Re: [math-fun] Stephen Hawking censored ?
wvv - first American edition, first printing, with the complete number row and with the later-suppressed text at page 131; 198 pp., hardcover, near fine in a near fine dust jacket
Didn't Hawking say that his publisher discouraged him from putting equations into the book, claiming that each equation would cut down his readership by 50%? Maybe there was an equation that he originally included and that his editors convinced him to leave out. That might be considered "suppression" by some. Jim Propp
Let's see: p = 0.5 P[a person reads a message with n equations] = p^n, so P[you are reading this EMail] = 1/16 (see below). Seems like some sort of self-referencing or self-interfering phenomenon. I.e., I will always have P[you are reading this] <= .5, unless I don't have it, in which case it could be 100%. :-) -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of James Propp Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 9:00 PM To: math-fun@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [math-fun] Stephen Hawking censored ?
wvv - first American edition, first printing, with the complete number row and with the later-suppressed text at page 131; 198 pp., hardcover, near fine in a near fine dust jacket
Didn't Hawking say that his publisher discouraged him from putting equations into the book, claiming that each equation would cut down his readership by 50%? Maybe there was an equation that he originally included and that his editors convinced him to leave out. That might be considered "suppression" by some. Jim Propp _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
I'm probably a bit weird, but the credulity of an assertion goes up with the number of equations used to prove the assertion (provided they're correct). -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Cordwell, William R Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:56 AM To: math-fun Subject: [math-fun] Schroedinger's EMail Let's see: p = 0.5 P[a person reads a message with n equations] = p^n, so P[you are reading this EMail] = 1/16 (see below). Seems like some sort of self-referencing or self-interfering phenomenon. I.e., I will always have P[you are reading this] <= .5, unless I don't have it, in which case it could be 100%. :-) -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of James Propp Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 9:00 PM To: math-fun@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [math-fun] Stephen Hawking censored ?
wvv - first American edition, first printing, with the complete number row and with the later-suppressed text at page 131; 198 pp., hardcover,
near fine in a near fine dust jacket
Didn't Hawking say that his publisher discouraged him from putting equations into the book, claiming that each equation would cut down his readership by 50%? Maybe there was an equation that he originally included and that his editors convinced him to leave out. That might be considered "suppression" by some. Jim Propp _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
So, should we trust your claim? :-) -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Payton, Paul Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:02 AM To: math-fun Subject: Re: [math-fun] Schroedinger's EMail I'm probably a bit weird, but the credulity of an assertion goes up with the number of equations used to prove the assertion (provided they're correct). -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Cordwell, William R Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:56 AM To: math-fun Subject: [math-fun] Schroedinger's EMail Let's see: p = 0.5 P[a person reads a message with n equations] = p^n, so P[you are reading this EMail] = 1/16 (see below). Seems like some sort of self-referencing or self-interfering phenomenon. I.e., I will always have P[you are reading this] <= .5, unless I don't have it, in which case it could be 100%. :-) -----Original Message----- From: math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:math-fun-bounces+cordwell=sandia.gov@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of James Propp Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 9:00 PM To: math-fun@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [math-fun] Stephen Hawking censored ?
wvv - first American edition, first printing, with the complete number row and with the later-suppressed text at page 131; 198 pp., hardcover,
near fine in a near fine dust jacket
Didn't Hawking say that his publisher discouraged him from putting equations into the book, claiming that each equation would cut down his readership by 50%? Maybe there was an equation that he originally included and that his editors convinced him to leave out. That might be considered "suppression" by some. Jim Propp _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
On 5/5/09, Payton, Paul <paul.payton@lmco.com> wrote:
I'm probably a bit weird, but the credulity of an assertion
"Credibility", I think ...
goes up with the number of equations used to prove the assertion (provided they're correct).
x^2 - 1 = (x-1)(x+1); \Del^2 \phi = 2 \pi \rho. Now do you believe me? WFL
participants (4)
-
Cordwell, William R -
Fred lunnon -
James Propp -
Payton, Paul