Pardon the hyperbolic thread title, but this is just the coolest bit of math research I can recall being conducted in my lifetime. https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150312-mathematicians-chase-moonshines-shadow/ Links to underlying research details in the above link.

Interconnectedness is a fascinating thing..its all in the math. I wish I was more fluent but the jist of it displays the high order and organization that is somehow reassuring and cozy to advocates of the Argument by Design.

If I understood any of that article I'm sure that I'd agree with you! Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk

A good read! I thought the article did a good job of trying to explain the mathematics to a non-mathematician.

Yeow. Didn't see that coming. Organization does not imply there exists an intention to organize. Please, let's not.

Why no, I haven't. But now I will. It's something I think about from time to time...and it makes my head hurt so I don't really think about it for too long. It's kind of fun to wonder if logic goes with the universe and if the rules completely change based on the physics of where you live.

-As with a sound wave, the j-function’s repeating pattern can be broken down into a collection of pure tones, so to speak, with coefficients indicating how “loud” each tone is. It is in these coefficients that McKay found the link to the monster group. So tone is in the coefficients, not the fingers or gear

I just browsed and found some fluff, but I'm really looking forward to actually making my way through it. Looks like he talks about one of the things that has really always bothered me a great deal. WHY should the Universe be describable by mathematics? I mean seriously, it just always seemed incredibly odd to me. Thanks for turning me on to this. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that people are actively working on stuff like this, but for whatever reason I just never thought to Google it.

"The monster has more than 1053 elements" Stopped. Dead. In. Tracks. Sidebar... An interesting way to help people understand large numbers is to ask them how long it would take to count to one billion... (counting by ones, one per second)

Well, I turned 1 billion seconds old about 10 years ago...which is also about when I started dating my wife, and coincidentally also the last time I can remember being right about ANYTHING. There's another deep connection for you to ponder.

Oy, I think the purpose of mathematics is to be a unifying, consistent language. 1+1=2 I suppose it's possible, in some theory, that there is an alternate universe with completely different physics wherein gravity is a repelling force instead of an attracting force, but we would never be able to communicate it if the language of mathematics weren't consistent across both.

I tripped balls learning the size and scope of Graham's number. That was my foray into math over this past year. Even popular level math like Grahams number and the Ackermann function are enough for me to wrestle with...the aim of the paper in question brought by the OP are too much for me!

haha another great pop-math video. They kind of gloss over an explanation of how this phenomenon arises, but lots of fun anyhow.