Peter Rowlett

Topic of the week in the finitegroup.co.uk Discord - here @ayliean.bsky.social explains @wordle-tetris.bsky.social.

This amused me because we’d had a conversation in the Finite Group Discord where I’d asked @mscroggs.co.uk how it worked framed around why had it put the L upright, then I saw your cries for it to rotate!

Brass for Brain: Lord Kelvin and tide prediction Published in BSHM Bulletin: Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics (Vol. 29, No. 3, 2014)

Ooo, I think I wrote a bit about that once for the BSHM journal. I don’t remember what I wrote exactly, it was a write up of a Raymond Flood talk that I was asked to report. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

This is excellent. Do you have a source for the image?

Mathematical Objects: A Norbert Wiener Story A conversation about mathematics inspired by a piece of folklore. Presented by Katie Steckles and Peter Rowlett.

New podcast episode! To round of season 9 of our Mathematical Objects, @steckl.es and I enjoy chewing over the folklore that developed around the absent-minded professor caricature.

#MathsToday

My son (10)’s spelling homework this week was words ending “cial” or “tial”. One of them was “artificial”. I asked if he knows what it means. He said “it’s the A in AI. It means fake”.

A brief history of The Mathematical Gazette: thirty years later This article revisits the history of The Mathematical Gazette, extending earlier accounts by examining developments since the publication of Michael Dampier’s ‘The Mathematical Gazette: a brief his...

A student of mine has been investigating the history of the journal I'm now editing.

She reviewed a previous history published in 1996, and covered the intervening period by interviewing the last two editors and the production editor.

The resulting paper is now published online.

I really enjoyed listening to your conversation with @nhoskee.bsky.social. This podcast episode was thought provoking and insightful.

Thanks! cc @steckl.es

Mathematics of life Reaching the top While snakes and ladders is purely a game of chance, there is a way to bring strategy into it, says mathematician Peter Rowlett

Pick up a copy of New Scientist this weekend, or go to the website (subscription or via your library), and you’ll find me writing about Snakes and Ladders and analysis of games of chance.

Mathematical Objects: Certified Mathematical Object sticker with Chris Nho A conversation about mathematics and communicating mathematics inspired by a ‘Certified Mathematical Object’ sticker. Presented by Katie Steckles and Peter Rowlett, with special guest C…

New podcast episode! @steckl.es and I have an interesting chat about maths, what it is, and how to communicate that, with @nhoskee.bsky.social inspired by the Public Math 'certified mathematical object' stickers.

aperiodical.com/2026/01/math...

A call for people to write for The Mathematical Gazette, and a plea for volunteers to peer review, from @amiemathematics.bsky.social. It's the journal I edit, behind the scenes we're getting ready to publish my first issue!

See what his teacher makes of e.π^e. 🤣

Haha, it’s a page from last year’s KS2 SATS paper.

Write a number in the box to make this correct. 3/5 < box over 100 < 0.7

What’s your answer here?

My son got it from school. He said 65. Very boring! I was wondering about 20π.

#MathsToday

Mathematical Objects: A taxicab A conversation about mathematics inspired by a taxicab. Presented by Katie Steckles and Peter Rowlett.

New podcast episode! @steckl.es tells me about the maths of taxicabs.

Search ‘Mathematical Objects’ where you get podcasts, or get it here:

I thought it was the % of people who rated themselves 4 or 5, although I’m not clear on that or what they were rating on. I haven’t dug through the report, but what I saw wasn’t huge on the technical detail.

One is a rating on a likert scale, the other is a score for ability which seems to be based on your maths qualifications and how you did on some questions. I wonder whether people answering knew ‘4’ means ‘I will score “high” on your test’, or whether they are totally different things.

Figure shows a gap between reported competence (those who score high or very high on the numerical competence index) and those who rated their competence 4 or 5 on a likert scale. Reported is around 60% and actual around 40% across a range of demographic groups.

The claim that "just about everyone overestimates their own ability to use everyday numbers" (p.19) which the Telegraph picks up on, is interesting. It refers to this graphic. 40% scored high/very high cf. 60% who thought they would, a pattern across all demographics. Is that "just about everyone"?

Think you’re good at maths? Here’s why your claim may not add up Sixty per cent of adults think they are good at maths but only 40 per cent scored highly in a research test

Report: people think using numbers is an important skill, more than half enjoy doing it (almost as many as enjoy reading), many don't score well but people want to improve their and their kid's abilities. richmondproject.org/wp-content/u...

Telegraph article ($): everyone's terrible at maths

Upcoming Livestream: Thursday 15th January, 11am GMT - Scroggsvent Revisited | Finite Group Get more from Finite Group on Patreon

Excited that the next Finite Group livestream will be @mscroggs.co.uk giving the behind-the-scenes scoop on his 2025 Advent Calendar. Will what I did to solve the puzzles match what he expected people would do? Attend live and get your scroggsvent questions answered!

www.patreon.com/posts/upcomi...

Having fun planning the next few livestream events for our online community for maths fans - join the Finite Group, and you can watch interesting people chat maths one hour a month, and be part of our Discord community all year round! finitegroup.co.uk

Learn about The Mathematical Gazette Learn about The Mathematical Gazette aims & scope, editorial board, journal metrics and more.

Realising that I am now actually the Editor of The Mathematical Gazette. I have been saying "I'm the next Editor, starting in 2026" for a while, but now it actually is 2026! Getting ready to publish my first issue in March.

www.tandfonline.com/journals/tmg...

Mathematical Objects: Venn diagram with Keisha Thompson A conversation about mathematics inspired by a Venn diagram. Presented by Katie Steckles and Peter Rowlett, with special guest Keisha Thompson. Katie mentioned the MathForEquality badges and pins.

New podcast episode: Mathematical Objects: Venn diagram with Keisha Thompson

* creativity, e.g. can I use floor/ceiling, double-factorial, other exotic stuff - you don’t need to, but if you like to, sure, and it might help if you decide to push beyond 10.

Lots of replies to this (many spoilers) - I forgot some of the clarifications people sometimes need, oops. Rules are a little loose because this encourages creativity. Some people don’t like including √, some like to include concatenation. Generally () included & symbols before the first 2 are fine.

Happy to report the 2026 game works.

So: place standard mathematical operators (+−×÷√!, that sort of thing) between 2, 0, 2, and 6, keeping the digits in order without concatenation, to make the numbers 0–10.

How many can you get?

#MathsToday

Particularly mathematical New Years Honours 2026 The UK Government have announced the latest list of honours, and we’ve taken a look for the particularly mathematical entries. Here is the selection for this year – if you spot any more, let us kno…

Particularly mathematical New Years Honours 2026 - just a couple this year, anyone spot any more?

#MathsToday

Mathematically extra-complicated Secretest Santa 2025 YouTube video by suckerpinch

Merry Christmas!

I’ve enjoyed the @mscroggs.co.uk puzzle advent calendar - prizes to be won if you complete the puzzles this year www.mscroggs.co.uk

Something else I’ve enjoyed being part of: the Mathematically extra-complicated Secret Santa 2025 — @tomvii.bsky.social’s video:
youtu.be/4pG8_bWpmaE

Teaser 3300 Peter Rowlett A Faulty Bet

I wrote a puzzle in today’s Sunday Times. Also on the last page of this PDF: extras.thetimes.co.uk/web/public/p...