TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Geometry for Entertainment (1950)

178 点作者 the-mitr12 个月前

11 条评论

yantrams12 个月前
This one is new to me. I still have my copies of Physics for Entertainment and Mathematics can be fun by the same author - Yakov Perelman. I owe my superfast stereogram decoding skills ( &lt; 2 seconds most of the times ) to him :)<p>Here&#x27;s an interesting tidbit from his wikipedia page - He is not related to the Russian mathematician Grigori Perelman, who was born in 1966 to a different Yakov Perelman. However, Grigori Perelman told The New Yorker that his father gave him Physics for Entertainment, and it inspired his interest in mathematics
评论 #40543261 未加载
vishnugupta12 个月前
I read “Physics For Fun” by the same author (translated to Kannada, my native tongue) in highschool. Terrific book. I would read it all the time, would open a random page and read a few articles.<p>This was at a time when India-Russia friendly relations were at their peak so in order to carry out cultural exchange Indian government funded translating a ton of Russian books to local languages here. Sadly the initiative seems to be dead as I don’t find such books anymore.
评论 #40543207 未加载
评论 #40533373 未加载
评论 #40532849 未加载
bigdict12 个月前
The name of the &quot;translator&quot; didn&#x27;t strike me as one that a native speaker of either Russian or English would have.<p>Sure enough:<p><pre><code> I have made use of machine translations for the bulk of the text, and the results are quite satisfactory. At times, I have used several translation services to ensure I am on the right track and that the meaning is not lost in translation. Though, of course, there might be places where I have not translated correctly. I learnt to read the Russian in a very rudimentary way in the process. </code></pre> Fascinating!
评论 #40531170 未加载
评论 #40529071 未加载
ccppurcell12 个月前
The translation is really bad. The very first paragraph is practically nonsensical. There are several sentences that are either badly wrong or maybe russian idioms translated directly. Machine translation is ok for a rough idea but it&#x27;s not good enough to put out in the world and call a translation.
评论 #40536536 未加载
obscurette12 个月前
It&#x27;s somehow became trend to make statements that there hasn&#x27;t been good physics&#x2F;math&#x2F;etc books in the past and that&#x27;s why many are so bad at these subjects. Perelman is a very good counterargument to use with everyone grown up in Soviet Union. His books are really legendary among 50+ people and I still have all of them on my book shelf.
评论 #40533419 未加载
评论 #40527879 未加载
评论 #40533101 未加载
Rygian12 个月前
Typo in page 281: The mnemonic in French has almost all offsets wrong because it considers &quot;j&#x27;aime&quot; as one word instead of two. If anyone feels like making a pull request, the source is at [1].<p>Correct:<p><pre><code> Que j&#x27;aime à faire apprendre un nombre utile aux sages ! 3 1 4 1 5 9 2 6 5 3 5 ... </code></pre> [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;mirtitles&#x2F;perelman-geometry&#x2F;-&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;09-circle.tex?ref_type=heads#L124" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;mirtitles&#x2F;perelman-geometry&#x2F;-&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master...</a>
评论 #40531508 未加载
评论 #40528242 未加载
anta4012 个月前
Ah.. I remember purchasing a Yakov Perelman&#x27;s math puzzle book many years ago (as a high schooler).<p>Just heard about this. Let&#x27;s see...
the-mitr12 个月前
Edit: Access to files is available here at the git repo<p><pre><code> https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;mirtitles&#x2F;perelman-geometry</code></pre>
__rito__12 个月前
The book is no more. It has been taken down, and I cannot find it anywhere.<p>Could anyone kindly email it to me? I will be grateful.
评论 #40543611 未加载
notorandit12 个月前
1950?
评论 #40527843 未加载
turtledragonfly12 个月前
I am perpetually annoyed by the argument &quot;the Sun&#x27;s rays are parallel&quot; made here and many other places. They tell you to take a single point on the sun, and draw a big skinny triangle from there to different points on the Earth, showing that the angle is very small.<p>But any child can look at the sun (with eye protection :) and see that it is a disc, not a point of light. The disc is about 0.5 degrees, which is not so small.<p>So, two rays emanating from opposite ends of the Sun and arriving at your eye are clearly not &quot;effectively parallel.&quot; Of course, 0.5 degrees often is small enough to not matter in some contexts, but it&#x27;s just annoying to me that the &quot;start from a single point on the Sun&quot; reasoning is used to draw a conclusion that flies in the face of simple observation.<p>Sorry, rant over (:
评论 #40529987 未加载
评论 #40533028 未加载
评论 #40530095 未加载
评论 #40530973 未加载