Tuesday, 02 October 2012

For class, I’ve been reading the soporific book The Theory Toolbox. On page 153, after bloviating for a while on structuralism vs. post-structuralism, the writers ask:

The big bang theory seems to be the accepted scientific version of the birth of the universe: It all started in one huge mass that broke apart in a huge explosion. The universe will expand as far as it can go and then begin again to contract, bringing everything crashing back into one undifferentiated mass. (This theory also helps to explain gravity, entropy, thermodynamics, and a series of other scientific concepts.) Is there anything suspicious about the big bang theory from a “poststructuralist” point of view?

Okay, I know what you’r thinking. You’re thinking: “Well, I can’t really answer that until I’ve read the pages on poststructuralism.” Yeah, that makes sense. In fact, I wasn’t even sure how to respond to the question, either, so I just sat in class and listened to what my fellow students said.

The discussion was very haphazard. One girl didn’t understand how gravity could be pushing everything apart but then, suddenly, one day, will pull it all together again. Another girl said it’s just a theory so we shouldn’t accept it as fact. Clearly, Hamline knows how to churn out intelligent graduates.

In the hubbub, one girl (okay – side note: there’s a lot of girls in my class – they acount for 13 of the 16 students) mentioned that we routinely defy gravity when taking airplane trips. Not many people heard her, because there were, like, five people talking at that moment, so I just let it slide. But then, a few minutes later, the Professor asked us if gravity really held true all the time. She cited, by way of illustration, the fact that astronauts just float in space.

So, I had to raise my hand and say something. I know my formal training is a bit lacking, but I had to say that gravity always applies. Flying in an airplane or floating in space is not evidence that the theory of gravity is wrong, and no one is “defying” or “violating” gravity at any time. Further, the laws of gravity hold true everywhere we’ve observed in the universe, and there is no reason to think they don’t hold true elsewhere. Gravity, I said, doesn’t mean that we are always stuck to the earth, it more correctly states that matter is attractive. An astronaut is falling to the earth at the exact rate specified by the mathematical laws we’ve uncovered, just as sure as an airplane is falling to earth, and the earth is falling to the sun and, heck, the earth itself is even falling toward this pencil.

I know there’s a lot of room for interpretation in these words (e.g., you could argue that “defying gravity” is simply a colloquialism for “not plummeting to the earth like I do when I jump off a diving board”), but my point just was that the sciences aren’t some fuzzy ideas like the humanities are.

I had a similar experience at the start of my last class. The professor asked if there were any absolute facts we could all agree on. Well, no, I guess, because there’s always some looney out there who will insist that the sky is a metal bowl, but I raised my hand anyway and said, “What about mathematics?” The professor said I was wrong, and then said this show that everything is open to interpretation.

I get this when it comes to history and English: Maybe Nixon was the best president America has ever had, maybe Shakespeare was a feminist, maybe Andy Warhol’s painting suck…but I must be missing something when this is applied to scientific laws and math…

Sunday, 30 September 2012

Yesterday, Jennifer’s parents invited the family over for a barbecue and bonfire. I decided to load up the trunk with lots of tree roots that I have extracted from the yard over the past month. They’ve been sitting in a pile drying out and, what with there being no rain and all, were plenty dry by yesterday morning. I unloaded them in my parents-in-law’s backyard and we cremated them that evening.

So, this morning, the car’s trunk was very dirty. Dirtier, even, then just filling the trunk with firewood because, remember, this was wood that had been underground. The rattling of the car ride shook all the dirt loose.

Damn if Owen doesn’t like to vacuum.

He vacuumed the inside of the trunk so efficiently and gleefully, that it behooved me to remove the cover over the spare tire (Owen asked, “Hey, what’s that tire for?”) and remove said tire so Owen could vacuum in the darkest recesses of the trunk.

But I didn’t stop there. Oh no. I didn’t stop there. I next opened all four doors and extracted the floor mats. I shook them out and Owen then vacuumed all of them and the floor around them. He even got in between the seats and around the door frames.

 The bottom one inch of our car is now quite immaculate.

Monday, 01 October 2012

Today I perfomed my first of two public readings from my work in The 2012 St. Paul Almanac. This reading took place at the Fresh Grounds Coffee Shop, which is close enough to our home so that we rode our bikes. Well, Jennifer, Owen, and I rode our bikes. Isla freeloaded in a trailer on the back of my bike.

We ordered some snacks, and then took a table far from the microphone. We’re not exactly the quietest people (especially isnce Isla decided to wear a pair of ruby tap shoes). Then we waited until it was my turn. The crowd was only about about 15 people, which Kimberly, the moderator, said was one of the smallest so far (some readings have had 40-50 people).

A couple of people who were signed-up to read didn’t show up, so my name came up quicker than I thought. Kimberly introduced me by reading the short bio I’d submitted for the almanac. Owen came and sat closer while I read, which was cool, since he is the main character in both of my essays.

I chose to read my essay “Park Two,” because I thought that was the funner of the two essays. After that, the moderator asked me to read my other essay. This kind of surprised me, and I stumbled for a moment wondering if I’d heard her correctly. She said, yeah, please read the other essay since we are short on readers tonight. So I ended up reading both essays.

As we got up to leave, two more readers showed up. They thought the event started at 7:00, I guess since a couple of earlier events were at 7:00. But no, tonight’s event was at 6:30. Kimberly let them read their pieces. Jennifer and I stayed because I thought that was the polite thing to do, and every once in a while I like to be polite. After shaking a few hands, including one guy who really liked my essays, we took off and got home right before sunset.

I’ll be participating in a second reading on Monday, November 19th at 7:00 at Claddaugh Coffee, in case you’d like to come support me. The complete schedule is HERE AT THIS LINK.

Saturday, 29 September 2012

Years ago, I had this grand idea that I would have a large bedroom on the second – or maybe third – story of my house, and one whole wall would be floor-to-ceiling windows. Large, single pane windows, like they use in aquariums. And then, in the morning, I could wake up, pull the cord or push the button (or clap, whatever), and the blinds would part, recessing into the side walls. And then I could look down at my property where, there, in the back yard, would be this enormous sundial. Like 20 feet long on each side, probably made of granite. “Well, it’s 10:30,” I’d say to Jennifer as I looked out at the old-school chronometer, “time to get up.”

Or something like that.

Anyway, I scaled that idea down a bit, and, following the instructions from this ancient book titled Fun With Astronomy (it was published before I was born), Owen and I constructed a sundial.

Okay, so first I did most of the work. I bought some wood and cut it to square, then made a groove down the center. I actually made three of these groovy squares, trying to get it just right. When Owen asked why I was making three, I told him I needed the practice, and maybe we’d give the other two to his cousins. This made sense back then, when he only had two cousins.

Anyway, so then I glued the gnomon onto the board, sanded the board real well, then painted it white. That was in 2009. We lived in an apartment back then, so I tried setting the sundial out on the deck. Yeah, that didn’t work. Primarily because we never received direct sunlight before 1:00 in the afternoon. So the sundial just languished in the garage.

A couple of months ago, Owen and I took the sundial outside to nail it to a tree stump in our yard. This has to be done exactly at noon – when the style can be moved until the gnomon casts the thinnest shadow possible. Alas, we didn’t do it correctly, so we had to abandon the project that day.

A few weeks later, when we had another free weekend day, we tried again. Success! After securing it in place, Owen drew a line on either side of the shadow and drew a “12” inside the lines. He did this every hour for the rest of the afternoon, writing in the correct time, respectively.

Owen marks the two o’clock position. His trusty water bottle waits nearby, in case the task becomes formidible and Owen needs to rehydrate.

The next day, we went outside in the morning and marked off 9:00, 10:00 and 11:00 and at some point later in the week, we also marked off 6:00 PM.

A week later, Owen wiped off the style (which a squirrel had been using as a walnut-cracking station) and carefully applied fancy-schmancy numerals. Owen pointed out that we used a lot of ones. This is true: a twelve-hour clock exhibits five numeral ones.

Owen applies the numerals while Dad (not pictured) barks at him to get it “just right” lest the universe end. Just to be safe, Owen donned a bike helmet for the duration of the activity.

This morning, we cleaned off the squirrel mess yet again, and Owen applied a coating of polyurethane, just like the anicents used to do when they built sundials.

Mission accomplished!

Wednesday, 26 September 2012

 Today at Toastmasters was bring-a-guest day.

I’ve brought a few guests in the past, so I called on one of them to accompany me again. There was pizza and breadsticks and beverages and door prizes, so getting him to accompany me was an easy sell.

At every Toastmasters meeting, there’s a Word of the Day. Since I was the grammarian today, I selected the word “Wend.” It only was used once, so either it was a clunker of a word, or no one could find a good way to incorporate it into their speech.

Also, I won a door prize: some kind of super -wallet, it’s about 9 inches long and zips closed on three sides. At first, I liked it, but after examining it for a while, I’m not sure what I’m gonna do with it. It might end up in the dice game.

Thursday, 27 September 2012

 This evening we watched the Modern Family episode “Baby on Board,” which is the final episode of the third season. We are now caught up with the rest of America…almost. The premier of season 4 aired last night, so we are still one episode behind, but we’ll get that under our belts soon enough.

We almost never start watching a show when it first airs on TV. I guess we need to hear some buzz about it. We began watching Pushing Daisies and The Rerun Show from the beginning, but those were exceptions.

We also like to see every episode from start to finish. So, when we heard, mid-way through it’s run, that Arrested Development was a great show, we didn’t just jump in and watch it. We waited until it was available on DVD. Same thing with Lost, which we are currently watching from Netflix. Our current Netflix rotation includes Lost, The Sopranos, and Seinfeld.

Friday, 28 September 2012

So, I found a penny on the ground yesterday a few blocks from our house. This brings my total amount of money found this year up to $16.63, quite an increase from lasy year at this time when I was at $9.56.

But today, when I updated my file to account for this new penny, I noticed something: I haven’t found any money on the 14th, 19th or 23rd of any month. I hadn’t found anything on the 27th of any month, either (until yesterday).

Last year, by August, I had found money on every day of the month except the 31st. This made sense, because there had been seven 1st-28th’s, six 29th’s and 30th’s, but only three 31st’s. On August 31st of last year, i found a nickel. Exactly a year later, I found a quarter.

Still…I was “missing” four days.

The penny I lifted off the sidewalk yesterday brought me down to three “missing” days. We’ll see if October fills in the gaps…

Monday, 24 September 2012

 Tonight, just before I went to bed, I decided to check my email once more. This message was waiting for me in my Hamline email account:

Dear Hamline Community,

In recent weeks, a number of you have urged the University to take a stand in opposition to the proposed amendment to the Minnesota Constitution which would limit marriage in the state to a union of one man and one woman.  These activities are all within the spirit and foundational ethos of a university—we think about societal issues, debate them, and then as citizens, act upon our convictions. 

Significant and careful consideration of this matter has been given by me, the Board of Trustees and many of you in the community.  Such consideration has led to the conclusion that Hamline will not take a position in opposition to or in favor of the amendment.

Those who have urged public opposition by the University have passionately and eloquently cited Hamline’s core values and history of inclusivity.  The University’s position should not be viewed as supportive of the amendment or as a rejection of these values.

Rather, the intent is to allow for civil discourse and civic engagement by all members of our community.  As a diverse university made up of students, faculty, staff, alumni, the Methodist church, and our neighbors, each individual and group should have the freedom to express their approval of or opposition to the amendment.  It is extremely important that Hamline remain a place where, in the words of John Wesley, “the very act of intellectual inquiry is sacred.”

I know that we each individually have a personal view—I certainly do as a citizen and voter.  And we will not all agree.  But Hamline is best served as a university to allow for intellectual discourse and the unfettered exposition of ideas and opinions in regard to this amendment.

President Hanson

I was going to write back immediately. In fact, I hit reply, and wrote: “Professor Hanson – I’ve been contemplating dropping out of Hamline after this semester. Thanks to your message, my decision is now clear.”

I laughed at how clever my ambiguity was, then I figured, “Meh, whatever,” cancelled my message, and went to bed.

Tuesday, 25 September 2012

Today, when I arrived on campus, there were students gathering on the grass speaking about the President’s deplorable lack of position. Some were writing big demands on the sidewalk with sidewalk chalk, saying things like “We will not be ignored,” and someone put a t-shirt on the bronze statue of Mr. Hamline himself that said “We will be heard.”

When I went into the building my class is in, some students were marching down the hallways, and the guy in front had a bullhorn saying something like: “What do we want?” and then everytone else shouted, “A meeting with the president.” Then he asked “When do we want it?” And I think the answer to that was 4:00. They were so loud that at least one class ended ten minutes early.

When our class began, the professor decided to kick off the day by asking us how we felt about our President”s lack of a spine. Pretty much everyone thought she was wrong for not taking a stance, especially since Hamline claims to be a force for social justice. Our professor told us that, in the 1950s, when racial integration at college’s was being met with resistance in third-world nations like Arkansas and Mississippi, Hamline took a stand saying that they were pro-integration.

Evidently they don’t care as much about gay people’s right.

One student raised a good point, though. She said that the racial integration of colleges directly affected Hamline, whereas gay marriage does not. But then another rather vocal student said that’s beside the point – a college that believes in social justice should be in the forefront of advancing their students’ rights and should show that they are a safe place for everyone. Then the first girl asked: “If gay marriage becomes legal, will churches be forced to perform gay marriages?”

Man, the misinformation being tossed about is shocking. I was a bit disgusted that a student at Hamline did not know better, but the other students quickly informed her that voting No will not make gay marriage legal and, even when it does become legal one day, churches are still free to forbid gay marriages in their churches, just as they are now free to forbid interracial marriages, or (in the case of my former religion), weddings that don’t use Kingdom Melodies or have a limosine.