Dork Scratchings

Angela shows off her new phone which (fingers crossed) can't be tapped like the last one was There's been a lot of discussion in the media recently about Huawei.  Is it safe to buy equipment from a company with such close ties to the Chinese state?  Governments around the world have come under a lot of pressure from the Trump administration in the US to ban the company from involvement in their 5G rollout. But can we trust American or British equipment manufacturers any more than the Chinese?  Here's my Trust in Telecomms Matrix to help you decide:   USA/UK CHINA Are they spying for commercial gain? Yes, according to the EU, and they have been for a long time.  From https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/may/30/eu.politics " [Echelon's] primary purpose, the report said, is to intercept private and commercial communications, not military intelligence " Yes, according to US State dept https://www.newsweek.com/china-involved-90-percent-ec

    I've been doing  an online course on climate change at the University of Exeter for the last couple of weeks.  It's an excellent introduction if you're a bit hazy on the science and I thoroughly recommend it.  Plus it's free. As someone who has already done a lot of research on the climate crisis, some of the material was already familiar.  However, I've still discovered a lot of new stuff.  This week we covered ocean acidification - which was an area I knew very little about - and I've gained a lot of insight into the mechanisms behind it. What about the CO2? In the past I've had a go at calculating exactly how much one would expect the atmospheric concentration to have increased assuming we were responsible for all of it.  If this happened to match the actual increase in atmospheric CO2, then - I thought - it would be a very nice slam dunk the next time I get into an argument with someone claiming it wasn't down to us$^\dagger \ ^{\dagger_2}$. Unf

About 18 years ago a friend patiently explained to me how to solve a Rubik's Cube.  I memorized the instructions, but realized sooner or later I'd forget them.  So maybe a week later I wrote up my notes using dia , and printed them out .  Since then I've carried this same slip of paper around in my wallet, for those occasional opportunities when you're 'round someone's house and you spot a cube exhibiting a frustratingly high degree of entropy. It's still just about legible Each face of the cube is given a letter U - up D - down F - front B - back L - left R - right A single letter on it's own represents rotating the face 90$^\circ$ clockwise (looking at the face), and a letter followed by an apostrophe means rotate anti-clockwise.  Thus LL' is the same as doing nothing.  An exponent of 2 simply means do the preceeding action twice.  Below, I've split the sequences into subblocks with dashes to make them easier to memorize$^\dagger$. HOW TO SOLV

The extended family I've been sharing digs with... See alt-text for code

Credit: NASA This article in the guardian points to some recent research.  The article begins: Planting billions of trees across the world is one of the biggest and cheapest ways of taking CO2 out of the atmosphere to tackle the climate crisis, according to scientists, who have made the first calculation of how many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas. As trees grow, they absorb and store the carbon dioxide emissions that are driving global heating. New research estimates that a worldwide planting programme could remove two-thirds of all the emissions from human activities that remain in the atmosphere today, a figure the scientists describe as “mind-blowing”. and goes on to quote the lead scientist from ETH Zürich saying "This new quantitative evaluation shows [forest] restoration isn’t just one of our climate change solutions, it is overwhelmingly the top one" Let's test this claim with two tools everyone has at their disp

In 2018 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change produced a report on 1.5 C of warming .  This is considered a level of warming that is 50% likely to trigger a tipping point beyond which further warming will be beyond human control. According to the report: "Global warming is likely to reach 1.5°C between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate" Unfortunately, that's been taken by our politicians to mean we've got until 2050 to zero our emissions. Let's see if this is true: According to section C.1.3 "C.1.3. Limiting global warming requires limiting the total cumulative global anthropogenic emissions of CO2 since the pre-industrial period, that is, staying within a total carbon budget (high confidence). By the end of 2017, anthropogenic CO2 emissions since the pre-industrial period are estimated to have reduced the total carbon budget for 1.5°C by approximately 2200 ± 320 GtCO2 (medium confidence). The associated remaining budget i

Why does $\sqrt{2} \ne \frac{7}{5}$?  Well, if it did, we could draw a square of side 5 and diagonal 7 Not in proportion! Then, by removing 5 from the diagonal we could create a second square of side 2 and diagonal 3, which would mean $\sqrt{2} = \frac{3}{2}$, which is a  different fraction to $\frac{7}{5}$. Actually, we can easily generalize this argument to show that if $$ \sqrt{2} = \frac{a}{b} $$ for some whole numbers $a$ and $b$, then $$ \sqrt{2} = \frac{c}{d} $$ for some smaller whole numbers $c \lt a$ and $d \lt b$.  Repeating this argument over and over leads us to the conclusion that $\sqrt{2}$ is a whole number itself!  This is clearly incorrect and leads us to the conclusion that we can't in fact write $\sqrt{2}$ as a fraction. This is not a particularly modern way to prove the existence of irrational (non-fraction) numbers, but it is - supposedly - how the ancient Greeks originally did it!  Unfortunately the person who discovered this fact, Hippasus of Metapontum , fo

Here's a cartoon I made on my phone.  It's an explanation of what the Polar Jet Stream is and how it might be changing! The winter of 2019/2020 was the 5th wettest on record in the UK, and the spring of 2020 looks like it will turn out to be the driest.  This has been attributed to the polar jet stream being more wavy and slower to change shape than in the past.  This meant that we got stuck in a U bend all  winter and an $\Omega$ bend all spring! This may be due to climate change, specifically the higher rate of heating that is occurring in the arctic region as newly exposed sea water causes less sunlight to be reflected.  However, most climate models appear to suggest the opposite: that the Jet Stream will speed up and become less wavy. Some types of prediction in climate science are easy and others are hard.  That the Earth will warm up significantly this century is certain; exactly what that will do to the polar jet stream and local weather patterns is very uncertain.  All