Sunday, March 11, 2012

Global warming is just Gaia meeting her needs?

Consider an electric motor. When you connect more load to it, it draws more power. It always had that power available to draw, but it tapped into it only when needed.  So the motor knows when its needs have increased and takes action to meet the increased need.

Consider your computer and its power supply. The powers supply (SMPS) of my computer is rated 450 Watts. But that doesn't mean it forces 450 Watts into my computer all the time. My computer draws power from it, only as much as needed, and up to that rated limit of the power supply. When much hard disk input/output is happening, the drive draws more power. When much calculations are happening, processor draws more power. The computer and its sub parts know their needs and draw power to meet it.

The picture at high level is the system draws in more power as its need increases. The exact mechanism may be slightly different for the motor and the computer, because they are different in their exact functioning too. 

But still, both are based on electromagnetic properties of materials. So when I make a broader generalization towards end of this post you might argue that I am making generalization out of a very specific situation of power consumption by devices running on electricity.

Lets see a more complex system - You! When you take up exercising, your appetite increases. Your body knows it is using more, and so asks you to send in more. The mechanism here is all sorts of complex biological process. 

Or let us look at even higher level example. When you know you are spending more, or are going to spend more in cash, you draw more cash from ATM/Bank.

And to go even further, suppose you feel your bank balance and current income isn't going to sustain your spending rate for too long, you try to increase your income!

In short, every system that needs something, or uses something, has some mechanism to obtain it. And when system needs more, there are in-built abilities in that mechanism to try to obtain more.

Now we come to the Earth. It gets energy from the Sun. We all agree on this. For millions of years, it was coolly collecting energy from the Sun and running its business normally. The CO2 in the atmosphere, was the indicator of energy consumption on Earth, mainly biological consumption. But then since the industrial revolution, we have started using energy at much higher rate. So CO2 has increased. So the Earth knows it needs more energy, so that the current levels of energy usage are sustainable. And this CO2 itself is its inbuilt mechanism for trapping more energy for use!

Now, I have heard some accounts of scientists saying that global warming may actually increase the vegetation on Earth. That further indicates to me that this is a predesigned mechanism of the Gaia or Earth's intelligence. Because outside of the current massive human intervention, higher CO2 would have just meant there are more animals breathing out CO2. Which would mean the upper layers of food pyramid have grown, and so to make it all still sustainable, the base layer of food pyramid - vegetation, needs to be increased.

So Global Warming is the correct 'solution' Earth/Gaia had figured out before us, to deal with increased CO2, or rather to compensate for what she thought the increased CO2 meant.

However by producing CO2 through industry rather than increased biological respiration, we are messing with Gaia's mind. So increased vegetation through global warming is not going to solve the problem or compensate for it. Or maybe I am wrong. Gaia does actually know that this increased CO2 is due to increased non-biological energy needs of the latest kids on the block - humans. But since she hasn't much idea about the sudden new systems made by these humans, she doesn't know the exact systems that will compensate for it. But at high level, she is still providing a solution "Ok guys, so you need more energy? Ok  abracadabra here is more!" And poof! Global Warming!

But since it is us who figured out new ways to consume more energy, we ourselves need to figure out more ways to harness this extra energy trapped by global warming. My power supply can give power to the computer. But computer must know or figure out how to use it! 

In fact right now a hazy picture is forming in my mind. Maybe, we will figure out how to use the extra energy of global warming. And then we will invest a sophisticated control system for adjusting rates at which solar energy is trapped. Sustain the industry by the global warming energy most of the time, and when we progress and need more energy, burn some more fossil fuels! Of course I am assuming that the technique to harness 'global warming energy' will keep Earth temperature to normal livable levels by using the energy up. And since fossil fuels would need to be burnt only to get more global warming energy, we wont exhaust them!

Monday, December 5, 2011

Moth, I am sorry.

A soft disturbance on my knee.
Nonchalant I flicked it casually.
Golden powder on knee I see.
And moth crippled nigh by destiny.
The moth could have been me.

Just a short poem at this hour of the night/morning to slightly lighten myself from what just happened. I hope I didn't damage the moth too much. One wing is very thinned, with no colour, and slightly broken at places. The other lush golden velvety wing tells me what a proud beauty the damaged wing once was, before I damaged it. The moth is sitting quietly. Flutters and jumps if I bring a finger near it. Hope it is able to recover, fly and live. I did not intend this.

Saturday, December 3, 2011

Occupational Hahahazard!

A very famous cook who dearly loved his job, was crying while cooking something. Seeing this, his concerned friend asked

"What is wrong? Why are you crying?!"
"Oh, nothing these are tears of joy!"
"Ah! That is nice! What kind of joy are we talking about?
"The joy of cutting onions, of course!"


Yes folks, a silly little joke that you can be sure I made up while cutting onions yesterday.

BTW ever wondered how many onions do they have to cut to gather all the tear gas for use around the world every year? ;)

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

When I decided to Levy Straws on the reader

I always knew my life sucked. One day I found out why. Straws suck. My life, it turned out was a straw. And that is how it broke my back.
-The camel with a broken back.

P.S. : I wonder how the cat manages. It has nine lives. Would the tenth one have been the last straw? Does that mean I am the unsung hero? With even more lives than the cat?


P.P.S. : All this also proves that a drowning man clutching at the straws is basically trying to hold on to dear life. But then we knew that already.



P.P.P.S: Stupidosaur says (and not the camel) : Who knew it is possible to write about 15 sentences connected through unrelated phrases talking about drowning men, cats, camels, straws and how sucky one's life is while giving it all a touch of a philosophical fable and finally signing off giving it a title that is a horrible pun on some apparel brand (Levi Strauss) :P

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Dynamics of Dough'ry & Dough'ters

I read a blog post about a well-off couple's first hand experience of using up entire life's saving + additional loan just for daughter's marriage!


First of all this doling the dough is just wrong. But then I also wonder if it will be a feasible phenomenon long term. This trend cannot continue in India if another trend continues. As the sex ratio in India is getting more and more skewed, there would be a scarcity of females in the 'marriage market'. So even if there is a huge cultural barrier, wouldn't the law of supply-demand act out in the end? A 'commodity' with higher demand than supply would be at higher premium. The guys would become the needy ones. So dowry thingy should go away. But that is just the less extreme end of it. Being the rarer commodity in the market, maybe females will start demanding dowry :P.



Saturday, June 18, 2011

The secret of my good health



Ever since I heard that it is Tetra Pak that really protects what is good, I pour the juice or milk down the drain and happily munch on its box. 

Yeah that's how you protect your good health.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Lolitickly incorrect.

Teacher : O.K Little Johnny, I am going to test you on gender opposites.
Little Johnny : Yes miss.
Teacher: King?
Jonnhy: Queen!
Teacher: Good! Prince?
Johnny: Princess?
Teacher: Thats right! So tell me, King Kong?
Johnny: Ermm...Queen Congress?


Saturday, June 11, 2011

Up! Up! And Abbey!!!

Give Me Some Sunshine!
Give Me Some Rain!
Give Me Another Chance..
I Wanna Grow Up! Once Again!

Thus sings Phunsukh Wangdu before the second trial of his new GM seeds. The first trial failed. He plans to sell them under the brand them Up!

Friday, June 10, 2011

Compilers ignore comments!

Until I get more creative, here's something interesting.

It is a comment I made here: Cicadas: ready for prime time. At the time of publishing this post it is still awaiting approval.

The article talks about a particular variety of cicadas who show up only every 13 year and are currently screeching/chirping around in Alabama and Arkansas (USA states). The author explains one existing theory why they show up after such a strange number of years. I just added my two pennies worth. Here's my nerdy comment. Have fun ;)!

"Cool explanation. I thought a little about it, thought I would present the thoughts to maybe make this 'more complete' or at least add food for thought.

I think LCM (Lowest Common Multiple, since different people learnt different names for it in school) has a very important part in this, even more than a prime. The LCM of two numbers is their product if they have no factors in common.

e.g.
6 & 7 - no factors common. LCM is 42 (6X7)
6 & 9 - 3 is common factor, so LCM = 18 (6X3 or 9X2) is smaller than above even though 9 is larger than 7

So if our 13 year friend has 39 year cycle predator, every generation of the predator would still get a nice cicada buffet, even though that would be every third cicada generation.

On other hand, if our cicada had a 10 (2*5) year cycle, which is definitely not a prime, the twain shall meet every (2 * 5 * 3 * 13) ie 390 years!!! that way 38 cicada generations would heave a sigh of relief, and every 39th would be screwed. But that 'years of peace' is just the direct advantage. Additinally, the same predator's 9 generations would be devoid of cicada. If cicada were vital to their survival, they might be very dwindled in numbers, if not gone totally extinct. So more reasons for the 39th cicada generation to rejoice!

  --->So, if the cicada is looking at saving itself from just ONE particular predator ( as your article says "these loud insects are trying to evade A predator"), it would get maximum advantage by 1) having a life cycle years number which has no factors common with predator life cycle years number, even if it is not a prime. 2) Within constraints of condition 1, having as large cycle as possible.

But, therein comes the statistical aspect, and an important one. Does the cicada have to worry about just one predator? Most likely, no. And even if yes, does the cicada/nature know what the life cycle of this predator is? Again, we could lean in favour of no. In such a 'blind' or 'random' case, cicada's best option is to go for a prime number, because it can only have factors common with predator if the predator's cycle is a multiple of it's cycle. I that case, the twain shall meet at every preadtor generation (tough luck!) for such special 'multilple of cicada year's predator, and will meet at large intervals (product of cicada & predator's cycle years) for every other predator!!!

  --->So yeah, that way primes are best, if we don't know the predator's nature!

And hopefully, the things the cicadas eat do grow every year, otherwise such prime cicada's would hit puberty, come out happy to find no predators, and die hungry!!

Also, this theory makes sense only if, the 'adult cicada' eating preadtors themselves are in a biological state of feeding on cicadas for only 1 year (or such short duration of time that the cicadas are out)

Otherwise, say the cicada has 13 year cycle, and predator has 30 year cycle. Mathematician will predict many happy care-free generations for the cicada, (13 * 30 = 390, so only 390th generation needs to worry). But suppose out of those 30 years, the predator is in a state that can feed on cicadas for 5 years (adulthood suppose). Then well, the cicada and this theory are both screwed. Like this...

say year 0 of the cicada (13th year of last generation) was year 0 of predator (25th year of last generation). Then in the 13th year 1st generation cicadas are safe. But in the very next generation ie. in the 26th year, the cicadas are out just when the predator starts feeding! Shit! So if the predator has a large 'feeding band' of years, prime or its neighbour non prime would not make heck of a difference. cicadas with 13, 14 or 15 years cycle would be toast in their second generation. Rather the cicadas with 12 year cycle (non prime) will be safe at least in second generation. This is just a knee jerk thought, and a very conveniently picked example to illustrate it. I have yet to think whether primes still cope better with such 'band feeding duration' predators in the long run. I think in this case the optimum number might be a function of the 'ideal cicada prime' (if predator was not banded duration feeded), the predator cycle, and the predator feeding band years. Just an intuition. Maybe will work on it later, maybe not."



Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Alarming Behaviour!

Why do I turn the alarm off even when and especially when the alarm goes off?

Isn't that like beating a dead horse? :P

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails