amarbledesk.com
a not infamous place
| archive for January, 2006 |
Heinlein checklist
25 Jan 2006 21:50 EST
Heinlein: “A human being should be able to
change a diaper, Check!
plan an invasion, Check minus. Conducted Army wargames as an NCO/squad leader only.
butcher a hog,Check minus. Done small game and fish only.
conn a ship, Check minus. Done a boat, not a ship.
design a building, Check!
write a sonnet, Check!
balance accounts, Check!
build a wall, Check!
set a bone, Not yet.
comfort the dying, Check!
take orders, Check!
give orders, Check!
cooperate, Check!
act alone, Check!
solve equations, Check!
analyze a new problem, Check!
pitch manure, Check!
program a computer, Check!
cook a tasty meal, Check!
fight efficiently, Check!
die gallantly. Not yet!
Specialization is for insects.”
On using the "fat tax" to change behavior
25 Jan 2006 15:50 EST
This week’s Grand Rounds hosted by Kevin MD included a thought-provoking article, “Marketing, Obesity, and the Fat Tax” at Diabetes Mine. Kevin MD, in refencing it, said “I’m all for it”, ‘it’ being a proposed tax on fattening, unhealthy, or non-nutrient-dense foods. Amy, the host of Diabetes Mine, in turn said:
On this note, I have to say that I think the proposed Fat Tax (aka “Twinkie Tax“) is a great idea. Slap a 7 to 10 percent tax increase on high-fat, high-calorie, low-nutrient foods
The Diabetes Mine commenters were likewise supportive:
- I agree with you that the so called “fat tax” is a good idea.
- I have to agree, they should take that so called “fat-tax” and make the healthier foods more damn affordable.
- IMHO the money from the fat-tax (if it is ever implemented) should go to programs that will educate people about healthy eating.
- I really like the idea of a “fat” tax, diabetes tax, whatever you wanna call it.
I have to be honest, I personally am not in favor of such a tax, and think that this line of reasoning is defective. So I figured, it’s time for a little research. The question “should there be a fat tax?” actually boils down to 4 separate questions here:
1. Has taxation been ever shown to reduce consumption of any other unhealthy consumables?
2. Are those other unhealthy consumables comparable to “junk food” in significant ways?
3. If implemented, will the tax have the effect intended?
4. Should, as a matter of public policy, a tax therefore be implemented?
To Pluto
19 Jan 2006 22:42 EST
New Horizons page is at http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/.
Per NASA: “New Horizons is the first mission to the last planet – the initial reconnaissance of Pluto-Charon and the Kuiper Belt – sent out to explore the mysterious worlds at the edge of our solar system”
It is right that we conduct these exploratory scientific missions. The search for knowledge of our universe is both primal and important. I just really hope this guy makes it to his destination intact and working…it’ll be 2015 when it gets to Pluto-Charon. I’ll try to keep my fingers crossed for 9 years!
Cool Shots of Shots
06 Jan 2006 15:40 EST
From American Scientist online:
Verrrry interesting description and pictures of splosions, guns, and things that go boom. One of my favorites:
(c) American Scientist, courtesy Garry Settles.
The Penn State Gas Dynamics Lab are the folks who authored the article and who have done a lot of research in this area. Their Images page has additional interesting and beautiful pictures, including this one:
(c) Penn State Gas Dynamics Laboratory.
Guns and grills! Yup, that’s my kind of science!
Stupid nutjob spaceship design
05 Jan 2006 22:48 EST
Here is some idiot who says he has designed a magnetism-based spaceship engine that can actually {spooky echo} WARP YOU INTO ANOTHER DIMENSION!!!!{/spooky echo}.
It’s hard to even list all the things that are wrong with this from any reasonable scientific point of view. But in particular the article says:
Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension.
1. I myself would not find it very useful to have my ship powered by an engine which could disappear or reappear at any moment.
2. I assume the engine and ship are made out of, like, matter and stuff. How exactly does this 3D matter-based craft survive going into another dimension intact? Hmm?
3. I love the bit about “a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster”. Oh boy. Sign me up! If the speed of light is faster a lot of real bad things are going to happen since I assume that the engine, ship, and inhabitants will still rely on well-behaved photons in order to function.
The writer is obviously scientifically challenged, too. “in our current dimension”??? I guess he means in our current 3+1 spacetime dimensions. Otherwise, oh lucky me, if I am forced to turn one-dimensional, do I get to pick which one?
From slashdot.
UPDATE: What’s worse of course is that the government is evidently spending tax dollars looking into this jackass’s theory. What do you expect. They put money into parapsychology and “lie detectors” too.
about mark beadles
I write the things you read here. Polymath renaissance redneck. I build software, stories, and young men. More...on the desk
around the web
in the vault
-
