Dans le secret des nombres

by Rachel Thomas, Martine Lemonnier (Translator), Marianne Freiberger

Partez à la découverte du monde des mathématiques et laissez-vous guider par les nombres. Nombre d'or, nombres irrationnels, nombres premiers, nombre pi..., des plus connus aux plus mystérieux, les nombres permettent d'explorer l'histoire des mathématiques et de leurs applications dans tous les domaines: architecture, météorologie, informatique, médecine... Rédigé dans un style clair et élégant, agrémenté de nombreuses anecdotes et d'images mentales originales (par exemple, les nombres premiers assimilés à un collier de perles), cet ouvrage charmera tous les curieux de science.

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Mathematics

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2014

About the author

There is more than one author with this name

Reviews

[Eden Costello · Rating 5 out of 5]

If anyone wants a brief but throughly enjoyable tour through some of the most fascinating and beautiful parts of maths I would highly recommend numericon. From the origin of counting, to irrationality, fractals, and various other wonderful mathematical tidbits, numericon narrates and skims over the world of maths masterfully. Written for the layman, numericon explains everything it explores from the most basic principles. A wonderful book: 4.5 stars.

[Myat Thura Aung · Rating 3 out of 5]

Don't be fooled by the name. This book is not just about the numbers or number theory. It's, in fact, a short excursion for the general reader into different fields of mathematics. Despite its clumsy take on Godel's incompleteness theorems, it's overall a good read and can be quite witty and entertaining.

[Craig · Rating 5 out of 5]

This nicely summarizes quite a lot of interesting mathematics in an engaging format--each chapter is ostensibly about a number. Some of these numbers (infinity, i, e, Graham's Number) do describe their chapters well, others are just nice starting points to delve into interesting math (3 and 4 go into dimensions; 6 into degrees of separation; 42 goes into simulations, via Douglas Adams; etc.). A very delightful book; I'm enjoying reading it with my 11-year-old. (Well, we didn't linger on the Riemann zeta function--one can skip to one's interests.)

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Got a bit complex to read at times. But the things I've learned and relearned ain't imaginary. Nicely written reminder of the power, elegance, and hidden gems in math, and how it runs the world in oh so many ways. Chapters numbers are brilliant!

[Shira · Rating 3 out of 5]

this is like the US weekly of math

[Abdulrahman · Rating 5 out of 5]

An amazing book..
Gives a pretty great overview of maths, with a few jokes and twists.

Has some history (including dead mathematicians)

[Maurizio Codogno · Rating 3 out of 5]

Carino, ma mi pare manchi qualcosa

Le autrici di questo libro sono editor di Plus Magazine, e quindi sono abituate a divulgare matematica. I vari numeri (interi, irrazionali anche se al posto di π hanno preferito usare τ, e già che c'erano anche l'unità immaginaria, oltre che l'incognita x) sono pertanto trattati da un punto di vista puramente matematico, anche se con molti agganci con la vita reale. Chi è abituato a leggere divulgazione matematica probabilmente non troverà molte cose nuove; ho però apprezzato il modo in cui le autrici hanno assemblato il materiale per ottenere uniformità e scorrevolezza, cosa che non è usuale in testi che per la loro stessa natura nascono frammentati. Alla fine mi è però rimasta una sensazione strana, come se mancasse qualcosa. Può darsi che la colpa sia la descrizione della quarta di copertina, che paragonava il libro a Etimologycon: no, non è la stessa cosa. Ah: mi raccomando, leggete la sezione finale sulla "bibliografia ragionata", che non è un semplice elenco di libri.

[Electric-guitar · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book. Very interesting, clear writing and easy to understand.
A book I would read over a few times.

[Farida El azab · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved the book it was soo interesting and intriguing.but there was alot of things that weren’t accurate historically. The topics could have been covered better than that.