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...