Did 18th century mathematician point to the existence of G-d?

Did 18th century mathematician point to the existence of G-d?

Euler Equation

Tomorrow, April 15th marks the 307th anniversary of the birth of the great Swiss mathematician, Leonhard Euler. He is considered the greatest mathematician of his day and the forth greatest of all time.

His Euler equation, eip+1 = 0 may be the strangest discovery ever, since it represents an equation that relates five of the most fundamental constants in mathematics. With other laws of mathematics or physics, such as Newton’s laws, they are explainable since we would not be here in the first place, had they not taken the form that they did.

But Euler’s equation is different. There’s no obvious, inherent reason that these five fundamental constants, pi (ratio of circumference to diameter of a circle), e (base of the natural logarithm), I (square root of –1) 1 (multiplicative identity) and 0 (additive identity) should relate to one another in one equation and no mathematician nor scientist has ever come up with a reason for them to do so.

 Carl Sagan’s baloney test is a way of demonstrating the folly of most extraordinary claims. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” Carl opined and he was right. To me, Euler’s equation passes the Sagan Baloney Test. By the way, Euler made so many other contributions, but this is surely the strangest!

Happy birthday Leonhard and thank you. Uber-strange coincidence or pre-planned? You decide!

Best Buy?

I'm very disappointed with Best Buy. To cut a long story short, last Oct., in 2012, I bought my son a laptop from Best Buy in Rockaway, NJ. About a month ago, the screen stopped working. The computer was not hit, dropped or damaged in any way. So I knew I was within the ASUS manufacturer's one year warranty & I had even purchased the Geek Squad Technical Support. I took the laptop to Best Buy in East Hanover, NJ. They sent it off to have it repaired. About two weeks, I got a call from Best Buy indicating that it would be about $400 to repair. I indicated that they would repair it for free, since they were legally obligated to do so. They said that that the computer was hit or dropped, which I refuted, knowing that that was not the case and that there was no external damage. To date, I've not heard back regarding the state or whereabouts of the computer since June 14th 2013. This was Service Order # 00473981 303 195. Below is the string of emails in which I tried to get solid answers from them. Best Buy has not responded to my email on June 14th 2013. I insist that Best Buy make good on its legal commitments and repair the laptop for free. ------------June 9 2013----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Per Amanda's suggestion on your Facebook timeline, I am emailing you about the problem. The only thing I have to add is that the service order number given to me was 00473981 303 195. My son is the most honest kid around and I know he's telling the truth in so far as the laptop was not dropped nor hit. Furthermore, I inspected the laptop and there was no external damage or scratches, just an internal screen mess. I've also seen a lot of complaints about ASUS monitors online. We bought my son, a freshman in high school, the laptop to see him through high school. We cannot afford to pay $400 to get it fixed and it's clear to me that the problem is a manufacturer's defect. Your assistance in resolving this matter would be appreciated. Sincerely Dan Rudy ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Rudy I’m very disappointed with Best Buy. I bought my son an Asus laptop at their Rockaway NJ store last October 2012, so it should still be covered by warranty. I also have geek squad assistance. Last week, my son turned on the laptop and the left side of the screen had wavy lines and was unreadable, making the laptop unusable. When he had turned it off the previous night, it worked fine, and he had not dropped or damaged it. So I took the laptop back to the Best Buy store in East Hanover, NJ, who at first said that the problem was only cosmetic and that therefore it was not covered under warranty. I pointed out that the laptop was unusable, therefore the problem was not just cosmetic. Anyway, they then indicated that they could not fix it in the store & needed to send it to Kentucky. Tonight I got a call from Kara C. at Best Buy in Kentucky who wanted to charge me $396 since they said that the laptop had been dropped or hit. I told Kara that this was definitely not the case and that there was no external damage to the laptop, only an apparent manufacturer’s defect and that the problem was on the inside of the screen. Kara insisted that there was nothing they could do & were sending the laptop back, unfixed. I really hope that Best Buy has a better answer since this is a violation of FTC rules by not honoring the warranty. Like · · 55 minutes ago near Livingston Best Buy I am very sorry to hear about you troubles fixing your son's laptop, Daniel. This definitely sounds like a stressful situation you have on your hands. If the computer was not dropped then they should have fixed your computer under warranty. I am going to recommend that you email us at facebook@bestbuy.com, and our team will into this further for you. -Amanda 45 minutes ago · Like Daniel Rudy Thanks Amanda. Will do. 45 minutes ago · Like ------------------------------June 12 2013----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Daniel, Thank you for emailing us about the concerns you have on the repairs of your son’s computer. I’ve had a chance to review the service order from Geek Squad City and the original purchase receipt. Although you did purchase Geek Squad Technical Support in October of 2012, you did not purchase the Geek Squad Protection Plan. When you had the computer sent to the service center, it was noted that you were under the manufacturer warranty and the service center was able to determine the damage to the screen was not a defect in the screen but in fact damage to the computer itself. Unfortunately, the manufacturer warranty would not cover the cost of repairs to the computer so an estimate of repair was assessed and shared with you. In cases involving computer repairs and the categories of damage involved, we will typically yield to the technicians at Geek Squad City as they are trained and able to diagnose and determine the nature of repairs necessary to fix a unit. I apologize for the inconvenience this experience has caused you and your family. Derald, Community Connector ECC Social Connections & Innovation Best Buy Co., Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 8:20 PM To: Facebook (Best Buy) Subject: follow through of post on Facebook. Per Amanda's suggestion on your Facebook timeline, I am emailing you about the problem. The only thing I have to add is that the service order number given to me was 00473981 303 195. My son is the most honest kid around and I know he's telling the truth in so far as the laptop was not dropped nor hit. Furthermore, I inspected the laptop and there was no external damage or scratches, just an internal screen mess. I've also seen a lot of complaints about ASUS monitors online. We bought my son, a freshman in high school, the laptop to see him through high school. We cannot afford to pay $400 to get it fixed and it's clear to me that the problem is a manufacturer's defect. Your assistance in resolving this matter would be appreciated. Sincerely Dan Rudy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Daniel Rudy I’m very disappointed with Best Buy. I bought my son an Asus laptop at their Rockaway NJ store last October 2012, so it should still be covered by warranty. I also have geek squad assistance. Last week, my son turned on the laptop and the left side of the screen had wavy lines and was unreadable, making the laptop unusable. When he had turned it off the previous night, it worked fine, and he had not dropped or damaged it. So I took the laptop back to the Best Buy store in East Hanover, NJ, who at first said that the problem was only cosmetic and that therefore it was not covered under warranty. I pointed out that the laptop was unusable, therefore the problem was not just cosmetic. Anyway, they then indicated that they could not fix it in the store & needed to send it to Kentucky. Tonight I got a call from Kara C. at Best Buy in Kentucky who wanted to charge me $396 since they said that the laptop had been dropped or hit. I told Kara that this was definitely not the case and that there was no external damage to the laptop, only an apparent manufacturer’s defect and that the problem was on the inside of the screen. Kara insisted that there was nothing they could do & were sending the laptop back, unfixed. I really hope that Best Buy has a better answer since this is a violation of FTC rules by not honoring the warranty. Like · [Comment] · 55 minutes ago near Livingston ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Derald I appreciate that you are trying to expedite this case, but your diagnosis is complete fiction. My 14 year old son informs me that the laptop was not dropped or hit in any way. Furthermore, there was absolutely no external damage to the screen or laptop, therefore, your assessment was pure conjecture. The device was working fine the night before. My son went to sleep and when he woke up, this screen problem manifested itself the following morning. Therefore, it was a manufacturer's defect. I'm prepared to continue to tell my story via social media and to take this to a local small claims court, if Best Buy does not live up to it's legal obligations. As the device comes with a warranty and I also bought Geek Squad Technical Support in October of 2012, I was not prepared to add yet another expense to the ticket price for the Geek Squad Protection Plan. As my son is careful in protecting his laptop, there should have been no need for yet another costly layer of protection. Your stated repair costs of nearly $400 make it uneconomical to fix the laptop. I hope for a better response from Best Buy before moving forward. Sincerely ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Daniel, Thank you for your response. I understand your frustration with this issue, however the decision by the Geek Squad service center will stand. Geek Squad Technical Support is not Geek Squad Protection and does not cover hardware repairs or repairs suffered though accidental damage from handling to the unit. As you are under the manufacturer warranty, any repairs to the computer would fall under that umbrella as long as the damages to the unit are covered according to the guidelines of that warranty. I do apologize for the inconvenience. Derald, Community Connector ECC Social Connections & Innovation Best Buy Co., Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- · Best Buy I am very sorry to hear about you troubles fixing your son's laptop, Daniel. This definitely sounds like a stressful situation you have on your hands. If the computer was not dropped then they should have fixed your computer under warranty. I am going to recommend that you email us at facebook@bestbuy.com, and our team will into this further for you. -Amanda 45 minutes ago · Like · Daniel Rudy Thanks Amanda. Will do. 45 minutes ago · Like · Daniel Rudy Jun 14 to Facebook Derald So to be clear, if you had felt that the laptop had not been dropped, hit or externally damaged, Best Buy would repair the laptop without charge? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hello Daniel, It’s as I stated earlier, should the scope of the repair fall within the parameters set by the manufacturer’s warranty, then the service center would proceed along that path. However, according to the service order, the damaged was outside the range of work that the manufacturer warranty provides thus an estimate of repairs was sent to you. I apologize if my earlier statement was not clear. Derald, Community Connector ECC Social Connections & Innovation Best Buy Co., Inc. From: Daniel Rudy [mailto:daniel.rudy1@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 10:43 AM ------------------------------ June 14 2013----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm really not understanind your legalease. Can you aswer my question "yes or no"? If you felt that there was no external damage, would you have repaired the machine without charge. This is a very simple question. Please advise. Dan Rudy

The Secret of Life or Why are we the way we are?

Have you ever thought about why we are the way we are? Why do we think the way we think? Why are we built the way we're built? Why do all living (and extinct) creatures behave the way they do (or did) and why are they constructed in the way they are (or were).

These are very big questions, which at first glance appear to be too large to answer in a succinct manner. I've searched for answers to these questions and found them, but never in a form that would have been acceptable to William of Ockham, one of the great sages of the 14th century. In an age of intense darkness, his genius shined brightly. William hailed from the picturesque village of Ockham, southwest of London, England, which is mentioned in the doomsday book of 1086. William discovered a key principle of science, the law of parsimony, today known as Ockham's razor. Ockham's razor has taken many forms, but my favorite is "all other things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the best."

So here goes, my attempt to answer the big question of "why", bearing in mind William's advice. I've boiled the answer down to two rules. Rule 1) applies to all life. Rule 2)applies only to humans, since we know of no other life form that has our complicated and abstract thought and linguistic capabilities.

Rule 1) All life evolved in such a way as to maximize its genetic destiny.
Rule 2) The relatively enormous human brain, has enabled a culture and a history, that sometimes acts to mitigate rule 1).

My definition of genetic destiny is simply the sum of the relatedness of all close relatives, as well as ourselves. We are 100% related to ourselves, hence our need for self preservation. First degree relatives such as children (50%)and siblings (roughly 50%) related are all very important to us. Second degree relatives such as nieces, nephews and grandchildren (25% related) are important, but not as instinctively life-critical as closer relations, and so on. This is commonly known as "kin selection".

Anyway, how do we know who is closely related to us? As young children, we see whom we interact with and instictively classify them as close relatives, just as we did in pre-technological times. The more time together, the closer the assumed relationship. This is the reason that Kibbutzniks in Israel seldom marry each other. They intermix at a young age with the youngsters of other families as if they were their own family. Therefore, internally, they recognize their peers as siblings, rather than as potential mates.

Please note that I'm not professing to bring forth any new information; I'm merely summarizing an important area of science, in a succinct way. In addition to Charles Darwin, who discovered Darwinian evolution, we can thank giants such as the Harvard Professor E.O. Wilson, Robert Trivers and others for the fields of sociobiology and evolutionary psychology, from which these rules are derived. I do find it incredible that only two rules are required. I also feel that it is important for this area of science to have a simple set of universal rules, analogous to those of mechanics, e.g. Newton's Laws of Motion, or the laws of thermodynamics.

Upon scrutinizing rule 1) we might ask ourselves why would bees willingly kill themselves in order to defend their colony? Why would a male black widow spider practically offer itself up as a meal, to the much larger female, simply to reproduce?

The answer lies inside the genes that build both our bodies and our brains. The genes that survive the evolutionary process, are the ones that construct us in such a way as to preserve themselves, not us. The bee sacrifices herself in order to preserve the queen bee (or more precisely the common genes)who is 2/3 related and therefore carries 2/3 of the genes over and above the rest of that species of bee; 2/3 is a much higher relatedness than human siblings who on average are only 1/2 related to each other. The spider sacrifices itself since its genes have pre-programmed its small brain to believe that it's more important to produce a large number of offspring, than to avoid being a meal for its mate. The male spider's offspring will carry far more genetic matches of the spider, than the spider itself.

Thus we've given a few cursory examples as well as an analytical explanation for rule 1). Nature offers countless other examples. It's enlightening and reassuring to know that there has never been brought forth, a behavior pattern (other than human) or body construction, that has violated rule 1).

So why do we humans have friends who are not related to us, and why do we fight so much with our close relatives? These phenomena seem to violate rule 1).

We need close friends as allies in order to successfully maneuver through life and therefore to fulfill our genetic destiny. We are there for them, and vice versa. This is a well known phenomenon called "reciprocol altruism". We fight with our families since we are rivals for the same scarce resources. If one looks at the bloody history of European monarchs, one will see a pattern of limited elimination of related rivals to the throne, but generally not wholesale slaughter of close relatives to the point where it would do more genetic harm than good.

So what's the explanation for suicide bombers or Japanese Kamikaze who are clearly not acting to maximize their genetic destiny. In 1976, Richard Dawkins' seminal work, "The Selfish Gene", introduced the concept of the meme. Memes are ideas that are transferred from human brain to human brain via language. Only human beings have the mental horsepower to exchange complex, abstract ideas in this way. Memes act like genes except they transfer and mutate at a much faster rate. They are so powerful that they can even overcome billions of years of evolutionary programming and cause us to do things that are not in our best genetic interest. Hence the need for rule 2).

By the way, I'm not suggesting that following rules 1) & 2) is the appropriate way to act. In fact, to be human is to endeavor to rise above our base instincts (which itself is a meme).

Anyway, that's my explanation for how life works. Hopefully, William, would have been proud.

BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Rig Catastrophe: Why is this eco-disaster different from all other eco-disasters?

The BP Deepwater Horizon calamity of 2010 is different from all previous eco-disasters, not just in terms of the environmental damage done and the loss of eleven lives, but in the fundamental way that nature has been pitted against herself.

In a “normal” disaster, such as the Exxon Valdez incident in Prince William Sound, Alaska, in 1989, eleven million gallons of oil were spilled. In 2002, twenty million gallons were lost after the sinking of the oil tanker Prestige, off the coast of Galicia, Spain.

Despite the devastating effect that these two events and others have had on delicate eco-systems, as well as the local economies, they pale in comparison to the staggeringly destructive genie that was uncorked by the Deepwater Horizon incident. The difference is that with all previous events, with the possible exception of the Ixtoc rig disaster in 1979, a comprehensible amount of oil was spilled. This is not the case with the current BP deluge, which could involve volumes that are orders of magnitude greater.

Deepwater Horizon has unleashed earth’s primordial forces against each other. These two great fluidic magisteria, the ocean and the vast subterranean gulf oil reservoir, were never meant to come in contact with each other. It took tens of millions of years to form the oil that is spilling out, since it is the product of ancient, dead plants and animals. The deep, man-made hole connecting the two reservoirs, can be compared to a rift in the space-time continuum, assuring the mutual destruction of both universes.

Oil is highly toxic and kills nearly all life that it comes into contact with. Compounding the problem, is the fact that oil and water don’t mix due to their differing valencies (the way that their electrons are held by the nucleus). These properties guarantee long term, devastating pollution and the destruction of eco-systems. The people, fauna and flora of Prince William Sound and Galicia, still have many decades of man-induced misery to look forward to.

As a fluid mechanician, a former oil rig worker and an environmentalist, I’m totally horrified by this catastrophe. My heart goes out to the folks living around the gulf. The management of BP need to do better. But remember, they are not monsters. Oil extraction is inherently, a very messy and dangerous business. BP employs eighty thousand people while supplying an energy-hungry world with its most needed commodity. BP also earned $27 billion last year.

Surely, given the scale of this calamity and the enormous profits involved, we can and must learn to do better. This means employing all available resources to stop the spill, cleaning up the mess, raising our safety requirements, and ensuring that such a plague, of biblical proportions never occurs again.

Stunning Eco-Unfriendliness of New Breed of Printers

Stunning Eco-Unfriendliness of New Breed of Printers

My printer gave up the ghost last week. No matter what fixes I tried, no matter how much web advice I took, there was no reviving it. For some arcane reason, my printer cartridges were stuck, even though I could manually move them. Anyway, I figured the four years that I got out of the printer was not too bad, by today’s standards. Little did I imagine.

So off I trundled to Staples in search of a new printer. Actually, I was in the market to replace my four in one, printer, fax, copier & scanner. I was at least delighted by the wireless feature, which meant that not only could our main computer access the printer, but all our laptops could also, without the need for a printer cable. I was less delighted to hear from the man wearing the “Expert” badge that the current expected lifespan of the printer was a mere six months.

The reason for this short life span was as simple as it was devious. The printer manufacturers make their money not on the printers, but on the ink cartridges. New printers take new cartridges numbers, not the previous models’ cartridges. So when the printer dies, so does the usefulness of their now obsolete cartridges. Therefore, the consumer will have to buy new ones, even though on average, they will only have been half used up.

The bottom line is that all the plastic that went into the printer will be dumped back into the environment. Even if it is recycled, that takes energy. Chances are this process is powered by, you guessed it, fossil based fuels. This is the same basic stuff from which petroleum based products, such as the plastic in your printer originate. To add insult to injury, the now obsolete printer ink and their cartridge vessels will also be dumped into the environment, gumming things up for perhaps hundreds of years.

There are two very negative effects resulting from using all this petroleum for plastic – taking it out and putting it back. The Energy Watch Group (EWG) 2007 report shows total world Proved (P95) plus Probable (P50) reserves to be between 854 and 1,255 Gb (30 to 40 years of supply if demand growth were to stop immediately). So let’s use one trillion barrels as a round number. This corresponds roughly to the amount that we’ve already used since oil was first discovered as a major energy source at the end of the 19th century. Guess what. This resource is not renewable. It took millions of years of animals and plants dying and sinking into the ground to produce.

Basically, we’re running out. This is not over-hyped eco-fanaticism, just simple mathematics. As previously mentioned, the disposal side is not pretty either. Some of the surplus plastic winds up in the ocean.In fact, there is a region known as the great Pacific Ocean garbage patch, about twice the size of Texas, where much of the world’s plastic winds up. Eventually, the plastic breaks down and is eaten by the fish. Next, the now toxic fish are eaten by humans, creating an extremely unhealthy and eco-disastrous situation.

E.O. Wilson is a Biology Professor at Harvard, and one of the world’s most respected naturists. He’s also one of my personal favorites, having written the landmark book “Sociobiology”, in the 1970s. In his more recent work “Consilience”, Wilson predicted that the world would run out of resources sometime in the late 21st century. Historians will note that the British scholar Thomas Malthus, writing in the early 19th century predicted similar results, which according to Malthus, should have happened a long time ago. The difference is that Wilson’s models are much more refined (excuse the pun) and reflect a broad consensus within the scientific community.

So the bottom line is that the printer manufacturers should change the way they do business. Make the printers last longer and help to protect the health and future of the planet.

Philonatura - future topics - nature, ecology, science

Dear Friend

Welcome to my blog, philonatura, meaning love of nature. I hope to share with you my deep-seated respect for nature, natural philosophy (science), humanity and my own work area of expertise which includes formulating with natural ingredients for natural products. I also look forward to your comments from which I no doubt will learn a great deal. My topics reflect those areas that I have found so meaningful, but are almost always neglected in schools and are rarely properly addressed in other venues. The themes usually fall into one of four broad categories:

1) Ecology

2) Sociobiology – The biological origin of how living things think and act

3) Arcane, but essential science, mathematics and history

4) The Meaning of Life

Some of my topics include:

• Hidden meanings of PI, e, The Golden Ratio
• Global Warming – Fact or Fiction?
• Are men really attracted to their mothers or just Freud?
• Dimensional Similitude – The most stunning scientific phenomenon that you’ve never heard of
• Can an atheist really be ethical?
• Nature vs. Nurture – Who is the Winner?
• Postpartum Depression – Why it’s a natural, evolutionary phenomenon, not an illness and how to deal with it
• The inherent conflict between in-laws
• Do scientific explanations, e.g. understanding how a rainbow is formed, destroy our appreciation of underlying beauty?
• Pre-industrial society; was it really a paradise?
• Is beauty only skin-deep? Is there one ideal and does it vary between cultures?
• What’s the fundamental difference between a conservative and a liberal?

Enjoy

Daniel Rudy

Why do we love Nature? - The Straight Dope

Have you ever wondered why we love the great outdoors? Why do we think natural ingredients are usually better. There is a simple and logical answer.

Simply look at what we Humans are, and where we came from. We evolved in the savannas of Africa. From there, we spread out to the four corners of the world. Africa is not a jungle, nor is it a desert. That may be why we like our landscaped yards to have some trees, water etc., but in a Goldilocks way, not too much and not too little. In other words, our preferred surroundings are in tune with our more recent evolutionary forward burst, which occurred in Africa.

That's also why we trust natural ingredients more than synthetic ones. While this natural, first order approach is reasonable, it is not the complete answer. It's also where almost all so-called natural ingredients people get lost.

Remember, our natural surroundings were far from perfect. Think about not having vaccines for our children, no anesthetics for having a tooth pulled, dangerous predators lurking around every corner and limited food sources. Modern technology has brought us many advantages and largely eliminated these awful experiences, at least in the developed world. But, we must also never forget our roots.

So the bottom line is that the optimal strategy is to both respect what we get from nature via our genes, and to also respect the more comfortable surroundings that technology has brought us. If a synthetic ingredient in a product, be it a shampoo or a cake has been found to be safe in reasonable quantities, under reasonable circumstances, then we should not automatically shun it.
Nor should we forget that natural is often the best route.