On my trip out to Berkeley I decided to try out this new fangled image format called RAW, which applies no compression to an image thus keeping it in highest possible quality. Turns out iPhoto does not recognize RAW images. So now I'm frantically trying to find a way to get these images. Photoshop handles the format, but of course that means converting each image by hand. Anyway I guess this will keep me busy. I have looked for quite some time and it doesn't appear that anybody has written a raw2jpg source thats worth its salt. Anyway, the lesson learned here is don't ever try to improve anything you do.

As Well...

There is an excellent documentary concerning the filming of a George W. Bush campaign advertisement. As its quite entertaining, it deserves more than a link. I have offered three different viewing options:

So I guess theres a bit to be said about the past few weeks (and week to come) so I'll let everyone know what I've been doing.

So I am kind of worn out on politics and need a break, I'm spending most of my time worrying about Sersic functions and Isophotes of elliptical galaxies as well as thinking of ways to annoy Sarah. Anyway I don't really feel like writing anything so check back later, I'll try to put something up here.

Here are some pictures from the workshop I attended in Leiden. I did not take them, nor did I know how weird I look with my legs in that position. Click on one of the images to see a large version

Respond or View Forum

Link :Shamefully I could not say last noght who the white house chief of staff was, every one should take a moment and see who the people are that run our countryWhite House Cabinet

Scientific alternatives to the anthropic principle

It is explained in detail why the Anthropic Principle (AP) cannot yield any falsifiable predictions, and therefore cannot be a part of science. Cases which have been claimed as successful predictions from the AP are shown to be not that. Either they are uncontroversial applications of selection principles in one universe (as in Dicke's argument), or the predictions made do not actually logically depend on any assumption about life or intelligence, but instead depend only on arguments from observed facts (as in the case of arguments by Hoyle and Weinberg). The Principle of Mediocrity is also examined and shown to be unreliable, as arguments for factually true conclusions can easily be modified to lead to false conclusions by reasonable changes in the specification of the ensemble in which we are assumed to be typical.
We show however that it is still possible to make falsifiable predictions from theories of multiverses, if the ensemble predicted has certain properties specified here. An example of such a falsifiable multiverse theory is cosmological natural selection. It is reviewed here and it is argued that the theory remains unfalsified. But it is very vulnerable to falsification by current observations, which shows that it is a scientific theory.
The consequences for recent discussions of the AP in the context of string theory are discussed.

Full-text: PostScript, PDF, or Other formats

Respond or View Forum

We are now almost at the end of this conference which as of yet has taken a sort of odd tone. This workshop is bringing together two groups who in the past have been in competition, the result must be similar to the end of the Cold War. The main question for this workshop is modeling galaxies to measure masses of super massive blackholes. Everybody has a differenet way of doing this, and no one can seem to completely explain what they are doing. The meeting is full of quite poor communication, yet nobody will to back down.

Now what of little David Fisher, seeing as how I don't model black hole masses (and have almost no interest in ever doing it) I often sit and listen to the two groups argue in high detail, about tiny points. For all the aspiring scientist reading I have noticed something, the more detailed arguements become the more dead the future of that field appears. There has been little talk of things I am interested. Except for the proposed collaboration of course which is not looking so good either. So why did I come, I'm beginning to wonder that myself. I will not get to see any of the country, and have seen nothing more than the hotel and science center so far.

So this week has been disappointing, and mainly boring. I have gotten a lot of work done. And perhaps it will thurst me and my current collaborators forward into completing my papers. But of course the discussion and the work I did could have happened in Austin.

Respond or View Forum

Link : I've been keeping up with the Decratic Convention by listening to the speeches on NPR

So I have returned to Europe. This time to visit Leiden, Holland. I am here to supposedly set up a working collaboration with the SAURON group. There data is well suited to my research. They have built a spectrograph which aranges an aray of spectra on a 40x30 arcsecond pathc on the sky. So I can get the velocities of stars in a galaxy and know their 2-D position within the galaxy all at the same time.

I can say that loading my computer up with all these whiz-bang features has already payed off. If your a laptop person I would recomend never flying without your machine. On the flight I worked for a couple hours, then whatched an episode of West Wing while everyone else was starring at there little four inch screen. I rode on KLG (also called Northwest), they played Vivaldi during take off and landing and served a chickpea-curry dinner that was n't bad. It was the second best trans-atanltic flight I've ever taken (the first being the one that Sarah rode with me).

Anyway, upon arrival (and after a nap) I was pleasantly greeted by a couple of my colleagues. I was stumbling out to the hotel resteraunt to get some coffe when I found Richard Green (of NOAO) and Eva Noyola (of UT-Austin) eating lunch. We went out and walked through the town of Leiden. It is quite a nice city, I am not sure if all of Holland is this weel off. But the city seems wealthy. Rembrandt was born here (we happened upon the building where he arrived). As well, the Rhine river empties into the Atantic in Leiden so the city is full of canals and water ways.

Respond or View Forum

Link :Tavis Smiley did an entertaining interview with Bill Clinton, check it out.

White House

21-July-2004: S.15Signed
President Bush signed Project Bioshield into law which will increase funding those fields involving the defense against bio-terrorism, specifically $5.6 billion to stockpiling vaccinations. As well moneys to research at NIH.
Full Text of Law

Senate

H.R. 4613 :: Sponsor : Rep Jerry Lewis (CA):: Aggreed To
Making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.
Full Text

S.2677 :: Sponsor: Sen. Charles Grassley (IA) ::Passed
A bill to implement the United States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement.
Full Text of Bill || How the Vote Went


Respond or View Forum

Link :Ever wonder about root canal? I have found some quiteinformative videos on toothcare.

If I could get one message across to people who oppose paying taxes to help others, I would hammer home the reality of a relative economic system. The absolute dollars you have are not as important as the relative dollars to people in the econimic system. If the majority of people cannot afford something the price of that object will drop. I am not an economist, however I can invoke logic. My point is that if everyone pays the same percentage more in taxes, no one has lost ground in economic status. In integral part is that all pay more, that there exist no way around it.

The attack point of this is the short term. It is the truth that initially life will be difficult. However, soon after the down turn an economy will adjust itself using interest rates and prices. As well, what happens when money is poored into social progams, jobs increase. Money goes back into the economy, and it is fueled from the bottom up. The way a strong economy should be fueled. Anyone who works in goods and services is aided by a bigger middle class. The middle class is the group who purchases everything, and maintains a capatalist society. The more people in this position the more goods and services are purchased, which means those backing these industries make more money. Paying taxes for social programs bolsters people from the lower class into the middle class, then all the sudden we have a strong economy, with a solid foundation.

There is an opposing theory, that if almost all money is left in the hands of the people the system will naturally support itself. The problem with this is the the self interest that our system harbors. Self interest is not bad, I'm not saying that. It is the duty of a federal government to protect its people, and I think that economic protection is just as important as militaristic. This is the fundamental thinking of the liberal who wants to raise taxes. A federal government is self interested as well, however all those who pay taxes are part of the "self" of a federal government. Thus all are, in the end, helped by raising taxes.




Respond or View Forum

Link :Ever wonder about root canal? I have found some quiteinformative videos on toothcare.

We are at the beginning of one of m favorite times, election season. Next week is the Democratic convention. Get ready for our little old debates come creeping out as we dust off old opinions. In light of this I wish to express what I think needs to be addressed. These are things I will be listening for this year. When acting as a critical political observer one should keep in mind the long term. Unfortunatly political change cames gradually over the long term.

It is my opinion that these following fields are in need of the greatest reform in our country:

So I have just completed the two day super upgrade on my Mac. I predict this to be the turnign point in the David B Fisher website, and life. I now have more software on this bad boy than you can shake a stick at. For all the geeks who know what any of this means, I added the superastronomy upgrade which included g77, MIDAS, SM, IRAF, Python, Pyraf, and ds9.

Aside from that I now have the internet at home (road runner) and bought a three button mouse. I'm all fancy now, damn. Becasue I have the home internet you should all picture me writing blog entries in my under-wear or naked... Yes naked.

I realized of course this is quite uninteresting to anyone who is not me, but I can now work anywhere. If I'm walking down the street and some guy asks me to fit the isophotes of some galaxy, I just pull out Aristotle (thats the Mac) and get down and funky astro-style.


Respond or View Forum

Link :Ever wonder where I get some of my statistics, Gallup Organization

So what I think I'm going to start doing is post the "major" legislation that occurred in the past week each weekend.

Whitehouse

15-July-2004: H.R. 1731 :: Signed
President Bush signed a bill into law which strengthens the penalty for those convicted of identity theft.
Full Text of Bill

U.S. Senate

15-July-2004: H.R. 4520 :: Sponser: Rep Thomas, William M. (CA):: Passed 78-15
Mainly a commerce resolution, however Chapter 1 of this law gives Food & Drug Administration (FDA) authority over tobacco products, which they spurisingly did not have before. Thus the FDA can now set standards and test tobacco for contaminents etc.
Full Text of Bill ::: Senate Vote

15-July-2004: S.J. Res. 40 :: Sponser: Sen. Wayne Allard. (CO):: Failed 48-50
Federal Marriage Ammendment: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.
Full Text of Bill :: Senate Vote


Respond or View Forum

Link :I've made it to fame, I've made it to the top of Google

I don't know if you can tell (check blog entries on March 5 and July 13), but this piece of legislation really bothers me. I have thus decided to try and find the root (or what they're telling us is the root).

This proposed ammendment is pushed forth to help protect the sanctity of marriage. Sanctity, from the Latin sanctus, means "the quality or state of being holy or sacred". Thus these electied officials wish to keep marriage holy. This is exactly the reason that this ammendment shouldn't even be considered of course because it violates the first ammendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Now for the moment lets set that whole thing aside and focus on the battle at hand. The question is does gay marriage destroy the sactity of marriage? First let me be straight forward here, the legislation is coming from the urging of George W. Bush who openly supports and sides with Chistianity. So let me rephrase the question at hand: According to Christian doctrines does same-sex marriage destroy the holiness of marriage?

The original condemnation of homosexuality in the bible comes from the Levitical code in verse Leviticus 18:22

Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; .

The problem is that the Levitical Code was written to directly prohibit and discourage many cultish practices occuring in ancient Isreal. There exist many versus in the Levitcal code which have also become obsolete, for example Leviticus 19:20-22

If a man sleeps with a woman who is a slave girl promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting for a guilt offering to the LORD. With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the LORD for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven.

The next reference is in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. This story is often misinterpreted. The scripture is actually refering to rape not homosexuality. Now we have to go all the way to Paul's letter to the the Romans Chapter 1. In which the issue of homosexuality is taken up, verses 26-27:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Even this is disputable, due to the explicit stipulation that the sexual relations be unnatural. In the day of Paul it would be easy to think that homosexuality is unnatural as it does not create the standard father, mother and child family. Although, modern science is in a stark debate as to the validity of this claim. It is unclear whether homosexuality is a naturally occuring psychological phenomenon or if it is a learned trait. The word unnatural could refer to prostitution or possibly marraiges which are not based out of love (these both already being unholy weather hetero or homosexual). As well, it is not the assumption of the church that the only way to live is in a family, eunichs are considered quite holy people. Thus its is not at all true that a child bearing relationship is the only holy (or sacred) way of living. As well its is not obvious that a natural homosexual relationship is wrong either.

Finally, I think its telling to note how big an issue this is to some people, compared to its frequency in the bible. Homosexuality is only dealt with a few times, and it is not spoken about alone, it is allways listed out with other sins. As well, Jesus nor any of the profits have anything to say about it (Paul was not a profit). Thus it is not Christianity itself which condemns homosexuality, but rather a few people with narrow interpretations of the Bible. And it is quite unfortunate that this coming fall we will hear this issue battled against all because GW Bush knows that gay bashing will get him votes from rural Americans. So next time some Bush-ite starts attacking same-sex marriage I hope we can fight fire with fire.


Respond or View Forum

Link :I've made it to fame, I've made it to the top of Google

Tommorrow the Senate will vote on an Ammendment to the Constitution which bans the possibility for any state to recognize a same-sex marriage. Now whether you are for or against same-sex marriages is not whats at stake here, an ammendment will possibly be passed which will restrict the civil rights of a group of people who have committed no crime. It is not the correct thing, no matter how many people in America like it or hate it. It is not the place of the Constitution to decide this. Let us not return to state in this country where peoples are deamed wrong by constitutional ammendments, we need to learn from such mistakes as Jim Crow.

I know your saying, "But David, I can't do anything about it, the vote will happen tommorrow. I'm not going to go protest. I have to work." You can do one of a couple things. The most productive would be to call one (or both) of your Senators. If your in Texas they are:

Kay Bailey Hutchison (202) 224-5922

John Cornyn (202) 224-2934

Tell them to vote NO on the federal marriage ammendment.

Or you can sign the petition that MoveOn.org is sponsering. This will only take a second.

Listed below are the "major" decisions made in the 2003-04 Supreme Court term (this list was lifted from WashingtonPost.com)

Cases Concerning the First Amendment

Ashcroft v. ACLU
Decision (5-4): Ruled that the Child Online Protection Act probably violates free-speech rights, but for the second time the justices sent the case back to a lower court for a new trial.

Locke v. Davey
Decision (7-2): Ruled that states do not have to give students preparing for careers in the clergy the same access to taxpayer-funded college aid that other students receive.

Elk Grove v. Newdow
Decision (8-0): Ruled that Michael A. Newdow lacked legal standing to sue and thus overturned a 2003 federal appeals court decision that would have barred the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools.
Note: Scalia recused himself from the case.

Cases Concerning Law Enforcement and the Police

Blakely v. Washington
Decision (5-4): Ruled that only juries, not judges, may increase criminal sentences beyond the maximum sentences suggested by statutory guidelines.

Missouri v. Siebert
Decision (5-4): Ruled that police officers may not deliberately avoid warning suspects of their right to remain silent before questioning.

Cases Concerning Politics

Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Decision (7-2): Ordered a federal appeals court to give Vice President Cheney another chance to shield the internal workings of the 2001 energy policy task force he headed.

McConnell v. FEC
Decision (5-4): Upheld the key provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law including a ban on "soft money" and rules limiting campaign-season political advertising.

Vieth v. Jubelirer
Decision (5-4): Upheld a congressional redistricting plan that sought to give the Republican Party an edge in races for Pennsylvania's 19 congressional seats but refused to close the door on court challenges to such "partisan gerrymandering" in future cases.

Cases Concerning The War On Terror

Rasul v. Bush
Decision (6-3): Ruled that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of detaining foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
Decision (5-4): Ruled that the president has the power to declare U.S. citizens enemy combatants and detain them as such. However, in a 6-3 decision, the court also ruled that Yaser Esam Hamdi is entitled to contest that determination before a "neutral decisionmaker."

Rumsfeld v. Padilla
Decision (5-4): Ruled that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York lacks jurisdiction over Jose Padilla, now jailed in South Carolina, and that Padilla must refile his petition for habeas corpus in South Carolina.

Other Cases

Tennessee v. Lane
Decision (5-4): Ruled that private citizens have the right to sue a state for alleged violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Aetna v. Davila
Decision (9-0): Struck down a Texas patients' rights law in a ruling that bars all states from letting patients sue managed care companies whose refusal to pay for treatment allegedly results in death or injury.




Respond or View Forum

Link :Since returning I have become a sad victum to evil, Austin Allergies

Recently the Cassini-Huygens probe has reached the Saturn system of moons (and one planet). In doing so it has capture some amazing pictures of the ringed planet. It was while viewing Saturns rings, about six years ago, through a telescope that I myself decided to enter the field of astronomy. And I am still capitivated by it. (Note that on the left is actually Jupiter.)

Saturns rings are comprised of ice boulders whcich are contantly colidding with one another. The thickness of the rings was predcited abotu 25 years ago by a clever calculation that used the random motion of these boulders and their probablity of colliding to determine the thickness of the disk. The predicted height was two and a half meters, this is about the equivalent of a disk with the radius of several miles and the thickness of a piece of paper. The measured thickness of saturns rings is actually a little under five meters, they were pretty close. The reason for the breaks (or gaps) in the rings is the balance of gravitational interaction of Saturn with the closest moons. Both objects are pulling on the system in opposing directions, and the motion of the moons creates resonant distances from Saturn where the ice boulders cannot stay in the orbit. This tug-of-war is responsible for the patterns in the rings.

I stole a quote from my advisor some time ago which is that we should strive to understand what fascinates us, and this is the justification of astronomy. It is my opinion that this statement certainly applies to what I have seen in the rings of Saturn.