My friend Russ died a few days ago.
I don't know why, but I haven't gone though the regular stages of mourning. I wasn't able to experience disbelief because Russ had had a brain tumor for a long time. I just feel really sad about it when I think of him. I learned of his death literally a few minutes before I left for a business trip. So I had a lot of time on that trip to think about him.
Now that I am writing about his death, I'm feeling really sad again. I'm kinda feeling guilty too because while I'm sad for Russ himself and for his family, I'm really quite sad for myself. He was my closest friend in graduate school and I really miss him.
Anyway, I was reflecting about two things about Russ. One was that I was surprised to recall how much he taught me about cooking. Russ and I were housemates for a year and he knew quite a few things about cooking and he passed his knowledge freely to me. I guess the one thing that sticks the most is how he would add sherry to gravies... I still do that. Now it will remind me of him.
The other thing that came to mind was this: fifteen years ago when we were in school, Russ accompanied a friend to their uncle's funeral. I don't recall if this was a girlfriend or just a friend, Russ was that kind of guy. When he got back, he mentioned to me that the funeral hall and the service were packed and it was evident to Russ, who had never met this deceased uncle, that he had touched many people's lives and had been well loved. I don't recall Russ's exact words but he was very moved by this. And he considered his own passing. And I think it really changed his outlook on life by at least a few degrees. He said something to me about there being more to life than work and wanting to make a difference with his life.
Well, Russ's services were packed. I think it was evident that he had touched many peoples' lives and he was well loved. And for that I am grateful, although I am quite, quite sad.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Friday, September 16, 2005
What is Chaos theory?
Through history, until relatively recently, there has been at least an implicit feeling that once we knew enough about the world, we could predict anything. There was debate about whether this could be pushed to the logical extreme where if we measured all inputs, could we, say, absolutely know a person's thoughts because we would know the movements of the atoms and impulses in a person's brains?
But, forget mind-reading... I'd like to know if it will be sunny or rainy in ten days when I have a picnic planned? Well, it turns out that the forces that create weather are so "chaotic" that very slight changes can snowball into significantly different outcomes (rain vs. sunshine) over time. The shorthand is the “Butterfly effect:' something about a butterfly flapping it's wings in China means rain in Iowa.
Which leads to the conclusion that, because we can never hope to actually measure weather data with enough accuracy in the quantities that we would need, we will never be able to determine weather precisely at a date far in the future (e.g., ten days).
Chaotic systems are all around us. Drop five sheets of paper in exactly the same way in a still room and observe their different decent paths.
So, getting to the question: Chaos theory studies systems that are chaotic, like weather or air turbulence. These things were studied before, but it was a considerably philosophical and scientific leap forward to realize that they are all manifestations of the same class of phenomena and that many times very different chaotic systems can be described (stochastically) using the same mathematics. The math itself has lead to breakthroughs in other areas. As a trivial example, in the random generation of things like branches and shorelines in computerized graphics.
But, forget mind-reading... I'd like to know if it will be sunny or rainy in ten days when I have a picnic planned? Well, it turns out that the forces that create weather are so "chaotic" that very slight changes can snowball into significantly different outcomes (rain vs. sunshine) over time. The shorthand is the “Butterfly effect:' something about a butterfly flapping it's wings in China means rain in Iowa.
Which leads to the conclusion that, because we can never hope to actually measure weather data with enough accuracy in the quantities that we would need, we will never be able to determine weather precisely at a date far in the future (e.g., ten days).
Chaotic systems are all around us. Drop five sheets of paper in exactly the same way in a still room and observe their different decent paths.
So, getting to the question: Chaos theory studies systems that are chaotic, like weather or air turbulence. These things were studied before, but it was a considerably philosophical and scientific leap forward to realize that they are all manifestations of the same class of phenomena and that many times very different chaotic systems can be described (stochastically) using the same mathematics. The math itself has lead to breakthroughs in other areas. As a trivial example, in the random generation of things like branches and shorelines in computerized graphics.
Sunday, August 21, 2005
StupidPatents
Wow! I'd love to hear more details and the other half of this story about a supposed patent shyster.
I'ts becoming clearer and clearer that the US patent systems is no longer working for individual inventors.
On the other hand, the villain in this story, the inventor with the putatively false patents, was dead. You wonder how fairly his patents could be defended with him unable to offer testimony.
One thing I’ve often wondered of late is this: With all the patent agreements we’ve made, what’s to stop villains in other countries from filing false patents and then coming after US companies? This assumes that the US does not have the world’s worst patent office… which may be more optimistic than warranted.
I'ts becoming clearer and clearer that the US patent systems is no longer working for individual inventors.
On the other hand, the villain in this story, the inventor with the putatively false patents, was dead. You wonder how fairly his patents could be defended with him unable to offer testimony.
One thing I’ve often wondered of late is this: With all the patent agreements we’ve made, what’s to stop villains in other countries from filing false patents and then coming after US companies? This assumes that the US does not have the world’s worst patent office… which may be more optimistic than warranted.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Arrogant Ale
Long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away I drank a couple pints of Academic Ale at Joe's Brewery in Champaign. IL. I had had an unmemorable and unpleasant beer at Joe's and, at first, this beer was worse--off-putting. It had an intense, citrusy bitterness and hoppy aroma, and I wouldn't be surprised if I made a face after my first sip. But I recall quite clearly the next day having an enormous longing for another pint. I could taste the bitter hoppiness in my mouth like some Pavlovian beer dog. This stuff was beer-smack and I was totally hooked.
I wish that could write about how I had a long history with Academic Ale and how I enjoy it frequently to this day. Alas, really outrageously good beers are like castles of sand and I only ever had the couple pints.
So, anyway, the point is that I was recently in San Diego for a conference and I purchased a large bottle of Arrogant Bastard Ale. The bottle says "This is an aggressive beer. You probably won't like it." and man, it's Academic Ale all over again. Fine, fine, fine, wonderful beer. Extraordinarily hoppy, especially in the citrusy bitterness. I am hooked again and I now have some hope of enjoying truly extraordinary beer again. This stuff was merely expensive in San Diego; I imagine it will be frighteningly indulgent to buy it here. But I bet I will. I bet I will, a lot.
I wish that could write about how I had a long history with Academic Ale and how I enjoy it frequently to this day. Alas, really outrageously good beers are like castles of sand and I only ever had the couple pints.
So, anyway, the point is that I was recently in San Diego for a conference and I purchased a large bottle of Arrogant Bastard Ale. The bottle says "This is an aggressive beer. You probably won't like it." and man, it's Academic Ale all over again. Fine, fine, fine, wonderful beer. Extraordinarily hoppy, especially in the citrusy bitterness. I am hooked again and I now have some hope of enjoying truly extraordinary beer again. This stuff was merely expensive in San Diego; I imagine it will be frighteningly indulgent to buy it here. But I bet I will. I bet I will, a lot.
Funny fights
I stumbled upon Things My Girlfriend and I Have Argued About which is a very, very funny website. Well, the author, Mil Millington wrote a book on the same topic and with the same name. Of course, just to be funny, the two are completely independent. The website is a series of short anecdotes that are mostly tears-streaming-down-your-face funny. There is rather little theme running through the website, Millington just writes what's funny. And God bless him; very enjoyable.
Well, the book is completely different in that it's an actual story. The website is (ostensibly) true-life stories of the author, Mil, and his German common-law wife. The book is an actual story about a Brit named Pel and his German common-law wife. Worlds apart, you can see.
Well, anyway, I really, really liked this book. To give you an idea, there is a copyright page like any book. Copyright 2002. Library of congress. Blah blah. But on that page, there is a disclaimer that the book is a work of fiction and this disclaimer is pretty funny. Not wet-your-pants funny, but by far and away the funniest legalese that I have ever read. Ok, granted there's not that much competition but the point is this--this Millington guy is either a really funny guy or really a talented writer. Or, quite possibly, both.
I was a little worried when I read some of the reviews on Amazon where people were complaining about the boring and improbable plot twists. Having read the book I could not disagree more. I haven't counted words but it seemed to me as thought the plot was only about a tenth of the book which was dominated by fairly quick scenes of fighting that were only sometimes related to the story development. (Mr. Millington does not let the story-telling get in the way of a good set-up.) Also, I'm mortally afraid of anyone who is concerned about improbable plot twists in a comedy. I envision these people writing furious letters to the editor, "I saw a policeman today and HE WAS WEARING A GUN!!"
One of my very favorite authors is Doug Adams and this book has a similarish feel. The two authors are both extremely talented and funny. They both use absurdities well. Millington's style differs in some ways... he frequently includes asides--yes, that's right, he speaks right "at you"--in his writing and he doesn't have Adam's genius for plot twists. (Or, quite possibly--in deference to your pants--he's been hiding that candle under a basket.)
The final thing I'll say about this book is that I admire the author's writing. He isn't just funny, I think he's a very gifted writer. For example, it may be a bit trite for a book to deliver justice at all, but I have to say that I was enormously satisfied by the way in which "what goes around" ended up "coming around" for the art teacher and his "shrike" wife. At times, the narrator and his wife fight so vigorously that it stretches credularity that they stay together. But in the end, I find the characters engaging and--I hate to say it--lovable. Of the books I've read recently, this has been absolutely the most enjoyable by a wide margin.
Well, the book is completely different in that it's an actual story. The website is (ostensibly) true-life stories of the author, Mil, and his German common-law wife. The book is an actual story about a Brit named Pel and his German common-law wife. Worlds apart, you can see.
Well, anyway, I really, really liked this book. To give you an idea, there is a copyright page like any book. Copyright 2002. Library of congress. Blah blah. But on that page, there is a disclaimer that the book is a work of fiction and this disclaimer is pretty funny. Not wet-your-pants funny, but by far and away the funniest legalese that I have ever read. Ok, granted there's not that much competition but the point is this--this Millington guy is either a really funny guy or really a talented writer. Or, quite possibly, both.
I was a little worried when I read some of the reviews on Amazon where people were complaining about the boring and improbable plot twists. Having read the book I could not disagree more. I haven't counted words but it seemed to me as thought the plot was only about a tenth of the book which was dominated by fairly quick scenes of fighting that were only sometimes related to the story development. (Mr. Millington does not let the story-telling get in the way of a good set-up.) Also, I'm mortally afraid of anyone who is concerned about improbable plot twists in a comedy. I envision these people writing furious letters to the editor, "I saw a policeman today and HE WAS WEARING A GUN!!"
One of my very favorite authors is Doug Adams and this book has a similarish feel. The two authors are both extremely talented and funny. They both use absurdities well. Millington's style differs in some ways... he frequently includes asides--yes, that's right, he speaks right "at you"--in his writing and he doesn't have Adam's genius for plot twists. (Or, quite possibly--in deference to your pants--he's been hiding that candle under a basket.)
The final thing I'll say about this book is that I admire the author's writing. He isn't just funny, I think he's a very gifted writer. For example, it may be a bit trite for a book to deliver justice at all, but I have to say that I was enormously satisfied by the way in which "what goes around" ended up "coming around" for the art teacher and his "shrike" wife. At times, the narrator and his wife fight so vigorously that it stretches credularity that they stay together. But in the end, I find the characters engaging and--I hate to say it--lovable. Of the books I've read recently, this has been absolutely the most enjoyable by a wide margin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
