Why Dont You Blog?

Five days ago I talked about the odd statistics which were showing up in my BOINC client for Einstein@Home. Sadly in the intervening five days, nothing has become any clearer.

Now, the BOINC client has been running constantly (with the exception of one 9 hour period) for the last five days, yet the increase seems minimal and the average is plummeting like a stone. Looking at the client stats page there are still 82 work units “pending” credit (at around 53.4 credits per unit) so eventually this should change.

Even so, I am still not sure how the two sets of numbers compare to each other. I cant work out how the averages are calculated at all. Any comments welcome.

Popularity: 23% [?]

Popularity: 23% [?]

I am far from an expert on these subjects, but it covers something which has been intriguing me over the last few days. The Einstein@HOME program is described as follows:

Einstein@Home is a program that uses your computer’s idle time to search for spinning neutron stars (also called pulsars) using data from the LIGO and GEO gravitational wave detectors. Einstein@Home is a World Year of Physics 2005 project supported by the American Physical Society (APS)and by a number of international organizations.

(A bit like Seti@Home but that seems to have lost some popularity of late)

Now this is a nice bit of software which runs from something called the BOINC manager, where you can get to view your current work unit, see stats, visit the forums etc.

The question I have, is about the “user statistics” it shows. As you can see in the screen shots, there is choice of “user total” or “user average” and to me, the two don’t seem to match up. I am led to believe the average is “recent average” rather than a simple (total / days) type. But even so, it seems odd - especially as I have had the software running almost constantly for little or no return in the way of work units.

Any feedback or commentary welcome. Given the steady climb shown by the total figures, the mountain-like averages seem somewhat… odd.

Popularity: 23% [?]

Popularity: 23% [?]

OK, most ID blogs are beyond parody but this is quite a stunning archive of tosh uncommondescent.com.

One post that took my fancy says:

Question: What do you call a person who hypothesizes an unseen intelligent being and searches outer space for confirming material evidence?
Answer: A scientist.
Question: What do you call a person who hypothesizes an unseen intelligent being and searches inner space for confirming material evidence?
Answer: A religious nut.

His argument is that SETI fall into the first category and his fellow religious nuts into the second. On the offchance that this isn’t blindingly obvious to you, SETI aren’t searching for “an” intelligent superbeing, who planned everything in the universe. They are searching for mortal beings with enough similar technological knowledge to ours to match our broadcasts. Maybe the name, SETI, confused him. I think I can speak for SETI, having once had its program installed on my computer, when I say that no one would be more surised that the SETI people if they get a response from an Egyptian god living in the distant reaches of the galaxy.

The grasp on reality shown in the second half of that comparison is even slimmer. I thought that meditating on one’s inner god-nature was a Buddhist thing. Certainly, anyone who examines their inner nature in search of some sense of transcendence is experimenting with their consciousness. I can’t really see what that has to do with Intelligent Design. I mistakenly thought that ID involved teaching kids that the theory of evolution was irreligious nonsense.

It appears to be a search for “unseen intelligent being” that lives inside you. Well, I must respect Dave Scot’s and Roddy Bullock’s (the perpretrators of this tosh) attempt to find one, but I think that, on the evidence of the blog, the search is doomed to failure.

It’s probably gilding the lily here, but

(a) the comments show that other ID supporters have failed to locate intelligence inside themselves either. One GilDodgeon says

“This is one of the best essays on the topic I have ever read. It should be framed, and should be required reading in every junior high and high school science class.”

2 paragraphs make an essay? One of the best defences of ID? (Speaks volumes about the rest) Required reading in every school? Argh! Argh! Argh!

(b) There is a line in the article

Darwin would be disappointed to find his eponymous ism has driven such a venomous schism..”

that just screams “Ned Flanders” to me.

Popularity: 13% [?]

Popularity: 13% [?]