Skip to main content

The Raven's Hat - Jonas Peters and Nicolai Meinshausen ***

This book promises something intriguing - 'a series of engaging games that seem unsolvable - but that can be solved when they are translated into mathematical terms.' Such a title succeeds or fails on two key aspects of that promise - are the games engaging and are the mathematical solutions comprehensible to the general reader.

Before getting into the detail, I must say that I loved the illustrations by Malte Meinshausen, featuring characters that are an endearing cross between a raven and the old 'Spy vs Spy' illustrations in Mad magazine. As will become clear, I do have some difficulty with the content as far as the general reader is concerned, though some will definitely find it interesting.

Are the games engaging? I'd say mostly not. The first, which features hat colour guessing, is the most so, as it's just about imaginable playing it as a real game. Similarly, there's a magic trick involving a pack of cards that feels as if it could just about be usable as a genuine card trick (even though it's a card trick where the magician is said to only have 84% chance of success, which seems a bit low to be truly successful.) Those apart, though, the game formats are so convoluted that they become abstractions rather anything that's imaginable as a game you would play.

How about the solutions? They are quite difficult to get your head around and aren't broken down well enough for the non-mathematician to really grasp them. They also generally seem too complex for anyone but a maths wizard to remember how to make use of in reality. And it can also be difficult to pick up on exactly what is meant. 

So, for example, in the hat colour game, players are given red or blue hats without seeing their own hats. They can't talk to each other, but after a few seconds, when asked, they have to hold up a sign with the answer to 'What colour is your hat?' of 'Red', 'Blue' or '?'. We are then asked the best strategy, which seems to involve the players deciding together what they should do - but we were told they can't talk to each other. When it comes to solutions of this game, we are told 'the key to success will be to "collect" the wrong answers in single instances of the game' as this will bundle 'the false guesses into the same game and spread out the correct guesses over as many games as possible.' But there was no suggestion up front the game was to be played multiple times - and the concept of bundling up false guesses feels wrong, so needs more explanation.

Similarly, for the card trick, the mechanism requires the pre-ordered pack to be riffle shuffled three times. I have never seen a real card trick, where the audience member is told a mechanism for shuffling - they are just asked to shuffle the cards (personally I would alternate overhand shuffles and riffle shuffles). As soon as the mechanism is forced on them, it immediately becomes suspect.

That all sounds a touch negative - but I would stress again that those who are deeply into the theory and mathematics of games will no doubt find this book extremely intriguing. It's just that there's an opportunity missed for it to reach a wider audience.

Paperback:

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

On Time - Jim Al-Khalili *****

By a small margin Jim Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics is my favourite of his books, both because the 'three pillars' concept at its heart works so well - but also because it's short. On Time is somewhat heavier, but thankfully not a wrist-buster. It might seem at first sight odd that a book on a subset of physics is considerably longer than one covering the whole thing, but time is one of those subjects that inevitably involves considerable complexities and needs depth. As Al-Khalili establishes, it's hard to think of any other scientific concept where our perception of it - what he refers to as manifest time or psychological time - is so different from the view from physics. Some physicists go so far as to suggest that time doesn't exist at all. In the book, Al-Khalili sets out (to my mind quite successfully) both to explain why they think this is the case, but also why it's not the best interpretation of time. I'd certainly note that I...
Post a Comment
Read more