baggage'.
I am not sure the word 'taught' any longer has any value, other than as a
pejorative or euphemism for various orders of presumption, inure, and the
emotional and psychological imposition and
violence those represent in practice.
The liabilities and self deceptions inhererent in any legacy of having bein=
g
taught, in having been taught, are endless, and, given their context, tend =
-
with small exception at best - to remain invisible and un-assayed or denied
by the victims and perpetrators of it.
Or, it is a legacy which operates through people, converting victims into
perpetrators.
Do any of us know anyone who has actually learned anything about this?
Or is creating and managing and insisting on the 'problem', something we
were taught to 'see' AS a 'solution'?
Phil
L v
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Freeman"
> Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics,
> and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on =
a
> clay forum!). There has also been a thread involving the idea of ignorin=
g
> received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. Yesterday, came news
> quite apropos to both discussions.
>
> 300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
> precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
> The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that
> calculus
> had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
> solutions were available. A 16 year old boy from India has changed this.
>
> The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
> calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). The family moved t=
o
> Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of German
> at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
> early. He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on a
> class
> project. He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivety."
> "When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought
> to
> myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
>
> The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond
> anything
> he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of himself (and
> obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!). Much as
> Newton
> invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvable problem, this
> young man has created a new approach to mathematics which will have
> profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was dumb enoug=
h
> to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. As a side note, the young man
> also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem that was
> posed
> over 100 years ago.
>
> Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
>
> All the best.
>
> ...James
>
> James Freeman
>
> "Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
> -Euripides
>
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
James Freeman on tue 29 may 12
In response to some off list queries and comments, the original article
appeared in the London Sunday Times. Unfortunately, there seems to be no
way to link to the article that does not require the reader to pay a
subscription fee. Here is a link to a derivative article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150225/Shouryya-Ray-solves-puzzles=
-posed-Sir-Isaac-Newton-baffled-mathematicians-350-years.html
Both problems which he solved are in the field of Dynamics, and both relate
to ballistics.
The interesting thing about this kid is that he insists that he is not a
genius, and laments that he is not good at sports! Such is the sad truth
of current mass culture, which makes idols of court jesters and athletes,
and disparages those possessed of intellect (egg-head, nerd, geek,
brainiac...).
All the best.
...James
James Freeman
"Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
-Euripides
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:57 PM, James Freeman m
> wrote:
> Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics,
> and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on =
a
> clay forum!). There has also been a thread involving the idea of ignorin=
g
> received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. Yesterday, came news
> quite apropos to both discussions.
>
> 300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
> precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
> The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that calcul=
us
> had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
> solutions were available. A 16 year old boy from India has changed this.
>
> The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
> calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). The family moved t=
o
> Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of German
> at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
> early. He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on a cla=
ss
> project. He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivety."
> "When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought =
to
> myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
>
> The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond
> anything he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of
> himself (and obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!).
> Much as Newton invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvabl=
e
> problem, this young man has created a new approach to mathematics which
> will have profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was
> dumb enough to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. As a side note, the
> young man also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem th=
at
> was posed over 100 years ago.
>
> Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
>
> All the best.
>
> ...James
>
> James Freeman
>
> "Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
> -Euripides
>
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
>
>
Margaret Flaherty on tue 29 may 12
Your story illustrates how curiosity, passionate interest and a "what have
I got to lose?" attitude can be a real engine for creativity.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:57 PM, James Freeman m
> wrote:
> Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics,
> and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on =
a
> clay forum!). There has also been a thread involving the idea of ignorin=
g
> received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. Yesterday, came news
> quite apropos to both discussions.
>
> 300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
> precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
> The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that calcul=
us
> had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
> solutions were available. A 16 year old boy from India has changed this.
>
> The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
> calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). The family moved t=
o
> Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of German
> at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
> early. He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on a cla=
ss
> project. He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivety."
> "When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought =
to
> myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
>
> The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond anythi=
ng
> he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of himself (and
> obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!). Much as Newt=
on
> invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvable problem, this
> young man has created a new approach to mathematics which will have
> profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was dumb enoug=
h
> to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. As a side note, the young man
> also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem that was pos=
ed
> over 100 years ago.
>
> Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
>
> All the best.
>
> ...James
>
> James Freeman
>
> "Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
> -Euripides
>
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
>
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on wed 30 may 12
Hi Robert,
Or...in other words...it is about as I have observed before -
That the end-stage senility of the Industrial Revolution, or of Western
Culture, is a
kind of Marxism, where control of production, means control of the process
of converting People into products to be consumed by governments,
institutions, and corporations...with anything else, being merely
incidental.
Phil
L v
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Harris"
Phil,
I think that a good deal of what you are lamenting stems from our
current production line approach to teaching.
To make an analogy to pottery - a couple of hundred years ago, most
pots were hurried, somewhat crude, but wonderfully functional. So too
was education up to 8th grade. Most people left school at 14 to go to
work on the farms and factories. Some few continued to high school,
and likewise a few of the middle classes could pay for "Sunday Best"
pottery (or even china). A fewer still went to College (the wealthy
and supremely bright), and so too could some people afford export
porcelain. There were many more teachers in those days, often women
who wanted to escape a life they would otherwise be condemned to. More
often than not, they had a diploma, or perhaps the equivalent of an
associated degree, but frankly that was hardly important compared to
what they had to teach. Just like most country potters, they were
effective craftsmen.
With the rise of production lines, there were no longer any craft
potters, but the price and quality of pottery (and other more
important goods), went down enough so that everyone could afford new
full sets of dishes. Not necessarily a bad thing, even if some
craftsmanship was lost.
Likewise we can now afford (as a people) to educate far far more of
our children to a greater degree. BUT as in a production line,
craftsmanship is necessarily lost. Children are forced into a
production line mold, to which many of them are not suited. BUT, of
course, without some production line values (teachers cannot
individually teach 25 children every hour), we would not be able to
afford to educate so many. While, as potters, we love great
craftsmanship, we also have to recognise that only relatively wealthy
people buy our pots, most people in this country need cheap
manufactured goods to have a better day to day life than they did 200
(or even 75) years ago.
Robert
P.S. I've obviously made some broad generalisations and stereotypes in
this analogy, but I hope you get the point. (i.e. if we want more
children to be educated we have to accept production line values. IMO,
even if we were to double the education budget (practically impossible
- not just politically impossible), we would still have to accept the
production line methods of teaching.)
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:11 PM, wrote:
> Hi James, all...
>
>
>
> Do you have any Links to these mentions?
>
>
> It seems to me that one of the greatest problems we face, are the
> limitaitons
> which have occurred to Learning, and to our ability to Learn, that arise
> from the consequences of what we have been taught.
>
> I see this everywhere, every day, and I have been seeing it since
> childhood.
>
> I suffer from it, and, I regret it constantly.
>
>
> We have no way of assaying how many 'solutions' to erstwhile or seemingly
> insoluable 'problems' of all sorts, have been found or could be found, by
> people who are not part of the melieu who insists to own the Territory in
> which the 'problem' is upheld or preserved...or, who in effect, are the
> reason
> for the 'problem' being or remaining a 'problem' in he first place.
>
>
> I am not sure I even find the term 'problem' to have any value whatever,
> as
> a word used to denote what is actually some deficit of the observer.
>
> Whatever it's meaning may originally have been, it has long since acquire=
d
> far too much 'Baggage'.
>
> I am not sure the word 'taught' any longer has any value, other than as a
> pejorative or euphemism for various orders of presumption, inure, and the
> emotional and psychological imposition and
> violence those represent in practice.
>
>
> The liabilities and self deceptions inhererent in any legacy of having
> being
> taught, in having been taught, are endless, and, given their context,
> tend -
> with small exception at best - to remain invisible and un-assayed or
> denied
> by the victims and perpetrators of it.
>
> Or, it is a legacy which operates through people, converting victims into
> perpetrators.
>
>
> Do any of us know anyone who has actually learned anything about this?
>
>
> Or is creating and managing and insisting on the 'problem', something we
> were taught to 'see' AS a 'solution'?
>
>
>
>
> Phil
> L v
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Freeman"
>
>> Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics=
,
>> and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on
>> a
>> clay forum!). There has also been a thread involving the idea of ignorin=
g
>> received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. Yesterday, came news
>> quite apropos to both discussions.
>>
>> 300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
>> precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
>> The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that
>> calculus
>> had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
>> solutions were available. A 16 year old boy from India has changed this.
>>
>> The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
>> calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). The family moved t=
o
>> Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of Germa=
n
>> at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
>> early. He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on a
>> class
>> project. He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivety."
>> "When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought
>> to
>> myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
>>
>> The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond
>> anything
>> he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of himself (an=
d
>> obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!). Much as
>> Newton
>> invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvable problem, thi=
s
>> young man has created a new approach to mathematics which will have
>> profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was dumb
>> enough
>> to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. As a side note, the young man
>> also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem that was
>> posed
>> over 100 years ago.
>>
>> Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> ...James
>>
>> James Freeman
>>
>> "Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
>> -Euripides
>>
>> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
>> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Robert Harris on wed 30 may 12
Phil,
I think that a good deal of what you are lamenting stems from our
current production line approach to teaching.
To make an analogy to pottery - a couple of hundred years ago, most
pots were hurried, somewhat crude, but wonderfully functional. So too
was education up to 8th grade. Most people left school at 14 to go to
work on the farms and factories. Some few continued to high school,
and likewise a few of the middle classes could pay for "Sunday Best"
pottery (or even china). A fewer still went to College (the wealthy
and supremely bright), and so too could some people afford export
porcelain. There were many more teachers in those days, often women
who wanted to escape a life they would otherwise be condemned to. More
often than not, they had a diploma, or perhaps the equivalent of an
associated degree, but frankly that was hardly important compared to
what they had to teach. Just like most country potters, they were
effective craftsmen.
With the rise of production lines, there were no longer any craft
potters, but the price and quality of pottery (and other more
important goods), went down enough so that everyone could afford new
full sets of dishes. Not necessarily a bad thing, even if some
craftsmanship was lost.
Likewise we can now afford (as a people) to educate far far more of
our children to a greater degree. BUT as in a production line,
craftsmanship is necessarily lost. Children are forced into a
production line mold, to which many of them are not suited. BUT, of
course, without some production line values (teachers cannot
individually teach 25 children every hour), we would not be able to
afford to educate so many. While, as potters, we love great
craftsmanship, we also have to recognise that only relatively wealthy
people buy our pots, most people in this country need cheap
manufactured goods to have a better day to day life than they did 200
(or even 75) years ago.
Robert
P.S. I've obviously made some broad generalisations and stereotypes in
this analogy, but I hope you get the point. (i.e. if we want more
children to be educated we have to accept production line values. IMO,
even if we were to double the education budget (practically impossible
- not just politically impossible), we would still have to accept the
production line methods of teaching.)
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:11 PM, wrote:
> Hi James, all...
>
>
>
> Do you have any Links to these mentions?
>
>
> It seems to me that one of the greatest problems we face, are the
> limitaitons
> which have occurred to Learning, and to our ability to Learn, that arise
> from the consequences of what we have been taught.
>
> I see this everywhere, every day, and I have been seeing it since childho=
=3D
od.
>
> I suffer from it, and, I regret it constantly.
>
>
> We have no way of assaying how many 'solutions' to erstwhile or seemingly
> insoluable 'problems' of all sorts, have been found or could be found, by
> people who are not part of the melieu who insists to own the Territory in
> which the 'problem' is upheld or preserved...or, who in effect, are the
> reason
> for the 'problem' being or remaining a 'problem' in he first place.
>
>
> I am not sure I even find the term 'problem' to have any value whatever, =
=3D
as
> a word used to denote what is actually some deficit of the observer.
>
> Whatever it's meaning may originally have been, it has long since acquire=
=3D
d
> far too much 'Baggage'.
>
> I am not sure the word 'taught' any longer has any value, other than as a
> pejorative or euphemism for various orders of presumption, inure, and the
> emotional and psychological imposition and
> violence those represent in practice.
>
>
> The liabilities and self deceptions inhererent in any legacy of having be=
=3D
ing
> taught, in having been taught, are endless, and, given their context, ten=
=3D
d -
> with small exception at best - to remain invisible and un-assayed or deni=
=3D
ed
> by the victims and perpetrators of it.
>
> Or, it is a legacy which operates through people, converting victims into
> perpetrators.
>
>
> Do any of us know anyone who has actually learned anything about this?
>
>
> Or is creating and managing and insisting on the 'problem', something we
> were taught to 'see' AS a 'solution'?
>
>
>
>
> Phil
> L v
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Freeman"
>
>> Earlier in the week we were discussing teaching, creativity, mathematics=
=3D
,
>> and how different people learn and think differently (and all of this on=
=3D
a
>> clay forum!). =3DA0There has also been a thread involving the idea of ig=
no=3D
ring
>> received wisdom and just trying things for oneself. =3DA0Yesterday, came=
n=3D
ews
>> quite apropos to both discussions.
>>
>> 300 years ago, Isaac Newton posed a problem involving calculating the
>> precise path of a projectile subject to both gravity and air resistance.
>> The problem, though seemingly simple, was far beyond anything that
>> calculus
>> had the power to solve, and until now only partial (though usable)
>> solutions were available. =3DA0A 16 year old boy from India has changed =
th=3D
is.
>>
>> The young man's father is a professor engineering, and taught the boy
>> calculus when he was 6 (the boy was 6, not the dad!). =3DA0The family mo=
ve=3D
d to
>> Germany when the boy was 12, and though he did not speak a word of Germa=
=3D
n
>> at the time, he will graduate from high school next month, two years
>> early. =3DA0He came across Newton's unsolvable problem while working on =
a
>> class
>> project. =3DA0He credits his solution to "curiosity and schoolboy naivet=
y.=3D
"
>> "When it was explained to us that the problem had no solution, I thought
>> to
>> myself, 'well, there's no harm in trying'".
>>
>> The father said that the math which his son employed is far beyond
>> anything
>> he taught him, and also far beyond anything he is capable of himself (an=
=3D
d
>> obviously far beyond anything ANYONE else was capable of!). =3DA0Much as
>> Newton
>> invented calculus in order to solve a previously unsolvable problem, thi=
=3D
s
>> young man has created a new approach to mathematics which will have
>> profound and far reaching implications, and all because he was dumb enou=
=3D
gh
>> to try to solve an "unsolvable" problem. =3DA0As a side note, the young =
ma=3D
n
>> also proceeded to solve another related "unsolvable" problem that was
>> posed
>> over 100 years ago.
>>
>> Keep tilting at those windmills, boys and girls!
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> ...James
>>
>> James Freeman
>>
>> "Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you foolish."
>> -Euripides
>>
>> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
>> http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
--=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------
| |
|
