[HN Gopher] 500-year-old maths problem turns out to apply to cof...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       500-year-old maths problem turns out to apply to coffee and clocks
        
       Author : gumby
       Score  : 115 points
       Date   : 2024-05-17 17:30 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.newscientist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.newscientist.com)
        
       | brudgers wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/aQGyH
        
       | ffhhj wrote:
       | The butt pattern.
        
         | banish-m4 wrote:
         | Finally, a mathematical solution to why coffee makes me poop.
         | It's clearly subliminal messaging.
        
           | IncreasePosts wrote:
           | I always assumed despite the slight laxative effect of
           | coffee, the real reason is most people are just morning
           | poopers and morning coffee drinkers.
        
             | nullbio wrote:
             | I think it's because it pulls water into the intestines,
             | which helps you poop easier.
        
               | euroderf wrote:
               | As it's a diuretic I'd say it pushes water, but yeah.
        
             | idiotlogical wrote:
             | I noticed years ago while feeding my newborn that she would
             | chug some delicious warm milk and fill up that diaper.
             | Since then I always figured the coffee phenomenon was
             | related.
             | 
             | Drinking plain warm/hot water can trigger the same response
             | so it is arguably not just coffee.
        
             | mewpmewp2 wrote:
             | I vary my routine a lot, so I am pretty sure that it is the
             | liquid coffee here that is the trigger. Not just caffeine
             | because I normally use caffeine pills instead.
        
             | schmidt_fifty wrote:
             | It's hard to discount other factors but I certainly notice
             | a difference switching from water to coffee.
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | It's a pretty strong effect for me, but IIRC there are
             | multiple causes, like that it's hot + acidic + caffeinated.
        
             | alexey-salmin wrote:
             | On some days I'm 8-10 times a day coffee drinker and on the
             | same days I turn out to be 4-5 times a day pooper. I
             | suspect there is some connection.
        
             | DeathArrow wrote:
             | I can drink as much coffee as I want and I experience no
             | laxative effects. But if I eat some chilli peppers next
             | morning I feel like I am going to explode.
        
           | bruce511 wrote:
           | Correlation <> causation.
           | 
           | Most people tend to poop around the same each day. Largely
           | because we tent to eat around the same time each day.
           | 
           | Most people tend to drink coffee at the same times each day.
           | Naturally for a bunch of folk one will co-incide with the
           | other, at least some days a week.
           | 
           | The added factor is that most people (who drink coffee) drink
           | multiple times per day, allowing for more correlation
           | opportunities.
           | 
           | But mostly what causes pooping is eating (he says,
           | speculating, with no data to back it up.)
        
             | ErikBjare wrote:
             | All stimulants cause this, it is well known.
        
       | gradschoolfail wrote:
       | Epicycloid -> Antikythera gearing -> planetary epicycles
       | 
       | https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
       | 
       | The mathematics of the epicycloid : a historical journey with a
       | modern perspective
        
       | barfbagginus wrote:
       | See the Wikipedia page for satisfying proofs of the Cycloid's
       | Involute, Arc Length, Area, and Pendulum properties. The involute
       | property has a particularly neat proof, and it gives us a neat
       | proof of the arc length property, and a shockingly elegant
       | construction for the pendulum motion:
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycloid
       | 
       | The article about cardioids has a very elegant proof of coffee
       | cup caustic reflection property:
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardioid
        
       | ykonstant wrote:
       | Here is an amusing related phenomenon: if you look at dynamical
       | system induced by multiplication by 3/2 on the binary digits of a
       | seed and cut a fixed window, you get the following graph family:
       | https://ykonstant1.github.io/images/trans_limit.png
       | 
       | More generally, exponential maps on finite structures produce
       | these reflection-like envelopes.
        
       | adamddev1 wrote:
       | In "An Introduction to Mathematics", by A. N. Whitehead, he makes
       | a wonderful argument for the "usefulness" of pure math. With many
       | fascinating examples like this he describes how when people work
       | to solve purely mathematical problems without any "real-world
       | application," they actually end up having incredibly useful
       | applications in real life situations down the road. But where
       | people are limited only to seemingly useful, "practical" math
       | problems, they don't end up making the progress that brings great
       | practical advances in the end.
        
         | adonovan wrote:
         | I just finished G. H. Hardy's celebrated "A Mathematician's
         | Apology". He describes "useful" math such as calculus as "on
         | the whole, rather dull", and contrasts it with the "real" math
         | of Euler, Fermat, and Gauss, which he finds "almost wholly
         | 'useless'"; he adds that the great achievements of applied math
         | --relativity and quantum mechanics--are "almost as useless as
         | number theory".
         | 
         | He was prudent to add "at present [1940], at any rate": the
         | phone on which I am typing wouldn't work at all without number
         | theory, relativity, and quantum mechanics!
        
           | jprete wrote:
           | I have a vague sense that mathematicians take some pride in
           | the uselessness of their discipline, even when it's the exact
           | opposite of useless. Maybe because the more useless the
           | mathematics appears to be, the more it must be motivated by
           | the pure love of the subject?
        
             | vector_spaces wrote:
             | With regard to the "pride in uselessness" thing, I caution
             | you against generalizing here. Different people get into
             | math for different reasons, but I would say that all the
             | pure mathematicians I know of are motivated principally by
             | interest in the problems they care about, and don't think
             | too much about questions of purity.
             | 
             | There's a nice quote from Courant in his "Introduction to
             | Calculus & Analysis" where he warns against "smug purism",
             | exhorting students to draw inspiration and insight from
             | other fields because it will make them better
             | mathematicians. I think this is the attitude that I
             | encounter most frequently among mature, pure
             | mathematicians.
             | 
             | Chebyshev in particular was known not only for working on
             | problems that had engineering applications, but for using
             | methods and techniques from engineering to inform his
             | approach to pure math problems. As the founder of the St.
             | Petersburg school of mathematics, this approach had broad
             | impacts on (later) Soviet mathematics and global
             | mathematics as students brought up in this tradition went
             | on to train later generations of mathematicians around the
             | world.
        
       | boringg wrote:
       | Why is it a maths problem and not a math problem?
        
         | innocenat wrote:
         | "maths" is British English for "math" in US English.
        
         | onionisafruit wrote:
         | .
        
         | lelanthran wrote:
         | > Why is it a maths problem and not a math problem?
         | 
         | Because what Americans call 'math' is called 'maths' in many
         | parts of the English-speaking world.
        
           | gist wrote:
           | Similar in US we typically say 'the University' however on HN
           | I frequently see just 'University'.
           | 
           | (Note I had the same thought as you but assumed (w/o a
           | search) it was for the reason stated by your reply).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-19 23:01 UTC)