The Secret Lives of Numbers |
|
|
Statement
Certain patterns are made readily visible in the data browser, such as people's preference for multiples of 10, or reduplicative numbers such as 1010, 1111, 1212, etc. While American zip codes do not present a similarly coherent visual pattern, they can nevertheless be quite prominent—and unlike viewing cities from space, where only the larger cities are visible, here, both the larger and the more interesting places are brighter. Further highlights in the data reveal more fleeting reflections of our activities: bright spots such as those for 80486 and 68040 reveal our interest not only in technology, but tell us about the state of that technology at the time. Other points indicate our interest, or lack of interest, in history. And popular culture inevitably makes its presence felt, but perhaps less than we might expect. Linguists have noted that the ideal construct of proper "Language" diverges considerably from its actual use, suggesting that the linguistic "ideal" may be a pale abstraction of a far more nuanced and textured practice. Although we like to think of the use of numbers as objective and removed from our personal lives, it appears they also display elements of "practice." The denizens of the number line are not the mere automatons or corporate tools we have made them out to be: each has a personality, talents, communities, and sometimes a little je ne sais quois. They reflect us. This unusual reflection is the focus of this project.
One consequence of abstraction is that we must ignore the individual characteristics of the entities we abstract. As a result, the numbers we use to codify these abstractions must also lack character. Twenty-three cows may be better (or worse) than three cows, but "23," is not better than "3." Both numbers are simply descriptors, which inherit their meaning solely from taking part in fixed systems of fixed relations with other numbers. Apart from the existence of the numeric system (and the numbers' participation in it) individual numbers have no meaning. Thus, our number system is seen as an objective tool—a tool that does not reflect human preference, emotion, or inconsistency. As such it is a tool used not to express ourselves, but is reserved only to describe the world around us. We do not write poetry with numbers, nor do we express our personal doubts or prejudices through them ...except as our humanity is projected onto the emotionless toil of mathematical proof, ledger balances, or pedagogical exercises. But like every symbiotic couple, the tool we would like to believe is separate from us (and thus objective) actually provides an intricate reflection of our thoughts, interests, and capabilities. One intriguing result of this symbiosis is that the numeric system we use to describe patterns, is actually used in a patterned fashion to describe. We are imperfect users of our perfect tool. Buildings often skip the 13th floor, there is no year 0, and our only contact with very large numbers comes from government debt, numbers which remain unreal to us for their very size. We spend most of our time using numbers not for calculating, or even measuring, but in acts of remembering, guessing, and simplifying. The secret lives of numbers presented here, deals less with the apparently inviolate laws we have contrived for the staid little number, than with our own natures expressed through their quixotic use. This secret life tells us not only about the number system we have fashioned, but also about our cognitive, professional, and creative liaisons with the various inhabitants of the number line.
The Population Prominent Families In addition to the population at large, and the most prominent families within it, some numbers enjoy a certain degree of popularity owing to their occupation. Here are just a few examples; many more can yet be found in the data: The Journalists The Stars The Dorks & Techies The Responsible Citizens
Furthermore, historical years before the 1990s do not have magnitudes that reflect an atemporal vantage point, but appear instead to be talked about less, the further they fall from the present. (Perhaps this trend would not be visible if we were to do these searches on Web sites devoted only to history.) These phenomena point to the possibility of measuring the longevity of our memory, or the degree to which we care about how historical events may have shaped our present lives. In the slope of our curve between 1600 and 2002, we see an image of our cultural rate of forgetting.
Further comparisons over time are possible, and are likely to yield more interesting results than a look at any single slice of time can provide. Numeric searches on a defined subset of Web pages, such as those devoted to medicine, history, physics, or literature, may generate further insights. Differentiating country of origin may also prove interesting. On the most basic level, arranging the data using different parameters may shed light on patterns not visible in the current arrangements. The numeric system has helped document the regularity and periodicity inherent in our environments and ourselves for millenia. In allowing us to examine our own patterns of use, we hope this data will be used to shed some light on our cultural biases and numeric capacities. We also hope to underscore the influence technology has had in changing the set of numbers we can and cannot imagine.
Benford, F. 1938. The law of anomalous numbers. Proceedings
of the American Philosophical Society 78:551. |
|
• 