Four Ways of Thinking: Statistical, Interactive, Chaotic and Complex - David Sumpter

Mathematics is about finding better ways of reasoning. But for many applied mathematicians, the primary mission is to shape their minds in a way that gets them closer to the truth. The calculations are secondary, the real question is: how we can better understand the world around us?
In this Oxford Mathematics Public Lecture, David takes us on a journey through applied mathematics from statistics all the way to complexity theory, lifting examples from his work with football clubs - signing the best players (statistical thinking) or organising an attack (complex thinking) - and from every day life - bickering less with our partners (interactive thinking) and learning to let go (chaotic thinking). David reimagines applied mathematics as a set of tools for life, from big work decisions to how we treat our friends, family and work colleagues. No problem is too big or too small for a mathematical solution.
Professor David Sumpter is author of five books including Soccermatics (2016), Outnumbered (2018) and Four Ways of Thinking (2023). His research covers everything from the inner workings of fish schools and ant colonies, through social psychology and segregation in society, to machine learning and artificial intelligence.

[@ChronicleContent]

Timestamps: 0:00:02 - Introduction to talk on applied mathematics and thinking styles. 0:03:03 - Ronald Fisher's life and work at Cambridge University. 0:05:57 - Testing if milk affects tea taste with experiments. 0:08:42 - Designing experiments using combinatorics. 0:11:31 - Gary Neville statistic measures player performance after conceding a goal. 0:14:17 - Statistics used to rank top players, limitations of measurement. 0:17:00 - Explaining the limitations of statistics in 10 words. 0:19:46 - Eugenics, smoking, and misuse of statistics. 0:22:25 - Context matters in statistical significance and causation. 0:25:13 - Balanced chemical reactions and ecological models explained with math. 0:27:46 - Mathematical modeling of foxes and rabbits. 0:30:32 - Analysis of applause and social recovery in groups. 0:33:12 - Human behavior equation: non-smiling person + 2 smiley people = 3 smiley people. 0:35:55 - Using physics-based models to scout football players. 0:38:51 - Introduction to chaos theory and Margaret Hamilton. 0:41:29 - Weather simulation error due to decimal input mistake. 0:44:05 - Generating divergent numbers through a simple process. 0:47:06 - Chaos, Margaret Hamilton, and the importance of control. 0:49:55 - Finding balance between order and chaos in life. 0:52:33 - Simple rules create complex patterns in simulations. 0:55:21 - Capturing complexity in science through detailed descriptions. Follow me for more AI

[@oosmanbeekawoo]

His lecture is not really about ‘ways of thinking’ but mainly arguments to solve certain problems using techniques he expects his audience to know. Always the British Oxford snobbish people!

[@jamil.12]

Exactly the reason why i chosed to study mathematics and physics that is to understand the world around me.And i love studying these two subjects.When i study these two subjects properly i get totally involved,you can say i live in those moments fully.

[@bellakrinkle9381]

That's interesting. If I were smarter, I could have moved up a few notches. I, also, wanted to understand the world around me - reality driven - I started with psychology, (psychoanalysis) then later, added the financial markets, geopolitics and a bit of economics.I mostly enjoy my time spent moving around in these realms and feel totally involved and focused, daily. I'm happiest doing my "work". I feel fortunate to live as I choose.

[@Ensource]

dont let how smart you are define what your work ethic can get you. @@bellakrinkle9381

[@pangeaproxima3681]

ok, ok...

[@allisons6910]

Have you completed your degree(s)? If "Yes", then please confirm / deny the following *hypothesis*: The channel, Veritasium, has recently (on average) significantly declined in quality wrt the subjects explored (Note: ⬅ eval is distinct from the quality of editing, audio, camera, storyboarding, and so on). Answered separately: The quality decline is in part due to over-focusing on analytics and the business side of the channel. Therefore, in a circumstance where they lacked a solid video idea, rather than skipping the weekly scheduled video release, they prioritized making and releasing one anyways to keep up with the algo. In my estimate, this reason accounts for 30% of the quality decline. Of course, running out of feasible ideas would likely account for the lion's share, say 60%, but I want to know if you agree or disagree with the 30% estimate AND the reasoning supporting your stance.

[@RaiiD-dg7ur]

Ĺm​@@pangeaproxima3681

[@mightytitan1719]

i love this youtube algorithm which recommends random great video just like a random variable

[@catloverJ]

are you sure it is random?

[@mightytitan1719]

​​@@catloverJyes i never dissapointed by this youtube algorithm Iam happy that it doesn't promotes only ones who has million followers and post nonsense content ,obviously youtube shorts are 🤮 But This video algorithm is like batman 🦇

[@abdallahelra3y118]

Random sometimes Calculated when needed.

[@CuriouslyBored]

My statistical way of thinking: of a mindset care for probabilities, historical data, an assessment of assets and liabilities before pursuits of actualization occurs. My interactive way of thinking: of a mindset care that awaits or hunts for societal circumstances that appears to 'door' or facilitate pursuits of actualization. My chaotic way of thinking: of a mindset care for rolling the dice-- a 'just do it' actualization pursuit that minds no statistical odds or favorable circumstances and may even lack certainty of what actualization looks like. It is a pleasant surprise when no sense of chaos follows an unstudied action. My complex way of thinking: of a mindset that utilizes statistical and interactive cognitive intelligence to facilitate pursuits of actualization. I do believe success is most likely when complex thinking is applied. Additionally, the way of thinking determines what the mind is inclined to focus upon; what we focus upon occurs within mindsets. If I am of a Will to think in a manner that invites the possibility of chaos, there would be no consideration of mindsets associated with statistical or interactive thinking. Often, it is the actualization objective and not the Will that dictates the mind's cognitive cascade options-- care of success demands management of one's Will, usually. There is a control 'care' in mathematical logic; through an understanding or a care of the answer, one controls the problem. The lecture's turn towards discerned marital controls that are implemented and sustained, if "care" exists, is of complex thinking that minds objective (statistical) and subjective (interactive) truths. The identified existential marital problem has a determined answer that is not natural within our lecturer-- conscious, willful "control" of his natural inclinations is the answer that he believes "care" will sustain. If a strong "care" becomes weakly felt, the answer and the "manipulations required" will feel a key to a prison versus a key to greater marital happiness; sustaining a marital reality that survives upon an unnatural answer, of little care, is difficult-- even grit requires passion to exist in its application. Addendum: What is in grit? A Will to persevere, despite any headwinds of statistical and/or interactive inform. What does perseverance require? A deeply held belief that a pursuit will see actualized success. What is in belief? A measured patience that is governed by an adjustable long view. When the long view dies, all that underpins grit dies; grit may require an ability to visualize and intensely feel an anticipated actualization of victory. What a grit-gifted victorious actualization satisfies is dependent upon the state of one's ego and other psychological influences; a satisfied ego (no circumspect psychological insecurities or of a felt need to proof/validate identity associations of gender, abilities, intelligence, etc.), scar-free interactive psychological truth (never felt derisively underestimated or had declared goals disparaged and/or discouraged) and/or of no passion to defy odds-- less likely to endure pursuits of actualization that requires grit. Some form of anticipated internal resolution, validation or balm-- beyond the externalized actualization pursuit-- exists in the long view of a grit-driven pursuit, I believe.

[@carlfletcherjunior9076]

This was one of the best lectures ive ever watched in my life. Loved it

[@elpina587]

Got me thinking already

[@AlexanderPetersonml]

The smoking bit reminds me of a silly anecdote when Bertrand Russell was asked if he was concerned about smoking impacting his health. He said that one time he was going on a flight, and they told him he couldn't smoke on the airplane, so he decided to delay his trip rather than go without smoking for a few hours, and the plane ended up crashing.

[@jkhhahahhdkakkdh]

Wow...Bertrand Russell

[@chuckhall5347]

If you want to smoke on a plane, no problem. Just buy your own plane. I don't want to smoke on a plane including second hand smoke. If I sit next to you and drink whiskey, you don't get drunk. If you sit next to me a smoke, nicotine ends up in my blood.

[@Ayra_Is_Cool_lol]

Smoking saves lives!

[@whitb6111]

This isn't what happened. On a flight he had to sit in the smoking section and the plane actually crashed. Everyone that was sitting in the non-smoking section died. He had to swim to safety. Therefore his life was saved by having to sit in the smoking section.

[@whitb6111]

You really didn't understand this story did you lol? Maybe watch the above video and get some critical thinking skills.@@chuckhall5347

[@ThomasToPC]

Yin-yang is chaotic manifestations; taiji is the orderly existence of the whole... if I was to apply this side of classical Chinese philosophy. This of course in no way detracts from what a great talk this is. Thank you!

[@An-yq6oy]

Great lecture! Thanks

[@SSNewberry]

Needs an Oxford comma in the title, of course.

[@dantesanford7065]

Best comment of all.

[@jonminton1878]

Of, course

[@SSNewberry]

@@jonminton1878 Why, not, go, for, it, all, t,h,e,n?

[@davidjohnston4240]

Nope. He's British and he's in Britain. Oxford commas are not used in Britain. This is the issue I didn't cave on with the copy editors of my book.

[@SSNewberry]

@@davidjohnston4240 60 million people can be wrong. Lord knows I am in America and see it all the time. We have two of them running for president. For other British faux pas, you have Nigel Farage and Brexit. Just because you, personally, are wrong does not make it right.

[@KarlLew]

For the curious, Dr. Muriel aced the tea test and thereby hoisted Fisher on his own petard.

[@MrAndrewAllen]

I suspect the tea will mix eventually, but not in the time between pouring and drinking. A better test today might be clear teacups and video cameras that record from all angles.

[@kooisengchng5283]

What causes the difference?

[@athertg]

@@kooisengchng5283 Putting a small volume of cold milk into a larger volume of near boiling water scalds the milk and changes the flavour. Adding hot water to cold milk doesn't scald the milk.

[@gideonk123]

Karl Lew, through you, today I learned the word “petard”, thanks

[@HellCatLeMaudit]

Is it possible that Ronald Fisher did not know there is a difference between putting water to acid and putting acid to water? I stand with Prof Sumpter's opinion that Ronald Fisher is an asshole. He wanted to prove Dr Muriel wrong and devised an experiment that he thought would prove Dr Muriel wrong. Ronald Fisher tried to do the same thing with cancer and tobacco, and with Bayesian statistics. He is an arrogant jerk.

[@GrigorySapunov]

Thanks for the talk! I enjoyed watching it with my kid!

[@JeremyHelm]

55:11 A pattern is as complex as the length of the shortest description that can be used to produce it. Andrei Nikolaevich Kolmogorov

[@floatingblaze8405]

The Kolmogorov complexity stikes again!

[@HorrorMakesUsHappy]

It strikes me as amusing that this only seems brilliant on the surface because it's really nothing more than a tautology - which is exactly why it's so concise itself, because it's not really saying anything at all, hence its own complexity is low. It's essentially saying, "A thing is as complex as it is complex." Okay. And? lol

[@Andrew.baltazar]

​@HorrorMakesUsHappy A very long pattern may look complex, but if it can be condensed into a repeating motif it can be considered simpler than something that cannot be condensed. Complexity is characterised here by resistance to compression. This definition distinguishes bloated patterns from complex ones. It's not a tautology.

[@HorrorMakesUsHappy]

@@Andrew.baltazar You've missed my point. My point is that the quote is a tautology, not any system it might refer to.

[@hrdcpy]

I like how the quote relates to Wolfram's term of computational irreducibility

[@mathgeek7966]

Great lecture, thank you for posting it!

[@verbumsat]

How do you arrive at this conclusion? He's verbose to a fault.

[@icenarsin5283]

Wonderful lecture!

[@TheSnowdolphin]

If you are not a gritty person, it's OK, there's lots of ways your life can succeed. YES THANK YOU!!!

[@jacksonp2008]

Very interesting, highly recommended

[@grantbeerling4396]

John Maynard Keynes 'principle of uncertainty' in economics states that we can predict the very near future with some degree of success, but the more distant, the more uncertain we become; thus, mathematical modelling in economics is not a science of absolutes; rather, it's a social science of human infinite variability-a perfect example of chaos theory. Daniel Kahneman later backed this up in behavioural economic theory. Also Adam Smith wrote, that the market in the long run will return to an equilibrium, to which Keyens replied, in the long run we're all dead! (ie the disaster that was 1930s and the 2010s, both unnecessary suffering, we can always afford a war, so let's win the peace.

[@raminsafizadeh]

Why not change the title to “three ways of thinking” ? One can hardly not feel abused (time wise) when told “go buy the book” for the fourth-complex!

[@cdd7672]

5th one is left out, “complainers”

[@neilrichardson7454]

​@@cdd7672these are the 4 ways how the presenter thinks. Not how complainers think 😊

[@youonlytubeonce]

I believe the answer to this question is too complex for a short description here.

[@AvidL7]

Because he came there the 3rd time as he mentioned at the start!

[@Kannot2023]

The answer is complex

[@billtensus]

I like Ronald Fischer, from being a Eug@nics advocate to going 80 years ageless teaching at Oxford about Himself in "Four Ways of Thinking: Statistical, Interactive, Chaotic and Complex"

[@MrLuigiFercotti]

This is one of those videos where you can't decide whether you feel smarter or dumber after watching.

[@pangeaproxima3681]

ok, ok...

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

Let me fix that for you. "This is one of those videos where I can't decide whether I feel smarter or dumber after watching."

[@pangeaproxima3681]

@@BariumCobaltNitrog3n ok, ok.....

[@MrLuigiFercotti]

@@BariumCobaltNitrog3n Got a problem with 3rd person references?

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

@@MrLuigiFercottiWhen people talk about their own experience, it sounds more authentic than speculating what someone else might think or feel. "You" is 2nd person. He/she/they is 3rd person. A lot of people phrase it like you did, speaking to the reader, pondering. Some though try to speak for the world, as in "No one cares about..." Anyway, I agree and feel the same, still can't decide which hat...

[@varunsingh7670]

earphones on and my volume was up, the sound in the beginning almost made me deaf. great content btw.

[@ophthojooeileyecirclehisha4917]

thank you so much

[@michaellipkin9430]

Great talk. As regards the slight relationship between grit and success the terms 'statistically significant' vs 'practically significant' come to mind. The problem then is practically significant for who? As we move through life we meet individuals and it is a foolish person who makes any assumptions about an individual based on secondary characteristics. But what about those who are making evaluations in bulk? Suppose someone has found a similar slight relationship between 'grit' and programming skills and is charged with hiring 100 programmers for a project. The temptation might be to use 'grit' as an evaluative proxy when hiring. But what if 'grit' has some cultural factors that influence it? Then the hiring process might be biased against some groups and this bias might be incorrect. Bean counting micro-optimisation is (unfortunately) a common feature in business, moreover increasing use of 'AI' is likely to hide such biases behind a wall of pseudo-objectivity. Bringing us back to the Fisher problem.

[@jakeunderland5258]

Fantastic insight.

[@gideonk123]

One is then reminded of the chaotic and complexity ways of thinking, since programming ability (as well as football/soccer) are definitely not easily predictable at all

[@MrJHDK]

Several layers of unwarranted assumptions in there.

[@TheOraware]

I am very naive and want to learn more, you made very good point, but my concern is the 4% variance explained by grit provides valuable information for researchers, educators, employers, and individuals themselves who are interested in understanding and fostering success. It highlights the importance of factors like perseverance and passion for long-term goals in achieving positive outcomes. Apart from cultural factor the other factors are not proven and measured yet, don't you think one should believe on proven statistics? If not, then how come one believe on other factors if they are not proven yet?

[@justinzhou5875]

great! all these ways of thinking are from macro perspective to see the world. so that we can see the pattern, trending, development of organic system.

[@joeedley3936]

I've only seen thru 32 min of this video, am enjoying it, have skills and education in math, and suggest that there is a stronger correlation between the LOUDNESS of applause (coupled with the peak loudness correlation) and enjoyment of the "event" rather than the length of time of the applause. Just a spontaneous theory here. Could be wrong...

[@que_93]

A bit more intuition on the "Complex" segment would have made it a lot more worthwhile, it while being a brilliant talk without a doubt. The two examples were good, but I guess it needed a few more words from him. I suppose the time limitation at hand...

[@Dan-dg9pi]

That was a well-coordinated crowd at the end.

[@PerFeldvoss]

Interesting, but I prefer the six thinking hats, simpler and yet more complex!

[@jarkkoaitti287]

at 6:15, there is this milk-tea problem. i've done a highly scientific research of drinking coffee with vegetarian based (oat and soymilk) milk and because these conditions are a lot more extreme, it enabled me to do some practical tests with clear results. many of those vegetarian "milk" products curdle or accumulate to nasty bit and pieces easily in coffee. to prevent that, pour milk first so it is the strong coffee introduced to a lot of milk first vs. a wiff of milk in a strong coffee. in both cases, a vigorous mixing will help alot. also there has to be enough of milk to make the mix mild enough. yes, i know i missed the point :) so she was right, milk first! also the toilet paper should come out from top side.

[@weeb3277]

23:28 where did this come from? i'd rather learn more about this way of thinking

[@marca9955]

I wish he could have elaborated on why complexity is distinct from chaos, but he cut it short. Seems he was only describing the same thing - chaos is macro-behaviour that emerges from the complex interaction of micro-motives. So not sure why they merit a separate category.

[@gideonk123]

Chaos may produce randomness, but complexity is something which may look very random, yet be completely deterministic and hence exactly reproducible.

[@bramvanduijn8086]

Good question, they may be different in scale instead of category. Let's think about this a bit. You can have chaotic behaviour arise from something very simple and logical. On the other hand complexity interacts with the strength of the connections in various ways, when one of those ways is chaotic then complexity + tight coupling -> danger. So in a loosely coupled complex system you will not get chaotic macro behaviour, because the loose coupling prevents the small chaos from growing.

[@skeltek7487]

Descriptions meaning and information content depend on the formula or algorithm evaluation it. It is always a sort of function giving the se of possible source data meaning in the result space.

[@nailahuq137]

He is very smart spoken.

[@AlumniQuad]

38:20 "Magnus opus"? Also, a lot of his complaints aren't shortcomings of the techniques he discusses--they're shortcomings of the people using the techniques.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

What would that phrase be in your native language?

[@DavidConnerCodeaholic]

i'm a "sugar before coffee" man myself. There is definitely a difference in milk before tea: the complex colloid solution of proteins and solutes in milk will react differently based on the relative concentration of milk and tea -- especially with regard to the relative concentration of heat in the tea. I always put two cubes of ice in my coffee after brewing to cool the solution so that the cream doesn't gunk up. The undesirable byproducts of heat on milk are less if there is more milk which allows it to heat more slowly.

[@DavidConnerCodeaholic]

but my guess is B, because the experiment yields more information for insight, though maybe i'm wrong.

[@DavidConnerCodeaholic]

this assumes that you aren't leveraging the introduction of variance into the values of experimental variables. but for the same reason that Fischer was wrong, your assumption that you can perfectly manage the experimental variables for four pairs of glasses is an oversimplification. it's better to embrace the randomness, quantifying the deviation of variables from norms and thus extracting more information.

[@DavidConnerCodeaholic]

GPA is an acceptable way to compare a cohort of students, but when some students don't fit into the variables a cohort controls, it can be a particularly terrible metric for success. You can easily find yourself measuring the ruler. Students representative of the cohort who focus their efforts on meeting the objectives of the classes and programs will typically have high GPA's. At least their effort should correlate to their GPA. Students who don't fit the cohort well, fail for lack of social support or try to extend themselves beyond the constraints of a program may not exhibit a GPA that correlates with time investment or resilience. It's the last one which can be particularly sad: by setting the expectations for a 4.0 GPA, you load the student with work and prevent them from accomplishing other things. Even the best students are then stovepiped into a singular field in the initial years of their career, unless they did the coursework before their college started. I almost failed out of community college: I had no one to study with for physics or statics and while I was simultaneously studying devops (no one to help study). So on paper, I'm a terrible student, but I'm okay with this since no one would understand me anyways.

[@winexhd9373]

@@DavidConnerCodeaholic I like to think I fall into that category. I did engineering with not a good GPA (< 3.0 GPA) because at some point I got really interested in the derivation of theorems in engineering and the underlying mathematical, physical and sometimes philosophical insights behind the engineering conclusions, than the applicability of the theorems themselves. Along with battling learning disability, unstable housing situation, poor social awareness, etc., there was a point where I had to pick a choice between 'actual education' of the concepts and the bending of the mind, or to follow blind and measure up to the standard. It is hard to say that I regret this, because I certainly feel like I have learned far more than I was given the chance to learn, but it may have limited, even in the slightest bit, for further learning, as GPA is used as a source of evaluation. Although perhaps other activities may be used to supplement my profile in the context of graduate level admissions or so, that is if I am even in interested in pursuing more academia. Since I have graduated my engineering program, I am eligible to start working, but post secondary is something in my mind to pursue potentially. Ideally I would like to get a job. It really is a tough world out there. To "map" the complexity of human capability to a single number 'GPA' is such a limiting way of looking at things, but at least it is 'a measure' of looking 'at something'. A world, that looked so objective and rational to me, upon further reading and studying different concepts, seems rather subjective, arbitrary and uncertain.

[@channalmath8628]

Not a stats expert, nor a futbol expert, but as a scientist I strongly suspect the explanation for these strikers' performances has a lot more to do with how the other players on the field react to a goal being scored. You can't separate a player from his team, at least not with such crude data

[@andrewbuchanan5342]

These are great stories. But what about the tea: which was better? And what did explain success better than grit & IQ at 4A% each?

[@hrdcpy]

I shouldn't have to ask this because credit should have been given in the slide deck, but can anyone identify the artists behind the Twitter art @54:19 ? Note: In 2024, the X, formerly known as Twitter, character limit is 280 not 240 as suggested in this video.

[@gorgeousgentleman5390]

Mr. Kolmogorov is the favourite one

[@tilkesh]

Thx

[@chrimony]

@48:18: But there was room for errors at NASA. During the first successful moon landing, Apollo 11, they encountered programming alarms 1201 and 1202. There was a question on whether to abort the landing mission or not, and they went ahead.

[@archimedesCNC]

the art of the measurement becomes the reality to the measured ambitions of the narrowness of arrogance. i found David Sumpter's beauty in these 4 measures the protagonist toward the Long Term Capital Management story. really appreciate this opportunity of sublime serendipitous interaction the youtube algo sought out my desire for such. thank you.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Always pour the added liquid down close to the inner edge of the cup, like a good Chemist, and then it doesn't matter much which went first.

[@hrdcpy]

I feel it's easier to eyeball a more precise measurement of milk when added first. When getting a to-go coffee, the barista will typically ask if you need room. If milk is in first, then the question is not necessary.

[@OpenAITutor]

Yes, Dr. Muriel Bristol, the subject of Ronald Fisher's famous tea-tasting experiment, was indeed able to tell whether the milk was poured into the tea or the tea was poured into the milk, according to the results of the experiment!!! Please don't leave us hanging.

[@OpenAITutor]

It's funny how he tried to use statistics to really prove her wrong :)

[@playgirl7305]

Concerning the tea cups, it probably also depends on the length of time the milk and tea had to mix, their different densities, temperatures of each liquid and cup etc.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

How do you make your tea? That answers all your questions. I think there is a big difference between the two methods and she is right. Tea is acidic and milk is a base. As the milk is added to the tea, it heats up quickly and is overwhelmed by the acid and curdles. Adding tea to the milk slowly warms the milk and the acid is quickly neutralized by the milk which doesn't curdle (form a colloid) and that's better.

[@FuaConsternation]

15:30 - right right i remember her Ted talk about "Grit"....what a god awful way to do analysis. the gist, as you can plainly guess, was "well, those that succeeded had....grit...because they were the ones that...succeeded in the end" talk about water is wet. kind of like the survivor bias, amirite? show a bunch of people pictures of where bombers, who returned to base, were shot full of holes and you'd rightly assumed it would be "hey, let's strengthen those bits that are more likely to be shot up"...except they forgot that this ignored the ones that were shot up in the places not full of holes in the survivors...and didn't make it back to base.

[@northdot9]

He didn't give the fourth option: "I don't know which one is better", for what the effect is of the way you present the experiment.

[@kaoskronostyche9939]

That was very good. Thank you.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

On Tea and Cookies: I think there is a big difference between the two methods and she is right. Tea is acidic and milk is a base. As the milk is added to the tea, it heats up quickly and is overwhelmed by the acid and curdles. Adding tea to the milk slowly warms the milk and the acid is quickly neutralized by the milk which doesn't curdle (form a colloid) and that's better.

[@hikarustarr]

How many maths were you good at?

[@user-hu9op1lg9s]

Incorrect @10:08 - No matter how many ways there are to present four cups of tea, there are always 2 cups 'milk first' and 2 cups 'tea first' on the table. So, the chance of getting the first cup right is 50% (there are 2 cups of each). If the first guess was right, there are 3 cups left on the table: 1 'milk first' and 2 'tea first'. Now, the chance of getting the second cup right is 33%. And, if the second guess was right, both other guesses are per definition also correct. (The only cups left are the 'tea first' ones.) So, the chance of getting your guesses right in the second set-up are 50% x 33% = 16,6% or 1 in 6.

[@Blue-Spirit]

17:21 Bird shot variance.

[@Sullabe]

In the real world, perhaps it is true to say there is no such thing as chaos? Orders born of differing magnitudes all relate back to the smallest factors, whether or not we perceive them. Inverting the Margaret Hamilton example imagine however, a system capable of infinite complexity designed to apply order from a macro perspective, but without the capability for seeing below a certain quantity... lets say in practical terms its design allows for '0' after other numbers, but not before them, and somehow requires the storing of a data in a minimum number of functional memory 'locations' to give a value in calculating. Suppose it's a system with a functionally infinite number of decimal places, that can't however 'hold' numbers starting under a value of 2 separate integers - in effect saying it can make 'two' by 1+1, but cannot make 'one' by 0+1. Designed to bring 'Order' and in abstract terms capable of perceiving division and multiplicity, it's attempting a 'real world' unity based on 'perfect' conception, but lacking the capability for a small yet important part of 'Loving' - the forgetting of self.

[@christopherellis2663]

7:21 oh, good methodology 21:42 clever isn't the same as smart. 33:56 where does the thinking come in?

[@beautifulsmall]

Rubics cube, paths to solution, I had to watch 55min 31s to ... we all want the power of action at a distance.

[@johncbattersby]

OK I agree option B is the better way to design the trial but what about the answer? Could she tell if the milk was put in first or added after the tea?

[@SpiveyJean]

The first example with the tea doesn’t seem like either of the experiments are measuring what the milk first is really conveying: whether the milk first gives a sense of ritual and a small pleasure of identity, or if the milk first created a different temperature variance for immediate consumption. ?

[@xlerb2286]

A relatively minor point in the talk as a whole but the bit about grit being a good indicator of success is spot on in my experience. I've worked in a technical field for ~30 years so I've observed plenty of folk through those years. Grit is a much better measure of how good an engineer a person will make than GPA or similar.

[@KarlDMarx]

I plead guilty ... Once my then wife complained when I put the milk in her cup and then added the coffee. The next time I prepared her coffee out of sight and asked her which method I had been using. Actually when I suspect that the milk might be close to "expiry" I always put the milk first and test with a minimal amount of coffee. "Shaken, not stirred" ... some scientist did the test.

[@crimfan]

Fisher is one of the encyclopedia examples of “that guy.”

[@pmcate2]

Maybe I just gotta go back and re-watch, but I missed how the interactive method of thinking was able to to predict things that statistical thinking could not.

[@selfcaresally]

interactive method detects factors or variables that can/do change patterns. He used examples from biology/chemistry. So statistical methods identify patterns based on what has already happened; interactive methods identify agents or actions that can change patterns as they are happening (i.e. infectious disease management).

[@user-iq4kl8wi7p]

Maths is magic and magic is maths

[@luisamendes8181]

Confusing lecture, but interesting. I hope his books are more clear on demonstrations

[@bhaveerathod2373]

0:08 the most funniest part is how they didn’t use the Oxford comma here despite this video literally being published by Oxford Mathematics 😂

[@placebojesus5652]

Not the Oxford English Dept lol

[@zahiralishah455]

🌹👍🌹👌🌹🙏🌹

[@aseprohmandar6812]

on 🔛 to be Thninker in life amazing gift !

[@mrcleanisin]

Hey, I got a math puzzle for you. How long will it take to ring a bell on the moon when you push the earth end of a stick that is within 1 inch of the moon end when you push it at the rate of 1 inch in 1 second?

[@Free_Bird_23]

tell us

[@mrcleanisin]

I believe 1 second, but I am trying to get a scientist to respond.

[@ThePicoProject]

Probably the length of the stick (around 380 thousand km) divided by the the speed of sound for the stick material - this becomes less of a math problem and more so a physics or engineering problem at the distance described. Without really digging into the problem, another reassurance that it would take longer than a second as suggested is that light (which we can consider a maximum possible speed) only reaches the Moon from the Earth in a little over a second.

[@mrcleanisin]

One inch per second is much slower than the speed of sound. Not to worry, scientist can't wrap their head around this puzzle either. I believe one's IQ has to be greater than 120 to even grasp this puzzle and probable greater than 200 to solve it.

[@voldllc9621]

I take it that the stick is not rigid, and that it has mass. In that case, pushing on the stick causes a wave front that travels up the stick at a specific velocity which can be calculated from the physical properties. I do not think that relativistic issues play any role here in spite of the dimensions involved.

[@staceyhart9746]

Fisher designed the tea tasting experiment. But did Dr Bristol actually do the experiment with him???

[@sidleyparkhermit6391]

And how many cups did she identify? Actually hang on I'm gonna google this... According to her Wikipedia page, Dr. Bristol correctly identified all eight cups. Appropriately enough I found this right around 21:53 in the video, when Professor Sumpter observed, "I mean, what a dick." 🤣

[@kingki1953]

i hope a generous person give timestamp to this great video

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

TRansCript! Boom you're welcome!

[@publicunderstanding]

I wonder what kind of thinking was at play to come up with an idea to persistently decrease the video's effective surface area by 20% in favour of displaying three distracting logos.

[@lolakauffmann]

I'm here SOLELY to settle the tea vs milk first debate - WHAT HAPPENED IN THE EXPERIMENT!? Aren't we going to get the result after all?!?!?! 0_o

[@forheuristiclifeksh7836]

19:20

[@forheuristiclifeksh7836]

5:00

[@stonethecrows555]

Cool, but what about the most intriguing unanswered question- Could Dr. Bristol tell the difference between whether milk or tea was poured into the cup first?

[@zenzen4982]

Muriel Bristol was able to identify the cups into which tea had been poured first, if anyone else was wondering...

[@michaellipkin9430]

By abandoning the fixed numbers of 4 tea-first and 4 milk-first and having each cup one or the other at random you have 2^8 = 256 possibilities

[@matroqueta6825]

true, but you would also have to include the binomial distribution of the number of tea-firsts in your experiment run as a prior when analyzing the results, making it harder to analyze also your test subject is even more likely to be annoyed at your experiment, flip the tray and wak away

[@michaellipkin9430]

Each cup could be made based on the flip of a coin as to whether milk-first or tea-first. The tester would have a 50% chance of getting each cup right if their decision was random - making it easier to analyse. However, you are undoubtably right that the procedure is even more irritating for the taster.@@matroqueta6825

[@virendrapratapsingh2270]

Here, I am maths teacher.

[@forheuristiclifeksh7836]

40:00

[@chrisholding2382]

I used some amazing mathematics to predict over 70/1s in football 😊 can't believe that England won 7-0 1314 days after they last won 7-0 on king Charles bday in 2019 it was mathematically amazing 👏 I measured before the game and won 3/5 bets 65/1 70/1 and 45/1 the hatrick kane let me down and my cover bet 8-0 haha

[@gregmonks]

Speaking as a musician . . . none of your ways of thinking are even on my radar.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

What is your way of thinking?

[@northdot9]

He forgot a fifth option: use all seventy combinations but present Pair-wise. I.e. present some "no win" options, and some "no loose" options. If you don't gaslight your rat then are you really a scientist?

[@gonzo1354]

Didn't some bloke called de Bono come up with Six Thinking Hats already? Which hat is the one for ripping off ideas?

[@thmensen]

i'm exited about this presentation

[@oosmanbeekawoo]

You should exit this presentation yeah we all agree!

[@timmy18135]

21:32

[@jmoney1941]

How about just getting to the point?

[@sandmango]

This professor just destroyed the foundation of racism and stereotyping people.

[@chrimony]

No he didn't.

[@GeorgeMonsour]

Is language a medium of chaos?

[@Ibasirov]

I guarantee that the book is quite more interesting than this lecture. The lecture is alright, but because of its format he wasn’t able to give more illustrative examples of the four ways. Though the book is also short, it is way more fun to read. One of my favourite books of the last couple of years

[@trichomaxxx]

1 to 99? Why not 0 to 99, or 1 to 100?

[@TheThBe]

because both 0 and 100 (given the specific set of rules) would cause a loop of zeros

[@behrad9712]

👌🙏

[@mkirtikoushik8471]

mathematics can t be taught it is only learned through sheer practice its a sheer thought process for the human brain and can be used to derive the real life management applications

[@jonathonjubb6626]

Only a mathematics professor could wear that shirt...

[@hrdcpy]

I had made up the story that his hotel room iron was broken. haha

[@ericlaska4748]

Busy Beaver Function teehee

[@adokoka]

This reminds me of how some prominent scientists use statistics to make COVID crisis a mess.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

I think covid made its own mess, but what did the prominent scientists do?

[@k.i.l.l.7935]

fischer who ?

[@jonr6680]

The connection between caffeine and genius... I'm doing my best to explore that relationship. I sure FEEL like a genius but evidence doesn't support this perception.

[@TerriblePerfection]

I tried to write a poem after smoking weed and then cringed when the effect wore off.

[@tinakerr8163]

Tea experiment presumes the variable is the taste, rather than care for the bone china cups where very hot tea can cause it to crack/ cause an existing crack to open up. First check your basic assumptions don't include bias.

[@bocckoka]

football is a type of science now?

[@alananthony7053]

46:26 What happens if you choose 50 as your number? ( It's neither smaller than nor greater than 50 😂)

[@hrdcpy]

Simulation malfunction. Reboot human.

[@MrAndrewAllen]

I do not believe the title describes the content of the video.

[@keenanwyatt7929]

I think that’s the name of his book