Is Your Number System Breeding Bolsheviks?
February 21st, 2007 by WaltI have a fever, so posting from me will be light. Before I go back to my sick-bed, though, I wanted to draw your attention to this web site that documents bias in Wikipedia. Most of the examples listed are not math-related, but item number 16 is:
Wikipedia has many entries on mathematical concepts, but lacks any entry on the basic concept of an elementary proof. Elementary proofs require a rigor lacking in many mathematical claims promoted on Wikipedia.
Further perusing of the site reveals that they mean elementary proofs in number theory, i.e. proofs don’t use complex analysis. Apparently belief in the complex numbers is a form of bias.
Via Good Math, Bad Math.
February 22nd, 2007 at 7:41 am
This site isn’t just attempting to document Wikipedia bias. It’s advancing an evangelical Christian agenda. For example there is the following complaint. “Edits to include facts against the theory of evolution are almost immediately censored.” This criticism implies that there are scientific facts that cast the theory of evolution in doubt. That is decidedly not the case.
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:13 am
Maybe the conservapedia needs an article on reverse mathematics so that users can see how to eliminate unnecessary radical left-wing axioms from their work.
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:22 am
Yeah, CP is pretty silly, and quite the echo chamber.
Really I wanted to say that I love the topic of the post. I actually managed to get a vintage print of that poster a few years ago.
February 22nd, 2007 at 6:53 pm
I’ve said this before but. . .
elementary != easily comprehensible
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:49 pm
it’s good to talk about complex numbers without invoking the imaginary number i.