The Upside of Irrationality

BY NOW I hope it’s clear that if we place human beings on a spectrum between the hyperrational Mr. Spock and the fallible Homer Simpson, we are closer to Homer than we realize. At the same time, I hope you also recognize the upside of irrationality—that some of the ways in which we are irrational are also what makes us wonderfully human (our ability to find meaning in work, our ability to fall in love with our creations and ideas, our willingness to trust others, our ability to adapt to new circumstances, our ability to care about others, and so on). Looking at irrationality from this perspective suggests that rather than strive for perfect rationality, we need to appreciate those imperfections that benefit us, recognize the ones we would like to overcome, and design the world around us in a way that takes advantage of our incredible abilities while overcoming some of our limitations. Just as we use seat belts to protect ourselves from accidents and wear coats to keep the chill off our backs, we need to know our limitations when it comes to our ability to think and reason—particularly when making important decisions as individuals, business executives, and public officials. One of the best ways to discover our mistakes and the different ways to overcome them is by running experiments, gathering and scrutinizing data, comparing the effect of the experimental and control conditions, and seeing what’s there.

Googol and Google

Crucially, freeze-frame gags provided opportunities for the mathematical writers on The Simpsons to throw in some references that would appeal to hard-core number nerds. For example, “Colonel Homer” (1992) features the first appearance of the local movie theater, and eagle-eyed viewers would have noticed that it is called the Springfield Googolplex. In order to appreciate this reference it is necessary to go back to 1938, when the American mathematician Edward Kasner was in conversation with his nephew Milton Sirotta. Kasner casually mentioned that it would be useful to have a label to describe the number 10100 (or 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000). The nine-year-old Milton suggested the word googol.

In his book Mathematics and the Imagination, Kasner recalled how the conversation with his nephew continued: “At the same time that he suggested ‘googol’ he gave a name for a still larger number: ‘Googolplex.’ A googolplex is much larger than a googol, but is still finite, as the inventor of the name was quick to point out. It was first suggested that a googolplex should be 1, followed by writing zeros until you get tired.”

The uncle rightly felt that the googolplex would then be a somewhat arbitrary and subjective number, so he suggested that the googolplex should be redefined as 10^googol. That is 1 followed by a googol zeroes, which is far more zeroes than you could fit on a piece of paper the size of the observable universe, even if you used the smallest font imaginable.

These terms—googol and googolplex—have become moderately well known today, even among members of the general public, because the term googol was adopted by Larry Page and Sergey Brin as the name of their search engine. However, they preferred a common misspelling, so the company is called Google, not Googol. The name implies that the search engine provides access to vast amounts of information. Google headquarters is, not surprisingly, called the  Googleplex.”

Googol and Google

Crucially, freeze-frame gags provided opportunities for the mathematical writers on The Simpsons to throw in some references that would appeal to hard-core number nerds. For example, “Colonel Homer” (1992) features the first appearance of the local movie theater, and eagle-eyed viewers would have noticed that it is called the Springfield Googolplex. In order to appreciate this reference it is necessary to go back to 1938, when the American mathematician Edward Kasner was in conversation with his nephew Milton Sirotta. Kasner casually mentioned that it would be useful to have a label to describe the number 10100 (or 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000). The nine-year-old Milton suggested the word googol.

In his book Mathematics and the Imagination, Kasner recalled how the conversation with his nephew continued: “At the same time that he suggested ‘googol’ he gave a name for a still larger number: ‘Googolplex.’ A googolplex is much larger than a googol, but is still finite, as the inventor of the name was quick to point out. It was first suggested that a googolplex should be 1, followed by writing zeros until you get tired.”

The uncle rightly felt that the googolplex would then be a somewhat arbitrary and subjective number, so he suggested that the googolplex should be redefined as 10^googol. That is 1 followed by a googol zeroes, which is far more zeroes than you could fit on a piece of paper the size of the observable universe, even if you used the smallest font imaginable.

These terms—googol and googolplex—have become moderately well known today, even among members of the general public, because the term googol was adopted by Larry Page and Sergey Brin as the name of their search engine. However, they preferred a common misspelling, so the company is called Google, not Googol. The name implies that the search engine provides access to vast amounts of information. Google headquarters is, not surprisingly, called the  Googleplex.”

The Kind of Math That Has Letters

NELSON: She can do the kind of math that has letters. Watch! What’s x, Lisa?

LISA: Well, that depends.

NELSON: Sorry. She did it yesterday.

The Simpsons and Mathematics

Although the writers have offered various explanations of why mathematical minds lend themselves to writing comedy, one important question remains: Why have all these mathematicians ended up working on The Simpsons rather than 30 Rock or Modern Family?

Al Jean has one possible explanation, which emerged as he recalled his teenage years and his relationship with laboratories: “I hated experimental science because I was terrible in the lab and I could never get the results correct. Doing mathematics was very different.” In other words, scientists have to cope with reality and all its imperfections and demands, whereas mathematicians practice their craft in an ideal abstract world. To a large extent, mathematicians, like Jean, have a deep desire to be in control, whereas scientists enjoy battling against reality.

According to Jean, the difference between mathematics and science is paralleled by the difference between writing for a live-action sitcom versus writing for an animated series:

“I think live-action TV is like experimental science, because actors do it the way they want to do it and you have to stick within those takes. By contrast, animation is more like pure mathematics, because you have real control over exactly the nuance of the line, how the lines are delivered, and so on. We can really control everything. Animation is a mathematician’s universe.”

Rubik’s Cube which I will never solve!

As proprietor and bartender of Moe’s Tavern, Moe regularly receives prank calls from Bart asking to speak with particular people with fictitious and embarrassing names. This prompts Moe to call out to everyone in the bar with lines such as “Has anyone seen Maya Normousbutt?” and “Amanda Hugginkiss? Hey, I’m looking for Amanda Hugginkiss.” The “Donnie Fatso” episode is notable because Moe receives a phone call that is not a prank and not from Bart. Instead, Marion Anthony D’Amico, head of Springfield’s notorious D’Amico crime family, is calling. Fat Tony, as he is known to his friends (and enemies), simply wants Moe to find out if his Russian friend Yuri Nator is in the bar. Assuming that this is another prank by Bart, Moe makes the mistake of threatening the caller: I’m gonna chop you into little pieces and make you into a Rubik’s Cube which I will never solve!