Thursday, April 3, 2014

quick stats on guns

Took some data from Wikipedia, and since I do not anymore have an account there, putting these up here. There was a shooting in a military installation on 02.04.2014, which is not surprising, as military handles guns regularly. Also there's been some talk recently of domestic use of guns  so I was a bit surprised that wikipedia didn't have any images on gun related deaths. Getting the sources correct is of course difficult and I didn't try to improve nor expand on wikipedia sources. The first image is a bit misleading since I left all of Asia, Africa, Central and South America out. Also there weren't any statistics on many many countries so if your country isn't listed wikipedia is to blame. Oh, also, the scales are just what was the quickest way of checking relative positions between countries they may not represent what they say, so the recommended procedure for spreading these is to make one self.

It looks like visits from USA have increased somewhat after this went live so the short take away wrt this country are as follows: 

1. for a western (and some of the former eastern block) country, USA has a quarter to a third (c.30%) more gun-related deaths than it should have considering the amount of gun-ownership.

2. it looks like USA citizens are near the average in solving their problems by shooting if we look at the whole world, looking at western world only, USA is in the highest third in their trigger happiness (if you think death by gun causes this too).

3. made also an image (unpublished) of how many of the guns in a country are used in a gun-related death. However, this should be multiplied by the number of people in these countries to get more solid statistics so leaving this out. For USA the number is 1 in 8641 (so be careful when buying the 8641th gun, it might kill you)

General observations: 
1. deriving from the 2nd image, it's obvious that the world hasn't yet reached a normal distribution regarding gun-related deaths. What to think of this, is harder to put to words than I want to have publicly published.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Book of ages, parts 28-23.5, illustration

(I think Pleistocene begins at 23.5)

'Kids, would I get some attention? ... ... Thanks. What I have here to show you is an image of the subject of the couple of stories you're next about to hear. This image has been passed to me by the elders and I think it's been originally done two ages ago, maybe three. I'm sorry, it has been scribbled over by some jokesters, so it's not something you need to copy and remember as such. There are more pure and more complex versions of this image available in the public library, though you cannot loan them they're there for you to see, if you want. Just remember that they are not all the same. Even nowadays some smart people over in the larger schools for young adults during their wanderyars argue which are the best versions so don't bother to argue between yerselves over this. You remember last time we talked of long-gone monsters. Now it's time to hear how monsters vanished and how animals appeared.'

Sunday, March 9, 2014

book of ages, intro.

'Hello kids, you've now a little bit older than last year, and with all your good questions the teachers have decided you're so smart now that you need a few more teachers. You may remember Dork the Storyteller from last year, and he started telling you about how everything came to be. He is a well-spoken sage, and I'm not trying to tell you much differently about origins of everything, heavenly things and earth, but use my own words to describe his story. You also possibly remember something about Erila's stories , and I'll try also to tell something about her stories as well. So, you may think my classes as history and herstory, since I hear some of you have been inventing new words about things you do not know the proper name yet. During this year of your studies, the other teachers will also start to reiterate - tell again - the stories of old and some of the new too, but you already see how things are and how they're done - nowadays - with your parents, family and village, so we're here just keeping you company and answering some questions of youse, while the heavy work you can't yet do is being done. As you see, I'm old and a bit crippled, this is partly because of the heavy labor, but I've got a good memory, so I can be here with you to tell stories about labours of old. So, let's use these 4 hours of storytelling each day to our benefit, you'll get to do stuff later on the day in the practical school.'

'So, are everyone comfortable? Please do not make much noise so those two guys behind leaning to the ice age boulder can also hear, in fact you two could come a bit closer. It's a nice day so we can be outside, but outside is so large you may get lost if you do not know enough about it.

Thursday, January 9, 2014

Wiggle Matching (was:brutality)

In the blog Science of Doom there's been a lot of deliberation about the ends and the beginnings of the ice ages, or glacials as they're known in the geology department, recently. The blog host has kindly provided readers a lot of data and mathematics involved in meteorology and climatology. In part nine of the series on paleoclimates he gave a link to the NGRIP data set. And on later chapters also plots of insolation on various latitudes during the last glacial and interglacial. Previously I had found the EPICA core record.

The image is a bad example of wiggle matching combining the info mentioned. Now, I'm not claiming Toba eruption messed up the southern hemisphere circulation so the antarctica didn't get snow for 6000 years or that the Holocene climate maximum melted some 400 years of NGRIP data nor that EPICA borers dropped and shattered a five hundred year segment of the core or some other mishaps to have happened. I'm merely stating that inserting ~7000 years in this 123000 year section of paleoclimate data seems to get the records from different hemispheres to match more closely to each other. That's 5,7% of the whole set. That's still way better accuracy than many economists get.

If this was all the complications presented by the honorable host of Science of Doom in matching the ice core records to orbital theory of glacial inception (so called Milankovitch cycle theory) it would still be a hard run for anyone. But no, the orbital wiggles producing variations in the amount of insolation on different areas of the world during the ice age cycles do not seem to match well on the last glacial. I used the image for 40-50S insolation as the base for the image manipulation (no maths or curious theories here at all, at least yet) since I think the starts of the interglacials should have more to do with insolation over the oceans than over the continents. I've though organized the NGRIP and EPICA data to a same spreadsheet so I may start to manipulate those (in order to find out where the missing 6-7000 years might be). Anyway, as can be seen on the image, succeeding in this mathematical task with pretty wild theoretical assumptions would still leave matters unclear considering glacial and interglacial inception via orbital theory.

So the image is the initial artistic interpretation done before forming any hypothesis or doing any maths on a scientific problem of the exact effects of orbital variation on earth. Interested readers might want to take the quiz on

FTR (for the record): NGRIP was mutilated in 2 places and EPICA 8 times, in one case both had to be adjusted, because this is not science.

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Thursday, December 19, 2013

lanl (los alamos national lab) seeking a professional

who is very good at programming and analysing high-dimensional Bayesian Networks (partly hierarchial or fully hierarchial depending how you look on things) with non-linear and time-dependent relationships to evaluate the more scientific physical models of climate and to seek potential improvements via statistics in some of these, on areas that are hardest to model with strict physical equations [IOW, make some black-box surrogate models less black]. please note the results of your work are not necessarily implemented on running systems, so do not be a dick with your fellow workers who most likely know their specific subject better than you. statistics is usually only a tool to get better results, but in this position there's a possibility to be a part of cutting edge statistics and science. So, good personal communication skills are required in this highly qualified research group aiming to find the minute errors in physical models arising from the complexity of the real world. military experience not required but a minor advantage (even a pacifist, green activist might be accepted depending on credentials). Bring out and hone your skills in Bayesian multivariate nonlinear statistics with our select crew to better the mankind and understanding of the physical world!

the real ad for the position here:

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Haiyan scale

based on earlier work seen somewhere in the net. since the B-scale has worked well but ends up at the point where a wooden, well-built ship disintegrates, taking no account to the washed-to-shore iron-hulled fishing boats which still may float someday.

the table in graphical format (no tornado ever has been 11):