Observation

Watch people walk by, immersing themselves in too-often vicious social media, inattentive to all but their mo' bile devices.

Artemis

Some people are excited about the Artemis mission, and others are pretty grumpy about it. Moon shots have been done before, of course, and the thrill isn't going to be the same. I remember the original well.

The same reasons for not doing it at all circulate again: Benefits are speculative, We've got great needs (wars, the poor, etc) that all need dealing with and this is a mere distraction, and so on. There's a new reason too: Why not use robots for exploration since they work so well now.

Of course the benefits of using low earth orbit and geosynchronous orbit are not speculative at all anymore, but we have a better handle on what we can find on the Moon and Mars and a better appreciation for how hard work there will be.

The "How can we spend money on this when we have so many poor/etc" sounds very noble-minded, but that argument has no boundaries or limits. Why did Beethoven waste his time composing music when he could have been agitating for peace and trying to relieve poverty?

No. There are things worth doing, things that make life better, that have nothing to do with the usual list of desperate needs. I judge exploration (physical and scientific research) to be among those, along with arts. "We can put a man on the Moon but we can't fix homelessness." Well, we can carve a Pieta but we can't cure drug addiction--and probably never will. I don't believe the societal-problem advocates should have an automatic veto on the work of the rest of us.

The question comes down to balance. You can overdo anything. And there are several kind of costs to consider: money of course, but enthusiasm and good will too. Thanks to the intervening years of development some effects can be had for much less (in constant dollars) than they could for the Apollo program. Enthusiasm seems harder to come by, for pretty much anything. A certain decadence set in in society, and NASA turned rather sclerotic. Private rockets pack a lot more enthusiasm now.

If you argue that the Artemis program lacks vision--that we're just doing what our ancestors did, just a little bigger; a little larger pyramid this time--I admit there's justice to the argument.

If you complain that it's inefficient to try to loft people instead of robots--granted.

If you complain that the Constitution doesn't mandate research spending like this--well, it doesn't mandate poverty spending either. And several decades of the latter have shown some stubborn problems with poverty elimination and a moral hazard or two as well--the programs are not an unmitigated good.

You could argue that private firms should take up the torch of space travel. I like the idea, though we have a tragedy of the commons problem already.

Where should the balance be--this year? I don't know. Existential problems, such as war or overwhelming debt, may demand cuts to the bone and beyond. We don't have a good track record of facing up to problems and making hard decisions either.

Nor do I know on what scales you weigh conflicting desires: smaller classes or more to teach about?

I do know that if I had funding authority, I'd want to keep trying to explore.

Webcam and zoom

(Logitech C615, ubuntu 22.04.5, gnome/wayland) Under cheese the resolution looks quite decent, but under zoom it's fuzzy, as though it doesn't want to focus. It turns out that changing the resolution can't be done from a zoom desktop, but only through logging into the web interface to the account.

Even with that, autofocus is painfully slow.

Speeds

When I learned to type we measured speed in words per minute. Did Incan scribes measure their quipu speed in knots?

Judas

We get some detail about Judas, but not a huge amount. The story isn't mainly about him anyway.

He was a thief, and helped himself to what was in the moneybag. How did John know? Matthew, a tax collector, might have spotted small discrepancies easily enough, and told Jesus, and John, close to Jesus, heard of it. Was Judas afraid of exposure, unwilling to repent?

I've read it proposed that Judas, knowing Jesus' power, wanted Him to quit dilly-dallying and use that power and popularity, and so tried to force Jesus' hand. It didn't work the way Judas hoped, hence his despairing not-quite-repentance. It's quite plausible, but not supported by the texts.

Or perhaps he was jaded with miracles. Many others saw the same miracles and merely got angrier with Jesus, and not at all interested in following Him. Jesus had said some things that would be really hard for a good Jew to listen to ("eat my flesh"), and maybe Judas was wondering if Jesus was really good. We're told that the disciples, when on mission, were also doing miracles--perhaps Judas did some miraculous healings too. People are really good at forgetting inconvenient things, but that would be a doozy to try to forget.

Or perhaps he was sloppy and the devil slowly took hold of him.

Or perhaps his motives were a mix of all of the above.

I heard it asked if Judas had a choice; if the prophecy meant that somebody had to betray Christ. I think that's a bit backwards. If Judas had chosen otherwise, the prophets would have been told something else to say.

It's been claimed that Peter is Everyman, standing in for us all, denying Christ through fear and surprise. But so is Judas, betraying Christ and perhaps not entirely sure why. And so is Thomas, doubting the testimony. And so is John, loved by Christ.

Speedy trials

A mysterious death. After a gold miner was found dead, "tensions escalated when during the procession into town, residents claimed that, in line with traditional practices, the corpse allegedly identified Thomas Cooper as responsible for Morris’ death."

That would certainly explain the mob that tried to kill Thomas earlier.

Following the incident, Thomas Cooper reportedly confessed, alleging that Morris was killed through traditional means. He claimed that food and alcohol consumed at the gold mining site were poisoned through witchcraft. He also alleged that others were involved but has not disclosed their identities.

Authorities say investigations into the matter are ongoing.

There's a picture of a partly destroyed house that Thomas was hiding in. I rarely saw palm-branch roofs--they weren't legal. Crowded villages tended to have one house set the rest on fire, so corrugated metal or asbestos roofing was mandated.

I wonder when during the various proceedings the confession happened. I'd bet it was before the authorities rescued him.

Naval engineer's prayer

Drachinifel says this was a real plea by midget submarine engineers.

Grafting

Discussing Romans 11 this morning we noticed how Paul uses the reverse of normal grafting to emphasize that his Gentile audience shouldn't get swelled heads: grafting wild grapes onto a cultivated vine.

Grafting is weird -- who thought of it? How could you guess you weren't going to just kill the scion?

People started doing it somewhere between the Middle East and China, and it slowly spread from those places. Apparently more observant people noticed naturally occurring "inosculation" where branches or roots grow together on contact. I've not seen this with branches, but I have with tree roots -- I just never made the connection. Somebody did, played around with the process, and came up with other possibilities.

Lots of other possibilities.

Bus numbers

Back before Covid, before the bus reorganizations but after they first started running them to this town, I'd drive to or be dropped off at the bus stop and ride downtown. I never saw more than 15 people on the (rush hour only service) buses, and usually about half that. I liked the convenience--I could use my time much more usefully than I could driving--but wondered just how heavily the town was subsidizing the ride.

The city then expanded bus service, including an in-town only route, which I have used twice. Once again, I wondered: how much was that subsidized?

Budget shortfalls are bringing a lot into public view. Last year Metro Bus+Paratransit had 113,951 riders on this town's lines. Counting weekends as a single day, that comes to about 9 riders per bus run. That's more than I expected, based on what I see through the windows, but OK. To be clear, there are two circulator lines, and one which links to Madison downtown. I just assumed everybody rode the circulator.

The contract with Metro this year is for 2.04 million. That's about 18 dollars per ride, all lines included. Fares were about 2 bucks (and there is some state aid, but that doesn't reduce the cost per ride, just changes who pays), so the city itself subsidizes 600,000 -- a bit over 5 bucks a ride.

Madison Metro got itself a reputation for exploitive contracts with the suburbs, but 18 dollars a ride? You'd have to put 2 people on every seat to make 2 dollar fares alone pay for the contract.

For the in-city short hops, a taxi costs less than the real price for the bus ride. I wasn't expecting that.

Voodoo lily

One of our daughters gave us a few bulbs. Last year they grew in a pot on the deck, and provided an exotic complement to the other flowers there.

This year one of the bulbs started sprouting early after the winter-over, so my wife potted it and set it up in the kitchen window. (We don't get a lot of direct sunlight in the house.)

It grew nicely, and started to flower.

I spent some time emptying cabinets trying to find the dead mouse until I realized where the smell was actually coming from. Turns out the voodoo lily is related to the infamous titan arum.

It is now in the garage with a plastic bag over it to keep it warm. When it is done blossoming it can come back inside, or if the weather warms up return to the deck...

Science and art

Patrick Kurp posted some thoughts on science writing and literature. He quotes Chappell: "Poetry celebrates visual appearance while disciplines like chemistry and particle physics plunge below appearance into a universe often impossible to visualize, a void punctuated by brief pulses and intermittent bleeps of electromagnetic energy. There is, besides, the dread problem of accuracy:"

One could quote Dirac on learning that Oppenheimer wrote poetry:

I do not see how a man can work on the frontiers of physics and write poetry at the same time. They are in opposition. In science you want to say something that nobody knew before, in words which everyone can understand. In poetry you are bound to say ... something that everyone knows already in words that nobody can understand.

That's probably not being entirely fair to Oppenheimer, though it may depend on which poems Dirac was thinking of. (I don't think my wife would be thrilled to receive such an Epithalamion.)

But in the general case Dirac was wrong, the poetic ideal is to be understood.

"True Wit is Nature to advantage dress'd
What oft was thought, but ne'er so well express'd;
Something whose truth convinced at sight we find,
That gives us back the image of our mind."

True, in the sciences and in math precision is vital—a statement should mean one thing only, while in poetry a phrase can stand for or allude to many things—preferably compactly, memorably, beautifully, and rhythmically. "In size, a node; in swing, more anti."

Dirac was convinced of the importance of beauty in physics, that the clumsy expression of the details of reality could be underpinned by simple and beautiful equations.

The language will be unfamiliar to many, but surely this is also a kind of poetry too.

(And it's better poetry than when we try our hands at more traditional versions.)

Quasi-war

Perhaps my history books covering the era were defective, or my memory is, but somehow I missed the US quasi-war with France. Stuff like the XYZ affair got overshadowed by the War of 1812, I guess.

France had loaned us money for the Revolutionary War. In 1793 we found it inexpedient to keep paying (Louis was dead, and we were having trouble with the Brits), and the French Directorate got a bit upset with us and let loose privateers to seize ships. With customary brilliance Congress had sold off the last warships.

The Brits had us over a barrel--they had a bigger navy and were at war with France (and seizing some of our ships trading with France too) -- and the resulting Jay treaty left us nominally sort-of anti-French (not popularly, though).

We wound up losing about 2000 merchant ships by the time things wound down.

No declaration of war (the Supreme Court said that was OK) -- that set a bit of precedent. It made sense not to go all out; all we wanted to do was shoot up their corsairs until they quit bothering us. And get reimbursed for our loses, which didn't happen.

"that is"

A verse caught my eye this morning: Revelation 13:6. The part that looked interesting was "to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, that is, those who dwell(*) in heaven." (*) Or "who tabernacle" (as a verb). The "that is" isn't in the text, but is inferred from the grammar--in the Vaticanus/Sinaiticus versions. The KJV used a different Greek text that has an and there.

It's a trivial difference, and both readings make sense and neither changes anything about the thrust of the passage.

But the image of "those who dwell in heaven" is different between the two. With the "that is, those who dwell in heaven" reading, all those in heaven have the Spirit of God within them, and are also a kind of tabernacle and a kind of incarnation.

Catholic and Orthodox devotions refer to the Virgin Mary as the tabernacle--the place where God is/was staying. Some call her the first of the new tabernacles. Seems reasonable.