Mathematics, in pictures.

Some mathematical ideas are hard because they are genuinely hard. Others are hard only because nobody drew them properly. This is a collection of essays about the second kind — one idea at a time, illustrated to the point where the argument becomes visible.

Pascal's triangle mod 2, 32 rows. Only the odd entries are drawn; the pattern that appears is the Sierpiński triangle.
Fig. 1 Pascal’s triangle with the odd numbers shaded and the even ones left blank. Nothing here was designed to make a pattern; the pattern is a consequence of the arithmetic. See Pascal’s triangle, two colours.

Recently added

22 essays, 21 October 2026 — everything that has been added, in order

Shrinking beats the nearest point at every true mean. p=3: ratio at |θ|²/p = 0, 1, 5: 0.667, 0.863, 0.976; p=5: ratio at |θ|²/p = 0, 1, 5: 0.400, 0.732, 0.931; p=10: ratio at |θ|²/p = 0, 1, 5: 0.200, 0.621, 0.886; p=25: ratio at |θ|²/p = 0, 1, 5: 0.080, 0.549, 0.855 Algebra

The nearest point is not the best guess

Measure ten unrelated quantities once each, with noise, and report the measurements. Nothing seems better. Yet pulling all ten towards nought by an amount the data choose gives a smaller total error whatever the true values are — in three dimensions or more, and never in one or two. The reason is a right angle: in many dimensions noise is nearly perpendicular to the truth, so a measurement is always too long, and the best correction is the shadow of the truth on it.

7 figures
How often a table of random signs is singular. n=2: 0.5000 (parallel 0.500); n=3: 0.6250 (parallel 0.625); n=4: 0.6602 (parallel 0.660); n=5: 0.6558 (parallel 0.628); n=6: 0.6270 (parallel 0.547); n=7: 0.5810 (parallel 0.442); n=8: 0.5216 (parallel 0.329); n=9: 0.4515 (parallel 0.234); n=10: 0.3757 (parallel 0.154); n=11: 0.2963 (parallel 0.0978); n=12: 0.2274 (parallel 0.0619); n=13: 0.1639 (parallel 0.0361); n=14: 0.1136 (parallel 0.0217); n=15: 0.07550 (parallel 0.0127); n=16: 0.04668 (parallel 0.00683); n=18: 0.01639 (parallel 0.00229); n=20: 0.004725 (parallel 0.000683) Algebra

How often a table of random signs is flat

Fill a square table with random plus and minus signs and ask whether its determinant is nought. For four rows the answer is yes two times in three. The chance then falls, and since 2020 it has been known to fall at exactly the rate of the dullest accident, two rows or columns equal or opposite. The conjecture is that this accident is, in the end, the whole story. Every size a computer can reach says otherwise, and the theory says the computer has not gone far enough.

7 figures
Where the samples go matters more than how many. n=10: trap -2.65, simp -1.70, cc -1.74, gauss -2.07; n=20: trap -3.69, simp -3.35, cc -3.89, gauss -4.21; n=40: trap -4.31, simp -7.10, cc -8.16, gauss -8.51; n=80: trap -4.93, simp -8.28, cc -14.49, gauss -15.26 Analysis

Where to take the samples

Every numerical integral is a weighted sum of samples of the curve. Spacing the samples evenly gives errors that shrink like a power of their number; choosing where they go, as Gauss did in 1814, makes six samples exact for every polynomial up to degree eleven and turns the power into a geometric rate. The surprise is that the humble trapezoid rule, evenly spaced and exact only for straight lines, does the same thing on any smooth curve that goes once round a circle — and that a single corner defeats every one of them.

7 figures
Three angles with one tripled sine. roots of 4x^3 - 3x + sin3°: 0.017452406437, 0.857167300702, -0.874619707139. Analysis

The sine of one degree

Every table of sines ever made by hand needed the sine of one degree, and no construction with ruler and compass can produce it: one degree is a third of three, and thirds are what the constructions cannot make. Ptolemy fenced it in with an inequality and got it right to the precision his table carried. Thirteen centuries later Jamshīd al-Kāshī wrote the triple-angle formula as a rule for improving a guess and let it run, gaining almost three decimal places at every turn — a cubic solved without Cardano, by doing the same thing again.

6 figures
How often a game picked at random has a core. n=3: 0.20:1.000 0.24:1.000 0.28:1.000 0.32:1.000 0.36:1.000 0.40:1.000 0.44:1.000 0.48:1.000 0.52:1.000 0.56:1.000 0.60:1.000 0.64:1.000 0.68:1.000 0.72:0.997 0.76:0.993 0.80:0.980 0.84:0.958 0.88:0.933 0.92:0.899 0.96:0.872 1.00:0.833; n=4: 0.20:1.000 0.24:1.000 0.28:1.000 0.32:1.000 0.36:1.000 0.40:1.000 0.44:1.000 0.48:1.000 0.52:0.991 0.56:0.937 0.60:0.843 0.64:0.737 0.68:0.634 0.72:0.517 0.76:0.424 0.80:0.323 0.84:0.258 0.88:0.182 0.92:0.134 0.96:0.091 1.00:0.066; n=5: 0.20:1.000 0.24:1.000 0.28:1.000 0.32:1.000 0.36:1.000 0.40:1.000 0.44:0.994 0.48:0.904 0.52:0.725 0.56:0.438 0.60:0.245 0.64:0.116 0.68:0.059 0.72:0.022 0.76:0.009 0.80:0.002 0.84:0.002 0.88:0.001 0.92:0.001 0.96:0.000 1.00:0.000 Applied

A core is a rare thing to find at random

A game has a core when the whole can be shared so that no group would do better on its own, and Bondareva and Shapley turned that into a finite list of checks. For three players there are five checks; for four, forty-one; for five, 1,291. Draw the coalitions' values at random and the list wins: a third of three-player games fail, nineteen four-player games in twenty, and not one five-player game in two thousand passes. The cores that theorems promise come from structure, and structure is exactly what a random game lacks.

6 figures
One weak element drags both procedures down. p1=0.55: premise 0.6331, verdict 0.5607; p1=0.6: premise 0.7535, verdict 0.6834; p1=0.7: premise 0.9218, verdict 0.8754; p1=0.8: premise 0.9883, verdict 0.9717; p1=0.9: premise 0.9997, verdict 0.9978 Applied

The element the judges are worst at

A court can vote element by element or on the verdict, and the comparison so far assumed judges equally good at every element. Real judges are surer about the law than about a contested fact. Make one element hard and both procedures sink towards the majority on that element, but they sink differently: the verdict vote sees only the product of the judges' competences and cannot tell an even court from a lopsided one, while the premise vote is ruled by its weakest majority. And when a judge's errors on two elements come from the same misreading of the facts, the gap between the procedures closes.

6 figures

Start anywhere

Eight of 1078 essays — the whole collection is a click away, or search it.

The Pythagorean theorem by dissection. Two squares of the same size. Each holds four copies of one right triangle. The space left over is a single tilted square on the left and two upright squares on the right. Geometry

Two squares, four triangles, and no algebra

The Pythagorean theorem is usually met as a formula to be memorised. It is much better met as a rearrangement that can be checked by eye.

7 figures
Odd numbers as square shells. Nested L-shaped shells of 1, 3, 5 … 11 cells stack into a 6 by 6 square. Geometry

Every square is a stack of odd numbers

Add up the odd numbers in order and the running totals are 1, 4, 9, 16, 25. This is not a coincidence, and the reason fits in a single picture.

7 figures
Euclid's algorithm on a 34 by 13 rectangle. The rectangle is tiled by peeling off the largest square that fits, again and again, until nothing is left. Geometry

The oldest algorithm, drawn as a tiling

Euclid's method for finding a greatest common divisor is usually presented as a loop. It is also a way of tiling a rectangle with squares, and the tiling explains why it works.

7 figures
The five Platonic solids. Tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron, drawn at a common scale. Geometry

Why the list of perfect solids stops at five

There are infinitely many regular polygons and exactly five regular solids. The reason is not deep, but it is very sharp, and it can be checked on a single row of corners.

8 figures
Four conic sections from one cone. Circle, ellipse, parabola and hyperbola, produced by tilting a single cutting plane further and further. Geometry

One cone, four curves

The circle, the ellipse, the parabola and the hyperbola look like four separate objects with four separate equations. They are one object, cut at four angles.

6 figures
A circle unrolled into a sine wave. On the left a radius turns through an angle; on the right the height of its tip is plotted against the angle, tracing a sine curve. Analysis

A sine wave is a circle seen from the side

Sine is introduced as a ratio in a right triangle, which is true and explains nothing about why its graph is a wave. There is a better picture.

7 figures
8 rectangles under a curve. A left-endpoint Riemann sum with 8 rectangles approximating the area under a curve. Analysis

Adding up rectangles until they stop being rectangles

The integral is defined as a limit of sums of rectangles. The definition is exact, the picture is honest about what it costs, and the gap between them is the whole subject.

7 figures
Partial sums of the square wave. Approximations using 1, 3, 7, 21 terms; the corners sharpen but a fixed overshoot remains. Analysis

A square wave built entirely out of round ones

Add enough sine waves together and flat tops and vertical cliffs appear from nothing. Almost — there is a 9% overshoot that never goes away, and it is not a bug.

7 figures

The eleven fields

the spine — every essay sits in exactly one

Longest series

one idea, several arguments — all 134 of them

Threads running through

themes, not categories

Proof without words

Arguments that are complete once they have been looked at properly. Not illustrations of proofs — the proofs themselves.

102 essays

Pi turns up uninvited

A constant defined by circles, appearing in places with no circle anywhere in sight, and what that tends to mean.

32 essays

Doing infinitely many things

Sums that never end, subdivisions that never stop, and the care required to make either of them mean something.

94 essays

The same thing twice

Two constructions that look unrelated and turn out to be the same object wearing different clothes.

442 essays

Throwing things away

Progress made by deleting detail: the map that becomes a graph, the shape that becomes a number.

67 essays

Order out of noise

Random processes that reliably produce the same shape, and the reason that is less mysterious than it looks.

165 essays

One point away

Constructions that work perfectly except at a single exceptional place, and what is done about it.

51 essays

Things that cannot be done

Results that close a door rather than open one — and the peculiar difficulty of drawing a picture of something that does not exist.

267 essays

Counting the same thing twice

One collection, counted by two different methods, and an identity that falls out because both answers have to agree. The proof is the pair of counts.

291 essays

Sensitive to everything

Systems where a difference too small to draw becomes the whole difference, and the reason that is a property of the rule rather than of the measurement.

35 essays

Small rules, large behaviour

Rules short enough to write on one line, producing behaviour nobody can summarise — and the finding that the size of a rule predicts nothing about the difficulty of the questions it raises.

69 essays

What a system cannot say

Rules asked a question about themselves, and an answer that is provably not available from inside — which is a different kind of limit from not knowing yet.

91 essays

Decided by exhaustion

Questions with finitely many cases, settled by going through all of them — and what changes when a claim about every argument becomes a count.

295 essays

Small cases lie

Patterns that hold for every example anyone would check by hand, and then stop. The cases within reach are not a sample of the cases.

237 essays

All 1078 essays · by series · by named object · by figure · what the figures prove · what is new