{∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} : Rage Against the Meat Grinder

Let me just say that I am not always enthusiastic about learning.  I still lean strongly in the direction of nihilistic defeatism.  It is just that, since I am no longer drowning myself in alcoholic oblivion, for the moment, "programming and mathematics" (and philosophy of a defeatist, pessimistic, and nihilistic nature) seem stimulate this angst-filled brain.

It is possibly because of the career-oriented mentality of industrial society that I am often left wondering what the point is in my interest.  In other words, when one is not employed or never has been employed as a "programmer", one does not identify oneself as such.

So, while reading Stepanov's Elements of Programming (a hard copy) a few pages of a time, I find it kind of beautiful.  It really does present programming as a scientific discipline.  The mathematical notation he uses is elegant.  The book is dense.  It's not a book of tips and tricks. 

Looking for guidance on how to approach this text, and really wondering what motivates this continued interest in this craft, I found a talk given by Stepanov.  While he may be addressing future and current "employees", this does not prevent me (and others out there like me) from being a little bit inspired.  If we are stimulated by what we are tinkering with, why should we feel we are "goofing off" just because we are not working in a corporate or academic setting?

I think of my great love for Schopenhauer and testify how one who stood totally outside the halls of academia has made the greatest impression on me.

Maybe I am writing this now as a note to myself, for when I question my motives for tinkering around with the ideas I tinker around with.

I will place a link to the talk here.

Stepanov says that his book presents practical programming as a mathematical discipline.  Programming is an intellectually stimulating activity.  I sympathize with the youth who may feel drawn to it but are put off by the confusion ... I cannot imagine how agonizing it must be for someone to have to feign interest in some business oriented web-development project as an "employee" when he would be content thinking about number theory.

Ah, I know I must sound like a confused and rebellious teenager.  One would think, by the time one reaches my age, one would have surrendered to the economic forces that fuel the industries (gaming, sports, music, entertainment, advertising).  Forever outside of all this, it is my destiny to make my way through this life as a stranger in a strange land, as a free spirit who has no profession, no title ... which amounts to having no identity in our world.

stepanov

Stepanov claims that programming is an ancient activity, that it was not invented by Bill Gates or Steve Jobs ... that it is a thousand year old activity and the name of it is MATHEMATICS.

crap

I'm tired and frustrated.  It's my own fault.  I do this to myself.


Note to self:  Forget it!  Just  slow down and study the theories!   Read Stepanov.

Also, maybe take a break from programming every day ... read a little Husserl ... then try rereading Merleau-Ponty.

Slow down before you destroy your motivation.

Focus on the fundamentals.  You do not have to master any of this.  You're only tinkering and exploring.  You're a curious and frustrated creature.

I thinking you are trying to rush it,well,don't.You WILL be able to understand it -I'm certain.Just give it sometime.Sleep on it.
That's what I've found-there's no mathematical concept beyond the capacity of my comprehension so long as I deliberately think slowly.
The moment I hurry-all is lost.
So,slow down.You know,like when you used to think about the imaginary numbers for days on end.
That's the way to go.In mathematics,in all things.I learnt that from you.
This is for you :

What one likes & what one hates depends on the grade of will to which one belongs.And one cannot choose the grade.

I am trying to keep my thoughts slow,while I do a little math,read a little & watch of a world in flames.
Its hip to be square

The same solution that finally enabled me to compile and run code with the GiNaC libraries turns out to enable me to run some code compiled from Nicolia Josuttis's The C++ Standard Library Tutorial & Reference:   -static-libstdc++

g++ -o sptr1 -g shardedptr1.cpp -std=c++11 -static-libstdc++

While this works, the need for these flags puts questions in my mind that I hope to eventually understand better, questions like, "Why?"

Maybe one day I'll understand why.  For now, I just have to accept it as "magic" ... or, if I may coin a geeky term, "source-ory" 

Yesterday I was so tired after coming back from the office that I did not even know when I feel asleep.
I think the authorities don't feel comfortable with someone whom they cannot classify.
Our philosophy is workable only if it's an anti-natalist philosophy.

A "case manager" suggested I return to school for certification and I became indignant.  Professional programmers are most likely too disgusted with meeting deadlines to study anything they might really be interested in learning, like the C++ STL or some "useless" mathematical interests.

When she witnessed my reluctance to want to become more employable, she then suggested I become a monk since I like to study.  I said I have no faith in any God or religion.  She said I should look into becoming a Buddhist monk.   Imagine that.   If someone would prefer to try to deepen his understanding by studying mathematics and Stepanov's work in programming - rather than chase certifications so as to have some Microsoft-like seal of approval - then one is seen as some kind of freak who "belongs" in a monastery.
Now this case manager of yours,about her I think the following:
1.She is probably having children,she  cannot even begin to imagine that you have chosen to end the world entire.
 (God couldn't live a moment without me).
2.She may have studied psychology/sociology ,she may be what is called a"liberal" in the US,
now these typer of people like to think that they are kinder than the Texas-Conservatives, but are they really?
I mean,Mr H,I think you & I are more of a socialist than Marx even.He had 7 children.
See,its like this- socialism WITHOUT antinatalism will always fail.So,in effect,socialism can exist only for 1 generation.
Thank God you are not at a workplace,whole day long one is required to play petty politics,one is humiliated.
One is broken ,piece by piece.
Believe me,you should never think of returning to the workforce,for by your lifestyle,you are proving that there exists an alternative to the rat race.
Though,intellectually I know that Socialism will always fail in this world(because the bastards won't stop breeding),
I am glad to say I am a true lone socialist but only because I am an anti-natalist.
I had a vivid dream yesterday,but let me post that in the other thread.
Keep well my dearest friend!

Holden,
I was wondering how I might be able to share some code with you that is implementing the Old School Algorithm for Calculating Square Root, which, although it is hardly used since the use of tables and now calculators, I believe must have originated in ancient India a long, long, long time ago.

I sent some notes I had taken from the 1964 Modern Algebra: A Logical Approach to you via email, and i have been transforming the algorithm into code in the hopes of building a program that displays to the user the steps needed to do this by hand with pencil and paper.  I know it would appear to be a crazy idea to go through the trouble of having a machine explain to a human how to do this without a machine, but it is rather amazing to discover beauty in the mundane "drudgery of arithmetic" ...

It is coming along nicely.  I have a version without the "educational explanations" which I created just to be sure I coded the algorithm correctly.  The final version I am working on takes the arguments at the command line.

What i am getting at is this:  I found a place on line where you can compile and run the code.

https://www.onlinegdb.com/online_c_compiler

When the final version is complete, I believe you can enter the arguments as well.

How to get the code to you?

I could either:
(A) upload it here as a text file, then you just select all, copy, and paste it into the site (after deleting their template code)

(B) email you the .c file.

Let's try A first.

When asked for input, you could use the number I use in the notes I sent you, which is 753 with 4 or 5 digits of accuracy.  This way you might follow along with that example.  You can, of course try other combinations as well.   The goal was not to get the result as much as the next phase, which is, with brute force, to extract intelligence from the process; that is, to somehow make the connections between the "square of a binomial" and the systematic process we might draw in the sand (the Old School method which has become a forgotten art).

The version I am working on now is much more robust only due to my attempt to display the mathematics to the user in a systematic fashion.

The one that just gives the result is oldschool.c (uploaded as oldschool.txt)

The version I am working on right now is digit_by_digit_debug.c (also uploaded as text).  This is the one you would typr 753 5 as command line arguments.

Please note that the second version is a work in progress so onlny the first phase is producing desired output.  I thought you might like to see how it develops.

 I will simply replace that file each time I make a breakthrough until finally I will post the final version which may be missing some of the more interesting printf statements. 

This idea of having you run the code online eliminates you needing to find the gcc compiler on your Mac in order to see the kinds of code I tinker with.

This will be as much a breakthrough for us as cocalc, probably more so.

When you are studying something in particular, you can mention it to me, I can can look through my folders to see if I tinkered with some code you might use.

As I said once before, I think, I become most enthusiastic about mathematics and programming when I take a version of a practical program and tweak it into something that explains the mathematical ideas behind the code.

Let me know if it runs for you on your end.   I already tested it out on https://www.onlinegdb.com/online_c_compiler with language set to C.

Oh, and this is no rush, no emergency!   I am just leaving it here for when you become curious and want to better understand the pages I emailed you.

Also remember that the object is to understand a forgotten art.  Nobody, and I mean nobody, uses this beautiful algorithm these days.  If anything, they get "approximations" with Newton's Method or the Babylonian algorithm.

Keep in mind that this is a calculation that can be performed using pencil and paper for finding square roots of rational numbers.  We pick up the correct digits at each step.  In these two features, it is different from the algorithms employing successive approximations.

As I already mentioned, I strongly suspect this algorithm has its origins in your neck of the woods, so I am honored to serve it to you in this manner, and I hope the final "product" will teach you and others this forgotten art.

That's the beauty of this little side project.  It is code that aims to teach a human being how to calculate the square root without tables or a calculator.

In effect, it is code which begs the user to pick up a pencil and start computing on paper if only as a mental exercise, engaging the brain in an ancient craft.

Imagine the years and hours it took our ancestors to derive these algorithms.

When we issue the square root command with a calculator, we save much tedious "drudgery", but I still think there is something inceredibly satisfying at least taking a little time to understand how the ancients did this.  It helps to confirm what you and Schopenhauer and Raul and myself have suspected all along.

The ancients were intellectually superior to us.  We have powerful machines to assist us.  We have paper and pencil as well.   Your grandfather made calculations in the sand, you say? 

My goal with this code is to help us to be able to extract a square root with a stone in the sand ... I want the code to explain the Old School "long division style" way of finding square roots.


 PEACE!

The machines are set up for development, but also, the one Dell notebook is more like a Linux Box set up for Learning, Learning, Learning.

Now I have transformed the Windows 10 installations on these notebook PC's to a point where I kind of resent not being able to afford to live indoors, but must put the funds to keeping these machines and the text-books and notebooks ...

No longer any time to spare to explain this nightmare to "the outsideside world" - so-called Outside World ... bullShit