If statisticians are mathematicians then so are physicists and engineers.
Using math is different from being a mathematician. Mathematicians discover new mathematical principles, not just make use of existing ones.
Yeah I don't think this is the burn on statisticians OP makes it out to be. Lots of technical disciplines use mathematics, like... all of them I think? I don't know of any field that doesn't incorporate math that isn't purely artistic.
Also why are dentists catching strays?
And by extension, so is a cashier.
And as everyone knows theorems in statistics are brought to this world by storks.
Are you a programmer if you program programming languages, or a program programming programmer?
This is the difference between Computer Science (a field of mathematics) and Software Engineering (a field of engineering).
Statisticians are somewhere between Sociologists and Psychologists according Mathematicians and between Chemists and physicists according to Statisticians.
Between chemists and physicists is where I would place them too, as someone with a physics degree.
philosophers way to the right of mathematicians saying "oh! I didn't notice you there"
i'm an economist (basically advanced statistics with weird assumptions).
I'd rank them macro econ > sociology > psych > micro econ > stats > bio > chem > phys > > > math > > > > > > > > > > philosophy
I don't think I will ever figure out the order to read these things.
Just... Why? Wouldn't you want it to be formatted in a way that's immediately obvious what order to read them?
I used bluesky lately (which i guess uses the same format?) and it looks like so because we are viewing a reply(3) to a post (2) that cite another post (1)
Thanks. I hate it.
So convenient.
Same
Genuine question: what's confusing about this post?
There are some that are confusingly structured, but this one should be quite obvious
Obvious would be top to bottom. You know, like how every human reads.
For replies, yes. And that is the case. But the first one is a quote, not a reply
And it makes sense to put the reply before the thing they're replying to.
As someone who has taught both mathematics and statistics in his life the real difference boils down to proof Vs evidence.
The mathematician is uncertain because Gödel showed no system can prove its own consistency. Proof is (generally) rigourous enough that this is the main issue; once it has been proven (assuming your axioms are good), it's considered true.
The statistician is uncertain because they work with samples rather than the population. There is also the issue of inferring causation even if your sample isn't unrepresentative. With statistics you're always building evidence, but you can never have concrete proof via statistical methods alone.
Also fun fact, given that there is more than one type of mathematics (e.g. platonist Vs intuitionistic), some giving different answers to the same question (excluded middle/trichotomy on the reals), and all of which are equiconsistent, we realise that mathematics really is just a branch of philosophy (i.e. what axioms are you willing to believe).
Everything is philosophy, ultimately
"statistics" can mean two things: it's a field of mathematics, and it's also the application of that field to the real world.
There are many theorems in statistics: the central limit theorem, the proof of the t-test, for example. This is maths.
But if what you're doing is assuming a certain real distribution is normal, or testing for normality of real data, that's not maths any more.
Just like calculus is real maths, but once you're solving real integrals for real scenarios, you're doing science.
Statisticians in reality are programmers, typically using R or Python to run models. You only ever touch math in undergrad.*
There's a long tradition of skipping hard math, though-- ever have a stats class that has you looking at a t-table for a critical value? That's because it gives us a cutoff to use instead of calculating a p-value (which is hard).
*Note: statistics majors in PhD programs still need the hardcore math. Matrix algebra, calculus, etc. Who else is gonna make the packages we use?
I took statistics with Roger Purves. I distinctly remember him saying that stats wasn't "math" in his intro lecture.
And technical analysis is the astrology of the investing world
This is a very very very good analogy
I am oscillating between "math is just applied philosophy" and this.
I have a graduate degree in statistics and use it heavily in my job. I always tell people that mathematicians study math, but statisticians just use math the study data.
To badly paraphrase Mark Twain..."There are lies, damned lies, statistics, and polls!".
Even the original quote isn't from Twain. He misattributed it to British PM Disraeli, but the saying originated after Disraeli's death.
A bit ironic given the quote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics
Cool info. Thanks!
Are they constantly contradicting the advice of the rest of the mathematicians?
Mathematics is a search for absolute truth, as proven from axioms.
Meanwhile, this is said about statistics: There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
And even when used in good faith, statistics tends to move toward approximate truth. Statistics can tell you the exact chance that you'll pull a red marble out of a bag of other marbles, but until you actually pull the marble, it still can't tell you exactly what color marble you'll pull. Run the experiment again, and it may turn out differently next time. You never get absolute truth, only percentage approximations.
Very different than other types of math, yes, where 2+2 is always 4, and you can know it for absolute certain in every case for all of time.
Stats is technically math but it's the softest math you can imagine. A huge amount of it is data collection and interpretation. It works different parts of your brain, requires different skills than pure math
Irl they become actuaries. It's usually applied mathematics and if by mathematician one means someone exploring mathematics alone then this is accurate. CompSci kinda falls half into this and half outside of it.
It reminds me of the statement by Clifford Stoll, (paraphrased) the first time you do something it's science, the second time you're an engineer, the third time you're a technician. link.
In essence most statistician work ranges in the engineer to technician level of mathematics.
Terrance Tao is an absolute beast. If you debate him on this you'll get a rigorous proof back on how you're wrong.
I like to think of them as accountants. They sure use numbers, but I'm not sure what they're doing with them is in a'y way shape or form morally acceptable.
Or the surgeons, who started off as glorified barbers, and to this day don’t get the title of doctor, even though “brain surgery” and “open-heart surgery” are metaphors for tasks requiring extreme skill
What? That must be a thing in other countries. Here in the USA all surgeons are doctors.
Then who are the chiropractors?
Economists, money math is pretty much make-believe
Economists are fantasy writers whose entire purpose is maintaining the falsehood that upholds the wealthy getting to have so much wealth. Much like lawyers whose entire job is upholding the rights and privileges of property owners
Most of them won't do mathematics research. And since realistically it is quite hard to both innovate in mathematics and in an applied field at the same time, the differentiation is valid.
Most STEM scientists i know end up doing statistics instead because it's easier to have a paycheque
In that case probability theorists are the chiropractors of math
Hot damn, that's a take!
I really don't want to take anything away from dentists, cause I got an emergency removal that quite possibly saved my life.
And then some
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
