abujug blogspot

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Friday, 11 June 2010

On the Death of Birds

Posted on 10:03 by hony
Andrew's commenters point out that although the avian death toll in the Gulf is sure to be staggering...its not the worst thing we've done to birds:
The American Bird Conservancy estimated in 2003 that between 10,000 and 40,000 birds were killed each year at wind farms across the country, about 80 percent of which were songbirds and 10 percent birds of prey. "With the increased capacity over the last seven years, we now estimate that 100,000 – 300,000 birds are killed by wind turbines each year," said Conservancy spokesman Robert Johns. By our math, that comes to 274 to 822 birds a day killed by wind farms across the country.
And then this nugget from another reader:
40,000 or 300,000 birds is a lot - but a tiny number compared to some other causes of death. The US Fish and Wildlife Service estimates (PDF) that somewhere between 97-196 million birds are killed annually by collisions with building windows.

So you're saying we need to sue the glass manufacturers? The glass manufacturers would probably just say we should blame the window sales companies. The window companies would say we need to blame the contractors who installed the windows. The Republicans would say that the window installer's union is the root cause. And eventually the glass manufacturers would argue that only a single bird has actual been killed by collisions with building windows.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday Poetry Burst

Posted on 07:14 by hony
God's Wheel, by Shel Silverstein

GOD says to me with a kind of smile,
"Hey how would you like
to be God awhile
And steer the world?"

"Okay," says I, "I'll give it a try.

Where do I set?
How much do I get?
What time is lunch?
When can I quit?"

"Gimme back that wheel," says GOD.
"I don't think you're quite ready YET."


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday Pranks

Posted on 07:10 by hony
Once in a while, I choose a random friend and post the following on their Facebook wall: "Hey man! Heard you are expecting! Congrats!"

Then I sit back and let the magic happen.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 10 June 2010

How To Regulate Traffic

Posted on 09:55 by hony
TAE is constantly harping on concepts like automated cars and taking the driving out of the hands of the drivers, and how that would massively expedite traffic as well as massively reduce accidents and fatalities. Why not get wasted at the bar and fall into your car...when you car can take you safely home?

It occurred to me today that in the meantime, cities that wanted to reduce congestion at busy intersections should charge people to use those intersections. This would incentivize people taking alternate routes, or better yet, other forms of transportation.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 8 June 2010

Terraforming Mars, Ctd

Posted on 13:04 by hony
All the key ingredients seem to be coming together to successfully launch my plan (and by "my plan" I mean the plan I believe would work; I am not the original source of the idea) to seed Mars with custom-made bacteria that would create an atmosphere.

1. Scientists have announced artificially made organisms. Obviously the plan hinges on the ability to produce anaerobic bacteria (or heavily modified algae) that can convert surface elements into other elements and release oxygen and ozone. It would potentially also work if the microbes converted the CO2 in the Martian atmosphere into oxygen and ozone. For years I have wondered just what the problem is (I really don't know the answer) that prevents scientists from making bacteria with new functions. For years we've had "Bt corn" which is corn that produces the bacillus thuringensis toxin, which is toxic to European corn borer. Specifically, genetic engineers have added a new trait to an existing organism. If a set of genes exists in a creature here on earth that allows it to live by mining its own oxygen from the rust in surrounding rocks, why can't we isolate those genes and add them to an algae?

2. Bacteria have been found in Canada that could possibly survive on Mars. As our exploration of our own planet continues, we are learning that bacteria can survive and thrive in harsher and harsher places. It is no surprise to me that scientists have found a bacteria that survives in a place here on Earth that has conditions potentially worse than conditions on Mars. Understanding the methods that bacteria uses to survive could be key to building a terraforming microbe to ship to Mars...

3. Falcon 9 successfully launched. Honestly, if a private corporation announced today that they had developed the above terraforming microbe, and wanted to terraform Mars and claim it for their own real estate/mining/emerging markets efforts, what currently is there to stop them? The simplest answer is that their access to space would be halted by governments, who currently regulate all flights into Earth orbit. But with the speech from President Obama that commercialization of space is a priority, and with the first successful launch of a privately owned spacecraft, one has to wonder: how far are we from a legal battle for space rights? If SpaceX landed a colony ship on the Moon...there is no existing entity on Earth that could stop them from claiming the Moon their property...other than the courts...
I am retreading old wheels, I know, but the point I want to make is this: a corporation with foresight and long-term planning strategies (and a butt-load of capital) might find the idea of terraforming Mars very prodigious. What better way to secure the future of their business than to create an entire planet of future customers? Especially if this planet reaches some sort of population cap, or worse, an ecological disaster or war eliminates much of this planet's population. This century might be the century of globalization, but perhaps smart corporations, armed with terraforming tools, might make the next century the one of solar systemization.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Quote for the Day

Posted on 10:01 by hony
"I wish I could convey to you what it's like for me now; what I've become... I can conceive almost infinite possibilities and can fully explore each of them in a nanosecond. I perceive the universe as a single equation, and it is so simple. I understand... everything."

Lieutenant Reginald Barclay, in the Nth Degree episode of Star Trek: TNG.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Playing with photons 10 miles away

Posted on 07:19 by hony
This makes my head hurt it is so awesome.

Contrary to the article, however, I don't see this as a good application for satellites. I see it as the elimination of satellites. Why send a satellite to space to broadcast information when you could do it literally anywhere?


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Sunday, 6 June 2010

Falcon 9

Posted on 12:25 by hony
Worked perfectly. Oh no, that means we might have a non-NASA shuttle alternative soon! WHHHAAAAAA?!?!


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday, 4 June 2010

The Evolution of Empathy

Posted on 10:23 by hony
All throughout evolutionary history, there are trade-offs. In fact, the history of evolution might be titled "Trade-offs and Their Consequences." Animals, plants, and others have all found that a new trait can be obtained...but usually at the cost of another trait. A great example is that no large (>1 lb.) flying creatures exist that have both arms and wings...they only have arms or wings. The simplest reason for this is that the genetic cost of Cox genes for all that information is simply too high, not to mention the mental and physical resources required to pack functional wings and arms into a creature are much higher than simply rigging existing arms into wings.

Human evolution is peppered with such concepts. We wanted to talk upright, so we needed a different hip and spine structure. This cost us the ability to bend over and trot on all fours like gorillas often do. We wanted thicker legs for jogging, but in order to jog we had to give up massive shoulders and arms. We wanted big brains, but it cost us mandible strength. We wanted even bigger brains, but it meant we had to be born very early, rendering us helpless infants for longer than virtually all other creatures on the planet. And to feed that brain, herbivorism was just impossible, meaning protein-rich foods like meat had to be regularly obtained.

So while Douthat tries to reconcile the Millenials lack of empathy with their enhanced idealism, I see no conflict. The internet has allowed my generation to reach out in ways never before.
But is it so hard to believe that perhaps we humans have a finite amount of empathy in us? We seem less locally empathic than Gen X, but more empathic globally. Could it be that Gen X simply is spending the same amount of empathy we are, but just at a different level?

In layman's terms, I can only give a shit about so much. And while I give a shit about the plight of Palestinians, the victims of the oil spill, torture victims, my parents, my family, people struggling with unemployment, NASA, and various other entities...it just doesn't leave me a lot of empathy to give to my friends who are whining about God only knows what.
The genetics of this make sense...it only makes sense for the brain to have enough empathy built into it to support empathy for an individual's local tribe. Extra empathy just costs the individual resources. My generation hasn't changed how much empathy we have...we've simply changed the definition of our tribe.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Oil on Our Hands

Posted on 10:15 by hony
This all could have been avoided if we'd bought electric cars. Keep that in mind when you fill up today.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Monday, 31 May 2010

On Flat Tops

Posted on 11:35 by hony

I wish I could write that Nick and I spent 4 lazy days trout fishing and hiking in Flat Tops Wilderness Area. I wish I could say that I had some beautiful moment, surrounded by nature, where God, in all His glory, revealed Himself to me through a beautiful night sky filled with stars, or through an astonishing glade complete with waterfall and epic scenery.
I wish I could say that we skipped up the trail like two plucky heroes, and effortlessly conquered that vast, unkempt wilderness; modern day Lewis and Clark.

Instead we hiked, plowed, and gasped our way up 7 miles of steep trail only to find snow increasingly deep, until eventually in a deep forest along a canyon wall the trail disappeared completely into four foot high drifts of snow. At one point we had waded, barefoot, across a rushing snow-fed creek, a move that would not have gained the approval of my mother or my wife. We had dried our throbbing feet on the far bank and pressed on. At another point, we began having to set down our packs and press forward through the snow to try to find the trail, only to find it and circle back for our packs. We'd move forward a hundred yards, then put our packs down again and began the trail-searching anew. Nick's hiking boots, combined with the creek-wading incident, had given him a bleeding heel. I felt a weird tweak in my hip, which was to become much worse later. We were 90% of the way to the plateau, and we simply could not reach it. I remember dropping my pack and sitting down on a log, feet frozen and soaked, despondence on Nick's face as we discussed our options. Unfortunately, continuing forward was simply not one of them.
In the end, we turned around and headed back. Our eight mile journey up became a mad dash back down to a suitable camping site before dusk, out of the snow. About three miles back down we found one. On the way, as I was posting through a snowbank, I lost my footing and slipped. I caught myself on my right hand, impaling it on a piece of deadfall, and felt a "pop" in my already tweaked right hip. I regained my footing and we continued the hike.
We set up camp and pitifully tried to console each other, as our second Man Trip in 3 years had once again been waylayed by snow.

But as we sat there, eating our food and watching the fire, it slowly dawned on me that this was karma at it's best. Instead of me smugly striding like a warrior king on the plateau for a few days, catching trout and stroking my ego like I'd planned, instead I had been crushed before I ever got there. Is there a lesson to be learned here? I certainly asked myself that question many times that evening. The next morning was a baking sauna, and by the time Nick and I got down to the truck we'd drank 2 gallons of water a piece. My foot was bleeding, and Nick (an M.D. for those of you not acquainted with him) determined that my right hip was severely out of place...he showed me that when lying down my right leg was nearly an inch shorter than my left due to the dislocation. Nick's foot looked like hell, and he quickly moaned out of his boots into some flip-flops.

What is this life, we live? It occurs to me that my trip to Flat Tops was awfully metaphorical for my life back home. I stride around (smugly at times), stroke my own ego, and expect that a good plan means life will be a cakewalk followed by 3 days of easy trout fishing. And instead life is an uphill, heaving battle, where you suddenly feel that your youthful vitality has left you. Life is a big, well-planned, ambitious undertaking that often prematurely halts with the road in front of you completely impassible. Life is a well-worn pair of boots suddenly deciding that a blister is a good idea. Life is not, ever, what I expect. And it certainly isn't easy.

But then again, when in your life have you stood and watched a pair of wild elk watch you back? When have you seen fresh lynx tracks in the mud in front of you? How often, really, have you seen a beaver building his dam in the morning mist? When in your life have you stood on a hilltop, completely surrounded by mountains and canyons, and heaved breaths of fresh mountain air? When have you ever come across a gushing stream, 33 degrees at most, and waded into it barefoot? Can you think of a time you have gone to sleep knowing that bears were in your vicinity? Can you think of a time you have woken to the sound of several dozen hummingbirds dancing in the air above you?

And so, it was not the trip we planned. It never is. But by God, what an adventure. What a great place, what beautiful terrain, what a great friend I had with me. Isn't that what life is? Some airhead philosopher, surely thinking he was offering empathy, said once that "life is about the journey, not the destination." In this case, though I find the words cliche, he is right. Life is the suffering, the bleeding, the freezing, the pain, the wonder, the adventure, the camaraderie, the gasping for breaths of air, the 12 hour drives for 2 days of camping...life is slinging a 40 pound backpack on your shoulders again and again after you search for a hidden trail. Life is starting a fire while your whole body convulses from cold. Life is a long drink of coffee at 5 in the morning.

What life isn't is a stroll through the park with the keys to the city handed to you. Sometimes it is good to be reminded of that.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 25 May 2010

Vacation

Posted on 21:35 by hony
Forgive me, dear readers, for the hiatus. I am backpacking here until next Wednesday.

You stay classy, Planet Earth.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 19 May 2010

Republicans Kill Science Funding...

Posted on 14:00 by hony
Science funding is good...reelection is better.
I love the part where science funding is okay if you include an anti-pornography amendment.

Dear Republicans,
Don't count on my vote. ESPECIALLY YOU, JERRY MORAN.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday, 14 May 2010

Friday Poetry Burst

Posted on 11:35 by hony
My Life Has Been The Poem,
By Henry David Thoreau

My life has been the poem I would have writ,
But I could not both live and utter it.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 13 May 2010

Neil Armstrong Quotables

Posted on 13:52 by hony
"orbital sentinels were helping man understand the vagaries of nature..."

What does that even mean?

"America’s only path to low Earth orbit and the International Space Station will now be subject to an agreement with Russia to purchase space on their Soyuz (at a price of over 50 million dollars per seat with significant increases expected in the near future)"

It currently costs America $160 million per astronaut to launch people in the shuttles.

"For The United States, the leading space faring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature."

The decision to retire the shuttles this year was actually in place during Bush's administration. We have not had human exploration capability beyond Earth orbit since Apollo, some 40 years ago. And the Constellation Program wasn't expected to get us anywhere until 2020 or so.

What I don't get is why these guys think we can't do anything in space without people up there to do it.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 12 May 2010

TAE's Official Iron Man 2 Review

Posted on 06:57 by hony

I’m not going to spoil the plot and tell you what happens. The movie was really good. Very entertaining, though understandably predictable. You know from the start that Stark will defeat Vanko. You know that the War Machine armor will kick ass. You know that Scarlett Johannson is in the movie because of her looks (in Scarlett’s defense, her crazy blitzkrieg at Hammer Industries was probably the second best female vs. multiple males fight scene I’ve watched, second only to Uma Thurman dispatching the Crazy 88 in Kill Bill Vol. 1).

The scenes are lush and epic, the technology is unsurprisingly bleeding edge. RDJ plays Stark well; he’s believably smug, and his mortality clearly weighs on him and only exacerbates narcissistic character flaws, which disconnects the audience from him emotionally and while it helps build his character, it also makes us care less about his impending death. Of course, this could be because we all know somehow he won’t die of palladium poisoning.

I thought Justin Hammer, as portrayed by Sam Rockwell, was very well done. He seems a clear Stark wannabe, his attempts to grandstand like Stark seemed awkward and forced, and near the end of the movie when he yells angry threats at Ivan Vanko, you don’t feel like he is any good at being angry; the passive aggressive character shines through.

But the movie in general had a theme I felt needs addressing: Tony Stark has Bill Gates Syndrome. By Bill Gates Syndrome, I mean that upon successful completion of a mega-wealthy empire, and having reached the point where he could literally never run out of money, Bill Gates suddenly became a born-again charitable guy. After years of cutting and hacking at competition, and aggressively marketing his products and raking in every dollar possible, he appears to have realized his legacy isn’t going to be so wonderful, and has gone on this world-improvement bonanza. More power to you, Mr. Gates.

Stark appears to have developed the same sudden sense of morality, possibly continuing from that revelatory moment in the cave in Afghanistan in the first movie. He wants to be remembered for something other than Stark Weapons, wants his legacy to be more than just the “Merchant of Death.”

But TAE asks: could Stark have done anything good with his life without his piles of money? It seems these rich men who turn good have one thing in common: they are really, really rich. It’s easy to exact your will on others, no problem to get press for your beneficent activities, simple to sway the hearts of others, when you are exorbitantly wealthy. Gates, Stark, and many other wealthy benefactors suffer from a singular issue: trust. They do not trust the poor (or anyone else) to manage money well, and so they believe they, in all their wisdom, can best help the poor by managing it for them. If Bill Gates wants to really do good for Africans, why doesn’t he just give all $33 billion of his Foundation’s assets to Africans and be done with it? Because he thinks he should micromanage his charity, both because he mistrusts others and because he fears losing control of his work will mean that the good that comes from it might not be associated to him. It’s called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for a reason! Why didn’t he name it the “Anonymous Donor Who Wants to Help Others Foundation”? Mostly because he doesn’t want to be anonymous. He wants the credit. Stark, in a fictional sense, is doing the same with his appropriately named “Stark Expo.”

And so I found myself sympathetic to Ivan Vanko, a little bit. Partnered with Tony’s father Howard Stark, Ivan Vanko’s father Anton Vanko had developed the first arc reactor, now famously strapped into Iron Man’s chest. Realizing the awesome, world-changing potential of the technology, Vanko had wanted to sell it, and make a fortune. Stark, on the other hand, wanted to give it away to make the world a better place. Howard Stark has Vanko deported to Russia, where he suffers an embittered fate. Then Stark goes on to build a weapons empire inherited by Tony, and the arc reactor technology, for some reason, never goes public beyond the one powering the Stark Industries factory.

TAE scratches his head. Why wasn’t the arc reactor technology taken public, like Howard Stark wanted? If Howard Stark wanted to make the world a better place, why did he build a weapons conglomerate? And what kind of funding did Stark use to build his empire? Probably Defense funding.

And if Anton Vanko had gotten his wish, and he and Stark had sold the arc reactor technology for millions, would he have then used that money to build a charitable empire? Would his son have spent his life as a weapons manufacturer, who then about-faced and tried to build a legacy of good deeds? “That should be you,” Anton Vanko says to his son at the beginning of the movie as Stark emcee’s his Expo on the television. Does Vanko mean his son should be the wealthy playboy…or the weapons conglomerate turned benefactor?

And so a conundrum appears here that gives TAE pause: can you not effect real change for the better in the world without wealth to back you? Certainly, Christianity teaches us that your wealth and the amount of good you do in the world is irrelevant as long as you spend your life in the selfless service of others. In fact, Jesus directly states that wealth is a hindrance to good acts. But pound for pound, someone who wanted to do good…for as many people as possible…needs a lot of money under them.

Readers of this blog know that my life goal is to develop technologies that will change the world for the better, much like Dean Kamen is attempting. But Kamen, like Gates, like Elon Musk, and like Stark…all have started down their beneficence roads armed with a fortune acquired from private capital. Start improving the world with an empire of money to back you, it seems, and you end up with a legacy like Edison. Try to improve the world without capital, and you end up like Tesla.

And so the question I begin to ask myself is this: do I build the weapons empire and let my children have the luxury of being the world-improvers? Though I dream of being like Tony Stark…am I in reality actually more like Howard Stark?

Anyway…Iron Man 2 was good.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

The Iron Man Costume

Posted on 06:36 by hony
Built using an Objet Eden printer.

Did I mention I have one of these at work, not 15 feet from my cube? Yes. I do.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 11 May 2010

Space Exploration

Posted on 09:52 by hony
If we assumed humanity was a viral infection of the planet Earth, and assumed that Earth's increasing ecological toxicity was in fact an immune response to our presence (global warming is Earth's fever), could we rethink space exploration and colonization thusly?

TAE thinks this is a pretty fair way to plan extraterrestrial colonization. Viruses spread from person to person by causing themselves to be expelled, either in fluids or in the air (basically still in fluids), which is then put into contact with other living creatures. If those living creatures are the right species, the virus can take hold in the new host.

The solution, of course, is to spew small seed groups of humans at random into space. Those humans, of course, are simply fertilized embryoes, who will be raised by robots once a fertile planet is reached. Although a massive 99.9997% of those humans will never see the light of an extraterrestrial day, a tiny handful will, and our species will have found a new host planet.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Surprise of the Century

Posted on 09:48 by hony
Halliburton was involved in the safety casing of the exploded oil pumping station now sitting at the bottom of the Gulf.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Fringe Benefits of My Job

Posted on 09:37 by hony
Most of my readers know that I am not a full-time blogger. To the rest of you, it should be obvious from the mediocre quality of my posts!
What I do full time is engineer. I work for a non-profit research institute and we build some pretty kick-ass stuff.

Being a non-profit, we don't exactly get yearly bonuses. That's fine though, because we have a huge, sometimes-bottomless-seeming coffer of overhead money we can politely ask our bosses to spend on our behalf. I might not get a $300 check in the mail for my hard work...but when I suggested to my boss that our research efforts might be better served if we spent $300 and bought this book, this book, and this book...he had cleared me to buy them on overhead before I had finished the sentence.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Monday, 10 May 2010

Iron Man vs. Zombies

Posted on 09:45 by hony

Nothing tweaks my ire more than people who expect The Godfather Part II every time they go to a sequel. And then they come home and write some incredibly snobbish drivel about how they were so disappointed that they, unlike the majority of the rest of America, did not find the movie entertaining.
So today we have this absurd argument from Ross Douthat that all these actors in the 70's were amazing (and never did a bad film), all these directors in the 70's did brilliant work (and never did a bad film), and all these movies in the 70's were epic blockbusters that the world can barely fathom even to this day (and never once was there a bad film)...and current blockbusters don't come up to that par.

Nothing like revisionist history.

What Ross is forgetting, up on his "I demand the greatest show on Earth every time I grace a theater" horse is that the movie industry's entire point is to entertain us while making lots and lots of money. Not to be an artist venue.
If Americans are entertained by two large men in Speedos pounding each other around in a fenced cage, and the UFC makes tons of money because of it...well, I keep waiting for someone who has grown up watching Muhammad Ali make an argument that ultimate fighting is not what boxing was in the 70's, and be damned if it ever will be.
Look, Ross, if you wanted to see amazing directors doing amazing work, go to the Sundance Film Festival. Don't go to a summer blockbuster. The purpose point is different.

Then you get guys like Matt Seitz at Salon arguing that superhero movies suck because they aren't groundbreaking enough.

But wait, Seitz beats me to the punchline:
Critics who don't like a particular superhero film -- any superhero film -- are apt to be simultaneously blasted in online comments threads as aesthetic turistas ill-equipped to judge the work's true depth and snooty killjoys who expect too much and need to lighten the hell up.
Matt, you need to lighten the hell up. Just because you think you can waylay others from countering you just by mentioning what their likely arguments will be does not thereby render those argements invalid!

His basic argument, further on, is that a parallel genre, zombie movies, has so much more depth and so many more really good movies than the superhero genre. Perhaps that is true. But what he leaves out of his discussion of movie quality is how effectively either genre succeeds at its purpose. What is the purpose of a zombie movie? True hardcore aficionados would suggest that zombies are an argument against the nameless hordes of a welfare state, and vampires are an argument against the elites. But in the modern era (and by modern era I mean the era in which 28 Days Later was filmed) the primary purpose of a zombie movie is to scare the hell out of the audience. Or gross them out. Or probably both. Certainly, the zombie genre's purpose is not to make people walk out of the theater and go "that movie really made me rethink some things" or "as Elizabeth Banks was running from those zombies she really put on a great acting performance". In fact, the lack of big actors should tell us something about zombie movies; namely that no one goes into the project expecting an Oscar. And almost every zombie movie ends the same way: open-ended, tragic ending. The all build to the point where you think the infection has been contained...and then either right before the credits or right after, you see a zombie/virus/monster escape containment.

Conversely, the superhero movie tries to excite the audience, and rather than feeding on their childhood fears, instead it attempts to mine every childish fantasy possible. In that way, Iron Man 2 succeeds admirably. What is more fantastic (and entertaining) than being a billionaire genius with a suit that gives you (a normally ordinary little boy) super powers? The only thing better would be if it happened before you had to bother with growing up, right?
When we were kids, we were scared of the dark, of strangers, of the unknown, of lots of things. So during the daytime we pretended to be superheroes. Zombie movies that succeed are ones that find those vague insecurities we still have and exploit them. This entertains us. Superhero movies are no different, except for the imagined scenarios plumbed from the thickness of our brains are much more pleasant.

If you look at superhero movies, and simply say "what was the purpose of this movie?" The answer almost exclusively would be "to entertain me." In this way, superhero movies continue to be wildly successful, and despite Ross' protests, the 70's could never have hosted good superhero movies; there were no good special effects that could sufficiently capture our childhood imaginations on film!

Seitz leaves one thing out, in his quest to prove zombies beat superheroes: for every bad superhero movie there are at least ten bad zombie movies. Compare this list of every superhero movie ever made to this list of every zombie movie ever made. Do we really want to compare these genres?
And how can someone judge the superhero genre without mentioning V for Vendetta, one of the smartest movies made in the last 15 years? And why does Seitz ignore Hellboy, a brilliant, dark movie that pushed for character development over special effects? Why doesn't Seitz mention M. Night Shyamalan's wonderful masterpiece, Unbreakable? And if he loves when movies pay homage to their roots, he certainly should have mentioned Disney's 1991 serial piece The Rocketeer, which featured a deliciously evil Timothy Dalton and a young woman named Jennifer Connelly who gave a performance so hot that some movie theaters actually found burn marks on their screens.
Sure, its easy to go after the larger, more advertised pictures in the superhero genre as campy and formulaic. But just like the zombie genre, the superhero genre has a lot of meat below the surface that deserves its due credit.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

So bad its...good really, really bad.

Posted on 06:31 by hony
How could a tagline like this produce a bad movie...
Ali (Christina Aguilera) is a small-town girl with a big voice who escapes hardship and an uncertain future to follow her dreams to Los Angeles. After stumbling upon The Burlesque Lounge, a majestic but ailing theater that is home to an inspired musical revue, Ali lands a job as a cocktail waitress from Tess (Cher), the club’s proprietor and headliner. Burlesque’s outrageous costumes and bold choreography enrapture the young ingenue, who vows to perform there one day.

Soon enough, Ali builds a friendship with a featured dancer (Julianne Hough), finds an enemy in a troubled, jealous performer (Kristen Bell), and garners the affection of a bartender and fellow musician (Cam Gigandet). With the help of a sharp-witted stage manager (Stanley Tucci) and gender-bending host (Alan Cumming), Ali makes her way from the bar to the stage. Her spectacular voice restores The Burlesque Lounge to its former glory, though not before a charismatic entrepreneur (Eric Dane) arrives with an enticing proposal.
Such an original script definitely deserves my movie patronage!


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 6 May 2010

Posted on 10:46 by hony
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go drool at a movie screen for a few days.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Antibiotics, Pesticides, and the War on Terror?

Posted on 05:32 by hony
It seems to me that a weird paradox has emerged in science, where people are now advocating that less is more when it comes to antibiotics and pesticides. Carl Zimmer issues this worrying blog post in Discover magazine about rapid methods weeds are developing to circumvent death-by-Roundup.
For a while, it seemed as if glyphosate would avoid Melander’s iron rule. Monsanto scientists ran tests that showed no evidence of resistance. Glyphosate seemed to strike at such an essential part of plant biology that plants could not evolve a defense. But after glyphosate-resistant crops had a few years to grow, farmers began to notice horseweed and morning glory and other weeds encroaching once more into their fields. Farmers in Georgia had to cut down fields of cotton rather than harvest them because of infestations of Palmer amaranth.

What’s striking is how many different ways weeds have found to overcome the chemical. Scientists had thought that Roundup was invincible in part because the enzyme it attacks is pretty much the same in all plants. That uniformity suggests that plants can’t tolerate mutations to it; mutations must change its shape so that it doesn’t work and the plant dies. But it turns out that many populations of ryegrass and goosegrass have independently stumbled across one mutation that can change a single amino acid in the enzyme. The plant can still survive with this altered enzyme. And Roundup has a hard time attacking it thanks to its different shape.
What I find interesting is how this seems just like worrying documentation of antibiotic resistance in bacteria. It seems every time I turn on the TV I see news of antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis, or staph, and how more and more diseases need stronger and stronger antibiotics...the old guard has failed.

Many are calling for organic farming, suggesting that diligence and hard work can produce farms as productive as farms gassed with massive doses of Roundup (these are mostly people who have not worked on a farm). Many (who have never had to take care of a child with severe fever) also call for reduction in antibiotic use, suggesting that people should just "tough it out" when they get a non-lethal infection (see here and here). The argument, as Melander put it over 100 years ago, is that by letting the some of pesticide-susceptible bugs live, some of the time, then they spread their genes out and pesticides work better.

It's funny, really. In the War on Weeds, and the War on Bacteria, more and more people think that we should just let the weeds win. Let the bacteria win. Unless, you know, things get really bad. Then we should step in with our antibiotics and herbicides and show 'em who's boss.
But somehow this doesn't really play out when it comes to terrorism. You just don't see people on TV saying "the smarter we get in the War on Terror, the smarter the terrorists get. We should give up the fight and let as many terrorists come to our country as want to. We'll deal with the really dangerous terrorists...but let most of the low-key, Times Square bombing-level terrorists do their thing. They really aren't a threat to the majority of America."
For some reason, the "surrender to win" thing doesn't really work in this case.

But then again, it doesn't work with antibiotics either. Did you know that in Africa, places without clean water have an appalling literacy rate below 25%? Give those areas clean water, and studies show the literacy rate jumps above 90%. Why? Because kids aren't missing school with water-borne illnesses.
The same is true for antibiotics. How many kids would miss school, even here in America, if they were down with a 100+ fever that lasted weeks? How far behind would kids be if they missed a month of school with whooping cough? Maybe only a few people would die if they didn't get their antibiotics...but our society would inevitably fall behind.
And could you afford to miss two weeks of work due to your upper respiratory infection? Do you have that luxury? Most don't, and so they need antibiotics so they can bounce back in just a few days.
No, we just can't put down the War on Germs. Surrender here does not mean victory, it means setbacks, suffering, and slowdown. Instead of lamenting bacterial resistance, we should be ever more aggressively searching for new and stronger medicines.

Essentially the same is true for herbicides. Can you really look a farmer in the face and tell him that he should only produce 2/3 of his potential crop because he shouldn't use herbicides? If I told you that I wanted you to work at your job just as hard (or harder, given you'd have to go back to walking beanfields), but from now on you only got paid a fraction of your former wage...would you be upset? Would you tell me to screw off?
How can anyone honestly tell farmers to intentionally be less productive? America's very foundation was built on the concept that innovation allowed more and more productivity from farms...which allowed more and more people to move to the cities and innovate.
No, less herbicide (and subsequently less crop) is no answer to the War on Weeds. Smarter herbicides, smarter crop plants is the better answer. The same is true for pesticides. Do you think that if farmers stop using Bt corn...the corn borer will agree to stop eating corn?

It just seems to me that although humans and evolution seem locked in an eternal arms race, laying down our weapons would not solve the problem. Nature does not negotiate, Nature does not sign treaties. And so we cannot blink first.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 5 May 2010

Dear Kansas Senate

Posted on 05:40 by hony
Dear Kansas Senate,

It is hard enough out there right now. Really. I got laid off last year, for Christ's sake. My family scrapes by now, choked to the hilt with debt and student loan payments. My retirement funds are just now starting to recover from the recession, my wife is still trying to get through college, and my daughter, poor thing, has to wear used clothes we buy at garage sales.

And now you want to make it harder for me to be fat.

It's not enough that you take away my right to have my car's suspension be destroyed with your constant and diligent road maintenance, not enough that you provide and maintain gorgeous public lands upon which I successfully caught catfish two weekends ago, not enough you forced me to endure top-notch schools...now you want to incentivize healthiness too? You bastards.

This is America! In America we're supposed to be rotund, fat behemoths! We need those sugary, death-hastening, acidic drinks in order to stay awake and work the long, stressful hours required to make enough money to buy all the fast-food we eat! You can't take that away from us!

Everyone knows that when government increased the tax on cigarettes, the number of smokers went down. Increasing the tax more, decreased the number of smokers more. It's science. Same thing is true for alcohol. But I know deep down that that wouldn't apply here!

Look, we know you are arguing that you are doing this to shore up the state deficit. And I know that the deficit was caused by the recession. And I know the recession was mostly not the fault of Kansans. But you're politicians! Don't we pay you to magically fix the budget every year despite changes in the taxes levied? Doesn't part of that assume you will always be able to lower taxes, no matter what the national fiscal situation is?

And just because the $90 million dollars you would raise from the soda tax would save thousands of government jobs, keep many schools open, and help Kansans statewide, what's more important than any of that crap is saving the jobs of the three to five hundred Coke and Pepsi employees who would be laid off as a result of this tax! You just can't do that to good people. To hell with the hundreds of teachers that would be laid off, the hundreds of road workers that would be laid off, and the multitude of others that would be laid off as a result of a state deficit.

Look, if you want to tax something, tax lipstick. You could make a lot of tax revenue because lots of people use it. But, since I don't personally use it, I don't really care much if you tax it.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 4 May 2010

Quote for the Day

Posted on 06:10 by hony
"It's just like if I fed you a nutritionally incomplete diet of Hershey chocolate bars and then stressed you by loading your hive on a semi-truck and hauling your 3,000 miles and unloading you and putting you in contact with herbicides and pesticides, it would be like my spraying your face with Raid every day. Then if you have a big blood-sucking mite on you, you’re going to get sick!"

-Jerry Hayes, Florida Dept. of Agriculture, in reference to why the Honeybees are disappearing.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Monday, 3 May 2010

Writing About Wine

Posted on 11:45 by hony
Impossible to do without sounding like a total snob/douchebag.
My own favorite form of self-experimentation has to do with wine. It's pretty clear that we expect more expensive wines to taste better. (This expectation is visible in an fMRI machine.) But it's also clear that, at least for amateurs, this expectation is mostly false: when you give people bottles of wine without any price information, there is no correlation between the cost of the wine and its subjective ratings. A $8 bottle is just as enjoyable as an $80 one.

Every few months, I conduct a blind taste test. (In general, I think the most useful forms of self-tracking will be the tracking of our innate biases.) I trek to Costco and my local wine store and pick up several bottles at various price points. The wines are poured into cheap decanters. And then I taste the wines over the course of a lazy afternoon, being sure to eat lots of crackers in between. I smell, swirl, sip and swallow. (I like my wine too much to spit it out.) I'm no Robert Parker, but I take a few notes and render my judgement. What have I discovered? Mostly I've learned that my ratings are woefully inconsistent. The same $18 pinot that I loved last year might get low marks at a later date. A Tuscan blend that seemed so generic now seems like it would be a perfect foil for pasta with tomatoes.
Well, it must be horrible to subject oneself to the humiliation of buying wines and not knowing expensive from cheap. Probably similar to the humiliation one feels when misidentifying a Lamborghini Countach as a Lamborghini Diablo. Or mistaking the jet you are flying is as a Gulfstream III when in fact it is a Gulfstream V.
Perhaps Jonah could spare himself from humiliation and just drink Yellow Tail like the rest of us.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Where Does Iron Man Get His Strength?

Posted on 07:01 by hony
Last week I outlined the four technologies that a high school student entering college could focus on in terms of their career path if they wanted to be part of a future in which Iron Man was feasible.
Of those four, we've covered power supplies and control systems. Today I want to focus on the 700 lb. gorilla in the room: the artificial muscle.

As a mechanical engineer by training and a biomechanist by preference, I've become intimately aware just how incredibly well-designed skeletal muscle is. Frankly, if it didn't work so well, why has the entire animal kingdom adopted it as a locomotive method? Muscle, as it turns out, is elegant in its complexity of construction while being simple in its purpose: to pull as hard as possible. Most people don't realize just how strong muscle is; during your hardest muscle flex, only about a third of your muscle fibers are firing at any given moment...much more than that and your muscles would literally rip themselves off your bones. Muscles come in a wide variety, from quickly-tiring fast-twitch to endurance slow-twitch. They, at some point in history, captured some bacterial precursor to mitochondria and enslaved them into their own built-in energy factories.

A quick math lesson: typing 120 words a minute, with an average of 6 letters per word, takes about 2,500 individual muscle actions a minute. And that's just to sit there and type!

But the real marvel of muscle is how energy dense it is. Muscle can produce about 0.35 MPa of stress, roughly 50 psi for us Americans. So a muscle with a one inch diameter can pull with about 40 lbs of force. Want to be stronger? Add muscle thickness.

Creating an artificial version of muscle, however, has been thwarting scientists and engineers for decades. Mechanical actuators, driven by motor/gear sets are promising, especially as brushless permanent magnet motors get smaller and stronger. But those assemblies trade speed for strength. Pneumatic actuators work really well at the same strength as muscle, but suffer from control issues due to the compressibility of air. Futuristic materials like "electroactive polymers" and "shape memory alloys" require high voltage, high temperature, or suffer from short lifespans.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory seems to have thrown their weight behind "mesofluidics" which is their term for hydraulic pistons the size of human muscles. They report hydraulic systems that can basically mimic human muscle in energy density in this paper. The researchers suggest the artificial hand could be used for telerobotic disassembly of roadside bombs in war areas.

TAE suggests a more likely use for these systems: powered exoskeletons. Here's two reasons why it would be better for exoskeletons: auxiliary systems and danger.
Unlike a standalone mechanical servo actuator, a hydraulic piston requires valving, pumps, and a motor assembly. These are all heavy. The ORNL team waxes over the fact that their prosthetic hand will require these systems, instead focusing on how light the actual hand it. Of course, if any artificial muscle technology could have auxiliary systems of unknown weight elsewhere, those AMT's would look amazing too!
But imagine instead, the mesofluidic actuators used as a powered exoskeleton...giving the user 3-5 times their normal strength, and the system would carry its power generator, pump, reservoir, filter, valving, and control systems on itself somewhere, unloading it from the user. This is essentially what the SARCOS/Raytheon exoskeleton intends to do; the exoskeleton is a hydraulic system that carries the weight of the auxiliary hydraulic components on its back.
The second problem with hydraulic actuation, as opposed to some of the other actuation technologies, is danger. Personally, I don't know that I want to have a mechanical component intimately attached to my body that has 3,000 psi compressed parts in it. The last time I got in the way of a power-washer (at ~200 psi), I found the sensation a little unpleasant. I can't imagine getting blasted at 15X that intensity.
Once again, though, I turn to exoskeletons. It would be a relatively simple process to plate the exoskeleton wearer with light plastic or carbon fiber that would protect that soldier/user from exposure to failed hydraulic components. Those protective plates, however, are unsuitable for an 80-year-old who lost his hand in the war.

What ORNL and SARCOS have hit on here is that really, if we are honest with ourselves, hydraulic pistons are the only things capable of producing the power, pound for pound, that muscle does.

That's not to say Tony Stark uses hydraulics in his Iron Man armor. Given that he invented a new power source for it, invented a new control system technology, and is responsible for inventing all the weapons in his company and on the suit...it wouldn't be a leap to assume he invented a novel artificial muscle too.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday, 30 April 2010

Wikipedia Article of the Day

Posted on 11:31 by hony
Theremin:
The theremin was originally the product of Russian government-sponsored research into proximity sensors. The instrument was invented by a young Russian physicist named Lev Sergeivich Termen (known in the West as Léon Theremin) in October 1920[3] after the outbreak of the Russian civil war. After positive reviews at Moscow electronics conferences, Theremin demonstrated the device to Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin. Lenin was so impressed with the device that he began taking lessons in playing it,[4] commissioned six hundred of the instruments for distribution throughout the Soviet Union, and sent Theremin on a trip around the world to demonstrate the latest Soviet technology and the invention of electronic music.
Fantastic video of its use here.
_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday Poetry Burst

Posted on 05:59 by hony
In the wake of yesterdays lamentation over the environment I thought this one appropriate.
The Storm Cone, by Rudyard Kipling, 1932


This is the midnight-let no star
Delude us-dawn is very far.
This is the tempest long foretold-
Slow to make head but sure to hold

Stand by! The lull 'twixt blast and blast
Signals the storm is near, not past;
And worse than present jeopardy
May our forlorn to-morrow be.

If we have cleared the expectant reef,
Let no man look for his relief.
Only the darkness hides the shape
Of further peril to escape.

It is decreed that we abide
The weight of gale against the tide
And those huge waves the outer main
Sends in to set us back again.

They fall and whelm. We strain to hear
The pulses of her labouring gear,
Till the deep throb beneath us proves,
After each shudder and check, she moves!

She moves, with all save purpose lost,
To make her offing from the coast;
But, till she fetches open sea,
Let no man deem that he is free!


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 29 April 2010

Iron Man's New Power Supply

Posted on 14:31 by hony
From New Scientist:
Tony's big problem is to cure the ache in his heart. Palladium, we can surmise, drives a cold-fusion nuclear reactor that Tony has miniaturized into the arc reactor, but the radioactive palladium is killing him. The only solution is to make a hypothetical element from a structure suggested by his late father.

Making a new element is not as fantastical as it might sound. New Scientist readers will know that the periodic table is a work in progress, with a new element - Copernicum, atomic number 112 - officially finding its place there last year. A string of other new elements are currently being considered.

Like real-life element forgers, Tony needs some hard-core tech. He assembles what appears to be a particle accelerator and fires a beam of high speed atoms (blue in this case), at a target: presumably two existing elements.

OK, it is not the LHC snaking around his spacious lab, nor is it a "table-top particle accelerator", in which laser beams accelerate electrons with a plasma. But whatever it is, it's impressive.

The result is almost immediate: a triangular-shaped sample of the element, which seems completely stable, and glows white. "Congratulations, you have created a new element," announces a robotic voice. "That was easy," says Tony.
Readers of this blog will remember that I speculated that the movie would feature Tony dealing with his immune system rejecting the arc reactor, just like in the comics. Apparently I was right.
This article implies that he develops a new element that is less poisonous than Palladium.

Fortunately for you, dear readers, I took chemistry. Unfortunately for viewers of Iron Man 2, Jon Favreau and Justin Theroux did not. The clear solution to the palladium poisoning issue would be to use titanium...which not only is lighter and stronger than palladium, but also has its hydrogen storage capabilities...AND IS COMPLETELY BIOCOMPATIBLE!

(Aside: Radioactive palladium fueling a cold fusion reactor? Please. Obviously he's used the palladium as a tritium storage bed and figured out a way to reach 900X concentration of tritium, and uses the "arc" to excite and increase radioactive decay of the tritium, yielding beta particles. Obviously.)


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Are We Dammed?

Posted on 06:23 by hony
Brazil, apparently, has chosen intermittent hydroelectric power over environment and native culture. They have cleared the way for the third largest dam in the world to be built along the Amazon river.
The reason I say "intermittent" power is because the dam will only operate at 100% capacity during the monsoon season, which lasts three months. During the dry season, it is expected the dam will only produce about 10% of monsoon season power.
Blah blah blah wipe out fish populations, increase malaria in standing water areas, wipe out rain forest, displace native peoples, blah blah blah.

You know, at some point, the human race will have effectively destroyed this planet. Scientists, politicians, and annoying bloggers like me argue when that point will happen, but virtually all human beings acknowledge that eventually we will succeed in our efforts to irrevocably damage the global ecosystem beyond simple, autonomous repair. Some, like Rush Limbaugh, see the global climate apocalypse as asymptotically distant, though not impossible. Most conservatives see it as unlikely in their lifetimes. Liberals tend to implore us to change our ways, because the climate needs our help, sooner rather than later, but even they cannot irrefutably nail down the PoNR for Earth's climate.

And then you have that lunatic fringe. That small group of people who don't claim, but rather simply accept, that our race has passed the point where the climate is fixable. I try not to fall into this group. I really do.

And then this happens. And I really, really wonder if we've blown it.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Simply Amazing

Posted on 06:01 by hony
E.J. Becker was talking to Liz Cheney on the radio this morning on my way to work:


E.J.: What do you make of all these polls that show America having a high approval rating for President Obama and actually saying that Americans trust Democrats on big issues more than Republicans?

Liz: All those polls are outliers, obviously.

Oh, obviously.
_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 28 April 2010

Creationists

Posted on 13:15 by hony
Using carbon dating to prove the Earth is billions of years old is not okay.
Using carbon dating to prove dinosaurs and humans did no coexist is not okay.

But using carbon dating to prove some wood was part of Noah's Ark is A-O-K!

Selectively applying science to prove science wrong is the epitome of hypocrisy.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

O. M. G.

Posted on 10:42 by hony
Greatest Web Tool Ever?

Here's a sample result.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Our Own Worst Enemy

Posted on 07:22 by hony
Continuing my Iron Man themed posts as I count down the days to the movie premiere of Iron Man 2 this next friday, May 7th, I want to touch on a major issue that affects technology in general, and science-fiction movies in specific: villain's rise because of the hero.

In the first Iron Man movie, Tony Stark's life is a playboy joyride until he has his "come to Jesus" moment and decides to build the Iron Man armor. Lo and behold, because he starts using the armor to thwart Obadiah Stane, Stane builds his own armor and they have an Iron Man/Iron Monger duel at the climax of the movie. What if Tony hadn't built his first armor?
Or similarly, Stark starts his "Mk. I" armor by building the "arc reactor" that protects his heart as well as powers his suits. What if, upon escaping from Afghanistan, he had returned home and had surgery to remove the metal shards in his heart? He could then have removed the arc reactor and destroyed it. Or at least hidden it where Obie couldn't have used it to power the Iron Monger suit.
I am concerned a major flaw in the upcoming Iron Man 2 movie will be that all of Tony's nemeses will derive from things he did/does, rather than simply existing. I'm afraid that Mickey Rourke's Whiplash will be motivated by some anger he holds towards Stark, and be seeking revenge. I am concerned that Justin Hammer will build the Iron Bots because he uses industrial espionage of some sort to obtain basic plans for the old Mk. I-III suits Tony proudly displays in his lab.

Back in the real world, isn't this a pretty common theme as well? The government invents and develops the internet, then upon releasing it to the public becomes enmeshed in an eternal battle against hackers who use that very internet to try to obtain government information or harm government agencies/individuals? Or consider the modern automobile, that has single-handedly changed the way we commute, travel, and live...while also introducing a concepts like vehicular homocide, drunk-driving, and greenhouse gas emissions. Or consider the gun. Without the gun, would JFK still be alive? Martin? Bobby? And how many soldiers, friend or foe, have died because of guns? But then again, how many people have protected themselves with guns? How many frontiersman fed their families during harsh winters via guns?

The cynical truth is that technological utopia is an illusion. As long as character flaws continue to exist in humans (hint: they have existed since our species emerged), technology that becomes available - no matter how altruistic its original purpose - will be inescapably maligned by someone and give that technology a bad name.

So we must look to the future, and try to anticipate exactly how emerging technologies could be corrupted. I harp on and on about autonomous cars being the safest future imaginable...but could a malicious individual hack my car, and turn it into a high-speed steel projectile? Could a malicious person hack their own car, giving themselves emergency vehicle priority so they could zoom through traffic...thereby snarling traffic all around them? I often suggest fusion power is the future for Earth-based humanity's energy needs. But could fusion be bent to a dictator's will? Could a terrorist state circumvent safety protocols, overloading a fusion reactor and holding the world hostage?
Certainly these events are unlikely. But if 20 years ago I'd told you that "a hacker will break into the former Alaska governor's yahoo email account and obtain evidence that the former governor had used that account for official government business, and the former governor will be subpoenaed and testify about it" I'd have been laughed at. Yet here we stand, with elected officials and hackers alike illegally abusing the very technology we once thought would set us free.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 27 April 2010

Feasibility of Iron Man's Suit

Posted on 10:41 by hony
There are bound to be millions of high school juniors and seniors going next weekend to see Iron Man 2. Of those, several thousand surely have not decided what their academic major will be when they enter college. Of these, a small number will see the movie and go "I'd like to build the Iron Man suit."
To you, tiny minority, I write this post. Now, I will be the first to tell you that it is very unlikely you, alone in your basement machine shop where you rebuild cars, will be able to build the single most technologically advanced piece of hardware in human history. But you certainly can make an impact in the development of that hardware. And if you place yourself correctly, you can be on the team that builds it.

There are four key things missing from the world of science and technology that are really required before Iron Man's suit can be reality.

1. Power Supply It is no coincidence that the development of Iron Man's suit begins with a power supply. Tony Stark (or rather Jon Favreau's engineering advisory team) made it patently clear that super strength requires a lot of energy. The engineering calculations for how much power needed aren't impossible to create, but currently that much power is! At least in a donut shaped, chest mounted device. Go into electrical engineering, physics, mechanical engineering, plasma research, or battery engineering and build Iron Man's arc reactor. Or something better.

2. Linear Actuator/Artificial Muscle Where exactly, does Iron Man's suit get its strength? The comics waste no time explaining it, probably because comic book writers/artists are not scientists. But the truth is a powered exoskeleton will need some kind of actuators to give it strength. Raytheon's suit uses hydraulics. Other suits use similar technologies including pneumatics or mechanical linear actuators. Electro-active Polymer Muscle (EPAM) and other artificial muscle technologies are still in fledgeling phases, and their suitability is questionable considering they need hundreds to thousands of volts to operate.
No, what we really need is for you to go into materials science or chemical engineering and develop a true artificial muscle. Normal human muscle has a strength of approximately 0.35 megapascals, so you need to invent artificial muscle with the same (or preferably greater) energy density. Want to really impress me? Go to school and learn how to make artificial muscle that has an energy density linearly correlated to current passing through it. And it generates little or no heat.

3. Control System Somehow, Tony Stark controls his armor. In the comics he uses direct neural linking, or the armor becomes part of him. In the first movie, they are rather ambiguous about how that is accomplished. My own research is on tracking eye gaze, and using that in combination with custom blink algorithms. Also, I humbly submit that voice recognition would be convenient. You could always just raise the faceplate if you wanted to talk to anyone other than the suit.
In any case, software engineers, neurobiologists, and electrical engineers need to get busy developing a breakthrough way for a human to interact with a machine. Or as I like to say, "we just need the drivers to make human software talk in 1's and 0's."

4. Weapons In the comics, Iron Man has a blistering array of sweet, powerful weapons. In the movie they mostly focus on his repulsors in his hands as weapons. So the long and short of it is: invent repulsors for your exoskeleton to fight with.

That's it, really. A blending of all four of those, toss in flight capability, and you have your own Iron Man armor. That is, if I don't beat you there.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Powered Exoskeleton Control Systems

Posted on 09:27 by hony
With Iron Man 2 only days away, at work we engineers are buzzing with our own belief-sets about the feasibility of technical aspects of the Iron Man movies. For example, most of us agree that Whiplash's ability to cut through cars with electrified whips is "impossible" whereas Iron Man's palm-mounted repulser weaponry is merely "implausible."

One topic about which we cannot build a consensus is the control mechanism by which Iron Man controls his suit. Most of us agree that it is implied in the movies that direct neural interfacing with Tony Stark's brain is the only plausible way that he is controlling the suit, as verbal commands are nearly absent, and since his hands and feet are busy fighting/flying, he must be just "thinking" commands that are somehow picked up by the suit.

Direct thought reading, through EEG or various other technologies remains technology about which I am highly dubious. I have proposed that eye-gaze tracking systems could basically control the suit, given a HUD and various pre-trained protocols.
Reading thoughts though, to me, is unlikely for the following reason: you can't accurately determine what the fish population in a pond if you simply stand at the edge of it and see what swims by.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Stephen Hawking Fears A Romulan Invasion Fleet

Posted on 05:57 by hony
Hawking assumes that visiting intelligent life would be malicious, bent on stealing our resources or simply killing us. I don't necessarily agree with that. My belief is that any alien race sufficiently advanced to develop interstellar propulsion must have overcome genetic and cultural propensities for violence.

He makes a good point though, and I find it refreshing to hear from a thinker:
"If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans," he said.

What Hawking is suggesting here is that any violent confrontation between us and visiting aliens will be fairly lopsided. But what isn't clearly stated here is the old saying "Columbus brought smallpox, and took home syphilis."
Face-to-face interaction with an alien race would almost certainly kill us, and them. This was alluded to over 100 years ago when H.G. Wells wrote in War of the Worlds that all-powerful aliens reach Earth bent on take-over, only to be completely annihilated by the bacteria and virii we native species have found innocuous for millenia.

So Hawking is right. Shaking hands with aliens would probably mean our doom.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Monday, 26 April 2010

Musing on the External Darkness

Posted on 07:52 by hony
Saturday morning I rose at a breathtaking 3:15 AM to go catfishing. It turns out catfish are as nocturnal as a newborn baby, and are best caught when you'd rather be sleeping. I headed out to a new spot, a put-in on the Kansas River just west of Lenexa. When I arrived, I was alone in the parking lot. The boat ramp was silent. Below me and to the east, I could detect the faint gurgling of Cedar Creek. I grabbed my fishing gear, my new, 90 lumen LED flashlight (which basically turns night into a surreal, narrow spectrum of day), and off I went. I walked down to the point, and set up shop. I got both rods out pretty quickly, using HyVee's Bacon Cheddar Bratwurst as bait. I figured the combination of bacon oil and cheese oil would bring the cats in heavy and fast. Once I had my lines in the water, I clicked off my flashlight.

What greeted me can only be described as oppression. Darkness, like a blanket, surrounded me. From every direction, I could see nothing, but hear everything. The chirping of little insects, the buzz of a mosquito in my ear, a fish splashing nearby...all suddenly seemed implausibly loud, and impossibly close. My uber-flashlight had served its purpose well, but my eyes were now maladjusted to the darkness. Far off in the distance, I saw a flash...a nearby thunderstorm was moving off into the distance.

I suddenly felt very small. Very alone. It occurred to me that what I was feeling was a sense of being distinctly mortal. And it dawned on me that I don't normally feel that.

I don't think it was fear that gripped me, that cool morning. In Kansas there are literally zero native animals that can easily kill you. There aren't even tropic diseases or insect-borne pathogens to fear. No fish could come up out of the water and eat me. No flash flood could wash me away. No, in the darkness I did not feel fear. Or at least, I did not feel afraid for my life. Instead I felt weight.

I felt like the sky, the cool breeze, and the sounds of nature all around me were pressing against me, from every direction. Perhaps the ability to see not only allows to a person to see how far away something is, but also how close it is to you...if you catch my double meaning. A sound that would normally send my eyes looking a fair distance away suddenly seemed basically in my ear. The smells in the breeze, including one that smelled of something rotten, seemed to force themselves upon me.

At some point, my eyes began to adjust. I began to see faint outlines of things, like the point where Cedar Creek and the Kaw joined, the two waters swirled and mixed in a terrific impression of the cloud cover of Jupiter. At one point I caught a large fish, a blue catfish in the neighborhood of 5 lbs. He fought on in and I took a look at him, then released him. He disappeared back into the dark. After he was gone, I realized I had enjoyed the few minutes of his company, even at one point talking out loud to him, describing his features to him. Then, with my customary pat on his tail, I'd set him on his way. Once again I was alone in the darkness. Once again the weight was upon me.

I wondered to myself if this was some sort of sensation only I felt, or if this sense of the world pushing on me was something all humans felt? I imagined my ancestors, thousands upon thousands of years ago, crowding up to the fire, and actually evolving a pathway in their brains that released pleasure hormones when they sat and stared into the flames. I imagined them turning to face the darkness, and only feeling cold on their faces, only hearing noises from sources they couldn't see.
Then my mind ventured forward in time, to a city, perhaps the first human city, where people willingly paid tax money to have a man walk down the street each night and light gas lamps, so that the darkness would be eternally banished from their lives. They lit candles in their houses, they kept a merry blaze going in the hearth. All to drive out the dark and fill their lives with sweet, pleasurable light.
Then I imagined a creature in the dark, perhaps a raccoon or skunk, watching me exit my truck earlier that morning. I had interrupted its natural feeding so it watched, amused, as I fumbled in the dark like a blind infant. Watched me, as I fumbled desperately for my flashlight, then visibly relaxed upon its ignition. I can imagine the raccoon watching the erratic way I flashed my light back and forth, not knowing "what's out there", moving with a quick, purposeful stride through the blanketing dark.

As this all stewed on in my mind, and as I continued to catch and release fish I realized that the dim light of the night, the tiny amount I could utilize to see, was actually not natural. It was light pollution from the nearby city. That was a bleak moment. To know that this nearly utter darkness that pressed in on me was not actually as bad as it got.

At some point, along Nature's course for our species, we gave up the tapetum lucidum that most animal species use to see at night. The tapetum ludicum is a reflective surface that lies behind the retina in the back of an animal's eye. Essentially light comes through the eye, and whatever passes through the retina without being absorbed by rods is bounced off the tapetum lucidum back into the retina, essentially giving the eye a double shot at seeing the photons coming at it. The upside of this little piece of anatomy is good vision at night. The downside is that vision at night is blurry - the eye has two dim versions of an image and your brain must rectify those into a single, brighter image, but the time delay between the images leads to them being out of focus with one another.

I would have paid good money for a pair of tapetum lucidum, just then. Something, anything, really, to break the darkness' hold on me. Eventually I broke; I switched on my flashlight and pointed it at the end of my fishing rods, where it traveled on into the night. And with that piercing, blessed light, I began to cheer up. I began to once again forget my mortality.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday, 23 April 2010

Muhammad and Censorship

Posted on 06:43 by hony
















I'm not going to rehash a bunch of arguments other people are making about censorship and whether Comedy Central did the right thing. Instead let me just say this:

Nuke the Whales.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, 21 April 2010

The Genius Brain

Posted on 07:09 by hony
Carl Zimmer suggests that athletes are geniuses because the super-efficiency their brains exhibit during athletic activity:
Del Percio’s team has also measured brain waves of athletes and nonathletes in action. In one experiment the researchers observed pistol shooters as they fired 120 times. In another experiment Del Percio had fencers balance on one foot. In both cases the scientists arrived at the same surprising results: The athletes’ brains were quieter, which means they devoted less brain activity to these motor tasks than nonathletes did. The reason, Del Percio argues, is that the brains of athletes are more efficient, so they produce the desired result with the help of fewer neurons. Del Percio’s research suggests that the more efficient a brain, the better job it does in sports. The scientists also found that when the pistol shooters hit their target, their brains tended to be quieter than when they missed.
Zimmer goes on to describe numerous examples of athletes' brains being energetically efficient.

But it is barely touched on that this same efficiency can extend to almost any human process. I humbly submit that we engineers are absolutely sick-fast at math, and do complicated calculations in our heads with relative ease and efficiency, but art students don't. The mental processes that can be optimized do not have to be the ones that lead to physical motion. A good example would be people who do a lot of public speaking get better and better at both their oratory style as well as their ability to improv on the fly. Another example is people who become extraordinarily good at card games, or board games. The plasticity of the brain allows a person to become more efficient at whatever they focus on, given that focus is frequent and regular.

Zimmer drops a little gem at the end of his piece:
The scientists also trained another group of people on the same game, but with a twist. They put a battery on top of the head of each subject, sending a small current through the surface of the brain toward a group of neurons in the primary motor cortex. The electric stimulation allowed people to learn the game better.
Subjecting people's brains to electrical excitation during an event to make their memory stronger is not new; scientists have known for a long time that during traumatic events, like a car crash, people's observation that "time seemed to slow down" was in fact due to a huge surge of electrical activity in the brain during the event, essentially giving them photographic memory.
But what is striking here is the implications for all types of learning. By providing the brain with mild excitation, people were not only better at remembering, they were better at learning. Zimmer worries that tennis players of the future may cheat by wearing a portable electrode while she practices her serve.
But I wonder instead if the future isn't a much brighter one: people can actually learn faster, and remember what they learn better, making them more productive humans. Kids can spend less time in school, or perhaps spend the same time in school but double their total knowledge. And they remember what they learned better than they can now. Imagine people getting college degrees in less time, or getting more degrees in the same time as now. Imagine new hires learning their job skills faster, and doing them more efficiently.

Simply put, if cortical electrical stimulation makes people better learners, and gives them better memories, then I say plug me in.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, 20 April 2010

It's not my fault!

Posted on 11:37 by hony
Yeah...its grandpa's penchant for bonbons that gave me cancer, not my penchant for smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day...science has proved it!


(disclosure to my mom: TAE does not smoke 2 packs a day, promise)


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

NASA Weather Hijinx

Posted on 11:33 by hony
Look, perhaps the best reason not to build big rockets that blast huge spacecraft into space that go on amazing, daring missions, and then return and safely land back on Earth to a heroes welcome, and instead launch small rockets with cargo to the ISS where the big spacecraft are built and launched from there

IS THE FACT THAT NASA CAN'T LAND THE SHUTTLE IF A SINGLE CLOUD IS IN THE SKY


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Friday, 16 April 2010

Deep Thought on Supervolcanoes

Posted on 10:57 by hony
The volcano in Iceland has disrupted tens of thousands of flights. The volcanic ash is a health threat to hundreds of millions.

And it is a mere pimple compared to the Yellowstone Caldera. Imagine no airplane flights for a century. Imagine an ice age.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Neural Prosthetics - Featured in Comics!

Posted on 10:42 by hony
XKCD tackles the absurdity of reveling in present-day technology when tomorrow's technology sounds so much cooler:






(click image for larger version)
_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

NASA V2.0

Posted on 09:39 by hony
President Obama's speech yesterday at NASA could be described as "a little everything for everyone." He promised manned trips to Mars. He promised a bigger budget. He promised research into advanced propulsion. He promised robotic exploration of other planets. He promised new jobs. He promised old ones could be spared.

Overall though, I liked the tone of his speech. Assuming manned space missions are required, due to political wrangling and the fact that I'm simply not in charge, then developing the technologies to go to Mars while skipping return missions to the Moon makes a lot of sense. The President had this to say:
Now, I understand that some believe that we should attempt a return to the surface of the Moon first, as previously planned. But I just have to say pretty bluntly here: We’ve been there before. Buzz has been there. There’s a lot more of space to explore, and a lot more to learn when we do. So I believe it’s more important to ramp up our capabilities to reach -- and operate at -- a series of increasingly demanding targets, while advancing our technological capabilities with each step forward.
The President is imply here and elsewhere that recreating the 60's isn't really giving NASA a goal worthy of its potential. Mars, on the other hand, he finds worthy.
By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. And a landing on Mars will follow. And I expect to be around to see it.
This, along with many other Obama Administration strategies implies the following: he is committed to goals that may not come to fruition during his Presidency. This suggests a deep, understated patience, and a hard-to-ignore altruism that idealists are drawn to.

Now, while I am no fan of manned spaceflight, my basic argument against it is that current propulsion schemes are too inefficient, and that without a an advanced method of getting around the cosmos very fast, it is a waste of time and money to send astronauts up to do what robots could do much more cheaply. Obama dropped this little trinket in my lap though, and I was simply floored:
But I want to repeat -- I want to repeat this: Critical to deep space exploration will be the development of breakthrough propulsion systems and other advanced technologies. So I’m challenging NASA to break through these barriers. And we’ll give you the resources to break through these barriers. And I know you will, with ingenuity and intensity, because that’s what you’ve always done.
I dunno who told Mr. Obama to say that, whether he thought that gem up himself, Holdren directed him to do so, or one of his writers felt that way, but it is the quintessential argument I have been making (doggedly) for the last 2 years, and I felt as though a weight were lifted off my shoulders when the President tasked NASA (with promises of funding) to find faster ways of traveling to and fro in zero-G.

All in all, I liked it. I like this President, I like the way he thinks. I like that he thinks.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Deep Thought

Posted on 05:33 by hony
"Couple Blogging" will ruin blogging.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 15 April 2010

Obama's NASA Speech - The Transcript

Posted on 14:51 by hony
Can be found here. My full analysis to come.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Live-Blogging the NASA speech

Posted on 12:15 by hony
Obama: "Critical to manned spaceflight will be breakthrough propulsion systems..."

I love it.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Live-Blogging the NASA speech

Posted on 12:06 by hony
Obama just said "ramp up robotic exploration of the solar system."

I am glad I voted for this guy.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments

The New NASA

Posted on 06:09 by hony
In a bizarre twist, a liberal Democrat President is urging privatization of a government-run entity, and the Republicans are upset.

President Obama releases his new vision for NASA today in a speech at Cape Canaveral, where it is expected he will outline the following changes to NASA's current plans:
- Ferrying astronauts to the ISS shall be privatized ASAP.
- Research will continue on a large rocket to transport cargo to space.
- No moon mission planned.

Obviously, I love this. Obama wants to invest $6 billion into stimulating private spaceflight. Of course, the Old Guard is pissed, probably because this means space might become democratic. Just think of it...orbiting the Earth no longer would require a government entities' prior approval!
The old NASA stalwarts, like Chris Kraft, are understandably mad. Their entire careers were built in a world where space was dominated by the Americans, and namely the American Government.
Now at some point, the internet was declassified and pushed into the private sector. No longer could the government completely control the flow of electronic information around America! NO!!! But look what the internet has done; wikipedia, my blog, news articles about President Obama's speech about NASA all come to your eyeballs instantly, for a nominal monthly fee.
Is it so hard to believe that privatization of spaceflight will be any different? Maybe for a while - even a long while - plebs like me won't be able to afford a ticket up there, but you can bet during my daughter's lifetime, the price of admission to zero-G will fall. And that is a good thing. Because there is no engine of technological evolution ever witnessed like the mighty power of the United States Economy.

Of course, that doesn't mean I support manned exploration of space. I hold to my belief that astronauts exploring the stars is as unrealistic as sending humans to the bottom of the ocean to explore there - only the marine biologists are smart enough to accept that robots can do it better; NASA hasn't. Or more specifically, Tom Jones, Buzz Aldrin, Gene Cernan, and a cadre of old, patriotic men who don't want to see "their era" end cannot accept that manned spaceflight will be great for setting up an orbital economy, but is a pointlessly dangerous and obscenely expensive way to explore the deeper heavens.
President Obama's promise to "extend the space station's life by five years and put billions into research to develop the big new rocket ship capable of reaching a nearby asteroid, the moon or other points in space. Those stops would be stepping stones on an eventual mission to Mars" doesn't seem to me very smart, or cost-effective.
Look, President Obama, you are uber-smart (as evidenced by the fact that you regularly read this blog), and I support most of your policies simply because I know you think about them. So please, hear my suggestions and then think about your space policy.
1. Develop a heavy lifting rocket as planned, but for the sole purpose of lifting mechanical components up to the ISS, where they can be stored and assembled.
2. Privatization of astronaut ferrying is perfect, and I laud you for adopting this as policy. However, the purpose of these astronauts is to be space construction workers, not scientist/explorers.
3. Use the ISS as a workshop for building LEO (low earth orbit) to Mars spacecraft, and launch as many as possible containing any number of robotic explorers. Any astrophysicist will tell you that the energy required to reach Mars is trivial compared to the energy required to go from the ground to LEO, because once you get into space, moving around up there is relatively easy.
4. Sell the Moon. Given that the Moon is technically owned by the United States (there is no legal ownership of the Moon, but given legal precedent, it can be potentially assumed by the U.S.A. that being the first and only ones there, we effectively own it.
5. Pour as much money as possible into advanced propulsion technology.

The MSNBC article I reference implies that the new NASA plan will appeal more to a "younger generation." I suppose this is true. While I do not intend to personally insult Buzz Aldrin &Co., and owe them a debt of gratitude for their risk-taking during my parents' childhood, I must admit - I don't give a rats' ass about what they think. Buzz Aldrin has a hard time checking his email. This is my generation's turn to make the choices.

I love my grandfather. I listen to his advice, which is usually "worship God and save as much money as you can." But although he was a retirement consultant for many years, I would not ask his advice as to which internet companies deserve my investment dollars. The market is just to fast-moving, the technology has just outpaced him, and the economy is just too different now.
The same is true for these Old Guard Astronauts. I value their advice on patience and fortitude, and on America needed to explore the stars. But when they start giving specifics my eyes glaze over. They really aren't qualified, anymore.

I'm starting to that the proper allegory for NASA is a tree. The first 30 years was like a full growing season for the tree. At the end of the 80's and into the 90's, the summer got late, and the tree growth slowed. Then the last decade was the winter. Now it's Spring again, time for the tree to move up to higher heights, greater goals, and loftier aims. The old leaves need to be shaken off, and discarded forever, so that better, healthier, more productive leaves can take their place. And think of privatization of space not as the end of the tree, but rather the scattering of its seeds in the wind, ensuring that tree's legacy will blossom on forever.


_
Read More
Posted in | No comments
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Global Exctinction Continues to be a Backpage Item
    I am warning you , the world ends when the oceans collapse. Further evidence continues to mount . HEED MY WARNING! _
  • God Mania!
    This afternoon on the radio I heard a man discussing a food aid center in Haiti that had been "ready" for the earthquake. Apparent...

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2010 (147)
    • ▼  June (10)
      • On the Death of Birds
      • Friday Poetry Burst
      • Friday Pranks
      • How To Regulate Traffic
      • Terraforming Mars, Ctd
      • Quote for the Day
      • Playing with photons 10 miles away
      • Falcon 9
      • The Evolution of Empathy
      • Oil on Our Hands
    • ►  May (18)
      • On Flat Tops
      • Vacation
      • Republicans Kill Science Funding...
      • Friday Poetry Burst
      • Neil Armstrong Quotables
      • TAE's Official Iron Man 2 Review
      • The Iron Man Costume
      • Space Exploration
      • Surprise of the Century
      • Fringe Benefits of My Job
      • Iron Man vs. Zombies
      • So bad its...good really, really bad.
      • Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go drool at a m...
      • Antibiotics, Pesticides, and the War on Terror?
      • Dear Kansas Senate
      • Quote for the Day
      • Writing About Wine
      • Where Does Iron Man Get His Strength?
    • ►  April (37)
      • Wikipedia Article of the Day
      • Friday Poetry Burst
      • Iron Man's New Power Supply
      • Are We Dammed?
      • Simply Amazing
      • Creationists
      • O. M. G.
      • Our Own Worst Enemy
      • Feasibility of Iron Man's Suit
      • Powered Exoskeleton Control Systems
      • Stephen Hawking Fears A Romulan Invasion Fleet
      • Musing on the External Darkness
      • Muhammad and Censorship
      • The Genius Brain
      • It's not my fault!
      • NASA Weather Hijinx
      • Deep Thought on Supervolcanoes
      • Neural Prosthetics - Featured in Comics!
      • NASA V2.0
      • Deep Thought
      • Obama's NASA Speech - The Transcript
      • Live-Blogging the NASA speech
      • Live-Blogging the NASA speech
      • The New NASA
    • ►  March (21)
    • ►  February (31)
    • ►  January (30)
  • ►  2009 (353)
    • ►  December (36)
    • ►  November (46)
    • ►  October (45)
    • ►  September (40)
    • ►  August (44)
    • ►  July (32)
    • ►  June (32)
    • ►  May (50)
    • ►  April (28)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

hony
View my complete profile