Hackerspace - STEMspace
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
This entire site is a private effort of free information.
There are no cookies or adverts, and nothing for sale.

400ky of atmospheric CO2

CO2 levels cycle 180-280 ppm every 120K years

Current Items of Interest
  1. Gwynne Dyer Hypocrisy, and the 'rules-based order' -  Israel's defence minister, Yoav Gallant, dismissed the ruling by the International Court of Justice in The Hague on the accusation that Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip with the words "Hague Schmague." U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was equally dismissive, saying the case brought before the ICJ by South Africa was "meritless." On the other hand, the South African government hailed the ruling as a "decisive victory" for the international rule of law. It's the same ruling, but two radically different interpretations of what it means. Which one is right? The ICJ split the difference, because neither a simple "yes" nor a definite "no" would properly answer the question. It did not say Israel is committing a genocide or order it to accept an immediate ceasefire. It did, however, reject Israel's demand that it just throw the case out, and confirmed Israel's troops in the Gaza Strip are at risk of committing genocide. So the president of the court hearing the case, Judge Joan Donoghue (a former senior official of the U.S. State Department), issued a number of provisional orders that Israel obey. The key four orders say that Israel must prevent its troops from committing genocide, prevent and punish public incitement to genocide, provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, and preserve evidence of any possible violations of the Genocide Convention. Israel must report back to the court on its compliance within a month. Most Israelis will be insulted by these demands, since they will think it's outrageous even to suggest that its soldiers need to be given such orders. However, all they have to do is report in a month that the court's provisional orders have been obeyed. Why, then, does anybody even bother to send their lawyers to the ICJ? Because it is the frail, tender shoot of what might one day, with a lot of luck, grow into an international court that really could compel countries to obey international law. In other words, "fake it till you make it" on a global scale. The nationalists and the populists hate the very idea of a "rules-based order" because it limits their ability to act any way they wish. Most people, these days, recognize that even powerful countries need the protection of international law because they are all vulnerable to massive violence, but even in the wisest of them that recognition is permanently at war with older notions of unlimited sovereignty. The consequence is perpetual hypocrisy at every level from the personal to the international. Bronwen Maddox, director of the Chatham House think-tank in London, summed up the dilemma of double standards nicely last week, at least so far as the western countries are concerned. "The West cares about democracy, but not when it wants to install leaders it likes in other countries. It respects sovereignty except when it does not, as in Iraq. It argues for self-determination in Taiwan, but not in Catalonia. It supports human rights, but not in countries from which it needs oil. It defends human rights except when it gets too difficult, as in Afghanistan." Similar accusations are true, and in some cases even truer, for non-Western countries. It is a universal problem and it requires a universal solution, but that is still a long way off. Many countries do not even aspire to a solution. Some reject it because they have not seen the cataclysmic destruction of modern total war and do not understand that it is inextricably linked with total independence. Others are simply dictatorships that cannot tolerate the rule of law even internationally. Nevertheless, the effort to build the international rule of law must continue, and even hypocrisy is better than brazen rejoicing in lawlessness and evil. In the meantime, what are we to make of the accusations against Israel? It is not yet committing a genocide in the commonly understood meaning of the word, because the intention "to destroy a people as a whole or in part" is not there. The wish to destroy the Palestinian people may lurk in the hearts of many Israelis, but they lack the means to do such a thing and it is not their government's policy. Where the Israelis are on thin ice is in the crime of "public incitement to genocide," for there are senior members of the current Israeli government who engage in that on an almost daily basis. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does not do so himself, but he does not silence or disclaim them. He dares not, because his coalition would collapse if he did.
    Gwynne Dyer (2024-01-31) 
  2. When it comes to guns, the USA might be the most violent of all Western democracies. Americans justify their gun violence because they share a very pessimistic view of human nature. But this recent podcast When Things Fall Apart (54 min) mentions that the origin of this pessimistic view originated with Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, which were written between 1787 and 1788. IMHO, if American students continue to learn this stuff in school, it will contribute to another generation of violence.
  3. Food for thought about the age of social media:    
  4. Some sufferers of IBS would be wise to watch this new YouTube video about food additives like Sorbitol (a sugar alcohol which is neither sugar nor alcohol) which is classified as a Polyol. Note that a Polyol is represented by the letter 'P' in the acronym FODMAP
    Others may wish to visit this Canadian non-profit site
  5. In 1755, an earthquake struck Lisbon, Portugal, on November 1 (a.k.a. all saints day). Most of the Christian community were inside cathedrals at the time, so many were killed. To make matters worse, the resulting tsunami killed even more. It is thought that the total death toll exceeded 30,000 people. European philosophers of the time, including Voltaire, wondered why the Christian god didn't delay the quake until the day after. This philosophical thought contributed to both The Enlightenment and Deism
  6. Blame Reagan for distrust of science by Craig Wallace - I have puzzled over the quite odd (in my mind) distrust of science and experts among politicians on the political right and their supporters. This is most evident when we look at the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change. As the world endured COVID, I was dumbfounded by the (at times,) fury and disdain directed by right-wing politicians such as former U.S. president Donald Trump and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre at public health figures such as Dr. Teresa Tam in Canada and Dr. Anthony Fauci in the United States. In Canada we saw former Alberta conservative premier Jason Kenney declaring Alberta “open for business” (against medical advice) in May 2021, when COVID was still rampant. By August 2021, Alberta hospitals were literally staggering under the strain of treating COVID patients, and some patients had to be sent to other provinces for care. In the U.S. in 2020 we saw Trump flouting mask mandates, bellowing “liberate Michigan” (from public health mandates). Hard to imagine a responsible, rational, nation’s leader encouraging people to ignore medical advice. Then in 2022 Poilievre openly embraced the “Freedom Convoys” which advocated for the end of all public health mandates. These are just a few examples. What we didn’t see, (as far as I am aware of) are left-wing or “progressive” politicians questioning the medical science behind pandemic measures. (This doesn’t excuse the fact that some progressive politicians appeared somewhat “lax” in enforcing lockdown and social distancing mandates during civil unrest at this time.) We have also seen distrust of science with climate change. In the fall of 2022 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) reported “In 2020, 88 per cent of Democrats agreed with scientific findings that climate change was a major threat to the well-being of the United States, but only 31 per cent of Republicans thought so. Similarly, 94 per cent of Democrats believe that the documented increase in global temperature is due to human activities (again, consistent with the scientific consensus), but only 69 per cent of Republicans do.” In Canada, we see Poilievre vowing to abolish the carbon tax which is in fact a market-based solution that conservatives would normally embrace to change unwanted behaviour. He refuses to provide Canadians with a science-based alternative. Former president Trump vows to “drill, drill, drill” (for oil) on his first day back in office if he wins the 2024 election. Why does the right appear to distrust science? Certainly this hasn’t been a foundation of conservative thought forever. Republican president Dwight Eisenhower embraced science to get America into the space race in the 1950s. He and Progressive Conservative prime minister John Diefenbaker endorsed medical science as polio vaccines were distributed that same decade. What changed?  I believe this dates back to the 1980s and American president Ronald Reagan. He argued "government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." This has been a “mantra” of the conservative movement ever since. But it is problematic. First, this implies one should not trust the government. Public health guidelines are laid down by government officials — thus according to conservatives we shouldn’t trust them. That is what is being suggested here. It also implies that governments are incompetent. Think about these further words from former president Reagan. “The nine scariest words in the English language are: I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” If you truly believe that, are you thus inclined to accept advice or instructions from government medical experts? And if conservatives followed this advice would they not be repudiating their core beliefs? It appears that many conservatives are trapped in a flawed ideology that does not allow them to respond rationally to serious crises. It isn’t logical to embrace a philosophy that may very well lead to death. Conservatives should look to their past and rethink some of their core beliefs.
  7. Is Doug Ford's business case for the Ontario Science Center just another poorly conceived plan? Read the original article at the Toronto Star (authored by the ex-CEO of the OSC)
    comments: what is it with Ford and his supporters? Conservatives claim to be fiscally responsible and yet the Ford government has allowed Ontario's debt to exceed 403 billion while refusing to collect automobile fuel taxes and license renewal fees. To make matters worse, his spending and borrowing now exceed those of his Liberal predecessors, McGuinty and Wynne.
  8. Electoral Reform.
    Fair Vote Canada
    This chart uses Canada as an example of what went wrong in 2015 where Liberal votes (39%) were over-represented in parliament while all others (61%) were underrepresented. Notice that on the world stage, not a single democracy formed, or reformed, since world-war-2 has selected first-past-the-post. Many countries adopted Proportional Representation 
    To learn more:
    Canada fairvote.ca
    UK makevotesmatter.org.uk
    USA fairvote.org
    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electoral_systems_by_country
    2. University of Waterloo professor, Byron Weber Becker, has published a set of computer simulations based upon historical voting statistics. These simulations indicate that the Alternative Vote (AV) scheme used in Australia is worse than first-past-the-post.
      caveat: note that Alternative Vote is just first-past-the-post with ranked ballots. BTW, this scheme was used in Alberta approximately 100 years ago.
    3. Andrew Coyne: The Way Forward on Electoral Reform in Canada and What’s Wrong With How We Vote?
    4. John Cleese (Monty Python) discusses FPTP problems in Britain
    5. History shows that costly errors are usually associated with majority wins because fewer people are involved in decision making. Food-for-thought: British politicians of all parties agreed to quietly work together under Churchill during WW2. Everything went well (politically speaking) until the end of the war when party bickering resumed. If Britain had adopted proportional representation, then I suspect:
      Britain would have applied to join the EU in 1952 rather than 1962 (entry was delayed until 1973 for reasons discussed here) Winston Churchill won a majority government in 1951
      there would have been no Suez Canal crisis in 1956 Anthony Eden won a majority government in 1955
      there would have been no Falklands War in 1982 Margaret Thatcher won a majority government in 1979
      there would have been no BREXIT (starts in2016) David Cameron won conservative majorities (2010, 2015)
    6. More than 100 years ago, the majority of voters were barely educated, so they needed to send an educated representative to the nation's capital. Since the majority of today's voters are better educated, I wonder if sending a representative to the capital (where they fall under the influence of the party whip to vote the party line) is still necessary.
    7. Fifty years ago, when manufacturing was still a thing, the 'business class' usually voted conservative while the 'working middle class' usually voted labor. Since then, 'millionaires and billionaires' (a.k.a. the one percent) have hijacked conservative politics, then tricked the working class into supporting many right-wing causes which includes flat taxes, lower taxes, and austerity.
  9. World's Largest Iceberg breaks free of Antarctica 2023-11-24
    The world's largest iceberg is on the move for the first time in more than three decades, scientists said on Friday. At almost 4,000 square km (1,500 square miles), the Antarctic iceberg called A23a is roughly three times the size of New York City. Since calving off West Antarctica's Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in 1986, the iceberg — which once hosted a Soviet research station — has largely been stranded after its base became stuck on the floor of the Weddell Sea. Not anymore. Recent satellite images reveal that the berg, weighing nearly a trillion metric tonnes, is now drifting quickly past the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, aided by strong winds and currents. It's rare to see an iceberg of this size on the move, said British Antarctic Survey glaciologist Oliver Marsh, so scientists will be watching its trajectory closely. As it gains steam, the colossal berg will likely be launched into the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. This will funnel it toward the Southern Ocean on a path known as "iceberg alley" where others of its kind can be found bobbing in dark waters.
    Links: Additional bad news:
  10. Bad news for Earth's ice (read original scientific paper)
    comment: 80 calories of heat energy will convert one cc of ice into water without raising temperature. But when the ice is gone, 80 calories of heat will raise temperature of one cc of water by 80 degrees Celsius (144 degrees Fahrenheit). You will not want to live on planet Earth without ice.
  11. About Cement and Concrete. Concrete is the world's most manufactured product, and its environmental impact is similarly impressive — in particular, the large amount of carbon dioxide emitted during its production. Today, there are many scientists working to reduce that impact. Canadian researcher Leah Ellis co-founded a company that produces cement, which is one of the most energy-intensive parts of concrete, with electricity instead of burning fossil fuels. University of California Davis professor Somayeh Nassiri is studying ways to mix other materials with cement while reducing its carbon footprint – such as wood ash, volcanic ash, and ground-up crustacean shells. In Canada, University of British Columbia researcher Shahria Alam is looking at a circular approach to construction by making concrete with… more concrete, recycled from demolished structures.
    https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/quirks-quarks-oct-7-2023-1.6987989 (listen: 15 minutes)
    (1) According to last month's UN Environmental program report, the [concrete] equivalent of the entire city of Paris is added to the world, in new buildings, every week.
    (2) The whole sector accounts for roughly 37% of global green house gas emissions. (a.k.a. CO2)
  12. A few thoughts on Education. First off, you might wish to listen to this NPR podcast which explains how government-sponsored education transformed China from a very backward country to a modern juggernaut
    caveat: this history ends with Mao so does not contain any information from the second educational wave instituted by Deng Xiaoping which I personally witnessed in Boston more than 40 years ago while training as a computer engineer
    comments: If you agree with me that an educated society is the primary factor in becoming/remaining relevant in the modern world, then:
    1. why do western governments institute austerity programs to defund public education? (the father of economics, Adam Smith, advocated "government sponsored" education for all, including the working class who were unable to afford to educate themselves)
    2. why do western governments support sectarian (religious-based) education which includes home schooling?
      • this is only desirable if you want to produce a society of priests and nuns.
      • won't all sectarian students eventually become wards of the state? (look to modern day Israel to see and example of this)
      • shouldn't religious education only be done on church property?
      • What happened to the separation between church and state?
    3. why do western governments allow investors to make huge amounts of money on student loans, which only serve to temper higher levels of education? (perhaps "education" and "health care" should be run without capitalism's market-place incentives)
    1. Sal Khan of Khan Academy on 'How I Built This' (42-min) speaks about using A.I. to help teachers educate students. This is not a magic bullet for funding education since it requires all students to have access to an internet-connected computer. But it could provide the equivalent of a personalized tutor.
    2. Advanced Placement (many times just known as "AP") for providing opportunities to capable students.
  13. I have come to the conclusion that the economists running national banks have no clue as to what they are doing.
    First an aside: Last year as I drove my automobile out of a parking lot, I stepped on the brake pedal but nothing happened. I then applied much more force which achieved the desired result. Next, I slowly drove to a mechanic who informed me that while my front brakes were working, my back brakes were totally shot (rust had eaten though the hydraulic brake lines). Three cheers for dual brake systems!
    Now back to the economics: Many national banks are trying to control of inflation by raising the prime lending rate (they hope that a small artificial recession will allow them to regain control of the economy). Unlike my automobile example, national banks have applied the metaphoric brake pedal numerous times but have not achieved the desired result, so they dither for a time, read their tea leaves, then try again. As of May-2023, American bankers have tried this ten times but none have asked the question: "what has changed to prevent this interest rate rise from working?" IMHO they are overlooking the obvious: "they think" there is only one meaningful money supply (theirs) but overlook the fact that huge pools of capital exist in corporations. Here are two: (1) Some North American automobile manufacturers are offering 1.5% interest rate loans (on the full Manufacture's Suggested Retail Price) which are more than 5% lower than a rate from a bank. (2) Many larger American companies (who pay little-to-no taxes because they see themselves as multi-nationals) are sitting on huge pools of off-shore capital which is moved in-and-out of the economy, irrespective of the prime lending rate. BTW, some of these companies have trillion dollar valuations making them bigger than most banana republics. Anyway, permit me to state the obvious: huge companies, not paying their taxes while sitting on a lot of offshore cash was almost unheard of thirty years ago. That was a time when the common citizen only used the word million.
    My worry: In the book Capital in the Twenty First Century (a modern reinterpretation of Adam Smith) the author informs that the fundamental principle of capitalism is to provide 5% annual return on investment. This is always in the back of my mind whenever I hear that a bank intends to raise interest rates above 5% (USA, Britain, and Canada are already higher)
    But what of the housing dilemma? High interest rates affect the whole economy which includes builders. I suspect very few construction projects (homes, apartments, condos) will be started when interest rates are high, and might go higher
  14. This 1980 quote by author-educator Isaac Asimov (PhD Biochemistry) perfectly describes modern life in North America where citizens become misinformed by accessing social media sites (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat) or politically biased news outlets (like Fox) run by publishing billionaires (like Rupert Murdoch). The graphic reads:
    "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

    Isaac Asimov (Newsweek, 21 January 1980) 

    A cult of ignorance
  15. From Anti-Government to Anti-Science: Why Conservatives Have Turned Against Science.
    article: https://direct.mit.edu/daed/article/151/4/98/113706/From-Anti-Government-to-Anti-Science-Why
    In this essay, we argue that conservative hostility toward science is rooted in conservative hostility toward government regulation of the marketplace, which has morphed in recent decades into conservative hostility to government, tout court. This distrust was cultivated by conservative business leaders for nearly a century, but took strong hold during the Reagan administration, largely in response to scientific evidence of environmental crises that invited governmental response. Thus, science (particularly environmental and public health science) became the target of conservative anti-regulatory attitudes. We argue that contemporary distrust of science is mostly collateral damage, a spillover from carefully orchestrated distrust of government.
  16. Ignorance abounds in the era of social media where people offer opinions on topics they know nothing about.
    • woke became popular in US African American music community during the 1930s and means "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination". So today, anyone who is anti-woke could technically be guilty of "racial prejudice".
    • critical race theory (CRT) is an academic critique of race theory (like eugenics, "race theory" is now considered pseudo science).  Since "race theory" was used by the German NAZI party during the 1930s and 1940s to justify murder, then anyone who criticizes CRT could technically labelled a supporter of NAZI murder. Click here to learn more about this at NPR.
    • lots of political types want to ban books and/or takeover control of libraries. They seem to have missed the lesson that " book bans" are always on the wrong side of history, and that banned titles are always more sought after. (psst: want to look at a banned book?)
    • I still can't believe the number of people (many of them who identify as religious) who think that "sex" and "gender" mean the same thing. Sex (hardware of the body) is a label based upon physical observations at birth (not 100% accurate since 1-2% of babies are born with unambiguous or undifferentiated genitalia) or chromosomal tests. Gender is best thought of as software of the brain (which can develop differently from the body). I was totally unaware of this stuff until the release of this 1970 Hollywood movie, staring Raquel Welch, where she plays the role of a transsexual woman. Hugh Hefner shone light on this topic in a 1978 issue of Playboy Magazine. comment: Perhaps some of the current cultural confusion begins here because there is no such thing as transsexual since the post-op person would never be able to change their chromosomes -OR- reproduce via copulation. Anyway, medical professionals inform that only 1-2% of society is gay, and only 1% of that group seeks transgender surgery. This puts transgender statistics at 1 in 10,000 which seems to me to be a tiny number compared to the noise generated by politicians who are more interested in culture wars than traditional political issues like keeping people employed.
    • Dog Whistle statements allow bigots and racists to hide in plain site:
      • Antisemites avoid the label by hurling their criticisms against George Soros.
      • Homophobes avoid the label by hurling their criticisms against transgenders.
      • Racists avoid the label by hurling their criticisms against CRT (critical race theory) or other proxies like Obama's citizenship, etc. (this latter item was a favorite of Donald Trump and many voters fell for it)
  17. Why I disconnected from social media (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn) starting 15-Jan-2023. The following items describe some of the contributing factors:
    update: After 12 months, my social media strike continues.
  18. The Atlas of Impunity is the name of a publication which ranks countries by five dimensions of impunity: unaccountable governance, abuse of human rights, economic exploitation, conflict and violence, and environmental degradation. Visit the next link to learn more: https://www.eurasiagroup.net/live-post/atlas-of-impunity-2023
  19. Sea Level Rise is rising faster (one proof of global warming)
    sealevel rise over 30 years

    Global mean sea level has risen 101 millimeters (3.98 inches) since 1992 and continues to do so at 3.9 mm (0.15 inches) per year.

    • nineteenth century average rate of rise: 1.4 mm per year.
    • twentieth century average rate of rise: 1.7 mm per year.
    • current "satellite measured" rate of rise is: 3.9 mm per year.
    • multiplying by 100 yields 390 mm (39 cm or 15 inches) per century.
    • recall that distance over time is known as velocity (or speed); and that an increase in velocity over time is known as acceleration. Since the rate of sea level rise (speed) is increasing then we can say that sea level rise is accelerating (much worse than simply increasing)
    • this measurement is vertical, but beaches are sloped which means much more flooding during high tides and storm surges.
    • 39 cm (15 inches) per century is a guaranteed minimum BUT it appears that the annual rate has now passed 4.0 mm per year.
  20. Sea-level rise(continued): IPCC projections While it is difficult to measure Earth's daily average temperature (consider: day-night cycles; seasonal changes) then do annual trend analysis (consider: daily weather events; decadal weather events like El Niño and La Niña), it is much easier to measure the effects of warming as seen in sea-level rise. Most climate-change skeptics stand down after viewing data showing average annual sea level rate-of-rise more than doubling from 1.7 mm per year to 3.9 mm per year in just one century (much of the original data came from military sources)
    additionally: The content of this scientific paper from Denmark ( https://os.copernicus.org/articles/17/181/2021/ ) is much more troubling. The first line of the abstract reads: "Recent assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) imply that global mean sea level is unlikely to rise more than about 1.1 meters within this century but will increase further beyond 2100". This statement infers that a rise of one meter (39 inches) by the end of this century is within the scope of possibility. Then from this IPCC 2021 summary we read one very troubling line: "Sea-level rise by 2100 is likely to be from half to one meter, but two to five meters is not ruled out, as ice sheet instability processes are still poorly understood."
    1964 quote from Rachel Carson: “We live in an age of rising seas. In our own lifetime we are witnessing a startling alteration of climate.”
  21. POLIDIOT (political idiot) is a label applicable to both citizens and politicians who insist their "political opinion" is superior to "empirical fact" (this includes politicians who advocate for cryptocurrenices). To those people I present this quote from 1936: will work for food

    "The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back. There are not many who are influenced by new theories after they are twenty-five or thirty years of age, so that the ideas which civil servants and politicians and even agitators apply to current events are not likely to be the newest."

    comment: no one "likes" the idea of printing up money, but you would not like the alternative. Recall that very little was done after the crash of 1929; this resulted in a decade of hobos (homeless men looking for work), soup kitchens, and people wearing signs reading "will work for food"
  22. Two decades of misinformation and COVID-19
    science meets stupidity Misinformation 1: The Republican-dominated US Congress of 1987 eliminated the FCC Fairness Doctrine citing a violation of the right to free-speech by corporations (did the framers of the constitution ever intend corporations to have the same rights as people?) This enabled politically biased outlets, like Fox News (Cable TV) and Rush Limbaugh (Syndicated Radio), to play fast and loose with the truth. Americans today seem unaware of the fact that one-sided political propaganda in Germany triggered world-war-2
    Misinformation 2: Since the rise of the world-wide-web (1991) and mobile social media (2007) society has witnessed an ever increasing amount of bad science from non-experts on both sides of the political spectrum (vaccine hesitancy is one example). As advertising revenue moved online, many print publishers went out of business which triggered societal problems. Recall that newspapers could be sued under libel laws for publishing misinformation, so they employed editors and journalists to provide "best effort reporting" of "best-effort fact-checked information". Internet media sites are protected from lawsuits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (created in 1996 to help start internet businesses) so they check nothing which allows them to cut costs by eliminating jobs (even though they are incredibly rich and pay virtually zero taxes)
    Comments: Herbert Spencer published Principles of Biology in 1864 which is the first book containing the phrase Survival of the Fittest. We now live in the age of Survival of the Smartest which requires every citizen to be able to separate "fact from fiction", or "fact from political opinion", or "fact from religious dogma". Since many people are unable or unwilling to do this, then many are going to die prematurely. Thinking they are "politically right" will result is many becoming "dead wrong". Now click COVID-19 deaths by country then click top-of-the column "Deaths/1 million" to reorder the table by that metric. Why did the USA (rank=15) do so badly compared with their neighbors Mexico (39) and Canada (82)? Could this have anything to do with the fact that a modern interpretation of the American first amendment right to free speech, as it applies to billionaire big tech companies (Twitter, Facebook, Threads, YouTube, etc.) protects the dissemination of misinformation?   
  23. Half of us are as dumb as rocks
    I enjoy listening to the CBC radio program / podcast Under The Influence which tells past stories from advertising industry. Episode S10E14 compares the marketing success of the McDonald's Quarter Pounder with the marketing failure of the A&W Third of a Pounder. During post-failure analysis, marketers discovered that more than half the people in the focus groups were confused about which was the better deal. Consumers genuinely thought McDonald's was the better deal because they believed that a quarter pound was more than a third of a pound because 4 is larger than 3.
    comment: makes we wonder how much of our Neanderthal DNA is active. Please think about this the next time you decided to pontificate on subjects like politics, the economy and vaccines.
  24. China in the news
    This video shows China moving forward on many Chinese infrastructure projects while we watch vested interests in the North American fossil-fuel industry doing their best to maintain the status quo.
    comments: this video was created by Bloomberg and is titled Why China’s Lead on EVs Has Been a Long Time Coming. Even if you disagree with the title, this video shows that a significant change is already taking place in the world's most populated country. China is no longer a country of bicycle riders. I am sometimes shocked when I see modern video from places like Japan, South Korea or China where their societies seem to be moving in the direction of The Jetsons while everything in the North America seems to be decaying.
  25. Commenting on Huawei: It appears to me that western society only supports capitalism "when the west wins". When a Chinese company, like Huawei, becomes the next Nortel, then ridiculous conspiracy theories are invoked. Huawei was one of many companies that bid on the sale of Nortel's intellectual property, as did Apple, Microsoft, Sony, RIM (Blackberry), Google and others. Huawei was not one of the winners which forced it to increase its own R&D operations (estimates put Huawei R&D in 2019 at a massive 40% of net income) so it should come at no surprise that Huawei is 18-24 months ahead of their competition in the field of 5G wireless. Simple logic shows that Huawei could only achieve parity if they were stealing I/P. Did I mention that their 5G hardware is 90% less expensive than anything from their competition?
    food-for-thought: according to the 2022 book Chip War, Huawei employed 100 IBM consultants for more than a decade with the intent that "Huawei could operate with IBM efficiency"
    Deng Xiaoping (pronounced "dung chow ping") once said "The Middle East has its oil, China has rare earth". Since modern electronics is dependent upon rare-earth materials then it should be no surprise that Chinese-made electronics is much less expensive. Speaking of Deng for a moment, in 1985 I was attending school in Boston where it appeared to me that Chinese students were everywhere. Apparently, Deng had sent 1.3 million Chinese students out into the world to receive a top-quality western education paid for by China (one of my more-gifted Chinese classmates was accompanied by "two minders" who were there to ensure that he returned to China). Unlike Mao, Deng saw great value in education and realized that this was the best way forward for China. Thirty-five years later, China has moved more than 350 million Chinese citizens from poverty into the middle class. This number is greater than the total population of the USA so is it any surprise that China is doing well? Meanwhile, there is a tendency amongst some westerners to label "an educated person" as "an elite". It seems to me that the world has flipped.
  26. Our culture is awash in lies, dominated by streams of never-ending electronic hallucinations that merge fact and fiction until they are indistinguishable. We have become the most illusioned society on earth. Politics is a species of endless and meaningless political theater. Politicians have morphed into celebrities. Our two ruling parties are, in reality, one party - the corporate party. And those who attempt to puncture this vast, breathless universe of fake news, designed to push through the cruelty and exploitation of the neoliberal order, are pushed so far to the margins of society, including by a public broadcasting system that has sold its soul for corporate money, that we might as well be mice squeaking against an avalanche, but squeak we MUST
  27. A conservative friend of mine was fond of asking me political questions (I am a centrist) then would cut me off mid-sentence before I finished answering. Apparently, he was the only conservative among his family of brothers, sisters and parents but had no problem thinking he was right (er, correct) while they were wrong. How could this be? This thought rattled around in my mind until I stumbled across a book titled The Republican Brain which was positively reviewed by liberals and conservatives alike. The book contains several points which I will pass along here:
    • Size differences in two brain structures, the amygdala (larger in conservatives) and the anterior cingulate (larger in liberals), bias human perspective of the world.
    • Conservatives see most issues as "black-and-white" (or good-and-evil) and are more pessimistic while liberals see "shades of gray" and are generally more optimistic.
    • Conservatives are more fearful of others so are more easily encouraged to vote for POPULIST issues like "building the wall" or BREXIT (funny point: Britain had the lowest number of per-capita immigrants but had the highest political reaction against them)
    • Conservatives play politics as a team sport so will almost always "vote their party" while Liberals will split their vote choosing alternate parties (not very smart in first-past-the -post)
  28. When I was a student, I read an English translation of The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek. Then I later heard Margret Thatcher using the book to bash socialism, I wondered if she was reading a different translation (Hayek only published in German) since her quotes bore little resemblance to Hayek's book (was Thatcher paraphrasing?). Anyway, when Hayek slams socialism, he is referring to state-sponsored collectivism which is not the same thing as practiced (in one form or another) by most countries of the world except the USA. I recently stumbled onto this Hayek article titled Why I am Not a Conservative (excerpted from a 1960 book titled The Constitution of Liberty - I wonder if Thatcher knew about this).
  29. When I attended college in the early 1970s, many students seemed to be talking about Ayn Rand or quoting from her magnum opus Atlas Shrugged. Years later I finally got around to reading the book which left me with these thoughts:
    1. Like George Orwell (1984) Ayn Rand knows how to tell a fictional dystopian story
    2. Rand's character John Galt seems to be a kinder (although equally ridiculous) version of Orwell's character Big Brother
    3. 1984 (which Orwell claimed is really about 1948 England) was published in 1949 while Atlas Shrugged was published in 1957 so perhaps this tells us something about the zeitgeist of those years
    4. Ayn Rand seemed to project a naive (childish?) view of industry vs government regulation. Did she really think that corporations would never do anything evil? Had she lived longer I would have loved to hear her ATTEMPT to defend the actions of the Big Tobacco for knowing the numerous health hazards associated with the use of their product then hiding them in order to make a buck; or that EXXON knew as early as 1977 that the burning of fossil fuels would cause climate change (they hid these reports then hired retired scientists working for politically motivated think thanks to deny such a thing was possible). It is possible that these large companies got the inspiration to do this from Rand's description of the fictional "State Science Institute" which was low on science while high on politics. I wonder if people who read this book are also skeptical of science and vaccines.
    Feb-2022: I noticed that Atlas Shrugged had been made into a three-part movie currently available on Amazon Prime Video. I watched them all in order; what a waste of my time; it was like a train wreck that I could not stop watching. Part 1 was okay; part 2 was corny; part 3 was just bad. BTW, my comments have nothing to do with the actors or set designers for these productions (which were all done with different actors for some reason); my comments have everything to do with the really bad childish story line that I thought would have repaired for life this side of Y2K; There must be something wrong with the human species when anyone takes this stuff seriously.
    Jan-2023: I just heard this pod-cast about Ayn Rand on NPR: https://www.npr.org/2022/12/22/1145107911/the-monster-of-we-2021
    comment: People who see the world through the prism of politics (or see the world in black + white) will love this. People who see the world in shades of gray may not.
"2001: A Space Odyssey"
A mysterious monolith awakens the imagination of humanity's distant ancestors. A second monolith awaits humanity's giant leap to the moon. And in orbit around Jupiter, a third monolith beckons humanity to transcend beyond the limits of body and machine.
Click: 2001: A Space Odyssey @ Wikipedia
"a Feynman Diagram"
Feynman Diagram (animated) Feynman Diagram (static)
"All forces in the universe are mediated by particle exchange"
This Feynman Diagram describing "electron repulsion" depicts the movement of two electrons (1-to-3 and 2-to-4) in space and time. A virtual photon transfers energy between them (5-to-6) causing them to repel each other. To learn more:
1) brief explanation
2) detailed explanation
Legend: Y-Axis (up-down) is time while X-Axis (left-right) is space

Neil Rieck
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Hosted by ionos.ca on a virtual private server.
My personal email is changing from n.rieck@sympatico.ca to n.rieck@bell.net

More than 40% of Antarctica’s ice shelves have shrunk since 1997 with almost half showing “no sign of recovery”, a study has found, linking the change to the climate breakdown.