[The,Commutator]a4cover:Layout 1 08/02/2010 22:59 Page 1

[The,Commutator]
The Macsoc Magazine: FEBRUARY 2010
FIRST EDITION

Sponsored by: The Department of Mathematics and the IMA

[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 2
Contents Editor, Designer, Graphics
Carl Chaplin
Assistant Editors
News Stuart Andrew
Andrew Bestel
2 Editorial Those who were also actively
News involved in the organisation
David Halfpenny
Features Emma Cummin
Sandy Black
4 Group theory Fiona Doherty
Louise Ogden
Paul McFadden
An introduction to abstract algebra and a look at Michael Stringer
the mathematics of the rubik’s cube. Neil Fullarton
Jaspal Puri
6 Chaos theory
An introduction to a theory which reveals the de-
terministic equations which govern the seemingly
random and probabilistic events.
Word from
Mathematics & People
10 Are men really better at maths the Editor
A few words of thanks, a brief
than women? outline of what [The, Commutator]
is about and then a definition of the
11 Nazi Germany and Mathematics Commutator.
Discovery Thank You
My first duty as editor is to thank all
12 Finding Neptune those involved in the project. I have some-
times been frustrated with the level of in-
difference among undergraduates and I
have to say that it has been very refreshing
How Neptune was discovered to exist, its mass to meet and work with such a lively and
and orbit calculated before it was observed proactive team here in Glasgow. This en-
terprise has been built on their enthusiasm
it is to them that I am the most grateful.
I would also like to thank the Glasgow
Assorted Articles University Department of Mathematics
and the Maclaurin Society for their full
13 Foundations of Mathematics support both in terms of time spent organ-
ising and advising as well as their financial
support. It is their financial support that
14 Why study Mathematics? has allowed us to print the magazine in
full colour with a professional finish.
15 How to tile the sphere with dif- The Macsoc itself and by association
this magazine, is funded by the The Insti-
tute of Mathematics and its Applications
ferential equations (IMA) which is the UK's learned and pro-
fessional society for mathematics and its
Games applications. It promotes mathematics re-
search, education and careers, and the use
16 games and puzzles of mathematics in business, industry and
commerce.
2 [The , Commutator] February 2010
News
University Restructuring and You!
The Faculty of Information & Mathe-
matical Sciences (FIMS) is soon to be re-
placed by the School of Mathematics and
Statistics under the new college struc-
ture that will supersede the old faculty
structure from 1st August 2010.
The most notable affect for students
will be the combining of the existing
FIMS graduate school with that of the
Faculty of Chemistry, Faculty of Engineer-
ing and the Faculty Physics and Astron-
omy. The existing faculty based
graduate schools will form a single
graduate school for the College of Science
and Engineering.
Students were informed of the Uni-
versity wide changes by the Senior Vice
Principal and Deputy Vice Chancellor
Andrea Nolan, together with the prom-
ise of zero disruption while the changes
are implemented.
“The needs of our students are central to
the activity of the University and the re-
structure has not, and will not, alter that”
What’s it all about?
Our vision for the magazine is to have a
publication that first and foremost commu-
nicates ideas which have sparked an inter-
est in the writers. With this both the
understanding and the enthusiasm benefits
the reader. Our aim is to create something
which is both a Vista for first and second
year students who are yet to decide on
which disciplines will make up their de-
gree and also for honors students to
broaden their knowledge using the lecture
courses provided at Glasgow University as
a foundation.
The publication also serves to promote
discussion on all aspects of Mathematics be
it sociological, psychological, philosophical
or historical. Mathematics has affected
everyone’s lives both within and outwith
the department and so, although not cen-
tral to mathematical research objectives,
there are many areas of discussion should
be of interest to us all.
For the writers themselves we hope to
provides a platform for undergraduates to
be involved in an extra curricular pursuit
where they can develop skills outside of
Undergraduate students from Au-
gust will be awarded their degree by
their college instead of their faculty but
there will be little change in their day to
day experiences.
The main changes will be in the Uni-
versity Financial structure which was
previously comprised of ten budgets,
corresponding to nine faculties and the
University Services. The new structure
will be five larger budgets, correspon-
ding to four colleges and University
Services. The University has risen to
within the top 20 in the UK rankings
and within the top 100 in the world
rankings. To carry on this trend Glas-
gow needs to respond to the increase in
demand for inter-disciplinary academic
research and this restructuring of Uni-
versity finances is designed to facilitate
this. Currently research over faculty
boundaries requires multiple research
grants and so there is unnecessary re-
sistance and less coordination than can
be expected from a single college re-
search fund. Fewer budgets also allow
those that are offered as part of the under-
graduate programme.
What is the commutator?
For an outline of group theory see the
following feature article. The commutator
of two elements a, b of a group G is de-
noted by [a, b] and is defined as follows:
[a, b] : = a - 1 b - 1 ab . An important feature of a
Group is commutativity, that is the extent
to which ab = ba . Of course we take for
granted that addition is always commuta-
tive and that many of the multiplicative
groups we encounter day to day do not im-
pose an order effect on our calculation. The
savvy shopper would have to add to his
whit the ability to position each item of his
weekly shop on the conveyor belt at the su-
permarket check out in the cheapest possi-
ble order in a world without
commutativity. As an undergraduate you
will encounter matrix multiplication as a
first example of a non-commutative group
operation. However David Halfpenny pro-
vides an example of the rubik’s cube in his
article on page 5. If you rotate some of the
pieces about one axis and then perform a
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 3
for greater efficiency as there should be
fewer transaction and co-ordination
costs and delays. The university as a
whole expects to be more agile in its re-
sponse to external opportunities and
threats, while larger budgets should
make larger investments more feasible.
For those undergraduates who are
planning a future in academic research,
the benefits of the restructuring will be
immediately apparent as heads of col-
leges will have larger budgets and more
administrative support. The Univer-
sity’s standings in both the UK and the
World rankings should reflect any in-
crease in the volume or quality of re-
search while the College of Science and
Engineering should hold more weight
than the individual faculties it replaces.
As such all undergraduates should feel
an increase in the benefit that graduat-
ing from Glasgow University will bring.
Carl Chaplin
rotation about a different axis the rubik’s
cube will end up in a different configura-
tion to that achieved by performing the
same two rotations in reverse order, be-
cause these two group elements which act
on the cube do not commute with each
other in the Group.
Taking the set of all commutators of a
group we find that each pair of elements
that commute with each other are sent to
the identity element by their commutator
and we are left with the set of commutators
which don’t commute with each other. Tak-
ing the subgroup which is generated by
this set tells us something about the extent
to which that group commutes. This is
called the derived subgroup and it is an im-
portant tool in the understanding of the
structure of a group.
It is with this that we go straight into
our first feature which starts with some
basic group theory and goes on to demon-
strate the application of group theory to the
understanding of the rubiks cube.
Carl Chaplin
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 2
Contents Editor, Designer, Graphics
Carl Chaplin
Assistant Editors
News Stuart Andrew
Andrew Bestel
2 Editorial Those who were also actively
News involved in the organisation
David Halfpenny
Features Emma Cummin
Sandy Black
4 Group theory Fiona Doherty
Louise Ogden
Paul McFadden
An introduction to abstract algebra and a look at Michael Stringer
the mathematics of the rubik’s cube. Neil Fullarton
Jaspal Puri
6 Chaos theory
An introduction to a theory which reveals the de-
terministic equations which govern the seemingly
random and probabilistic events.
Word from
Mathematics & People
10 Are men really better at maths the Editor
A few words of thanks, a brief
than women? outline of what [The, Commutator]
is about and then a definition of the
11 Nazi Germany and Mathematics Commutator.
Discovery Thank You
My first duty as editor is to thank all
12 Finding Neptune those involved in the project. I have some-
times been frustrated with the level of in-
difference among undergraduates and I
have to say that it has been very refreshing
How Neptune was discovered to exist, its mass to meet and work with such a lively and
and orbit calculated before it was observed proactive team here in Glasgow. This en-
terprise has been built on their enthusiasm
it is to them that I am the most grateful.
I would also like to thank the Glasgow
Assorted Articles University Department of Mathematics
and the Maclaurin Society for their full
13 Foundations of Mathematics support both in terms of time spent organ-
ising and advising as well as their financial
support. It is their financial support that
14 Why study Mathematics? has allowed us to print the magazine in
full colour with a professional finish.
15 How to tile the sphere with dif- The Macsoc itself and by association
this magazine, is funded by the The Insti-
tute of Mathematics and its Applications
ferential equations (IMA) which is the UK's learned and pro-
fessional society for mathematics and its
Games applications. It promotes mathematics re-
search, education and careers, and the use
16 games and puzzles of mathematics in business, industry and
commerce.
2 [The , Commutator] February 2010
News
University Restructuring and You!
The Faculty of Information & Mathe-
matical Sciences (FIMS) is soon to be re-
placed by the School of Mathematics and
Statistics under the new college struc-
ture that will supersede the old faculty
structure from 1st August 2010.
The most notable affect for students
will be the combining of the existing
FIMS graduate school with that of the
Faculty of Chemistry, Faculty of Engineer-
ing and the Faculty Physics and Astron-
omy. The existing faculty based
graduate schools will form a single
graduate school for the College of Science
and Engineering.
Students were informed of the Uni-
versity wide changes by the Senior Vice
Principal and Deputy Vice Chancellor
Andrea Nolan, together with the prom-
ise of zero disruption while the changes
are implemented.
“The needs of our students are central to
the activity of the University and the re-
structure has not, and will not, alter that”
What’s it all about?
Our vision for the magazine is to have a
publication that first and foremost commu-
nicates ideas which have sparked an inter-
est in the writers. With this both the
understanding and the enthusiasm benefits
the reader. Our aim is to create something
which is both a Vista for first and second
year students who are yet to decide on
which disciplines will make up their de-
gree and also for honors students to
broaden their knowledge using the lecture
courses provided at Glasgow University as
a foundation.
The publication also serves to promote
discussion on all aspects of Mathematics be
it sociological, psychological, philosophical
or historical. Mathematics has affected
everyone’s lives both within and outwith
the department and so, although not cen-
tral to mathematical research objectives,
there are many areas of discussion should
be of interest to us all.
For the writers themselves we hope to
provides a platform for undergraduates to
be involved in an extra curricular pursuit
where they can develop skills outside of
Undergraduate students from Au-
gust will be awarded their degree by
their college instead of their faculty but
there will be little change in their day to
day experiences.
The main changes will be in the Uni-
versity Financial structure which was
previously comprised of ten budgets,
corresponding to nine faculties and the
University Services. The new structure
will be five larger budgets, correspon-
ding to four colleges and University
Services. The University has risen to
within the top 20 in the UK rankings
and within the top 100 in the world
rankings. To carry on this trend Glas-
gow needs to respond to the increase in
demand for inter-disciplinary academic
research and this restructuring of Uni-
versity finances is designed to facilitate
this. Currently research over faculty
boundaries requires multiple research
grants and so there is unnecessary re-
sistance and less coordination than can
be expected from a single college re-
search fund. Fewer budgets also allow
those that are offered as part of the under-
graduate programme.
What is the commutator?
For an outline of group theory see the
following feature article. The commutator
of two elements a, b of a group G is de-
noted by [a, b] and is defined as follows:
[a, b] : = a - 1 b - 1 ab . An important feature of a
Group is commutativity, that is the extent
to which ab = ba . Of course we take for
granted that addition is always commuta-
tive and that many of the multiplicative
groups we encounter day to day do not im-
pose an order effect on our calculation. The
savvy shopper would have to add to his
whit the ability to position each item of his
weekly shop on the conveyor belt at the su-
permarket check out in the cheapest possi-
ble order in a world without
commutativity. As an undergraduate you
will encounter matrix multiplication as a
first example of a non-commutative group
operation. However David Halfpenny pro-
vides an example of the rubik’s cube in his
article on page 5. If you rotate some of the
pieces about one axis and then perform a
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 3
for greater efficiency as there should be
fewer transaction and co-ordination
costs and delays. The university as a
whole expects to be more agile in its re-
sponse to external opportunities and
threats, while larger budgets should
make larger investments more feasible.
For those undergraduates who are
planning a future in academic research,
the benefits of the restructuring will be
immediately apparent as heads of col-
leges will have larger budgets and more
administrative support. The Univer-
sity’s standings in both the UK and the
World rankings should reflect any in-
crease in the volume or quality of re-
search while the College of Science and
Engineering should hold more weight
than the individual faculties it replaces.
As such all undergraduates should feel
an increase in the benefit that graduat-
ing from Glasgow University will bring.
Carl Chaplin
rotation about a different axis the rubik’s
cube will end up in a different configura-
tion to that achieved by performing the
same two rotations in reverse order, be-
cause these two group elements which act
on the cube do not commute with each
other in the Group.
Taking the set of all commutators of a
group we find that each pair of elements
that commute with each other are sent to
the identity element by their commutator
and we are left with the set of commutators
which don’t commute with each other. Tak-
ing the subgroup which is generated by
this set tells us something about the extent
to which that group commutes. This is
called the derived subgroup and it is an im-
portant tool in the understanding of the
structure of a group.
It is with this that we go straight into
our first feature which starts with some
basic group theory and goes on to demon-
strate the application of group theory to the
understanding of the rubiks cube.
Carl Chaplin
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 3
Feature Group Theory
THE GROUP
Whether you are new to abstract algebra or are in need of a little revision I will attempt to furnish you with all the
tools you require to enjoy David Halfpenny’s piece which follows.
What is a group?
Much of the mathematics you will have learnt
at school and in the first few years of your univer-
sity career will have involved manipulating for-
mulars and algebraic expressions involving
unknowns. Abstracting from this we formalise the
idea of dealing with elements which are somehow
compatible under some sort of operation. Vague
so far, but all avenues to the world of the abstract
are vague, deliberately so. Once you have a
foothold you can begin to admire the power you
gain when you liberate yourself from the specifics
of any particular example.
We therefore start with a set of elements such
as the integers and we define a binary operation
which acts on a pair of elements of this set to gen-
erate another element: f (a, b) = c . However we
choose to construct an operation it would be use-
ful if putting two elements in gave us something
which is again in the set of interest. For example
if we use * to represent our chosen operation,
5 * 23 = Blue would be very unhelpful to us be-
cause blue isn’t an integer. It is however liberating
to know that you could construct a binary opera-
tion that would act on a subset of the set of all
colours, we only illustrate abstract algebra with
numbers as this is a context which the reader will
be familiar with. Let’s define our binary operation
on the set S by the function:
f: S # S " S and we denote f (s, t) by s * t .
You will notice immediately that addition of the
integers can be considered in this way:
g: Z # Z " Z, g (s, t) = s + t .
One important feature of an algebraic object
such as a group is associativity. This is simply the
requirement that for all a, b, c in our
set: (a * b) * c = a * (b * c) . This simply means
that evaluating a * b and then taking * c of this
yields the same result as evaluating b * c and then
taking a * . This seems like a technicality at first
but actually it is a necessary axiom, without which
we can’t prove the simplest of results, as you will
see. The associative axiom will become your best
friend as you reed on.
From the integers we also observe a very spe-
cial element which we call the identity element.
Under addition this is zero but if we consider the
set of rationals with zero excluded under the bi-
nary operation of multiplication the identity ele-
ment is 1. You might ask: ‘what do these two
elements have in common? ‘ and by way of an an-
swer they both play the same role in the context
of their respective binary operations. Formally e
is an identity element if for all s in S ,
e * s = s * e = s.
Finally we can think about the expression
s * t as t doing something to s and we arrive at a
new element, but there ought to be some mecha-
nism for getting from (s * t) back to s and so we
introduce the notion of inverses. That is for each
-1
t in S there must exist t that satisfies:
-1 -1
t*t = t * t = e.
4 [The , Commutator] February 2010
PUORG EHT
Together with our definition of e and associa-
tivity we get:
-1 -1
(s * t) * t = s * (t * t ) = s * e = s .
If we furnish a set with a binary operation and
impose the axioms of associativity and inverses
we get a group.
Some elementary group theory
As a first step towards studying different
types of groups, once we have a group we can
take subsets of the original set which are them-
selves closed under the group operation and we
call such a subset a subgroup. For example the
even integers form a subgroup of the integers
under addition since addition of even integers al-
ways yields another even integer.
Once we have more than one group we can
consider maps which preserve the group opera-
tion. This is not as straight forward as it sounds as
we may have a map between two groups which
have two completely different operations such as
addition in one group and multiplication in the
other. We need functions between two groups
where it doesn’t matter whether you perform the
group operation on two elements in the first group
and then take the image of the mapping or take
the image of two elements and then take the prod-
uct under the second group operation. When a
function obeys this simple rule we call it a group
homomorphism and an interesting example of a
group homomorphism is the natural logarithm.
figure 1 the natural logarithm
The natural logarithm takes as its domain the
group of non-zero positive real number under
multiplication (denoted by (R 2 0, #) ) and it’s
codomain is the group of all real numbers under
addition (denoted by (R, +) ). This homomor-
phism can be thought of in the conventional sense
using the graph in figure 1 but its significance can
be appreciated by the fact that it is a group homo-
morphism. In fact this particular homomorphism
helped put man on the moon. The point being that
multiplication is labour intensive compared to ad-
dition and so before the advent of computers and
pocket calculators, slide rules were used to reduce
a multiplication down to a simple sum. Suppose
we needed to find the product of two elements in
(R 2 0, #) , we would first use the logarithm func-
tion to find the two corresponding elements in
(R, +) , we would then perform the operation in
this group (i.e. add them) and then we would per-
form the inverse map to get back to an element in
(R 2 0, #) which would correspond to the product
of the two elements we started with.
Immediately we have a practical application
of some elementary group theory, albeit that now
this happens inside a computer where once we
had to do it for ourselves. We can go further
though, the map is injective, that is no too ele-
ments are mapped to the same point; further it is
surjective, every real number has a corresponding
real number greater than zero under the inverse
of the natural logarithm. A homomorphism which
is both injective and surjective is called an isomor-
phism. A fancy word you might think but it is
quite deserving of its own fancy title since it tells
us that these two groups are structurally the same.
That is going between the two is as simple as re-
naming the elements and doesn’t require us to
change anything structurally.
It is from these humble begins that one of the
greatest mathematical achievements of the 20th
century was made, that is to classify all finite sim-
ple groups. It was a collaborative effort which
took up more than 10,000 journal pages to docu-
ment.
What do groups do?
In nature we observe symmetry in all life,
from the geometry of celestial bodies down to the
quantum particle. As such the study of and ability
to model symmetric systems is extremely impor-
tant to physicists and chemists alike.
It is with this in mind that, having said what
a group is, I answer the question of what a group
does: a group models symmetry.
The simplest illustration of this is the Dihedral
group on n elements, D 2n . For example D 6 can be
represented as the symmetries of an equilateral tri-
angle. It’s elements are the two rotations (by inte-
ger multiples of 2r/3 ) and three reflections and
it’s identity element is the element which doesn’t
move the triangle at all. We take the binary oper-
ation of two elements to be the application of one
element to the triangle followed by the other.
Clearly by geometry this group is closed under
this operation since we always recover our trian-
gle, it is just the corners which are permuted. If we
restrict this set of isometries of the plane to just re-
flections or just rotations we observe two naturally
occurring subgroups.
By way of example, quantum mechanics
showed that the elementary systems that make up
matter, such as electrons and protons, are truly
identical, not just very similar, so that symmetry
in their arrangement is exact, not approximate as
in the macroscopic world. Systems were also seen
to be described by functions of position that are
subject to the usual symmetry operations of rota-
tion and reflection, as well as to others not so eas-
ily described in concrete terms, such as the
exchange of identical particles. Elementary parti-
cles were observed to reflect symmetry properties
in more esoteric spaces. In all these cases, symme-
try can be expressed by certain operations on the
systems concerned, which have properties re-
vealed by Group Theory.
Carl Chaplin
Mathematics of the Rubik’s cube
figure 2
Be it a lamentable problem or a long term goal, the Rubik’s cube captures
universal fascination. Of course, there is clearly a technical property to this
puzzling device, but how mathematical is it? Here, we will take a brief glimpse
at the connection between the Rubik’s cube and elements of group theory.
Invented in 1981 by professor of architecture,
Erno Rubik, the Rubik’s cube is the best selling
puzzle game in history, selling over 350 million
cubes since its invention. Nowadays there are
many types of Rubik’s cube with all kinds of di-
mensions. We will, however, concentrate on the
traditional 3 # 3 # 3 structure. This type of cube
has the usual 6 faces, on each of which are 9 dis-
tinct squares, each of which have one of 6 pre-
scribed colours. The cube is built in such a way
that each 1 # 3 # 3 face has the ability to rotate
in a clockwise or anticlockwise direction. The pur-
pose of this puzzle is to perform a certain algo-
rithm of these rotations to a randomly mixed up
cube so that all the squares on each face of the
cube are of the same colour.
Notation
There are many texts available containing so-
lutions to the Rubik’s cube. Perhaps the most pop-
ular of which is "Notes on Rubik’s magic cube" by
David Singmaster. We shall use notation devel-
oped in this text.
Now, imagine holding a Rubik’s cube in front
of you so that you have just a single face facing
you. We label each face as follows:
f (front), b (back), l (left),
r (right), u (up) and d (down).
Using these denotations, we can refer to the
corners and edges of the cube. For example, fdr
corresponds to the corner located on the front face
at the bottom right hand corner. Similarly, bl cor-
responds to the edge on the left side of the back
face. So the first letter specifies the face and the fol-
lowing letters give the position on the face.
Let M be a move on the Rubik’s cube. Then
we can define the product of any two moves
M 1, M 2 , to be M 1 * M 2 where the move M 1 is
performed first and then M 2 . Moreover, if we de-
note G to be the set of all moves on a Rubik’s
cube, G is in fact a group under the operation * ,
as follows:
Let M 1, M 2, M 3 ! G . Since M 1 and M 2 are
moves then M 1 * M 2 is clearly also a move so G is
closed under the defined operation. * is associative
since: M 1 * (M 2 * M 3) = (M 1 * M 2) * M 3 ,
and the inverse of a move is simply the reverse of the
original performed. The identity element of G is simply
not performing a move. Thus G is a group.
The cube itself contains 20 permutable pieces,
namely 8 corners and 12 edges. In fact, the set of
moves that permute the corners of the cube is a
subgroup of the group G . Similarly, the set of
moves that permute the edges of the cube is also
a subgroup of G . These subgroups will be de-
noted by C and E , respectively.
As stated earlier, the individual moves on the
Rubik’s cube are the rotations of each face. From
this, clearly our group of moves, G , is generated
by these r/2 clockwise rotations of each face.
These generators are denoted by F, B, L, R, U, D ,
each corresponding to the obviously appropriate
face. Moreover, we can represent each generator
using cycle notation. Consider a generator F . If
we apply the generator F to a corner on the front
face, fur , say, it is permuted such that the fur
corner goes to where the fdr corner was origi-
nally situated. Similarly, under F , the fdr corner
goes to where the fdl corner started, see figure 2.
It follows that we can represent the permuta-
tions of the corners of f , under the generator F ,
as the cycle (fur fdr fdl ful) . Similarly, for the
edges we have (fr fd fl fu) . Moreover, since the
corners and edges are the only permutable pieces
is the cube, F can be represented by these to dis-
joint cycles, i.e.
F = (fur fdr fdl ful) (fr fd fl fu) .
This logic is obviously true for each face.
From the above, with the additional fact that
there are 8 corners and 12 edges on the cube, it is
true that we can regard every element of C as a
permutation of S 8 , and every element of E as a
permutation of S 12 . So, if we label each of the cor-
ners of the cube by integers in {1, g, 8} as in di-
agram 2. We are able to show that there exists a
group homomorphism: rC: G $ S 8 , defined by
rC (M) " v .
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 5
figure 3
i.e. rC (M 1 * M 2) = rC (M 1) rC (M 2)
Note that if this is true for any two generators
of G , it holds for all elements of G . So for
U, R ! G, rC (U * R) = (14872) and,
rC (U) $ rC (R) = (1432) (3487) .
Notice that (1432) and (3487) are not dis-
joint, so upon putting this into disjoint form, we
have: (1432) (3487) = (14872) .
Thus rc is a group homomorphism. This
logic is also true for rE: G $ S 12 . Note also that
elements of the group, can be considered as per-
mutations of S 20 with a corresponding group G
homomorphism defined similarly as with C and
E.
The commutator of moves M 1, M 2 in G ,
[M 1, M 2] can be used to permute a small number
of pieces on the cube whilst leaving the majority
unaltered. This is an important sequence as it al-
lows us to change unsolved parts of the cube with-
out disturbing other pieces that have already been
solved. The commutator is very effective in solv-
ing corners and edges of the cube as they usually
lie in the intersection of two faces and are there-
fore open to permutation under the commutator
of two generating moves, provided that these gen-
erators correspond to faces adjacent to each other.
As one can see, the connection between the
Rubik’s cube and concepts in group theory is very
strong. For more information on the connection
between puzzles such as the Rubik’s cube and
group theory, see texts such as "Adventures in
group theory" by David Joyner and David
Singmaster’s "Notes on Rubik’s magic cube".
David Halfpenny
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 3
Feature Group Theory
THE GROUP
Whether you are new to abstract algebra or are in need of a little revision I will attempt to furnish you with all the
tools you require to enjoy David Halfpenny’s piece which follows.
What is a group?
Much of the mathematics you will have learnt
at school and in the first few years of your univer-
sity career will have involved manipulating for-
mulars and algebraic expressions involving
unknowns. Abstracting from this we formalise the
idea of dealing with elements which are somehow
compatible under some sort of operation. Vague
so far, but all avenues to the world of the abstract
are vague, deliberately so. Once you have a
foothold you can begin to admire the power you
gain when you liberate yourself from the specifics
of any particular example.
We therefore start with a set of elements such
as the integers and we define a binary operation
which acts on a pair of elements of this set to gen-
erate another element: f (a, b) = c . However we
choose to construct an operation it would be use-
ful if putting two elements in gave us something
which is again in the set of interest. For example
if we use * to represent our chosen operation,
5 * 23 = Blue would be very unhelpful to us be-
cause blue isn’t an integer. It is however liberating
to know that you could construct a binary opera-
tion that would act on a subset of the set of all
colours, we only illustrate abstract algebra with
numbers as this is a context which the reader will
be familiar with. Let’s define our binary operation
on the set S by the function:
f: S # S " S and we denote f (s, t) by s * t .
You will notice immediately that addition of the
integers can be considered in this way:
g: Z # Z " Z, g (s, t) = s + t .
One important feature of an algebraic object
such as a group is associativity. This is simply the
requirement that for all a, b, c in our
set: (a * b) * c = a * (b * c) . This simply means
that evaluating a * b and then taking * c of this
yields the same result as evaluating b * c and then
taking a * . This seems like a technicality at first
but actually it is a necessary axiom, without which
we can’t prove the simplest of results, as you will
see. The associative axiom will become your best
friend as you reed on.
From the integers we also observe a very spe-
cial element which we call the identity element.
Under addition this is zero but if we consider the
set of rationals with zero excluded under the bi-
nary operation of multiplication the identity ele-
ment is 1. You might ask: ‘what do these two
elements have in common? ‘ and by way of an an-
swer they both play the same role in the context
of their respective binary operations. Formally e
is an identity element if for all s in S ,
e * s = s * e = s.
Finally we can think about the expression
s * t as t doing something to s and we arrive at a
new element, but there ought to be some mecha-
nism for getting from (s * t) back to s and so we
introduce the notion of inverses. That is for each
-1
t in S there must exist t that satisfies:
-1 -1
t*t = t * t = e.
4 [The , Commutator] February 2010
PUORG EHT
Together with our definition of e and associa-
tivity we get:
-1 -1
(s * t) * t = s * (t * t ) = s * e = s .
If we furnish a set with a binary operation and
impose the axioms of associativity and inverses
we get a group.
Some elementary group theory
As a first step towards studying different
types of groups, once we have a group we can
take subsets of the original set which are them-
selves closed under the group operation and we
call such a subset a subgroup. For example the
even integers form a subgroup of the integers
under addition since addition of even integers al-
ways yields another even integer.
Once we have more than one group we can
consider maps which preserve the group opera-
tion. This is not as straight forward as it sounds as
we may have a map between two groups which
have two completely different operations such as
addition in one group and multiplication in the
other. We need functions between two groups
where it doesn’t matter whether you perform the
group operation on two elements in the first group
and then take the image of the mapping or take
the image of two elements and then take the prod-
uct under the second group operation. When a
function obeys this simple rule we call it a group
homomorphism and an interesting example of a
group homomorphism is the natural logarithm.
figure 1 the natural logarithm
The natural logarithm takes as its domain the
group of non-zero positive real number under
multiplication (denoted by (R 2 0, #) ) and it’s
codomain is the group of all real numbers under
addition (denoted by (R, +) ). This homomor-
phism can be thought of in the conventional sense
using the graph in figure 1 but its significance can
be appreciated by the fact that it is a group homo-
morphism. In fact this particular homomorphism
helped put man on the moon. The point being that
multiplication is labour intensive compared to ad-
dition and so before the advent of computers and
pocket calculators, slide rules were used to reduce
a multiplication down to a simple sum. Suppose
we needed to find the product of two elements in
(R 2 0, #) , we would first use the logarithm func-
tion to find the two corresponding elements in
(R, +) , we would then perform the operation in
this group (i.e. add them) and then we would per-
form the inverse map to get back to an element in
(R 2 0, #) which would correspond to the product
of the two elements we started with.
Immediately we have a practical application
of some elementary group theory, albeit that now
this happens inside a computer where once we
had to do it for ourselves. We can go further
though, the map is injective, that is no too ele-
ments are mapped to the same point; further it is
surjective, every real number has a corresponding
real number greater than zero under the inverse
of the natural logarithm. A homomorphism which
is both injective and surjective is called an isomor-
phism. A fancy word you might think but it is
quite deserving of its own fancy title since it tells
us that these two groups are structurally the same.
That is going between the two is as simple as re-
naming the elements and doesn’t require us to
change anything structurally.
It is from these humble begins that one of the
greatest mathematical achievements of the 20th
century was made, that is to classify all finite sim-
ple groups. It was a collaborative effort which
took up more than 10,000 journal pages to docu-
ment.
What do groups do?
In nature we observe symmetry in all life,
from the geometry of celestial bodies down to the
quantum particle. As such the study of and ability
to model symmetric systems is extremely impor-
tant to physicists and chemists alike.
It is with this in mind that, having said what
a group is, I answer the question of what a group
does: a group models symmetry.
The simplest illustration of this is the Dihedral
group on n elements, D 2n . For example D 6 can be
represented as the symmetries of an equilateral tri-
angle. It’s elements are the two rotations (by inte-
ger multiples of 2r/3 ) and three reflections and
it’s identity element is the element which doesn’t
move the triangle at all. We take the binary oper-
ation of two elements to be the application of one
element to the triangle followed by the other.
Clearly by geometry this group is closed under
this operation since we always recover our trian-
gle, it is just the corners which are permuted. If we
restrict this set of isometries of the plane to just re-
flections or just rotations we observe two naturally
occurring subgroups.
By way of example, quantum mechanics
showed that the elementary systems that make up
matter, such as electrons and protons, are truly
identical, not just very similar, so that symmetry
in their arrangement is exact, not approximate as
in the macroscopic world. Systems were also seen
to be described by functions of position that are
subject to the usual symmetry operations of rota-
tion and reflection, as well as to others not so eas-
ily described in concrete terms, such as the
exchange of identical particles. Elementary parti-
cles were observed to reflect symmetry properties
in more esoteric spaces. In all these cases, symme-
try can be expressed by certain operations on the
systems concerned, which have properties re-
vealed by Group Theory.
Carl Chaplin
Mathematics of the Rubik’s cube
figure 2
Be it a lamentable problem or a long term goal, the Rubik’s cube captures
universal fascination. Of course, there is clearly a technical property to this
puzzling device, but how mathematical is it? Here, we will take a brief glimpse
at the connection between the Rubik’s cube and elements of group theory.
Invented in 1981 by professor of architecture,
Erno Rubik, the Rubik’s cube is the best selling
puzzle game in history, selling over 350 million
cubes since its invention. Nowadays there are
many types of Rubik’s cube with all kinds of di-
mensions. We will, however, concentrate on the
traditional 3 # 3 # 3 structure. This type of cube
has the usual 6 faces, on each of which are 9 dis-
tinct squares, each of which have one of 6 pre-
scribed colours. The cube is built in such a way
that each 1 # 3 # 3 face has the ability to rotate
in a clockwise or anticlockwise direction. The pur-
pose of this puzzle is to perform a certain algo-
rithm of these rotations to a randomly mixed up
cube so that all the squares on each face of the
cube are of the same colour.
Notation
There are many texts available containing so-
lutions to the Rubik’s cube. Perhaps the most pop-
ular of which is "Notes on Rubik’s magic cube" by
David Singmaster. We shall use notation devel-
oped in this text.
Now, imagine holding a Rubik’s cube in front
of you so that you have just a single face facing
you. We label each face as follows:
f (front), b (back), l (left),
r (right), u (up) and d (down).
Using these denotations, we can refer to the
corners and edges of the cube. For example, fdr
corresponds to the corner located on the front face
at the bottom right hand corner. Similarly, bl cor-
responds to the edge on the left side of the back
face. So the first letter specifies the face and the fol-
lowing letters give the position on the face.
Let M be a move on the Rubik’s cube. Then
we can define the product of any two moves
M 1, M 2 , to be M 1 * M 2 where the move M 1 is
performed first and then M 2 . Moreover, if we de-
note G to be the set of all moves on a Rubik’s
cube, G is in fact a group under the operation * ,
as follows:
Let M 1, M 2, M 3 ! G . Since M 1 and M 2 are
moves then M 1 * M 2 is clearly also a move so G is
closed under the defined operation. * is associative
since: M 1 * (M 2 * M 3) = (M 1 * M 2) * M 3 ,
and the inverse of a move is simply the reverse of the
original performed. The identity element of G is simply
not performing a move. Thus G is a group.
The cube itself contains 20 permutable pieces,
namely 8 corners and 12 edges. In fact, the set of
moves that permute the corners of the cube is a
subgroup of the group G . Similarly, the set of
moves that permute the edges of the cube is also
a subgroup of G . These subgroups will be de-
noted by C and E , respectively.
As stated earlier, the individual moves on the
Rubik’s cube are the rotations of each face. From
this, clearly our group of moves, G , is generated
by these r/2 clockwise rotations of each face.
These generators are denoted by F, B, L, R, U, D ,
each corresponding to the obviously appropriate
face. Moreover, we can represent each generator
using cycle notation. Consider a generator F . If
we apply the generator F to a corner on the front
face, fur , say, it is permuted such that the fur
corner goes to where the fdr corner was origi-
nally situated. Similarly, under F , the fdr corner
goes to where the fdl corner started, see figure 2.
It follows that we can represent the permuta-
tions of the corners of f , under the generator F ,
as the cycle (fur fdr fdl ful) . Similarly, for the
edges we have (fr fd fl fu) . Moreover, since the
corners and edges are the only permutable pieces
is the cube, F can be represented by these to dis-
joint cycles, i.e.
F = (fur fdr fdl ful) (fr fd fl fu) .
This logic is obviously true for each face.
From the above, with the additional fact that
there are 8 corners and 12 edges on the cube, it is
true that we can regard every element of C as a
permutation of S 8 , and every element of E as a
permutation of S 12 . So, if we label each of the cor-
ners of the cube by integers in {1, g, 8} as in di-
agram 2. We are able to show that there exists a
group homomorphism: rC: G $ S 8 , defined by
rC (M) " v .
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 5
figure 3
i.e. rC (M 1 * M 2) = rC (M 1) rC (M 2)
Note that if this is true for any two generators
of G , it holds for all elements of G . So for
U, R ! G, rC (U * R) = (14872) and,
rC (U) $ rC (R) = (1432) (3487) .
Notice that (1432) and (3487) are not dis-
joint, so upon putting this into disjoint form, we
have: (1432) (3487) = (14872) .
Thus rc is a group homomorphism. This
logic is also true for rE: G $ S 12 . Note also that
elements of the group, can be considered as per-
mutations of S 20 with a corresponding group G
homomorphism defined similarly as with C and
E.
The commutator of moves M 1, M 2 in G ,
[M 1, M 2] can be used to permute a small number
of pieces on the cube whilst leaving the majority
unaltered. This is an important sequence as it al-
lows us to change unsolved parts of the cube with-
out disturbing other pieces that have already been
solved. The commutator is very effective in solv-
ing corners and edges of the cube as they usually
lie in the intersection of two faces and are there-
fore open to permutation under the commutator
of two generating moves, provided that these gen-
erators correspond to faces adjacent to each other.
As one can see, the connection between the
Rubik’s cube and concepts in group theory is very
strong. For more information on the connection
between puzzles such as the Rubik’s cube and
group theory, see texts such as "Adventures in
group theory" by David Joyner and David
Singmaster’s "Notes on Rubik’s magic cube".
David Halfpenny
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 4
Feature Chaos Theory
A brief Introduction
This article aims to outline the discovery of ‘chaos’ and explain some of the basic ideas of the theory in terms of
the Lorenz Equations. It shall then look in more detail at examples of where we may find ‘chaos’ .
Chaos theory is a radical, topical scientific
discovery. It is not only a prolific field in math-
ematics but has proven to be applicable in a
staggering number of areas and provides us
with new tools in which we may explain and
interact with the world round about us.
What is Chaos Theory?
Popular perceptions of Chaos theory most
notably include ‘the butterfly effect.’ The idea
is that a tiny influence such a single butterfly
flapping its wings can cause a seemingly dis-
proportionate outcome, that is, tornado at the
other side of the world. This indeed is the idea
at the very heart of Chaos Theory; that minus-
cule differences in ‘initial conditions’ can have
drastic consequences on a final result
(Chorafas, 1994).
Chaos theory can be applied to describing
the behaviour of certain dynamical systems
which are functions of time. Uniquely in a
chaotic system, although behaviour appears
random and unpredictable the systems are ac-
tually deterministic. To understand that even
small, seemingly unimportant alterations in the
initial conditions change the entire outcome of
a system is to understand the basic principle of
Chaos theory.
The Discovery of Chaos Theory
Chaos theory was discovered in the 1960’s
by a collaboration of scientists who, against the
grain, considered these unexpected results and
ideas. However the discovery of the theory is
popularly attributed to Dr. Edward Lorenz
who coined the phrase the “butterfly effect”
and is commonly known as the “Father of
Chaos” (Lorenz, 1989). Lorenz had made a
weather stimulating programme on his com-
puter where he worked at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. This very complex pro-
gram had many complicated equations deter-
mining the probability of certain weather
forecasts. He would input some conditions
(e.g. the temperature, wind speed etc.) and it
would generate a graph of the predicted
weather. The program was considered very
highly and incredibly seemed as though it
would never repeat a previous sequence. It was
believed that if the exact initial weather condi-
tions were put in to this program, it could in-
fallibly mimic the real varying weather
conditions outside. On one occasion as the pro-
gram was running on the initial conditions that
Lorenz entered he decided that he wanted to
take a better look at the final outcome of the
6 [The , Commutator] February 2010
terminate at an equilib- approach a limit cycle
rium point
figure 1 The three possible phase paths of a two dimensional system
weather. Instead of allowing the program to
run he cheated, he read off the values from the
earlier stimulation and input these as the initial
conditions. Now although the computer would
calculate numbers to six decimal places, when
Lorenz inputted the values half way through
figure 2 two very different outcomes, with
very similar initial conditions
the stimulation he rounded them to three dec-
imal places. It transpired this minute change
in initial conditions completely altered the out-
come of the predicted weather.
The above graph is an example of the kind
of divergence that Lorenz would have been
presented with. It clearly demonstrates that the
small difference in initial conditions makes an
increasingly large difference as the time value
increases. It is for this reason that weather fore-
casts are more inaccurate the further into the
future one attempts to predict their behaviour.
Struck by the disproportionate effect that initial
conditions had on the final outcome of this sys-
tem Edward Lorenz certainly invented the the-
ory’s most enduring image in 1979, in an
address to the American Association for the
Advancement of Science entitled, “Does the
flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tor-
nado in Texas?” (Lorenz, 1993)
return to the original
point giving a closed path
Conditions for Chaos
If we consider Chaotic behaviour in nonlin-
ear systems there is one key condition that
must be met for this behaviour to occur. This
condition is that the phase space is at least three
dimensional. The reason for this is the Poin-
care-Bendixon Theorem that states, if we are
dealing with two dimensional autonomous
systems, for example:
xo = f (x, y)
yo = g (x, y)
Then the phase path must eventually do one of
three things: terminate at an equilibrium point;
approach a limit cycle; return to the original
point giving a closed path, as illustrated by fig-
ure 1.
This means we can know what will happen
to these systems, we can in theory predict their
behaviour. They are not therefore ‘random’ os-
cillations (Acheson, 1997).
Lorenz Equations
Lorenz used 12 equations when predicting
the weather; however, “the Lorenz Equations”
refers to the three main formulas he used
(Lorenz, 1989). These arose from a simplified
model of thermal convection in a layer of fluid.
They are as follows:
xo = 10 (y - x)
yo = rx - y - zx
8
zo = - z + xy
3 be stable for:1 1 r 1 24.74 . These are the
Where originally:
• x is proportional to the speed of motion
of the air due to convection.
• y is a measure of the temperature
difference between the warm, rising air and the
cool, falling air.
The Roulette
Gambling is certainly one area where
being able to accurately predict the future
results would of course lead to phenome-
nal successes. Although such a truly accu-
rate system would be any gamblers’ Holy
Grail, if it was to be universally available
it would destroy the very nature of the
practice itself. Gambling was convention-
• z is a measure of the vertical temperature
difference as you move through the system
from top to bottom.
• r the measure of the difference in the tem-
perature
If we find the equilibrium points for these
three equations it is evident:
x = 0, y = 0, z = 0 , is an equilibrium point
for all values of r . It turns out that this point is
only stable for values of r 1 1. If we now in-
crease r beyond this point we find two new
equilibrium points and these turn out only to
only equilibrium points that exist.
Lorenz, although recognizing the regular-
ity in these systems, was also very aware that
these where no ordinary systems. Their sensi-
tivity put huge restraints on the traditional
ways one may make use of a system. As for the
Wheel
ally thought to be predominantly based on
sciences of probability and perhaps even
luck. Although there are many tricks top
level gamblers employ to increase the like-
lihood of winning, it seemed hard to imag-
ine that any gambling system was
deterministic in any way. That is until
Chaos Theory entered the picture. We may
weather the implications of the findings where
mixed, although it was now theoretically pos-
sible to predicate any forecast given the condi-
tions, it was now even more than before
seeming practically impossible to provide the
data required to do so. As he wrote in his 1963
paper:
“When our results…. are applied to the atmos-
phere… they indicate that prediction of the suffi-
ciently distant future is impossible by any method,
unless the present conditions are known exactly. In
view of the inevitable inaccuracy and incomplete-
ness of weather observations, precise very-long-
ranging forecasting would seem to be non-existent.”
(Lorenz, 1963: 130–141)
These Chaotic systems, unconventional in
themselves, would have to be handled in dif-
ferent more unconventional ways it seems if
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 7
ask what kind of systems exhibit these
chaotic examples and the most famous one
in this area must be the roulette wheel.
The roulette wheel is nowhere near
as “random” as large scale casinos
would have you believe. In fact, a
bouncing roulette ball obeys exactly
the same laws of physics as a bounc-
ing tennis ball. So why is it so diffi-
cult, neigh on impossible, to predict
where the roulette ball will land? Pre-
dicting the motion of a tennis ball
seems simple enough and generally
speaking a minute inaccuracy in the
measurement of the initial conditions
(such as the height dropped, the angle,
air resistance… etc.) will result in a
very small inaccuracy of prediction.
The ball may land only a few millime-
The roulette wheel is
nowhere near as “random”
as large scale casinos would
have you believe.
tres from where it was expected to
land. A roulette ball, however, is in-
volved in a chaotic system. This means
that if there is even a minute inaccu-
racy in the measurements of how high
the ball was dropped from, how fast
the table was spinning or indeed the
dimensions of the table, then the pre-
dicted resting place of the roulette ball
would be massively inaccurate. In-
stead of landing just a few millimetres
from where it was predicted to land,
like the tennis ball, the roulette ball
may well end up on the other side of
the table. This is a prime example of a
chaotic system.
Emma Cummin
they where to aid the project of scientific en-
quiry.
Even if the success of the theory when ap-
plied to a weather model seemed to be cur-
tailed by limitations in other practices (of
weather observation for instance), the theory
was still groundbreaking. One of the reasons
for this was its incredible potential, it wasn’t
long before systems exhibiting chaotic dynam-
ics where being recognized across a large num-
ber of fields, from mathematical models to
biological patterns.
Chris Andrews
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 4
Feature Chaos Theory
A brief Introduction
This article aims to outline the discovery of ‘chaos’ and explain some of the basic ideas of the theory in terms of
the Lorenz Equations. It shall then look in more detail at examples of where we may find ‘chaos’ .
Chaos theory is a radical, topical scientific
discovery. It is not only a prolific field in math-
ematics but has proven to be applicable in a
staggering number of areas and provides us
with new tools in which we may explain and
interact with the world round about us.
What is Chaos Theory?
Popular perceptions of Chaos theory most
notably include ‘the butterfly effect.’ The idea
is that a tiny influence such a single butterfly
flapping its wings can cause a seemingly dis-
proportionate outcome, that is, tornado at the
other side of the world. This indeed is the idea
at the very heart of Chaos Theory; that minus-
cule differences in ‘initial conditions’ can have
drastic consequences on a final result
(Chorafas, 1994).
Chaos theory can be applied to describing
the behaviour of certain dynamical systems
which are functions of time. Uniquely in a
chaotic system, although behaviour appears
random and unpredictable the systems are ac-
tually deterministic. To understand that even
small, seemingly unimportant alterations in the
initial conditions change the entire outcome of
a system is to understand the basic principle of
Chaos theory.
The Discovery of Chaos Theory
Chaos theory was discovered in the 1960’s
by a collaboration of scientists who, against the
grain, considered these unexpected results and
ideas. However the discovery of the theory is
popularly attributed to Dr. Edward Lorenz
who coined the phrase the “butterfly effect”
and is commonly known as the “Father of
Chaos” (Lorenz, 1989). Lorenz had made a
weather stimulating programme on his com-
puter where he worked at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. This very complex pro-
gram had many complicated equations deter-
mining the probability of certain weather
forecasts. He would input some conditions
(e.g. the temperature, wind speed etc.) and it
would generate a graph of the predicted
weather. The program was considered very
highly and incredibly seemed as though it
would never repeat a previous sequence. It was
believed that if the exact initial weather condi-
tions were put in to this program, it could in-
fallibly mimic the real varying weather
conditions outside. On one occasion as the pro-
gram was running on the initial conditions that
Lorenz entered he decided that he wanted to
take a better look at the final outcome of the
6 [The , Commutator] February 2010
terminate at an equilib- approach a limit cycle
rium point
figure 1 The three possible phase paths of a two dimensional system
weather. Instead of allowing the program to
run he cheated, he read off the values from the
earlier stimulation and input these as the initial
conditions. Now although the computer would
calculate numbers to six decimal places, when
Lorenz inputted the values half way through
figure 2 two very different outcomes, with
very similar initial conditions
the stimulation he rounded them to three dec-
imal places. It transpired this minute change
in initial conditions completely altered the out-
come of the predicted weather.
The above graph is an example of the kind
of divergence that Lorenz would have been
presented with. It clearly demonstrates that the
small difference in initial conditions makes an
increasingly large difference as the time value
increases. It is for this reason that weather fore-
casts are more inaccurate the further into the
future one attempts to predict their behaviour.
Struck by the disproportionate effect that initial
conditions had on the final outcome of this sys-
tem Edward Lorenz certainly invented the the-
ory’s most enduring image in 1979, in an
address to the American Association for the
Advancement of Science entitled, “Does the
flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tor-
nado in Texas?” (Lorenz, 1993)
return to the original
point giving a closed path
Conditions for Chaos
If we consider Chaotic behaviour in nonlin-
ear systems there is one key condition that
must be met for this behaviour to occur. This
condition is that the phase space is at least three
dimensional. The reason for this is the Poin-
care-Bendixon Theorem that states, if we are
dealing with two dimensional autonomous
systems, for example:
xo = f (x, y)
yo = g (x, y)
Then the phase path must eventually do one of
three things: terminate at an equilibrium point;
approach a limit cycle; return to the original
point giving a closed path, as illustrated by fig-
ure 1.
This means we can know what will happen
to these systems, we can in theory predict their
behaviour. They are not therefore ‘random’ os-
cillations (Acheson, 1997).
Lorenz Equations
Lorenz used 12 equations when predicting
the weather; however, “the Lorenz Equations”
refers to the three main formulas he used
(Lorenz, 1989). These arose from a simplified
model of thermal convection in a layer of fluid.
They are as follows:
xo = 10 (y - x)
yo = rx - y - zx
8
zo = - z + xy
3 be stable for:1 1 r 1 24.74 . These are the
Where originally:
• x is proportional to the speed of motion
of the air due to convection.
• y is a measure of the temperature
difference between the warm, rising air and the
cool, falling air.
The Roulette
Gambling is certainly one area where
being able to accurately predict the future
results would of course lead to phenome-
nal successes. Although such a truly accu-
rate system would be any gamblers’ Holy
Grail, if it was to be universally available
it would destroy the very nature of the
practice itself. Gambling was convention-
• z is a measure of the vertical temperature
difference as you move through the system
from top to bottom.
• r the measure of the difference in the tem-
perature
If we find the equilibrium points for these
three equations it is evident:
x = 0, y = 0, z = 0 , is an equilibrium point
for all values of r . It turns out that this point is
only stable for values of r 1 1. If we now in-
crease r beyond this point we find two new
equilibrium points and these turn out only to
only equilibrium points that exist.
Lorenz, although recognizing the regular-
ity in these systems, was also very aware that
these where no ordinary systems. Their sensi-
tivity put huge restraints on the traditional
ways one may make use of a system. As for the
Wheel
ally thought to be predominantly based on
sciences of probability and perhaps even
luck. Although there are many tricks top
level gamblers employ to increase the like-
lihood of winning, it seemed hard to imag-
ine that any gambling system was
deterministic in any way. That is until
Chaos Theory entered the picture. We may
weather the implications of the findings where
mixed, although it was now theoretically pos-
sible to predicate any forecast given the condi-
tions, it was now even more than before
seeming practically impossible to provide the
data required to do so. As he wrote in his 1963
paper:
“When our results…. are applied to the atmos-
phere… they indicate that prediction of the suffi-
ciently distant future is impossible by any method,
unless the present conditions are known exactly. In
view of the inevitable inaccuracy and incomplete-
ness of weather observations, precise very-long-
ranging forecasting would seem to be non-existent.”
(Lorenz, 1963: 130–141)
These Chaotic systems, unconventional in
themselves, would have to be handled in dif-
ferent more unconventional ways it seems if
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 7
ask what kind of systems exhibit these
chaotic examples and the most famous one
in this area must be the roulette wheel.
The roulette wheel is nowhere near
as “random” as large scale casinos
would have you believe. In fact, a
bouncing roulette ball obeys exactly
the same laws of physics as a bounc-
ing tennis ball. So why is it so diffi-
cult, neigh on impossible, to predict
where the roulette ball will land? Pre-
dicting the motion of a tennis ball
seems simple enough and generally
speaking a minute inaccuracy in the
measurement of the initial conditions
(such as the height dropped, the angle,
air resistance… etc.) will result in a
very small inaccuracy of prediction.
The ball may land only a few millime-
The roulette wheel is
nowhere near as “random”
as large scale casinos would
have you believe.
tres from where it was expected to
land. A roulette ball, however, is in-
volved in a chaotic system. This means
that if there is even a minute inaccu-
racy in the measurements of how high
the ball was dropped from, how fast
the table was spinning or indeed the
dimensions of the table, then the pre-
dicted resting place of the roulette ball
would be massively inaccurate. In-
stead of landing just a few millimetres
from where it was predicted to land,
like the tennis ball, the roulette ball
may well end up on the other side of
the table. This is a prime example of a
chaotic system.
Emma Cummin
they where to aid the project of scientific en-
quiry.
Even if the success of the theory when ap-
plied to a weather model seemed to be cur-
tailed by limitations in other practices (of
weather observation for instance), the theory
was still groundbreaking. One of the reasons
for this was its incredible potential, it wasn’t
long before systems exhibiting chaotic dynam-
ics where being recognized across a large num-
ber of fields, from mathematical models to
biological patterns.
Chris Andrews
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 5
Feature Chaos Theory
Lorenz system of equations in detail
The weather is a complex and unpre-
dictable series of events that occurs every-
day and is extremely difficult to model. One
important aspect in meteorology, and fluid
mechanics, is the problem of convection: the
process by which hot air rises and cold air
sinks. In our atmosphere we know that the
air at the bottom is generally higher than it
is on the top. However, the convective
process is not completely stable and in some
cases there is no convection or complex tur-
bulent motion can occur.
Let T be the temperature of the atmos-
phere then the temperature difference be-
tween the two altitudes can then help us
describe the onset of convection and turbu-
lent flows. If we consider a temperature dif-
ference to be dt , then if this occurs below a
critical value, c then there is no convection,
above the critical value steady convection
occurs. The onset of convection has been re-
searched and a dimensionless number called
the Rayleigh’s number, R a , as described by
Lord Rayleigh which s used to determine
where the onset of convection occurs. How-
ever if the temperature difference is large
enough then complex turbulent flows ap-
pear and from this poses a difficult question:
for what value of temperature T do turbu-
lent flows occur?
This phenomenon was investigated by
Edward Lorenz, to which he discovered the
Lorenz system of equations which are de-
scribed on page 6 but will be outlined here
in more detail:
dx
= vx (y - x)
dt
dy
= rx - y - xz (1)
dt
dz
= - bz + xy
dt
The parameter r in the model is Rayleigh’s
number which is denoted as,
r = R a /R c (2)
where R C is the critical Rayleigh number
for which convection occurs, and so in the
investigation to where turbulence in the at-
mosphere occurs it is useful to consider dif-
ferent values of the parameterr .
Analysis of the Lorenz system
Onset of Convection
The Lorenz system in equation (1) is
non-linear due to the xz and xy terms, there-
fore it is difficult to get an analytical solution
and numerical methods must be used. How-
ever we can locate the critical points of the
system by setting dx/dt = dy/dt = dz/dt = 0 .
We can then choose x = y from the first
equation in (1) and we obtain,
x (r - 1 - z) = 0
2 figure 3 spectral diagram
x - bz = 0 (3)
8 [The , Commutator] February 2010
From the first equation in (3) we can
choose either: x = 0 to give x = 0, y = 0
and z = 0 as critical point CP1 , or, z = r - 1
to give x = ! b (r - 1) , y = ! b (r - 1)
and z = r - 1 as critical point CP2 . We note
that the only critical point for r < 1 is
CP1 = (0, 0, 0) since the second critical point
gives complex values. Then for r > 1 the crit-
ical points CP1 and CP2 are valid. Thus we
can see that r = 1 gives a bifurication point
and so denotes the onset of convection in
our model. This makes physical sense since
the value r is taken to be dimensionalised
where r = R a /R c where R c is taken to be the
critical Rayleigh number.
Methods of analysis
The Lorenz system of equations can be
analysed in different pictorial fashions such
as time plots, phase-space plots and spectral
diagrams. These are useful in examining the
different effects of r on the system which
may provide some understand into its be-
haviour.
Time plots
Time plots show the way in which a par-
ticular value of x, y and z and vary with
time t . This generally is a decent method to
show when a system develops chaotic be-
haviour. Usually a time plot consists of a
harmonic wave which oscillates with time
when the system is stable, however when
the system becomes unstable the harmonic
wave becomes inconsistent and may ’jump’
as shown in figure . This however is not a
decent method to evaluate different values
of r since it may require hundreds of plots to
see when r changes from stable to unstable.
Phase-space portraits
Phase-space portraits show the varia-
tions of x and y for example, or in the case
of a three dimensional plot show how x, y
and z vary after a specific time t . However,
to evaluate different values of r it is not very
effective since numerous plots are required
to examine specifically when a system be-
comes unstable. For a stable system the plot
oscillates towards a point and remains fixed
there for all time as shown in the first dia-
gram of figure. Interestingly with the lorenz
system, in the phase-space portrait, if a sys-
tem become unstable it develops strange at-
tractors. The trajectories orbit around these
attractors and in some cases produce limit
cycles, whereby the trajectory orbits the
same path for a certain amount of time. Usu-
ally when r is large enough the trajectory
will orbit one strange attractor then sud-
denly jump to jump to the other and then
back again without any real pattern, a sign
of chaotic behaviour as seen in the figure for
figure 1 The values of S are shown in the above diagrams. The first one shows a stable system when
r = 14 and the second shows and unstable system when r = 28 . A Initial conditions are
x = 1, y = 1, z = 1.
figure 2 The values of x (t) and y (t) are shown in the above diagrams. The first one shows a stable system
when r = 14 and the second shows and unstable system when r = 28 . The two vacant spaces that appear
in the second diagram are called strange attractor which the trajectories orbit. A Initial conditions are
x = 1, y = 1, z = 1.
the xy -plane. research has been to examine the system in
A brief summary of the Lorenz system of terms of spectral plots in terms of discrete
equations has been discussed. The values of systems, that is choosing a select number of
r are useful to examine in the real world as data points in the system, examining this
the system (1) can be used to model convec- against a Nyquist frequency and plotting
tion in the atmosphere. Interestingly, chaotic against its amplitude. Over 100 diagrams in
behaviour appear for a critical values of r figure 3 have been plotted together for val-
which is usually around r = 25 in most lit- ues between r = 0 to r = 30 and the ’noise’
erature and by running numerical calcula- that appear is approximately around r = 25
tions. These types of behaviour can be as well as slight chaotic behaviour around
examined in forms of time plots and phase- r = 14 . However further investigations are
space portraits to give a greater understand- needed into the practicality of this diagram,
ing of the systems behaviour. Further except it gives a decent pictorial description
for different values of r which is ideal for ex-
amining the onset of chaotic behaviour.
Sandy Black
Economic
C h a o s
Like in gambling (perhaps not
too far off the practise alto-
gether) one of the most fore-
front examples of a system in
which prediction is everything
The Tent Map
Chaos theory is also related to many mathematical models where there is a growing interest in
the area. Examples include the two-dimensional Small Horseshoe Map and the one-dimensional
Logistic Map and the one-dimensional Tent Map that shall now be presented in more detail.
In the preceding articles we have discussed Are there any other fixed points for this map?
the way in which chaos theory is related to com- Having a look at figure 4 it is clear that there
plicated systems such as the roulette wheel and exists another fixed point at point A. The fixed
how a slight change to an initial condition can sig- point at A can be attained algebraically by solving
nificantly change the outcome of the event or even where the tent function intersects the line
make the event outcome impossible to predict. Xn+1 = Xn ( y = x equivalent)
2 (1 - X n) = X n {since 0.5 # X n # 1.0 },
Properties of the tent map which yields the other fixed pointX n = 2/3 .
The tent map is
Suppose we choose a value close to either of
an iterated function the fixed points, lets say 0.659 (extremely close to
with its graph
the fixed point 2/3 ). After a few iterations under
likened to the shape the tent map function:
of a tent (figure 4). It
0.659 " 0.682 " 0.636 " 0.728…
demonstrates a
range of dynamical
We can see that the value of 0.659 gradually moves
away from the fixed point 2/3 but is still reason-
behaviour ranging
ably close to it which we expect since the change
from predictable to
to the initial value, 2/3, is very insignificant. Any
chaotic
Figure 4 The Tent Map point close enough to either of the fixed points be-
The tent func- have this way (unstable) and so we are able to pre-
tion is defined for all values on the unit interval
dict the direction that the value goes under the tent
[0, 1] . This closed interval contains the image of
map function, that is, away from the fixed point
this function so that when we input real values but still reasonably near to it.
from this domain, the function outputs real values Chaotic behaviour Now suppose that we
in, the interval [0,1]. Mathematically we write this choose two random non fixed values that are
mapping as f: [0, 1] " [0, 1] . Since the image of
again very close to each other, say 0.258 and 0.259.
this function is contained in the domain we can Applying the tent map, f , 10 times to each value
begin with a number, say x , in the interval [0, 1]
gives the graph :
and repeatedly apply or rather, iterate, the tent
map function f : x, f (x), f (f (x)), f (f (f (x))) ...
. The tent map is defined by the difference equa-
tion :
1
Xn+1 = 1 - 2 Xn -
2
This equation may be rewritten as:
X n + 1 = 2X n , 0 # X n 1 0.5;
X n + 1 = 2 (1 - X n) , 0.5 # X n 1 1.0. We can see how 0.258 and 0.259 initially follow a
similar pattern during the process of iteration
Predictable behaviour which we expect to happen as the difference be-
For certain points in the interval [0, 1] , when tween the initial values isn’t at all significant. After
we plug them into the function we will not see any the 8th iteration we start to see a hint of variance
change to the value after x amount of iterations between the values but by the end of the 10th iter-
since they do not map to any other value but ation we see a clear divergence between them.
themselves. These points are called fixed points. Again we see the telltale features of a chaotic sys-
We say that a is a fixed point of a function if and tem - the slightest of changes to the initial condi-
tions of the system can result in a seemingly
only if f (a) = a . In other words the point
unpredictable the outcome. We can see this same
(a, f (a)) lies on the line y = x , so that the graph
pattern emerge after a sufficiently large number of
of the tent function has a common point with the iterations (Simiu, 2002)
line y = x . As we can see (figure 1) 0 is a fixed
point of the tent map since f (0) = 0 i.e. the point
(0, 0) lies on the line y = x .
Sean Chan
is in economics; specifically, the
stock exchange. Here there is a
trologer can make a good living
and be taking seriously by a
It seems the spirit is strong but
the body of evidence weak;
huge demand for any theory
able to successfully predict the
highly educated audience
(Chorafas, 1994). Therefore the
there is as yet no conclusive
finding of the existence of a
totally random seeming fluctu- application of Chaos theory to chaotic system in economic and
ations in share prices for in- the stock exchange and other financial data (Brock et al,
stance. Indeed Wall Street is areas of economics has been at- 1991).
one of the few places in the tempted enthusiastically by re-
Fiona Doherty
modern world where an as- searchers but to limited success.
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 9
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 5
Feature Chaos Theory
Lorenz system of equations in detail
The weather is a complex and unpre-
dictable series of events that occurs every-
day and is extremely difficult to model. One
important aspect in meteorology, and fluid
mechanics, is the problem of convection: the
process by which hot air rises and cold air
sinks. In our atmosphere we know that the
air at the bottom is generally higher than it
is on the top. However, the convective
process is not completely stable and in some
cases there is no convection or complex tur-
bulent motion can occur.
Let T be the temperature of the atmos-
phere then the temperature difference be-
tween the two altitudes can then help us
describe the onset of convection and turbu-
lent flows. If we consider a temperature dif-
ference to be dt , then if this occurs below a
critical value, c then there is no convection,
above the critical value steady convection
occurs. The onset of convection has been re-
searched and a dimensionless number called
the Rayleigh’s number, R a , as described by
Lord Rayleigh which s used to determine
where the onset of convection occurs. How-
ever if the temperature difference is large
enough then complex turbulent flows ap-
pear and from this poses a difficult question:
for what value of temperature T do turbu-
lent flows occur?
This phenomenon was investigated by
Edward Lorenz, to which he discovered the
Lorenz system of equations which are de-
scribed on page 6 but will be outlined here
in more detail:
dx
= vx (y - x)
dt
dy
= rx - y - xz (1)
dt
dz
= - bz + xy
dt
The parameter r in the model is Rayleigh’s
number which is denoted as,
r = R a /R c (2)
where R C is the critical Rayleigh number
for which convection occurs, and so in the
investigation to where turbulence in the at-
mosphere occurs it is useful to consider dif-
ferent values of the parameterr .
Analysis of the Lorenz system
Onset of Convection
The Lorenz system in equation (1) is
non-linear due to the xz and xy terms, there-
fore it is difficult to get an analytical solution
and numerical methods must be used. How-
ever we can locate the critical points of the
system by setting dx/dt = dy/dt = dz/dt = 0 .
We can then choose x = y from the first
equation in (1) and we obtain,
x (r - 1 - z) = 0
2 figure 3 spectral diagram
x - bz = 0 (3)
8 [The , Commutator] February 2010
From the first equation in (3) we can
choose either: x = 0 to give x = 0, y = 0
and z = 0 as critical point CP1 , or, z = r - 1
to give x = ! b (r - 1) , y = ! b (r - 1)
and z = r - 1 as critical point CP2 . We note
that the only critical point for r < 1 is
CP1 = (0, 0, 0) since the second critical point
gives complex values. Then for r > 1 the crit-
ical points CP1 and CP2 are valid. Thus we
can see that r = 1 gives a bifurication point
and so denotes the onset of convection in
our model. This makes physical sense since
the value r is taken to be dimensionalised
where r = R a /R c where R c is taken to be the
critical Rayleigh number.
Methods of analysis
The Lorenz system of equations can be
analysed in different pictorial fashions such
as time plots, phase-space plots and spectral
diagrams. These are useful in examining the
different effects of r on the system which
may provide some understand into its be-
haviour.
Time plots
Time plots show the way in which a par-
ticular value of x, y and z and vary with
time t . This generally is a decent method to
show when a system develops chaotic be-
haviour. Usually a time plot consists of a
harmonic wave which oscillates with time
when the system is stable, however when
the system becomes unstable the harmonic
wave becomes inconsistent and may ’jump’
as shown in figure . This however is not a
decent method to evaluate different values
of r since it may require hundreds of plots to
see when r changes from stable to unstable.
Phase-space portraits
Phase-space portraits show the varia-
tions of x and y for example, or in the case
of a three dimensional plot show how x, y
and z vary after a specific time t . However,
to evaluate different values of r it is not very
effective since numerous plots are required
to examine specifically when a system be-
comes unstable. For a stable system the plot
oscillates towards a point and remains fixed
there for all time as shown in the first dia-
gram of figure. Interestingly with the lorenz
system, in the phase-space portrait, if a sys-
tem become unstable it develops strange at-
tractors. The trajectories orbit around these
attractors and in some cases produce limit
cycles, whereby the trajectory orbits the
same path for a certain amount of time. Usu-
ally when r is large enough the trajectory
will orbit one strange attractor then sud-
denly jump to jump to the other and then
back again without any real pattern, a sign
of chaotic behaviour as seen in the figure for
figure 1 The values of S are shown in the above diagrams. The first one shows a stable system when
r = 14 and the second shows and unstable system when r = 28 . A Initial conditions are
x = 1, y = 1, z = 1.
figure 2 The values of x (t) and y (t) are shown in the above diagrams. The first one shows a stable system
when r = 14 and the second shows and unstable system when r = 28 . The two vacant spaces that appear
in the second diagram are called strange attractor which the trajectories orbit. A Initial conditions are
x = 1, y = 1, z = 1.
the xy -plane. research has been to examine the system in
A brief summary of the Lorenz system of terms of spectral plots in terms of discrete
equations has been discussed. The values of systems, that is choosing a select number of
r are useful to examine in the real world as data points in the system, examining this
the system (1) can be used to model convec- against a Nyquist frequency and plotting
tion in the atmosphere. Interestingly, chaotic against its amplitude. Over 100 diagrams in
behaviour appear for a critical values of r figure 3 have been plotted together for val-
which is usually around r = 25 in most lit- ues between r = 0 to r = 30 and the ’noise’
erature and by running numerical calcula- that appear is approximately around r = 25
tions. These types of behaviour can be as well as slight chaotic behaviour around
examined in forms of time plots and phase- r = 14 . However further investigations are
space portraits to give a greater understand- needed into the practicality of this diagram,
ing of the systems behaviour. Further except it gives a decent pictorial description
for different values of r which is ideal for ex-
amining the onset of chaotic behaviour.
Sandy Black
Economic
C h a o s
Like in gambling (perhaps not
too far off the practise alto-
gether) one of the most fore-
front examples of a system in
which prediction is everything
The Tent Map
Chaos theory is also related to many mathematical models where there is a growing interest in
the area. Examples include the two-dimensional Small Horseshoe Map and the one-dimensional
Logistic Map and the one-dimensional Tent Map that shall now be presented in more detail.
In the preceding articles we have discussed Are there any other fixed points for this map?
the way in which chaos theory is related to com- Having a look at figure 4 it is clear that there
plicated systems such as the roulette wheel and exists another fixed point at point A. The fixed
how a slight change to an initial condition can sig- point at A can be attained algebraically by solving
nificantly change the outcome of the event or even where the tent function intersects the line
make the event outcome impossible to predict. Xn+1 = Xn ( y = x equivalent)
2 (1 - X n) = X n {since 0.5 # X n # 1.0 },
Properties of the tent map which yields the other fixed pointX n = 2/3 .
The tent map is
Suppose we choose a value close to either of
an iterated function the fixed points, lets say 0.659 (extremely close to
with its graph
the fixed point 2/3 ). After a few iterations under
likened to the shape the tent map function:
of a tent (figure 4). It
0.659 " 0.682 " 0.636 " 0.728…
demonstrates a
range of dynamical
We can see that the value of 0.659 gradually moves
away from the fixed point 2/3 but is still reason-
behaviour ranging
ably close to it which we expect since the change
from predictable to
to the initial value, 2/3, is very insignificant. Any
chaotic
Figure 4 The Tent Map point close enough to either of the fixed points be-
The tent func- have this way (unstable) and so we are able to pre-
tion is defined for all values on the unit interval
dict the direction that the value goes under the tent
[0, 1] . This closed interval contains the image of
map function, that is, away from the fixed point
this function so that when we input real values but still reasonably near to it.
from this domain, the function outputs real values Chaotic behaviour Now suppose that we
in, the interval [0,1]. Mathematically we write this choose two random non fixed values that are
mapping as f: [0, 1] " [0, 1] . Since the image of
again very close to each other, say 0.258 and 0.259.
this function is contained in the domain we can Applying the tent map, f , 10 times to each value
begin with a number, say x , in the interval [0, 1]
gives the graph :
and repeatedly apply or rather, iterate, the tent
map function f : x, f (x), f (f (x)), f (f (f (x))) ...
. The tent map is defined by the difference equa-
tion :
1
Xn+1 = 1 - 2 Xn -
2
This equation may be rewritten as:
X n + 1 = 2X n , 0 # X n 1 0.5;
X n + 1 = 2 (1 - X n) , 0.5 # X n 1 1.0. We can see how 0.258 and 0.259 initially follow a
similar pattern during the process of iteration
Predictable behaviour which we expect to happen as the difference be-
For certain points in the interval [0, 1] , when tween the initial values isn’t at all significant. After
we plug them into the function we will not see any the 8th iteration we start to see a hint of variance
change to the value after x amount of iterations between the values but by the end of the 10th iter-
since they do not map to any other value but ation we see a clear divergence between them.
themselves. These points are called fixed points. Again we see the telltale features of a chaotic sys-
We say that a is a fixed point of a function if and tem - the slightest of changes to the initial condi-
tions of the system can result in a seemingly
only if f (a) = a . In other words the point
unpredictable the outcome. We can see this same
(a, f (a)) lies on the line y = x , so that the graph
pattern emerge after a sufficiently large number of
of the tent function has a common point with the iterations (Simiu, 2002)
line y = x . As we can see (figure 1) 0 is a fixed
point of the tent map since f (0) = 0 i.e. the point
(0, 0) lies on the line y = x .
Sean Chan
is in economics; specifically, the
stock exchange. Here there is a
trologer can make a good living
and be taking seriously by a
It seems the spirit is strong but
the body of evidence weak;
huge demand for any theory
able to successfully predict the
highly educated audience
(Chorafas, 1994). Therefore the
there is as yet no conclusive
finding of the existence of a
totally random seeming fluctu- application of Chaos theory to chaotic system in economic and
ations in share prices for in- the stock exchange and other financial data (Brock et al,
stance. Indeed Wall Street is areas of economics has been at- 1991).
one of the few places in the tempted enthusiastically by re-
Fiona Doherty
modern world where an as- searchers but to limited success.
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 9
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 6
Mathematics and People
For centuries, the notion that women are in-
nately less capable of studying mathematics then
men has persisted even in the most educated of
minds. In 2006, the proportion of students apply-
ing to study Mathematical and Computer Sciences
at an undergraduate level in the UK who were fe-
male was just 21.2% . Many of us just accept this,
citing that maths and science are traditionally
more masculine subjects, but there has been a sur-
prising amount of research on gender and mathe-
matics in the past few decades. Is it fair to assume
that mathematics is just better suited to men, and
that because of a woman’s genetics she is always
destined to be outshone by her male counterparts?
In short, the answer is no, that is to say it doesn’t
fully explain the under representation of women
in the field. Certainly, it has been shown that boys
and girls learn differently due to genetics, but
there is no evidence to suggest that girls are less
able to learn and understand mathematics be-
cause of gender differences. This then suggests
that environmental factors could possibly explain
the differences, perhaps due to social influences
or current teaching methods.
In the UK, mathematics is taught as a core
subject, and all students must study it throughout
their primary and the majority of their secondary
education. This can make it challenging to deter-
mine a student’s attitudes towards the subject
until it no longer becomes obligatory. In Scotland,
many students have the choice to opt out of math-
ematics before studying for their Highers. In 2007,
the proportion of students who studied Higher
Mathematics that were female was 48.7%, which
does not seem particularly low, but if we then con-
sider the same statistic but in Advanced Higher
Mathematics the proportion drops to 38.2% .
Equivalently, in England and Wales, the propor-
tion of students studying an A Level in Mathemat-
ics in 2006 who were female was just 38.5% .
Previous data shows a similar trend going back
for decades so it is clear that there are fewer girls
then boys who choose to study mathematics once
the subject becomes elective. Despite this, the per-
centage of girls achieving a passing grade was
higher then for boys in both Mathematics Higher
and Mathematics Advanced Higher (70.5% com-
pared to 69.6% and 70.9% compared to 62.5% re-
spectively). So in the 2007 data, the gender
differences disappear when one accounts for the
number of students who participate in courses.
This is a common result among many different
studies across the world, and is known as the The-
ory of Differential Participation (Fennema & Sher-
man 1977). Although this theory is not fully
accepted by all researchers in mathematics educa-
tion, there is no dispute that fewer girls participate
in the more advanced levels of the subject.
One measure, which has been employed by a
10 [The , Commutator] February 2010
Are Men Really Better at
Maths than Women?
number of countries across the world, has been
the introduction of intervention programmes in
schools. In the USA, one such program run by
Fennema et al. in 1981, involved the broadcasting
of videos designed to change attitudes about gen-
der-related differences in maths by giving infor-
mation about careers, the educational relevance of
maths and suggestions for activities to effect
change. The videos were focused on specific target
groups including students, teachers and parents.
The research was based on two assumptions,
firstly, that if the girls’ knowledge on gender dif-
ferences increased and their attitudes towards
mathematics were improved then their participa-
tion in more advanced courses would also in-
crease. And secondly, that in order to change the
attitudes of the girls, then the expectations of their
parents and teachers would also need to be altered
assuming that the students are influenced by their
social environment. Fennema and her colleagues
did indeed find that the girls’ participation in ad-
vanced maths courses increased. They also
showed an increased understanding of gender
differences, saw mathematics as more useful for
their future lives and were less likely to blame
their failures on lack of ability. However, it should
be noted that boys were also included in the study
and their attitudes to mathematics improved in a
similar way to the girls’. The success of this pro-
gramme and others, however, shows how effec-
tive such interventions can be in improving the
attitudes of female (and male) students towards
mathematics. Before a child’s progression into sec-
ondary education, there is little difference in how
children value the subject (Eccles et al. 1983) but
once in secondary school girls begin to rank math-
ematics as their lowest valued subject compared
to boys who have it ranked as one of the highest
(Eccles et al. 1993). It has been suggested that this
is due to a child’s increasing awareness of gender-
roles as they grow older. In other words, girl’s be-
come influenced by their social environment in
such a way that they begin to value mathematics
less due to the expectations placed upon them
from society.
There are a number of government initiatives
in this country as well, targeted at improving not
only the gender differences in mathematics but
also the overall attitude of students to the subject.
However, they have had limited success, which
suggests that if a student’s perception of mathe-
matics is to be altered, then there should be as
much emphasis on improving the attitude’s of
teachers and parents. Many studies have shown
that boys tend to believe that mathematics will be
of greater value to them then girls do, and they
also have a higher confidence in their abilities to
learn the subject. Both boys and girls also tend to
believe that mathematics is more suited to male
learning (Sherman & Fennema 1978).
Equality in the classroom can be a controver-
sial issue. All students in the UK are now entitled
to a fair and equal education, and until now, that
has meant that teachers endeavour to teach all
their students in the same way. But there has been
some evidence to show that the current teaching
style adopted by many schools is not suited to the
way that girls’ in particular learn. Boys respond
better to an education focussed around competi-
tive groups and individual work, whereas girls
learn more effectively in cooperative groups (Fen-
nema & Peterson 1986). However, much of a
child’s education is focussed around the compet-
itive model, partly because it seems boys are
much more responsive to this style of teaching.
This raises the issue of equality, i.e. perhaps rather
than equality in the classroom what we are really
looking for is equality in the outcomes. This could
mean that for some subjects, not just mathematics,
children should be separated into gender groups,
and the teaching organised around what suits
each group respectively. Teachers inevitably treat
boys and girls differently; a person’s gender is an
unavoidable part of one’s personality. However, if
the way in which mathematics is taught is having
a detrimental effect on many girls’ capabilities in
the subject, something does need to change. Many
would argue that education cannot possibly be
equal if students are treated differently, but the al-
ternative seems to be that for some children, their
education suffers.
The complexity of this issue is overwhelming.
Although current research does show that gender
differences in mathematics are decreasing, they do
still exist especially in students’ beliefs about the
subject and in career choices that involve mathe-
matics. This is not to say that there are no high
achieving women in the field, but when we look
at the data from the classroom, there is no denying
the smaller proportion of women then men who
progress into the advanced levels of mathematics.
However, it is unclear whether an effective solu-
tion exists to this problem, or even if the gender
imbalance in mathematics is a problem at all. In-
creased awareness of gender differences by stu-
dents, teachers and parents, does appear to
increase participation in the subject, but it could
be argued that if we place such a high importance
on an advanced mathematics education those
who choose a different path, be them male or fe-
male, would seem inferior; an idea that can surely
never lead to true equality.
Louise Ogden
Nazi Germany and Mathematics
Open any history book about Nazi Ger-
many and you'll find page after page of infor-
mation about their propaganda machine. In
the aftermath of the First World War, a grow-
ing number of the German Public, disillu-
sioned with mainstream politics and crippled,
both physically and psychologically, by eco-
nomic poverty, turned to the Nazis in the
polls. After seizing power and dismantling
the Weimar Republic's democracy in 1933,
Adolf Hitler's National Socialist German
Worker's Party set about trying to change the
hearts and minds of the German public, in ac-
cordance with their extremist ideology, one
rooted in racism and nationalist pride. They
played on already existing tensions within
German society and used them to achieve
their own needs. Their abhorrent views on
the superiority of the ''Aryan Race'' over the
Jewish community, the mentally ill, homosex-
uals and other minorities are well known to
most and throughout their reign they com-
mitted some of humanities worst atrocities.
Their propaganda machine, under the
leadership of Joseph Goebbels, was particu-
larly concerned with changing education to
fit their views. After all, if children were
raised as Nazis then, at least theoretically, the
party would be more secure. It is easy to see
how sciences like biology and anatomy
would be altered to provide an idealistic view
of the ''superior'' race. Equally, social sciences
like history were rewritten to cast a more op-
timistic view on the nation's history, to say the
least. However, a non political subject such as
mathematics has no clear link to any kind of
ideology, at least not since Pythagoreans and
other cults, and few history books recount in
any great detail the Nazi views towards
mathematics, and the effect their rule had on
the subject's teaching. This article will provide
a brief and hopefully interesting overview of
this, and we will see how their views range
from reasonable to bizarre.
As with most subjects, the Nazis tilted the
teaching of their subjects to not-so-subtly im-
pose their views on pupils. Below, a few gen-
uine maths questions from a Nazi textbook
are provided:
1) The construction of a lunatic asylum costs
6,000,000 RM. How many houses, at 11,000 RM,
could be built for that amount?
2) To keep a mentally ill person costs 4 RM
per day, a cripple 5.5 RM per day and a criminal
3.5 RM per day. Many civil servants receive only
4 RM per day, white collar workers barely 3.5 RM
and unskilled workers not even 2 RM per day for
their families.
According to conservative estimates that there
are 300,000 mentally ill, epileptics etc in care.
How much do these people cost to keep in total, at
a cost of 4 RM per day?
3) The Jews are aliens in Germany. In 1933
there were 66,060,000 inhabitants in the German
Reich, 499,682 of whom were Jews, What is the
percent of aliens?
After school level, Nazi influence was
also clear in mathematics at universities. After
reforms made by the ruling Nazis in 1933,
each lecturer had to perform a traditional nazi
salute at the beginning and end of each class.
Also, in 1933, ''Dozentenschaft'', an organiza-
tion which brought all academics under the
Nazi banner, provided character profiles of all
lecturers to make sure they were ''suitable'' for
their jobs. However, rather than examine their
scientific work, these ''report cards'' made
sure that the academic community were po-
litically coherent with Nazi ideology, at least
on the face of things. Any expression of sym-
pathy for oppressed minorities, or worse still
communist movements, could lead to any-
thing from losing their job to a spell in a
forced labour camp. The repressive nature of
the Nazi state placed paranoia in the halls of
universities, and mathematics was no excep-
tion, despite its non political roots.
Intrusion into mathematics by Nazis did-
n't stop there. E.A. Weiss, a mathematician
with Nazi sympathies at Bonn University, is
known for creating a series of Mathematical
''Camps'' in 1933. Inspired by the Hitler Youth
camps which aimed to unite and train people
from a young age, Weiss tried to combine this
with mathematical study. In his 1933 pam-
phlet, ''Mathematics: For What?'' he tried to
align mathematics with fascist ideology. In
the work, he dismisses the claim that Mathe-
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 11
matics can be studied simply for the sake of
studying mathematics. He argues that stu-
dents must have a purpose to study mathe-
matics and that maths ''for the sake of maths''
is hard to justify- not a particularly unusual
claim, if flawed. Nazi overtones soon surface
as he asks if it is ''really German'' to study
things for this reason. He claims that mathe-
matics is a character building process, pro-
moting (amongst other things) clarity of
speech and writing, courage, manners and
comradeship between student and professor.
He saw maths as a personality moulding
process and, with this in mind, he organized
a Mathematics Camp in Kronenburg with 10
other students (8 male, 2 female: a direct re-
sult of the Nazis alienating women students)
at a ruined castle. After unfurling the
swastika, they took part in the usual Nazi
camp activities of hiking and military style
games, but combining them with mathemat-
ical studies. A typical timetable contained 5
hours of mathematical studies throughout the
day. The camps ran until 1938, when the de-
mands of war curtailed any future plans.
Although the Nazi intrusion into mathe-
matics was not as bold as in other sciences,
the very fact they encroached on a completely
non political subject is a stark reminder on
how far they were willing to go. Mathemati-
cal papers began to slant towards ideology.
For example, in Tietjen's work, ''Space or
Number?'' he compared Germans to space
and the Jews to numbers. In the paper, al-
though numbers are not dismissed (indeed,
they are necessary), he believes the study of
space though observation and logic, will lead
to numbers, and this analogy is his effort to
emphasize superiority. Although ridiculous
to the reasonable minded reader, these ideas
were indeed part of the Nazi drive towards a
perfect ''Aryan'' state, and mathematics un-
fortunately wasn't spared in their quest.
Paul McFadden
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 6
Mathematics and People
For centuries, the notion that women are in-
nately less capable of studying mathematics then
men has persisted even in the most educated of
minds. In 2006, the proportion of students apply-
ing to study Mathematical and Computer Sciences
at an undergraduate level in the UK who were fe-
male was just 21.2% . Many of us just accept this,
citing that maths and science are traditionally
more masculine subjects, but there has been a sur-
prising amount of research on gender and mathe-
matics in the past few decades. Is it fair to assume
that mathematics is just better suited to men, and
that because of a woman’s genetics she is always
destined to be outshone by her male counterparts?
In short, the answer is no, that is to say it doesn’t
fully explain the under representation of women
in the field. Certainly, it has been shown that boys
and girls learn differently due to genetics, but
there is no evidence to suggest that girls are less
able to learn and understand mathematics be-
cause of gender differences. This then suggests
that environmental factors could possibly explain
the differences, perhaps due to social influences
or current teaching methods.
In the UK, mathematics is taught as a core
subject, and all students must study it throughout
their primary and the majority of their secondary
education. This can make it challenging to deter-
mine a student’s attitudes towards the subject
until it no longer becomes obligatory. In Scotland,
many students have the choice to opt out of math-
ematics before studying for their Highers. In 2007,
the proportion of students who studied Higher
Mathematics that were female was 48.7%, which
does not seem particularly low, but if we then con-
sider the same statistic but in Advanced Higher
Mathematics the proportion drops to 38.2% .
Equivalently, in England and Wales, the propor-
tion of students studying an A Level in Mathemat-
ics in 2006 who were female was just 38.5% .
Previous data shows a similar trend going back
for decades so it is clear that there are fewer girls
then boys who choose to study mathematics once
the subject becomes elective. Despite this, the per-
centage of girls achieving a passing grade was
higher then for boys in both Mathematics Higher
and Mathematics Advanced Higher (70.5% com-
pared to 69.6% and 70.9% compared to 62.5% re-
spectively). So in the 2007 data, the gender
differences disappear when one accounts for the
number of students who participate in courses.
This is a common result among many different
studies across the world, and is known as the The-
ory of Differential Participation (Fennema & Sher-
man 1977). Although this theory is not fully
accepted by all researchers in mathematics educa-
tion, there is no dispute that fewer girls participate
in the more advanced levels of the subject.
One measure, which has been employed by a
10 [The , Commutator] February 2010
Are Men Really Better at
Maths than Women?
number of countries across the world, has been
the introduction of intervention programmes in
schools. In the USA, one such program run by
Fennema et al. in 1981, involved the broadcasting
of videos designed to change attitudes about gen-
der-related differences in maths by giving infor-
mation about careers, the educational relevance of
maths and suggestions for activities to effect
change. The videos were focused on specific target
groups including students, teachers and parents.
The research was based on two assumptions,
firstly, that if the girls’ knowledge on gender dif-
ferences increased and their attitudes towards
mathematics were improved then their participa-
tion in more advanced courses would also in-
crease. And secondly, that in order to change the
attitudes of the girls, then the expectations of their
parents and teachers would also need to be altered
assuming that the students are influenced by their
social environment. Fennema and her colleagues
did indeed find that the girls’ participation in ad-
vanced maths courses increased. They also
showed an increased understanding of gender
differences, saw mathematics as more useful for
their future lives and were less likely to blame
their failures on lack of ability. However, it should
be noted that boys were also included in the study
and their attitudes to mathematics improved in a
similar way to the girls’. The success of this pro-
gramme and others, however, shows how effec-
tive such interventions can be in improving the
attitudes of female (and male) students towards
mathematics. Before a child’s progression into sec-
ondary education, there is little difference in how
children value the subject (Eccles et al. 1983) but
once in secondary school girls begin to rank math-
ematics as their lowest valued subject compared
to boys who have it ranked as one of the highest
(Eccles et al. 1993). It has been suggested that this
is due to a child’s increasing awareness of gender-
roles as they grow older. In other words, girl’s be-
come influenced by their social environment in
such a way that they begin to value mathematics
less due to the expectations placed upon them
from society.
There are a number of government initiatives
in this country as well, targeted at improving not
only the gender differences in mathematics but
also the overall attitude of students to the subject.
However, they have had limited success, which
suggests that if a student’s perception of mathe-
matics is to be altered, then there should be as
much emphasis on improving the attitude’s of
teachers and parents. Many studies have shown
that boys tend to believe that mathematics will be
of greater value to them then girls do, and they
also have a higher confidence in their abilities to
learn the subject. Both boys and girls also tend to
believe that mathematics is more suited to male
learning (Sherman & Fennema 1978).
Equality in the classroom can be a controver-
sial issue. All students in the UK are now entitled
to a fair and equal education, and until now, that
has meant that teachers endeavour to teach all
their students in the same way. But there has been
some evidence to show that the current teaching
style adopted by many schools is not suited to the
way that girls’ in particular learn. Boys respond
better to an education focussed around competi-
tive groups and individual work, whereas girls
learn more effectively in cooperative groups (Fen-
nema & Peterson 1986). However, much of a
child’s education is focussed around the compet-
itive model, partly because it seems boys are
much more responsive to this style of teaching.
This raises the issue of equality, i.e. perhaps rather
than equality in the classroom what we are really
looking for is equality in the outcomes. This could
mean that for some subjects, not just mathematics,
children should be separated into gender groups,
and the teaching organised around what suits
each group respectively. Teachers inevitably treat
boys and girls differently; a person’s gender is an
unavoidable part of one’s personality. However, if
the way in which mathematics is taught is having
a detrimental effect on many girls’ capabilities in
the subject, something does need to change. Many
would argue that education cannot possibly be
equal if students are treated differently, but the al-
ternative seems to be that for some children, their
education suffers.
The complexity of this issue is overwhelming.
Although current research does show that gender
differences in mathematics are decreasing, they do
still exist especially in students’ beliefs about the
subject and in career choices that involve mathe-
matics. This is not to say that there are no high
achieving women in the field, but when we look
at the data from the classroom, there is no denying
the smaller proportion of women then men who
progress into the advanced levels of mathematics.
However, it is unclear whether an effective solu-
tion exists to this problem, or even if the gender
imbalance in mathematics is a problem at all. In-
creased awareness of gender differences by stu-
dents, teachers and parents, does appear to
increase participation in the subject, but it could
be argued that if we place such a high importance
on an advanced mathematics education those
who choose a different path, be them male or fe-
male, would seem inferior; an idea that can surely
never lead to true equality.
Louise Ogden
Nazi Germany and Mathematics
Open any history book about Nazi Ger-
many and you'll find page after page of infor-
mation about their propaganda machine. In
the aftermath of the First World War, a grow-
ing number of the German Public, disillu-
sioned with mainstream politics and crippled,
both physically and psychologically, by eco-
nomic poverty, turned to the Nazis in the
polls. After seizing power and dismantling
the Weimar Republic's democracy in 1933,
Adolf Hitler's National Socialist German
Worker's Party set about trying to change the
hearts and minds of the German public, in ac-
cordance with their extremist ideology, one
rooted in racism and nationalist pride. They
played on already existing tensions within
German society and used them to achieve
their own needs. Their abhorrent views on
the superiority of the ''Aryan Race'' over the
Jewish community, the mentally ill, homosex-
uals and other minorities are well known to
most and throughout their reign they com-
mitted some of humanities worst atrocities.
Their propaganda machine, under the
leadership of Joseph Goebbels, was particu-
larly concerned with changing education to
fit their views. After all, if children were
raised as Nazis then, at least theoretically, the
party would be more secure. It is easy to see
how sciences like biology and anatomy
would be altered to provide an idealistic view
of the ''superior'' race. Equally, social sciences
like history were rewritten to cast a more op-
timistic view on the nation's history, to say the
least. However, a non political subject such as
mathematics has no clear link to any kind of
ideology, at least not since Pythagoreans and
other cults, and few history books recount in
any great detail the Nazi views towards
mathematics, and the effect their rule had on
the subject's teaching. This article will provide
a brief and hopefully interesting overview of
this, and we will see how their views range
from reasonable to bizarre.
As with most subjects, the Nazis tilted the
teaching of their subjects to not-so-subtly im-
pose their views on pupils. Below, a few gen-
uine maths questions from a Nazi textbook
are provided:
1) The construction of a lunatic asylum costs
6,000,000 RM. How many houses, at 11,000 RM,
could be built for that amount?
2) To keep a mentally ill person costs 4 RM
per day, a cripple 5.5 RM per day and a criminal
3.5 RM per day. Many civil servants receive only
4 RM per day, white collar workers barely 3.5 RM
and unskilled workers not even 2 RM per day for
their families.
According to conservative estimates that there
are 300,000 mentally ill, epileptics etc in care.
How much do these people cost to keep in total, at
a cost of 4 RM per day?
3) The Jews are aliens in Germany. In 1933
there were 66,060,000 inhabitants in the German
Reich, 499,682 of whom were Jews, What is the
percent of aliens?
After school level, Nazi influence was
also clear in mathematics at universities. After
reforms made by the ruling Nazis in 1933,
each lecturer had to perform a traditional nazi
salute at the beginning and end of each class.
Also, in 1933, ''Dozentenschaft'', an organiza-
tion which brought all academics under the
Nazi banner, provided character profiles of all
lecturers to make sure they were ''suitable'' for
their jobs. However, rather than examine their
scientific work, these ''report cards'' made
sure that the academic community were po-
litically coherent with Nazi ideology, at least
on the face of things. Any expression of sym-
pathy for oppressed minorities, or worse still
communist movements, could lead to any-
thing from losing their job to a spell in a
forced labour camp. The repressive nature of
the Nazi state placed paranoia in the halls of
universities, and mathematics was no excep-
tion, despite its non political roots.
Intrusion into mathematics by Nazis did-
n't stop there. E.A. Weiss, a mathematician
with Nazi sympathies at Bonn University, is
known for creating a series of Mathematical
''Camps'' in 1933. Inspired by the Hitler Youth
camps which aimed to unite and train people
from a young age, Weiss tried to combine this
with mathematical study. In his 1933 pam-
phlet, ''Mathematics: For What?'' he tried to
align mathematics with fascist ideology. In
the work, he dismisses the claim that Mathe-
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 11
matics can be studied simply for the sake of
studying mathematics. He argues that stu-
dents must have a purpose to study mathe-
matics and that maths ''for the sake of maths''
is hard to justify- not a particularly unusual
claim, if flawed. Nazi overtones soon surface
as he asks if it is ''really German'' to study
things for this reason. He claims that mathe-
matics is a character building process, pro-
moting (amongst other things) clarity of
speech and writing, courage, manners and
comradeship between student and professor.
He saw maths as a personality moulding
process and, with this in mind, he organized
a Mathematics Camp in Kronenburg with 10
other students (8 male, 2 female: a direct re-
sult of the Nazis alienating women students)
at a ruined castle. After unfurling the
swastika, they took part in the usual Nazi
camp activities of hiking and military style
games, but combining them with mathemat-
ical studies. A typical timetable contained 5
hours of mathematical studies throughout the
day. The camps ran until 1938, when the de-
mands of war curtailed any future plans.
Although the Nazi intrusion into mathe-
matics was not as bold as in other sciences,
the very fact they encroached on a completely
non political subject is a stark reminder on
how far they were willing to go. Mathemati-
cal papers began to slant towards ideology.
For example, in Tietjen's work, ''Space or
Number?'' he compared Germans to space
and the Jews to numbers. In the paper, al-
though numbers are not dismissed (indeed,
they are necessary), he believes the study of
space though observation and logic, will lead
to numbers, and this analogy is his effort to
emphasize superiority. Although ridiculous
to the reasonable minded reader, these ideas
were indeed part of the Nazi drive towards a
perfect ''Aryan'' state, and mathematics un-
fortunately wasn't spared in their quest.
Paul McFadden
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 7
Discovery
Finding Neptune
For thousands of years man has been aware of
planets beyond our own: Jupiter, Saturn, Venus,
Mars and Mercury, each taking the names of
deities from the Greek Pantheon though known of
when that very construct was an inkling in the dis-
tant future. All could be seen from Earth, observed
from Rome to Xianyang with the naked eye, and
perceived even in that time of more primitive sci-
ence as having a decisive effect or influence on our
lives. But this was not the movement of the
spheres immortalised in Shakespearean literature,
nor was it to be found in the astrological mum-
blings of mystics. Rather it lay in the quest to com-
plete an ordered picture of the solar system where
the laws of physics ruled, and to do so took math-
ematical artistry and determination the likes of
which few possessed.
The road to their unveiling began in 1690
when the English astronomer John Flamsteed
spotted a point of light which he duly classified as
a star. Over the coming decades other astronomers
made the same observations, and the same mis-
take. It took the polymath Sir William Herschel to
show them the error of their ways when in 1781
he saw the same distant object, believing it to be a
comet. He soon realised that what he observed
might not have been a comet after all; taking up
his pen he jotted down some calculations to con-
firm his suspicions and realised that he had in-
deed discovered a planet, older than any of the
sons of Adam but a new and ground-breaking dis-
covery. Uranus had now been unveiled and tele-
scopes across the known world peered upwards,
what had been to our eyes a bit part of far remote
scenery in the cosmic play was now exposed as a
key player.
From a mathematical standpoint the discov-
ery of Uranus was of limited importance, the
methods used by Herschel had already been ex-
plored with the known planets of the solar system,
similarly the characteristics which led him to re-
evaluate his initial designation of Uranus as a
comet was a result of the pre-existing corpus of
knowledge. However there was a new challenge
posed by the discovery, as Joseph Jerome Le Fran-
cais de Lalande found in 1782 when he noted
Uranus following a significantly different orbit to
that predicted. The best mathematical models
available could not account for the variance, in-
creasing the data set to include earlier observa-
12 [The , Commutator] February 2010
In 1989 Voyager 2 was 12 years into it’s mission as it passed Neptune,
transmitting this startling image back to Earth. However 143 years earlier
Le Verrier had discovered the planet "with the point of his pen".
tions of Uranus did little to improve it. They were
faced with a stark choice between appealing to an
undiscovered trans-uranian planet and rewriting
the Law of Gravity. The problem remained unre-
solved for decades until the 1820s and early 1830s
when improved measurements, predictions, and
Uranus’ continued contempt for them, began to
give way to a belief that the problem might lie not
in the mathematical methods used, or indeed in
the accuracy of observations on the known plan-
ets, but in an incomplete data set which omitted a
key player from the cast list, the hunt for the latest
planet was on.
Astronomers the world over began to search
the night skies in earnest, the degree to which
Uranus’ orbit was altered gave a starting point
suggesting a celestial body not exceeding 12th
magnitude. Many came close to discovering the
hypothetical planet, some, including Lalande him-
self, even observed it but attributed any noted po-
sitional variation to errors in their observations or
as some other species of celestial inhabitant.
On this occasion it was up to theoreticians to
find the planet which practical astronomers were
unable to pin down. Perturbation theory, a
method which seeks to determine the discernible
effect of known bodies on other known bodies,
had been in use for some time. The basic principle
begins with the solution to a known problem
which can then be modified through an iterative
process, giving a Power Series which quantifies
the difference between the true value and the
known problem and hence providing the answer
to the problem they are trying to solve. Effectively
it is an application of differential equations, but re-
versing the method to find details about an un-
known body proved far more difficult, leading
some to believe that the problems may be insur-
mountable.
The nature of the problems were twofold,
firstly in order to find the missing planet they had
to deduce a method of inverting Perturbation the-
ory, taking what they did know about Uranus (the
effect the known planets had on it and Uranus’ ef-
fect on them) and then using that to find out about
this hidden planet. A comparable problem in na-
ture, though certainly not in difficulty, might be
reduced to having the result of an integral and at-
tempting to find the integral itself, but without
known limits how to deal with the constant? Even
then before finding the solution to their ‘known
unknown’ of a planet they would have to take
away the iterative ‘add ons’ of the power series to
obtain the initial value to their planet’s position.
In practical terms there were two problems, the
first, a limited data series resulting from its fairly
recent discovery, was eroding by the early 1840s
as Uranus neared the completion of its first orbit
since the discovery by Herschel the second, find-
ing a mathematician with the necessary insight,
ability and tenacity to tackle the problem re-
mained, until like buses two emerged in quick
succession.
The method employed by both was similar;
using a formula for the perturbations of mean lon-
gitude it was possible to construct an equation
based on three differential equations belonging to
the unknown planet. An assumption is used to ob-
tain the fundamental values which are then ap-
plied to the formula, after which by changing the
form of the equation trigonometric relationships
can be applied reducing the problem to a matter
of eliminating the unknown values from the equa-
tions. Having reduced the equations it is then pos-
sible to use approximations to obtain a value for
i , which can be improved by repeated approxi-
mations, with values for the longitude, eccentric-
ity and mass of the planet can be obtained.
John Couch Adams first encountered the
problem in 1841 after reading a paper on the sub-
ject of Uranus’ anomalous orbit by George Airy
and resolved to begin an investigation, “as soon
as possible after attaining my degree”. Having
graduated in 1843 decorated with the assorted
laurels of Cambridge, including the Smith prize
won by Lord Kelvin two years later, he was finally
free to begin his work and set about making the
necessary calculations. By September of 1845 hav-
ing found repeated iterations were making little
change, he communicated the result to Professor
Challis, in October he door stepped the As-
tronomer Royal, Airy, twice, missing him on both
occasions and leaving a written account of his
findings. After the discovery of Neptune he was
able to further refine his work resulting in the ver-
sion published in the eventual, though belated,
paper “On the perturbations of Uranus” as an Ap-
pendix to the Nautical Almanac.
However Adams was not the only one to have
have found the problem a tantalising prospect
and conflicting claims were soon to lead to a less
than scientific squabble. Urbain Le Verrier com-
pleted a mathematics degree before beginning
his studies and a career in chemistry. A failed job
application later and he found himself as a tutor
at l'École Polytechnique specialising in celestial
mechanics. Initially he focused on the motion of
Mercury, but by 1845 he had turned his attention
to Uranus. Initially he carried out an extensive
series of calculations, concluding in a paper of
November 1845 that there was no way of ac-
counting for its disturbed orbit by the known
planets. By June of 1846 in another paper he had
concluded that another planet must exist which
accounted for the residual effect on Uranus’
orbit, giving an approximation of its distance
from the sun and a calculation of its longitude.
Finally, in August he was able to publish a paper
with a predicted orbit and mass for the new
planet, sent his result to Galle at the Berlin Ob-
servatory who received it on 23rd September
and that very night sighted the predicted planet,
within 1 degree of the theoretical prediction. As
Arago put it, Le Verrier had discovered a planet
"with the point of his pen", Neptune was re-
vealed and from then until 1930, and again from
2006 onwards, the solar system’s planetary com-
pany was complete.
Though there was no question of who had
ultimately triggered the discovery the English
scientific establishment was eager to claim credit
for the discovery (a second planet in under a
century would have been quite a feat). Indeed
Le Verrier’s June paper had triggered a last
minute push, coordinated by Airy, to beat him
to the punch, but the method used was time
consuming and Challis’ outdated star-map ren-
dered the search futile. Only after hearing of the
discovery did they realise their search had twice
spotted the planet but not recognised the signif-
icance. In spite of the acrimony between some
of the characters involved, Adams himself ac-
knowledged the priority claim of Le Verrier, pro-
viding ample demonstration of the saying
“publish or die” as a planet might just hit you.
Michael Stringer
Assorted Articles
Foundations of Mathematics
It is often said that maths and absolute knowl-
edge go hand in hand; indeed, it is often claimed
that the theorems of mathematics are the only
things whose truth we can be undoubtedly sure
of, with all other ‘facts’ being temporary or am-
biguous. From the ancient days of Plato and
Pythagoras, to the revolutionary times of the En-
lightenment, maths has always been admired for
its truth and its beauty. But how certain can we ac-
tually be of the claims of the absolute truth of
maths? We must look to its foundations, and see
that they are built solidly, consistently, and with-
out errors; otherwise, the whole of maths could
come crashing down around us.
This was a task faced by mathematicians at
the beginning of the 20th century. An attempt at
formalising the foundations of maths, purely in
terms of sets, had been made by Georg Cantor at
the end of the 1800s, however this was shown to
be inconsistent; it had not been formulated rigor-
ously enough. Cantor defined a set to be any col-
lection of objects of our imagination, and allowed
new sets to be created out of old in various ways,
such as taking unions and intersections.
However, in 1901, Bertrand Russell showed
that this model for the foundations of mathemat-
ics was not consistent. Russell devised a set, X ,
consisting of all sets which are not members of
themselves. A contradiction arises, as it is easy to
show that X both is and is not a member of itself.
Clearly, a different approach was needed.
Throughout the early years of the 20th cen-
tury, what is now known as axiomatic set theory
was developed. An axiom is essentially just a rule
which is assumed to be true, or self-evident. Ax-
ioms are commonplace in mathematics: from Eu-
clid’s axiomatisation of geometry in 300 BCE, to
the axioms required in the definition of a vector
space. Axiomatisation is a necessary procedure, as
when trying to prove something, we cannot just
continually break down what we are doing into
smaller and simpler steps; eventually, we must
stop, and accept that (or decide if) the step we are
trying to do is true.
By 1922, after much debate, a list of nine ax-
ioms was produced; these were the axioms upon
which the entirety of mathematics would be
based. They are known as the ZFC axioms (as they
were primarily developed by Zermelo and
Fraenkel, and include something known as the
axiom of choice), and are still accepted as the
foundation of mathematics today: any proof you
do can be broken down into a (probably very
long) chain of applications of these nine axioms.
Having been let down by set theories before,
much scrutiny was made by logicians over the
consistency of the axioms. An axiomatic set theory
is consistent if no contradictions can be derived
using its axioms. Unfortunately, in 1931, Kurt
Gödel showed that it is not possible to prove
whether or not the ZF axioms (that is, the ZFC ax-
ioms but with the axiom of choice removed) are
consistent or not. It has, however, been proved
that if the ZF axioms are consistent, then so are the
ZFC axioms (that is, adding the axiom of choice
to our list does not introduce any contradictions).
It is, however, widely believed that ZFC is consis-
tent; if it were not, it is thought that a contradic-
tion would have been discovered by now.
Another problem we have to deal with is how
to be sure that we have picked the ‘right’ axioms
to be part of our theory. What criteria are we using
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 13
to decide if an axiom is ‘self-evident’? For in-
stance, it is fairly clear that if two sets, A and B,
contain the same members as each other, we
should want it to be true that A=B. And, indeed,
an axiom saying just this is on our list of nine. But
there are other axioms, whose truths are not so
self-evident, which also form part of our list.
One such axiom is the previously mentioned
axiom of choice, whose inclusion along with the
ZF axioms was hotly debated for decades. Objec-
tions were made, since many found the truth of
the axiom not to be intuitively obvious, and, in
fact, if accepted in the theory, the axiom of choice
can be use to prove true statements which some
mathematicians call ‘undesirable’. An example of
such a result is that it is possible to decompose a
rigid, geometric sphere into a finite number of
pieces, then rearrange them so you get two
spheres of the same size as the original. This is
known as the Banach-Tarski paradox. That being
said, it is not really correct to claim that one of ZF
and ZFC is ‘right’ and the other is ‘wrong’ – they
are simply different theories, starting from differ-
ent assumptions. Mathematically, it is possible to
work with any consistent set of axioms, and see
what we can prove from them. Strictly, every the-
orem stated should begin with “If the list of ax-
ioms I am working with is assumed to be true,
then…”, however it is usually assumed we are
working in ZFC, and this is thankfully omitted!
There is a another, more crippling problem
when trying to formulate a rigorous foundation
for maths, as was discovered by in the 1930s, by
Gödel. The results, known as Gödel’s incomplete-
ness theorems, say that all consistent axiomatic
systems are incomplete, meaning that there are
certain true statements whose truths are unprov-
able using the rules of the system. The outlook is
perhaps a little bleak for us, then: either ZFC is in-
consistent (and so, in fact, every proposition can
be proved true, such as 1+1=3), or ZFC is consis-
tent, but incomplete, and so some true statements
are undecidable by the axioms. This is not a flaw
inherent to the ZFC theory itself, but one which
afflicts any sufficiently powerful axiomatic sys-
tem. We can either prove too much, or too little (in
the inconsistent and incomplete cases, respec-
tively), and so any attempt at formulating a com-
plete, consistent description of mathematics is
doomed to failure.
As much of a blow as this is to mathematics,
it is a fact that is intimately tied to the use of an
axiomatic system. All hope is not lost, however;
we still have (what is believed to be) a consistent
list of axioms, from which every result you have
ever been taught, and ever will be taught, has
been proved. It is simply an immutable part of
mathematics that there are certain statements
whose truth cannot be decided upon. There are,
in fact, already known examples of statements
which cannot be proved in the ZFC theory: inter-
ested readers should investigate the continuum
hypothesis and inaccessible cardinals. Despite
these setbacks, thanks to the work of mathemati-
cians which started over a century ago, we are left
today with a theory of mathematics which is as
rigorous, consistent and complete as it can be –
and at the end of the day, what more can be asked
for?
Neil Fullarton
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 7
Discovery
Finding Neptune
For thousands of years man has been aware of
planets beyond our own: Jupiter, Saturn, Venus,
Mars and Mercury, each taking the names of
deities from the Greek Pantheon though known of
when that very construct was an inkling in the dis-
tant future. All could be seen from Earth, observed
from Rome to Xianyang with the naked eye, and
perceived even in that time of more primitive sci-
ence as having a decisive effect or influence on our
lives. But this was not the movement of the
spheres immortalised in Shakespearean literature,
nor was it to be found in the astrological mum-
blings of mystics. Rather it lay in the quest to com-
plete an ordered picture of the solar system where
the laws of physics ruled, and to do so took math-
ematical artistry and determination the likes of
which few possessed.
The road to their unveiling began in 1690
when the English astronomer John Flamsteed
spotted a point of light which he duly classified as
a star. Over the coming decades other astronomers
made the same observations, and the same mis-
take. It took the polymath Sir William Herschel to
show them the error of their ways when in 1781
he saw the same distant object, believing it to be a
comet. He soon realised that what he observed
might not have been a comet after all; taking up
his pen he jotted down some calculations to con-
firm his suspicions and realised that he had in-
deed discovered a planet, older than any of the
sons of Adam but a new and ground-breaking dis-
covery. Uranus had now been unveiled and tele-
scopes across the known world peered upwards,
what had been to our eyes a bit part of far remote
scenery in the cosmic play was now exposed as a
key player.
From a mathematical standpoint the discov-
ery of Uranus was of limited importance, the
methods used by Herschel had already been ex-
plored with the known planets of the solar system,
similarly the characteristics which led him to re-
evaluate his initial designation of Uranus as a
comet was a result of the pre-existing corpus of
knowledge. However there was a new challenge
posed by the discovery, as Joseph Jerome Le Fran-
cais de Lalande found in 1782 when he noted
Uranus following a significantly different orbit to
that predicted. The best mathematical models
available could not account for the variance, in-
creasing the data set to include earlier observa-
12 [The , Commutator] February 2010
In 1989 Voyager 2 was 12 years into it’s mission as it passed Neptune,
transmitting this startling image back to Earth. However 143 years earlier
Le Verrier had discovered the planet "with the point of his pen".
tions of Uranus did little to improve it. They were
faced with a stark choice between appealing to an
undiscovered trans-uranian planet and rewriting
the Law of Gravity. The problem remained unre-
solved for decades until the 1820s and early 1830s
when improved measurements, predictions, and
Uranus’ continued contempt for them, began to
give way to a belief that the problem might lie not
in the mathematical methods used, or indeed in
the accuracy of observations on the known plan-
ets, but in an incomplete data set which omitted a
key player from the cast list, the hunt for the latest
planet was on.
Astronomers the world over began to search
the night skies in earnest, the degree to which
Uranus’ orbit was altered gave a starting point
suggesting a celestial body not exceeding 12th
magnitude. Many came close to discovering the
hypothetical planet, some, including Lalande him-
self, even observed it but attributed any noted po-
sitional variation to errors in their observations or
as some other species of celestial inhabitant.
On this occasion it was up to theoreticians to
find the planet which practical astronomers were
unable to pin down. Perturbation theory, a
method which seeks to determine the discernible
effect of known bodies on other known bodies,
had been in use for some time. The basic principle
begins with the solution to a known problem
which can then be modified through an iterative
process, giving a Power Series which quantifies
the difference between the true value and the
known problem and hence providing the answer
to the problem they are trying to solve. Effectively
it is an application of differential equations, but re-
versing the method to find details about an un-
known body proved far more difficult, leading
some to believe that the problems may be insur-
mountable.
The nature of the problems were twofold,
firstly in order to find the missing planet they had
to deduce a method of inverting Perturbation the-
ory, taking what they did know about Uranus (the
effect the known planets had on it and Uranus’ ef-
fect on them) and then using that to find out about
this hidden planet. A comparable problem in na-
ture, though certainly not in difficulty, might be
reduced to having the result of an integral and at-
tempting to find the integral itself, but without
known limits how to deal with the constant? Even
then before finding the solution to their ‘known
unknown’ of a planet they would have to take
away the iterative ‘add ons’ of the power series to
obtain the initial value to their planet’s position.
In practical terms there were two problems, the
first, a limited data series resulting from its fairly
recent discovery, was eroding by the early 1840s
as Uranus neared the completion of its first orbit
since the discovery by Herschel the second, find-
ing a mathematician with the necessary insight,
ability and tenacity to tackle the problem re-
mained, until like buses two emerged in quick
succession.
The method employed by both was similar;
using a formula for the perturbations of mean lon-
gitude it was possible to construct an equation
based on three differential equations belonging to
the unknown planet. An assumption is used to ob-
tain the fundamental values which are then ap-
plied to the formula, after which by changing the
form of the equation trigonometric relationships
can be applied reducing the problem to a matter
of eliminating the unknown values from the equa-
tions. Having reduced the equations it is then pos-
sible to use approximations to obtain a value for
i , which can be improved by repeated approxi-
mations, with values for the longitude, eccentric-
ity and mass of the planet can be obtained.
John Couch Adams first encountered the
problem in 1841 after reading a paper on the sub-
ject of Uranus’ anomalous orbit by George Airy
and resolved to begin an investigation, “as soon
as possible after attaining my degree”. Having
graduated in 1843 decorated with the assorted
laurels of Cambridge, including the Smith prize
won by Lord Kelvin two years later, he was finally
free to begin his work and set about making the
necessary calculations. By September of 1845 hav-
ing found repeated iterations were making little
change, he communicated the result to Professor
Challis, in October he door stepped the As-
tronomer Royal, Airy, twice, missing him on both
occasions and leaving a written account of his
findings. After the discovery of Neptune he was
able to further refine his work resulting in the ver-
sion published in the eventual, though belated,
paper “On the perturbations of Uranus” as an Ap-
pendix to the Nautical Almanac.
However Adams was not the only one to have
have found the problem a tantalising prospect
and conflicting claims were soon to lead to a less
than scientific squabble. Urbain Le Verrier com-
pleted a mathematics degree before beginning
his studies and a career in chemistry. A failed job
application later and he found himself as a tutor
at l'École Polytechnique specialising in celestial
mechanics. Initially he focused on the motion of
Mercury, but by 1845 he had turned his attention
to Uranus. Initially he carried out an extensive
series of calculations, concluding in a paper of
November 1845 that there was no way of ac-
counting for its disturbed orbit by the known
planets. By June of 1846 in another paper he had
concluded that another planet must exist which
accounted for the residual effect on Uranus’
orbit, giving an approximation of its distance
from the sun and a calculation of its longitude.
Finally, in August he was able to publish a paper
with a predicted orbit and mass for the new
planet, sent his result to Galle at the Berlin Ob-
servatory who received it on 23rd September
and that very night sighted the predicted planet,
within 1 degree of the theoretical prediction. As
Arago put it, Le Verrier had discovered a planet
"with the point of his pen", Neptune was re-
vealed and from then until 1930, and again from
2006 onwards, the solar system’s planetary com-
pany was complete.
Though there was no question of who had
ultimately triggered the discovery the English
scientific establishment was eager to claim credit
for the discovery (a second planet in under a
century would have been quite a feat). Indeed
Le Verrier’s June paper had triggered a last
minute push, coordinated by Airy, to beat him
to the punch, but the method used was time
consuming and Challis’ outdated star-map ren-
dered the search futile. Only after hearing of the
discovery did they realise their search had twice
spotted the planet but not recognised the signif-
icance. In spite of the acrimony between some
of the characters involved, Adams himself ac-
knowledged the priority claim of Le Verrier, pro-
viding ample demonstration of the saying
“publish or die” as a planet might just hit you.
Michael Stringer
Assorted Articles
Foundations of Mathematics
It is often said that maths and absolute knowl-
edge go hand in hand; indeed, it is often claimed
that the theorems of mathematics are the only
things whose truth we can be undoubtedly sure
of, with all other ‘facts’ being temporary or am-
biguous. From the ancient days of Plato and
Pythagoras, to the revolutionary times of the En-
lightenment, maths has always been admired for
its truth and its beauty. But how certain can we ac-
tually be of the claims of the absolute truth of
maths? We must look to its foundations, and see
that they are built solidly, consistently, and with-
out errors; otherwise, the whole of maths could
come crashing down around us.
This was a task faced by mathematicians at
the beginning of the 20th century. An attempt at
formalising the foundations of maths, purely in
terms of sets, had been made by Georg Cantor at
the end of the 1800s, however this was shown to
be inconsistent; it had not been formulated rigor-
ously enough. Cantor defined a set to be any col-
lection of objects of our imagination, and allowed
new sets to be created out of old in various ways,
such as taking unions and intersections.
However, in 1901, Bertrand Russell showed
that this model for the foundations of mathemat-
ics was not consistent. Russell devised a set, X ,
consisting of all sets which are not members of
themselves. A contradiction arises, as it is easy to
show that X both is and is not a member of itself.
Clearly, a different approach was needed.
Throughout the early years of the 20th cen-
tury, what is now known as axiomatic set theory
was developed. An axiom is essentially just a rule
which is assumed to be true, or self-evident. Ax-
ioms are commonplace in mathematics: from Eu-
clid’s axiomatisation of geometry in 300 BCE, to
the axioms required in the definition of a vector
space. Axiomatisation is a necessary procedure, as
when trying to prove something, we cannot just
continually break down what we are doing into
smaller and simpler steps; eventually, we must
stop, and accept that (or decide if) the step we are
trying to do is true.
By 1922, after much debate, a list of nine ax-
ioms was produced; these were the axioms upon
which the entirety of mathematics would be
based. They are known as the ZFC axioms (as they
were primarily developed by Zermelo and
Fraenkel, and include something known as the
axiom of choice), and are still accepted as the
foundation of mathematics today: any proof you
do can be broken down into a (probably very
long) chain of applications of these nine axioms.
Having been let down by set theories before,
much scrutiny was made by logicians over the
consistency of the axioms. An axiomatic set theory
is consistent if no contradictions can be derived
using its axioms. Unfortunately, in 1931, Kurt
Gödel showed that it is not possible to prove
whether or not the ZF axioms (that is, the ZFC ax-
ioms but with the axiom of choice removed) are
consistent or not. It has, however, been proved
that if the ZF axioms are consistent, then so are the
ZFC axioms (that is, adding the axiom of choice
to our list does not introduce any contradictions).
It is, however, widely believed that ZFC is consis-
tent; if it were not, it is thought that a contradic-
tion would have been discovered by now.
Another problem we have to deal with is how
to be sure that we have picked the ‘right’ axioms
to be part of our theory. What criteria are we using
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 13
to decide if an axiom is ‘self-evident’? For in-
stance, it is fairly clear that if two sets, A and B,
contain the same members as each other, we
should want it to be true that A=B. And, indeed,
an axiom saying just this is on our list of nine. But
there are other axioms, whose truths are not so
self-evident, which also form part of our list.
One such axiom is the previously mentioned
axiom of choice, whose inclusion along with the
ZF axioms was hotly debated for decades. Objec-
tions were made, since many found the truth of
the axiom not to be intuitively obvious, and, in
fact, if accepted in the theory, the axiom of choice
can be use to prove true statements which some
mathematicians call ‘undesirable’. An example of
such a result is that it is possible to decompose a
rigid, geometric sphere into a finite number of
pieces, then rearrange them so you get two
spheres of the same size as the original. This is
known as the Banach-Tarski paradox. That being
said, it is not really correct to claim that one of ZF
and ZFC is ‘right’ and the other is ‘wrong’ – they
are simply different theories, starting from differ-
ent assumptions. Mathematically, it is possible to
work with any consistent set of axioms, and see
what we can prove from them. Strictly, every the-
orem stated should begin with “If the list of ax-
ioms I am working with is assumed to be true,
then…”, however it is usually assumed we are
working in ZFC, and this is thankfully omitted!
There is a another, more crippling problem
when trying to formulate a rigorous foundation
for maths, as was discovered by in the 1930s, by
Gödel. The results, known as Gödel’s incomplete-
ness theorems, say that all consistent axiomatic
systems are incomplete, meaning that there are
certain true statements whose truths are unprov-
able using the rules of the system. The outlook is
perhaps a little bleak for us, then: either ZFC is in-
consistent (and so, in fact, every proposition can
be proved true, such as 1+1=3), or ZFC is consis-
tent, but incomplete, and so some true statements
are undecidable by the axioms. This is not a flaw
inherent to the ZFC theory itself, but one which
afflicts any sufficiently powerful axiomatic sys-
tem. We can either prove too much, or too little (in
the inconsistent and incomplete cases, respec-
tively), and so any attempt at formulating a com-
plete, consistent description of mathematics is
doomed to failure.
As much of a blow as this is to mathematics,
it is a fact that is intimately tied to the use of an
axiomatic system. All hope is not lost, however;
we still have (what is believed to be) a consistent
list of axioms, from which every result you have
ever been taught, and ever will be taught, has
been proved. It is simply an immutable part of
mathematics that there are certain statements
whose truth cannot be decided upon. There are,
in fact, already known examples of statements
which cannot be proved in the ZFC theory: inter-
ested readers should investigate the continuum
hypothesis and inaccessible cardinals. Despite
these setbacks, thanks to the work of mathemati-
cians which started over a century ago, we are left
today with a theory of mathematics which is as
rigorous, consistent and complete as it can be –
and at the end of the day, what more can be asked
for?
Neil Fullarton
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 8
Assorted Articles
Why study mathematics?
A common question for undergraduates of mathematics to encounter is why do they study mathematics? De-
pending on how this is asked the question could mean what are the benefits of mathematical results and their ap-
plications, or alternatively, what is it about the subject that the student enjoys. This article is an undergraduates
offering of an (incomplete) answer to both interpretations of the question.
To illustrate the benefits of mathematics
two examples will be used. The first will show
how pure mathematics can be used in an ap-
plied setting with obvious benefits and the sec-
ond will come from applied mathematics with
effects on pure mathematics.
The first example comes from graph theory.
A graph is a graphical model that shows rela-
tionships between collections of objects. So as
in figure 1 each circle represents an object and
two objects are related to one another if a line
joins their respective circles. The problem
linked to a graph such as the one in figure 1, by
asking it is possible to colour the graph with
two colours in such a way that no two con-
nected circles have the same colour. If this can-
not be done with two colours what about three
or four and so on. The first attempt to colour
this with two colours is bound to fail: the circles
labeled A, B and H are connected in a triangle
so if we pick A to be red and H to be green, then
C cannot be either red or green. A third colour
must be used, say blue. Now the graph can be
coloured as shown in figure two. So how does
this related to a non-mathematical area? One
of the classic examples is that of exam
timetabling. Table 1 shows the choice seven
students, labeled 1 - 7, make out of a selection
of 8 exams, labeled A through to H. Some stu-
dents are sitting three exams and some are sit-
ting two. The problem is to minimize the
number of times an exam hall is booked whist
making sure there are no exam conflicts, i.e. no
student has two exams booked at the same
time. For this, conveniently enough, the graph
of figure 2 works as a representation of the
problem. Each circle represents an exam as
given by its letter, and the connecting lines
show if exams cannot be set at the same time.
For example, student two is taking exams B
and D so their circles are linked and student
seven is taking exams B and C so these are
linked. Now the colouring takes on a meaning:
each set of coloured circles represents a non
conflicting booking, and this set of bookings is
known to be the most efficient since the fewest
number of colours were used.
This example was chosen to give a quick il-
lustration of how graphs are applied; there are
many more applications ranging from map-
ping internet sites to tracking the spread dis-
eases to understanding molecules at an atomic
level. It must be noted that pure mathematics
is a huge subject; graph theory is one area and
this was one application.
For the applied mathematics student bene-
14 [The , Commutator] February 2010
fits of study can usually be derived from exam-
ples given in courses and sometimes directly
from course titles. For example, everyone read-
ily sees the importance of studying fluid me-
chanics; it is important to understand the
mechanics of piping gas from Russia to the UK
to keep everyone warm with no leaks or explo-
sions along the way. Similar examples can be
found for subjects like Newtonian Mechanics
or Mathematical Biology. So instead of giving
a detailed example of an application of applied
mathematics this article will show that tech-
niques of applied mathematics can be used in
the study of pure mathematics, which in turn,
as shown above, can be used to study applied
problems.
For this example the reader must be famil-
iar with the idea of a 3-manifold. A manifold
is a space that looks similar to a Euclidean
space on a small enough scale. So, for example,
the earth is a 2-manifold as locally (on a small
scale) it looks like a flat 2-dimensional Euclid-
ean surface but globally is a 3-dimensional
sphere, where the rules of geometry are differ-
ent. 3-manifolds are defined analogously, as an
example the reader may know that locally the
universe seems like a 3-dimensional Euclidean
space but globally it may be something differ-
ent.
It is known that there are eight classifica-
tions of 3-manifolds. The distinction between
classifications can made by studying the non-
Euclidean global structure: specifically, by
studying paths of shortest distance in the space
(here the space is 3-manifold). If the space is
defined in an appropriate way it is possible to
differentiate along a path between two points
to give the velocity and differentiate again to
get the acceleration along the path. The study
then begins resemble a mechanics problem and
in fact with only a little further manipulation
tools from Newtonian, Hamiltonian and La-
grangian mechanics can all be used to study
these abstract spaces.
Although the above illustration of applied
techniques in pure mathematics is not as ex-
plicit as the graph example, it is hope the
reader has still gained a sense of the intercon-
nected nature of mathematical techniques.
And to say it explicitly: The implication is that
studying one area of mathematics can have ap-
plications to subjects far from the original area
of study.
This article now takes an inevitably more
personal stance as it addresses the second in-
terpretation: why do students enjoy mathemat-
Tiling the sphere using differential equations
The purpose of this article is to see how ideas from
differential equations can be used to generate a sphere
tiling.
To do this we consider an equation know as the hypergeomet-
ric equation:
d 2
w
z (z - 1) 2 + [c - (a + b + 1) z]
dz
Here the independent variable z is consid-
ered to be a complex number that we also
Exam Paper
allow to be infinite. This equation has 3
A B C D E F G H singular points at 0,1 and 3 . These can
1 X be thought of as point where the co-
X X
efficients of the equation become in-
2 X X finite. This is easy to see if we
3 X X divide through by the coefficient
students
4 of the second derivative.
X X X The solutions to this about
5 X
X these singular points are given in
6 terms of Gauss’s hypergeometric
X X
series:
7 X X to the vertices of this triangle. Its
(a) n (b) n n
table 1 F (a, b, c | z) = / n3= 0 z angles are rm , rn andro .
(c) n n!
where
(a) n = a (a + 1) (a + 2) + n - 1)
called the Pochhammer symbol. The
values a, b and c are complex constants
called parameters.
In order to produce a sphere tiling we
need to construct the solutions about the singular
points. They are:
w (00) (z) = F (a, b, c | z)
w 0 (z) = z F (a - c + 1, b - c + 1, 2 - c | z)
(1) (1 - c)
at the point 0,
w (10) (z) = F (a, b, 1 + a + b - c | 1 - z)
figure 1 w (11) (z) = (1 - z) (c - a - b) F (c - a, c - b, 1 + c - a - b | 1 - z)
at the point 1 and
w (30) (z) = z - a F (a, a - c + 1, 1 + a - b | z - 1)
w (31) (z) = z - b F (b, b - c + 1, 1 + b - a | z - 1)
A problem that has had hours spent on it to no
avail months before can, if the solution was fully
understood, be conquered in minutes. Gaining a
good understanding of something that once seems
really hard is very satisfying.
The next reason is concerned with exactly
what mathematics is. It is clearly a science, but
it is different from other sciences in that it has
a fascinating range of areas. Mathematics has
figure 2 models that explain the motions of stars, the
world of finance, how the many types of num-
ics? bers interact, there are even mathematical mod-
Mathematics can be very hard. Students els that can predict parts of your probable
are given problems to which they can apply future and some that can represent distances of
tools they have learnt in lectures or from books infinity in a circle of radius 1! Maybe this can
and they can compare similar questions to try to be summarized by this fun argument:
solve the problem. Most problems are attempted
knowing that there is a solution; the student just
1. “God ever geometrises.”- Plato
has to find it. And this can get frustrating. Hours
can pass on one question with only dead ends 2. “Geometrical properties are character-
reached. Problems like these are hard. So where ized by their invariance under a group of trans-
does the satisfaction come in? Personally it is from formations” – Felix Klein
two points. The first is seeing the solution, even 3. “If Plato and Klein are correct, then God
if it is explained by someone else, and the second must be a group theorist.” – Stewart and Golu-
comes when revising the problem at a later stage. bitsky: Fearful Symmetry
at the point 3 . It is also helpful to introduce the new param-
eters, called angular parameter, that we can define from a, b and
c in the following way
m = 1-c
n = c-a-b
o = a - b.
It is now possible to define triangle maps. These are con-
dw - abw = 0. structed as the ratios of the solutions at each singular
dz point i.e.
w (1) (z)
s k (z) = (k0)
w k (z)
with k taking one of the values 0,1 or
3 . In the case that the angular param-
eters m , n and v have absolute value
between 0 and 1 (that is they lie
within unit distance of the origin in
the complex plane) the s k (z) maps
the upper half complex plane to a
triangle on the surface of a sphere
with the edges being circular arcs.
The points 0,1 and 3 are mapped
In the special case that we can
find integers p, q, r such that the an-
is
gular parameters can be written as:
m = 1 ,n = 1 ,o = 1
figure 3 a single tile on a sphere p q r
Then this triangle will tile the sphere as in
figure 3.
The tiling is achieved, like any other, by taking
copies of the triangle in the above image and reproducing
it all over the surface. Hence it is possible to tile a sphere with a
differential equation.
Stuart Andrew
matical ideas. It appears that the Dutch artist
To study mathematics is to study almost anything. had formal no mathematical training, yet his
This article finishes with a look at one final prints caused quite a stir in mathematical com-
application of mathematics: to the arts. munities as they represented hyperbolic tessel-
During the Italian Renaissance, Leonardo lations, as in the Circle Limit series, or
Da Vinci wanted to create paintings that looked Riemannian surfaces, as in print gallery.
as real as possible. He is quoted as saying “The Through this work Escher ended up friends
most praiseworthy form of painting is the one with the famous geometer HSM Coxeter. And
that most resembles what it imitates.” (One as the arts are discussed it must also be noted
might think of mathematical models). To get mathematics has been used extensively in lit-
his paintings as life like as possible Da Vinci de- erature. For examples see Lewis Carrols “Alice
veloped a mathematical system known as lin- in wonderland” and ”Through the Looking
ear perspective and the notion of a vanishing Glass” or Yevgeny Zamyatins “We.”
point that allowed him to create the illusion of Mathematics can be studied to gain a better
depth on a flat 2-dimensional canvas. To show understand of problems in the world, it can be
how important mathematics was to Da Vinci, studied by those who enjoy creating sound
consider his comment: “Let no man who is not logic, or who enjoy solving problems, it can
a Mathematician read the elements of my also help in work outside of maths such as the
work.” Da Vinci obviously had a passion for arts.
mathematics, but not all painters have needed
this. In fact if the work of Escher is considered
then it is clear mathematical training is not al- Andrew Bestel
ways needed to draw even advanced mathe-
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 15
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 8
Assorted Articles
Why study mathematics?
A common question for undergraduates of mathematics to encounter is why do they study mathematics? De-
pending on how this is asked the question could mean what are the benefits of mathematical results and their ap-
plications, or alternatively, what is it about the subject that the student enjoys. This article is an undergraduates
offering of an (incomplete) answer to both interpretations of the question.
To illustrate the benefits of mathematics
two examples will be used. The first will show
how pure mathematics can be used in an ap-
plied setting with obvious benefits and the sec-
ond will come from applied mathematics with
effects on pure mathematics.
The first example comes from graph theory.
A graph is a graphical model that shows rela-
tionships between collections of objects. So as
in figure 1 each circle represents an object and
two objects are related to one another if a line
joins their respective circles. The problem
linked to a graph such as the one in figure 1, by
asking it is possible to colour the graph with
two colours in such a way that no two con-
nected circles have the same colour. If this can-
not be done with two colours what about three
or four and so on. The first attempt to colour
this with two colours is bound to fail: the circles
labeled A, B and H are connected in a triangle
so if we pick A to be red and H to be green, then
C cannot be either red or green. A third colour
must be used, say blue. Now the graph can be
coloured as shown in figure two. So how does
this related to a non-mathematical area? One
of the classic examples is that of exam
timetabling. Table 1 shows the choice seven
students, labeled 1 - 7, make out of a selection
of 8 exams, labeled A through to H. Some stu-
dents are sitting three exams and some are sit-
ting two. The problem is to minimize the
number of times an exam hall is booked whist
making sure there are no exam conflicts, i.e. no
student has two exams booked at the same
time. For this, conveniently enough, the graph
of figure 2 works as a representation of the
problem. Each circle represents an exam as
given by its letter, and the connecting lines
show if exams cannot be set at the same time.
For example, student two is taking exams B
and D so their circles are linked and student
seven is taking exams B and C so these are
linked. Now the colouring takes on a meaning:
each set of coloured circles represents a non
conflicting booking, and this set of bookings is
known to be the most efficient since the fewest
number of colours were used.
This example was chosen to give a quick il-
lustration of how graphs are applied; there are
many more applications ranging from map-
ping internet sites to tracking the spread dis-
eases to understanding molecules at an atomic
level. It must be noted that pure mathematics
is a huge subject; graph theory is one area and
this was one application.
For the applied mathematics student bene-
14 [The , Commutator] February 2010
fits of study can usually be derived from exam-
ples given in courses and sometimes directly
from course titles. For example, everyone read-
ily sees the importance of studying fluid me-
chanics; it is important to understand the
mechanics of piping gas from Russia to the UK
to keep everyone warm with no leaks or explo-
sions along the way. Similar examples can be
found for subjects like Newtonian Mechanics
or Mathematical Biology. So instead of giving
a detailed example of an application of applied
mathematics this article will show that tech-
niques of applied mathematics can be used in
the study of pure mathematics, which in turn,
as shown above, can be used to study applied
problems.
For this example the reader must be famil-
iar with the idea of a 3-manifold. A manifold
is a space that looks similar to a Euclidean
space on a small enough scale. So, for example,
the earth is a 2-manifold as locally (on a small
scale) it looks like a flat 2-dimensional Euclid-
ean surface but globally is a 3-dimensional
sphere, where the rules of geometry are differ-
ent. 3-manifolds are defined analogously, as an
example the reader may know that locally the
universe seems like a 3-dimensional Euclidean
space but globally it may be something differ-
ent.
It is known that there are eight classifica-
tions of 3-manifolds. The distinction between
classifications can made by studying the non-
Euclidean global structure: specifically, by
studying paths of shortest distance in the space
(here the space is 3-manifold). If the space is
defined in an appropriate way it is possible to
differentiate along a path between two points
to give the velocity and differentiate again to
get the acceleration along the path. The study
then begins resemble a mechanics problem and
in fact with only a little further manipulation
tools from Newtonian, Hamiltonian and La-
grangian mechanics can all be used to study
these abstract spaces.
Although the above illustration of applied
techniques in pure mathematics is not as ex-
plicit as the graph example, it is hope the
reader has still gained a sense of the intercon-
nected nature of mathematical techniques.
And to say it explicitly: The implication is that
studying one area of mathematics can have ap-
plications to subjects far from the original area
of study.
This article now takes an inevitably more
personal stance as it addresses the second in-
terpretation: why do students enjoy mathemat-
Tiling the sphere using differential equations
The purpose of this article is to see how ideas from
differential equations can be used to generate a sphere
tiling.
To do this we consider an equation know as the hypergeomet-
ric equation:
d 2
w
z (z - 1) 2 + [c - (a + b + 1) z]
dz
Here the independent variable z is consid-
ered to be a complex number that we also
Exam Paper
allow to be infinite. This equation has 3
A B C D E F G H singular points at 0,1 and 3 . These can
1 X be thought of as point where the co-
X X
efficients of the equation become in-
2 X X finite. This is easy to see if we
3 X X divide through by the coefficient
students
4 of the second derivative.
X X X The solutions to this about
5 X
X these singular points are given in
6 terms of Gauss’s hypergeometric
X X
series:
7 X X to the vertices of this triangle. Its
(a) n (b) n n
table 1 F (a, b, c | z) = / n3= 0 z angles are rm , rn andro .
(c) n n!
where
(a) n = a (a + 1) (a + 2) + n - 1)
called the Pochhammer symbol. The
values a, b and c are complex constants
called parameters.
In order to produce a sphere tiling we
need to construct the solutions about the singular
points. They are:
w (00) (z) = F (a, b, c | z)
w 0 (z) = z F (a - c + 1, b - c + 1, 2 - c | z)
(1) (1 - c)
at the point 0,
w (10) (z) = F (a, b, 1 + a + b - c | 1 - z)
figure 1 w (11) (z) = (1 - z) (c - a - b) F (c - a, c - b, 1 + c - a - b | 1 - z)
at the point 1 and
w (30) (z) = z - a F (a, a - c + 1, 1 + a - b | z - 1)
w (31) (z) = z - b F (b, b - c + 1, 1 + b - a | z - 1)
A problem that has had hours spent on it to no
avail months before can, if the solution was fully
understood, be conquered in minutes. Gaining a
good understanding of something that once seems
really hard is very satisfying.
The next reason is concerned with exactly
what mathematics is. It is clearly a science, but
it is different from other sciences in that it has
a fascinating range of areas. Mathematics has
figure 2 models that explain the motions of stars, the
world of finance, how the many types of num-
ics? bers interact, there are even mathematical mod-
Mathematics can be very hard. Students els that can predict parts of your probable
are given problems to which they can apply future and some that can represent distances of
tools they have learnt in lectures or from books infinity in a circle of radius 1! Maybe this can
and they can compare similar questions to try to be summarized by this fun argument:
solve the problem. Most problems are attempted
knowing that there is a solution; the student just
1. “God ever geometrises.”- Plato
has to find it. And this can get frustrating. Hours
can pass on one question with only dead ends 2. “Geometrical properties are character-
reached. Problems like these are hard. So where ized by their invariance under a group of trans-
does the satisfaction come in? Personally it is from formations” – Felix Klein
two points. The first is seeing the solution, even 3. “If Plato and Klein are correct, then God
if it is explained by someone else, and the second must be a group theorist.” – Stewart and Golu-
comes when revising the problem at a later stage. bitsky: Fearful Symmetry
at the point 3 . It is also helpful to introduce the new param-
eters, called angular parameter, that we can define from a, b and
c in the following way
m = 1-c
n = c-a-b
o = a - b.
It is now possible to define triangle maps. These are con-
dw - abw = 0. structed as the ratios of the solutions at each singular
dz point i.e.
w (1) (z)
s k (z) = (k0)
w k (z)
with k taking one of the values 0,1 or
3 . In the case that the angular param-
eters m , n and v have absolute value
between 0 and 1 (that is they lie
within unit distance of the origin in
the complex plane) the s k (z) maps
the upper half complex plane to a
triangle on the surface of a sphere
with the edges being circular arcs.
The points 0,1 and 3 are mapped
In the special case that we can
find integers p, q, r such that the an-
is
gular parameters can be written as:
m = 1 ,n = 1 ,o = 1
figure 3 a single tile on a sphere p q r
Then this triangle will tile the sphere as in
figure 3.
The tiling is achieved, like any other, by taking
copies of the triangle in the above image and reproducing
it all over the surface. Hence it is possible to tile a sphere with a
differential equation.
Stuart Andrew
matical ideas. It appears that the Dutch artist
To study mathematics is to study almost anything. had formal no mathematical training, yet his
This article finishes with a look at one final prints caused quite a stir in mathematical com-
application of mathematics: to the arts. munities as they represented hyperbolic tessel-
During the Italian Renaissance, Leonardo lations, as in the Circle Limit series, or
Da Vinci wanted to create paintings that looked Riemannian surfaces, as in print gallery.
as real as possible. He is quoted as saying “The Through this work Escher ended up friends
most praiseworthy form of painting is the one with the famous geometer HSM Coxeter. And
that most resembles what it imitates.” (One as the arts are discussed it must also be noted
might think of mathematical models). To get mathematics has been used extensively in lit-
his paintings as life like as possible Da Vinci de- erature. For examples see Lewis Carrols “Alice
veloped a mathematical system known as lin- in wonderland” and ”Through the Looking
ear perspective and the notion of a vanishing Glass” or Yevgeny Zamyatins “We.”
point that allowed him to create the illusion of Mathematics can be studied to gain a better
depth on a flat 2-dimensional canvas. To show understand of problems in the world, it can be
how important mathematics was to Da Vinci, studied by those who enjoy creating sound
consider his comment: “Let no man who is not logic, or who enjoy solving problems, it can
a Mathematician read the elements of my also help in work outside of maths such as the
work.” Da Vinci obviously had a passion for arts.
mathematics, but not all painters have needed
this. In fact if the work of Escher is considered
then it is clear mathematical training is not al- Andrew Bestel
ways needed to draw even advanced mathe-
February 2010 [The , Commutator] 15
[The,Commutator]first edition:Layout 1 12/02/2010 10:24 Page 1

Games and puzzles

[The,Commutator]
Kakuro Kendoku
Fill in the boxes Try and fill each row and
with the inte- each column with the integers
gers 1,2,...,9 so 1,2,3 and 4 exactly once so
that each integer that the numbers in each nest
only occurs can be combined under the
once in each designated product to equal
string and the the prescribed number.
The Macsoc Magazine: FEBRUARY 2010 add up to the
number adjoin-
Then try it with the inte-
gers 1,2,...,8:
ing that string

FIRST EDITION

Find the flaw in the logic

This month 1 = 0 . Don’t believe me? Well here are two “proofs”:

“Proof” 1 “Proof” 2
x=0 0 = 0 + 0 + 0 + 0f
` x (x - 1) = 0 = (1 - 1) + (1 - 1) + (1 - 1) + (1 - 1) + f
` x-1 = 0 = 1 + (- 1 + 1) + (- 1 + 1) + (- 1 + 1) + f
`x=1 = 1+0+0+0+f
`1=0 =1

Sodoku Fill in each row and each column with the integers 1,2,...,9 exactly once

Difficult Easier

7 1 2 9 7
3 9 7 5 2 9 5 4
8 1
1 3 6 9
6 1 2 9 1 5
9 5 6 7 2 3
8 5 6 3 1 9 7 5
4 9 3 6 1 4
Sponsored by: The Department of Mathematics and the IMA
8 5 2 6 4
16 [The , Commutator] February 2010