Stats is intuitive in discrete (dice, coins, balls in urns), unintuitive in continuous. Calculus is opposite. This has deep effects.
-
-
Replying to @vgr
Calculus being more natural on continuum means discrete realities feel like approximations. You try to go more fine-grained for better truth
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
Calculus is more fundamentally indeterminate view of the world: zoom in enuf (and you can do so infinitely in continuous), more bits appear
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Stats on the other hand, leads naturally to determinacy through finiteness. Like discrete set of futures with countable branching structure
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Of course, at limit, this gets to philosophical imponderables like quantum scale, or digital vs. regular physics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
You get misled when you cherry pick example like predictability of space orbits as "proof" of precise predictability of calculus world.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Try Navier-Stokes equations (also calculus!) for predicting turbulent fluid flow. Opposite of predictable.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Equally, stats can lead to highly predictable results, as in dominant game theoretic strategies over long iteration horizons.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Not nerd-quibbling with Thiel's model for no good reason. This has serious implications for mental models on the Thiel 2x2.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
The motivation for that 2x2 is to talk about luck and success as constructed by society, but the account is simplistic.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
ε/δ thinking gets at a more fundamental question: when do small changes lead to small effects, versus huge, rapid, snowball effects?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.