Numb3rs: A Missed Opportunity for Mathematical Accuracy

[Hurkyl]

I have a headache. :yuck:

 

[Moonbear]

I have a headache. :yuck:

Yep, that's my opinion too! :yuck: It wasn't even a good cop show if you ignored the weird math. I'm still laughing about the garage though! I don't want to ruin it for anyone who wants to see this for themselves, because that actually had me really laughing. It's worth paying careful attention to the details! :rofl:

A few more time zones to go and then we can post the details.

 

[Icebreaker]

Well, would you expect them to spend 45 minutes of air time solving an equation?

"Mmm... wait... if we move x here. Hey Bob, what's the trig identity for sine squared x? Aaaaaah what do YOU know... ok, what if I expand these two and extract the constant..." *we'll be right back after these messages*
*and now back to Numb3rs* "... and thus, we integrate by parts by substituting..."

 

[motai]

Well, would you expect them to spend 45 minutes of air time solving an equation?

"Mmm... wait... if we move x here. Hey Bob, what's the trig identity for sine squared x? Aaaaaah what do YOU know... ok, what if I expand these two and extract the constant..." *we'll be right back after these messages*
*and now back to Numb3rs* "... and thus, we integrate by parts by substituting..."

Now that is something I would enjoy... but most of America would probably disagree.

 

[Moonbear]

Well, would you expect them to spend 45 minutes of air time solving an equation?

"Mmm... wait... if we move x here. Hey Bob, what's the trig identity for sine squared x? Aaaaaah what do YOU know... ok, what if I expand these two and extract the constant..." *we'll be right back after these messages*
*and now back to Numb3rs* "... and thus, we integrate by parts by substituting..."

It actually might have been more entertaining.

 

[Evo]

It actually might have been more entertaining.

This is killing me. The "math genius" is telling the FBI that "now that the suspects know you're aware of them, they will change how they operate". WOW, YA THINK? I'll bet the FBI, let alone anyone with half a brain would figure that out by themselves. I think it's called "common sense". But...NO...it's Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle!

Watching this reminded me why I don't watch network tv shows.

The math wiz "Charlie" looks like our very own genius hunk Gokul. :!) :!)

From this show I understand Charlie graduated from high school. What other schooling has he had?

Who is the guy with the post grad's that Charlie is supposed to talk to at the University? In what subject? This guy obviously is not in a Math related field (based on his conversations with Charlie)?
.
Charlie's guesses seemed to me based more on logic than math.

 

[Moonbear]

This is killing me. The "math genius" is telling the FBI that "now that the suspects know you're aware of them, they will change how they operate". WOW, YA THINK? I'll bet the FBI, let alone anyone with half a brain would figure that out by themselves. I think it's called "common sense". But...NO...it's Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle!

I was trying not to ruin this for those on Pacific Time. Or is it on in an earlier time slot there?

Watching this reminded me why I don't watch network tv shows.

Yep, the CSI roller coaster flying off the track was pretty impressive tonight though.

The math wiz "Charlie" looks like our very own genius hunk Gokul. :!) :!)

No WAY! Charlie is SOOOOO geeky! Gokul is way better looking than that! At least I think Gokul knows how to comb his hair.

From this show I understand Charlie graduated from high school. What other schooling has he had?

Well, it's perfectly clear he hasn't had any more schooling than that. He's a true pottery magician! :rofl: Did you see the garage yet?

Charlie's guesses seemed to me based more on logic than math.

There was logic in there? The math truly had no relevance, though it was funny to have the detectives running around saying, "We need a new equation!" :rofl:

 

[Evo]

Ooops, forgot about the Pacific time zone people. Oh well, if they're watching it, they aren't reading this.

The math truly had no relevance, though it was funny to have the detectives running around saying, "We need a new equation!"

I know, that was hysterical! :rofl:

 

[Moonbear]

I know, that was hysterical! :rofl:

See, it's actually very high brow entertainment. Only the very educated elite can appreciate that it's really a comedy and feel pity for those uneducated commoners who think it's a crime drama. :rofl:

 

[mattmns]

He played minesweeper? Dang I missed it. I, umm, recorded the wrong channel

 

[Moonbear]

He played minesweeper? Dang I missed it. I, umm, recorded the wrong channel

Yep, he was playing minesweeper. Apparently it led to the big revelation that cracked the whole case. :rofl: I thought it was hysterical that they did this close up dramatization of minesweeper buttons being clicked...you know how in CSI they do those gory "inside" views of the bullet trajectory through a body, it was sort of like they were trying to do this with a computer screen displaying minesweeper.

What channel did you record? Hopefully you didn't wind up with Medical Investigation and got something actually worth watching.

 

[mattmns]

Dang! I love minesweeper. I recorded comedy central, I was watching reno 911 before and I guess my vcr got on that channel or something, I was not paying attention I guess.

 

[Moonbear]

Okay, if anyone's watching this on Pacific time, it's already on and getting into the show, so we can probably safely give away details now...if you are reading this thread and still watching and don't want to read spoilers, stop here.


I was absolutely DYING as he was in the garage putting chalk boards up on the ceiling and climbing ladders to reach them. Who writes on the ceiling?! Especially when he didn't have any chalkboards down low on the wall. And where did all the chalk boards come from? Did he just have them lying around? Chalkboards, yes, not a computer. :rofl:

And, then I was looking at what was on the boards. One looked like it just had people's names on it. One of my friends has a very unusual name, and I swore I saw her name on it...I'm going to have to mention this to her now. Then, another just had terms on it with lines connecting them, but they weren't related words or anything. I swore the one across from him in the scenes where he was talking to the other math guy and they showed boards in the background just had drawings of envelopes on it. There was NO math on those boards that I saw despite the fact he claimed he was trying to solve an unsolveable equation. And then he made that comment about not being able to focus on anyone thing, even if was necessary, he just had to work on whatever was in his head at the time. :rofl: He's pure crackpot! :rofl:

 

[Moonbear]

Dang! I love minesweeper. I recorded comedy central, I was watching reno 911 before and I guess my vcr got on that channel or something, I was not paying attention I guess.

That's okay, you really didn't miss much. I'm sure whatever was on Comedy Central was better. At least it was supposed to be funny.

 

[franznietzsche]

This is killing me. The "math genius" is telling the FBI that "now that the suspects know you're aware of them, they will change how they operate". WOW, YA THINK? I'll bet the FBI, let alone anyone with half a brain would figure that out by themselves. I think it's called "common sense". But...NO...it's Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle!

YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME

I missed it (decided that headin over to my friends place took precedence).

They took Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and twisted it like that? OH MY GOD. Thats as bad as saying that according to HUP, once you see a giraffe mate, they'll change how you do because you observed them--HUP IS NOT EVEN APPLICABLE. Can i burn down CBS now? I mean, that's just plain bad. Not to mention insulting. I'm seriously insulted.

 

[Icebreaker]

Well, even as an analogy, it's poorly done: in HUP, the suspects will change his behaviour as soon as the police is observing suspects, regardless whether the suspects know that fact.

 

[Moonbear]

Well, even as an analogy, it's poorly done: in HUP, the suspects will change his behaviour as soon as the police is observing suspects, regardless whether the suspects know that fact.

HUP had nothing whatsoever to do with the example. How many generations of kids are we going to have to deprogram and reteach HUP to when they get to high school and college now? You know they'll remember the wrong explanation from TV far longer than what their teachers taught them.

They also fail to realize the difference between probability and certainty.

Maybe we should all write to CBS and tell them we'll be watching 20/20 from now on, and hope they cancel the show quickly, before it does too much damage.

 

[Icebreaker]

How would you rate the way the Nash equilibrium was "explained" in A Beautiful Mind?

 

[graphic7]

HUP had nothing whatsoever to do with the example. How many generations of kids are we going to have to deprogram and reteach HUP to when they get to high school and college now? You know they'll remember the wrong explanation from TV far longer than what their teachers taught them.

They also fail to realize the difference between probability and certainty.

Maybe we should all write to CBS and tell them we'll be watching 20/20 from now on, and hope they cancel the show quickly, before it does too much damage.

Or they could issue an advisory before the show starts stating, "This show is purely ficitious and nothing presented should be classified as factual."

Edit: This reminds me of the Dover, MA. school board issue several weeks ago, where they put the warning sticks on the biology textbooks.

 

[Moonbear]

Or they could issue an advisory before the show starts stating, "This show is purely ficitious and nothing presented should be classified as factual."

Do you really think warnings like that help? However, I now see a fun end-of-year lesson for a math/science class: watch an episode of the show and debunk it.

 

[Evo]

They took Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and twisted it like that? OH MY GOD. Thats as bad as saying that according to HUP, once you see a giraffe mate, they'll change how you do because you observed them--HUP IS NOT EVEN APPLICABLE.

That is exactly how it was explained! It's probably a good thing you missed it.

 

[polyb]

I had the unfortunate happenstance to be exposed breifly to some of the show, though I did ignore a lot of it. My first thought was who ever wrote this script either really liked the movie "Pi" or was part of the production. A lot of the equation flashing and 'cinematography' seemed to be right out of that movie. My next revulsion was some of the pseudo mystigogical pretense and worship of the 'wizard mathematician'. 'OOOH, he can write an equation, sooo mysterious' which in short relays a message about how only these mystical wizards with superpowers can actually do math! The gods must have placed them amongst us mere mortals! :grumpy:

My only hope is that perhaps someone on the show will put a drill to their head and end it if possible. GAWD, people get paid big bucks to come up this nonsense!

Side note: Reductio ad absurdun-there is truly only one operation in mathematics. Anyone care to guess?

 

[franznietzsche]

Well, even as an analogy, it's poorly done: in HUP, the suspects will change his behaviour as soon as the police is observing suspects, regardless whether the suspects know that fact.

No. Just no. HUP has absolutely nothing to do with it, not even remotely. Mathematically, HUP simply states:

$$\Delta x \Delta p > \frac{h}{2\pi}$$

Where delta x is uncertainty in position, and delta p is uncertainty in momentum, h is Planck's constant. h over 2 pi is often called h-bar, i just don't know how to enter that symbol in latex, but h over 2 pi is equivalent.

Its similar to the mention of HUP in Jurassic Park 2, which was marginally better, because what they stated was in fact a result of quantum theory, but it was not applicable to their situation, nor was it HUP.

only these mystical wizards with superpowers can actually do math!

But i am superman!

How would you rate the way the Nash equilibrium was "explained" in A Beautiful Mind?

That was not nearly as bad.

you can read his nobel prize seminar here http://nobelprize.org/economics/laureates/1994/nash-lecture.pdf

it says:

Nash proved by page 6 of his thesis that ever n-person finite non-cooperative game has at least one (Nash) equilibrium point. This is a profile of mixed strategies, one for each player, which is such that no one player can improve his payoff by changing his mixed strategy unilaterally.

In the scene where this is introduced, the situation is applicable, i mean its game theory, and a bunch of guys trying to get laid is mathematically speakin, classified as a game.

Its not a great explanation of the concept, but it stays in the realm of the concepts applicability.

 

[Icebreaker]

Wouldn't you describe an effect of HUP as being "changing the results by measuring?" What analogy would you form, then, to explain it?

 

[franznietzsche]

Wouldn't you describe an effect of HUP as being "changing the results by measuring?" What analogy would you form, then, to explain it?

No it does not change results by measurement. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

AAARRRRGGG.

Better analogy, compare a long duration photo graph of a dancer to a short duration. The first shows you their motion, but nothing about their position, the second tels you their position but nothnig about their motion. The point of HUP is that the better you know one, the less you know about the other.

The whole "measurement changes what you're observing" is from the double slit experiemt with electrons. IF you send electrons through two slits, one electron at a time, without obersving which slit they go through you get a diffraction pattern. If you do watch which slit they go through, individually, you don't. THAT IS NOT HUP.

And it doesn't apply to anything not on the quantum level. People do not change where they're driving to when i notice them speeding. Giraffe's don't change how they mate once we take not of it. IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

I really hate people who insist on think unscientifically. Quantum mechanics applys at the quantum level. HUP is meaningless for large obects because $$\frac{h}{2\pi}$$ is so small that its insignificant for humans. For electrons, its a very significant difference.

 

[Icebreaker]

You're too literal. You can certainly use an example, say, poking a beehive and the consequences thereof, as an analogy of Newton's third law.

 

[franznietzsche]

You're too literal. You can certainly use an example, say, poking a beehive and the consequences thereof, as an analogy of Newton's third law.

When speaking to a 3 year old, or person of equivalent intellect (read: the audience this show is meant for), then sure.

If you're trying to give a valid scientific explanation then no. If you're trying to pass off what you're saying as scientifically valid, then no.

 

[polyb]

But i am superman!

:rofl:

OK 'superman', able to solve an ODEs in a couple of lines, try this!

Reductio ad absurdum-there is truly only one operation in mathematics. Care to guess?

 

[franznietzsche]

:rofl:

OK 'superman', able to solve an ODEs in a couple of lines, try this!

Reductio ad absurdum-there is truly only one operation in mathematics. Care to guess?

ODEs are much easier than NLDEs, particularly second order ones. Bring out the programming skills for those.

As for the one true operation...

...this is probably wrong, but here is my guess and justification for:

Addition.

Subtraction is simply adddtion of a negative number.
Multiplication is simply repeated addition.
Division is repeated subtraction is repeated addition of a negative number.
Exponentiation is repeated multiplication is repeated addition.

Trig functions are not true operations, but functions.

 

[polyb]

ODEs are much easier than NLDEs, particularly second order ones. Bring out the programming skills for those.

As for the one true operation...

...this is probably wrong, but here is my guess and justification for:

Addition.

Subtraction is simply adddtion of a negative number.
Multiplication is simply repeated addition.
Division is repeated subtraction is repeated addition of a negative number.
Exponentiation is repeated multiplication is repeated addition.

Trig functions are not true operations, but functions.

YEEEAH! You should get a prize or a pretzel, just don't choke on it! :rofl: As absurd as it sounds, I have not found anything to counter the claim! Strange isn't it, you spend all this time really just learning snazzy ways of adding things up! :rofl:

You'll never find an exact solution to any NLDE, so you goto Euler's house or you call up that japanese pop band RK4. Plus as soon as you change the boundry conditions by an infinitesimal you get a completely different result. Now if you add noise though, some systems do tend to 'behave' more. The irony is that reality is a huge system of NLDE's and at best the ODEs are a first order apporixamtion of sorts!

 

[franznietzsche]

YEEEAH! You should get a prize or a pretzel, just don't choke on it! :rofl: As absurd as it sounds, I have not found anything to counter the claim! Strange isn't it, you spend all this time really just learning snazzy ways of adding things up! :rofl:

You'll never find an exact solution to any NLDE, so you goto Euler's house or you call up that japanese pop band RK4. Plus as soon as you change the boundry conditions by an infinitesimal you get a completely different result. Now if you add noise though, some systems do tend to 'behave' more. The irony is that reality is a huge system of NLDE's and at best the ODEs are a first order apporixamtion of sorts!

I just write a computer program to solve the NLDE's. Brute force runge-kutta algorithm. Inelegant, inefficient, but effective (i mean the way i tend to write code, not the runge-kutta algorithm itself. Well, actually i would consider it those things as well, now that i tihnk about it.)

 

[juvenal]

I didn't watch the second episode, but I talked to my Dad, who watched both. He thought the second was better than the first, and actually liked both of them. He does have a master's in applied math - but he's not exactly the first person I'd turn to if I wanted math questions answered. He didn't seem to be bothered by the chalkboards in the garage or minesweeper either. He also thought the first one was too heavy on the math stuff.

 

[Curious3141]

YEEEAH! You should get a prize or a pretzel, just don't choke on it! :rofl: As absurd as it sounds, I have not found anything to counter the claim! Strange isn't it, you spend all this time really just learning snazzy ways of adding things up! :rofl:

You'll never find an exact solution to any NLDE, so you goto Euler's house or you call up that japanese pop band RK4. Plus as soon as you change the boundry conditions by an infinitesimal you get a completely different result. Now if you add noise though, some systems do tend to 'behave' more. The irony is that reality is a huge system of NLDE's and at best the ODEs are a first order apporixamtion of sorts!

You could just as easily say the only "true" operation in math is the union set. Addition is based on the union set operation.

 

[franznietzsche]

You'll never find an exact solution to any NLDE, so you goto Euler's house or you call up that japanese pop band RK4. Plus as soon as you change the boundry conditions by an infinitesimal you get a completely different result.

I just got that, as i reread the quote in curious' post. I am ashamed. I would blame lack of sleep but there is no excuse really. And let's just say that doing iterations every 1/100000th of a second (using that as your stepsize i mean) really ups the accuracy.

 

[Zorodius]

You're too literal. You can certainly use an example, say, poking a beehive and the consequences thereof, as an analogy of Newton's third law.

You can, I guess, but it doesn't convey any accurate or meaningful information to do so.