Month: November 2017

While on a theoretical level, math seems to represent little more than numbers, values and sums, the application of this in the real world takes on a very different nature. After all, math is more than just calculation; it is the way in which analyse the nature of the world around us, and the situations presented to us as a result of this. One reason why we can use math in the real world is because it teaches us the importance of reasoning. In so many of the other subjects we explore on an educational level, the idea of ambiguity and indefiniteness is encouraged, as we are taught to understand and appreciate the fact that so much of our reality is simply what we have interpreted it to be. However with math we are made to acknowledge that this is not always the case, that there are some truths that simply exist and conclusive nature of the mathematical method further justifies this. By encouraging us to follow these truths it teaches us how to to reason and deduce from what we already know to be correct or false, allowing us to address the issues we face in a more pragmatic way. Another reason why we can use math in the real world is because it is a method of communication. Although this is a debatable matter, it is reasonable to suggest that mathematics itself is simply a language to interpret concepts that already exist. In that sense, math is a way of communicating reality and things of value, which is essentially what we do on a day to day basis. We communicate to understand, to explore, to express, and hence it can be said that the process of communication is mathematical.

One reason why math cannot be applied to the real world is because it deals primarily with truth. Unlike scientific truth, in which theories are accepted as temporary, a truth cannot be a mathematical truth if there is even the slightest possibility that it may be disproven. So much of what we interpret to be true is simply speculation. For example, the theory created by the mathematicians in the given video regarding the predictions of the future of couples, the woman described the criteria used by the group to determine the stability of the couple and the very high success rate of its predictions. However, while it had proven to be largely effective, it was not 100% accurate. Therefore the criteria used by the mathematicians itself was not fully accurate, meaning that while we can often interpret such qualities in being applicable to our predictions, if they are not established on the basis that they are completely true they are not completely mathematical; it is only with the addition of other human analysis such as experience and behaviour that they were able to reach their conclusion. Another reason why math cannot be applied to the real world is because it is an inherited skill. We are all born with some ability to deduce and analyse our surroundings, but without learning the formal process of synthesis and evaluation at any level it must be recognised that a the actions and behaviour of a person is influenced by means of intuition, faith and past experience, all of which contradict the idea of mathematical thinking. Therefore, we must question whether those who do not understand math are really incorporating math into their daily process, or other aspects of human nature that math can explain but cannot control.

The mathematical method is the process by which a theory is processed to determine whether or not it can be considered a mathematical truth. This is initiated by an observation of a pattern, or an assumption that a certain process will result in a pattern. Experimenting with different values and existing truths can lead to the confirmation and hence proof of this pattern. After that this pattern must be articulated in a certain way, whether it be a model, formula, equation or mere statement, such that it can be used in an applicable way and can be understood by others, given the complex and interconnecting nature of math. For example, the term ‘ln’ was created to represent a logarithm to the base ‘e’, with this term allowing for its application to the process and rules of calculus.

Mathematics and science have always been correlated throughout history. They are often dependent on each other to justify their independent truth, such is the case with many mathematical and scientific models. Almost all of the phenomenons of physics can be explained with both scientific and mathematical reasoning. There are many apparent similarities between the scientific and mathematical methods. Both rely heavily on evidence and proof, given the importance of their application in real life situations and hence the structure of modern day society. Therefore countless tests must be performed under varying conditions to determine for certain whether a certain hypothesis can be considered a truth. Both also result in the formation of a theory, and at the point of time of its formation it must be considered a truth.

Within these two methods there are many key differences as well. While the scientific method relies purely on physical observation of a phenomenon that is then justified using scientific knowledge and experimentation, mathematics can include theoretical ones, for unlike science, mathematical truths do not necessarily need to be represented in a physical manner for these involved values can be used to model hypothetical situations and well as explain physical ones. Another difference is the process of falsification. There is a universality to the mathematical method where unlike the scientific method, there should not be any new finding that would disprove an existing theory; any new findings must be explained by a mathematical theory for it to be applicable to the field of maths all together. Therefore it can be said that while a scientific truth exists to be disproven, if a mathematical truth has the capacity to be disproven it cannot be considered a truth at all.

Traces of logarithms as means for mathematical evaluation have existed since as early as 2000 BC. Babylonians are believed to have used multiplication tables in a similar way that logarithmic tables are used today. Jost Burgi was the next to significantly adapt modern day logarithms in the late 16th century, creating a table of ‘antilogarithms’, which could be simplified using trigonometric values. Scottish mathematician John Napier perhaps played the biggest role in the discovery of modern day logarithms, by proposing the method of logarithms in a book in 1614. While other mathematicians have expanded his theory further in the years after, it is Napier whose efforts are most recognized.

So who can claim to have invented logarithms? While it was John Napier who articulated the concept in the most recognized manner, the mathematical theories around it have existed for centuries because of the fact that it is so applicable to so many areas of math; it is likely that even without the specific efforts of Napier and Burgi, logarithms would have inevitably been discovered. Therefore the invention of logarithms must be seen as a collective effort, through the applied theories of many different mathematicians for it to exist the way it does today.

This year I am taking part in the Under 19 Girl’s Football team for the third year, having successfully tried out every year since I began high school. This year the activities department in our school outlined their intent to increase the intensity and hence success of the sports program here at UWC East, and this was immediately evident from the first day of tryouts. This year the football program was collaborating with the Chelsea Football Club Youth Foundation, with the coaches from the foundation assessing our abilities in tryouts in far more intensive sessions than I had experienced in recent years. We were also informed that the number of training sessions would be increased from 2 to 3, ensuring that each player gives their maximum commitment to the sport. These sessions will take place every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, unless replaced by a competitive match, and each session will be one and a half hours long

After 3 tryouts and many cuts, I was finally selected as one of the players in the squad this year. My goal for this year is to play with more confidence and to not be afraid to commit myself during difficult situations in games. While I have always been very comfortable in training I get extremely tense during games, which is something I hope to overcome. I also want to maximise the support given to us by the coaches from the Chelsea Football Foundation to allow myself to develop new individual strengths and improve as a player. These goals relate to the 2nd CAS Learning Outcome, and during this process I hope to use the support and advice of my teammates to learn and grow as much as possible, hence relating to the 5th CAS Learning Outcome.

Teacher Supervisor: Mr. Watson (MWn)