17 June 2009 (am)

Workout notes Travis track; 14:34 drills, 36:28 (5K: 8 x (400 form, 200 off) + 200; 35:10 at 4800), cool down (1:04:28 total for 5 miles).

Then yoga and push-ups; up to 5 sets of 12.

Posts

Mathematics: This post is about the origins of life (the possible ways life could have originated from an inorganic state). But embedded in it is an application of symmetry to organic chemistry.

Free Speech: evidently some people think that “free speech” means that they have immunity from criticism:

Now, I’m not going to go back and prosecute out the merits of the two articles that have led us to this point. But newspaper columnists, fighting in their respective pages, debating a topic, presenting arguments…this is de rigeur stuff, basically. Nothing to see here. The robust debate of America’s Men of Letters.

And that’s why I’m a bit dumbstruck by Gaffney, today, who straight up has the vapors over the fact that Krugman dared to namecheck him. Gaffney, in his lead paragraph, tells his readers that his is “surprised to see the New York Times columnist take a swipe at me and the paper that has long been my home.” Surprised? How can this be? Surely Gaffney is aware that people react to op-ed columns, and criticize them. Surely Gaffey wrote his column with the expressed intent of gaining a reaction! Why else write things like this?

This is not to say, necessarily, that Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim any more than Mr. Clinton actually is black. After his five months in office, and most especially after his just-concluded visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, however, a stunning conclusion seems increasingly plausible: The man now happy to have his Islamic-rooted middle name featured prominently has engaged in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain over Czechoslovakia at Munich.

Surely, someone who compares a middle name to the annexation of the Sudetenland INTENDED TO ELICIT A RESPONSE. [...]

So, I’m just wondering why Gaffney closes by complaining about being “shunned into silence.” He calls that “extremism,” and it is! Good thing no one’s shunned him into silence! By the looks of things, he is still a well-compensated editorial writer at a well-known newspaper. So the answer to the question “Free Speech, but not for me?” is “No. Free speech for you. And for everyone. Even people who criticize what you say. And vice-versa.” When the government starts rounding up all the copies of the Washington Times, I’ll be the first to decry it, because I love that Liz Glover column!

Social: President Obama extends basic family rights to gay couples who work for the federal government.

Some are wondering if this is related to the flap over the Department of Justice defending the so called “defense of marriage” act and it might be; it could be that President Obama is trying to prevent a possible roll-back of benefits.

From an Apple Conference:
This never happens at mathematics conferences

Advertisement