A Riddle
Before jumping into my post, see if you can name the following figure:
A L U P
P U L A
L A P U
U P A L
Answer at the end of the post.
Numerology and Me
I loved the section on Numerology, even though most of it was a bit ridiculous. It makes it seem like the numerologist was behind Puff Daddy/P. Diddy's name change, though a quick Google search did not confirm this.
When Tammy and I were dating, she was teaching elementary school, and she did a math lesson where she had all the kids add up the letters of their names (A=1, B=2,... ,Z=26). So we decided to add up the letters in our names (first and middle names), and Alvin Cutler and Tammy Lynn both add up to the same number: 137. And that number is prime! (For those non-readers out there, a long section was devoted to prime numbers.) It's an obvious sign that we were meant to be together.
My roommate at the time was a computer science major, and after learning of our connection, he wrote a program to calculate numbers of different names. Then he fed the ward list from our singles ward through his program. His number didn't match any of the girls in our ward. Not surprisingly, he did not marry any of them.
Hopefully, your name/number matches that of your wife, but if not, I guess not all of us are lucky enough to marry our soul mates.
Short Thoughts
Did you know that the British title for the same book is Alex's Adventure in Numberland? I like the American title better.
I thought I understood the China-men puzzle when it was described in the book, but when you see it in action, it's much cooler.
I have never used or even seen a slide rule before, though I'd heard lots of old people use it as a reference for how old they are. Slide rules are really quite ingenious. And for as often as I use the log function in my work, I have to admit that I really didn't understand it very well before reading this book.
I have mixed feelings about an American getting credit for the original Sudoku puzzle because Sudoku is one of my least favorite kind of puzzle. They're very tedious.
The world is a big place with lots of people in it. If you search hard enough, you can find a cult following (and an ensuing competition) in anything. Abacus using championships, recognizing random sequences of 50 digits from pi, ability to multiply large numbers in your head, etc. Apparently you can also find people that literally don't have numbers in their vocabulary.
The first couple chapters I had to stop every couple of pages and tell Tammy what I was learning. I loved the history of numbers, explaining why we have 60 minutes in an hour, etc. It's amazing how such elementary mathematical concepts took the most brilliant minds in the world thousands of years to discover.
Overall, I thought the book was very interesting. I agree with an assessment Glenn sent me via email, "fascinating, fun, and frictional (it slows me down to the point where I have to stop reading and think)." Not a breezy read, but good nonetheless.
Riddle Answer
It's a Lattin Square!
Get it? A Latin square with Paul's name in it. Feel free to ROFL.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Monday, December 26, 2011
Recent and future readings
I just finished reading the Hunger Games Trilogy last week. It was much more political than I anticipated, as highlighted by the following quote from the third book: "... in return for full bellies and entertainment, his people had given up their political responsibilities and therefore their power."
Before I started the Hunger Games, I had finished reading The Bridge at Andau, by James Michener, a book about the revolution against communism that occured in Hungary in the 1950s. The people were greatly oppressed by the Soviets, and the brutality and oppression were shocking.
There is a book that I intend to check out from the local library. It is called The Girl Who Was on Fire, and is a collection of essays from other authors' perspectives on the social and political aspects of the Hunger Games series. Not sure when I'll get to it, I recently put together a list of books that would likely be much more educational.
I found out that the National Academies Press has many reads available for free download. http://www.nap.edu/While most of the free download books aren't the most interesting, the site did help me piece together this list of books that I hope to get too eventually (the first one on the list is available to view for free online). Have any of you read any of these books?
Before I started the Hunger Games, I had finished reading The Bridge at Andau, by James Michener, a book about the revolution against communism that occured in Hungary in the 1950s. The people were greatly oppressed by the Soviets, and the brutality and oppression were shocking.
There is a book that I intend to check out from the local library. It is called The Girl Who Was on Fire, and is a collection of essays from other authors' perspectives on the social and political aspects of the Hunger Games series. Not sure when I'll get to it, I recently put together a list of books that would likely be much more educational.
I found out that the National Academies Press has many reads available for free download. http://www.nap.edu/While most of the free download books aren't the most interesting, the site did help me piece together this list of books that I hope to get too eventually (the first one on the list is available to view for free online). Have any of you read any of these books?
- A Beautiful Math: John Nash, Game Theory, and the Modern Quest for a Code of Nature
- Here's Looking at Euclid: A Surprising Excursion through the Astonishing World of Math
- Struck by Lightning: The Curious World of Probabilities
- Unknown Quantity: A Real and Imaginary History of Algebra
- The Secret Life of Numbers: 50 East Pieces on How Mathematicians Work and Think
- The Matchbox that Ate a Forty-ton Truck: What Everyday Things Tell Us about the Universe
- Degrees Kelvin: A Tale of Genius, Invention, and Tragedy
- The Man Who Stopped Time: The Illuminating Story of Edward Muybridge - Pioneer Photographer, Father of the Motion Picture, Murderer
- Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics
- Stephen Hawking: A Life in Science
Monday, August 15, 2011
Health Care Costs ("bending the curve")
Below is an graph of three phases of healthcare costs, from 1960-1979, 1980-1989, and 1990-2010*. The data are taken from the OECD statistics database. The red curve tracks US spending on healthcare (normalized to the beginning of each period) and the blue curve tracks the normalized spending of all other OECD countries**.
The graph represents a comparison of cost growth between the US and non-US-OECD during three unique phases. What strikes me about the plot is that the growth in costs has been remarkably similar between the two groups for forty of the past fifty years, despite differences between the systems. This indicates to me that claims that changing the system alone will "bend the curve" are ill-founded.
That's not to say the US's system is ideal, or good, or fair, or efficient, or anything else. It's just to say that inasmuch as long term costs are driven by growth, and growth seems to be relatively similar between the US and non-US-OECD countries, simply changing the healthcare system is unlikely to control long-term costs.
What I really want to know is what happened during the 1980's. Up until that point, the US costs were fairly similar to most OECD countries (again, despite differences in the delivery systems) both in terms of absolute costs and growth. But during the 1980's, the US saw healthcare spending relative to GDP grow at a similar to the previous two decades, while other OECD countries saw no appreciable growth (on average). Does anyone have a thought on why that would be? Did something change in Europe in the late 70s early 80s? Or something in the US that caused us not to realize the relative gains our industrialized brethren enjoyed?
*Note: the downtick in the blue curve at 2010 is due to sparsity of reporting. Data isn't yet available from most countries, so the final data point is largely spurious.
**The set of OECD countries expanded throughout the period graphed. So each blue data point is the average of a slightly different set of countries.
The graph represents a comparison of cost growth between the US and non-US-OECD during three unique phases. What strikes me about the plot is that the growth in costs has been remarkably similar between the two groups for forty of the past fifty years, despite differences between the systems. This indicates to me that claims that changing the system alone will "bend the curve" are ill-founded.
That's not to say the US's system is ideal, or good, or fair, or efficient, or anything else. It's just to say that inasmuch as long term costs are driven by growth, and growth seems to be relatively similar between the US and non-US-OECD countries, simply changing the healthcare system is unlikely to control long-term costs.
What I really want to know is what happened during the 1980's. Up until that point, the US costs were fairly similar to most OECD countries (again, despite differences in the delivery systems) both in terms of absolute costs and growth. But during the 1980's, the US saw healthcare spending relative to GDP grow at a similar to the previous two decades, while other OECD countries saw no appreciable growth (on average). Does anyone have a thought on why that would be? Did something change in Europe in the late 70s early 80s? Or something in the US that caused us not to realize the relative gains our industrialized brethren enjoyed?
*Note: the downtick in the blue curve at 2010 is due to sparsity of reporting. Data isn't yet available from most countries, so the final data point is largely spurious.
**The set of OECD countries expanded throughout the period graphed. So each blue data point is the average of a slightly different set of countries.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Federal budget deficits (Redux)
Given the apparent deal on raising the debt ceiling (*sigh of relief*), I've again become interested in what's driving our persistent deficits. I went back and plotted historical federal spending by subcategory [edit] and revenues by source[/edit] as a percentage of GDP (see plots below).
Spending Plot
A couple things I notice about the spending plot. First is that the major increase in social spending (as a % of GDP) happened between 1965 and 1975. I guess this was Johnson's "Great Society." It also coincides with the period of divergence in health care costs between the US and the rest of the industrialized world (something I don't really understand the causes of). The other thing is that, while social spending rose precipitously with the onset of the Recession, prior to that it was relatively flat for about 20 years. This gives me some small hope that projections of continued significant increases in social spending are not as accurate as I'd previously believed.
But really, the story of the spending plot is the inverse relation between defense and social spending. For the past 60 years we've consistently chosen to fund increased social spending through cuts in defense spending. I don't think that is necessarily bad, but at a minimum it brings up the issue of what to do when we can't decrease military spending any more.
Revenue Plot
The revenue plot shows that federal revenues have been remarkably flat (as a % of GDP) over time. They've hovered around 18% of GDP for the past 60 years. The interesting trends I see in this plot are the decrease in receipts of corporate income taxes and the rise in taxes due to social insurance (increases in FICA and so forth). Total federal revenue is at a 6-decade low, due largely to the fall in income tax receipts. This is a result both of the two recessions in the 2000s and the Bush tax cuts (particularly those for the middle class).
Spending Plot
A couple things I notice about the spending plot. First is that the major increase in social spending (as a % of GDP) happened between 1965 and 1975. I guess this was Johnson's "Great Society." It also coincides with the period of divergence in health care costs between the US and the rest of the industrialized world (something I don't really understand the causes of). The other thing is that, while social spending rose precipitously with the onset of the Recession, prior to that it was relatively flat for about 20 years. This gives me some small hope that projections of continued significant increases in social spending are not as accurate as I'd previously believed.
But really, the story of the spending plot is the inverse relation between defense and social spending. For the past 60 years we've consistently chosen to fund increased social spending through cuts in defense spending. I don't think that is necessarily bad, but at a minimum it brings up the issue of what to do when we can't decrease military spending any more.
Revenue Plot
The revenue plot shows that federal revenues have been remarkably flat (as a % of GDP) over time. They've hovered around 18% of GDP for the past 60 years. The interesting trends I see in this plot are the decrease in receipts of corporate income taxes and the rise in taxes due to social insurance (increases in FICA and so forth). Total federal revenue is at a 6-decade low, due largely to the fall in income tax receipts. This is a result both of the two recessions in the 2000s and the Bush tax cuts (particularly those for the middle class).
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Merrill Hall Alumni Alert
I've been listening to a lot of books by Brandon Sanderson lately, a graduate of BYU. Then I finally read one, and which allowed me to read the acknowledgments page, something that often gets left out of the audio.
On the acknowledgments page of Mistborn, the author thanks "the incalculable Peter Ahlstrom". In the sequel, Well of Ascension, another Merrill Hall alum is credited, Nathan Goodrich, and Peter is again given special mention. (For those of you that lived in University Park with me, Stacy Whitman is also mentioned.)
The books may not be the best book club books, as they're rather long, and don't need a lot of discussing, outside of a few 'That was awesome.' comments. Besides, I'm unclear as to if the book club is even still alive. It's been a year since an official book was chosen.
On the acknowledgments page of Mistborn, the author thanks "the incalculable Peter Ahlstrom". In the sequel, Well of Ascension, another Merrill Hall alum is credited, Nathan Goodrich, and Peter is again given special mention. (For those of you that lived in University Park with me, Stacy Whitman is also mentioned.)
The books may not be the best book club books, as they're rather long, and don't need a lot of discussing, outside of a few 'That was awesome.' comments. Besides, I'm unclear as to if the book club is even still alive. It's been a year since an official book was chosen.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Let the Good Times Roll
I had a conference in NYC last week, so I used it as an excuse to go up to Boston (and then the coast of Maine).
Besides the degrees, the kids, the homes, and the sore backs, Peter and Jesse haven't changed a bit. It was like old times.
Peter's new universal conversation starter, to his wife's chagrin, is the federal budget. It doesn't work much better in real life than it has on this blog.
The Jones and Barnes families were both excellent hosts. Thanks.
Besides the degrees, the kids, the homes, and the sore backs, Peter and Jesse haven't changed a bit. It was like old times.
Peter's new universal conversation starter, to his wife's chagrin, is the federal budget. It doesn't work much better in real life than it has on this blog.
The Jones and Barnes families were both excellent hosts. Thanks.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Federal budget deficits
I've been reading a lot over the past few days about the current federal budgetary issues. One of the more interesting things I've found is this working paper from Alan Auerbach (UC Berkley economist) on the mid and long term debt projections. He calculates deficit projections under the assumptions of perpetuating the AMT and Medicare Doc fixes and compares it to the CBO scores. Essentially it shows that the CBO score for the budget likely underestimates total deficits over the next 10 years by about $5 trillion. And that's assuming Bush tax cuts expire as does stimulus spending. If those assumptions are reversed it adds another $5 trillion over 10 years.
But for me the real story is Figure 3 (page 22). Under every projection, revenues (as a percent of GDP) will be flat after 2013 and spending (as a percent of GDP) will linearly increase. All non-mandatory (i.e. non-social) spending will fall, as a percentage of the budget as more and more money (absolutely and proportionally) goes to providing social goods.
The good news is Auerbach is reportedly on Obama's short-list to replace Austen Goolsbee as the head of the Council of Economic Advisers. So if he's appointed, and he manages to avoid being captured by Washington interests, maybe he can bring some sense to the budget process.
Do we need to curtail federal spending? If so, how? The paper linked above doesn't make it totally clear, but the tables found here make it clear that the only sector of spending that is increasing (as a proportion of GDP) is mandatory social spending (Medicare, Medicaid, SS, SSDI, etc.). So, for those PVSers who support liberal federal economic policy, can you propose some way of making social spending sustainable?
But for me the real story is Figure 3 (page 22). Under every projection, revenues (as a percent of GDP) will be flat after 2013 and spending (as a percent of GDP) will linearly increase. All non-mandatory (i.e. non-social) spending will fall, as a percentage of the budget as more and more money (absolutely and proportionally) goes to providing social goods.
The good news is Auerbach is reportedly on Obama's short-list to replace Austen Goolsbee as the head of the Council of Economic Advisers. So if he's appointed, and he manages to avoid being captured by Washington interests, maybe he can bring some sense to the budget process.
Do we need to curtail federal spending? If so, how? The paper linked above doesn't make it totally clear, but the tables found here make it clear that the only sector of spending that is increasing (as a proportion of GDP) is mandatory social spending (Medicare, Medicaid, SS, SSDI, etc.). So, for those PVSers who support liberal federal economic policy, can you propose some way of making social spending sustainable?
Friday, April 29, 2011
Doug Comes to Maryland
Doug and Becky Larson were kind enough to include us on their trip up to DC from NC. They stayed for two nights. It was great. Just like old times. We even went running a couple of times (I'm so out of shape.), as Doug showed off his 5-finger shoes (it was too wet for him to run barefoot, which he often does). I hope all of you will stop by for a visit eventually.
We talked a little about this USA, Inc. business. Doug was mostly interested in the health care side of things. His first suggestion was to blow up the tobacco industry, somehow forcing all smokers to cover their own health care cost. Personally, I think it's a nice idea, but as one who has just been snacking on Easter candy, I can't point the 'be healthy' finger. I can't see anything like that happening politically.
Doug also pointed out that we are much more overweight and have many other health problems that other countries don't, so comparing health costs may not be a fair comparison. Plus, we pay a lot for studies (to get approved by the FDA) and the medical trials and basic medical science that we do here is like a gift we give to the rest of the country. Of course, he also recognizes, much better than I, all of the problems with our health care system, and I suppose he'll post here himself and explain them one of these days.
Becky thinks everyone should need some sort of end of life plan in order to receive Social Security. We waste so much money in end-of-life care, when often the person receiving treatment wouldn't even want that done. I like this idea, especially if it can free doctors (even a little bit) from fear of lawsuits.
There are lots of ways our health care system could become more efficient. Obama's budget plan depends on being able to make it more efficient. Even if he does so, I found his plan to be severely lacking. I'm not even against taxing the richest people a little more. I think everyone is going to have to sacrifice some, but Obama's speech wasn't about sacrifice. He basically said, "Hey, we're America. We can afford everything. We just need the rich people to pay their share."
I think all avenues of getting the budget problems fixed should be on the table. USA Inc. ignores defense because it's not that different than historical levels. It's nice not to blame everything on the wars, but we've got to be better in all of our spending.
I have been listening to this book called 'The Black Swan'. It goes into some detail about how wrong economic predictions are. They have quite a terrible track record. The reason they are so terrible is because they always miss big, rare events, such as 9/11, etc. These models that all of this budget talk is based on... they are almost assuredly all wrong, that goes for both political parties. Just like how it always takes you longer than you think to paint a room, the budget will surely turn out worse than people think.
As a government employee, I know that there are a lot of inefficiencies in the government. I expect there are inefficiencies in most companies, too, but companies are better a scaling back and adjusting when things go wrong. I don't have much faith in our politicians' ability to fix our debt problem. I hope I'm wrong.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Thesis Defense and USA, Inc.
For those who didn't see the news via other information feeds, I successfully defended my thesis last Friday. It's a wonderful feeling not to have an unfinished thesis hanging over one's head (Alvin, I'm looking at you). The thesis title was "Coherent Approximation of Distributed Expert Assessments." The main idea is that when people (or non-human expert systems, like computer algorithms) try to guess the value of two or more uncertain quantities that are related (like, for instance, the probability that the Red Sox win the World Series and the probability the Cubs win the World Series), they may generate logically irreconcilable estimates. The irreconcilability manifests itself in terms of money pumps, like Dutch Books in distributed probability estimation or market arbitrage more generally. My thesis develops a mathematical method for correcting such errors.
On the subject of USA, Inc., I think now would be a great time to discuss it. I'd love to see it in context of the several budget proposals that are currently being put forward (evidently House Democrats are expected to put out a budget proposal today to counter the Republicans' proposal from last week, and President Obama is also getting in on the game, outlining a proposal in his speech tonight).
I read the executive summary of the report and liked several of the points the author made. Most importantly, I think she accurately pointed out that we need to set reasonable goals for revenues and outlays. For instance, the Ryan budget sets revenue at 18% of GDP, and balances the budget by 1) capping Medicare outlays and indexing them to inflation and 2) turning Medicaid payments into block grants to states and 3) significantly reducing all non-defense discretionary spending. This is about what we should expect if revenue is set to approximately 18% of GDP; the federal government simply can't do all it's been doing with that level of funding.
If, instead, we want to continue funding Medicare, Medicaid and discretionary spending at the current levels we need to talk about how much of revenue that will require. In this case, as Meeker points out, the outlays have been growing faster than GDP, so the revenue side would have to grow faster than GDP. This is obviously unsustainable, which leads me to conclude that any plan that doesn't index entitlement growth to GDP growth (or a surrogate like inflation) is not a serious plan.
There are a lot of nuances that I think could be added to the debate; for instance, during the 1990s (most recent decade I found data on) US healthcare costs rose at about 3%, in line with inflation. The big increases people cite (particularly in cross-national comparisons) seem to have largely happened in the 1970s and 1980s. So are healthcare rates really increasing, or are outlays increasingly primarily because more people are being enrolled (hint: it's the latter). Meeker rushes by this point (at least in the executive summary), but I think it's an important conceptual one to recognize (if it's valid; I don't know that the sparse statistics I've seen thus far justify my assertion).
On the subject of USA, Inc., I think now would be a great time to discuss it. I'd love to see it in context of the several budget proposals that are currently being put forward (evidently House Democrats are expected to put out a budget proposal today to counter the Republicans' proposal from last week, and President Obama is also getting in on the game, outlining a proposal in his speech tonight).
I read the executive summary of the report and liked several of the points the author made. Most importantly, I think she accurately pointed out that we need to set reasonable goals for revenues and outlays. For instance, the Ryan budget sets revenue at 18% of GDP, and balances the budget by 1) capping Medicare outlays and indexing them to inflation and 2) turning Medicaid payments into block grants to states and 3) significantly reducing all non-defense discretionary spending. This is about what we should expect if revenue is set to approximately 18% of GDP; the federal government simply can't do all it's been doing with that level of funding.
If, instead, we want to continue funding Medicare, Medicaid and discretionary spending at the current levels we need to talk about how much of revenue that will require. In this case, as Meeker points out, the outlays have been growing faster than GDP, so the revenue side would have to grow faster than GDP. This is obviously unsustainable, which leads me to conclude that any plan that doesn't index entitlement growth to GDP growth (or a surrogate like inflation) is not a serious plan.
There are a lot of nuances that I think could be added to the debate; for instance, during the 1990s (most recent decade I found data on) US healthcare costs rose at about 3%, in line with inflation. The big increases people cite (particularly in cross-national comparisons) seem to have largely happened in the 1970s and 1980s. So are healthcare rates really increasing, or are outlays increasingly primarily because more people are being enrolled (hint: it's the latter). Meeker rushes by this point (at least in the executive summary), but I think it's an important conceptual one to recognize (if it's valid; I don't know that the sparse statistics I've seen thus far justify my assertion).
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
USA Inc
This is one of the more interesting and important things I've read in awhile. It isn't exactly a book but has some significant depth and deals with issues that are obviously critical. It is written mostly in finance-speak but I think is presented plainly enough to be clear if you walk through it. We could even make it up for discussion if people have interest...
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Glenn in the news
Well, I wasn't actually in the news, but someone I know was. Craig Franklin (AKA, the cheese-head man).
A group of us from the University got together to participate in the Polar Plunge, a fund-raiser for the Missouri Chapter of the Special Olympics.
Since we work with research animals, we dubbed ourselves the mice-cicles. Our boss (Craig Franklin), was the cheese.
It was cold crazy fun, though we were fortunate enough to have the weather warm up substantially in the week preceding the event.
Pictures and such on my blog:
http://glennandgirlies.blogspot.com/2011/03/polar-plunge.html
A group of us from the University got together to participate in the Polar Plunge, a fund-raiser for the Missouri Chapter of the Special Olympics.
Since we work with research animals, we dubbed ourselves the mice-cicles. Our boss (Craig Franklin), was the cheese.
It was cold crazy fun, though we were fortunate enough to have the weather warm up substantially in the week preceding the event.
Pictures and such on my blog:
http://glennandgirlies.blogspot.com/2011/03/polar-plunge.html
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Keeping New Year's Resolutions
Last night, I had a dream that Peter was riding his BMX bike past the place where I was giving blood, so I guess I need to respond to his post. I think Peter's ideas about having a schedule and a theme are brilliant. The schedule would be the more helpful of the two. Then I can reserve books in advance and plan time on the calendar to write a post. (It's surprising how much more effort it takes to write than to read.)
In my opinion, the first schedule should include 4 books between now and the end of June. Then we can adjust from there. I know that most people won't read 4 books, but if only 2 are scheduled, then there's a greater chance that you won't like any of the options. Plus, the rotation in who gets to choose goes faster. (Note: I can be convinced of 3 if they're going to include long books, like Rob's suggestion of Ayn Rand.)
I think the theme idea is fun. I would make slight tweaks to Peter's suggested themes. For example, instead of "Leadership", I would say "Leaders and Legends", the proposed names of two divisions in the Big Ten. You can tie ANYTHING into a theme, so no one needs to feel limited. If you've ever played Bible Scattegories, you know what I mean. Of course, if you are subsequently going to ignore the theme, then there's really no point in having one. So perhaps a theme is unnecessary.
Anyway, let's get this party started. Just make a decision, Peter, and we'll all try it out. I'm looking forward to more stimulating virtual conversation this year.
In my opinion, the first schedule should include 4 books between now and the end of June. Then we can adjust from there. I know that most people won't read 4 books, but if only 2 are scheduled, then there's a greater chance that you won't like any of the options. Plus, the rotation in who gets to choose goes faster. (Note: I can be convinced of 3 if they're going to include long books, like Rob's suggestion of Ayn Rand.)
I think the theme idea is fun. I would make slight tweaks to Peter's suggested themes. For example, instead of "Leadership", I would say "Leaders and Legends", the proposed names of two divisions in the Big Ten. You can tie ANYTHING into a theme, so no one needs to feel limited. If you've ever played Bible Scattegories, you know what I mean. Of course, if you are subsequently going to ignore the theme, then there's really no point in having one. So perhaps a theme is unnecessary.
Anyway, let's get this party started. Just make a decision, Peter, and we'll all try it out. I'm looking forward to more stimulating virtual conversation this year.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Happy New Year's Day
Happy 2011 PVS!
I've been less active on the blog than I would like recently. I chalk it up to guilt over
And welcome to mythical Rob. I'm pretty positive I invited you to join a couple of times, but maybe the hotmail address I was using was defunct.
I've been thinking about a way forward for the PVS book club; it seemed to fizzle a bit at the end of 2010, and I had a couple of ideas I thought might make it more enjoyable for 2011. First, I'd like to choose a broad theme for the year, something to tie the books together. I had thought something like "Leadership" or "Death" or "Marriage". This will decrease the eclecticism somewhat (unfortunately), but I think it might make the overall experience more rewarding. My other thought is that we should choose the list of books and discussion dates in advance (set a schedule through June, for example); according to Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler, this would be a helpful nudge that might make participation easier.
So, if you like these ideas, or if you hate them, or if you have a suggestion for a theme, or if you have other suggestions on the book club, I'm pretty sure you can find the comment box. And even if you don't have any comment other than "yeah, I wanna keep the book club going," that would be still be helpful to gauge interest.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Born to Run
Well this is several months late, but a quick look at recent posts says I may not be all that late after all...
And it's too bad that the Mortensens are not coming to North Carolina. That would have been fun. I haven't seen Robert since a trip I took to Phoenix several years ago.
My answers to Alvin's specific questions are posted as a comment below. I know you are dying to read them...
One of the first friends I made when I moved to Durham was our Elder's quorum president. This guy was from the Portland Oregon area and totally fit the mold: (remember, I lived there and love it, so this is not meant in derision) he loved outdoor activities, was a conservationist, drove a Volvo, and generally eschewed unnecessary worldly possessions. They raised their own chickens and eat granola. At the same time, he's a brilliant PhD candidate. Anyway, the one truly weird thing was the barefoot running.
Apparently he had always been a runner and cyclist. Then one day at a meeting in Chicago, he meets a barefoot runner and everything changes. By the time I moved to Durham, he had run at least one barefoot marathon, using his bedroom slippers to get him through some of the more rocky parts of the course.
Bizarre!
Or so I thought...
About 6 months after I moved here, the brand new Nikes I was wearing turned out to be a bad purchase. My old plantar fasciitis was flaring up and even worse, I discovered the reality of IT band syndrome. I was limping rather severely through my life when this friend again took the chance to preach the virtues of barefoot running. I listened just enough to hear him out, but still had not considered that he may be on to anything significant.
Then I heard he was running with a track club and had posted a 4:40 mile earlier that year. The speed shouldn't have mattered to me but it did. I have a blind respect for people who are faster than I. Plus, there was no way I could afford new running shoes on our current budget.
I limped through my half marathon in March 2010, then put the running shoes in the closet.
It has been a difficult transition, to say the least. There is no small amount of pain involved with conditioning the skin on your feet, or developing muscles in your feet and calves to support the running style. For a while, I waffled back and forth between shoes and barefoot. There was a day sometime in the fall, though, when the fight was over. I was 4 or 5 miles into a run and my feet were again bothering me. I took the shoes off, finished the run, and haven't worn them since.
I don't know that barefoot running is really the answer to all my running woes. So far it has just been a pleasant surprise. I never would have pictured myself running 11 miles barefoot just for a good time, but that is what has started happening.
For Christmas, I got the Vibram FiveFingers. They are too new for me to give an opinion here, but early returns are positive.
Anyway, I did enjoy reading "Born to Run." Not coincidentally, my friend had been pestering me to read it for months. I was glad for the extra nudge from the PVS.
And as a final comment about this topic: I think the book may set a too-idealized tone about the benefits of the running lifestyle. If you could somehow magically turn our society into a society of runners, however, I believe the change would be overwhelmingly positive from a spiritual and especially medical perspective.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Quick Mortensen family update
At the end of September I started working with a company that repairs bank-owned homes (foreclosed homes). My job had me traveling from Maryland to South Carolina for 10 days at a time and we were about to move from Boise to the Raleigh area. The company called me while in NC one day and asked if I'd take a position in Salt Lake in the office of our largest client (one of those evil loan servicing companies that works for the bailed-out banks). So, we are moving to a home in Bountiful this week. We were excited about having an east coast family experience, but the new position is much more conducive to family life (no travel) for which I am grateful. Plus its closer to BYU football games!
I hope you have all had a great Christmas and may you all have a wonderful 2011!
I hope you have all had a great Christmas and may you all have a wonderful 2011!
Friday, December 17, 2010
Mythical Rob
I just got back from Utah where I saw Rob Christiansen. He told me he was aware of the Perpetual Virtual Symposium because of Scott and was interested in joining.
I just sent him an invitation and hopefully he'll be able to join soon and give you more of a background post. He claims to be the precinct chair for the local Democrats in Bountiful, Utah (all 10 of them?), but he thought reading some Ayn Rand together would generate some interesting discussion.
Here's hoping that some new blood and a controversial book will rejuvenate the PVS this next year.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Born to Conserve Energy
Since at least 3/4ths of the active book club members have already read Born to Run, I will kickoff the request to have a little discussion. The book's thesis is that early humans survived because they could out-run their prey. Thus, as part of our evolutionary DNA we are all potential distance runners. The fact that distance runners need to conserve energy, which would explain the human tendency toward laziness, makes the thesis all that more convincing. But were you completely convinced?
The author weaves his main thesis and his many sub-theses, quite entertainingly, into his story of legendary, super-runners. So lets' play a game called...
Do You Believe
I'll give a series of statements proposed directly or implicitly in the book, and you decide if you believe it or not. My answers are at the bottom and feel free to add to the list, as it has been a few months since I read the book.
Do you believe...
1. In evolution as a general principle?
2. That you, specifically, and modern humans in general are a product of evolution?
3. That modern man evolved from early distance runners?
4. That running injury-free is a realistic possibility?
5. That running barefoot, or close to barefoot, is the key to healthy running?
6. That shoe companies are a large racket that will eventually be exposed and fail?
7. That beer and magic beans are key components to a healthy diet?
8. That salad is the best breakfast?
9. That a species that evolved to chase down animals is better off not eating meat?
10. That an occasional drunken love-fest would be good for all societies?
11. That being happy makes you a better runner?
12. That you have the mental and physical powers to run an ultra-marathon (if you really wanted to)?
13. That you love your wife enough to run a marathon beside them as she runs an ultra-marathon?
14. That a super-fast lost indian tribe where the runners where capes and sandals is the coolest thing to ever happen to distance running?
My answers:
1. 100% Yes.
2. Unsure. There is certainly a lot of evidence for human evolution, and I think Mormonism includes all truth. Still, there are some Mormon doctrines that appear to be in conflict with human evolution (no death until after the fall, Adam as the first human, etc.), though there may certainly be ways for both the doctrines and evolution to be completely true. Gods ways are higher than mine own.
3. If 2 is true, then I like 3, as it explains laziness.
4. No.
5. I believe it should help.
6. Yes, and so are mattress companies.
7. No.
8. No. It's cereal.
9. The Word of Wisdom agrees with the little to no meat philosophy, but it seems contrary to point 3.
10. No.
11. It's difficult to separate cause and effect here, but being happy and loving what you do will tend to make you better at anything.
12. Nope.
13. No, but I'd drive beside her.
14. Most definitely. I loved the underdog sports story element to this book. The visual image of these happy, painfully-shy indians running against the best racers in the world in these impossibly difficult races was just awesome.
I really liked the book.
I liked the desire I had to run when I had finished the book.
Too bad that has passed.
The author weaves his main thesis and his many sub-theses, quite entertainingly, into his story of legendary, super-runners. So lets' play a game called...
Do You Believe
I'll give a series of statements proposed directly or implicitly in the book, and you decide if you believe it or not. My answers are at the bottom and feel free to add to the list, as it has been a few months since I read the book.
Do you believe...
1. In evolution as a general principle?
2. That you, specifically, and modern humans in general are a product of evolution?
3. That modern man evolved from early distance runners?
4. That running injury-free is a realistic possibility?
5. That running barefoot, or close to barefoot, is the key to healthy running?
6. That shoe companies are a large racket that will eventually be exposed and fail?
7. That beer and magic beans are key components to a healthy diet?
8. That salad is the best breakfast?
9. That a species that evolved to chase down animals is better off not eating meat?
10. That an occasional drunken love-fest would be good for all societies?
11. That being happy makes you a better runner?
12. That you have the mental and physical powers to run an ultra-marathon (if you really wanted to)?
13. That you love your wife enough to run a marathon beside them as she runs an ultra-marathon?
14. That a super-fast lost indian tribe where the runners where capes and sandals is the coolest thing to ever happen to distance running?
My answers:
1. 100% Yes.
2. Unsure. There is certainly a lot of evidence for human evolution, and I think Mormonism includes all truth. Still, there are some Mormon doctrines that appear to be in conflict with human evolution (no death until after the fall, Adam as the first human, etc.), though there may certainly be ways for both the doctrines and evolution to be completely true. Gods ways are higher than mine own.
3. If 2 is true, then I like 3, as it explains laziness.
4. No.
5. I believe it should help.
6. Yes, and so are mattress companies.
7. No.
8. No. It's cereal.
9. The Word of Wisdom agrees with the little to no meat philosophy, but it seems contrary to point 3.
10. No.
11. It's difficult to separate cause and effect here, but being happy and loving what you do will tend to make you better at anything.
12. Nope.
13. No, but I'd drive beside her.
14. Most definitely. I loved the underdog sports story element to this book. The visual image of these happy, painfully-shy indians running against the best racers in the world in these impossibly difficult races was just awesome.
I really liked the book.
I liked the desire I had to run when I had finished the book.
Too bad that has passed.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
One Nation, Under Science
Sorry for the extreme lateness of this response to the book club. I'd planned on writing something about three weeks ago, but life intervened. And I know that Alvin used the "One nation" schtick in his title too, but I really am just that unoriginal.
I enjoyed most of The Nation, right up until Daphne/Ermintrude's father arrived at the island. But I found the final few chapters thoroughly off-putting, to the point where I now tell people that I didn't much like the book. My particular gripes are about the need that Pratchett (an avowed humanist) had to intervene in the story and make it a moralistic play about the ability of science and exploration to give semi-mystical meaning to our otherwise purposeless civilization. Maybe that's putting it a bit strong, but I felt like the author spent four-fifths of a book exploring the interesting interstices of faith, doubt, miracle, perserverance, love and devotion, and then resolved it with some pablum about how "science doesn't belong to anybody" and can somehow both preserve our cultural traditions and at the same time unite us across all cultural boundaries. Which I think is absolute tripe. Science is (IMO) too revered in our Western culture (even our anti-authoritarian American culture); it's a useful tool, but it's not the answer to life, the universe and everything. Douglas Adams, Terry Pratchett and Carl Sagan notwithstanding.
Whew, rant out of the way. What's hidden in there is I really did think it was a rippingly good book for about 200 pages. I think all of the questions Alvin and Paul raise are interesting and deserve a more full treatment than I can give at the moment, but I'll write my thoughts on a few.
The Culture and the Necessary I don't know to what degree I try to separate those aspects of my belief system that are culturally bred from those that are fundamental and invariant under multi-verses. I often ask myself questions like, "How absolutely wrong is it to drink alcohol?" (appropriate, given the context of the question within the poison beer). Obviously in ancient times and within the modern church prophets have drunk alcohol, presumably without everlasting consequences. So if alcohol isn't absolutely wrong, why is it wrong now in this time? Is it a cultural reason?
Perhaps more along the lines of what Alvin was thinking, I remember my shock during my first few weeks in Belgium when the Priests didn't cover the sacrament bread with a white cloth! I had seen in so many US wards the ritual of the sacrament that it seemed naked somehow without the solemn folding back of the cover to expose the bread, and then recovering and folding back the side to reveal the water. And I was doubly shocked when I realized that the sacrament ritual I was so used to was nowhere prescribed in the Scriptures. It was a bit of culture that had crept into the observance.
Are such things bad? I think they are, but not as bad as what can happen when you choose to confront them overly often. Specifically, performing spurious rituals and accepting as true and right things that are really just cultural appendages is (generally) preferable to attacking misfounded belief and risking 1) hurting another's faith and 2) accidentally hewing too deep and attacking well-founded belief. Excessive piety has seldom (it seems to me) led to excommunication, but if you slaughter too many sacred cows you may eventually find yourself killing something truly sacred (no offense to the Hindoos).
North vs. South In actual terms of North and South, it's interesting to note that most of the people live north of the equator (which makes sense since about 70% of the habitable land mass is north of the equator). So on one level it's almost inevitable that history would have a Northern slant to it.
To the more salient question of cultural superiority and subjugation, I feel pretty sensitive to it. I see within the US itself an increasingly homogenized culture, as regional dialects and accents disappear and we all shop for the same cheap crap at identical Walmarts and eat the same cheap food in identical plastic booths at fast food chain restaurants. I recognize that it's a completely rational decision; there are real to cost and efficiency benefits of the homogeneous culture. But I find it distressing that all local flavor seems to be disappearing from America. And I worry that the same thing is happening as a result of modernizing forces throughout the world.
While I feel that loss of cultural identity is a real problem, both within the US and internationally, I don't know that I would support any organized efforts to combat it. I think cultural preservation, and the desire and energy for cultural preservation must come from within the culture rather than without. Tying into the book, I thought the eventual protective role played by the British Empire while the island Nation made itself into a scientific Shangri-la derives from the same nation-building hubris that makes us believe we can export ideology. While I think it's important to engage on such matters (I'm a big supporter of muscular US diplomacy), I think the idea that a system in which local culture needs a global protector is doomed to failure.
Is there a time to lie In the tenth grade we were assigned to write an in-class essay on this very question. More specifically, on the portion of Adventures of Huck Finn when Huck lies to protectTom Jim and whether that was a moral decision or not. I rebelliously refused (in the most passively aggressive way possible) to write the essay until the final two minutes of class. Then I wrote a short note called "Lying: an existential viewpoint" in which I argued that lying was just a social construct and hence the question itself was meaningless. My teacher ate it up.
I think there is definitely a time to lie. I wouldn't be able to construct scenarios in which it is unambiguously the right decision, but I feel confident in a Nephi and Laban way that all actions, no matter how abhorrent in normal everyday life, may be right in certain circumstances. That said, I'm pretty careful about giving honest answers to my kids about things like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. I don't seek out opportunities to puncture their innocense, but if they come to me with questions I pretty unapologetically give honest answers. Because I think a lot of harm can be done when you put your child's trust in you at risk, and I think there are few reasons to do such a thing.
Still, though, I would not say never; I can easily conceive of scenarios in which I would purposefully mislead and even straight out lie to my children in order to protect them from truths which would, in my belief, harm them. And if slave-traders were really after my friend Jim, I would tell them he ran the other way and try to sneak off while they weren't looking.
I enjoyed most of The Nation, right up until Daphne/Ermintrude's father arrived at the island. But I found the final few chapters thoroughly off-putting, to the point where I now tell people that I didn't much like the book. My particular gripes are about the need that Pratchett (an avowed humanist) had to intervene in the story and make it a moralistic play about the ability of science and exploration to give semi-mystical meaning to our otherwise purposeless civilization. Maybe that's putting it a bit strong, but I felt like the author spent four-fifths of a book exploring the interesting interstices of faith, doubt, miracle, perserverance, love and devotion, and then resolved it with some pablum about how "science doesn't belong to anybody" and can somehow both preserve our cultural traditions and at the same time unite us across all cultural boundaries. Which I think is absolute tripe. Science is (IMO) too revered in our Western culture (even our anti-authoritarian American culture); it's a useful tool, but it's not the answer to life, the universe and everything. Douglas Adams, Terry Pratchett and Carl Sagan notwithstanding.
Whew, rant out of the way. What's hidden in there is I really did think it was a rippingly good book for about 200 pages. I think all of the questions Alvin and Paul raise are interesting and deserve a more full treatment than I can give at the moment, but I'll write my thoughts on a few.
The Culture and the Necessary I don't know to what degree I try to separate those aspects of my belief system that are culturally bred from those that are fundamental and invariant under multi-verses. I often ask myself questions like, "How absolutely wrong is it to drink alcohol?" (appropriate, given the context of the question within the poison beer). Obviously in ancient times and within the modern church prophets have drunk alcohol, presumably without everlasting consequences. So if alcohol isn't absolutely wrong, why is it wrong now in this time? Is it a cultural reason?
Perhaps more along the lines of what Alvin was thinking, I remember my shock during my first few weeks in Belgium when the Priests didn't cover the sacrament bread with a white cloth! I had seen in so many US wards the ritual of the sacrament that it seemed naked somehow without the solemn folding back of the cover to expose the bread, and then recovering and folding back the side to reveal the water. And I was doubly shocked when I realized that the sacrament ritual I was so used to was nowhere prescribed in the Scriptures. It was a bit of culture that had crept into the observance.
Are such things bad? I think they are, but not as bad as what can happen when you choose to confront them overly often. Specifically, performing spurious rituals and accepting as true and right things that are really just cultural appendages is (generally) preferable to attacking misfounded belief and risking 1) hurting another's faith and 2) accidentally hewing too deep and attacking well-founded belief. Excessive piety has seldom (it seems to me) led to excommunication, but if you slaughter too many sacred cows you may eventually find yourself killing something truly sacred (no offense to the Hindoos).
North vs. South In actual terms of North and South, it's interesting to note that most of the people live north of the equator (which makes sense since about 70% of the habitable land mass is north of the equator). So on one level it's almost inevitable that history would have a Northern slant to it.
To the more salient question of cultural superiority and subjugation, I feel pretty sensitive to it. I see within the US itself an increasingly homogenized culture, as regional dialects and accents disappear and we all shop for the same cheap crap at identical Walmarts and eat the same cheap food in identical plastic booths at fast food chain restaurants. I recognize that it's a completely rational decision; there are real to cost and efficiency benefits of the homogeneous culture. But I find it distressing that all local flavor seems to be disappearing from America. And I worry that the same thing is happening as a result of modernizing forces throughout the world.
While I feel that loss of cultural identity is a real problem, both within the US and internationally, I don't know that I would support any organized efforts to combat it. I think cultural preservation, and the desire and energy for cultural preservation must come from within the culture rather than without. Tying into the book, I thought the eventual protective role played by the British Empire while the island Nation made itself into a scientific Shangri-la derives from the same nation-building hubris that makes us believe we can export ideology. While I think it's important to engage on such matters (I'm a big supporter of muscular US diplomacy), I think the idea that a system in which local culture needs a global protector is doomed to failure.
Is there a time to lie In the tenth grade we were assigned to write an in-class essay on this very question. More specifically, on the portion of Adventures of Huck Finn when Huck lies to protect
I think there is definitely a time to lie. I wouldn't be able to construct scenarios in which it is unambiguously the right decision, but I feel confident in a Nephi and Laban way that all actions, no matter how abhorrent in normal everyday life, may be right in certain circumstances. That said, I'm pretty careful about giving honest answers to my kids about things like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. I don't seek out opportunities to puncture their innocense, but if they come to me with questions I pretty unapologetically give honest answers. Because I think a lot of harm can be done when you put your child's trust in you at risk, and I think there are few reasons to do such a thing.
Still, though, I would not say never; I can easily conceive of scenarios in which I would purposefully mislead and even straight out lie to my children in order to protect them from truths which would, in my belief, harm them. And if slave-traders were really after my friend Jim, I would tell them he ran the other way and try to sneak off while they weren't looking.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Long Lost PVS Friends
Last week I got a phone call from this PVS
Since James isn't around much, I'll post a brief update on his behalf (and if I get it a little wrong he can correct me). He just graduated from Wharton (Penn) business school and decided to move his wife and 3 1/2 kids (due in December; congratulations!) to Delhi, India to pursue a business opportunity. He and a couple of partners have spent the last few months setting the business up, and hopefully within the year they'll have found success. I don't think James would like me releasing the details over the interwebs, but the idea is great and we obviously wish him all the success in the world (or at least I do; Alvin I'm not so sure).
So after an all-too-short visit, James headed down the Cape to pitch his business plan to some VC investors (I haven't heard whether that particular pitch was successful or not). Today, if I'm not mistaken, his plane is en route to India, carrying him and his family on their wonderful adventure. Safe travels Nuttall family and shubh kaamnaayein (शुभ कामनाएँ).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)