Tussur Silk’s Purpose

I have been a student of randomness and one of its offspring, uncertainty, for a while.  This website is focused on understanding randomness and managing uncertainty from a faker’s point of view. I have gathered all the information here for someone very dear to me and this is how we used to communicate. I am not interested in debates or discussions. Please accept my apologies if that offends you.

I am both fascinated and scared by randomness. Fascinated because randomness is impartial, terrified because its offspring, uncertainty, can hit one in ways one can’t imagine.

But why from a faker’s point of view?  Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a faker as “one who makes false claims of identity or expertise” and that is the narrow scope in which I use the word. I could have used the word “Pretender” but I like “Faker” better.  Pretender sounds a little pretentious. Fakers are overachievers, goal seekers and terrified of failure and hence uncertainty.  We are smart but emotional. Although capable of in-depth analysis, fakers usually depend on simple intuition or heuristics. At times this leads us to make wrong choices. I hope to present a scientific way to analyze randomness and either minimize downside risk from uncertainty or even profit from it in ethical and legal ways.

What is a scientific method? I subscribe to Karl Popper’s definition and emphasize the concept of falsifiability.

Here is an inspiring quote from the famous 10th century scientist, astronomer, mathematician, and philosopher, Alhazen on scientific method:

“The duty of the man*, who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and … attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency.”

* Please accept my apologies if the use of the word “man” bothers you in any way I choose to focus on the intent/message and ignore the bias/messenger. I do quote a lot of people, who have influenced my thinking but I do not idolize them. Some of them have character flaws. Should we not admire the beauty of a lotus because it blossomed in a muddy pond?

Of course, every method has its limitations. Humility is a much needed trait for us fakers. Dr. Richard Feynman, Physicist, said the following and captures the tone of this entire website:

“I think it’s much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of uncertainty about different things, but I am not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things I don’t know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we’re here. I don’t have to know an answer. I don’t feel frightened not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell.”

Thank you.