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.
2002/12/14
Yuletide Lights Run
Today I ran my annual Holiday Fantasy Lights run around our neighborhood. This is similar to the Fourth of July run, but this time I run to find good holiday light displays. This is a different task than hunting Fourth of July fireworks. The fireworks are sporadic. If I hear them I have to run there right away or I'll miss them. Not so with holiday lights. I can't hear them but they are visible for hours at a time. I found this year disappointing. Many streets in my neighborhood which were brilliantly lit in years past this year were mostly dull, with only an occasional holiday display. I try to find which display is the best. This year this honor goes to someone who put strings of colored lights all through all of the trees in his front yard. The side of the street is close enough to make you feel that you are in a wonderland. It must have been hard to get those lights up there; either a long pole or a ladder, with unsure footing on that tree, was needed. Most of the brighter displays use white floodlights. To me these are out. They pollute the sky! If I were a display judge, I would automatically eliminate all lots with white floodlights on them.
Today I ran my annual Holiday Fantasy Lights run around our neighborhood. This is similar to the Fourth of July run, but this time I run to find good holiday light displays. This is a different task than hunting Fourth of July fireworks. The fireworks are sporadic. If I hear them I have to run there right away or I'll miss them. Not so with holiday lights. I can't hear them but they are visible for hours at a time. I found this year disappointing. Many streets in my neighborhood which were brilliantly lit in years past this year were mostly dull, with only an occasional holiday display. I try to find which display is the best. This year this honor goes to someone who put strings of colored lights all through all of the trees in his front yard. The side of the street is close enough to make you feel that you are in a wonderland. It must have been hard to get those lights up there; either a long pole or a ladder, with unsure footing on that tree, was needed. Most of the brighter displays use white floodlights. To me these are out. They pollute the sky! If I were a display judge, I would automatically eliminate all lots with white floodlights on them.
2002/12/12
Hypermediaism of the day
I may establish a regular feature on this blog. Hypermediaism of the day, honoring the most hypered-up news story of the past 24 hours or so. Today the honor of Hypermediaism of the day goes to the Hyper-TV networks such as CBS, NBC, and ABC, as well as CNN's web page. CNN's web page featured late today a story showing the discovery of nuclear sites in Iran. This was highlighted as the lead story on their site, and even included an aerial site showing some works. So I tried to listen for it on 1830 news tonight. But not a single one mentioned the story in the first 10 minutes. Instead, they blabbed endlessly about Trent Lott's statement about Strom Thurmond. First they give huge lead story billing to the Iran nuke story; then they drop it and give the lead hype to Trent Lott. If the networks can do this, then either the Iran nuke story has been hyped up far more than is warranted, or the Trent Lott story is. I think both are true. In fact, I believe that the hypermedia are helping make things bad for Sen. Lott and may force him to resign. For this reason, I award Hypermediaism of the Day honors today to the Iran nuke and the Trent Lott stories.
I may establish a regular feature on this blog. Hypermediaism of the day, honoring the most hypered-up news story of the past 24 hours or so. Today the honor of Hypermediaism of the day goes to the Hyper-TV networks such as CBS, NBC, and ABC, as well as CNN's web page. CNN's web page featured late today a story showing the discovery of nuclear sites in Iran. This was highlighted as the lead story on their site, and even included an aerial site showing some works. So I tried to listen for it on 1830 news tonight. But not a single one mentioned the story in the first 10 minutes. Instead, they blabbed endlessly about Trent Lott's statement about Strom Thurmond. First they give huge lead story billing to the Iran nuke story; then they drop it and give the lead hype to Trent Lott. If the networks can do this, then either the Iran nuke story has been hyped up far more than is warranted, or the Trent Lott story is. I think both are true. In fact, I believe that the hypermedia are helping make things bad for Sen. Lott and may force him to resign. For this reason, I award Hypermediaism of the Day honors today to the Iran nuke and the Trent Lott stories.
2002/12/10
Estival Christmas
I got an email today that says that we should try to show up for a party in the most festival costume that we can find. Well, of course, your costume can't be festival, for that's a noun, not an adjective. It can be festive or estival, but not festival. If it is estival, that means T-shirt, shorts, and flip-flops, or a swimsuit and a surfboard, since "estival" means "summerlike" or "summery". Thus a baseball uniform is estival. Which gave me the idea to rewrite "Take me out to the Ballgame" for this season of the year. At a Yuletide party, it would go:
Take me out to the Yule Party,
Take me out to the bash,
Buy me some chestnuts and spiked egg nog,
I don't care if I ever come back
for it's Ho, Ho, Ho here comes Santa Claus
If he don't come it's a shame,
For it's jerk, nod, up the chimney he scoots
at the Old Yule Party.
I got an email today that says that we should try to show up for a party in the most festival costume that we can find. Well, of course, your costume can't be festival, for that's a noun, not an adjective. It can be festive or estival, but not festival. If it is estival, that means T-shirt, shorts, and flip-flops, or a swimsuit and a surfboard, since "estival" means "summerlike" or "summery". Thus a baseball uniform is estival. Which gave me the idea to rewrite "Take me out to the Ballgame" for this season of the year. At a Yuletide party, it would go:
Take me out to the Yule Party,
Take me out to the bash,
Buy me some chestnuts and spiked egg nog,
I don't care if I ever come back
for it's Ho, Ho, Ho here comes Santa Claus
If he don't come it's a shame,
For it's jerk, nod, up the chimney he scoots
at the Old Yule Party.
What is a code?
When is a code not a code? When it is the dress code of a place in West Virginia. It seems that this one worker at this company protested the code by coming to work dressed in a dress. It was a maternity dress, and he says it is not as comfortable as it would seem to appear. He started working at his computer, then his company sent him home because he did not conform to their dress code. Now dress codes may be nice. If I were head of a firm that had contact with the public, I would have them all dress in purple shirts, pants and skirts to make us look unique. And maybe some decorum is needed. But the supervisor of this worker said, ""The dress code is not a code. It is a statement that we expect our employees to be properly attired at work," Now that goes beyond the pale of simple logic. Since when is a code not a code? I guess when it's a dress code in West Virginia. You can require a workplace to adhere to a dress code, but you can't require them to follow a code that is not a code. That is simply contradictory.
When is a code not a code? When it is the dress code of a place in West Virginia. It seems that this one worker at this company protested the code by coming to work dressed in a dress. It was a maternity dress, and he says it is not as comfortable as it would seem to appear. He started working at his computer, then his company sent him home because he did not conform to their dress code. Now dress codes may be nice. If I were head of a firm that had contact with the public, I would have them all dress in purple shirts, pants and skirts to make us look unique. And maybe some decorum is needed. But the supervisor of this worker said, ""The dress code is not a code. It is a statement that we expect our employees to be properly attired at work," Now that goes beyond the pale of simple logic. Since when is a code not a code? I guess when it's a dress code in West Virginia. You can require a workplace to adhere to a dress code, but you can't require them to follow a code that is not a code. That is simply contradictory.
2002/12/08
Ice Storms
We had a snowstorm followed by an ice storm this week, coating all the branches with ice. It did not affect our power much, causing only one or two glitches of a fraction of a second. But it caused a lot of power outages in the Carolinas. Some people don't have power for a week. For them it was like the Great Ice Storm of 1998 December 24 for us which gave us a 21-hour power outage.
The question is why ice storms come with such large number of power outages. It is because trees fall on power lines. Many of our power lines are aerial, on endless sequences of TTTTT that line highways through the countryside. If there are trees nearby, then they could fall on these power lines. It seems to me that electric companies could do a better job of keeping trees away from power lines, and of making power lines that withstand weight better. Trees are not intelligent creatures, and they don't want to harm us. Terrorists are intelligent and they want to harm us. If falling trees can take hundreds of thousands of people out of power for a week, think of what terrorists can do. This is something the power utilities need to do something about. The worst of ice storms should cause no more than a few hundred outages.
We had a snowstorm followed by an ice storm this week, coating all the branches with ice. It did not affect our power much, causing only one or two glitches of a fraction of a second. But it caused a lot of power outages in the Carolinas. Some people don't have power for a week. For them it was like the Great Ice Storm of 1998 December 24 for us which gave us a 21-hour power outage.
The question is why ice storms come with such large number of power outages. It is because trees fall on power lines. Many of our power lines are aerial, on endless sequences of TTTTT that line highways through the countryside. If there are trees nearby, then they could fall on these power lines. It seems to me that electric companies could do a better job of keeping trees away from power lines, and of making power lines that withstand weight better. Trees are not intelligent creatures, and they don't want to harm us. Terrorists are intelligent and they want to harm us. If falling trees can take hundreds of thousands of people out of power for a week, think of what terrorists can do. This is something the power utilities need to do something about. The worst of ice storms should cause no more than a few hundred outages.
2002/12/05
Ambiguity forever and ever
I found today an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune's web site about the North Carolina ice storm. The headline read: "Residents of North Carolina face up to life without power after ice and snow storm", and was by Emery P. Dalesio. The headline is ambiguous, and the other meaning of the headline is simply horrendous! It says that North Carolina residents have lost their electrical power for good; that they will never, ever again have electricity; and that furthermore, there is an implication that this was due to some wrongdoing. Convicted criminals "face up to life". North Carolina residents "face up to life". Perhaps whoever wrote the headline could have said "Residents of North Carolina adjust to life". He should have checked the meaning of his headlines before he published.
I found today an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune's web site about the North Carolina ice storm. The headline read: "Residents of North Carolina face up to life without power after ice and snow storm", and was by Emery P. Dalesio. The headline is ambiguous, and the other meaning of the headline is simply horrendous! It says that North Carolina residents have lost their electrical power for good; that they will never, ever again have electricity; and that furthermore, there is an implication that this was due to some wrongdoing. Convicted criminals "face up to life". North Carolina residents "face up to life". Perhaps whoever wrote the headline could have said "Residents of North Carolina adjust to life". He should have checked the meaning of his headlines before he published.
Snow, ice and birds
Yesterday we had a snowstorm, followed by an ice storm that produced a crusty snow surface on the ground. I went out early in the morning and restocked the bird feeder and scattered bird seed on the ground. This produced results fairly quickly. A whole bunch of birds came to our feeder, including seven blue jays. Snowbirds and several other species came as well, and it was interesting to see how these react to each other, or to squirrels. There were a dozen or more small birds there if there were no blue jays, but if there were blue jays there, there were no more than six small birds. These birds behaved in a domineering manner, as demonstrated when one blue jay arrived at the ground filled with small birds and squawked, "skaaaaa…". Half of the small birds left. There were five blue jays on the ground near the feeder when a red-headed woodpecker, considerably smaller than the jays, swooped down on the feeder area and caused all the blue jays to fly away. That is something to see a bird scare away five substantially larger, more aggressive birds. We saw eight species in our backyard today:
Blue jay
Tufted titmouse
Slate-colored junco (snowbird)
Carolina Chickadee
White-Throated Sparrow
Cardinal (female)
Song Sparrow
Red-headed woodpecker
Yesterday we had a snowstorm, followed by an ice storm that produced a crusty snow surface on the ground. I went out early in the morning and restocked the bird feeder and scattered bird seed on the ground. This produced results fairly quickly. A whole bunch of birds came to our feeder, including seven blue jays. Snowbirds and several other species came as well, and it was interesting to see how these react to each other, or to squirrels. There were a dozen or more small birds there if there were no blue jays, but if there were blue jays there, there were no more than six small birds. These birds behaved in a domineering manner, as demonstrated when one blue jay arrived at the ground filled with small birds and squawked, "skaaaaa…". Half of the small birds left. There were five blue jays on the ground near the feeder when a red-headed woodpecker, considerably smaller than the jays, swooped down on the feeder area and caused all the blue jays to fly away. That is something to see a bird scare away five substantially larger, more aggressive birds. We saw eight species in our backyard today:
Blue jay
Tufted titmouse
Slate-colored junco (snowbird)
Carolina Chickadee
White-Throated Sparrow
Cardinal (female)
Song Sparrow
Red-headed woodpecker
2002/12/03
Metric System and the Kilofoot
I saw a review of a book "The Measure of All Things", by Ken Alder, about how the meter was first defined. The review was entitled "The Meter is a Crock". The book was about two Frenchmen who surveyed in a triangulated form stretches of land all across Europe, to estimate the distance between the North Pole and the Equator. The meter was then defined to be one ten-millionth of this distance. The review showed how mistakes were made in the surveying, and that the Frenchmen assumed that the Earth was a sphere when actually it is slightly oblate. However, neither the book nor the review offers an alternative to the meter; if it supposed to be a "crock", then what's better?
Here is my answer: the foot. Yes, the foot. This is English measure, but we are used to feet in measuring things. What I would change the definition of the foot. Right now it is 12 inches, and an inch is defined to be 2.54 centimeters. I would define it as the distance that light travels in a nanosecond, one billionth of a second. Then the speed of light would be a gigafoot per second. I would not use miles, yards, or inches, but rather metric versions of the foot: kilofoot, decafoot, millifoot, decifoot (the new inch), and so forth. So I can talk about traveling 2800 kilofeet or 2.8 megafeet to drive somewhere in a day rather than 530 miles. Further, this would be useful in dealing with computers. If there is a billion operations per second (1 GHz), then one operation can take place only within a foot, since nothing can travel faster than light. Most importantly, the foot would be defined on a natural measure, in terms of the speed of light and in terms of time - a second is 1/86400 of a day.
I saw a review of a book "The Measure of All Things", by Ken Alder, about how the meter was first defined. The review was entitled "The Meter is a Crock". The book was about two Frenchmen who surveyed in a triangulated form stretches of land all across Europe, to estimate the distance between the North Pole and the Equator. The meter was then defined to be one ten-millionth of this distance. The review showed how mistakes were made in the surveying, and that the Frenchmen assumed that the Earth was a sphere when actually it is slightly oblate. However, neither the book nor the review offers an alternative to the meter; if it supposed to be a "crock", then what's better?
Here is my answer: the foot. Yes, the foot. This is English measure, but we are used to feet in measuring things. What I would change the definition of the foot. Right now it is 12 inches, and an inch is defined to be 2.54 centimeters. I would define it as the distance that light travels in a nanosecond, one billionth of a second. Then the speed of light would be a gigafoot per second. I would not use miles, yards, or inches, but rather metric versions of the foot: kilofoot, decafoot, millifoot, decifoot (the new inch), and so forth. So I can talk about traveling 2800 kilofeet or 2.8 megafeet to drive somewhere in a day rather than 530 miles. Further, this would be useful in dealing with computers. If there is a billion operations per second (1 GHz), then one operation can take place only within a foot, since nothing can travel faster than light. Most importantly, the foot would be defined on a natural measure, in terms of the speed of light and in terms of time - a second is 1/86400 of a day.
Null
Microsoft has done a lot to infuriate computer users and programmers, but one of the worst is Null, most prevalent in his database package, Access. This is a quantity that supposedly fills a slot where there supposedly is no value; it isn't zero, it isn't "" (a word with zero letters in it), it isn't 0.0, and it isn't False. It is Null, and any operation that uses Null is Null. 3 + Null = Null. "This is a good string" concatenated with Null is Null, and so forth. The most unreasonable at one time was saying that True or Null is Null. No matter what the truth value of the second argument is, the expression is going to be True; that is a property of "or". Later versions of Access set True or Null to True.
The other way in which Null infuriates programmers is that you can't use it in certain applications without causing an error message that terminates the entire application. That's like A-bombing a street because it has a pothole. When this thing can happen, it can take a long time to see what is happening, and it causes you to have to program around it. I don't know how many programmer hours have been lost because of Null, but it must be a lot.
Microsoft has done a lot to infuriate computer users and programmers, but one of the worst is Null, most prevalent in his database package, Access. This is a quantity that supposedly fills a slot where there supposedly is no value; it isn't zero, it isn't "" (a word with zero letters in it), it isn't 0.0, and it isn't False. It is Null, and any operation that uses Null is Null. 3 + Null = Null. "This is a good string" concatenated with Null is Null, and so forth. The most unreasonable at one time was saying that True or Null is Null. No matter what the truth value of the second argument is, the expression is going to be True; that is a property of "or". Later versions of Access set True or Null to True.
The other way in which Null infuriates programmers is that you can't use it in certain applications without causing an error message that terminates the entire application. That's like A-bombing a street because it has a pothole. When this thing can happen, it can take a long time to see what is happening, and it causes you to have to program around it. I don't know how many programmer hours have been lost because of Null, but it must be a lot.
A day that shall live in infamy
It is interesting that Saddam Hussein picked December 7 to offer his report to the United Nations on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. According to President Roosevelt, that is a day that shall live in infamy, because of a catastrophic event that happened 61 years ago. Will Saddam continue that infamy?
It is interesting that Saddam Hussein picked December 7 to offer his report to the United Nations on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. According to President Roosevelt, that is a day that shall live in infamy, because of a catastrophic event that happened 61 years ago. Will Saddam continue that infamy?
2002/11/29
Putting up the Holiday Lights
Well today I put up our holiday decorations and lights. It took several hours and a few hitches to do it. The biggest is that we are having our house painted this month. Therefore, nothing can go on the exterior walls of the house that would be painted. That eliminates the lights above the porch, so I have to redesign the display. I put lights on our deck instead of around the back door. I put a lot of lights in the bushes. But still it makes for a monotone display. So maybe I should get something like a deer to put on the lawn.
Except that our decorations take up a lot of space, 27 boxes of it (I counted such things as the Xmas tree base as a box). I put up the lights first and some broke, so I had to go to the loco Wal-Mart to get another string of 100 white lights. Then some other lights would not work, so I had some time trying to find a set of lights that would work, but I did. I next put up the candelabras. We put a three-candle electric candelabra in each window except in the kitchen. That is 13 three-candelabras. Our neighborhood has the habit of putting up a single white candle in each window, but it is our tradition to put up three red ones instead; I think it looks better. Putting these up is somewhat of a match-it game. I use these X-10 modules like from Radio Shack, so that I can turn on and off all 13 of them with the press of a button. I need to figure out how to deploy all of our candelabras, cords and modules so that when I put them together I don't get stuck because I have a three-pronged plug that wants to go into a two-pronged outlet.
The tree comes next. We use an artificial tree, and we put the tree together in seven layers with branches that are color-coded: yellow, red, black, pink, brown, green and white. Then we put a top on the tree. We also put a toy train set around the tree. The idea here, long ago was to prevent our cats from playing with the ornaments, by scaring them away with a noisy train. However, the train did not work this year; I suppose too many connector bars are missing. So this year it is merely decorative.
Tonight I got out the remote and hit "on". Instantly the lights came on, and I could see that some of the white lights were not working. So I will need to go to the store again. But the holiday lights are up, giving us cheer this Yuletide season until New Year's Day 2003, when we take them down.
Well today I put up our holiday decorations and lights. It took several hours and a few hitches to do it. The biggest is that we are having our house painted this month. Therefore, nothing can go on the exterior walls of the house that would be painted. That eliminates the lights above the porch, so I have to redesign the display. I put lights on our deck instead of around the back door. I put a lot of lights in the bushes. But still it makes for a monotone display. So maybe I should get something like a deer to put on the lawn.
Except that our decorations take up a lot of space, 27 boxes of it (I counted such things as the Xmas tree base as a box). I put up the lights first and some broke, so I had to go to the loco Wal-Mart to get another string of 100 white lights. Then some other lights would not work, so I had some time trying to find a set of lights that would work, but I did. I next put up the candelabras. We put a three-candle electric candelabra in each window except in the kitchen. That is 13 three-candelabras. Our neighborhood has the habit of putting up a single white candle in each window, but it is our tradition to put up three red ones instead; I think it looks better. Putting these up is somewhat of a match-it game. I use these X-10 modules like from Radio Shack, so that I can turn on and off all 13 of them with the press of a button. I need to figure out how to deploy all of our candelabras, cords and modules so that when I put them together I don't get stuck because I have a three-pronged plug that wants to go into a two-pronged outlet.
The tree comes next. We use an artificial tree, and we put the tree together in seven layers with branches that are color-coded: yellow, red, black, pink, brown, green and white. Then we put a top on the tree. We also put a toy train set around the tree. The idea here, long ago was to prevent our cats from playing with the ornaments, by scaring them away with a noisy train. However, the train did not work this year; I suppose too many connector bars are missing. So this year it is merely decorative.
Tonight I got out the remote and hit "on". Instantly the lights came on, and I could see that some of the white lights were not working. So I will need to go to the store again. But the holiday lights are up, giving us cheer this Yuletide season until New Year's Day 2003, when we take them down.
2002/11/28
International Space Station
When I was a boy around 1955, I read books and magazines about how one day we will have space stations that look like double doughnuts and that these stations will be big and numerous. It is now 2002, the future is here. Do we have space stations? Yes, but we have only one, the International Space Station, much smaller than the ones that Chesley Bonestell imagined in his space art, and difficult to get to. But we do have one, and after looking the times up on a NASA web site, I went outside tonight just before 1800 and saw the space station crossing from right to left with a shuttle docked to it. I enjoyed seeing this bright speck of light traveling in the sky - it indicates that we are progressing into space, although rather slowly. Eventually we will get more space stations up and start colonizing the moon, provided that none of a number of possible catastrophes hits us first. I found the sight of that station inspiring.
When I was a boy around 1955, I read books and magazines about how one day we will have space stations that look like double doughnuts and that these stations will be big and numerous. It is now 2002, the future is here. Do we have space stations? Yes, but we have only one, the International Space Station, much smaller than the ones that Chesley Bonestell imagined in his space art, and difficult to get to. But we do have one, and after looking the times up on a NASA web site, I went outside tonight just before 1800 and saw the space station crossing from right to left with a shuttle docked to it. I enjoyed seeing this bright speck of light traveling in the sky - it indicates that we are progressing into space, although rather slowly. Eventually we will get more space stations up and start colonizing the moon, provided that none of a number of possible catastrophes hits us first. I found the sight of that station inspiring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)