>"Thousands of years ago in India, poets were trying to think about the possible meters. In Sanskrit poetry, you have long and short syllables. Long is twice as long as short. If you want to work out how many there are that take a length of time of three, you can have short, short, short, or long, short, or short, long. There are three ways to make three. There are five ways to make a length-four phrase. And there are eight ways to make a length-five phrase. This sequence you’re getting is one where every term is the sum of the previous two. You exactly reproduce what we nowadays call the Fibonacci sequence. But this was centuries before Fibonacci."
Related:
Ambuda: "Building the world's largest Sanskrit library":
On the surface: The world would be premises and stories would be proofs.
Linear Logic for Non-Linear Storytelling by Anne-Gwenn Bosser and Marc Cavazza and Ronan Champagnat has an example.
Then generating proofs means generating valid stories. Linear logic is tough though, it is a logic that admits contradiction so straightaway most logicians are clueless in how to handle it.
There are lots of mathematicians, and statisticians and the like, who become interested in literary analysis. They may even go on to publish articles and books with their findings, applying mathematical or computational techniques to the study of literature. The problem is, they're usually only interested in their own insights, and shy away from the existing conversation that surrounds a given work of literature. These researchers seem to be unaware that literary scholars have been thinking about their same problems for years. Their bibliographies often contain hardly a single work of literary criticism. You wouldn't try to write a book about physics, or mathematics, without consulting a physicist or a mathematician, but somehow these scholars think that you can write a book about literature without being in dialogue with literary scholarship.
Math and Physics equations are full of beauty capable of transmit the same joy as poetry. The main difficulty is that they require more study.
For me, looking at Maxwell equations is a source of pleasure. Also, after improving my understanding of the Laplacian, I came to appreciate the heat equation.
Readit News
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallpaper_group
Related:
Ambuda: "Building the world's largest Sanskrit library":
https://ambuda.org/
those interested in the link between math and literature might be interested in the link between narratives and linear logic.
Linear Logic for Non-Linear Storytelling by Anne-Gwenn Bosser and Marc Cavazza and Ronan Champagnat has an example.
Then generating proofs means generating valid stories. Linear logic is tough though, it is a logic that admits contradiction so straightaway most logicians are clueless in how to handle it.
Mathematical journeys into fictional worlds (2021) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39576156 - March 2024 (10 comments)
For me, looking at Maxwell equations is a source of pleasure. Also, after improving my understanding of the Laplacian, I came to appreciate the heat equation.