Newcomb first argues that all his "natural numbers" are ratios. This makes sense because most natural numbers are given in units, and the number exhibited is the ratio of some measurement to the same measurement taken on some more or less arbitrary token, e.g. the standard kilogram, the solar year. Then he argues that the set of natural numbers must be closed under further formation of ratios, i.e. under multiplication and division.
http://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/feature-column/fcarc-newcomb
So the new Netflix series "Connections" (video) featuring a science geek, "dumbing down" the "magic" of science for us... neglects to mention the above "rules" of Benford's Law.
So the question remains, can numbers exist on their own without being "units"? Pythagoras stated, "All is Number and Harmony." So Benford's Law applies to music - but it's been applied to WESTERN music. Benford's Law applies to "natural" phenomenon, but it applies to WESTERN science measuring natural phenomenon. So yes if you are using external technology to measure numbers as units - with the result being a logarithmic growth pattern - then indeed you find Benford's Law. Someone comments on youtube:
The reason is simple if you know that numbers are interchangable, it is the units behind that matters e.g. 1 inch = 2.54 cm, see that 1 becomes 2.54 if the unit changes. People who develop units usually starts with 1 for the most common size, e.g if sweets comes in 3 pieces most of the time, the developer will say "1" pack (1p) = 3 sweets therefore probability of 1 unit "1p" is higher than "2p" or 3p as determined before, 3 pieces of sweets = 1p is most common as choosen by developer of the unit
The reason it is scale invariant is that scaling creates more number of 1 than 2, and more number of 2 than 3 and so on. So Benford's law is due to 2 factors, factor 1 as I mention previously and factor 2 as scaling also creates this frequency distribution of more 1s than 9s. e.g. Scale 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 by 2 = 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 see that because anything above 5 becomes 2 digit with a 1, frequency of 1 is higher.
But that is not the limitation of number. Number can exist on its own term in relation to time as frequency. That's why science is based on time-frequency "uncertainty." You can not precisely "count" the ratio of time to frequency since the future overlaps with the past to create the "present" moment of "counting." There is no materialistic "unit" by which to create a closed ratio.
Since Western science assumes a "materialistic idealism" philosophy of closed ratios then the above "exceptions" are not considered.
Benford's Law lecture vid by John D. Barrow
However, there are many data sets that do not follow Benford’s law, such as lottery and telephone numbers.
What’s the difference between these data sets that makes Benford’s law apply or not? It’s hard to escape the feeling that something deeper must be going on.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2010/05/07/203468/benfords-law-and-a-theory-of-everything/
Lijing and Bo-Qiang say that logarithmic distributions are a general feature of statistical physics and so “might be a more fundamental principle behind the complexity of the nature”.
Any decent explanation will need to explain why some data sets follow the law and others don’t and it seems that Lijing and Bo-Qiang are as far as ever from this.
Benford’s Very Strange Law slides of Barrow's lecture
No comments:
Post a Comment