Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Should More Math and Equations Be Used In the Popular Press?

Posted by Soulskill on from the readers-shouldn't-be-distracted-from-drooling-on-their-shoes dept.

raque writes "The NY Times recently published two op-eds in their Philosophy section, The Stone, discussing how Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle is abused. The second is a followup to the first. The author struggled to make clear his point and left the impression he was creating a strawman argument. In his followup he said he was avoiding equations because he was writing for a general audience. I replied to both articles, asking whether showing some basic equations would have worked better, allowing math to illustrate where metaphors struggled. Now I'm asking the same question to everyone on Slashdot. Would Dr. Callendar have been better off just diving in and dealing with Heisenberg and quantum mechanics using the tools that were developed for it?"

5 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. I just say by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Probability that more maths equations should be used > 0

  2. Definitely by burisch_research · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Without math, it's impossible to convey what you're trying to convey. The press is way too dumbed down already, and many times I've read science stories that are just plain misleading as they try to simplify the message.

    Putting equations into news stories means that some people won't understand them, but most importantly it will encourage some of those people to investigate further, and learn how to read equations. If there's no math in the popular press in the first place, then there's no incentive for people to improve themselves.

    --
    char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    1. Re:Definitely by martijn+hoekstra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Without math, it's impossible to convey what you're trying to convey. The press is way too dumbed down already, and many times I've read science stories that are just plain misleading as they try to simplify the message.

      Putting equations into news stories means that some people won't understand them, but most importantly it will encourage some of those people to investigate further, and learn how to read equations. If there's no math in the popular press in the first place, then there's no incentive for people to improve themselves.

      no equations doesn't mean no math. Equations generally do a pretty poor job in explaining things. I'd much rather read an article containing "because acceleration is inversely proportional to mass" than one containing "because F=ma"

  3. Most Ph.D. don't read mathematics by jarek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've written lots of reports with math formulas (in Latex) where they are needed. Most, if not all, the intended readers have a Ph.D. in experimental physics or optics but I noticed that unless the math is really trivial, they will not follow. Even the slightest math supported reasoning will throw them off. That experience tells me that math for the general audience is probably not a good idea. It is simply pointless the be correct if you are not coming across. Who hears the tree falling in the forest.

  4. Re:Betteridge by hweimer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Betteridge's Law of Headlines says no.

    And at least in this particular case, "no" is indeed the correct answer. Equations can never be a substitute for actual understanding. You can use equations to develop understanding by starting from an earlier point and transform the initial equation to establish a new fact. But where do you start with quantum mechanics? "Quantum states are being represented by rays in a complex Hilbert space"?

    If anything, equations can be used to create an argumentum ad auctoritatem, and I'm not sure that this is a good thing.

    --
    OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software