### Math and Living Things

An interactive overview of mathematical biology written for those who are generally "mathematics-averse."

### Analytics

### Comments

This was an excellent work of exposition. The interactive demos greatly added to the experience.

8.6Very nice interactive Article.

7.2minor correction: the golden ratio is a surd meaning it is irrational but not transcendental. technical: placing cells in the game of life embed seems to be buggy where it places it a few cells off from where you click. Other than this the article's explanations are great and engaging

7.6The submission is very detailed and the „applets” provided certainly prove the effort put into this. Even though I don't particularly like Biology, your article really made me have a change of heart (at least for the subfield of Mathematical Biology). Congrats for this article!

9A nice gentle introduction to some interesting areas of mathematics with nice links to biology and simple interactive exploration

7.3Very fun interactives. Overall I had a hard time finding the motivation, and felt like a bit of a grab-bag of extant Cool Math.

5.6Yea, I felt a sense of suspense after reading through the ending statement of "Goldel Spirals," then seguing into "Cells as Machines." This article is a brisk yet effervescent summary of models that aid in modeling biological phenomena. I appreciate how you wrote upon a dual existence of well-ordered and the chaotic, complex behavior for living things. Could it be that dynamical systems that exhibit self-similarity IS also well-ordered in its half dimension? This is a question I asked myself after reading the "Conclusion," part of your work. Might I recommend reviewing some body of work of th Golden Cantor Set with the work you wrote on Golden Ratios/Spirals? https://www.jstor.org/stable/2588988 Thank you for your article, and I hope you expound upon more of what you've discovered.

7.2Nice article! I loved the interactive elements. One thing I will point out, though, is that the golden ratio is not transcendental since it's a solution to the polynomial equation x^2 - x - 1 = 0, while the Feigenbaum constant is not known to be transcendental or even irrational. Other than that, well done!

5.9Extremely fun interaction

7.3I think this was cool, but it was too "kitchen-sink" to be too interesting. I think it might have been more valuable to do a deep dive into one of the topics than present all four at a surface level (especially because all four of these have been presented at a surface level before... a lot) (also minor error - phi isn't transcendental; it is algebraic as it is the solution to x^2 = x + 1)

5.2Interesting topics and the interactive elements were great. I found the Cells as Machines chapter somewhat unclear and a bit too opinionated. Also note that the golden ratio is irrational, but not transcendental: it is a root of x² - x - 1. It is yet unknown whether the Feigenbaum constant is transcendental, or even irrational. Anyways, good blogpost!

4.9It’s great that your article shows connections between math and biology. I think often the most interesting ideas are found at the boundaries of different disciplines. I like that you’re using simulations in your article. It makes reading more engaging and interactive. The idea of linking directly to specific simulation setups in the text is brilliant—I can quickly check what you’re talking about, and I’m actively involved in the reading. One thing, though—the part about bifurcation was a bit tricky for me. It wasn't super clear what bifurcation actually is. I got it from the example eventually, but a little explanation would help (e.g., “Bifurcation is this…”). Plus, “bifurcation” is a term that's used differently in biology and medicine (like bifurcation of the aorta or tail bifurcation). There are even related terms like "furca" or "furcula" that refer to a forked, tail-like structure in springtails. But generally, you did a great job explaining things in a way that’s easy to follow, even if someone’s not super familiar with the topic. Practical note: The text was harder to read because of its small font size. It was fine on a tablet but less comfortable on a laptop. Even increasing the font size by 2 pixels would improve readability. Also, having less space under the headings than above them would make the text easier to navigate. Overall, I enjoyed your article. It inspired me to think more deeply about the ideas and seek additional sources. I believe you achieved what you set out to do in your introduction. :)

7To be honest , I'm not attracted to the content itself, but I love your principle. You are doing a cool job! Keep moving forward!

6.8Nice article with good interactive images. One important error: golden ratio is irrational but not transcendental.

6.7I appreciate the general overview of a few of the more well known concepts/models within the field of mathematical biology, but there is a lack of context for why each of these particular ideas are important in studying biological systems. To orient the reader, a short introduction in each section describing an example of how each concept was/is currently used to study a biological phenomenon would go a long way. Besides that, I liked the use of interactive demos. If you enjoy coding, I would suggest putting together a Gray-Scott simulation of your own. It's a fun and informative exercise in numerical analysis.

7Really nice effort! I found it a bit too broad, whereas a deep dive I believe would be more enjoyable rather than a survey of things re: mathematical biology

3.6-Lack of visually appealing elements to the readers. -Efforts have been made to ensure a depth of concepts have been covered. -Not many effort made to keep the readers to be interested in the article

3.4WOW. Thank you for this read, really honestly incredible. Also I love that you let us play game of life.

8.3There was a good variety of topics that explored different aspects of mathematical biology. I liked the application of the logistic equation to help visualize the different nodes of bifurcation there. In terms of tone, I think there can be more focus on the tone. If this is for a more casual audience, the mathematics on the differential equation can be reduced. On the other hand, for a more math centric mind, we would want to go into more detail into one topic.

5.1Great topic, with neat interactive diagrams. I would have loved to read your own thoughts on why there has been so little progress. Where are you going to look for a link?

5.9