Matt 24 watch, 158: There, we are all journalists now . . .

It seems that there has been a reaction to my highlighting the implications of Samizdat as a counter to an age of materialist spin, and to my highlighting the misbehaviour of denizens of the evolutionary materialist hate sites, as well as the following particularly outrageous piece of scripture-wrenching by American Atheists replied to here:

At notorious evo mat advocacy sites, there has been further abusive behaviour, duly enabled and tolerated -- exposing yet again the longstanding moral bankruptcy of evolutionary materialism, rooted in its utter want of a worldview foundational IS that can sustain the weight of OUGHT. 

(BTW: The evo mat advocates don't even seem to know enough about what was done to dissidents in the atheistical worker paradise known as the USSR to steer clear of false accusations of mental instability. As in, such now need to explain themselves about cynically falsely accusing dissidents from the party-line talking points of mental instability, locking them up and pumping them full of mind altering drugs through corruption of science, technology, institutions and professions. [cf. here and here also. Let's quote, to understand the utter viciousness of false accusations of mental instability: "The use of [mental] hospitals instead of jails prevents the victims from receiving legal aid before the courts, makes indefinite incarceration possible, discredits the individuals and their ideas . . . " In short, no need to embarrass yourself by addressing inability to answer on the merits, just play dirty tricks and if you have power to then lock people up, do so.] And, short of the full totalitarian power, the abusive evo mat advocates need to answer for their habitual resort to subtler forms of cynically dishonest abuse championed by the neo-marxist (yes, neo-marxist) Alinsky.)

If you are getting flak, you are getting close to the key targets, I suppose.

It looks like advocating a "long tail," each one tell one, samizdat strategy, is close to the target indeed. Let me summarise by key excerpt:

. . . man does not live by bread alone, and there is a hunger for the truth and for the right that in the end cannot be quenched. A hunger that points straight to our Eternal Author.

How does that work, practically speaking?

Say, I spend a month investigating something and pull together my summary report. Next month, I share  what I know with one other trusted person, and then a month later, we both share again. We are now at four who know more than Big Brother wants us to know. The next month, eight are in on the secret. After that, sixteen, thirty-two, and so forth. After thirty-three months, we are at 2^32 power, or 4, 294,967,296.

That's over four BILLION.

One more month, and we have covered the world's whole population.

The world -- in principle -- can know the truth in three years, without access to  instruments of mass manipulation, aka media and education power centres.

In short, sharing the truth a few at a time, and being motivated to pass it along repeatedly, has great power.

Potentially.

A power that is so great that the servants and dupes of deception make sure to put out their spin talking points to smear those who dare stand up, and to distort, confuse and polarise. Not to mention, to outright persecute if they think that will shut down the spread of the unwelcome truth.

Okay, one of my key points was that "Journalism is what we DO, not what we have duly anointed credentials that say we are." Let me prove it by releasing a media statement sampler. As I added to the post that has so obviously stirred evo mat ire:

I am sufficiently moved by outrageous misbehaviour to add a proof of this by sampler, for a media statement -- aim for 250 - 300 words for a release, and for 600 - 750 words for a column or radio talk. The first is about 2 minutes speaking, the second four to five. They could work as a short slot announcement in say a church service, even if the spin-doctors down by the local daily fish wrapper or radio spin zone refuse to publish:

MEDIA STATEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE/EMBARGOED UNTIL DD/MM/YYYY, TT:TT am/pm

Contact :     [name of spokesperson]
Contact Info:   [web page or blog etc]
email:    name@provider.com  (use a throw-away, there are stalkers)  
Date:        Date
Re:       [subject]

CITY, LOCATION, Month, dd, yyyy --  Lead sentence and para, stating a current incident or issue or event on which the statement hangs. It should give who, what where when why how info, in the context of significance to the target audience. Begin , then, with a one to three sentence short paragraph that provides a quick overview of the news-worthy  incident or issue and why it is important. It should read easily and make the bridge and body of your statement/commentary to follow sound exciting to a general audience – the intelligent 12 year old.

Next, provide some bridging and background information on the focal topic, and perhaps, the point you are contending for.  Give pros and cons, or new info that is pivotal. Highlight apt quotes or the like, to strengthen the points. Draw a conclusion and invite a positive response, explicitly or implicitly. Make sure to write your statement in terms that readers, consumers, your target audience, and the general public will understand. Do not use industry terminology, and provide definitions that readers might not know about or understand.

Your text  should explain the purpose, target audience, and benefits of your conclusion and recommendation or invitation to action. It should intrigue the reader to find out more, visit your website, contact you for more information, recommend your key points to a friend, or promote your points to friends, neighbours, co-workers etc.

_______

ABOUT [Source] The final paragraph should be a brief description of the author, his or her basis for credibility  and the products and services s/he provides. Include a summary of other key views supported, and a brief history if relevant. Also include "For more information, contact: " as the last sentence.

There, we are all journalists now. END

For record: A comment on the issues raised by Dr Fuller at the ID blog Uncommon Descent (HT: Gregory and Nullasalus), and onward concerns in the wider context of debates over design theory

Since this blog is subject to hostile scrutiny, I think it useful to mirror a UD post here as well.

Let me highlight, by clipping from the below:

There has been a miasma of scientism underwritten by implicit or explicit materialism and a grossly extrapolated and exaggerated view of the capacity of mechanisms of chance variation and differential reproductive success to innovate body plan level structures that has clouded clarity of thought and that has also created a highly polarised, ideology-driven atmosphere on scientific reconstruction of origins.

That is the sort of reason why some resort to hate sites, personal attacks, smears, outright slander and libel etc. Not to mention censorship, outing tactics, career busting and mafioso-style implied gangsterish threats against family members. All they succeed in doing when they act like that is to expose their want of basic broughtupcy, and to highlight the utter moral bankruptcy of evolutionary materialism, due to its want of a worldview foundation IS adequate to ground OUGHT. Those who act like this, and those who harbour them or indulge in enabling passivity by not correcting them, or — worse — imagine that such misbehaviour is legitimate free comment, show just how bankrupt their thinking has become. From Plato in The Laws, Bk X, this issue of nihilistic factions driven by evolutionary materialist ideology has been a significant concern for the well-being of society.

I trust those who know just what I am speaking of, have enough conscience left to be ashamed. Let us further trust that they will now do better. (And if your conscience is too benumbed to be ashamed, that is a very bad sign.)

Okay, here is the post:

========

I have just now commented in the recent thread on Dr Fuller’s thought, and think it useful to headline for record (especially given some continued abusive misbehaviour at Anti- Evo and linked sites that has come to my attention in recent days):

____________

>> Let me clip a few thought-sparker cites from Dr Steve Fuller:

“The failure of intelligent design theory to specify the intelligent designer constitutes both a rhetorical and an epistemological disadvantage…The epistemological disadvantage is subtler, namely, that intelligent design theory is unnecessarily forced to adopt an instrumentalist philosophy of science, whereby its theory is treated merely as a device for explaining particular phenomena (i.e. as products of intelligent design) without allowing inferences to the best explanation (i.e. the properties of the implied designer).” (171)

“I believe [it] is necessary [to] return to theology as the source of theoretical guidance on the nature of the intelligent designer (Fuller 2008a).” (171)

“In short, by studiously avoiding the appeal to theological arguments as part of their scientific explanations, intelligent design theorists only inhibit their own ability to meet the opposition of Neo-Darwinian apologists like Sober. Admittedly, making such appeals would mean not only re-opening old theological debates but also making them part of secular academic debate. A test of our collective intellectual maturity will lie in our ability to tolerate such a newly charged situation. But as it stands, intelligent design theory does itself no intellectual favours by keeping the identity of the intelligent designer as vague as Neo-Darwinians keep the identity of evolution, even if that practice appears justified as politically expedient.” (173) . . . .

“…[M]y own interest in promoting intelligent design in schools, which is much more positive than Johnson’s original worries about naturalism turning into an established religion. I actually believe that the deep theological roots of intelligent design theory provide a robust basis for perpetuating the radical spirit of inquiry that marks both philosophy and science at their best – not at their worst, as their collective response to intelligent design has put on public display (Fuller 2009b). As a true social constructivist (Fuller 2000b: Preface), I see myself as one of the constructors of intelligent design theory. I am not simply remarking from the sidelines about what others have done or are doing, as a historian or a journalist might. Rather I am making a front-line contribution to defining the theory’s identity.” (177)

“In terms of pedagogical implications, my support of intelligent design goes beyond merely requiring that students learn the history and philosophy of science alongside their normal studies. It involves reengineering the science curriculum so that its history and philosophy falls within its normal remit.” (180)

In my initial response, I first think that there is merit in raising the issues of phil of sci and what I guess could be called philosophy of nature, i.e. discourse on the relevant aspects of metaphysics etc. Also, relevant history of science and of ideas is key context. A familiarity with at least the sort of ideas on the nature and limitations of scientific knowledge that Newton discussed in his General Scholium and in Opticks, Query 31, will be a useful first nexus for all of this.

That said, I would look on the strengths and limitations of knowledge deriving from inductive inquiry (including abduction) and the inherent open-endedness of science as a consequence, as a powerful way to clear the air. There has been a miasma of scientism underwritten by implicit or explicit materialism and a grossly extrapolated and exaggerated view of the capacity of mechanisms of chance variation and differential reproductive success to innovate body plan level structures that has clouded clarity of thought and that has also created a highly polarised, ideology-driven atmosphere on scientific reconstruction of origins.

That is the sort of reason why some resort to hate sites, personal attacks, smears, outright slander and libel etc. Not to mention censorship, outing tactics, career busting and mafioso-style implied gangsterish threats against family members. All they succeed in doing when they act like that is to expose their want of basic broughtupcy, and to highlight the utter moral bankruptcy of evolutionary materialism, due to its want of a worldview foundation IS adequate to ground OUGHT. Those who act like this, and those who harbour them or indulge in enabling passivity by not correcting them, or — worse — imagine that such misbehaviour is legitimate free comment, show just how bankrupt their thinking has become. From Plato in The Laws, Bk X, this issue of nihilistic factions driven by evolutionary materialist ideology has been a significant concern for the well-being of society.

It is in that context that the sort of links from history of ideas to history issues raised by Weikart et al, become highly relevant.

But, as can be seen here, we are looking at phil context of scientific knowledge, and at broad, philosophically and historically informed questions of science in society. Worldviews and cultural agendas and issues.

By contrast, as we narrow focus to the logic of inductive warrant that makes certain ideas warranted as empirically reliable and useful so far, we can see that — again from Newton et al on — there is reasonable warrant for caution and what can be called, chastened or humbled realism that embraces some degree of instrumentalism in understanding scientific knowledge. Especially, on origins science matters where in reconstructing a remote and unobservable past we must rely on factual adequacy relating to traces of the past we can observe today and tested signs of adequate dynamics to produce explanations on a best current basis.

Where, instrumentalism can be set in relevant context with a clip from the Stanford Enc of Phil, article on Scientific Progress:

The instrumentalists follow Duhem in thinking that theories are merely conceptual tools for classifying, systematizing and predicting observational statements, so that the genuine content of science is not to be found on the level of theories (Duhem 1954). Scientific realists, by contrast, regard theories as attempts to describe reality even beyond the realm of observable things and regularities, so that theories can be regarded as statements having a truth value. Excluding naive realists, most scientists are fallibilists in Peirce’s sense: scientific theories are hypothetical and always corrigible in principle. They may happen to be true, but we cannot know this for certain in any particular case. But even when theories are false, they can be cognitively valuable if they are closer to the truth than their rivals (Popper 1963). Theories should be testable by observational evidence, and success in empirical tests gives inductive confirmation (Hintikka 1968; Niiniluoto and Tuomela 1973; Kuipers 2000) or non-inductive corroboration to the theory (Popper 1959).

It might seem natural to expect that the main rival accounts of scientific progress would be based upon the positions of instrumentalism and realism. But this is only partly true. To be sure, naive realists as a rule hold the accumulation-of-truths view of progress, and many philosophers combine the realist view of theories with the axiological thesis that truth is an important goal of scientific inquiry. A non-cumulative version of the realist view of progress can be formulated by using the notion of truthlikeness. But there are also philosophers who accept the possibility of a realist treatment of theories, but still deny that truth is a relevant value of science which could have a function in the characterization of scientific progress. Bas van Fraassen’s (1980) constructive empiricism takes the desideratum of science to be empirical adequacy: what a theory says about the observable should be true. The acceptance of a theory involves only the claim that it is empirically adequate, not its truth on the theoretical level. Van Fraassen has not developed an account of scientific progress in terms of his constructive empiricism, but presumably such an account would be close to empiricist notions of reduction and Laudan’s account of problem-solving ability (see Section 3.2).

An instrumentalist who denies that theories have truth values usually defines scientific progress by referring to other virtues theories may have, such as their increasing empirical success. In 1908 Duhem expressed this idea by a simile: scientific progress is like a mounting tide, where waves rise and withdraw, but under this to-and-fro motion there is a slow and constant progress. However, he gave a realist twist to his view by assuming that theories classify experimental laws, and progress means that the proposed classifications approach a “natural classification” (Duhem 1954).

Evolutionary epistemology is open to instrumentalist (Toulmin) and realist (Popper) interpretations. A biological approach to human knowledge naturally gives emphasis to the pragmatist view that theories function as instruments of survival. Darwinist evolution in biology is not goal-directed with a fixed forward-looking goal; rather, species adapt themselves to an ever changing environment. In applying this account to the problem of knowledge-seeking, the fitness of a theory can be taken to mean that the theory is accepted by members of the scientific community. But a realist can reinterpret the evolutionary model by taking fitness to mean the truth or truthlikeness of a theory . . .

There is a lot of room for debates in there, but it should be clear that scientific knowledge is inescapably provisional and that inductive reasoning is only capable of a weak form warrant. Inductive knowledge claims are not certain beyond correction. And, it is fair comment to note that different scientific claims come with differing degrees of corroboration and differing degrees of openness to empirical testing. So, as we are less and less open to testing, and as the degree of warrant decreases, we would be well advised to hold claims with a lesser degree of certitude. In particular, the notion of a general authority of Science that gives an imprimatur of practical certainty to dominant theories is — for good reason — highly suspect.

In that context, I would hold that the design inference explanatory filter (addressed per aspect of a phenomenon or object etc) — and/or its equivalent in mathematically structured models of complex specified information — is a legitimate approach to inferring cause on a best explanation basis, in contexts where we do not have direct access to observe the causal process in action. It is interesting in this context to see the objections often made, that there is no independent access to the inferred designer so the inference can be dismissed and denigrated. This of course is ideologically loaded and begs the question that the reason why we are inferring is that we need to see what inferred cause is best adequate, given that we did not and often cannot observe the actual causal process at work. In short, the objection is self-serving and selectively hyperskeptical.

But to infer cause by design as process or mechanism, is manifestly not to infer the identity or personal characteristics of the designer. One may infer arson as cause of a fire without knowing the culprit. Of course, that inferred deed may suggest a moral characteristic, but that is a question of motives.

My broader point is that design as process is separable as a matter of inductive investigation, from the identity or characteristics of the candidate designers in question. All that a design inference requires is a sufficiently open mind that is willing to accept the possibility of design — not ruling it out a priori — and a willingness to accept that various causal processes tend to leave characteristic signs that can be tested and warranted as reliable signs of design. With a growing toolbox of relevant techniques and signs in hand, one has a perfect epistemic right to infer the causal process on the observed sign.

One may then wish to debate characteristics of candidate designers, but that is a further exercise.

Where prof Fuller is quite right to be concerned, is the point that what is happening is that an institutionally dominant ideological school — we can term it a priori evolutionary materialist scientism — is trying to censor the reasonable process of inference in the interests of their school. So, ironically, they have made the penumbra of issues and concerns above highly relevant to a fair evaluation of scientific practice, science education, and to science, society and good citizenship concerns.

In particular as we see science professors championing atheism in the name of science — never mind the sophomoric bluster typically involved — and as we see them embracing, using, enabling and harbouring nihilistic, amoral, might/manipulation makes ‘right’ tactics and as we see them championing the ill-considered distortion of foundational societal and cultural institutions, they are the best argument as to why evolutionary materialistic scientism and secular humanism are intellectually and morally bankrupt and a positive danger to the well-being of our civilisation.

So, we do have to set science in the context of ideas and issues, and in the wider context of impact on society. But, I still think that the inference to design as cause is properly distinct from that wider connexion. Sufficiently so, that we may undertake a technical inquiry as to how well warranted the design inference is. The answer to that is actually blatant: very well warranted indeed, especially as we focus on functionally specific complex organisation and associated information [FSCO/I], the relevant form of CSI. Especially where the info is in the form of digitally coded algorithmic or linguistic symbol strings.

That is why many thoughtful people hold and will continue to hold for the foreseeable future, that C-chemistry, aqueous medium cell based life that pivots on DNA is designed. The supportive, fine tuned physics of the observed cosmos that supports that also warrants a design inference. So does the information-centric nature of body plans and key features of life forms, like the bird lung or wing and the human vocal apparatus and language ability.

We are not going away, and we are not perverse or perverted to hold such views. The resort to slander-laced smears, cruel mockery, outing tactics and threats against careers or family simply underscores the moral bankruptcy and ill-will of objectors who resort to such, or passively enable or harbour such.

We are here, we are qualified to address scientific and linked phil, history of ideas and societal issues. We have good reason to call for reform in science, in the academy, in education, in the media, and in society. We are not going away, and we will stoutly defend our reputations, careers, families and civilisation against such ideologically motivated bully-boy tactics.

And, at length, we will prevail.>>

____________

Since this is a comment in a fresh thread, I encourage comments there, and comments will be disabled here.

======== 

A response to issues, and in light of recent bully-boy tactics at hostile sites. END

Capacity focus, 52: Reforming ICT education, to equip people for productivity in the digital control and digital communication age

I am convinced that ICT education has to be transformed to equip people to be productive in the age of digital control systems and digital communications. "How to play with Wintel machines using MS Office applications such as Word, Excel and Powerpoint" is no longer nearly good enough. As was discussed here at KF recently, that is going to call for education in programming in realistic languages, and it is going to call for being able to work with interfacing, networking and signal processing.

A tall order, but if we are to be competitive in the days ahead, one we have to figure out a way to fill.

Let me speak in the context of the proposed AACCS, assuming that students will have been introduced to computer programming, and are now looking at an interfacing and control course, with things like robots or drip irrigation systems in mind. (Let's hold on networking for now. One slice of a cake has in it all the ingredients.)

The host and target architecture of such a system can be laid out in a diagram, such as:

A host and target interfacing and control system

In this system, the controlled "plant" is monitored by using an array of sensors. The sensor outputs are then processed through instrumentation and are fed back to a digital controller. At some stage, analogue -- smoothly varying -- signals are converted into digital ones, suitable for a digital controller. 

The sensed performance of the plant is then compared to the intended one for that time, and the gap between the two is used to drive controller action. 

The controller puts out a control signal that then drives the plant through power amplifiers, actuators and effectors, the latter perhaps mounting tools. Somewhere in that forward path, if an analogue control signal is needed, there will be digital to analogue conversion. 

Sometimes, though, a digital -- stepwise, discontinuous -- signal is what we need, e.g. turn the power switch on. Such switches are on or off, and there is no relevant intermediate state. 

(In general, a real world controller will need to do both types of control. There is a discrete sequence of steps to be taken: discrete state control, and there may be set values or paths that must be followed smoothly in the face of disturbances, component wear and drift, etc: process regulation or servo-system control. [A car's power steering is a common servo-system, and the float ball level controller in a toilet tank is a familiar process regulator. The flush of course is a massive disturbance, but a desired one, and the float ball controller refills to a controlled level!])

Students, then, should be familiar with the control loop, and with the various elements and components that go into it: plants, sensors, instrumentation, controllers, actuators and effectors. Simple robots and drip irrigation systems are excellent exemplars for that. 

We thus need to become sufficiently familiar with these technologies and how to hook them up together to get  a functioning system.

Something else lurks.

The controller is carrying out digital processing of signals. 

A way to begin to understand that without getting lost in the forest of complex mathematics, is to understand the action of the three basic digital signal processing elements:

Basics of digital signal processing (HT Wiki for the handy simple filters used)

Here, we can see that by combining unit-period delay, gain and summing elements, we can carry out quite sophisticated processing of digital signals. But, the process of sampling, processing through combining networks (esp IIR ones) and so forth have effects on how the signals behave. For instance, if we look back up at the control loop, we can see that we are feeding back the output to affect the input. That means that the system can end up feeding itself and starting to oscillate or it could drive itself hard to a limit, perhaps damaging components. Feedback can introduce instability.

Not good.

That also means that we need to understand how forces and elements that store energy (e.g. if you lift a weight, you store energy in it that can come back out when it falls) tend to act across time, and we need to see how loops create gain and phase shifts that can trigger oscillations. (This is a major headache in control engineering.)

A simple way to look at this, is to see z as a variable that has two perpendicular components, Re-Z and Im-Z. These terms mean real and imaginary, for reasons tracing to the origins of so-called complex numbers. The imaginary component is based on the imaginary square root of minus one, a very useful trick in mathematics. The best way to view Z is to see that it is a composite number, where the real and imaginary parts are like x and y axes respectively. 

Then, we can look at how the transfer function -- a measure of the relationship between output and input -- behaves in the z plane. It turns out that the transfer function, H(z) is normally a ratio of two polynomials: 

H(z) = P(z)/Q(z)

As well all know from high school, polynomials can be factored and this gives rise to roots, where the polynomial's value goes to zero. Obviously, if P(z) is zero, H(z) must be zero. These are the zeros of H. 

But also, Q can go to zero, forcing H to infinity!

These last  -- for reasons we will shortly see -- are called the "Poles" of H.

The poles and zeros of H control the behaviour of a system when an input X(z) is given. For, in the z-domain, output Y(z) = H(z) x X(z). [These are related to the signals we can see in the time domain, y(t), and x(t), by some sophisticated math. But we can think of all of this as a way to turn that math into algebra in the z domain. Similar to how logarithms used to be used to simplify arithmetic in the days before digital calculators became commonplace.]

The magic trick is to imagine that the z-plane is covered by a thin, flexible, stretchy but heavy rubber sheet. Zeros pin it to the plane, and poles stick up under it. And, it turns out that if we cut a circle of unit radius centred on the origin where z = 0, the cross section going around the circle gives us the system's frequency response. 

That it, it tells us how it would behave in response to sine wave signals of varying frequency, up to the limit imposed by the sampling and digitising process. 

Phase-shifting of the sinusoids is also related to the gain behaviour, and so we can spot where there may be problems, as well as see how the system will behave in general. Just what we need for design and testing work.

All of this can be pictured:

The rubber sheet, showing how z-plane poles and zeros drive system response

In short, design boils down to manipulating the heavy rubber sheet. (Easier said than done, but the software that shows the picture helps! Cf this short primer on design, noting the onward linked book. This intro on DSP will also help. This is a full bore textbook on DSP.)

One more thing.

Rigol DS 1052E, US$ 329 - 400 or so, 50 MHz digital 'scope

The issues of time and frequency domain should make the significance of test instrumentation plain.The oscilloscope helps us see what is happening in time, the Fast Fourier Transform driven spectrum analyser helps us see the frequency domain (including frequency response and across-time frequency behaviour), and the logic analyser allows us to inspect the sequence of logic states.

As the Rigol DS 1052E shows, the cost to acquire a reasonable test bench  unit has come way down. 

The sound card type software oscilloscope looked at previously is also worth looking at for more basic work, noting that most control type signals are well under 10 kHz. In fact, the more significant challenge may be to use chopper stabilisation techniques to bring a slowly varying, low amplitude signal into a domain where it can be more easily and accurately processed.

We can thus see a framework for digital productivity emerging, that brings familiarity with ICTs to the table, joins to it programming and interfacing, and applies this to real world productivity.

The challenge is to flesh these ideas out into a reasonable course sequence.

And, given the need to move beyond digital consumption to productivity, the issue is not whether something like that is needed. It is HOW can we do it successfully.

For that, I hope the above is a first, modest step. END

Software-based soundcard Oscilloscopes -- a preliminary note

One of the interesting finds I have been making is the existence and performance of free for download software soundcard oscilloscopes. These use audio inputs and the processing and plotting capabilities of modern PCs to give viable audio bandwidth instruments, though one has to be careful about input and output voltage ranges. 

For instance, they typically enfold a Fast Fourier Transform based audio spectrum analyser, here shown in "waterfall" or 3D mode that takes successive spectral snapshots, showing how the pattern of sound is unfolding as someone speaks amidst background noise:

A "waterfall" view of an audio spectrum, in Visual Analyser that shows how most of the signal energy in speech lies between 100 - 300 and 3,000 - 4,000 Hz. The pattern of resonant peaks -- formants -- is also visible, where the - 60 dB floor is set; actual signals can be seen 40 dB lower if desired but the "hash" will be confusing to the first-time viewer. Analysis of hearing will show how much of our ability to recognise and interpret speech is based on detecting such peaks and how they vary as we manipulate our vocal tracts. Notice, how the scales are logarithmic, not linear so that equal spacings correspond to equal ratios. (Cf discussions on the cepstrum here and here.)

Such packages as Visual Analyser, are interesting and informative. 

I also like Zeitnitz's scope (which seems to be based on the National Instruments LabView platform, but is standalone), and the Virtins RTA has a freebie tier that is upgradable to a full audio suite. You might also like their multi-Instrument, which is available as a 21-day free trial. (These last two put a definite processing load on my Netbook.)

These virtual instruments also point to how software capabilities of modern computers can potentially transform empirical investigations and industrial process control. For instance, typical slowly varying signals can be transformed by chopper stabilisation (cf. here), a form of amplitude modulation that alternately feeds the signal then signal ground into pre-processing amplifiers. That shifts the frequency to be processed out of the "flicker" or "pink" 1/f noise band to the much lower white noise zone, and it also can suppress drift effects. Similarly, video or wide band instrumentation operational amplifiers and associated processing circuitry could open up worlds of useful "roll your own" designs. (For op amps, cf. here, here, here, here and here.)

A basic chopper stabilised amplifier. The oscillator chops the input, acting as an amplitude modulator and moving its i/p from near DC to several hundred Hz, and so takes it into a zone where it is much easier to get a well-behaved amplifier.  The second stage "integrator" acts as a low pass filter, in effect demodulating the signal to recover the base-band, but now at a much higher and precisely determined amplified amplitude. (A chopper does not have to be done electronically, I recall a case of a specialist instrument, where an optical path was chopped with a rotating shutter that gave the pulsed signal.)  Auto zero designs are more advanced. (From Horowitz and Hill, 2nd edn, 1989)

This of course points to the significance of the hardware processing pods that are now marketed to work with PCs to make more capable instruments. Pico is a well known brand. at the low end the DAQ32 is worth looking at. Logger Pro looks interesting as a new way to do physics, chemistry and other scientific exercises in school.

However, something like the above also points to how such modules and libraries can be incorporated into programs used in an interfacing, control and data logging context. END

F/N 1: I suggest the Scientists' and Engineers' Guide to DSP, here. (There is a one file download here, notice how you will have to decrypt by using a provided password. Good enough that you may wish to look at the print version. )  

F/N 2: To try to figure out the Fast Fourier Transform, a first look could be here, noting that our hearing does this in a certain sense. That is, in the cochlea there is an array of hairs that resonate at different frequencies. Hearing is based on exciting these frequency resonances in an array, where the hairs are linked to nerves and are then processed in our brains: frequency comes from the hair excited, and amplitude from how fast the nerve cells are fired. The FFT algorithm is a quick computational way to do much the same, using mathematical tricks. Try also here, here and here. (The last is a book which uses a fair number of BASIC exercises to help build understanding -- a hint for how what we want may be do-able.) In effect:

•  any pulse or wave can be analysed as a combination of sine waves of different frequency, phase and amplitude, 
• a repetitive wave being a pattern of separate frequencies 
• and, a transient pulse like a drumbeat being a continuous smear of sinusoids. 
• A discrete time  digital version can be constructed. 
• This, BTW, is why bandwidth is so important for telecommunications; 
• you can see in the screenshot above that you can get away with 300 - 3,000 Hz for voice comms, 
• which -- per Nyquist -- requires a sampling rate of at least 6,000 samples per second 
• (the quick way to see why is to spot that you want to catch the upswing and the downswing of the sine, where also one will have to filter off at the 3 kHz to prevent a problem known as aliasing)
•  it will work with 8-bit [256 level] uniformly spaced sampling, 
• though it is more effective to use some form of ratio-based compression, to use fine steps for the likely to be low amplitude fine details. 
• And so forth, and more, at length

. . . Sorry, a full-bore analysis and explanation is a serious mathematical exercise that starts from sinusoids, calculus and complex numbers, with series, then heads steeply north. The best I can do in a nutshell is to point to how the ear works. But, the point is, this sort of stuff is now very close to hand when we deal with technological equipment.

F/N 3: NC Lab cloud based numerical modelling is worth the look (and the wider site has other interesting packages).  So also are PSpice student, and LT Spice.

Video: Prof Richard Dawkins (ret'd) struggles with his forays into philosophy

Thanks to UD News we can see prof Dawkins as he struggles with key philosophical challenges to his breezily confident atheism:

It is fair comment to say that he has rushed in well out of his depth. 

For just one instance, philosophically, nothing denotes non-being. As Aristotle put it: what rocks dream of.  But, rocks have no dreams? Precisely.

That is why the philosopher's principle that something does not come from nothing is quite reasonable. And nothing thus is not a proper description of the suggested quantum fluctuation that is used to explain the big bang singularity in some circles.

Well worth a watch, especially as we see his talking points taken up by ever so many of the so-called new atheists. END

PS: For a 101 on philosophical thinking, cf here, and cf here on for a 101 level approach to grounding a theistic, Christian worldview.

Rom 1 reply, 9: The non-mythical Adam and Eve (a video lecture)

Dr Robert Carter of CMI gives a lecture on genetic evidence pointing to the reality of Adam and Eve:

Food for thought. For further food for thought, cf this paper. HT, BA 77. END

Microsoft's Surface -- the tablet form factor converges with the netbook

While fiddling with cepstrum -- pseudo spectrum -- analysis used for audio system and speech and freeware audio analysis oscilloscopes and spectrum analysers, I have to pause.

Microsoft has just unveiled its Surface tablet, with Windows 8, the tabletised version of Windows.

The Surface (credit: CNET)

It will be in two forms (probably released to market in October), and the ARM processor version will have 32 or 64 GB of storage with the now usual SD card slot, as well as a 10.6" diagonal, widescreen in the now common 16:9 aspect ratio. Of course, the price has not yet been announced, but will be "competitive," presumably with comparable tablets. US$ 400+ - 500+ or so in short. 

The pro version will run an Intel processor and the full form Windows 8, so that it can run the typical Windows applications including of course Microsoft Office.

The key wrinkle is that it comes with a cover that doubles as a keyboard. 

In short, we have the clear convergence of netbooks and tablets, here.

Video:

 

All of this underscores how fast the tablet revolution is rising. 

Which points to the significance of the projected US$ 100 or so education tablet based on the Android mobile phone operating system platform. END

Matt 24 watch, 157: Michelle Malkin reminds us of the power of Samizdat and the long tail in the struggle vs spin in the mind/ ideas/ news and views/ "facts"/ education/ truth culture-struggle battlespace in our spiritual war

(Hostile scrutinisers, kindly cf. here , here, here and here on
The vid and remarks below on the founder of Samizdat's fate
will help set our thinking straight on what false accusations of
mental instability by evo mat ideologues have already led to.
And, FYI, THIS is the sort of edu initiative I have in mind.) 

Michelle Malkin is "just" a 90-lb, Filipina blogger and "Grizzly Bear" mom, who happens to be a new media success story. 

In the speech below, she reminds us of the power of samizdat (self-publishing) against truth-challenged, media and education system spin-driven ideologies that dominate the systems of a society:

(Oh, yes, you can see Mrs Palin without the hostile media filters and snippers here, and you may find the discussion of the "Occupy"/Acorn etc. vs. "Tea Party" movements here, interesting [and I do not approve of the advocacy of being grungy and vulgar that one panelist advocates]. And indeed, the precepts of the neo-marxist (yes, neo-marxist) Saul Alinsky -- who founded the Chicago school of "Community Organizers" -- will allow us to understand the significance of having a product of that school in the White House. The now "standard" trifecta fallacy smear and slander tactics of distractive red herrings led away to strawmen soaked in personal attacks or insinuations, and set alight through incendiary talking points, are also worth studying. But that is not my main point.)

What is the main point?

It is right there in the word, Samizdat.

Self-publishing.

In the old, Gulag Archipelago-haunted, secret police, knock- on- the- door- at- 4:00 am Soviet Union that collapsed in 1989 - 91 in large part due to the efforts of its despised dissidents, in the end the "long tail" of concerned citizens who said enough is enough, and investigated and spread the truth by literally writing it out on a few sheets of paper (or if they had a typewriter, typing it up with carbon copies) and sharing it around.

Let Wiki, speaking against known interest, inform us:

Samizdat (Russian: самизда́т; IPA: [səmɨzˈdat]) was a key form of dissident activity across the Soviet bloc in which individuals reproduced censored publications by hand and passed the documents from reader to reader. This grassroots practice to evade officially imposed censorship was fraught with danger as harsh punishments were meted out to people caught possessing or copying censored materials.
Vladimir Bukovsky defined it as follows:

"(...) I myself create it,
edit it,
censor it,
publish it,
distribute it, and ...
get imprisoned for it. (...)"

  [ . . . . ]

 Essentially, the samizdat copies of texts were passed among friends, such as Mikhail Bulgakov's novel The Master and Margarita or Václav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless. Techniques used to reproduce these forbidden texts varied, from making several copies of the content using carbon paper, either by hand or on a typewriter, to printing on mainframe printers during night shifts, to printing the books on semiprofessional printing presses in larger quantities. Before glasnost, the practice was dangerous, because copy machines, printing presses, and even typewriters in offices were under control of the First Departments (KGB outposts): reference printouts for all of them were stored for identification purposes . . . .

Samizdat distinguishes itself not only by the ideas and debates which it helped spread to a wider audience, but also by its physical form. The hand-typed, often blurry and wrinkled pages which possessed numerous typos and nondescript covers helped to separate and elevate Russian samizdat from Western literature.^[2] Though the physical form of samizdat grew out of the simple lack of resources and necessity of inconspicuousness, dissidents in the USSR began to fetishize samizdat for the sharp contrast between samizdat’s ragged appearance and the appearance of texts published by the state. The form of samizdat itself took precedence over the ideas expressed in it, and came to symbolize the resourcefulness and rebellious spirit of citizens of the Soviet Union.^[3] In effect, the physical form of samizdat itself elevated the reading of samizdat to a prized clandestine act.^[4]

 In short, man does not live by bread alone, and there is a hunger for the truth and for the right that in the end cannot be quenched. A hunger that points straight to our Eternal Author.

How does that work, practically speaking?

Say, I spend a month investigating something and pull together my summary report. Next month, I share  what I know with one other trusted person, and then a month later, we both share again. We are now at four who know more than Big Brother wants us to know. The next month, eight are in on the secret. After that, sixteen, thirty-two, and so forth. After thirty-three months, we are at 2^32 power, or 4, 294,967,296.

That's over four BILLION.

One more month, and we have covered the world's whole population.

The world -- in principle -- can know the truth in three years, without access to  instruments of mass manipulation, aka media and education power centres.

In short, sharing the truth a few at a time, and being motivated to pass it along repeatedly, has great power.

Potentially.

A power that is so great that the servants and dupes of deception make sure to put out their spin talking points to smear those who dare stand up, and to distort, confuse and polarise. Not to mention, to outright persecute if they think that will shut down the spread of the unwelcome truth.

Notice what Ms Malkin points out about the price paid by the founder of samizdat: she was seized, unjustly "diagnosed" as insane by corrupted psychiatrists -- ideologically driven abusers of science and medicine -- and locked in a mental institution. Probably, tied up in a straightjacket by corrupted nurses and attendants "just doing their jobs," to collect their pensions, and pumped full of mind altering drugs as "treatment," too. (And that was the "good days" of the USSR; in Stalin's day she would have been dragged off at 4:00 am to the Gulag's death camps and starved or worked or shot to death. Did you notice how the truth about Communism and its over 100 million victims somehow has disappeared from the major media stories? No prizes for guessing why.)

In short, fair warning: this is a day for courage in the face of possibly serious consequences.

I am not primarily speaking about the politics of the upcoming US presidential elections, I am talking about the spiritual war for the mind and heart -- and most importantly, the souls of men -- in our civilisation.

And, I am saying, in the teeth of the sort of people who would willfully twist scripture like this (as just discussed):

. . . that we need to create a latter-day, C21 College of Adullam's Cave, to equip a new David Generation, to become the greatest generation in the Caribbean's history. 

Adullam's Cave?

Addullam's Cave, where David fled

The very fact that we don't know this reference shows just how we have been starved for the guidance of the Scriptures. David, at maybe sixteen, had been sent to the battlefront with rations for his big brothers, and walked in just as Goliath showed up for his morning challenge to do a battle of champions, the same as he had done for six weeks. Not a man was willing to take him up, from the king on down. Until the boy too young for the army showed up with lunch for his brothers, a sling shot in his back pocket, and by the power of God, the vision that with lions and bears for breakfast, giants for lunch was no problem. (And BTW, anyone else noticed how the Philistines did not keep their side of the bargain, that the defeated side in the battle of the champions, should submit to the other side? No wonder, 800 years later, the Maccabees warned that the gentiles never keep their promises.)

But that is the story of the morning of quick victory.

No sooner had David beaten Goliath, than the jealous king -- regretting that he had given an opportunity for David to shine -- was scheming to undermine this "threat." So, while he became a general at sixteen, and proved that his victory over the giant was no fluke, there was scheme after scheme, and David literally had to be ducking javelins hurled at him by a jealous, half-mad king.

So, he fled for his life, into the Judaean wilderness and hid in Adullam's Cave. And at this point we read in 1 Sam 22:

1 Sam 22:1 David . . . escaped to the cave of Adullam. When his brothers and his father’s household heard about it, they went down to him there. ² All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their leader. About four hundred men were with him. [NIV]

These four hundred desperate men became the hard core of equipped leaders who -- in the midst of a time of collapsing civilisations of the "first dark age" -- would carry Israel to its finest hour on the stage of world history.

In our time, we are not dependent on writing or typing out a few copies of hard to find news. We are not locked up to going to classrooms and lecture halls staffed by ideological foot-soldiers of the great Western Apostasy that is going on around us. 

No, every computer and camera cell-phone wielding citizen can be a journalist. 

Journalism is what we DO, not what we have duly anointed credentials that say we are. It is a skilled practice, not a learned profession. So, any reasonably intelligent person who is willing and has enough English to pass, can do it. And, BTW, so is education, i.e. teaching is a practice. 

{U/D Jun 30: I am sufficiently moved by outrageous misbehaviour to add a proof of this by sampler, for a media statement -- aim for 250 - 300 words for a release, and for 600 - 750 words for a column or radio talk. The first is about 2 minutes speaking, the second four to five. They could work as a short slot announcement in say a church service, even if the spin-doctors down by the local daily fish wrapper or radio spin zone refuse to publish:

MEDIA STATEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE/EMBARGOED UNTIL DD/MM/YYYY ,TT:TT am/pm

Contact :     [name of spokesperson]

Contact Info:   [web page or blog etc]

email:    name@provider.com  (use a throw-away, there are stalkers)  
Date:        Date
Re:       [subject]

CITY, LOCATION, Month, dd, yyyy --  Lead sentence and para, stating a current incident or issue or event on which the statement hangs. It should give who, what where when why how info, in the context of significance to the target audience. Begin , then, with a one to three sentence short paragraph that provides a quick overview of the news-worthy  incident or issue and why it is important. It should read easily and make the bridge and body of your statement/commentary to follow sound exciting to a general audience – the intelligent 12 year old.

Next, provide some bridging and background information on the focal topic, and perhaps, the point you are contending for.  Give pros and cons, or new info that is pivotal. Highlight apt quotes or the like, to strengthen the points. Draw a conclusion and invite a positive response, explicitly or implicitly. Make sure to write your statement in terms that readers, consumers, your target audience, and the general public will understand. Do not use industry terminology, and provide definitions that readers might not know about or understand.

Your text  should explain the purpose, target audience, and benefits of your conclusion and recommendation or invitation to action. It should intrigue the reader to find out more, visit your website, contact you for more information, recommend your key points to a friend, or promote your points to friends, neighbours, co-workers etc.

_______

ABOUT The final paragraph should be a brief description of the author, his or her basis for credibility  and the products and services s/he provides. Include a summary of other key views supported, and a brief history if relevant. Also include "For more information, contact: " as the last sentence.

There, we are all journalists now.}

But, the above -- except for the part on the College for the desperate held in Adullam's Cave, professor David presiding --  is not my main focus.

It is time, high time, maybe past time, to take education back; especially first level tertiary education to the Associate degree standard. Hence, the proposed Associate in Arts, concentration in Caribbean Christian Service, with a strong second emphasis on moving on from being consumers of digital technology to being productive with it:

With the accessible web technologies, the pool of educated people, the facilities we already have largely sitting idle in our churches, community centres etc, and some modest development effort, we can create a viable education and training programme as just outlined. One that breaks through the artificial barriers that are holding our people -- especially our youth -- back.

Just think of the cumulative impact of waves of a programme like this, distributed across our region and backed up by the cumulative resources, institutions, facilities and educated people we already have all across the region. (And, if you want to build up people to Masters level, why not let us do a similarly structured micro campus and cyber campus based Masters in Education?)

So, why not now, why not here, why not us? END
________
PS, Jun 18: I have updated the title to reflect the cultural struggle aspect of our spiritual war. Let me cite a bit on this:

First, on the worldviews struggle aspect:

2 Cor 10:³ For though we walk (live) in the flesh, we are not carrying on our warfare according to the flesh and using mere human weapons. ⁴ For the weapons of our warfare are not physical [weapons of flesh and blood], but they are mighty before God for the overthrow and destruction of strongholds,

⁵ [Inasmuch as we] refute arguments and theories and reasonings and every proud and lofty thing that sets itself up against the [true] knowledge of God; and we lead every thought and purpose away captive into the obedience of Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One) [AMP]

Next, Christian ethics of proclamation and persuasion:

 2 Cor 4:1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God,^[a] we do not lose heart.

² But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice^[b] cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God.

³ And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. ⁴ In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. ⁵ For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants^[c] for Jesus' sake.

⁶ For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

⁷ But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us.

⁸ We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; ⁹ persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; ¹⁰  always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. ¹¹ For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.[ESV]

And of course we cannot omit:

Eph 6:¹⁰ Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. ¹¹  Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.

¹² For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

¹³ Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm.

¹⁴ Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, ¹⁵ and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace.

¹⁶ In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; ¹⁷ and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, ¹⁸ praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.

To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, ¹⁹ and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, ²⁰ for which I am an ambassador in chains, that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak. [ESV]

We also set all of this in key context, noting the key method of multiplication of truth:

 Eph 4:¹⁷ Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds.

¹⁸ They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. ¹⁹ They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.

²⁰ But that is not the way you learned Christ!— ²¹ assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, ²² to put off your old self,^[f] which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, ²³ and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, ²⁴ and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

²⁵ Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another . . . .


5  Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. ² And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.

³ But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. ⁴ Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. ⁵ For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous ( that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. ⁶  Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. ⁷ Therefore do not become partners with them; ⁸ for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord.

Walk as children of light ⁹ (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), ¹⁰ and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. ¹¹  Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. ¹² For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret. ¹³ But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible, ¹⁴ for anything that becomes visible is light. Therefore it says,

“Awake, O sleeper,
    and arise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

¹⁵  Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, ¹⁶  making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.

¹⁷ Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. ¹⁸ And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, ¹⁹ addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, ²⁰  giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, ²¹  submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. [ESV]

Finally, let us hold confidence in the warrant for the truth we have and let us be ready to answer for the hope we have:

 2 Peter 1:¹⁶ For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  

¹⁷ For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son,^[i] with whom I am well pleased,” ¹⁸ we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.  

¹⁹ And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, ²⁰ knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 

²¹ For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. [ESV]

1 Peter 3:¹⁵ . . . .  in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, ¹⁶  having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. [ESV]

Spiritual war is in critical part the battle for the transforming, liberating, protective power of truth in the hearts, minds and souls of men. That is why we ought not, dare not, cannot cede the information and education spiritual battle-space to the willing servants and simple dupes of demonic evil.