So I got my first A that I have seen in a long time (got a lot of shit going on, not doing well at all) on a test and at the bottom my prof wrote: "We need to talk." So I met him after class after looking through his comments on my essays, and he told me that "we need to find an intellectual niche for you." This sounded all too familiar because my father and an Arabic tutor of mine (Dr. Talhami) once sat down for several hours at a Golden Corral to discuss my academic future as far as linguistics goes, as well as when that same tutor asked me what I want to do with my life and told me to make a list, then he and I talked for several weeks about the items.

I've taken about two years to pursue a degree in physics because I love it, and I did very poorly. I also have taken 1.5 years to pursue a degree in history because I love that and I'm doing very poorly in it as well. However, when I'm left alone to do the work without instruction, I have had record of coming out on top (as far as foreign languages go).

My prof says that I took a completely different approach to analyzing history through the use of sine and cosine waves, and though he wasn't sure about how the amplitude/frequency/wavelength work into the equation and apply to Rousseau's Troglodyte society (offset cycles of power and virtue). He did say it makes sense and thinks that I have a strong scientific mind for history and philosophy. Now, this was all exchanged in the brief discussion after class, but he says he wants me to come in and discuss it at length. I've got the sick feeling he's talking about grad school, but if I can get my shit together, it's an option.

My question to TWW: is a mathematical analysis on history any more feasible than using math to analyze scientific phenomena? It's a given that math is founded on undeniable principles, but so is the majority of what I've been studying in the Enlightenment. It's a given that math is predictable and exact and doesn't apply to special historic circumstances that will cause spontaneous reactions, but so is science (and math can still be applied the particulars).

11/23/2005 7:57:48 AM

that has to be the dumbest thing i've ever heard of

11/23/2005 8:52:02 AM

ever see the end of Pi?

[Edited on November 23, 2005 at 11:04 AM. Reason : dsf]

11/23/2005 11:04:00 AM

yeah you definitely don't want to put a drill gun to your head

11/23/2005 11:25:47 AM

Yes, I've seen all of Pi. I still don't get how he kept it in one spit after pressing the button - would have been aweful hard. It's been years since I last saw it, but when I did see it I didn't understand if that last scene with the kid on the bench was him in heaven or him after lots of surgery and just a zombie.

11/23/2005 11:32:36 AM

what I got from it was that he was he had such a miserable life he decided to drill out part of his brain which I guess was a tumor so that he could live a normal life.

11/23/2005 11:58:57 AM

no.


2341234123512421341235145160923469345 variables in every historic event. Few of which can be accurately measured after the fact.

[Edited on November 23, 2005 at 2:06 PM. Reason : .]

11/23/2005 2:06:39 PM

Quote :

"Golden Corral "

11/23/2005 2:19:26 PM

^^ Wow, that didn't take long, but prove it anyway.

If nobody has gotten the point yet, I want some academic discussion on the matter or I'll have to start looking up possible profs to discuss it with. Didn't think I'd get much out of this site, but I'll always have a faint ember of hope that TWW's ocean of users includes one or two experienced in the combined fields.

11/23/2005 3:03:27 PM

Let me see if I have this straight in my head.

You did horrible in two different majors for years. Then you get an A on a test. Flashback to an all-you-can-eat buffet...

Now you want us to believe that you have some kind of inner genius waiting to bust out?


I don't see much substance in your question: can mathematics be used to analyze history? Isn't it used all the time?

11/23/2005 9:20:18 PM

Well, I just got my masters' in math from Cambridge, and also have a strong interest in sociology and history... I'd be interested in reading said essay you wrote to see what kind of approach you're taking. Maybe then I'd have a better understanding of what you're talking about doing, and could make better comments on it.

Nothing wrong with grad school; even drudging through the work of a PhD is probably still going to amount to some of the best, most carefree years of your life. Getting paid to learn is a pretty good deal, in my opinion.

11/24/2005 5:47:29 AM

PM sent.

Not asking for sympathy people, asking for ideas on the combination of fields. Any other flaming on my level of intelligence can go in chit chat.

11/24/2005 6:44:46 AM

Your explanation of your "intellectual niche" doesn't even make sense.

What purpose would your use of math serve towards historical analysis? How could you accurately quantify social milieus on a macro level? What purpose would it serve?

I find it hard to believe that any history prof I know would care about this.

[Edited on November 25, 2005 at 11:20 PM. Reason : .]

11/25/2005 11:13:32 PM

don't you get it?

if you could mathematically characterize history...

then you could predict the future!!!

11/25/2005 11:35:13 PM

11/26/2005 12:06:44 AM

^^^ Look up Dr. Anthony La Vopa and tell HIM that. I was trying to get some helpful idea from you about what he might have meant, but I'm removing this from my favorites since you guys don't seem to agree with a PhD.

[Edited on November 26, 2005 at 3:18 AM. Reason : Probably looking at mathematical colinguism here.]

11/26/2005 3:16:33 AM

Quote :

"My prof says that I took a completely different approach to analyzing history through the use of sine and cosine waves, and though he wasn't sure about how the amplitude/frequency/wavelength work into the equation and apply to Rousseau's Troglodyte society (offset cycles of power and virtue)."

Here's my concern, math's power comes from the specificity of it's arguments. Sure you could apply all kinds of various math models to historical events, but what would it mean? Could you really define objects in history such as "virtue" without ambiguity. I doubt it. More likely you would end up using math to make arguments about history which could be made without the math. I would guess it is how you define this notion of "virtue" that governs what you have to say about history. Perhaps I'm overly cynical, but it seems in this modern age much of what passes for "history" is not so much an analysis of the facts as it is an attempt to interpret the past for the advancement of some politcal ideology.

I took Hi 322 here a while back and I've been suspicious of "historians" ever sense.

11/26/2005 11:31:09 PM

Quote :

"that has to be the dumbest thing i've ever heard of "

11/26/2005 11:43:43 PM

Quote :

"Perhaps I'm overly cynical, but it seems in this modern age much of what passes for "history" is not so much an analysis of the facts as it is an attempt to interpret the past for the advancement of some politcal ideology. I took Hi 322 here a while back and I've been suspicious of "historians" ever sense."

First of all, I'm not sure what aspect of the history of modern science made you so cynical about history.

Secondly, this sounds like a case of someone getting their panties in a wad because history doesn't always support their beliefs.

Finally, I'd like to reiterate that this is a very, very bad idea.



Samir is angry because biologists are merely advancing their anti-Jesus pseudo-science.

[Edited on November 27, 2005 at 1:56 AM. Reason : .]

11/27/2005 1:45:52 AM

Perhaps the course has changed, but when I took Hi 322, I was looking forward to learning more about the history of science. However, what I learned in that course were a bunch of half-baked ideas about how science effects soceity and the converse. Very little actual science history!

The fact that the history dept. offers the course under the title "Rise of Modern Science" is what made me ultimately cynical about historians, well that and the fact that the texts we studied were apparently esteemed in the historical community.

I just have the naive notion that to understand the history of science one should study the lives of scientists and the details of how they came to the conculusions that they did. I have this crazy idea that to understand science's progress one should study the interelationships and interworkings of the science community, NOT the community at large as was suggested in Hi 322.

Ok, I could rant for pages about that course but I must sleep. I can go into more detail about why Hi 322 is the suckiest course I ever took at NCSU if you desire... anyway I was offended because I wanted to learn some science history, good grief our professor didn't even know the science history I knew at that point!

^nice movie

[Edited on November 27, 2005 at 3:03 AM. Reason : samir]

11/27/2005 3:01:50 AM

You are welcome to pursue whatever line of research you want to ... be prepared for having to deal with the realities of getting funded though. Also consider life outside of academia as well and ask if this path meets with your personal/career goals.

The idea itself isn't too farfetched ... you'd need to narrow your scope by a HUGE margin (IMHO) to make anything out of it. Pick a time period, pick a common theme within that time period, go from there. Don't go all Nostradamus though and attempt to make future predictions.

[Edited on November 27, 2005 at 3:34 AM. Reason : .]

11/27/2005 3:34:25 AM

^ Alright, I'll keep it realistic when I meet with him. I just get a kick out of it, which is why I want to pursue it. Most of what I'm doing in school now is not useful unless I become a prof myself, and I do not want to do that.

11/27/2005 4:23:50 PM

how did this thread get this long without somebody mentioning Asimov's Foundation

11/27/2005 4:45:25 PM

Because no one wants to admit that they're that geeky.

11/27/2005 5:28:46 PM

Quote :

"You did horrible in two different majors for years. Then you get an A on a test. Flashback to an all-you-can-eat buffet... Now you want us to believe that you have some kind of inner genius waiting to bust out?"

that's pretty funny

12/1/2005 9:53:48 PM