Monday, March 28, 2011

The search for alien life

Nothing has the potential to change society quite like the discovery of alien life.  Many Star Trek fans have dreamed about it their whole lives.  There are two parallel endeavors underway in the scientific community that have a very real chance of detecting the existence of alien life within the very near future.  One is SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence.  The second is the NASA Kepler mission.

SETI is a fascinating group of projects that analyze radio data to look for unnatural signals.  Many forms of SETI have existed over the years, gaining fame back in the 1970's with the detection of the "Wow!" signal.  A radio signal fitting all the characteristics of an artificially created transmission originating from space, which remains unexplained to this day.  Modern SETI research into alien life mainly piggybacks on the data collected from the giant Arecibo telescope in Puerto Rico.  This data is processed by thousands of personal computers around the world through the BOINC distributed computing project.  This provides an exciting opportunity for average folks to participate in the search for alien life.  The SETI institute is working on building their own dedicated telescope, the Allen telescope array, using donated funds.  This telescope will greatly increase the chances of finding alien life.

The NASA Kepler mission is a space telescope located outside of the Earth's orbit, at the point between the Earth and Sun where gravity is exactly canceled out.  This allows the telescope to remain stationary (relatively, as it is still orbiting the sun with the Earth) as it stars at one giant field of stars.  Kepler is the first, and only, telescope capable of detecting earth sized planets around other stars that could potential sustain alien life.  Kepler will spend the next few years staring at ~100,000 stars to determine what percentage of them have planets, how many planets, and the size/temperature of those planets.  While this wont directly lead to any alien contact, once an earth like planet is found, with a temperature capable of supporting liquid water, future instruments will be able to analyze the atmospheric contents to look for signs of industrial pollution (i.e. alien life). Lets hope the aliens are abusing their environment as much as humans are.

To date, the SETI community has not been able to re-detect the Wow! signal or any other signals of particular interest that could indicate alien life elsewhere in the universe.  However, you must understand that piggy backing on the Arecibo telescope is not particularly efficient, as it points wherever it wants.  Furthermore, the SETI group is only analyzing a very narrow band of the radio spectrum, hoping that aliens will actually be using those frequencies.  Given a dedicated telescope and a wider frequency band, the SETI institute could still see some very interesting signals.

The Kepler space telescope has been operating for about two years, and has so far produced astounding results.  According to recently released data, from May to September of 2009, Kepler discovered 1235 planets around other stars, 54 of which have the right temperature to support liquid water and alien life.  Of those 54, 6 are roughly the size of Earth.  So in just 5 months, Kepler found 6 potentially Earth like planets around other stars.  The Kepler mission is set to continue for at least 3 full years, so who knows how many other Earth like planets will be discovered in that time.

Going forward, my hope is that the SETI team and the Kepler team figure out a way to work together in the search for alien life.  Future telescopes will be able to measure the atmospheric chemistry of detected Earth-like planets, looking for water, oxygen, etc., thus determining if human life could survive on the surface.  Once the Allen telescope array comes online, it would be great if they pointed it at one of those Earth like planets rather than randomly sweeping through the sky (like they are today). Once focused on a specific planet, a much wider frequency range could be examined for alien signals.  This is an incredibly exciting time in Astrophysics.  The next few years could very well end up radically altering our view of humanity's place in the universe.

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Convert and stream your DVDs

Playing DVD's in a DVD player is a thing of the past.  Nowadays, it is easy to rip all of your DVDs to your home computer, convert and stream them to any TV, computer, or cell phone.  There are two big advantages to this.  First, you dont need to keep your entire DVD library on the shelf next to your entertainment center.  You dont even really need to keep the DVDs at all once you've transferred them to the computer.  Secondly, you can watch your movies anywhere.  This is great for travel, as well as just watching tv in a room without a DVD player.

Here is the process I use to rip my DVDs to my main home computer (server) and stream them to all connected devices (TV's, laptops, cell phones).  All of the software involved is free.

1.)  DVDfab - Use this program to rip your DVDs to your hard drive.
  • This will remove any copy or regional protection that may be on the disk.
  • Select the highest quality setting available (usually DVD7 or DVD9).
  • This is a commercial program and the full version costs money, but the free shareware/demo version has the one function you need unlocked, and never expires.
2.) Handbrake - Use this program to transcode your ripped DVD folder to a .mkv container format.
  • Select the "High Profile" setting
  • Change to the MKV container.  This is because the MP4 container doesn't do well with AC3 surround on some devices.
  • Under the Video tab, force the FPS to 29.97
  • Save these setting as a new custom profile (for future use)
  • Now you can add the folder you ripped in step 1 (the main folder holding both the AUDIO_TS and VIDEO_TS subdirectories)
  • Once you start the transcode, your computer will be busy for a while, this is the longest step.
  • This will produce a .MKV file with H.264 video and multi-track AAC/AC3 audio.  This will give you the highest possible quality video with full Dolby 5.1 surround sound (AC3) when supported, and 2-channel stereo (AAC) when not (by the playback devices).
3.) tsMuxer (optional) - Use this program to change the container format of the .mkv file.
  • The MKV format is not natively supported by Windows Media Player. If you use something else, then you might not care.  If you do care, then tsMuxer will change the container to .m2ts, which is supported by Windows Media Player.
  • Add your .MKV file output from Handbrake.  Select the M2TS setting and let it convert.
  • Note that this is simply changing the container, not the underlying audio and video codecs (H.264/AC3/AAC). So there is no loss in quality, no matter how many container changes you go through, and the process only takes a few seconds.
4.) TVersity - Run this program to serve your videos around the house and on the internet.
  • You will have to enable the internet part with a user name and password.  TVersity runs a server on the computer that can be access via the internet from your laptop or cell phone.
  • Tversity has a great online support so I wont bother with many of the particulars.
  • I did find however that I much preferred the "File System" setting under Settings -> Media Library -> Media Library Menus.
  • Now your home computer will stream, transcoding on the fly when necessary, your DVD collection to any device that can access the computer.  TVersity also streams pictures and music, so this is a handy program to use even if you dont convert your DVDs.
5.) Play back your video
  • Watch movies on your TV using a set-top media player, Xbox, PS3, Direct TV Receiver/DVR, DISH Receiver/DVR, or, on newer TVs, the built in video widget.  Many Blue-Ray players will also stream video.
  • Watch movies on another computer in the house by locating your server in the Network Places
  • Watch movies on a computer or cell phone outside the house by opening up the web browser and going to http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxxx:41952.  Make sure you set this up first per the TVersity users guide. Fill in the x's with your router's WAN IP address.
  • For DirectTV folks out there, the latest version of TVersity (1.9.3) at the time of this writing does not work with the HR2x series of Receivers/DVRs.  I dont know why.  Use an older version instead.  1.7.3 and 1.7.4.1 both work fine.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Everyone needs an SSD


If you own a computer, it needs to have a Solid State Drive (SSD) in it.  New computer, old computer, desktop, laptop, doesn't matter, put an SSD in it.   Traditional hard drives have been getting bigger, but the technology hasn't really changed much in the last 15 years or so.  The time is ripe for the next big thing.  Something with no moving parts, something shock proof that wont "crash", something that consumes very little power and produces very little heat, and something that can access information in microseconds, without waiting for a read head to physically move to the right spot on a spinning magnetic disk (wow that's old fashioned).  Everyone needs an SSD.


Tech guru's have been raving about SSDs for the better part of two years.  Anand Shimpi of Anandtech has done extensive testing and reviewing of all the major brands.  For more information on how SSDs work, see his SSD Anthology.  Put simply, an SSD is the single most noticeable upgrade you can make to your computer.  When you double click on an icon, boom, the program opens.  No more waiting around for the old hard drive to finally find that data and get it into RAM.  Oh, and for what it's worth, no more defragmenting your hard drive either.  "Fragmenting" is only a problem for the old folks with their archaic spinning magnetic disks.

Plus, if you have a laptop, then you really really need an SSD.  SSDs are shock proof and use way less power than traditional laptop hard drives.  So in addition to the performance gain, the battery will last longer.

For some reason major computer manufacturers still havent caught on and SSDs are still a relatively rare option when buying new computers.  They are really only available on the high end models.  But even the budget line of PCs should have SSDs in them.  They are that important.  So unfortunately, you're going to have to buy one separately from your computer and put it in.  Even old computers will benefit.  Chances are, if you're reading blogs on the internet, you'll be able to install an SSD.  It's not any different than any other hard drive.  You dont really dont even have to screw it in since it's the size of a credit card and doesn't weigh much more, you can just tape it down if you have to.

So check out Anandtech.com, then find yourself a deal on an SSD. I've been using them in all my desktops and laptops since Christmas of '09.  Join the rest of us in the 21st century.



Monday, March 21, 2011

What is the definition of freedom?

To many Americans, nothing is more important than “freedom.”  Hardly a single newsworthy event can happen in the world without the media and viewers measuring its impact to “freedom.”  The forums of popular news outlets are flooded with angry reader’s postings on how a particular piece of legislation (or lack) impacts their “freedom.”    A quick Wikipedia search yields 10 American towns and 3 US Navy ships named Freedom.  Yet, at the same time, it is generally accepted by many that more government equals less freedom.  This is subtly outlined on websites such as www.lessgovernmentmorefreedom.org.  A fascinating (in a bad way) article on the topic can be found at www.centerforajustsociety.org.


from freedomhouse.org

Does a "big” government and the laws/regulations that stem from it limit freedom? Generally, laws are enacted to limit freedoms of individuals or entities when they may cause harm (and/or loss of freedom) to other individuals or entities.  Robbery is illegal, even though it limits your freedom to provide for yourself, because it harms others.  Business monopolies are illegal, which limits freedom of mergers and acquisitions, but preserves competition and free market balance.  So, paradoxically, laws both grant and limit freedom simultaneously.  Somalia has no government or laws, but you wouldn’t want to live there.  The argument really boils down to whether or not the freedom granted by a law is worth the freedom lost.  I wish I heard the news media actually frame it that way once in a while.

Republicans tend to value individual choice and responsibility.  They feel you should be free do to as you please without government regulation, but held responsible for the outcome of your choices.  Sounds good.  Democrats tend to value fairness and equality in society.  They feel that your freedom in life depends on getting a fair chance on the same playing field as everyone else.  Also sounds good.  Both sides get along fine until one person’s individual choices, all perfectly legal, lead to vast amounts of wealth and power over others, thus altering the playing field for that individual and their heirs for generations to come.  If you are born in to poverty, do you have access to the same freedoms as someone born in to wealth?   Most Democrats would say no.  Republicans say taxing and over regulating the rich to take care of the poor robs the wealthy of some of their freedom.  They are right.  Democrats say that the poor have less freedom than the rich and need to get some back.  They are also right.  Well this seems to be a paradox, taking freedom in order to give it.  But remember the point of laws from the previous paragraph?  Laws admittedly and openly take freedom away from one group in order to give it to another.  So it all comes down to the same core debate, do the freedoms granted to one group from a particular law/regulation outweigh the freedoms lost by another group?  Tough question, and nobody in the news or in politics is even asking it.

What exactly is the definition of freedom anyway?  The answer is, there isn't one.  People are confusing and mixing up many different concepts and throwing them all under the blanket term “freedom.”  Worldaudit.org grades nations around the world on their level of freedom using three criteria: Legal, Political, and Economic.  Their grading of freedom focuses mainly on media content and dissemination (freedom of speech).  Legal freedom deals with the laws allowing or preventing free speech.  Political freedom deals with government control or ownership of media outlets and their ability to censor.  Economic freedom deals with the ability to run and operate media outlets as well as the degree of corruption and bribery.  To most Americans, this is totally irrelevant to the previous paragraph.

Freedomhouse.org is widely cited in the news media as the main authority on “freedom”, their mission statement (which does not define freedom) contains the following sentence:

“Freedom is possible only in democratic political systems in which the governments are accountable to their own people; the rule of law prevails; and freedoms of expression, association, and belief, as well as respect for the rights of minorities and women, are guaranteed.”
This may be closer to what the American government is thinking when it tries to spread freedom to the rest of the world.  But again, it is totally irrelevant to the earlier paragraph.  Americans already elect their own government, and they accept that laws are necessary, the debate is over what laws.  Interestingly, guaranteeing certain specific freedoms is used as their explanation of how freedom is possible.

I am of the opinion that “freedom” is a red herring term thrown around to evoke emotional responses at the expense of rational, factual debate.  Taxes, healthcare, gun control, financial regulation, these have nothing to do with your real underlying freedom.  Lets stop playing the freedom card. Maybe we would be better off if we lost the freedom to use the term freedom.  Now, when it comes to rights as defined in the Constitution, well that is a different story.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Why don't High Schools teach modern music?

Most High Schools across the country have classical music programs.  Most of these music programs provide students with one of three options: Concert Band, Orchestra, or Chorus.  Why don't they teach modern music?
 
The short story on the purpose of music programs, better explained in the national standards for music education, is to teach students how to read and notate music (time, tempo, the staff etc), basic music theory (keys, scales, progressions etc.), perform (individually and/or together as a group), improvise, and maybe even a little composition.  Naturally, students learn all this through their instrument of choice.  Therein lies the question, what is it with the choice? Modern music can accomplish these goals.
 
Concert band consists of classical music instruments: Flute, Clarinet, Saxophone, Trumpet, French Horn, Trombone, Tuba, Snare Drum, Bass Drum, Cymbals, etc.  Orchestra consists of the classical string instruments: Violin, Viola, Cello, Bass etc.  These two groups play predominantly classical music, as one would expect.  But very few high school students actually like classical music or classical instruments.  This could explain the popular “band geek” stereotype and the fact that very few teenagers ever play their high school instruments after graduation.  Modern music bands that students actually listen to consits of guitars, bass, maybe keyboard, and drums.
 
Clearly though, teenagers like the idea of playing music.  Guitar Hero was the first video game to surpass $1 billion is sales (reference) while Rock Band based the $1 billion mark a short time later (reference).  Both games cater exclusively to modern music genres.  The current top billboard hits in this country (driven primarily by teenagers) show pop stars such as Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, and Rihanna are by far the most popular, followed by others in the Hip-Hop, Country, Rock, and Dance genres (reference).  These collectively can be thought of as the modern music of which I  speak.  Classical doesn’t even get a category.
 
I’m definitely not advocating that High Schools just give in to what the students like, but there is absolutely no reason why you cant teach all the previously mentioned standards of music education using modern music songs that students like on the instruments used in those songs.  Lady Gaga songs have a key, a tempo, a chord progression, and sheet music is readily available (here, for example).  Maybe the kids would be more inclined to practice their scales if they knew that their favorite songs were composed using those same scales.
 
Granted, its hard to give a concert to proud parents with 100 guitars, 50 keyboards, and 25 drum sets, but that really shouldn't be our motivation in music education.  Plus, even the parents may get a kick out of hearing their children perform the same modern music songs that can be heard on the radio, rather than classical songs played by no one outside of school.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Why you shouldn't have a strong opinion

I thought it would be fitting to inaugurate an opinion site with an article on why you shouldn't have much of an opinion.  It will probably generate some strong opinions.

In short, you dont know what you're talking about.  You are wrong.  Whether it be politics, taxes, healthcare, foreign policy, global warming or American Idol, you are not even close to being an expert, and your opinion is wrong.  For what it's worth, so is mine, so is everyone else's.  A couple examples can be found in these articles (1 and 2), but there are many many more.

This is not meant to insult or anger people, quite the opposite in fact.  Once you open your mind to the possibility that you may be wrong, all of a sudden, life's problems don't seem so bad.  Democrats, It's OK if the Republicans get their latest bill passed through Congress, they might be right.  Republicans, consider the possibility that President Obama doesn't hate America and is actually trying to do what is best for the country.  There is no sense in getting too upset if you understand that the other side is not evil, and could be right.  Politicians have full time aides with years of experience and knowledge of the topics guiding their decisions.  The President has a Cabinet of advisors who are experts in their respective fields. They know more than you do, Period.  Of course, in all likelihood, both sides of a particular topic are wrong, and the "truth," whatever that really means, is somewhere in the middle.  This article on the budget deficit illustrates my point.

I dont think "light" opinions are a bad thing.  People should be informed on what's happening in the world, and they should say what they think about it.  But open your mind to the other side of things, and maybe even allow yourself to be convinced by a well reasoned opposing argument.  The world will be a better place for it.

So the next time some scientist talking global warming gets you angry, or some government regulation regarding healthcare keeps you up at night, take comfort from the fact that science and healthcare are complicated things, people spend many many years studying them, there is no simple right or wrong, and you dont know what you're talking about.