Easy Easter
12 years ago
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Science 101...
Yeah... so my remedial science class had us do this paper... i think i kinda over did it... and i did a pretty weak job too...
Good and Bad Science
In the marketing world we live in, “Good” and “Bad” science lies all around us. Although the moral issue can be addressed perhaps on another occasion, we will look at 2 examples of science, one “Good” and one “Bad”. What we will denote as “Bad” science is a scientific theory or claim that has no REAL evidences or backing to support it and has failed to comply with Reliable, Rational, and Reproducible methods.
In the United States, and the World for that matter, image is everything. We pour billions of dollars a year into cosmetic surgeries, beauty salons, shaving products, and other superficial products and services. Home Laser Hair Removal has been on the rise ever since the commercial out coming of the companies that provide this service. With a little bit of marketing and even less research several companies have claimed they’ve been able to take a machine, that large cosmetic companies pay thousands of dollars for, and create a small handheld device that can do the same for close to $200. By simply a rational view we know the results will be dramatically different. TV ads boost the market scandal by showing the product works for them on beautiful people, yet when the user brings it home the reproducibility is not found. The “evidences” provided simply state numbers, but have no actual report of the findings, suggesting to one that they may be falsified. Regardless of the matter, Home Laser Hair Removal is a perfect example of “Bad” science and how the United States Population as a whole buys into marketing schemes with far too much ease.
On a less pessimistic side; “Good” science also perks up, giving us faith in our hard working super-geniuses. An example of this “Good” science at work is a theory developed by two scientists, Britton J. Olson and Andrew W. Cook. After months of research and literally thousands of tests, on what was recently the most powerful super-computer in the world, they made an educated theory regarding fluid mechanics and shock waves and how it applies to our modern day world. They have a rational standpoint regarding their theory because of the amount of research and tests gone into it and explain with logic and reason. They’ve had peers go over their work and were able to repeatedly reproduce the events in simulation and came up with the following conclusion:
“Beginning from a state of hydrostatic equilibrium, in which a heavy gas rests atop a light gas in a constant gravitational field, Rayleigh–Taylor instability at the interface will launch a shock wave into the upper fluid. We have performed a series of large-eddy simulations which suggest that the rising bubbles of light fluid act like pistons, compressing the heavy fluid ahead of the fronts and generating shocklets. These shocklets coalesce in multidimensional fashion into a strong normal shock, which increases in strength as it propagates upwards. The simulations demonstrate that the shock Mach number increases faster in three dimensions than it does in two dimensions. The generation of shocks via Rayleigh–Taylor instability could play an important role in type Ia supernovae.”
Not only is their stated conclusion found, but also mathematical equations that support their theory as well as graphs and figures from their respective findings. What we therefore can see is the example of “Good” science, being reliable, reproducible, and rational.
As the “Good” and “Bad” science fight all around us we tend to be fixated on the temporal and visual aspects of science disregarding the proof which is essential in any thesis, theory, or claim. Looking at these claims or theories we may or may not find Rational, Reproducible, and Reliable evidences, but it will help us determine whether it is “Good” or “Bad” science.
Good and Bad Science
In the marketing world we live in, “Good” and “Bad” science lies all around us. Although the moral issue can be addressed perhaps on another occasion, we will look at 2 examples of science, one “Good” and one “Bad”. What we will denote as “Bad” science is a scientific theory or claim that has no REAL evidences or backing to support it and has failed to comply with Reliable, Rational, and Reproducible methods.
In the United States, and the World for that matter, image is everything. We pour billions of dollars a year into cosmetic surgeries, beauty salons, shaving products, and other superficial products and services. Home Laser Hair Removal has been on the rise ever since the commercial out coming of the companies that provide this service. With a little bit of marketing and even less research several companies have claimed they’ve been able to take a machine, that large cosmetic companies pay thousands of dollars for, and create a small handheld device that can do the same for close to $200. By simply a rational view we know the results will be dramatically different. TV ads boost the market scandal by showing the product works for them on beautiful people, yet when the user brings it home the reproducibility is not found. The “evidences” provided simply state numbers, but have no actual report of the findings, suggesting to one that they may be falsified. Regardless of the matter, Home Laser Hair Removal is a perfect example of “Bad” science and how the United States Population as a whole buys into marketing schemes with far too much ease.
On a less pessimistic side; “Good” science also perks up, giving us faith in our hard working super-geniuses. An example of this “Good” science at work is a theory developed by two scientists, Britton J. Olson and Andrew W. Cook. After months of research and literally thousands of tests, on what was recently the most powerful super-computer in the world, they made an educated theory regarding fluid mechanics and shock waves and how it applies to our modern day world. They have a rational standpoint regarding their theory because of the amount of research and tests gone into it and explain with logic and reason. They’ve had peers go over their work and were able to repeatedly reproduce the events in simulation and came up with the following conclusion:
“Beginning from a state of hydrostatic equilibrium, in which a heavy gas rests atop a light gas in a constant gravitational field, Rayleigh–Taylor instability at the interface will launch a shock wave into the upper fluid. We have performed a series of large-eddy simulations which suggest that the rising bubbles of light fluid act like pistons, compressing the heavy fluid ahead of the fronts and generating shocklets. These shocklets coalesce in multidimensional fashion into a strong normal shock, which increases in strength as it propagates upwards. The simulations demonstrate that the shock Mach number increases faster in three dimensions than it does in two dimensions. The generation of shocks via Rayleigh–Taylor instability could play an important role in type Ia supernovae.”
Not only is their stated conclusion found, but also mathematical equations that support their theory as well as graphs and figures from their respective findings. What we therefore can see is the example of “Good” science, being reliable, reproducible, and rational.
As the “Good” and “Bad” science fight all around us we tend to be fixated on the temporal and visual aspects of science disregarding the proof which is essential in any thesis, theory, or claim. Looking at these claims or theories we may or may not find Rational, Reproducible, and Reliable evidences, but it will help us determine whether it is “Good” or “Bad” science.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
6 weeks later...
So Yeah, i apologize for not writing any blogs or anything on the happenings of my life. So... since I've been back, i have slowly adjusted to this apostate world, and accepted that some people are just a little behind on their spiritual progression... I was able to see my close friend Joey Citti graduate with a bachelors in Business Administration. He's a Good kid and will be married the summer of 09'... I was in my Antioch Singles ward for a short 7 weeks where i received the calling of 1st Councilor in the Sunday School Presidency. I went on a few dates which was kind of a bust, but I'm not really too worried about it. I went out with the missionaries a few times and even played a few video games... i know i know... Most recently i've arrived to the BYU-Idaho campus, Dad drove me up and it was very nice to spend some time with him... sure do love my papa... I've decided the career path that best fits me will be to get a BS in Computer Science and then get my MBA from the best college i can get into. My Roommates so far are Jamison Egberdt from Reno Nevada, who served in the Dallas Texas Mission, Sam Jenkins from Elko Nevada, who served in the England Mission, Michael Sorensen from Seattle Washington, who served with me in the Peru Lima North Mission... I'm very excited to start studying and the spirit here is very strong... I feel that i will do very well. Hopefully i will update this weekly so as to keep you informed as to how my studies go and whats new in my life... I sure do love my family and My Testimony grows daily... oh yeah... there are a TON of hot girls here... Booya!
-Derek-
-Derek-
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Blog what now?
After seeing my ridiculous gringo family blog-away putting their daily lives on display i finally have succumb to temptation and created my own Blog. During my mission my Dad would send me his blogs which are generally outrageously funny and would share these blogs with my companions. Being back in the states is defiantly an awkward situation for me and random Spanish words slip out in most conversations. I still flinch when a girl talks to me and always extend a handshake first. Although changed forever, i am a lot the same. Most Missionaries, myself not excluded, go through this post-mission depression, nothing too serious, but enough to be a nuisance. Hopefully i can get on the ball before too long and apply my Mission skills... seeing as how I've already mastered my bow staff skills...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
