Plus, this Monday, you can come see me speak in person in San Francisco<\/a>.<\/p>\n Every week, I put up a \u201cRadio Readings\u201d post, so you can track down the books, articles, and, this week: Passover songs(!) that I cite on the show. So, without further ado, here\u2019s what I\u2019m talking about this week.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Uncle Tungsten by Oliver Sacks uses his own curiosities and experiments in childhood to explain fundamental questions in chemistry, then moves to the big players in figuring out that question. He talks about each obstacle they had and how they got around it, then highlights the series of logic leaps that get to the real problem. So you don\u2019t even realize you\u2019ve learned chemistry knowledge, you just have this timeline of creating fundamental ideas, and unlike chemistry class where everything is shown to you as what simply is, this gives you the context and uses it to make an interesting story. I learned a lot about how to present ideas, especially without using any numbers. For the periodic table especially, there\u2019s good deep reasons why it\u2019s built like that, and I never knew them through four classes of chemistry. The book taught me those reasons without me realizing.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n (I\u2019ve put Uncle Tungsten<\/em> on hold at the library on the basis of Adam\u2019s recommendation, maybe you\u2019re also one of today\u2019s lucky 10,000?<\/a>)<\/p><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n In science, there\u2019s this traditional hierarchy where you have biology on top, and chemistry underlies it, and then physics underlies chemistry. If the physicsts are in a generous mood, they\u2019ll say that math underlies physics. Then, computer science is over somewhere with soil engineering or some other non-science.<\/p>\n Now, my point of view is a bit different: computer science is what mediates between the physical world and the Platonic world. With that in mind \u201ccomputer science\u201d is a bit of a misnomer, maybe it should be called quantitative epistemology.\u201d It\u2019s sort of the study of the capacity of finite beings such as us to learn mathematical truths.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n![\"fights](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/84\/2015\/01\/fights-in-good-faith.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nReading Out of Your Depth<\/h3>\n
\n
\nMapping the Limits of What Can be Known<\/h3>\n
\n
\nSaying \u201cDayenu\u201d When You Read<\/h3>\n