Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Infinity Comes in Different Sizes

*apparates in front of computer*

Ahem, so where were we! I have been sent the following link by an email from a mathemagician, (or the opposite of that*!) and found it interesting.

"...Scientific American article on the "different" sizes of infinity. It discusses Cantor's Paradox and how this is possible.

Full Article:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa029&articleID=DFCF15E5-E7F2-99DF-3EAAFAF2776CEFC5"

It's two pages BTW! (You might not have noticed...)

I've finished reading the last Harry Potter book and will probably discuss it later on. (You might not have read it yet, and I do recall how I didn't like it when someone told me about the 5th one). One thing I've noticed is that Rowling's books are very similar to the Lord of the Rings. Obviously they both have a 'good vs evil' theme, but the similarities seem to jump at you. My reduced thoughts: it was a great book and it kept me from showing my face for the whole day! (I didn't read much on the weekend. Although during the night, I had sat in the lit hallway till some weird time until I was spotted reading- wasn't home you see). However, today there was no holding back. It's funny how you never realise how hungry you are when you're just sat in one place reading!

Believe it or not Harry Potter had been out of my system since the sixth book because I'd hated it! However the magic returns. (coughs). I got it for a bargain as well - £5 from Asda! BTW I've concluded that I was either under the Imperious curse or confuddled during the previous post (if indeed you shook your head at it). Wait... I need to get a life! Nah- I was just playing the devil's advocate I suppose but I'm seeing things differently now. (Not in a bad way). I still haven't read on because of the Harry Potter book, but will do.

Isn't it weird how quickly we tend to read fiction, yet when it comes to reading non-fiction we seem to take ages. (Or is that just me?) Actually I've slowed down my fiction reading speed considerably, and I think that's because now whenever I read I have to have the images of what I'm reading forming in my head. I've got all the Harry Potter book images in my head at the moment - well the way I see things. It's pretty 'cool' and maybe that's why I hate the movies so much! (I have refused to watch the movie Off Mice and Men having read the great book and hopefully won't ever watch it!)

Hopefully things will be returning to normal in the coming week, but then again one can never be too sure about these things! (especially considering it's me we're talking about!)

For those who don't know about Harry Potter, if you're not a wizard you're called a muggle. So if you're not a mathemagician, what would/should you be called? I thought 'trouble' to rhyme with muggle but poetry has never been my strongest point. And you can't go around calling 'troubles', 'trouble' unless you are indeed looking for trouble! (ouch).

I'd say a mathemagician is someone who enjoys maths as opposed to someone who has to do it. So someone who doesn't enjoy maths is called... (apart from evil!)... erm... I'll have to sleep on it! I think I also need to watch my step from now on: Protego. Haha- try getting me now. Wait- I thought I'd grown up. Oops, I'm probably still excited and so to end this post on a more sober note, what is one plus one? (This question should determine the \sout{century} year you were born in!)1

Wait if I'm a (wanabe) mathemagican then protego shouldn't work for me- drat I'll have to end up staying on the run now! We should all work together (ahem) and invent spells(?)/maths(?) that are mathemagician friendly -I vote we start on one to shield ourselves! Of course we should be wary of any Voldemort's flying around -know any?

Are there any Potter fans out there? If not, my apologies and I'll promise not to erase your memory of such post if you don't contact St. Mungos. :( (I don't know when to shut up do I? (Rhetorical question alert!)).

1 Well not really- but it'll give me a subtle indication. Again not really really... just answer the question in the way you would! :D It's a test!

PS: I really need to start providing links again.

4 comments:

Jake said...

(I have refused to watch the movie Off Mice and Men having read the great book and hopefully won't ever watch it!)

I know what you mean by this but I generally find that watching the film after you have already read the book isn't so bad as you have already formed the image in your mind.

Incidentally, Of Mice and Men is one of my favourite ever pieces of fiction. I saw the film a few years ago and it was actually quite good; fairly faithful to the book IIRC.

beans said...

It's the opposite with me- if I watch the movie first then I probably won't mind too much but that probably also depends on whether or not I liked the movie. Actually since I can't recall watching a movie before reading the book I'm not too sure!

Yes, Of Mice and Men was great. I had to do an English coursework on it and for once I actually enjoyed it! Steinbeck is a great author, but I don't think I'll watch the movie. :p I can see it all in my head you see- the path they walked on in the beginning and the contrasting nature of the end. (oops, getting carried away here!)

I blame the Harry Potter films for my attitude towards movies since I've absolutely hated them. The third book was my favorite and the movie was a disgrace- dementors flying!! What the heck, they 'float'. And Lupin was meant to be cool. (I'll stop myself before I continue this rant, and I know that thay can't make the movies according to how everyone would like them which is why I don't watch them).

(Hey BTW :p)

Jake said...

Having as of yet failed to become enticed by the allure of the Harry Potter series, I haven't actually read any of the books yet *gasp* *shock* *horror* ;p

I did however see (read:- get dragged along to) his latest cinematic release and I must admit that I found it completely awful. Judging by comments from my fellow cinema-goers, I think that they concurred that the books were not translated to film well. Apparently the films were too short to fit in all the content and hence several plot lines were either severely undeveloped or missed out entirely. I found that the dark elements of the film ame accross as being comical and that conversely, the intended comical moments were just not funny.

It is a shame really as I am told that the books are really quite good but after seeing that film, I now have even less desire to read any of them.

With the Lord of the Rings, I was in a similar situation. My friend wanted me to go and see the final film and I said 'I am not interested in fantasy novels' etc. but after much cajoling, I relented and watched the first two on DVD on got hooked. After really enjoying those films, I felt a lot more inclined to read the book (although I still haven't got round to it). Being a bit of a geek about these sorts of things, the fact that the films were really well shot and had a great score; I probably would have enjoyed them even if I hadn't have followed the plot line.

beans said...

You haven't! *faints* ;) Lol, a few of my friends have yet to read them as well.

Thank you for that- I was actually going to allow myself to be dragged to watch it but had declined! The trailers had looked interesting but you make a fair point. The plot is quite complex and you can't understand much of it by just watching the movies- especially since some cool bits have been cut out. The darn werewolf in the third one wasn't even scary! Finally someone else who agrees that the movies are comical.

I think, especially for the movies, they tried to 'copy' the LOTR ones a lot. The LOTR movies are fantastic in my opinion. I've watched them on numerous occasions-especially the first one! I had actually read the book before but it's about 1000 pages and so I dodgily remembered stuff. Strangely enough, the only bits that I did remember and wouldn't have mind seeing in the movie was Tom Bombadil. I've just got to continue agreeing with what you're saying!

I'd definitely recommend the Harry Potter books but the first few might not seem 'great'. I first read them in year 8 you see, but as you continue reading the lot you feel part of the 'wizarding world' and then you're into it. Book 3 was my fav. but the last one was equally absorbing- I didn't want it to end. :( Although having read that all day yesterday probably explains my stiff neck! (After book three the plot thickens...)

I loved both of the books (HP and LOTR) but I detest the HP movies and love the LOTR ones. (The sound effects etc were far superior in LOTR- maybe Jackson should have directed HP!)