[time 1030] Re: [time 1026] Simpson's Paradox

Hitoshi Kitada (hitoshi@kitada.com)
Thu, 25 Nov 1999 01:23:17 +0900

Dear Robert and All,

ca314159 <ca314159@bestweb.net> wrote:

Subject: [time 1026] Simpson's Paradox

> Dear Hitoshi,
> My condolences on the loss of your relatives.

I appreciate.

> I know you will
> find in yourself a way to express your pain and carry on.

I hope I will not disturb you all by my personal pain anymore.

> ---
> When Bill Moyers interviewed C. N. Yang for the "World of Ideas"
> television series, Yang explained that he felt the U.S. was set up
> to educate only a few "silver bullets" at the expense of the rest,
> whereas the East was educating everyone equally well and but
> not stressing any boldness or individualism in the students.

This has been correct but it is changing rapidly. The younger generation do not
accept the traditional Japanese education and it is repoted in an offical report
that many children do not go to school. They are beginning to refuse the older
"wisdom" as you pointed out in your essay

I do not think this is regretful, but a natural consequence of the pressed form
of asian education.

> Over here it seems everyone is in a power struggle "to win"
> but also it is the "be your own business" attitude that makes
> such competition essential to funding.
> With the high cost of education here (10 fold increased since I was in
> university) it seems now that the professors are the ones getting
> the education at the expense of the students.

Could you explain more concretely the problems in the US?

> Edwin T. Jaynes remarked how he refused to take part in this american
> system and write his thesis with Oppenheimer's (his advisor) ideas
> and not his own. The rest of his life was spent in opposition to
> his peers and he never received the recognition that I think he
> was due. His work in now, getting more attention.
> http://linkage.rockefeller.edu/wli/news/jaynes.html
> ---
> An excerpt from the New York Times article:
> Physicists Invading Geologists' Turf
> "In some ways, they irritate us," said Dr. Dietrich,
> a professor at the University of California in Berkeley,
> speaking for university and government geologists.

Who does "they" mean? I do not find time to see the following article for the
time being.

> You may have to subscribe (for free) in order to access the article:
> ---
> I agree with your remarks on power and time. The world has always
> been that way to this day. But how long can it continue that way ?

It will not continue so long. That is meant by the word "industry." I wanted to
mean some new technolgy common to all.

> We humans think in such small intervals that long-term problems
> surprise us when they finally show their penalties with great force,
> like a repressed memory, or an earth quake. Is the world becoming
> 'wiser' or just 'smarter' ? Isn't there a distinction there ?
> Technology gives us Big Brother:
> http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/echelon991122.html
> for you UNIX fans this is sort of:
> /dev/phone | grep -i "bomb" | NSA > nul
> They must be using quantum computers to parallelize the observation :)

Computation would be necessary to realize the new technology and such
parallelized compuation would be a candidate.

> ---
> I'm reading now a fiction book now by G. G. Simpson (Simpson's Paradox)
> called "The Decronization of Sam Magruder". It's about a man
> who accidently goes back in time after a quantum experiment
> and find he has to learn how to survive in the days of dinosaurs.
> Simpson has an interesting concept of time which inherently has no
> 'future'. The present is like the top-most tip of a tall pine tree
> and the past is the rest. The past "grows" and the present "moves"
> but there is no 'time' in the present.

I agree with the non-existence of the future. The technology will relate to this

> ---
> http://www.bestweb.net/~ca314159/

Best wishes,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Dec 01 1999 - 01:15:40 JST