If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Nature)   Like the Honey Badger, math don't care. Math don't give a shiat   (nature.com) divider line 60
    More: Amusing, yeast infection, wishful thinking, calculus, algebra, Fast Forward, physical effects, statisticians, Scientific American  
•       •       •

6370 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 Nov 2012 at 6:23 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-08 04:59:59 PM
But math is just an artificial modeling tool developed by humans.
 
2012-11-08 05:32:26 PM
...David Brooks calling Silver "over-rated," MSNBC's Joe Scarborough dismissing him as an ideologue and "a joke," and even Politico's Dylan Byers pondering whether Silver was "a one-term celebrity" - as if it was his name recognition, rather than the numbers, that mattered. And the Unskewed Polls founder, Dean Chalmers, sneered in The Examiner that Silver was "a man of very small stature, a thin and effeminate man with a soft-sounding voice that sounds almost exactly like the 'Mr. New Castrati' voice used by Rush Limbaugh on his program...

But the outcry was as much part of the rampant anti-intellectualism that dominates certain circles in our society. In a post at Deadspin, David Roher opined, "It was only a matter of time before the war on expertise spilled over into the cells of Nate Silver's spreadsheets...

Silver is not an oracle, and has never claimed to be, so the over-reaction was just plain silly.


Cut the bullshat. It isn't "certain circles," it's the GOP.

growlersoftware.com
 
2012-11-08 06:11:02 PM
Gosh, @NateSilverwrong deleted an awful lot of tweets...
 
2012-11-08 06:39:21 PM
www.rumproast.com

imgs.xkcd.com

Actually, Nate's work is waaay to the left side on the purity scale, but it does actually use math.
 
2012-11-08 06:41:46 PM

doglover: But math is just an> unreasonably effective, artificial modeling tool developed by humans.


FTFY
 
2012-11-08 06:49:59 PM
All right, I have to admit that I never expected the headline's quotes to literally be in a Nature article, of all things, not even the op-ed preface bits.
 
2012-11-08 06:55:01 PM
FTFA: Another friend, Allyson, was even more blunt: "My initial reaction to the word 'calculus' is not unlike a caveman throwing rocks at the moon in ignorance and fear resulting in blind rage. There is no such thing as ghosts creeping up behind me on the stairs, but there is such a thing as a polynomial monster, and it has hooked teeth and causes chronic yeast infections, I'm sure."

As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.
 
2012-11-08 07:00:21 PM
Magic exists and we call the magicians Scientists ... at least for the majority of the population.
 
2012-11-08 07:04:18 PM

dark side of the moon: As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.


I keep telling my wife that everything is easier after algebra II. It's true.

Math works. I may never decide if I think math is a science or not. It is, however, a language. How well you speak the language is one thing. Whether or not you know what the fark you're saying is another.
 
2012-11-08 07:31:38 PM
img338.imageshack.us
 
2012-11-08 07:34:58 PM
So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?
 
2012-11-08 07:41:50 PM
Link


PROBABLY.
 
2012-11-08 07:57:28 PM

Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?


Yep.

Let that sink in.

If Rush et al didn't start attacking Nate Silver, for the audacity of doing math, he likely would have never have gotten all this press. The GOP should be flogged hard for this. Openly and often.
 
2012-11-08 08:03:19 PM
The colloquial language used in that article wasn't quite what I expected from a publication like Nature.
 
2012-11-08 08:06:54 PM

Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?


Math is too divisive these days.
 
2012-11-08 08:13:10 PM
I voted for the loser.

What I don't understand is why the GOP won't just accept the statistical analysis. I cannot imagine that they don't have their own people inside their campaigns that are doing similar analysis. They must know. But the pundits are amazing. Even if you don't "believe" Silver, if you simply look at electoral-vote.com you could see the trend.

Makes no sense. There will be another GOP president some day, and Nate Silver's model will predict it when it happens. Nate doesn't "make" the votes... he just gives a highly confident prediction. No magic.
 
2012-11-08 08:16:43 PM

dark side of the moon: FTFA: Another friend, Allyson, was even more blunt: "My initial reaction to the word 'calculus' is not unlike a caveman throwing rocks at the moon in ignorance and fear resulting in blind rage. There is no such thing as ghosts creeping up behind me on the stairs, but there is such a thing as a polynomial monster, and it has hooked teeth and causes chronic yeast infections, I'm sure."

As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.


I never thought I'd be the one saying this...

Practice practice practice. The more you do the mental work the easier it gets, and eventually you'll see and remember all sorts of solutions. In math departments there's this motif of "its a solved problem, because I've seen it before".
 
2012-11-08 08:24:51 PM

Bronzed War God: What I don't understand is why the GOP won't just accept the statistical analysis. I cannot imagine that they don't have their own people inside their campaigns that are doing similar analysis. They must know. But the pundits are amazing. Even if you don't "believe" Silver, if you simply look at electoral-vote.com you could see the trend.


Nope.
The huge and enthusiastic crowds in swing state after swing state in recent weeks - not only for Romney but also for Paul Ryan - bolstered what they believed intellectually: that Obama would not get the kind of turnout he had in 2008...

They thought intensity and enthusiasm were on their side this time - poll after poll showed Republicans were more motivated to vote than Democrats - and that would translate into votes for Romney....As a result, they believed the public/media polls were skewed - they thought those polls oversampled Democrats and didn't reflect Republican enthusiasm. They based their own internal polls on turnout levels more favorable to Romney.
...
State polls showed Romney winning big among independents. Historically, any candidate polling that well among independents wins. But as it turned out, many of those independents were former Republicans who now self-identify as independents. The state polls weren't oversampling Democrats and undersampling Republicans - there just weren't as many Republicans this time because they were calling themselves independents...

he perception is they always break for the challenger, since people know the incumbent and would have decided already if they were backing him. Romney was counting on that trend to continue. Instead, exit polls show Mr. Obama won among people who made up their minds on Election Day and in the few days before the election.


Link

Obama's team used data driven analysis to target likely Democratic voters, and used methods proven by data driven analysis to motivate them to vote (i.e. send them letters telling them that their neighbors vote).

One side embraced science, the other side went with their gut.
 
2012-11-08 08:32:52 PM

Bronzed War God: I voted for the loser.

What I don't understand is why the GOP won't just accept the statistical analysis. I cannot imagine that they don't have their own people inside their campaigns that are doing similar analysis. They must know. But the pundits are amazing. Even if you don't "believe" Silver, if you simply look at electoral-vote.com you could see the trend.

Makes no sense. There will be another GOP president some day, and Nate Silver's model will predict it when it happens. Nate doesn't "make" the votes... he just gives a highly confident prediction. No magic.


I don't think anyone really likes being told their candidate is going to lose several months away from the election. Kinda makes your campaign efforts futile.
 
2012-11-08 08:33:58 PM

MrEricSir: img338.imageshack.us


Holy crap that made me laugh!
 
2012-11-08 08:34:32 PM

impaler: Obama's team used data driven analysis to target likely Democratic voters, and used methods proven by data driven analysis to motivate them to vote (i.e. send them letters telling them that their neighbors vote).

One side embraced science, the other side went with their gut.



Liberals think with their brains - grey and no muscle to back it up.
Conservatives think with their ass - white, chubby, and full of crap.
 
2012-11-08 08:49:08 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.


We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.
 
2012-11-08 08:53:53 PM

JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.


We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
 
2012-11-08 09:00:24 PM
The publication is a Scientific American (magazine you can find on airport shelves) blog. Scientific American being owned by nature publishing group so you're not gonna find this tidbit in the next issue of Nature.
 
2012-11-08 09:06:56 PM

dark side of the moon: FTFA: Another friend, Allyson, was even more blunt: "My initial reaction to the word 'calculus' is not unlike a caveman throwing rocks at the moon in ignorance and fear resulting in blind rage. There is no such thing as ghosts creeping up behind me on the stairs, but there is such a thing as a polynomial monster, and it has hooked teeth and causes chronic yeast infections, I'm sure."

As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.


I enjoyed math until calculus. I think I would have liked it better if they had emphasized its use as a problem-solving tool, maybe using historical examples. The first test I took, I was beating myself up for doing so poorly, I didn't know if any of my answers were correct. I went to the professor the next day and asked if I could do some sort of make-up work; she graded it then and there, and I'd gotten a low A. And had no idea. That was the last time THAT happened (the A).
 
2012-11-08 09:16:27 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.


I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.
 
2012-11-08 09:22:24 PM
TFA: State polls showed Romney winning big among independents. Historically, any candidate polling that well among independents wins. But as it turned out, many of those independents were former Republicans who now self-identify as independents.

a.k.a. Fark Independents
 
2012-11-08 09:24:00 PM
Oh TFA was actually impaler's link, not subby's.
 
2012-11-08 09:25:11 PM

blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.


We can do this, because it's hip to be square.
 
2012-11-08 09:29:51 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.


Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.
 
2012-11-08 09:45:36 PM

born_yesterday: dark side of the moon: FTFA: Another friend, Allyson, was even more blunt: "My initial reaction to the word 'calculus' is not unlike a caveman throwing rocks at the moon in ignorance and fear resulting in blind rage. There is no such thing as ghosts creeping up behind me on the stairs, but there is such a thing as a polynomial monster, and it has hooked teeth and causes chronic yeast infections, I'm sure."

As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.

I enjoyed math until calculus. I think I would have liked it better if they had emphasized its use as a problem-solving tool, maybe using historical examples. The first test I took, I was beating myself up for doing so poorly, I didn't know if any of my answers were correct. I went to the professor the next day and asked if I could do some sort of make-up work; she graded it then and there, and I'd gotten a low A. And had no idea. That was the last time THAT happened (the A).


The historical examples and motivations for the development of calculus are beyond the reach of entry-level calculus students.
 
2012-11-08 09:48:10 PM

blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.


True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.
 
2012-11-08 10:01:24 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.


Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote
 
2012-11-08 10:14:38 PM

ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote


You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.
 
2012-11-08 10:18:04 PM

ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote


This, right here, is why I love Fark.

/got nothin
 
2012-11-08 10:33:55 PM

blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote

You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.


Oh, you're just being obtuse.


Unimpressed Man: This, right here, is why I love Fark.


*tips hat*

Sorry for going off on a tangent.
 
2012-11-08 10:57:09 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote

You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.

Oh, you're just being obtuse.


Unimpressed Man: This, right here, is why I love Fark.

*tips hat*

Sorry for going off on a tangent.


This (and many other reasons) is why I love you TMLO.
 
zez
2012-11-08 11:02:56 PM

born_yesterday: I enjoyed math until calculus. I think I would have liked it better if they had emphasized its use as a problem-solving tool, maybe using historical examples.


I was the same way. I barely passed algebra 2 with a D- but in my electronics/electric class I was doing all kinds of math with phase shifting and other things that was way more advanced and acing that class.

I guess it came down to understanding why I was trying to do something rather than just doing it just to do it.
 
2012-11-08 11:11:13 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote

You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.

Oh, you're just being obtuse.


you are acute when you are angry
 
2012-11-08 11:12:15 PM
Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.
 
2012-11-09 12:22:05 AM

doglover: But math is just an artificial modeling tool developed by humans.


yup. math is only right because mathematicians say it is.
 
2012-11-09 12:26:01 AM

ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote

You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.

Oh, you're just being obtuse.

you are acute when you are angry


I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.
 
2012-11-09 12:34:40 AM

I sound fat: doglover: But math is just an artificial modeling tool developed by humans.

yup. math is only right because mathematicians say it is.


Does 1 + 1 = 2 in all universes?
 
2012-11-09 03:27:20 AM

nmemkha: I sound fat: doglover: But math is just an artificial modeling tool developed by humans.

yup. math is only right because mathematicians say it is.

Does 1 + 1 = 2 in all universes?


You'd be surprised. For most purposes, our universe adds 1 and 1 and gets a number between 0 and 2, usually 1.4
 
2012-11-09 05:33:28 AM

gadian: Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.


More or less.

Mathematics isn't a description of reality. Mathematics is a description of the human perception of reality, and that is an important, if perhaps irrelevant, distinction.

We do not possess the ability to jump outside our skulls - outside human perception, reasoning, and comprehension of the natural world and its faculties - and truly observe the Universe on a completely objective level. We are the observance observing the observation which, if you know your Godel & Heisenberg, means that nothing can be proven true.

Everything we know comes to us through biased, human filters. Even things we think are universal absolutes, like logic, math and physics - they're all human constructs: Human tools created by humans and used by humans to understand human perceptions of the Universe in human terms that humans can relate to, for the benefit of humanity. We may be way off with all of this and never know it. The true answers may never be knowable, but that's okay because our current observations are the best guesses we got. Just because we can't count to infinity is no reason to stop counting.
 
2012-11-09 07:55:47 AM
7+8=3 mod 12

Ta Da!

This is the GOP math, take 2 numbers and make them equal to whatever you want. Then adjust the number line accordingly.
 
2012-11-09 08:16:04 AM

gadian: Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.


In modern math all you actually have to take without proof are the 9 axioms which describe the real number system. Everything else we know in math stems from these axioms. These aren't really arcane and complex ideas either they are simple things like, there is a number one which is the multiplicative identity, or there us such a thing as addition.
 
2012-11-09 08:28:20 AM

gund goat: In modern math all you actually have to take without proof are the 9 axioms which describe the real number system. Everything else we know in math stems from these axioms. These aren't really arcane and complex ideas either they are simple things like, there is a number one which is the multiplicative identity, or there us such a thing as addition.


Well, that's like religion except they only need one Axiom.

Axiom 1: God Exists
Proof of every other crazy thing they believe in: See Axiom 1
 
2012-11-09 08:35:29 AM

gund goat: gadian: Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.

In modern math all you actually have to take without proof are the 9 axioms which describe the real number system. Everything else we know in math stems from these axioms. These aren't really arcane and complex ideas either they are simple things like, there is a number one which is the multiplicative identity, or there us such a thing as addition.


A Link to the Philosophy of Mathematics
 
2012-11-09 08:40:05 AM

blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: ATRDCI: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: blipponaut: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: JayCab: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Silverstaff: So, mathematics has a liberal bias now?

Math is too divisive these days.

We need to do better at trying to integrate our society.

We've tried our hardest to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I think we could better. We need to get to the root of the problem.

We can do this, because it's hip to be square.

Exactly, just act rational and everything will work itself out.

True, but overconfidence in these situations is a cardinal sin.

Its almost impossible to derive a solution cos we have folks who make up imaginary, irrational numbers in an effort to sec out a product of their beliefs that results in great dividends for them personally while the difference between their sums and reality is climbing a vertical asymptote

You could give them any combination of numbers and they'll spin it how they.

Oh, you're just being obtuse.

you are acute when you are angry

I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.


These jokes are very derivative.
 
2012-11-09 08:48:07 AM

gadian: Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.


While yes, it is true that most of the people in math class just memorize the steps they've been taught to solve problems of format x, there are some people that actually cared about understanding why a problem is solved with certain steps. If you take math on 'faith' because you were to lazy to really understand it, that's your problem. But math isn't faith-based. That 2 + 2 = 4 is true even if we had chosen to use other symbols to represent the concepts of addition and equality. Even if we had no such symbols or understanding of the concepts, if you picked up two rocks, and then two more, you'd have four rocks. And that's not terrible.

Sure, we choose our own conventions, like writing things down in base ten, defining certain operations and properties in category theory with specific names and symbols, but the truths they represent are not negotiable. Math isn't invented, it is discovered. It doesn't require faith, some people just can't muster up anything besides faith.
 
2012-11-09 09:46:27 AM

dark side of the moon: FTFA: Another friend, Allyson, was even more blunt: "My initial reaction to the word 'calculus' is not unlike a caveman throwing rocks at the moon in ignorance and fear resulting in blind rage. There is no such thing as ghosts creeping up behind me on the stairs, but there is such a thing as a polynomial monster, and it has hooked teeth and causes chronic yeast infections, I'm sure."

As a woman currently enrolled in Calculus 1, I laughed heartily at this quote. I don't hate math. Rather enjoy it actually. But indefinite integrals are not my favorite thing as of late.


you'll get to where you can do indefinite polynomial integrals in your head, triple trigonometric integrals are where the pain is in Calculas. At the end of Calc 2 our exams only had 2 or 3 questions on them because even going at full steam with no thinking it took the whole class ( 1 hour 20 min ) to just write out the answers since they were multiple pages each.
 
2012-11-09 10:00:42 AM

Ishkur: gadian: Math is like religion. You take it at faith that 2 + 2 = 4 and you blindly memorize sums, formulas, and proofs as if they were prayers or commandments that are drilled in to the skulls of quaking children. You follow the steps that you're told and told that doing it any other way messes up the catechism and makes god angry, but this way, for this kind of problem, always gives you the right answer so sayeth they. They? Who are they? Well, that is a story not meant for mortal ears.

Sure, I'll divide by this number, flip this greater than sign if the number is negative, and round to the nearest thousandth, but it is all holy text written in greek of which I'm taught the answer as the priest perceives it, but never the meaning or reasoning. I take it on faith that every problem set up this way uses the same process to find the answer and when a problem that is set up that way and doesn't follow the same process, I know that we're on a different chapter and I don't question it. I should pray over my weakness and suffer through until I'm granted clarity, but I confess to never being a true believer to begin with.

More or less.

Mathematics isn't a description of reality. Mathematics is a description of the human perception of reality, and that is an important, if perhaps irrelevant, distinction.

We do not possess the ability to jump outside our skulls - outside human perception, reasoning, and comprehension of the natural world and its faculties - and truly observe the Universe on a completely objective level. We are the observance observing the observation which, if you know your Godel & Heisenberg, means that nothing can be proven true.

Everything we know comes to us through biased, human filters. Even things we think are universal absolutes, like logic, math and physics - they're all human constructs: Human tools created by humans and used by humans to understand human perceptions of the Universe in human terms that humans can relate to, for the benefi ...


Everything you said is actually complete bullshiat.
 
2012-11-09 11:22:47 AM

doyner: I keep telling my wife that everything is easier after algebra II. It's true.


Math isn't easier after Algebra II. It's just that Algebra II sits roughly at the abstraction limit for a lot of people. If you can make it past that, you're sufficiently "good at math" to continue, and while the math does get harder, you can probably still handle it (at least until you get to real mathematician-level math, not just the applied math you see in college). But a lot of people don't get past Algebra II.
 
2012-11-09 11:43:56 AM
Math in the simple sense of using numbers to count, add, and subtract is the decategorification of a correspondence between sets. For example, you could use your fingers to determine if all your children or sheep are present by having each finger stand for one child or sheep - e.g. right hand thumb stands for "Bob". Or you could decategorify this where let's say you have established that all and only the fingers on your right hand correspond to your children. To see if your all your children are present you can count those fingers (5), count the children, and see if you get the same count.

Most everyday counting happens using the natural number object of the topos Set. Of course you can count and add in any other topos that has natural numbers and you can wind up with "non standard" variations.
 
2012-11-09 12:45:27 PM

Coder: Math isn't invented, it is discovered.


I've been sayin' that shiat for years.
 
2012-11-09 04:58:41 PM

dark side of the moon: This (and many other reasons) is why I love you TMLO.


:D

*tip o' the hat*

Good to see back around the way, dark side of the moon!


ATRDCI: you are acute when you are angry


blipponaut: I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.


PC LOAD LETTER: These jokes are very derivative.


THIS WORDPLAY IS INTEGRAL TO THIS THREAD
 
2012-11-09 05:49:06 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: dark side of the moon: This (and many other reasons) is why I love you TMLO.

:D

*tip o' the hat*

Good to see back around the way, dark side of the moon!


ATRDCI: you are acute when you are angry

blipponaut: I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.

PC LOAD LETTER: These jokes are very derivative.

THIS WORDPLAY IS INTEGRAL TO THIS THREAD


Please try to be discrete. Yes, wordplay is standard. Deviation is permitted nonetheless.
 
2012-11-09 06:11:10 PM

doyner: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: dark side of the moon: This (and many other reasons) is why I love you TMLO.

:D

*tip o' the hat*

Good to see back around the way, dark side of the moon!


ATRDCI: you are acute when you are angry

blipponaut: I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.

PC LOAD LETTER: These jokes are very derivative.

THIS WORDPLAY IS INTEGRAL TO THIS THREAD

Please try to be discrete. Yes, wordplay is standard. Deviation is permitted nonetheless.


The remainder of this thread will be a sobering one.
 
2012-11-09 06:16:18 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: doyner: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: dark side of the moon: This (and many other reasons) is why I love you TMLO.

:D

*tip o' the hat*

Good to see back around the way, dark side of the moon!


ATRDCI: you are acute when you are angry

blipponaut: I see a convergence of the hearts happening here. Hawt.

PC LOAD LETTER: These jokes are very derivative.

THIS WORDPLAY IS INTEGRAL TO THIS THREAD

Please try to be discrete. Yes, wordplay is standard. Deviation is permitted nonetheless.

The remainder of this thread will be a sobering one.


Yeah. We need to get out of this mode....and I mean that.
 
Displayed 60 of 60 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report