Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

thehowlingfantods.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 127 posts

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#41

Post by ofalkaed »

npilk wrote: post #7

I've seen a theory that the mistakes Pemulis makes are intentional, and signal that he isn't as smart as he thinks and that he doesn't really have everything in control. I'm not sure; clearly DFW had some math aptitude but these also could have been honest mistakes. Presumably it would have been harder for editors to check these things in the 90s. The probability error seems harder to explain and likely just a mistak…

They are purposeful, I don't think Pemulis ever gets one thing right in the novel. His explanation of Annular Fusion is a good example, unless you also want to make the case that Wallace got the made up science wrong as well. Pemulis grew up in a place where he was generally the smartest person around and was able to bluff his way through life without much effort. Then he got a scholarship to somewhere with actual expectations and standards but Pemulis kept on with his lazy ways. Pemulis is probably smart but his laziness and arrogance keep him from ever achieving his own intelligence, he is forever lobbing but is a bit too slow to get to the net in time.

Vast majority of character's are well explained and the answers are all in the novel, just need to look at their childhood and upbringing.

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#42

Post by gowld »

sanderjd wrote: post #18
FL33TW00D wrote: post #5

I look forward to the day another book makes me feel like IJ - even with the mathematical flaws :)

Agreed. It was really a revelation to me. Looking back now, it's clear that I started reading it as a status seeking thing. I thought my intellectual friends (and especially girlfriends) would think it was cool that I actually read the whole thing (which nobody else in our circle had actually managed yet). But then it turned out to really affect me deeply. I read it again about a decade later after all those games we…

> I thought my intellectual friends (and especially girlfriends) would think it was cool that I actually read the whole thing

Interesting though, considering the popular meme among women, that men think reading IJ makes them look smart.

https://reductress.com/post/why-im-waiting-for-the-right-man...

https://www.reddit.com/r/davidfosterwallace/comments/evsylv/...

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#45

Post by jknoepfler »

dkarl wrote: post #36
lacker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don't agree with that review at all, and I loved Everything and More . I'm even somewhat of a "finitist" myself mathematically, but I think you can just view the whole hierarchy of infinities as a finite mode of description, and get utility from it without worrying about the "reality" of the whole thing. But that's a bit of an aside. The review-writer clearly hates the book before he even gets to the mat…

> The whole book is striking a middle ground between expressing every step of mathematical rigor, and describing in a more literary way how to feel about these concepts I really hate this. If you don't care to understand something, why would you want to absorb the feelings that somebody else thinks you should have from understanding it? It reminds me of all the cringey posturing that undergrads engage in because thei…

Why would you hate a book exploring mathematics and reflecting on your relationship with it? What a weird thing to hate. Wouldn't you rather celebrate intellectual curiosity?

Like... I hate journalism that profits off of xenophobic fear mongering. A book from a genuinely curious and interesting author who did some moonlighting in more formal subjects, though? That seems harmless and kind of cute at worst. Maybe a little misguided, maybe not.

It's a weird energy to bring to a relatively innoccuous corner of the world.

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#46

Post by [deleted] »

dkarl wrote: post #36
lacker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don't agree with that review at all, and I loved Everything and More . I'm even somewhat of a "finitist" myself mathematically, but I think you can just view the whole hierarchy of infinities as a finite mode of description, and get utility from it without worrying about the "reality" of the whole thing. But that's a bit of an aside. The review-writer clearly hates the book before he even gets to the mat…

> The whole book is striking a middle ground between expressing every step of mathematical rigor, and describing in a more literary way how to feel about these concepts I really hate this. If you don't care to understand something, why would you want to absorb the feelings that somebody else thinks you should have from understanding it? It reminds me of all the cringey posturing that undergrads engage in because thei…

[deleted]

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#47

Post by feoren »

arh68 wrote: post #11

Maybe he "just" got it wrong. Maybe they're typos, and the manuscript was correct. Or... Maybe Pemulis gave Hal an obviously wrong derivative, and when uncorrected, drove Pemulis to abruptly end the tutoring. Maybe Pemulis said it right but Hal heard it wrong. Or... Maybe it's "just" another sign they're in an alternate universe where even the math is different. That's pretty much how I feel about it

> Maybe it's "just" another sign they're in an alternate universe where even the math is different

Unlike physics, there are no conceivable alternate universes with different math. That's what's so cool about math: it could not possibly be any different. There could be alternate universes where they've discovered different amounts of it, or named the discoveries different things, but everything that is "wrong" in math in our universe is universally (multiversally?) wrong.

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#48

Post by mathgradthrow »

npilk wrote: post #7

I've seen a theory that the mistakes Pemulis makes are intentional, and signal that he isn't as smart as he thinks and that he doesn't really have everything in control. I'm not sure; clearly DFW had some math aptitude but these also could have been honest mistakes. Presumably it would have been harder for editors to check these things in the 90s. The probability error seems harder to explain and likely just a mistak…

Maybe DFW wasn't as smart as he thought he was.

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#49

Post by ks2048 »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #19

DFW also wrote Everything and More: A Compact History of Infinity -- an uncritical review of Cantor's work, which was absolutely loaded with errors. Rudy Rucker wrote a scathing review here: https://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf I actually read Everything and More and it's probably even worse than that. Though I'll admit that I'm a little bit biased; I'm a sort of Aristotelian Realist or even a Fi…

Yeah, I like DFW (although mainly from essays and interviews) and thought this book was not good. Tangentially, I didn’t really like Rucker’s book on infinity either. I can’t remember why exactly, but it didn’t match up with other math popularizers (eg, Strogatz, Nahin).

Re: Dubious Math in Infinite Jest (2009)

#50

Post by scyzoryk_xyz »

gowld wrote: post #42
sanderjd wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It was really a revelation to me. Looking back now, it's clear that I started reading it as a status seeking thing. I thought my intellectual friends (and especially girlfriends) would think it was cool that I actually read the whole thing (which nobody else in our circle had actually managed yet). But then it turned out to really affect me deeply. I read it again about a decade later after all those games we…

> I thought my intellectual friends (and especially girlfriends) would think it was cool that I actually read the whole thing Interesting though, considering the popular meme among women, that men think reading IJ makes them look smart. https://reductress.com/post/why-im-waiting-for-the-right-man... https://www.reddit.com/r/davidfosterwallace/comments/evsylv/...

It's a Bildungsroman for the 90's Americana age.

Whoever is reading it is eager to come of age, but is likely super obnoxious because they're not there yet. At least that's how I think of myself reading it at 25.

Post reply on HN