Everything has a science Oct 19, 2007
I'm always amazed at the amount of detail involved in what would otherwise seem like an ordinary job or activity.  In that respect, there's no such thing as ordinary.  Everything has a science built around it, and the people who work these jobs and do these activities every day are essentially scientists in their specific field. 

One example is a friend of mine who owns a turkey farm.  They butcher their turkeys and sell them in their little farm store.  The most recent bit of science came out when talking about the upcoming turkey-eating season.  Every year, Thanksgiving falls on the fourth Thursday of November.  This year, November 1 is a Thursday, so Thanksgiving is officially the earliest it can be.  This equates to an especially busy turkey-buying season because Thanksgiving seems to come around quicker than normal.  And for turkey farmers, this means trouble because people will wait until the last minute to order a turkey, and then they'll be mad when they can't get it right away.  This seems like a simple thing, but coupled with all the other turkey farmer wisdom I've heard over the last few years, it makes me realize that not just anyone can be a turkey farmer.  The person who says, "That doesn't sound too hard ... I could be a turkey farmer" is actually quite out of their league. 

It's the same with sports like golf.  Golf seems pretty simple:  Hit a ball into a hole.  But there's an elementary science about how to hit the ball, which club to use at what distance, how to putt on a sloped green, and things like that.  And once you get past that, there's an intermediate science about head placement while hitting the ball, grip tightness, arm angles, foot placement, and things like that.  There's probably also an advanced science, but I haven't made it that far.  It probably has something to do with ball dimples, tee material, and emotional preparation.  It wouldn't surprise me. 

I used to work at a pharmaceutical company, and that's where I learned how much thought goes into making such seemingly simple things.  For example, the company made pills.  To make the pills, they mixed powders together, then they put the mixture into a pill press.  After that, it went to a coating chamber where the pill was sprayed with various chemicals to make it stay together and to aid in digestion.  Then it went into packaging where it traveled over several series of conveyor belts, got sealed in blister packs, put into little boxes, put into bigger boxes, then put on a pallet and shrink-wrapped.  At each step of the manufacturing process, there were layers and layers of details that I can't even begin to understand or remember.  Hundreds of people worked on the process, and hundreds more scientists, engineers, and mechanics came up with the process and made sure it worked.  There was so much complication in the process, it was easy to forget we were just in the business of making pills. #psychology
Blood on hand Oct 19, 2007
You know it'll be an interesting day when you look down at your hand and say, "Who's blood is on my hand?" #psychology
Canned response (12) Oct 17, 2007
I really need to come up with a canned response to a few common questions.  The current system of trying to think of something on the spot just isn't working.  The questions are usually variations of the following: 
What's new?
How's work?
How was your weekend?
They're simple questions.  And they have answers.  But I'm not good at communicating under pressure, and my brain equates conversation with pressure.  I'm sick of sitting there trying to think of an appropriate response to an otherwise unimpressive question, only to come up with "Not much" or "Pretty good".  My goal for the next few weeks or months is to come up with acceptable answers to these questions.  Then I'll be complete. #psychology
Hotel wants Oct 17, 2007
I don't think the current state of hotels is optimal.  I always feel like I'm wasting money and resources by being the only person in my room.  I'm definitely not sharing a room with my co-workers, but I feel like hotels could change things around a bit to get with the times.  I always feel like I'm overcharged for my stay and accommodated with unnecessary things.  I don't need a couch in my room, nor do I need 85 channels of cable TV or furniture made of exotic woods.  Without further adieu, here are my suggestions: 
  1. Adopt a modular pricing system.  Have options to select when reserving a room, such as with or without cable, internet, phone; number of beds; number of closets and amount of storage space.  Have prices to reflect these options.  When I'm traveling by myself, I definitely don't need more than one bed, nor do I need a kitchen or a living room.
  2. Adopt a variable pricing system.  Reward people for conserving water, electricity, heat/AC, etc.  This will not only reduce the average room bill, it'll encourage people to be nicer to the environment.  With the current system, I pay the same price whether I turn on all the lights, run the air conditioning full blast, and take 12 showers.  This is stupid.
  3. Have budget rooms.  This is sort of a combination of (1) and (2).  Like I said, I don't need cable TV and oak furniture.  All I want is a bed and a bathroom.  And I'd like to be able to pay 1/3 the price of a normal room if I can get just the bare necessities.  If I wanted luxury, I wouldn't be staying at a low-to-mid-priced hotel.
  4. Do what your environmentally conscious signs say you do:  Don't wash my towels if I hang them up.  I don't understand why hotels put up a facade and then waste water and energy when you're not looking.  I'm ok with a once-used towel (as long as it wasn't used by someone else).
#travel
Nuclear power (1) Oct 16, 2007
Nuclear power in a nutshell: 
  1. Place a chunk of radioactive material (usually uranium) in water.
  2. Stand back as the radioactive material decays, creating heat.
  3. Use the heat to boil water.
  4. Use the steam produced to spin a turbine (the same thing used to generate hydroelectric power and, in a sense, wind power).
  5. Use the turbine to generate electricity.
That's pretty much it.  Safety precautions and waste disposal make things a bit more complicated, but that's essentially the process of nuclear power generation used in pretty much every nuclear power plant on earth. 

Optional steps: 
  1. Replace all instances of the word "nuclear" with the non-word "nucular".
  2. Instruct otherwise smart people and world leaders to do the same.
#science
Electromagnetic radiation (1) Oct 16, 2007
The same thing that enables us to talk on our cell phones is the thing that enables us to get sunburn.  It's also the thing that powers FM radio, Bluetooth, WiFi, satellite TV, GPS, microwave ovens, medical X-rays, and visible light.  It's all done by electromagnetic radiation. #science
Mustache revisited Oct 12, 2007
I've already come to the conclusion that mustaches are no longer acceptable in today's culture, with the one exception being men who have had mustaches since mustaches were cool.  Other than that, there's no excuse for this facial atrocity. 

When I see a guy growing a mustache, I can think of the following possible rationalizations: 
  1. "My electric razor ran out of batteries right before I could shave above my upper lip."
  2. "I got punched in the face, and it left me with a big cut above my upper lip, preventing me from shaving there."
  3. "I lost a bet."
  4. "I've given up on life."
I really can't think of any other reason a person would grow a mustache. 

Part of my hatred comes from watching the mustache-growing process in action.  Knowing a person pre-mustache and post-mustache means you were around for the intra-mustache stage.  It's a hideous thing to witness.  For a few days, it looks like they missed a spot.  You figure they'll realize how ridiculous they look and shave it off right away.  After a week or two, you notice they haven't shaved yet, and it doesn't look like they'll be shaving anytime soon.  What's funny about the intra-mustache phase is that every distinct moment in the phase is excruciating to watch.  From the first moment they have stubble, to the final moment they have a half-inch long mustache, the thing growing on their face never looks good.  And it still doesn't look good at the end.  All you can do is sit there and wonder what's going through the mind of the mustache-grower, longing for an opportunity to get home to your own bathroom and shave again just for good measure. #lifestyle
Numb3rs errors (2) Oct 11, 2007
I'm a geek.  Professionally.  I went to geek school, majored in geek, and now am employed full time as a geek.  Oh, and I watch the show Numb3rs, which is on Friday nights at 10pm.  Clearly the producers of that show know who their target audience is. 

I noticed two pretty major errors in last week's episode.  One was Charlie Eppes saying something about physical forces, one of which he said was mass.  Mass is not a force.  It's a quantity.  Weight is a force.  The two words and ideas are similar in meaning and are often used interchangeably (usually by non-geeks).  But this was famed mathematician Charlie Eppes, child prodigy and current FBI consultant.  Surely he must know the difference between mass and weight! 

The other error was when they tried to calculate the size of the murderer based on how much water was displaced in the bathtub.  The theory is correct:  You can calculate the volume of a solid object by submersing it in a liquid and measuring the change in volume.  From that volume, you can calculate the mass of the object if you know its density.  Submersing a human in water and measuring his/her displaced volume will allow you to calculate his/her approximate mass based on an approximate density.  The problem with the method on the show was that they assumed the murderer was fully submersed in the bathtub.  This is a bit of a stretch since the murderer would've likely drowned if he/she was in the bathtub with the victim.  The volume of displaced water they were measuring was likely due to a combination of the murderer's feet, legs, hands, and forearms.  If they calculated a mass of anything more than say 50 lbs, I'd be a little surprised. 

C'mon, Numb3rs.  You're clearly targeting a specific audience.  Now, measure up! #entertainment
Sore from golf (3) Oct 10, 2007
I played golf on Monday for the first time since 2004.  It was great.  I started off a little rough, getting the "maximum score" for the first two holes, but I ended up getting a couple of pars and only losing two or three balls all day, none of which were in the water.  A golf score in my book takes into account not only the actual number of strokes it took to complete the round, but also the number of balls and tees lost, the number of balls and tees found, and the number of water and sand traps missed.  This is why I only play golf once every three years. 

The other reason I rarely play golf is because I was sore the next day.  As if the act of playing golf didn't make me enough of a non-athlete, I got sore muscles from playing this non-sport.  It had something to do with the fact that my body doesn't normally experience that kind of swinging motion on a daily basis.  It also had something to do with the fact that I, like any testosterone-filled individual, swung as hard as I possibly could.  If you're gonna lose a ball, you might as well make it worthwhile. #sports
Favorite team (1) Oct 9, 2007
As I've mentioned before, I'm a fair-weather fan.  Years of rooting for loosing teams have left me jaded and cynical.  At least I admit it.  I don't claim to be a Colts fan or a Patriots fan.  People who do this are below scum in my opinion.  Unless you can prove you liked either team before they got good, you're a fair-weather fan too.  You just haven't been around long enough to ditch them when they get bad (largely because they never get bad; Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are godlike).  It's easy to like teams that always win.  It's also shallow.  So there you have it:  Two insults in one paragraph. 

For this reason and a few others, I've decided to adopt a "no favorite team" policy.  I've been teetering on the edge for over a year now:  I claim to like the Eagles, but I show absolutely no loyalty to them.  They win some, they lose some.  I'm apathetic.  To be quite honest, it's extremely difficult to like a team that's not from your area (or if you live in a dual-team region) because their games are rarely televised.  It's a heck of lot easier to like the local team simply because it's a heck of lot easier to watch their games.  And go to their games.  And fraternize with their fans.  And buy their merchandise in stores. 

But again, I have no favorite team.  I'll watch the local team.  I'll also watch their division rivals.  I'll watch last year's Super Bowl champions.  I'll watch this year's likely Super Bowl champions (Pats).  I'll watch that old guy from Wisconsin.  I don't really care.  I like watching football (by the way, this post is entirely about football because I don't watch or care about other sports ... perhaps I should've mentioned that at the beginning ... oh well).  I like watching good football.  Watching Tom Brady systematically get first downs and score points is amazing.  The man doesn't make mistakes.  I enjoy watching stuff like that.  Watching my favorite team fumble the ball and stumble down the field is disheartening at best.  It would be easier if my favorite team was a good team, but it's not and has rarely ever been.  So yes, I'm essentially giving up. 

The advent of fantasy football has really helped my decision.  With a fantasy team, I manage players from all over the NFL.  Some are on good teams, some on bad.  The success of a specific team often has nothing to do with the success of an individual player in fantasy football land.  This makes it easier to watch games that would otherwise have no impact on me or my favorite team.  I have a wide receiver from the Jets and a kicker from the Cardinals (my kicker is oddly a reliable point-scorer).  Do I like the Jets or the Cardinals?  No, but I'll watch their games because I like some of their players. 

I have to admit the idea of not having a favorite team didn't occur to me until a few weeks ago.  When asked what his favorite team was, a guy I know said he was undecided.  He made it sound like he didn't know much about the sport and was still formulating an opinion.  I have a feeling he knew exactly how he felt and intentionally chose to not have a favorite team.  I liked the idea and latched onto it. 

So that's how it's gonna be.  I'm not basing my decision entirely on fantasy football, mainly because I just started about a month ago.  That interest may fade.  But my disinterest in a favorite team probably won't. #sports