Harebrained Schemes - 2

Another potpourri. Some real, some alternate news.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This one is hairbrained rather than harebrained.

My kipah keeps falling off, and, because I'm bald, I have nothing to attach it to. A golden spike might work but it would be very expensive and, I suspect, it would leave a scar. I've tried one of the beanies intended for bald-headed drones like me and it wasn't effective. It strikes me that a small strip on the front inside -- along a radius -- that is attached at both ends but open in the middle would leave room for a Band-Aid (or equivalent) to be slid through -- open and the sticky side facing the pate. Band-aids stick to skin and would probably hold the kipah in place until removed. It would not cause bodily damage. I think it is cranially applicable, but I don't know if it is commercially applicable and I don't know what other solutions are available – ones that work.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Here's another selection from Taleisim East (See the first incarnation of this feature for an explanation. I reworded it so it wouldn't sound like the catalog entry it used to be.)

The Bar-Code Talis and Temple Bar-Code Reader

The Bar-Code Talis. As up-to-date as the morning news is this system. Each talis would be unique, with stripes that comprise a bar-code registered in your name and which cannot, under international law, be duplicated. So you'll always be able to identify your talis. And so would the Temple Bar-Code Reader. The reader, suggested by Monsieur Louis in New Haven (with Morrie's help in formulating the idea), would be custom-designed for each temple and fitted with magnificent stereophonic speakers. As a member is approaching the stage on being called to the Torah, the system “reads” her or his talis and announces her or his name. It can even be done in the holy language. Poof! It would make any temple “the talk of the town.”

It might also be used at the Kiddush, when the glasses are raised on high.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Back to serious (although the Reader described above might seem reasonable to some).

I'm embarrassed to admit it, but we have a mouse problem. The commercial solutions we've tried have been of only marginal value, and some of our little friends can get the bait off the traps without springing them – something I have trouble doing. And they're smart enough to avoid the poison we've set out. It strikes me that the best solution is to scare them away. A spray of material derived from cats might do that. My hope is that smelling it would convince the little beasties to go elsewhere.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I'm not sure if the following suggestion is realistic or if it's more dangerous than helpful – risk/benefit and all that kind of stuff.

We're expecting a snowstorm tonight. A blizzard we're told. Twelve to eighteen inches of snow. Shoveling the stuff is a real hassle. I know because we've had bad snow before. It's hard on my back, it takes a long time, and, in all honesty, I don't do all that good a job. Nor do those I pay good money to do it for me. That's especially the case on the part in my driveway that's turned into ice. We have four-wheel drive vehicles that can handle the snow (if it's not too deep) but their bodies are not designed to bumper or fender off the ice without (expensive) damage.

Perhaps it's possible to have a heat-blower (or even a flame-thrower) designed to melt the snow and ice and get it out of the way. It should have necessary safeguards to keep it from being used by children, and a temperature sensor that would keep it from being used inside – one that keeps it from working if the temperature is over 34 degrees might do it. Sure it could be misused, but so can your car, your kitchen knives, and an assortment of blunt instruments in your house.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Enough for now. More coming when I feel up to it.






March 13, 2017

Insanity

There are numerous “Eskimo” words for “snow.” It's not an urban legend. It's a fact. Part of the plethora results from the fact that people whose environment is almost always snowy have developed a vocabulary that distinguishes among multiple varieties caused by different conditions – temperature, humidity, and the like. Also important is the fact that their lives are largely governed by the snow and it is important to differentiate the types better suited to sleighs or snowshoe, those requiring different tools for hunting or other tasks, the varieties which determine where particular fauna may be found, etc. (And, in terms of the number of terms, we should not forget that there are many “Eskimo” languages.)

And there are differences among the snow "atoms" as well.  No two snowflakes are alike. That is both the teaching and the science. The snowflake, or snow needle, has a shape that is governed by the way molecules come together at different temperatures and levels of humidity. And with a virtually infinite number of possible arrangements of molecules, no two have ever been the same.

No two people are identical. Even “identical” twins, though their DNA may be matching, display differences. All the moreso when considering individuals with different genetic patterns.

Indeed, no two of anything are identical. “Real” objects, formed from matter, have differences like those of snowflakes based on differing arrangements of molecules. (We may even wonder if all electrons are absolutely identical, and all protons, neutrons, quarks, etc.) The differences may be minor and require complicated instruments to demonstrate, but they are there. And concepts and words, no matter how similar, carry disparate “baggage” in the form of varying nuances. And that makes accurate translation impossible.

In the words of Albert Einstein, “Insanity [is] doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” It's pithy, and it certainly is a reasonable view. But it's misleading. I don't question either Einstein's knowledge or his wisdom. However, according to Wikipedia – a source which many dispute – “Albert Einstein may have been the first person to carefully point out the radical effect the new quantum physics would have on our notion of physical state. Quantum indeterminacy can be quantitatively characterized by a probability distribution on the set of outcomes of measurements of an measurements of an observable [occurence]. The distribution is uniquely determined by the system state, and moreover quantum mechanics provides a recipe for calculating this probability distribution.”

That's a fancy way of saying that everything is random – it has a probability but we can never know if two situations are the same. And they're not. No matter what we may think or believe. So if “Insanity [is] doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” we should recognize that we're (virtually) never doing the same thing over and over. No matter how it may seem and what we may think.

And I think about it. Often. Every time a problem comes up when I'm using my computer I wonder if I should try again. (If you don't succeed at first, try, try again.) I usually do so, and occasionally it works. If not I follow the wisdom recommended by all the computer mavins: “reboot.”

So I reboot and try again. And most of the time the problem is solved. I've gotten to the point that I expect a different result. Einstein would consider me insane, and perhaps I am, but the system works. I view it as black magic and, while I don't believe in magic, I prefer that to seeing myself as insane. I assume that there is some difference between the situation when I failed and the conditions when I succeeded. The difference may relate to the phase of the moon, to electrical impulses, quantum indeterminacy and randomness, temperature and humidity changes, slight variations between electrons, or evil spirits. I don't know.

And I don't care.

I have to run now. The men in the white coats are coming for me.

Next episode: “Re:” Virtual or hard-copy.