#### Debates Forum

1. 22 Jul '17 19:03 / 4 edits
"Iranian Woman Mathematician Dies of Breast Cancer" (page 2, post 6).
The late Maryam Mirzakhani won two individual gold medals (with a perfect score
of 42 and a score of 41) for Iran at the International Mathematical Olympiads.

The 2017 IMO in Brazil has just concluded.
The highest scores were unusually low compared to the past IMOs
because one problem (#3) was almost impossibly difficult and solved
by only two students (an Australian and a Russian). So the highest
individual scores were 35 (out of 42) by three students (Iran, Japan,
Vietnam), followed by one student (China) with a score of 32.

Here are the top teams:
1) Republic of Korea (South) (North Korea did not participate this year.)
2) China (which has won about 2/3 of recent IMOs)
3) Vietnam
4) USA
5) Iran
6) Japan
7) Singapore (tied)
7) Thailand (tied)
9) Taiwan (tied)
9) UK (tied)
11) Russia

The winning Korean team had consistently strong performances from its top three
students (including one female) scoring 29, with its lowest student scoring 27.
All six Koreans won an individual gold medal. The (less consistent)
Chinese team won five individual gold medals and one individual silver medal.

Having a vast population does not necessarily correlate to success.
India (with the world's second largest population) finished in 52nd place.
India never has finished higher than 7th (in 2001 and 1998).
In recent years, India has finished 52nd, 34th, 37th, 39th, and 29th.
(Tiny Singapore routinely far surpasses India.)

Having wealth also has a weak correlation to success at the IMOs.
Richer west European countries typically perform much worse than many east Asian countries.
Vietnam often performs better than Japan (which is more populous and wealthy).

Iran's 5th place was a strong result, its best since another 5th place in 2008.
Iran finished 24th in 2016 and 7th in 2015.
Iran has won the IMO once (in 1998), when China did not participate.

As usual, the top teams were almost all from East Asia or full of East Asians,
The US team had four ethnic Chinese, one Indian, and one white.
There were four mostly, if not fully, ethnic Chinese teams (China, USA,
Singapore, Taiwan) among the top nine teams.

Looking at the individual results, 8 (including one female) out of the top 12 and
18 out of the top 28 students are of East Asian heritage.

It's worth noting that Saudi Arabia (with two females in its six members)
finished tied with France (with no females) for 39th place. What irony!
(France has enacted laws aimed at its female Muslim minority, supposedly
to encourage them to become more integrated into secular European life.)
Even when wearing hijab, Muslim women are not necessarily less intelligent.

So I believe that Maryam Mirzakhani would have been pleased by Iran's strong
showing and Saudi Arabia's accepting more female participation at the 2017 IMO.
I hope that her life will encourage more girls, particularly Muslims, to believe
that they also can excel in mathematics.
2.  Wajoma
Die Cheeseburger
23 Jul '17 02:56
Originally posted by @duchess64
"Iranian Woman Mathematician Dies of Breast Cancer" (page 2, post 6).
The late Maryam Mirzakhani won two individual gold medals (with a perfect score
of 42 and a score of 41) for Iran at the International Mathematical Olympiads.

The 2017 IMO in Brazil has just concluded.
The highest sco ...[text shortened]... encourage more girls, particularly Muslims, to believe
that they also can excel in mathematics.
An event celebrating mathematical knowledge and D64's main concern is dividing, classifying and staticising the participants by race. D64, what mathematical formula did you use for mixed race participants, does 50/50 put them in some kind of nether region or do you wave your wand?

*waving wand* "Walla (as the french say) you are now asian." says D64

A more interesting stat would be how many of the participants took advantage of free market private tution to supplement the state brain washing factory.
3. 23 Jul '17 19:45 / 1 edit
Originally posted by @wajoma
An event celebrating mathematical knowledge and D64's main concern is dividing, classifying and staticising the participants by race. D64, what mathematical formula did you use for mixed race participants, does 50/50 put them in some kind of nether region or do you wave your wand?

*waving wand* "Walla (as the french say) you are now asian." says D64
...[text shortened]... ants took advantage of free market private tution to supplement the state brain washing factory.
Wajoma shows his usual abysmal ignorance, prejudice, and racism.

"An event celebrating mathematical *knowledge* ..."
--Wajoma

The International Mathematical Olympiad does *not* 'celebrate mathematical knowledge'.
There are many professors who *know* more mathematics than the secondary school
students in the IMO, but these professors would do worse at *solving its problems*.
The IMO tests insight and ingenuity in solving challenging problems *without* requiring
students to have been taught (or memorized) advanced techniques of 'heavy machinery'.
I believe that, at least in theory, no knowledge of calculus is required to solve IMO problems.
The IMO prefers that a student show ingenuity in using elementary methods to solve problems
rather than regurgitate more powerful methods typically learned long after secondary school.

Discussing the IMO's domination by students of East Asian heritage should offend no one
any more than discussing the NBA's domination by players of black African heritage.

I know that the IMO's results will upset white racist supremacists (including many in this forum).
In the Science forum, Eladar earlier attempted to argue that the IMO's results help
prove the intrinsic superiority of white people over black people in intelligence.
No predominantly black African country ever has performed very well at the IMOs,
and I don't know of any individual black African student who ever has done so.
South Africa (with a team of Asians and whites) has done best in sub-Saharan Africa.
Eladar preferred not to draw any conclusions from the fact that usually only a rather
small minority of the top students at the IMOs are white.

I also know that many white people still like to regard Asians as inferior in intelligence.
I have not noticed most white people freely (rather than grudgingly at best) acknowledging
the generally superior performance of East Asians (particularly Chinese) in mathematics
and science competitions, both internationally and in Western societies like the USA.
I have not noticed any white person drawing the conclusion that the consistent superior
performances of East Asians mean that white people *could* be inferior in intelligence.

Wajoma's apparent (desperate) racist belief that many, if any, of the IMO's top students of
East Asian heritage must be half-white (and derive their intelligence from superior 'white' genes)
has no factual basis. East Asian societies like China, Taiwan, Japan, Korea (both),
and Vietnam have tiny minorities of people who are half-white by ancestry, and these
'mixed race' people are not known for being more likely to surpass 'pure' East Asians academically.

I would note that the top countries in the IMOs have very diverse school systems.
The USA's closest to Wajoma's dystopian ideal of laissez-faire capitalism in education.
But the USA's team usually drawn disproportionately from its tiny Chinese minority
(four Chinese out of six members in 2017), who tend to embrace cultural ideals different
from the dominant American culture's emphasis on making money as easily as possible.

The DPRK (North Korea), which usually has a strong team, did not participate in the 2017 IMO.
The DPRK (whose educational system is completely controlled by the state) performed
better (5th) than the much more populous and wealthy USA (6th) at the 2009 IMO.
When the DPRK has participated recently, it almost finishes from 4th to 8th place.

I suspect that many racist readers here may be offended by the reality that right-wing
white males (like themselves) do *not* (with rare exceptions at most) excel in mathematics
competitions or other tests of intelligence. Indeed, there's some evidence indicating
that right-wing white males tend to be more stupid than most other people.
4. 23 Jul '17 19:56
I don't intend to discuss the technical details any further, but anyone who's interested
in the 2017 IMO's extremely difficult problem #3 may like to look at this:

(RHP has a problem--not my fault--with allowing mathematical notation.
If you want to try the problem, look at the website, not what I copied below.)

https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c6h1480157_imo_2017_problem_3

A hunter and an invisible rabbit play a game in the Euclidean plane.
The rabbit's starting point, $A_0,$ and the hunter's starting point, $B_0$ are the same.
After $n-1$ rounds of the game, the rabbit is at point $A_{n-1}$ and the hunter is at
point $B_{n-1}.$ In the $n^{\text{th}}$ round of the game, three things occur in order:

The rabbit moves invisibly to a point $A_n$ such that the distance between $A_{n-1}$
and $A_n$ is exactly $1.$
A tracking device reports a point $P_n$ to the hunter. The only guarantee provided by the
tracking device to the hunter is that the distance between $P_n$ and $A_n$ is at most $1.$
The hunter moves visibly to a point $B_n$ such that the distance between $B_{n-1}$
and $B_n$ is exactly $1.$

Is it always possible, no matter how the rabbit moves, and no matter what points are
reported by the tracking device, for the hunter to choose her moves so that after
$10^9$ rounds, she can ensure that the distance between her and the rabbit is at most $100?$
5. 23 Jul '17 20:01 / 1 edit
Here's my earlier related post (slightly amended) from another thread:

Maryam Mirzakhani won two individual gold medals (with a perfect score of 42 and a score of 41)
for Iran at the International Mathematical Olympiads.

https://www.imo-official.org/participant_r.aspx?id=926

There's some patriotic 'boosterism' (appealing to an ignorant public) in the following article,
celebrating the achievements of two British girls (one white and one ethnic Chinese):

Teenagers Rosie Cates and Naomi Wei win entry to traditionally male-dominated ‘world cup of maths’"

"[Geoff] Smith is unwilling to speculate as to why there are fewer girls than boys, but one contentious
theory is that teenage girls are more emotionally mature and are more likely to be engagedI
n social networks and friendship groups, while boys of the same age may be more
introverted and more likely to find an outlet in the world of mathematical challenges."

One should not necessarily project British cultural norms upon every other society.
Some (often non-Western) societies have a high proportion of female students in their IMO teams.

"The only teams in the top 10 last year which were not from the far east were the US, Russia and the UK.""
--Geoff Smith (leader of the UK team at the 2017 IMO)

The recent (and more successful) UK teams at the IMOs have had a disproportionately
high number of Asian students. The 2017 UK team had three whites (including one female),
two Chinese, and one Indian. It's normal for some of the leading Anglophone Western countries
(USA, UK, Canada, Australia) to have teams mostly of Asians (particularly Chinese).
The 2017 US team had four Chinese, one Indian, and only one white.
(White supremacist beliefs are absurd at the IMOs, which are dominated by Asians.)

"My tip is that the USA and China will be competing for the top spot.
The South Koreans also look very good this year."
--Geoff Smith

It was obvious to me that China (which has won about 2/3 of recent IMOs), the Republic of Korea
(the DPRK--North Korea--which usually does well, did not participate in the 2017 IMO),
and the USA were the favorites for the medals--not necessarily in that order.
2017 IMO; 1) Korea (South) 2) China 3) Vietnam 4) USA 5) Iran

"Let’s hope for *another great performance* by the UK team."
--Geoff Smith

The 2017 UK team finished tied for 9th-10th with Taiwan.
The article prefers to emphasize that the UK finished 7th ('great performance' ) in 2016
and ignores the fact that the UK finished 22nd in 2015 and 20th in 2014.

In contrast to the winning Korean team, which was exceptionally consistent, with the top
students (including one female) scoring 29 and the lowest student scoring 27, the UK team
had a top half that was much stronger than the bottom half of its students.
1) Joe Benton: 29 2) Harvey Yau: 26 3) Neel Nanda: 25 4) Rosie Cates: 18 ...
The top three (male) students won individual gold medals.
Rosie Cates won a bronze medal (tied for 139th place).

I am not saying that Rosie Cates should not be proud of her achievement at the 2017 IMO.
I am saying that it falls far short of what Maryam Mirzakhani achieved in two IMOs.
The 2017 IMO's top female student is Dain Kim (Korea) who scored 29 and won an individual gold medal.
6.  lemon lime
blah blah blah
23 Jul '17 22:02
Originally posted by @duchess64
I don't intend to discuss the technical details any further, but anyone who's interested
in the 2017 IMO's extremely difficult problem #3 may like to look at this:

(RHP has a problem--not my fault--with allowing mathematical notation.
If you want to try the problem, look at the website, not what I copied below.)

https://artofproblemsolving.com/com ...[text shortened]... r
$10^9$ rounds, she can ensure that the distance between her and the rabbit is at most $100?$
"Is it always possible, no matter how the rabbit moves, and no matter what points are reported by the tracking device, for the hunter to choose her moves so that after $10^9$ rounds, she can ensure that the distance between her and the rabbit is at most $100?$"

Yes, it is always possible.
7. 23 Jul '17 22:05 / 1 edit
I suspect that Q3 probably added

As opposed to

'Have a guess'

Spoilsports!
8.  lemon lime
blah blah blah
23 Jul '17 22:52 / 1 edit
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracks
I suspect that Q3 probably added

As opposed to

'Have a guess'

Spoilsports!

Yeah, and I'm expecting to hear that from her soon.

Teachers were always telling me to show my work, whether it was for math problems, or in a formal set of steps in a logical progression leading to a conclusion.

I tried explaining to one of them how I could arrive at answers without going through several steps, but he had no idea what I was talking about. Anywho, my answers are not always correct...
And right now, I'm hoping I was wrong.

hint: $10^9$ rounds
9. 23 Jul '17 23:01 / 1 edit
To be fair, setters of Maths problems do not always have to accept the given answer with NO working for full marks, although confusingly sometimes they may

for example, in a complex trig question, where angle 'x' is 56.7 degrees, just 56.7 on the answer line would be worth full marks

Asking which of 3 sized cereal boxes ( with weights/price given for each) is best value certainly wouldn't.

The invisible rabbit requires working. I am looking into it!
10.  lemon lime
blah blah blah
23 Jul '17 23:17 / 2 edits
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracks
To be fair, setters of Maths problems do not always have to accept the given answer with NO working for full marks, although confusingly sometimes they may

for example, in a complex trig question, where angle 'x' is 56.7 degrees, just 56.7 on the answer line would be worth full marks

Asking which of 3 sized cereal boxes ( with weights/pric ...[text shortened]... best value certainly wouldn't.

The invisible rabbit requires working. I am looking into it!
56.7 is a very specfic number. Highly improbable arriving at such a number through the magic of guesswork. When I was in school teachers always insisted on "showing your work". If not, even a correct answer was marked 'wrong'. So I would try showing my 'work' for the sake of passing the test, but most of the time I left out steps I was supposed to show... not intentionally, but I couldn't seem to avoid skipping steps.

It was like walking up a set of stairs, and there was a rule saying you MUST place a foot on each and every step. No leaping over steps, no pole vaulting to avoid most of the steps, etc. Apparently the steps were living entities, and would become very unhappy if you ignored them.
11. 23 Jul '17 23:22 / 1 edit
But....

Suppose you had the METHOD to 56.7 deg, but chose not to show it, maybe because you thought you could implement none 90 degree trig ( sine and cosine rule) by adept use of a calculater. You present JUST 64.6 deg as answer.

Clearly zero

IF you showed your method, with maybe one small a'tic error, may be worth 5 marks from a possible 6.
12.  lemon lime
blah blah blah
24 Jul '17 04:27 / 3 edits
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracks
But....

Suppose you had the METHOD to 56.7 deg, but chose not to show it, maybe because you thought you could implement none 90 degree trig ( sine and cosine rule) by adept use of a calculater. You present JUST 64.6 deg as answer.

Clearly zero

IF you showed your method, with maybe one small a'tic error, may be worth 5 marks from a possible 6.
Apparently there are math shortcuts that work, and can be taught to young children. I don't know the method (or methods) but apparently it always works. Somehow they are able to quicky arrive at the correct answers in their heads... without calculators, or penci and paper, or slide rules, etc. It's all done in their minds. It's not something I can do, and I've never seen an explanation of how it's done.
I can't adequately explain how I'm able to solve certain kinds of problems without going through a lot of steps. Tried once to explain it to a teacher, because when he asked I thought he literally wanted to know. But now I think his question was rhetorical, and maybe he assumed I was lucky, or maybe cheating... but I can't say for sure. All I know for certain is that he had no idea what I was talking about.

One time I told a science teacher there had to be something in the center of our galaxy exerting an enormous gravitational force. When he asked why that is (this was long before a large black hole was discovered at the center) all I could think to say was there was no other way to account for such a closely packed group of stars. The center part looks like the hub of a gigantic wheel. Without some enormous attracting force in the center, holding and stabilizing the motion, our galaxy wouldn't fly apart but it wouldn't look nearly as stable as it does.
Maybe it was only intuition on my part, but many years later a black hole was discovered at the center of our galaxy.
13. 24 Jul '17 06:02 / 1 edit
Originally posted by @wajoma
An event celebrating mathematical knowledge and D64's main concern is dividing, classifying and staticising the participants by race. D64, what mathematical formula did you use for mixed race participants, does 50/50 put them in some kind of nether region or do you wave your wand?

*waving wand* "Walla (as the french say) you are now asian." says D64
...[text shortened]... ants took advantage of free market private tution to supplement the state brain washing factory.
D has often bemoaned the fact of not having proper tutors due to financial hardship.

D could have been a contender.
14.  finnegan
GENS UNA SUMUS
24 Jul '17 11:57 / 1 edit
Originally posted by @wajoma
An event celebrating mathematical knowledge and D64's main concern is dividing, classifying and staticising the participants by race. D64, what mathematical formula did you use for mixed race participants, does 50/50 put them in some kind of nether region or do you wave your wand?

*waving wand* "Walla (as the french say) you are now asian." says D64
...[text shortened]... ants took advantage of free market private tution to supplement the state brain washing factory.
By its nature an olympiad these days is organised around national teams. The same is true of the chess olympiads for example and certainly true of the Olympics proper. I am fairly sure, without checking, that the ancient Greek Olympics were similarly organised to represent various city states, which is why winners were rewarded by the state they represented. So olympiads, despite involving individuals in competition, are by their nature contests between teams and not just individuals, and it is in that way that anyone interested will discuss the results.

Your post is idiotic and provocative, written only to offend, and has no merit. As always, you are just an unpleasant troll. You will notice that others have been able to enter into a quite sensible discussion of the topic without diverting into ideological hobby horses like you do. I know nothing whatsoever about mathematics - on this level - and so sensibly do not join in a discussion which I am pretty confident you also do not even understand.
15.  finnegan
GENS UNA SUMUS
24 Jul '17 11:59