jump to navigation

I have converted January 9, 2012

Posted by mareserinitatis in computers, research, science, solar physics.
Tags: , , ,
7 comments

Because of the vagaries of my status at UMN (that is, I am an enrolled student, but I don’t pay tuition and therefore do not get some of the perks), I found out that I could no longer get access to Matlab.  This is a bummer because, well, I need it for my thesis.

I’m trying to prove out some code and it’s easier to see what’s going on in Matlab because of the plotting functions.  The idea is that I would like to write it up in there, see what’s going on, and then translate it to the dreaded Fortran.

Alas, I guess I’m having to break up with Matlab.  Instead, I’m learning Scilab.  I find this somewhat funny given how I was explaining to my engineering students last semester that once you know a computer language, it’s often easier to learn another.  (Sadly, most chose not to learn a first one.)  This is doubly so moving from Matlab to Scilab (or, I imagine, the reverse order) because they are so similar.

I like Scilab because it seems to me like a cleaned up version of Matlab.  I don’t consider myself a master in the art of Matlab Kung Fu, but I’m passable.  I have written a small program to solve the Boltzmann equation in the presence of an electromagnetic field and later solved the intractable igloo problem.  However, there are some of the subtleties of matrix operations in Matlab which have always proved problematic for me, mostly dealing with conditional statements to indicate matrix indices, leaving me to fall back on loops.  Not efficient, but it works.  So far, it appears that these operations are more straightforward in Scilab.  I also like the use of the % to indicate prenamed variables.  I am all too guilty of using i as a counter and then being frustrated because it wouldn’t work as an imaginary value later in the program.  And of course, I really like the price tag.

I haven’t yet gotten to some of the plotting I need, however, and as I understand it, that is where Matlab excels.  We shall see.

Have you used both programs?  If so, how do you think they compare?

Diffusion in the presence of nerds January 7, 2012

Posted by mareserinitatis in engineering, feminism, humor, science, societal commentary.
Tags: , , ,
4 comments

If only life were as simple as mathematics.  Unfortunately, people to act like molecules.  That is, they’re not easily quantifiable and logical.

Earlier this week, I had to do an experiment in diffusion of the human variety.

I went into a meeting where I was the only woman (as usual), and it began with someone telling me a somewhat sexist (as well as old and lame) joke.  At least I think it is.  Either way, it definitely had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

How many men does it take to change a roll of toilet paper?  They don’t know…it’s never happened.

My first inclination was to respond that obviously the investigators had never been to my house.  One of the things you probably don’t need to know about me is that I tend to be lazy and pull TP out of the closet and just put it on the back of the toilet.  My dear, patient husband gets horribly annoyed with this particular quirk of mine.  However, he’s never actually told me he’s annoyed, but he will make a show of picking it off the back of the toilet and putting it on the roller in front of me.  When he does so, I tend complain that he has put it on backwards and that I will have to fix it.  (We’ve both engaged in these practices for at least ten years, so I don’t see them changing any time soon.)

I also had the inclination to say that I’d heard it before…or even that I thought I was inappropriate.  The problem is that there were other people in there, and I got the feeling that most of them were both thinking also that the joke was inappropriate and not sure how I would react.  The overall sense I got (which may or may not have been incorrect) was that everyone was a bit uncomfortable and not sure how to respond.  Hence, I needed a way to diffuse the situation.

I did none of these things (pointing out the inappropriateness of the behavior seems rather useless with certain individuals).  I’d heard a joke the day before and had shared it online with several people.  I decided to not acknowledge the joke the colleague had just told other than to say, “And now I have a joke for you.”

A photon walks into a hotel. The concierge asks, “May I help you with your bags?” The photon says, “No, thanks. I’m traveling light.”

Given I was with a bunch of engineers and scientists, this was a great way out of it.  I didn’t have to look like a jerk for calling the person out nor did I make anyone uncomfortable, even though I don’t think anyone would have faulted me if I had.  And better yet, I think those present appreciated my sense of humor than my colleague.

What would you have done in that situation?

Against all odds January 6, 2012

Posted by mareserinitatis in engineering, research, science.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

I was speaking with a colleague who mentioned that he was happy the latest defense bill had been passed and signed as it meant there would be some money behind a couple funding announcements he’d to which he’d submitted white papers

Of course, he noted, he was unlikely to get them.  One of the calls had received over 1500 white papers…for something like 10 awards.  That meant less than a 1 percent chance of receiving anything.  If he’d had the ability to submit 5 white papers, this would have resulted in about a 3% chance of receiving something.  Had he known that there were that many applicants, he might not have bothered.

I have been shaking my head ever since this conversation.  You know what will happen with these awards: likely they will all be given to top 20 schools.  And yet, any school that is not in the top 20 will still be evaluating faculty based on how much money they’re bringing in and papers.

When you pretty much have no chance of getting funding, how can that be fair?  It’s not just an individual that brings in the funding: a lot of it also has to do with the reputation of the school and the facilities available.  It is not strictly a function of an individual, yet the individual is the one held accountable for all factors.

I just don’t know how a person is not supposed to be intimidated (or even just plain scared) when hearing these types of numbers.

Doing before thinking January 3, 2012

Posted by mareserinitatis in engineering, research, science, societal commentary.
Tags: , , ,
2 comments

I like to plan.  I like to work things out in my head before starting to do things with my hands.  I’m an INTJ, and from what I understand, this is fairly common for people with this personality type.

It’s frustrating for me to see people do things when I’m not sure they know why they’re doing it.  For instance, I was trying to work on a problem with a widget.  Someone sent me some information on another widget which worked in a completely different way.  Absolutely every component of colleagues widget was different from mine.

While I really appreciate the fact that someone is trying to help me out, I found myself putting a lot of time into trying to figure out how their data was going to help me.  Was I missing something?  Maybe one of the parts is really the same, so I can rule that out?  Nope.  Basically, the only thing that came of it is that the measurement device was working correctly.  That’s certainly a good thing to know…but if it’s calibrated properly and regularly, that shouldn’t be a concern in the first place.

I guess if people want to spin their wheels taking useless data, that’s okay with me.  However, it gets frustrating when I spend a lot of time trying to figure out what the point is, only to realize I just wasted a bunch of time on something that really didn’t help at all.

As much as I know some people are bothered by the time I “waste” thinking about taking, I guess it makes me feel better knowing that sometimes diving in head first without thinking can be just as much of a waste…and sometimes more.

Take that, Larry Summers! December 15, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, feminism, math, papers, science.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

ResearchBlogging.org

I came across an article on the new research by Kane and Mertz which supposedly disproves the “greater male variability” hypothesis.  That is, while averages for both genders are approximately the same, males have more variance in their intelligence.  Thus, when intelligence tested, you’ll see more males at both the upper and lower tails of the distribution.

When Larry Summers was talking about the greater male variability hypothesis (GMVH) in his really awful speech, he was talking about those who are at least two standard deviations away from the mean.  If you look at the distribution of IQ for each sex, which is what he was referring to, you can see that the ratio at the 98th percentile is approximately 2:1 male to female.

If IQ were an accurate predictor of success in academia and academics came primarily from that top 2% (neither of which are universally true), you would then expect to see approximately 2 men for every woman in those professions.  Unfortunately, the ratio is much worse than that (from the perspective of women and feminist men, anyway).  This very compelling evidence of social, cultural, and/or economic factors, potentially up to outright sexism coming into play when women are being considered for academic positions.  The fact that it is still so far from this ratio makes me have a lot of issues with Larry Summer’s argument.  Aside from all that, there is the issue that IQ isn’t the best predictor of success.

However, let’s pretend it is…or that it at least that it may be reflected in math achievement for the tests used in the study.  In the study, they took variances from scores on tests like TIMSS and PISA, both of which are given internationally and used to compare various countries’ standing.  Specifically, the paper examined the variance question.

To do this, we can begin by looking at the data from IQ Comparison site, which says that the standard deviation in the WISC IV IQ test was about 14.54 for men and 13.55 for women.  The variance is the square of the standard deviation, giving the variance for men as 211.4116 and women as 183.6025.  If you want to do a comparison, just take the ratio of men’s variance to women’s and you’ll get a variance ratio (VR) of 1.15.  Keep in mind that the data this is taken from the US standardization which was used to norm the test, and it was done in the early 80s.  If you want to compare that to the data presented in the paper, the US VR in 2003 was 1.11 on the TIMSS and 1.19 on the PISA.  In 2007, it had dropped to 1.08 on the TIMSS (no PISA data is given).  Therefore, the VR has changed.

The authors use the math testing data to do this for many countries, not just the US.  You would expect that if the GMVH is true, then you would see VRs of about 1.15 from most countries and that it is constant in time.  What Kane and Mertz find is that the number seem to vary a lot, but many of them have changed.  That by itself gives an indication that a VR of 1.15 is not fixed and that the VR may be somewhat cultural.  Further, they changed through time.  Some of the VRs increased, like in Australia, and some decreased, like Japan’s.

This is the table presented in the paper:

They then attempt to find a correlation between male variance and the VR ratio.  If GMVH is true, you would also expect that a higher VR ratio would be highly correlated with males having a larger variance.  That’s not what they find, however.  The correlation value is fairly low, and the authors state that sometimes a higher VR is actually due to poorer performance on the test by boys.

There is significantly more analysis than I’ve communicated in this post, but the gist is that they found that gender equity in economic and educational arenas were the best predictor of test performance.  This gives a good indication that the GMVH is bunk – performance in math is not biologically destined.

Jonathan M. Kane and Janet E. Mertz (2011). Debunking Myths about Gender and Mathematics Performance Notices of the American Mathematical Society

The Crying Game December 14, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, engineering, science, societal commentary.
Tags: , ,
2 comments

You know that stereotype about girls always being the ones to cry in the professor’s office?

Not true.

I’ve had two criers this semester, and both of them were men.  I’m getting more comfortable with this.  If a woman cries, you offer her a tissue, empathize a bit, and then set down what needs to be done.  Most of the female students were relieved that I didn’t blow up at them for something or another, although I think I had one who despised me for noticing.  However, with the male students, I’ve learned that they don’t want you looking at them when they’re about to have an emotional breakdown.  They remind me of ostriches, looking for a way to hide themselves, but lacking one, can only refuse to make eye contact with you.  Worse yet is acknowledging that this is happening in any way, shape, or form.  Best to just pretend things are fine and talk about how to deal with the problem at hand.  And did I mention not to look at them?

I wish these things were confined to crying, but they’re not.  In general, I seem to get more emotional behavior from male students than female, although the most extreme behavior seems to be representative of the gender distribution of the class.  In one particularly bad year, I had a student who gouged out her hand during class and another (male) who had a series of offensive behavior, including showing up drunk to a make-up lab.  The chair of the department asked me why I get all of the difficult students.

The student who was the hardest to deal with, however, was one who I caught cheating more than once.  One day he came to my office, and the way he started yelling at me made me wonder if he was going to get violent.  I was particularly happy my officemate and the prof next door were both in.  This student kept it up for an hour, going from trying to intimidate me to giving me a sob story.

The worst thing about dealing with this student is that it became apparent that his really obnoxious behavior was confined to me. I was a TA for the class, but there was one other TA and the instructor, both of whom were male.  When these problems got to the point where they were impossible, he was switched to the other TA’s section and had to deal with the instructor.  He was immediately caught cheating again, but when confronted by the other TA and, later, the instructor, his attitude was completely different.  There was no hint of belligerence in his interactions with them.

It’s made me realize that a lot of students are apparently more comfortable around me than my male counterparts, and thus feel it is alright to be more emotional in my presence.  I think it doesn’t matter if the emotion is frustration, sadness/depression, or anger: whatever filter they put in place for other people, particularly if those people are male, seem to disappear when dealing with me.  Not that I’m saying they know this; I suspect most of them don’t realize there is a difference in their behavior.

This semester has been one of my better semesters as far as dealing with emotional students.  I can handle a couple of students who are obviously having a tough time, especially when there are medical issues involved or other situations where the students are dealing with stressors that are out of their control.  I do sort of wonder, however, if I’ll manage to get through one semester without some sort of emotional outburst.

The magical standardized exams December 9, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, gifted, homeschooling, math, older son, science, societal commentary, teaching.
Tags: , , ,
2 comments

I’ve been reading a lot of different takes on the whole fiasco of the Florida school board member with two MS degrees who failed the state’s 10th grade standardized test.  His name is Rick Roach.

While it doesn’t seem to be a popular view, I am agreeing with Roach: the test really doesn’t have anything to do with how people will fare in the real world.  I’d dare say that grades are probably a better predictor, although they have their flaws, too.  Students who do well in school tend to be those who read teachers well and know what they want.  They don’t have to be very bright to figure out how to keep teachers happy, follow the rules, and, in general, conform.  They stay organized, hand in their work, which was hopefully done well, and keep the people around them happy.  I hate to say it, but these are the skills that tend to help people at a job, not passing a standardized exam.

In my view, people who do well in life are those who are able to conform to the expectations of those around them OR those who follow their passions and work very hard at them.  I don’t believe that tests do much more than how well one takes tests.  And, to be perfectly honest, I’m not sure all the emphasis on getting kids up to speed in science, math, and reading is doing much good and may, in fact, be doing a significant amount of harm.

The reason I say this is the experience with my older son, who is now a sophomore in high school.  So let’s start out with a shocker: he got kicked out of school recently.  He was going part-time, but he wasn’t sufficiently interested and never made it a priority to be there.  This is the same kid who became so engrossed in studying US history that he passed both CLEP exams on the subject, earning him a full year of US history credits at most colleges…in 9th grade.

We decided we better start looking at how he’s going to get his degree, so I figured that since he’s almost 16, he can start prepping to take the GED.  For those of you who are unfamiliar, this is a high school equivalency exam, but you can’t take it until you turn 16.  It tests on reading, writing, science, social studies, and math.  While he has had a decent amount of algebra, he’s never had a formal science class except for one in 6th grade.  However, he passed the practice GED with no problems, meaning that he probably won’t even need to study before he can take the exam in a couple months.  He’s very happy about that because he doesn’t want to spend his time studying for that: he wants to study to take the macroeconomics CLEP instead.  The kid who doesn’t want to be bothered to make it to school on time will work his but off to study something he’s interested in.

I have a kid who is good at passing exams.  I don’t have a kid who is a conformist and understands the need to be places on time.  (Well, I think he understands…but he’s not going to make the effort unless he really cares about it.)  Unfortunately, I think his lack of conformity is going to hurt him a lot in life, probably more than his exam-taking ability will help him.  He’ll have an easy time earning his high school equivalency, but what good will this do him if he’s not going to be able to keep a job if he decides he’s not sufficiently interested in working?

I have also come to the realization that he really doesn’t need to know much math.  In fact, I think most people don’t.  Being a scientist, I use math day in and day out.  In my work as an engineer, I don’t use nearly as much math as you’d think.  In fact, like Roach said, I know a lot of people who don’t use math all that often.  A lot of those people are engineers.  A good chunk of engineering education involves teaching processes that invalidate the need for much higher level math.  Yes, a lot of it is a cookbook for boiling things down to high school algebra.  Now, the good engineers will have a conceptual understanding of what’s underlying those steps, and the really good engineers will understand it mathematically.  But realistically, most of what they learn in college, in terms of math, won’t be used.  And I say this as someone who is frustrated because I’ve had a lot of math and realize I’m forgetting much of it because I don’t use it.

Going back to the discussion on this emphasis toward pushing more math, science, and engineering hurting students, I’d have to say that there are a lot more kids like my son than people acknowledge.  Kids are going to be successful in life when they follow their passion.  I’ve seen kids who showed no motivation in classes go and learn the information taught in those classes because they wanted to work on something that required that information.  There is so much emphasis on establishing superiority in these academic areas (when we can’t even manage competency in most cases) that we’re not allowing kids a variety of experiences they need to find their interests.

Our education system provides no real motive for learning aside vague promises of getting a good job after high school.  I’m sure most students think that their job will be a lot like high school, which is probably not all that inspiring.  There is no real motivation for them to learn, their curiosity is damped, they’re never allowed to excel unless it’s in an area where our system is currently focusing.  And even then, bright kids are bored because they’re not really allowed to excel and dig into things on a deep level: they have to stay lock-step with kids who have no interest.

The whole ruse reminds me of Fahrenheit 451, where the whole society is distracted by notions of this or that trivial thing being important.  Our society is fixated on test scores and ‘competency’ in science and math and writing.  However, we’ve failed to pay attention to how and why kids really learn, and we’re delusional to think that competence in testing is the only indicator of who will succeed in life.

Of course, colleges will have you believe this, and there’s a huge industry surrounding making you believe that and providing you with more and more tests you’ll need to pass (for a sizable fee) despite the fact that grades are still the best predictor of college performance.  There’s also the politicians who are also convinced that this is the way to fix our country’s problems…most of whom benefit from the system as it is because their kids almost always end up as winners in the education race.  It also makes them look like they’re doing something substantial for education, which is why we have the No Child Left Behind legacy.

The gist of this is that most tests are assumed to be measuring things they aren’t measuring.  The SAT is not going to tell you if you are going to be successful in life.  It can’t even tell you that you are going to do well in college.  We are imbuing these tests with magical powers: they have become our Sorting Hat.  We believe in the magic of these exams to put people in some sort of ‘succeed at life’ or ‘fail at life’ category because it’s easier than looking at the realities of how our educational system is truly dysfunctional.

It went boom November 27, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, physics, science, teaching.
Tags: , , , ,
1 comment so far

A few years ago, I was working on as part of an NSF educational program.  The idea was to pair students (undergrad and grad) with local science and math teachers to help them do whatever they needed.  I was paired with a physics teacher who asked me to build a Ruben’s tube.  (I suppose I should put the instructions here some day…they’re still on my old blog.)

If you’re not sure what I’m talking about, here’s a video of the demonstration.  I’m holding the speaker at the end of the metal tube that’s covered with saran wrap.  The noise from the speaker is vibrating the saran wrap and hence the gas inside the tube.  At the right frequencies, you get standing waves, which is visible in the flames coming from the top of the tube:

Anyway, as a safety measure, we started by throwing some dry ice in the tube.  This was supposed to evacuate out any oxygen in case the flakey methane jets in the high school lab went out.  (Carbon dioxide is heavier than oxygen, so it’ll stay in the tube and force the oxygen out.)  If the jets did go out with oxygen still in the tube, then I’d be standing at the open end of a pipe bomb because the flame would’ve backed into the pipe and ignited all the methane inside.  Without the oxygen, there would be no explosion…just a slow burn off of the remaining methane.

In order to test this, I got a bunch of dry ice from the chemistry supply at NDSU.  I filled a couple of soup thermoses and brought it to the high school.  We tested things out, and our first test went fairly well.

As I was leaving the school, I was walking toward a teacher in the hallway.  I was about to smile at him when I heard a huge “BANG!”  I stood there, stunned, and a second later realized I had a really bad pain in my side.  The teacher, who a second ago was smiling at me, came running at me.  And he looked very angry.  He started yelling at me, and I couldn’t understand what was going on.

I looked down while he’s angrily asking me questions, only to realize that he was angry because I was the source of the huge noise I’d just heard.  I saw one of the thermoses, which had formerly been under my arm, had blown off the bottom and was laying in pieces on the floor.  The pain I’d felt had been the thermos ejecting itself from my grasp.

Despite all my efforts to avoid being blown up by a pipe bomb, I’d managed to make a small explosive device anyway.  I’d forgotten the ideal gas law…and over the past couple hours, it appeared that pretty much all of the dry ice had sublimated.  A thermos full of solid dry ice turning to gas was going to create an extremely large amount of pressure.

I finally explained to the teacher that I wasn’t a student trying to blow up the school, despite the fact that I apparently looked young enough to be a student (at 28?!) and was standing in front of the administrative offices when the incident occurred.  I explained who I was and what was going on…and once he realized I was half in a state of shock, he started helping me to clean up my thermos pieces.

And people wonder why I don’t want to be an experimentalist.

An accessory to blowing people up… November 5, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in engineering, physics, religion, science, societal commentary.
Tags: , , , ,
6 comments

Part of the reason I’m interested in teaching is because I feel like it’s a morally unambiguous effort:  teaching helps people to learn, and that is always a good thing.  However, I just came across one part of teaching that I don’t feel so good about.

I had a student come to talk to me about advising for coursework.  He said that he had difficulty with his actual advisor, and after a few minutes, the guy just signed his card and told him he was done.  (The professor is new and apparently has some difficulty with English.)  He wants me to sit down and help him plan out his coursework.  I’m fine with that.  In fact, once we started talking, it was clear he was in the wrong major: his major is computer engineering, and he hates coding.  I said the first thing he needs to do is switch over to an EE major because he’ll get a lot more opportunity to work on hardware there, which he said he really likes.

In the process of talking, I figured I should ask if he had any career plans.  He wants to do weapons development.

*gulp*

My dilemma is that I feel that because the student asked for help, I should help him.  On the other hand, I’m pacifist (or try to be) and don’t feel that helping someone find a way to blow up other people is in line with the Quaker peace testimony.

The best thing I’ve been able to think of is to tell the student that while I am very willing to help him plan out his coursework, I do feel like I need to say I really wish he’d use his intellectual abilities to save people rather than kill them.

The other option, in my mind, is to simply not help him.  I have considered this, but I believe strongly in setting an example through action.  If I refuse to help someone when they ask, I think I am only going to make this person less willing to try to see things from my perspective.

This is the hard thing about being in technical fields.  It’s like knowledge of nuclear processes: it can be used to provide a lot of energy for people, but it can also be used blow people up.  By training people in this field, however, there’s likely a non-zero chance you’ll end up with at least one student who does research on making bombs or things like that.  So does that make you an accessory to killing people?  I really don’t know.  And I guess I never really thought about the fact that by teaching engineering students, I could be in this position.  I have to say that it doesn’t make me terribly comfortable.  Of course, the same would be true in physics.

I realize that most people don’t have this particular dilemma, and it’s one I never thought would come into play with teaching students.  I’ve contemplated this a lot because good chunks of my paycheck right now come from military organizations.  I’ve tried to look at the things I’m working on and see if these are morally questionable.  In pretty much all cases, the things I’ve been working on could easily be used for good things: research into ionospheric physics, devices used for communication that could also go into things like cell phones, and RFID for asset tracking.  (I do say that I feel a big funny about working on things that encourage materialism, like the constant push toward new and better cell phones, for instance.  I also know that there’s pretty much no stopping it when we live in an economy that only functions because of materialism…but that’s a dilemma for another post.)

It’s making me realize how very hard it is to completely extricate one’s self from things that are morally questionable despite best intentions.  Maybe the Amish have it right.

The elements quilts September 16, 2011

Posted by mareserinitatis in science.
Tags: , , , ,
2 comments

Several local quilters started a project making a periodic table out of several quilts.  The artists have a website that shows the quilt pieces representing each element, along with an explanation.

The quilts will be on display at the Hjemkomst Center in Moorhead until November 13th.  Additionally, there will be a program about the quilt on Sunday from 2-5 p.m.

After looking through the project, I have to say that my favorites were Helium and Cesium.  Both were very pretty while conveying the idea.  (That, and Cesium had some major bling going on.)  I was also very amused by Arsenic, given how much I loved the movie Arsenic and Old Lace.

Which elements do you like?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 914 other followers