07 August 2009
28 July 2009
09 July 2009
Stochasticity
On my long trip to Yellowstone last weekend, I took some time to catch up on Radiolab podcasts. This one about Stochasticity starts with a story of two ten-year-old girls with the same exact name who just happened to be on either end of an experiment-- one Laura Buxton released a balloon with her name and address, and the other Laura Buxton, 150 miles away and in the country side, was on the receiving end of that balloon.
The girls even looked the same, they both dressed in pink jumpers and jeans the first time they met, and they both had labradors, rabbits and guinea pigs!!!
What are the chances???
Well I wish I could tell you... but you should listen to the podcast to find out.
The girls even looked the same, they both dressed in pink jumpers and jeans the first time they met, and they both had labradors, rabbits and guinea pigs!!!
What are the chances???
Well I wish I could tell you... but you should listen to the podcast to find out.
19 April 2009
e to the i 2 pi
This xkcd reminds me of an old story. Kyle and I were at Sequoia Natl park, hiking through the trees and discussing science, math, and other sundries. At some point I said something which ended with the justification, "because e to the i 2 pi is one," and he almost laughed at me. Come on!
But when you use euler's formula, well, it's right there. So easy.
I love that.
So I justified it to Kyle on a little scrap of paper in my pocket... and for the rest of the afternoon we would shout it every once in awhile to the skies-- e to the i 2 pi is ONE!!!
Yep.
But when you use euler's formula, well, it's right there. So easy.
I love that.
So I justified it to Kyle on a little scrap of paper in my pocket... and for the rest of the afternoon we would shout it every once in awhile to the skies-- e to the i 2 pi is ONE!!!
Yep.
09 April 2009
Project 2061
Today while my simulations were running, I skimmed through a book called "Science for All Americans." I have had it checked out for a few months, but finally I wasn't allowed to renew it anymore :) So this book is a report from a government group called Project 2061, tasked to improve the science, math, and technology curriculum.
I think the report made some very good points that (1) (quoting the text) "The present science textbooks and methods of instruction, far from helping, often actually impede progress toward scientific literacy. They emphasize the learning of answers more than the exploration of questions, memory at the expense of critical thought, bits and pieces of information instead of understandings in context, recitation over argument, reading in lieu of doing. They fail to encourage students to work together, to share ideas and information freely with each other, or to use modern instruments to extend their intellectual capacities."; (2) We try to cram too many things in our K-12 science and math curriculum, instead of teaching the very important things thoroughly; and so (3) We should really refocus from tabula rasa and try to design a math and science curriculum that emphasizes the very most important concepts while instilling skills and attitudes of scientists into the students.
Some of the concepts they said should be emphasized in "The Nature of Science" were good:
The world is understandable.
Scientific knowledge is durable.
Science demands evidence.
Science explains and predicts.
Scientists try to identify and avoid bias.
Science is not authoritarian.
Interestingly, in the chapter on mathematical skills which should be emphasized, four out of seven were concepts I use every day:
- Uncertainty
- Summarizing data
- Sampling
- Reasoning
I think the report made some very good points that (1) (quoting the text) "The present science textbooks and methods of instruction, far from helping, often actually impede progress toward scientific literacy. They emphasize the learning of answers more than the exploration of questions, memory at the expense of critical thought, bits and pieces of information instead of understandings in context, recitation over argument, reading in lieu of doing. They fail to encourage students to work together, to share ideas and information freely with each other, or to use modern instruments to extend their intellectual capacities."; (2) We try to cram too many things in our K-12 science and math curriculum, instead of teaching the very important things thoroughly; and so (3) We should really refocus from tabula rasa and try to design a math and science curriculum that emphasizes the very most important concepts while instilling skills and attitudes of scientists into the students.
Some of the concepts they said should be emphasized in "The Nature of Science" were good:
The world is understandable.
Scientific knowledge is durable.
Science demands evidence.
Science explains and predicts.
Scientists try to identify and avoid bias.
Science is not authoritarian.
Interestingly, in the chapter on mathematical skills which should be emphasized, four out of seven were concepts I use every day:
- Uncertainty
- Summarizing data
- Sampling
- Reasoning
16 March 2009
computer programmers
"There are only two industries that refer to their customers as 'users.'" -Edward Tufte
20 February 2009
math for logic's sake
Rob just told me--
There's something about going through the math classes that gives you a sense of when there are holes in someone's argument. You may not know exactly where the holes are, but you know that you're not totally convinced.
The classes themselves may not give me the most pertinent knowledge-- some of the math I'm doing right now, I will never use. But he's right-- I am learning when to say "Wait a minute, something's fishy." And that's what's fundamental to scientific reasoning and discussion.
It's somewhat astonishing how my ability to find these holes has improved over the past few years. Just ask my study buddies-- I have a bad reputation for destroying their ideas that they were done with the homework...
There's something about going through the math classes that gives you a sense of when there are holes in someone's argument. You may not know exactly where the holes are, but you know that you're not totally convinced.
The classes themselves may not give me the most pertinent knowledge-- some of the math I'm doing right now, I will never use. But he's right-- I am learning when to say "Wait a minute, something's fishy." And that's what's fundamental to scientific reasoning and discussion.
It's somewhat astonishing how my ability to find these holes has improved over the past few years. Just ask my study buddies-- I have a bad reputation for destroying their ideas that they were done with the homework...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)