Cakes, Custard and Category Theory: Easy Recipes for Understanding Complex Maths

[phaet0n]

https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/content/book-review-cakes-custard-and-category-theory-by-eugenia-cheng

[kqr2]

In the US, the book's title has been changed to How to Bake Pi: An Edible Exploration of the Mathematics of Mathematics

Perhaps the publisher thought that "category theory" might not work well for American audiences?

http://smile.amazon.com/How-Bake-Pi-Exploration-Mathematics/...

[pavedwalden → kqr2]

Thank you so much for pointing that out. I was having trouble finding the category theory book but finding the Pi one by the same author everywhere!

[wumbernang]

Interesting - thanks for posting. Will grab a copy of that.

I seem to collect mathematics books. However this is still my favourite book on mathematics and only because it was written by a surgeon rather than a mathematician: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/383087.Mathematics

Warning: Took me a couple of years to get through.

Oh and 1946 copy of Calculus for the Practical Man by J E Thompson.

[escherplex → wumbernang]

If not in any particular rush, you can get a UK copy of 'How to Bake Pi' at http://www.bookdepository.com/ (best price, free shipping, and they take paypal). Plus it turns out that Eugenia Cheng just released another book in UK on June 4 called 'Cakes, Custard and Category Theory: Easy Recipes for Understanding Complex Maths' which seemed interesting so that was ordered as well. Shipping time to US is listed as 5 days.

Plus if you need a .pdf of Feynman's favorite math book (Calculus for the Practical Man - Thompson (1946)) currently there are copies at KAT and PB.

[jonnybgood → escherplex]

How to bake pi and cakes, custard, and category theory are the same book.

[escherplex → jonnybgood]

You're right. The new one looks like a US pb release of the original yet at UK book sites these are presented as separate entities in their summaries. Found that out by skimming Cheng's Twitter page. Thanks for the info.

[jlees]

This sounds like a lovely book. Can't say I'm a huge fan of the "maths for girls" angle, but anything that makes mathematics more accessible is great.

[Dewie3]

> Despite the fact that the number of students taking A-level maths has risen in recent years and that girls outperform boys at GCSE, the number of girls taking A-level mathematics is proportionally much lower.

Grab the nearest popcorn and watch the gender wars unfold.

[escherplex → Dewie3]

Not if this is considered a particularly difficult UK Maths GCSE exam question, which over 90 percent couldn't answer:

Hannah has 6 orange sweets and some yellow sweets. Overall, she has n sweets. The probability of her taking 2 orange sweets is 1/3. Prove that: n^2-n-90=0.

If a HS student I would imagine you would

First: think of coins p(H1) = .5; p(H2) =.5; p(H1+H2) = .5 * .5 = .25

Second: OK, here (6/n) * (5/(n-1)) = 1/3

Third solve: 30/(n * (n-1)) = 1/3

                     90 = n^2 - n
                      0 = n^2 - n - 90

n=10 or -9; if -9 then Hannah only has one sweet and lifted 9 from somebody else just to demo her point.

(from London Telegraph today)

[thaumasiotes → escherplex]

my instinct for approaching the problem:

    C(6,2) / C(n,2) = 1/3

(where C(n,k) is n choose k)

    15 / [n(n-1)/2] = 1/3
    30 / n(n-1) = 1/3
    n(n-1) = 90

I probably wouldn't have done that in high school, though.