Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 21:33:03 -0500 Message-ID: <56172764.3BB5@ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 19:33:08 -0700 From: The Starmaker Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,sci.physics Subject: Re: green stars References: <560E3D7D.3AA6@ix.netcom.com> <5616F969.713B@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 132 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 45.49.183.72 X-Trace: sv3-fWw0MGCEQ+Bk430C+BbRguvE1kyHywm3ouSi4F9O3wgFaY4S4VGEqLfqCwtngGFZ1jC/bxgSTr0QSlW!Z1rHciFXJa/uNglelFs9gfzvnWa9AOzoHLPqIgJQOPjOfZHT8jjbX9fnhlhBK0O1CpdTWd2fDGqq!mfzg/ddQ X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 8370 Xref: csiph.com rec.arts.sf.written:424360 sci.physics:525367 pnalsing@gmail.com wrote: > > On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 4:16:59 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > > > > > In article , > > > Wayne Brown wrote: > > > >In rec.arts.sf.written J. Clarke wrote: > > > >> In article , djheydt@kithrup.com says... > > > >>> > > > >>> In article , > > > >>> J. Clarke wrote: > > > >>> >In article , djheydt@kithrup.com says... > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> In article <561313c8$0$1658$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, > > > >>> >> Dimensional Traveler wrote: > > > >>> >> >On 10/5/2015 6:02 AM, jmfbahciv wrote: > > > >>> >> >> Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > > >>> >> >>> In article , > > > >>> >> >>> jmfbahciv wrote: > > > >>> >> >>>> Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > > >>> >> >>>>> In article , > > > >>> >> >>>>> William December Starr wrote: > > > >>> >> >>>>>> In article , > > > >>> >> >>>>>> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said: > > > >>> >> >>>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>>>>> I managed to get an A in my one physics course (Physics 10, aka > > > >>> >> >>>>>>> Bonehead Physics), but I do not understand anything past Newton. > > > >>> >> >>>>>>> I haven't had to. I take it on faith. > > > >>> >> >>>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>>>> Did you drop a '1' off the end of that, or was the course really > > > >>> >> >>>>>> "Physics [ten]?" > > > >>> >> >>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>>> Yes. > > > >>> >> >>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>>> Its official title, I think, was "physics for Humanities Majors". > > > >>> >> >>>>> Everybody enrolled in the College of Letters and Sciences, who > > > >>> >> >>>>> wasn't actually majoring in a science, had to take it. In a > > > >>> >> >>>>> similar way, those majoring in math or sciences, if they couldn't > > > >>> >> >>>>> pass a basic entrance exam in written English (in which case > > > >>> >> >>>>> they'd take the standard lower-division English courses like the > > > >>> >> >>>>> rest of us) would take English 10, which of course was called > > > >>> >> >>>>> Bonehead English. > > > >>> >> >>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>>> Mind you, this was nearly sixty years ago; I don't know what they > > > >>> >> >>>>> do now. > > > >>> >> >>>>> > > > >>> >> >>>> When I went to college, we were required to take an Honors Physics > > > >>> >> >>>> course which was real physics without using calculus. The art > > > >>> >> >>>> majors were not interested in the course until they figured out > > > >>> >> >>>> it helped them with their art which was mostly drawing and > > > >>> >> >>>> painting. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> We did not, thank heaven, have to use calculus. Just algebra. > > > >>> >> >>> At which I was not very good either. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> I know I've told this story before, but it's been a while. If > > > >>> >> >>> you remember it from last time, hit 'n' now. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> I was living in a rooming house where we did our own cooking. > > > >>> >> >>> There was a kitchen on the ground floor and another (small) > > > >>> >> >>> kitchen on the third floor, where I lived. One of my housemates > > > >>> >> >>> was not only taking Physics 10 when I was, but we had the same > > > >>> >> >>> section with the same TA. So we got the same problem sets, which > > > >>> >> >>> the TA handed out at the Tuesday section and got back at the > > > >>> >> >>> Thursday section. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> So every Wednesday evening she and I would settle down in the > > > >>> >> >>> third-floor kitchen and do the problem sets. She had, and knew > > > >>> >> >>> how to use, a slide rule. I didn't. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> So we would both read the problem, and I would set up the > > > >>> >> >>> equation, and she would solve it with her slide rule. We would > > > >>> >> >>> thus have exactly the same answers on our problem sets, and get > > > >>> >> >>> the same grades on them. We got some credit toward our final > > > >>> >> >>> grade from the problem sets, more from the midterm, and a lot > > > >>> >> >>> more from the final. > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> Came the final, and we were put into a much larger room than we'd > > > >>> >> >>> taken the class in, so we could be separated from one another by > > > >>> >> >>> several seats; standard procedure. Memory tells me now that > > > >>> >> >>> there were several hundred problems to solve; it was probably > > > >>> >> >>> more like 100. And there I sat, with no slide rule, just basic > > > >>> >> >>> arithmetic, at which I have always stunk. (And there were no > > > >>> >> >>> electronic calculators, back in the early 1950s.) > > > >>> >> >>> > > > >>> >> >>> After a moment of despair, I reasoned, "Well, this is a physics > > > >>> >> >>> class, not a math class, so if I set up all the equations and > > > >>> >> >>> then solve as many as there's time for by brute force and scratch > > > >>> >> >>> paper, I'll get at least partial credit." So I did that. > > > >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> That's how engineers do it :-). Crunching numbers is left > > > >>> >> >> as an exercise for computers. I always thought that computers > > > >>> >> >> were invented so engineers didn't have to do arithmetic. ;-) > > > >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >No, the ORIGINAL computers were kept around because the male engineers > > > >>> >> >liked having pretty girls to look at and hit on. > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> You mean, like, Grace Hopper? > > > >>> > > > > >>> >Grace Hopper built computers, she wasn't one herself. > > > >>> > > > >>> Oh, I see, you're using "computer" meaning "the person who does > > > >>> calculations." E. E. Smith used that too, only his computers > > > >>> were all guys. > > > >> > > > >> People today don't realize that "computer" used to be a job title. > > > >> Although rather than "cute girls", the people I knew who remembered that > > > >> era usually described them as "little old ladies in green eyeshades". > > > > > > > >Here are some of those computers at work: > > > > > > > >http://creative-automata.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/humancomputer.jpg > > > > > > > > > > Gosh. Do you know the date of that photograph? The hairstyles > > > look sort of 1930s, but their skirts reach to the ground. 1910s > > > maybe? > > > > 1920 > > http://www.shorpy.com/node/5993?size=_original#caption > > Well, 1920 wasn't WW2... I understand that, but that is what it says here... http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/computing-power-used-to-be-measured-in-kilo-girls/280633/ under the photo reads: Women at work tabulating during World War II (Shorpy) wat do you expect from people who write about in www.theatlantic.com, technology, computing-power articles, genuieses??