Monday, December 31, 2018
It reminds me of the 1977 video called Powers of Ten (of which there are also modern versions), except with new stuff that we now know!
(Tip of the cap to Sara Solla.)
Saturday, December 29, 2018
The winner of Answers magazine's big Question Competition of 1888 was Mr. E Bond of Bloomsbury, who submitted this entry: pic.twitter.com/0kU0Mwxlqj— Dr Bob Nicholson (@DigiVictorian) December 28, 2018
And here is the beginning of the thread.
In 1888, Answers magazine ran a prize competition in which readers were challenged to send in 'The Most Interesting Question On Any Subject.' Reading through the results is like looking at Victorian Britain's Google search history...— Dr Bob Nicholson (@DigiVictorian) December 28, 2018
Thread 👇👇👇: pic.twitter.com/Z4aQDTtM3E
Thursday, December 27, 2018
In the new year, don't forget about this final, very important step when doing the final polishing of your manuscripts and grant proposals just before you submit them. :P— Mason Porter (@masonporter) December 27, 2018
[Note: I clipped this comic years ago from LA Weekly. It fits academia like a clever but frustrating glove.] pic.twitter.com/K2ncYEatya
Friday, December 21, 2018
Amazing. Train a network to classify papers (accept/reject). Then run the network on the paper describing the network, and it classifies the paper as a strong reject. This is why we can't have nice paper classifiers. (h/t @hardmaru) https://t.co/OC2baCI1Za pic.twitter.com/3N9wsKQ374— Chethan Pandarinath (@chethan) December 21, 2018
(Tip of the cap to Karen Daniels.)
Thursday, December 20, 2018
Here is picture proof that (reasonably) balanced binary trees exist in real life!— Mason Porter (@masonporter) December 21, 2018
[I took this picture about a decade ago in front of @peetscoffee a few blocks from @Caltech.] pic.twitter.com/iwxfYtVSV4
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
And I mean this literally: the title of the paper is "An Agent-Based Model for Bovine Viral Diarrhea".
Update: Normally, I hate it when papers are full of bullshit. However, I may need to make an exception in this case.
Tuesday, December 18, 2018
Elephants failed the mirror test for self-awareness — until researchers made the mirrors big enough for elephants to see themselves alongside other elephants.https://t.co/GnI2Z1hsi7 pic.twitter.com/SA5oRE65NU— Quanta Magazine (@QuantaMagazine) December 18, 2018
(Tip of the cap to Steve Strogatz.)
Friday, December 14, 2018
(Tasty, tasty reproducibility.)
(Tip of the cap to Javier Buldú.)
Update: Now that I think of it, "Sweet, sweet reproducibility." would have been better phrasing, given its larger set of allusions.
Wednesday, December 12, 2018
Title: "Variability in Fermi–Pasta–Ulam–Tsingou Arrays Can Prevent Recurrences"
Authors: Heather Nelson, Mason A. Porter, and Bhaskar Choubey
Abstract: In 1955, Fermi, Pasta, Ulam, and Tsingou reported recurrence over time of energy between modes in a one-dimensional array of nonlinear oscillators. Subsequently, there have been myriad numerical experiments using homogenous FPUT arrays in the form of chains of ideal, nonlinearly coupled oscillators. However, inherent variations (e.g., due to manufacturing tolerance) introduce heterogeneity into the parameters of any physical system. We demonstrate that such tolerances degrade the observance of recurrences, often leading to complete loss in moderately-sized arrays. We numerically simulate heterogeneous FPUT systems to investigate the effects of tolerances on dynamics. Our results illustrate that tolerances in real nonlinear oscillator arrays may limit the applicability of results from numerical experiments on them to physical systems, unless appropriate heterogeneities are taken into account.
Sunday, December 09, 2018
These are not good picks, especially the one of Harold Baines. They belong more in the Hall of Very Good, rather than in the Hall of Fame. They had very good careers and compiled large numbers in various stats, but in my opinion they don't belong in the Hall of Fame. One of the things to think about when considering whether a player raises or lowers the standards of the Hall at their position. In my view, Lee Smith is a borderline case and I would put him just below the border, but he was the all-time saves leader for a while (and, in general, I can see the arguments in his favor), and he got many Hall of Fame votes for years. Thus, I only view this as a mildly bad pick. I understand it, but I wouldn't put him in the Hall. Part of the issue with Lee Smith has always been the overrating of saves, and I am not surprised that he got in through the Today's Game Era Committee, given the many votes he got from writers over the years in the regular voting. So I can mostly understand his case. But Harold Baines? He was a very good player, but he really lowers the bar at his position. He never got a sniff from the writers, nor did he deserve it.
I'm looking forward to the regular ballot, which will get us Mariano Rivera (who may break the record for highest voting percentage), Edgar Martínez (finally!), Roy Halladay, and maybe (and hopefully!) Mike Mussina will make it. Those four all richly deserve enshrinement in the Hall of Fame.
Maybe Lee Smith's election will help Billy Wagner's case?
Friday, December 07, 2018
Comment 2: Apparently, some of my what we did in mathematics in Somerville was an even better idea than I thought. ;)
'The provision of chocolate cookies had a significant effect on course evaluation. These findings question the validity of (student evaluations of teaching) and their use in making widespread decisions within a faculty.' HT @KStackWhitney (photo: Dschwen) https://t.co/lO1v18tmf5 pic.twitter.com/N6epK3GinU— Erika Marín-Spiotta (@emsaurios) December 7, 2018
(Tip of the cap to Jacquelyn Gill.)
Tuesday, December 04, 2018
Wolfram Alpha thinks that I may want to find jewelry, even though I asked it about a differential equation. pic.twitter.com/PpfoFUbEUb— Mason Porter (@masonporter) December 4, 2018