Friday, January 31, 2014
No Traction
Even deer slip on the ice. Here is the evidence of one of them trying to cross the frozen-over creek. I wish I could have watched its unstable display of ballet.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Wrenched Orion—Part 1
I
wrote recently about how the stars appear to be points of light
scattered on a distant sphere above us. Our eye perceives this
phenomenon as if the stars are all the same (great) distance from us,
when, in fact, their distance varies. As a result, the constellations
appear to us to be two-dimensional planar figures, when they are
really three-dimensional objects.
The
two-dimensional shape we perceive is a result of viewing a
constellation from only one point in space: Earth. If we could move
to another point in space, the constellation would appear very
different.
Let's
consider a simple example. Suppose we had an imaginary constellation
of eight stars arranged in a way that they formed the corners of a
perfect cube. Here's how a three-dimensional cube is represented:
From
a particular point in space eight stars might look like this:
If
we used our imaginations (as the ancients did, to create the
constellations), we might connect the stars (dots) and see this:
It's a cube!
But
we might also imagine these eight stars (from this same location in
space) to form an object like this:
or even this:
Depending
on our culture, we could discern many different objects from these
eight stars, depending on how we imagine them to be connected.
But
it gets even more fascinating. Suppose we were able to travel vast
distances through space. Our perspective of the “cubic”
arrangement of these eight stars would change. What if we were to
travel to a location where we viewed the cube face-on. It would look
like this:
where
each of the four stars is hiding another one behind it.
How
the civilizations at this location would perceive this “cubic”
constellation, we can only guess. But it's a reminder that the
constellations we see have their three-dimensional stars arranged in
a pattern that is unique to us, at our location in space.
More
on Orion next time...
Monday, January 27, 2014
Deep Snow
The winter has brought too much snow. On one of my treks through the woods, I found this poor individual buried in the deep snow--only his hand protruding, asking for rescue. I was too late.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Old Trees Rule!
The
chorus to John Prine's song “Hello in There” begins with, “Ya
know that old trees just grow stronger...” The song is a poignant
appeal that, while trees strengthen in their later years, “old
people just grow lonesome,” so we should make an extra effort to
acknowledge them when we encounter them on the street and say, “Hello
in there.” Years ago I played Prine's records a lot, and was
touched one day when my then-10-year-old son said that he went out of
his way while walking downtown to say hi to old people.
Old
trees do become more and more magnificent, as the years
pass... especially giants like redwoods and sequoia (or oaks and
poplars, here in Virginia). I have had the opportunity a couple of
times to stand at the base of some of these patriarchs and feel awed
by their massive trunks and humbled by how they soar up into the
heavens. It makes me feel simultaneously small and grand, to be close
to one. It seems a tragedy when one of these behemoths is toppled for
furniture.
Trees
are also a major source of the oxygen that we animals breathe. They
do double duty by both absorbing carbon dioxide from the air (thus
countering global warming) as they simultaneously exhaust that
life-giving oxygen. We need them, and they are being cut down at a
terrifying rate.
There's
been much attention in recent years put to the benefits of trees and
other vegetation, in countering the heavy load of CO2 that
we are dumping into the atmosphere. But what kind of vegetation
extracts the most carbon? Should we protect those kinds of plants
more than others? Are they more valuable to the planet (and us)?
It
has been assumed that fast-growing young trees are more valuable than
big, old trees for removing carbon. But a recent study tells a
different story. An international team of researchers published an
article in the scientific journal Nature,
showing that old trees are not
less productive than robust young trees, but significantly more
so. Because elderly trees vigorously continue to add mass—even into
their senile period—they soak up more carbon than the juveniles
do... as much as three times
more!
Since
I'm rapidly headed into my
senile period, I take comfort from the fact that my old woody buddies
that surround me aren't slowing down. Maybe they can inspire me to
resist the ravages of age and continue to thrive as they do. I think
I'll go out and hug a big ol' tree.
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Monday, January 20, 2014
Narrow or Broad View?
An article several months ago in the
Guardian
presented an interesting symbol about someone attempting to predict
future events: it contained a sketch of a person holding a
flashlight, whose beam is shining out into the darkness—the dark
representing the hidden future. The description with the illustration
described that the holder of the flashlight could choose to focus the
beam either into a narrow ray, or a wider cone. The narrower the
beam, the brighter the light shone on any future object, and the more
accurate a prediction might be. When the beam is widened, more of the
future could be revealed, but less light is shown and therefore one's
guess would be less accurate.
The article's main thrust was about
one's hoping to be able to predict the future reliably (by shining
that narrow beam on a potential forthcoming event), but then risking
having some surprise event—lurking in the darkness outside the
narrow beam—prove the prediction wrong. In order to avoid these
surprises, the article described, one could widen the flashlight's
beam and spot more potential future events, but only at the expense
of a dimmer light beam and nothing being as distinct. It's sort of
like a horse wearing blinders: it can concentrate on things straight
ahead of it, but is blind to unexpected things to the side.
The image of choosing between the
flashlight's narrow or wide beams stuck in my head for a couple of
days. It spoke to me as a metaphor for more than just the topic of
the article: futurology (the ability to predict future events based
on present trends). I came to see the cone of light shining outward
as an illustration of one's attention to life in general. If my
attention is kept too narrow, my ability to respond to life's events
may be well focused, but I can miss the wider picture. Like the horse
wearing blinders, I may be able to focus clearly on what I wish to
see, but by so doing, I can miss the bigger picture that life is
presenting me.
Life is full of surprises. Although we
like to think that we're on top of things and that we know what to
expect (and thus make smart choices), that's usually not the case.
More often than not, life tosses unexpected contingencies in our
path, and we stumble over them. If we are too narrowly focused, we
can get blind-sided by an event coming from the side that we never
expected; an event that we were ill prepared for.
I guess, like many choices in life,
it's a case of seeking an appropriate balance: sometimes we focus
narrowly and deftly handle an expected event—like shooting an arrow
right into the bulls-eye. At other times we should keep our senses
open and broad—so we don't miss something that could be important.
In either case, our motto could be: PAY ATTENTION!
Saturday, January 18, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)










