Almost 50 years ago I had the misfortune to take two statistics classes at the same time. One was a required introduction to statistics and the other was econometrics. Don’t ask why I took them both — I don’t remember. But I do remember one day in the Intro to Statistics class when another student asked about this distribution plot (below).
“What was it? What did it indicate? What could it be used for?” they asked.
“It’s nothing,” said the TA. “It’s useless.”
But I had seen that shape before, in econometrics, where they called it a split normal distribution. that was said to be good for displaying time-series data.
So not useless at all.
The split-normal distribution was first drawn in 1897 and has been rediscovered several times since, most recently in 2016 by people who — honest to God — think they invented the thing.
Which brings us to an important book on the history of thermodynamics by Paul Sen. If you are into the history of science, read this book.
When I was a kid I loved reading books about science, the history of science, biographies of scientists — anything I could get my hands on about science. In all of this reading about science, though, I never read a non-textbook specifically about thermodynamics — until now.
Einstein’s Fridge by Paul Sen is the thermodynamics book I never knew I needed to read. It’s an exciting story of how the three laws of thermodynamics haltingly came to be and what they mean for our modern life, which comes down to pretty much everything. Thermodynamics turns out to rule both the beginning and the end of the universe. Who knew?
Author Sen comes to book writing from British television where he has made films about science and technology for more than 30 years, so the fact that he wrote this complex story as the equivalent of a really good BBC Connections episode shouldn’t surprise.
To be clear, the author is my friend. He directed my documentaries Triumph of the Nerds, Connected, Plane Crazy, and of course the derivative Steve Jobs — The Lost Interview. But in Plane Crazy I threatened on camera to beat the shit out of Sen, so if I didn’t legitimately like his book I wouldn’t be writing this column at all.
The big players on Sen’s thermodynamics stage start with Nicolas Sadi Carnot, the Frenchman who figured out that steam engines worked by moving heat around. Carnot then dropped the ball by dying of cholera at age 36. Then there was Rudolf Clausius, a German physicist who came up with the First Law of Thermodynamics, which states the equivalence of heat and work. Whenever work is done by heat then an equivalent amount of heat is consumed.
Clausius also developed the concept of entropy (the state of disorder or randomness in a system) leading to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that there is a natural tendency for any system to degenerate into a more disordered state, maximizing entropy.
My son Fallon, 15, has been using entropy lately to explain why his room is so messy.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics was stated about the same time by Clausius and by the Englishman William Thomson, who was later dubbed Lord Kelvin.
The Third Law of Thermodynamics extends the concept of the Second Law, stating the entropy of a system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero. Another way of explaining this is that atoms stop moving at absolute zero, which pretty much describes the end of the world, eh?
This Third Law, which was stated by chemist Walter Nernst in 1906, is a sort of outlier in Sen’s thermodynamics tale, both because it was coined by a chemist rather than a physicist, but also because it came after a three-decade fight-to-the-death between physicists arguing about whether atoms existed or not.
The Third Law might have come from Austrian physicist Ludwig Boltzmann. Boltzmann did the math, but that math was dependent on the existence of atoms and a lot of the cool physics kids — specifically the Germans Ernst Mach and Max Planck — did not believe in atoms. Boltzmann had developed a statistical approach that allowed him to sort of sneak up on the Third Law, but Mach and Planck didn’t buy it. Like high school bullies, they taunted Boltzmann at conferences, ultimately leading to the Austrian’s suicide in 1906.
I am not making this up.
Now the irony really begins to boil, because the math that Boltzmann couldn’t do had already been done by Yale physics professor J. Willard Gibbs. Gibbs was able to prove the Third Law without mentioning atoms at all, but hardly anyone in Europe had even heard of J. Willard Gibbs.
The great Scottish physicist James Maxwell knew about Gibbs, writing the American was “better than all the Germans,” but then Maxwell died in 1879 and Gibbs lost his champion, decades before finishing his seminal work.
Gibbs was a Yale professor, but his position was unpaid and he worked in a department that had no laboratory budget. So Gibbs — who was independently wealthy — built a lab in the attic of his New Haven home. Even his scientific papers were published obscurely by the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences — a publisher who literally did not understand what Gibbs was writing about.
Gibbs published his papers where he did because it was the closest thing in New Haven to a scientific journal. And the Connecticut Academy published his papers because Gibbs submitted them. They not only had no idea what he was saying, the Academy had to raise extra funds to typeset the papers (this was all math, remember) which ran as long as 471 pages!
They saw publishing Gibbs’s work as a patriotic duty — and they were correct.
Einstein later described Gibbs in a wonderful bit of European chauvinism as “the greatest mind in American history.”
So Gibbs was an unheralded (and unread) genius who could have saved Boltzmann from the bullying of Mach and Planck, which brings us back to the split normal distribution.
Because while Mach and Planck and even Einstein were uncertain about whether atoms actually existed, their existence was, by the time of Boltzmann’s suicide, already the basis of the global chemical, munitions, and pharmaceutical industries.
Like those econometricians who used split normal distributions every day, thousands of chemists IN GERMANY were relying on the existence of atoms to make their living. Which in part explains why it was a chemist who published in 1906 the Third Law of Thermodynamics.
How could the German physicists have not known this?
Einstein eventually proved the existence of atoms based on Planck’s work on quanta which led to the latter’s 1919 Nobel Prize — a prize that ironically could only have been won if atoms were real.
Boltzmann made possible Planck’s Nobel, yet Boltzmann was still dead.
It’s all in Sen’s book and well worth reading.
I thought it was contemplating the Maxwell’s Demon thought experiment that led to Boltzmann’s suicide.
Bang! Bang! Maxwell’s silver hammer came down upon his head!
You’re so weak Stephens. Boltzman killed himself because he had mental issues. Science is ALL ABOUT taunting you duface. Or should we just accept all different ideas as valid? That won’t work cause as you know most times there is really only one true / valid theory. Namely – the best theory. When a better one comes along the old one is no longer valid. God you POS. I just wish you would pay back the people who have complained about you taking their money.
“The Englishman William Thomson” was born in Ireland.
He moved to Scotland as a child when his father was appointed Professos at Glasgow University.
When I studied at Glasgow University in the 1970s, the physics lectures were given in Kelvin’s ampithatre
I always enjoy your work! Here you hit it on the head most great advances tend to come from cross pollination of research in separate areas. And thanks for the heads up on the book by Sen, it’s great that it’s on audible I can’t read like I used to!
Good column. I may read the book. I remember a passage in my Physical Chemistry book by Moore (from 45 years ago), where he speculated that Boltzmann’s bouts of depression could have be due to his being born in the dying hours of a gay Mardi Gras ball. He called him a martyr to thermodynamics and noted that the Boltzmann equation is on his tombstone.
Philip – I’m trying to find the passage you’re referring to in my copy of Moore (1961) but can’t find it. What section/page is it on?
Thanks
https://www.chemeurope.com/en/encyclopedia/Ludwig_Boltzmann.html
<>
Boltzmann was subject to rapid alternation of depressed moods with elevated, expansive or irritable moods. He himself jestingly attributed his rapid swings in temperament to the fact that he was born during the night between Mardi Gras and Ash Wednesday;
FYI – coming here via Firefox and I get this:
“Firefox detected an issue and did not continue to p.feedblitz.com. The website is either misconfigured or your computer clock is set to the wrong time.
It’s likely the website’s certificate is expired, which prevents Firefox from connecting securely. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.
The issue is most likely with the website, and there is nothing you can do to resolve it. You can notify the website’s administrator about the problem.”
Works for me: https://p.feedblitz.com
147 days since the promised book review to appear.
.
217 days since a promise on an update on the Mineserver project. Still no sign of it.
.
Not saying that Cringely is slow, but the Taliban took over a whole country in less than a week…
Ah, Cringely returns! And with the long-awaited book review! I remember him saying that this book was “important”.
.
*reads review*
.
Well, the book certainly seems interesting, but I’m failing to see how it’s important.
.
“To be clear, the author is my friend. ”
.
Ah. Okay. Well, it’s nice to help friends out.
.
“I am not making this up.”
.
You should retire this catchphrase, for many reasons. Here, it’s kind of jarring to see it associated with suicide.
.
Anyway, a good book recommendation. Looks like a fine tale. And now, there’s nothing standing in your way from delivering a Mineserver update! 😉
> “I am not making this up.”
> .
> You should retire this catchphrase, for many reasons.
Well jokes on you, I just bought all the Mach 2.2+ capable copies of “Einstein’s Fridge”. All of them, you see… and I am not making this up… all of them on the planet.
😀
Hmm. . . Is Joe Bloggs a nom de plume for Jeff Bezos?
My copy arrived today from Amazon.
Looks like the book came out on March 16th of this year. It’s got lots of good reviews!
It was on March 26th that Crookely wrote:
“My next column will be, believe it or not, a book review, which is something I don’t do very often but this book is important. And the column after that will be my long awaited Mineserver update.”
So maybe he had the book when it first came out but it’s taken him this long to read it? Of course, that comment was made *2* posts ago, but I suppose one can forgive him for taking a moment to write about the hot-off-the-presses, time-sensitive, breaking story of — checks notes — space networks, or something.
Nonetheless, I’m sure we’re all waiting with bated breath for his *next* column which will, undoubtedly, be his “long awaited Mineserver update”.
Sitting in shop class; reading a comic book.
Teacher walks up, grabs the book and says, “You’ll get this back at the end of the semester.”
“Why? Does it take you that long to read it?”
Cheerfully stolen from a Bill Cosby album from the 1970s.
One other thing (I’ll probably have a bunch of these, as my university degree is in Physics and I have an interest in this stuff) that might need clarification from the review is the idea that physicists in Einstein’s day were unsure about whether atoms existed. I don’t think this is quite correct. The concept of an indivisible unit of matter called the “atom” dates back to ancient Greece and Democritus, although it was purely theoretical at the time. In the 1800s, chemists proposed more detailed atomic theories that related to their work, and many of the laws of gases assumed the existence of tiny particles working at scale.
.
The problem of the day was not believing that atoms existed, but actually observing them. They were far too small to see by technology available at the time. Einstein’s brilliance was to propose looking for random “Brownian motion” of tiny dust particles suspended in liquids, a result of being battered by molecules. Still an indirect observation, but more than anyone else had done before. For this he won the Nobel prize, since his work on Relativity was considered too “out there” at the time.
.
These days we can not only “see” individual atoms but move them around at will, work pioneered (ironically) by IBM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_(atoms)
Jeremy, Einstein’s Nobel Prize was for the photoelectric effect.
.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1921/einstein/facts/
.
Thanks for the correction!
Here’s where I got confused:
.
“The introduction of the ultramicroscope in 1903 aided quantitative studies by making visible small colloidal particles whose greater activity could be measured more easily. Several important measurements of this kind were made from 1905 to 1911. During this period the French physicist Jean-Baptiste Perrin was successful in verifying Einstein’s analysis, and for this work he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1926.” https://www.britannica.com/science/Brownian-motion
.
So Brownian motion didn’t win the prize for Einstein, but verifying the theory did win the prize for someone else.
Jeremy,
The Nobel Prizes have also gone to other people that didn’t make the original discovery.
.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jocelyn-Bell-Burnell
.
Mach was quite strident in his anti-atomism, and it certainly affected Boltzmann personally (and professionally), to say nothing of science more broadly. A good read is “Saving Mach’s View on Atoms” by Baechtold (2010).
It’s too simplistic to say that Mach caused Boltzmann’s suicide, but the conflict certainly did not help LB’s mental health, either.
Looks like an interesting book. I recommend for promotional purposes dropping a payload of them out of an Eldorado Space jet across the Bay Area proper.
The Three Laws of Mineserverdynanics:
1. Conservation of Mineservers. Mineservers can neither be created or destroyed. The total number of Mineservers will always remain zero.
2. The entropy of report backs on Mineservers will always increase, until the report backs reach a state of no energy and no work. To put it another way, Mineservers can never flow from a Mineserver-lacking region to a Mineserver-desiring region.
3. Interest in Mineservers will tend towards absolute zero over a sufficiently long period of time.
*golf clap*
Very good
Ever hear about Murphy’s Law of Thermodynamics as related to projects…
Things get worse under pressure
Okay, this isn’t physics-related, but this quote:
.
“But in Plane Crazy I threatened on camera to beat the shit out of Sen, so if I didn’t legitimately like his book I wouldn’t be writing this column at all.”
.
… it just seems weird and confusing. Does it mean that when you threatened your friend that one time it was because you really didn’t like him, therefore the reader knows that your praise of his book is only because the book is so good? Or is it a joke, harking back to the threat on Plane Crazy that wasn’t real but was part of a “bit”? (It seemed pretty real in the video!) Maybe I’m over-analyzing it.
.
Another thing that I’m confused about in this review is how the split-normal distribution relates to… anything at all. Are you just saying that people didn’t believe in atoms but they made their living from them, just like.. people don’t believe in the split-normal distribution but they.. make a living from it? It’s really unclear. Since you opened and closed with the graph, it feels like it should have been making a stronger statement.
I saw Plane Crazy, and this event happened while Bob was deeply frustrated with his lack of progress (his original plan was to both design and build his own plane in 30 days). He wanted the film crew to stop filming, they of course were paid to continue filming, and seeing him come completely unglued was good entertainment, in a morbid sort of way.
As I recall, they kept filming despite his demands, at least until he stood up and strode purposefully towards the camera crew with a death-for-breakfast look in his eye, at which point they stopped and the story cut to the next scene.
I gotta say, Plane Crazy is riveting storytelling. One of the best documentaries I have ever seen.
Boring. I read the entire article as an insecure man finding a roundabout way to complain that his genius was relegated to a corner of the internet while he tinkered in his attic with Mineserver. I also have to wonder what kind of weakminded lapdog would call Mark Stephens (aka Cringely) a friend after his violent behaviour. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, Stephens built a career on a book about pipes and the rest is guff. And that’s how you end as a forgotten only remembered in retrospect faded scribble in the margin. I daresay this explains a lot of the snark about Einstein. As for Europeans Stephens experiences at an English private boarding school must sting to this day which makes me wonder. How much of this book is Stephen’s alleged “friend” and how much of this book is Stephen’s brainwashing a gullible mouthpiece? Where do the lies and excuses begin and end?
Kirkus Reviews? lol None of the Amazon “reviews” have much to say. I wonder if any of them actually read the book.
Without Channel Four or the BBC neither Stephen’s or Senn would have careers worth talking about.
Paul Sen is Bob’s buddy. Looks to me just another way to hype up the book same as Editor David does for Bob’s articles. (I can be wrong here of course just my 2 cents).
I just remembered I caught a mention of this book earlier this year or last year? Yes I’m sure I did and from what I remember it didn’t interest me then. It’s basically just a clickbait book I don’t want to waste braincells on. Whatever oh so great mysteries and emotional ride this book promises doesn’t rock my boat at all. It’s a bit like Reminiscence which I watched yesterday. I find American stuff over the past few years takes itself too seriously and has too dark an emotional undercurrent.
.
For professional reasons I paid close attention to certain scenes which anyone watching would guess at. I’m familiar with other artistic representations and have a fair guess who the art director was channeling. It was actually well done but I’m viewing it from the other side of the fence as this is my day job. Yes I have flicked my internal switch and turned it on just like in that scene and yes it did have an effect on the client like all his birthday and Christmas’s had come at the same time. I’ve done this with other clients too and while each client is different it pretty much always has the same effect on them. Apart from this the move isn’t very realistic in terms of tone and the physicality. It confuses two very very different types sex and two very very different types of client. The two never go together in the real world so this bit is pure Hollywood fantasy. The same is true of the relationship bit aspect as well. You’re simply not going to get the type of woman portrayed in this aspect of the film with the situation. The actress is portraying two very very different characters in the movie. It’s just not going to happen in the real world.
.
So I don’t know. I just view Senn’s book (and anything Mark Stephens aka Cringely writes) as somewhat similar. It’s blather and entertaining to people who don’t know any better but mostly just blather.
I do, honestly, enjoy your book reviews more than your ‘tech predictions.’ They’re worth perusing; I would happily read more of them, and, in many cases, the texts being reviewed.
.
But this “name-drop, name-drop, shoehorn personal-story, name-drop” comes off a bit like giving a speech at someone’s wedding, while making 88% of the speech about yourself, rather than the bride or groom. Relax.
@Questionable_PhD I agree with your analysis of the review. It’s five months late and spends a lot of time talking about things that don’t really apply to the subject matter, like split normal distributions.
.
But the book intrigued me. I’m interested in Physics anyway, and I’m a sucker for historical tales written with a strong narrative bent. Hell, that’s what was so good about Accidental Empires in the first place!
.
So I picked up a copy. First impressions are that it’s decent. Maybe I’ll write a review for it when I’m done.
Cringeley coming back (to your senses, it seems, good to me, ’cause I left in the dark while you wrote about nonsense, politics etc). Never heard of a Third Law. It’s been Two Laws. Entropy is an OLD subject.
The Brits discovered the Laws of Thermodynamics, and James Clerk Maxwell and many other brits contributed to the knowledge of the Universe as we know it today. So, though this is old news, the nowadays current ignorance -at least partially- provoqued by the frenetic misuse of the IT had made the young see the good old knowledge of science (specially the Thermodynamics, which explains almost anything, from economy to the good life) as useless, hence I celebrate this re-enacting of love for scientific knowledge that had costed so many so much along so many years, yeilding a good understanding of the world as we see today. Of course we need to know more ! and better ! yes !
I shouldn’t say this is a good column, this is a good article because this is a GOOD SUBJECT Bob !
Science is always a good subject.
Cheers for this coming back with true good stuff.
Regards
There’s a curious sneering about Einstein and I’m sure the Heil Hitler tag is accidental. Like, 88 is just a number, right?
.
I’m staying with my own opinion of the book before reading Mark Stephens (aka Cringely) review. I think the book is a shallow con job. Like a university lecturer’s bon mot stretched out. Semi interesting but ultimately useless. A conceit padded out.
.
If only Mark Stephens and Senn had put the same effort into Nerds 2.0 which, quite frankly, was an insult to UK computing just as that same insult to Europeans runs through this book and Stephens “review”. The whole Triumph of the Nerds thing is a con on part with American financial regulation at the time which as we found out later with the financial crash revealed how much America was taking the piss out of Europe by parcelling out its bad debt and landing Europe with a problem. Only this past month has revealed how big headed American tech industry is while dumping Afghanistan in the shit so I guess you could call America equal opportunity bastards.
.
The pack of lies and hiding behind his kids and tear stained arm waving when Mark Stephens finally produces his long promised and much delayed explanation for Mineserver should be entertaining. From scamming the UK for free pilot lessons to scamming his own employers (Infoworld and Channel Four) to scamming his mainly American readers. That’s quite a tale. Speaking of Stephens partners in crime what happened with this alleged programmer Stephen’s hired to work on Mineserver he claims cost $30,000 of his “retirement fund”? Is this another imaginary friend of his or another one of his dubious partners in crime? How deep and how wide is the trail of disaster left behind Stephens and his kingpin ambitions?
.
I think deep down Mark Stephens is alluding to and hoping for a directed by Steven Spielberg starring George Clooney biographical drama of his life but we all know that’s not going to happen.
Come On Kick him while he’s down!
Do you have a rednecks belief that only you have the truth.
If you’re up set with UK computing then I’m shitted off at UK saying to Oz “stay out of computing and work with Sheep” in 50’s. Oz had the first software programable computer!!!!!
How’s your eyesight these days?
OFF TOPIC
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/23/investing/virgin-orbit-ipo-spac-scn/index.html
Richard Branson’s satellite-launching company Virgin Orbit to go public
Question: When will Bob’s satellite-launching company go public ?????
I wouldn’t touch anything off Branson. He has never made a profit where it didn’t involve somebody else subsidising his investment or a state subsidy. He also has a record of cashing out before the inevitable drop in value. Branson never leads the market. He always follows from behind. I can think of far worse people of the planet but be assured Branson knwos how to look after Branson and he didn’t get rich by giving it away.
.
Also what is it with Bezos playing the hard man? I watched him in an interview with his brother once. The comparison was shocking. It was like his brother got all the good genes and Jeff had all the bad genes. Seriously he looks like what you would throw in the bucket or something out of the movie The Fly when you see him next to his brother. Mind you he’s not stupid. I suspet this is why he goes around wearing this big hat and hit the gym. Americans seem to get off on this macho bro culture and I doubt he sees any point in being rich if you’re not around to enjoy it. I wouldn’t be surprised if his girlfriend Lauren has been an influence. I’ve been known to discuss sartorial choices and health with clients. Men can lose their confidence and let themselves go because of depression or age but I’ve seen the before and after and it is worth doing. Some clients actually realise they’re slipped a bit and make an effort without prompting which is nice of them.
.
As for Mark Stephens (aka Cringely) he dresses like a bum or wears his thirty year old con artist suit. Nothing screams loser louder than this. I’ve had an American man explain climate issues to me and yes I do get this but golf shirts and cargo pants don’t do it for me. Nor does grunge or that slacker look. I’m not going to be making an effort or be seen in public with a man like this. I’d be too embarrassed.
Whenever I encounter the phrase “I am not making this up” – I immediately think of Dave Barry. He has been using this phrase for at least 35 of the 40 years I’ve been reading him. He might have registered it as a Trademark.
Also, if Dave Barry had written this column, he would have pointed out that EINSTEIN’S FRIDGE would make a great name for a band.
I thought of Dave Barry, too! Glad I’m not the only one.
@Gnarfle
.
There’s a book called “Knickers in the Fridge”. This is not a crime I am guilty of. Knickers on the floor, yes. Knickers on the bed, yes. Knickers hanging accidentally on purpose on a rack, yes. Knickers in the lingerie draw, yes. Knickers stretched smooth and tight around my rear, yes. But certainly never in the fridge nor would anyone ever call me Miss Chilly Knickers. You know the type. Every workplace has at least one Chilly Knickers.
.
I never cease to be amazed by the effect such a flimsy thing can have on men.
This book review took 4 months? Really?!? Can’t believe I actually stuck around waiting for this.
That’s quite a trick, considering you’ve never been here before, “Really?”
Just because I don’t perpetually post (like you) or whine incessantly about Mineserver, doesn’t mean that I’ve not been here before.
My apologies. I thought you might be a regular poster who wanted to say something anonymously. You realize the name “Really?” may not apply as well to some of your future posts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84x0_MuZzfg
@Really @Ronc
I have to balance new clients and regular clients with do we do whoopee now or do we go for delayed gratification. It can be quite difficult to judge depending on whether you want to provide a more personal experience or just grab the money.
As for Mark Stepens (aka Cringely) the self-described “sex symbol” I’ll just say there’s the one client every now and again who never gets there or who is more bother than they are worth.
Cringely states, “Another way of explaining this is that atoms stop moving at absolute zero, which pretty much describes the end of the world, eh?”
This is in error. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle precludes absolute ceasing of motion so that absolute zero cannot be reached.
This is technically correct (the best kind of correct!) Absolute zero is more of a theoretical construct– in Physics class our instructors would draw a dotted line on a graph that would intersect at “absolute zero” when no more energy (in the form of heat) could be extracted from a particle. But even without Heisenberg, it would be hard to reach in real life. The deepest, darkest reaches of intergalactic space still glow at slightly over 3 degrees above absolute zero— the last remnant of the searing temperatures of the Big Bang.
LOOK UP HOW CLOSE SCIENTIST HAVE GOT TO ABSOLUTE ZERO
WHEN YOU HAVE – then you’ll say shit I don’t believe IT!!
I looked it up! Damn, that’s pretty close! 170 nano Kelvin!
.
I feel like laser-generated Bose-Einstein condensates should have made more appearances in sci-fi movies.
No work can be extracted from zero-point energy, so, if that were all that were left, it would be tantamount to heat death.
True!
But who want to live at minus 250 degrees C — How are you going to live with solid Oxygen You Idiot!!!
Has anyone found what was “important” about this book as Mark Stephens (aka Cringely) claimed? Or was this just another one of those junior press officer statements, or media type things like how politicians are trained to point at the crowd to get them excited?
I would call it more of a clickbait sort of thing. Like how sleezy websites write leading (or misleading) headlines to get you to click so they can slam you with ads (and/or malware).
Stolen from a commentary thread on the Register . . . https://www.theregister.com/
You think you’re smarter than previous generations? Well, for previous generations, the vehicle handbook told you how to adjust your valves and carburetor. Nowadays, it warns you not to drink the battery acid.
“” Einstein eventually proved the existence of atoms based on Planck’s work””
Sorry Atomic theory started with chemists Molecules were invented in the 1700’s. My favourite number is Avogadro’s number — the exact number of molecules (atoms) in a Mole (6 X 10 ^23 ) in 1800’s
What Einstein showed in his Noble prize was that a specific frequency was needed to produce electrons from a metal “”Einstein said, is a beam of particles whose energies are related to their frequencies according to Planck’s formula “” Wikipedia If you shone infrared you could melt the metal and NOT GET ELECTRONS!!
Not How the atom was — a central positive mass and a cloud of electrons
NO WONDER TRUMP WAS ELLECTED IF ALL AMERICANS ARE DUMB!!!!!
WHAT Boltzmann suicide shows is that Scientists have deluded beliefs AND they hold onto them against evidence!!
Scientists have the same psychological desire to hold beliefs against evidence as the Taliban, Usama and rednecks with Covid19.
.
.Einstein & Planck both died NOT BELIEVING IN THE THEORY THEY INVENTED!!
Okay, so I’ve done a bit more digging into this whole “physicists didn’t believe in atoms” thing and it’s really quite the rabbit hole.
.
Chemists at the time understood about elements and how they combined and broke apart, and the various gas laws all relied on what was called “kinetic theory” of gases, which assumed there were trillions of tiny particles moving around. Of course they couldn’t be directly or even indirectly observed at the time, so that made some physicists uneasy.
.
Where it really gets weird is with Ernest Mach, the speed of sound guy. He was into philosophy, and he really was into this idea called “phenomenalism”, which if you extended it a bit basically said that only sensations were real and anything that you couldn’t sense didn’t actually exist. So since nobody had directly or indirectly sensed atoms yet, he just assumed they couldn’t exist. Which, I’m sorry, is probably the stupidest thing to believe since the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal (who assumed that if you couldn’t see it, it couldn’t see you — see the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy for details)
.
Anyway, Max Planck didn’t necessarily believe in phenomenalism or that atoms weren’t real, but he had a problem with Boltzmann’s statistical analysis for even less valid reasons. He just didn’t like the idea. But unlike Mach, who (let’s face it) was a bit of a stubborn old fart at the time, Planck was willing to test his ideas and change them when confronted with new evidence. He came around to atomic theory and even went further, developing the beginnings of quantum theory for behaviors at the subatomic level. I couldn’t find any evidence that Einstein didn’t believe in atoms.
.
Planck became a mentor for Einstein and helped get the latter’s papers published in scientific journals. In a single year (1905), Einstein came up with a way to indirectly observe atomic motion, another way to prove the quantization of light and other electromagnetic radiation, and a little thing called the Theory of Relativity.
.
And yes, Einstein, having helped create the foundations for quantum mechanics, was uneasy with some of its later implications. I don’t blame him, as quantum mechanics is fundamentally weird and crazy and nonsensical, and is also totally incompatible with general relativity. It just happens to work really well and explain a lot of things that do really happen at subatomic distances. For example, CPU designs today use such tiny junctions that they have to take into account that electrons will have a certain probability of just “existing” outside the wire they are running through, even if it is surrounded by material with zero conductivity. So you can’t have two wires running parallel to each other for too long, or enough electrons will just “jump” across the impenetrable gap and ruin the circuit.
.
I’m still only a third of the way through the book. It’s pretty good, but uneven in parts. It’s hard to make physics easy to understand and entertaining, but the author does his best.
Thank you for a very helpful comment. I couldn’t get around that Physicists had to have atoms proven in the 20th century. Also, thank you, Mr. Cringeley once again for the best artiicle I’ve read in a long time.
I don’t want to rave on!
1st Atomic theory is about atoms — bits of matter that are the smallest ( look up what atom in Greek means)
People knew that lead and gold were different elements how were their atoms different? This ends in Protons Electrons & Neutrons. It took lots of experiments to get there, and still more now with LHC at Cerrn.
2nd electrical theory is about electro-magnetism Maxwell solved the “CLASSICAL Theory” in the 1860’s Millions of scientist think Maxwell’s laws are the most PERFECT LAWS EVER. But the theory failed rotating currents that electrons in atoms had to do — simply the electrons fell into protons and became Neutral see below.
But experimental evidence lead to failure of the Classical Physics in some cases.
1 Why doesn’t light go faster with the speed of earth C + e
2 Why has Maxwell’s Laws have the speed of light in it
3 Why doesn’t 100000watts of infrared energy not give a electron.
Mathematicians found formulae to fit the results – BUT NO THEORY WHY.
Planck quantised energy WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT ENERGY IS made of bits like atoms Energy is not continuous ( look up what that means in Maths) Energy is discontinuous.
BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT THE ELECTRICITY WE GET AT HOME IS CONTINUOUS!! (there are no dark bits)
THAT’s where Planck didn’t believe what he invented.
Einstein used that for the experimental evidence of electrons coming out of metals and that’s what he got his Nobel prize for. He QUANTISED the energy in an atom.
An asside ALL THE 1900 Physicists that did theoretical work on QUANTUM THEORY saw that the physics came out of the book ALICE IN WONDERLAND.
Quantum theory is the MOST PERFECT THEORY OUT ( I want to make it a religion Ha Ha Ha) NO Scientist can DISPROVE IT. But its iffy 50/50 probability which sucks. ***
But it has a feature HUMANS HATE it doesn’t say “X is the answer” it says maybe X maybe Y maybe W — it gives all the answers
That’s what Einstein Hated – he want the answer Because he believed in God and god MUST KNOW THE ANSWER
That why he didn’t believe in QUANTUM THEORY. HE said ” God does not play dice with the world” He want the answer to be 100% perfect.
But he was worse when he started relativity (and started from 1st principles) the answer said that the universe was expanding. AGAIN HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE MATHS (like in Quantum theory) and put in a constant to stop the expanding Universe in the maths
The idiot said it was his “worst mistake” — He could have had a second Nobel prize.
That’s because he believed fairy tails. Ideas without evidence!!!!!
***. This is a human problem Humans in general want perfection. Who is perfect – GOD. We want perfect kids we want perfect laws we want perfect answers.
SORRY
Greek mathematicians committed suicide when they discovered irrational numbers.
Babylonians had a number base of 60 because that was close to 365.2 days in a year ( 60X6)
Quote: “That’s what Einstein Hated – he want the answer Because he believed in God and god MUST KNOW THE ANSWER”
.
There’s a bit more subtlety than that.
.
Einstein had proven the existence of atoms, despite them being too small to be seen directly at the time. With atoms, science had found a hidden, underlying structure to matter that en masse could be approximated well statistically, but were in fact discrete particles that could (in theory) be shown to be deterministic.
.
Quantum mechanics makes it impossible to find that determinism, of course. But what Einstein hoped was that there was another, even tinier, hidden deterministic theory underneath the quantum level, that we could only observe statistically because it was too small to see. Just like atoms had been before
.
Einstein was never able to find this extra hidden layer, nor has anyone else. String theory is an attempt at trying to imagine what such a layer could be, but since it makes no testable predictions it’s hard to call it science, and our technology is possibly hundreds of years away from being able to construct particle accelerators large and powerful enough to even make the attempt.
!st What is a gas ?
2nd how many atoms in a molecule of nitrogen in the air
3rd you can do it for oxygen carbon dioxide and any other gas you want in the air
4th the only single atom gases in the air are noble gases about 5% ( don’t quote me)
The browmian experiment is with molecules in the majority (95%) NOT ATOMS
5 WHAT DOES AVOGADRO ‘s number show does it measure your intelligence?
6 What did the chemist do in the 1700’s 1800’s to make the chemical equations work
7 What is the periodic table and why could the inventer predict other elements
WHEN YOU KNOW THE ANSWER TO ABOVE THEN YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAY SOMETHING
“”””Einstein hoped was that there was another, even tinier, hidden deterministic theory underneath the quantum level, “”””
HE HAD TO BELIEVE IN QUANTUM THEORY ( NOT YOU PUTTING WORDS IN HIS MOUTH) to find the lower structure. He died before string theory was invented. DON’T MAKE EINSTEIN CARRY YOUR BULLSHIT!!!!!
String theory needs proof.
I gave up when synchrotrons were used to smash atoms now the use the LHC millions times more powerful
To prove string theory we need a machine that is millions of times more powerful than the LHC.
Everything else is speculation!
Constantly posting in all caps makes it seem like you’re constantly yelling. Please stop doing that. Thanks!
@Bazz
I’m not the kind of person you’re projecting. If Australia had a first then speak up. I don’t have an ego problem with it. It’s called fair dealing.
.
I’ve been taking an extended holiday now the worst of the pandemic is out of the way. It’s actually hard work being a glammed up escort believe it or not. Speaking of which I have had Australian clients. Thankfully not crass right wingers more the easy going thoughtful type which I’m fine with. Americans may splash the cash more but they are much more hard work. Thankfully I’ve never had an American client. I could do New York but that’s going to need a client who puts his money where his mouth is. He would also have to be the right kind of client on top of an insatiable desire for whoopee. Particle accelerators would be cheaper.
Sorry!
.
As we’ve seen in Afghanistan
The only thing that Americans can do properly is Westerns!
And legally rob others of their ideas — See Rocky Horror Show. Microwaves. Landing Radar. Windows.
But at least they want to save us!
@Bazz
.
Oh the Americans have very definately taken Europe for a ride! I don’t mind so much if I get paid but life isn’t just about the money. I tell myself this when I have clients throbbing tool in my gob for the millionty time or my knickers are whipped off and on the floor. You know those scenes in television shows where you get a front view of the expression on a woman’s face as she jolts forward and back to the sound of flesh slapping together and hot sweaty grunts? God in heaven talk about finding your place in the universe. I could but it would ruin the moment to look back and say “You know Maxwell? He never invented Maxwell’s formula and he was dead before it had a name.” I have random thoughts like that during sex and really have to bite my lip sometimes. It sounds a bit comic book doesn’t it? I can just imagine it – running around a laboratory chased by an aging professor wanting to play particle accelerator.
Have been reading a draft of a book that Gary Kildall wrote before he died. It’s short and witty, nerdy to the marrow, very much like a conversation in written form and left for his friends to whom the draft was given. You can find it on the Internet Archive; I originally found it linked from his (sad) Wikipedia article.
.
Like a lot of people I first heard of Kildall through Triumph of the Nerds and rewatching that section the treatment is really savage. It seems like what happened to Kildall (regardless of the details and Bob’s account which most of his friends strongly dispute) happened to literally hundreds if not thousands of people who bet the wrong way. In business history but especially Silicon Valley history we repeatedly come across people who did something better but didn’t “win” (and Bill Gates, despite spending a fortune reputation washing to get a Nobel Prize, does not seem to be winning much these days) but were beaten to market, or had short-sighted owners, or made a decision with sound logic but saw the trend shift another way.
[…] "Boltzmann had developed a statistical approach that allowed him to sort of sneak up on the Third Law, but Mach and Planck didn’t buy it. Like high school bullies, they taunted Boltzmann at conferences, ultimately leading to the Austrian’s suicide in 1906." https://www.cringely.com/2021/08/20/einsteins-fridge-who-knew-the-history-of-thermodynamics-was-so-m… […]
[…] Einstein’s Fridge: Who knew the history of thermodynamics was so much like high school? […]
So Mark Stephen’s (aka Cringely) has a habit of picking on dead people who can’t talk back? And foreigners. And repeating gossip which has already been discredited?
.
What’s next? “Jesus the Lost Interview”? Oh we already had that. Did Stephen’s actually ever get copyright clearance on using that footage? What about editorial agreements? Do we have an confirmation in writing from the UK’s Channel Four or Steve Jobs estate that Stephens was authorised to use the material? Given Stephen’s propensity to steal copyright images not to mention his lack of producing paperwork over his very clearly failed insurance claim it all looks very doubtful to me.
.
It would take the entire lifetime earnings Stephens claimed he earned off the laptop he alleged was lost in a fire which we know now was not to hire Paul Allen’s old yacht for one week. Yes, the same Paul Allen who got Stephens to buy him a burger. Like, Paul Allen invited basically anyone and everyone onto his yacht but Stephen’s never got an invite. Not once. Not ever. Presumably Stephens isn’t doing one of his hatchet jobs because Paul Allen isn’t dead enough or was sensible enough to keep his mouth shut and not invite a gossip columnist into his personal life.
.
Nice comment about Gate’s reputation washing. Gate’s is also doing this from behind the tax dodge of the century. Not only that but Gate’s managed to talk his old poker buddy Buffet into Buffet giving him his entire fortune to manage. Then his wife divorced him as it turned out Gates was chasing the ladies behind his wife’s back. The funny thing is though Job’s wife waited a ceremonial year “grieving” after his death before marrying her squeeze. You have to wonder what was going on there.
.
As for Bezos and Musk. Good grief. And none of them nor that plastic sociopath running Facebook will touch Stephens at all. Nor the media. No wonder Stephens is trying to backdoor his way into relevance through his lackey’s book which itself reeks a bit of Stephen’s hand.
.
You can almost write the long overdue Mineserver story yourself before Stephens writes it.
I was looking up a reference in a book and came across the company called Compupro, which built and sold S-100 buses back in the day. The owner, Bill Godbout, filed for bankruptcy in the mid-1990s and was unfortunately killed in the Camp Fire in California in 2018, about a year after Cringely’s home was allegedly burned.
.
The comments in this obituary which I found linked from The Register turned to Gary Kildall and Cringely himself shows up in the comments to weigh in:
.
https://vcfed.org/wp/2018/11/13/r-i-p-bill-godbout-79/
.
“Oops. Gary was, of course, no longer with us in 1995 when that show was made, so I got that story from Jack Sams, who led the IBM contingent that day in Pacific Grove. I guess is was a mistake to trust Jack’s recollection (he eventually had Alzheimers, by the way). But Jack’s story was confirmed by Gordon Eubanks, who claimed to have been there that day at DRI and we verified parts of it with the lawyer, whose name I can’t remember. Certainly IBM arrived early and that was a big part of the problem.
.
“In fact, looking back at the show transcript, what we said was that Gary didn’t arrive until late in the afternoon. So we had him there, but IBM arrived in the morning and they spent hours arguing over the onerous IBM NDA.”
.
The author asks if Cringely can use his platform to boost a GoFundMe for Godbout’s family but he doesn’t reply (in fairness he probably just has a Google Alert set up for his name and wasn’t a regular reader.)
> came across the company called Compupro, which built and sold S-100 buses back in the day. The owner, Bill Godbout,
.
Yep, those names were all over the US press back in the day. Buses were a big deal back in the day, because you could not do a single board computer, and the bus protocol was how boards talked to each other. Sound, video, serial and parallel I/O, disk controllers, you name it.
.
Nowadays it’s mostly just PCI-express for the mainboard to talk to the graphics boards that gamers, crypto-miners and AI researchers buy.
I knew it! I said this Paul guy is familiar, then like you said you would kick the $&^% out of him, I said, oh yes I remember that! I hope you have one more PBS series in you! How we have evolved or devolved and how “Jeff is richer than Bill or god…” Those were great series and people who watched them grew up and became believers of what was to come and how it was cool to be a Nerd. You nailed it first.
Transexuelles Marseille is great web platform for finding casual chat contacts in France and whole EU
Transexuelle á Rennes is fine web place for casual sexy chat contacts with hot ladies in France
Transen Bonn is great place for sexy chat contact in EU
WHAT Boltzmann suicide shows is that Scientists have deluded beliefs AND they hold onto them against evidence!!
Scientists have the same psychological desire to hold beliefs against evidence as the Taliban, Usama and rednecks with Covid19.
.
.Einstein & Planck both died NOT BELIEVING IN THE THEORY THEY INVENTED!!
Aplikasi mendownload video TikTok tanpa watermark
For lonley guys to find casual chat contacts Sexe Transexuelle Marseille
Shemale sex Rennes is great place for your own sexy chat pleasure with hot girls in France
Wow, I love it!
Since this thread will close soon, I’m going to be using it to test out banned words and create a sort of list for people. Why? Why not?
Banned word: n u g g e t
Banned word: j u g g l i n g