Editing 2610: Assigning Numbers
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
+ | {{incomplete|Created by YÖDEL'S COMPLETENESS THEOREM - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} | ||
− | + | [[Cueball]] is falling into a common trap, because a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Faced with some sort of information, of an unknown kind but seemingly not intrinsically mathematical in nature, he has decided that one possible way to proceed is to somehow translate everthing into values which can be combined and compared numerically. | |
− | |||
− | [[Cueball]] is falling into a common trap, because a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Faced with some sort of information, of an unknown kind but seemingly not intrinsically mathematical in nature, he has decided that one possible way to proceed is to somehow translate | ||
This is a very common thing to do, in fields as diverse as {{w|computational linguistics}} or {{w|sports analytics}}, and can be a powerful tool for understanding and learning new things about a subject as {{w|Data science}} tries to extract knowledge and insights from potentially noisy and disordered facts. But it is also used to implement bad science by using incorrect or misguided ideas about how to represent the source material. While it's possible to casually assign numeric values to random pieces of data, these numbers are generally not meaningful enough to compute with and draw any useful inferences from. It is generally possible to perform statistical analysis only on actual measurements, not on what may effectively be arbitrarily-assigned values. | This is a very common thing to do, in fields as diverse as {{w|computational linguistics}} or {{w|sports analytics}}, and can be a powerful tool for understanding and learning new things about a subject as {{w|Data science}} tries to extract knowledge and insights from potentially noisy and disordered facts. But it is also used to implement bad science by using incorrect or misguided ideas about how to represent the source material. While it's possible to casually assign numeric values to random pieces of data, these numbers are generally not meaningful enough to compute with and draw any useful inferences from. It is generally possible to perform statistical analysis only on actual measurements, not on what may effectively be arbitrarily-assigned values. | ||
Line 19: | Line 18: | ||
So, as well as being the mechanism that underlies one of the most profound theorems of 20th century mathematics, it can be mis-used for all kinds of bad or misguided science. From Cueball's attitude, it is far from clear that his attempt will reliably translate his project into a numerical system, nor that his attempt to "do math on it!" will be any more competent. | So, as well as being the mechanism that underlies one of the most profound theorems of 20th century mathematics, it can be mis-used for all kinds of bad or misguided science. From Cueball's attitude, it is far from clear that his attempt will reliably translate his project into a numerical system, nor that his attempt to "do math on it!" will be any more competent. | ||
− | One of the major characters who looked at the concept is Kurt Gödel | + | One of the major characters who looked at the concept is Kurt Gödel he introduced the idea {{w|Gödel numbering}} with his landmark {{w|incompleteness theorems}}. In it a unique natural number is assigned to each atom, statement, and proof, which might otherwise be difficult to accurately process in any other kind of approach. Instead, it is now possible to create metamathematical statements in the language of mathematics. |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | As the formulation in use was itself definable with numbers, in doing so, Gödel also proved the existence of a statement that essentially said "this statement has no proof." If the statement could be proven, the statement would there be false, and the mathematics being used would be inconsistent. Gödel presumed that the only other possibility was that the statement is true without a mathematical proof, and therefore the mathematics of the system is incomplete; however, since the statement is self referencing, a third possibility exists: The statement might actually be paradoxical. (This third possibility is presented here http://dstoner.net/Math_Science/godel.html.) Gödel's theorem led to a fundamental reckoning in the world of mathematics when it was published. | |
The title text suggests that Gödel should perform such an analysis on different branches of mathematics, by calculating the average of all the fields' theorems' Gödel numbers. This is nonsensical for a number of reasons: | The title text suggests that Gödel should perform such an analysis on different branches of mathematics, by calculating the average of all the fields' theorems' Gödel numbers. This is nonsensical for a number of reasons: | ||
− | :1) Gödel is long dead, and dead people can't write articles | + | :1) Gödel is long dead, and dead people can't write articles{{citation needed}}; |
:2) Gödel numbers grow very large very quickly, and depend heavily on the specific values assigned to each logical operator. Therefore the results could be manipulated simply by changing the numbering order of each operator; | :2) Gödel numbers grow very large very quickly, and depend heavily on the specific values assigned to each logical operator. Therefore the results could be manipulated simply by changing the numbering order of each operator; | ||
− | :3) It may be very hard to gather all theorems in a field, or even a representative sample | + | :3) It may be very hard to gather all theorems in a field, or even a representative sample; |
− | If anyone were to attempt this form of analysis, it would be an example of the bad data science described in the | + | :4) Different fields of science, like biology or human behaviour, may not be able to write their theorems in the the mathematical language of Gödel's incompleteness theorem |
+ | If anyone were to attempt this form of analysis, it would be an example of the bad data science described in the title text. | ||
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | : | + | Cueball thinking while observing a whiteboard: If I assign numbers to each of these things, then it becomes ''data'', and I can do ''math'' on it! |
− | :The same basic idea underlies Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem and all bad data science. | + | |
+ | Caption: The same basic idea underlies Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem and all bad data science. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} | ||
{{comic discussion}} | {{comic discussion}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− |