Nullity and Nonsense

Pat found this article on the BBC site and passed it along to me. The story is about a professor of computer science at the University of Reading who thinks that by calling the result of dividing any number by zero "Nullity," he has solved a 1,200 year old math problem and fixed a programming problem that could kill people in one fell swoop. Addressing these claims in reverse order:

(A) Programmers have been using this solution for decades, and it was no big deal when it was developed in the first place -- they just called their solution "NaN" (Not a Number) instead of "Nullity."

(B) The professor's claim and the BBC's tone make it sound like naming "Nullity" is of a kind with building a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. With "Nullity," there was no problem to be solved, and a solution which simply renames an existing solution wouldn't be much of a breakthrough, anyway.

For a better explanation of the numerous problems with the BBC article in question, read this. And check out the comments on the original BBC article -- they go on and on, covering nearly every conceivable reaction: angry, funny, nasty, apologist, etc.

Pat didn't understand why dividing by zero was so problematic, so he IM'd me. I explained why (or tried to), and Pat turned our IM conversation into this post on the Clog.

The most notable part of the post, however, is in the setup preceding the IM transcript, where Pat introduces me as the Clog's Senior Math Nerd. My parents will be so proud.

String theory

A few weeks ago, I had my first CityPaper byline in about a year. I should write more. Anyway, here's the article. It's a review of two recent books, The Trouble With Physics by Lee Smolin and Not Even Wrong by Peter Woit, that criticize string theory. I guess I cover the string theory beat for the CityPaper, since I wrote this (it's the fifth one from the top) a few years ago, too.

Writing about books written by people with Ph.D.'s in math and/or physics can be a little intimidating when:

* they're writing about the things they know well
* your math education stopped shortly after advanced calculus and functional analysis

One of the author/scientists, Peter Woit, has a blog which conveniently sports the same name as his book. The site is pretty interesting and lively, although some of the posts and/or comments won't make sense to you unless you've had at least a few years in a doctoral program in physics somewhere, which rules me out. There's a page tracking all of the reviews of his book, including a link to mine.

Lastly, this guy left a thoughtful (and positive!) comment on my article. I owe him a response, although the prospect of entering into a dialogue on string theory with someone who knows way more about it than I do is, like writing the original review, a little intimidating.