Invited guest of
the Japanese Embassy
in Piccadilly
“A Symposium”
they call this. Lectures followed
by wine (hopefully)..
Astronomy and
Space Science unite nations.
One cosmos for all!
Invited guest of
the Japanese Embassy
in Piccadilly
“A Symposium”
they call this. Lectures followed
by wine (hopefully)..
Astronomy and
Space Science unite nations.
One cosmos for all!
Just time for a brief post as it has been a very long and stressful day (it’s probably best if I don’t try to explain why). I’m going to pour myself into a bottle of wine when I get home. For some reason I thought of this clip, from the TV series Smiley’s People, which I thought I’d share because I happened to watch the entire series on DVD at the weekend. I think it’s beautifully done.
Just to set the scene, the series (based on the novel of the same name by John Le Carré) is set a few years after Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Intelligence officer George Smiley (Alec Guinnness) is in retirement, as is his former colleague Toby Esterhase (Bernard Hepton) who has adopted the identity of a dodgy art dealer. Smiley is called back into action when a former agent by the name of Vladimir is murdered on Hampstead Heath en route to an appointment with British Intelligence (aka “The Circus”). Smiley is told to find out what happened and hush it up, but a combination of detective work and intuition leads him to the realization that he may, at last, have stumbled upon a way of bringing down his opposite number in Soviet Intelligence, the enigmatic Karla. This scene, wherein Smiley and Esterhase meet up for the first time since they parted company with the Circus marks the point where Smiley decides to ignore his instructions to bury the case and embark on one last operation in the hope that he can at last locate Karla’s Achilles Heel. To find out more, you’ll have to watch the series, which unfolds slowly, but brilliantly…
Follow @telescoper
Here’s a nice set of short videos about the de Broglie-Bohm theory which is a causal, deterministic, interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that can be thought of as a hidden variable theory. It’s a common misconception that hidden-variable theories are ruled out by experimental evidence (which is probably why they tend not to be discussed very much at undergraduate level) but this is not the case. What is true is that hidden variables have to be non-local, which many physicists consider too weird for comfort – but who’s to say that the Universe isn’t even weirder than we thought?
Follow @telescoperJust time for a quick post from the London to Brighton train, having spent the day at my last ever “Plenary” meeting of the Astronomy Grants Panel of the Science and Technology Facilities Council which was held at the Institute of Physics. This meeting marks the end of the annual grants round; in January there’ll be a meeting to kick off next year’s business.
I’ve been on this panel for four years now, so I think I’ve done my bit. Time for some new blood to replace those of us who have been stood down.
Anyway I just want to say a big public thank you to the STFC staff, especially Kim, Diane, and Colin for doing their best to keep the panel members in order, as well as to Theory sub-Panel Chair Tom and overall Chair Andy who are also stepping down.
Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof. I refer to the day, not the AGP, because it began with a major wobbly in Victoria station on the way to the IOP but ended with a couple of pints and a nice chinwag in the pub round the corner..
Follow @telescoperNominations for the Inaugural Beard of the Year Poll at the School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences at the University of Sussex closed on Friday 29th November. We now move to the final phase of the competition, with a public vote. I’m afraid I had to rule out some of the nominees because no photographic evidence was supplied. I also have a sneaking suspicion that some of those who made the short list may not be entirely authentic. Please make your own mind up when casting your vote.
Before introducing the contestants, I’d like to say a big public thank you to our caterers, Chartwells, for producing this lovely cake for a little “Movember” event we had in the School on Friday afternoon:
The purpose of “Movember” is to raise awareness about testicular and prostate cancer, and mental health issues. We’ve gone a bit further and gone for a fully bearded version of the event, but in any case I hope that this bit of fun will at least remind blokes (who are notoriously bad at looking after themselves) to check our their bits every now and again. In any case always remember that facial hair is not just for Movember, but for life…
Anyway, to the contenders (in no particular order)
Now you have seen all the choices, please vote here:
The winner will be announced on Wednesday 11th December.
Follow @telescoperI received the following email about a forthcoming conference which is probably of interest to a (statistically) significant number of readers of this blog so I thought I’d share it here with an encouragement to attend:
–o–
We are pleased to announce the IAU Symposium 306 on Statistical Challenges in 21st Century Cosmology, which will take place in Lisbon, Portugal from 26-29 May 2014, with a tutorial day on 25 May. Apologies if you receive this more than once.
Full exploitation of the very large surveys of the Cosmic Microwave Background, Large-Scale Structure, weak gravitational lensing and future 21cm surveys will require use of the best statistical techniques to answer the major cosmological questions of the 21st century, such as the nature of Dark Energy and gravity.
Thus it is timely to emphasise the importance of inference in cosmology, and to promote dialogue between astronomers and statisticians. This has been recognized by the creation of the IAU Working Group in Astrostatistics and Astroinformatics in 2012.
IAU Symposium 306 will be devoted to problems of inference in cosmology, from data processing to methods and model selection, and will have an important element of cross-disciplinary involvement from the statistics communities.
Keynote speakers
• Cosmic Microwave Background :: Graca Rocha (USA / Portugal)
• Weak Gravitational Lensing :: Masahiro Takada (Japan)
• Combining probes :: Anais Rassat (Switzerland)
• Statistics of Fields :: Sabino Matarrese (Italy)
• Large-scale structure :: Licia Verde (Spain)
• Bayesian methods :: David van Dyk (UK)
• 21cm cosmology :: Mario Santos (South Africa / Portugal)
• Massive parameter estimation :: Ben Wandelt (France)
• Overwhelmingly large datasets :: Alex Szalay (USA)
• Errors and nonparametric estimation :: Aurore Delaigle (Australia)
You are invited to submit an abstract for a contributed talk or poster for the meeting, via the meeting website. The deadline for abstract submission is 21st March 2014. Full information on the scientific rationale, programme, proceedings, critical dates, and local arrangements will be on the symposium web site here.
Deadlines
13 January 2014 – Grant requests
21 March 2014 – Abstract submission
4 April 2014 – Notification of abstract acceptance
11 April 2014 – Close of registration
30 June 2014 – Manuscript submission
Follow @telescoperYesterday I was sitting at home listening to the radio when someone used the phrase “The World’s Oldest Profession”. Naturally, that made me think of those such as myself who Profess for a living (although that’s apparently not what the original expression applies to). Anyway, that idle thought made me wonder whether there is, in the Guinness Book of Records or elsewhere, a recognized holder of the title World’s Oldest Professor?
A short tweet about this elicited one suggestion: Professor Ephraim Engleman of the University of California at San Francisco who is an extremely distinguished Professor of Rheumatology and is still active at the age of 102. Blimey. That’s going to be a pretty though record to beat, but I thought I’d post about it to see there are any other contenders for (a) the world’s oldest professor in any discipline and (b) the world’s oldest professor in physics and astronomy?
Suggestions through the comments box please.
P.S. Apart from anything else, Prof. Engleman’s inspirational example has made me feel guilty for moaning about the advancing years at the tender age of 50; he’d reached my current age before I was even born!
Follow @telescoperI was just thinking this morning that it’s been a while since I posted about crosswords, and then an email arrived from Prof. Monica Grady pointing out the sad news of the passing (on Tuesday, 26th November, at the age of 92) of Johh Galbraith Graham, better known to crossword fans as Araucaria of the Guardian. I had missed the announcement of his death because I’ve just been too busy recently to look at the papers except at weekends.
For those of you not aware, the pseudonym Araucaria is the “Monkey Puzzle ” tree. Those of you who were aware already of that, I’ll add that another name for this tree is “Chile Pine” whence John Graham formed the anagram CINEPHILE, under which pseudonym he also set puzzles in the Financial Times for many years. Not a lot of people know that.
John Graham was an undoubted genius as a crossword setter, one of the few whose clues have made me laugh out loud when working out the solution not only because of their cleverness but also because of the wonderful sense of humour with which they were composed. His clues didn’t always abide by the strict conventions laid down by the father of the crossword puzzle, Derrick Somerset MacNutt (aka Ximenes) but he was a compiler whose transgressions in this regard were easy to forgive when so many of his clues were so brilliant.
Here’s a nice video made about a year ago featuring the man himself talking about the art of crossword setting:
I switched from the Guardian to the Independent some time ago so haven’t done any of Araucaria‘s recent puzzles – my only regret for having switched allegiances, as it happens. I’ve actually won prizes from the weekend Independent competition over twenty times subsequently, which has given me a steady supply of dictionaries. More importantly I do find their crosswords generally more challenging and more entertaining than the Guardian‘s. But the irreplaceable Araucaria was in a class on his own. Having given so much pleasure to so many people for such a long time, he has certainly earned his status as national treasure.
Rest in peace John Galbraith Graham (1921-2013).
Follow @telescoperI’m taking it easy today so this will be a brief post to follow up on an old one in which I bemoaned the lack of (visible) Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgendered physicists. I was subsequently invited to speak at an event in London about this issue. I couldn’t make it because of other commitments, but I gather it went well. Anyway, in my earlier post I wrote
It has always annoyed me that the Independent newspaper’s annual “Pink List” of the UK’s most influential LGBT people never – and I mean never – has a single LGBT scientist on it, despite the immense amount they do not only in research, but also in teaching and outreach. It’s very sad that this work is largely unacknowledged and even sadder that a great many potential role models are hidden.
Actually this year’s Pink List did have one scientist on it, but my point remains relevant. It turns out that nominations are open for the Readers’ Awards of Out and g3 magazines to be voted on by the public in 2014. The prizes will awarded in April and expect to be reported in the gay media, they often lead on to more widespread publicity for the winners. So I thought I’d do my little bit to encourage folk out there to think about nominating a scientist or engineer for this prize.
You may nominate your favourite sportsperson, broadcaster, celebrity or ‘straight ally’, but why not put forward the name of a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender person you know from the world of science, medicine or engineering under the ‘Inspirational Role Model of the Year’ category?
All you need for now is their name and email address, so it only takes a few seconds.
Go on. You know you want to. The link is here.
Follow @telescoperThere’s an interesting article in Research Professional upon which I thought a brief comment would be appropriate. The article is mainly about the recent demise of the 1994 Group of universities, made inevitable when some of its larger members jumped ship to climb on board the much posher Russell Group. I’ve always felt that mission groups of this type were of little interest or value, but the growth of the Russell Group has, in my view, become rather sinister because it involves a cynical attempt to manufacture status when none is justified by performance.
The piece in Research Professional says:
Vice-chancellors and principals are not the only ones playing the status game. Students, employers, academics and government ministers—who seem to love visiting Russell Group universities—all want to be associated with high-status universities, even if those institutions do not necessarily provide better education or research. A 2009 analysis of the results of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise, carried out by the Higher Education Policy Institute, found that Russell Group institutions performed only half a percentage point better than the overall average, and that when universities in the golden triangle were excluded the score fell to below average. Truly, this is an emperor with very modest clothes.
This echoes my experience. Before moving to the University of Sussex earlier this year I worked in two Russell Group universities (and one which wasn’t in the Russell Group when I worked there but is now). All these institutions have much to recommend them – and I have no desire whatsoever to say negative things about former colleagues – but it is clear to me that they (or at least their Physics Departments) can’t claim to be any better than the one in which I currently work. Indeed the Physics department that performed best in the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise was Lancaster, which is also not in the Russell Group.
It’s also noticeable that the primary characteristic of Russell Group universities in the National Student Survey tables is that they generally do quite poorly relative to non-members. Does Russell Group status mean promoting research at the expense of teaching and the student experience generally?
There’s no doubt that by many metrics there is a group of “elite” English universities – Oxford, Cambridge, UCL, and Imperial. The Russell group comprises these and a few other excellent institutions. But the later additions are simply a group of fairly average universities who thought the £500,000 joining fee was worth paying to try to convince students and others that they had elite status too. Worryingly, it seems that the Russel Brand Group Group Brand has been marketed so effectively that politicians are starting to talk as if “research intensive” and “Russell Group” mean one and the same thing.