Maine Outlapped
One of the best things that has happened to our currency is the 50-state quarter program. It started in 1999. Every 1/5 of a year (about 73 days) a new quarter is minted commemorating another state. It started in early 1999 with the Delaware coin, which featured Cesar Rodney on a horse. Since then I have been collecting several sets of the coins as they came out. Some of the coins came fast and furious; for example, Virginia, while others were really slow in coming, such as South Carolina. Earlier in the year, I found the Alabama coin, which features Helen Keller and an inscription in Braille. The next two coins after that were Maine and Missouri. I waited for the Maine coin to come out. It would not. I kept getting quarter after quarter, getting mostly eagles with a few Connecticuts, North Carolina, Mississippis and New Hampshires and so forth, but never any Maine. I have been trying to buy things whose price end in a .05 to .25, so that I would get three quarters in change, but today when I tried that twice I got six eagles.
I therefore declared Quarter War and went out in an all out effort to get the Maines. Mid-August has already passed, so therefore the next coin to come out, Missouri, started getting minted. Up to today, I still have not seen a single Maine quarter. Then my wife came home with two coins she showed me. They were Missouri quarters! The first ones to come out. Maine has been outlapped by Missouri. It is the first coin not to come out before the coin after it. So now I have two Missouri quarters, and still no Maine quarter. I wonder what happened to it.
Next week if I still don't have a Maine quarter, I will go to the bank and ask for some. If that does not work, I will order some rolls of Maine quarters from the US Mint and that will settle it. Oh where oh where is Maine? Remember the Maine!
A Journey through Blogrealm
Blogtrek
Blogtrek
2003/09/05
2003/08/31
Updates: Taoism, mondegreens, and true north
Taoism principle: Since yesterday, when I came up with all these versions of one of the principles of Taoism (The tao that can be mentioned is not the Real Tao), I came up with some more that are interesting. For example, after hearing a song by Stephanie Corby called "True North", I came up with this one:
The north that is observed is not True North.
Which of course has this corollary:
The north that is found on a magnetic compass is not True North.
So from an Ultimate Principle of a major religion, I have derived a mundane fact that any Boy Scout knows. So it appears that we stumble through life, limited by our senses, not knowing what Reality is, while we experience magnetic reality.
Mondegreens: I remarked earlier on how mondegreens occur in Amy Carol Webb's songs; for example, I heard "tears" as "tease". I tried something else today. I listened to Stephanie Corby's song "True North" (the song I mentioned above) and found it hard to keep focused on it. It did have some interesting lines, such as "Sense of direction". I figured it was a song about how one needs to keep focused on a goal to achieve it. But I just found it hard to listen to. Could it be that it contains mondegreens? I tried this experiment. I listened to "True North" without looking at the lyrics of the song, and tried to transcribe to paper what I heard. Then I compared it to her intended lyrics that came with the CD. I found no less than 17 mondegreens! I also found an 18th one that I resolved: I heard "graves of" and on a second listening heard "great". I heard "inner" as "Hannah". This is another case where a singer tries to avoid the hard-to-listen-to "eerrrrr" and winds up creating a mondegreen, causing me to hear "inner" as "Hannah". Sometimes you must sing "errrr". Other mondegreens I heard were "there are parades" for "I always", "soame" for "zone" (her "n" was apparently not distinct), and "eh?" for "my".
I feel the main causes of these mondegreens were that her melody was not clear and easily heard above a too-loud accompaniment, and that she drawled her words so long that the endings of them tended to get lost, or the syllables became two or more syllables, and that to improve the song, I would make the singer louder and the accompaniment softer.
In addition, I feel the singer in this song shows dependency on her "true north". It is an oft-used theme that sells, but in this case I would have preferred a searching theme, where the singer realizes, as I have said before that the north she is seeking is good but is not the true North. As I said above, the north that can be sung is not the True North.
Taoism principle: Since yesterday, when I came up with all these versions of one of the principles of Taoism (The tao that can be mentioned is not the Real Tao), I came up with some more that are interesting. For example, after hearing a song by Stephanie Corby called "True North", I came up with this one:
The north that is observed is not True North.
Which of course has this corollary:
The north that is found on a magnetic compass is not True North.
So from an Ultimate Principle of a major religion, I have derived a mundane fact that any Boy Scout knows. So it appears that we stumble through life, limited by our senses, not knowing what Reality is, while we experience magnetic reality.
Mondegreens: I remarked earlier on how mondegreens occur in Amy Carol Webb's songs; for example, I heard "tears" as "tease". I tried something else today. I listened to Stephanie Corby's song "True North" (the song I mentioned above) and found it hard to keep focused on it. It did have some interesting lines, such as "Sense of direction". I figured it was a song about how one needs to keep focused on a goal to achieve it. But I just found it hard to listen to. Could it be that it contains mondegreens? I tried this experiment. I listened to "True North" without looking at the lyrics of the song, and tried to transcribe to paper what I heard. Then I compared it to her intended lyrics that came with the CD. I found no less than 17 mondegreens! I also found an 18th one that I resolved: I heard "graves of" and on a second listening heard "great". I heard "inner" as "Hannah". This is another case where a singer tries to avoid the hard-to-listen-to "eerrrrr" and winds up creating a mondegreen, causing me to hear "inner" as "Hannah". Sometimes you must sing "errrr". Other mondegreens I heard were "there are parades" for "I always", "soame" for "zone" (her "n" was apparently not distinct), and "eh?" for "my".
I feel the main causes of these mondegreens were that her melody was not clear and easily heard above a too-loud accompaniment, and that she drawled her words so long that the endings of them tended to get lost, or the syllables became two or more syllables, and that to improve the song, I would make the singer louder and the accompaniment softer.
In addition, I feel the singer in this song shows dependency on her "true north". It is an oft-used theme that sells, but in this case I would have preferred a searching theme, where the singer realizes, as I have said before that the north she is seeking is good but is not the true North. As I said above, the north that can be sung is not the True North.
2003/08/30
The Real Tao
Among the mainline religions on the Earth, to me one of the most valid is Taoism, because it manages to state truths without relying on faith. In fact, the concept of truth itself is shown to be faulty at the foundation, with an example being "What is the truth value of 'This Sentence is False.'?". But the truth that has impressed me so far in Taoism is this one:
"The tao that can be talked about is not the Real Tao."
In other words, if you have a concept of god, the ultimate reality, atah or the like, then you have conceived that concept, and for that reason, the concept you have conceived, limited to the confines of your finite brain, is not the Real God, Ultimate Reality, Allah, or the like. This is just another way of stating my "Just Add One." principle: if you have conceived of ultimate reality, then you can find more reality beyond your concept. This implies that the god that is talked about in Christian churches is not the Real God, if indeed there is one. The cosmic consciousness that you imagine envelopes all living creatures and all existence is not the Real Cosmic Consciousness, and so forth.
But these concern concepts that are "way out there". How about down to Earth concepts? It is true there too! This is because the only way you know an object in our universe is through your brain and your senses, and what these have for the object is not the real object. Therefore we can substitute many other concepts for Tao in the principle. Just about everything is a Tao. For example:
The tao that can be spoken of is not the Real Tao.
The decision you are about to make is not the Real Decision.
The job you currently have is not your Ideal Job.
The partner that you currently are married to or are living with is not your Ideal Partner.
The dog that you can pet is not the Real Dog.
The cat that you own and love is not your Ideal Cat.
The investments that you have made are not your Real Investments.
The fourth turning that can be predicted is not the Real Fourth Turning. (Strauss and Howe state in their book that the events of a Fourth Turning often can't be anticipated in advance.)
The axis of evil that is referred to in speeches by important government officials is not the Real Axis of Evil.
The stock market upturn (or downturn) that you see on the TV station or the newspaper is not the Real Stock Market Upturn (or Downturn).
The hubbert's peak that is observed (for example, the oil production peak of 2000) is not the Real Hubbert's Peak.
The function that can be integrated is not The Real Function. (But it can be approximated. Sarah Voss, creator of Pizine said once that God is a definite integral.)
The religion that is celebrated on the Sabbath is not the True Religion.
The duck that you just shot is not the Real Duck - it is only a decoy.
So duck hunters can learn something from the principles of Taoism - that since they can never catch The True Duck, they might as well give up and let these poor birds live. The Whatever that resulted in all of us being here saw fit to give life to them.
Among the mainline religions on the Earth, to me one of the most valid is Taoism, because it manages to state truths without relying on faith. In fact, the concept of truth itself is shown to be faulty at the foundation, with an example being "What is the truth value of 'This Sentence is False.'?". But the truth that has impressed me so far in Taoism is this one:
"The tao that can be talked about is not the Real Tao."
In other words, if you have a concept of god, the ultimate reality, atah or the like, then you have conceived that concept, and for that reason, the concept you have conceived, limited to the confines of your finite brain, is not the Real God, Ultimate Reality, Allah, or the like. This is just another way of stating my "Just Add One." principle: if you have conceived of ultimate reality, then you can find more reality beyond your concept. This implies that the god that is talked about in Christian churches is not the Real God, if indeed there is one. The cosmic consciousness that you imagine envelopes all living creatures and all existence is not the Real Cosmic Consciousness, and so forth.
But these concern concepts that are "way out there". How about down to Earth concepts? It is true there too! This is because the only way you know an object in our universe is through your brain and your senses, and what these have for the object is not the real object. Therefore we can substitute many other concepts for Tao in the principle. Just about everything is a Tao. For example:
The tao that can be spoken of is not the Real Tao.
The decision you are about to make is not the Real Decision.
The job you currently have is not your Ideal Job.
The partner that you currently are married to or are living with is not your Ideal Partner.
The dog that you can pet is not the Real Dog.
The cat that you own and love is not your Ideal Cat.
The investments that you have made are not your Real Investments.
The fourth turning that can be predicted is not the Real Fourth Turning. (Strauss and Howe state in their book that the events of a Fourth Turning often can't be anticipated in advance.)
The axis of evil that is referred to in speeches by important government officials is not the Real Axis of Evil.
The stock market upturn (or downturn) that you see on the TV station or the newspaper is not the Real Stock Market Upturn (or Downturn).
The hubbert's peak that is observed (for example, the oil production peak of 2000) is not the Real Hubbert's Peak.
The function that can be integrated is not The Real Function. (But it can be approximated. Sarah Voss, creator of Pizine said once that God is a definite integral.)
The religion that is celebrated on the Sabbath is not the True Religion.
The duck that you just shot is not the Real Duck - it is only a decoy.
So duck hunters can learn something from the principles of Taoism - that since they can never catch The True Duck, they might as well give up and let these poor birds live. The Whatever that resulted in all of us being here saw fit to give life to them.
2003/08/29
Hurricane Coming?
I heard on the news recently that a tropical wave way out in the Atlantic has become Tropical Storm Fabian, and just tonight it became Hurricane Fabian. It is way out to sea but I want to see if it would affect where I am living (in central Virginia). So I checked the hurricane sites such as Weather Underground's site. It shows the future track of the tropical storm for a few days and shows that it will skirt north of the Caribbean islands, such as the Leeward Islands. But that's not far enough. I want to know if it will hit the mainland United States, and if so, where. There are two sources of this. I tried the Global Forecasting System first. I checked it two days ago and it said that Fabian, which I suppose will become a major hurricane, will hit Miami, then go in the Gulf and hit Fort Walton Beach, Florida, then go off to the northwest and peter out and not affect central Virginia. I checked it again today. The forecast has changed. The 384-hour forecast shows that Fabian will approach Florida, turn up to the north, strike the Wilmington, NC area and make a direct hit on central Virginia. We hardly need this here in Virginia. We have had enough rain this year, and a 6-10 inch deluge, which is what this storm would produce, would cause massive flooding all over the place. I also checked Gary Gray's discussion and he says it may come up the Eastern seaboard, saying that the GFS scenario has Fabian first "taunting Florida" then "slamming hard into the Carolinas". But he notes that there are other models that take it out to sea, and still others that cause it to go poof midsea, sort of like Debby did near Hispaniola in 2001.
I will be monitoring this storm carefully. The local news media don't mention it much at all, and it could conceivably go another way. But it seems like it is going to become another Fran or Floyd. Watch out for those F storms, those storms that have an f-word for their name, such as Fabian. By the way, these links are likely going to become different or invalid in a few days.
I heard on the news recently that a tropical wave way out in the Atlantic has become Tropical Storm Fabian, and just tonight it became Hurricane Fabian. It is way out to sea but I want to see if it would affect where I am living (in central Virginia). So I checked the hurricane sites such as Weather Underground's site. It shows the future track of the tropical storm for a few days and shows that it will skirt north of the Caribbean islands, such as the Leeward Islands. But that's not far enough. I want to know if it will hit the mainland United States, and if so, where. There are two sources of this. I tried the Global Forecasting System first. I checked it two days ago and it said that Fabian, which I suppose will become a major hurricane, will hit Miami, then go in the Gulf and hit Fort Walton Beach, Florida, then go off to the northwest and peter out and not affect central Virginia. I checked it again today. The forecast has changed. The 384-hour forecast shows that Fabian will approach Florida, turn up to the north, strike the Wilmington, NC area and make a direct hit on central Virginia. We hardly need this here in Virginia. We have had enough rain this year, and a 6-10 inch deluge, which is what this storm would produce, would cause massive flooding all over the place. I also checked Gary Gray's discussion and he says it may come up the Eastern seaboard, saying that the GFS scenario has Fabian first "taunting Florida" then "slamming hard into the Carolinas". But he notes that there are other models that take it out to sea, and still others that cause it to go poof midsea, sort of like Debby did near Hispaniola in 2001.
I will be monitoring this storm carefully. The local news media don't mention it much at all, and it could conceivably go another way. But it seems like it is going to become another Fran or Floyd. Watch out for those F storms, those storms that have an f-word for their name, such as Fabian. By the way, these links are likely going to become different or invalid in a few days.
2003/08/26
If the other shoe fits. . .
I like mixing up slogans, such as "It's an ill wind that spoils the broth." Today I was thinking about shoes. I thought about the slogan, "If the shoe fits, wear it". So I decided to Googolize™ it. I Googled for "If the shoe fits, * it" -wear. I got for the asterisk such words as design, sell, buy, and even steal and f**k, the famous f-word which I don't spell in full to avoid getting this blog filtered out. One of the more interesting ones was If the shoe fits, bang it. Guess who that's attributed to? Former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, banging his really big shoe at the UN in 1960, that's who.
But then I thought of another slogan "waiting for the other shoe to drop".. So I tried "the other * to drop *quot; -shoe . Minusing out shoe eliminated 90% of the hits. I got things like the other contributors to drop, also side, end, and player. The most interesting ones were foot(If the shoe drops, why not drop the entire rest of the foot as well?) and bomb.
But I like best combining the two slogans to get "If the other shoe fits, drop it". It's perhaps a description of acquiring an unwanted skill, causing you to get deployed to an undesirable place or causing Dobson syndrome. This slogan then says when offered the opportunity to learn an unwanted skill, don't.
I like mixing up slogans, such as "It's an ill wind that spoils the broth." Today I was thinking about shoes. I thought about the slogan, "If the shoe fits, wear it". So I decided to Googolize™ it. I Googled for "If the shoe fits, * it" -wear. I got for the asterisk such words as design, sell, buy, and even steal and f**k, the famous f-word which I don't spell in full to avoid getting this blog filtered out. One of the more interesting ones was If the shoe fits, bang it. Guess who that's attributed to? Former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, banging his really big shoe at the UN in 1960, that's who.
But then I thought of another slogan "waiting for the other shoe to drop".. So I tried "the other * to drop *quot; -shoe . Minusing out shoe eliminated 90% of the hits. I got things like the other contributors to drop, also side, end, and player. The most interesting ones were foot(If the shoe drops, why not drop the entire rest of the foot as well?) and bomb.
But I like best combining the two slogans to get "If the other shoe fits, drop it". It's perhaps a description of acquiring an unwanted skill, causing you to get deployed to an undesirable place or causing Dobson syndrome. This slogan then says when offered the opportunity to learn an unwanted skill, don't.
Mars
Well, here it is, folks. Mars comes closer to us than at any time in the past 60,000 years or so. This is going to attract a lot of people out to see the sky. The media have really hyped this one up. Sure, it comes closer than at any time in the past 60,000 years, but it came almost as close in 1971 and 1988. It came close in 1956, which I remember well, as my parents took me to a skywatch at my school then, when I was 10 years old. I saw several planets, including Mars, through telescopes. It is closer in 2003 but by only a few thousand miles. This is because Mars' perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) has been getting closer and closer to the Sun the past few years, probably because of perturbations from other planets, especially Earth and Jupiter. This can't go on forever; it has to oscillate, else Mars at one time would have been really far out; it would have been at Jupiter's orbit where it would have eventually gotten too close to Jupiter and thrown out of the solar system. So eventually the close approaches will get farther apart again.
Further, there is misinformation out there by the media. Tonight I see that in a side box on a CNN story, CNN says
WHERE IS MARS?
The red planet is now in the constellation Aquarius.
Most viewers can see it in the southeast in the hours after sunset.
By midnight, it will be high overhead.
Before sunrise, it will dip toward the southwestern horizon.
At midnight it will not be overhead, or anywhere near it, except for people in the Southern hemisphere. When Mars comes closest to us at perihelion, it is always in the southern sky, and so it does not get very high. It gets only halfway up in southern Florida, and it may not even clear the trees and houses in places to the north, such as Canada and Minnesota. This is unfortunate, because that makes it harder to see Mars. In any case, CNN should not be stating point blank that it is going to be high.
I have seen the planet several times, with the naked eye and with an 8-inch-aperture telescope, and I have taken a picture of it, which I will put on my astronomy page soon. I find the best way to take a picture of it is to use an extender that allows me to put an eyepiece between the camera and the telescope. I used a 9.7-inch Plössl eyepiece. I probably will take more pictures and view it more, now that it is easily visible in the evening sky; up to now it required waking up in the middle of the night.
Well, here it is, folks. Mars comes closer to us than at any time in the past 60,000 years or so. This is going to attract a lot of people out to see the sky. The media have really hyped this one up. Sure, it comes closer than at any time in the past 60,000 years, but it came almost as close in 1971 and 1988. It came close in 1956, which I remember well, as my parents took me to a skywatch at my school then, when I was 10 years old. I saw several planets, including Mars, through telescopes. It is closer in 2003 but by only a few thousand miles. This is because Mars' perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) has been getting closer and closer to the Sun the past few years, probably because of perturbations from other planets, especially Earth and Jupiter. This can't go on forever; it has to oscillate, else Mars at one time would have been really far out; it would have been at Jupiter's orbit where it would have eventually gotten too close to Jupiter and thrown out of the solar system. So eventually the close approaches will get farther apart again.
Further, there is misinformation out there by the media. Tonight I see that in a side box on a CNN story, CNN says
WHERE IS MARS?
The red planet is now in the constellation Aquarius.
Most viewers can see it in the southeast in the hours after sunset.
By midnight, it will be high overhead.
Before sunrise, it will dip toward the southwestern horizon.
At midnight it will not be overhead, or anywhere near it, except for people in the Southern hemisphere. When Mars comes closest to us at perihelion, it is always in the southern sky, and so it does not get very high. It gets only halfway up in southern Florida, and it may not even clear the trees and houses in places to the north, such as Canada and Minnesota. This is unfortunate, because that makes it harder to see Mars. In any case, CNN should not be stating point blank that it is going to be high.
I have seen the planet several times, with the naked eye and with an 8-inch-aperture telescope, and I have taken a picture of it, which I will put on my astronomy page soon. I find the best way to take a picture of it is to use an extender that allows me to put an eyepiece between the camera and the telescope. I used a 9.7-inch Plössl eyepiece. I probably will take more pictures and view it more, now that it is easily visible in the evening sky; up to now it required waking up in the middle of the night.
2003/08/24
The 1965 Principle
A lot of statements have been made about this blackout that the Northeast recently had. For example, this is the worst blackout this nation has ever had. This blackout disrupted the lives of 50 million (figure is hyped up; see my previous blog). The blackout is a sign of things that could come. And I myself said that this is a precursor to shortages of oil, electricity, and natural gas.
However, a lot of these claims are hyped up or are bogus. How can you tell? Apply the 1965 principle: Any statement that is made about the blackout that occurred this year must also be true about the 1965 November 9 blackout. These two blackouts were near twins of each other. A local problem happened somewhere, and it spread all over the place in the Northeast, causing the lack of electricity to between 20 and 30 million people, in both 1965 and 2003. So any statement that is true about one is likely to be true of the other.
For example, this blackout may not be a foreboding of things to come. Sure there is an oil shortage coming around 2010, a natural gas shortage next year, and an electrical shortage coming in 2005. But how can the blackout of 2003 be a precursor of these when the blackout of 1965 clearly was not? In 1965 there was plenty of electrical power, oil, and natural gas. Sure the 2003 blackout may cause people to take a look at these other problems; in that case, I am glad that it occurred. But the 2003 blackout has nothing to do with these problems, because otherwise the 1965 blackout would have been followed by the same problems.
People acted courteously and civilly at this blackout. That’s OK. They did in 1965 as well. But this can’t be said to be because of Planeattack on 2001 September 11 or the events that followed that awful day, because there was no such event before the 1965 blackout; I don’t think the Kennedy assassination qualifies. It is said that this blackout means that we have a Third World transmission system. Be careful when you say that. That implies that we had a Third World transmission system in 1965, which says that we have done absolutely nothing about it in the 38 years since then.
I think that one reason why people make these blithe statements without taking 1965 into account is that many people, including many of the hypermedia, were not even born in 1965, or were kids who were more concerned about Tinkertoys and Mickey Mouse than about power generation. Those of us who were adults in 1965 know what happened then, and can appreciate how similar this blackout was to that one.
I still think we have problems ahead. But don’t believe it when you hear hype in the media about the Great Blackout of 2003 that doesn’t take 1965 into account.
A lot of statements have been made about this blackout that the Northeast recently had. For example, this is the worst blackout this nation has ever had. This blackout disrupted the lives of 50 million (figure is hyped up; see my previous blog). The blackout is a sign of things that could come. And I myself said that this is a precursor to shortages of oil, electricity, and natural gas.
However, a lot of these claims are hyped up or are bogus. How can you tell? Apply the 1965 principle: Any statement that is made about the blackout that occurred this year must also be true about the 1965 November 9 blackout. These two blackouts were near twins of each other. A local problem happened somewhere, and it spread all over the place in the Northeast, causing the lack of electricity to between 20 and 30 million people, in both 1965 and 2003. So any statement that is true about one is likely to be true of the other.
For example, this blackout may not be a foreboding of things to come. Sure there is an oil shortage coming around 2010, a natural gas shortage next year, and an electrical shortage coming in 2005. But how can the blackout of 2003 be a precursor of these when the blackout of 1965 clearly was not? In 1965 there was plenty of electrical power, oil, and natural gas. Sure the 2003 blackout may cause people to take a look at these other problems; in that case, I am glad that it occurred. But the 2003 blackout has nothing to do with these problems, because otherwise the 1965 blackout would have been followed by the same problems.
People acted courteously and civilly at this blackout. That’s OK. They did in 1965 as well. But this can’t be said to be because of Planeattack on 2001 September 11 or the events that followed that awful day, because there was no such event before the 1965 blackout; I don’t think the Kennedy assassination qualifies. It is said that this blackout means that we have a Third World transmission system. Be careful when you say that. That implies that we had a Third World transmission system in 1965, which says that we have done absolutely nothing about it in the 38 years since then.
I think that one reason why people make these blithe statements without taking 1965 into account is that many people, including many of the hypermedia, were not even born in 1965, or were kids who were more concerned about Tinkertoys and Mickey Mouse than about power generation. Those of us who were adults in 1965 know what happened then, and can appreciate how similar this blackout was to that one.
I still think we have problems ahead. But don’t believe it when you hear hype in the media about the Great Blackout of 2003 that doesn’t take 1965 into account.
2003/08/20
50 Million People in Blackout?
The biggest blackout in our history hit last Thursday. According to the media, over 50 million people were denied electricity from some time in the afternoon of 2003 August 14 to some time after that. That is a huge number of people. In fact, I even heard some media say 60 million. That is about 1/6 to 1/5 of the population of our country of over 282 million. If that had happened, it would be a P8 power outage. But did that really happen? I saw a blog from Peter Dutton entitled Jumping to Conclusions that said that the media really hyped up this one. Mr. Dutton said that the figure 50 million is way overinflated, that it was a creation of the media. If so, then media hype strikes again. But was it so?
I did some calculating. I looked up “united states” and “megawatts” on Google™ and found that in 2000, the US used 604,514 megawatts of energy. I heard from Mr. Dutton that the New York Times reported that a total of 61,800 megawatts of energy were lost in the blackout. I divided the 604,514 megawatts by the 2000 US population of 282,421,906 and got that the US consumes this year 2.14046 kilowatts of energy per person. That seems reasonable, since our household consumes 1.5 kilowatts. So I simply divided the 61,800 megawatts by 2.140 and got that 28,872,240 people (or 29 million people) were affected by the blackout. Media hype exposed! So much for the 50 million. This demotes the blackout to P7 and in fact it is not the biggest power blackout in our history. The blackout of 1965 November 9 affected 30 million people in a nation with far fewer people, although that figure could have been hyped also.
Sometimes it pays to check the figures before believing what is in that pile of papers at your doorstep. I thank Peter Dutton of Jumping to Conclusions (like a lemming?) for alerting me to this latest media hype.
By the way, my “P7” and “P8” notation is explained in Logarithms Keep Dr. Brown in Perspective.
The biggest blackout in our history hit last Thursday. According to the media, over 50 million people were denied electricity from some time in the afternoon of 2003 August 14 to some time after that. That is a huge number of people. In fact, I even heard some media say 60 million. That is about 1/6 to 1/5 of the population of our country of over 282 million. If that had happened, it would be a P8 power outage. But did that really happen? I saw a blog from Peter Dutton entitled Jumping to Conclusions that said that the media really hyped up this one. Mr. Dutton said that the figure 50 million is way overinflated, that it was a creation of the media. If so, then media hype strikes again. But was it so?
I did some calculating. I looked up “united states” and “megawatts” on Google™ and found that in 2000, the US used 604,514 megawatts of energy. I heard from Mr. Dutton that the New York Times reported that a total of 61,800 megawatts of energy were lost in the blackout. I divided the 604,514 megawatts by the 2000 US population of 282,421,906 and got that the US consumes this year 2.14046 kilowatts of energy per person. That seems reasonable, since our household consumes 1.5 kilowatts. So I simply divided the 61,800 megawatts by 2.140 and got that 28,872,240 people (or 29 million people) were affected by the blackout. Media hype exposed! So much for the 50 million. This demotes the blackout to P7 and in fact it is not the biggest power blackout in our history. The blackout of 1965 November 9 affected 30 million people in a nation with far fewer people, although that figure could have been hyped also.
Sometimes it pays to check the figures before believing what is in that pile of papers at your doorstep. I thank Peter Dutton of Jumping to Conclusions (like a lemming?) for alerting me to this latest media hype.
By the way, my “P7” and “P8” notation is explained in Logarithms Keep Dr. Brown in Perspective.
The Great Power Blackouts of 1965 and 2003
On 2003 August 14, I turned on the evening news expecting to hear the weather. Instead I heard that some news outfits, such as NBC, were broadcasting on emergency power and that there was a power outage. I looked on the Internet and sure enough, the big banner headline on CNN’s site was “BLACKOUT”. It had hit New York State, including my birthplace, Ohio, Detroit and parts of Canada, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Connecticut. Terrorism was ruled out. I would think so. To me this blackout reminds me greatly of the 1965 November 9 blackout.
I was a college sophomore at the time in Rochester, NY. I had just came back from a trip to a Niagara Falls military base to get a physical for Air Force ROTC, which I enrolled in the next year. It was 1700, 5 o’clock, so I went to the dining hall to get something to eat. While I was at the table, the lights started going dim and bright over and over again in a sinusoidal pattern. Then they got dim. Shortly afterwards I saw students with candles in their hands. I went back to my dorm to see if what had happened to the power had hit my dorm. It had. There was no power there. My roommate had a radio and was listening to the radio broadcast. It said tghat New York City was hit by the blackout. It said that Buffalo was hit. After a while it said that Boston was hit. It became apparent to us that this was a huge power blackout. I tried to swtudy in the darkness and figure I was going to have to go to bed early, when the power came back on at around 1930, 7:30 pm. I heard later, though, that power did not come on to New York City until the next morning.
The 2003 blackout affected pretty much the same area, except that it hit Detroit and Cleveland but did not hit Boston. People are now saying that we need to replace our antiquated power system. Because of this blackout? In that case, they should have done something in 1965. People are saying this is the worst power blackout in our history, but they ignore the 1965 blackout, which was a near twin of this one. There is a difference between this one and 1965, however. In 1965 energy was plentiful: there was plenty of coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy, and our nation had yet to hit a peak in oil production (1970). Today in 2003 we face a world wide ultimate oil shortage about 2010 or so, an electric power distribution shortage around 2005, and just this coming winter a natural gas shortage that threatens to double prices. Already (because of a pipeline burst) Phoenix is repeating the scenes of 1973’s oil crisis. I hope the Blackout of 2003 alerts the nation and the world to these upcoming shortages so we can do something about them.
On 2003 August 14, I turned on the evening news expecting to hear the weather. Instead I heard that some news outfits, such as NBC, were broadcasting on emergency power and that there was a power outage. I looked on the Internet and sure enough, the big banner headline on CNN’s site was “BLACKOUT”. It had hit New York State, including my birthplace, Ohio, Detroit and parts of Canada, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Connecticut. Terrorism was ruled out. I would think so. To me this blackout reminds me greatly of the 1965 November 9 blackout.
I was a college sophomore at the time in Rochester, NY. I had just came back from a trip to a Niagara Falls military base to get a physical for Air Force ROTC, which I enrolled in the next year. It was 1700, 5 o’clock, so I went to the dining hall to get something to eat. While I was at the table, the lights started going dim and bright over and over again in a sinusoidal pattern. Then they got dim. Shortly afterwards I saw students with candles in their hands. I went back to my dorm to see if what had happened to the power had hit my dorm. It had. There was no power there. My roommate had a radio and was listening to the radio broadcast. It said tghat New York City was hit by the blackout. It said that Buffalo was hit. After a while it said that Boston was hit. It became apparent to us that this was a huge power blackout. I tried to swtudy in the darkness and figure I was going to have to go to bed early, when the power came back on at around 1930, 7:30 pm. I heard later, though, that power did not come on to New York City until the next morning.
The 2003 blackout affected pretty much the same area, except that it hit Detroit and Cleveland but did not hit Boston. People are now saying that we need to replace our antiquated power system. Because of this blackout? In that case, they should have done something in 1965. People are saying this is the worst power blackout in our history, but they ignore the 1965 blackout, which was a near twin of this one. There is a difference between this one and 1965, however. In 1965 energy was plentiful: there was plenty of coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy, and our nation had yet to hit a peak in oil production (1970). Today in 2003 we face a world wide ultimate oil shortage about 2010 or so, an electric power distribution shortage around 2005, and just this coming winter a natural gas shortage that threatens to double prices. Already (because of a pipeline burst) Phoenix is repeating the scenes of 1973’s oil crisis. I hope the Blackout of 2003 alerts the nation and the world to these upcoming shortages so we can do something about them.
I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh
Today, 2003 August 20 0900, I wanted to see if there would be any hurricanes in our future. So I went to Weather Underground’s Tropical Page to see if there were any. There weren’t any. So I went down to near the bottom of the page to the link that has the North Atlantic Tropical Outlook to see if any were going to form. When I clicked on that link, I got “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh”. That’s right, the answer to the question “Are there going to be any hurricanes soon?” is “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh”. Well I certainly don’t want any of those affecting my weather soon. Further, the Weather Underground people got it wrong. “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh” is not a prediction of hurricanes. It is a prediction of where our email system is going. Remember that in an earlier blog that I said that eventually spam would become gibberish. In fact, most email will become gibberish. If indeed a ‘cane is coming, then it is a gibbericane, and I see that it has already hit Weather Underground. Ssleh.
Today, 2003 August 20 0900, I wanted to see if there would be any hurricanes in our future. So I went to Weather Underground’s Tropical Page to see if there were any. There weren’t any. So I went down to near the bottom of the page to the link that has the North Atlantic Tropical Outlook to see if any were going to form. When I clicked on that link, I got “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh”. That’s right, the answer to the question “Are there going to be any hurricanes soon?” is “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh”. Well I certainly don’t want any of those affecting my weather soon. Further, the Weather Underground people got it wrong. “I.(?Am?Kdzqh9q)#Zthv+U>!;Ssleh” is not a prediction of hurricanes. It is a prediction of where our email system is going. Remember that in an earlier blog that I said that eventually spam would become gibberish. In fact, most email will become gibberish. If indeed a ‘cane is coming, then it is a gibbericane, and I see that it has already hit Weather Underground. Ssleh.
2003/08/12
The California Alphabet
California has a lot of things. It has energy crises, a governor so bad that he had to be recalled, people taking a cyanide trip to the other side of comet Hale-Bopp, movie superstars that try to outglitter the Milky Way but fail, and so forth. Now in this latest development in their three-ring circus that they call a Recall Election, California now has its own alphabet.
In kindergarten and early grade school, we learn the alphabet. We sing, "ABCDEFG…" That is the way we have always recognized the alphabet as being in order. But not in California any more. Due to the desire to randomize the candidates, the people running this Recall Election have invented their own alphabet. This means if you are a child in California, you now sing not "ABCDEFG…" but "RWQOJMV…" The entire California alphabet, in fact, reads:
RWQOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFL
This has some interesting consequences. For example, if you look in an ordinary dictionary to try to find the first and last words, the first word is a and the last word is zymurgy (science of fermentation), or perhaps zyzzogeton (a leaf hopper) if you have an unabridged. But not in California. No, if you look in a California dictionary, you will find the first word to be rorqual, which is a variety of whale. Next comes row, as in rowdy, which is an apt way to describe this election. What's the last word? It is llano, an Argentine plain, just barely beating out llama, the animal.
So many of us are used to the ABC alphabet that we are unaware of some of the other alphabets around. For example, this very keyboard I am typing on generates the QWERTY alphabet:
QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM
Pangrams are sentences containing each letter of the alphabet. A 26-letter pangram contains each letter once and only once, and is scarce. But if you find them, you can use them as an alphabet:
SQUDGYFEZBLANKJIMPCRWTHVOX (Squdgy fez, blank jimp crwth vox!)
CWMFJORDBANKGLYPHSVEXTQUIZ (Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz.)
TVQUIZDRAGNYMPHBLEWJFKSCOX (TV quiz drag nymph blew JFK's cox.)
Or you can reverse the alphabet:
ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
or take the odd letters first, then the even ones:
ACEGIKMOQSUWYBDFHJLNPRTVXZ
or take them by frequency of usage in English- get something like (not sure of the middle letters):
ETAOINSHRDLCUMPGWYFBVKJXQZ
So now we have 7 different ways of ordering the letters.
Actually what they are doing in California is using the RWQ alphabet for District 1, then they shift the R to the end for District 2:
WQOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFLR
and then send the W to the end for District 3:
QOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFLRW
And so forth.
In any case, this thing in California looks like a mess. Talk about confusing ballots! A punch-the-pregnant-chad ballot with 80 candidates, much more complicated than any in Florida in 2000. I hope it works out OK.
California has a lot of things. It has energy crises, a governor so bad that he had to be recalled, people taking a cyanide trip to the other side of comet Hale-Bopp, movie superstars that try to outglitter the Milky Way but fail, and so forth. Now in this latest development in their three-ring circus that they call a Recall Election, California now has its own alphabet.
In kindergarten and early grade school, we learn the alphabet. We sing, "ABCDEFG…" That is the way we have always recognized the alphabet as being in order. But not in California any more. Due to the desire to randomize the candidates, the people running this Recall Election have invented their own alphabet. This means if you are a child in California, you now sing not "ABCDEFG…" but "RWQOJMV…" The entire California alphabet, in fact, reads:
RWQOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFL
This has some interesting consequences. For example, if you look in an ordinary dictionary to try to find the first and last words, the first word is a and the last word is zymurgy (science of fermentation), or perhaps zyzzogeton (a leaf hopper) if you have an unabridged. But not in California. No, if you look in a California dictionary, you will find the first word to be rorqual, which is a variety of whale. Next comes row, as in rowdy, which is an apt way to describe this election. What's the last word? It is llano, an Argentine plain, just barely beating out llama, the animal.
So many of us are used to the ABC alphabet that we are unaware of some of the other alphabets around. For example, this very keyboard I am typing on generates the QWERTY alphabet:
QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM
Pangrams are sentences containing each letter of the alphabet. A 26-letter pangram contains each letter once and only once, and is scarce. But if you find them, you can use them as an alphabet:
SQUDGYFEZBLANKJIMPCRWTHVOX (Squdgy fez, blank jimp crwth vox!)
CWMFJORDBANKGLYPHSVEXTQUIZ (Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz.)
TVQUIZDRAGNYMPHBLEWJFKSCOX (TV quiz drag nymph blew JFK's cox.)
Or you can reverse the alphabet:
ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
or take the odd letters first, then the even ones:
ACEGIKMOQSUWYBDFHJLNPRTVXZ
or take them by frequency of usage in English- get something like (not sure of the middle letters):
ETAOINSHRDLCUMPGWYFBVKJXQZ
So now we have 7 different ways of ordering the letters.
Actually what they are doing in California is using the RWQ alphabet for District 1, then they shift the R to the end for District 2:
WQOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFLR
and then send the W to the end for District 3:
QOJMVAHBSGZXNTCIEKUPDYFLRW
And so forth.
In any case, this thing in California looks like a mess. Talk about confusing ballots! A punch-the-pregnant-chad ballot with 80 candidates, much more complicated than any in Florida in 2000. I hope it works out OK.
2003/08/11
My Third Birthday
Tonight as I was returning from an astronomy meeting I saw the full moon out. Two days from now is my birthday, and I knew that I was born just after a full moon. It was a reminder that today is my third birthday. Not of regular years, but of metonic cycles. The sun and the moon have separate motions in the sky, and we find that there is 11 days of a moon left over after 12 moons to make a full calendar year. That's too bad. Otherwise one could tell the day of the month from the lunar phase. Even after two years, the phase of the moon and the end of the year don't correspond. Not after 3, 4, or 5 years does it correspond, because the sun and moon have periods that have nothing to do with each other. They are worse than irrational, in that we can't even compute beyond about 4-6 decimal places.
But they come really close after 19 years. The link above says that 19 years is only hours removed from being 235 moons. Therefore, lunar phases will repeat approximately after 19 years. This means that since there was a new moon on 1972 July 11, for example, there will be another one on 1991 July 11, 19 years and 235 moons later.
So what is my age in metonic cycles? It is 3. It is also 57 years, or 705 moons. So since the moon was full when I was born, it is full now - it is like a birth moon for me. I wonder if my mother saw the full moon when she was pregnant, and knew she had to go to the hospital - I was coming. It is also interesting that 57 and 705 both have a 5 and a 7 in them. I was a full grown adult on my first birthday in 1965; I was working as a janitor then during the summer while earning a degree at the University of Rochester. At two cycles, I was working as an operations research analyst, constructing models of such things as maintenance and warehousing. It was the Orwellian year 1984. Now it is 2003, and a third cycle has passed. It is interesting to see how the world has changed during these periods. I have things that I could have only dreamed of having in 1984, let alone 1965 or 1946, namely cell phones, PDAs, and a computer in a small piece of luggage many times more powerful than any computer in 1984, even mainframes. The next cycle will be in 2022, when I am 76 years or 912 moons old. If I am still blogging then, I will comment on my reaching the age of 4.
Tonight as I was returning from an astronomy meeting I saw the full moon out. Two days from now is my birthday, and I knew that I was born just after a full moon. It was a reminder that today is my third birthday. Not of regular years, but of metonic cycles. The sun and the moon have separate motions in the sky, and we find that there is 11 days of a moon left over after 12 moons to make a full calendar year. That's too bad. Otherwise one could tell the day of the month from the lunar phase. Even after two years, the phase of the moon and the end of the year don't correspond. Not after 3, 4, or 5 years does it correspond, because the sun and moon have periods that have nothing to do with each other. They are worse than irrational, in that we can't even compute beyond about 4-6 decimal places.
But they come really close after 19 years. The link above says that 19 years is only hours removed from being 235 moons. Therefore, lunar phases will repeat approximately after 19 years. This means that since there was a new moon on 1972 July 11, for example, there will be another one on 1991 July 11, 19 years and 235 moons later.
So what is my age in metonic cycles? It is 3. It is also 57 years, or 705 moons. So since the moon was full when I was born, it is full now - it is like a birth moon for me. I wonder if my mother saw the full moon when she was pregnant, and knew she had to go to the hospital - I was coming. It is also interesting that 57 and 705 both have a 5 and a 7 in them. I was a full grown adult on my first birthday in 1965; I was working as a janitor then during the summer while earning a degree at the University of Rochester. At two cycles, I was working as an operations research analyst, constructing models of such things as maintenance and warehousing. It was the Orwellian year 1984. Now it is 2003, and a third cycle has passed. It is interesting to see how the world has changed during these periods. I have things that I could have only dreamed of having in 1984, let alone 1965 or 1946, namely cell phones, PDAs, and a computer in a small piece of luggage many times more powerful than any computer in 1984, even mainframes. The next cycle will be in 2022, when I am 76 years or 912 moons old. If I am still blogging then, I will comment on my reaching the age of 4.
2003/08/10
If I were Governor of California
Well, now they are in. Over 100 candidates (the link requires that you fill in certain data) have filed for the recall election to replace Gray Davis as Governor of California. This is democracy in action. You don't have to choose between two candidates. You can choose from among a hundred of them. And it is not that hard to have filed for candidacy. All you need is 65 friends and $3,500, and, of course, be a resident of California. If you are on a third party ticket, you may just get by with 150 friends and $0.
Some of the candidates are interesting. Many play the same old banal lines, that they will cut the budget, that they will put good government back into California, and so forth. One of the more interesting ones said, "If I'm supposed to run for this office, please let there be some sign. At that very instant, this giant comet streaks across the sky and the comet is as bright as can be for five seconds OK, thank you, I got the message." This one would need some education. Comets don't streak across the sky. If he really wanted a comet to tell him to run for office, he should run for President in 2004. In 2004 a really bright comet is supposed to arrive (Comet NEAT).
One candidate is 100 years old. She will be 104 when her term ends. Two candidates are running because they believe that marijuana laws should be eased or eliminated. One of these is a disabled Vietnam veteran who has been jailed on marijuana charges. Several candidates say there should not be a recall, and at least one says he should not be the next governor. So there are some candidates that shoot themselves in the foot.
What would I say if I were running for governor of California? Here is what I would say: "The foremost problems in California are balancing the budget and straightening out the economy. But another problem is looming for California that affects both the budget and economy, and we had a precursor of it in 2000. There is going to be a natural gas shortage in California, and indeed in our entire nation. I would take steps right now to prepare for this crisis - encourage conservation, seek alternative sources of energy, especially hydrogen generated by sunlight, and encourage industry to reduce their dependence on natural gas. By taking these steps early, a huge energy crisis will be prevented or eased, one that could turn whoever is elected into the next Gray Davis."
Well, now they are in. Over 100 candidates (the link requires that you fill in certain data) have filed for the recall election to replace Gray Davis as Governor of California. This is democracy in action. You don't have to choose between two candidates. You can choose from among a hundred of them. And it is not that hard to have filed for candidacy. All you need is 65 friends and $3,500, and, of course, be a resident of California. If you are on a third party ticket, you may just get by with 150 friends and $0.
Some of the candidates are interesting. Many play the same old banal lines, that they will cut the budget, that they will put good government back into California, and so forth. One of the more interesting ones said, "If I'm supposed to run for this office, please let there be some sign. At that very instant, this giant comet streaks across the sky and the comet is as bright as can be for five seconds OK, thank you, I got the message." This one would need some education. Comets don't streak across the sky. If he really wanted a comet to tell him to run for office, he should run for President in 2004. In 2004 a really bright comet is supposed to arrive (Comet NEAT).
One candidate is 100 years old. She will be 104 when her term ends. Two candidates are running because they believe that marijuana laws should be eased or eliminated. One of these is a disabled Vietnam veteran who has been jailed on marijuana charges. Several candidates say there should not be a recall, and at least one says he should not be the next governor. So there are some candidates that shoot themselves in the foot.
What would I say if I were running for governor of California? Here is what I would say: "The foremost problems in California are balancing the budget and straightening out the economy. But another problem is looming for California that affects both the budget and economy, and we had a precursor of it in 2000. There is going to be a natural gas shortage in California, and indeed in our entire nation. I would take steps right now to prepare for this crisis - encourage conservation, seek alternative sources of energy, especially hydrogen generated by sunlight, and encourage industry to reduce their dependence on natural gas. By taking these steps early, a huge energy crisis will be prevented or eased, one that could turn whoever is elected into the next Gray Davis."
2003/08/07
California's weird election
I see now that Gray Davis now has to go through a recall election. The laws of California say that all you need to run for Governor is to be a resident of California, pay $3,500, and get 65 signatures. A K2 person can easily run for Governor. (K2 means that the person knows or is known by between 31 and 316 people; the notation is logarithmic and is explained in "Logarithms keep Doc Brown in Perspective"). Most of us are K3 (between 316 and 3,162 people), so most of us could run for governor, and a lot of people are. I hear that there are 352 candidates for governor now, and the number is likely to rise. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Arianna Huffington, and Larry Flynt are among the candidates. So also is Bridget O'Reilly, who has been unemployed for three years and thinks of this as another job she is trying to get. She will get fame and notice out of this, and that may help her to get another job.
But with so many candidates, we could wind up with a winner with only 5.2% of the vote, say, but leading all the 351 others by a wide margin. And perhaps those 5.2% are a fringe group that the other 94.8% don't believe in at all. You get one of those as governor and almost everyone will be unhappy. So this could get wild. If they are going to do this, they need a runoff election, or several runoff elections, to eliminate the fringes and get at the candidates that are rated in the top 10% or so by everyone.
This may even hurt Bush's chances of getting reelected next year. I thought at first of an Arnold Schwarzenegger challenge to the Republican Party's nomination of Bush, but he is foreign-born. Still, this could be a place where people voice their discontent, and maybe a governor will be elected who will be emboldened by this either to challenge Bush for the Republican nomination or run as a third-party. If either of these succeed, Bush loses a Lichtman key and perhaps the election.
I see now that Gray Davis now has to go through a recall election. The laws of California say that all you need to run for Governor is to be a resident of California, pay $3,500, and get 65 signatures. A K2 person can easily run for Governor. (K2 means that the person knows or is known by between 31 and 316 people; the notation is logarithmic and is explained in "Logarithms keep Doc Brown in Perspective"). Most of us are K3 (between 316 and 3,162 people), so most of us could run for governor, and a lot of people are. I hear that there are 352 candidates for governor now, and the number is likely to rise. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Arianna Huffington, and Larry Flynt are among the candidates. So also is Bridget O'Reilly, who has been unemployed for three years and thinks of this as another job she is trying to get. She will get fame and notice out of this, and that may help her to get another job.
But with so many candidates, we could wind up with a winner with only 5.2% of the vote, say, but leading all the 351 others by a wide margin. And perhaps those 5.2% are a fringe group that the other 94.8% don't believe in at all. You get one of those as governor and almost everyone will be unhappy. So this could get wild. If they are going to do this, they need a runoff election, or several runoff elections, to eliminate the fringes and get at the candidates that are rated in the top 10% or so by everyone.
This may even hurt Bush's chances of getting reelected next year. I thought at first of an Arnold Schwarzenegger challenge to the Republican Party's nomination of Bush, but he is foreign-born. Still, this could be a place where people voice their discontent, and maybe a governor will be elected who will be emboldened by this either to challenge Bush for the Republican nomination or run as a third-party. If either of these succeed, Bush loses a Lichtman key and perhaps the election.
Googlisms
Recently I found out about a googly type site on the Internet. It is Googlisms. No, this is not Google&tm;. It is a site set up by an Australian in which you type in a name, click a radio button labeled "who", "where", "what", or "when", and submit, and the result is a list of quotes from the Internet concerning the name you submitted. For example, if you submit "bill gates", you get things like "bill gates is satan conspiracy theory", "bill gates is the pope" and so forth. So I experimented with it. I submitted my name and got nothing. I submitted the names of some people I know, and I got some items on some of them. I then tried dates and organizations such as the Astronomical League and got lists of items describing them. I tried "blogtrek" and got "blogtrek is getting out". I don't want to see that. I looked "blogtrek is getting out" in Google and got one of my previous pages in which I find that other bloggers are listing a link to my Blogtrek. I wrote "I am glad to see that word of Blogtrek is getting out." As you can see, Googlisms took that phrase right out of context. That is not what I meant at all. I found an even more egregious case when I looked up "toastmasters". I got "toastmasters is only for professional speakers". Whaaa?? The whole purpose of Toastmasters is to give people new to public speaking or afraid of it a chance to get better with speaking. It is not just for professional speakers. I looked up the phrase in Google and got from the site http://www.portlandtn.com/toastmasters.htm the quote "Some might think Toastmasters is solely for professional speakers. It is not. Toastmasters come from a variety of occupations and backgrounds.". By taking the phrase out of context, Googlisms completely reversed the meaning of this quote!
I did some more "googlisming" and concluded that it looks for your search term plus "is" (not "are", not "was"; if you try a plural noun, you may not get any hits) plus a phrase that lasts until something other than a letter, number, sharp, or space is found. No wonder we get out-of-context returns. "of" phrases can easily change radically in meaning: "A daughter of Mary is a kindergartener." to kindergarten together" becomes "Mary is a kindergartener." Googlisms will make the mother go to school too.
Therefore I consider this site dangerous. Using "is" as your verb is said to be bad form, and it does not occur that often. Therefore, most of the people I know get no hits, even though they occur frequently on the Web. You now have to be careful how you use "is" because Googlism will pick it up and chop your sentence to pieces. Googlisms may be fun, but don't take it too seriously. Take everything in context.
Recently I found out about a googly type site on the Internet. It is Googlisms. No, this is not Google&tm;. It is a site set up by an Australian in which you type in a name, click a radio button labeled "who", "where", "what", or "when", and submit, and the result is a list of quotes from the Internet concerning the name you submitted. For example, if you submit "bill gates", you get things like "bill gates is satan conspiracy theory", "bill gates is the pope" and so forth. So I experimented with it. I submitted my name and got nothing. I submitted the names of some people I know, and I got some items on some of them. I then tried dates and organizations such as the Astronomical League and got lists of items describing them. I tried "blogtrek" and got "blogtrek is getting out". I don't want to see that. I looked "blogtrek is getting out" in Google and got one of my previous pages in which I find that other bloggers are listing a link to my Blogtrek. I wrote "I am glad to see that word of Blogtrek is getting out." As you can see, Googlisms took that phrase right out of context. That is not what I meant at all. I found an even more egregious case when I looked up "toastmasters". I got "toastmasters is only for professional speakers". Whaaa?? The whole purpose of Toastmasters is to give people new to public speaking or afraid of it a chance to get better with speaking. It is not just for professional speakers. I looked up the phrase in Google and got from the site http://www.portlandtn.com/toastmasters.htm the quote "Some might think Toastmasters is solely for professional speakers. It is not. Toastmasters come from a variety of occupations and backgrounds.". By taking the phrase out of context, Googlisms completely reversed the meaning of this quote!
I did some more "googlisming" and concluded that it looks for your search term plus "is" (not "are", not "was"; if you try a plural noun, you may not get any hits) plus a phrase that lasts until something other than a letter, number, sharp, or space is found. No wonder we get out-of-context returns. "of" phrases can easily change radically in meaning: "A daughter of Mary is a kindergartener." to kindergarten together" becomes "Mary is a kindergartener." Googlisms will make the mother go to school too.
Therefore I consider this site dangerous. Using "is" as your verb is said to be bad form, and it does not occur that often. Therefore, most of the people I know get no hits, even though they occur frequently on the Web. You now have to be careful how you use "is" because Googlism will pick it up and chop your sentence to pieces. Googlisms may be fun, but don't take it too seriously. Take everything in context.
2003/08/05
The Mystery Man of Carly Simon
I heard in a news story yesterday; for example, in USA Today, that Carly Simon sold at an auction for $50,000 the identity of the mystery man in the song You're So Vain. The winner of the auction had to promise Carly that he would never give away the identity of the vain man. Lots of legends have built over the 30 years since the song came out about just who this vain man with the apricot scarf was. Some say it was Warren Beatty, others Cat Stevens, and Kris Kristofferson and Mick Jagger have been mentioned as well.
The song is interesting in many respects, and it is somewhat vain itself and certainly it contradicts itself, rather like a snake eating its own tail. The picture that it paints is certainly a vain one. This guy saunters out onto a dance floor wearing an apricot scarf, which normally would be found on a woman. He cocks his cap a certain way, strategically. Interesting. He doesn't boogie on the dance floor. He doesn't salsa, waltz, swing, or rock either. He gavottes. He is pretty, prim and proper about it, just like the type of dance the gavotte is. He is looking in the mirror to see how pretty he is. Well hasn't everyone from time to time? And certainly if all the people of the opposite sex wanted to be with you, that would make you feel good, wouldn't it? I certainly would if I had women pursuing me left and right. Sadly, most of my life has not been like that at all, although for a few precious times it has.
So this is a pretty vain cat, whoever he is. Some other aspects of this song interest me as well. For example, She sings "then you flew your Lear jet to Nova Scotia to see a total eclipse of the sun". She means the 1972 July 10 total eclipse of the sun in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Gaspe. I saw that eclipse from Prince Edward Island, but I took the train, not a Lear jet. I wasn't that vain. Besides, a 25-year-old brand new math PhD does not have that kind of money. It got really DARK when I saw that eclipse on Stanhope Beach. I tried to take a picture of it with an Instamatic but it did not come out. I resolved right then and there to see another one with proper equipment.
So I went to Mexico on 1991 July 11 to see it. I had a 4-inch telescope and a camera and took a good photo of that eclipse, the longest in our lives (see My Astronomy Page for my photo of that eclipse). If the Carly Simon song had come out then, it would have said, "took your Lear jet to Cabo San Lucas to see a total eclipse of the sun...".
But talking about my rather huge web site sounds pretty vain in itself, so I will come back to Carly. Some other interesting words in the song are "clouds in my coffee", as though your inner weather is determined by the weather in a cup of holy brown liquid; "some underground spy or the wife of a close friend"; well certainly I would not want to deal with any spy, let alone an underground one; I don't know about the close friend's wife. She said she was quite naïve. Well, everyone is when they are young.
But the thing that really gets me going about this song is that it contradicts itself. She sings, "You're so vain." OK. This guy does sound pretty narcissistic. But then she sings "You think this song is about you, don't you?" She implies by her tone of voice that this song was not written with this vain guy in mind, that it was one of those parts of her life that don't concern him at all. But look again at the lyrics. Just about every word in the song talks about this mystery man. It is about him, isn't it? Isn't it? Isn't it? The song contradicts itself; it is essentially an embellishment of the sentence "This sentence is false."
Besides there is something vain about the idea of writing about a mystery person. It gives you a certain sense of price to know that you sang about a person that nobody knows who it is. I know, for I have written such a song. Go to jimvb.home.mindspring.com/music2002.htm and you will see some of the lyrics of a song I wrote about someone. No, I am not going to tell anyone who this is. In fact, I am displaying only four lines of the lyrics of the song. Perhaps I will tell when Carly Simon tells me who she's singing about.
I heard in a news story yesterday; for example, in USA Today, that Carly Simon sold at an auction for $50,000 the identity of the mystery man in the song You're So Vain. The winner of the auction had to promise Carly that he would never give away the identity of the vain man. Lots of legends have built over the 30 years since the song came out about just who this vain man with the apricot scarf was. Some say it was Warren Beatty, others Cat Stevens, and Kris Kristofferson and Mick Jagger have been mentioned as well.
The song is interesting in many respects, and it is somewhat vain itself and certainly it contradicts itself, rather like a snake eating its own tail. The picture that it paints is certainly a vain one. This guy saunters out onto a dance floor wearing an apricot scarf, which normally would be found on a woman. He cocks his cap a certain way, strategically. Interesting. He doesn't boogie on the dance floor. He doesn't salsa, waltz, swing, or rock either. He gavottes. He is pretty, prim and proper about it, just like the type of dance the gavotte is. He is looking in the mirror to see how pretty he is. Well hasn't everyone from time to time? And certainly if all the people of the opposite sex wanted to be with you, that would make you feel good, wouldn't it? I certainly would if I had women pursuing me left and right. Sadly, most of my life has not been like that at all, although for a few precious times it has.
So this is a pretty vain cat, whoever he is. Some other aspects of this song interest me as well. For example, She sings "then you flew your Lear jet to Nova Scotia to see a total eclipse of the sun". She means the 1972 July 10 total eclipse of the sun in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Gaspe. I saw that eclipse from Prince Edward Island, but I took the train, not a Lear jet. I wasn't that vain. Besides, a 25-year-old brand new math PhD does not have that kind of money. It got really DARK when I saw that eclipse on Stanhope Beach. I tried to take a picture of it with an Instamatic but it did not come out. I resolved right then and there to see another one with proper equipment.
So I went to Mexico on 1991 July 11 to see it. I had a 4-inch telescope and a camera and took a good photo of that eclipse, the longest in our lives (see My Astronomy Page for my photo of that eclipse). If the Carly Simon song had come out then, it would have said, "took your Lear jet to Cabo San Lucas to see a total eclipse of the sun...".
But talking about my rather huge web site sounds pretty vain in itself, so I will come back to Carly. Some other interesting words in the song are "clouds in my coffee", as though your inner weather is determined by the weather in a cup of holy brown liquid; "some underground spy or the wife of a close friend"; well certainly I would not want to deal with any spy, let alone an underground one; I don't know about the close friend's wife. She said she was quite naïve. Well, everyone is when they are young.
But the thing that really gets me going about this song is that it contradicts itself. She sings, "You're so vain." OK. This guy does sound pretty narcissistic. But then she sings "You think this song is about you, don't you?" She implies by her tone of voice that this song was not written with this vain guy in mind, that it was one of those parts of her life that don't concern him at all. But look again at the lyrics. Just about every word in the song talks about this mystery man. It is about him, isn't it? Isn't it? Isn't it? The song contradicts itself; it is essentially an embellishment of the sentence "This sentence is false."
Besides there is something vain about the idea of writing about a mystery person. It gives you a certain sense of price to know that you sang about a person that nobody knows who it is. I know, for I have written such a song. Go to jimvb.home.mindspring.com/music2002.htm and you will see some of the lyrics of a song I wrote about someone. No, I am not going to tell anyone who this is. In fact, I am displaying only four lines of the lyrics of the song. Perhaps I will tell when Carly Simon tells me who she's singing about.
The Tri-City Tornado of 1993
Storm after storm after storm this spring. At least it wasn't as bad as 10 years ago here. On 1993 August 6 an F4 tornado tore through Old Town Petersburg, Virginia and a Wal-Mart in Colonial Heights causing four deaths and property damage so bad that some of it still hasn't been repaired. The strange thing about this for me is that first of all I was not at work but I was on RDO ("regular day off"); for the people at work, it was "not a RDO", which if you rearrange the letters thereof, you get "tornado". Everyone should have taken that Friday off. In fact, I think it would do this country good if everyone would take every Friday off and do what they feel like doing; make every Friday a SUUSI.
The other strange thing is that I had a dream about tornados two nights previous. Here is the text of part of that dream:
I was in a large parking lot. I was with another group of people, but the lot was nearly empty. There was supposed to have been some sort of workshop (or worship?) here. I had heard earlier of some approaching thunderstorms. Then I heard thunder.
I looked up and saw a threatening sky in front of us, quite black. I did not want to go anywhere, however. We were discussing some sort of deal. "We" consisted of me, Anne, and some friends of ours, and a group of people from elsewhere that we had known earlier. I heard you should go inside in case of tornadoes striking. I tried to keep attention but I turned around and I saw two tornadoes coming out of the blackness. They were small in diameter, frizzly, and as black as the clouds. They came right at us. We did not do anything but wait and see where they would go. They side-swiped us to the right, and I could feel the high wind from them even though they did not strike us headon. The tornadoes also went up in the air slightly. After they left, I saw things were apparently OK. But I saw more tornadoes coming.
It startled me when I had that dream, and then the real thing struck two days later. It came close to the church I went to but did not quite hit it. Predictive dream? At that time even ABC was interested in my story, but they rejected it. I suppose it was because I concluded that the dream was caused not by the tornado of August 6 but by the storms of August 2, which caused four power outages at my house.
But still that tornado devastated the community, especially Petersburg (Wal-Mart came out of it OK - they replaced the destroyed store with a Sams and built an even bigger Wal-Mart a mile down the road) and it gave pause to me - some day this could happen to my house, to me. We are not the master of nature.
Storm after storm after storm this spring. At least it wasn't as bad as 10 years ago here. On 1993 August 6 an F4 tornado tore through Old Town Petersburg, Virginia and a Wal-Mart in Colonial Heights causing four deaths and property damage so bad that some of it still hasn't been repaired. The strange thing about this for me is that first of all I was not at work but I was on RDO ("regular day off"); for the people at work, it was "not a RDO", which if you rearrange the letters thereof, you get "tornado". Everyone should have taken that Friday off. In fact, I think it would do this country good if everyone would take every Friday off and do what they feel like doing; make every Friday a SUUSI.
The other strange thing is that I had a dream about tornados two nights previous. Here is the text of part of that dream:
I was in a large parking lot. I was with another group of people, but the lot was nearly empty. There was supposed to have been some sort of workshop (or worship?) here. I had heard earlier of some approaching thunderstorms. Then I heard thunder.
I looked up and saw a threatening sky in front of us, quite black. I did not want to go anywhere, however. We were discussing some sort of deal. "We" consisted of me, Anne, and some friends of ours, and a group of people from elsewhere that we had known earlier. I heard you should go inside in case of tornadoes striking. I tried to keep attention but I turned around and I saw two tornadoes coming out of the blackness. They were small in diameter, frizzly, and as black as the clouds. They came right at us. We did not do anything but wait and see where they would go. They side-swiped us to the right, and I could feel the high wind from them even though they did not strike us headon. The tornadoes also went up in the air slightly. After they left, I saw things were apparently OK. But I saw more tornadoes coming.
It startled me when I had that dream, and then the real thing struck two days later. It came close to the church I went to but did not quite hit it. Predictive dream? At that time even ABC was interested in my story, but they rejected it. I suppose it was because I concluded that the dream was caused not by the tornado of August 6 but by the storms of August 2, which caused four power outages at my house.
But still that tornado devastated the community, especially Petersburg (Wal-Mart came out of it OK - they replaced the destroyed store with a Sams and built an even bigger Wal-Mart a mile down the road) and it gave pause to me - some day this could happen to my house, to me. We are not the master of nature.
The size of hailstones
I have been hearing reports in the media and from NOAA and other weather people about hailstorms. In these reports they describe to us how big they were. They don't say "13 mm" or "1 inch" because most of us don't have a feel for how big that is. Instead, they say things like "golf-ball-sized hail", or "quarter-sized hail". I tried doing a Google&tm; game on that. I Googled for "sized hail". I got these sizes: pea, nickel, quarter, dime, golf ball, tennis ball, baseball, grapefruit, softball, soccer, and volleyball. Volleyball-sized hail? That would really be apocalyptic. Good thing I got no basketball-sized hail.
But what is of more interest to me is the object that people use to compare hail with. Most of the time it is either a monetary coin or a ball from a ball game of some sort. Does the selection of such words reflect our society? Is it mainly interested in money and sports? It would appear that way, when football and basketball stars earn tens of millions of dollars a year. Suppose people were more interested in gardening instead. Then we would see "petunia-sized hail" or "dandelion-sized hail"; something like that. A person in the medical field might say "fingernail-sized hail" or "kneecap-sized hail". The fact that hail is either dime-sized or tennis-ball-sized tells me something about our society. Namely, that we are gaga about moolah and sports.
I have been hearing reports in the media and from NOAA and other weather people about hailstorms. In these reports they describe to us how big they were. They don't say "13 mm" or "1 inch" because most of us don't have a feel for how big that is. Instead, they say things like "golf-ball-sized hail", or "quarter-sized hail". I tried doing a Google&tm; game on that. I Googled for "sized hail". I got these sizes: pea, nickel, quarter, dime, golf ball, tennis ball, baseball, grapefruit, softball, soccer, and volleyball. Volleyball-sized hail? That would really be apocalyptic. Good thing I got no basketball-sized hail.
But what is of more interest to me is the object that people use to compare hail with. Most of the time it is either a monetary coin or a ball from a ball game of some sort. Does the selection of such words reflect our society? Is it mainly interested in money and sports? It would appear that way, when football and basketball stars earn tens of millions of dollars a year. Suppose people were more interested in gardening instead. Then we would see "petunia-sized hail" or "dandelion-sized hail"; something like that. A person in the medical field might say "fingernail-sized hail" or "kneecap-sized hail". The fact that hail is either dime-sized or tennis-ball-sized tells me something about our society. Namely, that we are gaga about moolah and sports.
2003/08/03
Anaphylactic Shock
This weekend while running through the woods, I hit a wasp nest and got stung four times. It seems to be OK now but it did hurt at first. The sting puts in a "peptide" which has no lasting effect but it does cause the area to swell at first. My main fear was "anaphylactic shock". I looked this up and found that it was the immune system reacting or overreacting to the attack by the wasps. This can cause much worse problems than the original stings - it can cause shortness of breath and in some cases death. That is why some people when they go out in to the woods must carry an antidote kit with them in case this happens.
When I found out about this, I thought of another case which could be called anaphylactic shock, namely Planeattack, the terrorist attacks of 2001 September 11. They were devastating, especially to some people, but as a whole it just hurt a bit and the nation continued to function after about two months. Sort of like the wasp stings. However, the aftereffects of this attack are still continuing to be fought. There are much tighter restrictions on air travel now. Access to military bases is much stricter. There is a national alert system, and the Patriot Act, which throws a lot of constitutional provisions out the window, was passed. I wonder if this is a case of national anaphylactic shock. I hope not, but certainly the Patriot Act needs to be repealed.
This weekend while running through the woods, I hit a wasp nest and got stung four times. It seems to be OK now but it did hurt at first. The sting puts in a "peptide" which has no lasting effect but it does cause the area to swell at first. My main fear was "anaphylactic shock". I looked this up and found that it was the immune system reacting or overreacting to the attack by the wasps. This can cause much worse problems than the original stings - it can cause shortness of breath and in some cases death. That is why some people when they go out in to the woods must carry an antidote kit with them in case this happens.
When I found out about this, I thought of another case which could be called anaphylactic shock, namely Planeattack, the terrorist attacks of 2001 September 11. They were devastating, especially to some people, but as a whole it just hurt a bit and the nation continued to function after about two months. Sort of like the wasp stings. However, the aftereffects of this attack are still continuing to be fought. There are much tighter restrictions on air travel now. Access to military bases is much stricter. There is a national alert system, and the Patriot Act, which throws a lot of constitutional provisions out the window, was passed. I wonder if this is a case of national anaphylactic shock. I hope not, but certainly the Patriot Act needs to be repealed.
2003/07/31
Blogger is weird tonight
When I just tried publishing the blog on trust to my site tonight with Blogger on Internet Explorer, it started going click...click...click... for an infinite number of times. I checked the page and found that the blog had not been published. So I went to Opera. It gave me a weird display with everything huge and few of the buttons I was familiar with. So I quit Opera and went to Netscape. Netscape gave me that same strange display. So I tried posting to it. It gave me a long list of stuff and squawked about some error. To me that tells me that Blogger is going wacky tonight. The first requirement for a blogging system is that it gives me a reasonable display to blog from, and it did not do that tonight, not at any time, not at any place, not with any browser.
Oh finally, I tried Internet Explorer again. This time it clicked twice and then said that my post was successful. So it looks like Blogger came to its senses. But too many of these cuckoo spells and I will be looking for another blogging system.
When I just tried publishing the blog on trust to my site tonight with Blogger on Internet Explorer, it started going click...click...click... for an infinite number of times. I checked the page and found that the blog had not been published. So I went to Opera. It gave me a weird display with everything huge and few of the buttons I was familiar with. So I quit Opera and went to Netscape. Netscape gave me that same strange display. So I tried posting to it. It gave me a long list of stuff and squawked about some error. To me that tells me that Blogger is going wacky tonight. The first requirement for a blogging system is that it gives me a reasonable display to blog from, and it did not do that tonight, not at any time, not at any place, not with any browser.
Oh finally, I tried Internet Explorer again. This time it clicked twice and then said that my post was successful. So it looks like Blogger came to its senses. But too many of these cuckoo spells and I will be looking for another blogging system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)