Category Archives: Video

Who’s Talking about Judgment Day?

I don’t have a television set — just a projector connected to a computer, which is plenty good for movies but not so great for tapping the airwaves — so my impression of NOVA’s new program, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, has been mostly textual. I say “mostly,” because I did see the trailer:

PBS promises us that the whole thing will be available ontube this Friday.

The National Center for Science Education is pleased with Judgment Day, and that’s a recommendation which carries a lot of weight. Still, they’re an awfully Web 1.0 lot over there, so what do we suave cyber-philosophes have to say?

PZ Myers and the Pharynguloids watched the show last night, live-blagging as they went along. Then, this morning, PZ observed that the Discovery Institute’s response was a regurgitation of old whines which managed to miss the point of the program entirely. (EDIT: Tyler DiPietro has some details.)

Greg Laden, who also live-blagged the broadcast (1, 2, 3, 4) has an overview and a couple complaints — nothing fatal; he enjoyed the show, but in a few respects, the producers could have made a good thing even better.

Meanwhile, Dave Bacon is complaining that the biologists are having all the fun. Where are the epic court battles over quantum physics? Come on, you pansy Vedic Shiva-botherers, bring it on!
Continue reading Who’s Talking about Judgment Day?

Another D-Word Sighting

This is Mark Lawson interviewing Sir David Attenborough on BBC Four.

Remember, Sir David is the most trusted man in Britain.

LAWSON: Have you at any time had any religious faith?

ATTENBOROUGH: No.

Clearly, he’s not going to be trusted in the United States any longer.

One verbal item caught my attention. Lawson, a journalist of English birth and education, employs the word Darwinist.

LAWSON: Your programs clearly are Darwinist, but it’s not something. . . You never seem to actually take on the creationism. For example —

ATTENBOROUGH [overlapping]: Oh, I certainly do, privately, and, and would be happy to do — it’s not the place to do it in the sort of programs I make.

From this single instance, it’s hard to tell whether Lawson equates “Darwinist” with “atheist,” as our American creationists are wont to do, or if he’s closer to the usage observed among certain academics, roughly equating “Darwinism” with “evolutionary biology.”

James Burke, Weightless

I grew up on James Burke‘s books and television series, a taste I inherited from my father. All the way through high school, I had a reputation as a know-it-all, a walking encyclopaedia (who was, at least, a helpful guy). I kept telling people that if they’d watched Connections — and read The Cartoon History of the Universe — my know-it-all-itude would be a great deal less impressive.

I saw James Burke live, once, at an aerospace conference back in 2000. I had to run off and do something else right after his talk, so I didn’t get a chance to have a conversation or even get a book autographed (one more reason I’m glad I was able to say thanks to James Gleick). I do, however, remember a story he told about his days in the BBC, covering the Apollo program.

He was responsible for explaining the scientific motivations for going to the Moon, the motivations which stay valid after you beat the Russians there. As he reports in the Connections book, the British media put more emphasis on this than the Americans did, so British interest remained relatively high during the later missions, when NASA’s TV ratings in the United States were dropping. At the time, the significance of all this was probably less apparent, and Burke was busy enough just trying to translate NASA tech-speak into something people could understand.

Part of this job involved reading through NASA’s manuals for the equipment which would be used on the Moon. These machines were not simple devices, nor were their instructions straightforward. Each manual had to have a full description of possible failure modes, with contingency plans for each eventuality, and all written with such detail that both the astronauts and the Mission Control people could handle all possible malfunctions without going back to the original engineers. The result, Burke said, was something like this: “If X-Y-Zed, then gobbledygook. If X-Y-Zed-Beta, then gobbledygook squared.”

Finally, after a whole page of bullet-pointed technical jargon, came the last contingency plan:

“If all else fails, kick with lunar boot.”

And because this is the multimedia era, here’s a clip from BBC Four, in which James Burke demonstrates how the KC-135 “Vomit Comet” was used for weightless training.

Happy Fun Movie Time

Neil Gaiman quotes a bit of a report about the forthcoming Beowulf movie, and asks us to spot the typo. At first, I thought it was “embarrassed,” because I can never remember how to allocate the Rs and Ses in that word anyway.

Angelina Jolie has admitted she was got a little shy when she saw her nude scenes in her latest film “Beowulf.” The actress says although the nude scenes were stimulated, she was still a little embarrassed. “I was a little shy,” she says. “I was really surprised that I felt that exposed. There were certain moments where I actually felt shy — and called home, just to explain that the fun movie that I had done that was digital animation was, in fact, a little different than we expected.”

Suddenly, I’m feeling the urge to go see Beowulf.

Also, the Coolidge Corner Theatre will be showing the “final cut” of Blade Runner (1982) starting the sixteenth of this month. For the proper ambiance, they should have chosen a venue in Chinatown, of course — but hell, it’s Boston in November. We’re going to have to walk from a half-broken subway through a construction zone in the sleet. All you need to add is a giant speaker on the Hood blimp telling us, “A new life awaits you in the off-world colonies. . . .”

At one point, during a film-studies class, I made a chart comparing the profusion of versions then known of Blade Runner. Nowadays, alternate or unused footage is a little easier to come by. For example, there was filmed a scene where Deckard meets Holden in the hospital, and they talk about hunting replicants. Watching the clip, I think I concur with the choice to leave it on the cutting-room floor:

It’s entirely the wrong feel for Blade Runner. It conveys no information not present in Rachel’s Voight-Kampff interrogation scene, and it undercuts the severity of Captain Bryant’s line, “He can breathe all right, so long as nobody unplugs him.”

On the other hand, this deleted scene from Terminator 3 (2003) is no worse than the rest of the movie (cough, cough).
Continue reading Happy Fun Movie Time

Transmetropolitan Video

OK, after all that science talk, it’s time for some “mature viewers” content. Here is an adaptation which Julia Dameron directed of a scene in Warren Ellis’ Transmetropolitan, specifically Spider Jerusalem’s encounter with the President of the United States in a men’s room. The original can be found on pages 20–24 of Lust For Life (1998). Geek out, comix fans:

That’s probably as much of Transmet as you can film without a budget.

All Hallows

To begin at the end:

This is Orson Welles, ladies and gentlemen, out of character to assure you that The War of The Worlds has no further significance than as the holiday offering it was intended to be. The Mercury Theatre’s own radio version of dressing up in a sheet and jumping out of a bush and saying Boo!

Starting now, we couldn’t soap all your windows and steal all your garden gates by tomorrow night… so we did the best next thing. We annihilated the world before your very ears, and utterly destroyed the C. B. S. You will be relieved, I hope, to learn that we didn’t mean it, and that both institutions are still open for business.

So goodbye everybody, and remember please, for the next day or so, the terrible lesson you learned tonight. That grinning, glowing, globular invader of your living room is an inhabitant of the pumpkin patch, and if your doorbell rings and nobody’s there, that was no Martian… it’s Halloween.

Tonight, if you aren’t spreading madness over the airwaves, as the Mercury Theatre did; if you’re not showing off comets as you hand out candy; if you’re not dressing up as an antiparticle seeking to annihilate with an attractive particle, as Jennifer Ouellette suggests; then you should at least have a song in your heart.
Continue reading All Hallows

Rotely

Jasprizza Will asks Language Log if rotely is a “real word.” Mark Liberman replies that it occurs in newspaper writing — even, on occasion, in the New York Times — and in the scholarly journals. For example, Carol Sue Englert et al. write in “Influence of Irrelevant Information in Addition Word Problems on Problem Solving” (1987),

Blankenship and Lovitt (1976), for example, found that in the presence of irrelevant numerical information, LD [Learning Disabled] students rotely added all numbers.

The more subtle question is whether rotely can be used as an adverb. In this example, it modifies added, and Liberman provides instances of rotely modifying turned out, tinkled out and affixed, in addition to usages like “material rotely learned” and “rotely feminized ‘conformity’.” Now, sometimes the -ly suffix turns a noun into an adjective (for example, kingly), but television raised me to think that its main use is turning adjectives into adverbs:
Continue reading Rotely

Nine Minutes of Science

OK, this is too good to pass up. Jim Blinn, the computer-graphics expert responsible for the Mechanical Universe animations — and therefore, responsible for filling my childhood with arrows — summarizes The Mechanical Universe in nine minutes. Watch all of first-year physics packed in a single morsel:

Blinn also worked on Caltech’s Project MATHEMATICS! series. I’m a little surprised that so few of the Project MATHEMATICS! videos have found their way onto the Intertubes yet. Here’s a “teaser trailer” of sorts, made from clips of “The Story of π”:
Continue reading Nine Minutes of Science

From Atoms to Quarks

Yesterday, I said that the excited states of the hydrogen atom are our prototype for understanding how the periodic table works. This is part of our motivation for solving the hydrogen atom, a subject to which I will be devoting several more posts. However, the next post requires some diagrams which I, er, haven’t drawn yet, so while I work on that — and my day job — why not kick back with a video?

And hey, let’s make that an educational experience. For those of you who survived freshman physics, The Mechanical Universe is an easy refresher on the basics. Here’s the Google Video version of episode 51, “From Atoms to Quarks,” which addresses the point about the Periodic Table which I raised last time.

In case this copy breaks, Annenberg Media has the series online for free, although you have to go through a quick registration.

The Mathematics of Love

Or, at least, of nostalgia — who else here remembers Square One?

And no, the Phoenicians did not use Arabic numerals. Those were cooked up a couple hundred years after Rome fell, in India, and spread to Europe via the Arabs. The forms of the written digits changed over time, and the idea of “0” seems to have come around later than the use of numerals for 1 through 9.

It suddenly occurs to me that people who watched too much Square One grow up to sing about the Finite Simple Group of Order Two.

Philosophia Naturalis #14

While I continue to befuddle myself with my random-spatial-network simulation results, everyone else should go enjoy themselves by reading Philosophia Naturalis #14, the latest edition of the physical-science blogging carnival. It’s got a Sputnik theme!

And, why not, here’s Tom Lehrer singing about “Pollution.”

Back to my perplexing plots I go. . . I need to wrap things up in time to attend the Ig Nobel Prizes tonight.

Scott Aaronson’s Outreach Program

What’s that sound? Could it be the information content of the popular discourse about quantum physics rising by a detectable degree?

Oh, dear. An advertising agency took a passage from Scott Aaronson’s quantum computing lecture notes and used it in a commercial.

Model 1: But if quantum mechanics isn’t physics in the usual sense — if it’s not about matter, or energy, or waves — then what is it about?

Model 2: Well, from my perspective, it’s about information, probabilities, and observables, and how they relate to each other.

Model 1: That’s interesting!

Naturally, the commercial doesn’t mention where they got the text from, but thanks to the quintessential Internet appeal of this story, it looks like Prof. Aaronson is already getting some server-crashing free publicity out of this. Should he be demanding more? Like, say, private tutoring sessions with the fashion models who show such an interest in quantum theory? Each of them have already shown a far greater command of the material than, for example, Deepak Chopra, and it would be a shame to waste such an opportunity.

You can read the ad agency’s craven response in this Sydney Morning Herald article:
Continue reading Scott Aaronson’s Outreach Program