from seeking out and sustaining friendships with the people you already like most, rather than devoting too much time to the sad, the mad, or the bad alternative. Like staying away from the back ends of horses, this is a way to make the curve work for you.
Â
Poissonâs distribution could be seen as a special case of the standard distributionâbut as probability advanced into statistics it came upon many more curves to conquer, if the mathematics and the data were to continue their engagement. Curves spiky, curves discontinuousâscatters that could not be called curves at all, although they were still defined by functions (that is, rules for assigning a single output to any given input). Mathematics spent much of the nineteenth century seeking methods to bind such boojums and snarks, snaring them in infinite series, caging them with compound constructions of tame sine-curves, snipping them into discrete lengths of manageabilityâgetting their measure.
At the turn of the century, the French mathematician Henri Lebesgue brought these many techniques to their philosophical conclusion: a way to assign a valueâa measureâto even the most savage of functions. Measure theory, as his creation was called, made it possible to rein in the wilder curves, gauging the probabilities they represented. It offered its power, though, at the price of intuition: a âmeasureâ is just that. It is simply a means whereby one mathematical concept may be expressed in terms of another. It does not pretend to be a tool for understanding life.
By 1900 it was clear that if the counterintuitive need not be false, the intuitive need not be true. The classical approach to probability could no longer conceal its inherent problems. Laplace had founded his universal theory of probability on physical procedures like tossing a coin or rolling a die, because they had one particularly useful property: each outcome could be assumed to have equal probability. We know beforehand that a die will show six 1/6 of the time, and we can use this knowledge to build models of other, less well known, aspects of life. But think about this for a minute: how, actually, do we know these cases are equally probable?
Well, we could say we have no reason to believe they arenât; or that we must presuppose equal application of physical laws; or that this is an axiom of probability and we do not question it; or that if we didnât have equally probable cases . . . weâd have to start all over again , wouldnât we? All are arguments reflecting the comfortable, rational assumptions of Enlightenment scienceâand all draw the same sardonic, dismissive smile from our prosecutor, Richard von Mises.
Â
Lemberg, alias Lwów, alias Lviv: a city that lies at the intersection of three sets in three dimensions: Polish, Austrian, Ukrainian; Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish; applied, abstract, artistic. It remains a symbol of intellectual promise for the debatable lands between the Vistula and the Dniepr; a Baroque lighthouse in a politicogeographic tempest. Its prominent sons and daughters would be themselves enough to populate a culture: the writers Martin Buber and Stanislaw Lem; the pianists Moriz Rosenthal and Emanuel Ax; the Ulam brothers, Stanislaw (mathematician) and Adam (historian); Doppler of the eponymous effect; Redl the spyânot to mention Weegee, Paul Muni, Sacher-Masoch, and the Muslim theologian Muhammad Asad (one of the few imams to be the son of a rabbi).
Lembergâs Richard von Mises was a pioneer in aerodynamics, designing and piloting in 1915 Austria-Hungaryâs monster bomber, the 600-horsepower Aviatik G. III. The plane was not a success, for many of the subtle local reasons that govern heavier-than-air flight. Perhaps in reaction, von Mises became increasingly interested in turbulence. Turbulence (as we will see later) lacks the pleasant predictability of the solar system; the swirls of fluid vortices may
Antony Beevor, Artemis Cooper
Jeffrey Overstreet
MacKenzie McKade
Nicole Draylock
Melissa de La Cruz
T.G. Ayer
Matt Cole
Lois Lenski
Danielle Steel
Mark Reinfeld, Jennifer Murray