<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for ACME Science</title>
	<atom:link href="http://acmescience.com/comments/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://acmescience.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:59:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on SCC Episode 44: The Museum of Math by Weekly links &#8211; February 12 &#171; God plays dice</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/scc-shows/1419/comment-page-1#comment-1593</link>
		<dc:creator>Weekly links &#8211; February 12 &#171; God plays dice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:59:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1419#comment-1593</guid>
		<description>[...] Hansen interviews people behind the Museum of Mathematics. Opening in late 2012 at 11 East 26th Street, Manhattan, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Hansen interviews people behind the Museum of Mathematics. Opening in late 2012 at 11 East 26th Street, Manhattan, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Internet Maths Aperiodical &#8211; dinner and a theorem by Newcastle MathsJam January 2012 Recap &#124; cp&#039;s mathem-o-blog</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/mathematics/1343/comment-page-1#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>Newcastle MathsJam January 2012 Recap &#124; cp&#039;s mathem-o-blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:57:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1343#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>[...] we were just about to get ready to leave, I mentioned that while writing an edition of the Internet Maths Aperiodical I had found out that there are $85$ ways to tie a tie, $43,200$ ways to do up your shoelaces and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] we were just about to get ready to leave, I mentioned that while writing an edition of the Internet Maths Aperiodical I had found out that there are $85$ ways to tie a tie, $43,200$ ways to do up your shoelaces and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fight 1: Newton Vs. Leibniz by Thony C</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/1408/comment-page-1#comment-1548</link>
		<dc:creator>Thony C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:02:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1408#comment-1548</guid>
		<description>Some of the main historical errors and misrepresentations in your pod cast. I apologise for the somewhat abrupt style but as you can see it&#039;s way too long as it is ;)

1) There is nothing strange about Isaac being sent away to school, Woolsthorpe being a very small agricultural village doesn’t have a grammar school! 
 2) Newton was very happy lodging with the apothecary in Grantham, a perfectly normal arrangement, from whom he also received help in furthering his studies.
3) Newton’s superior intelligence was very much recognised in his school time and he was even given a special departure ceremony with speech praising his achievements when he left to go to Cambridge.
4) That his mother took him out of school to manage the farm was also perfectly natural as he was destined to inherit the farm, which generated an income of £600 per annum at least six time more than he would get paid as a professor in Cambridge.
5) I’ve said it before and I’ll probably say it a thousand times more before I die, Cambridge was not a top university in the last third of the seventeenth century. It was an educational backwater with a bad reputation. Also the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics carried with it no status at all. (See my post from 25.12.2011)
6) The attempt to contrast the superior successful Newton with a downtrodden unsuccessful Leibniz is historical bullshit. When the calculus wars took place, about which more soon, Leibniz like Newton was recognised as one of the intellectual giants of Europe. In turns of academic status it was a clash of equals.
7) The calculus wars did not start with Leibniz’ first publications. In fact Newton acknowledged Leibniz’ achievements whilst claiming priority for himself. At that time both saw it as a case of simultaneous independent invention.
8) Even in the 1690s when the Swiss mathematician Nicolaus Fatio de Duillier, who knew and had worked with both Newton and Leibniz, first accused Leibniz of plagiarism Newton apologised and exonerated Leibniz.
9) The accusations of John Keill in 1707 were the beginning not climax of the calculus war. The situation was certainly also exacerbated by the philosophical dispute between Newton and Leibniz about the theory of gravity.
10) It was actually Leibniz who requested that the Royal Society should officially investigate the accusations that Keill had made against him. An unwise move as you correctly point out given that Newton was president of that august body. Leibniz assumed that Newton, who had never personally attacked him and had on more than one occasion acknowledged his independent invention of the calculus, was an honourable man. He was mistaken. Not only did Newton stack the committee in his own favour he actual wrote the committee’s report himself. Of course finding Leibniz guilty as charged. He even took the dispute beyond the grave publishing a new account of a collection of documents that supposedly proved his case several years after Leibniz’ death.
11) That Georg of Hannover did not take Leibniz with him when he became King of England in 1714 probably had as much to do with the dispute over the theory of gravity as that over the calculus.
12) Your assessment of the troops mustered on both sides of the dispute is also somewhat inaccurate. Whilst it is true that Jacob and Johann Bernoulli were superior to any of the Newtonians with the exception of Isaac himself there were top class mathematicians and mathematical physicists on the English side too. David Gregory, Abraham de Moivre, Brook Taylor and Colin MacLaurin were all members of the Newton camp.
13) You are perfectly correct in stating that English mathematics fell behind the continental developments during the eighteenth century however George Green paper from 1828 was by no means the first mathematical publication in the continental style in England in the nineteenth century.
14) Robert Woodhouse a highly influential Cambridge tutor published his textbook on the continental style of analysis Principles of Analytical Calculations in 1803.
15) Charles Babbage and John Herschel published their first volume of The Memoirs of the Analytical Society in 1812 and the second volume in 1817. (See my blog post from 26.12.2011)
16) By the time George Green became a mature student in Cambridge in 1832 Woodhouse, George Peacock and William Whewell had already introduced the continental methods into the Cambridge mathematical syllabus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some of the main historical errors and misrepresentations in your pod cast. I apologise for the somewhat abrupt style but as you can see it&#8217;s way too long as it is <img src='http://acmescience.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>1) There is nothing strange about Isaac being sent away to school, Woolsthorpe being a very small agricultural village doesn’t have a grammar school!<br />
 2) Newton was very happy lodging with the apothecary in Grantham, a perfectly normal arrangement, from whom he also received help in furthering his studies.<br />
3) Newton’s superior intelligence was very much recognised in his school time and he was even given a special departure ceremony with speech praising his achievements when he left to go to Cambridge.<br />
4) That his mother took him out of school to manage the farm was also perfectly natural as he was destined to inherit the farm, which generated an income of £600 per annum at least six time more than he would get paid as a professor in Cambridge.<br />
5) I’ve said it before and I’ll probably say it a thousand times more before I die, Cambridge was not a top university in the last third of the seventeenth century. It was an educational backwater with a bad reputation. Also the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics carried with it no status at all. (See my post from 25.12.2011)<br />
6) The attempt to contrast the superior successful Newton with a downtrodden unsuccessful Leibniz is historical bullshit. When the calculus wars took place, about which more soon, Leibniz like Newton was recognised as one of the intellectual giants of Europe. In turns of academic status it was a clash of equals.<br />
7) The calculus wars did not start with Leibniz’ first publications. In fact Newton acknowledged Leibniz’ achievements whilst claiming priority for himself. At that time both saw it as a case of simultaneous independent invention.<br />
 <img src='http://acmescience.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /> Even in the 1690s when the Swiss mathematician Nicolaus Fatio de Duillier, who knew and had worked with both Newton and Leibniz, first accused Leibniz of plagiarism Newton apologised and exonerated Leibniz.<br />
9) The accusations of John Keill in 1707 were the beginning not climax of the calculus war. The situation was certainly also exacerbated by the philosophical dispute between Newton and Leibniz about the theory of gravity.<br />
10) It was actually Leibniz who requested that the Royal Society should officially investigate the accusations that Keill had made against him. An unwise move as you correctly point out given that Newton was president of that august body. Leibniz assumed that Newton, who had never personally attacked him and had on more than one occasion acknowledged his independent invention of the calculus, was an honourable man. He was mistaken. Not only did Newton stack the committee in his own favour he actual wrote the committee’s report himself. Of course finding Leibniz guilty as charged. He even took the dispute beyond the grave publishing a new account of a collection of documents that supposedly proved his case several years after Leibniz’ death.<br />
11) That Georg of Hannover did not take Leibniz with him when he became King of England in 1714 probably had as much to do with the dispute over the theory of gravity as that over the calculus.<br />
12) Your assessment of the troops mustered on both sides of the dispute is also somewhat inaccurate. Whilst it is true that Jacob and Johann Bernoulli were superior to any of the Newtonians with the exception of Isaac himself there were top class mathematicians and mathematical physicists on the English side too. David Gregory, Abraham de Moivre, Brook Taylor and Colin MacLaurin were all members of the Newton camp.<br />
13) You are perfectly correct in stating that English mathematics fell behind the continental developments during the eighteenth century however George Green paper from 1828 was by no means the first mathematical publication in the continental style in England in the nineteenth century.<br />
14) Robert Woodhouse a highly influential Cambridge tutor published his textbook on the continental style of analysis Principles of Analytical Calculations in 1803.<br />
15) Charles Babbage and John Herschel published their first volume of The Memoirs of the Analytical Society in 1812 and the second volume in 1817. (See my blog post from 26.12.2011)<br />
16) By the time George Green became a mature student in Cambridge in 1832 Woodhouse, George Peacock and William Whewell had already introduced the continental methods into the Cambridge mathematical syllabus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fight 1: Newton Vs. Leibniz by Thony C</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/1408/comment-page-1#comment-1545</link>
		<dc:creator>Thony C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:32:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1408#comment-1545</guid>
		<description>Will write you a list of some of the mains errors later. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will write you a list of some of the mains errors later. <img src='http://acmescience.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fight 1: Newton Vs. Leibniz by samuel</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/1408/comment-page-1#comment-1544</link>
		<dc:creator>samuel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1408#comment-1544</guid>
		<description>It is definitely on the list of upcoming fights.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is definitely on the list of upcoming fights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fight 1: Newton Vs. Leibniz by JP</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/1408/comment-page-1#comment-1543</link>
		<dc:creator>JP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:44:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1408#comment-1543</guid>
		<description>Next fight should be Tesla vs Edison!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Next fight should be Tesla vs Edison!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Internet Maths Aperiodical &#8211; How to cheat and make the Russian people think you can build the Great Pyramid using a Hungarian folk dance by Interesting Esoterica Summation &#124; cp&#039;s mathem-o-blog</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/mathematics/1363/comment-page-1#comment-1541</link>
		<dc:creator>Interesting Esoterica Summation &#124; cp&#039;s mathem-o-blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:40:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1363#comment-1541</guid>
		<description>[...] the halting problem is undecidable. this joke recycled wholesale from the latest edition of the Internet Maths Aperiodical [&#8617;]basically shuffling a deck and recording the order of the cards [&#8617;]Share [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the halting problem is undecidable. this joke recycled wholesale from the latest edition of the Internet Maths Aperiodical [&#8617;]basically shuffling a deck and recording the order of the cards [&#8617;]Share [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Episode 2: Bruce Reznick by Project Euler 78: Ways coins can be separated into piles &#124; MathBlog</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/shows/scc-shows/46/comment-page-1#comment-1516</link>
		<dc:creator>Project Euler 78: Ways coins can be separated into piles &#124; MathBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 07:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/uncategorized#comment-1516</guid>
		<description>[...] has been solved by less than 5000 people. A day or so later I listened to the second episode of Strongly Connect Components where Bruce Reznick mentioned that his prime research is on integer partitions and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] has been solved by less than 5000 people. A day or so later I listened to the second episode of Strongly Connect Components where Bruce Reznick mentioned that his prime research is on integer partitions and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Newton&#8217;s Papers by christianp</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/mathematics/1355/comment-page-1#comment-1472</link>
		<dc:creator>christianp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1355#comment-1472</guid>
		<description>Wow, they are a lot more interesting than I was expecting! Even the &lt;a href=&quot;http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-04000/7&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;first page of his College notebook&lt;/a&gt; is fascinating - how he uses quite long-winded language because the conventions and notation for talking about this kind of thing concisely didn&#039;t yet exist.

He had the correct attitude to crossing out: not a neat line but a furious scribble that you were so stupid as to make an error in the first place!

&quot;quintuplicate&quot; is an excellent word.

Sam, I&#039;m being swayed. You need to campaign to get Leibniz&#039;s papers online or Newton might win my heart.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, they are a lot more interesting than I was expecting! Even the <a href="http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-04000/7" rel="nofollow">first page of his College notebook</a> is fascinating &#8211; how he uses quite long-winded language because the conventions and notation for talking about this kind of thing concisely didn&#8217;t yet exist.</p>
<p>He had the correct attitude to crossing out: not a neat line but a furious scribble that you were so stupid as to make an error in the first place!</p>
<p>&#8220;quintuplicate&#8221; is an excellent word.</p>
<p>Sam, I&#8217;m being swayed. You need to campaign to get Leibniz&#8217;s papers online or Newton might win my heart.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Internet Maths Aperiodical &#8211; dinner and a theorem by christianp</title>
		<link>http://acmescience.com/mathematics/1343/comment-page-1#comment-1454</link>
		<dc:creator>christianp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acmescience.com/?p=1343#comment-1454</guid>
		<description>More mathematical fashion (both more mathematical-fashion and more-mathematical fashion): &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/12/10/MN189934.DTL&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;there are 43,200 ways to lace up your shoes&lt;/a&gt; (via &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/2trillionmethods.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the legendary Ian&lt;/a&gt;)

If we do this for every item of clothing, can we get a number of different ways you can clothe yourself, from head to toe? Is it possible for each person on the planet to wear the same articles of clothing, in a different way?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More mathematical fashion (both more mathematical-fashion and more-mathematical fashion): <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/12/10/MN189934.DTL" rel="nofollow">there are 43,200 ways to lace up your shoes</a> (via <a href="http://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/2trillionmethods.htm" rel="nofollow">the legendary Ian</a>)</p>
<p>If we do this for every item of clothing, can we get a number of different ways you can clothe yourself, from head to toe? Is it possible for each person on the planet to wear the same articles of clothing, in a different way?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

