THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
03/29/13 -- Vol. 31, No. 39, Whole Number 1747
Mulder: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Scully: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
All material is copyrighted by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent will be assumed authorized for inclusion
unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
The latest issue is at http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at
http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm.
Topics:
The MT VOID Marches On (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups, Lectures,
etc. (NJ)
My Picks for Turner Classic Movies in April (comments
by Mark R. Leeper)
Kaffeeklatsch with Jordin Kare (interview
by Dale L. Skran, Jr.)
Technology and Its Discontents (comment by Evelyn C. Leeper)
FAMILY WEEKEND (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
Comments on David Leeper's Puzzle Answers (letter of comment
by Walter Meissner)
Boskone (letter of comment by Dan Kimmel)
Guns (letter of comment by Steve Milton)
This Week's Reading (UCB Philosophy 6, and THE ODYSSEY)
(book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
==================================================================
TOPIC: The MT VOID Marches On (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Neither rain, nor wind, nor staying at remote cabins with no
Wifi, nor travel to South Africa, nor week-long power outages after
post-Hurricane Cyclone Superstorm Sandy will stay the MT VOID from
its appointed rounds. To this you may add a broken hip--the last
MT VOID was sent from a hospital bed where I was recovering from a
broken hip. This one is being sent from a rehab center.
Details may be found at http://leepers.us/hip.htm. [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups, Lectures,
etc. (NJ)
April 4: ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND and "The Memory
Clearing House" by Israel Zangwill http://bit.ly/ZeRLy4,
Middletown (NJ) Public Library, 5:30PM; discussion after
the film
April 18: FANCIES AND GOODNIGHTS by John Collier (some subset TBD),
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
May 2: TBD, Middletown (NJ) Public Library, 5:30PM; discussion
after the film
May 23: THE STARS MY DESTINATION by Alfred Bester, Old Bridge (NJ)
Public Library, 7PM
June 20: FLOATING OPERA by John Barth, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM
July 25: TRSF by the MIT Technology Review, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM
August 15: [canceled]
September 26: THE TIME SHIPS by Stephen Baxter, Old Bridge (NJ)
Public Library, 7PM
October 17: THE LANGUAGE INSTINCT by Steven Pinker, Old Bridge
(NJ) Public Library, 7PM
November 21: DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP? By Philip
K. Dick, Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
December 19: THE MOON AND SIXPENCE by W. Somerset Maugham,
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
Speculative Fiction Lectures:
April 4: Linda Addison (Editor, "Space & Time Magazine),
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 12N
May 11: Alaya D. Johnson, "Doing Historical Research",
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 12N
June 8: Leanna R. Hieber, "Directing Your Book",
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 12N
Northern New Jersey events are listed at:
http://www.sfsnnj.com/news.html
==================================================================
TOPIC: My Picks for Turner Classic Movies in April (comments by
Mark R. Leeper)
Spring is coming again and it is the time of the month when I make
suggestions for films to see on TCM. So what is up this month?
(All times given are for the Eastern Time Zone.)
When I review a film I usually to not let it count against the
movie that the special effects are not as good as they might be in
other films. After all I grew up with films by the likes of Bert
I. Gordon with horrid matte lines around the giant creatures Gordon
liked to feature. But there is one film that I think really ruined
its impact with the bad dinosaur special effects in that the film
employed. That film would be the AIP and Amicus production of
Edgar Rice Burroughs novel THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT (1975). The
script was written by popular science fiction and fantasy author
Michael Moorcock and James Cawthorn. The film is generally fairly
faithful to the novel with one major exception. In the novel the
character Captain Von Schoenvorts is a treacherous, evil villain.
The screenplay makes him (played by John McEnery) really the most
complex and interesting character of the film. He has good reason
for what he does. The book he torpedoes hero Bowen Tyler's (Doug
McClure) ship as just a black and nasty deed. In the film Von
Schoenvorts is given a chance to explain that the ship was carrying
weapons that would have been used against his countrymen. When
they get to the lost island of Caprona, it is Von Schoenvorts who
is the most anxious to take advantage of the opportunity to study
the unique fauna of the island, including the dinosaurs. The
script is as complex or more than the novel would allow it to be.
Really the best part of the film is the submarine warfare before
the main characters ever get to Caprona. The dinosaurs are of the
man-in-suit variety and *very* unconvincing. Worst of all are the
pterodactyls that seem to be entirely rigid at the ends of their
wires. If you can ignore the terrible effects the film is really
better than you would expect. Depending on your attitude toward
JOHN CARTER this might be the best Edgar Rice Burroughs film ever
made. (Friday, April 12, 6:15 PM)
Early morning Sunday, April 21, Turner is showing a very find
double feature of British horror films. I have discussed BURN,
WITCH, BURN (1962, aka NIGHT OF THE EAGLE, shown at 2:15 AM) in a
previous month summary so I will not go into detail about BURN,
WITCH, BURN. I will just say the screenplay is by Richard Matheson
and Charles Beaumont based on the novel CONJURE WIFE by Fritz
Leiber. That is one terrific line-up of talent. The film they
made is a semi-classic. Afterward, at 4 AM TCM will show Hammer
Films' THE WITCHES (a.k.a. THE DEVIL'S OWN). This was Hammer's
first of their three Black Magic horror films. The other two are
based on somewhat better novels by Dennis Wheatley. This one is
not quite as good but still worth seeing. THE WITCHES probably
takes too long to establish that there really is such a thing as
Black Magic, a mistake avoided by the later two films. Joan
Fontaine play Gwen Mayfield who after in Africa nearly falling
victim to what might have been Black Magic comes to a little
English village to teach. Little does she know that there is very
similar skullduggery in her new location. The screenplay is by
Nigel Kneale and based on a novel by Norah Lofts.
All that seems to be missing from THREE STRANGERS (1946) is
Humphrey Bogart. It was written by John Huston who wrote THE
MALTESE FALCON (1941) and by Howard Koch who wrote CASABLANCA
(1942). It stars Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet both of whom
were in CASABLANCA and THE MALTESE FALCON. The very dark THREE
STRANGERS may or may not have a fantasy element. That is left up
to the viewer to interpret. Central to the plot is wishing on a
Buddhist idol. The film has a sort of a film noir feel crossed
with supernatural currents. For its positive credits, it is still
very little known. But that is why it is the sort of film I like
to draw people's attention to. (Wednesday, April 10, 2:30 AM)
Mostly just for fans of William Castle there are two rare films.
ZOTZ! (1962) stars funny man Tom Poston in a fantasy about a
magical coin that gives people super powers. It will be on
(Friday, April 12, 3 PM). Even rarer is the Western THE GUN THAT
WON THE WEST (1955). This Castle-directed Western involves cavalry
and Indians. I have not seen it and reputedly is not all that
great, but William Castle completists might find it of interest.
(Tuesday, April 16, 1 AM)
If people promise not to think I am too silly, I would say that my
pick of the month is THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT, and if you have
seen it I would go for THREE STRANGERS.
Also note that on Sunday, April 1 there will be a mini-festival of
Lon Chaney films and on Tuesday April 16 there will be a mini-
festival of Charles Chaplin films.
April 1: Lon Chaney
6:00 AM Hunchback of Notre Dame, The (1923)
In this silent film, a deformed bell-ringer gives sanctuary to a
beautiful gypsy accused of witchcraft. Dir: Wallace Worsley Cast:
Lon Chaney, Ernest Torrence, Patsy Ruth Miller. BW-117 mins, TV-G.
8:00 AM He Who Gets Slapped (1924)
In this silent film, a scientist flees his tragic past to become a
circus clown. Dir: Victor Seastrom Cast: Lon Chaney, Norma Shearer,
John Gilbert. BW-72 mins, TV-G.
9:15 AM Monster, The (1925)
In this silent film, a mad scientist engineers car wrecks so he can
experiment on the survivors. Dir: Roland West Cast: Lon Chaney,
Gertrude Olmsted, Hallam Cooley. BW-87 mins, TV-G.
10:45 AM Blackbird, The (1926)
A benevolent bishop helps the needy during the day, but runs a
crime syndicate at night. Dir: Tod Browning Cast: Lon Chaney, Rene
Adore, Doris Lloyd. BW-86 mins, TV-G.
12:15 PM Tell It To The Marines (1926)
In this silent film, a tough drill sergeant and a spoiled recruit
become romantic rivals. Dir: George Hill Cast: Lon Chaney, William
Haines, Eleanor Boardman. BW-103 mins, TV-G.
2:00 PM Mockery (1927)
A peasant saves a countess during the Russian Revolution. Dir:
Benjamin Christensen Cast: Lon Chaney, Ricardo Cortez, Barbara
Bedford. BW-70 mins, TV-PG.
3:15 PM Mr. Wu (1927)
In this silent film, a Chinese patriarch goes mad when his daughter
falls for an Englishman. Dir: William Nigh Cast: Lon Chaney, Louise
Dresser, Rene Adore. BW-91 mins, TV-PG.
5:00 PM Unholy Three, The (1930)
A ventriloquist, a strong man and a midget form a criminal
alliance. Dir: Jack Conway Cast: Lon Chaney, Lila Lee, Elliott
Nugent. BW-72 mins, TV-G, CC.
6:15 PM Lon Chaney: A Thousand Faces (2000)
This documentary reveals the secrets of the screen's first great
horror star. Dir: Kevin Brownlow. BW-85 mins, TV-PG, CC.
April 16: Charles Chaplin
6:00 AM Tillie's Punctured Romance (1914)
In this silent film, a con man dupes a wealthy country girl into
marriage. Dir: Mack Sennett Cast: Marie Dressler, Charles Chaplin,
Mabel Normand. BW-72 mins, TV-G.
7:30 AM Sunnyside (1919)
In this silent film, an overworked farmhand dreams of marrying the
farmer's daughter. Dir: Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles Chaplin, Edna
Purviance, Albert Austin. BW-29 mins, TV-G.
8:00 AM Gold Rush, The (1925)
In this silent film, a lost soul in the Yukon seeks love and
wealth. Dir: Charlie Chaplin Cast: Mack Swain, Tom Murray, Georgia
Hale. BW-72 mins, TV-G.
9:15 AM Circus, The (1928)
In this silent film, the Little Tramp joins a circus to hide from
the police. Dir: Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles Chaplin, Merna
Kennedy, Betty Morrissey. BW-72 mins, TV-G.
10:30 AM Modern Times (1936)
The Tramp struggles to live in a modern industrial society with the
help of a young homeless woman. Dir: Charlie Chaplin Cast: Charlie
Chaplin, Paulette Goddard, Henry Bergman. BW-87 mins, TV-G.
12:00 PM Chaplin Today: Modern Times (2003)
Filmmakers Luc and Jean-Pierre Darenne share their impression of
Charlie Chaplin's classic Modern Times. C-26 mins, TV-G, CC.
12:30 PM Great Dictator, The (1940)
A Jewish barber takes the place of a war-hungry dictator. Dir:
Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles Chaplin, Paulette Goddard, Jack
Oakie. BW-125 mins, TV-PG, CC.
2:45 PM King in New York, A (1957)
A European king loses his money while stranded in the U.S. Dir:
Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles Chaplin, Dawn Addams, Maxine Audley.
BW-105 mins, TV-PG.
4:30 PM Chaplin Today: A King in New York (2003)
Filmmaker Jim Jarmusch discusses his impressions of Charlie
Chaplin's A King in New York. C-27 mins, TV-G, CC.
5:00 PM Limelight (1952)
A broken-down comic sacrifices everything to give a young dancer a
shot at the big time. Dir: Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles Chaplin,
Claire Bloom, Nigel Bruce. BW-138 mins, TV-G, CC.
7:30 PM Chaplin Today: Limelight (2003)
Director Bernardo Bertolucci shares his impressions of Charlie
Chaplin's classic Limelight. Dir: Charles Chaplin Cast: Charles
Chaplin, Claire Bloom, Sydney Chaplin. C-27 mins, TV-G, CC.
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Kaffeeklatsch with Jordin Kare (interview by Dale L. Skran,
Jr.)
Science fiction cons have an interesting custom of allowing fans to
sign up for hour long "kaffeeklatsches" with famous and not-so-
famous authors and guests. Recently at Boskone 2013 I had the
opportunity to attend one of these with Jordin T. Kare, the science
guest of honor. As it turned out, my wife and I were the only
people who signed up for the last-minute event, with the result
that it was more of an interview than a discussion. Kare is a
fascinating figure, and one of the world's leading experts on solar
power satellites and laser launch. He may be better known for his
invention of the laser mosquito fence, which you can read about at
http://tinyurl.com/void-backyard-star-wars. Kare is also widely
known in SF fandom as a filker. If this isn't enough, he is also
employed by Intellectual Ventures, perhaps the biggest firm that
focuses on the development and monetization of intellectual
property. This is a fancy way of saying Intellectual Ventures is a
patent troll with an R&D wing that also spins out companies to
exploit inventions made by people like Kare, who claimed to a be a
named co-inventor on over 100 patents, with 300 more in the
application pipeline.
Since I didn't record the meeting, I'm going to be paraphrasing
what Kare said. Thus, please *don't* extract some of my words
and attribute them to him. If you want a quote from Mr. Kare,
please contact him directly. However, I think the article will be
easier to follow in question and answer format. All mistakes are
my own, and I apologize in advance to Mr. Kare and anyone else who
may have been wronged.
[Dale] Recently NASA has announced that they will pay for an
experiment with an interferometer designed to show whether the
Alcubierre Warp Drive might actually work.
[Note to reader] You can find the wiki article on the Alcubierre
Drive at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
and the wiki article on the experiment at
http://tinyurl.com/void-interferometer.
[Kare] I'm not familiar with the details of this experiment, but
I am and remain skeptical of the underlying physics behind these
kinds of warp drives.
[Dale] I've been interested in potentially leading an effort in the
ITU-R (International Telecommunications Union--Radio) to reserve a
microwave frequency for SPS usage. My takeaway from your earlier
panel on space solar power is that the near and medium term future
of SPS (Solar Power Satellites) lies with laser power return, and
hence there is no need to (for 50 years or so anyway) reserve any
microwave frequencies.
[Kare] Yes. The only scenario where microwave receiving antennas
make sense is in the relatively distant future where there is a
large industrial infrastructure in space already (created for some
non-SPS reason) that allows large SPS to be constructed without a
high up-front cost.
[Dale] From a practical planning perspective, what are the next
steps in SPS research? In other words, what are the obstacles to a
small "demo" SPS with laser power return? What are the obstacles to
a "production" SPS with laser power return?
[Kare] It is important to understand that the only advantage SPS
has is that there is no need for power storage, and that the power
can be beamed to "transient" applications, i.e., military camps,
disaster sites, or remote locations. Jay Penn at Aerospace
Corporation did the closest thing to a real demo study a few years
back. It used 60KW fiber lasers to return power to the ground. It
would take about $10 million in research and a few more million in
production costs to build an orbiting demo SPS. Launch costs are
extra. After the orbital demo it is all about scaling and focusing
on the needs of the main customer. Lunar power is a real
application. There are two weeks of darkness on the moon, which
make "lunar surface" solar power impractical due to the large
storage requirements. An alternative approach is to have solar
cells on the lunar surface and build a reflector in space. This
may be cheaper than SPS, but possibly also less reliable.
[Dale] What about using SPS to support spacecraft?
[Kare] Transportation using power from an SPS turns out to result
in a major advantage, i.e., think of an ion drive ship with very
small solar panels receiving energy from a remote SPS. The SPS
could also be used to provide both electricity and thermal energy
to the rocket, but the laser for each application would need to be
different--thermal requires a tighter beam.
[Dale] In the earlier solar power panel, you mentioned that you
used XCOR piston pump rocket motors in your most recent laser
thermal design. Could you say a bit more about this?
[Kare] John Whitehead invented piston pump rocket motors for
SDI's "brilliant pebbles" project while at Livermore. The idea was
tested as part of the ASTRID project in the early 90s. Somehow
Whitehead hooked up with XCOR, and XCOR started using piston pumps
in their rocket engines. The exact licensing arrangement is
unclear, but XCOR seems to use piston pumps in all their rocket
motors. Their piston pump looked good and they were willing to
sell it at a reasonable price so I incorporated the design as part
of my laser thermal system.
[Note to reader] You can learn more about XCOR piston pump
technology at http://www.xcor.com/products/pumps/. If you want
to know more about the ASTRID project there is a paper at
. It appears that at
long last we are seeing some non-military benefit from all the
money spent on SDI.
[Dale] Can you address the issues with SpaceX/Blue Origin/DCX style
re-usability?
[Kare] SpaceX is doing a 2-stage reusable design. Everyone agrees
that it is possible. However, it is less clear that it is worth
doing. The first stage may not be worth recovering since it is the
less expensive of the two stages. The second stage tends to be the
more expensive, and hence more worth re-using. However, the extra
weight in the second stage needed for recovery is taken right off
the payload. In any case, it is clear that 2-stage reusable
rockets will work if there is a big enough market.
[Kare] Single stage is harder but has lower operation costs.
It's unfortunate that the X-33 used the least likely to succeed of
three competing single-stage to orbit approaches. Of course, the
X-33 had the most advanced technology, and that's what NASA wanted
to fund.
[Dale] Thanks very much for your time, and the best of luck in your
research!
[-dls]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Technology and Its Discontents (comment by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Technology: When it is good, it is very, very good, but when it is
bad it is horrid.
I like my GPS, but after the last software update it decided that
it would start only one time, then after it was shut off the
batteries had to be popped out and replaced to be able to start it
again.
I like my printer, but it has decided it no longer likes its print
cartridges and it takes 15 minutes to print a single page.
I like our Kindle, but after the last software update, it has not
re-indexed many of the books on it, so there is no way to search
them (which is, of course, one of the main advantages of e-books).
I like the improved picture quality of Blu-ray discs, but the menus
on them are often impenetrable, and figuring out how to skip the
previews is often impossible.
All in all, it seems as though lately "technology" is just another
word for "more things that can go wrong." [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: FAMILY WEEKEND (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: A teenager, fed up with her counter-culture family, takes
her parents hostage to give them a crash course in traditional
family values. The story could have been taken from a 1970s family
comedy, but actress Olesya Rulin gives the film a fresh crispness.
The film is directed by Benjamin Epps from a screenplay by Matt
K. Turner. Rating: +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10
Are there limits to personal freedom in a family to keep that
family together? Are traditional values necessary to make a family
work? These are the questions that screenwriter Matt K. Turner
wrestles with in FAMILY WEEKEND.
Pert sixteen-year-old Emily (played by Soviet-Russian-born Olesya
Rulin) is from a family that really respects individuality. In
fact, everyone is so individual that it seems that they barely even
relate to each other. Emily's father (Matthew Modine) has devoted
his life to art--the kind that does not pay. Her mother (Kristen
Chenoweth) is a successful businesswoman with more time for her
work presentations than for her family. Emily has a gay brother
who sees himself as an underground filmmaker with the self-selected
moniker "Thor". And Joey King playing Lucinda is a younger sister
who rather humorously takes on the personalities of familiar film
characters.
When nobody in the family has enough interest to attend Emily's
playoffs in the state speed-rope-jumping championship, Emily
decides to take her own parents hostage, tape them to chairs, and
give them a crash course in traditional family values, parental
aptitude, and in how to fix a dysfunctional family.
The plot of taking parents hostage could easily have fit a 1970s
teen TV movie. Emily has certain ideas of what she thinks her
family should be like and of what each person's responsibility is
to the family. The interesting reversal here is that what Emily
wants is basically a return to "Leave it to Beaver" sort of values.
That may be a hard sell in the 21st Century. The screenwriter's
dialog is funny and a pleasure to listen to, but it is wholly
unconvincing as spontaneous exchange. Of course that is not
necessarily a fault if the wordplay is good. The dialog in HAMLET
does not sound natural either.
FAMILY WEEKEND is hard to take seriously even when it lapses from
comedy into some emotional drama. Here Emily's school adversary
Kat (Chloe Bridges) shows unexpected insight. But what makes the
film work is Olesya Rulin, best known for the "High School Musical"
series, and her nursed-on-Jolt-Cola, energetic performance. Born
in Russia, she is a pleasure to watch as an American girl about a
decade younger than the actress really is. Even playing against
the more familiar actor Modine, she handily holds viewer attention.
One wonders how Emily was born into a family with so many different
personality types, but she does seem to have inherited from her
mother her motivated drive and a sense of organization. The film
opens on her placing post-it stickers all over the house to remind
each person of their promise to attend her competition.
In the end it is not clear what this story was saying. Emily finds
her strategy wrong as are some of her goals. It is rare but
realistic that in the end what she achieves is something of a
compromise. But the film is amusing even if its lessons are
indistinct. I rate FAMILY WEEKEND a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale or
7/10.
Film Credits: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1821426/combined
What others are saying:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/family_weekend/
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Comments on David Leeper's Puzzle Answers (letter of comment
by Walter Meissner)
PROBLEM 4.
David wrote:
On #4, I first note that there are no terms in theta in the
integrand, so the outermost integration can be replaced by a scalar
multiplier of 2pi. The integrand can be re-written rho3
cos(phi)sin(phi) which is the same as rho3 2 sin(2 phi). And the
integral of sin(2 phi) from zero to pi/2 is 2 (I think).
So that puts another scalar out front equal to 4.
Finally the integral of rho3 is 1/4 rho4 evaluated from
0 to 4 = 43 = 64. So I get (2 pi) (4) (64) = 512 pi for a solution.
That also took about 15 minutes. Ugh. [-DGL]
Walter Meissner wrote":
David recognized that (cos(phi) sin(phi)) can be simplified by
using the Double Angle Formula "sin (2 phi) = 2 sin (phi) cos
(phi)" so
sin (phi) cos (phi) = 1/2 sin (2 phi)
but not
2 sin (2 phi)
The integral d phi becomes
integral (1/2 sin (2 phi)) d phi = - 1/2 * 1/2 sin (2 phi)
The extra 1/2 is due to the derivative of 2 phi
If he used the same limits as I did (0..pi/4)
then he would have gotten the same result (64 pi)
If I had used the limits (0..pi/2) then my answer would have been
128 pi instead of 64 pi.
However the limits are hard to read, I zoomed in on the comic page
and it is really just a blur. Zoomed out it looked more like a 4
than a 2, but its anyone's guess. [-wm]
PROBLEM 3
David wrote:
The solution to #3 is u^n ln(u) / (n+1) assuming I did the algebra
correctly, but that took over 5 minutes, not 5 seconds.
Walter writes:
Since the solution steps aren't spelled out, I can't tell how he
got the extra 1/(n+1) factor, which is incorrect.
If someone tries to do this just in their head, without
pencil/paper, then mistakes are easy to do when juggling multiple
terms and/or factors.
PROBLEM 2
David wrote: I couldn't find a closed form solution to #2, but it
the summand can be rewritten (-1)^(k+1) / (k + 1/k2). That
summation is bounded from above by the alternating harmonic
series 1--1/2 +1/3--1/4 +1/5 ... = ln(2) which comes from a Taylor
(McLauren?) series for ln(1+x) where x = 1.
Walter writes:
I like his approach, but there is a misstatement here.
Here he used an alternative method, numerator and denominator were
divided by k2 to get 1/((k + 1/k2). Presumably, it was done this
way to make it easier to do this in one's head.
The series is 1/2 - 4/9 + 9/28 - 16/65 + 25/126 - 36/217 ... =
0.5000 - 0.4444 + 0.3214 - 0.2462 + 0.1984 - 0.1659 ...
so it does seems to be a good approximation for [ 1- ln(1+x) ]
evaluated at x=1.
As [ 1 - ln(1+x) ] = 1 - (x - x2/2 + x3/3 - x4/4 + x5/5 ...) =
1 - (1 - 0.5000 + 0.3333 - 0.2500 + 0.2000 - 0.1667) = 0.5000 -
0.3333 + 0.2500 - 0.2000 + 0.1667
So [ 1 - ln (2) ] = 1 - 0.6942 = 0.3069 which is less then the
converging sum of 0.239561...
He should have said 1 - ln (1+x) instead of ln (1+x)n but it is
indeed an upper bound on the given infinite series.
Using ln (2) = 0.6931 would have also given an upper bound, but not
as close.
Interestingly, using 1/3 ln(3) = 0.231049 would give a
surprisingly close answer, off by only 0.0085
Wolfram's note on Foxtrot's comic, problem 3 ...
"It arose from a convergence testing problem in a calculus book by
Anton,
but was inadvertently converted into a summation problem on an
alleged final exam by the strip's author:"
So this problem was inadvertently made almost unsolvable
(analytically) by Bill Amend.
PROBLEM 1
Walter writes:
Same limit reduction as stated in MT VOID.
[-wm]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Boskone (letter of comment by Dan Kimmel)
In response to Dale Skran's report on Boskone in the 03/15/13
issue, Dan Kimmel writes:
First, while I was not influenced by his views on the sad state of
the media Hugos--I think the two categories are irretrievably
broken--we are much in agreement. I appreciate that he did not feel
I tried to take over the panel in that regard but I thought it was
an important statement to make at the outset. I think his solution
is a bit too complex and unlikely to ever get through a Worldcon
Business Meeting (which struggled with merely splitting the
category in two). My solution would be to simply have "best movie"
and "best TV series." That way "Dr. Who" gets *one* nomination.
"Game of Thrones" competes as a TV series, not an entire season
against movies. And if I'm granted dictatorial powers I would add
that any entry containing an appearance by Gollum is automatically
disqualified.
Second, I do not attend Boskone on Sunday because of my commitment
to the annual SF Movie Marathon, and so I missed the panel he rails
against about SF television. I cannot answer his description of
what went on at that time. However I do want to come to the
defense of Jennifer Pelland. Like me, she has strong opinions and
is not shy about expressing them. I was on a panel with her about
the "John Carter" movie at Arisia and had a great time. We engaged
in some banter as well as discussing the topic at hand. Perhaps
the problem was that the two Bobs (Devney and Eggleton), while very
knowledgeable and eloquent, both have somewhat different speaking
styles. Having been on panels with both of them I can say they may
have hesitated to more fully engage because they did not know her
well. I don't know. I do know that you ought to give her another
chance, as she is smart and a superb writer. Her novel Machine
made my Hugo ballot even if it's unlikely to make the final cut.
[-dk]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Guns (letter of comment by Steve Milton)
In response to Mark's comments on guns in the 03/22/13 issue of the
MT VOID, Steve Milton writes:
I agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment although I
never seen a gun opponent use it. I think there would have been a
lot more qualifying language if the writers had envisioned a 100-
plus increase in the rate of fire of a hand-held weapon.
I kind of agree with Heinlein's comment, but I think he stated it
poorly. Societies are polite when there is a segment of the
society that is a) armed and trained in weapon use b) has an
implicit right to use those weapons on anyone they feel like
I believe the Samurai with their two swords have a lot to do with
why the Japanese are so polite. Also I don't think its a
coincidence that the parts of the United States where people put
more emphasis on manner tend to be the ones where regular citizens
are fond of guns. [-smm]
==================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Quite a while ago, I started an article to cover the books in
University of California at Berkeley's "Philosophy 6" course by
Professor Hubert Dreyfus. I then got totally sidetracked by MOBY
DICK and never finished it, but now with my broken hip, it is a
good time to publish what I had managed to write up.
The course is variously titled "From Gods to God and Back" and
"God, Man, and Society in Western Literature". There are two
versions of this floating around in the datasphere: a podcast
version (from 2007) and an iTunes U version (from 2010). The
podcast version seems to have more lectures, but a couple of them
are only fifteen minutes long, indicating some technical
difficulties. (It turned out that even the full-length lectures
sometimes had problems. The most common was that Dreyfus had the
wrong kind of mike, or was wearing it wrong, or *something*--the
sound is awful, frequently dropping down to inaudible and then,
just when you have cranked up the volume to the max, it recovers
and blasts your eardrums! This is not just Dreyfus--other podcast
live courses have the same problem. Another problem is questions
from the class--almost always inaudible and rarely repeated by the
professor for the benefit of the listeners.) Just to see how
different the two instances were I listened to the introductory
lectures of each--and discovered that in the intervening three
years, the course had undergone major changes.
The 2007 syllabus included:
- THE ODYSSEY by Homer
- "The Oresteia" (AGAMEMNON, THE LIBATION BEARERS,
and THE EUMENIDES) by Aeschylus
- THE AENEID by Virgil
- "The Gospel of John"
- THE DIVINE COMEDY ("Inferno", "Purgatorio", and "Paradiso")
by Dante
- Inferno: Cantos I, IV, V, VIII, XXVI, XXXII-XXXIV
- Purgatorio: Cantos I, XIV, XVI, XVII, XXVI-XXX
- Paradiso: Cantos I, XXXI-XXXIII
- PENSEES by Blaise Pascal
- MOBY DICK by Herman Melville
In several cases, only parts of the work were included (for
example, THE DIVINE COMEDY). In most cases, I read the entire work
unless noted. Although Pascal's PENSEES was on the syllabus,
Dreyfus dropped it halfway through the semester, when he realized
that he was spending more time on each book than he had intended,
and would run out of time, and it was not on the 2010 syllabus at
all. Both versions of the course are about thirty hours long.
(Dreyfus at least has an understanding of student finances et al.
He is not too picky about which translation of THE ODYSSEY they
use--other than warning them away from Fagles for reasons I will
discuss later--but he says for MOBY DICK it will be important to
have everyone's page numbers matching. However, he said he found
the perfect edition: the Dover Giant Thrift Edition. It is
inexpensive, and printed on lightweight paper so it is not
difficult to carry in a backpack.) And for "Paradiso", he provided
photocopies since they were reading only about 10% of the book.
(In the 2007 version, he still was unclear on what would be
included, so he started by saying that he would cover just Cantos I
and XXXI-XXXIII, and would hand out photocopies so people did not
have to buy the entire book. Then he decided to add some other
cantos, which he handed out, but did not clearly name in the
podcast; they seemed to include IV and VI, but I was never sure if
I had read the complete syllabus.)
The basic thing the course is looking at is what people show up as
in various eras and societies. In ancient Greece, there were
heroes and slaves, in medieval Europe saints and sinners, more
recently as rational beings, etc. This is not the same as what
people are "essentially", and it is not a belief system. It is
more basic than that, and starts in infancy (e.g. distance
standing, active versus passive). This "basicness" is embodied by
William Butler Yeats's statement, "Man can embody truth, but he
cannot know it," if we substitute "understanding of being" for
"truth".
Dreyfus's plan is to read these works for the specific (and
different) "understandings of being" that the authors had, rather
than the universal truths to be found in them (the humanist
approach). In other words, the ideas is to see how the ancient
Greeks, the medieval Christians, and the 19th century Americans are
different from each other (and from us) than how they are the same.
As he observed, the man admired in medieval Europe was a saint, but
someone with the traditional saintly qualities who lived in ancient
Greece would be at best a slave, but quite possibly considered
insane. (This is of science fictional interest in terms of time
travel. Mark Twain captures this in A CONNECTICUT YANKEE IN KING
ARTHUR'S COURT, where his beliefs of what constitutes admirable
behavior is at variance with everyone else's.) Conversely,
Odysseus was a hero to the Greeks, but placed in the eighth circle
of Hell by Dante (though frankly this seems to be more because
Odysseus opposed the Trojans, and the Trojan Aeneas found Rome and
hence was an Italian hero). This is why Dreyfus has warned against
the Fagles translation of THE ODYSSEY--Fagles's goal was to make
THE ODYSSEY seem very current and immediate, and his method was to
smooth over any differences between the Ancient Greeks and us.
(Dreyfus mentioned that St. Augustine wrote about how St. Jerome
could read without moving his lips, and how unusual this was. I
had been looking for this reference to approximately when silent
reading was invented/discovered, and was glad to finally find it.)
Dreyfus distinguishes between "articulating" works of art
(descriptive) and "reconfiguring" works of art (prescriptive). In
specific, he describes "The Gospel of John" as a reconfiguring work
of art, but since that seems to be the only reconfiguring work of
art he mentions, I am not sure how applicable the distinction is
here.
First off was THE ODYSSEY. I had forgotten how much of this was
*not* concerned with Odysseus's doings, but with Telemakhos and the
suitors, or with Nausicaa, or with other characters. For those
into trivia, of the three great "Trojan" epics (THE ILIAD, THE
ODYSSEY, and THE AENEID) the only one which does not tell the story
of the Trojan Horse is the one actually about the war, THE ILIAD.
In Book IV of THE ODYSSEY we get the story, told by Helen. She may
be a bit of an unreliable narrator, because first she says when she
discovers Odysseus spying within Troy, "My heart sand--for I had
come round, long before, to dreams of sailing home, and I repented
the mad day Aphrodite drew me away from my dear fatherland,
forsaking all--child, bridal bed, and husband--a man without defect
in form or mind." But Menelaos then says to her that later, when
the Horse was outside Troy, "Three times you walked around it,
patting it everywhere, and called by name the flower of our
fighters, making your voice sound like their wives, calling."
(This almost made the soldiers in the Horse call out in return, but
they managed to stifle it.) This does not sound like the actions
of someone repenting her flight with Paris and wanting to go home
with the attacking Akhaians.
Dreyfus claims that "repented" is really the wrong word, and
"regretted" would be better, and in fact that Helen was not
responsible for her actions in going off with Paris, because she
was overcome by Aphrodite's will. Dreyfus's premise regarding the
world view of the Homeric Greeks is that they believed that people
did things because the gods decreed it. Helen went with Paris
because the gods made her do it--she was actually blameless. The
question of whether the Greeks believed that anyone ever had free
will, or for that matter, did the gods have free will, was
discussed in the class, but not resolved. Dreyfus did seem to feel
the suitors had free will and did what they did of their own
accord. Given that what they did was bad, it did not make a good
case for free will. But if all the heroes did what they did
because of the gods, why are they deserving of admiration?
Dreyfus also seemed to think that asking if they gods have free
will was a meaningless question (he compared it to asking if they
had athlete's foot) because the gods are exemplars of moods (lust,
domesticity, war, etc.) rather than actual beings. But that does
not sound right to me; in fact, it sounds almost diametrically
opposed to the caution not to try to see the Homeric Greeks'
worldview in terms of ours. We think of the Greek gods as
embodiments of different aspects of our internal states, but did
the Homeric Greeks? It seems more likely that they thought of
their gods in more tangible, or at least more anthropomorphic, form.
Clearly the gods' physical state is mutable and ambiguous, but that
to them the gods have an independent existence apart from humans
seems clear. For starters, the gods have conversations with each
other. If Athena is supposed to represent some interior aspect of
Odysseus and Aphrodite is an aspect of Helen, how could they have a
conversation?
And to return to Helen, what does it mean for Helen to say she
regretted doing it at one point and then later doing something that
could only betray Menelaos and the Akhaians?
The idea of compulsion by the gods is not unique to the Homeric
Greeks. In the Haggadah, we have the following:
Jacob went down into Egypt.
Why did Jacob go down into Egypt?
He was compelled by God's decree.
And later, God "hardens Pharaoh's heart," forcing him to act
contrary to what he had been planning. The former might indicate
that Jacob chose to do what God said, but the latter seems to
indicate force or actual compulsion.
A question: If plugging their ears with wax will block out the
Sirens' song from Odysseus's men, how could they possibly hear him
asking to be released, or know when they are past the singing and
may release him?
In Book XIII, Alkinoos tells all the guests to give Odysseus gifts,
adding, "We'll make levy upon the realm to pay us for the loss each
bears in this." I guess this makes him the original "tax-and-
spend" guy, or at least an early example.
And speaking of contemporary issues, how about Antinoos's speech in
Book XVII: "Who would call in a foreigner?--unless an artisan with
skill to serve the realm, a healer, or a prophet, or a builder, or
one whose harp and song might give us joy. All these are sought
for on the endless earth, but when have beggars come by invitation?
Who puts a field mouse in his granary?"
By the way, Fitzgerald uses some unusual spellings for the Greek
names. He uses a "K" where we are used to seeing a "C", such as
"Kirke" (Circe), "Akhaians" (Achaeans), and "Klytaimnestra"
(Clytemnestra). He also adds accent marks, umlauts, and other
pronunciation clues, such as an accent over the second 'e' and an
umlaut over the last 'e' in Penelope;. This is a little
distracting to a reader familiar with the usual transliterations,
and Seirenes (with carets over the last two 'e's) instead of Sirens
is particularly odd, since the name has passed into English as an
ordinary word.
[to be continued]
[-ecl]
==================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
I sometimes think it is because they are so bad
at expressing themselves verbally that writers
take to pen and paper in the first place.
--Gore Vidal