“A single square is the monomino, two squares are the dominoes, three the trominoes, four the tetrominoes, and five the pentominoes. This column is remembered today for introducing readers to mathematician Sol Golomb's five-square versions of “polyominoes” – pieces formed by fitting several unit squares together along their edges. “More about complex dominoes” (December 1957) It fell to Gardner to revive them 15 years later, little dreaming that it would launch him on the most successful phase of his career.Īs he noted shortly before his death, “Today there are some fifty websites devoted to flexagon theory and variants of the original forms.” Here are two from more recent times that will guide you through making your own: Hexaflexagon Templates and Make Your Own Hexaflexagons…and Snap Pictures of ThemĢ. The war intervened and the paper curiosities were forgotten. An English graduate student named Arthur Stone had accidentally discovered flexagons at Princeton in 1939, and he and fellow students John Tukey, Bryant Tuckerman and Richard Feynman then explored them mathematically. Heath, the man credited with popularizing the term “mathemagic” from 1951 onwards. In his memoirs, Gardner recounts how he was introduced to them by Royal V. Hexaflexagons, as they’re known today, are hexagonal folded paper objects which can be transformed repeatedly by “turning them inside out” to reveal new faces. Thus, in January 1957 "Mathematical Games" proper was born. It was actually the second piece he wrote for the magazine ( “Logic Machines” had appeared as a one-off back in March 1952) but it was such a hit that editor Gerry Piel promptly invited Gardner to write a monthly column. Including Gardner’s “first” Scientific American article, “Flexagons,” is a no-brainer. “Flexagons, in which strips of paper are used to make hexagonal figures with unusual properties” (December 1956) The following list takes all of these points into consideration, so without further ado, I present, in order of publication, an annotated list of what are, in my opinion, Gardner’s top ten articles for Scientific American:ġ. Should we focus on the ones that are most talked about today, those that generated the biggest volume of correspondence upon publication, or those that were the scientifically influential? How does one choose the top ten Gardner articles from the roughly 300 that he wrote for Scientific American? The vast majority of those were "Mathematical Games" columns, which appeared monthly from January 1957 to December 1980, and then sporadically until June 1986. As a result, I had to struggle to understand what I wrote, and this helped me write in ways that others could understand.” Even today my knowledge of math extends only through calculus, and even calculus I only dimly comprehend. The secret of its success was a direct result of my ignorance. Their contributions to my column were far superior to anything I could write, and were a major reason for the column’s growing popularity.
"One of the pleasures in writing the column was that it introduced me to so many top mathematicians, which of course I was not.
In his memoirs Undiluted Hocus-Pocus (Princeton, 2013), Gardner recalls: This success is all the more remarkable considering that Gardner had no formal training in mathematics. Even the articles that seemed to be purely for entertainment sometimes inspired important research, some of which led to developments with real impact on science, technology and society. The columns are still considered models of clarity and elegance for introducing fresh and engaging ideas in mathematics in non-technical ways.Īs we pause to celebrate the centennial of the man who wrote them, the ever-prolific Martin Gardner (1914–2010), we note that while many of his articles fell under the umbrella of “recreational mathematics,” others touched on cutting-edge concepts involving contributions from some of the world's most creative minds. The "Mathematical Games" column in Scientific American that began in January 1957 is a legend in publishing, even though it's been almost 30 years since the last one appeared.
0 kommentar(er)
