Pennsylvania has voted, and we are no closer to knowing who the Democrats will field in November than we were two months ago.
The pundits are saying that this is a big win for Clinton, and while it may be, a 55-45 win doesn't net her enough delegates to make much of a dent. What this does set up, though, is a situation where it is mathematically impossible for either candidate to have a sufficient majority of pledged delegates to claim the nomination going into the convention.
In short, when it comes to the question of whether Clinton or Obama should be the party's nominee, the party rank-and-file has basically said, "Beats me." Both poll strongly within their core constituencies, both pull enough support from other sources to stay viable. Odds are, they split the remaining pledged delegates right down the middle, meaning that this particular knife fight in a phone booth keeps rolling on with no signs of stopping. That is, until the blood-letting finally ends on the convention floor in Denver.
Denver. Where the unthinkable will happen: the Democratic party's super-delegates will actually have to take sides on the record and say who they're supporting. The prospect scares them spitless.
Look, I have no beef with the party's big-wigs and elected officials picking their candidate. The Democratic Party, just like the Republican Party, isn't a public instutition, it's a private club. Like any other private organization, from the Ulaanbataar Yacht Club to the local Moose Lodge, they can make, amend, or ignore any damn-fool rules they wish. I do happen to think that they have too many super-delegates to make for a manageable meeting, but that's just personal opinion. I did vote for Obama over Clinton, but otherwise, I ain't got a dog in this hunt. I'm not really emotionally invested.
But the prospect of a contested convention does pique my interest. Coronation conventions bore me. They're dull as dust. You already know what everyone's gonna say. You already know what everyone's gonna do. The only spark of interest is when they announce the VP pick. Otherwise? Yawn city. But a contested convention, on the other hand ... Rage, recriminations, and fist-fights on the convention floor make for damn good TV.
The only drawback, really, is that there are four freakin' months to go until that particular convention. Kyrie Eleaison, can we please have a shorter primary season? Please? To save what's left of my poor, tattered sanity? But no. That won't happen. The super-delegates won't come off the fence until they have to. Megan McArdle has an ongoing discussion of this issue, and I think it's a combination of her reasons (1) through (4) inclusive. Committing now is all risk and no reward.
Criminy. At this rate, we'll know who won the Tour de frickin' France before we know who won the Democratic Presidential Primary. Oh well. Nothing for it but to hunker down and wait, I suppose.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Huh?
OK, this item has me perplexed.
Here's a summary of the situation: The Soyuz TMA-11 capsule was returning from the International Space Station with a crew of three. The pilot -- the CNN article calls him "flight engineer", but he's a rated pilot, and besides, somebody's gotta work the stick -- was Yuri Malenchenko, along with returning ISS commander Peggy Whitson and South Korean astronaut Yi So-Yeon. But "something" went wrong during re-entry. According to the report, the capsule landed 260 miles off-target, and twenty minutes late.
Say what?
Initially, that was all I knew, and it made absolutely no sense me. Off-course I can understand, but how the purple roaring hell do you land twenty minutes late? If you're twenty minutes late firing your retros, you're not missing by 200 miles, sport, you won't even hit the right continent. And if you're only 200 miles off, it's an overshoot or undershoot, and dammit, I just couldn't figure out where you eat up twenty minutes during descent.
Until some other information came out in this report, that is. That made everything clear. No one's saying for sure, but I'm fairly certain what had to have happened. It turns out that (1) there was some heat damage to the front hatch, and (2) they experienced 8 Gs during re-entry.
"Oho," says I, "This sort of thing has happened before..." Well, sort of.
The Soyuz 5 re-entry also landed way off-course, and also experienced large re-entry forces, as a result of an unusual re-entry attitude. No mention about timing, though, which is to be expected. But, given this precedent, this is what I think happened.
One of the few flies in the ointment of an otherwise well-honed design is that the Soyuz capsule is perfectly happy flying forward during re-entry. It's an aerodynamically stable configuration. With Apollo, weight distribution trumps aerodynamics, essentially forcing it to fly butt-first during re-entry. And once you get established butt-first, the Soyuz will stay that way once it's properly spin-stabilized. But if something screws that up...
Kudos are due to Yuri Malenchenko, because he probably saved their lives. He had the training and experience to recognize the situation, and was able to act quickly enough to achieve a survivable re-entry and landing. That's fine stick-and-rudder work by anyone's standard. You, sir, are one steely-eyed missile man.
In any case, getting unstuck from their nose-first posture probably caused them to skip off the upper atmosphere briefly, altering their final descent to a much steeper profile than they had originally planned. And while eight gees aren't fun, they're easily tolerable to a fit person, even one debilitated by a long stretch of free-fall. And yeah, I can see that kind of path taking some extra time, accounting for the twenty minute delay in descent.
All in all, I'm somewhat less than shocked. Re-entry, as I've said before, is always a hand of Texas Hold-'Em with the Grim Reaper. When you do everything perfectly, you can stack your hand with aces. When you don't, well, you pays your money and you takes your chances. I'm just glad they all made it back home this time.
Here's a summary of the situation: The Soyuz TMA-11 capsule was returning from the International Space Station with a crew of three. The pilot -- the CNN article calls him "flight engineer", but he's a rated pilot, and besides, somebody's gotta work the stick -- was Yuri Malenchenko, along with returning ISS commander Peggy Whitson and South Korean astronaut Yi So-Yeon. But "something" went wrong during re-entry. According to the report, the capsule landed 260 miles off-target, and twenty minutes late.
Say what?
Initially, that was all I knew, and it made absolutely no sense me. Off-course I can understand, but how the purple roaring hell do you land twenty minutes late? If you're twenty minutes late firing your retros, you're not missing by 200 miles, sport, you won't even hit the right continent. And if you're only 200 miles off, it's an overshoot or undershoot, and dammit, I just couldn't figure out where you eat up twenty minutes during descent.
Until some other information came out in this report, that is. That made everything clear. No one's saying for sure, but I'm fairly certain what had to have happened. It turns out that (1) there was some heat damage to the front hatch, and (2) they experienced 8 Gs during re-entry.
"Oho," says I, "This sort of thing has happened before..." Well, sort of.
The Soyuz 5 re-entry also landed way off-course, and also experienced large re-entry forces, as a result of an unusual re-entry attitude. No mention about timing, though, which is to be expected. But, given this precedent, this is what I think happened.
One of the few flies in the ointment of an otherwise well-honed design is that the Soyuz capsule is perfectly happy flying forward during re-entry. It's an aerodynamically stable configuration. With Apollo, weight distribution trumps aerodynamics, essentially forcing it to fly butt-first during re-entry. And once you get established butt-first, the Soyuz will stay that way once it's properly spin-stabilized. But if something screws that up...
Kudos are due to Yuri Malenchenko, because he probably saved their lives. He had the training and experience to recognize the situation, and was able to act quickly enough to achieve a survivable re-entry and landing. That's fine stick-and-rudder work by anyone's standard. You, sir, are one steely-eyed missile man.
In any case, getting unstuck from their nose-first posture probably caused them to skip off the upper atmosphere briefly, altering their final descent to a much steeper profile than they had originally planned. And while eight gees aren't fun, they're easily tolerable to a fit person, even one debilitated by a long stretch of free-fall. And yeah, I can see that kind of path taking some extra time, accounting for the twenty minute delay in descent.
All in all, I'm somewhat less than shocked. Re-entry, as I've said before, is always a hand of Texas Hold-'Em with the Grim Reaper. When you do everything perfectly, you can stack your hand with aces. When you don't, well, you pays your money and you takes your chances. I'm just glad they all made it back home this time.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Video Del Fuego, Part V
Holy Jet-Blast, Batman!
This guy is, without a doubt, stone barking mad. But I love it. Definitely my kind of guy.
What kind of maniac bolts a jet engine into, of all things, a Dodge Caravan? Not that there's anything wrong with that...
This dude must burn through brake pads at a truly alarming rate. But what a ride!
This guy is, without a doubt, stone barking mad. But I love it. Definitely my kind of guy.
What kind of maniac bolts a jet engine into, of all things, a Dodge Caravan? Not that there's anything wrong with that...
This dude must burn through brake pads at a truly alarming rate. But what a ride!
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Video Del Fuego, Part IV
Ordinarily I have little use for the French. But whatever their other proclivities, there's nothing at all wrong with the products of Dassault. Their thunder chariots have always been first-rate. This video features a Mirage 2000 fighter, with a few guest appearances by a Dornier Alpha Jet.
Really, the worst you can say about the Mirage 2000 (or, for that matter, the Rafale) is that it's not a Raptor. But what else is?
Bonus Feature: Speaking of Raptors, if you're a Chinese military aviator, scenes like this probably loom large in your nightmares:
Really, the worst you can say about the Mirage 2000 (or, for that matter, the Rafale) is that it's not a Raptor. But what else is?
Bonus Feature: Speaking of Raptors, if you're a Chinese military aviator, scenes like this probably loom large in your nightmares:
Video Del Fuego, Part III
I haven't fallen into a rut, honest I haven't, but (a) I'm convalescing from a cold, and don't care to engage in serious thinking; and (b) I just figured out how to embed videos into blog posts. Today, Video Del Fuego lives up to its name, as we honor the Saturn V.
So far as I'm aware, the Saturn V has no nickname. Gods have no nicknames. You approach them with fear and trembling, not with easy familiarity.
This is the most powerful machine ever built by human hands:
Brief science lesson: A fast stream of fluid, like a jet or rocket's exhaust, will drag the neighboring air along with it. So, during a launch, you'll see a very brief puff of smoke at the rocket's base, then see that puff sucked back down into the exhaust channel as the thrust builds up.
Another curious thing you'll see is that the plume coming right out of the nozzle isn't as bright as the flow just downstream. There are two reasons for this. One, the nozzle itself is cooled by a flow of liquid oxygen, so the flow right next to the wall is much cooler than it would be ordinarily. Second, the fuel-oxidizer mixture has not completely burnt up yet. There's just not enough time between the thrust chamber and the end of the nozzle. It's mostly burnt, but not completely.
Musical note: This sequence was set to "Mars, the Bringer of War" from Gustav Holst's suite "The Planets". It's an appropriate piece. The business end of an F-1 engine running full-bore isn't a very friendly place to be.
Bonus double feature: the liftoff of Apollo 8.
This is about the best launch sequence I've seen from this era. You see all the important bits, all the way up through staging. Two things to look for: first, as the vehicle climbs up into the high, thin air of the upper atmosphere, the exaust plume expands. It was designed to match pressures at sea level. But as it gets higher, it's working against thinner air, and the plume expands until it reaches equilibrium. Second, when the second stage lights off, you don't see an exhaust plume. Its J-2 engines burn liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, producing a clear flame. There's exhaust, we just can't see it.
In many ways, this was our finest hour: we built the most powerful machines ever so that we could go somewhere we'd never been, and learn something new we didn't know before.
So far as I'm aware, the Saturn V has no nickname. Gods have no nicknames. You approach them with fear and trembling, not with easy familiarity.
This is the most powerful machine ever built by human hands:
Brief science lesson: A fast stream of fluid, like a jet or rocket's exhaust, will drag the neighboring air along with it. So, during a launch, you'll see a very brief puff of smoke at the rocket's base, then see that puff sucked back down into the exhaust channel as the thrust builds up.
Another curious thing you'll see is that the plume coming right out of the nozzle isn't as bright as the flow just downstream. There are two reasons for this. One, the nozzle itself is cooled by a flow of liquid oxygen, so the flow right next to the wall is much cooler than it would be ordinarily. Second, the fuel-oxidizer mixture has not completely burnt up yet. There's just not enough time between the thrust chamber and the end of the nozzle. It's mostly burnt, but not completely.
Musical note: This sequence was set to "Mars, the Bringer of War" from Gustav Holst's suite "The Planets". It's an appropriate piece. The business end of an F-1 engine running full-bore isn't a very friendly place to be.
Bonus double feature: the liftoff of Apollo 8.
This is about the best launch sequence I've seen from this era. You see all the important bits, all the way up through staging. Two things to look for: first, as the vehicle climbs up into the high, thin air of the upper atmosphere, the exaust plume expands. It was designed to match pressures at sea level. But as it gets higher, it's working against thinner air, and the plume expands until it reaches equilibrium. Second, when the second stage lights off, you don't see an exhaust plume. Its J-2 engines burn liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, producing a clear flame. There's exhaust, we just can't see it.
In many ways, this was our finest hour: we built the most powerful machines ever so that we could go somewhere we'd never been, and learn something new we didn't know before.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Video Del Fuego, Part II
Continuing to mine the vein of vintage thunder crates, here's a 1986 Van Halen music video featuring the Blue Angels.
The A-4 Skyhawk was a simply astonishing airshow airplane. Fast, nimble, and they can damn near fly them right on top of one another. I realize that they had lots of good reasons for switching to the F-18, starting with the fact that logistical support was getting expensive, and ending with the fact that military pilots really need to keep currency with their go-to-war airplane.
Be that as it may, I loved Heinemann's Hot Rod, and I still miss it.
The A-4 Skyhawk was a simply astonishing airshow airplane. Fast, nimble, and they can damn near fly them right on top of one another. I realize that they had lots of good reasons for switching to the F-18, starting with the fact that logistical support was getting expensive, and ending with the fact that military pilots really need to keep currency with their go-to-war airplane.
Be that as it may, I loved Heinemann's Hot Rod, and I still miss it.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Video Del Fuego, Part I
New semi-regular feature: videos from YouTube that I like. For the first entry in this series, let's get acquainted with thirty tons of angry St. Louis steel -- The McDonnell-Douglas F-4 Phantom.
The Smoking Thunderhog lives!
The Smoking Thunderhog lives!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Stupor Tuesday 2008 Post-Mortem
National Primary Day was only about 50% successful. It appears to have decided the Republican primary, but the Democratic primary is still a dead heat. Something is about to happen that I don't think I have ever experienced: the Texas primary will actually mean something, this year.
How very interesting...
I have grown accustomed to making largely symbolic votes. In every previous election that I've participated in, the party's nominee had been pretty well decided by the time I cast my vote. I was either agreeing with the sense of the voters who'd come before, or flinging a protest vote into the wind.
But not so this year, at least, provided that you're voting in the Democratic primary. (If you're a Republican and you don't like McCain, well, sucks to be you.)
Now, what exactly did Super Tuesday do? Two things, really. As I expected, it forced a down-select to a two-man Republican race. What I really didn't expect was that Romney would punch out as quickly as he did. I figured that since he had the cash to stay in, he'd hang around a bit longer. You never know, McCain might implode. He made a good case in his concession speech, though, about America needing a strong war-time President. He's done his party a huge favor, here. Huckabee isn't going to mount a serious challenge, not really. He'll show strength in the small, rural states, but probably not so much in the bigger states. He's basically making a case for VP, at this point. Which means that, even though it's still technically a two-man race, McCain would have to actively try to lose the nomination. It is still mathematically possible for him to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but I don't think he has it in him. He can start trying to unite the party around him now, and prepare the ground for November.
This makes it a much more sporty proposition for the Democrats, who are still engaged in a two-way knife fight in a phone booth. Super Tuesday clarified exactly jack. Clinton and Obama are still locked in a tie for the national delegate count. What's interesting is that Obama took some recent wins in Maine, Louisiana, Nebraska, and Washington. Interesting, but not conclusive ... but nonetheless, Clinton is shaking up her campaign organization. You can tell a lot about the state of a struggle by looking at who is dictating the pace and tempo of the conflict. It's all about the initiative. It doesn't matter if you're talking about small-unit tactics, football, or political campaigns, the principle is still the same. As I said earlier, it's pretty clear that Obama is inside Clinton's decision cycle. Hillary is still on the Decide portion of her OODA loop, while Obama is already Orienting on his next cycle. I don't think this shake-up is going to be enough. She has to do something absolutely gob-smackingly spectacular to regain the initiative. The question is, is her campiagn sufficiently agile to make that happen?
It makes for a fascinating question. I just don't know yet. It should be interesting to find out, though.
How very interesting...
I have grown accustomed to making largely symbolic votes. In every previous election that I've participated in, the party's nominee had been pretty well decided by the time I cast my vote. I was either agreeing with the sense of the voters who'd come before, or flinging a protest vote into the wind.
But not so this year, at least, provided that you're voting in the Democratic primary. (If you're a Republican and you don't like McCain, well, sucks to be you.)
Now, what exactly did Super Tuesday do? Two things, really. As I expected, it forced a down-select to a two-man Republican race. What I really didn't expect was that Romney would punch out as quickly as he did. I figured that since he had the cash to stay in, he'd hang around a bit longer. You never know, McCain might implode. He made a good case in his concession speech, though, about America needing a strong war-time President. He's done his party a huge favor, here. Huckabee isn't going to mount a serious challenge, not really. He'll show strength in the small, rural states, but probably not so much in the bigger states. He's basically making a case for VP, at this point. Which means that, even though it's still technically a two-man race, McCain would have to actively try to lose the nomination. It is still mathematically possible for him to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but I don't think he has it in him. He can start trying to unite the party around him now, and prepare the ground for November.
This makes it a much more sporty proposition for the Democrats, who are still engaged in a two-way knife fight in a phone booth. Super Tuesday clarified exactly jack. Clinton and Obama are still locked in a tie for the national delegate count. What's interesting is that Obama took some recent wins in Maine, Louisiana, Nebraska, and Washington. Interesting, but not conclusive ... but nonetheless, Clinton is shaking up her campaign organization. You can tell a lot about the state of a struggle by looking at who is dictating the pace and tempo of the conflict. It's all about the initiative. It doesn't matter if you're talking about small-unit tactics, football, or political campaigns, the principle is still the same. As I said earlier, it's pretty clear that Obama is inside Clinton's decision cycle. Hillary is still on the Decide portion of her OODA loop, while Obama is already Orienting on his next cycle. I don't think this shake-up is going to be enough. She has to do something absolutely gob-smackingly spectacular to regain the initiative. The question is, is her campiagn sufficiently agile to make that happen?
It makes for a fascinating question. I just don't know yet. It should be interesting to find out, though.
Red-Letter Day
It seemed like a good idea at the time. Of course, I led out with a book that was very influential to me, that I think everyone ought to re-read and give serious thought to. The theory is that, re-reading these books as a middle-aged adult, I might gain some new insights.
Well, partially correct. I now know precisely why I despised The Scarlet Letter. I couldn't quite put my finger on it before, but I sure can now. And while I'd like to say that I had the fortitude to hang with it to the bitter end, I can't. About two thirds of the way through I decided that I'd had as much of the company of the Dynamic Duo -- Arthur Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth -- as I cared to. It was indeed the rare chapter that I didn't want to reach into the story and pimp-slap the both of them. Should you ever see this passage materialize in the text, you'll know I succeeded: "Forsooth! A disembodied hand from the Future hath descended from the Heavens and smote both Mr Dimmesdale and Mr Chillingworth into unconsciousness! Prithee, what doth it portend?"
It doth portendeth that this book sucketh, Beavis.
But, with the possible exceptions of the Dazzler graphic novel and The Sixgun Samurai, nothing is entirely bereft of redeeming qualities. The book does have some good points to make.
A minister told me once that there are three fundamental problems in the human spirit: guilt, bitterness, and stubbornness. Each of the three has its natural remedy: asking forgiveness, giving forgiveness, and submission to a higher authority, respectively. We see examples of all of the above, in abundance. Dimmesdale is wracked by guilt, but is too stubbornly proud to seek forgiveness. Chillingworth is consumed by bitterness, but is too stubbornly proud to forgive. Hester seems a bit stubborn at first, but of the three she is the only one who is actually working through her problems, trying to find some kind of redemption. This went completely over my head when I was younger. Stories of loss and redemption are wasted on the youth. You really have to be middle-aged to understand, to realize that the fondest dream of a man past his first youth is for a second chance. I was able to get that now, in a way that I couldn't then, and I'd have enjoyed it better if it weren't for one lamentable fact.
There are no real men in this book.
This book is absolutely jam-packed with examples of men shirking, avoiding, and otherwise ignoring their manly duties. Part of the sympathy Hester gets is due to the fact that she is so horribly ill-used by the so-called men who should be her staunchest defenders: her minister, and her husband. Poor Hester. Stuck for all eternity in a story with only these two chimps for company. But I get ahead of myself:
Where do I begin? Arthur Dimmesdale is a mewling, crawling, simpering, craven, boot-licking coward. He knows what he needs to do, knows what he ought to do, knows the right thing to do, but can't find the backbone to do it. Instead, he wails and moans about his guilt, beats himself as if that actually meant something, and otherwise makes a nuisance of himself. The Fist of the Future has this to say to the Reverend: MAN up, 'FESS up, take your lumps, and move on. You'll feel better, breathe easier, and enjoy life more. He makes a belated, half-hearted effort at this later in the book, but true to form, isn't enough of a man to pull it off successfully.
Not that Roger Chillingworth, the amazing human urine stain, is any better ... or, to give him the proper name he abandoned, Mr. Prynne. What a cad. What a miserable oxygen thief. Let's start with the fact that, if he were any kind of real man at all, he wouldn't have sent his young wife ahead of him to break trail in the wilderness, but would have come himself and sent for her later. But he didn't, and so he gave Hester the means, motive, and opportunity to dance the naked pretzel with the good Reverend. He had an opportunity to salvage what was left of his manhood, but botched it: he abandoned his wife to destitution while he sought his meaningless revenge. Revenge for what? For your non-existent manly honor? Wasted effort, pal. Here, why don't you go swimming with these cement overshoes, and hold onto this fathom of anchor chain while you're at it? You may not feel better, but I sure will.
Anyway, you may go in for this sort of gratuitous self-abuse, but I've had all I can stand. If you want to read a historical novel about adultery, go pick up any of the Flashman novels by George MacDonald Fraser. They're far more entertaining, and far less painful, than this particular groin-stomp in literary form.
Final verdict: Not recommended. Stay away from it, unless you happen to be a high-school lit teacher, or student, in which case you have my most profound sympathy.
Well, partially correct. I now know precisely why I despised The Scarlet Letter. I couldn't quite put my finger on it before, but I sure can now. And while I'd like to say that I had the fortitude to hang with it to the bitter end, I can't. About two thirds of the way through I decided that I'd had as much of the company of the Dynamic Duo -- Arthur Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth -- as I cared to. It was indeed the rare chapter that I didn't want to reach into the story and pimp-slap the both of them. Should you ever see this passage materialize in the text, you'll know I succeeded: "Forsooth! A disembodied hand from the Future hath descended from the Heavens and smote both Mr Dimmesdale and Mr Chillingworth into unconsciousness! Prithee, what doth it portend?"
It doth portendeth that this book sucketh, Beavis.
But, with the possible exceptions of the Dazzler graphic novel and The Sixgun Samurai, nothing is entirely bereft of redeeming qualities. The book does have some good points to make.
A minister told me once that there are three fundamental problems in the human spirit: guilt, bitterness, and stubbornness. Each of the three has its natural remedy: asking forgiveness, giving forgiveness, and submission to a higher authority, respectively. We see examples of all of the above, in abundance. Dimmesdale is wracked by guilt, but is too stubbornly proud to seek forgiveness. Chillingworth is consumed by bitterness, but is too stubbornly proud to forgive. Hester seems a bit stubborn at first, but of the three she is the only one who is actually working through her problems, trying to find some kind of redemption. This went completely over my head when I was younger. Stories of loss and redemption are wasted on the youth. You really have to be middle-aged to understand, to realize that the fondest dream of a man past his first youth is for a second chance. I was able to get that now, in a way that I couldn't then, and I'd have enjoyed it better if it weren't for one lamentable fact.
There are no real men in this book.
This book is absolutely jam-packed with examples of men shirking, avoiding, and otherwise ignoring their manly duties. Part of the sympathy Hester gets is due to the fact that she is so horribly ill-used by the so-called men who should be her staunchest defenders: her minister, and her husband. Poor Hester. Stuck for all eternity in a story with only these two chimps for company. But I get ahead of myself:
Where do I begin? Arthur Dimmesdale is a mewling, crawling, simpering, craven, boot-licking coward. He knows what he needs to do, knows what he ought to do, knows the right thing to do, but can't find the backbone to do it. Instead, he wails and moans about his guilt, beats himself as if that actually meant something, and otherwise makes a nuisance of himself. The Fist of the Future has this to say to the Reverend: MAN up, 'FESS up, take your lumps, and move on. You'll feel better, breathe easier, and enjoy life more. He makes a belated, half-hearted effort at this later in the book, but true to form, isn't enough of a man to pull it off successfully.
Not that Roger Chillingworth, the amazing human urine stain, is any better ... or, to give him the proper name he abandoned, Mr. Prynne. What a cad. What a miserable oxygen thief. Let's start with the fact that, if he were any kind of real man at all, he wouldn't have sent his young wife ahead of him to break trail in the wilderness, but would have come himself and sent for her later. But he didn't, and so he gave Hester the means, motive, and opportunity to dance the naked pretzel with the good Reverend. He had an opportunity to salvage what was left of his manhood, but botched it: he abandoned his wife to destitution while he sought his meaningless revenge. Revenge for what? For your non-existent manly honor? Wasted effort, pal. Here, why don't you go swimming with these cement overshoes, and hold onto this fathom of anchor chain while you're at it? You may not feel better, but I sure will.
Anyway, you may go in for this sort of gratuitous self-abuse, but I've had all I can stand. If you want to read a historical novel about adultery, go pick up any of the Flashman novels by George MacDonald Fraser. They're far more entertaining, and far less painful, than this particular groin-stomp in literary form.
Final verdict: Not recommended. Stay away from it, unless you happen to be a high-school lit teacher, or student, in which case you have my most profound sympathy.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Phase Change
One of the most fascinating phenomena in physical chemistry is the phase change. Did you know that the temperature of a melting ice cube does not change? As you add heat to an ice cube at melting point, the heat does not go towards raising the ice's temperature, but to changing the phase of the water from solid to liquid. And did you know that the temperature of a pot of boiling water also does not change, for the same reason? The additional heat goes towards changing the phase from liquid to gas, not towards raising the temperature.
There are other phenomena I find interesting, that are kind of similar. For example, you can take a very hot pot of water, and dissolve a bunch of sugar. Then, if you're careful, and cool the solution very slowly, all of the sugar will stay dissolved. This is what you call a super-saturated solution -- it has way, way more sugar dissolved in it than it ought to at that temperature. But the solution is very unstable. The extra sugar wants to come out of solution, badly. Drop one crystal in, and foom! Instantly, the water clouds up as sugar crystals precipitate out of the saturated solution.
I feel a little as if I were watching something like that happen.
Last time, I was writing about a complex race for the Republican nomination for President, and a three-way scrum for the Democratic nomination. All of a sudden, the picture has become much more plain.
Well, I knew that Giuliani had to pull big numbers in Florida if he wanted to stay competitive. He didn't, and was set to crash and burn in short order. What I didn't expect was that he'd be so ruthless about cutting his losses and pulling the plug once it became clear that his gamble didn't pay off. What I really didn't expect, and what caught me completely gobsmacked, was seeing John Edwards bail out, too.
Some observations follow:
First, the early primaries have worked more or less as intended. They've shaken the tree and flushed out the flakes and lightweights. Those still clinging on have either lots of support, or rather more than the normal ration of stubborn tenacity. Leaving aside the stubborn cranks -- that means you, Dr. Paul and Sen. Gravel -- the remaining candidates represent substantial constituencies within their respective parties. Now, the state parties get to sort out who represents them come November.
Second, Super Tuesday is liable to set up the political equivalent of a Breakout and Pursuit situation, possibly in both parties. At this point, I really think the Republican nomination is John McCain's to lose. He won big in Florida, and picked up some key endorsements not only from Giuliani, but from Governor Schwarzenegger of California. Given their respective popularity within New York and California, that probably safely delivers those states into the McCain camp. Big, big advantage there. McCain can probably still snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but he'll have to put in a Herculean -- nay, a Clayton Williams-ian -- effort to do so.
(Ah, Clayton Williams ... Now there was a rare one. He had an easy run at the Republican nomination for Governor of Texas in 1990, plenty of money, a solid grass-roots organization, and he was facing a Democratic opponent weakened by a brutal, ugly primary campaign. But with unerring precision he swept all of these obstacles aside, and from tranquility wrought a smoking, chaotic ruin. Ann Richards stunned everyone with a come-from-behind win. We may never see his like again. But I digress...)
The picture on the Democratic side is muddier, but looking steadily less favorable for the Clinton camp. They took a stinging hit in South Carolina, and another body blow with the endorsements from the Kennedys (Ted and Caroline) for Barack Obama. And that was before the bombshell dropped that Edwards was quitting. It's far too early to say that the race is Obama's to lose, but I do think it's fair to say that Obama is inside Clinton's decision cycle. If that persists, then the junior Senator from Illinois will take it all the way home. Clinton simply has to do something to regain the initiative, she's sunk otherwise.
Third, I think that the Republican base is about to fracture. How the Republicans manage this will determine if their center can hold, and whether they can run a competitive campaign come November. As I see it, there are three basic constituencies within the Republican party: the National Security conservatives, the Fiscal conservatives, and the Social conservatives. Reagan somehow spot-welded these into a coalition that's lasted almost thirty years now. It's beginning to show cracks. Each of these constituencies has a candidate in the primary. John McCain is the natural choice for the voter who's interested in a strong military and a bullish foreign posture. Mitt Romney's business acumen and background is attractive to the fiscally-oriented voter. And Mike Huckabee is a natural fit for the social conservative. Only one can win, and I've already said that I think McCain is the man. Question is, do the other two factions line up and play ball, or do they sit it out? I think the fiscal conservatives will, but will the social conservatives? I think many of them did sit out 2006. Too early to tell, and this may not be the year it goes blooey, but the schism's coming.
Mind you, all of this may change at a moment's notice. That's what makes this season so interesting.
There are other phenomena I find interesting, that are kind of similar. For example, you can take a very hot pot of water, and dissolve a bunch of sugar. Then, if you're careful, and cool the solution very slowly, all of the sugar will stay dissolved. This is what you call a super-saturated solution -- it has way, way more sugar dissolved in it than it ought to at that temperature. But the solution is very unstable. The extra sugar wants to come out of solution, badly. Drop one crystal in, and foom! Instantly, the water clouds up as sugar crystals precipitate out of the saturated solution.
I feel a little as if I were watching something like that happen.
Last time, I was writing about a complex race for the Republican nomination for President, and a three-way scrum for the Democratic nomination. All of a sudden, the picture has become much more plain.
Well, I knew that Giuliani had to pull big numbers in Florida if he wanted to stay competitive. He didn't, and was set to crash and burn in short order. What I didn't expect was that he'd be so ruthless about cutting his losses and pulling the plug once it became clear that his gamble didn't pay off. What I really didn't expect, and what caught me completely gobsmacked, was seeing John Edwards bail out, too.
Some observations follow:
First, the early primaries have worked more or less as intended. They've shaken the tree and flushed out the flakes and lightweights. Those still clinging on have either lots of support, or rather more than the normal ration of stubborn tenacity. Leaving aside the stubborn cranks -- that means you, Dr. Paul and Sen. Gravel -- the remaining candidates represent substantial constituencies within their respective parties. Now, the state parties get to sort out who represents them come November.
Second, Super Tuesday is liable to set up the political equivalent of a Breakout and Pursuit situation, possibly in both parties. At this point, I really think the Republican nomination is John McCain's to lose. He won big in Florida, and picked up some key endorsements not only from Giuliani, but from Governor Schwarzenegger of California. Given their respective popularity within New York and California, that probably safely delivers those states into the McCain camp. Big, big advantage there. McCain can probably still snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but he'll have to put in a Herculean -- nay, a Clayton Williams-ian -- effort to do so.
(Ah, Clayton Williams ... Now there was a rare one. He had an easy run at the Republican nomination for Governor of Texas in 1990, plenty of money, a solid grass-roots organization, and he was facing a Democratic opponent weakened by a brutal, ugly primary campaign. But with unerring precision he swept all of these obstacles aside, and from tranquility wrought a smoking, chaotic ruin. Ann Richards stunned everyone with a come-from-behind win. We may never see his like again. But I digress...)
The picture on the Democratic side is muddier, but looking steadily less favorable for the Clinton camp. They took a stinging hit in South Carolina, and another body blow with the endorsements from the Kennedys (Ted and Caroline) for Barack Obama. And that was before the bombshell dropped that Edwards was quitting. It's far too early to say that the race is Obama's to lose, but I do think it's fair to say that Obama is inside Clinton's decision cycle. If that persists, then the junior Senator from Illinois will take it all the way home. Clinton simply has to do something to regain the initiative, she's sunk otherwise.
Third, I think that the Republican base is about to fracture. How the Republicans manage this will determine if their center can hold, and whether they can run a competitive campaign come November. As I see it, there are three basic constituencies within the Republican party: the National Security conservatives, the Fiscal conservatives, and the Social conservatives. Reagan somehow spot-welded these into a coalition that's lasted almost thirty years now. It's beginning to show cracks. Each of these constituencies has a candidate in the primary. John McCain is the natural choice for the voter who's interested in a strong military and a bullish foreign posture. Mitt Romney's business acumen and background is attractive to the fiscally-oriented voter. And Mike Huckabee is a natural fit for the social conservative. Only one can win, and I've already said that I think McCain is the man. Question is, do the other two factions line up and play ball, or do they sit it out? I think the fiscal conservatives will, but will the social conservatives? I think many of them did sit out 2006. Too early to tell, and this may not be the year it goes blooey, but the schism's coming.
Mind you, all of this may change at a moment's notice. That's what makes this season so interesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
