1 / 18

Latkes vs. Hamantaschen

Prof. Jason Eisner from JHU's Department of Computer Science engages in a lively debate discussing the informational complexity, linguistic complexity, and computational complexity of latkes and hamantaschen. Join this interesting discussion to explore the mathematical aspects and gastronomic preferences.

tadc
Download Presentation

Latkes vs. Hamantaschen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Latkes vs. Hamantaschen Prof. Jason Eisner Department of Computer Science JHU Debate – Dec. 4, 2007

  2. Jewish Simplicity vs. Complexity

  3. Jewish Simplicity vs. Complexity

  4. Establishing hamantaschic superiority: Informational complexity Linguistic complexity Computational complexity Jewish Simplicity vs. Complexity

  5. (measured in bytes) Informational Complexity • What is the information contentof each food?

  6. heads tails Informational Complexity • Asymmetries • Alas, orientation is not reliably transmitted

  7. n strands of potato * 4 real #s per strand * k bits recovered per real = 4kn bits? (x1,y1) (x2,y2) Strands are unordered: Fine-grained Informational Complexity

  8. n poppy seeds * 3 real #s per seed * k bits recovered per real Fine-grained Informational Complexity (0,0,1,0) (0,0,0,1) (0,1,0,0) (each point’s coords sum to 1) (1,0,0,0)

  9. n poppy seeds * 3 real #s per seed * k bits recovered per real (x1,y1) (x2,y2) Fine-grained Informational Complexity (0,0,1,0) (0,0,0,1) (0,1,0,0) (each point’s coords sum to 1) (1,0,0,0) • n potato strands • * 4 real #s per strand • * k bits recovered per real 

  10. n poppy seeds * 3 real #s per seed * k bits recovered per real (x1,y1) (x2,y2) Fine-grained Informational Complexity (0,0,1,0) (0,0,0,1) (0,1,0,0) (each point’s coords sum to 1) (1,0,0,0) • n potato strands • * 4 real #s per strand • * k bits recovered per real 

  11. Linguistic Complexity • Gemetria • The Bible Code = 10 = 22 + 50-point length bonus!

  12. This debate Chanukah 2007-2008 Purim Point of Order …

  13. Purim, a.k.a. the Feast of Lots

  14. Purim, a.k.a. the Feast of Lots

  15. Computational Complexity  NC  NP  (“Nosh Chanukah”) (“Nosh Purim”) decidable in polylogarithmic time with a polynomial number of processors decidable in polynomial time with a nondeterministic processor

  16. Computational Complexity • NP is more computationally complex! • But don’t want to prove that is NP-hard  NC  NP  (“Nosh Chanukah”) (“Nosh Purim”)

  17. Computational Complexity • So let’s do a direct reduction: • This is a poppynomial reduction • Implies existence of a gastric reduction • Therefore, if you can digest a hamantasch, you can digest a latke • Therefore, the hamantasch is the more complex carbohydrate

  18. Conclusions • Judaism loves complexity • Hamantaschen are more complex • Informational complexity • Linguistic complexity • Computational complexity • And they’ll enhance your math!

More Related