Gray Matter at Wolfram Research

As I promised, I have visited the Periodic Table Table on the penultimate floor of the Wolfram Research building. This is a fairly tall building for Champaign, IL and contains some serious brains. We walked in, rode up to the top floor, and asked to see "The Elementary Mr. Gray." The receptionist chuckled, made sure that I claimed to have an appointment, and called down to the co-founder and interface designer for Mathematica Software, Theodore Gray. We were escorted down to his spacious office area, in which samples of every element in the universe are kept. Many on open display. One Corner of the Office Big SamplesI had budgeted 2 hours, and had to tear myself away after 3. There were huge samples of some things like 99.999999% pure silicon and a massive block of magnesium. There were pretty and ingenious samples of others. The pictures he took for PeriodicTable.com are excellent, but seeing them and holding them is an order of magnitude more impressive. I got to hold a nice chunk of depleted Uranium (kept in the safe with the gold and platinum and antique samples). Heavy stuff, and almost as big as my sample of equally heavy tungsten. Maybe I should mention the layers of security and cameras, in case anyone gets acquisitive. PeriodicTableTable and its creator Notice the lead pipe over by Hydrogen? It was last seen on my patio, and now is part of this collection. I hadn't realized that this brain trust is where Hollywood went to get correct math for the TV show Numb3rs. Wolfram staff may not criticize the inaccurate applications, but at least they make sure the formulas written by the actors match what they say they are doing and look cool. I often regret not having gotten a job at a brain trust back when I was young and quick. It was nice to visit such a place and to be made to feel a collegue. So, how shall I spin this as a serious post? Real science is a matter of playing with reality and seeing what makes it tick. To understand matter, one should see what there is of it. To understand the mathematical models on which our standard of living depends, it is good to know some real math. I find comfort in knowning that those who really know the math have fun with it.

Continue ReadingGray Matter at Wolfram Research

JREF Censored on YouTube via DMCA

YouTube has suspended the James Randi Education Foundation channel, The FriendlySkeptic. JREF hopes to get it back soon. From the video information:

To complain to YouTube follow this link Scroll to the very bottom and click on "new issue" Select "suspended account" from the options and express your opinion. Download the video above from MediaFire The DMCA is a wonderful 1990's Act of Congress that lets printer manufacturers file a copyright to block third party ink refills in the name of protecting children from pornography. Clause after clause of this act are getting struck down by the Supremes, but still it limps along frustrating mostly legitimate users who run into it. Anyway, DCMA forces YouTube to suspend an account if anyone makes a claim that something uploaded violates a copyright held by another. Then, after cautious investigation, the account may be reinstated. Technically the filer of a false claim is liable to criminal charges. But this has apparently never been executed. The closest case I know of was Thunderf00t vs. VenomfangX, where a Creationist made a false claim of infringement on the author of the "Why People Laugh At Creationists" series. Meanwhile another prominent bastion of proper skepticism has been banned from YouTube.

Continue ReadingJREF Censored on YouTube via DMCA

Fundies really do say the darndest things

It's enough to make Jesus depressed. I just learned of a site called Fundies Say the Darndest Things. This is your one-stop shop for finding "an archive of the most hilarious, bizarre, ignorant, bigoted, and terrifying quotes from fundies all over the internet." The bad science is reason enough to visit the site, at least until you are sufficiently depressed at hearing such nonsense. It's pretty amazing stuff. Consider, too, the 100 all-time most ignorant and offensive fundamentalist quotes. Each on of them is taken from a fundie website and includes the link to the original (consider Rapture Ready, for example). Consider watching FSTDT's reenactment of some of the quotes at youtube (warning: some coarse language). All of this will leave you shaking your head wondering how people can be so pompously ignorant.

Continue ReadingFundies really do say the darndest things

Huffington Post to delve into investigative journalism

The Huffington Post has announced that it will begin an investigative journalism branch. I applaud this move, coming at a time when newspapers everywhere are cutting or eliminating the investigative reporting:

The Huffington Post said Sunday that it will bankroll a group of investigative journalists, directing them at first to look at stories about the nation's economy.

The popular Web site is collaborating with The Atlantic Philanthropies and other donors to launch the Huffington Post Investigative Fund with an initial budget of $1.75 million. That should be enough for 10 staff journalists who will primarily coordinate stories with freelancers, said Arianna Huffington, co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.

Work that the journalists produce will be available for any publication or Web site to use at the same time it is posted on The Huffington Post, she said.

I attended a talk by Arianna Huffington last year. Her site's procedure is that she doesn't pay bloggers money to post at her site. Rather, they are rewarded (many of them richly) in traffic. This investigative reporting wing Huffpo continues that same basic model.

Continue ReadingHuffington Post to delve into investigative journalism

How undependable are the experts?

We are in the middle of a huge economic crisis. Should we listen to the experts? Of course we should, because the economy and the financial sector are horrifically complicated. What happens when the experts disagree, however? To which experts should we listen? I took a stab at that question recently, but I remain unconvinced that any of the economics experts can be trusted. Yes, there are people like George Soros who have made a phenomenal amount of money during the crisis, but this makes me wonder whether he (and all of the other recent success stories) are smart or whether they are lucky. Today, Nicholas Kristof (in the NYT) reminds us that many experts (at least political experts) have a terrible track record. His opening sentence: "Ever wonder how financial experts could lead the world over the economic cliff?" He warns us of the “Dr. Fox effect,” named for a "pioneering series of psychology experiments in which an actor was paid to give a meaningless presentation to professional educators." Despite the fact that the lectures consisted of gibberish, they were well received. He mentions a study showing that "clinical psychologists did no better than their secretaries in their diagnoses." He also mentions a study by Philip Tetlock which determined that "The [82,000] predictions of [284] experts were, on average, only a tiny bit better than random guesses — the equivalent of a chimpanzee throwing darts at a board." Those experts who were the most impressive to most people "provided strong, coherent points of view, who saw things in blacks and whites." I'm reminded of Alan Sokal's intentionally nonsensical article that he submitted to the postmodern journal, Social Text. See here for more of the details. BTW, if you want to generate your own postmodern bullshit, use this postmodernist bullshit generator (every time you hit the link, more impressive-sounding bullshit will be assembled automatically into an article). How far astray are we led by "experts"? Consider investment "experts." There are none worse. Entire industries are built on the thoroughly disproved notion that a stock-picker can consistently beat the market. Dan Smolin has made a career of proving that stock-picker experts are thoroughly and demonstrably terrible at what they claim to be. But many of us still run to these financial "experts" to help us pick the "right" stocks. Just think of the hundreds of political military experts who were similarly awful at their recommendations and predictions regarding the invasion of Iraq. They appeared hundreds of time on network TV during the few weeks prior to the invasion, all of them confident in their assessments and advice. Consider, also that fewer than 1% of them took anti-war stances. Consider, also, that many of these "experts" were secretly in positions to financially benefit from an invasion of Iraq. Consider the thousands of religious experts, from coast to coast, who loudly and confidently tell their religious followers that there is a heaven and that they will go there, without the tiniest big of evidence in support. The followers of fundamentalist preachers continue to listen to these guys even when they attack evolutionary biologists, even though these religious leaders have no training in science and no basic understanding of the principles of evolutionary biology. Everyone loves weather forecasters, right? These guys are wrong so incredibly often that no station dares to post their track records for those five-day forecasts they confidently present night after night. The list goes on and on. We insist on listening to the experts, medical experts, beauty experts, psychologists, their track records be damned. That's because they are the best that we've got, no matter how wrong they are how often. The bottom line is that we crave experts because we crave certainty, even where there isn't any. The confirmation bias causes us to rely heavily on experts hawking our own opinions, even when there is no evidence in support, as long as the expert dishes out those opinions with a loud confident voice. And a fancy business suit doesn't hurt either.

Continue ReadingHow undependable are the experts?