Why There Are Only 12 Days of Christmas

To contact us Click HERE

By now, you may be getting very tired of the Christmas carol equivalent of "The Wheels on the Bus Go Round and Round".

We're talking of course about "The Twelve Days of Christmas" song. You know, the one with "five goooooolden rings" and "a partridge in a pear tree".

What most people don't fully appreciate about the carol is just how much stuff is being doled out in the twelve days it spans. Not even PNC Wealth Management, the people who calculate the value of the gifts being given out on each day in the song each year, really get it.

You see, they treat the math as if only one gift is being given out on each of the 12 days, whether it be a single set of 10 lords-a-leaping on Day 10 or 3 French hens on Day 3. But here's the thing - if you pay close attention to the lyrics, many of the gifts are repeated on each subsequent day after being given out.

So instead of just one partridge in a pear tree, the recipient of all this true love would actually have 12 - one partridge in a pear tree for each day the song goes on. The "goooooolden rings" would be pretty cool to get, because you'd be getting 40 of them, which you could then equally divide among the 40 milking maids would would start arriving in batches of eight on Day 8.

Needless to say, this is a lot of stuff to keep track of, which is why we've created today's tool, which you can use to keep track of how many total items have been transferred as gifts through each day of Christmas. Just enter the day, and we'll tell you just how many items we're talking about....

Days of Christmas
Input Data	Values
What Day of Christmas Is It?

How Many Gifts Have Been Given to Your True Love?
Calculated Results	Values
Gifts Given on Entered Day of Christmas
Total Gifts Accumulated Through Entered Day of Christmas

And there you have it. Going back to the title of our post "Why Christmas Only Has 12 Days", we find that after 12 days, the gift recipient in the song has accumulated 364 items - enough for every other day of the year (except for leap years, but don't tell the 10 lords.)

You can get a visual sense of all the gifts given during these twelve days in the following image, which was the inspiration for today's post!

This is our final post for 2012 - we'll see you again in the new year. In the meantime, we'll leave you with the only tolerable version of "The Twelve Days of Christmas" that we could find:

Have a Merry Christmas!

I've Been Banned

To contact us Click HERE

CREDIT: True Dinos

CREDIT: True Dinos

So much for having a conversation.  


I visited the FaceBook page, True Dinos, of a young Earth creationist (YEC) run a fellow named Aaron Tulllock.  You can no longer see my posts, because I've blocked by the administrator for "being a troll." 
What did I do?
I asked about the design of the vas deferens and the recurrent laryngeal nerve. [See Smack Down.] Here's what left of the comments about Intelligent Design.

CREDIT: True Dinos

Then there was my comments on this post. Since True Dinos is also a biblical literalist, I informed him that the bible literally claims that the Sun revolves around the Earth. When pressed by another YEC called The Question Evolution Project, I provided not only the biblical verses, but a link to other biblical literalists who truly believe in geocentrism. [Regular readers might know my earlier blog posts Your Elementary School Teachers Were Right and LA Times Does Story on Geocentrism.] He never responded; in fact, his comments on True Dinos have been wiped.
Since The Question Evolution Project was unwilling to confront his obvious hypocrisy on the bible being literally true, I visited The Question Evolution Project FaceBook page. Because I had the audacity to debate, he promptly blocked me . 
Oh, what am I to do now? 
If any of the administrators from those pages wish to comment on this blog, they are free to do so.  All I ask is that they not do so anonymously. They are free to use whatever language they see fit to use. They will not be banned.
A bit more about these two pages.
Aaron Tullock (True Dinos) claims to have sighted a living pterosaur in 1995 in Marion County, Texas. The fossil and geologic evidence shows quite dramatically that  these reptiles became extinct about 65.5 million years ago. An excellent resource for those interested in pterosaurs is Pterosaur.net.
The paleontologists there say

Unusual winged animals reported from around the world have been suggested by some cryptozoologists and creationists to be modern-day pterosaurs that survived the end-Cretaceous extinction event. From Africa, people have reported a semi-aquatic winged animal called the kongamato while on New Guinea and the surrounding islands sightings are claimed of a gigantic, bioluminescent, crested flying creature (the duah) and a smaller, long-tailed version, the ropen. Fossil evidence demonstrates overwhelmingly that pterosaurs did not survive beyond the end of the Cretaceous, and the sightings of pterosaur-like animals that have been reported appear to be a combination of hoaxes and misidentification of large birds and bats. So-called modern pterosaurs are generally ugly, dark, carnivorous, bat-winged horrors—they sound more like imaginary generic flying monsters than the pterosaurs we know from the fossil record.

Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence.

Plus technically speaking, pterosaurs aren't dinosaurs, although they did coexist.
Now for The Question Evolution Project.  In their About section, they write "true science is not afraid to examine contrary evidence and allows alternative theories to the interpretation of the evidence." Agreed. Science does not make progress without questioning.  Consider the Copernican revolution or the quantum revolution. So why was I banned? I presented biblical evidence that didn't fit their preconceived notions about what the bible says. 
On the other hand, "the Admins have other things to do besides engage in lengthy debates." It's strange that for people that being interested in "scientific evidence and its interpretation" and "intellectual honesty and freedom," they refuse to discuss anything.  How does The Question Evolution Project feel about questions? They say "[the site] is for people who can think for themselves and dare to ask questions," but don't ask them if they're geocentrists, because that will get you banned.
One last item, The Question Evolution Project claims that evolution is not a fact."  What do scientists say about that?  
The National Academy of Sciences says 

Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science states

But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.

I imagine The Question Evolution Project will just say we're being bullies.

Dr. Oz's Diet Advice

To contact us Click HERE

I was really bored yesterday, August 6, 2012.  Flipping through the channels, I came upon the Dr. Oz show, and I wondered what woo he was pushing today.  Sure enough, he begins the show with metabolism boosters.  
I immediately began to wonder whether a person can really boost their metabolism by simply drinking tomato juice spiked with a little Tabasco sauce and lime juice, but then he said this.
"And while wine snobs may not approve, adding ice chips to your red wine forces your body to burn calories, as it has to use its own energy to warm the liquid to body temperature."
Let's see what science has to say about this.
One learns in both physics and chemistry courses that to raise the temperature of any substance it takes an amount of energy equal to Q = mcdT where m is the mass of the substance, dT is the final temperature minus the initial temperature, and c is called the specific heat. The specific heat takes into account all the complicated physics and chemistry of how energy is distributed among the atoms and molecules.
I went to my freezer and looked at a ice cube - technically it's not a cube, it's a rectangular solid, but I'm being pedantic.  I don't have a kitchen scale, so I'll determine its mass by measuring its dimensions.  My cube is 5 cm by 3 cm by 3.5 cm or about 53 cm³.  The density of ice is 0.998 grams per cubic centimeter, so I can calculate its mass by multiplying the density by the volume.  Therefore, my ice cube's mass is 53 grams.
The ice will melt and cool the wine as cold as 0ºC.  After you drink the wine, your body will warm the liquid to body temperature, about 37ºC.
The specific heat of water is 1 calorie per gram per Celsius degree.  So your body will use 

Q = (53 g)(1 cal/(g ºC))(37ºC–0ºC) = 1961 calories.

But I have to correct something here.  A food calorie is different from a calorie.  A food calorie, also called the Calorie (notice the capital C), is equal to 1000 calories.
So your body has to expend almost 2 Calories to warm the cold wine.  I think you can burn 2 Calories by breathing for a whole minute.

UPDATE: Oops! I made a mistake here.  Your body has to warm all the liquid, not just the melted ice.  If you have a standard serving of wine, 6 oz., then your body expends 8.5 Calories.
You can do a little better by eating the ice, since your body has to melt the ice, too.  I''ll spare you the details, but that takes a whopping 4 10 Calories! Assuming you drink the wine, too.

Even if you live a sedentary lifestyle, you will burn at least 1200 Calories every day by just existing. This is your metabolic activity. If you are active, your metabolic activity can be as high as 3000 Calories.  
If you want a little dieting advice, I share with you the only diet proven to work.  
The Thermodynamic Diet
The 1st law of thermodynamics states that one cannot create nor destroy energy.  All that can be done is to convert energy from one form to another.  Your body converts chemical energy in the food to kinetic energy (energy of motion) and thermal energy (you may call that heat, but that's technically incorrect).  Any energy not converted into these two forms may be converted into another form of chemical energy; that is, weight gain.
So the thermodynamic diet is burn more calories than you ingest.

I'm Being Sued?

To contact us Click HERE

Almost a month ago, I wrote about how I had been banned by a couple of Facebook users FaceBookers, The Question Evolution Project and True Dinos.  In the post I invited both of them to respond.  It took them three weeks, but Cowboy Bob Sorensen did on this blog,and Aaron Tullock did on his True Dinos Facebook FB page.I'm a physicist, not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I didn't post anything illegally.  Both of the Facebook pages are public, as are their web pages.  I believe that the Fair Use Doctrine may apply.

As to the defamation charge, Aaron needs to know the difference between slander and libel.  Notwithstanding the vocabulary, I think libel is " to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others." [dictionary.law.com]  If Aaron can point out the untruth, I will gladly retract.
By the way, Cowboy Bob and Aaron, calling you out for your scientific nonsense is not ridiculing you for spreading your gospel.  I'm ridiculing you for believing in creationist gibberish.
Lastly, I will take this opportunity to once again invite them to address the issue that led them to ban me.

Both Cowboy Bob and Aaron are biblical literalists.  The bible literally says the Sun orbits the Earth.  [A historical point here.  Galileo was tried and convicted by the Catholic Church in 1633 for promoting the heliocentric model for which Pope John Paul II apologized in 1992.]  Do they adhere to the biblical view or is their bible wrong on this matter?  To make matters easy on them I will once again provide a link to true biblical literalists that know what the bible says on this. Galileo Was Wrong; The Church Was Right.

They are invited to comment here using whatever language they deem appropriate.  I ask that they do not do so anonymously.  They will not be banned.

I wonder if they will extend to me the same courtesy?

Twas the Night Before What?

To contact us Click HERE

CREDIT: unknown

Isaac Newton, who in my not-so-humble-opinion may have been the smartest person to have lived, was born on the 25th of December 1642.*

In honor of his birth, I stole adapted the poem attributed to Clement Moore.  Here is

Twas the Night Before Newtonmas.

Twas the night before Newtonmas, when all through the house
Not a field was changing, not even a gauss.

The test tubes were stacked by the sink with care,

In hopes that Einstein soon would be there.

The faculty were huddled all smug in their wool threads,

While visions of bosons collided in their heads.

And the Dean at her desk, and I in my lab,

Had just collimated the particle beams at Fermilab.



When out on the quad there arose such a clatter,

I sprang from the lab to see what was the matter.

Away to the window I flew like a photon,

Tore open the shutters and spied an electron of Compton.



The radiation through the nearly ideal gas

Gave a Cerenkov blue hue to objects of mass.

When, what should appear in the department,

But a miniature CERN, and eight grad students.



With a little old professor, proclaiming "nein, nein, nein!",

I knew in a moment it must be Albert Einstein.

More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,

And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name!"

Now Bethe! now, Boltzmann! now, Maxwell and Feynman!
On, Noether! On, Pauli! on, on de Sitter and Gell-Mann!

To the top of the chart! to the top of the graph!

Now graph away! Graph away! Graph away staff!"

He sprang to his office, and his team of academicians,

And away they all flew like the neutrons of a fission.

But I heard him exclaim, ‘ere he theorized out of sight,
"Happy Newtonmas to all, and to all a good-night!"



*In an amazing coincidence, Galileo Galilei died this same year on the 8th of January.

Middle East On Fire - America In Decline : Why?

To contact us Click HERE
The irony of all this posturing by the progressive socialists on the Middle East moving to Democracy is just wishful thinking. The progressives believe all they have to do is give lip service to a situation and that's all that is needed to change outcomes. Really?

Has the media asked Mr Obama how his strategy has worked in Lydia, Syria or Egypt? For that matter how is siding with the tyrants in Iran against the uprising of the people brought about any kind of Democracy. By his refusal to support the people in the street demonstrating for freedom in Iran, in which one woman died, he assured the continued power of a mass killers that are now threatening the entire Middle East and the world with nuclear weapons.

Whose fault is it that we are in this situation of half of the world on fire and our own country in decline? That easy, Barack Obama and the progressive socialist left Democrats. Who voted for this nightmare? Who are these people and where do they live?

Middle East Democracy
Walter E. Williams

Here's the first paragraph of my last year's column "Democracy Is Impossible":

"After Moammar Gadhafi's downfall as Libya's tyrannical ruler, politicians and 'experts' in the U.S. and elsewhere, including French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe, are saying that his death marked the end of 42 years of tyranny and the beginning of democracy in Libya. Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said Gadhafi's death represented an opportunity for Libya to make a peaceful and responsible transition to democracy. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said, 'Now it is time for Libya's Transitional National Council to show the world that it will respect the rights of all Libyans (and) guide the nation to democracy.' German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that 'Libya must now quickly make further determined steps in the direction of democracy.'"

It's good to have hope, but if we're going to be realistic, there's little chance for Middle East emergence of what we in the West call democracy.

Almost a year ago, both Egyptians and Westerners welcomed and celebrated the downfall of three decades of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak's tyrannical rule. It was called an "Arab Spring." A year later, Egyptians are once again taking to the streets, this time protesting the tyrannical acts of President Mohamed Morsi, who represents the vision and ideological orientation of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood's goal has always been to impose Shariah law. Egyptian tyranny hasn't been eliminated; its form has changed.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship is now being challenged by a hodgepodge of armed resistance groups nominally united as the Free Syrian Army. Speaking for our nation, last year President Obama said, "The United States has been inspired by the Syrian peoples' pursuit of a peaceful transition to democracy. They have braved ferocious brutality at the hands of their government." Is al-Assad's downfall in any way more likely to produce democracy than Gadhafi's downfall or Mubarak's downfall? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is optimistic in saying the rebel protest shows "the strong desire of the Syrian people ... for a Syria that is democratic, just and inclusive."

Wind Power Is Always A Loser : Taxpayers Always Pay

To contact us Click HERE

This is just one more instance where the federal government has failed. This subject has been discussed over and over but the result is always the same, wind energy is a loser costing states and taxpayers billions for little or no realistic return.

By PHIL GRAMM

Federal subsidies for new wind-power generation will end on Dec. 31 unless they are renewed by Congress. For the sake of our economy and the smooth operation of the energy market, Congress should let the subsidies lapse. They waste taxpayer money, subvert the allocation of capital, and generate a social cost many times the price tag of the subsides themselves.

Since 1992, the federal government has expended almost $24 billion to encourage investment in wind power through direct spending, tax breaks, R&D, loan guarantees and other federal support of electric power. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that a one-year extension of existing federal subsidies for wind power would cost taxpayers almost $12 billion.

The costs of wind subsidies are extraordinarily high—$52.48 per one million watt hours generated, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. By contrast, the subsidies for generating the same amount of electricity from nuclear power are $3.10, from hydropower 84 cents, from coal 64 cents, and from natural gas 63 cents.

In addition, wind power benefits from federal mandates requiring the use of renewable energy by federal agencies along with preferential treatment by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. Many states provide additional tax breaks, subsidies and mandates for wind power. The total value of these additional subsidies has never been calculated.

But the cost to taxpayers is only part of the problem. Subsidized, wind-generated electricity is displacing other, much cheaper sources of power. The subsidies are so high that wind-power producers can pay utilities to take the electricity they produce and still make a profit. Such "negative pricing" has occurred for some time in the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest and in Texas—and, according to the Energy Information Administration, it will likely grow.