The Da Vinci Code

While on the houseboat, I couldn't only read a technical book. No-one would have forgiven me. So I read "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown. I presume I'm close to the last person on the planet to actually read this book but I decided it was time to do so before the movie comes out.

It certainly is a great little yarn with lots of breath-taking action but I have to say the mathematical side of me kept cringing every time he'd draw a completely unwarranted conclusion.

The arguments in the book are told by a pair of academic characters. This allows Dan Brown to make amazing statements but have someone else say them like they're fact. It sounds so authoritative. However, it's the logic that gets me. It goes something like:

1. Authoritative character says "A" is true.

2. 2nd Authoritative character says "B" is true.

3. One of them points out that if "A" and "B" were in fact true, "C" would be true.

However, "C" is something Dan Brown already knows to be a fact so he keeps using this sort of "reverse inference" to make points. He completely ignores the fact that there could be a huge number of other possibilities as to why "C" could be true. In general I find that the most obvious reason is usually the right one, not some convoluted or conspiracy theory. If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck, odds are it's a duck.