Book Review-Do Dice Play God: The Mathematics of Uncertainty

By Ian Stewart

This is the book that I was very eager to read because of the subject: the mathematics of uncertainty. I read it in parallel with The Art of Statistics by David Spiegelhalter because I felt the combination of the two books on similar topics from two different directions would make the reading experience more complete as the two books should complement one another. It was mentally challenging to read both books together, but I am glad I did because my goal was accomplished: they were indeed complementary. There were certain areas where the books overlapped but it was good retrieval practice to go over some of those areas at spaced intervals.

The book comprises of 18 chapters. The first two chapters sets the tone for Stewart.  By defining the six ages of uncertainty in Chapter One, Stewart proceeds to converse about some of the things that humankind has been using to deal with uncertainty and to predict the future. He follows that initial setting of the stage with a qualitative discussion of the idea of probability and statistics. It is a difficult task because it is easier to discuss probability and statistics in terms of the equations. Even with that caveat, Stewart did an excellent job of explaining quantitative concepts qualitatively, it takes someone who deeply understands the ideas, in all their glory, to be able to pull it off, and Stewart did so. This is not to say that the book is completely devoid of numbers and figures, but it was enlightening to be reading about these concepts without equations and mathematics.

The book then proceeds into many topics about uncertainty and randomness. He shares an abundance of examples and evidence which demonstrates the idea. It sometimes feel like an unrelenting onslaught of different cases in different areas, regarding different problems. The examples  come from mathematics, biology, medicine, physics, numerical systems, and many more, which gives proper perspective to the reader as well elicits an understanding about the universality of uncertainty in our reality.  The main topics that I had struggles with,  and that is true of Spiegelhalter's book as well, is the section on the Bayesian probability, even though Stewart did a masterful job of explaining it. I understand Baysian ideas after having read both but I am still easily confused when trying to apply the idea.

Stewart lost me with his explanation of quantum mechanics and the counter intuitive ideas from quantum mechanics. It was a difficult section to read, even though I was exposed to the idea when I was a young engineering student. On the other hand, when Stewart expounded on the ideas of  dynamical systems, he made perfect sense, as I was thinking about  Lorenz attractors when I was studying dynamical systems as a graduate student.  Since I had understood those equations as equations,  it was not much of a leap for me to understand them as applications which made the mathematics more sensible.

As the reader work their way through the book, they will find themselves doing many mental gymnastics with the mathematics that he does present, but he does an excellent job of explaining  why these concepts are so important to us.

The last chapter is the magnum opus chapter that Professor Stewart uses as his platform to summarize his intention with the book. His key intent is to make the general audience become aware and comfortable with the fact that uncertainty is a normal part of life. Professor Stewart has work diligently throughout the book to chip away at our enduring and grossly erroneous belief that our lives are deterministic, and that any uncertainty that we admit or accept is not something that we overcome easily or can be disregarded because the uncertainty plays a very large role in how our lives will often result.

A quick summary of all the topics that that had been discussed ends the book. In returning to these topics while reading these short pages, the reader realizes the extensive number of  topics that Professor Stewart had discussed; more importantly, the reader finally understands the lessons that Professor Stewart is trying to teach us. He started with the basic ideas of how human beings dealt with uncertainty. As humanity progressed along the timeline, we got better at rationalizing some of the uncertainties, and we thought we were able to minimize the uncertainties. We invented tools like statistics and probability; we deliberately tested and  experimented to arrive at what we thought was the truth. Even though this book is not the definitive history of uncertainty in our world, this book does very well in filling some of the obvious gaps in our thinking and dispels enough biases to make the readers at least accept the fact that life itself is uncertain and full of mystery.

I thought the book was a marvelous read even though it was particularly challenging. Professor Stewart explained many different concepts very well, some better than others, but the overall effect is that the reader can gain a much better understanding of how little and how much we know about our world and appreciate how much guessing we are doing on a daily basis.

Book Review-Quack this Way. Conversation between Bryan A. Garner and David Foster Wallace

Quack this way is a transcript of a 67-minute-long interview between David Foster Wallace and Bryan A Garner. David Foster Wallace is a writer of extraordinary renown. He is a hero amongst the younger writers while practicing his art as a novelist, short story, and magazine writer. He is known as a real polymath:  he was a  mathematician, philosopher, and logician. Bryan Garner,  whose name was not well known to me, wrote the definitive American Usage dictionary titled:  Garners Modern American Usage. It has been favorably compared to Fowler’s Usage Dictionary for American English. I had not known about the usage dictionary until I read about Garner and as soon as I learned about it I bought it.  It is a treasure trove for anyone who even pretends to be a writer.

What started the friendship was that David Foster Wallace wrote a very complimentary review of the Garner’s Dictionary of American Usage. Harpers condensed it to a publishable length and published it. Wallace felt that they had cut out what he considered to be essential in his review, so he published it in his own book of articles called Consider the Lobster in its full length. He felt very strongly about that review.  Garner and  Wallace became good friends and they kept in touch through emails and phone calls; they've actually only met twice in person. This is the transcript of the second time. Garner was able to film their conversation in an LA hotel  to preserve for eternity, and we are lucky to still have this recording.

If you were to tell me that I would be geeking out over a book about English usage I would call you crazy, but it is indeed a crazy kind of intellectual stimulus that makes me happy these days. The  transcript is short, but chock full of very deep insights and repartee. The interview took place in February of 2006, the subject is language and writing. They started out with Garner asking Wallace about the advice Wallace ˗ who was teaching writing at Claremont College at the time ˗ what key things he wants to get through to his students. Much of what he had to say is philosophical in nature,  he does get into the nitty gritty details of communicating in English and it's obvious that he loves what he does, the intricacies, the mental turns, and the technical details. In fact, both of  them have the passion; that came through clearly in the interview.

Wallace riffs about the writer’s job, amongst other things. How he needs to teach the  very bright and gifted students and how he enjoys the challenges. He does go off into the wild about some esoteric writing foibles as well as specific types of writing, such as writing for the law and  marketing. As an example, he also delves into the use of passive versus active voice, as he is not an absolutist in that regard, and he makes the point that it is all about what you need to convey which should finally dictate the voice.

Eventually, Garner and Wallace gets into the book review that brought them together. Wallace talking about the deeper points that he wanted to make with the review, but which was edited out by the Harper’s editors.

Reading this transcript made me wish to have been present for the conversation itself and to have the chance to interject, asking both Wallace and Garner questions because as an enthusiastic amateur, I am just beginning to  appreciating the black art of communicating in English through writing,  I'm now coming around to being able to understand enough to be able to understand the art, beyond just appreciating.