Categories
philosophy science

random stuff

Thanks to my colleague Brendan Jennings I’m now spending an unhealthy amount of time considering whether a random number generator would have to be tested over an enumerably or unenumerably infinite period of time to be proven truly random. When you leave behind the notion of statistically useful levels of randomness, <b>”random”</b> becomes an ideal. Random? is one of the biggest questions imaginable, predicated on a perhaps-impossible absolute comprehension of relativity, quantum effects, determinism, free-will, the origins of life and the universe itself.

I’ll never take

java.util.Random generator = new java.util.Random();

for granted again.

Categories
science

The pleasure of finding things out

R asked me recently to recommend a book on physics and science. I’m not really sure why. I think perhaps she feels she’s missing out on something although, tautologically, she doesn’t actually know what it is. I recommended she read Hawking’s “Brief History of Time” as I felt it had some great attributes. Clarity, reasonable depth, breadth and memorable writing. Everything you want from a great popular science book.
I made the wrong recommendation however. No disrespect at all to Dr. Hawking but the best communicator of scientific ideas was probably Richard Feynman. What he communicates better than any other is the enthusiasm required for great scientific endeavour, or as he aphoristically put it “The Pleasure of Finding Things Out”. I’d find it difficult to recommend anyone who hasn’t studied physics or at least mathematics in college to buy the Feynmann lectures but his collection of short essays “The Pleasure of Finding Things Out” is marvellous for even the uninitiated.
Reading Feynman is an antidote to the general dullness of much of what we now describe as knowledge. His science is as much swashbuckling adventure as dry machination. In particular the observation of Parallel computing pioneer Danny Hillis regarding collaboration with Feynman sticks in my memory. Feynman volunteered his services to Hillis when he was creating the original connection machine. Seeing that Hillis was about to tackle what’s known as a BIG problem and sure they needed some assistance, Feynman showed up for work. Feyman wasn’t a computist so when he was asked to analyse the router design for the Connection Machine 1, he produced a set of differential equations as a result. Hillis account is available here
His seminal essay on what’s now described as nano-tech “There’s room at the Bottom” has inspired a new science which will undoubtedly lead to revolutions, “good” and “bad”.
If you were to compare science to magic most publications are created b y prestidigitation (literally “fast hands”). Some are more profound, the work of conjurers. By contrast Feynman was a magician.

“There are two kinds of geniuses: the ‘ordinary’ and the ‘magicians’. An ordinary genius is a fellow whom you and I would be just as good as, if we were only many times better. There is no mystery as to how his mind works. Once we understand what they’ve done, we feel certain that we, too, could have done it. It is different with the magicians. Even after we understand what they have done it is completely dark. Richard Feynman is a magician of the highest calibre.”Mark Kac, Feynman collaborator and mathematician

Feynman’s work isn’t faceless. Physicists like Paul Dirac or Neils Bohr were brilliant yet impossible for the ordinary joe to empathise with. With Feynman you get an exuberant character who lived life with zest and mixed light anecdote with grave fact, and sometimes vice versa. If reading “Surely you’re joking Mr. Feynman” doesn’t inspire someone to learn more about the world they live in then they’re brain is probably not wired for physical curiosity or skepticism. Now that would be sad!

Categories
science

Craig Venter on TED

Those interested in genetics should really watch Craig Venter’s presentation on TED. Craig is one of the world’s greatest scientists who has evolved the field of genetics over the past 15 years with feats such as the mapping of the human genome by his former company, Celera. His TED presentation is about creating synthetic life, in this case designing a bacteria (unicellular micro-organisms). This has important repercussions in the design and creation of new fuel sources which reduce the worlds reliance on fossil fuels by creating designer fuels with better characteristics. Currently they’re using mechanisms to essential recombine the chromosomes of existing organisms (e.g. e-coli) but the future is full biodesign and assembly without the need for a transformative process on existing organsisms. “Life from scratch”.

Craig suggests he’s around 18 months away from creating a “4th generation fuel” (designed to produce octane with C02 as it’s fuel)) but scale of manufacture and efficiency of carbon capture are the real issues here. Example, there are organisms out there that have evolved to produce octane but they didn’t evolve to be refineries of the scale we require for the petrochemical industry. Also fascinating is the approach of experimenting with thousands (or millions) of bacterial combinations to try and evolve a super fuel. It’s heady stuff and I sincerely hope he gets there.

Categories
science

Boiling Point

I’ll leave the politics out of this one. I’m quite concerned about the “Boil Notices” that the Galway county council have being issuing in relation to the recent contamination of the water supply with cryptosporidium. There are 2 issues at play here and the guidelines provided by the British Columbia Ministry of Health are worth noting. The first is that there appears to be some dispute about whether quick boiling is enough to kill cryptosporidium. I could be wrong here but I’m basing my comments on the US EPA’s statement advising people in affected areas to “bring their drinking water to a full boil for one minute”. From research and querying friends in the US this is often taken to imply stove boiling where the steam, which is hotter than 100 deg celsius boiling water, is effective in killing Cryptosporidium.
So the EPA clearly request a full boil for a one minute period. The problem is that the kettles we use in Europe tend not to boil for a one minute period. They’re efficiently designed to do a 15-20 second boil. Watch your kettle the next time your boiling water for tea and see when you can observe steam and for how long it lasts. This efficiency is a great energy saver but lessens the effectiveness in killing the pathogen.
If in doubt then a possible solution is to boil the water in a pressure cooker where the higher-temperature steam has a better chance of killing the bacteria. The second is a combination of boiling and (one micron) filters to remove cryptosporidium oocysts. (A human hair is around 50 microns thick for reference).
One of the problems with this pathogen is its resistance to chlorine-based disinfectants. In many cases the amount of bleach required to kill the pathogen would render the water poisonous to drink. Success has been had with Ultra Violet light but this is relatively recent research and isn’t recommended by any government that I’m aware of.