Discussion:
U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
(too old to reply)
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2009-09-08 22:40:56 UTC
Permalink
also has made cnn tv news

U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/25/students.science.math/

however, this has been going on for a couple decades ... didn't quote
study that claimed US would contribute to more robust US economy and
GDP. past threads

past threads over past couple yrs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#33 Students mostly not ready for math, science college courses
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#36 Students mostly not ready for math, science college courses
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#38 Students mostly not ready for math, science college courses
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#46 Students mostly not ready for math, science college courses
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007s.html#22 America Competes spreads funds out
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#78 Education ranking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#57 Computer Science Education: Where Are the Software Engineers of Tomorrow?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#62 competitiveness
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008b.html#57 Govt demands password to personal computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008e.html#61 Study Finds Sharp Math, Science Skills Help Expand Economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008e.html#63 Study Finds Sharp Math, Science Skills Help Expand Economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008f.html#22 Study Finds Sharp Math, Science Skills Help Expand Economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008f.html#70 Study Finds Sharp Math, Science Skills Help Expand Economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008f.html#81 Is IT becoming extinct?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#18 VMware Chief Says the OS Is History
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008o.html#58 Everyone is getting same deal out of life: babyboomers can't retire but they get SS benefits intact
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008s.html#20 Five great technological revolutions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009d.html#21 IBM 'pulls out of US'

--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2009-10-09 03:15:16 UTC
Permalink
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <***@garlic.com> writes:
> also has made cnn tv news
>
> U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
> http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/25/students.science.math/
>
> however, this has been going on for a couple decades ... didn't quote
> study that claimed US would contribute to more robust US economy and
> GDP. past threads

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#69 U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says


It's Sputnik, Stupid!; Is it too late for the U.S. to catch up with
other countries in math and science education?
http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/08/science-education-china-technology-cio-network-sputnik.html

from above:

So, where is the U.S. 52 years later? As a society, we have unknowingly
eaten most of our Sputnik-era technology seed corn.

...

I and the others in my math and science generation are now retiring, and
we have failed to numerically and qualitatively replace ourselves. The
deputy director at one of our most prestigious national laboratories
told me two years ago that all of his top scientists would retire by
2012 and that he could not find qualified candidates to replace them.

... snip ...


--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
h***@bbs.cpcn.com
2009-10-09 03:49:42 UTC
Permalink
On Oct 8, 11:15 pm, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <***@garlic.com> wrote:

> It's Sputnik, Stupid!; Is it too late for the U.S. to catch up with
> other countries in math and science education?http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/08/science-education-china-technology-c...

> So, where is the U.S. 52 years later? As a society, we have unknowingly
> eaten most of our Sputnik-era technology seed corn.

Unfortunately, yes.

> I and the others in my math and science generation are now retiring, and
> we have failed to numerically and qualitatively replace ourselves. The
> deputy director at one of our most prestigious national laboratories
> told me two years ago that all of his top scientists would retire by
> 2012 and that he could not find qualified candidates to replace them.

It seems many will have to come from overseas, which is not good.

So why is it this way? I would posit the following:

--Media discourages it, calling eng/sci "nerds" and socially
undesirable. Just about every TV show depicts the smart kids as
losers but the stupid kids cool and fun. No stigma is assigned to the
dumb kids, but one is given to the smart kids. (Look at "Big Bang").
This discourages kids from studying those fields.

I couldn't believe but I saw a very smart teenage girl intentionally
act like a typical ditz when around her peers for those reasons.

--Lack of parental support: I submit much of the quality of education
achieved is dependent on the home. Too many parents give only lip
service to school, happy that their kids aren't arrested or flunking
out. If they go on to community college, that's cool. Parents need
to be more supportive, beginning at an early age.

--Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.

--Feast or famine job market. Remember when engineering was booming
in the 1960s and then there was massive unemployment circa 1971?
There have been several boom/bust cycles since then. That does not
encourage entrants to the field.

--Sports, sports, sports: The glories of high school go to the jocks,
not the math/sci kids. Sports and extra curricular and jobs take up a
great deal of time which ought to be spent on basic studies.

--More rigorous primary/middle school: Build a better foundation.


There are undoubtedly other reasons, but I agree this is a very
serious issue.
jmfbahciv
2009-10-09 11:03:47 UTC
Permalink
***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Oct 8, 11:15 pm, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <***@garlic.com> wrote:
>
>> It's Sputnik, Stupid!; Is it too late for the U.S. to catch up with
>> other countries in math and science education?http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/08/science-education-china-technology-c...
>
>> So, where is the U.S. 52 years later? As a society, we have unknowingly
>> eaten most of our Sputnik-era technology seed corn.
>
> Unfortunately, yes.
>
>> I and the others in my math and science generation are now retiring, and
>> we have failed to numerically and qualitatively replace ourselves. The
>> deputy director at one of our most prestigious national laboratories
>> told me two years ago that all of his top scientists would retire by
>> 2012 and that he could not find qualified candidates to replace them.
>
> It seems many will have to come from overseas, which is not good.

I know of a guy who got his PhD in physics; he could not find work
in that field. this was 4, maybe 3, years ago. I know another
guy who got his PhD in chemistry in the late 80s. He also could
not find work in his field. This one was even willing to teach
but was told he didn't fulfill the "diversity" requirement.
>
> So why is it this way? I would posit the following:
>
> --Media discourages it, calling eng/sci "nerds" and socially
> undesirable. Just about every TV show depicts the smart kids as
> losers but the stupid kids cool and fun. No stigma is assigned to the
> dumb kids, but one is given to the smart kids. (Look at "Big Bang").
> This discourages kids from studying those fields.

If you are very smart, there is nothing that will keep you from
scratching that itch your curiosity creates. As soon as high school
kids get to college and find people who are as smart, or smarter,
than you are, they'll begin to study. High school was boring in
the 60s. I'll bet it's worse now.
>
> I couldn't believe but I saw a very smart teenage girl intentionally
> act like a typical ditz when around her peers for those reasons.

Of course. It's her choice. Later, when she gets out of that stage
of hormone wars, she'll be able to work.
>
> --Lack of parental support: I submit much of the quality of education
> achieved is dependent on the home. Too many parents give only lip
> service to school, happy that their kids aren't arrested or flunking
> out. If they go on to community college, that's cool. Parents need
> to be more supportive, beginning at an early age.

Parents pass millages to throw money at the "education" problem. This
doesn't work.
>
> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.

You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>
> --Feast or famine job market. Remember when engineering was booming
> in the 1960s and then there was massive unemployment circa 1971?
> There have been several boom/bust cycles since then. That does not
> encourage entrants to the field.
>
> --Sports, sports, sports: The glories of high school go to the jocks,
> not the math/sci kids. Sports and extra curricular and jobs take up a
> great deal of time which ought to be spent on basic studies.

Jobs? Kids aren't allowed to work during a school week; child labor
laws have made it almost impossible to get any work that might
cause kids to get a splinter or something.
>
> --More rigorous primary/middle school: Build a better foundation.

Which is getting fought tooth and nail by the teachers' unions. See
the graduation mandate laws passed in Mass. The requirements are
slowly getting watered down.
>
>
> There are undoubtedly other reasons, but I agree this is a very
> serious issue.
h***@bbs.cpcn.com
2009-10-09 17:41:09 UTC
Permalink
On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
> > --Poor math teaching:  I noticed in high school and college most math
> > teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't.  That
> > is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
> > weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
> > classes.  We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
> > place for them in eng/sci.  Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>
> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
> scientists?  We already have programmers who can't code.

What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
required.






> > --Sports, sports, sports:  The glories of high school go to the jocks,
> > not the math/sci kids.  Sports and extra curricular and jobs take up a
> > great deal of time which ought to be spent on basic studies.
>
> Jobs?  Kids aren't allowed to work during a school week; child labor
> laws have made it almost impossible to get any work that might
> cause kids to get a splinter or something.

Not true anymore. Kids work a great many hours after school and on
weekends these days.
Walter Bushell
2009-10-09 22:20:48 UTC
Permalink
In article
<50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
> required.

Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
g***@mail.com
2009-10-09 23:51:33 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
> In article
><50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>> required.
>
> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>

One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
not simple interest.


--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Walter Bushell
2009-10-10 00:18:50 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@maushome.org>, ***@mail.com
wrote:

> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
> > In article
> ><50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> > ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >
> >> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> >> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> >> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> >> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
> >> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
> >> required.
> >
> > Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
> >
>
> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
> not simple interest.

And it needs to be driven home by examples.

"This is the story of Nick and Diane, two American kids doing the best
they can. Oh Yeah, life goes on, long after the thrill of living is
gone."

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Chris Barts
2009-10-12 00:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> writes:

> In article <***@maushome.org>, ***@mail.com
> wrote:
>
>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>> > In article
>> ><50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>> > ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>> >> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>> >> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>> >> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>> >> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>> >> required.
>> >
>> > Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>> >
>>
>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
>> not simple interest.
>
> And it needs to be driven home by examples.

The news provides plenty. Bringing current events (that is, turning on
the TV every so often) into math would not be a bad idea for certain
specific topics.

It would also be good to teach them how to estimate things. That is
almost completely neglected IME. Giving them number sense lets them know
when numbers look wrong, so they can check up on newspapers and
calculators and other potential sources of misinformation.

The University of Maryland has a Fermi Problems site:
http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/fermi/fermi.htm

Some examples:

1. Estimate the total number of hairs on your head.

2. Estimate the number of square inches of pizza consumed by all the
students at the University of Maryland during one semester.

3. When it rains, water would accumulate on the roofs of flat-topped
buildings if there were no drains. A heavy rain may deposit water to a
depth of an inch or more. Given that water has a mass of about 1 gm/cm^3,
estimate the total force the roof of the physics lecture hall would
have to support if we had an inch of rain and the roof drains were
plugged.

4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
into orbit. Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)

>
> "This is the story of Nick and Diane, two American kids doing the best
> they can. Oh Yeah, life goes on, long after the thrill of living is
> gone."

I suppose this would be the version of the song changed just enough to
avoid copyright litigation... ;)

(Psst... "Jack and Diane", not Nick.)
Bernd Felsche
2009-10-12 01:30:59 UTC
Permalink
Chris Barts <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> writes:
>> ***@mail.com wrote:
>>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>> > ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>>> >> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math
>>> >> whizzes but still can be taught how to do math if taught
>>> >> better. These people will not end up being the leading
>>> >> lights of the future, but can fill the need of lower
>>> >> echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>> >> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high
>>> >> demands of math required.

>>> > Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.

>>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
>>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges
>>> compound, not simple interest.

>> And it needs to be driven home by examples.

>The news provides plenty. Bringing current events (that is, turning on
>the TV every so often) into math would not be a bad idea for certain
>specific topics.

>It would also be good to teach them how to estimate things. That is
>almost completely neglected IME. Giving them number sense lets them know
>when numbers look wrong, so they can check up on newspapers and
>calculators and other potential sources of misinformation.

>The University of Maryland has a Fermi Problems site:
>http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/fermi/fermi.htm

>Some examples:

>1. Estimate the total number of hairs on your head.

>2. Estimate the number of square inches of pizza consumed by all the
> students at the University of Maryland during one semester.

>3. When it rains, water would accumulate on the roofs of flat-topped
> buildings if there were no drains. A heavy rain may deposit water to a
> depth of an inch or more. Given that water has a mass of about 1 gm/cm^3,
> estimate the total force the roof of the physics lecture hall would
> have to support if we had an inch of rain and the roof drains were
> plugged.

>4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
> into orbit. Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)

I don't know where you're buying your steel, but if it's only 5
times as dense as water, it's NOT steel.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Those who can make you believe absurdities
X against HTML mail | can make you commit atrocities.
/ \ and postings | -- Voltaire
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-12 14:33:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:30:59 +0800
Bernd Felsche <***@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:

> I don't know where you're buying your steel, but if it's only 5
> times as dense as water, it's NOT steel.

Foam steel shipped from New-New ?

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
A***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com
2009-10-12 02:18:27 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
<chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>
>4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
> into orbit.
I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
quite good enought to actually figure it out.

>Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
And that it would probably sink into the earth no matter what you use
for a base. :-)

<snip>
--
ArarghMail910 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
Andrew Swallow
2009-10-12 02:28:22 UTC
Permalink
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>> into orbit.
> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
> quite good enought to actually figure it out.

The tower would have to be the same height as geostationary orbit
approximately 36,000 km (22,000 miles) above sea level for the
payload to stay in orbit.

The tower has saved about 1 km/s of velocity and has got the spacecraft
above the atmosphere. To stay in orbit the payload would need
to accelerate by about 7.5 km/s.

Andrew Swallow
Morten Reistad
2009-10-12 09:14:41 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@bt.com>,
Andrew Swallow <***@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
>> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>>> into orbit.
>> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
>> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
>> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
>> quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>
>The tower would have to be the same height as geostationary orbit
>approximately 36,000 km (22,000 miles) above sea level for the
>payload to stay in orbit.

You can stay in orbit from a somwehat lower altitude; this will
descrobe the apogee, and the perigee can be quite a lot lower. It
just has to stay clear of the athmosphere.

>The tower has saved about 1 km/s of velocity and has got the spacecraft
>above the atmosphere. To stay in orbit the payload would need
>to accelerate by about 7.5 km/s.

-- mrr
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-12 14:34:56 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:28:22 +0100
Andrew Swallow <***@btopenworld.com> wrote:

> ***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
> > <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without
> >> using rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator.
> >> One would put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and
> >> just step out into orbit.
> > I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
> > not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
> > not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
> > quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>
> The tower would have to be the same height as geostationary orbit
> approximately 36,000 km (22,000 miles) above sea level for the
> payload to stay in orbit.
>
> The tower has saved about 1 km/s of velocity and has got the spacecraft
> above the atmosphere. To stay in orbit the payload would need
> to accelerate by about 7.5 km/s.

So the tower should contain a 300km linear accelerator and a *lot*
of capacitors.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-12 03:18:25 UTC
Permalink
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:

> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>> into orbit.
> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
> quite good enought to actually figure it out.

wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).

>>Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
>> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
>> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
>> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
> And that it would probably sink into the earth no matter what you use
> for a base. :-)
>
> <snip>

--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
A***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com
2009-10-12 06:51:43 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:18:25 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
<***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

>***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
>
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
>> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>>4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>>> into orbit.
>> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
>> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
>> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
>> quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>
>wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
A geosynchronous orbit is 22,000 miles (some 35,400 kilometers) out
there - I have known that figure for YEARS.

>
>>>Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
>>> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
>>> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
>>> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
>> And that it would probably sink into the earth no matter what you use
>> for a base. :-)
>>
>> <snip>
--
ArarghMail910 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2009-10-12 14:14:48 UTC
Permalink
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
> A geosynchronous orbit is 22,000 miles (some 35,400 kilometers) out
> there - I have known that figure for YEARS.

I got suckered into doing some HSDT stuff for SBS (consortium of ibm,
aetna and comsat) which included getting involved in how computer
communication interface to earth stations ... and all the stuff about
latency going up to satellite and back down (couple hops if going
between west coast and europe), working with vendors building custom
equipment to design spec, etc. I got invittation to cape launch party
for 41-D that was taking sbs4 part way up to orbit (had to be released
from the bay and had rocket boosting it the rest of the way).

one of the vendors even mentioned that a specific large
telecommunication company had approached them to build identical set of
earth stations to our specs. (industrial espionage ... there has been
periodic references to "business ethics" being an oxymoron)

41-d reference at nasa
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/41-d/mission-41-d.html

misc. past posts mentioning HSDT
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt

misc. past posts mentioning 41-d:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#27 Tysons Corner, Virginia
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#14 Ping: Anne & Lynn Wheeler
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#23 Health care and lies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#21 Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#11 An Out-of-the-Main Activity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#16 Why I use a Mac, anno 2006
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006p.html#31 "25th Anniversary of the Personal Computer"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#41 Year-end computer bug could ground Shuttle
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#61 Damn
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008m.html#19 IBM-MAIN longevity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008m.html#20 IBM-MAIN longevity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008m.html#44 IBM-MAIN longevity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#27 My Vintage Dream PC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#76 And, 40 years of IBM midrange

--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-12 14:17:44 UTC
Permalink
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:

> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:18:25 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
> <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>
>>***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
>>> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
>>> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
>>> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
>>> quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>>
>>wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>>higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
> A geosynchronous orbit is 22,000 miles (some 35,400 kilometers) out
> there - I have known that figure for YEARS.

How appropriate that that brain fart happened in a thread on
innumeracy. I sent out a cancel about a minute after the original post,
in hopes eternal-september would at least let me cancel my own posts.....
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-13 09:36:43 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:17:44 -0600
Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

> How appropriate that that brain fart happened in a thread on
> innumeracy. I sent out a cancel about a minute after the original post,
> in hopes eternal-september would at least let me cancel my own posts.....

I think it did honour the cancel but by then it had already been
passed on to servers that didn't. I never saw your post but I did see
replies.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Morten Reistad
2009-10-12 09:16:23 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
>
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
>> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>>4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>>> into orbit.
>> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
>> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
>> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
>> quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>
>wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).

Perhaps that wiki page lost three digits on the way?

>>>Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
>>> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
>>> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
>>> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
>> And that it would probably sink into the earth no matter what you use
>> for a base. :-)

Or just collapse internally.

-- mrr
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-12 14:54:45 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:16:23 +0200
Morten Reistad <***@last.name> wrote:

> In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

> >wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
> >higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
>
> Perhaps that wiki page lost three digits on the way?

I didn't see Joe's post - but geostationary is more like 40
*thousand* km up, 40 km up is not even considered to be in space.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-12 21:45:03 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> writes:

> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:16:23 +0200
> Morten Reistad <***@last.name> wrote:
>
>> In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
>> Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>
>> >wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>> >higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
>>
>> Perhaps that wiki page lost three digits on the way?
>
> I didn't see Joe's post - but geostationary is more like 40
> *thousand* km up, 40 km up is not even considered to be in space.

Maybe my cancel at least saved some people from my brain fart.....
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
A***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com
2009-10-12 23:30:16 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:45:03 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
<***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

>Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:16:23 +0200
>> Morten Reistad <***@last.name> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
>>> Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> >wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>>> >higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
>>>
>>> Perhaps that wiki page lost three digits on the way?
>>
>> I didn't see Joe's post - but geostationary is more like 40
>> *thousand* km up, 40 km up is not even considered to be in space.
>
>Maybe my cancel at least saved some people from my brain fart.....

I didn't think many news servers honored cancels anymore.
--
ArarghMail910 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-13 02:46:46 UTC
Permalink
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
>
> I didn't think many news servers honored cancels anymore.

I was sort of hoping that since I had to authenticate they would believe
it was really me....
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
A***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com
2009-10-13 04:45:26 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:46:46 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
<***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

>***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com writes:
>>
>> I didn't think many news servers honored cancels anymore.
>
>I was sort of hoping that since I had to authenticate they would believe
>it was really me....
Your server believed it was talking to you, but all the rest of the
servers have no idea who issued the cancel.

Remember, news is passed by servers peering and exchanging articles.

ANYBODY can issue/forge a cancel for ANYTHING.

There is no way (that I know of) to verify that a cancel was actually
issued by the original sender of the message.
--
ArarghMail910 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
jmfbahciv
2009-10-13 13:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:16:23 +0200
>> Morten Reistad <***@last.name> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
>>> Joe Pfeiffer <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>>>> wikipedia is your friend -- a 300 km high tower is almost ten times
>>>> higher than necessary for a geosynchronous orbit (only 40KM high).
>>> Perhaps that wiki page lost three digits on the way?
>> I didn't see Joe's post - but geostationary is more like 40
>> *thousand* km up, 40 km up is not even considered to be in space.
>
> Maybe my cancel at least saved some people from my brain fart.....

ah, but look at all the gas we exuded thinking about it :-).

/BAH
Walter Bushell
2009-10-12 12:10:45 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:23:06 -0600, Chris Barts
> <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
> > rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
> > put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
> > into orbit.
> I should think one would be more likely to fall back to earth. But
> not straignt down. :-) My snap guess is the top of such a tower is
> not moving at orbital speed for that height. My math knowledge is not
> quite good enought to actually figure it out.
>
> >Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
> > tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
> > Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
> > as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
> And that it would probably sink into the earth no matter what you use
> for a base. :-)
>
> <snip>

Which is the reason you counterweight the thing with a mass way about
orbital height (geostationary--only works as the equator) so the whole
thing is under tension.

This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
beast.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-12 14:41:26 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:

> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
> beast.

Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
g***@mail.com
2009-10-12 22:51:24 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
>> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
>> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
>> beast.
>
> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
> with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
>

Would the Africans mind?..


--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Peter Flass
2009-10-12 23:31:11 UTC
Permalink
***@mail.com wrote:
> On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
>>> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
>>> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
>>> beast.
>> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
>> with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
>>
>
> Would the Africans mind?..
>
>

Apparently not, since they're winning to put up with a big solar
installation in the Sahara.
g***@mail.com
2009-10-13 11:51:23 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-12, Peter Flass <***@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> ***@mail.com wrote:
>> On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
>>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
>>>> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
>>>> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
>>>> beast.
>>> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
>>> with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
>>>
>>
>> Would the Africans mind?..
>>
>>
>
> Apparently not, since they're winning to put up with a big solar
^ illi ^?
> installation in the Sahara.

I don't think that idea has been fully floated with those countries
either.

--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Peter Flass
2009-10-13 21:16:51 UTC
Permalink
***@mail.com wrote:
> On 2009-10-12, Peter Flass <***@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ***@mail.com wrote:
>>> On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
>>>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
>>>>> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
>>>>> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
>>>>> beast.
>>>> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
>>>> with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
>>>>
>>> Would the Africans mind?..
>>>
>>>
>> Apparently not, since they're winning to put up with a big solar
> ^ illi ^?
>> installation in the Sahara.
>
> I don't think that idea has been fully floated with those countries
> either.
>

Sorry -- "willing". My spiel-chucker must have sprung a leak.

I was under the impression the the project was approved and ready to get
underway.
Bernd Felsche
2009-10-14 03:06:26 UTC
Permalink
***@mail.com wrote:
>On 2009-10-12, Peter Flass <***@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ***@mail.com wrote:
>>> On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
>>>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:

>>>>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly
>>>>> that limited to the Solar System, and of some significant
>>>>> engineering speculation. We need some advances in material
>>>>> technology to make such a beast.

>>>> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper.
>>>> IIRC with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African
>>>> continent.

>>> Would the Africans mind?..

>> Apparently not, since they're winning to put up with a big solar
> ^ illi ^?
>> installation in the Sahara.

>I don't think that idea has been fully floated with those countries
>either.

You reckon that they might tell them about the dust?
And that they don't volunteer to wash the panels on a regular basis
and then to rip the weeds out if any drops of water sprinkle onto
the ground?

The local "conservationists" might have a word or two about THEIR
environment as well.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Those who can make you believe absurdities
X against HTML mail | can make you commit atrocities.
/ \ and postings | -- Voltaire
g***@mail.com
2009-10-14 09:51:17 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-14, Bernd Felsche <***@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
> ***@mail.com wrote:
>>On 2009-10-12, Peter Flass <***@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> And that they don't volunteer to wash the panels on a regular basis
> and then to rip the weeds out if any drops of water sprinkle onto
> the ground?
>
> The local "conservationists" might have a word or two about THEIR
> environment as well.

Humm, yes, `conservationists' would be a good description.

--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-15 00:34:07 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2009 22:51:24 GMT
***@mail.com wrote:

> On 2009-10-12, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
> > Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
> >> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
> >> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such
> >> a beast.
> >
> > Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
> > with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
> >
>
> Would the Africans mind?..

I suppose that would depend on the resettlement deal - I don't know
where we'd get that much steel though.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
jmfbahciv
2009-10-13 13:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:10:45 -0400
> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a fairly common trope of science fiction particularly that
>> limited to the Solar System, and of some significant engineering
>> speculation. We need some advances in material technology to make such a
>> beast.
>
> Nah you can build it out of steel with a wide enough taper. IIRC
> with a 1 meter top the bottom will fit within the African continent.
>

almost enough area to place a turtle.

/BAH
g***@mail.com
2009-10-12 08:51:28 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-12, Chris Barts <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> writes:
>
>
> 1. Estimate the total number of hairs on your head.

In some people, a rapidly reducing figure!.

>
> 2. Estimate the number of square inches of pizza consumed by all the
> students at the University of Maryland during one semester.
>
> 3. When it rains, water would accumulate on the roofs of flat-topped
> buildings if there were no drains. A heavy rain may deposit water to a
> depth of an inch or more. Given that water has a mass of about 1 gm/cm^3,
> estimate the total force the roof of the physics lecture hall would
> have to support if we had an inch of rain and the roof drains were
> plugged.
>
> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
> into orbit. Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)

Whassiz Arthur C. Clarkes book?.. He went tthrough several books
using that theme, AFAIRemember, the only possibility was fibers
several times stronger than steel, but not heavier. Course, it would,
in the case of steel, be a framework, not a solid steel tower.. or a
box structure, in which case, t'would depend on the box. Half the
structure would be in tension, balancing the lower bit.

>
>>
>> "This is the story of Nick and Diane, two American kids doing the best
>> they can. Oh Yeah, life goes on, long after the thrill of living is
>> gone."
>
> I suppose this would be the version of the song changed just enough to
> avoid copyright litigation... ;)
>
> (Psst... "Jack and Diane", not Nick.)


--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Huge
2009-10-12 09:07:11 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-12, ***@mail.com <***@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2009-10-12, Chris Barts <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> writes:

>> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>> into orbit. Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
>> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
>> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
>> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
>
> Whassiz Arthur C. Clarkes book?..

The Fountains of Paradise.

I saw him give a presentation at the Royal Society about "space elevators".


--
What did happen on the 9th of November, anyway?
http://hyperangry.blogspot.com/
[email me, if you must, at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]
g***@mail.com
2009-10-12 11:51:27 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-12, Huge <***@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2009-10-12, ***@mail.com <***@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2009-10-12, Chris Barts <chbarts+***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> writes:
>
>>> 4. One suggestion for putting satellites into orbit cheaply without using
>>> rockets is to build a tower 300 km high containing an elevator. One would
>>> put the payload in the elevator, lift it to the top, and just step out
>>> into orbit. Ignoring other problems (such as structural strain on the
>>> tower), estimate the weight of such a tower if its base were the size of
>>> Washington DC and it were made of steel. (Steel is about 5 times as dense
>>> as water, which has a density of 1 gm/cm^3.)
>>
>> Whassiz Arthur C. Clarkes book?..
>
> The Fountains of Paradise.
>
> I saw him give a presentation at the Royal Society about "space elevators".
>
>

Good thing that he's dead (he is, innit?), otherwise if he realized
that another of his ideas was coming, he would be unbearable. In one
of the books, it snaps. (AFAIRemember, he had it placed in Ceylon,
near the Equator, but there are higher bases in Indonesian-Occupied
New Guinea)

--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-12 14:49:58 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2009 11:51:27 GMT
***@mail.com wrote:

> Good thing that he's dead (he is, innit?), otherwise if he realized
> that another of his ideas was coming, he would be unbearable. In one
> of the books, it snaps. (AFAIRemember, he had it placed in Ceylon,
> near the Equator, but there are higher bases in Indonesian-Occupied
> New Guinea)

It's not his idea, it goes back to a Russian by the name of Yuri
Artsutanov in 1960 which Clarke acknowledges in the afterword of Fountains
of Paradise.

He had it placed in an imaginary country called Taprobane which he
modelled closely on Sri Lanka (aka Ceylon). Most writers seem to go for
Quito in Ecuador which is apparently a pretty reasonable place to drop one.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-12 21:43:16 UTC
Permalink
In Clarke and Pohl's "The Last Theorem" (the only book the two ever
collaborated on, and I think maybe Clarke's last book), they put it in
Sri Lanka, and admitted in an afterward they'd moved Sri Lanka closer to
the equator for purposes of the book.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
sidd
2009-10-13 03:43:46 UTC
Permalink
Joe Pfeiffer wrote on Monday 12 October 2009 11:43 pm:

Re: gravity, orbits

a tower to geostationary orbit confused me quite a bit, until i realized
there were two separate things to get confused about. (then it confused me
almost twice as much for a while...)

one is the gravitational potential itself, and the orbits thereof.

the other is the 24 hour rotation imposed on the problem by a rigid tower
co-rotating with the earth.

consider a demon who builds a tower to the heavens in Quito. He seizes you
and drags you up it, only pausing to drop you off it evry nowanthen. Being
demonic and bored, he retrieves your remains each time, reanimates them as
necessary and proceeds, letting you go at a higher point each time.
23kilomiles up or so is the first time you dont move when he lets you go,
but even before that you will have been in orbits with non grazing perigees
(after splashing down in the atlantic, making a crater in africa and eaten
by sharks in the indian ocean, until perigee is outside the atmosphere,
after which you merely expire from lack of air)

As he passes geostationary point, your free orbit (the path you describe
between demonic possessions) circularizes, the major axis of your orbital
ellipse goes to zero and then reappears turned thru pi/2, and eccentricity
increases again, until it crosses 1 at parabolic orbit and (earth) escape
velocity point.

I have always found that imposing the daily co-rotating frame leads to all
manner of complications such as hurricanes. And it isnt as tho Newtonian
gravity doesn't have all manner of twisted arcana, all by itself, without
considering how to work it out while chasing your tail evry day.

One of those arcana is the fifth conserved quantity

fizicists are a lazy bunch and the first thing they do when looking at a
calculation are the symmetries they can use to finesse the calculations

Gravity is a central (acts toward a single point), and an inverse square
(varies inversely as the square of the distance) force. The central force
bit already gives you a powerful symmetry: that of the rotational group in
3 dimensions, called the special orthogonal group or SO(3). You immediately
know that the angular momentum, L, will be conserved, which is a 3-D
vector, so that gives you 3 conserved quantities. You also know that time
does no appear explicitly in the newtonian equations. Therefore energy is
also conserved, and that is another conserved quantity, and you have,
immediately, 4 constants of the motion, quantities that are constant once
you know the intial conditions (initial position and velocity of the
orbiting mass)

There are deep corners with inverse square forces like gravity. that magic
minus 2 power ensures that orbits are closed (evry time the demon lets you
go, you come back to his clutches after one orbital period, neglecting the
orbits that end with a big kaboom) but more; it is a peculiar symmetry that
gives you one more conserved quantity related to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz
vector, which is a litle vector that points from the central point of the
force thru the axis of symmetry of the orbit and whose magnitude is
proportional to the eccentricity. This is a result that exposes the deeper
SO(4) and SO(3,1) symmetries and makes me feel all deep and tingly inside.
probly coz i dont fully understand it.

there are more symmetries here, that of reflection and such, which brings in
O(4) and other groups, but i have probly said too much already
g***@mail.com
2009-10-13 11:51:22 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-13, sidd <***@situ.com> wrote:
>
> the other is the 24 hour rotation imposed on the problem by a rigid tower
> co-rotating with the earth.
>
> consider a demon who builds a tower to the heavens in Quito. He seizes you
> and drags you up it, only pausing to drop you off it evry nowanthen. Being
> demonic and bored, he retrieves your remains each time, reanimates them as
> necessary and proceeds, letting you go at a higher point each time.
> 23kilomiles up or so is the first time you dont move when he lets you go,
> but even before that you will have been in orbits with non grazing perigees
> (after splashing down in the atlantic, making a crater in africa and eaten
> by sharks in the indian ocean, until perigee is outside the atmosphere,
> after which you merely expire from lack of air)
>
> As he passes geostationary point, your free orbit (the path you describe
> between demonic possessions) circularizes, the major axis of your orbital
> ellipse goes to zero and then reappears turned thru pi/2, and eccentricity
> increases again, until it crosses 1 at parabolic orbit and (earth) escape
> velocity point.
>
> I have always found that imposing the daily co-rotating frame leads to all
> manner of complications such as hurricanes. And it isnt as tho Newtonian
> gravity doesn't have all manner of twisted arcana, all by itself, without
> considering how to work it out while chasing your tail evry day.
>
> One of those arcana is the fifth conserved quantity
>
> fizicists are a lazy bunch and the first thing they do when looking at a
> calculation are the symmetries they can use to finesse the calculations
>
> Gravity is a central (acts toward a single point), and an inverse square
> (varies inversely as the square of the distance) force. The central force
> bit already gives you a powerful symmetry: that of the rotational group in
> 3 dimensions, called the special orthogonal group or SO(3). You immediately
> know that the angular momentum, L, will be conserved, which is a 3-D
> vector, so that gives you 3 conserved quantities. You also know that time
> does no appear explicitly in the newtonian equations. Therefore energy is
> also conserved, and that is another conserved quantity, and you have,
> immediately, 4 constants of the motion, quantities that are constant once
> you know the intial conditions (initial position and velocity of the
> orbiting mass)
>
> There are deep corners with inverse square forces like gravity. that magic
> minus 2 power ensures that orbits are closed (evry time the demon lets you
> go, you come back to his clutches after one orbital period, neglecting the
> orbits that end with a big kaboom) but more; it is a peculiar symmetry that
> gives you one more conserved quantity related to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz
> vector, which is a litle vector that points from the central point of the
> force thru the axis of symmetry of the orbit and whose magnitude is
> proportional to the eccentricity. This is a result that exposes the deeper
> SO(4) and SO(3,1) symmetries and makes me feel all deep and tingly inside.
> probly coz i dont fully understand it.
>
> there are more symmetries here, that of reflection and such, which brings in
> O(4) and other groups, but i have probly said too much already
>

Or not enough?.
from memory, one of the projects that I read about was building from
geostationry orbit, both towards the earth, and away from it, to
balance the load. Material was not realizable with current technology,
something like sapphire fibres (Must read up about all this?). In one
of Clarkes episodes, someone travelling up the (line?) released a
battery for some reason (reduce load?), there was a bit about where
it would land. Early Clarke was a lot about things like this,
mind-games of how things are done, wwhile later, with ghost writers,
was a lot lower in quality. Like PTerrys new book.

Want a aliens-were-here-ages-ago suggestion?.
Jack and the beanstalk would be based on a folk memory of something
like this.



--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
jmfbahciv
2009-10-20 12:27:39 UTC
Permalink
sidd wrote:
> Joe Pfeiffer wrote on Monday 12 October 2009 11:43 pm:
>
> Re: gravity, orbits
>
> a tower to geostationary orbit confused me quite a bit, until i realized
> there were two separate things to get confused about. (then it confused me
> almost twice as much for a while...)
>
> one is the gravitational potential itself, and the orbits thereof.
>
> the other is the 24 hour rotation imposed on the problem by a rigid tower
> co-rotating with the earth.
>
> consider a demon who builds a tower to the heavens in Quito. He seizes you
> and drags you up it, only pausing to drop you off it evry nowanthen. Being
> demonic and bored, he retrieves your remains each time, reanimates them as
> necessary and proceeds, letting you go at a higher point each time.
> 23kilomiles up or so is the first time you dont move when he lets you go,
> but even before that you will have been in orbits with non grazing perigees
> (after splashing down in the atlantic, making a crater in africa and eaten
> by sharks in the indian ocean, until perigee is outside the atmosphere,
> after which you merely expire from lack of air)
>
> As he passes geostationary point, your free orbit (the path you describe
> between demonic possessions) circularizes, the major axis of your orbital
> ellipse goes to zero and then reappears turned thru pi/2, and eccentricity
> increases again, until it crosses 1 at parabolic orbit and (earth) escape
> velocity point.
>
> I have always found that imposing the daily co-rotating frame leads to all
> manner of complications such as hurricanes. And it isnt as tho Newtonian
> gravity doesn't have all manner of twisted arcana, all by itself, without
> considering how to work it out while chasing your tail evry day.
>
> One of those arcana is the fifth conserved quantity
>
> fizicists are a lazy bunch and the first thing they do when looking at a
> calculation are the symmetries they can use to finesse the calculations
>
> Gravity is a central (acts toward a single point), and an inverse square
> (varies inversely as the square of the distance) force. The central force
> bit already gives you a powerful symmetry: that of the rotational group in
> 3 dimensions, called the special orthogonal group or SO(3). You immediately
> know that the angular momentum, L, will be conserved, which is a 3-D
> vector, so that gives you 3 conserved quantities. You also know that time
> does no appear explicitly in the newtonian equations. Therefore energy is
> also conserved, and that is another conserved quantity, and you have,
> immediately, 4 constants of the motion, quantities that are constant once
> you know the intial conditions (initial position and velocity of the
> orbiting mass)
>
> There are deep corners with inverse square forces like gravity. that magic
> minus 2 power ensures that orbits are closed (evry time the demon lets you
> go, you come back to his clutches after one orbital period, neglecting the
> orbits that end with a big kaboom) but more; it is a peculiar symmetry that
> gives you one more conserved quantity related to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz
> vector, which is a litle vector that points from the central point of the
> force thru the axis of symmetry of the orbit and whose magnitude is
> proportional to the eccentricity. This is a result that exposes the deeper
> SO(4) and SO(3,1) symmetries and makes me feel all deep and tingly inside.
> probly coz i dont fully understand it.
>
> there are more symmetries here, that of reflection and such, which brings in
> O(4) and other groups, but i have probly said too much already
>
Or not enough :-).

Query: If I stand on the point where the axis of rotation comes up
through the ground at the North Pole (chosen because I can't think
3D geometry upsidedown), will I feel that rotation?

Assuming that one could construct a tower 24Kmiles high, would
it be possible to just walk up the sides of the tower in a
spiral? My "down" would be the side of the spinning tower...
wouldn't it?

/BAH
sidd
2009-10-20 18:52:59 UTC
Permalink
jmfbahciv wrote on Tuesday 20 October 2009 02:27 pm:


> Query: If I stand on the point where the axis of rotation comes up
> through the ground at the North Pole (chosen because I can't think
> 3D geometry upsidedown), will I feel that rotation?

no. once a day is too slow for the accelerometers in our inner ear. you
could see it with a Foucault pendulum


> Assuming that one could construct a tower 24Kmiles high,

at the pole ?

> would it be possible to just walk up the sides of the tower in a
> spiral? My "down" would be the side of the spinning tower...
> wouldn't it?

no. a difference between a tower at the equator and one at the pole is that
when the demon drops you from the tower at the equator, you describe far
more interesting orbits, than if (s)he were to drop you off a tower at the
pole, where you always drop straight down like a sack of wet cement.
jmfbahciv
2009-10-13 13:05:48 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 12 Oct 2009 11:51:27 GMT
> ***@mail.com wrote:
>
>> Good thing that he's dead (he is, innit?), otherwise if he realized
>> that another of his ideas was coming, he would be unbearable. In one
>> of the books, it snaps. (AFAIRemember, he had it placed in Ceylon,
>> near the Equator, but there are higher bases in Indonesian-Occupied
>> New Guinea)
>
> It's not his idea, it goes back to a Russian by the name of Yuri
> Artsutanov in 1960 which Clarke acknowledges in the afterword of Fountains
> of Paradise.
>
> He had it placed in an imaginary country called Taprobane which he
> modelled closely on Sri Lanka (aka Ceylon). Most writers seem to go for
> Quito in Ecuador which is apparently a pretty reasonable place to drop one.
>
I would think that the ideal place would be the spot whose center would
be one of the two spots that only spins and doesn't make an arc.
Of course, it would have to be on a movable platform to accomodate the
wiggle of poles.

/BAH
Joe Makowiec
2009-10-12 13:03:31 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, wrote:

> Whassiz Arthur C. Clarkes book?.. He went tthrough several books
> using that theme, AFAIRemember, the only possibility was fibers
> several times stronger than steel, but not heavier. Course, it would,
> in the case of steel, be a framework, not a solid steel tower.. or a
> box structure, in which case, t'would depend on the box. Half the
> structure would be in tension, balancing the lower bit.

Also Larry Niven, in the Ringworld series. He postulates a broken Dyson
sphere, held together by cabling. These cables are light but strong, and
when the inevitable deterioration occurs, they cause problems with
spaceships flying in the vicinity.

--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Joe Makowiec
2009-10-12 14:35:34 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, Joe Makowiec wrote:

> a broken Dyson sphere,

Let me expand on that - when the Ringworld Engineers built Ringworld, it
was in fine working order. It was 'broken' in the sense that a Dyson
Sphere completely encloses a star. Ringworld is complete, but is only an
annulus, not a sphere, and thus only part of a sphere or 'broken'.

--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
A***@NOT.AT.Arargh.com
2009-10-12 19:08:55 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:35:34 +0000 (UTC), Joe Makowiec
<***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, Joe Makowiec wrote:
>
>> a broken Dyson sphere,
>
>Let me expand on that - when the Ringworld Engineers built Ringworld, it
>was in fine working order. It was 'broken' in the sense that a Dyson
>Sphere completely encloses a star. Ringworld is complete, but is only an
>annulus, not a sphere, and thus only part of a sphere or 'broken'.
And the cables weren't holding the ring together, but keeping the ring
of panels that provided night & day aligned. At least until the ship
hit and broke the cable.
--
ArarghMail910 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-13 09:32:17 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:35:34 +0000 (UTC)
Joe Makowiec <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, Joe Makowiec wrote:
>
> > a broken Dyson sphere,
>
> Let me expand on that - when the Ringworld Engineers built Ringworld, it
> was in fine working order. It was 'broken' in the sense that a Dyson
> Sphere completely encloses a star. Ringworld is complete, but is only an
> annulus, not a sphere, and thus only part of a sphere or 'broken'.

Well it's also broken in the sense that it requires quite a lot of
maintenance mechanisms to keep it in good order - attitude jets to deal
with the instability, pumped pipelines up to half a million miles long to
retrieve the topsoil from the ocean bottoms (actually that seems like a
really inelegant solution, I'd have been inclined to go for much shorter
pipelines and dump the flup nearer to the oceans), meteor protection system,
puncture repairs, atmosphere topup (sooner or later leakage over the
edges and through eyestorms will need to be made up), cable restringing for
the shadow squares and probably a bunch more that haven't yet been noticed.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Walter Bushell
2009-10-13 12:09:23 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@eircom.net>,
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:35:34 +0000 (UTC)
> Joe Makowiec <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, Joe Makowiec wrote:
> >
> > > a broken Dyson sphere,
> >
> > Let me expand on that - when the Ringworld Engineers built Ringworld, it
> > was in fine working order. It was 'broken' in the sense that a Dyson
> > Sphere completely encloses a star. Ringworld is complete, but is only an
> > annulus, not a sphere, and thus only part of a sphere or 'broken'.
>
> Well it's also broken in the sense that it requires quite a lot of
> maintenance mechanisms to keep it in good order - attitude jets to deal
> with the instability, pumped pipelines up to half a million miles long to
> retrieve the topsoil from the ocean bottoms (actually that seems like a
> really inelegant solution, I'd have been inclined to go for much shorter
> pipelines and dump the flup nearer to the oceans), meteor protection system,
> puncture repairs, atmosphere topup (sooner or later leakage over the
> edges and through eyestorms will need to be made up), cable restringing for
> the shadow squares and probably a bunch more that haven't yet been noticed.

But, it's built by Protectors who are confident of their ability to come
up with a solution.

Wait until the Moties get ahold of the stories and put a ringworld in
their system. Soon more Motie population than humans in all the Empire
of Man.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-15 00:39:07 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:09:23 -0400
Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:

> Wait until the Moties get ahold of the stories and put a ringworld in
> their system. Soon more Motie population than humans in all the Empire
> of Man.

Eeek.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Walter Bushell
2009-10-15 12:45:00 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@eircom.net>,
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:09:23 -0400
> Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>
> > Wait until the Moties get ahold of the stories and put a ringworld in
> > their system. Soon more Motie population than humans in all the Empire
> > of Man.
>
> Eeek.

Next novel Ringworm, where the humans bomb the Ringworld with the
contraceptive worm.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Patrick Scheible
2009-10-13 20:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <***@eircom.net> writes:

> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:35:34 +0000 (UTC)
> Joe Makowiec <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 12 Oct 2009 in alt.folklore.computers, Joe Makowiec wrote:
> >
> > > a broken Dyson sphere,
> >
> > Let me expand on that - when the Ringworld Engineers built Ringworld, it
> > was in fine working order. It was 'broken' in the sense that a Dyson
> > Sphere completely encloses a star. Ringworld is complete, but is only an
> > annulus, not a sphere, and thus only part of a sphere or 'broken'.
>
> Well it's also broken in the sense that it requires quite a lot of
> maintenance mechanisms to keep it in good order - attitude jets to deal
> with the instability, pumped pipelines up to half a million miles long to
> retrieve the topsoil from the ocean bottoms (actually that seems like a
> really inelegant solution, I'd have been inclined to go for much shorter
> pipelines and dump the flup nearer to the oceans), meteor protection system,
> puncture repairs, atmosphere topup (sooner or later leakage over the
> edges and through eyestorms will need to be made up), cable restringing for
> the shadow squares and probably a bunch more that haven't yet been noticed.

Yes, though none of those would be a big problem for engineers
advanced enough to build Ringworld in the first place.

Though if I were designing Ringworld, I'd have found some way to
separate it into several regions that were biologically isolated from
each other. That way plagues like the superconductor plague or
anything else affecting the people or other flora or fauna could be
stopped before they infected the entire structure.

-- Patrick
Dave Wade
2009-10-10 14:07:53 UTC
Permalink
<***@mail.com> wrote in message
news:***@maushome.org...
> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article
>><50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>> required.
>>
>> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>>
>
> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
> not simple interest.
>

Interest on my first mortgage was simple. However that was a long time
ago...


>
> --
> Greymaus....
> Irritating messsage suggestions?
Peter Flass
2009-10-10 18:57:58 UTC
Permalink
Dave Wade wrote:
> <***@mail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@maushome.org...
>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>>> required.
>>>
>>> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>>>
>>
>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
>> not simple interest.
>>
>
> Interest on my first mortgage was simple. However that was a long time
> ago...
>
>
Back then, *everything* was simple;-)
Charles Richmond
2009-10-11 01:03:16 UTC
Permalink
Peter Flass wrote:
> Dave Wade wrote:
>> <***@mail.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@maushome.org...
>>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>>> In article
>>>> <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>>>> required.
>>>>
>>>> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
>>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
>>> not simple interest.
>>>
>>
>> Interest on my first mortgage was simple. However that was a long time
>> ago...
>>
>>
> Back then, *everything* was simple;-)

The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:

How much did you make this year??? _________

Send it in.

--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
g***@mail.com
2009-10-11 08:51:32 UTC
Permalink
On 2009-10-11, Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass wrote:
>> Dave Wade wrote:
>>> <***@mail.com> wrote in message
>
> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>
> How much did you make this year??? _________
>
> Send it in.
>

remember Norm, the drunken accountent in "Cheers"?

Someone else "What do you think of the new income tax rules?"

Norm "There are new rules?"

(Which can either mean that Norm is not paying attention to changes
in his profession, or, more likely, he assumes that the changes are
cosmetic)..

In some cases in this country, you pay the first installment of tax,
before your accounts are finished (The year is not over), on what you
paid _last year_. So, with a really disastrous year in many
businesses, You could be paying multiples of your taxable income.


--
Greymaus....
Irritating messsage suggestions?
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-11 09:05:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:03:16 -0500
Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:

> Peter Flass wrote:
> > Dave Wade wrote:
> >> <***@mail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:***@maushome.org...
> >>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
> >>>> In article
> >>>> <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> >>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> >>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> >>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> >>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be
> >>>>> in engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands
> >>>>> of math required.
> >>>>
> >>>> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
> >>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
> >>> not simple interest.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Interest on my first mortgage was simple. However that was a long time
> >> ago...
> >>
> >>
> > Back then, *everything* was simple;-)
>
> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>
> How much did you make this year??? _________
>
> Send it in.

Nope you missed the bit at the bottom

Due date: 31 December 2008
Penalty for late payment: 5% per day

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
jmfbahciv
2009-10-11 13:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond wrote:
> Peter Flass wrote:
>> Dave Wade wrote:
>>> <***@mail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@maushome.org...
>>>> On 2009-10-09, Walter Bushell <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>>>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of
>>>>>> math
>>>>>> required.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One thing I was always sore at it that when we were taught about
>>>> interest in school, we were not told that everyone charges compound,
>>>> not simple interest.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Interest on my first mortgage was simple. However that was a long
>>> time ago...
>>>
>>>
>> Back then, *everything* was simple;-)
>
> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>
> How much did you make this year??? _________
>
> Send it in.
>
That's not how it will be done. IRS will collect it all, and
send you a stipend whenever Congress thinks the economy needs
a boost.

/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-11 16:59:44 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news5.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
writes:

> Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>
>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>
>> Send it in.
>
> That's not how it will be done. IRS will collect it all, and
> send you a stipend whenever Congress thinks the economy needs
> a boost.

Or they'll withhold the stipend in those years, since they feel
that they know better how to distribute the money (with helpful
advice from the bankers and megacorps, of course).

It's kind of like that warranty I once read: "If you're not
completely satisfied, send us the unused portion of our product,
and we'll send you the unused portion of your money."

Or the government agent knocking at someone's door: "Hello, I'm
from the government. I'm afraid we've misued all your money.
Can we have some more?"

(Except that nowadays they don't ask.)

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-11 16:55:46 UTC
Permalink
In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@tx.rr.com
(Charles Richmond) writes:

> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>
> How much did you make this year??? _________
>
> Send it in.

The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:

Add 5% GST.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Gene Wirchenko
2009-10-11 22:28:47 UTC
Permalink
On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:

>In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@tx.rr.com
>(Charles Richmond) writes:
>
>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>
>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>
>> Send it in.
>
>The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>
> Add 5% GST.

Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-12 06:04:32 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@ocis.net
(Gene Wirchenko) writes:

> On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> ***@tx.rr.com (Charles Richmond) writes:
>>
>>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>>
>>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>>
>>> Send it in.
>>
>> The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>>
>> Add 5% GST.
>
> Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.

Aw, do I have to? I've just spent a very nice day and I'm more
relaxed than I've been in a long time. I don't want to blow it.

Besides, I'm waiting to see whether the Sun prints the letter
I sent them yesterday about the latest Olympic debacle...

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
jmfbahciv
2009-10-12 11:25:09 UTC
Permalink
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@tx.rr.com
>> (Charles Richmond) writes:
>>
>>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>>
>>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>>
>>> Send it in.
>> The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>>
>> Add 5% GST.
>
> Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.
>
they added an F#?

/BAH
Gene Wirchenko
2009-10-14 04:06:50 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:25:09 -0400, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@tx.rr.com
>>> (Charles Richmond) writes:
>>>
>>>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>>>
>>>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>>>
>>>> Send it in.
>>> The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>>>
>>> Add 5% GST.
>>
>> Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.
>>
>they added an F#?

It is more like an F-up. Set for next July I think.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
jmfbahciv
2009-10-14 13:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:25:09 -0400, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>
>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>> On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@tx.rr.com
>>>> (Charles Richmond) writes:
>>>>
>>>>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>>>>
>>>>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>>>>
>>>>> Send it in.
>>>> The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>>>>
>>>> Add 5% GST.
>>> Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.
>>>
>> they added an F#?
>
> It is more like an F-up. Set for next July I think.

Is that F a 7 in my world?

/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-14 16:28:31 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news2.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
writes:

> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:25:09 -0400, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>
>>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11 Oct 09 08:55:46 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs"
>>>> <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <harasj$9ln$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>> ***@tx.rr.com (Charles Richmond) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The *new* simplified U.S. Income Tax form only has *two* lines:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How much did you make this year??? _________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send it in.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Canadian counterpart adds a third line:
>>>>>
>>>>> Add 5% GST.
>>>>
>>>> Charlie, tell them about the Harmonised Sales Tax debacle in B.C.
>>>
>>> they added an F#?
>>
>> It is more like an F-up. Set for next July I think.
>
> Is that F a 7 in my world?

Well, July is the 7th month, suggesting an F7 chord. But considering
how most people think about it, perhaps Fm7 is more appropriate. On
the other hand, given the magnitude of the F-up, it'll likely be Fmaj7.

My wrist hurts. It's time to use a capo - on the balls of those
responsible.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Charles Richmond
2009-10-10 01:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article
> <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>> required.
>
> Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
>

Compound interest "eats your lunch", that's what it does!!! Would
you like to take out a "payday loan"??? ;-)

--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Walter Bushell
2009-10-10 02:11:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <haoo4o$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:

> Walter Bushell wrote:
> > In article
> > <50f84f7c-b3b5-4ea8-95c6-***@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> > ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >
> >> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> >> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> >> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> >> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
> >> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
> >> required.
> >
> > Everybody needs to know what compound interest is and does.
> >
>
> Compound interest "eats your lunch", that's what it does!!! Would
> you like to take out a "payday loan"??? ;-)

Eats your breakfast and diner and repossess the house. There was a
cartoon that exposed the fast food industry and the payday loan
industry. ("Lucky Cow") For some reason it is no longer with us.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Charles Richmond
2009-10-10 01:30:08 UTC
Permalink
***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>
> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
> required.
>

I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.


--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Walter Bushell
2009-10-10 02:07:49 UTC
Permalink
In article <haoo30$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:

> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
> >>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
> >>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
> >>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
> >>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
> >>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
> >>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
> >> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
> >> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
> >
> > What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
> > still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
> > will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
> > the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
> > engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
> > required.
> >
>
> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
> I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.

Or, he thought he didn't have to study.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Peter Flass
2009-10-10 11:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <haoo30$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
>>>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>> required.
>>>
>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
>> I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>
> Or, he thought he didn't have to study.
>

My freshman calculus course was like a factory. We had a large
auditorium filled with students for the lectures. The smaller sessions
were conducted by graduate students who invariable spoke such bad
English as to be nearly impossible to understand.

I think that course was a test - if you could do well in that, you would
probably do well in anything.
Paul
2009-10-10 16:34:04 UTC
Permalink
Peter Flass <***@Yahoo.com> wrote in
news:hapsof$97n$***@news.eternal-september.org:

> Walter Bushell wrote:
>> In article <haoo30$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college
>>>>>> most math teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or
>>>>>> they didn't. That is, the natural math talents picked it
>>>>>> right up, but those that weren't had a great deal of trouble
>>>>>> and barely got through the classes. We need a better method
>>>>>> to reach the other kids and find a place for them in eng/sci.
>>>>>> Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes
>>>> but still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These
>>>> people will not end up being the leading lights of the future,
>>>> but can fill the need of lower echelons. There are people who
>>>> would like to be in engineering or science but aren't quite up
>>>> to the high demands of math required.
>>>>
>>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed
>>> out the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high
>>> school. When he went to college, he almost flunked the first
>>> math courses. I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the
>>> professor.
>>
>> Or, he thought he didn't have to study.
>>
>
> My freshman calculus course was like a factory. We had a large
> auditorium filled with students for the lectures. The smaller
> sessions were conducted by graduate students who invariable spoke
> such bad English as to be nearly impossible to understand.
>
> I think that course was a test - if you could do well in that, you
> would probably do well in anything.

I had almost the same exact experience (mid 1960s) and learned
nothing, so I had to repeat it second semester. The instructor for
the "off" semester was a stereotypical college professor, in his 50s
or so, glasses, tweed jacket with elbow patches. He wrote the
examples clearly on the chalkboard, and did not erase them right
away as the grad student had done. He also stopped and explained
thoroughly if anyone had a question. I think I got a B+.

The grad student seemed to have been a brilliant mathematician who
understood his subject, but he was NOT a teacher.

--
Paul
jmfbahciv
2009-10-11 13:42:34 UTC
Permalink
Peter Flass wrote:
> Walter Bushell wrote:
>> In article <haoo30$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>>>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't.
>>>>>> That
>>>>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>>>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>>>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>>>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>>> required.
>>>>
>>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I
>>> can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>>
>> Or, he thought he didn't have to study.
>>
>
> My freshman calculus course was like a factory. We had a large
> auditorium filled with students for the lectures. The smaller sessions
> were conducted by graduate students who invariable spoke such bad
> English as to be nearly impossible to understand.
>
> I think that course was a test - if you could do well in that, you would
> probably do well in anything.

It's a way to shake out those who shouldn't be there.

/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-10 18:21:14 UTC
Permalink
In article <proto-***@news.panix.com>, ***@panix.com
(Walter Bushell) writes:

> In article <haoo30$ekn$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
>> I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.

Sounds like me - except I made it to second year before hitting
the wall.

> Or, he thought he didn't have to study.

I didn't, in high school. In first year, I had to. But in
second year, I just couldn't make it intuitive anymore. I can't
help but think that better books and teachers could have made a
difference. Most books started out with a rehashing of trivial
concepts on page 1, followed by a leap into the next galaxy on
page 2. And by then, I needed to be able to tie the abstractions
to real-world examples or it was just meaningless games. A
physics class I was taking at the time changed complex numbers
from a mental game to sound real-world practice when calculating
electrical impedances, but it was years later - long after I had
lost linear algebra - before I discovered how useful matrices were
for co-ordinate transforms. Too little, too late.

Fortunately, in the meantime I had discovered programming - and
realized that contrary to popular belief at the time, it wasn't
math, which I could no longer grasp, but logic, which I could.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-10 05:30:31 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> writes:

> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out the
> SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school. When he
> went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I can only
> ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.

Not necessarily. There are several places in math where there's a huge
jump in the level of abstraction, and somebody who's been great up until
then can't make the next step. The real big ones are algebra, calculus,
and college algebra (in that order). I hear combinatorics is another
big one, but I didn't get that far....
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
Dave Wade
2009-10-10 14:06:13 UTC
Permalink
"Joe Pfeiffer" <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message
news:***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net...
> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> writes:
>
>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out the
>> SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school. When he
>> went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I can only
>> ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>
> Not necessarily. There are several places in math where there's a huge
> jump in the level of abstraction, and somebody who's been great up until
> then can't make the next step. The real big ones are algebra, calculus,
> and college algebra (in that order). I hear combinatorics is another
> big one, but I didn't get that far....

For me vector fields were where I started to have issues.

> --
> As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
> be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
> and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
Walter Bushell
2009-10-10 16:10:35 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
"Dave Wade" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Joe Pfeiffer" <***@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message
> news:***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net...
> > Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> writes:
> >
> >> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out the
> >> SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school. When he
> >> went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I can only
> >> ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
> >
> > Not necessarily. There are several places in math where there's a huge
> > jump in the level of abstraction, and somebody who's been great up until
> > then can't make the next step. The real big ones are algebra, calculus,
> > and college algebra (in that order). I hear combinatorics is another
> > big one, but I didn't get that far....
>
> For me vector fields were where I started to have issues.
>
It took me a semester to assimilate Abstract Nonsense.

--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-10 18:26:25 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
***@cs.nmsu.edu (Joe Pfeiffer) writes:

> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> writes:
>
>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
>> I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>
> Not necessarily. There are several places in math where there's
> a huge jump in the level of abstraction, and somebody who's been
> great up until then can't make the next step.

Sounds like me.

> The real big ones are algebra, calculus, and college algebra (in
> that order). I hear combinatorics is another big one, but I didn't
> get that far....

If there's any improvement that could be made in the teaching
of mathematics, it would be in helping people make these jumps.
I don't know whether this is even possible - for some people it
might not be - but it'd be a good place to look for solutions.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-10 18:20:37 UTC
Permalink
"Charlie Gibbs" <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:

> In article <***@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> ***@cs.nmsu.edu (Joe Pfeiffer) writes:
>
>> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> writes:
>>
>>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses.
>>> I can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>>
>> Not necessarily. There are several places in math where there's
>> a huge jump in the level of abstraction, and somebody who's been
>> great up until then can't make the next step.
>
> Sounds like me.
>
>> The real big ones are algebra, calculus, and college algebra (in
>> that order). I hear combinatorics is another big one, but I didn't
>> get that far....
>
> If there's any improvement that could be made in the teaching
> of mathematics, it would be in helping people make these jumps.
> I don't know whether this is even possible - for some people it
> might not be - but it'd be a good place to look for solutions.

And they've been looking for ways to do that since before I was born,
typically with bad and sometimes spectacularly bad results. That's
where the "new math" of the 1960's came from, that's where the current
effort to try to find some way to make everything that appears in a
middle school algebra book somehow "relevant".
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
jmfbahciv
2009-10-10 11:27:41 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond wrote:
> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
>>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>
>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>> required.
>>
>
> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out the
> SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school. When he
> went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I can only
> ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>
>
Possibly. It could also be that he had had no exposure to real
math in high school which starts out with axioms and builds an
algebra, geometry, etc. based on those axioms. If he went
from high school level math to a Thomas calc course in college,
that epsilon would confuse him for a long time. In college,
a "long time" is a couple of weeks. If you don't get the
concept after 10 classes, you're completely lost for the rest
of the term and all courses after that.

/BAH
Charles Richmond
2009-10-11 01:01:58 UTC
Permalink
jmfbahciv wrote:
> Charles Richmond wrote:
>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't. That
>>>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>>
>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>> required.
>>>
>>
>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out the
>> SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school. When he
>> went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I can only
>> ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>>
>>
> Possibly. It could also be that he had had no exposure to real
> math in high school which starts out with axioms and builds an
> algebra, geometry, etc. based on those axioms. If he went
> from high school level math to a Thomas calc course in college,
> that epsilon would confuse him for a long time. In college,
> a "long time" is a couple of weeks. If you don't get the
> concept after 10 classes, you're completely lost for the rest
> of the term and all courses after that.
>

It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over
next semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do
*not* continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.

--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
jmfbahciv
2009-10-11 13:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond wrote:
> jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> ***@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Oct 9, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>>>>> --Poor math teaching: I noticed in high school and college most math
>>>>>> teachers taught in a way that kids either got it or they didn't.
>>>>>> That
>>>>>> is, the natural math talents picked it right up, but those that
>>>>>> weren't had a great deal of trouble and barely got through the
>>>>>> classes. We need a better method to reach the other kids and find a
>>>>>> place for them in eng/sci. Not everyone will be a Feynman.
>>>>> You want people who can't do the math to become engineers and
>>>>> scientists? We already have programmers who can't code.
>>>>
>>>> What I meant was that there are people who aren't math whizzes but
>>>> still can be taught how to do math if taught better. These people
>>>> will not end up being the leading lights of the future, but can fill
>>>> the need of lower echelons. There are people who would like to be in
>>>> engineering or science but aren't quite up to the high demands of math
>>>> required.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I knew a guy back in the 70's who was a whiz in math. He maxed out
>>> the SAT math section, and had taken some calculus in high school.
>>> When he went to college, he almost flunked the first math courses. I
>>> can only ascribe this to *poor* teaching by the professor.
>>>
>>>
>> Possibly. It could also be that he had had no exposure to real
>> math in high school which starts out with axioms and builds an
>> algebra, geometry, etc. based on those axioms. If he went
>> from high school level math to a Thomas calc course in college,
>> that epsilon would confuse him for a long time. In college,
>> a "long time" is a couple of weeks. If you don't get the
>> concept after 10 classes, you're completely lost for the rest
>> of the term and all courses after that.
>>
>
> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But ISTM
> that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10 classes ruin
> the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next semester, but
> get some help in the mean time so that you do *not* continue to be lost.
> Anything... but keep going.
>
What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
college algebra.

/BAH
Joe Pfeiffer
2009-10-11 23:35:44 UTC
Permalink
jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>
> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
> college algebra.

Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
"college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level Groups,
Rings, and Fields series.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
jmfbahciv
2009-10-12 11:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
>>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
>>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>
>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>> college algebra.
>
> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
> remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level Groups,
> Rings, and Fields series.

Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
get a round tuit.

/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-12 15:47:51 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news3.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
writes:

> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>
>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>
>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over
>>>> next semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do
>>>> *not* continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>
>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>> college algebra.
>>
>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts
>> to remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level
>> Groups, Rings, and Fields series.
>
> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
> get a round tuit.

Even if you did, it wouldn't be enough. You have to understand
the hole thing.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
jmfbahciv
2009-10-13 13:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> In article <***@news3.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
> writes:
>
>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>
>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>
>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over
>>>>> next semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do
>>>>> *not* continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>
>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>> college algebra.
>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts
>>> to remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level
>>> Groups, Rings, and Fields series.
>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>> get a round tuit.
>
> Even if you did, it wouldn't be enough. You have to understand
> the hole thing.
>
But then the class would be discontinuous.

Sorry, best I can do....I still want to grow up to be as good
as you guys are....


/BAH
Roland Hutchinson
2009-10-13 21:26:12 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:02:38 -0400, jmfbahciv wrote:

> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> In article <***@news3.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
>> writes:
>>
>>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>
>>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over
>>>>>> next semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do
>>>>>> *not* continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>>
>>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>>> college algebra.
>>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts
>>>> to remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level
>>>> Groups, Rings, and Fields series.
>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't get
>>> a round tuit.
>>
>> Even if you did, it wouldn't be enough. You have to understand the
>> hole thing.
>>
> But then the class would be discontinuous.

It's still connected.

> Sorry, best I can do....I still want to grow up to be as good as you
> guys are....

Eat your donuts.

When you get to eating your coffee mug, you are ready.



--
Roland Hutchinson

He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba,"
... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy.
--Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ )
jmfbahciv
2009-10-14 13:32:40 UTC
Permalink
Roland Hutchinson wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:02:38 -0400, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> In article <***@news3.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
>>> writes:
>>>
>>>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over
>>>>>>> next semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do
>>>>>>> *not* continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>>>> college algebra.
>>>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts
>>>>> to remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level
>>>>> Groups, Rings, and Fields series.
>>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't get
>>>> a round tuit.
>>> Even if you did, it wouldn't be enough. You have to understand the
>>> hole thing.
>>>
>> But then the class would be discontinuous.
>
> It's still connected.
>
>> Sorry, best I can do....I still want to grow up to be as good as you
>> guys are....
>
> Eat your donuts.

Is that my bug? I don't eat donuts; I only charged them.
>
> When you get to eating your coffee mug, you are ready.

Do I have to eat it before or after I've drunk my coffee?

/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
2009-10-14 16:10:59 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news2.newsguy.com>, ***@aol (jmfbahciv)
writes:

> Roland Hutchinson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:02:38 -0400, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <***@news3.newsguy.com>, ***@aol
>>>> (jmfbahciv) writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH.
>>>>>>>> But ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone
>>>>>>>> let 10 classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and
>>>>>>>> start over next semester, but get some help in the mean time
>>>>>>>> so that you do *not* continue to be lost. Anything... but
>>>>>>>>keep going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take
>>>>>>> the college algebra.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>>>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what
>>>>>> amounts to remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly)
>>>>>> senior-level Groups, Rings, and Fields series.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>>>>> get a round tuit.
>>>>
>>>> Even if you did, it wouldn't be enough. You have to understand the
>>>> hole thing.
>>>
>>> But then the class would be discontinuous.
>>
>> It's still connected.
>>
>>> Sorry, best I can do....I still want to grow up to be as good as you
>>> guys are....
>>
>> Eat your donuts.
>
> Is that my bug? I don't eat donuts; I only charged them.
>
>> When you get to eating your coffee mug, you are ready.
>
> Do I have to eat it before or after I've drunk my coffee?

That depends on whether you keep your coffee in a Klein bottle.

I'm surprised there haven't been any Lord of the Rings puns yet.

--
/~\ ***@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2009-10-13 09:34:17 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:26:45 -0400
jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:

> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> > jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
> >> Charles Richmond wrote:
> >>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
> >>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
> >>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
> >>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
> >>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
> >>>
> >> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
> >> college algebra.
> >
> > Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
> > "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
> > remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level Groups,
> > Rings, and Fields series.
>
> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
> get a round tuit.

Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
rectangular one:

+-------+
| ONE |
| TUIT |
+-------+

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
jmfbahciv
2009-10-13 13:18:11 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:26:45 -0400
> jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>
>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
>>>>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
>>>>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>
>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>> college algebra.
>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
>>> remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level Groups,
>>> Rings, and Fields series.
>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>> get a round tuit.
>
> Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
> rectangular one:
>
> +-------+
> | ONE |
> | TUIT |
> +-------+
>

Those points hurt.

/BAH
Charles Richmond
2009-10-13 14:45:33 UTC
Permalink
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:26:45 -0400
> jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>
>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
>>>>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
>>>>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>
>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>> college algebra.
>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
>>> remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level Groups,
>>> Rings, and Fields series.
>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>> get a round tuit.
>
> Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
> rectangular one:
>
> +-------+
> | ONE |
> | TUIT |
> +-------+
>

How about a "rectangular round tuit":

+-------+
| ROUND |
| TUIT |
+-------+

--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Bernd Felsche
2009-10-14 03:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:

>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>>> get a round tuit.

>> Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
>> rectangular one:

>> +-------+
>> | ONE |
>> | TUIT |
>> +-------+
>>

>How about a "rectangular round tuit":

> +-------+
> | ROUND |
> | TUIT |
> +-------+

Not necessary. Just change your reference frame (and axes).
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Those who can make you believe absurdities
X against HTML mail | can make you commit atrocities.
/ \ and postings | -- Voltaire
jmfbahciv
2009-10-14 13:33:56 UTC
Permalink
Bernd Felsche wrote:
> Charles Richmond <***@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>
>>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>>>> get a round tuit.
>
>>> Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
>>> rectangular one:
>
>>> +-------+
>>> | ONE |
>>> | TUIT |
>>> +-------+
>>>
>
>> How about a "rectangular round tuit":
>
>> +-------+
>> | ROUND |
>> | TUIT |
>> +-------+
>
> Not necessary. Just change your reference frame (and axes).

I'll have to get me a double-handled axe.

/BAH
jmfbahciv
2009-10-14 13:30:19 UTC
Permalink
Charles Richmond wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:26:45 -0400
>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> wrote:
>>
>>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>> jmfbahciv <***@aol> writes:
>>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>>> It may be that those 10 classes are the "tipping point", BAH. But
>>>>>> ISTM that this should *not* be that way. How can anyone let 10
>>>>>> classes ruin the rest of his/her life??? Drop it and start over next
>>>>>> semester, but get some help in the mean time so that you do *not*
>>>>>> continue to be lost. Anything... but keep going.
>>>>>>
>>>>> What he should have done is drop the Calc 101 course and take the
>>>>> college algebra.
>>>> Should be noted that my earlier post and your post here are using
>>>> "college algebra" differently. You're using it to mean what amounts to
>>>> remedial algebra, while I meant it as the (roughly) senior-level
>>>> Groups,
>>>> Rings, and Fields series.
>>> Ah, yes, definitely. :-) I didn't get into the rings, groups and
>>> fields. I thought about sitting in the topology class but didn't
>>> get a round tuit.
>>
>> Hey it's topology any equivalent shape will do - here have a
>> rectangular one:
>>
>> +-------+
>> | ONE |
>> | TUIT |
>> +-------+
>>
>
> How about a "rectangular round tuit":
>
> +-------+
> | ROUND |
> | TUIT |
> +-------+
>
Now try fitting a square tit in a round hole.

/BAH
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2009-10-09 15:22:55 UTC
Permalink
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <***@garlic.com> writes:
> It's Sputnik, Stupid!; Is it too late for the U.S. to catch up with
> other countries in math and science education?
> http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/08/science-education-china-technology-cio-network-sputnik.html

there have been a number of past references about deteriorating
competitive sitatuion contributes to falling economic standing
and standard of living ...

Whodunit? Sneak attack on U.S. dollar
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20091008/pl_politico/28091

and some followup comments ...

Washington DC discovers new economic force: the World
http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001192.html

--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2009-10-18 14:51:14 UTC
Permalink
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#69 U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009o.html#27 U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009o.html#28 U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009o.html#36 U.S. students behind in math, science, analysis says


The US's Reverse Brain Drain
http://slashdot.org/story/09/10/17/1948223/The-USs-Reverse-Brain-Drain

from above:

TechCrunch has a piece by an invited expert on the reverse brain drain
already evident and growing in the US as Indian, Chinese, and European
students and workers in the US plan to return home, or already have.

... snip ...

studies in the early 90s had found that half of advanced technical
degrees from institutions of higher learning were going to foreign born
students ... and some US industries were being dominated by these
graduates. there was hypothesis that a drop in US environment &/or
improvement in their home environment ... could result in tipping point
(discontinuity not gradual transition) where there would be outflow of
these graduates back home. i've conjectured in the past that he internet
bubble would not have been possible w/o these graduates (and with the
internet bubble and Y2K remediation occuring at the same time, there
wasn't enough resources in the country ... accelerating movement of work
offshore).

a few past posts mentioning the subject:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#33 [IBM-MAIN] NY Times editorial on white collar jobs going
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#21 Taxes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#7 U.S. Cedes Top Spot in Global IT Competitiveness
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#57 IBM Unionization
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#36 Students mostly not ready for math, science college courses
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008e.html#37 was: 1975 movie "Three Days of the Condor" tech stuff
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008i.html#65 How do you manage your value statement?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#27 VMware Chief Says the OS Is History

--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...