Thursday, March 31, 2005
Fibonacci Numbers: a different look
Ivars Peterson writes a little about Fibonacci numbers and some of the other, less well-known, patterns.
Chris Moriarty: Sci Fi with pics
Chris Moriarty is a science fiction author who has a terrific website. It's not so much a science site, in fact, there's no science there. But I was struck by the way she put it together so I'm citing it here.
Note the photos she shows on each page, they're excellent even though that's only one person's opinion. If you click through I think you'll enjoy the photos.
Note the photos she shows on each page, they're excellent even though that's only one person's opinion. If you click through I think you'll enjoy the photos.
Chris Moriarty: Science Fiction with Photos
Chris Moriarty is a science fiction author who has a terrific website. It's not so much a science site, in fact, there's no science there. But I was struck by the way she put it together so I'm citing it here.
Note the photos she shows on each page, they're excellent even though that's only one person's opinion. If you click through I think you'll enjoy the photos.
Note the photos she shows on each page, they're excellent even though that's only one person's opinion. If you click through I think you'll enjoy the photos.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Science and Art: A contest
The National Science Foundation and the Association for the Advancement of Science (who publishes the magazine Science) are holding a competition for the best displays of art and science.
Here's a quote from the site:
"To recognize and encourage visualization in the communication of science, and to showcase the exceptional talents of those who work in this area, the National Science Foundation and the journal Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), are cosponsoring the third annual Science and Engineering Visualization Challenge.
An international contest designed to recognize outstanding achievements by scientists, engineers, visualization specialists, and artists in the use of visual media to promote understanding of research results and scientific phenomena."
So, those of you who are science-oriented and artistic, go for it! You've got nothing to lose. Good luck.
Here's a quote from the site:
"To recognize and encourage visualization in the communication of science, and to showcase the exceptional talents of those who work in this area, the National Science Foundation and the journal Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), are cosponsoring the third annual Science and Engineering Visualization Challenge.
An international contest designed to recognize outstanding achievements by scientists, engineers, visualization specialists, and artists in the use of visual media to promote understanding of research results and scientific phenomena."
So, those of you who are science-oriented and artistic, go for it! You've got nothing to lose. Good luck.
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Women: Different than men, different than each other!
This article, entitled "X Chromosome May Show Gender Differences" discusses how the X-chromosome on women plays a vital role in women and that while scientists thought only one X-chromosome functioned for women, genes from the "off" chromosome may function as well.
If you thought you knew women, well...give me a call! :-)
If you thought you knew women, well...give me a call! :-)
Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
Time tonight is slim but here's a link to a site for correcting misconceptions on cosmology. It's referenced in the Scientific American article I've been posting on tonight. I haven't had time to go through the site, but it looks pretty cool.
It's a bit confusing at first glance, but maybe some time spent will be worth it. I'll plan on reading the article I cited below first, but then Ned Wright's site will be right behind it.
It's a bit confusing at first glance, but maybe some time spent will be worth it. I'll plan on reading the article I cited below first, but then Ned Wright's site will be right behind it.
Expanding Confusion: Common Misconceptions of Cosmological Horizons and the Superluminal Expansion of the Universe
This paper was in the reference section of the Scientific American article I just mentioned. I haven't read it yet because I want to print it to read it. Even with just a scan I can see that it'll be worth reading and taking time to understand what's there.
Down load a copy for yourself, make some coffee, get out the white board, and have at it.
Enjoy!
Down load a copy for yourself, make some coffee, get out the white board, and have at it.
Enjoy!
What you know may be wrong
This month's Scientifi American magazine (http://www.sciam.com) has a wonderful article on misconceptions about cosmology. The authors do a wonderful job of telling why the theory of the expanding universe is often misrepresented and what the true theory really says. For example, they address the idea of the Hubble distance and why some things can travel faster than the speed of light.
Frankly, I didn't understand all of it, but I was most intrigued to learn that what I thought I understood about the Big Bang was dead wrong. The big bang was not some point in space where all matter condensed (if that's the correct word), and then exploded so that matter was propelled out in space. Rather the big bang was the contraction of all of space itself, and then space itself expanded.
Read the article, it's worth your time.
Frankly, I didn't understand all of it, but I was most intrigued to learn that what I thought I understood about the Big Bang was dead wrong. The big bang was not some point in space where all matter condensed (if that's the correct word), and then exploded so that matter was propelled out in space. Rather the big bang was the contraction of all of space itself, and then space itself expanded.
Read the article, it's worth your time.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Chaos Movie
I was out of town and unable to post for the past few days. Now, I'm back with what I hope is a neat link. It's a movie of various chaotic systems. The movie is over 140MB so download time is not quick. I'm trying to download it now.
If you can view it, let me know what you think. Thanks.
If you can view it, let me know what you think. Thanks.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
North pole: Why is there ice there?
Researchers conclude the North Pole has so much ice because of a temperature difference years ago that forced more water to evaporate in the summer (hotter summer) and then more snow in the winter (colder) to produce the ice we have today.
This is one of those theories that scientists must love to work on. I mean you can sit all day, think thoughts like this, develop a theory, and then spout it. But who cares? More to the point, how can anyone test this theory? Should we warm the planet, then cool it to see if the ice first melts away, and then reappears after the cooling?
This is one of those theories that scientists must love to work on. I mean you can sit all day, think thoughts like this, develop a theory, and then spout it. But who cares? More to the point, how can anyone test this theory? Should we warm the planet, then cool it to see if the ice first melts away, and then reappears after the cooling?
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Subscribe to Mini-AIR
I've posted two excerpts from the current newsletter. Here's one more to tell you how to subscribe.
-----------------------------------------------------
2005-03-18 How to Receive mini-AIR, etc. (*)
What you are reading right now is mini-AIR. Mini-AIR is a (free!)
tiny monthly *supplement* to the bi-monthly print magazine.
To subscribe, send a brief E-mail message to:
LISTPROC@AIR.HARVARD.EDU
The body of your message should contain ONLY the words
SUBSCRIBE MINI-AIR MARIE CURIE
(You may substitute your own name for that of Madame Curie.)
----------------------------
To stop subscribing, send the following message: SIGNOFF MINI-AIR
-----------------------------------------------------
2005-03-18 How to Receive mini-AIR, etc. (*)
What you are reading right now is mini-AIR. Mini-AIR is a (free!)
tiny monthly *supplement* to the bi-monthly print magazine.
To subscribe, send a brief E-mail message to:
LISTPROC@AIR.HARVARD.EDU
The body of your message should contain ONLY the words
SUBSCRIBE MINI-AIR MARIE CURIE
(You may substitute your own name for that of Madame Curie.)
----------------------------
To stop subscribing, send the following message: SIGNOFF MINI-AIR
More from Mini-AIR
2005-03-11 RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT: Driving Whilst Plastered
Each month we select for your special attention a research report
that seems especially worth a close read. This month's pick:
"Driving Whilst Plastered: Is It Safe, Is It Legal? A Survey of
Advice to Patients Given by Orthopaedic Surgeons, Insurance
Companies and the Police," O.A. Von Arx, et al., Injury, vol. 35,
no. 9, September 2004, pp. 883-7. (Thanks to Leslie Lawrence for
bringing this to our attention.) The authors, who are at Great
Western Hospital, Marlborough Road, Swindon, UK, explain that:
Many patients, immobilised in a plaster cast after
a fracture of the upper or lower limb, wish to drive.
They frequently ask permission to do so from the treating
surgeon. ... [We canvassed] 126 consultant orthopaedic
surgeons, 27 insurance companies and the 6 regional
police constabularies ... asking how they would advise
these patients regarding safety to drive.
Each month we select for your special attention a research report
that seems especially worth a close read. This month's pick:
"Driving Whilst Plastered: Is It Safe, Is It Legal? A Survey of
Advice to Patients Given by Orthopaedic Surgeons, Insurance
Companies and the Police," O.A. Von Arx, et al., Injury, vol. 35,
no. 9, September 2004, pp. 883-7. (Thanks to Leslie Lawrence for
bringing this to our attention.) The authors, who are at Great
Western Hospital, Marlborough Road, Swindon, UK, explain that:
Many patients, immobilised in a plaster cast after
a fracture of the upper or lower limb, wish to drive.
They frequently ask permission to do so from the treating
surgeon. ... [We canvassed] 126 consultant orthopaedic
surgeons, 27 insurance companies and the 6 regional
police constabularies ... asking how they would advise
these patients regarding safety to drive.
New U.S. Science Policy
The following is a parody of our current policy on science in the United States. However, those of us who work with policy makers (I do so in the military community) and with analysts and researchers know that this isn't really a joke. One of my collegues told me, "Science is dead." He does research with the Navy, by the way, and there's little funding going on there, too. There is, overall, little funding for science today and even less of an appreciation for whatever science is done.
Ask yourself: How many people do you know who care about science, math, or engineering? Not only that, but how many can even understand anything about science? I believe that we, as a nation, have become so ignorant of what science is, how it's done, what it can and cannot do, that we have no comprehension of this most important endeavor. Furthermore, I think the Dilbert Principle is at work.
The Dilbert Principle, from the book of the same title by cartoonist Scott Adams, states that anything you don't understand is easy to do. Thus, if don't know how a satellite stays in orbit, it's an easy concept nonetheless. Applying the principle gives rise to the idea that science need not be explored because it's easy anyway. Sure, you may not understand it, but so what? It's easy so why study or fund it.
What's more, and here I'll rant just a little more so please bear with me, there is also the arrogance principle at work. This idea (of my own nomenclature but I'm sure others are equally familiar with it) says that whatever I know is all there is to know. It is a corrolary to the Dilbert Principle. It's the idea that allows people with only a little knowledge, and sometimes not even that much, to make statements with such authority and boldness that it challenges listeners to question them. Oftentimes, the speaker isn't challenged and the listeners, who don't know better, accept the statement as true when there is little to actually substantiate it. The Dilbert Principle says that what I don't know is easy to know, the arrogance corollary says that if I know a little, I know it all. Both are a sign of our times, sorry to say.
Here's the excerpt:
2005-03-04 Don't Look, Don't Tell
Many scientists are confused.
We have a remedy for them.
At a recent science meeting in Washington, DC, we encountered many
scientists, from the United States and elsewhere, who said they were
confused and troubled. "What," most everyone was asking, "has happened
to the US government's policy about science?"
The question has a happy answer. The US now, at long last, has a
coherent, simple science policy. You can state it in four words:
The following is from Mini-AIR, the newsletter of the Journal of Irreproducible Results.
Don't Look, Don't Tell
This is a practical policy, because scientists are a pain in the neck.
They often insist on digging for "the real story" of how something
works. Told about a plan to build or do something, they try to "figure
out" -- in advance -- how well that plan is going to work.
Political leaders -- the modern, superior ones -- have learned to trust
their gut feelings. That's what brought them their success. They know
that, in the long run, problems always manage to work themselves out one
way or another. Scientists, who often nervously distrust their own gut
instinct, can learn from the logic of their superiors.
The new policy -- Don't Look, Don't Tell -- is a lesson for all of us.
Please spread the word.
Ask yourself: How many people do you know who care about science, math, or engineering? Not only that, but how many can even understand anything about science? I believe that we, as a nation, have become so ignorant of what science is, how it's done, what it can and cannot do, that we have no comprehension of this most important endeavor. Furthermore, I think the Dilbert Principle is at work.
The Dilbert Principle, from the book of the same title by cartoonist Scott Adams, states that anything you don't understand is easy to do. Thus, if don't know how a satellite stays in orbit, it's an easy concept nonetheless. Applying the principle gives rise to the idea that science need not be explored because it's easy anyway. Sure, you may not understand it, but so what? It's easy so why study or fund it.
What's more, and here I'll rant just a little more so please bear with me, there is also the arrogance principle at work. This idea (of my own nomenclature but I'm sure others are equally familiar with it) says that whatever I know is all there is to know. It is a corrolary to the Dilbert Principle. It's the idea that allows people with only a little knowledge, and sometimes not even that much, to make statements with such authority and boldness that it challenges listeners to question them. Oftentimes, the speaker isn't challenged and the listeners, who don't know better, accept the statement as true when there is little to actually substantiate it. The Dilbert Principle says that what I don't know is easy to know, the arrogance corollary says that if I know a little, I know it all. Both are a sign of our times, sorry to say.
Here's the excerpt:
2005-03-04 Don't Look, Don't Tell
Many scientists are confused.
We have a remedy for them.
At a recent science meeting in Washington, DC, we encountered many
scientists, from the United States and elsewhere, who said they were
confused and troubled. "What," most everyone was asking, "has happened
to the US government's policy about science?"
The question has a happy answer. The US now, at long last, has a
coherent, simple science policy. You can state it in four words:
The following is from Mini-AIR, the newsletter of the Journal of Irreproducible Results.
Don't Look, Don't Tell
This is a practical policy, because scientists are a pain in the neck.
They often insist on digging for "the real story" of how something
works. Told about a plan to build or do something, they try to "figure
out" -- in advance -- how well that plan is going to work.
Political leaders -- the modern, superior ones -- have learned to trust
their gut feelings. That's what brought them their success. They know
that, in the long run, problems always manage to work themselves out one
way or another. Scientists, who often nervously distrust their own gut
instinct, can learn from the logic of their superiors.
The new policy -- Don't Look, Don't Tell -- is a lesson for all of us.
Please spread the word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)