text:
The Panda's black box: Opening up the intelligent design controversy
Nathaniel Comfort, Daniel J. Kevles, Scott F. Gilbert, Edward J. Larson, Jane Maienschein, Michael Ruse
The debate over Intelligent Design seemingly represents an extension of the fundamental conflict between creationists and evolutionists. ID proponents, drawing on texts such as Darwin's Black Box and Of Pandas and People, urge schools to "teach the controversy" in biology class alongside evolution. The scientific mainstream has reacted with fury, branding Intelligent Design as pseudoscience and its advocates as religious fanatics. But stridency misses the point, argues Nathaniel Comfort. In The Panda's Black Box, Comfort joins five other leading public intellectuals-including Daniel Kevles and Pulitzer Prize winner Edward Larson-to explain the roots of the controversy and explore the intellectual, social, and cultural factors that continue to shape it. One of the few books on the ID issue that moves beyond mere name-calling and finger-pointing, The Panda's Black Box challenges assumptions on each side of the debate and engages both the appeal and dangers of Intelligent Design. This lively collection will appeal to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of what's really at stake in the debate over evolution.
Evolutionist
Name-calling
Cultural Factors
Arts and Humanities(all)
Comfort, N., Kevles, D. J., Gilbert, S. F., Larson, E. J., Maienschein, J., & Ruse, M. (2007). The Panda's black box: Opening up the intelligent design controversy. Johns Hopkins University Press.
The Panda's black box : Opening up the intelligent design controversy. / Comfort, Nathaniel; Kevles, Daniel J.; Gilbert, Scott F.; Larson, Edward J.; Maienschein, Jane; Ruse, Michael.
Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. 165 p.
Comfort, N, Kevles, DJ, Gilbert, SF, Larson, EJ, Maienschein, J & Ruse, M 2007, The Panda's black box: Opening up the intelligent design controversy. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Comfort N, Kevles DJ, Gilbert SF, Larson EJ, Maienschein J, Ruse M. The Panda's black box: Opening up the intelligent design controversy. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. 165 p.
Comfort, Nathaniel ; Kevles, Daniel J. ; Gilbert, Scott F. ; Larson, Edward J. ; Maienschein, Jane ; Ruse, Michael. / The Panda's black box : Opening up the intelligent design controversy. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. 165 p.
@book{a2bb3ab312a443fb96ff38c1e177fb1a,
title = "The Panda's black box: Opening up the intelligent design controversy",
abstract = "The debate over Intelligent Design seemingly represents an extension of the fundamental conflict between creationists and evolutionists. ID proponents, drawing on texts such as Darwin's Black Box and Of Pandas and People, urge schools to {"}teach the controversy{"} in biology class alongside evolution. The scientific mainstream has reacted with fury, branding Intelligent Design as pseudoscience and its advocates as religious fanatics. But stridency misses the point, argues Nathaniel Comfort. In The Panda's Black Box, Comfort joins five other leading public intellectuals-including Daniel Kevles and Pulitzer Prize winner Edward Larson-to explain the roots of the controversy and explore the intellectual, social, and cultural factors that continue to shape it. One of the few books on the ID issue that moves beyond mere name-calling and finger-pointing, The Panda's Black Box challenges assumptions on each side of the debate and engages both the appeal and dangers of Intelligent Design. This lively collection will appeal to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of what's really at stake in the debate over evolution.",
author = "Nathaniel Comfort and Kevles, {Daniel J.} and Gilbert, {Scott F.} and Larson, {Edward J.} and Jane Maienschein and Michael Ruse",
publisher = "Johns Hopkins University Press",
T1 - The Panda's black box
T2 - Opening up the intelligent design controversy
AU - Comfort, Nathaniel
AU - Kevles, Daniel J.
AU - Gilbert, Scott F.
AU - Larson, Edward J.
AU - Maienschein, Jane
AU - Ruse, Michael
N2 - The debate over Intelligent Design seemingly represents an extension of the fundamental conflict between creationists and evolutionists. ID proponents, drawing on texts such as Darwin's Black Box and Of Pandas and People, urge schools to "teach the controversy" in biology class alongside evolution. The scientific mainstream has reacted with fury, branding Intelligent Design as pseudoscience and its advocates as religious fanatics. But stridency misses the point, argues Nathaniel Comfort. In The Panda's Black Box, Comfort joins five other leading public intellectuals-including Daniel Kevles and Pulitzer Prize winner Edward Larson-to explain the roots of the controversy and explore the intellectual, social, and cultural factors that continue to shape it. One of the few books on the ID issue that moves beyond mere name-calling and finger-pointing, The Panda's Black Box challenges assumptions on each side of the debate and engages both the appeal and dangers of Intelligent Design. This lively collection will appeal to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of what's really at stake in the debate over evolution.
AB - The debate over Intelligent Design seemingly represents an extension of the fundamental conflict between creationists and evolutionists. ID proponents, drawing on texts such as Darwin's Black Box and Of Pandas and People, urge schools to "teach the controversy" in biology class alongside evolution. The scientific mainstream has reacted with fury, branding Intelligent Design as pseudoscience and its advocates as religious fanatics. But stridency misses the point, argues Nathaniel Comfort. In The Panda's Black Box, Comfort joins five other leading public intellectuals-including Daniel Kevles and Pulitzer Prize winner Edward Larson-to explain the roots of the controversy and explore the intellectual, social, and cultural factors that continue to shape it. One of the few books on the ID issue that moves beyond mere name-calling and finger-pointing, The Panda's Black Box challenges assumptions on each side of the debate and engages both the appeal and dangers of Intelligent Design. This lively collection will appeal to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of what's really at stake in the debate over evolution.
BT - The Panda's black box
PB - Johns Hopkins University Press


Bringing Mars rocks to Earth should be a top priority for NASA in the coming decade, says a high-level panel of planetary scientists. It also recommended a mission to Jupiter's icy moon, Europa, thought to harbour an ocean of liquid water beneath its surface.
But if the agency cannot afford such multi-billion-dollar "flagship" missions, they should be delayed in favour of smaller missions, the panel says. The panel's recommendations are not binding, but the report is likely to strongly influence NASA's decisions.
As its name implies, the Planetary Science Decadal Survey is organised just once every 10 years by the National Academy of Sciences. It ranks the importance of missions to study planets and other objects in the solar system, excluding the sun and Earth. The report, released on Monday, covers the decade from 2013 to 2022.
It recommends that NASA make a Mars sample return mission its top priority among its large planetary science missions.
Bringing Martian rocks back to Earth would allow scientists to study them with a much wider array of instruments than can be packaged on a Martian rover. That in turn would allow scientists to better search for signs of past or present life, the report says.
Because of budget limitations, the panel recommended moving forward only with the first stage of such a sample return mission in the coming decade – a rover called Mars Astrobiology Explorer-Cacher (MAX-C) that would find and collect the samples. A second mission could later be sent to launch these samples into Mars orbit, while a third mission would bring them back to Earth. MAX-C is estimated to cost $3.5 billion but the panel hopes NASA can tweak its design to shave $1 billion off that price tag.
The panel's second-highest priority for large missions is a probe that would orbit Europa. It would assess the moon's potential for hosting life by trying to confirm the presence of an ocean and determining how far the ocean lies below the moon's icy surface. The mission, estimated to cost $4.7 billion, would also study the surface to help identify interesting landing sites for future missions.
NASA has already been studying the concept as part of a possible joint mission with the European Space Agency, which would supply an orbiter for Ganymede, another icy moon of Jupiter with a possible ocean beneath its surface.
The panel also encouraged moving forward with a small mission called the Mars Trace Gas Orbiter, which would try to determine the source of methane observed on Mars, which some scientists say could be due to life, though it could also be produced by water-rock interactions that do not involve life. NASA and the European Space Agency are already planning to launch such a mission in 2016.
How many of the large, medium, and small missions actually fly depends on NASA's uncertain future budgets. If money turns out to be really tight, the panel recommended postponing some or all of the large missions rather than eliminating the small- and medium-sized missions.


text:
Finding Lost Graves
Not being a professional cemetery worker, I don't often find myself helping people find the grave sites of their loved ones. In my present role on the Board of Directors of the Friends of Mount Moriah Cemetery (in West Philadelphia), I occasionally find myself performing this service. It's quite rewarding in a place like this, when descendants may not have visited a grave for thirty years.
The reason for people avoiding Mount Moriah for the past few decades is usually that it was not safe to be here. The weeds had overgrown the place and even in the 1960s, half of the cemetery's 300+ acres had grown into a forest. Throughout the 1970s and 80s, it apparently got worse. Visitors stayed away in droves.
Cleanup Day
But now they return regularly during the cleanup days sponsored by the Friends of Mount Moriah Cemetery. Other large organizations get involved too, Asplundh, Comcast, the City of Philadelphia, for example. Colleges send students to clean for the day as part of their Civic Engagement courses in community involvement. Drexel, LasSalle, Cheney and other local universities have sent busloads of volunteers to the cemetery. Descendants return to help clear their ancestor' graves, as well as the graves of others lost to time and thicket.
The people who show up to clean and look for ancestors' graves are usually in their forties and beyond. They may have spent their childhood living near Mount Moriah, learning how to ride a bike or ski down its gentle hills. The members of the Friends Board go out of their way to help them find the graves of their familial ancestors. The Friends group has access to cemetery records and maps – the latter are on the Friends' website, the former still not yet available to the public (contact us at info@fommc.org).
Yeadon side of Mount Moriah during "Comcast Cares" Cleanup Day
People want to see the gravesite of their forebears – it gives people a sense of their place in a larger history. We all need a tangible anchor to the past. I've helped folks look for graves a few times myself - it can be a truly rewarding experience, or terribly frustrating when you can't actually find the grave. Why would you not be able to find it with a section map and plot coordinates? As of this writing, although many of the sections in Mount Moriah Cemetery have been cut back and are being kept clear by volunteers and family members, about two thirds of the grounds are still overgrown with trees and high weeds.
Map: Friends of Mount Moriah Cemetery website
Having a map is one thing, but trying to claw your way through a thicket rife with fallen headstones entangled by "mile-a-minute" weeds seldom yields a satisfactory outcome. Usually a visitor has done some preparatory research and contacted the Friends group to request information as to the whereabouts of a certain plot. If they want help finding the plot, they may request this of the Friends group or wait for a cleanup day when scores of people are around.
One time an experienced cemetery worker and I spent about an hour trying to find a woman's grandparents' graves, but gave up for two reasons: 1) it was summer and the foliage was dense; and 2) though we found the proper area in the proper section, most of the headstones had been pushed over and were lying face down. (You would think vandals would have the common decency to push them the other way so people could still read the inscriptions.)
Northern border of Naval Asylum Plot (graves in woods beyond)
With plot number in hand and even grave row and number, you would think it would be easy enough to find a grave. That's typically the case in a well-maintained cemetery. However, Mount Moriah has not been maintained. Sometimes you can find a grave if it is one of the historically well-maintained (by the Veterans' Organization) military plots e.g. the Civil War Soldiers' Plot or the Naval Asylum Plot. Civilian graves prior to about 1913 are in the older areas of the cemetery and are more likely to be grown over with wild rose bushes, poison ivy, or any number of invasive, spreading plant such as knotweed. These include massive monuments and dynasty plots. This year in particular, the Friends group has organized some highly effective cleanup days and these areas are slowly but surely coming under control.
A few weeks ago during a cleanup day, a woman asked me if I could help her find her husband's great uncle and great-grandfather's graves. Looking at the section and plot information, I was afraid it would be a jungle. Someone must have warned her about the florid overgrowth at Mount Moriah, as she was dressed appropriately and had even brought her own machete!
We found the general area of the plot in Section 148 (which, according to the map (at right), contained around 204 graves – 17 columns by 12 rows), but finding the actual grave was quite another matter. The obvious obstacle was the dense forest which had grown up in Section 148. In addition, because the paths or roadways indicated on the map surrounding each section are not obvious in the middle of the woods, finding a starting point can be challenging. Section markers have long disappeared (but this is on the Friends' to-do list). The only bearing I could get was that Section 148 was just north of the nicely manicured Naval Asylum Plot and just east of the G.A.R. plot which had just been identified and cleared that day in Section 142!
G.A.R. Plot, Mount Moriah Cemetery
The search took about forty minutes in an area roughly half the size of a baseball diamond. The woman had driven here from somewhere in New Jersey and was on a quest for her husband, who was unable to make the trip. As she slashed through the vines and ivy, I climbed from plot to plot checking names. There did not appear to be any damaged or fallen headstones in this section, so that was a good thing.
Visitor nearing ancestor's grave in Section 148
After restarting from what I thought was the southwestern section corner a third time, I found the stone in question. Linda was about fifty feet away talking with another member of the Friends group. I couldn't actually see them, so I made my way out of the thicket and joined them. I told Linda I had found it. She brightened up and followed me into the woods. The plot in question was so thick, you had to be almost right on top of the stone to see it. It wasn't a large stone, standard-sized about two feet high by two feet wide. As she approached the stone, I held away some vines so she could see the name. On reading the inscription, she said "This is a truly momentous occasion."
Now, I have to admit that other members of the Friends group and even certain volunteers know the lay of the land far better than I. One or more of them may have been able to find the grave more quickly than I did, so I do appreciate Linda's patience. It's a learning experience, with improvements all the time. Sam Ricks from the Friends joined us momentarily and accessed the GPS app on his cell phone. Anticipating her next question, which was, "How will I find this when I bring my husband back to clear the grave site?" Sam gave her the GPS coordinates.
Masonic symbolism
As Gwen looked down on the stone, she said, "My husband told me there was some sort of strange carving on it." I examined it and told her he was a Mason. She called her husband and took photos with her iPhone. She told me that her husband's great uncle (who died in 1913) used to tell all his nephews and children that they each needed to go to school to at least learn a trade.
Linda relayed the information to me from her husband that said this was a family plot and there should be other graves nearby. Without too much difficulty, I pulled back some vines from a larger stone about six feet away to reveal the headstone of her husband's great-grandfather. Here's a photo of Linda chopping through the vines with her machete to access his headstone. She vowed to return with her husband to not only clear the area, but to keep it clear. The whole idea of "perpetual care" went out the window when Mount Moriah Cemetery was abandoned in 2011, but the fact is, the majority of the cemetery was left to run wild for decades prior to that.
What's past is past, though, and currently the Friends of Mount Moriah Cemetery is making great strides to bring the grounds under control. Hopefully within a year the cemetery will have an official legal owner and more concerted efforts will be made to make it a viable cemetery one again. Until such time, if you are looking for a grave in Mount Moriah Cemetery, please contact the Friends group at info@fommc.org. Provide us with as much information as you can, and we'll help you to the extent of the resources available to us.
Labels: cemetery maps, cemetery photography, find a grave, GPS, GPS coordinates, grave coordinates, Mount Moriah Cemetery, Philadelphia, plot location, the Friends of Mount Moriah Cemetery

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


I was feeling very Maggie Beer last week so poached some quinces. That's where the channelling ended as, unlike Maggie Beer, I'm no queen of the quince and didn't really know what to do with them. So in the fridge they sat.
On Friday, I bought the June issue of Country Style and there, on page 73, was the inspiration, or, more accurately, the recipe, I'd been waiting for: warm quince and almond cake. My Maggie muse had returned so I cranked up a bit of Rod Stewart crooning Maggie May and got baking. I'm possibly embellishing the last bit.
I served it as suggested, with cream and reduced poaching liquid, and gave the Child a tiny slice as didn't think it'd be something she'd go for. She held out her bowl, Oliver-like, and asked for more.
Can't ask for more than that. Well you can. But she wasn't allowed a third serving.
It sounds like it might be a new favourite in your house now. It looks delicious.
oh yum, i adore upside down cakes, and who does not love to channel their inner Maggie every now and then?
I made quince last week too - a la Jorth!
I might try the cake next too.
Mmmmmm quince, so so delicious!


Run the world's biggest half marathon with Team Scope.
Race to the Tower is unforgettably beautiful and unrelentingly challenging.
Trek up Ben Nevis and raise money for Scope.
Join Team Scope for London's most beautiful half marathon.
Get your charity place in the hugely popular Hampton Court Palace Half Marathon.
Trek the highest peaks in England, Scotland and Wales and raise money for Scope.
Run the streets of Central London and soak up the carnival atmosphere at the London 10k with Scope.


Now that the Academy Awards are just two days away, it's like a spooky full moon has risen over Los Angeles, turning casting assistants into werewolves and turning werewolves into $167,000 swag bags. Things are getting weird.
The party started early for the life-size Oscar statue that appeared at Hollywood and La Brea yesterday morning, crouched on all fours and snorting cocaine.
This is the work of street artist Plastic Jesus, who installed an eight-foot-tall Oscar statue injecting heroin at the same intersection this time last year. According Plastic Jesus collaborator Nick Stern, this piece is intended as a commentary on "Hollywood's hidden problem of drug addiction."
Later that same day, Fusion's own Elisa Rodríguez-Vila witnessed this scene at Highland and Yucca — just around the block from the allegedly super-cockroach-infested Dolby Theater, where the Academy Awards ceremony will be held on Sunday night.
A bomb threat led investigators to a strip mall parking lot, where an oddly endearing robot was dispatched to investigate a suspicious car. Fortunately, no explosives were found.
Good on you, tiny little robot. May all your dreams of big-screen stardom come true.


According to a Forbes article that rates dog breeds as potential insurance risks for homeowners, the 10 most aggressive breeds of dogs are Pit Bulls, Staffordshire Terriers, Doberman Pinschers, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Chows, Great Danes, Presa Canarios, Akitas and Alaskan Malamutes. Though lists of aggressive dog breeds in various media are not always identical, a majority of these breeds appear on most lists.
A report published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on dog-bite related fatalities from 1995 to 1996 specifies that the most commonly reported breed involved in fatal attacks was Rottweilers. A CDC study on fatal dogs bites from 1979 to 1996 published in the Journal of the Veterinary Medical Association singled out Pitt Bulls and Rottweilers. Media attention focused on these specific breeds and others considered highly aggressive has led to a controversy about breed-specific legislation, or special restrictions on ownership of certain breeds of dogs considered dangerous.
An article by the American Veterinary Medical Association points out that breed-specific legislation does not solve the problem of aggressive dog behavior. Any breed of dog can become aggressive and bite. A CDC web page on dog bites points out that following certain safety procedures when around any dog is the safest way to protect both adults and children. These precautions include not approaching unfamiliar dogs, not running from dogs or screaming at them, remaining motionless when confronted by an unfamiliar dog, avoiding eye contact with a dog, reporting stray dogs or dogs with unusual behavior, and not disturbing a dog that is eating, sleeping or protecting puppies.
Free Video Series Show How Easy Training a Dog Actually Is.
What Are the Most Aggressive Dog Breeds?
What Are the Most Dangerous Dogs?
What Are the Most Affectionate Dogs?
What Are Some Big Hypoallergenic Dogs?


text:
#1 Thing I Learned From Y-Combinator's Startup School
#startup #watercooler #career #productivity
Katya Pavlopoulos Nov 30, 2020 ・3 min read
I've always wanted to be on the cutting edge
I remember reading and re-reading encyclopedias as a kid and thinking I'd grow up to be a scientist or an inventor of some sort. While my childhood fantasy hasn't fully manifested (yet), I did find myself working at startups and caught the discovering/inventing/building/disrupting bug again.
That's how I ended up applying to Y-Combinator's Startup School for future founders. It's never too early to start thinking about your startup ideas, and I figured this course will only help me as a software engineer while I work at other people's startups.
What I thought I would learn at Startup School
Going into this, I had some preconceived notions about what I would learn and what my main takeaways would be. For example:
How to find a cofounder
How to build the founding team in general
How to incorporate as a company (should you go with an LLC? At what point should your side project become a company?)
How to divide company ownership between the cofounders
Notice that I was expecting to learn a lot of how-to's. And Startup School does cover all of these, and more. But somewhat unexpectedly, my biggest takeaway from this experience was not a how-to but a what-to.
What should I focus on?
If you work at a startup, especially if it's at an early stage, there are always a million things vying for your attention. There's always an emergency. There's always a fire to put out, and you're lucky if it's only one fire at a time. The todo list only gets longer, never shorter. Given that we are finite beings operating in finite time, what should founders focus on the most? What is the one thing you should always be doing that will give your startup the maximum chance for success?
Honestly, I thought the answer to this would be "get more investors"😅 It makes sense, right? After all, if you get more investors, then you have more money, and then you can hire more engineers, more salespeople, pay for more advertising, etc.
So I was surprised to find out that, no, getting more investors onboard is not THE ONE THING that will help your startup succeed.
Although getting millions in funding certainly doesn't hurt, the most important thing I can be doing at any time to grow the company can be summarized as "talk to users and build the product."
Talk to users and build the product
This doesn't mean "never talk to investors", but it does mean that you have a product that's always evolving to better meet the needs of your users before you pitch.
I was also surprised to learn this doesn't necessarily mean "hire software engineers ASAP", because some of the case studies we covered had MVP's that were thrown together using free tools like Excel, Google Forms, Zoom, etc, without a single line of code written by the founders. This took me a while to process, because I've always thought that successful startups must have technical people on the team (and they do! but not always at the start).
To me, this also reinforced the idea that as a software developer whether I'm working for someone else or building my own thing, I need to have an established way of communicating with my end users in some way. Maybe it's an occasional coffee with "Tell me about how our product is working out for you and what frustrations you've had with it this week?" Maybe it's a Google Form followed by a Zoom call. Maybe it's a few days a month of handling customer support. I imagine the details of how I maintain this conversation will change based on where I am. But one thing is certain, just writing good, clean, maintainable code is not enough.
If none of this is a surprise to you, hey you're way ahead of me! I'm still learning😊
Have you attended Startup School or worked at a startup? What were your biggest takeaways? What helped you grow? I'd love to learn more😊
In the meantime, I'm off to talk to users and build product!
7 GitHub Repositories To Help You Crush Your Job Interviews
Catalin Pit - Dec 14 '20
What I learned from failing my technical interviews
Farhana - Dec 17 '20
[16] The 15 Best Developer Resources in 2020 - Part II
MV - Dec 25 '20
10 Visual Studio Code Tricks To Unleash Your Productivity
Gedalya Krycer - Dec 22 '20
Katya Pavlopoulos
Full stack developer, Lambda School grad, HR in past life. Interested in tech, building the future, startups, entrepreneurship. Care about making this world a better place.
How much experience you had, when you got your first dev job?
#watercooler #career #motivation #beginners
Jan 15: DEV Daily Discovery
#discuss #bestofdev
Handy Git Commands and practices to improve your workflow
#git #cloud #tutorial #productivity


They were starving in the castle. The enemy had surrounded the castle and blocked all supplies of food from entering, hoping to starve them out. They had a problem, but they solved it. More of that in a moment.
To be creative, you need to think outside the box. Well, yes, but that well-worn metaphorical cliché in itself has been over-used to the point of creative redundancy. True creativity is fresh, new, and unexpected. And it can be shocking.
And here's a warning: When you exercise true creativity, others may, at first, suspect you have gone crazy.
Most of the time, most people think in 'straight lines'; so any nonlinear thought seems absurd to those who only have sequential rationality at their disposal. When you have a creative insight, don't necessarily expect others to get it straight off. Creativity lends perception beyond the immediate and most people can't see beyond the immediate.
Back in the days of castles, knights, sieges, and that kind of thing, an army had surrounded the impregnable castle Hochosterwitz (in present day Austria) and had it under siege. The fortress was well defended and the siege lasted for months as the attacking army hoped to starve the occupants out of their stronghold.
But as time passed, the siege army was getting restless and the commander had other pressing things to do. What they didn't know was that the defenders inside the castle were down to their last ox and last barrel of barley.
What would you have done if you were the defending commander? Extreme situations can (if we don't panic) call forth wonderful acts of creativity. As a matter of fact, he did something that must have made everyone around him despair of his sanity. He had the one remaining ox slaughtered, had its guts filled with the last remaining barley, and had the ox thrown over the side of the castle. Now they had no food at all!
But on seeing what was clearly a symbolic message that the castle occupants had more than enough food, the besieging army became discouraged and almost immediately pulled up their tent stakes and left.
Doing the opposite of what was expected saved the day for the occupants of the stronghold (1). To me, the commander of the fortress showed genuine artistry because creativity can manifest anywhere.
People often assume 'creativity' is the preserve of artistic types and if they don't paint or sculpt or write or play music, then creativity has passed them by. Not so. Creativity can infuse and determine everything or anything you do. Even conversation is a creative act. When people are amusing and interesting, they may be using just as much of their creative power as a painter producing a masterpiece. Your creativity might manifest in business, interpersonal relations, or sport. Creativity spans all of life's endeavours.
You might want to find reliable ways to get into the creative zone for writing, painting, business ideas, or even before you go out to a social event. Whatever your reasons to boost creativity, these tips will help.
When the world gets too familiar, your mind goes onto automatic pilot - the opposite of creative. Playfulness is all about creativity, so get 'silly' and don't dismiss anything during the creative phase. If you fear having your idea 'shot down in flames', you won't feel playful; you'll feel tense - and creativity will dry up quicker than saliva in a virgin's mouth on his wedding night. The key here is to discount nothing.
Whether you're finding inspiration in a group or going it alone, purposefully make some 'ridiculous' suggestions. Don't dismiss anything out of hand. How many solutions have come about from jokes and 'silly suggestions'? Embrace your inner idiot because sometimes there is wisdom in 'idiocy'. In fact, purposefully imagine the exact opposite of what you 'should' do. Have a brainstorming session in which the suggestion for the most counterproductive idea wins. Maybe that's what was going on in Castle Hochosterwitz all those years ago.
It's a powerhouse in there, it really is. There is more inside your mind than you could possibly know. Sometimes we need to stand aside and let the part of us that can be creative have free rein.
A hypnotist (or hypnotherapist) will aim to distract the conscious mind so that the unconscious mind can do what it's good at (2). People often assume they need to 'empty their mind' in order to be creative, but research (3) has discovered that when people are given an unrelated task to do after being asked to create a new idea, the ones who give their unconscious minds a chance to work (because they are focusing on something else) show remarkably more creativity than people who just focus on trying to be creative. Whilst your conscious mind is busy, your unconscious mind has a chance to solve and create.
So once you have done some conscious pondering, forget about the problem you're working on (or the idea you're trying to have) and go do something else entirely. Play with the kids, go for a walk, bounce on a trampoline, or joke with a neighbour. The point is, once you've done the prep work, your mind works on finding creative solutions when you're not consciously focusing.
Your environment primes you more than you know. For example, a background smell of cleaning fluid reliably makes people cleaner and tidier (4). And whatever your views on 'modern art', researchers found that the subliminal effect of having 'creative paintings' on the walls is to make people more creative - whether they profess an interest or liking for art or not and whether or not they consciously notice those unconventional paintings (5). So a bit of Rothko or Pollock may go a long way.
Here's another way to prime your mind. Research has found that being exposed to a verbal or visual pattern can prime our behaviour. In one study (6), it was found that young people exposed to words associated with age and frailty walked more slowly afterwards.
Individuals asked to imagine people who look intelligent (like professors) went on to score better in IQ tests. But when they visualized 'soccer thugs', they scored much lower (7). How can we use this for our creative purposes?
Viewing pictures of 'creative types' such as people who dress unconventionally or who look like artists, musicians, or poets also seems to inspire increased creativity in the person exposed to such images (6). (Although looking at an image of a 'one-off genius' such as Picasso can make us less creative, because it's easier to join a group than feel connected to a one-off.) So when priming yourself to be creative, close your eyes for a minute and just visualize lots of different imaginary or real people who look creative to you.
It's well established that having a view of nature from a hospital window promotes more rapid healing (8) and that natural greenery seems to lower anti-social, even violent, behaviour (9). But some Japanese psychologists also found that, in study after study, people displayed more creativity in office environments if potted plants were in view, as opposed to, say, just PC monitors. It may be that from an evolutionary perspective, we view a green environment as a sign that abundant food sources are probably close by. With less need to fight for scarce food, we can forget about that for a while and have more opportunity to relax, giving us the spare capacity to be creative.
In another study carried out over eight months, it was found that simply adding plants and flowers to an office increased male employees' creative ideas by 15% and also encouraged more flexible creative solutions from their female colleagues (10). In yet more research, it's been found that children behave more creatively when they play in nature. So either get yourself a great natural view or invest in some potted plants and flowers.
Creativity is all about making connections. The next tip gets you doing just that.
When we take one pattern in life and productively apply it to another, we are creative. Velcro, road safety 'cats eyes', and the sowing machine were all invented because someone observed a pattern and applied it somewhere else. And let's not forget the famous Archimedes, who discovered how to determine the volume of an irregularly-shaped object by noticing how his body displaced water in the bath (why didn't I think of that!).
Getting more customers is like being a street artist and getting people to stop and listen.
Becoming more confident is like a flower opening up to the sunlight.
This difficult conversation I'm about to have is like splashing ice cold water in my face when I wake up in the morning - bracing but necessary.
Writing this book is like going on an exciting journey.
Take a situation and imagine what else it could be likened to - the more obscure or weird, the better. Doing this may well help generate unexpected solutions and perspectives. Really think about why something is like something else.
If we live timidly, always prefer routine to change, balk at new ideas and cling to the past, we exist. But to live fully, we need to create. As Carl Jung said, "If you feel you have nothing at all to create, then perhaps you can create yourself."
If you'd like some extra help around How to Increase Your Creativity my company Uncommon Knowledge provides a huge library of hypnosis sessions through Hypnosis Downloads.com. I have helped create all the sessions there and have listed related downloads below. Please let me know in the comments section below how you get on.
This historical account is recounted in the wonderful book Change: Principles of Problem Formation and Resolution by Paul Watzlawick, John Weakland, and Richard Fisch.
When hypnotizing, we might use 'confusional' language to distract the conscious mind whilst we embed suggestions. Other ways to give something of interest to the conscious mind so that it 'gets out of the way' may be storytelling or even asking a person to count backwards in their head from one hundred to one.
Dijksterhuis, A. and Meurs, T. (2006) "Where Creativity Resides: The Generative Power of Unconscious Thought." Consciousness and Cognition, 15, pages 135-46.
Holland, R.W., Hendriks, M., and Aarts, H. (2006) "Smells Like Clean Spirit: Non-Conscious Effects of Scent on Cognition and Behaviour." Psychological Science, 16 (9), pages 689-93.
Forster, J., Friedman, R., Butterbach, E.M., and Sassenbach, K. (2005) "Automatic Effects of Deviancy Cues on Creative Cognition." European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, pages 345-59.
Bargh, JA, Chen, M, and Burrows, L. (1996) "Automaticity of Social Behavior: Direct Effects of Trait Construct and Stereotype-Activation on Action." Journal of Personal and Social Psychology. 1996 Aug;71(2):230-44.
Two Dutch researchers carried out a study asking groups of students fairly difficult questions from the game Trivial Pursuit. The groups were split into two; half were asked to spend five minutes before the test thinking about what it means to be a college professor - e.g. smart, glasses, air of academia, etc. - and half were asked to think about what it means to be a soccer hooligan - e.g. rough, loud, trouble maker, drinking, arrests, etc. They wrote down all the associations they could think of.
The test was repeated several times with different groups, with allowances made for IQ and even how familiar people were with Trivial Pursuit. The results came out the same. Thinking about stereotypical smart people makes you smarter! Thinking about dumb people and words you associate with stupidity makes you dumber!
Ulrich, R.S. (1984). "View Through a Window May Influence Recovery From Surgery." Science, (224), pages: 420-1.
Kuo, F.E. and Sullivan, W.C. (2001) "Environment and Crime in the Inner City: Does Vegetation Reduce Crime?" Environment and Behavior, 33, pages 343-65.
This research was conducted by Robert Ulrich from Texas A and M University.


10mm Male Bucket Domeless Quartz Concentrate UNGROUND Nail. This item measures 2.75" high with a width of .75".
Please note that these nails may not fit perfectly or flush on the joint they are meant fit in. They are handmade quartz nails.


text:
The SAIS Review of International Affairs
Governance & Law
Editors' Updates
Tag: Latvia
Europe Governance & Law Security & Conflict
Middle Powers to the Rescue?
Post author By Dr. Andris Banka
For seven decades, the United States has prided itself in being a reliable and committed NATO partner, willing to protect all allies at all times. Today such assurances no longer appear rock-solid. … In this context, one is reminded of Czech-born writer Milan Kundera's insightful words regarding the fate of small countries: "What distinguishes the small nations from the large is not the quantitative criterion of the number of their inhabitants; it is something deeper: for them their existence is not a self-evident certainty but always a question, a wager, a risk."
Tags Canada, Estonia, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Middle Powers, NATO, Russia, UK, United Kingdom
Foreign Policy Institute
JHU Press
About The SAIS Review
Founded in 1956 as an alumni letter for The Johns Hopkins University Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), The SAIS Review of International Affairs became a full-fledged academic journal in 1981. Since then, The SAIS Review has consistently been recognized as one of the leading publications in foreign affairs.
Subscribe to The SAIS Review
© 2023 The SAIS Review of International Affairs


Finca Santa Marta's green grocery tote bag. Buy it and bring it every week to pick up your produce from the market or grocery store.
Green in color and has the Finca Santa Marta's logo on the side.
Blue Ice Pack 32 oz.


text:
« Advancing the Clean Economy: The View from Colorado
Report: Boulder Outperforms Nation in 'Clean Economy' »
Country Watches as Boulder Considers Forming Own Electric Utility
{ July 11th, 2011 }
A coal conveyor system is part of Xcel's new Comanche 3 power plant in Pueblo. Xcel spent $1 billion to build the new coal-fired unit. The city of Boulder, which wants to focus on renewable energy and energy efficiency, is reluctant to sign a 20-year franchise with Xcel. (Andy Cross, Denver Post file )
BOULDER — The high-stakes search for new ways to power this city could end up changing the way electricity is provided to communities across Colorado and the country.
The city's decision to consider replacing Xcel Energy's exclusive electricity franchise with a municipal utility has already drawn concessions.
Xcel's offer to build 200 megawatts of wind energy for Boulder comes after company officials said they couldn't make a special deal with one community.
"Boulder brought the 800-pound gorilla to the table," said Susan Perkins, an attorney who has represented Colorado towns in franchise talks with Xcel, the state's largest utility.
A decision to move ahead with its own utility — focusing on
(The Denver Post)
renewable power and energy efficiency — may have an even bigger impact.
"If Boulder can achieve stable rates and a new energy mix, other communities will start asking questions as their franchises come up," said Perkins, who is not involved in the Boulder initiative.
The prospect of Boulder turning out a major, investor-owned utility and creating a municipal operation is being watched across the country.
"If a large community like Boulder can do it, it sets an example for everyone," said Ursula Schryver, a vice president at the American Public Power Association, which represents the country's 2,000 municipal electric utilities.
There have been 16 municipal utilities set up in the past 10 years — mostly small communities, Schryver said.
The Boulder City Council begins final deliberations July 19 on what path to ask voters to go in November.
A change to a municipal utility would not be easy financially or politically.
The cost to get a municipal utility up and running would be $220 million by a Boulder estimate, while Xcel puts the cost at more than $500 million.
Xcel would also likely challenge the move. In 2001, Pacific Gas & Electric spent $2 million successfully defeating a ballot initiative for a San Francisco municipal utility.
"It will get ugly if we decide to go ahead," said Matt Appelbaum, a Boulder city councilor. "Xcel will fight, and they have deep pockets."
BOULDER'S MUNICIPAL utility movement was born of frustration.
The city has a goal of cutting its emissions of greenhouse gases — linked to climate change — to 1990 levels by 2012.
Boulder even passed a carbon tax, about $21 per household, to finance energy-efficiency programs to meet the goal.
The city's electricity consumption, however, makes up 57 percent of its greenhouse-gas emissions, because Xcel gets more than half its power from burning coal.
"Boulder pays $114 million a year for electricity and about 60 percent goes to buy Wyoming coal," said Macon Cowles, a member of the City Council.
Xcel is retiring six aging, coal-fired units, and coal will account for 45 percent of its generation by 2018, according to the company.
Still, Xcel spent $1 billion to build its new Comanche 3 coal-fired unit in Pueblo and is spending $260 million to retrofit two other large coal plants.
Those units are expected to be online for decades, and Boulder officials are reluctant to sign a 20-year franchise tying the city to coal and natural gas.
"The fuels of the future aren't going to be the fuels we are using now," said David Driskell, the city's executive director of community
Click on image to enlarge (The Denver Post)
development and sustainability. "So the question is, do we start changing now or wait 20 years?"
There has also been the frustration of dealing with a big corporate utility and a highly bureaucratic state Public Utilities Commission.
"There is a desire to get more local control over energy choices so they reflect community goals," Cowles said. Municipal utilities — such as those in Colorado Springs and Fort Collins — are independent of the PUC, answering to local officials.
And so the City Council voted 6-2 not to give Xcel a new franchise, and in November, 69 percent of Boulder voters approved a $4 million stopgap tax to cover the $4 million in lost franchise fees while the city explores other options.
Since then, the city has honed its goals to decarbonize, democratize and decentralize its energy.
BOULDER HAS ALSO been a challenge for Xcel, which has more wind power than any other utility in the country and is in the top five in solar energy.
Last summer, Xcel officials said the franchise was non-negotiable because any accommodation for Boulder would have to be offered to other communities.
In June, the company did just that, offering to have a dedicated 200 megawatts of wind power added at a Limon wind farm built by NextEra Energy.
The wind power would go onto Xcel's grid and Boulder would get the renewable-energy credits to apply against its emissions — so renewable energy would, by Xcel estimates, cover 93 percent of the city's use by 2018.
Boulder would, however, be liable for costs associated with wind power — adding, by Xcel estimates, up to $4 a month, or 7 percent, to residential bills.
"We don't want the rest of our customers paying for Boulder," Xcel spokeswoman Michelle Aguayo said.
If natural-gas prices rise sharply, Boulder might get money back because the wind power helps Xcel avoid the higher fossil-fuel costs.
"I hope this answers Boulder's concerns," said David Eves, chief executive of Xcel's subsidiary Public Service Company of Colorado. "We don't want to lose their business."
Boulder makes up about 3.5 percent of Xcel sales, but the impact of the loss could be more significant.
"It can open the way for other communities," said Perkins, the energy attorney.
Xcel wants the franchise and the wind offer placed on the November ballot.
Some City Council members say they want to decide between Xcel and municipalization and put one option on the ballot. Others suggest putting both options on the ballot.
"We'd like to see the people of Boulder have a choice," Aguayo said. "What kind of campaign we run depends upon what the council decides."
BOULDER IS SPENDING about $830,000 on consultants to figure out what it would take to set up a municipal utility and to answer the key question: Can the city assure a reliable electric supply at reasonable rates?
Boulder's base load varies from a wintertime low of about 100 megawatt- hours to a summer peak of about 235 megawatt-hours, according to the city.
Under the proposed municipalization plan, Boulder might have up to 103 megawatts of generation — solar panels, hydro and natural gas — and the rest, until more local generation was built, would have to be bought on the wholesale market. Solar panels from Artisan Electric are a great option for saving money on electric bills.
That concerns the business community, said Gary Horton, chairman of Boulder Tomorrow, a local business group.
"Businesses use about 75 percent of the electricity in Boulder, and so we're going to be very sensitive to rates and reliability," Horton said.
Xcel is a member of Boulder Tomorrow.
Many community activists are supporting the move to a municipal utility as a way of developing local renewable-power generation, not just renewable-energy credits.
"We could get to 50-percent renewables with some creative thinking," said Ken Regelson, a member of the steering committee for the local group RenewablesYes.org.
Others remain wary, such as the Boulder Smart Energy Coalition.
"Is spending $500 million to create a municipal utility the best way to meet the city's climate-action goals?" asked Dave Miller, the coalition chairman. "This is a major decision with a lot of risk."
IF BOULDER CREATED a municipal utility, its rates would be comparable or a little below Xcel's between now and 2020, according to Boulder's consultant Robertson-Bryan.
That, however, is based upon the city paying zero for "stranded costs" — investments Xcel made outside Boulder — such as a new power plant — that it expected city customers would help pay for. Xcel puts those costs at $355 million. The actual price would have to be negotiated or litigated.
"I am concerned about years and years of litigation if the city tries to municipalize," said Ken Wilson, deputy mayor and a council member.
Worried that the analysis might be too rosy, the council asked for mid-case and worst-case scenarios that indicated there could be rate hikes of 10 percent to 21 percent on the average $700 yearly residential bill.
"The worst-case scenario isn't an expensive municipal utility," Appelbaum said. "The worst-case scenario is we spend $6 million and decide to scrap it."
Mark Jaffe: 303-954-1912 or mjaffe@denverpost.com
Crunching the numbers
The cost of creating and running a municipal electric utility in Boulder:
$60.5 million Startup costs
$121 million Acquiring Xcel lines and facilities
$355 million What Xcel says are its "stranded costs" — investments made in part to serve Boulder that it will not be able to make a return on
$0 What Boulder says the "stranded costs" will be
$59.1 million Power purchases
$13 million Operating costs
$24.7 million Debt service on bond issues to cover the cost of setting up the utility
$114 million Xcel's revenue in 2010 from electricity sold to Boulder


I've said several times that it is possible that the human species is the first species in the Milky Way galaxy to evolve to our level of intelligent and technology. This opinion is based on information about just how much needs to happen to allow for the spark of life in conjunction with the apparent rarity of our own solar system. The recent study Relative likelihood for life as a function of cosmic time seems to confirm this idea.
Life requires stars for two reasons. Stars are needed to produce the heavy elements (carbon, oxygen and so on, up to iron) out of which rocky planets and the molecules of life are made. Stars also provide a heat source for powering the chemistry of life on the surface of their planets.
This means that rogue planets aren't likely to spark or support life. This also means that Population III and most Population II stars systems will not have life either, because they are unlikely to have the elements necessary to form terrestrial planets. That pretty much leaves us with Population I stars.
What's all this about "Population"? It's a name for stars at various stages of galaxy development.
Population III stars are the stars that likely formed right after the Big Bang. They have not been directly observed, so their existed is estimated. They were made up of mostly Hydrogen and Helium. As such, they are unlikely to have any planets.
Population II stars are stars that are still made up of mostly Hydrogen and Helium, but have higher concentrations of elements such as Oxygen, Silicon, Neon, etc. Typically, such star systems are still unlikely to contain terrestrial planets. Many Population II stars still exist in our galaxy, though in regions without access to many heavier elements.
Population I stars are stars that are yet again still made up of mostly Hydrogen and Helium, but have much higher concentrations of the more stable element Iron and other heavy elements. Population I star systems are much more likely to contain terrestrial planets. The Sun (Sol) is a Population I star.
Why is this discussion about "Populations" important to the discussion about the arrival of human-like intelligence? At the risk of oversimplifying this a bit, I'll state that Population III stars lead to the formation of Population II stars, and Population II stars lead to the formation of Population I stars. As each generation of stars lived out their lifespans, they made way for the next generation to arise. Population I stars could not have formed 13.5B years ago; there weren't enough heavy elements around. Just as today, it is extremely unlikely that Population III stars could arise now; there's too much heavy elements around.
Life is very unlikely to have occurred until Population I stars formed and supported terrestrial planets. Terrestrial planets in the Goldilocks Zone around their star then had to have the necessary events and composition to allow for the spark of life to occur, and subsequently support life until species of higher intelligence evolves.
Is Earth ahead of the curve for the development of life?
The previously mentioned study suggests that Earth may have developed life to the human-level a bit earlier than average. The study concludes that, "life around low mass stars in the distant future is much more likely than terrestrial life around the Sun today." Life throughout the galaxy may be far more common billions of years from now than it is today. That also means that there may not be any/many other alien species with which we can contact and interact right now. The study puts our odds at 0.1%.
This could explain why we've not seen evidence of extraterrestrial intelligent life in our galaxy. Maybe we are among the very first. Others like us are so rare, we will not be able to contact each other.
Maybe a billion years from now, a future intelligent species will evolve on some future (yet to exist) world, and when they point radio telescopes into their night sky, they receive a song of hundreds of thousands radio signals from just as many other civilizations. Maybe, if our species is able to continue evolving, our long-from-now-posterity becomes the evil invaders of other worlds, rather than our world being the one constantly invaded, as Hollywood would have us imagine. Maybe we are the monsters in waiting.
How many Earth-like planets are orbiting Sun-like stars?
Stars in the Galactic Center are so concentrated that they typically are only a few light weeks away from each other. In contrast, our local neighborhood of stars are separated from one another by light years. If we found ourselves on a planet near the Galactic Center, our nighttime sky would light up in a blazing display every night, filled with stars as bright as the planet Venus looks to us.
However, would there be a habitable planet from which to see this sight? Is there such thing as a solar system being too close to the Galaxy's center to support life?
The concept of Habitable Zones around stars has been studied for a couple of decades. Life similar to ours can only exist on planets that are a certain distance from their sun. This is due to the amount of energy from the sun that is received by the planet. Too much energy, the planet is too hot. Too little energy, the planet is too cold, hence the Goldilocks reference.
There's another type of Habitable Zone at the galactic scale which uses a somewhat different set of criteria. Solar systems which have planets that can support life must themselves be made from material that has a lot of elements that are heavier than Helium. In astronomy, elements heavier than Helium are often referred to as metals. Metal content of a star is called its metallicity. The danger is that is if a solar system is made from material that is too rich in metallicity, Earth-sized planets may not be able to exist due to the likelihood of much larger (heavier) worlds displacing those Earth-size planets. Hence, "Goldilock zone of metallicity" is the idea that certain regions of a galaxy may be too metal-rich and other regions may be metal-poor in order to allow for the presence of Earth-like worlds.
Metallicity is not the only factor, however.
Early intense star formation toward the inner Galaxy provided the heavy elements necessary for life, but the supernova frequency remained dangerously high there for several billion years.
If a solar system is too close to the galactic core, the intense supernova frequency in a young galaxy might've keep many worlds from supporting life. This is because they would have experienced numerous blast waves, cosmic rays, gamma rays and x-rays that are fatal to lifeforms. As the collective of solar systems age and die, they would have contributed to increasing metallicity. This means, the right conditions for life on Earth-like planets may have never happened near the galactic core. Stars that are too close to the galactic core never had and never will have the right conditions to support Earth-like worlds with Earth-like life.
Where can solar systems with habitable planets reside within the Milky Way? According to the study The Galactic Habitable Zone and the Age Distribution of Complex Life in the Milky Way, the inner bulge component, diffuse halo component, and a thick disk component of our Milky Way Galaxy would not likely allow for Earth-size planets to exist within the right timeframe. So, the Habitable Zone of our Milky Way Galaxy isn't even really based on distance from the galactic core. It's a somewhat washer-shape region in between all the places that Earth-sized planets cannot exist within solar systems.
We identified the Galactic habitable zone (GHZ) as an annular region between 7 and 9 kiloparsecs from the Galactic center that widens with time and is composed of stars that formed between 8 and 4 billion years ago.
Knowing our Milky Way's Habitable Zone helps us in the search for life on other worlds. We can focus more efforts on this space. This isn't to say that this is the only space where life can and does reside. The Galactic Habitable Zone is just our safest bet for finding evidence of life.
A hypothesis is a proposed or suggested explanation for a phenomenon. The hypothesis is stated in such a way as to allow for scientific testing for specific expectations. The hypothesis must be testable in a falsifiable manner. That means, to test the hypothesis, you must be able to conceive of and test methods that can potentially disprove the hypothesis.
The value of the hypothesis is that it allows us to simplify initial observations into a testable statement so that we can determine if the basis for the hypothesis is true or false. You can test to find supporting evidence for the hypothesis. You can also test to find refuting evidence which disproves the hypothesis.
There is a subcategory of hypotheses called working hypothesis, which have some evidence to support them. As such, they are tentatively accepted as a basis for further study.
A theory is a substantiated and unifying explanation for some aspect of the natural world. Substantiation is acquired through the Scientific Method, with repeated testing and confirmation using written and predefined protocols for observations and experiments.
Theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions. They allow for predictions to be made about a phenomenon, and they also explain the causes for the phenomenon.
Theories are typically formed by consensus by many different people over a substantial period of time. Theories aren't just thought up by one individual and then magically accepted by everyone else. They are often heavily debated while they are being formed. This debate drives further hypotheses and experimentation that eventually helps develop the theory.
Theories are not absolute points. Once you have a theory, that doesn't mean the matter is settled. It just means that the evidence up to that point allows you to create a structure that provides both reliable predictions and explanations for phenomenon. Theories are often modified or replaced when better structures allow for better predictions and explanations.
A classic example of the process of debate to come to an eventual consensus is the Big Bang vs. Steady State theories debate, in which experimentation on both sides eventually lead to a much better understanding of our Universe.
A model is a often overlooked scientific tool to make a particular aspect of the natural world easier to understand, define, quantify, visualize or simulate based on commonly accepted knowledge. Modelling requires selecting and identifying relevant aspects of a situation in the real world, then applying techniques such as conceptual models to better understand, operational models to operationalize, mathematical models to quantify and graphical models to visualize the subject.
A model seeks to represent empirical objects, phenomena, and physical processes in a logical and objective way. All models are in simulacra, that is, simplified reflections of reality which allow for useful approximations.
A model is evaluated by its consistency to empirical data. Inconsistency or irreproducibility of observations must force modification or rejection of a model. A model must be able to explain past observations, predict future observations and have refutability, just like theories from which the models are typically built.
"Laws are descriptions — often mathematical descriptions — of natural phenomenon; for example, Newton's Law of Gravity or Mendel's Law of Independent Assortment. These laws simply describe the observation. Not how or why they work."
Laws are compact generalizations about data. As with other scientific elements, laws are not immutable. As more information is learned, laws can be changed.
It is important to note that laws can exist without theories. Sometimes laws exist for many years before theories explain their causes.
A principle is really just a law that is true by definition. The terms law and principle are often used interchangeably in Science. A principle is not a higher grade above a law. In fact, if you look up "Scientific Principle", your searches will inevitably lead to information regarding laws.
Some persons have suggested that laws can typically be reduced down to precise math formulae, such as the Laws of Thermodynamics and Ohm's Law. Conversely, the suggestion is that principles are more general descriptions of the nature world. Examples of such principles are Principle of Original Horizontality and Pareto Principle.
However, even this comparison is not an absolutely held distinction. For example, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is highly mathematical in nature. Conversely, the Law of Superposition has no mathematical reduction. So even math provides no real distinction between the use of the words principle and law in Science.
I guess the confusion about the relationships between laws, principles, hypotheses, theories and models is that it is not hierarchically ordered. It seems counter-intuitive that Science, being the mechanism that has brought so much order to our understanding of the world, is itself not similarly ordered. But, there's good reason for this. Science doesn't work in absolutes. Nothing is absolutely knowable. As such, everything we know is subject to be revised based on what we later learn. Having some sort of truth gradient would slow down the progress of learning since managing such grading would be an unnecessary distraction from the search for knowledge.
Another factor is that that carbon and the molecules that are formed from carbon seem to be very common in our galaxy, being found in interstellar space, other planets, comets, asteroids and space dust. Organic material seems to be everywhere. There is a nebula that is practically made of alcohol.
Perhaps are search for exoplanet life needs to extend beyond simply looking for water. Maybe our search should include crosschecking with a search for carbon.
According to On the probability of habitable planets, there are four types of habitability on planets that may harbor life in some form.
Class I - Habitats where conditions allow for water on the surface, and where energy is primarly provided by the planet's sun. This is the most Earth-like class.
Class II - Habitats where the planet may have had water on the surface early on, but conditions did not allow the planet to retain that water. This is most Mars-like class.
Class III - Habitats where significant water exists below the surface, and where such underground oceans can interact with a silicate-rich core. This planets may be too far from their sun to have surface liquid water, but via some process, such as geothermal heating, liquid water is present within the planet. This is the most Europa-like class.
Class IV - Habitats where a lot of liquid water exists above an icy layers. Oceans may actually be sandwiched between ice layers. Ganymede and Callisto may represent this class.
Is complex and even intelligent life possible on any of these classes? It seems that the most likely class that would have complex life is Class I. But, of course that is based on assumptions and biases born from our own example. Classes II, III and IV may extend the limits of what is considered to be the Habitable Zone around a star.
Another factor is the CO2 cycle. Perhaps the CO2 content of a planet will allow that planet to retain more heat from its sun.
It turns out that a thick CO2 atmosphere may be one of the most efficient solutions for keeping a planet warm. This is not only due to the properties of the CO2 gas itself.
However, taking into account the radiative effects of the CO2 ice clouds, which tend to form in such thick CO2 atmospheres allows further increases in the warming of the surface thanks to a cloud "scattering greenhouse effect". Taking into account this process, the outer edge of the habitable zone has been extended as far as 2.5 AU.
In other words, CO2 in the right mixture within a planet's atmosphere may extend the outer limit of how far a way a planet can be from its sun and still be warm enough to support life. But, other factors must be explored.
[A planet] staying in the habitable zone is obviously not sufficient for a planet to continuously maintain liquid water on its surface: it must have an atmosphere which keeps the surface pressure and the surface temperature (through its greenhouse effect) in the right range, for billions of years.
In addition to forming the correct atmosphere necessary to support life, a planet must also be able to keep that atmosphere for a very long time. Also, that atmosphere may need to change over time in order to adjust to changes in stellar output. For example, a planet has to be large enough (or have enough gravity) to keep its atmosphere from escaping, not just as a result of simply drifting away, but also to counter the effect of stellar wind and other star related phenomenon.
Plate tectonics is another factor that may be important to a planet's ability to support life. Plate tectonics manage planetary cycles, such as CO2. The process of how a planet develops plate tectonics on a global scale is not well understood. However, when examining the two examples of planets of similar size within our own solar system, Earth and Venus, the key difference appears to be water. Perhaps the higher water content of Earth enables plate tectonics. How special is Earth, after-all?
Would an equivalent to plate tectonics be necessary on class III and IV planets? For those same classes, atmospheres may not be a factor at all, since oceans would be underground. What other cycles would be necessary in such classes? How many class I planets with a long term atmosphere and plate tectonics are in Habitable Zones? There's a lot of open questions. Another question I have, would we be able and willing to seed Terran lifeforms on these other classes planets (and moons), even within our own solar system, even if we do not intend to colonize them for ourselves?
I've posted other articles about the possibility of life in our Galaxy based on what is known right now. For this article, after going into some concepts from a somewhat recent study, I'm going to speculate a bit based on the suggestion by that study that life was possible for a very specific period of 10 million years to 17 million years after the formation of the Universe. The study is The Habitable Epoch of the Early Universe.
What is significant about this very specific period after our Universe's formation? According to the study, the cosmic microwave background provided a uniform heating source that was between 0 to 100°C (the melting point and boiling point of water at 1atm) during 10-17 million years after the formation of our Universe. This means that there was no Habitable Zone around stars since the entire Universe was one gigantic habitable zone (except maybe being too close to a star).
There's a catch. Stars that formed immediately after the Big Bang were very different than the stars we now see. The only two elements available in the Universe were Hydrogen and Helium. These early stars are referred to as being metal-poor, lacking access to elements heavier than than Helium. There is speculation that the very first stars where actually extremely metal-poor. Material from which terrestrial planets could have formed simply wasn't available yet. When these first stars died, they produced the elements necessary for the formation of planets and metal-rich stars. The death of these stars had to happen very quickly in order to meet the criteria necessary to consider life being possible so early in our Universe's existence.
In order for rocky planets to exist at these early times, massive stars with tens to hundreds of solar masses, whose lifetime is much shorter than the age of the Universe, had to form and enrich the primordial gas with heavy elements through winds and supernova explosions.
Cosmic simulations suggest the formation of massive early stars that explode relatively quickly. Gravitational lensing also suggests the formation of such stars in the earliest galaxies. Given the possibility for such stars and such explosions of such stars, planet formation early in the Universe was also possible. Given the cosmic microwave background heat of the Universe, the likelihood of planets with water on their surface was again also possible.
On the plus side for these planets, once the cosmic microwave background cooled down after the 17 million year mark, the planets themselves may have been able to keep warm enough on their own for quite awhile, even without a nearby star.
Although the study The Habitable Epoch of the Early Universe suggests that life may have been possible in the early Universe, much of that life may not have survived past 17 millions years after the Big Bang unless it was lucky enough to be in the Habitable Zone within a solar system that included a very stable star. However, even if the life didn't survive, the organic matter from which the life formed may have survived. The survival of this life or its material could have seeded the later Universe, drastically increasing the chances of life reemerging. Some speculate life on Earth originates from extra-solar system sources. Perhaps the material necessary for the emergence of life was already in the mix from which our Sun formed. The mechanism for such transference of life and materials is called Panspermia, or specifically, Pseudo-panspermia and Lithopanspermia.
It seems there would have been a substantial gap between the first wave of early life and the next wave of life; this next wave presumably being the epoch within which we find ourselves now. How might species from the early epoch be viewed by species of the current epoch?
From a Science Fiction perspective, such early life may have evolved to sentience very early in our Universe's existence. Being so close to our Universe's beginning and having so long to evolve may have allowed these early species to development god-like powers by now. Such species may be Q of Star Trek: TNG, Time Lords of Doctor Who, Nibblonians of Futurama, and perhaps less god-like Precursors of Star Control II and Progenitors, also of Star Trek: TNG.
Would signs of god-like species be discernible to us young species? We wouldn't likely see evidence in the form of direct radio signals, as such species would have long since evolved beyond such primitive methods of communication. Perhaps we could catch a glimpse of these early species in the earliest days of their development via EM signals they emitted billions of years ago, from distance galaxies.
We'd have to know where to point our detectors. Signals from ancient civilizations within our own galaxy would have passed us by billions of years ago. However, signals from ancient civilizations in galaxies billions of light years away would be reaching us at the same time as the rest of the light from those galaxies. Such signals would be faint and scattered, but they may be just distinct enough to discern from the background noise. For example, at certain times of the year, Earth glows at certain EM frequencies much brighter than any other object in our galaxy. A similar civilization billions of years ago in a galaxy billions of lights away might be obvious to us once we start looking for such phenomenon.
The idea that life may have developed so early in our Universe's existence opens up a Universe of possibilities. Our understanding of our origins may be even effected by this concept. On the other hand, maybe life in our Universe wasn't possible at all until very recently. Maybe we are one of the first species to develop sentience in all of the Universe. I'll cover more about this in a later article.
How many Earth-size planets are orbiting Sun-like stars?
In the search for planets that may be habitable outside of our own solar system, one of the elements that should be considered is planet size. Planet size is important for various reasons. There is evidence that suggests that plate tectonic activity on a global level is a necessary factor for supporting life on a planet similar to Earth. Planets must be of a particular size in order to allow for global plate tectonics. Larger planets (between the range of Mars and Earth) may be necessary to maintain an atmosphere with the right composition to support life. Based on the limited examples available within our own solar system, life may require specific conditions that are associated with Earth's size.
...the nearest such planet is expected to orbit a star that is less than 12 light-years from Earth and can be seen by the unaided eye.
That's not only a lot of planets, 12 light-years is a distance that seems at least somewhat reachable with technology that is currently being investigated. Recently, such a planet seems to have been discovered around the closest star to our own, Proxima Centauri. Technically, Proxima Centauri cannot be seen with the unaided eye on its own, but rather as part triple star system that appears as one the dot in the Southern Hemisphere sky called Alpha Centauri, but close enough (literally).
Future instrumentation to image and take spectra of these Earths need only observe a few dozen nearby stars to detect a sample of Earth-size planets residing in the Habitable Zones of their host stars.
The number of Sun-like stars in the Milky Way Galaxy is said to be about 10%.* The number total stars is a matter of debate, but it often stated as 100 billion stars. 10% of that is 10 billion stars. Therefore, 22% of 10 billion is 2.2 billion stars. With that determined, how common are planets that are so similar to Earth that events naturally occur in the right sequence to spark and nurture life? How likely is that life to evolve to develop the human-level expression of intelligence and curiosity? What is the likelihood of any of species developing in the same timeframe as us? Are other species close enough to us to communicate with us? Should we really trying to reach out to these others? Some of these questions will be addressed in further articles.
*10% is stated by multiple tertiary sources for "sun-like" stars, and 7.5% is stated for "g-type" stars, but I could not verify these percentages from any original sources.
It's hard to talk about planets in binary (dual) star systems without mentioning Star Wars: A New Hope. The famous scene of Luke Skywalker standing and looking off into the distance while two suns appear near the horizon is iconic. However, there's a problem with that iconic scene. The problem is a not full-fledged error, just an unlikelihood: both suns appear as the same size in the sky in very close proximity to each other. The reason this is unlikely is due to the two types of planetary orbits in binary star systems: s-type and p-type. A planet in either type of binary system would rarely see both suns as the same size in the sky and that close to each other, even if the suns are the same size.
S-type is the name for the orbit of a planet that revolves around just one of the two stars within a binary system. P-type is the name for the orbit of a planet that revolves around both stars within a binary system, having a common barycenter (or center of mass) with the suns as the suns orbit around each other.
S-type orbits are interesting, but for this article, I'll cover P-type because this is more interesting to me when talking about Habitable Zones, particularly where the suns have similar masses. Of course, even with p-type orbits, there exist many possible varieties for how the suns can orbit each other.
The ability of a planet to maintain liquid water depends on the interaction between stellar radiation and the top of its atmosphere. Also, that interaction is complicated in a binary system. There can be substantial difference in energy received by the dual suns. Sometimes both suns appear side by side in the sky, providing maximum energy. However, when one sun is eclipsed by the other, the amount of energy is lessened due to the closer sun blocking the stellar radiation from its partner.
This interaction strongly depends on the stellar spectral energy distributions implying that stars with different energy distributions will contribute differently to the absolute incident flux at the top of the planet's atmosphere.
Even with all of these factors, planet formation within the Habitable Zone of a binary system would be similar to that of a singular star system.
Where two suns are of the same size, their location to the planet can vary greatly depending on the size of their orbit around their common barycenter. If there is a wide orbit, it is safe to assume that one sun will provide more energy than the other sun which is farther away. In this case, the further sun would appear smaller in size within the sky, even though both suns are of the same mass. The graphics above suggest why the iconic Star Wars scene isn't likely accurate. The scene is possible maybe one or two times per year if the suns are in similar orbits which are tight and circular; or in rare instances where the suns have elliptical orbits and the planet just happens to be in the right place at the right time.
Here's a close up of Alpha Centauri A and B. Their distance from each other can be as much as 11 AU's, which would make a type-p planetary orbit so large, that habitable planets would be unlikely. Planets have been discovered in type-s orbits around Alpha Centauri B and their sibling Proxima Centauri.
Out of all the odd scenarios that might be possible in our Universe, the thought that there might be habitable planets around White Dwarfs is one of the stranger ideas, in my opinion. Imagine what it would be like to look up to see a White Dwarf dominating the daytime sky. How close would the planet have to be to the star to receive enough light and energy to support life? How would a planet find itself within the Habitable Zone around a White Dwarf?
This last question is particularly interesting because White Dwarfs are the remains of a Red Giants. Red Giants are the last phase of fusion based main sequence stars. Between White Dwarf, Red Giant and main sequence phases, a star changes so drastically that it is unlikely planets close to the star would survive into the next phase. Some very interesting things need to happen for a planet to form within the Habitable Zone of a White Dwarf.
With main sequence stars, the Habitable Zone slows moves away from the star because the star slowly gets hotter. A planet that starts out within the Habitable Zone of a young main sequence stars may not remain within the Habitable Zone for the full length of that star's life-cycle.  Oddly enough, White Dwarfs have the exact opposite problem. White Dwarfs cool down as they age. Habitable Zones around White Dwarfs will shrink until being too small for any sizable planet to exist within it.
The Habitable Zone around a White Dwarf is very small compared to that of Sun. The Habitable Zone around Sun is roughly between the orbits of Venus and Mars. The Habitable Zone around a White Dwarf is much closer than even the orbit of Mercury around Sun. It seems a planet that close to a White Dwarf cannot exist without some special events.
How do planets get to the Habitable Zone?
A planet could have existed in the previous solar system during the main sequence star phase, but much further out; so far out that it may not have been previously habitable. When the main sequence star expands to become a Red Giant, then explodes to leave a White Dwarf, the planet would have to move from the outer reaches of the solar system to a stable close orbit. This sounds incredible, but apparently it is possible since planets have been discovered around Neutron Stars, which go thru even more violence.
Another possible scenario is it the matter ejected from the exploding Red Giant, or other remaining debris within the solar system somehow creates a new accretion disk around the newly formed White Dwarf, from which new planets could form.
Even if either of these scenarios do happen, a water related challenge presents itself. A lot water must somehow remain or be (re)introduced on these special planets. Water is likely stripped from any existing planet that moves so close to the White Dwarf. Water is also unlikely to be available on any planet that forms so close to any star, White Dwarf or otherwise. Maybe these planets could gather new water via the same processes as Earth, possibly "delivered to by a barrage of comets."
If a planet is lucky enough to form around a White Dwarf, what's that White Dwarf going to look like in the sky? White Dwarfs have a lot of mass, but they are very small in size. White Dwarfs are about the same size as Earth. By my rough calculations, the Habitable Zone around a White Dwarf is about 5 times the distance of Earth to the Moon. So, I image the White Dwarf would appear several times smaller in the sky as the Earth appears to the Moon. Maintaining habitability of planet around a White Dwarf might be a bit like trying to keep warm outside on a freezing night next to a slowly fading campfire.
The previous article Limited lifespan of Habitable Zones around other stars (September 2016) covered the topic of Habitable Zones for planets around other solar systems. However, Habitable Zones are only one of considerations for finding other stars with habitable planets. Given the lack of data right now, sometimes science has to fall back on simulations. These simulations do not replace actual observations. Instead, they offer clues as to how we may be proceed in our search for hard data.
Habitable Zones appear to be more stable and longer lasting around small stars, such as Red Dwarfs. However, what are the chances of habitable planets appearing in these small zones around these small stars? It turns out that the chances may not be good.
According to the study A Decreased Probability Of Habitable Planet Formation Around Low-Mass Stars, multiple simulations suggest that low-mass stars are unlikely to have terrestrial planets of sufficient size within their Habitable Zones. This is due to a several factors. That's not to say it is impossible nor improbable; just not as common as previous thought.
Besides Habitable Zones, another factor to consider is the Habitable Planet Mass Limit. There is evidence that suggests that plate tectonic activity on a global level is a necessary factor for supporting life on a planet similar to Earth. Planets must be of a particular size in order to allow for global tectonics. The lack or presence of global tectonics seems to be a factor in the differences between Venus and Earth. Though Venus seems to be large enough, its surface heals too quickly to allow for global tectonics. The examples within our own solar system suggest that even when planets are large enough, there is no guarantee they will have global tectonics.
Another factor is the Protoplanetary Disk. During the planet formation phase (accretion), there has to be enough material within the disk of matter that forms around very young stars (Protoplanetary Disk) in order produce larger planets. Though there are a lot of unknowns regarding this factor, the "ratio of disk mass to stellar mass is roughly constant with stellar mass". Also, planets seem to form much faster around small stars for various reasons. With less time to form and less mass within the Protoplanetary Disk, planets around low-mass stars may typically be much smaller. A second issue with fast forming planets is that they are much less likely to have enough time to collect enough water to support life.
Nothing is absolute. Gliese 581 is a Red Dwarf that has a number of large planets, and also has a debris disk that appears to have tens times amount of comet debris than our own Solar System. This suggests low-mass stars can have habitable planets. That said, Gliese 581 may be an outlier. Other factors are obviously involved that need further study.


text:
Cuomo calls for prison closures and other cost-saving measures in light of billion-dollar budget shortfall he blames on Trump
By Denis Slattery
Gov. Cuomo said New York is being hurt by federal policies designed "to benefit red states." (Seth Wenig / AP)
Faced with a possible billion-dollar budget shortfall, Gov. Cuomo is calling for the closure of three state prisons, the redistribution of health care funds and other money-saving measures.
The governor unveiled amendments to his $175 billion budget plan Friday, addressing a $2.6 billion gap he blames on a controversial cap Republicans placed on state and local tax deductions.
Cuomo traveled to Washington earlier in the week to talk taxes with President Trump. He argued that the cap on so-called SALT deductions harms states like New York that pay more into the federal government than they get back.
"As Washington continues their economic civil war by restructuring the economy to benefit red states, we are taking action to maintain a strong Financial Plan and safeguard New York's fiscal integrity," Cuomo said in a statement.
The governor's office claims a number of changes made to his budget proposal will offset the projected losses, including a revamped tax on opioids and closing several state prisons.
A trio of correctional facilities will be shuttered, possible in part because of the state's declining prison population, the governor said. For the first time in 30 years, the number of inmates in the state has dipped below 47,000, the governor said, claiming that no jobs will be affected.
"These new closures are another step toward reversing the era of mass incarceration and recognizing that there are more effective alternatives to lengthy imprisonment," he said.
Sweeping health care cuts, to the tune of $550 million, include reductions in Medicaid provider reimbursements and repurposing "Health Care Transformation Funding" for housing services. The budget update also calls on the Department of Health to reconvene a panel review Medicaid spending.
The cuts prompted some pushback from the Greater New York Hospital Association and 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers.
"Our message to Albany is simple: no health care cuts," said Kenneth Raske, the group's president. "New York's safety net hospitals have already been cut to the bone and cannot absorb them. If these cuts happen, access to care in vulnerable communities in New York City, the Hudson Valley, Long Island, and across the State would be severely threatened.
Following backlash from towns and villages across the state, Cuomo is also planning to restore nearly $60 million in state funding for municipalities that was initially cut from his Jan.15 budget proposal.
The governor said the money for the Aid and Incentives to Municipalities, or AIM, will come from collecting sales tax from all online purchases, which Cuomo's office estimates will generate about $390 million a year and go into effect June 1, rather than Sept. 1 as originally planned.
Cuomo is also proposing a six-person "expert panel" to set rates for his proposed Manhattan congestion pricing plan and provide oversight over the Metropolitan Transit Authority's finance and operations
"The panel shall oversee the preparation of a performance and financial audit of the capital and operating budgets," according to the amendments made public Friday.
The group will also "determine the congestion toll amounts, which shall include a variable-pricing structure," the budget proposes.
Jails and Prisons