PONDERING: The new science of quantum furionics

Lately I am making 'field trips' to Wiki to try to finally get into my brain the basics of quantum science.  My "classic physics" mind, relies on certain truths being stable.  It insists that 'real' requires things to have physical properties and behave in predictable, physical ways.

I am trying to stretch this mind of mine to wrap around things like wavicles and what quanta are, and mathematical bits of information that float around in my mind with nothing to anchor to. 

Examples! Give me examples!  I need concrete examples of things that don't necessarily have to be concrete themselves.  I need analogs...  metaphors...! The slowness of my brain, the stubborness of my mind, clinging to what it knows and believes in this area is so frustrating... 

Is there a wavicle for this... The 'frustron,' to quantize--is that the right use of the word?--frustration?

Frustrons collide with exasperons...  creating a critical mass, resulting in the production of explodium... which emits arghions... wavicles with a distinctive vibration in the range of hearing...  and ackions and gahons whch also make a sound impossible to duplicate. 

My head/brain/mind is flooded with them...  producing the by-product infurions...

COMMENTING: Who Needs Privacy, Anyway?

"Privacy is passe' "

Mr. Zuckerberg, the almost-30 CEO of Facebook, put out that declaration a while back which sounds to me like a sneer at people who still regard privacy as something we should be able to expect in our lives: something to value, and protect. 

As if we who bring up the topic are making too much of an obsolete and essentially meaningless matter.

Ask anyone who has been stalked if privacy is obsolete.

What Zuckerberg seems to be saying, is that no one should be caring about the loss of privacy inherent in participation in so-called 'social media,' that the social convenience outweighs any little thing, like who can tap into it to know all about you.  Besides, if you aren't doing anything naughty, why should you mind if people are watching over your shoulder?

Minimizing a problem surely is easier than solving it.

REVIEWING: "LOVE NEVER DIES"

LOVE NEVER DIES

(This show was presented in movie theaters as a special event: this review is of that event, not the stage production itself, which might come off a little better.)

Some stories should be permitted the graceful exit, never to be dragged down by an inept sequel.

THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA was a profoundly moving story when it was first published in the 1800s.  It became a lush and fantastic production, as Andrew Lloyd Webber made it into a showcase for Sarah Brightman's voice, and the movie of the musical was spectacular.

LOVE NEVER DIES also has some wonderful, extravagant costuming and set-design.  Instead of the Victorian gothic of the original, the makers of this one went to the grotesquerie of 1905 Coney Island.  The supporting cast is equally wonderfully, artfully grotesque, the sideshow elevated to wonder, never sleazy or gross. 

Possibly, A. Lloyd Webber's music is also fine, but I confess, the lyrics were distractingly awful, in my opinion, third rate poetry filled with psychotherapy jargon that failed to actually move my heart, or reveal the psychotic depths of the Phantom, though perhaps they were apt enough in revealing the banal psyches of the other lead characters.

The story is contrived and predictable from the entrance of each character, and seemed to me to be terribly terribly pretentious, as if  enough glamour and self-confidence could pass it off as a thing of real art and true depth. 

I fear money-making, more than art or truth, was behind this effort, and even the much finer elements of costuming, set, and the wonderful supporting cast, don't make it worth even the $18 ticket price for this movie-theater Special Event. The most wonderful packaging can't lift up mediocre content. It by no means lives up to the original PHANTOM...  but leaves only the taste of something trying to make more money off that original amazing and successful spectacle.

So... a lot of people have raved about this production, originally produced on stage in Melbourne, Australia.  I am making a guess that it comes across better on a stage, at some distance, than as close up and intimate as this film makes it.  Makeup for theater requires distance to be effective.  It is a different art from makeup for movies.  And the mics, attached to the singers' hairlines, invisible on stage, are distractingly obvious on film that puts you right on the stage with them.

Seems to me, a lot of miscalculations were made to bring this stage production to the screen. One of the worst is the tedious, self-congratulatory lead-in lecture by Lloyd Webber himself. It is rarely a good idea to wear down your listener with going on and on about how wonderful a child you've made, and a worse one to raise the level of expectations so high that it practically sets the audience up for disappointment.

No, I'm sorry, I don't recommend this. 

  

REVIEWING: BILL NYE, The Science Guy lecture

Bill Nye, Science Guy!

He gave a lecture last April at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs campus.

It was something really refreshing, listening to this wonderfully intelligent, enthusiastic, life-loving man who is near my own age, who refers back to things familiar to me, like the first Earth Day, and the Vietnam draft.  And did I mention, sensible?

His message to the kids is this:  There are problems in the world: find ways to fix them! Don't do less, or use less to conserve--Do more with less.  He wasn't telling anyone, Make the solution... He was saying, Come up with solutions. Come up with ideas, and share them, even if you can't make them yourself. 

Actually, it is his message to all of us, regardless of age: Share your ideas, stimulate awareness: Get out there and change the world! 

He shot down a lot of the common misconceptions that question the value of the Space Program.  He addressed also the politics of denying global warming, pointing out that the petroleum companies pay 'experts' not to prove global warming isn't happening, but to establish doubt about it in the minds of people who aren't trained or educated to know better, to see around the twisting and spinning of the facts. 

The absurdity there is that we have proof that the world is getting extraordinarily warmer, not just a normal fluctuation, but a dramatic rise visible in, as one example, the ice-core samples that reveal Earth's climate going back, literally, thousands of years.  We know what the surface temperatures were; we know--from the prehistoric and historic air within bubbles in the ice--what was in the atmosphere, over thousands of years.  We know enough, to see that what is happening now is significant, and no fad, crazy notion, nor political agenda.

And we know that we have something to do with it, and therefore, that we can influence what is happening with some intelligent and responsible choices.

Bill Nye's message is to make those choices, to get out there, and--change the world!

One young woman behind me griped afterward that he had really been a downer, talking about all those problems... She wanted something to cheer her up.  She didn't hear what he was saying that should cheer us up:  We, ourselves, at any age, any level of experience and knowledge, education and money, WE have the power to make a difference, to make it better, to... quoting him:  "Dare I say it...?  CHANGE THE WORLD!"

__________________

The Science Guy is the CEO of The Planetary Society, invites everyone to visit the site and find out about it.

REVIEWING: GAME OF THRONES

GAME OF THRONES

It's several volumes, this tour-de-force of fantasy writing.  It really is a remarkable (and very long: several volumes, epic in scope, wonderfully complex and literary) piece of writing by George R R Martin, and I do recommend it to you. It's about war and love, and the dynamics of dynasty: politics and humanity.

It delves into character, the foibles and follies of human interaction. It twists between the hopes and futilities of human endeavor, and challenges every one of our culture's cherished notions of correctness, honor, and the good intention. Nobility is not rewarded any more than greed or venality.  It is interesting to see what is rewarded.

It is fantasy because it is an author-created world, but it is about people who rely on very little fantasy to get through their complex lives. There is a little magic, a lot of religion of both familiar and exotic nature, and there may be dragons, but they are not the point of the story, only part of its mechanics, its setting, and logic. They are the devices of human beings, being human.

The thing that makes fantasy or even fiction in general worth reading, beyond the sheer escapism which we sometimes crave or even need, is that in the twists and detail, the intricacies of the make-believe, universal truths are revealed.  George R R Martin writes and creates with that kind of depth, that kind of value. After you take it in, reading or watching, you think.

The HBO series is typical of HBO series: it does not shy away from nudity, sex, or impolite language, though these are not out of place in this story, when they appear.  If nakedness offends or upsets, this is not the thing to watch.  If bare skin and sexual behavior are perceived as normalcy, and not a matter for alarm and dismay, then this will satisfy. It has a lot of realism, for a fantasy. 

If you have not yet seen it, there are two seasons to catch up with, before the next one starts, in March 2013.  

REVIEWING: CHIMPANZEE

CHIMPANZEE by Disney

Independent and impressively talented and dedicated film-makers provided the footage of the wild chimpanzees.  Disney organized it and added a lot of anthropomorphic music and narration, but stopped short of a laugh-track.  (Does anyone besides me ever wonder why there are not cry-tracks for sentimental moments? Just to make sure we get the emoting right... )

Disney has long been renowned for it's nature films' photography: in the 50s, one of my most-loved litte folks was Perry the Squirrel.  I was 4 or 5, when that came out.  I had the Golden Book novelization, too.  At that age, the narration and thinking this cute little guy was like me, was just fine.

This time, I'd much prefer that Disney forego the narration and the inapt music track, let it all speak for itself, let the editing of the material tell the story.  Okay, a modicum of hushed, informative verbal input... or a few words  on the screen as preface, or maybe a few lines of subtitling.  But not Tim Allen putting out lame humorous remarks that detract from who and what chimps are, and what their world is like, really.  Maybe if they could have gotten the dryly amused voice-over guy who did THE GODS MUST BE CRAZY...  but they didn't. (That was Paddy O'Byrne, by the way.)

Alastair Fothergill and Mark Linfield are the photographers credited for what is some astonishing footage: The end-credits go into some proper documentarian detail of the adventure of getting this footage, and I can't help but wonder what ended on Disney's cutting-room floor.  I would eagerly watch a proper documentary, which, if it is ever made, will be truly fascinating, and a far greater contribution to the world of popular knowledge and the hope of understanding. It will have what Disney so deftly removes from most of its product: depth.

Do I recommend CHIMPANZEES?  If you can somehow block the music and narration tracks, absolutely.  If Disney--now they own the rights to the photographer's work-- ever gets its act together to make a real documentary of this astounding footage and the real true story, I will be there to see it. 

This, however, is just sad.

The following link will take you to the New York Times review.  I note the reactions to the film of that reviewer run pretty much on the same lines as mine.
http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/04/20/movies/chimpanzee-a-disney-film-narrated-by-tim-allen.html

HEADLINES: RAPE and FACT-CHECKING

Controversy Over Rape, Abortion Hurts GOP.

Huh... nothing compared to how it hurts women.

I suppose it's all in your priorities.

"We're Not Going to Let Our Campaign Be Dictated by Fact-Checkers"
                                                                        Neil Newhouse, Romney pollster

Damn right!  We don't want to know the truth, we don't want to know who lies to us, who plays fast and loose with reality!

Right?

Heavens forbid, we should check facts ourselves, or face the fact that in a campaign season, everyone lies, and we believe who we want to believe.

So, disdain the journalist who does his/her job, sneer at the 'fact-checker' who questions your campaign's 'narrative,' its convenient and expedient versions of Truth. It's not as if it's relevant or anything.