Skip to main content

Numbercrunch - Oliver Johnson ***

A classic curate's egg of a book. Some aspects of it are brilliant, but there is enough that isn't to make it frustrating. Wisely, Oliver Johnson decided to do a book on very practical aspects of maths - applications that are a wonderful counter to the old moan at school of 'but what use is it to me?' This is great, but two aspects are less positive. One is that this would be a sensible argument if we taught school students this stuff. Just as I think we should teach interesting physics, this is genuinely interesting maths that doesn't necessarily involve more work to learn the basics. But we don't. The second issue is that Johnson decided to do maths without formulae and equations.

This is a common enough practice in popular science, where you can often get away without the mathematics, but in popular maths it is a real stumbling block. When, for example, Johnson is telling us about Bayesian methods - really useful stuff - rather than presenting us a with a very straightforward formula we have to deal with hard-to-grasp wording like using 'the "top divided by bottom-minus-top" rule'. I admit I'm comfortable with mathematical symbols, but getting my head round this kind of presentation was far too like hard work.

Despite this, there's a lot of good material covered. I particularly enjoyed the section looking at gambling odds - I understand probabilities, but I've never been able to get my head round a presentation of these like '3 to 1 on', and Johnson makes this approach clear, pointing out some of its uses (though I still find it less transparent that a straightforward probability). Another example where I got something useful out of it is an exploration of where using logarithmic plots is more effective than straightforward presentation of the numbers. Johnson demonstrates this well, though I feel he is so enamoured with log presentation, that he didn't seem aware of examples such as Moore's law, where the data is almost always presented logarithmically and I think this hides away just how dramatic the growth has been.

We get some good material on the way we struggle with randomness (and its implications), the basics of information theory and the usefulness of understanding Markov chains, the effectiveness of estimation in some cases (and the dubious nature of over-precise numbers) and significantly more. In all this, a little relaxation of the urge to avoid any mathematical representation would have helped.

I did have a couple of other issues that were personal and others might not have found them a problem. Johnson worked mathematically on the COVID pandemic and in all his main topics this features heavily. I find this a particularly unhelpful example to explain the maths because it is so out of or ordinary experience (and feels like a dream world now). The whole point of the book is to illustrate 'what use is it to me?' - it certainly was useful to Johnson and his colleagues in the pandemic, but less so to the rest of us. Of course, we all experienced the pandemic, but not in a way that can be seen as relating to everyday life. Johnson also used a number of sporting examples, which I find off-putting in the extreme - but I appreciate that there are plenty of potential readers who would find them entertaining.

Overall it's a great idea for a book, the areas Johnson cover are fascinating, and he knows his stuff. The book is worth having. But it would have benefited from more awareness of what makes a piece of popular maths writing a good read.

Paperback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support our online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all reviews and Brian's online articles or subscribe free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more