[null, {"document_url": "http://randomprocessed.blogspot.com/2014/01/", "unformatted_src": "http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nGal43o0mWA/UrsQ1fe-xGI/AAAAAAAABoM/1vlulmc9EuM/s640/gunsinus.jpg", "src": "http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nGal43o0mWA/UrsQ1fe-xGI/AAAAAAAABoM/1vlulmc9EuM/s640/gunsinus.jpg", "formatted_filename": "gunsinus", "rendered_width": 460, "rendered_height": 640}, null, null, null, null, null, null, {"document_url": "http://randomprocessed.blogspot.com/2014/01/", "unformatted_src": "http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/12/9/1386616279024/Litter-in-the-street-008.jpg", "src": "http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/12/9/1386616279024/Litter-in-the-street-008.jpg", "formatted_filename": "Litter in the street", "alt_text": "Litter in the street", "rendered_width": 460, "rendered_height": 276}, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, {"document_url": "http://randomprocessed.blogspot.com/2014/01/", "unformatted_src": "http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/24886971.jpg", "src": "http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/24886971.jpg", "rendered_height": 150}, null, null, null, null, null, {"document_url": "http://randomprocessed.blogspot.com/2014/01/", "unformatted_src": "http://www.artchive.com/artchive/g/goya/goya_sleep_of_reason.jpg", "src": "http://www.artchive.com/artchive/g/goya/goya_sleep_of_reason.jpg", "formatted_filename": "goya sleep of reason", "alt_text": "My favourite drawing", "rendered_width": 150, "rendered_height": 226}, null]

15 January 2014

Guns in churches "protect against Satan" [PH Series posting 1]

I'm starting a new series of postings which I will label "PH Series", that is, Personal History Series, where I will collect several anecdotes from my personal history, events and incidents which, to me, are quite memorable for certain reasons. I start by reposting the following story.

In the 90s I lived in Austin, Texas. One of the things that impressed me tremendously was the relation of people with guns. The following describes an incident which took place in a church. I think it's quite revealing of the mentality of (many) people, and this is why I kept a copy of the newspaper which reported the story.

In September 1999, a crazy guy entered a Baptist church in Fort Worth, and opened fire. He managed to kill several people before shooting himself. (A common phenomenon in the US. Mass shootings take place frequently.)

Back then I remembered how I was impressed, not by the shooting itself, but by the reaction of victims' relatives. Not a single one of them thought that guns was the problem. Rather, they thought it was Satan who did it and responded by saying "we need more guns!"

This was the first time I heard such an irrational statement. It impressed me so, that I made a copy of the New York Times article (click on the photo for detailed image): The story impressed me a lot. I underlined some statements which I found incredibly disturbing, and here they are (emphasis is mine):

Here, then, my friends, is what many Americans (and some others) believe: If someone shoots and kills people in a church (or elsewhere) using a gun, the last thing we should blame is the gun. We can blame Satan, the absence of more guns, attack on Christianity, that people are losing their faith, anything but guns.
Posted by Takis Konstantopoulos at 15.1.14 4 comments: Labels: guns, PH Series, religion, texas


What does "why" mean?

The following short clip shows Richard Feynman answering the question why two magnets attract or repel one another. The person asking the question is trying to understand why he has this feeling when he holds two magnets close to one another.

Feynman answers the question by not answering it! It is brilliant. He says that in order to answer the question he must know what the truth basis of the person asking it is. He digresses giving a number of interesting examples. He says that a first-order answer, such as "it's due to the magnetic force", may satisfy the person who asked but may not be an answer at all. A second why may follow, and a third, and so on. (Does the guy know what a magnetic force is? Is this not just a reduction of the problem to another problem?) A basis for truth must be known before the question can be answered. Feynman points out that the `magnetic force' (whatever this is) is intimately related to the `electric force' (whatever this is) and that the two are, essentially the same. (A consequence of a happy marriage of Electromagnetism and Relativity. In fact, the latter was borne because of the first.) But, Feynman continues, when guy asking the question rests his arm on the chair he doesn't ask (or even think that he could ask!) why the arm doesn't go inside the chair. Ultimately, it's an electric force keeping the arm where it is, but it does not seem as `unnatural' as a magnet. They are, however, the same kind of forces. So, he concludes, he can't answer his question, because, clearly, the person asking has no basis for understanding it.

Watch the video and read some more comments below.

As an electrical engineer, I find these things quite natural. This is due to the things I learned in the university and to the work I did. I am also puzzled as to how to explain certain concepts to people who want to know but who have no time or desire for a bit deeper studies. One can give `popular' answers, but over-popularizing is always--to some degree--cheating.

You may (correctly) argue that I shouldn't expect a lay person to study relativity before he or she can understand the answer. No. But I would expect an academic  to have the scientific curiosity (and integrity) to learn further.

Another thing that comes to mind when listening to Feynman's `explanation' is the word `pedagogy'. For several years now, universities (especially in certain parts of Europe) keep getting infested  by a new species of people who claim to have answers to all `pedagogical questions'. In fact, they are so sure of themselves, that they have convinced universities that they should train others on the matter. And yet, they themselves cannot answer simple, pedagogical, questions. The example above is perfect. One would expect that a lecturer in Physics ought to be know what Feynman is talking about, including the meaning of `why'. Traditionally, teachers learn these things by `doing' teaching, by practice. Now, if the species of pedagogues wants to train a teacher in physics, then one would expect that the pedagogue would be in position to teach what Feynman has in mind. Alas, this never happens. Pedagogical courses are, by and large, void of content. I've seen young guys and gals suffer in the UK by the pedagogical training they receive. Nobody has ever gone to a pedagogical class watching, for instance, a Feynman lecture. Why, in order that this happen, the pedagogues themselves must be in a position to understand what Feynman is talking about, from a pedagogical point of view. Unfortunately, pedagogical classes teachers seem to have no qualifications other than dissemination of bureaucracy. (Example: they train teachers how to fill in forms.)

Posted by Takis Konstantopoulos at 10.1.14 4 comments: Labels: academia, critical thinking, fake teaching, pedagogy, physics

7 January 2014

Emails from a disturbed individual

Everyone in academia has, from time to time, received mails from people who make extraordinary claims. Recently, I received at least 2 emails from a person called Thierno M. Sow claiming:

The goal of [my paper] is to prove the ABC Conjecture, the Beal Conjecture, the Goldbach Conjecture, the Riemann Hypothesis and the Twin Primes Infinity.

Take a look at the paper he sent me (and others) to see that he is, most likely, a disturbed individual. I am not a psychologist, but it is rather clear that this person suffers from some disorder. His paper contains "mathematics" and "chemistry" and claims to have solved some of the most difficult problems. All in 12 pages. Oh yes, it is also devoted to the memory of Nelson Mandela!

Posted by Takis Konstantopoulos at 7.1.14 8 comments: Labels: humour, idiocy

5 January 2014

Half of the Republicans reject evolution

According to Courrier International, more and more of Republican sympathisers in the US do not believe in the theory of evolution. In 5 years, among people who call themselves republican, the percentage of those who accept evolution has dropped by 11 points and has reached 43% today according to Pew Research.

On the other hand, the percentage of Democrats who accepst evolution has remained constant at 67%. The differences between the two groups remain the same even if one takes into account other characterstics, like race, education or religion.

The most skeptical of all are white evangelical Protestants comprising a powerful conservative political force in the ultra-conservative Tea Party. Nearly 2/3 of them simply reject evolution and claim that "humans and other living beings have existed during all time in their present form." The fraction of all Americans who say likewise is 1/3.
Note: To understand how ridiculous those who do not accept evolution are, compare with this: Evolution is as well established as the fact that the Earth rotates around the Sun. Even though this was established long ago, during "dark ages", lots of people did not believe it. They were "sure" the Earth was at the "center" (and were called geocentrists; laughably, there are still some of them, but nobody takes them seriously.)

Posted by Takis Konstantopoulos at 5.1.14 3 comments: Labels: evolution, geocentrists, politics, religion

4 January 2014

My top five postings

No 1:   Swedish pedestrian crossing signs   2001 hits
No 2:  "Necrophiliac" woman                     1540 hits
No 3:  Saint Joseph Stalin                           1116 hits
No 4:  Stoning in Iran                                   919 hits
No 5:  Joaquin Malats: Serenata Española    702 hits

The first two refer to Swedish things. (For those who ask me why I, sometimes, blog about Sweden, the answers are: (i) because I live in Sweden and (ii) I don't only blog about Sweden.)

The third refers to a Russian, and--to a certain extent--global phenomenon. Of all WWII criminals, Stalin is still considered a benevolent one. So much so that (some) Russians think of him as a saint.

The fourth refers to a phenomenon which takes place in many Islamic countries, Iran being an example: the stoning of women. Although stoning appears in the Torah (roughly the Old Testament), Jews and Christians have gotten rid of it. (Criminals excepted.)

The last one refers to one of the most beautiful classical guitar pieces, a transcription of Malats' Serenata Española.
Posted by Takis Konstantopoulos at 4.1.14 No comments: 
2 January 2014

How journals like Nature, Cell and Science are damaging science

by Randy Schekman Labels: academia, h-index, impact factor, science What measure theory is about The principle of dynamic programming Takis Konstantopoulos
 Customer service at the main airport of Sweden

Scandinavian airlines
refuses to take responsibility!!!

Events description
Posting 1
Posting 2 (insulting reply by SAS) Labels used in this blog My favourite drawing Goya: The sleep of reason produces monsters