How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction • Hacker News Board

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#71

Post by FredPret » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 7:39 PM UTC

jhbadger wrote: post #70

FredPret wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boeing is a good example of capitalism working. Go and look at their financial statements. Look at their stock over the past half decade. It's all deep in the red. They're still alive because their past achievements are significant enough to carry them through this and they will probably still be salvaged. Otherwise they'd be long bankrupt, freeing up immense human, physical, and financial capital to go do something…

But Boeing is the only remaining US-based manufacturer of airliners (among other things). This didn't used to be the case, but through mergers and acquisitions it's true today. There is just no way the US government would ever let Boeing go under and let the Europeans or Chinese dominate airliners. Like the banks in 2008, Boeing is just "too big to fail".

That's true but it's hardly a failure of the market. Airliners are big, complex products that are apparently best managed by big, complex companies (not my opinion, just an observation).

If the government decides airliners are a strategic priority and decides to interfere with the market, the cost of that decision is that tax money is going to be used to prop up the incumbent, instead of funding for the poor.

I think a little bit of industrial policy can be a good thing.

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#72

Post by itishappy » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 7:41 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #53

gus_massa wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and no. The photographer needs a nice photo, she needs the article to sell books and not get traped again in the ivory tower. Eveyone is happy. It's part of the job. Like politician using a suit and smiling. (Aparently smiling people with suits don't steal or start random wars.) I looked at the equations, they look correct but so unrelated that made me chuckle. I imagine she was chuckling while writing them. I'm…

Anyone recognize all the equations? I only recognize a few specifically and can sort of guess the general area of some of the rest. From left to right then top to bottom: 1. No idea. Based on the E sub λ, the use of Planck's and Boltzmann's constants, and the e^(hc/λkt)-1 I'd guess its the energy of something at wavelength λ and temperature t. I don't recall ever seeing energy have a factor of 1/λ^5 before college wa…

Fun! I'll take a swing (and I'm cheating by looking stuff up):

1. Blackbody radiation per unit wavelength.

2. Momentum.

3. Not sure. Quantum harmonic oscillator? Orbital mechanics?

4. Pythagorean theorem.

5. Bernoulli's equation.

6. Drake equation.

7. Velocity.

8. Ballistic/projectile motion.

9. Blackbody radiation per unit frequency.

10. Newton's law of gravity.

11. One of the Freidman equations for cosmological expansion.

12. Velocity of an accelerating object over some distance.

13. Einstein's mass-energy equivalence. (The memorable half, at least.)

14. Newton's second law.

15. Not sure, but I have a feeling that's one of the terms of the Ricci curvature. Maybe the classical limit?

15E. Edit: Whoops, nope, it's the Rydberg constant from the Rydberg formula for atomic energy levels. (Thanks gus_massa!)

16. Not sure. Reminds me of population inversion, so I'd guess stable state population of some quantum transition.

17. Not a clue.

[1][9] https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/505909/frequency...

[11] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations

[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relati...

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature

[15E] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rydberg_formula

[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_inversion

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#73

Post by gus_massa » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:00 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #35

hannofcart wrote: post #6

Does it bother anyone else that the picture featuring the author shows a blackboard containing seemingly unrelated equations just to make it look "this-is-high-brow-complex-mathy-stuff-that-I-am-an-expert-in"? Why would someone who wants to be taken seriously as a scientist pose in front of something like that?

> Why would someone who wants to be taken seriously as a scientist pose in front of something like that? She was probably asked to, knew that the photographer probably has a much better idea of what the publication wanted than she did, and so did what was asked. She would not have worried about it making it hard to take her seriously because she almost certainly knows that everyone who she needs to have take her seri…

I've seen a lot of "overstuffed bookshelf" in the wild, from offices in the university to homes, they are probably real. (It's difficult to transport and order so many books.) (I think that lawyers like to buy fake books, but scientist have real books.)

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#74

Post by vinnyvichy » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 1:19 AM UTC

observationist wrote: post #47

I gave the source and positioning of this post a lot more thought than i usually do; it's a weird one. bookofjoe harvests content and posts from many sources, he's one of the many people contributing to the inbound firehose of links and stories. Not sure how or why this got bumped to the top ten; maybe people see "sci fi" and/or "ivory tower" and a piece of content will get engagement? TBH it reads a little like a pu…

"Nature" seems to work more like a mix of traditional publishing house and BuzzFeed Inc than an impersonal incorruptible public institution. Insiders please chime in if you are out there.

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#75

Post by gumby » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 3:20 AM UTC

Seems logical she would become a writer: her handwriting is so clear.

All jokes aside, what's on that whiteboard looks pretty complex for a community college. It might be soul sucking to be working there after getting the PhD in astrobiology. So perhaps writing is a relief valve, and I wish her the best of luck at it.

(I do have a friend who teaches at a CC, The subjects are pretty basic: algebra and high school calculus. But he told me he really enjoyed the fact that every student wants to be there, so pays attention and does the homework).

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#76

Post by shiroiushi » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 4:14 AM UTC

5040 wrote: post #55

thrance wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space exploration and scientific missions has always been funded by states, so pretty much the inverse of capitalistic impulses. SpaceX does no scientific missions, focusing on the only somewhat profitable part of the space industry: putting satellites in orbit. Also it receives massive grants of public money. There are no economic incentives to colonize Mars.

>There are no economic incentives to colonize Mars. Perhaps, but much has been said about the vast fortunes asteroid mining could unlock.

That is true, and I also believe there really are vast fortunes that could be unlocked with asteroid mining. However, asteroid mining is absolutely nothing like colonizing Mars, aside from the fact that they both involve space travel.

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#77

Post by shiroiushi » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 4:20 AM UTC

jowea wrote: post #59

queuebert wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm talking about America, with a so-called democracy far older than the USSR Technically America is not a democracy -- it's a federal republic composed of states with widely differing interpretations of democracy.

Question: where does the idea that democracy and republic are incompatible comes from? I keep hearing this am curious where it started. Is it because the Founding Fathers wanted aristocratic elements to keep popular will at bay? To me the USA is obviously a (or maybe the ) federal democratic republic. There is no contradiction. Sovereignity resides in the people and there's no monarch so it's a republic and elected r…

>Sovereignity resides in the people and there's no monarch so it's a republic

Sovereignty residing in the people is not a feature of a republic. The only thing that defines a republic is that it isn't a monarchy.

If it's a republic and the government is elected by a democratic process, then it's a "democratic republic". And you don't need a republic to have a democratic state either: the UK and Japan are examples of this (both are monarchies).

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#78

Post by defrost » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 4:31 AM UTC

shiroiushi wrote: post #77

jowea wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question: where does the idea that democracy and republic are incompatible comes from? I keep hearing this am curious where it started. Is it because the Founding Fathers wanted aristocratic elements to keep popular will at bay? To me the USA is obviously a (or maybe the ) federal democratic republic. There is no contradiction. Sovereignity resides in the people and there's no monarch so it's a republic and elected r…

>Sovereignity resides in the people and there's no monarch so it's a republic Sovereignty residing in the people is not a feature of a republic. The only thing that defines a republic is that it isn't a monarchy. If it's a republic and the government is elected by a democratic process, then it's a "democratic republic". And you don't need a republic to have a democratic state either: the UK and Japan are examples of…

The US system is a mini-monarchy .. as recognised by the founders from the outset, a number opposing the notion.

https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/constitut...

Coming from a post US "Washminister* system (Australia) the US "Little King" looks very much a daft arrangement as exemplified by the inability to fire a POTUS for poor performance | losing support, etc.

We retained a symbolic monarch as a "nominal" head of State to bind the notion of a country over the transient seatings of Government but seeded very little in the way of real effective power to that monarch.

As a country we've swapped Prime Ministers (politically equivilant here to a US President) on a dime wothout skipping a beat in managing the country.

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#79

Post by shiroiushi » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 4:37 AM UTC

defrost wrote: post #78

shiroiushi wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Sovereignity resides in the people and there's no monarch so it's a republic Sovereignty residing in the people is not a feature of a republic. The only thing that defines a republic is that it isn't a monarchy. If it's a republic and the government is elected by a democratic process, then it's a "democratic republic". And you don't need a republic to have a democratic state either: the UK and Japan are examples of…

The US system is a mini-monarchy .. as recognised by the founders from the outset, a number opposing the notion. https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/constitut... Coming from a post US "Washminister* system (Australia) the US "Little King" looks very much a daft arrangement as exemplified by the inability to fire a POTUS for poor performance | losing support, etc. We retained a symbolic monarch as a "no…

>The US system is a mini-monarchy

Think what you like about the effectiveness of the US system, but it's not a monarchy in any way, shape, or form. A monarchy requires power (or at least a position that's supposed to have power, as most modern monarchies are really just figureheads) to be inherited. Sure, once in a while US presidents get to that position partly because of family connections (FDR, GWB), but that's nothing like the way an actual monarchy operates.

Re: How I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

#80

Post by defrost » Thu, Jul 11, 2024, 5:20 AM UTC

shiroiushi wrote: post #79

defrost wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US system is a mini-monarchy .. as recognised by the founders from the outset, a number opposing the notion. https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/constitut... Coming from a post US "Washminister* system (Australia) the US "Little King" looks very much a daft arrangement as exemplified by the inability to fire a POTUS for poor performance | losing support, etc. We retained a symbolic monarch as a "no…

>The US system is a mini-monarchy Think what you like about the effectiveness of the US system, but it's not a monarchy in any way, shape, or form. A monarchy requires power (or at least a position that's supposed to have power, as most modern monarchies are really just figureheads) to be inherited. Sure, once in a while US presidents get to that position partly because of family connections (FDR, GWB), but that's no…

What I think is irrelevant, I'm not even USAian, I paraphrased an opinion held by the anti-Federalist founders held during the (US) constitutional debates.

Clearly these were crazy people far divorced from reality as we know it modern times:

    During the ratification debates, Antifederalists charged that the President would become an elected monarch, that cabals would develop to ensure his reelection, and that the presidential veto power would be abused. They further feared that presidential power to grant pardons would allow the president to conspire with others in treasonable activities with impunity.

I mean, really? Can you even imagine anything like that happening?