Alternative religion
Snow, the sequel
Okay, Tuesday night's and Wednesday's ice storm really did a number on this area. My car was a frozen block. It took me three hours yesterday and about 90 minutes today to dig out. Then my windshield wipers went down ... so I decided to get that fixed before the long commute. And while I was looking for a mechanic to fix that, I got a flat. (Someone left a pair of pliers in the road: I found them embedded in the wheel well.)
I'm currently at Becker Subaru getting the tire and the windshield wipers fixed. I expect to get hit by a giant iceball from the sky on the way home.
One cheer for the snow ... I've had to take two straight snow days at work. Good thing everything was done ahead of time and we're in good shape.
Have a good one.
I'm currently at Becker Subaru getting the tire and the windshield wipers fixed. I expect to get hit by a giant iceball from the sky on the way home.
One cheer for the snow ... I've had to take two straight snow days at work. Good thing everything was done ahead of time and we're in good shape.
Have a good one.
Snow!
The snow's really coming down. First real snowfall of the year. Tomorrow may be a snowday. Great news!
The Marcotte Affair Ends ... or does it?
Michelle Malkin has a nice round up of quotes from the sane side of the blogosphere about Amanda Marcotte's resignation from the John Edwards campaign.
One thing I'd add, as a professional editor used to assessing the writing skills of young writers: Amanda lacked confidence writing on Edwards' blog -- it was clear to me she was not used to writing in a professional style, and her writing there was far weaker than her "musings" on the Pandagon blog. That is, Amanda is inexperienced in working clean ... This is not to say she can't. She just can't -- yet. Her writing skills were nowhere near up to the challenge of the position. Now she can go back to her blog and swear and play the victim. It's what's she's good at.
Writing a blog under your own name is a double-edged sword. On one hand, you can make a name for yourself and get hired in high-profile job that you may never have had a shot at otherwise. On the other hand, you can make a name for yourself and get fired from that high-profile job. The blog giveth, the blog taketh away ...
One thing I'd add, as a professional editor used to assessing the writing skills of young writers: Amanda lacked confidence writing on Edwards' blog -- it was clear to me she was not used to writing in a professional style, and her writing there was far weaker than her "musings" on the Pandagon blog. That is, Amanda is inexperienced in working clean ... This is not to say she can't. She just can't -- yet. Her writing skills were nowhere near up to the challenge of the position. Now she can go back to her blog and swear and play the victim. It's what's she's good at.
Writing a blog under your own name is a double-edged sword. On one hand, you can make a name for yourself and get hired in high-profile job that you may never have had a shot at otherwise. On the other hand, you can make a name for yourself and get fired from that high-profile job. The blog giveth, the blog taketh away ...
Thinking out loud about a math question
It's well-known that if you divide by zero, the answer is "undefined".
I just had a thought. Isn't dividing by zero the same as dividing zero times? Thus, dividing zero times is the same as not dividing it at all. That is, the answer is the numerator. No, I am wrong, and I know it. But I can't exactly figure out why. I need someone to complete my thinking.
I think the answer is something like this: By saying I divide it "zero" times, I am making a mistake. You don't divide by one and make one cut in a pie. To divide by one, I make a pie into one equal part. That is, it's the whole pie, a correct answer. If I divide by two, I end up with two equal parts. But if I divide by zero, I am saying there are zero equal parts. So would any series of cuts that divides the pie into unequal parts be an answer?
"Why is this pie divided into seven unequal parts?"
"Because I divided it by zero."
Or is this the answer: It's undefined because there are an infinite number of answers — any way of dividing the pie into unequal parts ends up being the equivalent of "dividing by zero?" That is, to say the pie was divided by zero simply doesn't tell you enough about how it's divided — the equation written as "1/0=?" simply tells you that the pie has in fact been divided, and that the resulting parts are unequal.
I guess what I'm getting it is I've always assumed dividing by zero was some kind of unknown, unknowable thing, some great mystery, just one of those ineffable things that we'll have to find the answer to in the afterlife. Actually, it just means the answer to what happened to the pie cannot be defined in an equation — NOT that there may not be other means of expressing what happened to the pie.
Is that it or am I wrong? Does everyone already know this? Or have I had another penetrating glimpse into the blatantly obvious?
I just had a thought. Isn't dividing by zero the same as dividing zero times? Thus, dividing zero times is the same as not dividing it at all. That is, the answer is the numerator. No, I am wrong, and I know it. But I can't exactly figure out why. I need someone to complete my thinking.
I think the answer is something like this: By saying I divide it "zero" times, I am making a mistake. You don't divide by one and make one cut in a pie. To divide by one, I make a pie into one equal part. That is, it's the whole pie, a correct answer. If I divide by two, I end up with two equal parts. But if I divide by zero, I am saying there are zero equal parts. So would any series of cuts that divides the pie into unequal parts be an answer?
"Why is this pie divided into seven unequal parts?"
"Because I divided it by zero."
Or is this the answer: It's undefined because there are an infinite number of answers — any way of dividing the pie into unequal parts ends up being the equivalent of "dividing by zero?" That is, to say the pie was divided by zero simply doesn't tell you enough about how it's divided — the equation written as "1/0=?" simply tells you that the pie has in fact been divided, and that the resulting parts are unequal.
I guess what I'm getting it is I've always assumed dividing by zero was some kind of unknown, unknowable thing, some great mystery, just one of those ineffable things that we'll have to find the answer to in the afterlife. Actually, it just means the answer to what happened to the pie cannot be defined in an equation — NOT that there may not be other means of expressing what happened to the pie.
Is that it or am I wrong? Does everyone already know this? Or have I had another penetrating glimpse into the blatantly obvious?
Great piece on global warming
An experiment that hints that the sun is determining global warming.
UPDATE: There's a interesting take by Czech President Vaclav Klaus by way of Dean Esmay, and gulp, the Drudge Report, here.
UPDATE: There's a interesting take by Czech President Vaclav Klaus by way of Dean Esmay, and gulp, the Drudge Report, here.