[math-fun] Tenuous Associations
I have in front of me an article "The Mystery of Time" from "The Mongol Messenger", a Mongolian newspaper out of Ulaan Bataar, dated January 2002. This article was sent to me by a friend in the country, who thought I might find it of mathematical interest. The content of the article is quite entertaining, though of little mathematical merit. The author is apparently from the UK. I would consider the article a crackpot piece, though it appears to be well written and of a less confrontational tenor than many such articles I have read. It contains some interesting equations(sic). It is difficult to summarize the article, which seems to be a hodgepodge of mystical and mathematical associations revolving around the concept of time, but with no overriding premise or point. I have a mosaic scan of the article available upon request, about 6MB. The author seems to be fixated on certain historical dates, 1543 (Copernicus's heliocentric theory), 1618 (Kepler's laws), 1687 (Newton's Principia), 2001 (unified physics?), and 2060 (Newton's Last Judgment date?). The Hindu cycle (4320000000 years?) also figures prominent. All sorts of wondrous mathematical associations are used to justify or explain the significance of these dates. The types of things done in this article are common in crackpot literature, particularly the misuse of associations. Since mathematics is so rich in associations, and numbers are so pervasive in our affairs, its is only natural that unjustifiable mathematical associations between unrelated numbers would suggest themselves. And if you push it, you can find "significant" relationships between all sorts of unrelated numbers. I was wondering if there is a name for the practice of drawing tenuous assocations between unassociated entities from a rich association domain, and specifically, the practice of drawing mathematical associations between mathematically unrelated numbers? For instance, let us suppose I see special historical significance in the person of George Washington (which I do). I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association. First, we assume that George Washington's birth date is a significant determinant or indicator of his personal signficance, not an uncommon practice, certainly a major underpinning of astrology and other mystical arts. Then we assign his birth year the number 1732. This is a customary, but ultimately arbitrary number. It indicates that the Earth has orbited the sun somewhere between 1732 and 1733 times between the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ and the time of birth of George Washington. 1732 has a visual similarity to the number 1.732, an approximation to the square root of 3. The visual similarity rests on the peculiarities of our decimal notation, which itself rests on the number 10, presumably the number of fingers on our two hands. The actual mathematical association is 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)). I could take this exploration further, but suffice it to say that this obvious mystic significance I have assigned to George Washington is based on a not-so-simple mathematical relationship between several unrelated quantities, including the time of George Washington's birth, the time of Jesus Christ's birth, errors in the calculation of the latter date, the period of revolution of the Earth about the Sun, the number of fingers on the hands of human beings, and the arbitrary integers 3 and 1000. To which of these quantities does the relation 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)) lend significance? And certainly there are many other birth dates and events occuring in the year 1732 as we reckon it, which were not nearly so historically significant as the birth of George Washington, which leads us to question the force of the association. Is there a name for the inappropriate use of tenuous associations such as the one described above? If not there should be. Because numbers are rife with mathematical associations, and are so pervasive in our everyday experience, they lend themselves to this sort of abuse, and there should be a specific term for this type of abuse of numerical associations.
I was wondering if there is a name for the practice of drawing tenuous assocations between unassociated entities from a rich association domain, and specifically, the practice of drawing mathematical associations between mathematically unrelated numbers?
Applied Statistics? Thane Plambeck 650 321 4884 office 650 323 4928 fax http://www.plambeck.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Wilson" <davidwwilson@comcast.net> To: "Math Fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 1:51 PM Subject: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
I have in front of me an article "The Mystery of Time" from "The Mongol Messenger", a Mongolian newspaper out of Ulaan Bataar, dated January 2002. This article was sent to me by a friend in the country, who thought I might find it of mathematical interest. The content of the article is quite entertaining, though of little mathematical merit. The author is apparently from the UK.
I would consider the article a crackpot piece, though it appears to be well written and of a less confrontational tenor than many such articles I have read. It contains some interesting equations(sic). It is difficult to summarize the article, which seems to be a hodgepodge of mystical and mathematical associations revolving around the concept of time, but with no overriding premise or point. I have a mosaic scan of the article available upon request, about 6MB.
The author seems to be fixated on certain historical dates, 1543 (Copernicus's heliocentric theory), 1618 (Kepler's laws), 1687 (Newton's Principia), 2001 (unified physics?), and 2060 (Newton's Last Judgment date?). The Hindu cycle (4320000000 years?) also figures prominent. All sorts of wondrous mathematical associations are used to justify or explain the significance of these dates.
The types of things done in this article are common in crackpot literature, particularly the misuse of associations. Since mathematics is so rich in associations, and numbers are so pervasive in our affairs, its is only natural that unjustifiable mathematical associations between unrelated numbers would suggest themselves. And if you push it, you can find "significant" relationships between all sorts of unrelated numbers.
I was wondering if there is a name for the practice of drawing tenuous assocations between unassociated entities from a rich association domain, and specifically, the practice of drawing mathematical associations between mathematically unrelated numbers?
For instance, let us suppose I see special historical significance in the person of George Washington (which I do). I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association.
First, we assume that George Washington's birth date is a significant determinant or indicator of his personal signficance, not an uncommon practice, certainly a major underpinning of astrology and other mystical arts. Then we assign his birth year the number 1732. This is a customary, but ultimately arbitrary number. It indicates that the Earth has orbited the sun somewhere between 1732 and 1733 times between the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ and the time of birth of George Washington. 1732 has a visual similarity to the number 1.732, an approximation to the square root of 3. The visual similarity rests on the peculiarities of our decimal notation, which itself rests on the number 10, presumably the number of fingers on our two hands. The actual mathematical association is 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)).
I could take this exploration further, but suffice it to say that this obvious mystic significance I have assigned to George Washington is based on a not-so-simple mathematical relationship between several unrelated quantities, including the time of George Washington's birth, the time of Jesus Christ's birth, errors in the calculation of the latter date, the period of revolution of the Earth about the Sun, the number of fingers on the hands of human beings, and the arbitrary integers 3 and 1000. To which of these quantities does the relation 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)) lend significance? And certainly there are many other birth dates and events occuring in the year 1732 as we reckon it, which were not nearly so historically significant as the birth of George Washington, which leads us to question the force of the association.
Is there a name for the inappropriate use of tenuous associations such as the one described above? If not there should be. Because numbers are rife with mathematical associations, and are so pervasive in our everyday experience, they lend themselves to this sort of abuse, and there should be a specific term for this type of abuse of numerical associations.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
One must be cautious when dismissing associations with birthdates as tenuous or inappropriate. People are moulded and shaped by their birthdates because of the associations people assign to those dates. For example, I'm sure lots of "Y2K babies" born near midnight on Jan 1, 2000 will have their lives affected by semi-mystical associations with that otherwise meaningless date. Every leap year, certain lucky individuals get their 15 minutes of fame by being "old enough to vote" at age 72, or 18 if you count birthdays. My mother used to be taunted as a child because her birthday is April 20, which at the time was well known to be Hitler's birthday.
Expert witnesses for the plaintiff's bar ? At 02:29 PM 1/19/2004, Thane Plambeck wrote:
I was wondering if there is a name for the practice of drawing tenuous assocations between unassociated entities from a rich association domain, and specifically, the practice of drawing mathematical associations between mathematically unrelated numbers?
Applied Statistics?
Thane Plambeck 650 321 4884 office 650 323 4928 fax http://www.plambeck.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Wilson" <davidwwilson@comcast.net> To: "Math Fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 1:51 PM Subject: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
I have in front of me an article "The Mystery of Time" from "The Mongol Messenger", a Mongolian newspaper out of Ulaan Bataar, dated January 2002. This article was sent to me by a friend in the country, who thought I might find it of mathematical interest. The content of the article is quite entertaining, though of little mathematical merit. The author is apparently from the UK.
I would consider the article a crackpot piece, though it appears to be well written and of a less confrontational tenor than many such articles I have read. It contains some interesting equations(sic). It is difficult to summarize the article, which seems to be a hodgepodge of mystical and mathematical associations revolving around the concept of time, but with no overriding premise or point. I have a mosaic scan of the article available upon request, about 6MB.
The author seems to be fixated on certain historical dates, 1543 (Copernicus's heliocentric theory), 1618 (Kepler's laws), 1687 (Newton's Principia), 2001 (unified physics?), and 2060 (Newton's Last Judgment date?). The Hindu cycle (4320000000 years?) also figures prominent. All sorts of wondrous mathematical associations are used to justify or explain the significance of these dates.
The types of things done in this article are common in crackpot literature, particularly the misuse of associations. Since mathematics is so rich in associations, and numbers are so pervasive in our affairs, its is only natural that unjustifiable mathematical associations between unrelated numbers would suggest themselves. And if you push it, you can find "significant" relationships between all sorts of unrelated numbers.
I was wondering if there is a name for the practice of drawing tenuous assocations between unassociated entities from a rich association domain, and specifically, the practice of drawing mathematical associations between mathematically unrelated numbers?
For instance, let us suppose I see special historical significance in the person of George Washington (which I do). I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association.
First, we assume that George Washington's birth date is a significant determinant or indicator of his personal signficance, not an uncommon practice, certainly a major underpinning of astrology and other mystical arts. Then we assign his birth year the number 1732. This is a customary, but ultimately arbitrary number. It indicates that the Earth has orbited the sun somewhere between 1732 and 1733 times between the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ and the time of birth of George Washington. 1732 has a visual similarity to the number 1.732, an approximation to the square root of 3. The visual similarity rests on the peculiarities of our decimal notation, which itself rests on the number 10, presumably the number of fingers on our two hands. The actual mathematical association is 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)).
I could take this exploration further, but suffice it to say that this obvious mystic significance I have assigned to George Washington is based on a not-so-simple mathematical relationship between several unrelated quantities, including the time of George Washington's birth, the time of Jesus Christ's birth, errors in the calculation of the latter date, the period of revolution of the Earth about the Sun, the number of fingers on the hands of human beings, and the arbitrary integers 3 and 1000. To which of these quantities does the relation 1732 = floor(1000 * sqrt(3)) lend significance? And certainly there are many other birth dates and events occuring in the year 1732 as we reckon it, which were not nearly so historically significant as the birth of George Washington, which leads us to question the force of the association.
Is there a name for the inappropriate use of tenuous associations such as the one described above? If not there should be. Because numbers are rife with mathematical associations, and are so pervasive in our everyday experience, they lend themselves to this sort of abuse, and there should be a specific term for this type of abuse of numerical associations.
Quoting David Wilson <davidwwilson@comcast.net>:
[...] I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association. [...] the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ [...]
Come on, now! 3 is the number of members constituting a trinity, ... What more association do you want? - hvm ------------------------------------------------- Obtén tu correo en www.correo.unam.mx UNAMonos Comunicándonos
If you look at http://groups.google.com/groups?q=steve+gray+group:alt.bible.errancy&hl=en&l , a Google site whose contents are impossible for me to fake, you will see that I actually predicted that a disaster would happen on 9/11/01, by combining certain numbers from the Bible. However, before I can claim to be the New Nostradamus, I must confess that it was a joke. I was making the point to some dingbat Christian that if enough people play with enough numbers, someone is bound to create an amazing accident. Steve Gray ----- Original Message ----- From: <mcintosh@servidor.unam.mx> To: "math-fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:35 PM Subject: Re: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
Quoting David Wilson <davidwwilson@comcast.net>:
[...] I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association. [...] the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ [...]
Come on, now! 3 is the number of members constituting a trinity, ... What more association do you want?
- hvm
------------------------------------------------- Obtén tu correo en www.correo.unam.mx UNAMonos Comunicándonos
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
A while ago, I searched for 9-11 predictions on usenet. I check my records, and I did find your prediction at http://groups.google.com/groups?q=prophecy++%22september+11+2001%22&hl=en&lr.... Also, you can look at http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22olli+saarikoski%22+%22world+trade+cente... where there is something that could possibly be interpreted as predictiong 9-11, although the post is in some weird language possibly Finish. Amazingly, out of all the crazy predictions posted to usenet, Steve Gray was only one to come up with the correct date. I wonder many other people have found your prediction. Anyway, have people contacted you, thinking that you are a prophet, or something? Gershon Bialer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Gray" <stevebg@adelphia.net> To: "math-fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:27 PM Subject: Re: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
If you look at
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=steve+gray+group:alt.bible.errancy&hl=en&l
, a Google site whose contents are impossible for me to fake, you will see that I actually predicted that a disaster would happen on 9/11/01, by combining certain numbers from the Bible. However, before I can claim to be the New Nostradamus, I must confess that it was a joke. I was making the point to some dingbat Christian that if enough people play with enough numbers, someone is bound to create an amazing accident.
Steve Gray
----- Original Message ----- From: <mcintosh@servidor.unam.mx> To: "math-fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:35 PM Subject: Re: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
Quoting David Wilson <davidwwilson@comcast.net>:
[...] I notice that his birth year, 1732 is reminiscent of sqrt(3) = 1.732+, and from that propose some sort of mystic significance. So let us drag down this mystic association. [...] the unknown and probably incorrect time of the birth of Jesus Christ [...]
Come on, now! 3 is the number of members constituting a trinity, ... What more association do you want?
- hvm
------------------------------------------------- Obtén tu correo en www.correo.unam.mx UNAMonos Comunicándonos
_______________________________________________ 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
Only 2 or 3 people have contacted me about 9/11, not including the ones whom I thought would be most interested, namely skeptics interested in showing that if enough monkeys play with enough numbers, one of them will hit the jackpot. One respondent suggested that the terrorists themselves saw my post and chose the date on that basis. I hope not. I claimed to be a prophet only to those brain-dead Christians who insist on predicting things based on Biblical numerbation. I have more respect for everyone else. Steve Gray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gershon Bialer" <gersh@bialer.com> To: "math-fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations A while ago, I searched for 9-11 predictions on usenet. I check my records, and I did find your prediction at http://groups.google.com/groups?q=prophecy++%22september+11+2001%22&hl=en&lr.... Also, you can look at http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22olli+saarikoski%22+%22world+trade+cente... where there is something that could possibly be interpreted as predictiong 9-11, although the post is in some weird language possibly Finish. Amazingly, out of all the crazy predictions posted to usenet, Steve Gray was only one to come up with the correct date. I wonder many other people have found your prediction. Anyway, have people contacted you, thinking that you are a prophet, or something? Gershon Bialer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Gray" <stevebg@adelphia.net> To: "math-fun" <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:27 PM Subject: Re: [math-fun] Tenuous Associations
If you look at
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=steve+gray+group:alt.bible.errancy&hl=en&l
, a Google site whose contents are impossible for me to fake, you will see that I actually predicted that a disaster would happen on 9/11/01, by combining certain numbers from the Bible. However, before I can claim to be the New Nostradamus, I must confess that it was a joke. I was making the point to some dingbat Christian that if enough people play with enough numbers, someone is bound to create an amazing accident.
Steve Gray
participants (7)
-
Dave Dyer -
David Wilson -
Gershon Bialer -
Henry Baker -
mcintosh＠servidor.unam.mx -
Steve Gray -
Thane Plambeck