Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Hat tip to MatthewMaddux (Egan Chernoff) for passing along this entertaining video on 'what is math?' Some stuff gets oversimplified, but then it tries to pack a lot into just 7 minutes -- hope you're good at listening fast ;-)
Monday, January 26, 2015
First, a bit about truth-in-advertising (Big Pharma style):
[...sorry, not sure the post is, or will be available -- apparently Briggs' blog was hacked at some point, and not sure if it's still in process of having all posts restored??? (perhaps Pfizer didn't care for the discussion! :-(( in any event, if the post is restored I'll put up a fresh link to it, with a note indicating such. ]
....and as long as we're talking stats criticism (moving from pharma to psychology), here's another scathing overview via Deborah Mayo:
From Nassim Taleb, this graphic has been getting passed around of late, a "genealogy" of the Black Swan/"fat-tails" problem (be sure to refer to the color coding key too):
And, finally, lo-and-behold, even xkcd is thinking about statistics this morning:
ADDENDUM: this afternoon, A. Gelman posted the following which looks toooo good/appropriate not to include along with the above entries:
Sunday, January 25, 2015
This week's 'Sunday reflection,' a few succinct lines from an old NY Times James Gleick piece:
"…unspoken, but always present, is the faith that doing mathematics purely, following an internal compass, seeking elegance and beauty in a strange abstract world, is the best way in the long run to serve practical science. As physics or biology progress, they will inevitably find that the way ahead has been cleared by some odd piece of pure mathematics that was thought dead and buried for many decades."
"A physicist is content to say that the earth orbits the sun; a mathematician will say only that there is convincing evidence."
"It has been said that the ideal mathematics talk has three parts. The first part should be understood by most of your audience. The second part should be understood by four or five specialists in your field. The third part should be understood by no one -- because how else will people know you are serious?"
-- all from "But Aren't Truth and Beauty Supposed To Be Enough?" NY Times, August 1986; anthologized in "The New York Times Book of Mathematics"
[…If you have a favorite math-related passage that might make a nice Sunday morning reflection here let me know (SheckyR@gmail.com). If I use one submitted by a reader, I'll cite the contributor.]
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Don't know how many readers are already well familiar with this?:
In 1999, the "Eternity" puzzle, a jigsaw puzzle on steroids, composed of 209 pieces shaped as equilateral triangles and half-triangles, was launched by Christopher Monckton, with a prize of one million pounds for the first person to solve it within 4 years. Naively, Monckton thought it would take at least that long to solve it (and even put up half the reward from his own funds). One of the early websites for the contest is here (where one of the pages gives the original rules; several other links are now dead):
Less than a year later though it was solved, and the prize awarded to 2 Cambridge mathematicians. You can read more about it from this 2001 plus.maths article:
With a little more study, Eternity 2 was launched in 2007, a 259-piece puzzle comprised this time of squares with colored edges that had to match up for the solution. It has better lived up to the hype, as the new $2 million award went unclaimed after Jan. 2011, the deadline for the prize -- and so far as I'm aware it remains unsolved!
AMS posted this blurb about the puzzles just last year:
I don't believe the puzzle is for sale any longer, other than second-hand copies.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Long-time readers here know that I'm especially fond of paradoxes, so was naturally drawn to a post from blogger Tony Mann where he employs some logic from Martin Gardner and Curry's paradox to demonstrate his knack for predicting sport outcomes, and beating "the pundits" :-):
Meanwhile, NPR has another new hour-long science-oriented show called "Invisibilia" -- the first two episodes that I've heard have been fantastic. Check your local station to see if it's available in your area, or you can pick it up off the Web here:
Anyway, the latest episode on "fear" included a segment that ended with an odd little paradox of its own. Turns out there is a very rare amygdala-destroying genetic disorder known as "Urbach-Wiethe disease" which eliminates the human experience of fear -- literally, individuals feel NO FEAR because they lack the biological requisites for its sensation. The end result of this bizarre condition is fascinating: it means that such a sufferer has many MORE "bad" experiences in their life, because they lack the necessary fear to avoid such experiences. On-the-other-hand, a normal person, with proper fear response, avoids a lot more of life's dangers, BUT experiences MUCH MORE fear/stress, and essentially unhappiness, via the fewer instances that they do experience... i.e., the individual who suffers more often (or has more bad things happen to them) is happier than the individual who suffers less often, because of how the suffering is experienced. Anyway, no math, just interesting, and counterintuitive. And paradoxes are part of life, not just logic textbooks.
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Not particularly mathy... but classic words that ought never be forgotten:
“It's said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That's false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods."
-- Jacob Bronowski, The Ascent of Man
Forever timely, because of "the itch for absolute knowledge and power":
....To end on a less somber note, I'll close with a different classic: Leonard Cohen as rendered by K.D. Lang at the 2010 winter Olympics:
Thursday, January 15, 2015
Greg Ross at Futility Closet writes in a very succinct explanatory style that usually makes his puzzles both clever and understandable. I think he came close to being too succinct on this one though that he just put up ("Ice Work"). It looks (and is really) a very simple problem, but the bare bones presentation required several minutes for me to grasp the simple solution. Do others find it initially confusing, or is it more obvious to most readers?:
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Research improprieties have always been with us, but we live in a day where (luckily) they are exposed with greater regularity (rather than remain hidden).
A long, I think important, commentary (and not heavy on mathematics) from statistician Deborah Mayo, this morning, giving a whistleblower's perspective on a well-known scandal emanating from one Duke oncology lab. Ought be read by anyone interested in ethics, statistics, and reproducibility in research:
Toward the end she writes this before giving a counterview:
"I have recently received letters from people who tell me that any attempt to improve on statistical methodology or to critically evaluate -- in a serious manner -- people’s abuses of statistical concepts, is an utter waste of time and tantamount to philosophical navel gazing. Why? Because everyone knows, according to them, that statistics is just so much window dressing and that political/economic expediency is what drives kicking data into line to reach their pre-ordained conclusions."And I dare say, as problems with research methodologies go, this represents but one of the iceberg tips toward which one must remain vigilant.
Sunday, January 11, 2015
Friday, at MathTango I posted the longest math potpourri I've ever done... To compensate, today's Sunday reflection is the shortest passage I've ever used ;-):
"As mathematicians the world over say, everything is either impossible or trivial."
-- from Ian Stewart's charming, "Letters to a Young Mathematician"
Friday, January 9, 2015
Thursday, January 8, 2015
I may be the last one to know about this(?), but only recently discovered the MathTwitterBlogoSphere group -- it's primarily for math teachers (which is probably why I missed it, as I'm not one), but I do enjoy following their Twitter hashtag #MTBoS to see what they're up to. If you are a math teacher, and have possibly missed their presence, worth checking out.
Learn more about them at these sites (or follow their hashtag on Twitter):
...also learn more about them with a Google search:
Another group that formed more recently is an email group, "Popular Math," for math enthusiasts of various stripes, again to share thoughts/ideas/solutions. Check them out here:
...and older standby hashtags for those on Twitter are #mathchat and #mathed (or British versions, #Mathschat and #Mathsed).
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
This has been around for awhile, but still contains some interesting problems to play with... Responses to the Quora question, "What are some unsolved problems in math which seem easy at first glance?":
Meanwhile, ICYMI, I've posted a bit of a year-end blog retrospective over at MathTango:
...and hope before month's end to have 1-2 new interviews over there as well.