I'm currently #94 on the @BookCrossing Leader Board for # of Books Registered in last week http:/
The reply to site won't be visible to most as it was a private message, but someone asked about how to get started on building their own Little Free Library branch. My reply:
I wrote a little bit about my building process here: http:/
You can find most of the details for set up and registry on http:/
There's also a nice little book about building and hosting your own as well. You can find it on Amazon at http:/
The BookCrossing.com and GoodReads.com portion I've integrated into mine are unrelated websites that are used for releasing and tracking books out in the wild, but that both work with the LFL concept really well.
I've done a lot of research on the upfront side, so I do know quite a lot about the overall concepts, but obviously have only just opened my own. I'm happy to provide as much or as little help as you might need, just let me know.
Best,
Chris
#LittleFreeLibrary #LFL8424
I've seen that same article floating around for the past several weeks (in some part because I had the originating professor in college). The trouble with the experiment as it relates to early human societies is that most of them were kinship based, and for basic functionality, they all were forced to intercommunicate and typically put family first in a sense. In this exercise, there is no communication, nor any real speakable "community"- everyone is truly out for themselves.
I've recently been reading Francis Fukuyama's The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011) [http:/
In short, the interesting exercise here to me seems to be what constructs in society lead to creating the tragedy of the commons and which don't? Figuring this problem out will help to maintain stability in our current culture for generations to come.
I'd mentioned his books previously as very Big History focused here: https:/
How is it that @HomeDepot hasn't partnered up with @LtlFreeLibrary to help customers build their own libraries? #DIY #community #books
My answer to Question on @Quora: Would it be worth it to study category theory? http:/
The sad answer for most in your situation is: probably not yet. There just isn't a broad layer of applied use of category theory in your area yet. (I'll note that I'm also an electrical engineer with a background in information theory.) HOWEVER, this certainly doesn't mean it's not important and that the future won't find lots of applications for it, particularly given its abstraction and ability to connect disparate areas of mathematics. On the bleeding edge of research, however, it's another story. (For a flavor of some of this, take a look at John Baez's blog Azimuth: https:/
My suggestion to you, particularly as you mention that it seems very abstract, is that you do some preliminary background work in abstract algebra, combinatorics, and even set theory, which will likely be much more immediately applicable to your present area of study. These will give you a far better preparation for attacking category theory in the future. (I can't recall having seen or heard any EE departments even suggesting category theory courses recently, much less requiring them, even at the master's level. Further, very few universities are offering coursework directly in the topic at the moment, so it's far more likely that you'll only see it at the graduate level.
Those looking to dip their feet in the water might consider taking a look at How to Bake Pi: An Edible Exploration of the Mathematics of Mathematics by Eugenia Cheng [http:/
I'll recommend that, if you're impatient, you take a peek at David Spivak's book Category Theory for the Sciences [http:/
As you're roughly in the same area I am, I'll mention that my interest in the topic was recently piqued by an article by Ilyas Khan: Category Theory – the bedrock of mathematics? [http:/
As someone currently studying the topic, I will note that it isn't very difficult so far, and is relatively much easier than topics like advanced algebraic topology or Lie groups, so it could certainly be done at an advanced undergraduate level, but I'd certainly recommend diving into Spivak's book before any/many of the others which require a much higher level of mathematical sophistication typically required at the master's level or above. I would suggest that if you've done coursework in calculus and linear algebra and know most of the material in a book like A Primer of Abstract Mathematics (Classroom Resource Materials) by Robert B. Ash [http:/
E-Books Get a Makeover http:/
How Long It Takes Kids to Read Popular Books #Infographic
A children's book retailer offers a look at the average times it takes kids to complete a range of classic children's titles. It bears mentioning that the figures in this infographic don't represent data from an empirical study, just the average reading speed per grade level calibrated to the various lengths of the books included. Still, it's a helpful gauge of the various time commitments reading content demands of young readers who are increasingly distracted by other media.
.@small_societies Do you happen to have a bibliography of books in the vein of Judith Rodin's Resilience Dividend? http:/
While researching the links between mnemonics and shorthand, I just came across "A complete guide to the improvement of the memory or the science of memory simplified: with practical applications to languages, history, geography, music, prose, poetry, shorthand, etc." written by James Henry Bacon and published by Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, London. https:/
Isaac Pitman, who published the book, was also the inventor of Pitman shorthand which was introduced in 1837 and is structurally similar to the Major System.
The book seems to be based on Bacon's prior work "The Science of Memory Simplified and Explained: Or, A Rational System for Improving the Memory, Etc" written in 1861.
Josh, if you feel it appropriate, you can also add the book above to http:/
#memory #shorthand
Response to Quora Question: Are there any popular science books on information theory?
There are a small handful that may meet your requirements:
Information, Entropy, Life and the Universe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know by Arieh Ben-Naim
http:/
An Introduction to Information Theory: Symbols, Signals and Noise by John R. Pierce
http:/
The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood by James Gleick
http:/
Decoding the Universe: How the New Science of Information Is Explaining Everything in the Cosmos, from Our Brains to Black Holes by Charles Seife
http:/
Complexity: A Guided Tour by Melanie Mitchell
http:/
Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos by Seth Lloyd
http:/
The Mathematical Theory of Communication by Claude E. Shannon and Warren Weaver
http:/
The Ben-Naim book is coming out at the end of May, and is probably the best popular science book on the topic that you're likely to find (I've read most of an early draft). Following that it's still very hard to beat Pierce's presentation all these years later. Seife wasn't too bad while Gleick comes at things from the most broad viewpoint and covers more history than anything else. Lloyd's book mentions it tangentially. Mitchell's book is excellent, and though it only has one chapter on information theory, some of the other areas it covers are tangential to the subject and very interesting in their own right.
Finally, after Ben-Naim and Robinson, I'd really recommend the UofI Press edition of Shannon/Weaver. Though you can get a copy of Shannon's paper for free online, the introduction by Warren Weaver is really excellent (and similar to Robinson's presentation) and then one can delve into a bit of Shannon's actual math, which isn't too difficult and should be able to be followed by most reasonable high school students. Shannon's text is the only one I've listed that has any mathematical equations, but the Weaver half of the book is certainly a popular science presentation without any math.
I'll turn this question around to suggest that instead of taking notes from your math/physics textbooks, that you're FAR better off PUTTING notes INTO them! Those margins are meant for writing down the parts of problems and examples that the author implicitly leaves out.
One typically wouldn't take notes from a Spanish, French, or Latin textbook would they? Like most languages, mathematics should be read and written to practice it (and maybe even spoken).
Knowing math or physics is best demonstrated by actually doing problems - and the majority of the time, this is what is going to be on the test too, so just pick up a pencil or pen and start working out the answers.
These subjects aren't like history, philosophy, or psychology with multiple choice or essay type questions that might benefit from note-taking, so just jump right in. Give the book a short read and start plugging away at problems.
If you have problems getting started, take a look at some of the examples provided by the author (or in other books), cover up the answer, and try to recreate the solution.
Drafting off of the Quora question "Why aren't math textbooks more straightforward?" (https:/
The Math Major Who Never Reads Math http:/
Certainly an interesting perspective on a very pervasive problem. I saw the provocative question "Why Aren’t Math Textbooks More Straightforward?" on Quora just the other day. I take much the same view as you (though I religiously read not only my assigned math texts for classes, but also read their competitors in search of increased clarity and beauty.) I spent a few minutes writing up a few thoughts on what is going on in math textbooks taking a broader view of the forest instead of complaining about the trees.
Perhaps some of the tentative will gain a better appreciation for mathematics: http:/
The repetition that a good mathematician (or really any good thinker) reads books with a pencil in hand needs to be drilled down to younger learners.
A parting math textbook joke:
Q. Why did Nicolas Bourbaki quit writing mathematics textbooks?
A. "He" realized that Serge Lang was just one person.