And another book again

Robot City, Isaac Asimov's, Book One: Odyssey

M.P. Kube-McDowell

I bought this book thinking that it was written by renown science fiction author Isaac Asimov. After it lived on my bookshelf for a year, I picked it and paid more attention to it than when I bought it, and was momentarily disappointed. With a more detailed look at the cover, I noticed that it just says Isaac Asimov above the title, with an apostrophe-S appended to the name, and another writer's name in fine print near the bottom... Uh-oh, I thought, I think I've seen this type of thing before... However, I decided to give it a chance, ready to back out at the slightest hint of boringness. So I read the intro by Isaac Asimov, where he was kind to the actual author (as you would expect / hope), and also to an illustrator- one Paul Rivoche, whom, as it turns out, I knew in high school. My interest immediately rekindled, I dove in. (The illustrations are great, by the way--- I bought the book because of Asimov's name, the cool sounding title, and the way cool cover art--- I am often suckered in by cool images like this.) 

The book seems to be written with Asimov's famous (to geeks, anyway) three laws of robotics as a major and ever-present theme element, which worried me, initially. That aside, it is actually a pretty good read- it includes a protagonist marooned astronaut, robots, space raiders, good aliens, bad aliens (including a really bad antagonist alien), a mysterious female, space ships, cool technology, more robots, and of course, a great big robot city. Fairly light reading, but I want to read the second book now!

And still another book

Winds of Change
Asimov, I.

After a serious "history" read, I needed a SciFy escape- how about something from one of the masters- Isaac Asimov...
The Winds of Change: 20 or so short stories by Isaac Asimov; some pretty good, some pretty dull. Here's a summary:
Perfect Fit: A criminal's punishment is being forced to forget how to use computers.
Belief: A man discovers that he can levitate; nobody will believe him, so a friend explains that he must find a way to help others to help him investigate the phenomenon.
A Fair Exchange: A scientist learns how to travel in time and make very slight adjustments; and ruins his life...
For the Birds: A man discovers a way for humans to move within the thin atmosphere of space stations.
Found: Two technicians discover than mankind has been discovered by metal life forms.
Good Taste: Nope, too boring; skipped this one after 2 pages...
How it Happened: Historians Aaron and Moses record history taking place over six days because they don't have enough papyrus on hand...
Ideas Die Hard: The first men to travel to the moon aren't- they're just in a simulation.
It Is Coming: Alien computer approaches Earth; humans scramble to tune their best computer to communicate with it; the computer is accepted into the computer society.
The Last Answer: A man dies, is selected by an immortal and omnipotent being offering immortality- to think of a way to end its existence...
The Last Shuttle: The last space shuttle takes the last humans off Earth for the last time...
Lest We Remember: An average man takes experimental drug to make him extraordinary; his wife ensures that he reaches his potential.
Nothing for Nothing: Visitors from space trade with prehistoric man- technology for art.
One Night of Song: Man grants a wish to another man- his ex-girlfriend is permitted to sing perfectly- for one performance only...
The Smile That Loses: Man grants a with to a woman- a photo of her husband smiling- a husband that never smiles...
To Tell at a Glance: Young woman must identify a spy amongst a group of dignitaries.
The Winds of Change: A scientist learns how to travel in time and makes changes that affect things (yawn).

I like Asimov, but not all of his stories. I'd like to read a novel of his, but how to know if it will be one of his good ones, or another Good Taste or Lest We Remember....

Another book: Winston Churchill: Young Statesman

Here's another one:

Young Statesman- Winston Churchill 1901-1914

R. Churchill

This book covers the life of Winston Churchill after his military experiences in India and Africa. He started as a member of the Conservative party, running in a “safe seat” guaranteeing election, but soon became disenchanted with the protectionist leanings of the party. He then "crossed the floor" and became a member of the Liberal party. Whether he really felt this way, or he saw it as an opportunity as the Conservative party crumbled around him is anyone’s guess. He did however, very effectively champion the concept of free trade. Either way, it was obvious that he had a great talent for both writing speeches and for delivering them. The book contains a plethora of examples of both. He was clearly seen as a very capable and rising star in politics by those who mattered-- members of parliament (both Conservative and Liberal), the press, and the influential, aristocratic and privileged classes. He was also a bit of a visionary; as early as 1904, he recognized the importance, and even the inevitable future involvement of the United States in European affairs.

By 1906 he became Under Secretary for the Colonies,, and was in the Privy Council a year later. In the same year, he first used the phrase “terminological inexactitudes” to indicate inaccurate terminology, but soon the phrase was understood to be a polite term for lying.

In 1906 he went for a “working holiday” - much of it personal time, and used the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Venus as his transportation. In modern times, this would seem an outrageous misuse of Navy resources, but was an accepted perk in the early 1900s, for a colonial official working for the government of a world power, in a time without air travel.

After making it to the Cabinet, he had to face an election- was defeated, then won again in a “safe” Liberal seat. In this election, he differentiated Liberalism and Socialism in this way: “Socialism wants to pull down wealth; Liberalism wants to pull up poverty...” a stance that stands up well more than 100 years later, even as the terms “Liberal” and “Socialist” have changed slightly in that time.

He was described by David Lloyd George, future Prime Minister (and longtime friend of Churchill), as being “as long winded as he is persistent” - this was a fair statement, and defined Churchill well, which is punctuated time and time again throughout his public career.

He was soon made a member of Asquith's cabinet, and ran the Home Office, where he initiated positive advancements for unions and the poor. He was also instrumental in attempts to advance the Irish Home Rule bill, and was not popular with Ulster for his efforts. He then advanced to the top spot in the Admiralty, as "First Lord" - the top political post in control of the Royal Navy, where his energy, intelligence and communication skills got him off to a great start, and did the country well in preparing for the inevitable clash with Germany. 

There’s a lot of information in these books -- a lot. If you have a keen interest in Winston Churchill, the build-up to the Great War, or British politics of this era, this is a very interesting book, and a good source of information. If you’re casually interested, look for a thinner book...

Baseball stats- ya gotta love 'em!

One of the many things I love about baseball is the stats. It starts with a pitcher's number of wins, losses, games started, games completed, shutouts, strikeouts, walks allowed, and ERA (run average per nine innings of pitching not including those runs scored due to defensive errors), and much more. And there's players fielding percentages- the number of errors compared to the total number of times the player fielded the ball. And then there's the batters hitting stats- number of hits, number of doubles, number of triples, number of home runs, number of runs scored, number of walks, batting average, on-base average, slugging percentage, and much more. 
Then there's the story of my poor Montreal Expos, who one year decided to improve their offence at the expense of defense. At the end of the year, they were the top team in their division in pitching (measured by pitcher's ERA, strikeouts, and other stats), and they were the top team in their division in hitting (measured by batter's batting average, runs scored and other stats). That year, they finished third in their division, because they used the better-hitting Wallace Johnson at second base instead of defensively amazing (but anemic hitting) Rodney Scott. Their preference for offensive numbers ahead of the less-measureable defensive capabilities was their downfall.
Then there's the story of the movie MoneyBall, and the real-life exploits of the Oakland A's in the early 1990s and the Boston Redsox on the early 2000s- proving that focusing on some statistics- the more important ones- does deliver results.
I bring all this up because I just read this article: http://www.athleticsnation.com/2013/6/12/4419388/bartolo-colons-historic-season. It's about the A's Bartolo Colon, who is having a good season pitching, while walking very few batters. And to quantify Colon's season, the author has dug deeply into the data (big data) to find the player's walks per nine innings of pitching and to calculate the player's walk percentage of total batters faced. But not just that-- also, the percentage of pitches in the strike zone, as called by the umpires, and of course, the percentage of pitches in the strike zone, as determined by Pitch f/x (which tracks the number of pitches that a pitcher throws both in and out of the strike zone, no matter what the umpires actually call the pitch).
So what does this all mean in the greater scheme of things?
Almost nothing.
But it makes me love baseball even more!

How to catch a football

Just wanted to present the most awesome photo of a football catch I have ever seen. The man's name is JJ Stokes. He was a decent receiver, not a great one; he played on the San Francisco 49ers when Terrell Owens was becoming a huge star...

No, it doesn't look like much, but what it does show is the super-intense concentration it takes to make a catch- even a seemingly simple catch. Hands ready and spread wide, eyes wide open and focused on the ball. Turning the body as much as possible towards the ball. That's what you have to do.
It's true that some players make 100 or more catches in a single year, so how hard can it be? Well, on the NFL broadcasts every Sunday (and Monday and Thursday, and sometimes Saturday), you're watching the best players in the world catch footballs. The truth is, the 3rd and 4th string receivers on most teams drop the ball a lot. Semi-pro receivers drop even more passes. Even the great Terrell Owens dropped tons of balls in his last couple of years.
The most common reason for dropping a passed ball is that the receiver just can't do it well. But those that do it well drop balls, too-- they take their eyes off the ball early. And that's the second most common reason for dropping the ball. A receiver will sometimes think too far ahead of the catch: "now that I'm about to catch this ball for sure, what will be my next move? where will I run? where is the nearest tackler? where are my blockers? where is....oops..."
The problem was right at the start- taking the eye off the ball.
And that's why I love this photo. Stokes shows us what you have to do-- what the best in the world have to do:
KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL !!

The Methuselah Star

The Hubble Space Telescope was used in the discovery of a very interesting star right here in the Milky Way galaxy (see article Astronomers Find Ancient Star Methuselah Which Appears To Be Older Than The Universe). The problem is that it's estimated age, about 14.5 billion years old (maybe as old as 16 billion years), is considerably older than our best estimates for the age of the whole universe, which is about 13.8 billion years old...

I actually love this stuff. The idea of things so old and time so great just excites me and kicks my curiosity and imagination into overdrive.

However, I sometimes think that we're more than a little bit arrogant, throwing around concepts like dark matter, dark energy and inflation like they're signed sealed and delivered, when in fact they're nothing but complicated abstractions that help to explain serious flaws in the mathematics of our best theories. I'd be much happier if, when we talk about this stuff, we describe them as theories- good theories, and the best theories that we have- but still, for now, just theories, and not necessarily real stuff. At least not until someone shows us a beaker of dark matter in their lab, anyway...

Vince Carter: bench strength

Vince Carter

I recently saw that Vince Carter put up 20 points for the Dallas Mavericks coming off the bench. Interesting. I also recall seeing him literally jump over an opponent (Frédéric Weis) in the 2000 Olympics. And there's a whole YouTube channel showing just his dunks and game winners. So why did the team on which he was rookie of the year him want to get rid of him so badly? And why wouldn't such a massively talented player be with one club for the duration? And why traded so often? Well, the answer has something to do with leadership, accountability and winning.

Charles Oakley

Carter took the Toronto Raptors to the playoffs three straight years, including their most successful season, and most successful playoffs, 2001. That year, the Raptors had a few veterans on a young roster, the most important being Charles Oakley. In the playoffs in 2001, after losing a game, Vince Carter when asked about the loss, responded with something to the effect of "we win as a team and we lose as a team." Afterwards, Charles Oakley refused to agree with the assessment, saying, in effect, no, Vince Carter is the leader of this team, and he has to lead the team to victory. In fact, he was throwing Carter under the bus, and rightly so. A leader has to take charge, and-- I don't know-- LEAD. Oakley's comments had the desired effect- an angry Carter led his team to victory, and a good playoff run. But what did that get Oakley? He was gone the following year, Vince and his friends were signed to long-term deals. And what happened to Carter's new found leadership? Dead in the water- the Raptors never again attained the heights of 2001. Worse, by 2005, they had to dump him-- the man was just not a leader; he never made players around him better, and he was never a winner. After the trade, TSN (Canadian equivalent of ESPN) showed a video montage of Vince rolling on the hard-court grimacing holding his knee, grimacing holding his ankle, grimacing holding his elbow, grimacing holding his hangnail (or whatever)-- there were, like 30 of these! Truly an unfortunate way to remember such a talented player.

Now he's bench strength - probably a fitting ending to a fantastic career that almost was. With a career filled with little more than highlight reel moments, he may make it to the hall of fame when he retires, but soon after that he will be forgotten. You see, only leaders and winners are remembered.

And another one: The Red Badge of Courage

The Red Badge of Courage

S. Crane

An American classic containing vivid, violent and realistic fighting scenes from the Civil War. Stories of war from the perspective of the regular private grunt intrigue me the most- it's not about an officer's opinions, relaying of facts and summations about large events, but rather the helplessness and confusion of the every-day man put into a place where no man would want to be. The scenes of battle ring so true in Red Badge of Courage, that book reviewers of the day assumed that the author was writing from his own personal battlefield experiences. He was not. He did not fight in the war, and he never saw battle until after he wrote the book, and even then it was as an observer (he wanted to see first hand if his book held up to the real thing- it did).
But the book is not really about the war at all- it is a backdrop for the story of a youth's internal struggle between his natural fear, cowardice and need to flee, and his deep desire to conceal his fear. Fear of being labelled and ridiculed by his peers as a coward and a deserter. In the thick of his first battle, he does just that- he is overcome by the fear of being overrun and killed, and desperately wants to run for his life, and finally, as a few others begin to flee, he joins them in a mad rush away from the charging enemy. After, in his internal deliberations he makes up excuses, makes rationalizations, transfers of admonishments to others, and outright alters the facts to avoid having to face his own cowardice. Eventually he makes his way back to his unit, and forces himself to stay, engage in battle, and to finally redeem himself (and more).
I think the book was so popular because it portrays the reaction that everyman would have to the ferocity of battle. Sure, there are people who were born to fight, and those who crave battle for the experience, but most people want to live their lives in peace and safety, and to pursue happiness, as it were. This is most people. His internalizations reflect those of the many- those normal ones that, when it is thrust upon them,  see war as an unspeakable horror, and not as a game or an adventure.
Most men would say outwardly that "I would never run" and it may be true of many, but for many more, what happens to the poor youth, Henry Fleming is what the rest of us fear, deep down inside. That our fear and cowardice will be discovered by all.
Written in the 1890's, the dialogue (probably) reflects the colloquial speak of the day, yet it is easy to read, the prose flowing and well written. Highly recommended for both those interested in the American classics, and for those interested in the Civil War.

Next book: Mr. Midshipman Hornblower

Mr. Midshipman Hornblower

C. S. Forester

In terms of internal story-line chronology, this is the first book of the Hornblower series, but not the first one that Forester wrote. This book, a series of swash-buckling mini-adventures, follows Horatio Hornblower from his first appearance on duty in the Royal Navy in the era of the Napoleonic Wars. Some spoiler alerts- He stands up to a bully, and challenges him to a duel. Chance offers him his first command, a captured rice ship, which he botches and get captured, but makes up for it by capturing a larger prize for his Captain. He plays an important role in the capture of a French ship docked in French waters. After the Spanish switch sides, he volunteers to help protect a convoy, avoids capture, and manages to capture a Spanish galley. He is put in charge of a shore party to support an ill-advised attempt by the British army and French loyalists to resist the French revolutionary forces. At risk from the plague, he supervises a transaction for food for the fleet at Oran, is quarantined at sea, again avoids capture, captures a small Spanish coastal and delivers his charge. About to fail his lieutenant's exam, the port at Gibraltar is invaded by burning ships, and he manages to save the lives of his one of his examination officers. Finally, he is charged with escorting orders and an aristocrat to England, but is intercepted and captured; ensuring the safety of his charges, he is subjected to a lengthy imprisonment, but is rewarded for heroism and honor with his release.

These stories were the basis for several episodes of the excellent Horatio Hornblower miniseries starring Ioan Gruffudd. This, and the movie from 1951 starring Gregory Peck got me into these books 10+ years ago. Now I've taken up the Forester books again; here we go...

Another read: R is for Rocket

R is for Rocket

R. Bradbury

A bunch of short stories. Some boring ones about 1950's awe and wonder about the future, but some real gems as well. A story about stranded humans adapting to a planet that is both too hot by day, and too cold by night. The dangers of a planet that has a female personality, showing both love and anger to temporary visitors from Earth. A crash landing on a terrible planet on which there are permanent torrential rains. An incompetent time travelling  dinosaur hunter disrupts the present by stepping on a butterfly in the past (a sort of butterfly effect). A spaceship travels to the sun and scoops up some sun-stuff. An ancient sea monster regularly comes up from the deep to answer the calls of a light-house's fog horn. And some lesser stories. Mostly though, some good shorts from a classic SF author.

About Sir Isaac Newton

My latest read was: Newton’s Notebook - The Life, Times and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton
J. Levy

The book was a great introduction to Isaac Newton’s life and accomplishments- it’s short and to the point. It covers the major accomplishments- He developed calculus to help him understand and describe the motion of the planets around the sun. He defined gravity and optics. He invented the scientific method. Before him, science was a type of philosophy- natural philosophy. This type of "science" was done my smart people thinking up explanations that describe natural phenomena. Newton was the first to explain that's just part of it. He invented the concept of experimentation, the key ingredient of the modern scientific method. He also hinted at a unifying theory for gravity, and other microscopic "unknown forces"- similar to today's elusive unified field theory.

He dabbled quite seriously in chemistry (alchemy), and was an "expert" in the "field"- although did not complete any works on the subject-- mostly because alchemy, while being the precursor to modern chemistry, was in many ways mysticism- dabblers were secretive, and only communicated on the subject with other dabblers. This type of secrecy fit nicely with a major flaw in his character- he was overly secretive, almost to the point of paranoia- almost costing him dearly. This trait allowed other great men to catch up while he kept his work under wraps.... 

He also spent much of his life trying to knit together his scientific discoveries with his theological research, which was pretty much a dead end.  And in the end, he may have thought himself a failure.
But he wasn’t just a scientist and philosopher. 

He also saved the Royal Society, and cleaned up a horrible mess at the Royal Mint. But he was also a jackass. He was rude and hostile toward anyone who disagreed with him (or even questioned him). He was also fiercely vindictive. While with the Mint, he ruthlessly pursued counterfeiters, and saw them hung, despite the fact that prosecution was not necessarily part of his mandate. When he was voted in charge of the Royal Society, a significant portion of the membership would not vote for him due to his disagreeable nature and temperament.

For me, this book whet my appetite to have a look at his The Principia- but that’s a pretty tall tree to climb for now...