Jason's Log

Choosing your food - what matters most to you?

For some strange reason, I've been discussing with friends the criteria they follow when making decisions about what they eat. Some people are primarily concerned with how tasty their meal is, while others care most about speed and convenience. In the middle are issues of healthiness, along with questions about the ethics, sustainability and possible environmental impact.

After thinking about what criteria I normally used, I came up with the following five general categories:

1. Health: How good is this for me?
2. Ethics: Is this locally grown? Sustainably harvested? Organic? Vegetarian? Ecologically sound?
3. Convenience: Can I get it quickly? Is it easily obtained?
4. Taste: Am I in the mood for this? Will it taste good? Is it yummy?
5. Price: How much does this cost? Is it a good value.

Mulling over that list, it became apparent that I almost always put those items in the following order:

Health > Ethics > Convenience > Taste > Price

I suspect that I am not the norm here. I would guess that most people are more like:

Taste > Convenience > Price > Health > Ethics

So in order to help me understand how other people think about such matters, I decided to put together a pseudo-scientific survey. I'm hoping that I will get a large enough number of respondents to do some useful statistical analysis of the results. If you have about 2 minutes, please fill out the survey:

Take the Food Choices Survey

How religions screwed up by making marriage civil

Update (2008-11-20): In this Slate.com blog entry, professor Doug Kmeic of Pepperdine University proposes the same thing!

In the debate that has followed the approval of Proposition 8 in California's November 4th, 2008 election, it occurred to me that this entire controversy could have been avoided had organized religions not allowed a sacred ceremony (the 'wedding') to fall under the jurisdiction of government.

Acknowledging the fact that Wikipedia is not necessarily a reliable source, but realizing that I have nothing better readily available: It appears that marriage was first codified into law somewhere in the early 1500's under the influence of John Calvin and the Protestant movement. Prior to that time, and certainly throughout most early written history, the institution of marriage and the ceremony that preceded it had been purely a non-governmental matter. Understandably, the leaders of that ere never foresaw the need for a formal separation between religion and the state.

But alas, the legacy of that decision is what we are left with today.

In keeping with the general principle of religious freedom, organized religions should be free to define marriage in their own terms. They should be able to enforce any requirements and qualifications they deem necessary on those persons who wish to undergo a wedding ceremony.

At the same time, governments need a working definition for 'people who willingly join together for the purposes of domestic organization and/or the rearing of children'. The result of which is that governments are now put in a position of creating the legal definition for what was once a private or religious agreement. The result? Acrimonious political battles that will likely continue.

Besides, anyone who has been married can tell you that it is not always civil (see definition #5).

Understand how breakdowns in the Commercial Paper and Credit Default Swap markets got us here

Over the past few weeks, I have been searching for a good resource to help me understand the chain of events that started with the sub-prime mortgage crisis evolved into a $700B federal bailout. Although I do not claim to be any sort of expert on the subject, this episode from This American Life featured quite a few of them:

365: Another frightening show about the economy

Ira Glass and friends do an especially good job of linking the collapses of AIG and Lehman Brothers into the bigger pictures of the mortgage crisis and credit crunch. Definitely worth listening to, and really very frightening at times.

HOWTO: Selectively silence telemarketer phone calls on Windows Mobile phones

With the campaign season in high gear, I find myself the recipient of frequent fund-raising phone calls placed to my mobile phone. Of course, the government Do-Not-Call list exempts political organizations, so that is no help. In order to reduce the irritation from these calls, I decided to take advantage of the 'Custom Ring Tone' feature of Windows Mobile SmartPhone edition. The number I wanted to silence was 805-897-1183 and is from a company called TeleFund.

Note: I am using a Motorola Q, equipped with WMSPv5. I assume this feature exists on newer versions of WM and is almost surely supported on other platforms. All you need is the ability to associate a custom ring tone to a particular phone number for this to work.

Using a nice little sound generator script that I found here, I was able to create a WAV file containing one second of silence. I then used the handy SoundCoverter on Ubuntu to convert this to an MP3. As it turns out, WMSP supports both MP3 and WAV formatted files for custom ring tones.

You can download the files here:

Download silence.wav

Download silence.mp3

Once you have these files transferred to your phone (I did this using an external MicroSD card that I use for storing podcasts and audio books), you then just need to associate this file as the ring tone for the phone number you want to ignore. Where the file should go may depend on your phone operating system. On WMSPv5 any MP3 or WAV file found on the Storage Card will be made available as a custom ring tone, for example.

To silence the number on WMSPv5 the process looks something like this: After you receive the unwanted call, press Ignore to send them to voicemail. Once the connection has been terminated, open your Call History application. From there, select the phone number (assuming Caller ID was provided) and then select 'Save to Contacts' from the right-side menu. Create a new contact record, give it a name, and insert the number. Scroll down a bit until you see the 'Custom Ring Tone' menu, which by default will display 'None'. Select that menu item and scroll down until you see the entry named 'Silence'. Select that sound file.

Now the next time that phone number calls your phone, the 'silent' ring tone will be played, you will not be interrupted, and life will be just a wee bit more pleasant.

Moving up in the Aptera line

This just arrived in my inbox from Aptera:

Jason Buberel,

Thank you for being a part of the Aptera Family! We have successfully separated the list into separate hybrid and all electric lists.

Here is your new reservation number: 838

Regards,
The Aptera Motors Team

I had previously been #2506 - so separating out the hybrid orders moved me up 1668 places in line! This hopefully increases the chances of getting my Typ1 before the end of 2009.

Is 1.9% GDP growth a good sign or a bad one?

My Netvibes home page gave me a chuckle today in the titles each chose for their headline story on the recently released GDP value (1.9%). Notice the slight difference in tone between the two:

Chances of getting my Typ1 increased a bit, I think

With the news of Aptera's next round of funding (see here and here), it seems as though my chances of getting my all-electric Typ1 have improved a bit. The lease on my current vehicle expires in early January 2009, and I am hoping to not have to extend it. This also means that I will need to sign-up for and complete a course in motorcycle safety so that I get the required license certification.  And for some reason I had been under the mistaken belief that the range of the electric model was only 40 miles between charges, but recent statements from Aptera have been quoting 120 miles as the official figure. That was a nice surprise.

In the most recent email that I received from Aptera about how the Typ1 wold be delivered, I was told only that new owners would be invited down to the Santa Monica headquarters for and introduction and brief training course before they hand over the keys. Now I just have to get that solar array installed here at home and I'll be all set.

Years in the stalking, the hummingbird is finally caught

Ever since the backyard was converted from a swimming pool into a California plantscape, I have been visited regularly by hummingbirds. I have heard the almost deafening hum of their wings as they hovered just a foot above my head. Looking out the window of my home office I have observed them hopping from bloom to bloom in the late morning sun. And for years I have failed to capture a photo of one in flight. They are skittish, to put it mildly. They normally zip away as soon as I emerge onto the deck.

This afternoon I decided to station myself in the middle of the yard, nearest to their favorite flowerbed. I then stood perfectly still for about 20 minutes and waited for them to return.  Although I wasn't as close as I would have liked, this is the best I've managed in 3 years of trying:

For the rest, go here: http://photos.buberel.org/p313827114/

Brian Greene's explanation of special relativity

After coming across this amazing  video presentation of the physics double slit experiment on Reddit.com earlier today:

I was reminded of what I consider the best explanation of Einstein's special theory of relativity, and in particular the adage that "when objects travel near the speed of light, time slows down". The full explanation goes from page 47-51 of The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene.

What I find so remarkable about Professor Greene's explanation is the way in which it gradually sets up the punch line like a long and elaborate joke (minus the funny ending). Each step along his explanatory pathway is simple to the point of obviousness. Yet if you follow along closely you reach one of those 'Aha!' moments at the end where suddenly the entire concept becomes clear in your mind.

The crux of his explanation is that all things are constantly traveling in one of four dimensions - three of which are spatial and one is the time dimension. So an object that appears to be at rest in the three spatial dimensions is actually moving forward at the speed of light, but only in the time dimension. With this idea as the foundation, the remainder is easy to explain: When an object is traveling through one of the three spatial dimensions, it has to 'borrow' some of that speed from the time dimension. If you add up the total speed of an object through the 3 spatial and 1 time dimensions, that number always adds up to the speed of light.

When you apply this reasoning to a particle such as a photon of visible light - which travels through space at the speed of light - you can think of it as using up all of its speed to travel the three spatial dimensions. This leaves no remaining speed for it to spend in the time dimensions. Because of this, photons never grow old. They simply have no speed left to spare for the time dimension, so they do not experience passage of time. If photons wore wrist watches, the hands would never move.

To be honest, I'm not sure why I feel the need to constantly refresh my understanding of this concept. In fact I feel a mild sense of panic anytime I find myself unable to recall the explanation. It is of absolutely no practical value to me. I am sure that most real physicists would laugh at such a simple explanation and all of the details that it omits. Some part of me is waiting for the day when one of my four nieces/nephews asks the question "Uncle Jason, why is it that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light?"  I'll then run to my bookshelf, re-read pages 47-51 again to refresh my memory, then walk them through it. When the light bulb of understanding appears, and a grin comes across their face, I'll remember why it was worth the effort.

Dry heat - my ass - but the rocks are pretty

Don't let any Las Vegas inhabitant try to convince you that "it's just a dry heat, so it's not that bad."  It is a freakin' desert! There is a reason why nothing grows there.  It is the same reason why humans were never meant to live there. Like it or not, that is where my nephews live and so it is where I spent the 4th of July weekend in 110+ degree weather. Christa, Cynthia, Marek, Colin and Dad were all there.

The highlight of the visit was our day trip out to Zion National Park in southern Utah. The drive from Henderson to the park entrance was just under 3 hours, and there was very little traffic. My goal for the day was to hike up to Angels Landing in order to take in the scenic overviews of the canyon floor. The hike is only 2.5 miles each way, but the final mile or so leaves you completely exposed to the sun and scrambling over rocks for the last 500 feet of vertical ascent. Although chains are provided to help you pull yourself up the steeper rock walls, it was more strenuous than I expected it to be. Definitely not for anyone afraid of heights or unable to lift their own body weight.

But when you reach the top, you suddenly realize that it was worth the effort.  The skies were mostly clear and  a vivid blue. When contrasted against the red clay and sandstone cliff walls, the effect is stunning:

There were a few people there when I arrived just before noon:

The hike back down wasn't actually that much easier. Scrambling back down the top 500 feet was just as difficult in the reverse direction, and much harder on my aging knees.  If you're ever in Vegas and have grown tired of the strip, this is definitely worth the visit. The views are awe inspiring. You can see more here:

Gallery of Zion National Park panoramics