Cornell 6 Clarkson 1

[Towerroad]

Wikipedia has a nice article on primes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number#Primality_of_one

1 used to be a prime number (hence my error as I learned math by counting dinosaurs) but Ursusminor correctly point out that 1 has fallen out of fashion as a prime to meet the needs of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that any number can be expressed as a unique product of primes or is prime itself. 1 poses a problem in that if included it would not lead to unique products of primes. 6=2X3, 6=2X3X1, 6=2X3X1X1 etc.

This is not entirely satisfying and could easily lead us into the realm of arithmetic not being axiomatic.

[jtwcornell91]

Wikipedia has a nice article on primes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number#Primality_of_one

1 used to be a prime number (hence my error as I learned math by counting dinosaurs) but Ursusminor correctly point out that 1 has fallen out of fashion as a prime to meet the needs of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that any number can be expressed as a unique product of primes or is prime itself. 1 poses a problem in that if included it would not lead to unique products of primes. 6=2X3, 6=2X3X1, 6=2X3X1X1 etc.

This is not entirely satisfying and could easily lead us into the realm of arithmetic not being axiomatic.

Well, it's like the silly "PWR is subjective" argument.  Math and logic are well-defined given a consistent set of axioms, but you have to choose which axioms to start with.  Just ask Riemann and Lobachevsky...

[Jim Hyla]

Wikipedia has a nice article on primes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number#Primality_of_one

1 used to be a prime number (hence my error as I learned math by counting dinosaurs) but Ursusminor correctly point out that 1 has fallen out of fashion as a prime to meet the needs of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that any number can be expressed as a unique product of primes or is prime itself. 1 poses a problem in that if included it would not lead to unique products of primes. 6=2X3, 6=2X3X1, 6=2X3X1X1 etc.

This is not entirely satisfying and could easily lead us into the realm of arithmetic not being axiomatic.

Well, it's like the silly "PWR is subjective" argument.  Math and logic are well-defined given a consistent set of axioms, but you have to choose which axioms to start with.  Just ask Riemann and Lobachevsky...

Well, that's a reason I can understand: "Because that's the way we defined it."::uptosomething::

[Trotsky]

Just ask Riemann and Lobachevsky...

Lobachevsky called.  He said "let no one else's work evade your eyes."

[jtwcornell91]

Just ask Riemann and Lobachevsky...

Lobachevsky called.  He said "let no one else's work evade your eyes."

"But remember always please to call it 'research'."

[Towerroad]

I taught my kids math when they were young and at some point for fun (danger nerd alert) we got to the set of all sets problem. I told them about Russell and Godel and how arithmetic was not as pure as one might think but I warned them "Just because Arithmetic is not axiomatic does not mean you should not balance your checkbook"

[jtwcornell91]

I taught my kids math when they were young and at some point for fun (danger nerd alert) we got to the set of all sets problem. I told them about Russell and Godel and how arithmetic was not as pure as one might think but I warned them "Just because Arithmetic is not axiomatic does not mean you should not balance your checkbook"

There's a reason it's called "Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem" and not "ZOMG teh mathz is brok3z0rz!1!!1!!oneone!!eleven!"

[Towerroad]

I think it is time to drop the puck

[Jim Hyla]

I think it is time to drop the puck

Is it ever time to not drop the puck?:-}

[Towerroad]

Amen!

[Chris '03]

Just noticed the ECAC site is posting video highlights of (most?) conference games, which I don't remember seeing before this season. Here are the highlights from Saturday:
http://www.ecachockey.com/men/video/2010-11/Clarkson_Cornell1.flv

[scoop85]

Good stuff.  I especially enjoyed seeing how after Gotovets scored and he jumped against the glass, some blond woman smacked the glass in disgust.  Perhaps that was the insufferable Goldie Knight from the Clarkson Roundtable? :-P

[jtwcornell91]

Good stuff.  I especially enjoyed seeing how after Gotovets scored and he jumped against the glass, some blond woman smacked the glass in disgust.  Perhaps that was the insufferable Goldie Knight from the Clarkson Roundtable? :-P

Our Knights are AWESOME!

[Robb]

Good stuff.  I especially enjoyed seeing how after Gotovets scored and he jumped against the glass, some blond woman smacked the glass in disgust.  Perhaps that was the insufferable Goldie Knight from the Clarkson Roundtable? :-P

Our Knights are AWESOME!

I can tell this is fake because there aren't at least 3 adverbs in front of AWESOME!

[Josh '99]

Just noticed the ECAC site is posting video highlights of (most?) conference games, which I don't remember seeing before this season. Here are the highlights from Saturday:
http://www.ecachockey.com/men/video/2010-11/Clarkson_Cornell1.flv

That was good entertainment right there.  Winning at Lynah East is all very well and good, but for me there's a special joy in seeing the team go on the road and light it up against somebody who has actual fans there in the rink.  Part of the whole dream-crushing soul-devouring juggernaut thing, maybe.