Last Friday (June 10 2011), Mint carried my next "A Matter of Numbers" essay. It's about cicadas and pleading with editors.
Do take a look: Cicadas: ready for prime time.
Comments welcome!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Roadrunner on Amazon!
Buy Roadrunner, Indian sites
Travel: Our Judgement Free
My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. (Listen)
It was January the thirtieth/And everybody was feelin' fine.
Yo!
Good times!
TwitTwotTwet
Some of my writing
Asirgarh, Narbona, towelsTsunami reports
Girls of his (my) dreams
Winner, Outlook/Picador 2004/5
'74 Bra Flinging Story
Not just about tennis
My books
Branded by Law | The Narmada Dammed | RoadrunnerSome of my photographs
Worth your time
Ramani's fieldnotesTom Pietrasik | Abi
Annie | Shivam V
Bombay Addict
Uma MD | Amitava Kumar | John Naughton
Amin for your travel needs
3 comments:
Amazing article, Dilip (as always).
Interesting. So you are saying that the original pool of cicadas came at all frequencies - the surviving frequencies are those that don't have a matching predator? Although I Wiki-thought that "Most cicadas go through a life cycle that lasts from two to five years". So why the fuss about prime numbers? Is it the same as the "man in the moon" or "canals on mars" phenomenon?
There is one flaw with this logic and that is that the solution to the problem leads to a problem similar to the original problem.
The question to start with is that why does a certain species have a cycle of x years and the answer to that is that another species has a cycle of y years. Now please answer, why does a certain species have a cycle of y years?
Post a Comment