I am sending them as I just finished reading "The Book of Numbers" which I thoroughly enjoyed. You really understand how to popularize difficult concepts.

It seems that her husband is very talented. The sculptures are complex wooden hemlock forms that look amazing. See for yourself here:

http://www.eliaswakan.com/

http://book.daum.net/detail/book.do? bookid=KOR9788979867305

I may be a collaborating professor at KAIST, but my Korean is limited to saying hello and thanks and ordering food. According to Babel Fish the title should be 수의 책 which is not quite what it says on the cover, see for yourself below. So I'm wondering what the title of my own book is... Anyway, it's always fascinating to see just how complicated they make cover designs out there compared to Western designs - it's a cultural difference that you see in many product designs (I think the red strip in the picture is just a loose "sales ribbon" to help sell the book). I prefer the UK, US and German covers, whatever this one says.

Also, according to my publisher, the British version was reviewed by The Royal Society of Popular Science and in a newsletter. (I have no idea what that is - but that's what the publisher said...) They also ran a competition on their website to win copies of the book, which was advertised in their newsletter from mid March to mid April. And apparently Answer Bank (a popular culture site with quizzes and competitions)“ had a banner on their homepage and in their newsletter. I can't find any of it online now, so I guess I missed it.

http://paanchfarzi.blogspot.com/2008/07/book-of-numbers.html

Here's just a little of what this reader wrote:

Last week I read this book "The Book of Numbers" by Peter J. Bentley.It is an extraordinary book written in a very lucid way. Even a layman can understand the intricacies of the complicated theories of the numbers. The book explains all the important numbers ranging from π, e.. to PHI . There origin, discoverer, and the related stories.

...

It has numerous fascinating stories about Scientists and there discoveries.You must read the book and satisfaction is Guaranteed :)

http://www.peterjbentley.com/amendments.pdf

Anyway this reader was almost a little over-the-top with the praise. It's much appreciated as ever:

I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I marvel at the author's concept for the chapters. The level of writing is extraordinary. The illustrations, photos, etc are first rate. I particularly enjoyed the historical aspect. You should consider entering the book into whatever competition(s) for which it qualifies.

Dear Dr Bentley:

Your book The Book of Numbers (c) 2008 is one of the most fascinating books I have read recently,

Ever since my troubles with arithmetic throughout grade school I have been intrigued by numbers and how to use them... Continued work in college studies over many years led to becoming a tutor for those who were having trouble in mathematics from second grade through college algebra. presently I tutor Math (and other subject) to challenged students... and recognized by several teachers as "one of the best math tutors"; an acclamation I am quite proud of.

There have been many number "tricks" I have discovered to overcome a lack of memory for memorizing times tables and other rote memory requirements placed on students in the early days without calculators. these come quite in handy when tutoring students with math challenges today.

It was because of these early school challenges with arithmetic that helped turn me on to the need to investigate alternative methods of working with numbers. And taught me how mysterious and beautiful they are.

Your book has been quite intruiging. I am now looking forward to learning even more about numbers beyond ordinary arithmetic, algebra and geometry. Ev3en though one may not be able to comprehend numbers like Phi, Chi, Pi, i, e or c, there is still a possibility of learning how to use them.

Like Aristotle, who seems to have disbelieved the possibility of infinity, I am inclined to do the same yet I must recognize that somehow it, along with imaginary numbers do exist and can be used in equations in a finite world.

Thank you for your book. It is thoroughly enjoyed and I will have to peruse it often. It is my belief that someday some new "Einstein" will arise and complete (?) the work Einstein did. I believe the Unified Theory is still in the process of being proved.

A THOUGHT: What would happen if someone came up with a workable formula (even if not as simple as E=mc2) that may include most if not all of those special numbers such as Phi, Chi, Pi, i, e and c? Might it solve the enigma of the universe? Or, possibly if someone could create a Klein Bottle as we can a Mobius Circle would we be able to see a replica of space we could understand?

Sincerely [name removed] An inquisitive soul.

I just wanted to say that I enjoyed reading your book, The Book of Numbers. I am a mathematics major and just found the entire history of numbers to be fascinating. I was very pleased to read a book that focused just on numbers and didn't dive too deep into the number theory or any other type of mathematics. I also enjoyed how you, towards the end, started to meld physics into the book, because the two subjects, I think, correlate very well.

...I just want to emphasize how much I enjoyed the read. I finished the book in about 3 hours because I just could not put it down.

It's always nice to have a review written by a knowledgeable person, and especially one with taste as good as this. I'd forgotten about this Cardano quote in the book; it's good that the personalities of past mathematicians are still able to amuse and stimulate in addition to their work. From the Guardian, book review section, last Saturday:

One month ago I finished reading your fascinating book "the Book of Numbers". From that moment on your question: Where are all the girls? keeps lingering through my mind. I wonder how many girls did react on this question.

I'm glad you enjoyed the book. So far you are the first to tell me about your reaction to that specific question. Let's hope a few more girls do become more interested in the subject!

You wrote about Euler, Pierre de Fermat and Descartes concerning amicable numbers.

I just happened to read the following text on the internet: Arabic mathematics : forgotten brilliance?

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Arabic_mathematics.html

…Continuing the story of amicable numbers, from which we have taken a diversion, it is worth noting that they play al large role in Arabic mathematics. Al-Farisi (born 1260) gave a new proof of Thabit ibn Qurra’s theorem, introducing important new ideas concerning factorisation and combinatorial methods. He also gave the pair of amicable numbers 17296, 18416 which have been attributed to Euler, but we know that these were known earlier than al-Farisi, perhaps even by Thabit ibn Qurra himself. Although outside our time range for Arabic mathematics in this article, it is worth noting that in the 17th century the Arabic mathematician Mohammed Baqir Yazdi gave the pair of amicable number 9,363,584 and 9,437,056 still many years before Euler’s contribution……

Perhaps it is of interest for you.

yes, when describing amicable numbers I wrote "(although some claim that they may also have been known before this)". I was referring to this text you found. There is some debate over the issue, but it is probably true that the Arabs had found many amicable numbers, which were then forgotten for several hundred years and rediscovered by the likes of Descartes and Euler. The University of St Andrews is an excellent source of information on this topic - I used their help when writing the Book of Numbers.

Thouroughly enjoyed reading your book.About 35 years ago I read a book called Men Of Mathematics published by Penguins.As a Student of Electrical Enggineering at IIT Mumbai India then,I enjoyed that book thouroughly .I was looking for it to re read it in my present days of retirement and with a little packet of experience.I could not find it in the market.But your book gave me lot more joy. Thanks for making maths so interesting. . Triangle has the least area and least perimeter of any enclosed 2 dimensional space.Perhaps I missed mention of this important property of triangle referred to in the chapters. Am I wrong in understanding the property or I really missed it? Sorry for taking your time but I thought I should check with you.Hope you reply. Thanks

I'm pleased you enjoyed the book. Actually a circle has the least area and perimeter of any enclosed 2D space in cartesian geometry. If you limit your shapes to those with straight lines then regular shapes with more sides (making them closer to a circle) win. But things become much more difficult in non cartesian spaces - which is how the universe really is!

Keep enjoying numbers!

Thanks for clearing the clutter.....