The New York Times Book of Mathematics: More Than 100 Years of Writing by the Numbers

by Gina Kolata (Editor), Paul Hoffman (Foreword)

“Some of the pieces included here are important and some are curiosities, but all are absorbing . . . Recommended for casual and serious math enthusiasts.” —Library JournalFrom the archives of the world’s most famous newspaper comes a collection of its very best writing on mathematics. Big and informative, The New York Times Book of Mathematics gathers more than 110 articles written from 1892 to 2010 that cover statistics, coincidences, chaos theory, famous problems, cryptography, computers, and many other topics. Edited by Pulitzer Prize finalist and senior Times writer Gina Kolata, and featuring renowned contributors such as James Gleick, William L. Laurence, Malcolm W. Browne, George Johnson, and John Markoff, it’s a must-have for any math and science enthusiast.“Many fascinating problems are explained in language that the layperson will understand . . . This compilation of real-world applications will interest those with an inclination toward mathematics or problem-solving.” —Publishers Weekly

Genres: Mathematics, Science, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy

498 pages, Kindle Edition

First published April 2, 2013

About the author

Kolata graduated from the University of Maryland and studied molecular biology at the graduate level at MIT for a year and a half. Then she returned to the University of Maryland and obtained a master’s degree in applied mathematics. Kolata has taught writing as a visiting professor at Princeton University and frequently gives lectures across the country. She lives in Princeton, New Jersey, with her family.

Reviews

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

When I read a collection like this I hope to find things that will lead to further reading. I can't say that's the case with this collection.

A few articles are interesting from a historical standpoint. The 1946 article speculating on using computers to forecast weather is interesting, but only from a naive viewpoint.

The one article that comes closest is Clive Thompson's reporting on Bueno de Mesquita's game theory forecasts of real events, "Can Game Theory Predict When Iran Will Get the Bomb?" from 2009.

Entire sections on Fermat's Last Theorem are repetitive.

A surprising thing in the book is the Times' obituary for Rear Adm. Grace Hopper. The Times is known for interviewing and archiving those interviews in advance of famous peoples' deaths. But the obituary published in the book shows no indication that anyone had contacted Hopper, who was famously quotable.

[Antony Monir · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a mostly pointless book. Most of the articles are too short and written for a general audience such that you don’t get much out of it. It makes me question who this book really is for. If you’re interested in math, you won’t get much out of this as the articles are targeted towards a general audience. If you’re not interested you probably won’t be reading this book in the first place. I’ll admit, some of the long form articles are quite interesting but these are few and far between. Most articles are 2-3 pages long and are incredibly uninteresting and uninformative. Some articles don’t even have much to do with mathematics. It’s as if the editors did a ctrl + f for the words “math” and “number” and included all articles that contain these words without checking if they’re even focused on math. The book itself is like 15 years old so it’s not like you’d be getting the latest and greatest of the happenings of the math world. Note that this rating doesn’t reflect my opinion on the articles (some are 5 stars others are 1-2 stars) but rather the book as a whole. I have massive respect for the individual journalists who put in the effort to make the concepts of the mathematical universe comprehensible to the average person. I don’t respect whichever NYT department that thought that this book does justice to the work of these journalists. One funny thing i noticed is that the older articles tend to have more respect for their readers than the more recent ones. I was quite impressed by the article that explained how computers worked. It really shows the decline in attentions spans over time. If you want to read a surface level explanation how large prime factorization in cryptography works this is the book for you cause you’re gonna read the same explanation at least a dozen times in separate articles. Otherwise, don’t waste your time on this and go read any other writings on math, or better yet, go practice math instead of reading about it. 2/5

[Darcy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a compilation of articles published by the New York Times, going back over 100 years. Grouped into categories, there are several on the same subject, but offered up chronologically so advances can be seen as they progress. Interestingly, there are a couple that fool you, as the publication date is saved for last, so articles you may think of as recent, are quite dated, and vice versa.

There is a lot to learn about here, but mainly in layman's terms. There are only a few formulas, and those are well explained, but they are there to illustrate the principal of the article, not to be a feature of the article itself. For example, there is a lot written about Fermat's Lost Theorem, but if you are expecting to see a proof, you will need to look elsewhere. However, if you are interested in learning about the people behind the calculations, their impact on the world, and how they go about their business, this is a fascinating read indeed. There is even a section dealing with early computer science and it is illuminating to learn how the basics have not really changed.

This is an easy read and you do not have to have a pad and pencil to hand to understand what is going on. While certainly an appetite wetter, it is only going to stoke your curiosity, not leaving you scratching your noggin, trying to determine what is going on. I very much enjoyed this survey of the field and learned a lot to boot!.

[Rebecca · Rating 3 out of 5]

I got this book off the bargain bin at Barnes and Noble a long time ago. It took me a long time to read this book. I thought I would learn something about math. A very unclear topic to me . It day in a box for a long time almost over10 years. There are a lot of bad reviews on this book. I actually like Gina Kolata for her book about the flu epidemic of 11918 and Paul Johnson for.pulling together a bunch of New York Times reviews on math from over 100 years from approximately 1913 to 2013. There were 19 New York Times science writers organized in 7 chapters. I learned about the fields medal an honor given to math geniuses who were the basis of our computer age, computer security, forensic meficine, prime numbers, chaos theory, random numbers, cryptography and even the beginnings of healthcare outcomes research. It goes you a glimpse unto the world of math geniuses mostly Jewish and American but a.m.a Indian math professors and this quest to solve difficult math questions before the age of 40.I learned of Paul Erds, Leonard Adelman, the ESA gcode, Andrew Giles, Grigor Perelman and game theory. A good review of what is out there and there is always more. It was kind of interesting and may be a good history in snipets. I think it is a good reference book. I kind of with the negative reviews but if you want a general overview of science writers for the New York Times, read it. It is a good history of math and the world. I gives a good overview. It is a bit self serving. I did learn something.

[Marisav · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Book of Mathematics is a fairly comprehensive book of most of the developments in math over the last several decades, as well as intriguing articles about game theory and statistics, computer programming, robots, etc. In particular, there’s a very long article about the way some people are using game theory and complex computer programs to make it seem like the world of The Foundation is write around the corner. It’s a really great book for an amateur mathematician, or just someone who’s a bit interested in the subject, since all of the articles are written for a popular audience.

My one complaint about the book is that since each article has to stand on its own, the book eventually gets a bit repetitive. Every article on Fermat’s last theorem or on Andrew Wiles has to explain the theorem all over again and the history of failed attempts. Same for the Riemannn Hypothesis, and even more basic concepts such as game theory are explained in every article that discusses game theory. I could probably have used about half as many articles. And really, the shorter (less than one page) articles only had information that was already included in the longer articles.

So in summary: interesting collection, lots of articles I wanted to read, probably could have had half as many articles total.

Read full review: https://acallidryas.wordpress.com/201...

[Frederick Gault · Rating 3 out of 5]

I put this book down unfinished in 2019. I picked it back up and this time I was in the mood for it. Yes, it is about math, but it is also about the people who do math, and as a group they tend to be remarkable and unusual. These stories, published over the years in the NY Times, were interesting enough to pull me through to the end. I often didn't understand some of the concepts that scary-smart people just had pop into their heads, but then most mathematicians themselves often don't understand it either. It was also interesting to muse on the question; "is math a human invention or an underlying blueprint of the Universe?" Often "pure" math, seen as art as well as science, will come back and become the backbone of some applied real-world tool, to the surprise of the mathematician who came up with it. Lest you think this is all pie-in-the-sky stuff that doesn't really concern real people, remember that these folks came up with the mechanisms of computing, the word "bit", and much of the theory behind the magic of modern life.

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

A quick read about stories in mathematics history, discovery and mathematicians you probably already knew from some other sources. Nevertheless, a great pastime, and it sometimes does have some first-time information.

[Chris · Rating 1 out of 5]

it makes me sad that human effort is spent creating and marketing work like this. The book is abysmal and devoid of value.

[Zachary Sokol · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very fun.

[Missy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Disclaimer: The extent of my high school math was geometry. In college, my mathematics credit was in “Math for Poets.” I count on my fingers. Yet for some reason, I find higher level mathematics fascinating. It’s mysterious and incomprehensible and magical. Combine the arcane world of higher mathematics with the crisp writing of the New York Times, and you have a winner of a book. The Book of Mathematics chronicles changes in theory and practice over the past 100 years, a time of tremendous change in industrialization, communication, and computation. An article from 1892, reports on a meeting of the Society of Actuaries, introducing readers to “the men who figure business by algebra.” You can read articles 10 years apart -- 1986 and 1996 -- demonstrating the transition in mathematicians’ attitudes about computers. According the earlier article by James Gleick, computers count while mathematicians think. A decade later, Gina Kolata writes about the possibility of computers becoming “as agile at reasoning as they are at calculating.” The Book of Mathematics is a joy to dip into; a visit to world of people (and machines) who think big and strange thoughts, explained and made understandable by gifted journalists.

[Jo]

I am still currently reading this book.. I happened upon it why just scanning the New book shelf at my local library.. It was the Saturday before Labor day, and my local library was to be closed Sunday and Monday, so I wanted to get something different out to read. No, I am not a Math Wiz, nor do I want to sound like I am being so important that I am trying to impress you with my math literacy.. Its just that these days, with computers taking up so much of our lives, and being so intricately involved in our day to day affairs( try job searching without a computer. Impossible) that math skills are more important than ever.


I have mentioned on my Facebook page that couponing is like algebra in a way. You are trying to reach zero sum, and you have to do equations, trying to get as much as you can, for the least you can..


Math to me is cold, but a blanket cold. Practical and always there.

[Jonita Sherman · Rating 1 out of 5]

I really don't know what the purpose of this book was supposed to be. I assumed (wrongly) from the title "Mathematics", it had something to do with math. Maybe even the evolution of math. Perhaps some mathematical concepts? Perhaps since it said "100 years of writing about the numbers" it would have been about math in the media--maybe the perception of math in mainstream media/culture? Mathematicians? Affects of math? Anything math-y?

But no. It was rather snippets of articles from 100 years. It would be better described as "We found a file full of old articles on math and crammed them in a book, and published them in no particular order with no particular theme."

It had so much potential, but no. Just no. Save your $30, Google "Mathematics" and read the first 100 hits you get--it's pretty much the same experience. As my dissertation advisor would have said "I stopped reading on page 10, you can do better than this- try again."

[Terry Freedman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not an obvious choice for Computing teachers, you might think, a book on mathematics. But this one is fascinating because there are sections on cryptography and computing, as well as odd chapters on interesting topics like random numbers and electronics.

The subtitle of the book is More than 100 years of writing by the numbers. In other words, this is a collection of articles taken from the New York Times over the last 100 years. It's readable for non-mathematicians (well, mostly), and gives you a great historical perspective of how computing – and thinking about computing – has developed over that time.

[Tom · Rating 2 out of 5]

As originally published, many of the collected essays were reasonably interesting. As collected however, they frequently overlap, with great redundancy, provoking a lot more skimming than a winning book should.

Beyond this basic structural nuisance, I kept feeling surprised how little math is included. The book reads more like a who's who along with the names of their accomplishments, with very little math content most of the time. I wasn't prepared to handle a math textbook, but somehow expected more substantive content.

[Cook Memorial Public Library · Rating 4 out of 5]

A 2013 staff nonfiction favorite recommended by staffer Melissa. Read her review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Check our catalog: http://encore.cooklib.org/iii/encore/...

[Walter Ullon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good collection of essays ranging for number theory, to probability, chaos theory, cryptology, and much more.

The only downside that I can think of is that if you've read some math in the past, you're bound to find many of the essays repetitive (there's more than a couple dealing with Fermat's Last Theorem) which is sort of like watching a movie you already know the ending to.

[John Ambrose · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very enjoyable collection of essays for the math-literate reader. I especially enjoyed the essay on the Monty Hall Problem, the series about Fermat's Last Theorem, and the section on chaos. The book also does a great job bringing the personalities of the great mathematicians of the 20th Century to life, especially Paul Erdos.

[Leland William · Rating 2 out of 5]

A silly book. While individual pieces of this collection stand out as good journalism, the collection as a whole stinks. There is repetition in subjects covered, and much of the content in this collection is too simplified to be interesting. I'm not sure what I was expecting out of this thing, but it did not impress.

[Stephen Cranney · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some of the writings were so out of date to be quaint (articles describing the exciting future of computers in 1960...), but the more recent articles or articles about the immortal problems were good.

[Cynthia · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wanted something more in-depth, and while the writing was accessible, it wasn't challenging and didn't offer enough examples.

[Michael Schwob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great excerpts from historical moments in mathematics.