Monthly Archive for November, 2009

What Are You Surest Of?

Among the things you’re sure of, which are you surest of? For Richard Dawkins, writing in the Wall Street Journal, it’s the theory of evolution:

We know, as certainly as we know anything in science, that [evolution] is the process that has generated life on our own planet.

Now, I would be thunderstruck if the theory of evolution turned out to be fundamentally wrong, but not nearly so thunderstruck as if arithmetic turned out to be inconsistent. In fact, I can think of quite a few things I’m more sure about than evolution. For example:

1. The consistency of arithmetic. (This amounts to saying that a single arithmetic problem can’t have two different correct answers.)

2. The existence of conscious beings other than myself.

3. The fact that the North won the American Civil War. (That is, historians are not universally mistaken about this. I am not interested in quibbling about what constitutes a “win”; I mean to assert that the North won in the everyday sense of the word, as reported in all the history texts.)
Continue reading ‘What Are You Surest Of?’

Share

Today’s the Day

I once owned a book where page 317, in its entirety, read as follows:

ERRATA

On page 317, change ERRATA to ERRATUM.

It’s a good thing I didn’t steal that joke. Because as it happens, The Big Questions contains an actual erratum. True, it’s only two missing letters. But of all the letters in the book, these are probably the two I’d least like to have seen go missing.

Fortunately, I discovered this erratum within minutes of receiving my first hardcover books a couple of weeks ago, and the Free Press division of Simon and Schuster sprang into action. Everyone, from the publisher to the editorial assistants to the warehouse managers, understood immediately that we needed to fix this. Better yet, they kept me involved and informed throughout the process, which contrasts dramatically with experiences I’ve had with other publishers.

finalDoubly fortunately, I happened to pour out my woes to the brilliant psychometrician Ellen Julian, who suggested that we make up cards much like the one illustrated here and somehow get them into the tens of thousands of books that were scheduled to leave the warehouse the following Monday morning. (This was a Thursday.) The Free Press made it happen in a day, and all would have been well had I not awakened on Saturday to the sickening realization that the cards contained the wrong URL. Now it was the weekend and too late to have new cards made in-house.
Continue reading ‘Today’s the Day’

Share

Hot Air

Steve Levitt and Steve Dubner, the SuperFreakonomics guys (formerly the Freakonomics guys) have raised a lot of temperatures with their chapter on global warming. The backlash began with Paul Krugman, who in turn was neatly skewered by several authors, but most effectively by the journalist Ari Armstrong.

The critics have raised two objections that come perilously close to contradicting each other: First, Levitt and Dubner are accused of minimizing the problem. Second, they are accused of overeagerness to solve the problem, as opposed to, say, demonizing the responsible parties. Of these, only the first deserves to be taken seriously.

Continue reading ‘Hot Air’

Share

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Physics

In The Big Questions (pages 18-19) I talk (channeling the physicist Eugene Wigner) about the apparently unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in revealing truths about the physical world. In Wigner’s words, “It is difficult to avoid the impression that a miracle confronts us here.”

But the physicist Peter Landsberg (no relation!) observes that sometimes the miracle runs in the opposite direction, and offers a curious use of physical reasoning to reveal a purely mathematical truth!

Continue reading ‘The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Physics’

Share