There have been a number of Scientific discoveries that seemed to be purely scientific curiosities that later turned out to be incredibly useful. Hertz famously commented about the discovery of radio waves: “I do not think that the wireless waves I have discovered will have any practical application.”

Are there examples like this in math as well? What is the most interesting “pure math” discovery that proved to be useful in solving a real-world problem?

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Imaginary numbers probably, they’re useful for a lot of stuff in math and even physics (I’ve heard turbulent flow calculations can use them?) but they seem useless at first

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    It’s imaginary numbers. Full stop. No debate about it. The idea of them is so wild that they were literally named imaginary numbers to demonstrate how silly they were, and yet they can be used to describe real things in nature.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      35 minutes ago

      I mean, quaternions are the weirder version of complex numbers, and they’re used for calculating 3D rotations in a lot of production code.

      There’s also the octonions and (much inferior) Clifford algebras beyond that, but I don’t know about applications.

    • chunes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I don’t really get 'em. It seems like people often use them as “a pair of numbers.” So why not just use a pair of numbers then?

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        36 minutes ago

        They also have a defined multiplication operation consistent with how it works on ordinary numbers. And it’s not just multiplying each number separately.

        A lot of math works better on them. For example, all n-degree polynomials have exactly n roots, and all smooth complex functions have a polynomial approximation at every point. Neither is true on the reals.

        Quantum mechanics could possibly work with pairs of real numbers, but it would be unclear what each one means on their own. Treating a probability amplitude as a single number is more satisfying in a lot of ways.

        They don’t exist is still a position you could take, but so is the opposite.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        I totally get your point, and sometimes it seems like that. Why not just use a coordinate system? Because innsome applications the complex roots of equations is relevant.

        If you square an imaginary number, it’s no longer an imaginary number. Now it’s a real number! That’s not something you can accomplish with something like a pair of numbers alone.

      • justastranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Because the second number has special rules and a unit. It’s not just a pair of numbers, though it can be represented through a pair of numbers (really helpful for computing).

    • alt_xa_23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I’m studying EE in university, and have been surprised by just how much imaginary numbers are used

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        From what I’ve seen that’s one example where you could totally just use trig and pairs of numbers, though. I might be missing something, because I’m not an electrical engineer.

      • underscores@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        EE is absolutely fascinating for applications of calculus in general.

        I didn’t give a shkt about calculus and then EE just kept blowing my mind.

  • amelia@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 hours ago

    As far as I know, matrices were a “pure math” thing when they were first discovered and seemed pretty useless. Then physicists discovered them and used them for all sorts of shit and now they’re one of the most important tools in in science, engineering and programming.

  • Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 hours ago

    The invention of the number 0, the discovery of irrational numbers, or l the realization that base 60 math makes sense for anything round, including timekeeping.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      60 was chosen by the Ancient Sumerians specifically because of its divisibility by 2, 3, 4, and 5. Today, 60 is considered a superior highly composite number but that bit of theory wouldn’t have been as important to the Sumerians and Babylonians as the simple ability to divide 60 by many commonly used factors (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15) without any remainders or fractions to worry about.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 hours ago

        12 is the most based number in that respect IMO.

        But then…hey, we use that for hours!

  • saimen@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Having watched all the veritasium math videos I feel like all the major breakthroughs in math were due to mathemicians playing around with numbers or brain teasers out of curiosity without a concrete use case in mind.

    • moseschrute@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      It’s crazy how engaging and well done Veritasium videos are and they’re just free to watch on YouTube.

  • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 hours ago

    If I recall correctly, one mathematician in the 1800s solved a very difficult line integral, and the first application of it was in early computer speech synthesis.

  • truthfultemporarily@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    A brain teaser about visiting all islands connected by bridges without crossing the same bridge twice is now the basis of all internet routing. (Graph theory)

  • TheBlindPew@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The math fun fact I remember best from college is that Charles Boole invented Boolean algebra for his doctoral thesis and his goal was to create a branch of mathematics that was useless. For those not familiar with boolean algebra it works by using logic gates with 1s and 0s to determine a final 1 or 0 state and is subsequently the basis for all modern digital computing

  • three_trains_in_a_trenchcoat@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Non-linear equations have entered the chat.

    Chaos and non-linear dynamics were treated as a toy or curiosity for a pretty long time, probably in no small part due to the complexity involved. It’s almost certainly no accident that the first serious explorations of it after Poincare happen after the advent of computers.

    So, one place where non-linear dynamics ended up having applications was in medicine. As I recall it from James Gleick’s book Chaos, inspired by recent discussion of Chaotic behavior in non-linear systems, medical doctors came up with the idea of electrical defibrillation- a way to reset the heart to a ground state and silence chaotic activity in lethal dysrhythmias that prevented the heart from functioning correctly.

    Fractals also inspired some file compression algorithms, as I recall, and they also provide a useful means of estimating the perimeters of irregular shapes.

    Also, there’s always work being done on turbulence, especially in the field of nuclear fusion as plasma turbulence seems to have a non-trivial impact on how efficiently a reactor can fuse plasma.

    • dylanmorgan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      A good friend of mine from high school got his physics PhD at University of Texas and went on to work in the high energy plasma physics lab there with the Texas Petawatt laser, and a lot of the experiments it was used for involved plasma turbulence and determining what path energetic particles would take in a hypothetical fusion reactor.

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Be honest, how many unofficial experiments were there?

        You ever just start lasering shit for kicks?

        • duckythescientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Probably not as many as we’d like to think. I recently got to run a few days of tests at Lawrence Livermore National Labs with an absurdly massive laser. At one point we needed to bring in a small speaker for an audio test. It took the lab techs and managers about two hours and a couple phone calls to some higher ups to make sure it was ok and wouldn’t damage anything. There’s so much red tape and procedure in the way that I don’t think there’s an opportunity to just fuck around. The laser has irreplaceable parts that people aren’t willing to jeopardize. Newer or smaller lasers are going to be more relaxed. This one is old enough to be my father, and it’s LLNL’s second biggest single laser iirc. And they are the lab using lasers for fusion, so they have big lasers.

  • blaue_Fledermaus@mstdn.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve read that all modern cryptography is based on an area (number theory?) that was once only considered “useful” for party tricks.

    • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      prime number factorization is the basis of assymetric cryptography. basically, if I start with two large prime numbers (DES was 56bit prime numbers iirc), and multiply them, then the only known solution to find the original prime numbers is guess-and-check. modern keys use 4096-bit keys, and there are more prime numbers in that space than there are particles in the universe. using known computation methods, there is no way to find these keys before the heat death of the universe.

      • stinerman@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 hours ago

        DES is symmetric key cryptography. It doesn’t rely on the difficulty of factorizing large semi-primes. It did use a 56-bit key, though.

        Public key cryptography (DSA, RSA, Elliptic Curve) does rely on these things and yes it’s a 4096-bit key these days (up from 1024 in the older days).

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Complex numbers. Also known as imaginary numbers. The imaginary number i is the solution to √-1. And it is really used in quantum mechanics and I think general relativity as well.

    • pcalau12i@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      A complex number is just two real numbers stitched together. It’s used in many areas, such as the Fourier transform which is common in computer science is often represented with complex numbers because it deals with waves and waves are two-dimensional, and so rather than needing two different equations you can represent it with a single equation where the two-dimensional behavior occurs on the complex-plane.

      In principle you can always just split a complex number into two real numbers and carry on the calculation that way. In fact, if we couldn’t, then no one would use complex numbers, because computers can’t process imaginary numbers directly. Every computer program that deals with complex numbers, behind the scenes, is decomposing it into two real-valued floating point numbers.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I don’t think this is really an accurate way of thinking about them. Yes, they can be mapped to a 2d plane, so you can represent them with their two real-numbered coordinates along the real and imaginary axes, but certain operations with them (eg. multiplication) can be done easily with complex numbers but are not obvious how to carry out with just grid points. (3,4) * (5,6) isn’t well-defined, but (3+4i) * (5+6i) is.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 hour ago

        That’s not quite accurate because the two numbers have a relationship with each other. i^2 = - 1, so any time you square a complex number or multiply two complex numbers, some of the value jumps from one dimension to the other.

        It’s like a vector, where sure, certain operations can be treated as if the dimensions of the vector are distinct, like a translation or scale. But other operations can have one dimension affecting the other, like rotation.

    • Bwaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s used extensively in electronic circuit design (where it’s called “j”, as "i’ already meant electronic current).

      Also signal processing has i or j all over it.

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I’m the akshually guy here, but complex numbers are the combination of a real number and an imaginary number. Agree with you, just being pedantic.

  • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Donuts were basis of the math that would enable a planned economy to be more efficient than a market economy (which is a very hard linear algebra problem).

    Basically using that, your smart phone is powerful enough to run a planned economy with 30 million unique products and services. An average desktop computer would be powerful enough to run a planned economy with 400 million unique products and services.

    Odd that knowledge about it has been actively suppressed since it was discovered in the 1970s but actively used mega-corporations ever since…

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s funny that you’re saying this is “actively suppressed” while not naming this field or providing links for further readings.

      • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Donut mathematics is the name of the field; I literally named it. The writings on it are dense and only available in Russian and Mandarin Chinese. Further I provided the name of an author on the subject.

        What would you call the purposeful prevention of English/French/German/etc translations of the material?

    • evujumenuk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s pretty interesting. Do you happen to have any introductory material to that topic?

      I mean, it might even have applications outside of running a techno-communist nation state. For example, for designing economic simulation game mechanics.

      • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Well Wassily Wassilyevich Leontief won a Nobel prize in economics for his work on this subject that might help you get started

        • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          There’s no such thing as a Nobel Prize in economics. Economists got salty about this and came up with the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, and rely on the media shortening it to something that gets confused with real Nobel Prizes.