(remind to self: post about inevitability of increasing inequality in society)
Is the current state of positive social science that different from natural science?
-Repeatability: Meteorology?
-Complexity: Thermodynamics?
-Ideal types: Ideal gas? Simple harmonic motion?
-Adaptive behaviour/observer effect: Zoology?
There appears to be many problems that surround the study positive social sciences, which are not present in the study of natural sciences. With a suitable choice of examples, it is possible to show that the two disciplines are so different in their fundamental nature that the method applied by one would not work for the other. However, the contrary may also be achieved by a different choice of examples.
There is a problem of complexity. Each human being has a complex structure. As with many-body problems in physics, even with simple underlying principles governing the interactions between the bodies, when the number of interacting bodies goes above three, the resultant behaviour may be so complicated that the equations of motion cannot be solved analytically. What more, with each body being so complex on its own, and the interactions being even more difficult to understand, how can we possibly come up with any understanding of the human society?
Let consider a box of gas. Each atom has a complex structure. When molecules collide, the resultant behaviour is due to the interactions between their electron clouds and their nuclei. Even when the molecules do not collide, every electron has a non-zero probability of being anywhere in the box, such that we can consider a box of gas as a scenario where every molecule interacts with all other molecules at once. Now, it is highly likely that a box of gas would contain more molecules than the entire world population. Yet, why is it that reliable models can be made for the behaviour of gases?
Some phenomena that do not arise on the small scale start to appear on the large scale. One example is temperature. Temperature is a concept that arises from the simultaneous exchange of energy between a large number of molecules of the system with the molecules of another body. Pressure is another. It is caused by the force exerted by a large number of molecules on the walls on the container. However, the concepts of pressure and temperature are not relevant when one is describing molecules themselves. Hence, on an molecular scale, it may be difficult to discover simple laws that describe the properties of a large number of gas molecules, because the properties that hold simple relationships to each other do not appear at the molecular scale.
So could it simply be that on a human scale, it is difficult to discover properties of societies? Or is it that the large scale properties that hold simple relationships to each other have not been defined or discovered yet? Bear in mind that some properties of gases in thermodynamics, such as entropy and free energy, are not exactly intuitive or obvious properties to discover. Or could it be that human behaviour is so much more complicated than atoms and molecules that it would forever be impossible to find simple laws on the large scale? I'm not sure if the answer can be easily given in one paragraph.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Friday, September 28, 2007
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Stuff I noted in Teck Whye.
There is this coffeeshop where all the people who sell drinks would wear neatly ironed shirts and long pants. It's a pretty rare sight for a coffee shop. The drinks seller are very courteous too. In the same coffee shop, there is this stall that sells dim sum. When you order dim sum, they will take out a small dish from the big metallic steamer (which ironically looks somewhat like a refrigerator) and place it in the bamboo zhen1 long2. I thought it was rather strange, since the zhen1 long2 are meant to hold the dim sum while they are being steamed, instead of being used as containers. However, it seems to me that it was a pretty good idea, since putting the dim sum in the zhen1 long2 allows people to see from a distance that there is a dim sum stall from afar.
But just to be sure, I'll ask the stall holder someday.
Then I went to the optician's, because my spectacles are loose. He looked at my specs and said, "Sigh. Bad habit."
"What bad habit?"
"You pull off your specs with your right hand. If you pull it off from the side, you will bend it outwards. I can fix it back for you, but after a few times your spectacles will break. You should pull it off with both hands, or from the bridge."
For a while I was impressed, I was thinking, "Woah, he can tell the way I take off my spectacles just by looking at my spectacles."
Then later as I thought about it, I realised that I had to take off my specs before I could pass it to him! So most probably he just saw the way I took off my specs.
There is this coffeeshop where all the people who sell drinks would wear neatly ironed shirts and long pants. It's a pretty rare sight for a coffee shop. The drinks seller are very courteous too. In the same coffee shop, there is this stall that sells dim sum. When you order dim sum, they will take out a small dish from the big metallic steamer (which ironically looks somewhat like a refrigerator) and place it in the bamboo zhen1 long2. I thought it was rather strange, since the zhen1 long2 are meant to hold the dim sum while they are being steamed, instead of being used as containers. However, it seems to me that it was a pretty good idea, since putting the dim sum in the zhen1 long2 allows people to see from a distance that there is a dim sum stall from afar.
But just to be sure, I'll ask the stall holder someday.
Then I went to the optician's, because my spectacles are loose. He looked at my specs and said, "Sigh. Bad habit."
"What bad habit?"
"You pull off your specs with your right hand. If you pull it off from the side, you will bend it outwards. I can fix it back for you, but after a few times your spectacles will break. You should pull it off with both hands, or from the bridge."
For a while I was impressed, I was thinking, "Woah, he can tell the way I take off my spectacles just by looking at my spectacles."
Then later as I thought about it, I realised that I had to take off my specs before I could pass it to him! So most probably he just saw the way I took off my specs.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
"Hey, the horizontal displacement of that pendulum is decaying with time!"
"No, it is obviously oscillating. You must be imagining things."
Question: How many times does the earth make a complete rotation about its own axis in the time it takes to orbit the sun? Round off to the nearest integer. (Think carefully! Try not to check any sources.)
The wonders of integration:
If your download speed decreases the moment you start downloading, such that your download speed is inversely proportional to time elapsed since the start of the download, you will ALWAYS be able to finish your download in a finite amount of time.
Suppose you have a tall glass. Its inner diameter decreases with depth, such that the inner diameter is inversely proportional to the depth. The inner diameter at the end of the tall glass is of a finite diameter, and extends infinitely downwards. This tall glass can hold a finite volume of water, but has infinite cross sectional area.
"No, it is obviously oscillating. You must be imagining things."
Question: How many times does the earth make a complete rotation about its own axis in the time it takes to orbit the sun? Round off to the nearest integer. (Think carefully! Try not to check any sources.)
The wonders of integration:
If your download speed decreases the moment you start downloading, such that your download speed is inversely proportional to time elapsed since the start of the download, you will ALWAYS be able to finish your download in a finite amount of time.
Suppose you have a tall glass. Its inner diameter decreases with depth, such that the inner diameter is inversely proportional to the depth. The inner diameter at the end of the tall glass is of a finite diameter, and extends infinitely downwards. This tall glass can hold a finite volume of water, but has infinite cross sectional area.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
When you first see a car, would you expect it to have dents on the other side?
Quote Math Tutorial S2B: "...and the probability that a patient needs an injection after he is seen by the gynecologist is 0.002."
A Boston Cream Pie is a cake. A Cheese cake is a pie.
Birds and insects are unaffected by capsaicin. Pain induced by capsaicin is not an indication of tissue damage.
________
In Teck Whye, a new popiah store opened, and it is just as good as the one before! For this store, instead of peeking out and checking how many people there are, the store owner would just carry a huge bundle of chopsticks and deal accordingly.
Most popiahs are cut into 5 pieces. However, this store owner cuts the popiah into 6 pieces, which I thought is very considerate, since 6 is a multiple of both 3 and 2, so if you have 1, 2 or 3 people, you can just share any number of popiah and don't have to think about who should eat the remainder. (Unlike 5, which is a prime number.)
I was so impressed by this, I thought that this was precisely the reason why the popiah is cut into 6 pieces instead of 5. However, I decided I shouldn't argue from consequences, so I asked the store owner.
"Auntie, why do you cut the popiah into 6 pieces? Most stores cut them into 5."
"Orh, if it is too big then you have to bite it. So I cut it smaller to make it one mouthful."
"So if you could cut it even smaller, would you?"
"No, the filling will come out too easily when you try to pick it up."
And hence, 6 is the magic number arising from 2 contradicting factors, and it so happens that this particular number is also a factor of 2 and 3! This is amazing.
I was thinking that books that deal with amazing statistics might have to use the exclamation mark sparingly. It might be mistaken for a factorial.
Maybe in some African math class, you hear: "The formula for n choose r is n *click* over n-r *click* times r *click*."
Quote Math Tutorial S2B: "...and the probability that a patient needs an injection after he is seen by the gynecologist is 0.002."
A Boston Cream Pie is a cake. A Cheese cake is a pie.
Birds and insects are unaffected by capsaicin. Pain induced by capsaicin is not an indication of tissue damage.
________
In Teck Whye, a new popiah store opened, and it is just as good as the one before! For this store, instead of peeking out and checking how many people there are, the store owner would just carry a huge bundle of chopsticks and deal accordingly.
Most popiahs are cut into 5 pieces. However, this store owner cuts the popiah into 6 pieces, which I thought is very considerate, since 6 is a multiple of both 3 and 2, so if you have 1, 2 or 3 people, you can just share any number of popiah and don't have to think about who should eat the remainder. (Unlike 5, which is a prime number.)
I was so impressed by this, I thought that this was precisely the reason why the popiah is cut into 6 pieces instead of 5. However, I decided I shouldn't argue from consequences, so I asked the store owner.
"Auntie, why do you cut the popiah into 6 pieces? Most stores cut them into 5."
"Orh, if it is too big then you have to bite it. So I cut it smaller to make it one mouthful."
"So if you could cut it even smaller, would you?"
"No, the filling will come out too easily when you try to pick it up."
And hence, 6 is the magic number arising from 2 contradicting factors, and it so happens that this particular number is also a factor of 2 and 3! This is amazing.
I was thinking that books that deal with amazing statistics might have to use the exclamation mark sparingly. It might be mistaken for a factorial.
Maybe in some African math class, you hear: "The formula for n choose r is n *click* over n-r *click* times r *click*."
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Elastic collision: Energy is conserved.
Inelastic collision: Energy is not conserved.
Totally Inelastic collision: Energy is like, totally not conserved.
My mother's comment about the guy who sneaked an assault rifle out of army camp: "He's very handsome!"
_______
What is the difference between "exchange" and "sacrifice"? It's the same right? Sacrifice just sounds more noble, and implies an exchange on unfair terms.
And in any case, "sacrifice" sounds much cooler! Like, if you play an RPG game, there are two skills to learn. One of their descriptions say "Exchange HP for an AOE spell dealing a great amount of damage" and the another's say "Sacrifice HP for an AOE spell dealing a great amount of damage". Okay I'm not sure about you, but if it's me I'll definitely choose the latter, since the word sacrifice seems to imply that more HP is exchanged for MUAHAHAHA more AOE damage MUAHAHAHA MORE POWER!!
Ok I'm going nuts over cool-sounding words. I asked an NUS professor, what do you call superstring theory in Chinese?
It's called 超弦理论. Like omg cool! Can totally imagine Ouyang Feng sparring with Ling Hu Chong with his newly founded 超弦真经 or 超弦七十二掌 or 超弦神功 or something like that, with superstrings flying and recombining into some weird object and making the whole place explode.
Nevermind, Ling Hu Chong will defend himself with "Loop Quantum Gravity"... whatever that's called in Chinese. And Zhang Wu Ji can also join in the fight with his newly learnt "Sacrificial Hyper Conjugation", whatever you call that in Chinese.
________
I believe that the two fruits whose value will increase by the greatest amount if rendered seedless would be mango and pomegranate. I say mango, because unless you buy the super expensive Taiwan Mango King, the seed accounts for about 20-30% of the volume of the fruit. Pomegranate is another, because consumption of pomegranate has been made a very irritating experience because of the seeds. Don't you think every pomegranate sac looks like a Soul Booster? Each sac looks so valuable, as though eating one will greatly increase your stats or something. But the experience of eating something so exquisite is spoiled by the presence of seeds. Would you expect to find something like a seed in something so valuable? Separating the seed from the sac is rather troublesome, and is always rather wasteful.
Imagine seedless pomegranates. It would be a bright red, spherical shell that encloses numerous rubies, which you can just pick and eat at leisure. (I admit, I was never good at describing stuff. It is supposed to sound really nice.) It would be a perfect fruit for misers. One pomegranate can serve an entire crowd, and each one of them just looks so good. Or perhaps you could add it to ice-kacang, to complement the corn that they add.
Perhaps you are supposed to eat the pomegranate seeds. But then again, the same can be said for grapes and watermelons as well; and they are also made seedless. Maybe the apprehension of biting into a seed spoils the fruit-eating experience.
Inelastic collision: Energy is not conserved.
Totally Inelastic collision: Energy is like, totally not conserved.
My mother's comment about the guy who sneaked an assault rifle out of army camp: "He's very handsome!"
_______
What is the difference between "exchange" and "sacrifice"? It's the same right? Sacrifice just sounds more noble, and implies an exchange on unfair terms.
And in any case, "sacrifice" sounds much cooler! Like, if you play an RPG game, there are two skills to learn. One of their descriptions say "Exchange HP for an AOE spell dealing a great amount of damage" and the another's say "Sacrifice HP for an AOE spell dealing a great amount of damage". Okay I'm not sure about you, but if it's me I'll definitely choose the latter, since the word sacrifice seems to imply that more HP is exchanged for MUAHAHAHA more AOE damage MUAHAHAHA MORE POWER!!
Ok I'm going nuts over cool-sounding words. I asked an NUS professor, what do you call superstring theory in Chinese?
It's called 超弦理论. Like omg cool! Can totally imagine Ouyang Feng sparring with Ling Hu Chong with his newly founded 超弦真经 or 超弦七十二掌 or 超弦神功 or something like that, with superstrings flying and recombining into some weird object and making the whole place explode.
Nevermind, Ling Hu Chong will defend himself with "Loop Quantum Gravity"... whatever that's called in Chinese. And Zhang Wu Ji can also join in the fight with his newly learnt "Sacrificial Hyper Conjugation", whatever you call that in Chinese.
________
I believe that the two fruits whose value will increase by the greatest amount if rendered seedless would be mango and pomegranate. I say mango, because unless you buy the super expensive Taiwan Mango King, the seed accounts for about 20-30% of the volume of the fruit. Pomegranate is another, because consumption of pomegranate has been made a very irritating experience because of the seeds. Don't you think every pomegranate sac looks like a Soul Booster? Each sac looks so valuable, as though eating one will greatly increase your stats or something. But the experience of eating something so exquisite is spoiled by the presence of seeds. Would you expect to find something like a seed in something so valuable? Separating the seed from the sac is rather troublesome, and is always rather wasteful.
Imagine seedless pomegranates. It would be a bright red, spherical shell that encloses numerous rubies, which you can just pick and eat at leisure. (I admit, I was never good at describing stuff. It is supposed to sound really nice.) It would be a perfect fruit for misers. One pomegranate can serve an entire crowd, and each one of them just looks so good. Or perhaps you could add it to ice-kacang, to complement the corn that they add.
Perhaps you are supposed to eat the pomegranate seeds. But then again, the same can be said for grapes and watermelons as well; and they are also made seedless. Maybe the apprehension of biting into a seed spoils the fruit-eating experience.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Sing-along Mathematical Induction
When n= 1, P(n) is true
When n= 1, P(n) is true
And if P(n) is true implies P(n+1) is, too
That means when n =2, P(n) is also true.
When n= 2, P(n) is true
When n= 2, P(n) is true
And if P(n) is true implies P(n+1) is, too
That means when n =3, P(n) is also true.
Just read "The Prince" again. The argument seems to be generally quite faulty. But Machiavelli says very cool things, like "It is better to be feared than loved." And Machiavelli is such a cool name too! Not like Kant. If they said the same things I'll rather quote Machiavelli than Kant any day.
Really, having a cool name makes a lot of difference. Einstein is clever; so is Kant. But when describing a person as clever, people say "He's such an Einstein", but people don't go "He's such a Kant."
Raffles helped build Singapore; so did Farquhar. But really, if there were a school named after each person, and one of the Raffles Schools were to be up against a Farquhar School for some sports competition, the cheering would go like this:
"Raffles Kemama! Ole ole ah ah!..."
"Farquhar Kemama! Ole ole ah ah!..."
"North! South! East! West! ... R-A-F-F-L-E-S!..."
"North! South! East! West! ... Far--quhar is the best!..."
"Say RA-RA-RA-Raffles! Say RA-RA-RA-Raffles!..."
"Say... eh darn."
Speaking of which, Fajar Secondary School has never been up against RI in matches where there are actually people cheering.
If it is true that the deceased can receive the things you burn, it seems like hell is a pretty interesting place:
Sir Stamford Raffles must be quite sad that the sports seasons never coincide with the 7th month, so he can't come out even if councilors and prefects are frantically summoning his Spirit.
When Hiroshima and Nagasaki were A-bombed, two cities, together with the souls and all the possessions in ground zero, would have instantaneously been transferred to hell. The people living there probably didn't even know they were dead until quite a while.
Rubbish must be quite a problem in hell, since people incinerate a lot of rubbish. But that's okay, it's compensated by all the Indonesian forest fires, so pollution shouldn't be that bad.
If the moment one is dead, the soul goes to hell, then when you cremate his body, wouldn't the body also go to hell? What will the soul do with his body? (There might just be a Black Market for bodies, for the dead Necrophiliacs. Mai4 Shen1 will take on a new meaning there.)
If you are American, rest assured that your dead relatives can celebrate Independence Day. American Flags are in large supply there.
Also, plastic items should also be very cheap in hell, since there is so much crude oil there.
I wonder if when the Heidelberg exploded, a bunch of people in hell started speaking in a higher pitch, due to the sudden influx of hydrogen.
The Chinese historians must be quite happy when they go to hell, since all the books that Qin Shi Huang and the revolutionists burned are intact.
There must also be a lot of pirated VCDs and DVDs there, since people keep burning them. I suggest that if you really want your relatives to do well, you should burn them a lot of televisions, VCD players and DVD players, so that they can sell it to other people who want to watch all those videos.
I think we should only burn items to them. Money means absolutely nothing to them, since it is a promise of equivalent exchange. Exchange for what? Supply of money is completely controlled by the people burning stuff. Imagine your great great great grandfather trying to buy something. He offers to pay $1000000000000000 to some guy with the stuff. But the guy has absolutely no use for $10000000000000000 since he can easily get $1000000000000000000000000000000000 anyway, and so is it for everyone else. You try to be smart, and burn him a $10 note, but claim that it is in base googolplex. Your great great great grandfather then tries to buy stuff with a $10 note. The guy with the stuff laughs and states that it is easy for him to obtain $100 in base googolplex, and so is it for everyone else. Your grandfather still doesn't get the stuff he wants. He'll probably have to barter trade for it.
Which makes sense to think that hell probably has its own legal tender which cannot be obtained by burning.
So don't burn hell notes. It's pointless, and it's bad for the environment anyway.
Kant's method of Categorical Imperative is pretty useful sometimes.
When n= 1, P(n) is true
When n= 1, P(n) is true
And if P(n) is true implies P(n+1) is, too
That means when n =2, P(n) is also true.
When n= 2, P(n) is true
When n= 2, P(n) is true
And if P(n) is true implies P(n+1) is, too
That means when n =3, P(n) is also true.
Just read "The Prince" again. The argument seems to be generally quite faulty. But Machiavelli says very cool things, like "It is better to be feared than loved." And Machiavelli is such a cool name too! Not like Kant. If they said the same things I'll rather quote Machiavelli than Kant any day.
Really, having a cool name makes a lot of difference. Einstein is clever; so is Kant. But when describing a person as clever, people say "He's such an Einstein", but people don't go "He's such a Kant."
Raffles helped build Singapore; so did Farquhar. But really, if there were a school named after each person, and one of the Raffles Schools were to be up against a Farquhar School for some sports competition, the cheering would go like this:
"Raffles Kemama! Ole ole ah ah!..."
"Farquhar Kemama! Ole ole ah ah!..."
"North! South! East! West! ... R-A-F-F-L-E-S!..."
"North! South! East! West! ... Far--quhar is the best!..."
"Say RA-RA-RA-Raffles! Say RA-RA-RA-Raffles!..."
"Say... eh darn."
Speaking of which, Fajar Secondary School has never been up against RI in matches where there are actually people cheering.
If it is true that the deceased can receive the things you burn, it seems like hell is a pretty interesting place:
Sir Stamford Raffles must be quite sad that the sports seasons never coincide with the 7th month, so he can't come out even if councilors and prefects are frantically summoning his Spirit.
When Hiroshima and Nagasaki were A-bombed, two cities, together with the souls and all the possessions in ground zero, would have instantaneously been transferred to hell. The people living there probably didn't even know they were dead until quite a while.
Rubbish must be quite a problem in hell, since people incinerate a lot of rubbish. But that's okay, it's compensated by all the Indonesian forest fires, so pollution shouldn't be that bad.
If the moment one is dead, the soul goes to hell, then when you cremate his body, wouldn't the body also go to hell? What will the soul do with his body? (There might just be a Black Market for bodies, for the dead Necrophiliacs. Mai4 Shen1 will take on a new meaning there.)
If you are American, rest assured that your dead relatives can celebrate Independence Day. American Flags are in large supply there.
Also, plastic items should also be very cheap in hell, since there is so much crude oil there.
I wonder if when the Heidelberg exploded, a bunch of people in hell started speaking in a higher pitch, due to the sudden influx of hydrogen.
The Chinese historians must be quite happy when they go to hell, since all the books that Qin Shi Huang and the revolutionists burned are intact.
There must also be a lot of pirated VCDs and DVDs there, since people keep burning them. I suggest that if you really want your relatives to do well, you should burn them a lot of televisions, VCD players and DVD players, so that they can sell it to other people who want to watch all those videos.
I think we should only burn items to them. Money means absolutely nothing to them, since it is a promise of equivalent exchange. Exchange for what? Supply of money is completely controlled by the people burning stuff. Imagine your great great great grandfather trying to buy something. He offers to pay $1000000000000000 to some guy with the stuff. But the guy has absolutely no use for $10000000000000000 since he can easily get $1000000000000000000000000000000000 anyway, and so is it for everyone else. You try to be smart, and burn him a $10 note, but claim that it is in base googolplex. Your great great great grandfather then tries to buy stuff with a $10 note. The guy with the stuff laughs and states that it is easy for him to obtain $100 in base googolplex, and so is it for everyone else. Your grandfather still doesn't get the stuff he wants. He'll probably have to barter trade for it.
Which makes sense to think that hell probably has its own legal tender which cannot be obtained by burning.
So don't burn hell notes. It's pointless, and it's bad for the environment anyway.
Kant's method of Categorical Imperative is pretty useful sometimes.
Saturday, September 01, 2007
And so there is a "Mr Muscle" detergent advertisement.
The ad goes like this: This housewife is unable to clean off the dirt and grime in her house, so she shouts "Help! Mr Muscle!" And this muscular guy wearing shades and orange spandex flies into the house. He analyzes the situation, and sprays the dirt and grime with Mr Muscle detergent, which supposedly allows you the clean the dirt "effortlessly". After saving the day, he receives a ping from another housewife who needs his help, and flies off. The last sentence goes something like "Mr Muscle: the effective scientifically formulated detergent".
Wait a minute, if the Mr Muscle detergent really allows you to clean off the dirt effortlessly, what's the use of all his muscles? (My sister: To entice the housewives to buy the detergent.)
Besides, how is a "scientifically formulated" detergent supposed to be better? Why scientific anyway?
"Dumex 3! + , mathematically formulated milk for fit and active champions!"
"Slim Ten, historically proven to be safe and effective!"
"Wash your hair the ethical way today!"
By the way, the UK Mr Muscle mascot is a lanky nerd. Check this.
Frankly speaking, I would prefer watching the Singapore version of Mr Muscle ad.
The ad goes like this: This housewife is unable to clean off the dirt and grime in her house, so she shouts "Help! Mr Muscle!" And this muscular guy wearing shades and orange spandex flies into the house. He analyzes the situation, and sprays the dirt and grime with Mr Muscle detergent, which supposedly allows you the clean the dirt "effortlessly". After saving the day, he receives a ping from another housewife who needs his help, and flies off. The last sentence goes something like "Mr Muscle: the effective scientifically formulated detergent".
Wait a minute, if the Mr Muscle detergent really allows you to clean off the dirt effortlessly, what's the use of all his muscles? (My sister: To entice the housewives to buy the detergent.)
Besides, how is a "scientifically formulated" detergent supposed to be better? Why scientific anyway?
"Dumex 3! + , mathematically formulated milk for fit and active champions!"
"Slim Ten, historically proven to be safe and effective!"
"Wash your hair the ethical way today!"
By the way, the UK Mr Muscle mascot is a lanky nerd. Check this.
Frankly speaking, I would prefer watching the Singapore version of Mr Muscle ad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)