Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Top 10 Scientific Advancements
Over the next couple of weeks I will share my list with you. And just to be arbitrary (blogger's prerogative), I am going to limit my list to 10 things.
In the meantime however, I would be very interested to hear from you.
So the open question is this -
What advancements in science do you think have most transformed the world we live in? You can be as specific or general as you want.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
The court of public opinion
The study gathered relatively un-biased individuals. The group as a whole was surveyed for their “approval” of a certain candidate. The group was then presented with credible, damning information about this candidate. They were once again polled, and as expected, the approval declined precipitously. Now the interesting part. A second piece of information was presented that conclusively, and without ambiguity, showed that the first evidence was baseless and concocted. A final poll showed that the approval again improved, but did not return, not even close, to its original mark.
I am not quite sure what this says about people and their intelligence. I can say that it is obvious that emotions and feelings of mistrust come into play.
So what lesson can we take from this? Mud slinging works. And we know it works, because if it consistently failed, it would no longer be the political weapon of choice.
Which is why it is bothersome when I hear politicians neck deep in the mud. It is a very transparent effort to sway voters with falsehood. If you can’t win with the truth… well, truth is so limiting anyway. Plus, aren’t there two sides to every story? And we all love winners. Even if they had to cheat. It is the American way no?
But that is not the end of it. Some politicians not only want to cheat, but would prefer to not look bad while doing so. So they send underlings to go do the dirty work.
Someday, if we all evolve a little more, or are encouraged to use our God-given critical thinking skills, we will see these candidates for what they are. Cowardly liars.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Biden / Palin Debate Debacle
Again, in salient pseudo-summary style, my takes on last night:
- I probably gave this one away with my post title. With every ensuing political debate I watch, I am convinced that debating is now a lost art. Call me delusional, but the last time I checked, a debate includes: questions, relevant answers, and rebuttals, with a dash of moderation. Last night we got questions.
Score: Biden 5; Plain 3; moderator 4 - A good debate challenges participants to show their skill in critical thinking, accurate retrieval of facts, and yes, performance. One can score amazingly well with just the performance aspect provided for - perception is half the battle. Biden came across calm and collected. Palin nervous, shaky and over dramatic.
On Performance - Score: Biden 6; Palin 3 - Itemized lists are not my favorite means of communication (not for a debate anyhow). Biden loves them. Small but bothersome detail - getting lost in detailing an item in a list and forgetting the count or even that one IS counting.
- Debaters often forget just how much they can sound like broken records. Yes, they are trying to engrave information in our heads, but that can only happen if we keep our attention on them long enough for the sponge action to happen. McCain/Palin just HAVE to find a better word than "maverick".
- Non-sequiturs:
--> Palin wants to address global warming, even though she either doesn't believe people are causing it, or doesn't think that its causes are important in trying to find a solution. Huh???
--> Palin would like us to think that her faith based belief systems would not affect her ticket's stance on such issues as gay marriage/unions. Sadly both candidates are taking half measures on this civil-rights issue.
--> Every politician wants to be the harbinger of change. As I understand the word "change", it is a relative term. You change FROM one thing TO another. And yet every time Biden tried to tar McCain with the Bush brush, Palin would chide him for looking only backwards. Not sure what her change is all about, other than a nice sounding word.
Score: Biden 8; Palin 4 - Spin on facts. Few things these days are true/false. Politicians know how to exploit this ambiguity to support their positions. There were several times last night where there was a disputed fact. Who voted for what and how often was brought up just a little too often, and seldom agreed on. Of course, that is a litmus test that means very little in these pork barrel days. Since few things voted on ever stand alone, one has to sully convictions by taking the bad with the good.
Score: Tie.
Give a quick vote on the left hand side bar!
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Obama / McCain Debate
So let me start by saying that I consider myself an independent, and could vote republican, democrat, or any other party if I felt the candidate would do his/her job successfully.
This year, barring any large surprises, I will vote for Obama.
So now that my political leanings and biases are well established - here is my take on last night's debate.
- Even if McCain does not respect Obama's politics or opinions, he should respect HIM. He was disrespectful and condescending last night. Not a trait I want to see any more of in this county's executive branch.
- Obama may be a little hurt by being overly respectful. To concede that your opponent is occasionally right (i.e. you agree with him), works well in most arenas (barring politics). He might have instead used the words "I am glad, Senator McCain, that you agree with my position on...
. Same thing, but assumes ownership of the idea. - Did anyone notice McCain's odd mannerisms every time Obama spoke? It was painful to watch. I know McCain was trying to use Obama's air-time to silently communicate disagreement, amusement and condescension. If that was an overt strategy on his part, in my opinion it is something he should immediately discontinue.
- Obama still panders a little too much for my liking. Example - McCain touted that he wears a POW bracelet. Mind you, I really couldn't care less. Instead of letting it pass uncommented, Obama said he too wore one. Now I *think* he was trying to say "so what if you wear one, how exactly does that qualify you to be president?". In these ridiculously political days - he could not say that without offending some veterans, or being misquoted. He should have let McCain's comment slide.
- McCain's intent was a little to single-minded and obvious. He wants to mention that he is the candidate with experience. Barrak is too young, too inexperienced, and naive. However, the punch was missing. For me to make that point, I need to expound on HOW my opponent is displaying that naivete. He failed to do that. In fact, there were several occasions when Obama spoke about a topic; McCain followed up with his too oft spoken "You just don't understand", and then proceeded to repeat the same basic points Obama said. Sorta takes the punch out of the take home when you speak from both sides of your mouth.
Monday, September 1, 2008
How business is done
As a general rule, business exists where profit can be made. Pretty basic stuff. Nothing wrong with making a profit. Of course, to make a profit, I usually have to sell something. Usually goods or services. When the supply greatly exceeds demand, prices tend to asymptotically approach the "zero profit" line. This is not really good for business, and tends to dispose of the more inefficient companies, and discourage new entrants into this market. In the end, a fairly good
balance can take place with proper free market driving forces. Everyone benefits, both consumer and business.
But how does this translate to the oil industry?
For starters, you are not very likely today to see many new entries into this market. It takes too much money to get started, and small businesses just don't have the economies of scale necessary to be competitive. So very limited competition.
On the demand end - how much choice does the average person have to reduce gas consumption? There is a little wiggle room, but not much. So we have a fairly fixed demand on a per capita basis, at least here in the USA. (Side note - if we were talking the lobster business, and prices tripled, people would stop eating lobster. Problem solved. But since the world's industry is based largely on oil - price increases will become inflationary).
Everyone knows that oil reserve supplies are limited, yet I am not of the opinion that this is THE reason for the price hikes we have seen over the last 2-3 years. The key suppliers of crude have made sure to allocate production to "match" demand. In the oil industry, excess is difficult to maintain, as you can only store so much oil. So one might infer that this is just how this business needs to be run. But wait. Haven't global markets recently stretched supplies? Driven prices upward? Indeed. And there were few industry experts who were surprised. We have had no fewer than 5-10 years "notice". So why wasn't the industry prepared?
Because that would be bad business. A couple minor shortfalls in supply do wonders for prices. And everybody in the business celebrates. Crude oil suppliers, refiners, and oil/gas distributers. Executives get well deserved pats on that back and record shattering bonuses, stock options, retirement benefits, etc. Again, nothing new about this.
Just don't expect drilling to add much to global market supplies. And don't be so naive to think that if we drill in the USA, or off-shore, that we somehow have dibs on this supply. Unless this country abandons the free market realm and nationalizes the oil industry - oil drilled here will be sold on the world market. Of course, even this is short-sighted. What incentive do oil companies have in off-shore drilling? They have a winning combination right this moment, and they have no desire to invest many billions of dollars in additional off-shore drilling that will only serve to reduce their profit margin. There are allocated lands on-shore today they have not drilled. There may be many reasons, the largest is lack of incentive.
So why do you suppose there is such a "drill, and drill now" mantra being spoken by both sides of the aisle? Because the sheeple want to think that their government is looking out for them, and government is all too willing to strike any pose to garner their votes. End of story.
The prevailing belief is that we have an oil shortage. It is a myth. Oil production has never been higher. The world demand has just outstripped this and other nations' abilities to REFINE the oil. So drill all we want, if the refining capacity is not increased, then we have no more gas.
Will there be ANY winners in the "drill now" crowd? Minimal. Add a couple percentage points (at most) to global oil supplies starting in 10 years or so. Employ a few thousand people. Make people *feel* better, even if they pay the same price at the pump.
Who loses? The environment. Our trust that the government can address a problem with a real solution. Politician's honesty.
The longer we keep looking in the wrong places, with simple-minded solutions to complex problems, the harder the fall will be when we get caught with our pants further down than they already are. Government and big business make for a nefarious combination when allied against the people. And although we the people hold the trump card, we refuse to play it. When we do, we can only hope it won't be too late.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Harbinger
(conclusion of "Inaugural")
The scheduled third quarter inspection was still two weeks away, but the date had been moved up to satisfy some government bureaucrat. She thought them all fools, but was glad to be here nonetheless. This was her third inspection at the heart of Pinnacle’s tether; the only spot where you could truly experience zero G. Pulled by gravity at one end, centrifugal forces at the other, this magic spot was where the high tech tether “hung” in both directions. It seemed a rope at this spot suffered the same lack of a sense of up and down as people did. It also happened to be where the highest tension was exerted. All things being equal, this was where a failure would be most likely to occur. Physical inspections were the most laborious but fruitful means of ensuring the safety of Pinnacle.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Inaugural (story continued)
“What’s wrong?” asked Brandon, noticing the freshly furrowed brow on Evan’s face. Evan was manning the Hyper Spectral imaging computers, which were currently running diagnostics and calibrations on the soon to be unveiled Pinnacle Observatory.“It looks like there might be a problem with the calibration algorithms. The diagnostics are coming back normal, but there are a number of stellar grids that are failing to calibrate.”
Now it was Brandon’s turn to be concerned. “I thought we exercised all this two, four and six weeks ago? Why didn’t we see a problem then?”
There was no answer to give, so Evan remained silent, intently studying the cryptic numbers littering the computer consoles. He knew what was at stake. They were six hours away from THE official ribbon cutting ceremony, when the new Observatory would officially become operational. Scientists, and not just those in the particle physics and cosmology fields, had been anticipating this day for years. It heralded the arrival of the most advanced tool in the arsenal of cosmic observatories. Hubble had radically revolutionized and advanced science – there was no less hope for Pinnacle One. It was not just another telescope. It was the culmination of decades of research into the emerging quantum sensor field, a specialization of the very successful quantum computer revolution.
The only fear was that this tool was as good as science could ever hope for. A single photon could be sensed accurately. Sophisticated computers would process the information in near real time and correlate amplitudes, frequencies, phases. The claim was that this observatory would be able to perform coherent observation throughout the entire observable spectrum. There were still many skeptics, who simply would not believe any system could be built to the exacting tolerances and specifications to make the theoretical system work.
The station had been preparing for months for the arrival of scientific, political and financial VIPs. Security had never been tighter. And the only day they were not allowed to have a problem? Today.
Evan’s momentary lapse into contemplations of a premature end to his budding career were interrupted “You know, if you are messing with my mind here…”.
“Nope, wish I was”.
“So what next genius? How long should I give you to figure out if this is a glitch or a real problem?”
“One second…” Evan was not the most stellar multi-tasker. However he was one of the best in his field. Brandon watched with a mix of confusion and admiration while Evan tapped away, with screens opening and closing almost too fast to take in the content. As fast as he worked, precious minutes were ticking away, each one heightening Brandon’s impatience. Finally Even slowed down, and looked over, saying “Here goes nothing”. He opened the switch guard, and pressed the glowing Calibrate button. The screen began filling in a complex checkerboard with numbers. One by one they began turning green, the universal color signifying all is well. But then the same grids as before flashed red. Both men muttered under their breath. “You better start panicking and call in the reinforcements boss”, said Evan. “We might be able to reboot the computer, but there is no guarantee that is the problem. And the reboot sequence takes about an hour to complete to get back to this point. If this is an issue with the programming, or worse, the hardware, we might not even have time to diagnose the root problem, much less fix it.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Intergalactic travel – science or fiction?
Just to put this in perspective. Lets take the nearest star outside of our sun as our galactic destination. That would be Alpha Centauri. A favorite of sci-fi authors precisely because of its nearness. How near is it? Well, if you had a nicely paved road, and obeyed typical freeway speed limits, it would take you just under a billion years to get there. Ok, we know we all speed a little. Half a billion. I still think you will need to stop here and there to stretch your legs along the road. Silly me – who drives a car to a star? Let’s instead take a fancy space shuttle. At nearly 18,000 mph, we can reduce our travel time to about a million years! I think we might get hungry along the way. Too bad there are no small towns or gas stations where we could stop and refill.
So if we are not going to take the shuttle, what could we take? We could try other options, like light sails, ionic or nuclear propulsion systems. But, we will instead cut to the chase. Let’s assume you have the most advanced propulsion system that can theoretically exist. An antimatter drive! Yup, antimatter is real. Not much of it yet, but it can be made, even if it is but one atom at a time. Let’s further assume you want to get there and return to tell of your tale to someone you know. Forty years sounds about right. Twenty years out, twenty back. That, in case you were doing the math, is 1/5th of the speed of light. On average! How much antimatter would it take to do this? Depends greatly on how big a ship you intend on taking for a spin. But roughly speaking, maybe a ton of antimatter would do it. So if someone handed me a ton of antimatter, could it be done? Not today. Remember, I still have to control the antimatter-matter annihilations that create my propulsive energy. And trust me, to get me there and back in the required time, we have to burn it hot. Real hot. Too hot for any known element to withstand. And then there is the unpleasantness of radiation, and the Kuiper belt, and the Oort cloud to get past; and all this just within our own puny solar system. Not to mention having to eat, drink, breathe and keep warm for all those years.
I guess what I am saying is that you should not hold your breath for any imminent human travels beyond our backyard. A shame. I so enjoyed holding on to the illusion of possibility!
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Ascent (continued)
The opportunity to work in the most technologically advanced facility on the planet warranted taking some risks. But there was where the similarity stopped. It had taken over a decade to manufacture the 260,000 tons of carbon composite nano-tubes that comprised the cables which hoisted people and goods up and down the space elevator’s length. Not to mention the decades of research required to overcome the issues, known and unknown. Radiation, lightning strikes, jet stream, meteorites, safety, cost, and ownership were but the most often cited issues that had kept this modern wonder from being built. There had been skeptics even after it was built, and probably still were. Though 11 years without a major mishap had quelled most of their predictions of doom.
Alan knew that the name “Pinnacle One” was intended to connote height, but still thought it more appropriately denoted one of man’s ultimate achievements. Almost as impressive as the technological prowess required to pull off its construction and maintenance, was the political cooperation that had been required. Building Pinnacle would have bankrupted a dozen average countries. Combined. People of some prominence had also pointed out the Panama Canal tragedy of ’44 as a warning and lesson. So when it came time to establish the necessary multi-national funding, all contributors were welcomed, the prevalent wisdom being that the likelihood of sabotage by a disgruntled nation was inversely proportional to its investment and return. It had taken years of patient negotiation to achieve the necessary buy-in. Even so there has been a couple of holdouts. Nations and peoples that had been effectively waging undeclared wars for hundreds if not thousands of years would never be sufficiently reconciled to sign an agreement, much less sit at the same table. Provisional use agreements were set up in order to keep even these dissenters as involved as they could be. Even with all this, Alan still held on to some deep misgivings. Would some misguided zealot think himself the agent of a God intent of sundering this edifice - as was the tower of Babel over 5000 years ago? He had not occupied himself with these concerns much before, but couldn't stop the panicky thoughts each time he heard, or worse, felt, the unfamiliar creaks and groans from the elevator.
His unpleasant thoughts were interrupted as he heard the hiss of air and his ears pop with the equalization of pressure needed before the doors would open and admit him to Pinnacle City. As the door opened unceremoniously, his fears melted away, a sense of awe overpowering him.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Global Warming, Evolution and The fate of the Universe...
The genesis for this post came from the latest article I read about Global Warming. Or rather, the 260 comments left on the ABC news article. I didn't read them all. After a while they all tended to one of a number of equivalent slants. From "Global Warming is the greatest hoax to be perpetrated" to "We are all about to die". There is much fertile middle ground where the real answer is most likely to exist.
However I digress. One of the assumptions (or at least simplifications) used by many for this and many other arguments, is that this planet is a closed system. In physics, a closed system must obey certain laws. Conservation of energy (1st law of thermodynamics) and the increase in entropy or randomness (2nd law of thermodynamics) to name a couple.
But we can be thankful that this is not the case.
Solar and galactic radiation bombard our planet every moment - providing some of the necessary elements for weather and change. We may slather ourselves with sunscreens and lotions to avoid the abuse of solar radiation - but without it, aeons ago our ancestral lines might have never progressed to leave the oceans.
While there are few things that can compete with the fate of the human race, some physicists have pondered the question on a more cosmic scale. They believe that the universe is cooling down (doesn't that sound like a good balancer to global warming?). That is one more way of saying entropy is increasing, and the available "useful" energy that can do work and support life is diminishing. Ok, the process is purportedly going to take billions of years to happen. You and I, and likely humanity as a whole will never have to address this impending universal Armageddon. So why bring this up? Because humanity consistently sizes their universe to the size of their imagination. You can guess which one wins. I have read enough physics (and fiction I admit) to be of the opinion that even our universe is unlikely to fall in the "closed system" category. I can't imagine what lies outside this universe. It could be that we live in what some have called a "foam" of universes. Or there may be nearly infinite universes, each existing as a finite probability. No matter what though, scientists can only base their hypothesis and theories on what is observable today. But if any of these assumptions are wrong... then some of the more basic tenets of science could be but approximations to a greater truth. And if there are more universes that can interact with this one - then maybe the end science foresees for this universe will not come to pass.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Speed of Light - Revisited
Interestingly, the following might sound more like fiction than what really is. You tell me...
Everyone knows, or at least I hope, that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant. We give its speed a special name: "c". Yes, the same c from Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2.
To remove any math, let me draw a simple analogy. Imagine a compass, with just the North South line, and perpendicular East West line. Traveling North represents you moving through time. West is you moving through space. Normally, we think that moving through time (North) is a constant. Watches tick regularly, etc. But when you move through space (West) relative to an observer, it turns out that you actually slow down your progress through time. The effect is small for any speed you and I can easily achieve, but if you could travel the actual speed of light, time would literally stop! Per the analogy - you have changed your compass heading.
But here is the tricky part - you have NOT modified your overall speed. The combined speed in space-time is still the speed of light! Just like the compass needle, your speed did not get longer or shorter, it just turned a little off the its original Northerly heading.
So far, if you don't start asking some questions, this just seems like one more useless thought experiment. So...
If we are fairly stationary in space, are we saying that we are still moving at the speed of light? The curious answer is YES. We move though the time dimension at the speed of light! When we get into the Starship enterprise and start moving at sci-fi speeds approaching that of light, we are just borrowing from our speed in time (time slows down) and replacing it with speed through space. So don't let anyone tell you that you can't move at the speed of light. You are REQUIRED to travel at the speed of light at all times. Any actual speed we gather in the spatial dimensions is achieved at the expense of borrowing from our progess through time!
Ok, then what about light itself? Didn't we just say that the speed of light is a constant "c"? And isn't this speed measured exclusively in the spatial dimension? Indeed. Light's heading per our analogy is Westward only. No motion at all in the Northerly direction. But... North, that is the passage of time isn't it? What does that mean for the poor photon, which is really all light is? It means that all light lives in a timeless world. Time can never progress for a photon. Unlike us, who can choose by some investment of energy to participate in both spatial and temporal dimensions, photons are captives of a single time point.
As if THAT isn't stranger than fiction...
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
And Now for the Horse
The elevator in question has been dubbed by pundits and proponents alike as a "space elevator". Should you not have the time or inclination to read up, it is, in short, a strong cable tethered to some anchor far out in space, balanced by its own weight and the outward force created by whatever it is that anchors the other end. Such an elevator would revolutionize space travel, affording cheaper and safer transportation than current technology could ever provide.
There are many technical challenges to this space elevator. The good news is that the most daunting - the lack of a sufficiently strong material - has been overcome. Even so, it is a lofty concept, and one which I sincerely hope will not remain exclusively in the realm of science fiction.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Short story intro
The ideas, howver, still bounce around in my head from time to time. So without any further delay, I dust off my prior efforts in the hope of breathing new life (and more humble beginnnings) to my amateur writing. Here is one version of what I wrote.
“Five thousand meters” chimed the talking altimeter. He could have sworn it spoke in a faint British accent. Not surprising, as this has been a North American / British collaboration. In less than five minutes he would be able to see a transoceanic flight dead on. That is, if any flights would have been allowed within 300 kilometers. Sophisticated radar and visual detectors monitored this airspace. A necessity with the myriad global terrorist organizations looking to make political statements. The thought gave him chills. No. Coincidence and nothing more. At this altitude, even with the heated environment in the elevator, the temperature had dropped more than 10 degrees Celsius. He was not surprised. He had been briefed, unnecessarily he grumbled, about what he could expect on his trip to the Near Space Observatory. Amazingly, at just over 400 Kilometers altitude, the entire trip would take less than 45 minutes. The first 10 minutes would go by rather uneventfully, with only a minor drop in temperature and air pressure, along with some minor buffeting by the jet stream. At 20 minutes, he would begin to notice a darker hue to the sky’s usual baby blue. He would not, as many people thought, feel any significant drop in gravity. For that he would need to travel much higher, to over 35000 Kilometers in altitude. Or travel faster so as to orbit the planet many times in a day, much as did the Antares Orbital Station. No, for that he was thankful. Though a view from space intrigued him, nausea did not. There were a few brave souls who were required to travel beyond apogee to tether’s end. These men and women endured not just weightlessness, but gravity reversal – the point where there would be an apparent shift in the direction of gravity. He had heard it was a real trip to grab the railings, turn your body upside down, and land on your feet. Timing was critical. There were anecdotal stories of those who had landed on their heads, so distracted with keeping their stomachs from turning. At 30 minutes, looking out of the small portal, one would finally be given an unobstructed view of space, with countless stars filling the small view into the void. Finally, at 40 minutes, the magnetic brakes would engage. He hoped.
In the six years since Pinnacle One had gone operational, there had only been one fatality, and that happened early on, before additional safety measures had been introduced. Despite all the assurances given, everyone working here was required to sign a disclaimer. No one refused. The opportunity to work in the most technologically advanced facility on the planet warranted taking some risks.