Fewer Broken Pieces

Scientists at the Large Hadron Collider are hoping to prove the existence of the Higgs boson, the particle which theoretically accounts for the phenomenon of mass.  It is one of a growing list of observed and predicted particles which are the constituent elements of atoms and forces.  Since the discovery of the atom, it seems these constituent particles have become all the more numerous, small, and hard to detect.  Will there be an end to this trend?  That is, will we find a base-level particle which is subject to no others?  Or will we continue finding smaller and smaller constituent particles - in other words, will it be “turtles all the way down?”

The film Men In Black, if I remember it correctly, ends with a gag wherein the entire universe we occupy ends up being a mere marble in a bag of marbles of some alien child.  It was a throw-away gag, but it was quite thought-provoking nonetheless.  Likewise, the matter of the immensity of space and the infinitesimal smallness of sub-atomic particles is as much a philosophical paradox as a scientific inquiry.  I suspect theoretical physics can provide an answer to my question.  That being said, the popular models of physics are being amended and replaced by new discoveries at an alarming rate of late.  At any rate, I am excited to see where the new discoveries take us.

Also published at Technocrat.

Activists like Vice President Al Gore are encouraging a massive shift in human behavior to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reverse the trend in global mean surface temperature in order to rescue humans and some of our favorite species from the unsavory side effects of further-increasing temperatures.  In other words, what was an inadvertent effect on the global climate would become an intentional attempt at global climate management. I am left with the following question: how can we know when to stop?

The question can be phrased in other ways.  For instance, what is the optimal global mean surface temperature, and how do we decide that temperature?  Also, what are the optimal atmospheric concentrations of various greenhouse gasses?  There are an enormous number of variables and interests which must be considered in such a determination.  But it seems to me that such determinations must be made if we are to begin managing the global climate.

Allow me to present a hypothetical: Say that humans are somehow able to drastically limit emissions of greenhouse gasses, lower atmospheric concentrations thereof, and facilitate a drop in global mean surface temperature.  Now, imagine that the downward trend in temperature continues past where we anticipated.  The planet might enter in to a period of cooling which would be just as harmful to humans and our favorite species as global warming, just in different ways.  What should be done then?

Also published at Technocrat.

Why is it that so many are focused on promoting the Linux kernel on the desktop as opposed to Free Software or Open Source Software on the desktop?  Or, why does Linux have to be the kernel of the F/OSS desktop when there are now other available options which may be better suited to the task?

Linux became the “standard” kernel for Free Software systems, it seems, because it was the first freely available kernel which was actually useful.  Now, however, there are some other options coming on line, namely OpenSolaris, and let us not forget our BSD brethren.  Could it be that one of these other kernels (and perhaps userlands) could better serve the purpose of a quality Free Software desktop operating system?  Excuse my ignorance, (I know it probably shows in this post), but the frenetic development process of the Linux kernel and its lack of a stable API for drivers are two possible disadvantages I can think of when it comes to using it as a basis for the Free Software desktop.

Also published at Technocrat.