December Solstice
Bring back the Sun! This is the slogan at many pagan services throughout the world this week. Today the Sun will set early, before 5 where I live. However, the sunsets have been getting later for some time. The earliest sunset was in the first week of December. Since then both sunsets and sunrises have been getting later. The days have been getting even shorter, because the sunrises were getting later faster than the sunsets. Today, the sunsets catch up with the sunrises so that the day's length is a minimum today and will get longer. The sunrises will continue to get later, until the Sun does not rise until about 7:25 am in early January. But this is not the latest sunrise in the sky. The latest sunrises are in late October, when we are still on Eastern Daylight Time. The sunrises then get as late as 7:35.
This can seem a dismal time of the year because of the short days, long nights, and cold weather. But there are some people who like the December solstice and welcome its coming. Astronomers like the long nights for viewing our universe and for the many bright stars that are visible at this time of the year. The romantically inclined love the Winter Solstice Full Moon, which goes nearly overhead and makes things seem so bright as to make it like twilight, doubly so if it glitters on new-fallen snow, which may make it light enough to see flying sleighs and reindeer. And those south of the Equator are experiencing Summer Sostice, when the Sun shines for 14 or more hours a day and gets nearly overhead; a January day in the Outback of Australia can easily top 40 degrees C (104 F). There it is the time for beaches and swimming, boating, and trekking through the wilderness and just plain vacationing during this Yuletide/summer season. And it can get really warm in Antarctica. A big heat wave in Antarctica can send the temperatures soaring out of sight, maybe to -25 degrees C (-8 F).
Now the days will grow longer, and eventually the weather will get warmer as we approach the June solstice.
A Journey through Blogrealm
Blogtrek
Blogtrek
2002/12/21
2002/12/19
When it isn't, it is
Frequently, when a person makes a negative statement, the corresponding positive statement is the one that is true. For example, when Richard Nixon said, "I am not a crook.", that says that he was a crook. When an email message comes that says "This is not spam.", that means that it is spam. For if an email message is legitimate, then it does not need to say that it is. When I email someone in one of my clubs about when the next meeting is, I don't say that it is not spam; I just simply state when the next meeting is, and the recipient will know from what I say that it isn't spam. So if a message has to say that it is not spam, that means that it is not legitimate, for it has to state that it is. Therefore, it is spam.
The latest example is Mariah Carey saying "I'm not wacko." Who would say this if they felt that they were relating satisfactorily to other people? I conclude from this that she is wacko. But then she goes on to say, "I mean, we're all a little wacko sometimes, and if we think we're not, maybe we are more than we know." Now this I agree with. We can never know ourselves completely because that would cause an infinite regress of brain tissue. But she did contradict herself.
Frequently, when a person makes a negative statement, the corresponding positive statement is the one that is true. For example, when Richard Nixon said, "I am not a crook.", that says that he was a crook. When an email message comes that says "This is not spam.", that means that it is spam. For if an email message is legitimate, then it does not need to say that it is. When I email someone in one of my clubs about when the next meeting is, I don't say that it is not spam; I just simply state when the next meeting is, and the recipient will know from what I say that it isn't spam. So if a message has to say that it is not spam, that means that it is not legitimate, for it has to state that it is. Therefore, it is spam.
The latest example is Mariah Carey saying "I'm not wacko." Who would say this if they felt that they were relating satisfactorily to other people? I conclude from this that she is wacko. But then she goes on to say, "I mean, we're all a little wacko sometimes, and if we think we're not, maybe we are more than we know." Now this I agree with. We can never know ourselves completely because that would cause an infinite regress of brain tissue. But she did contradict herself.
2002/12/18
World Trade Center
Now we have 7 more designs for the World Trade Center. The six original ones were rejected, as they seem to be just piles of buildings without any character. The new proposals are certainly unusual, except for Number 6. Also there is some contradiction in the media as to whether there are 7 designs or 9. Get this straight, hypermedia, or anything goes. I will assume that there are 7 designs, the 7 on the CNN site. Here is my view of them:
1. This one features a collection of buildings with corners taken off and one high 1,776 foot spire. The chopped nature of this design makes me feel uneasy, and the spire is somewhat ill-defined. I would give this one 2 stars.
2. This one features what looks like a buckled up tower or pair of towers of tremendous height. It is inspiring because of the great height but the buildings look like they might fall down. I'd give it 4 stars. (out of 5)
3. This one has one building that looks like a domed building next to it, as well as two buildings that look like parts of some toy. This clashes with the architecture near it and seems a little alien. I'd give it 3 stars.
4. I have seen two designs for this. One features a bunch of tall glass buildings but the picture does not show me their tops. Another shows two wire frames of the original towers, along the lines of the original towers. I think it features both, and if so, this may be the best of the designs. I would give it 4.5 stars.
5. This design has the same problem as 2 or 3: an alien look. The buildings are supposed to be tied in knots somehow, which would be an architectural feat. I would give this one maybe 2.5 stars.
6. This one looks like the original designs. It looks like the worst of those designs - a pair of tall buildings and nothing out of the ordinary. I would give it 1.5 stars.
7. This one consists of 9 buildings 80 stories high, and the buildings are of unusual shapes. The massiveness of this one is notable. Give it 3 stars.
It seems Design 4 is my favorite, but I would have to get a full look at this design before I could definitely say that. There seems to be a tendency to give these buildings a non-building or unusual look (except for Design 6), probably as a reaction to the negative response of the public at the original six designs.
I tried to compose a design of my own recently, by plucking a pentagonal dodecahedron on the WTC site. This dodecahedron would be essentially a cube with roofs on each of the six sides. It would look like a jewel from space but unfortunately so wide that a model that would fill the entire WTC site on the ground would not come anywhere near the height of the original towers.
I notice by the way that these designs are being compared to the Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, because the Petronas towers are supposed to be the tallest in the world. Not as far as I am concerned. If you count those tiny little minarets on the Petronas towers, then you have to count the antenna on top of the Great Tower of Chicago, in my opinion. That would make the Great Tower of Chicago the tallest building. So I feel that the Great Tower of Chicago is the tallest building in the world. I call it Great Tower of Chicago because the usual name for this building, the Sears Tower, is inappropriate in my opinion because Sears no longer owns it.
Now we have 7 more designs for the World Trade Center. The six original ones were rejected, as they seem to be just piles of buildings without any character. The new proposals are certainly unusual, except for Number 6. Also there is some contradiction in the media as to whether there are 7 designs or 9. Get this straight, hypermedia, or anything goes. I will assume that there are 7 designs, the 7 on the CNN site. Here is my view of them:
1. This one features a collection of buildings with corners taken off and one high 1,776 foot spire. The chopped nature of this design makes me feel uneasy, and the spire is somewhat ill-defined. I would give this one 2 stars.
2. This one features what looks like a buckled up tower or pair of towers of tremendous height. It is inspiring because of the great height but the buildings look like they might fall down. I'd give it 4 stars. (out of 5)
3. This one has one building that looks like a domed building next to it, as well as two buildings that look like parts of some toy. This clashes with the architecture near it and seems a little alien. I'd give it 3 stars.
4. I have seen two designs for this. One features a bunch of tall glass buildings but the picture does not show me their tops. Another shows two wire frames of the original towers, along the lines of the original towers. I think it features both, and if so, this may be the best of the designs. I would give it 4.5 stars.
5. This design has the same problem as 2 or 3: an alien look. The buildings are supposed to be tied in knots somehow, which would be an architectural feat. I would give this one maybe 2.5 stars.
6. This one looks like the original designs. It looks like the worst of those designs - a pair of tall buildings and nothing out of the ordinary. I would give it 1.5 stars.
7. This one consists of 9 buildings 80 stories high, and the buildings are of unusual shapes. The massiveness of this one is notable. Give it 3 stars.
It seems Design 4 is my favorite, but I would have to get a full look at this design before I could definitely say that. There seems to be a tendency to give these buildings a non-building or unusual look (except for Design 6), probably as a reaction to the negative response of the public at the original six designs.
I tried to compose a design of my own recently, by plucking a pentagonal dodecahedron on the WTC site. This dodecahedron would be essentially a cube with roofs on each of the six sides. It would look like a jewel from space but unfortunately so wide that a model that would fill the entire WTC site on the ground would not come anywhere near the height of the original towers.
I notice by the way that these designs are being compared to the Petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, because the Petronas towers are supposed to be the tallest in the world. Not as far as I am concerned. If you count those tiny little minarets on the Petronas towers, then you have to count the antenna on top of the Great Tower of Chicago, in my opinion. That would make the Great Tower of Chicago the tallest building. So I feel that the Great Tower of Chicago is the tallest building in the world. I call it Great Tower of Chicago because the usual name for this building, the Sears Tower, is inappropriate in my opinion because Sears no longer owns it.
Banning Schools
The school district that disallowed a lesbian girl from going to gym class in California is appropriately named. The school district is named Banning School District, and I wonder if they ban books, too. The URL is http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/17/lesbian.lawsuit/index.html
The school district that disallowed a lesbian girl from going to gym class in California is appropriately named. The school district is named Banning School District, and I wonder if they ban books, too. The URL is http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/17/lesbian.lawsuit/index.html
2002/12/17
Some amusing slogans
The more I see of men the more I admire dogs.
-Mme De Sevigne, 1626-1696
My reply: It takes one to know one.
If we men married the women we deserved, we should have a very bad time of it.
-Oscar Wilde
My reply: How would Oscar know? He was gay.
THE FLY
God in his wisdom made the fly
And then forgot to tell us why.
-Ogden Nash
My reply: God is omnipotent. God created all that exists. Flies are evil. God is good. Flies exist. Therefore, God does not exist.
THE PANTHER
The panther is like a leopard,
Except it hasn't been peppered.
Should you behold a panther crouch,
Prepare to say Ouch.
Better yet, if called by a panther,
Don't anther.
-Ogden Nash
My reply: How many times in our lives are we confronted by panthers? 1960s draft dodgers were called by the Draft Panther. They didn't anther. A panther calls us up to try to sell some panther oil to us. If we succumb to his appeal, prepare to say monetary ouch. It's better not to anther. One of the biggest tasks of life is to avoid being ouched by panthers. Know when not to anther.
The more I see of men the more I admire dogs.
-Mme De Sevigne, 1626-1696
My reply: It takes one to know one.
If we men married the women we deserved, we should have a very bad time of it.
-Oscar Wilde
My reply: How would Oscar know? He was gay.
THE FLY
God in his wisdom made the fly
And then forgot to tell us why.
-Ogden Nash
My reply: God is omnipotent. God created all that exists. Flies are evil. God is good. Flies exist. Therefore, God does not exist.
THE PANTHER
The panther is like a leopard,
Except it hasn't been peppered.
Should you behold a panther crouch,
Prepare to say Ouch.
Better yet, if called by a panther,
Don't anther.
-Ogden Nash
My reply: How many times in our lives are we confronted by panthers? 1960s draft dodgers were called by the Draft Panther. They didn't anther. A panther calls us up to try to sell some panther oil to us. If we succumb to his appeal, prepare to say monetary ouch. It's better not to anther. One of the biggest tasks of life is to avoid being ouched by panthers. Know when not to anther.
2002/12/16
Cards of the Season
It has been the custom to exchange Christmas cards with others. I have done so through most of my life, and remember seeing long lists of cards that we had gotten from others. In recent years, I have improvised on this custom. I had over thirty 30-minute tapes left over from an old TRS-80 that I gave away, so in 1997 I recorded some of my own music on them and sent them out along with the cards. In another year, I illustrated an Australian aborigine legend about the constellations Orion and Taurus on a card. This year my theme is peace, because of the threat of war in more than one place next year. I put an Earth-from-space on the front and one of my polyhedra in the body, comparing it with the interdependence of the world. And I hand-write my cards to people; I don't use Microsoft Word and I don't send people greetings on the Internet.
Double-youing
We have double-yous all over the place in today's world. All the places on the World Wide Web are www, which makes for some extended double-youing in such sites as www.wwbt.com, for TV station WWBT. How do you pronounce ww anyway? Is it double-you double-you or double double-you? How do you pronounce UU? Pronounce that You-You, not Double-you; there is no way that UU = W. What about www? Is that triple-double-you? Or double triple-you? Or is it simply dubyadubyadubya? Any of the above, except that the last one gives rise to an interesting Web site: http://dubyadubyadubya.com which says that maybe all this dubyaing around may be just a big technical problem.
It has been the custom to exchange Christmas cards with others. I have done so through most of my life, and remember seeing long lists of cards that we had gotten from others. In recent years, I have improvised on this custom. I had over thirty 30-minute tapes left over from an old TRS-80 that I gave away, so in 1997 I recorded some of my own music on them and sent them out along with the cards. In another year, I illustrated an Australian aborigine legend about the constellations Orion and Taurus on a card. This year my theme is peace, because of the threat of war in more than one place next year. I put an Earth-from-space on the front and one of my polyhedra in the body, comparing it with the interdependence of the world. And I hand-write my cards to people; I don't use Microsoft Word and I don't send people greetings on the Internet.
Double-youing
We have double-yous all over the place in today's world. All the places on the World Wide Web are www, which makes for some extended double-youing in such sites as www.wwbt.com, for TV station WWBT. How do you pronounce ww anyway? Is it double-you double-you or double double-you? How do you pronounce UU? Pronounce that You-You, not Double-you; there is no way that UU = W. What about www? Is that triple-double-you? Or double triple-you? Or is it simply dubyadubyadubya? Any of the above, except that the last one gives rise to an interesting Web site: http://dubyadubyadubya.com which says that maybe all this dubyaing around may be just a big technical problem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)