not a book log
Nov. 13th, 2005 11:30 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I finally got a copy of Freakonomics through the library and was rather disappointed; I think that perhaps my expectations had been inappropriately raised by the gushing commentary of others. It's not that it isn't enjoyable - it's just that it's not the kind of revelatory exercise I'd been led to believe. (And, suspecting it wasn't so much that as suggested, I'd tried to pad expectations against, but apparently, did not do so enough.) It's a fairly straightforward application of basic economic analysis to a series of issues and circumstances, some of which are entertainingly hot-button, others of which aren't.
The book claims not to have a central theme per se', but it actually does - the last several pages spell it out for you in case you haven't gotten it yet. I hope they chose not to state their point as such with the intent that you'd decide the theme was your own, and adopt it. Regardless, that theme - "conventional wisdom isn't," illustrated by a series of data-driven economic analyses of various subject - isn't exactly a shock, particularly not if you're used to the idea that facts mean things and that opinions do not determine absolute reality.
Anyway, In a few cases, the data itself was interesting, and some of the stories that framed the data were also interesting, so that's all good. It's is an entertaining way to spend a couple of hours. I suspect it'd make good airplane or bus reading. Just don't expect more than that.
Aside from that, it's a marvelously foggy, rainy, stay-inside-and-watch-the-birds outside kind of day. The last of the leaves are being knocked off the trees, so I'll have some yard work to do when it finally lets up later this week - assuming it does - but I don't mind that, either. Since the carrots failed - I think something ate them - I'll fall back to Plan B for the semi-raised semi-bed and use it as a tiny mulching box, just to see what happens. And something, we don't know what yet, has finally figured out the squirrel feeder. I suspect it might just be raccoons, which I don't mind as long as we get to see them once in a while. I'm sure, of course, that we still have raccoons around - one of the candle holders has had its glass bell swiped, which seems to be to be pretty clearly a raccoon going "oooh, shiny" and making off with it.
It's so damp out that even the birds are keeping hidden. But some of the fog is burning off, so maybe they'll be out soon.
Here's a picture from the market, last month, one of the last days before it closed for the season:

Well, the Bee is Convinced
And also, for
firni's enlightenment, here's the best I can do with Paul's camera from the doors facing the feeder. I really do look forward to being able to buy a digital body for my Canon lenses someday - I've got a 210mm that should let me capture much more than this:

Untitled (zoom test)
(
firni, do you ever want to do that see-what-pictures-you-can-get-here thing? You mentioned it once probably, I dunno, a year ago?)
On Nov 12, 2005, at 8:27 PM, Mark G------ wrote:
|Previously, Joshua T----- wrote:
||http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/bandt/html/veraz.htm:
||Its monumental 693 foot high towers are 1 5/8 inches farther apart at
||their tops than at their bases because the 4,260 foot distance between
||them made it necessary to compensate for the earth's curvature. Each
||tower weighs 27,000 tons and is held together with three million rivets
||and one million bolts. Seasonal contractions and expansions of the
||steel cables cause the double-decked roadway to be 12 feet lower
||in the summer than in the winter.
|I like how bridge engineers always claim their alignment error is
|intentional to compensate for the earth's curvature.
This is a question that can be answered by mathematics!
Okay, so it's an east-west bridge, if this map I found on the site is right. It's at or near the latitude of a google-found Staten Island reference point, which is to say, 40.628781 degrees north.
The circumference of the earth is 6378km at the equator. The circumference of the earth at any latitude foo is:
2*pi*r*cos(foo)
Which in this case produces:
30414.05268028723 km, or
1197403647.608854 inches
The length of the bridge (D1) between pylons is 4260 feet (according to Josh's post), or 51120 inches.
The height of each of the bridge's towers is 693 feet, or 0.2112264 kilometers. Adding that to the radius of the earth yields an increased circumference at that latitude of:
30415.05993191111km, or
1197443303.184557 inches.
Using math, we know that the distance D2 between the two towers at top vs. at bottom should be at the same ratio as the difference between the two circumferences. So therefore:
D2= 51120*(1197443303.184557/1197403647.608854)
And that the actual difference between the base and tops should be
D2-D1
or
51120*(1197443303.184557/1197403647.608854)-51120
Which, in turn, yields:
1.69 inches.
Compared to their provided number of 1.625 inches, that yields a disparity of 0.065 inches, or 0.000127% of the bridge's listed length between towers.
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to toss that up to rounding.
(Of course, it's more likely they did exactly what I did here, and rounded to the nearest 1/8th.)
The book claims not to have a central theme per se', but it actually does - the last several pages spell it out for you in case you haven't gotten it yet. I hope they chose not to state their point as such with the intent that you'd decide the theme was your own, and adopt it. Regardless, that theme - "conventional wisdom isn't," illustrated by a series of data-driven economic analyses of various subject - isn't exactly a shock, particularly not if you're used to the idea that facts mean things and that opinions do not determine absolute reality.
Anyway, In a few cases, the data itself was interesting, and some of the stories that framed the data were also interesting, so that's all good. It's is an entertaining way to spend a couple of hours. I suspect it'd make good airplane or bus reading. Just don't expect more than that.
Aside from that, it's a marvelously foggy, rainy, stay-inside-and-watch-the-birds outside kind of day. The last of the leaves are being knocked off the trees, so I'll have some yard work to do when it finally lets up later this week - assuming it does - but I don't mind that, either. Since the carrots failed - I think something ate them - I'll fall back to Plan B for the semi-raised semi-bed and use it as a tiny mulching box, just to see what happens. And something, we don't know what yet, has finally figured out the squirrel feeder. I suspect it might just be raccoons, which I don't mind as long as we get to see them once in a while. I'm sure, of course, that we still have raccoons around - one of the candle holders has had its glass bell swiped, which seems to be to be pretty clearly a raccoon going "oooh, shiny" and making off with it.
It's so damp out that even the birds are keeping hidden. But some of the fog is burning off, so maybe they'll be out soon.
Here's a picture from the market, last month, one of the last days before it closed for the season:

Well, the Bee is Convinced
And also, for
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)

Untitled (zoom test)
(
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
On Nov 12, 2005, at 8:27 PM, Mark G------ wrote:
|Previously, Joshua T----- wrote:
||http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/bandt/html/veraz.htm:
||Its monumental 693 foot high towers are 1 5/8 inches farther apart at
||their tops than at their bases because the 4,260 foot distance between
||them made it necessary to compensate for the earth's curvature. Each
||tower weighs 27,000 tons and is held together with three million rivets
||and one million bolts. Seasonal contractions and expansions of the
||steel cables cause the double-decked roadway to be 12 feet lower
||in the summer than in the winter.
|I like how bridge engineers always claim their alignment error is
|intentional to compensate for the earth's curvature.
This is a question that can be answered by mathematics!
Okay, so it's an east-west bridge, if this map I found on the site is right. It's at or near the latitude of a google-found Staten Island reference point, which is to say, 40.628781 degrees north.
The circumference of the earth is 6378km at the equator. The circumference of the earth at any latitude foo is:
2*pi*r*cos(foo)
Which in this case produces:
30414.05268028723 km, or
1197403647.608854 inches
The length of the bridge (D1) between pylons is 4260 feet (according to Josh's post), or 51120 inches.
The height of each of the bridge's towers is 693 feet, or 0.2112264 kilometers. Adding that to the radius of the earth yields an increased circumference at that latitude of:
30415.05993191111km, or
1197443303.184557 inches.
Using math, we know that the distance D2 between the two towers at top vs. at bottom should be at the same ratio as the difference between the two circumferences. So therefore:
D2= 51120*(1197443303.184557/1197403647.608854)
And that the actual difference between the base and tops should be
D2-D1
or
51120*(1197443303.184557/1197403647.608854)-51120
Which, in turn, yields:
1.69 inches.
Compared to their provided number of 1.625 inches, that yields a disparity of 0.065 inches, or 0.000127% of the bridge's listed length between towers.
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to toss that up to rounding.
- Solarbird
(Of course, it's more likely they did exactly what I did here, and rounded to the nearest 1/8th.)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 07:35 pm (UTC)do you ever want to do that see-what-pictures-you-can-get-here thing? You mentioned it once probably, I dunno, a year ago?
Refresh my memory. I can't even remember what I made for dinner last week.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 07:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 07:41 pm (UTC)p.s.
Date: 2005-11-13 11:54 pm (UTC)This is provided I can get out the house.
Re: p.s.
Date: 2005-11-14 07:06 pm (UTC)Re: p.s.
Date: 2005-11-14 07:34 pm (UTC)SMEG
Re: p.s.
Date: 2005-11-14 07:41 pm (UTC)