Friday, 8 March 2013

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...

Monday, 4 March 2013

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.

Saturday, 2 March 2013

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.