Mathematics and the Anthropocene equation: Comment on Gaffney O and Steffen W (2017) The Anthropocene equation. The Anthropocene Review 4:53-61

Reinout Heijungs; Jan J. Boersema; Gjalt Huppes

doi:10.1177/2053019617742416

Mathematics and the Anthropocene equation: Comment on Gaffney O and Steffen W (2017) The Anthropocene equation. The Anthropocene Review 4:53-61

Reinout Heijungs^*, Jan J. Boersema, Gjalt Huppes

^*Corresponding author for this work

CLUE+

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Comment / Letter to the editor › Academic

Abstract

A recent paper in The Anthropocene Review introduces an ‘Anthropocene equation’, which is assumed to model the Anthropocene. While welcoming mathematical treatment as such, we criticize the specific approach for being sloppy, wrong and empty. While the use of mathematics in the criticized paper suggests a high level of scientific rigor, it actually weakens the message rather than strengthens it.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	259-263
Number of pages	5
Journal	The Anthropocene Review
Volume	4
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019617742416
Publication status	Published - 1 Dec 2017

Keywords

Anthropocene equation
mathematics
rhetorics

Access to Document

10.1177/2053019617742416

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Mathematics and the Anthropocene equation: Comment on Gaffney O and Steffen W (2017) The Anthropocene equation. The Anthropocene Review 4:53-61'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{0a5324fb8b134e80b474c2efef813b31,

title = "Mathematics and the Anthropocene equation: Comment on Gaffney O and Steffen W (2017) The Anthropocene equation. The Anthropocene Review 4:53-61",

abstract = "A recent paper in The Anthropocene Review introduces an {\textquoteleft}Anthropocene equation{\textquoteright}, which is assumed to model the Anthropocene. While welcoming mathematical treatment as such, we criticize the specific approach for being sloppy, wrong and empty. While the use of mathematics in the criticized paper suggests a high level of scientific rigor, it actually weakens the message rather than strengthens it.",

keywords = "Anthropocene equation, mathematics, rhetorics",

author = "Reinout Heijungs and Boersema, {Jan J.} and Gjalt Huppes",

year = "2017",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1177/2053019617742416",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

pages = "259--263",

journal = "The Anthropocene Review",

issn = "2053-0196",

publisher = "SAGE Publications",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mathematics and the Anthropocene equation

T2 - Comment on Gaffney O and Steffen W (2017) The Anthropocene equation. The Anthropocene Review 4:53-61

AU - Heijungs, Reinout

AU - Boersema, Jan J.

AU - Huppes, Gjalt

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - A recent paper in The Anthropocene Review introduces an ‘Anthropocene equation’, which is assumed to model the Anthropocene. While welcoming mathematical treatment as such, we criticize the specific approach for being sloppy, wrong and empty. While the use of mathematics in the criticized paper suggests a high level of scientific rigor, it actually weakens the message rather than strengthens it.

AB - A recent paper in The Anthropocene Review introduces an ‘Anthropocene equation’, which is assumed to model the Anthropocene. While welcoming mathematical treatment as such, we criticize the specific approach for being sloppy, wrong and empty. While the use of mathematics in the criticized paper suggests a high level of scientific rigor, it actually weakens the message rather than strengthens it.

KW - Anthropocene equation

KW - mathematics

KW - rhetorics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038017647&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038017647&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/2053019617742416

DO - 10.1177/2053019617742416

M3 - Comment / Letter to the editor

AN - SCOPUS:85038017647

VL - 4

SP - 259

EP - 263

JO - The Anthropocene Review

JF - The Anthropocene Review

SN - 2053-0196

IS - 3

ER -