Along with the expertise that I have attained comes a certain smugness. I am certainly sympathetic to those who have difficulty integrating technology into their lives. After all, it really isn’t always so intuitive and easy. I appreciate that most people do not find their TVs, computers, iPods, etc. as transparent to operate as I do. That does not preclude me from enjoying some of the “Tech Support Tales” that you can find on the interweb. These are stories, and in some cases transcripts, of actual calls to technical support phone lines. Here’s one example:

Tech Support: “I need you to right-click on the Open Desktop.” Customer: “Ok.”
Tech Support: “Did you get a pop-up menu?”
Customer: “No.”
Tech Support: “Ok. Right click again. Do you see a pop- up menu?”
Customer: “No.”
Tech Support: “Ok, sir. Can you tell me what you have done up until this point?”
Customer: “Sure, you told me to write ‘click’ and I wrote ‘click’.”
Tech Support: “Ok, did you type ‘click’ with the keyboard?”
Customer: “I have done something dumb, right?”

I understand completely the customer’s problem in this case, but it doesn’t make any less funny.

So today I was down in my basement to take a ride on my bike. I normally watch something I have TiVoed to help pass the otherwise boring (but very good for me, yes I know) time. As I turned on the TV, I noticed that there was no signal from the cable box coming through. I looked at the front of the cable box and noticed that the power light wasn’t on. I checked the power cord and saw that it was plugged into and outlet that I confirmed was working. I replugged it in and the power light came on briefly and then went out. I rebooted the TiVo box (which is where the cable box is plugged into) just to make sure that there wasn’t something amiss there. Still no signal from the cable. I also tried plugging the cable box directly into the TV, and still didn’t work.

At this point, I called my cable company’s tech support line. I got through right away. I explained the problem, and the conversation went something like this:

Tech Support: “Do you have the remote control for the cable box handy?”
Me: “Yes”
Tech Support: “Can you press the power button on the remote and tell me what happens?”
Me: “D-oh!”

At some level I would like to believe that I have made my life so much easier with technology that I can no longer figure out how anything actually works. Or it could be that I am just stupid.

I originally said that “people claim,” because I really don’t know anyone who prefers the latter. Personally, I know that the quick rip is always better than the alternative, but I believe that this is probably related to excessive amounts of body hair, so much so (and I don’t mean to brag here) that I am considered to be the equivalent of Mel Gibson among certain species of apes.

But I digress.

I have been watching presidential addresses to joint sessions of Congress since the mid 60s, and the constant interruptions with standing ovations have always been annoying. They are most often done by rote—the president delivers a controversial line like “…and that’s why the United States is the best country in the world,” and the Speaker of the House and Vice President jump up out of their seats as if propelled by grenades. After a while, you get used to it and recognize that it is part of the kabuki dance that is American politics.

That said, I lost all patience for this show during the last administration. I suspect that some of it was that I rarely agreed with anything that guy said. But I came to realize that it was more than that. I wanted to end the ovationeering so that I wouldn’t have to listen to Bush mangle the language any more. Just like a bandage on a hirsute arm, I wanted him to rip off his 5,000-Word Jumble as quickly as possible. Each interruption simply postponed the time when my ears would stop bleeding.

Which brings us to Obama’s speech last night to a joint session of Congress. Obviously, there is no comparison between the styles of Bush and Obama. Leaving aside whether one agrees or disagrees with what’s being said, the quality of Obama’s speech writing and the ease of his delivery stands in stark contrast to what came before. The applausorupptions, however, were even more annoying. One might assume that if one wants to quickly dispose of pain, then the converse should be true, namely that one would want to draw out pleasurable stimuli. But clearly, this isn’t the case. I would actually like to hear what the man has to say in the natural flow of a speech, rather than the chopped up sound bites that get presented. Which is why reading the speech today was so much fun.

But now to the point of this post. I have written before about how it appeared that Obama “gets science” (see Barack on Track, Changeling). As many of you know, the stimulus package increases the budget for NIH by $10 billion and NSF by $3 billion (a 34% increase overall). That clearly shows his administration’s belief in science as one of the drivers of our economic future. As he said last night.

Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years. We’ve also made the largest investment in basic research funding in American history, an investment that will spur not only new discoveries in energy, but breakthroughs in medicine, in science and technology.

But is was these lines in last night’s speech that really sent me out of my chair in wild applause.

So tonight I ask every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training. This can be a community college or a four-year school, vocational training or an apprenticeship. But whatever the training may be, every American will need to get more than a high school diploma. And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself; it’s quitting on your country. And this country needs and values the talents of every American.

It is clear that he is placing a lot of weight on the shoulders of our institutions of higher learning. Large portions of the NIH and NSF budgets will be going to fund research at these places (hopefully, a small amount to my lab). He is also making it clear that he understands how important science and education are to the future of this country. And by calling out parents, students, and educators as he did, he is setting a clear tone of responsibility that is more than a little welcome. It is difficult to overstate how important it is to have a president that values science, education, and responsibility.

For those of you who point out that last night’s speech lacked specifics and was overambitious, let me say this about that: Nerts! I’m sorry to use such language, but it has to be said. The venue last night wasn’t the place for specifics, so hold off until you see what the administration’s budget contains. And if there is one word I’ve learned to hate over the years, it is “overambitious.” This is often used pejoratively in critiques of grant proposals, as if it is a crime to aim high. I want my president to aim high. The worst that will happen is that he comes up a bit short, but will accomplish quite a bit on his way to these lofty goals. That, my friends, is called leadership.

So it is now obvious that I have a man crush on the president. I used to think that everyone felt the same way, but then I saw this:

But of course the most noteworthy event on this day was the first post of this blog. Those of you who have been following this compendium of wit and wisdom from the beginning will no doubt remember the fine post I wrote where I gave my coveted endorsement to an obscure senator from Illinois. How did that one work out? I’m not saying that I put that skinny fellow over the top, but I urge you to look at his poll numbers before and after that date.

As I alluded to on the occasion of this blog’s 100th post, I will confess to worrying a little bit about appearing to be self absorbed and self aggrandizing. Those who know me well are aware that it is far too late for those types of concerns.

So as I think back on years worth of on and off blogging, I have to say that it has been a lot more fun that I thought it would be. I started this thing mostly as a technical challenge—I just wanted to know how the whole blogging thing worked. I also thought it would be a nice place to put up the occasional interesting link to share with friends and family. What I hope for in the next year is that I can keep up the momentum and maybe even coax a few people to read this thing.

Proponents contend that such life-lists are an efficient way to bring long-lost high school or college friends up to speed, and to take existing friendships to a deeper level of intimacy by conveying new aspects of their personalities or new information about their experiences. “It’s fun facts to learn about people you thought you knew a lot about already,” Carey said. “It’s your chance to kind of share your heart and what’s going on inside you.”

But not everyone agrees. There are some who worry about both receiving and getting too much information about their friends and acquaintances. Still others think that the concept is flawed from the get go.

A big part of the problem [...] is the number that defines the phenomenon. “There’s probably not 25 really interesting facts about anybody,” he said. “You could get 12 really good ones, and then you start hitting the bottom of the barrel.”

I take this as a challenge. For you, my faithful readers, I give you 25 Random Things About Me:

25. I once had a dog named Sparky for dinner. He was well behaved.

24. I have a haircut that requires very little prep time in the morning.

23. My CIA code name is “Barnaby”

22, I once wrote a fan letter to a pig.

21. I have an MBA.

20. I have forgotten more statistics than you will ever know.

18. I don’t count backwards very well.

17. I once competed in a ski race, and would have won my age group if I was an 87 year-old woman with one leg.

16. I’m a joker. I’m a smoker. I’m a midnight toker. Don’t want to hurt no one.

15. I can bench press my own weight 10 times. I only own a 5 pound weight.

14. I still think that I will begin to develop an accent from the old country when I turn 60.

13. I have seen Blazing Saddles over 20 times, and I am a lawyer. Wait, that’s not me.

12. I can make any food item into a Frittata.

11. I vomited in a cab once. Wanna see?

10. I sometimes keep Netflix movies at home for over a month.

9. I have a loathsome elbow disease.

7. I don’t count backwards very well.

6. I sometimes repeat myself.

5. I was the fifth Beatle.

4. My name is “The Other Gordon”

3. I have the hands of a sturgeon.

2. I almost beat Ken Jennings while watching Jeopardy on my couch. Okay, it was a rerun.

1. I make excellent pot holders. What color would you like?

generates musical accompaniment to match a singer’s voice. Just choose a musical style, sing into your PC’s microphone, and Songsmith will create backing music for you. Then share your songs with your friends and family, post your songs online, or create your own music videos.

This software is clearly targeted to amateurs and wannabes, and from all accounts it works pretty much as you expect, giving pedestrian, generally uninteresting accompaniment to one’s creations. Their commercial is an absolute hoot, and clearly demonstrates the “range” of the product.

But it turns out that serious musicians could use this software to to provide alternative arrangements to their classics. Well, not actually. But the geniuses on YouTube have taken the audio tracks from an impressive array of the artists and have seen what Songsmith can to them.

First up, Roxanne, by The Police.

Next we have We Will Rock You, by Queen.

And finally, a political/cultural statement.

Well, whatever it was, it was pretty damn good. You simply have to love an inaugural (THAT’S the word!) address where he mentions “data” and “statistics” in the first 5 minutes.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable, but no less profound, is a sapping of confidence across our land; a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, that the next generation must lower its sights.

Not only did he use the words, but he used them correctly. I’m simply not used to a President that does that. Of course, later in the speech, he made my heart soar with the following words:

We will restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its costs.

All in all a forceful, appropriate, and, dare I say, hopeful, speech (That sentence, by the way, has set a new standard in the use of the comma). It takes some pretty large cojones to delineate the changes his administration will make while his predecessor is sitting right there. His moves in the first few days of office, although expected, were still pretty stunning in setting a new course for this country. And it seems like most people, save Fox News, are willing to give him a break for the first couple of weeks. See this clip from The Daily Show for the alternative view.

In the spirit of change, my relationship to social media is also undergoing a little spruce up. The first year anniversary of this blog is coming up shortly, and I’ve decided undergo a little facelift. Some of you may have noticed some changes in the sidebar, and I will be making some other changes that will improve the world’s access to all things Glenn.

Toward that end, I started twittering last week. For those who don’t know, Twitter is a social networking site that asks the question “What are you doing right now?” Users post 140 characters describing what they’re doing, and those that subscribe to their feed can read these “tweets.” I approached this with some skepticism, but I am finding it somewhat entertaining, and it has fun to follow the few people I know on the site and see what they’re up to. If you are on the Twitter, you can find me at “jbsaywhat.” I’ll follow you if you follow me.

As if that wasn’t enough, I am using FriendFeed, which is a sight that aggregates all of my social networking feeds (blogs, twitter, Flickr, etc.) in one place. It is a free site, and even though I’ve only been using it since the weekend, I can see where it would be very useful for families and friends to keep in touch. Here’s the link to my feed.

So that is all for now. Keep an eye out for what might be a major redesign of the blog. Or just minor tweaks. Either way, it will made with you, the loyal reader, in mind.

In advance of those closest to me arranging for an intervention, I have decided to come clean, so to speak, with my problem.

The sentence leading off this post should not be a surprise to those of you know me. I have not hid my fondness for wine, and, in fact, have blogged about it occasionally here. The fact that I actually blog and have a job that almost defines nerdinesss seals the deal on that end.

(Let me add as further proof that when I found that my my spell checker thought that “nerdiness” wasn’t a word, I decided to look it up on the interweb. I eventually found myself at a web site that linked the following ad with the word in question. So all in all I suppose that if the web site is dynamically associating ad content with searches, I am, as a nerd, in good company.)

But let’s get back on track here. It turns out the perfect marriage of the two prominent traits of mine is an online database called Cellartracker. This web site now carries information on about 11.3 million bottles of wine, and has nearly 70,000 uers, of which I am one. This web site not only allows you to track wines in your cellar, but it also has over 750,000 reviews written by the users. I have been using this for nearly 4 years now, and have found it to be an amazing resource for keeping track of wines that I have in my cellar, wines that I have purchased on futures, as well as wines that I have consumed.

Because the information is stored as a database, you can generate all sorts of reports of varying degrees of interest. For example, you can find out from the consensus “drinking window” which of the wines in your cellar should be consumed before they go bad. You can find out how the price you paid for the wine compares to the average of other users of the site. While this particular feature can be used in a post hoc manner to inflate one’s sense of worth (so I’ve heard), it is particularly useful if you consult it before buying the wine.

But one of the failures of this database is that you actually have to be pretty religious about updating it. Well, technically, you really don’t have be that compulsive about it, unless of course you like wine and are a nerd, which we’ve previously established. Anyway, I tend to be reasonably attentive to managing my cellar, and definitely add wines to the database as I purchase them. What I’m not so good at is deleting the wines from the cellar after they’re removed.

So this weekend I decided to update my database. This entailed printing out the database—for fellow geeks, I will mention that Cellartracker provides a great Excel export feature—and then taking it downstairs and going through each bottle in my collection and comparing it to the list. For most people, this would be just as much fun as you would imagine. I, on the other hand, was completely taken with this task. This ended up as an ultimate fantasy weekend for the wine nerd. I won’t tell you how long it took to do this, but the fact that I now recognize that I have a problem should tell you everything.

When I completed the task, I then spent some time going through the different reports. Here are some random facts:

• I have 795 bottles in my collection, with 43 pending.
• In an odd coincidence, I have consumed 795 bottles in the 4 years that I’ve maintained the database. That means an average of one bottle every other day, which sounds about right.
• I bought 335 bottles for my extended family and friends, and gave 64 away.
• 679 of the bottles are from France, with over half being Rhone wines. I was surprised to find that I have almost as many bottles from Spain as from the USA (<20).

So that is just a small inkling of the terribly fascinating information that is available from this database. Not surprisingly, the overall cost for all the wine purchased and consumed can be accessed, and I suspect that this number might well be of greater interest to the reader. Because certain people with whom I share and house and bank account occasionally read this blog, let me say as previous generations of Rosen men have said in the past:

It’s only pennies a day, dear. Pennies a day.

I am tempted to leave this as an exercise for the reader, but I am sure that you’ve all guessed the real reason. I am, in essence, quite lazy. It seems that I would use pretty much any excuse to avoid writing. I knew it was bad when the televised version of the World Poker Tour held my interest for nearly a half hour. To be sure, I have had a pretty busy couple of months at work. The past two weeks, for example, were spent preparing four scientific posters for the annual Society for Neuroscience Annual Meeting which takes place next week in DC. It takes a fair amount of time to put together an attractive graphic layout, not to mention making up all the data. (To quote Foghorn Leghorn “Ah say, it’s a joke, son”).

Actually, I don’t think I am all that lazy. The truth is that I really didn’t have that much to say that I thought would be all that interesting. What is interesting about the speed with which information now gets conveyed, is that it becomes increasingly difficult to have a thought that is somewhat unique. Like everyone in the US (and beyond, I gather), I followed the Presidential election very closely. Trust me when I tell you that I had tons of pithy and incisive comments to make about the debates, Palin, the environment, elitism (again), etc. But as I began to write them down, I soon realized that they simply weren’t all that original. I understand that not having novel viewpoint doesn’t necessarily preclude one from speaking one’s mind—Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would be out of work if that were the case—but it just didn’t seem right to me.

I also found that when I would go on a rant in with my friends and family, it basically turned into a “group think” in the worst way possible. The sad fact is that I live in a part of the country and work in a place and live with people who basically think pretty much the same as I do. (I understand that that might be scary thought for some of you, but rest assured that most of these people are otherwise quite normal.) While it is sometimes nice to get a “call and response” type interaction going, it is less fulfilling that getting a good discussion going among people who honestly disagree.

Which brings me to my in-laws. One of the few good arguments I had about certain aspects of the election occurred when Jim and Dena visited a few weeks back. At one point, we needed to get actual facts to bolster our discussion. I used Cha Cha, which is a free service that allows you to phone in or SMS any question and get an answer via SMS in a few minutes (did you know, for example, that the top 5% of US wage earners pay 57% of the taxes?). In any event, that was fun discussion.

But back to Jim and Dena’s visit. Once we had settled our argument (I won), we decided to go and visit the Institute of Contemporary Art at its new home on Fan Pier in Boston. There was an installation by Tara Donavan that is a must see. She basically takes common objects—toothpicks, plastic cups, cellophane tape, styrofoam cups—and makes absolutely beautiful pieces out of them. I can’t remember an exhibit where all four of us were so smitten.

After we left the museum, we wandered down to Rowe’s Wharf and then onto the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, which is the new parkland area built on top of the big dig. What we saw while there gave me hope in mankind. If the people who work on signs have this kind of sense of humor, then perhaps all is not lost.

In any event, I promise to post more often. And the letter is in the mail.

There were two odd events that occurred during the run up to the move that give, for better or worse, an insight as to how my mind works. Before dealing with the initial incident, let me digress. I attended a college that provided maid service once/week where they would straighten up, change our sheets, and make sure that we didn’t destroy the room. “Casa de Rosen” was, I’ve been told, such an ungodly mess that I had to bribe the maid to enter my room. It is safe to say that in general, I am/was considered to be somewhat of a slob.

But that is not an entirely true characterization. I will concede that I can be quite messy, but eventually even I can no longer stand it. I react by initiating what can only be called a “cleaning frenzy” that results in my places becoming habitable. Parenthetically, I will add that it is safe to say that my threshold for action is somewhat higher than that of my wife, but over the years I have begun to recognize the subtle signs she gives me and get myself in gear.

So back to the move. By Tuesday I had spent the the previous 4 days finishing all the packing and purging and cleaning that I could do in advance of the movers. At the end of the day, I decided that it would be a good idea to clean up my desktop. The desktop on my computer. I’ll repeat that: The desktop on my computer.

What on earth was I thinking? Was cleaning my desktop going to make my computer lighter? Was purging old files going to help consolidate things so there would be less to pack? Obviously, I had completely been consumed by the cleaning fever, and simply had to make my desktop spotless.

The other odd interaction happened at lunch on Wednesday. I met with my longtime colleague, Al. He was the foolish man who initially hired me as a post-doc for his lab, and we have been collaborating and sharing lab space since that time. He asked me whether I was a little sentimental about leaving the lab space that we had occupied since 1982. I remarked that I tended not to get too sentimental about buildings (I’ve blogged about this before). What he next said, drew me up short: “I was asking because you’ve spent half your life in that space.”

Yikes. I could quibble that 26 years in one space is only 49.056% of my life, but the point is taken.

For reference, I am putting in some pictures of our space taken before we moved in. Once we’re fully ensconsed this week, I will include some more.

This is the big one for me. For years, we’ve been ping-ponged back an forth with regard to what is healthy to eat. First we needed to eliminate fats, but then just saturated fats. Carbs were first a good substitute for too much meat, now carbs are, to put it simply, death. What do these strictures have in common? They were all based on meager (to be generous) data.

People who know me are sick of my harping on this, but ever 2000, when I read “The Soft Science of Dietary Fat,” I have approached much of these guidelines with a pillar of salt (I guess that is my Lot in life. Get it?). Anyhoo, follow the links in the Tierney’s article to see the latest research that once again fails to show any link between dietary fat and serum cholesterol.

2. Your car’s planet-destroying A/C

Once again, I am right. I have argued with my spouse for years about this issue. I have always contended that using air conditioning on the highway (with the windows closed) actually saves gas because it allows for a more aerodynamic trip. I was told that I was simply using this theory to justify my comfort. This may be true, but now there is at least data to support me.

3. Forbidden fruits from afar

Others have pointed out that shipping produce locally sometimes leaves a bigger carbon footprint than shipping from across the globe because longer distance shipping is mostly by boat, which is better than planes and trucks. Interesting, nonetheless.

4. Carcinogenic cellphones

Am I worried that some neurosurgeons are suggesting to the physicians in their department that they stop using cell phonees? I just got an iPhone. I’ll give you my iPhone when you pry it from my cold, dead ear.

5. Evil plastic bags

Apparently it takes more energy to produce paper, as opposed to plastic, bags. This is news to me. Although paper takes up more space in the landfill, I wonder if it still degrades faster than plastic. I seem to recall reading somewhere that most landfills are packed so tightly that nothing degrades.

6. Toxic plastic bottles

As they say down in Texas, I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I know people who do. I guess it is OK that manufacturers are taking BPA out of their products, but I suspect that Tierney is right, and that this is yet another big scare that is based on weak data.

7. Deadly sharks

One fatal shark attack in the world last year. Enough said.

8. The Arctic’s missing ice

This was another surprise to me. I guess it is good news that the melt this year was not as great as expected, but the worry about the long term health of the planet is still probably worth considering.

9. The universe’s missing mass

I don’t know nothing ’bout birthin’ no universe.

10. Unmarked wormholes

I got nothing.

What that means, of course, is that I have neglected the blog (and, I’ve been told, my family and basic hygiene). But that has now come to an end. This week the wonderful folks at WordPress, the developers of the free blogging platform that I use, have released an iPhone app so that I can blog from my phone.

So as you can now see, I can deliver an endless stream of mindless drivel from anywhere.

By all accounts, Apple’s and AT&T’s introduction of the iPhone 3G yesterday did not go smoothly. There appeared to be a perfect storm of product introductions and lack of planning by Apple that ended up causing a number of customers leaving the Apple store less than satisfied with the shopping experience. What caused the problem?

1. Lots of pent-up demand

Contrary to what many analysts thought, the demand for this version of the iPhone either met or exceeded that or the previous version. The lines outside of Apple and AT&T stores were at least as long (or longer) than those the accompanied the introduction of the original iPhone last year.

2. The simulatneous introduction of iPhone 2.0 software

Apple has now opened up the iPhone to outside developers who have now released 100s of new applications that are downloadable directly from an iPhone with the updated 2.0 software. The key issue that in order to update an original iPhone with the new software, the owner had to tie into the Apple servers and re-activate the phone.

3. The simultaneous introduction of MobileMe

Apple has also migrated their so-so .Mac service to the horribly-named MobileMe. There are going to be advantages to this new service when it starts working well, including the ability to automatically push updated contacts and calendar events to whatever devices (computers or iPhones) that subscribe to the service. The problem is they launched the new service on the same day.

So the bottom line is that all these simultaneous events resulted in crashing Apple’s servers so that 1) purchasers of the iPhone 3G were not able to activate their phones, 2) people trying to activate their updated original iPhones were unable to do so, rendering their phones useless, and 3) no one could get onto MobileMe on its launch date. Clearly, heads will roll at Apple over this rather spectacular bit of bad planning.

But this also raises the more interesting question, which is this: “What is wrong with these people?” Why in heck were all these people so desperate to have an iPhone that they would line up for over 24 hours to get one. I’ve got news for you: There will be iPhones next week and next month. And you could walk in and get one without a long line.

BTW, I got my iPhone 3G today. And it’s awesome.

During a segment in which Fox & Friends co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade labeled New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and editor Steven Reddicliffe “attack dogs,” Fox News featured photos of Steinberg and Reddicliffe that appeared to have been digitally altered — the journalists’ teeth had been yellowed, their facial features exaggerated, and portions of Reddicliffe’s hair moved further back on his head.

In this article they show the before and after pictures of Steinberg and Reddcliffe, and it is worth your while to look at these. I will say ahead of time that I am not one of those people who generally see anti-semitism around every corner. That said, what is obvious about these amateurish retouchings—at least of the one of Steinberg—is that they seem to use the same kind of exaggerations of physical characteristics that were originally made popular by Joseph Goebbels. As an example, here’s a picture I purloined from The German Propaganda Archive from the infamous film “The Eternal Jew“.

“

So what was the purpose of Fox News changing these photographs? In the best case, it was simply a try to make these guys look a bit uglier. (From a personal perspective, I’m sort of annoyed that that they accomplished this in one case by making Reddcliffe look balder). In the worst case, they are playing into the old anti-semitic chestnut about the Jews controlling the media.

I generally give organizations and the people that comprise them the benefit of the doubt. In this case, Fox News has proven itself over and over again to be a highly partisan, non-fact-based news organization. That they resorted to ad hominem attacks is not particularly unusual for them—it is how they can best fight when the facts are against them. But this is an all-time low. I wonder how Bill Kristol, a main commentator on the network who is of Jewish origin, will react to this.

The reason why I mention all this is by way of noting that my LG phone croaked this week. Just three weeks short of iDay, the screen just went dead. Obviously, I wasn’t going to go back to Verizon and get a new phone (and a new 2 year contract). I checked on-line for used phones, and was going to that route, when I decided to check whether anyone in my lab had an old Verizon phone I could borrow for the three weeks.

The good news was that one of them had an old Razr phone. The great news was that it was pink. That’s right. Pink. I’m a baldy beardo on the north side of 50 carrying around a pink Razr phone. There aren’t many guys in my position who can carry this off, and I am proud to be one of them.

The kicker is that I was able to fix my LG phone by simply taking out the battery and replacing it. I could go back to using that phone, but I’m comfortable enough with my masculinity and my temporary Razr to wait out the days until the iPhone is in the pocket of my tactical pants.

I will mention in passing, however, that I’ve started dotting my “i’s” with hearts and I can’t stop singing songs from High School Musical.

The second reason for loving TiVo is the ability zap uninteresting content, whether it is commercials or a really boring story arc. I have developed a twitch in my right thumb that operates whenever I am confronted by less than interesting content. No matter where I am, I reflexively start hitting the 30-second skip button. This has proved embarassing when I find myself at someone else’s TiVo-free household and am forced to watch regular TV. It gets downright pathological as the thumb starts spasming when I’m in boring conversations at cocktail parties. But that’s another story.

This weekend I was faced with a sporting dilemma. I was playing golf late in the day on Sunday, and was therefore going to miss the final round of the US Open. So I set up the TiVo to record the final round, which was scheduled to end at 9PM eastern time. As it turns out, that was precisely the starting time of game 5 of the NBA finals (Celtics vs. Lakers), so I set that game up to TiVo.

My goal was to maintain a news blackout until I could watch the Open on the TiVo, which is no mean feat given that I was on a golf course. Fortunately, I arrived home ignorant as to the outcome, and proceeded to watch 5 hours of golf coverage in a little over an hour. The end result was a dramatic finish as Tiger sunk a birdie on the final hole to get himself and his recovering left knee into the a playoff scheduled for Monday (more on that in a bit). By that time, we were well into the Celtics game, so I fired up the TiVo and watched that game in its entirety, catching up to the live broadcast by 11 PM or so. While the result wasn’t what I wished for, it was a perfect example of why TiVo rocks.

Now that I was on a roll, I set up the TiVo to record the 18-hole US Open playoff on Monday, which was taking place on ESPN from 12-5:30. As with the day before, I came home having shielded myself from all news about the match, so I was in my naturally ignorant state when I started watching. I got through the first 8 holes or so, and then realized that the good-for-nothing bozos at ESPN switched their coverage to another one of their channels (I assume ESPN2). Switching in midstream is one thing that TiVo just can’t do. So I had to find out who won the Open the way other working stiffs had to find out–by watching selected news highlights.

It was a sad day to be sure, but don’t cry for me Argentina. The British Open is coming up next month, and I’m sure I’ll be in love with my TiVo again.

Although I suspect that there have been some experimentation in Physics classrooms, the science behind this phenomenon has never been rigorously explored. It was thought that perhaps it was the interaction of the covering of the candy with the acidity of the liquid that produced the gushers. The notion of enucleation sites—basically the bumpy surface of the Mento—produced a large number of carbon dioxide bubbles that therefore led to the explosion of the Diet Coke.

A recent paper in the Journal of American Physics now explores this issue directly.

Here’s what they did:

We examined the reaction between Diet Coke and samples of Mint Mentos, Fruit Mentos, a mixture of Dawn Dishwashing detergent and water, playground sand, table salt, rock salt, Wint-o-Green Lifesavers, a mixture of baking soda and water, liquid gum arabic, and molecular sieve beads (typically found in sorption pumps). We also examined the reaction between Mint Mentos and Diet Coke, Caffeine Free Diet Coke, Coca-Cola Classic, Caffeine Free Coca-Cola Classic, seltzer water, seltzer water with potassium benzoate added, seltzer water with aspartame added, tonic water, and diet tonic water. All of the samples were at room temperature unless otherwise indicated.

We constructed a bottle stand (roughly 10° off vertical) to prevent the bottles from tipping over and the liquid from falling back into the bottle. To maintain consistency we also constructed a tube to fit over the mouth of the bottle and a delivery mechanism for the solid materials. The liquid samples, including the gum arabic, the baking soda–water mixture, and the Dawn–water mixture, were administered by injection using a 10 ml syringe with an 18-gauge needle. The seltzer water and tonic water trials were 1 l bottles with 16 g of Mint Mentos added; all other trials were 30 g of solid material added to a 2 l bottle of liquid. The intensity of the reaction was determined by measuring the mass of the bottle using a double pan balance before and after the reaction to determine the mass lost in the reaction and by measuring the horizontal distance traveled by the soda’s spray. To ensure accurate distance measurements and to extract other useful information, a video was made of the reactions, and marker flags were placed every half foot on the level ground, up to a distance of 25 ft away from the bottle stand. For the Mint Mentos and baking soda trials, the pH of the Diet Coke before and after the reaction was measured by a pH meter with a two point calibration.

Sample morphology was determined by imaging the samples in an environmental scanning electron microscope (SEM).4 The uncoated samples were imaged in low vacuum mode. Quantitative surface roughness measurements were made with a Digital Instruments contact mode atomic force microscope (AFM) with Nanoscope III control electronics and a J type scanner with a 24 µm z range. For each of the samples a (10 µm)2 image was acquired, and the root-mean-square (rms) roughness in the image was reported. This size image was chosen for comparison between samples because the samples imaged were quite rough and had significant curvature, and images larger than 100 square µm often resulted in a z range larger than 24 µm.

For the temperature dependent trials one of the Diet Coke 2 l bottles was refrigerated for several hours prior to the experiment. The other bottles were heated in a water bath on a hot plate for approximately 10–20 min. Prior to heating, the bottle was opened to release some of the internal pressure, and then closed again. This procedure prevented the explosion of the bottle during heating, but the early release of some of the carbon dioxide gas may have caused these reactions to be less explosive than the cold or room temperature trials.

They basically found that it is indeed the rough surface of the Mentos, combined with the speed with which it falls to the bottom of the bottle, that causes the eruption of brown yuckiness. What is not to love about this study? This is just a perfect example of why science matters.

In 2006, an Oregon market research firm released an incendiary 500-page report. Its claim: A Humvee (13 miles per gallon city, 16 highway) uses less energy than a Prius (48 city, 45 highway). Scientists quickly debunked the study, but the Hummer lovers got one thing right. Pound for pound, making a Prius contributes more carbon to the atmosphere than making a Hummer, largely due to the environmental cost of the 30 pounds of nickel in the hybrid’s battery. Of course, the hybrid quickly erases that carbon deficit on the road, thanks to its vastly superior fuel economy.

Still, the comparison suggests a more sensible question. If a new Prius were placed head-to-head with a used car, would the Prius win? Don’t bet on it. Making a Prius consumes 113 million BTUs, according to sustainability engineer Pablo Päster. A single gallon of gas contains about 113,000 Btus, so Toyota’s green wonder guzzles the equivalent of 1,000 gallons before it clocks its first mile. A used car, on the other hand, starts with a significant advantage: The first owner has already paid off its carbon debt. Buy a decade-old Toyota Tercel, which gets a respectable 35 mpg, and the Prius will have to drive 100,000 miles to catch up.

It seems to me that this misses the point. I understand the argument that the first owner of used car is the one that pays off the carbon debt of manufacturing, so that the next owner starts with no debt to pay off. But what is the alternative? All cars have to be manufactured and have to have an original owner. Yes, one can think about how to decrease the carbon cost of manufacturing, and that is surely a worthy goal. But is seems to me that the real question is not how many owners a car has, but what its total carbon cost is over the life of the vehicle. It is highly likely that the carbon footprint of the Prius after 10 years will be less than that of the not quite as efficient Tercel. The planet doesn’t care if a car has 2 or 10 owners—the effect on the planet is still the same.

Don’t get me wrong. I think it is a great idea to buy a used car. The longer a car can stay on the road (provided it is running well and efficiently), the better it is for everyone. All I’m saying is that the unit of cost is the car, not the owner. To paraphrase James Carville: “It’s the car, stupid.”