SAP causes problems
I have heard of SAP, the arrangement on TVs and cable companies by which a TV show in English can be shown with a Spanish track. Today I found out about a misuse of this feature by a PBS station, WXXI in Rochester, New York, Channel 21, or 11 on a local cable system (might as well call it WXI). We tried to tune into the MacNeil-Lehrer report tonight, 2004 April 5 1900, but could not get it properly. The picture of MacNeil-Lehrer came out OK, but the sound was that of NPR, National Public Radio, instead! They did not even go well with each other. One was about Iraq, the other about biological viruses. This caused us to go to all sorts of measures to try to correct the problem. I called the station only to find out it was closed, but they give an option 6001, in which a recorded voice on the phone told how to correct the problem. Do this, and then do that, and then do this other rigmarole, and so forth. It was so voluminous and fast that it was useless; I could not digest it fast enough. So I went to their Web site and found a comment at the bottom of one page that said that if this happens, you may have SAP or MTS set. Actually they said that to get the NPR AM station, 1370 KHz, on the TV, set SAP or MTS. So I went to the TV and banged around. I found that pressing “settings” gives a menu item that said "disable SAP". So I did that. That corrected the problem.
The problem arose initially because on 2004 April 3 we could find absolutely no way of setting the VCR and TV clock to daylight saving time. Timer and date showed up in the menus, but no clock. In banging around for how to set the time, I must have accidentally set SAP.
So I found not one but two user-unfriendly features of both the cable system and PBS. PBS should have simply said, "turn off SAP". Not disable SAP. When I leave a room, do I disable the light, huhh? I could have found that. Further, these systems should allow the user to set DST. This is what users expect. If the system does it all for us (I call this McDonald’s Syndrome), then we will be searching endlessly for how to do it for ourselves, a waste of time. These systems need to be clearer about these items. They should allow you to set the time to what you want, and SAP should be restricted to its original purpose. Use it for Spanish, not for AM radio.
A Journey through Blogrealm
Blogtrek
Blogtrek
2004/04/05
Abilene Paradox
Something that has caught my interest recently is the Abilene Paradox. This is the story about a foursome who were taking it easy on a hot Texas afternoon when they got the idea of going to Abilene to eat, and each of them thought the others wanted it so they went along, but actually none of them did! This is a failure of communication. If you ask a woman to dance with you because you think you should and the woman accepts to please you even though she does not want to dance with you, then you are dancing with her to Abilene. If you agree to a suspense date with someone else at week even though you don’t think it can be made, and the other people agree so as not to seem odd even though they don’t think they can make it either, then the deadline will be in Abilene. It is a gross miscommunication. My idea so far has been to avoid dealing with people who take me to Abilene.
I suppose the way to deal with it is to double down with others and tell what you really want regardless. That is hard to do.
Something that has caught my interest recently is the Abilene Paradox. This is the story about a foursome who were taking it easy on a hot Texas afternoon when they got the idea of going to Abilene to eat, and each of them thought the others wanted it so they went along, but actually none of them did! This is a failure of communication. If you ask a woman to dance with you because you think you should and the woman accepts to please you even though she does not want to dance with you, then you are dancing with her to Abilene. If you agree to a suspense date with someone else at week even though you don’t think it can be made, and the other people agree so as not to seem odd even though they don’t think they can make it either, then the deadline will be in Abilene. It is a gross miscommunication. My idea so far has been to avoid dealing with people who take me to Abilene.
I suppose the way to deal with it is to double down with others and tell what you really want regardless. That is hard to do.
2004/04/01
Some interesting news stories
This has been some day! There has been some interesting news stories out, in locations I can't exactly remember. However, these stories are news because they seem amazing, but they are true. Or at least you can take a look at these and see what you think:
1. (2004 April 1 - AP) Asteroid to hit the Earth in 2008
Astronomers at Mt. Palomar Telescope have discovered an asteroid that is apparently going to collide with Earth in 2008. It is Asteroid 2004 EB, an Amor object, with a diameter somewhat over 3 miles. Initial observations and calculations show this object has a high carbon and possibly hydrocarbon content and is headed for a 300,000 miss of Earth in 2008. However, one of the astronomers saw the tell-tale lines of hydrocarbons very much like coal and petroleum on it, leading him to predict that the asteroid will strike Earth instead. He said, "If that asteroid has oil in it, then with gasoline prices and crude oil prices as high as they are, you can bet that nuclear explosions soon will drive that asteroid straight into the Earth."
2. (2004 April 1 - Reuters) Largest Prime Number Discovered
Mathematicians at Berkeley and Stanford, along with mathematicians in India, have discovered the largest prime number. It is described by a complicated formula in 327 pages and is 282,421,906 digits long. By combining a theorem describing ideals in K-theory with a bifurcation of a 23-dimensional manifold with a Haar measure, they isolated five classes of prime numbers and found an upper bound for each. The largest of the numbers is the Berkeley-Stanford-India number. Therefore, no prime numbers larger than this number will ever be found, and hence there are only a finite number of prime numbers, forming a set called the BSI set.
Dr. Yousef Clidinat of Southeastern University has some serious doubts about the proof, however, and he has resolved to find a larger prime number. His plan is to multiply all the prime numbers in the BSI set, about 200 million of them, and add 1. He has already calculated the result, but has had difficulty finding prime factors of the resulting number. He is confident of finding such a number soon, however, and insists that when he finds it, it will not be in the BSI set.
3. (2004 April 1 - Arrow News Service) The Best Government is a Dictatorship
One of the landmark events in human history has been the development of democratically elected governments. The idea that everyone by right has a voice in the government of a nation is now well established, and has resulted in countries in which people are free to live fulfilling lives. So it came as a shock to the Outbox Group think tank when its members discovered that, given reasonable assumptions, the best government is a dictatorship, wherein one person determines all the rules. The group made four rather reasonable assumptions, namely:
a. Given preferences from the citizens, there shall always be a societal decision. Otherwise, the government is indecisive.
b. If society decides on one alternative over another, then it shall decide on that one over the other if nothing happens to the preferences of the civilians except things that favor that one alternative over the other.
c. If society decides on one alternative over another, then it shall make that same decision even if how the individuals decide on other, irrelevant options is changed to something completely different.
d. For any two alternatives, there shall be a set of individual preferences that decide the first of these over the second. Else for all sets of preferences, society favors the second one, which means that this preference is imposed upon society from the outside, something rather undesirable.
The group, headed by Prof. Knuth Javelin, showed that these reasonable assumptions imply that there exists an individual such that what that individual says goes for all of society. In other words, this guy is a dictator.
The group is busy trying to find a flaw in the proof before all the democracies in the world find out and the dictators say, "I told you so."
4. (2004 April 1 - Bingby celebrity service) Michael Jackson is an extraterrestrial
Biologists in California have performed research on Michael Jackson's DNA in preparation for his child molestation case, and they have decided, based on what they found, that Michael Jackson is an extraterrestrial. "The genes and alleles in his DNA resemble absolutely nothing that is normally in human DNA.", said one of the researchers. He declined to comment on how he arrived on Earth, however, and it is unclear what the implications are for his case.
This has been some day! There has been some interesting news stories out, in locations I can't exactly remember. However, these stories are news because they seem amazing, but they are true. Or at least you can take a look at these and see what you think:
1. (2004 April 1 - AP) Asteroid to hit the Earth in 2008
Astronomers at Mt. Palomar Telescope have discovered an asteroid that is apparently going to collide with Earth in 2008. It is Asteroid 2004 EB, an Amor object, with a diameter somewhat over 3 miles. Initial observations and calculations show this object has a high carbon and possibly hydrocarbon content and is headed for a 300,000 miss of Earth in 2008. However, one of the astronomers saw the tell-tale lines of hydrocarbons very much like coal and petroleum on it, leading him to predict that the asteroid will strike Earth instead. He said, "If that asteroid has oil in it, then with gasoline prices and crude oil prices as high as they are, you can bet that nuclear explosions soon will drive that asteroid straight into the Earth."
2. (2004 April 1 - Reuters) Largest Prime Number Discovered
Mathematicians at Berkeley and Stanford, along with mathematicians in India, have discovered the largest prime number. It is described by a complicated formula in 327 pages and is 282,421,906 digits long. By combining a theorem describing ideals in K-theory with a bifurcation of a 23-dimensional manifold with a Haar measure, they isolated five classes of prime numbers and found an upper bound for each. The largest of the numbers is the Berkeley-Stanford-India number. Therefore, no prime numbers larger than this number will ever be found, and hence there are only a finite number of prime numbers, forming a set called the BSI set.
Dr. Yousef Clidinat of Southeastern University has some serious doubts about the proof, however, and he has resolved to find a larger prime number. His plan is to multiply all the prime numbers in the BSI set, about 200 million of them, and add 1. He has already calculated the result, but has had difficulty finding prime factors of the resulting number. He is confident of finding such a number soon, however, and insists that when he finds it, it will not be in the BSI set.
3. (2004 April 1 - Arrow News Service) The Best Government is a Dictatorship
One of the landmark events in human history has been the development of democratically elected governments. The idea that everyone by right has a voice in the government of a nation is now well established, and has resulted in countries in which people are free to live fulfilling lives. So it came as a shock to the Outbox Group think tank when its members discovered that, given reasonable assumptions, the best government is a dictatorship, wherein one person determines all the rules. The group made four rather reasonable assumptions, namely:
a. Given preferences from the citizens, there shall always be a societal decision. Otherwise, the government is indecisive.
b. If society decides on one alternative over another, then it shall decide on that one over the other if nothing happens to the preferences of the civilians except things that favor that one alternative over the other.
c. If society decides on one alternative over another, then it shall make that same decision even if how the individuals decide on other, irrelevant options is changed to something completely different.
d. For any two alternatives, there shall be a set of individual preferences that decide the first of these over the second. Else for all sets of preferences, society favors the second one, which means that this preference is imposed upon society from the outside, something rather undesirable.
The group, headed by Prof. Knuth Javelin, showed that these reasonable assumptions imply that there exists an individual such that what that individual says goes for all of society. In other words, this guy is a dictator.
The group is busy trying to find a flaw in the proof before all the democracies in the world find out and the dictators say, "I told you so."
4. (2004 April 1 - Bingby celebrity service) Michael Jackson is an extraterrestrial
Biologists in California have performed research on Michael Jackson's DNA in preparation for his child molestation case, and they have decided, based on what they found, that Michael Jackson is an extraterrestrial. "The genes and alleles in his DNA resemble absolutely nothing that is normally in human DNA.", said one of the researchers. He declined to comment on how he arrived on Earth, however, and it is unclear what the implications are for his case.
2004/03/30
Bush and Kerry have cleared the starting line
The Presidential campaign has started. Bush and Kerry are off and running, and so is Ralph Nader and some others. So how has it gone so far? In my opinion, both have made mistakes.
Bush accuses Kerry of being a tax-raising liberal. He chose a good time to say that, just before Independence Day and by that I mean the real Independence Day, namely April 15. Most of us have hit tax conniptions, so that is going to give him votes. For example, I found out that I could not contribute all that I wanted to into an IRA.
Bush accuses Kerry of asking for a hefty increase in the gasoline tax. He even has a Kerry gasoline calculator on his web site. The Bush camp needs to straighten out that site. You have to scroll to find the calculator. Most visitors won't bother, and will get the image of a President who promises but doesn't give. But it does compute how much more it will cost you. Easy come, easy go, and when it's gone, it's gone. No, Bush. This is a mistake. People may complain about gasoline prices, but there is a good reason why we need them now, namely the end of cheap oil, which may be as soon as 2008. We need something to urge people to conserve, and so that the proceeds from ever higher and higher prices of gasoline go not to the oil companies or Saudi Arabia, but to the US government, who can fund alternative fuels or help for those who need it, or even a big income tax cut. Kerry is right on this one and he needs to call for both an income tax cut and a gasoline tax raise.
Kerry says that Bush is doing nothing about gasoline prices. Yes he is. Only he is going about it wrong. He is trying to lower gasoline prices by drilling Alaska and by sending myriads of soldiers into Iraq.
So both candidates are stumbling from the starting line.
By the way, polls are showing an improvement for Bush, and Bush is claiming credit. No. Recent weeks have seen a deterioration for the President instead, if one is following Allan Lichtman's Keys to the White House. Key 9 (Scandal) and Key 8 (social unrest) are both shaking a bit more than they had been, increasing the probability that Bush will lose the keys and the election. Bush is still favored to win, but he was even more favored earlier when Kerry had an 8-point lead in the polls. The polls are fun to watch, but the don't make sense now.
The Presidential campaign has started. Bush and Kerry are off and running, and so is Ralph Nader and some others. So how has it gone so far? In my opinion, both have made mistakes.
Bush accuses Kerry of being a tax-raising liberal. He chose a good time to say that, just before Independence Day and by that I mean the real Independence Day, namely April 15. Most of us have hit tax conniptions, so that is going to give him votes. For example, I found out that I could not contribute all that I wanted to into an IRA.
Bush accuses Kerry of asking for a hefty increase in the gasoline tax. He even has a Kerry gasoline calculator on his web site. The Bush camp needs to straighten out that site. You have to scroll to find the calculator. Most visitors won't bother, and will get the image of a President who promises but doesn't give. But it does compute how much more it will cost you. Easy come, easy go, and when it's gone, it's gone. No, Bush. This is a mistake. People may complain about gasoline prices, but there is a good reason why we need them now, namely the end of cheap oil, which may be as soon as 2008. We need something to urge people to conserve, and so that the proceeds from ever higher and higher prices of gasoline go not to the oil companies or Saudi Arabia, but to the US government, who can fund alternative fuels or help for those who need it, or even a big income tax cut. Kerry is right on this one and he needs to call for both an income tax cut and a gasoline tax raise.
Kerry says that Bush is doing nothing about gasoline prices. Yes he is. Only he is going about it wrong. He is trying to lower gasoline prices by drilling Alaska and by sending myriads of soldiers into Iraq.
So both candidates are stumbling from the starting line.
By the way, polls are showing an improvement for Bush, and Bush is claiming credit. No. Recent weeks have seen a deterioration for the President instead, if one is following Allan Lichtman's Keys to the White House. Key 9 (Scandal) and Key 8 (social unrest) are both shaking a bit more than they had been, increasing the probability that Bush will lose the keys and the election. Bush is still favored to win, but he was even more favored earlier when Kerry had an 8-point lead in the polls. The polls are fun to watch, but the don't make sense now.
Ridiculousness in the Sky
I heard recently that they grounded, then canceled a flight, because a local clairvoyant said that something might happen to it. These charlatans can ply their trade all the time, as long as they don't interfere with me. But if I were on that flight, I would sue the clairvoyant, or more likely, the airline. I would have been inconvenienced, even missed an important appointment, because someone with a crackpot theory makes a pronouncement. I do not want any of my flights interrupted or held up because of someone's unscientific pronouncements.
I heard recently that they grounded, then canceled a flight, because a local clairvoyant said that something might happen to it. These charlatans can ply their trade all the time, as long as they don't interfere with me. But if I were on that flight, I would sue the clairvoyant, or more likely, the airline. I would have been inconvenienced, even missed an important appointment, because someone with a crackpot theory makes a pronouncement. I do not want any of my flights interrupted or held up because of someone's unscientific pronouncements.
2004/03/29
AM/PM Trouble
Sometimes a defect in the way we make, do, or say things can have positive effects; in fact, it can save lives. One such defect is AM and PM. Whoever made up this way of telling time was not trying to be user-friendly. One normally thinks of a day as a complete entity. Therefore, one expects 5 o'clock to represent a definite time. It does not. It represents two times: 5 AM and 5 PM. And this can cause confusion. Several times I have overslept because I set my alarm clock for PM instead of AM. Further, the way we tell time at 12 o'clock is really loony. We say the hour after 11 AM is 12 PM, even though this means the PM hours run 12, 1, 2, .. ., 11 instead of 1, 2, .. ., 12. And when it is 12 o'clock, then is it noon or midnight? For that reason, never say 12 o'clock or 12 AM or PM. Say noon or midnight. It is just too confusing. The military has recognized this so they threw out the system long ago and replaced it with 24-hour time in which the time from midnight to midnight ranges from 0000 to 2359, as numerical sense dictates.
But sometimes errors caused by AM/PM trouble can help; recently it has even saved lives. According to ABC News tonight, apparently the bombs in Trainattack in Spain were constructed out of briefcases or duffel bags with explosives, wires, and a cellular phone which was used as an alarm clock and a GPS device which was designed to tell the time, so that all bombs would explode at the same time. But one bomb did not explode, because its creator had AM/PM trouble. He had set it for 7:45 PM instead of 7:45 AM. Later on, well within 12 hours, investigators found it and traced it to the owner - an excellent lead in the case. That bomb not going off probably saved 20 lives. This was lucky.
I still say we will all be better off with military time. We should start junking the AM/PM system. That is not happening; I had a hard time finding an alarm clock that told 24-hour time. But I do believe that we will be better off. More police vigilance and better relations between nations are the way to prevent terrorist attacks and save lives, not reliance on an error.
Sometimes a defect in the way we make, do, or say things can have positive effects; in fact, it can save lives. One such defect is AM and PM. Whoever made up this way of telling time was not trying to be user-friendly. One normally thinks of a day as a complete entity. Therefore, one expects 5 o'clock to represent a definite time. It does not. It represents two times: 5 AM and 5 PM. And this can cause confusion. Several times I have overslept because I set my alarm clock for PM instead of AM. Further, the way we tell time at 12 o'clock is really loony. We say the hour after 11 AM is 12 PM, even though this means the PM hours run 12, 1, 2, .. ., 11 instead of 1, 2, .. ., 12. And when it is 12 o'clock, then is it noon or midnight? For that reason, never say 12 o'clock or 12 AM or PM. Say noon or midnight. It is just too confusing. The military has recognized this so they threw out the system long ago and replaced it with 24-hour time in which the time from midnight to midnight ranges from 0000 to 2359, as numerical sense dictates.
But sometimes errors caused by AM/PM trouble can help; recently it has even saved lives. According to ABC News tonight, apparently the bombs in Trainattack in Spain were constructed out of briefcases or duffel bags with explosives, wires, and a cellular phone which was used as an alarm clock and a GPS device which was designed to tell the time, so that all bombs would explode at the same time. But one bomb did not explode, because its creator had AM/PM trouble. He had set it for 7:45 PM instead of 7:45 AM. Later on, well within 12 hours, investigators found it and traced it to the owner - an excellent lead in the case. That bomb not going off probably saved 20 lives. This was lucky.
I still say we will all be better off with military time. We should start junking the AM/PM system. That is not happening; I had a hard time finding an alarm clock that told 24-hour time. But I do believe that we will be better off. More police vigilance and better relations between nations are the way to prevent terrorist attacks and save lives, not reliance on an error.
2004/03/24
P0108 Manifold Absolute Pressure High Input
Recently, as I was traveling on an interstate, I notice the scary words "Service Engine Soon" appear in yellow on my dashboard. I did not think I would reach my destination safely after that. But I did and got home safely again. In the morning I went to an auto parts store and asked what it meant. They got out a $400 gizmo and plugged it into a socket under the driver's side. After some hemming and hawing, it said "MAP/BARO High Input" and "P0108". I went home and looked it up on the Internet. It means "Manifold absolute pressure/Barometric pressure Voltage High Input". What in the heck does that mean? I read some more web sites and found out that it means something about the fuel injection system, which is governed by pressure in the engine. It also made mention of a "manifold absolute pressure sensor" or MAP sensor. Why was it making high voltage?
After the plugin, the light vanished! But it reappeared two days later when I turned into a parking lot. This time the van stalled, and it was hesitant upon restarting. The yellow light went on again. I went to an auto parts store and they tested it and it came up with the same message: P0108. The guy there told me that the MAP sensor was dead. Now how was that supposed to cause high input? I suppose it is supposed to control that input but it doesn't. I bought one but realized that a service place would have to install it. Two days later I took it in for repair and they installed my new MAP sensor, ran diagnostic tests, and cleaned up a fuel system munged up by improper fuel injection uncontrolled by the dead MAP sensor.
So that is apparently OK now. However, I think the entire process is rotten. We should not have to buy a $400 tool to plug into a socket when something goes wrong and read an incomprehensible error message. The message should state on the dash somewhere in clear language what has happened. I should get a message on my dash saying "MAP sensor voltage improper, may need replacement" instead of the cryptic and unhelpful "Service Engine Soon". But that is usual for the car industry, which I find the most disreputable of any group in this country. It is so bad, both car sales (blaring SUV ads at you at newstime on TV) and repair, that I refused to vote for Don Beyer for any office in Virginia, even though this meant voting for conservative Republicans. He was a car dealer. He was also a strike against Howard Dean, in my opinion. He was Dean's treasurer. That was cancelled out in part by Bobby Scott's support for Dean, but it still meant I was not completely for Dean. Something needs to be done about the car industry in this country.
Recently, as I was traveling on an interstate, I notice the scary words "Service Engine Soon" appear in yellow on my dashboard. I did not think I would reach my destination safely after that. But I did and got home safely again. In the morning I went to an auto parts store and asked what it meant. They got out a $400 gizmo and plugged it into a socket under the driver's side. After some hemming and hawing, it said "MAP/BARO High Input" and "P0108". I went home and looked it up on the Internet. It means "Manifold absolute pressure/Barometric pressure Voltage High Input". What in the heck does that mean? I read some more web sites and found out that it means something about the fuel injection system, which is governed by pressure in the engine. It also made mention of a "manifold absolute pressure sensor" or MAP sensor. Why was it making high voltage?
After the plugin, the light vanished! But it reappeared two days later when I turned into a parking lot. This time the van stalled, and it was hesitant upon restarting. The yellow light went on again. I went to an auto parts store and they tested it and it came up with the same message: P0108. The guy there told me that the MAP sensor was dead. Now how was that supposed to cause high input? I suppose it is supposed to control that input but it doesn't. I bought one but realized that a service place would have to install it. Two days later I took it in for repair and they installed my new MAP sensor, ran diagnostic tests, and cleaned up a fuel system munged up by improper fuel injection uncontrolled by the dead MAP sensor.
So that is apparently OK now. However, I think the entire process is rotten. We should not have to buy a $400 tool to plug into a socket when something goes wrong and read an incomprehensible error message. The message should state on the dash somewhere in clear language what has happened. I should get a message on my dash saying "MAP sensor voltage improper, may need replacement" instead of the cryptic and unhelpful "Service Engine Soon". But that is usual for the car industry, which I find the most disreputable of any group in this country. It is so bad, both car sales (blaring SUV ads at you at newstime on TV) and repair, that I refused to vote for Don Beyer for any office in Virginia, even though this meant voting for conservative Republicans. He was a car dealer. He was also a strike against Howard Dean, in my opinion. He was Dean's treasurer. That was cancelled out in part by Bobby Scott's support for Dean, but it still meant I was not completely for Dean. Something needs to be done about the car industry in this country.
Under God
The time has come. The case of Michael Newdow vs Elk Grove School is coming to the Supreme Court. Dr. Newdow sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance removed from the school that his daughter attended because the words "under God" were in it and hence it was a violation of the principle of separation of church and state. A lower court disagreed with him but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, saying that a Pledge that contains "God" cannot be recited in a public school classroom.
I agree with this ruling. Bringing in God or Christ into the classroom make people who don't believe in God or Christianity feel like second class citizens. However, the entire Senate of the USA voted in favor of a resolution condemning this decision. This includes some of my favorite senators such as Dianne Feinstein, John Edwards, and John F. Kerry, Democratic (probably) candidate for President of the United States. I resolved not to vote for any incumbents in the Senate in 2002 and I didn't. The House passed a similar resolution, which was voted 440-3 or something. One of those three was Bobby Scott of my home state of Virginia. I now am likely to write him in every time I see an unopposed race here in Virginia.
But with such a herd of people insisting that we must hear "God" in the public classroom here in America, what hope is there of this ruling surviving the Supreme Court? Actually much better than I had expected. Scalia saw fit to blabbermouth about his wanting to force God into the classroom, and Newdow objected, whereupon Scalia had to recuse himself from the case.
That makes it 8 justices, minus a conservative one. Further, a 4-4 tie is a null decision, thus leaving standing the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court and forbidding "God" in pledges throughout America. So the pro undergod forces need a 5-3 margin, and I don't know if they will get it. All that is needed would be for the four justices that voted against the selection of Bush as President in 2000 to rule in favor of the 9th Circuit Court. So far they think this is not religious or a prayer. Well, it is not a prayer, but anything containing "God" is religious and needs to be kept out of the public classroom. I am hoping that the justices will see the light and not ride the wrong-way white horseman of God through the public schools.
The time has come. The case of Michael Newdow vs Elk Grove School is coming to the Supreme Court. Dr. Newdow sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance removed from the school that his daughter attended because the words "under God" were in it and hence it was a violation of the principle of separation of church and state. A lower court disagreed with him but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, saying that a Pledge that contains "God" cannot be recited in a public school classroom.
I agree with this ruling. Bringing in God or Christ into the classroom make people who don't believe in God or Christianity feel like second class citizens. However, the entire Senate of the USA voted in favor of a resolution condemning this decision. This includes some of my favorite senators such as Dianne Feinstein, John Edwards, and John F. Kerry, Democratic (probably) candidate for President of the United States. I resolved not to vote for any incumbents in the Senate in 2002 and I didn't. The House passed a similar resolution, which was voted 440-3 or something. One of those three was Bobby Scott of my home state of Virginia. I now am likely to write him in every time I see an unopposed race here in Virginia.
But with such a herd of people insisting that we must hear "God" in the public classroom here in America, what hope is there of this ruling surviving the Supreme Court? Actually much better than I had expected. Scalia saw fit to blabbermouth about his wanting to force God into the classroom, and Newdow objected, whereupon Scalia had to recuse himself from the case.
That makes it 8 justices, minus a conservative one. Further, a 4-4 tie is a null decision, thus leaving standing the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court and forbidding "God" in pledges throughout America. So the pro undergod forces need a 5-3 margin, and I don't know if they will get it. All that is needed would be for the four justices that voted against the selection of Bush as President in 2000 to rule in favor of the 9th Circuit Court. So far they think this is not religious or a prayer. Well, it is not a prayer, but anything containing "God" is religious and needs to be kept out of the public classroom. I am hoping that the justices will see the light and not ride the wrong-way white horseman of God through the public schools.
2004/03/15
A new planet? Probably not
Astronomers today announced the discovery of an object in the distant reaches of the Solar System about 1200 miles in diameter. This makes it 80% the diameter of Pluto, which some say is a planet. Since Pluto is a planet, they say, that makes this new object, named 2003VB12 or Sedna after an Inuit goddess, a planet also. Finally the tenth planet has been discovered. Or has it?
I don't think so. In fact, I do not think of Pluto as being a planet. It is too small. What is a planet? That can be tricky. It orbits the Sun. Hipparcos, the solar observatory satellite, orbits the Sun and is only as big as a living room. So it's more than that. It is large. So therefore Mercury is a planet. So Ganymede, a satellite of Jupiter, is a planet because it is larger than Mercury. It has a gravity so strong that someone could not hop off it. But that would make Ceres a planet. So what is a planet?
I think the definition that seems to fit the best is that it have a mass of about 200 yottagrams (or 0.2 xonagrams) . Ganymede may be larger than Mercury but it is less massive. Ganymede is a snowball as large as my hand, while Mercury is a billiard ball or a cannonball. It is more dense, and it is more massive. Ganymede has a mass of 148 yottagrams, and Mercury has a mass of 330 yottagrams. (Earth's mass is 5.974 xonagrams). Under this criterion, Mercury is a planet but Ganymede is not. I also add the requirement that nuclear fusion is not going on in the object (except for nuclear wars) and that the object does not glow. Under these requirements, there are just eight planets in the Solar System: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Pluto is not a planet, since its mass is only 13 yottagrams. The mass of Sedna is even less yet, so it is not a planet either.
So what are these? Pluto is clearly a Kuiper Belt object: an asteroid that orbits somewhere just outside Neptune's orbit. About a thousand have been discovered, and some of these are huge, compared to Mars-Jupiter asteroids: Quaoar, Ixion, Varuna, and Charon are all bigger than Ceres. But Sedna is way, way out. At its closest, it is still just outside the Kuiper Belt, whereas at aphelion, it is much farther out, stretching into the Öoo (term used by Nigel Calder, meaning Öpik-Oort, and pronounced eu-oh, where eu is the sound of eu in French feu) Cloud. So Sedna is not a Kuiper Belt object. It is something unique. Maybe it is an Öoo Cloud object, even though so far the main residents of the Öoo Cloud are thought to be long-term comets. If an object that large can be out there and is not a Kuiper Belt Object, might there be other, even larger objects out there? If any are found with a mass of 200 yottagrams or more (it would have to be slightly larger than Mercury at least), then we will truly have found a tenth planet.
Astronomers today announced the discovery of an object in the distant reaches of the Solar System about 1200 miles in diameter. This makes it 80% the diameter of Pluto, which some say is a planet. Since Pluto is a planet, they say, that makes this new object, named 2003VB12 or Sedna after an Inuit goddess, a planet also. Finally the tenth planet has been discovered. Or has it?
I don't think so. In fact, I do not think of Pluto as being a planet. It is too small. What is a planet? That can be tricky. It orbits the Sun. Hipparcos, the solar observatory satellite, orbits the Sun and is only as big as a living room. So it's more than that. It is large. So therefore Mercury is a planet. So Ganymede, a satellite of Jupiter, is a planet because it is larger than Mercury. It has a gravity so strong that someone could not hop off it. But that would make Ceres a planet. So what is a planet?
I think the definition that seems to fit the best is that it have a mass of about 200 yottagrams (or 0.2 xonagrams) . Ganymede may be larger than Mercury but it is less massive. Ganymede is a snowball as large as my hand, while Mercury is a billiard ball or a cannonball. It is more dense, and it is more massive. Ganymede has a mass of 148 yottagrams, and Mercury has a mass of 330 yottagrams. (Earth's mass is 5.974 xonagrams). Under this criterion, Mercury is a planet but Ganymede is not. I also add the requirement that nuclear fusion is not going on in the object (except for nuclear wars) and that the object does not glow. Under these requirements, there are just eight planets in the Solar System: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Pluto is not a planet, since its mass is only 13 yottagrams. The mass of Sedna is even less yet, so it is not a planet either.
So what are these? Pluto is clearly a Kuiper Belt object: an asteroid that orbits somewhere just outside Neptune's orbit. About a thousand have been discovered, and some of these are huge, compared to Mars-Jupiter asteroids: Quaoar, Ixion, Varuna, and Charon are all bigger than Ceres. But Sedna is way, way out. At its closest, it is still just outside the Kuiper Belt, whereas at aphelion, it is much farther out, stretching into the Öoo (term used by Nigel Calder, meaning Öpik-Oort, and pronounced eu-oh, where eu is the sound of eu in French feu) Cloud. So Sedna is not a Kuiper Belt object. It is something unique. Maybe it is an Öoo Cloud object, even though so far the main residents of the Öoo Cloud are thought to be long-term comets. If an object that large can be out there and is not a Kuiper Belt Object, might there be other, even larger objects out there? If any are found with a mass of 200 yottagrams or more (it would have to be slightly larger than Mercury at least), then we will truly have found a tenth planet.
Spain and the Lichtman Keys
First Trainattack occurs, the 10 bombs on 4 trains on 2004 March 11 that killed 200 people in Madrid. Then the elections come, and Jose Maria Aznar is thrown out in favor of Socialist Jose Zapatero. Some people are thinking that the terrorists swung the election in Spain, so they may try it in the US. Barbara Stock has gone out as far as to say that there certainly will be a terrorist attack between now and Election Day in the US.
Is that really the case? Maybe the Lichtman Key theory can help. This theory says that there are 13 keys or questions to ask of the situation before an election, and that if five of these or less are false, then the incumbent party wins, and if six or more are false, then the challenging party wins. If terrorists can swing an election, it is because they change the values of the keys.
Let's go over the keys and find out what the chances are:
1. After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Not any more, in either country.
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. I don't see how a terrorist attack can create a new candidate for President.
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. No changing of this, provided the sitting president remains sitting.
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. Same as 2.
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. This is possible, but requires a huge attack, on the scale of Planeattack or greater.
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Same as 5.
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. Possibly, but this probably would work against the terrorists.
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Terrorists could cause social unrest if they act cleverly enough.
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. Why stage a terrorist attack when planting a factoid in some official's ear does a better job of creating a scandal?
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. This is for certain. A terrorist attack is a military failure.
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. Possibly, but again works against the terrorists.
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Terrorism can't change the charisma of a person; it is possible that the person could be replaced with one who is charismatic. Right now I am saying no effect.
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Same as with 12.
This means that only keys 5, 6, 8, and 10 can be reasonably changed by terrorists.
How about applying the key theory to Spain? It's not a perfect fit, but it may give some illumination. Here is what I found with Aznar as the incumbent:
1. Stands. Aznar won the last election by huge majorities and he seemed to be popular.
2. Stands. I have heard of no challenge to Aznar. Rajoy is more like a vice-president.
3. Stands. Aznar is the incumbent, regardless of terrorists.
4. Stands. I heard of no third parties in Spain.
5. Fails. Unemployment is 11.7%. That tells me the economy is not good.
6. Fails. It has not improved much recently. Unemployment has been bad the past few years, averaging 12%.
7. Fails. Aznar has not made any important changes that has caused world notice.
8. Stands. I have heard of no unrest in Spain.
9. Stands. There is no scandal involving the Aznar administration.
10. Fails. Trainattack.
11. Fails. Sending troops to Iraq is not a military success.
12. Fails. Aznar is not charismatic.
13. Stands. Zapatero is a nice-looking guy but I haven't heard of any heart throbs or Peronista type excitement involving him.
Six keys failed. Hence the Aznar government was defeated. What if Trainattack had not occurred? Then Key 10 would have stood, and hence Aznar's successor, Rajoy, would have been elected. So yes, the terrorists did change the outcome. That forebodes ill for other supporters of Bush's invasion. If an attack can change an election, they will be emboldened to attack elsewhere.
But in the US? Because of what happened in Spain, is a terrorist attack likely here? I am not sure, since I don't know what the terrorists know or how they operate. But if the keys are any factor in their decision, I don't think so. Why not? It is because Bush has won keys 1, 2, 3, 11, and 13; lost keys 5, 10, 12 and 7; probably has keys 4, 8, and 9, and key 5 is favoring Bush but is wobbling severely. Note carefully that Key 10, military failure, is already down because of Planeattack, and if another attack occurs, that does not make it count twice; it will have no effect. The terrorists would have to tamper with keys 4, 5, 8, and 9, and those are harder to deal with. So I don't think a terrorist attack will affect the election results. It still looks like a victory for Bush, and terrorists can't change that. So I think there will be no terrorist attack for the rest of the year.
Let me know if I have any of the facts about Spain wrong.
First Trainattack occurs, the 10 bombs on 4 trains on 2004 March 11 that killed 200 people in Madrid. Then the elections come, and Jose Maria Aznar is thrown out in favor of Socialist Jose Zapatero. Some people are thinking that the terrorists swung the election in Spain, so they may try it in the US. Barbara Stock has gone out as far as to say that there certainly will be a terrorist attack between now and Election Day in the US.
Is that really the case? Maybe the Lichtman Key theory can help. This theory says that there are 13 keys or questions to ask of the situation before an election, and that if five of these or less are false, then the incumbent party wins, and if six or more are false, then the challenging party wins. If terrorists can swing an election, it is because they change the values of the keys.
Let's go over the keys and find out what the chances are:
1. After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Not any more, in either country.
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. I don't see how a terrorist attack can create a new candidate for President.
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. No changing of this, provided the sitting president remains sitting.
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. Same as 2.
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. This is possible, but requires a huge attack, on the scale of Planeattack or greater.
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Same as 5.
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. Possibly, but this probably would work against the terrorists.
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Terrorists could cause social unrest if they act cleverly enough.
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. Why stage a terrorist attack when planting a factoid in some official's ear does a better job of creating a scandal?
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. This is for certain. A terrorist attack is a military failure.
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. Possibly, but again works against the terrorists.
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Terrorism can't change the charisma of a person; it is possible that the person could be replaced with one who is charismatic. Right now I am saying no effect.
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Same as with 12.
This means that only keys 5, 6, 8, and 10 can be reasonably changed by terrorists.
How about applying the key theory to Spain? It's not a perfect fit, but it may give some illumination. Here is what I found with Aznar as the incumbent:
1. Stands. Aznar won the last election by huge majorities and he seemed to be popular.
2. Stands. I have heard of no challenge to Aznar. Rajoy is more like a vice-president.
3. Stands. Aznar is the incumbent, regardless of terrorists.
4. Stands. I heard of no third parties in Spain.
5. Fails. Unemployment is 11.7%. That tells me the economy is not good.
6. Fails. It has not improved much recently. Unemployment has been bad the past few years, averaging 12%.
7. Fails. Aznar has not made any important changes that has caused world notice.
8. Stands. I have heard of no unrest in Spain.
9. Stands. There is no scandal involving the Aznar administration.
10. Fails. Trainattack.
11. Fails. Sending troops to Iraq is not a military success.
12. Fails. Aznar is not charismatic.
13. Stands. Zapatero is a nice-looking guy but I haven't heard of any heart throbs or Peronista type excitement involving him.
Six keys failed. Hence the Aznar government was defeated. What if Trainattack had not occurred? Then Key 10 would have stood, and hence Aznar's successor, Rajoy, would have been elected. So yes, the terrorists did change the outcome. That forebodes ill for other supporters of Bush's invasion. If an attack can change an election, they will be emboldened to attack elsewhere.
But in the US? Because of what happened in Spain, is a terrorist attack likely here? I am not sure, since I don't know what the terrorists know or how they operate. But if the keys are any factor in their decision, I don't think so. Why not? It is because Bush has won keys 1, 2, 3, 11, and 13; lost keys 5, 10, 12 and 7; probably has keys 4, 8, and 9, and key 5 is favoring Bush but is wobbling severely. Note carefully that Key 10, military failure, is already down because of Planeattack, and if another attack occurs, that does not make it count twice; it will have no effect. The terrorists would have to tamper with keys 4, 5, 8, and 9, and those are harder to deal with. So I don't think a terrorist attack will affect the election results. It still looks like a victory for Bush, and terrorists can't change that. So I think there will be no terrorist attack for the rest of the year.
Let me know if I have any of the facts about Spain wrong.
2004/03/13
Planeattack and Trainattack
Now Spain has had a major terrorist attack. On 2004 March 11, early in the morning, ten bombs ripped through cars of commuter trains taking passengers to or away from Madrid, killing exactly 200 people (this may go higher). It reminds us of Planeattack on 2001 September 11, and it occurred 2 1/2 years after Planeattack. It was only one-third the intensity of Planeattack; in a nation of 52 million people, or about 1/5 the size of the US, 1/15 of the people (200 versus about 3,000) died. Still, it was a terrible tragedy.
However, I do note a problem and an error appearing in the media about this event. First of all, they are calling it 3/11 or even March 11. This is just as inappropriate as calling Planeattack 9/11 or September 11. It demeans people born on March 11, and the phrase "March 11" can't be used for anything else (such as 2005 March 11) without causing confusion. Further, the numbers 3/11 can also cause confusion. If one says that something will occur on March 3-11, then that will cause confusion.
It is difficult to find names for these events, and it was only after some searching that I came up with the name Planeattack for the events of 2001 September 11, choosing it over Attack on America, Towerfall, and several other names. But now that I call the events of that day Planeattack, that suggests that the events in Spain on 2004 March 11 be called Trainattack (el Trenataque or el Trenatentado in español). One problem with both names is that there could very well be another event of this type, especially Trainattack. I suppose it would be Trainattack II, or for the first one, Trainattack in Madrid, instead. Indeed, I have already used planeattack, with a small p, to denote the deliberate crashing of planes into buildings as terrorist attacks in general. But I still am lacking a better name, so for now it is Planeattack and Trainattack.
An error that the media has made is saying that Trainattack occurred 911 days after Planeattack. Maybe this is the reason the day was chosen (more likely is the 2 1/2-year anniversary), but it is just plain wrong. Planeattack occurred on Tuesday, and Trainattack occurred on Thursday. It occurred on Wednesday to people in the Western Hemisphere, but that isn't what counts: it occurred on Thursday in the place where it mattered. The number 91 is divisible by 7, so likewise 910 is divisible by 7. Hence when 911 is divided by 7, the remainder is 1. This means that 911 days after a certain day of the week is the next day of the week. So 911 days after Tuesday is Wednesday, not Thursday. It is true that 911 days lie between the two dates, but that is not how the media states it. The two events occurred 912 days apart, and if the media continues to call it 911 days, then I will have to answer them the same way as the receiver of an unwanted call did: "Ah no, you got the wrong number. This is 91…2."
Now Spain has had a major terrorist attack. On 2004 March 11, early in the morning, ten bombs ripped through cars of commuter trains taking passengers to or away from Madrid, killing exactly 200 people (this may go higher). It reminds us of Planeattack on 2001 September 11, and it occurred 2 1/2 years after Planeattack. It was only one-third the intensity of Planeattack; in a nation of 52 million people, or about 1/5 the size of the US, 1/15 of the people (200 versus about 3,000) died. Still, it was a terrible tragedy.
However, I do note a problem and an error appearing in the media about this event. First of all, they are calling it 3/11 or even March 11. This is just as inappropriate as calling Planeattack 9/11 or September 11. It demeans people born on March 11, and the phrase "March 11" can't be used for anything else (such as 2005 March 11) without causing confusion. Further, the numbers 3/11 can also cause confusion. If one says that something will occur on March 3-11, then that will cause confusion.
It is difficult to find names for these events, and it was only after some searching that I came up with the name Planeattack for the events of 2001 September 11, choosing it over Attack on America, Towerfall, and several other names. But now that I call the events of that day Planeattack, that suggests that the events in Spain on 2004 March 11 be called Trainattack (el Trenataque or el Trenatentado in español). One problem with both names is that there could very well be another event of this type, especially Trainattack. I suppose it would be Trainattack II, or for the first one, Trainattack in Madrid, instead. Indeed, I have already used planeattack, with a small p, to denote the deliberate crashing of planes into buildings as terrorist attacks in general. But I still am lacking a better name, so for now it is Planeattack and Trainattack.
An error that the media has made is saying that Trainattack occurred 911 days after Planeattack. Maybe this is the reason the day was chosen (more likely is the 2 1/2-year anniversary), but it is just plain wrong. Planeattack occurred on Tuesday, and Trainattack occurred on Thursday. It occurred on Wednesday to people in the Western Hemisphere, but that isn't what counts: it occurred on Thursday in the place where it mattered. The number 91 is divisible by 7, so likewise 910 is divisible by 7. Hence when 911 is divided by 7, the remainder is 1. This means that 911 days after a certain day of the week is the next day of the week. So 911 days after Tuesday is Wednesday, not Thursday. It is true that 911 days lie between the two dates, but that is not how the media states it. The two events occurred 912 days apart, and if the media continues to call it 911 days, then I will have to answer them the same way as the receiver of an unwanted call did: "Ah no, you got the wrong number. This is 91…2."
2004/03/07
What's going on tonight, anyway?
It seems like half the Internet is malfunctioning tonight. These things have happened tonight:
1. My workplace says that it can't log me onto my account.
2. Only partly to mostly cloudy were called for in the official weather forecast for Virginia, and instead thunderstorms with high winds occurred.
3. When these thunderstorms occurred, WTVR's site as of the evening of 2004 March 7 displayed a radar from 2004 March 6 1745; since it was perfect weather then, with a beautiful sunset, naturally, nothing was on the radar.
4. Blogger, to which I post my blogs, has a weird new interface which won't let me see my old blogs.
5. CNN had a story on the Republican National Committee warning TV stations not to air ads from moveon.org, so when I searched for them, it said it could not do it right now.I had to go to news.google.com to search for it elsewhere.
6. Accessing Weather Underground causes a vicious popup firm to change your home page, and worse yet, threatens to open up all your CD drives.
7. Intellicast refuses to show radar.
Is there a virus out there? Have some hubs been hit? What's going on here?
It seems like half the Internet is malfunctioning tonight. These things have happened tonight:
1. My workplace says that it can't log me onto my account.
2. Only partly to mostly cloudy were called for in the official weather forecast for Virginia, and instead thunderstorms with high winds occurred.
3. When these thunderstorms occurred, WTVR's site as of the evening of 2004 March 7 displayed a radar from 2004 March 6 1745; since it was perfect weather then, with a beautiful sunset, naturally, nothing was on the radar.
4. Blogger, to which I post my blogs, has a weird new interface which won't let me see my old blogs.
5. CNN had a story on the Republican National Committee warning TV stations not to air ads from moveon.org, so when I searched for them, it said it could not do it right now.I had to go to news.google.com to search for it elsewhere.
6. Accessing Weather Underground causes a vicious popup firm to change your home page, and worse yet, threatens to open up all your CD drives.
7. Intellicast refuses to show radar.
Is there a virus out there? Have some hubs been hit? What's going on here?
Beware of using Weather Underground
Weather Underground is one of the best sites for obtaining weather information. It gives the weather for a wide range of locations, and has a huge amount of statistics for all of these locations. That is why I have listed it as a site on my weather page. However, they now insist on throwing ads and popup windows in your face, or on charging you something like $5 a year. The problem with that is that all these sites want to charge you (or throw ads in your face). If you subscribe to all of them, it can add up to a huge bill.
So I don't subscribe and put up with the ads. But I wish they would put them in their place. They should go inline in with the page and do nothing except sit there with the words. Above all, they should not pop up windows in your face. Fortunately, there are ways of dealing with the popups. You can download Pow! from AnalogX, or Popup Stopper from Panicware. However, these programs do not properly identify the offending popups by name, and only Pow! will allow you to tell the computer which sites to pow off the screen. Still, they keep the popup situation in check.
Now there is a new menace, so severe that perhaps one should not use Weather Underground anymore unless you take precautions. Every once in a while when you access Weather Underground something called Default Homepage Network will throw a popup window in your face. Not only that, but it will change your default page to the Default Homepage Network page, and worse of all, it will open up all your CD-ROM drives. They are clearly going too far here. This could cause damage to the computer, because one does not normally expect all one's CD drives to open up at once. If your hand happens to be anywhere near the CD drives at the time, the CD drive will be blocked and damage may occur. These people are asking for lawsuits. Fortunately I have found a way to cure the menace. Go into Tools, Internet Options in Internet Explorer, and click on Security, then click on the red Restricted Sites symbol. Click on the "Sites…" button, and type "httq://*.default-homepage-network.com" in the blank, and click "Add". Click OK. Then click on the General Tab, and where it says "Address:" in the Home Page block at the top, you will have to retype in your desired default page; Default Homepage Network probably has changed it to their page. Click OK. If you have Symantec Internet Security, you may be able to block the site there. I tried it already and when it happened tonight, it changed my home page, but it did not open up all my disc drives. I think the "restricted zone" bit did it. The red symbol appeared in the right corner. Unfortunately I don't know of any way of blocking popup or other malicious access to your home page; you just simply have to change the page back to where it was.
If any of you know of any more information on this CD-ROM pop-out phenomenon such as who is behind it or a better way of blocking it, please let me know. In the meantime, don't use Weather Underground until you have protected your CD drives from this malicious spam popup.
Weather Underground is one of the best sites for obtaining weather information. It gives the weather for a wide range of locations, and has a huge amount of statistics for all of these locations. That is why I have listed it as a site on my weather page. However, they now insist on throwing ads and popup windows in your face, or on charging you something like $5 a year. The problem with that is that all these sites want to charge you (or throw ads in your face). If you subscribe to all of them, it can add up to a huge bill.
So I don't subscribe and put up with the ads. But I wish they would put them in their place. They should go inline in with the page and do nothing except sit there with the words. Above all, they should not pop up windows in your face. Fortunately, there are ways of dealing with the popups. You can download Pow! from AnalogX, or Popup Stopper from Panicware. However, these programs do not properly identify the offending popups by name, and only Pow! will allow you to tell the computer which sites to pow off the screen. Still, they keep the popup situation in check.
Now there is a new menace, so severe that perhaps one should not use Weather Underground anymore unless you take precautions. Every once in a while when you access Weather Underground something called Default Homepage Network will throw a popup window in your face. Not only that, but it will change your default page to the Default Homepage Network page, and worse of all, it will open up all your CD-ROM drives. They are clearly going too far here. This could cause damage to the computer, because one does not normally expect all one's CD drives to open up at once. If your hand happens to be anywhere near the CD drives at the time, the CD drive will be blocked and damage may occur. These people are asking for lawsuits. Fortunately I have found a way to cure the menace. Go into Tools, Internet Options in Internet Explorer, and click on Security, then click on the red Restricted Sites symbol. Click on the "Sites…" button, and type "httq://*.default-homepage-network.com" in the blank, and click "Add". Click OK. Then click on the General Tab, and where it says "Address:" in the Home Page block at the top, you will have to retype in your desired default page; Default Homepage Network probably has changed it to their page. Click OK. If you have Symantec Internet Security, you may be able to block the site there. I tried it already and when it happened tonight, it changed my home page, but it did not open up all my disc drives. I think the "restricted zone" bit did it. The red symbol appeared in the right corner. Unfortunately I don't know of any way of blocking popup or other malicious access to your home page; you just simply have to change the page back to where it was.
If any of you know of any more information on this CD-ROM pop-out phenomenon such as who is behind it or a better way of blocking it, please let me know. In the meantime, don't use Weather Underground until you have protected your CD drives from this malicious spam popup.
2004/03/04
March Forth
Today is a most unusual date. You can't February 25, you can't July 4, you can't September 11, you can't December 25 and so forth, but you can March 4. You can March 4th into battle, or you can March 4th for the Arts, as one charity would have us do. That caused the online periodical Newszap to pose this question:
"P.S. GF's annual quiz question: What's the only date on the calendar that issues a command?"
The intended answer is today, of course. March 4th. March Forth. Of course this is correct; you can march forth. However, today is not the only day of the year that is a command. They overlooked that one can March 1st. In fact, whoever Marched 1st probably were not the ones that Marched 4th, since they marched before everyone else.
Today is a most unusual date. You can't February 25, you can't July 4, you can't September 11, you can't December 25 and so forth, but you can March 4. You can March 4th into battle, or you can March 4th for the Arts, as one charity would have us do. That caused the online periodical Newszap to pose this question:
"P.S. GF's annual quiz question: What's the only date on the calendar that issues a command?"
The intended answer is today, of course. March 4th. March Forth. Of course this is correct; you can march forth. However, today is not the only day of the year that is a command. They overlooked that one can March 1st. In fact, whoever Marched 1st probably were not the ones that Marched 4th, since they marched before everyone else.
Religion R vs One Big Mess
Last May (2003) I blogged about the saying "God is a definite integral.", by the Rev. Sarah Voss, minister of the Sioux Falls, SD, Unitarian Universalist Church. Her idea was that God was like the area under a curve and above the x-axis of a Cartesian graph, from one place on the horizontal axis to another. One can approximate the area under the graph by subdividing the interval into a number of subintervals, then drawing rectangles from these to the curve and adding up their areas. The finer the mesh, the closer the area comes to the area under the curve; i.e., to God or the Ultimate. She imagined that each religion was like a subdividing of the interval, and that the closer the area, the finer the mesh, to the ultimate curve, the more like The Reality or God the mesh and the interval was. She then said, take the subdividings representing each religion, one for Christianity, one for Jainism, one for Buddhism, and so forth, and take the union of all their subdividing points and take the sum of areas based on that. That comes much closer to the actual curve than any of the individual meshes or religions does. In mathematics, one takes the limit of these areas, and the result is called the definite integral of the function on the interval. That is where Rev. Voss gets her saying from. She called this combined religion Religion R, and she remarked that her and my faith, Unitarian Universalism, out of all the religions, comes the closest to being Religion R. See her book What Number is God? for details.
However, I read a newsletter a little while ago called Human Kindness Foundation: a Little Good News. In the Christmas 2003 issue, Bo Lozoff wrote "An Impatient Letter from God". In it, God says,
I'm not telling you to abandon your religions. I want you to enjoy your religions, honor them, learn from them, just as you should enjoy, honor, and learn from your parents. But do you walk around telling everyone that your parents are better than theirs? Your religion, like your parents, may always have the most special place in your heart; I don't mind that at all. And I don't want you to combine all the Great Traditions into One Big Mess. Each religion is unique for a reason. Each has a unique style so that people can find the best path for themselves.
He seems to say that Rev. Voss' Religion R is "One Big Mess". The newsletter makes a case for not considering your religion as above the others. But then he says don't try to practice them all. If indeed your own religion is not something special, it follows that you might want to try following some tenets of another religion. But then Bo, as God, says that makes a big mess. So which is it, a big mess or the religion that comes closest to The Way?
I say the difference is this. If you go out and try to practice all the religions, you indeed get a big mess. In fact, you get contradictions all over the place. For example, you revere Jesus as God (Christianity), and you revere Jesus as an important human prophet, but not God (Islam). That is a blatant contradiction. I think that Rev. Voss means take the best of each religion and combine these best beliefs into a Religion R. That can resolve the contradictions. For instance, you then believe in a Christianity that reveres Jesus as a model human, but not a god, or you may believe that everyone has a little bit of God or the divine in them (Wicca). Indeed, to me it seems this Religion R, and to a somewhat lesser extent Unitarian Universalism, does indeed come closer to the Ultimate Reality than any of the individual components does, just like with the areas. It seems to me that Religion R then is the way to go.
Last May (2003) I blogged about the saying "God is a definite integral.", by the Rev. Sarah Voss, minister of the Sioux Falls, SD, Unitarian Universalist Church. Her idea was that God was like the area under a curve and above the x-axis of a Cartesian graph, from one place on the horizontal axis to another. One can approximate the area under the graph by subdividing the interval into a number of subintervals, then drawing rectangles from these to the curve and adding up their areas. The finer the mesh, the closer the area comes to the area under the curve; i.e., to God or the Ultimate. She imagined that each religion was like a subdividing of the interval, and that the closer the area, the finer the mesh, to the ultimate curve, the more like The Reality or God the mesh and the interval was. She then said, take the subdividings representing each religion, one for Christianity, one for Jainism, one for Buddhism, and so forth, and take the union of all their subdividing points and take the sum of areas based on that. That comes much closer to the actual curve than any of the individual meshes or religions does. In mathematics, one takes the limit of these areas, and the result is called the definite integral of the function on the interval. That is where Rev. Voss gets her saying from. She called this combined religion Religion R, and she remarked that her and my faith, Unitarian Universalism, out of all the religions, comes the closest to being Religion R. See her book What Number is God? for details.
However, I read a newsletter a little while ago called Human Kindness Foundation: a Little Good News. In the Christmas 2003 issue, Bo Lozoff wrote "An Impatient Letter from God". In it, God says,
I'm not telling you to abandon your religions. I want you to enjoy your religions, honor them, learn from them, just as you should enjoy, honor, and learn from your parents. But do you walk around telling everyone that your parents are better than theirs? Your religion, like your parents, may always have the most special place in your heart; I don't mind that at all. And I don't want you to combine all the Great Traditions into One Big Mess. Each religion is unique for a reason. Each has a unique style so that people can find the best path for themselves.
He seems to say that Rev. Voss' Religion R is "One Big Mess". The newsletter makes a case for not considering your religion as above the others. But then he says don't try to practice them all. If indeed your own religion is not something special, it follows that you might want to try following some tenets of another religion. But then Bo, as God, says that makes a big mess. So which is it, a big mess or the religion that comes closest to The Way?
I say the difference is this. If you go out and try to practice all the religions, you indeed get a big mess. In fact, you get contradictions all over the place. For example, you revere Jesus as God (Christianity), and you revere Jesus as an important human prophet, but not God (Islam). That is a blatant contradiction. I think that Rev. Voss means take the best of each religion and combine these best beliefs into a Religion R. That can resolve the contradictions. For instance, you then believe in a Christianity that reveres Jesus as a model human, but not a god, or you may believe that everyone has a little bit of God or the divine in them (Wicca). Indeed, to me it seems this Religion R, and to a somewhat lesser extent Unitarian Universalism, does indeed come closer to the Ultimate Reality than any of the individual components does, just like with the areas. It seems to me that Religion R then is the way to go.
Weather Report Errors
It is sometimes interesting to listen to TV weather personnel give their weather report on the six o'clock news (AM and PM) and on the Weather Channel, although I have not looked at that much lately. When thunderstorms come, they march (as though they had feet) or roll (as though they had wheels), or they are popcorn. They will say when a cold spell comes that temperatures are headed south, even though temperatures are usually warmer to the south. They will say that storms check out, although it seems they never try to collect the bill, like any hotel would. They even go to the extent of trying to use a broom to sweep away pesky clouds on the satellite map that have been making several days in a row cloudy.
But at least they should do it without errors. I notice that when they venture outside weather, say to astronomy, they can make mistakes. For example, once I heard one say that the time it takes the Earth to go around the Sun is 365.24 days. That is not true. It takes 365.2564 days. Besides, that's not what he is really talking about; he meant the year, which is not the time it takes for the earth to go around the sun. The year we live by is the time it takes the seasons to repeat. That is indeed 365.2422 days. The two differ by precession, which takes the vernal equinox all the way around the ecliptic or zodiac in 26,000 years.
He then said that leap year is not always every 4 years. Actually, it is, usually. It is true except for some century years. He then said that every 400 years we skip a leap year. That isn't true, either. He is talking about the century rule. Among century years, it is actually every 400 years that is a leap year, not every 400 years that it is isn't. The other century years are common years. Specifically, if a year is a century year, it has to be divisible by 400 to be a leap year. This means that 2000 was a leap year, but 1900 wasn't.
Newscasters and weathermen, this is a place where you can clear up the fog of confusion about science. Tell how it really is, and that will help clear the fog.
It is sometimes interesting to listen to TV weather personnel give their weather report on the six o'clock news (AM and PM) and on the Weather Channel, although I have not looked at that much lately. When thunderstorms come, they march (as though they had feet) or roll (as though they had wheels), or they are popcorn. They will say when a cold spell comes that temperatures are headed south, even though temperatures are usually warmer to the south. They will say that storms check out, although it seems they never try to collect the bill, like any hotel would. They even go to the extent of trying to use a broom to sweep away pesky clouds on the satellite map that have been making several days in a row cloudy.
But at least they should do it without errors. I notice that when they venture outside weather, say to astronomy, they can make mistakes. For example, once I heard one say that the time it takes the Earth to go around the Sun is 365.24 days. That is not true. It takes 365.2564 days. Besides, that's not what he is really talking about; he meant the year, which is not the time it takes for the earth to go around the sun. The year we live by is the time it takes the seasons to repeat. That is indeed 365.2422 days. The two differ by precession, which takes the vernal equinox all the way around the ecliptic or zodiac in 26,000 years.
He then said that leap year is not always every 4 years. Actually, it is, usually. It is true except for some century years. He then said that every 400 years we skip a leap year. That isn't true, either. He is talking about the century rule. Among century years, it is actually every 400 years that is a leap year, not every 400 years that it is isn't. The other century years are common years. Specifically, if a year is a century year, it has to be divisible by 400 to be a leap year. This means that 2000 was a leap year, but 1900 wasn't.
Newscasters and weathermen, this is a place where you can clear up the fog of confusion about science. Tell how it really is, and that will help clear the fog.
2004/03/02
Mission Accomplished
No, not Iraq. Mars. Today, NASA scientists announced that they have obtained results from the two rovers going over the surface of Mars and drilling into rocks. They have found definite indications that at one time the area that Opportunity had landed into was soaked in water - probably underwater in a sea or lake. The objective of the two rovers was to find evidence that Mars has or had water on it. Today they have met their objective. Mission Accomplished.
The big question is, however, was there ever life on Mars? The rovers did not find this and were not expected to. But with water on Mars, conditions suitable for life may have once existed. Maybe we won't find out until humans are on Mars. However, the chances look good. That may not be so good. If there is or was life on Mars, then that suggests that there is life all over the place in the cosmos. However, we have not detected any signal from an extraterrestrial civilization. Putting these two facts together with the Greenbank equation suggests that advanced civilizations are short-lived. That would not be good news for us, that our civilization may last only a hundred or more years or so. But it was good that they at least found water on Mars. The money put on this program was well spent. Keep going, NASA.
No, not Iraq. Mars. Today, NASA scientists announced that they have obtained results from the two rovers going over the surface of Mars and drilling into rocks. They have found definite indications that at one time the area that Opportunity had landed into was soaked in water - probably underwater in a sea or lake. The objective of the two rovers was to find evidence that Mars has or had water on it. Today they have met their objective. Mission Accomplished.
The big question is, however, was there ever life on Mars? The rovers did not find this and were not expected to. But with water on Mars, conditions suitable for life may have once existed. Maybe we won't find out until humans are on Mars. However, the chances look good. That may not be so good. If there is or was life on Mars, then that suggests that there is life all over the place in the cosmos. However, we have not detected any signal from an extraterrestrial civilization. Putting these two facts together with the Greenbank equation suggests that advanced civilizations are short-lived. That would not be good news for us, that our civilization may last only a hundred or more years or so. But it was good that they at least found water on Mars. The money put on this program was well spent. Keep going, NASA.
Dick Clark commits age discrimination
I heard an unbelievable story today. Ralph Andrews, 76, with a considerable background in the entertainment industry, was rejected for a job with Dick Clark's Bandstand because he was too old. Here is what the CNN site said:
"I have great respect and admiration for your accomplishments, and wish you success in your desire to 'get back to work," Clark's letter read, according to the suit. (But) the last development guy we hired was 27 years old. Another person who is joining our staff next week is 30. People our age are considered dinosaurs! The business is being run by 'The Next Generation."' Clark added, "On a brighter note, Ralph, please know that if any project comes up where we could use your experienced hands, I wouldn't hesitate to call you."
Dick Clark himself is 74 years old! To me this is blatant age discrimination. If he feels this way about old people, he should fire himself. How much do those two measly years mean, anyway? Mr. Andrews has filed a suit against Dick Clark. Maybe it's good. Mr. Clark was not shown in a favorable light in the movie "Bowling for Columbine". Mr. Andrews has filed a suit against Mr. Clark. Good. I hope he wins.
I heard an unbelievable story today. Ralph Andrews, 76, with a considerable background in the entertainment industry, was rejected for a job with Dick Clark's Bandstand because he was too old. Here is what the CNN site said:
"I have great respect and admiration for your accomplishments, and wish you success in your desire to 'get back to work," Clark's letter read, according to the suit. (But) the last development guy we hired was 27 years old. Another person who is joining our staff next week is 30. People our age are considered dinosaurs! The business is being run by 'The Next Generation."' Clark added, "On a brighter note, Ralph, please know that if any project comes up where we could use your experienced hands, I wouldn't hesitate to call you."
Dick Clark himself is 74 years old! To me this is blatant age discrimination. If he feels this way about old people, he should fire himself. How much do those two measly years mean, anyway? Mr. Andrews has filed a suit against Dick Clark. Maybe it's good. Mr. Clark was not shown in a favorable light in the movie "Bowling for Columbine". Mr. Andrews has filed a suit against Mr. Clark. Good. I hope he wins.
2004/03/01
Bowling for Columbine
No, this is not about strikes and spares, nor is it about flowers. It is a movie about guns. This movie, written by Michael Moore, is much better than the previous one I reviewed, The Passion of the Christ. This time I saw the entire movie. It made a lot of good points about our obsession with guns in this country. It does have some weak points, primarily in supporting material for some of the claims made in the movie, and because it had some glaring omissions. But it was a movie worth making and seeing. I give it five stars and recommend to anyone wanting a movie to see to see this one, a winner at a film festival last year.
The movie features several memorable scenes. Two children with bullets in their body from the slaughter at Columbine High School go with Michael Moore and others to K-Mart to demand a change to their gun policy. This group actually went to a K-Mart and bought ALL the ammunition at that store and bought it to the headquarters. After some discussion and some delaying, a spokesperson came out saying that K-Mart would change its policies. Michael interviewed Charlton Heston but got nowhere. A bank offered a gift of a gun for opening an account there. That's right, a gun. The best moment of the film was in comparing statistics for annual gun deaths in a number of countries. Japan, European countries, and Canada had two and three digit numbers of deaths from guns, but the US had 11,127. That's right, five digits. So big that the fact that the US is bigger doesn't matter. Further, the usual arguments for the US having so many gun deaths don't work. The US has had a bloodthirsty history. True, but what did Nazi Germany have? And the Germans have a two-digit annual gun death total, probably 68. There are a lot of guns in the US. There are guns in every block. But so does Canada, which has a much lower rate. Even Windsor, right next to gun-happy Detroit, has a low death toll from guns. The US is entertained with violent TV and video games. Where did those video games come from? Japan, that's where, and Japan has a low death toll from guns. No none of these arguments work. That baffled me at first, and a movie that does that is usually a good movie. Later on, after reading some about it, I concluded that it's the hypermedia again. They blow up anything violent, and even create fears in us that are unfounded, such as fear from terrorists, overseas dictators, and even African bees.
One important omission, one which could explain part of the toll as well, was that of illegal drugs. Many deadly shootings and prison convictions in this country result from the sale of drugs. So it seems to me that a solution to the problem of gun deaths in this country is to legalize drugs and discourage their use, as well as countering the hyperboles of the media. Overall, it is a good movie. Stay home and watch it on DVD, or go to a theater and see it, if it is still there.
No, this is not about strikes and spares, nor is it about flowers. It is a movie about guns. This movie, written by Michael Moore, is much better than the previous one I reviewed, The Passion of the Christ. This time I saw the entire movie. It made a lot of good points about our obsession with guns in this country. It does have some weak points, primarily in supporting material for some of the claims made in the movie, and because it had some glaring omissions. But it was a movie worth making and seeing. I give it five stars and recommend to anyone wanting a movie to see to see this one, a winner at a film festival last year.
The movie features several memorable scenes. Two children with bullets in their body from the slaughter at Columbine High School go with Michael Moore and others to K-Mart to demand a change to their gun policy. This group actually went to a K-Mart and bought ALL the ammunition at that store and bought it to the headquarters. After some discussion and some delaying, a spokesperson came out saying that K-Mart would change its policies. Michael interviewed Charlton Heston but got nowhere. A bank offered a gift of a gun for opening an account there. That's right, a gun. The best moment of the film was in comparing statistics for annual gun deaths in a number of countries. Japan, European countries, and Canada had two and three digit numbers of deaths from guns, but the US had 11,127. That's right, five digits. So big that the fact that the US is bigger doesn't matter. Further, the usual arguments for the US having so many gun deaths don't work. The US has had a bloodthirsty history. True, but what did Nazi Germany have? And the Germans have a two-digit annual gun death total, probably 68. There are a lot of guns in the US. There are guns in every block. But so does Canada, which has a much lower rate. Even Windsor, right next to gun-happy Detroit, has a low death toll from guns. The US is entertained with violent TV and video games. Where did those video games come from? Japan, that's where, and Japan has a low death toll from guns. No none of these arguments work. That baffled me at first, and a movie that does that is usually a good movie. Later on, after reading some about it, I concluded that it's the hypermedia again. They blow up anything violent, and even create fears in us that are unfounded, such as fear from terrorists, overseas dictators, and even African bees.
One important omission, one which could explain part of the toll as well, was that of illegal drugs. Many deadly shootings and prison convictions in this country result from the sale of drugs. So it seems to me that a solution to the problem of gun deaths in this country is to legalize drugs and discourage their use, as well as countering the hyperboles of the media. Overall, it is a good movie. Stay home and watch it on DVD, or go to a theater and see it, if it is still there.
2004/02/29
Operation Iraqi Liberation
Recently I ran into an incomprehensible acronym: OIF, and also OEF. After doing some research, I found that OIF stood for Operation Iraqi Freedom (and OEF for Operation Enduring Freedom). I suppose that ONE then is Operation Noble Eagle; there can be only one such operation, apparently. I think these operation names should not be acronymed. Spell it out or the reader may not understand. It is an Operation Iraqi Freedom, not an oif, whatever that is. If you insist on using acronyms, at least make them meaningful. Name the operation Operation Iraqi Liberation instead and then the acronym will mean something: OIL.
Recently I ran into an incomprehensible acronym: OIF, and also OEF. After doing some research, I found that OIF stood for Operation Iraqi Freedom (and OEF for Operation Enduring Freedom). I suppose that ONE then is Operation Noble Eagle; there can be only one such operation, apparently. I think these operation names should not be acronymed. Spell it out or the reader may not understand. It is an Operation Iraqi Freedom, not an oif, whatever that is. If you insist on using acronyms, at least make them meaningful. Name the operation Operation Iraqi Liberation instead and then the acronym will mean something: OIL.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)