Brett,
Thanks for the encouragement of your latest submission to the list-se=
rve. I will be glad to exchange ideas with you on the matter of internal f=
riction that derives from defect structures in springs. I could write a bo=
ok on the subject, but as you note-most of our readers would probably not w=
ant that degree of detail. It's like my daughters, who in their student da=
ys used to say, "Dad we didn't want that much answer to the question". I =
would nevertheless like to point out the following to everyone. As a physi=
cist, I was trained (in characteristic fashion) to 'hit problems head-on'. =
I have several times through the years been at gatherings (not involving m=
e directly) in which one might think that a 'knock-down drag out' fight was=
about to erupt. Actually, 'after the dust settled', those who had 'locked=
horns' were once again engaged in friendly fashion, of the type that chara=
cterized their relationship before the head-banging. It's just the modus o=
perandus in which we in my profession have practiced their trade for many g=
enerations. Before some personal encounters in which my need for diplomacy=
was demonstrated to be seriously deficient, I didn't appreciate how this p=
ractice is alien to most other disciplines, such as seismology.
I also want to point out how much I have personally enjoyed and benefi=
tted as the recipient of feedback from you list-serve folks in general. Th=
e most important recent example is that which resulted in the partnership I=
enjoy with Larry Cochrane, involving the VolksMeter. But recently Chuck B=
urch and Randy Pratt gave me practical help with the Hilbert transform-whic=
h I should have been exposed to years ago (since my undergraduate degree wa=
s in engineering)-but I had never heard about. As the result of their reco=
mmendations, the Hilbert transform is now part of the Mathematica software =
that I use to generate frequency domain information, as part of the grant t=
hat I'm working with two medical colleagues (NIH support to do 3-axis seism=
ocardiography). And finally I want to mention the friendship that I enjoy =
with Chris Chapman, who recommended to me the lecture that I gave on the pr=
esent subject, to the physics department at the University of Glasgow, seve=
ral years ago. All of us are so glad, Chris, to see you back (almost now o=
n all 'cylinders') following your terrifying health crisis. I never would =
have met Chris, and been hosted in fine manner by him there in England befo=
re going to Scotland-were it not for this group of 'rank amateurs'. Moreov=
er, I would never have encountered your true greatness, that is impacting e=
ven the professional world-were it not for the recommendation given to me b=
y one of my physics department colleagues at Mercer University. Years ago,=
because of the resistance to my work (not just seismology, but also from s=
ome parts of physics), Matt Marone recommended that I begin to interact wit=
h folks like yourselves.
These examples speak to the dramatic positive benefit that I have enj=
oyed, of doing 'honest to goodness' interdisciplinary research, as opposed =
to giving the concept 'lip service', as is so now widespread in academic ci=
rcles. To do so, one must 'swallow the pride' that so often operates aroun=
d the 'not invented here syndrome'.
One thing I have come painfully to recognize, "it's not so much what=
you know, but who you know" when it comes to getting your ideas 'out there=
'. I would have made little progress with my most important specialty, wer=
e it not for the internet. If you type either 'nonlinear damping' or 'line=
ar damping' into Google (without the tick marks for a literal search), you =
will see that my publications on the subject are ranked very 'high' on the =
basis of web-visibility. This derives in large measure from the influence =
of Clarence W. deSilva, Professor of Mechanical Engineering (faculty of App=
lied Science) at the University of British Columbia. That he gave me 'cart=
e blanche' liberty to write two chapters on the subject for two of his now =
well known engineering reference books-was a source of great personal satis=
faction, for the following reason. Clarence holds two PhD's, one in Mechan=
ical Engineering (Dynamic System Control) from MIT, and the other in Inform=
ation Engineering from the University of Cambridge in England. Considering=
the stature of both these institutions, I think his opinions on the subjec=
t are worthy of note.
Then there is my invited article, titled "Friction at the mesoscale=
" that was published in Contemporary Physics (by Taylor and Francis, Ltd, L=
ondon). This paper would never have been possible were it not for my chanc=
e meeting years ago at Texas Tech University, of one of the highly esteemed=
leaders of the laser physics world (Peter Milonni). More recently, Peter =
even assisted (me and a mechanical engineering Mercer faculty colleague, Lo=
ren Somner) in the better writing of a paper titled "Intuitive derivation o=
f Reynolds Number" (a now popular to the internet paper that was deemed by=
a referee as 'worthless'). I mention these matters because of the peculia=
r scientific place in which we find ourselves, here in the beginnings of th=
e 21st century. One might think that new ideas are readily embraced, when =
in fact my experiences have been just the opposite. My earliest encounters=
with this unexpected trend occurred in the 1990's while at TTU, in trying =
to be promoted to the rank of Professor. In my letter of denial, the Dean =
of our college wrote how "she hoped I would be eventually able to say I tol=
d you so"-concerning my research in mesodynamics.
I am mystified by the resistance that I continue to meet in some cir=
cles. I mention here just two examples, because of their present relevance=
to the poor state of science education in this country. A prominent figur=
e in the "International Pendulum Project", where I was an invited speaker w=
ith expenses paid (in Sydney in 2002) - once told me that it was his opinio=
n of science education in the U.S. - that "it was beyond redemption". I =
took to heart his comments, since this capable individual has traveled exte=
nsively in our country, and interacted with some of our best known educator=
s. Of course my thinking on the matter has been also influenced by the re=
cent education fiasco in Atlanta (cheating scandal in general, not involvin=
g just science education)
Recently, I worked with two physics majors at Mercer on a problem whic=
h is readily treated theoretically. It ought to be well known to the scie=
nce and engineering community that the common expression for the tidal forc=
e is a first order approximation. In fact, as we have demonstrated in our =
article titled "asymmetric tidal force", there is a 5% difference between t=
he zenith and nadir components of the crustal tide due to our Moon's influe=
nce on the earth. For a closer satellite this difference between zenith an=
d nadir components can be dramatic. I figured this paper would be readily =
published, but in fact it was summarily rejected by arxiv-my first occasion=
to be treated by them in this manner.
Then there was my paper that derived also from student interactions i=
n the classroom a year ago, titled "inductor phasor subtlety" . One would=
think the subtleties of that paper would have been recognized decades ago-=
- for reason of the great attention given to the Steinmetz phasor by both t=
he physics world and the electrical engineering world.
If you have read this far in my 'ramblings', then thanks for your pat=
ience with me. And as I said at the start, Brett-I will be glad to talk wi=
th you about some specifics of your questions. But I think we should do so=
by means of email between the two of us-unless some others make known thei=
r great interest for us to do otherwise. And most of all-Larry, I would li=
ke to know your thinking about the matter. I don't want your list serve to=
get immersed in 'politics' that have nothing to do with your mandate for e=
xistence. If you prefer to make your wishes known, only by way of my Merce=
r email address, that will be fine.
Thanks to all,
Randall
Brett,
Thanks for the enc=
ouragement of your latest submission to the list-serve. I will be gla=
d to exchange ideas with you on the matter of internal friction that derive=
s from defect structures in springs. I could write a book on the subj=
ect, but as you note—most of our readers would probably not want that=
degree of detail. It’s like my daughters, who in their student=
days used to say, “Dad we didn’t want that much answer to the =
question”. I would nevertheless like to point out the fol=
lowing to everyone. As a physicist, I was trained (in characteristic =
fashion) to ‘hit problems head-on’. I have several times =
through the years been at gatherings (not involving me directly) in which o=
ne might think that a ‘knock-down drag out’ fight was about to =
erupt. Actually, ‘after the dust settled’, those who had =
‘locked horns’ were once again engaged in friendly fashion, of =
the type that characterized their relationship before the head-banging.&nbs=
p; It’s just the modus operandus in which we in my profession have pr=
acticed their trade for many generations. Before some personal encoun=
ters in which my need for diplomacy was demonstrated to be seriously defici=
ent, I didn’t appreciate how this practice is alien to most other dis=
ciplines, such as seismology.
&nb=
sp; I also want to point out how much I have persona=
lly enjoyed and benefitted as the recipient of feedback from you list-serve=
folks in general. The most important recent example is that which re=
sulted in the partnership I enjoy with Larry Cochrane, involving the VolksM=
eter. But recently Chuck Burch and Randy Pratt gave me practical help=
with the Hilbert transform—which I should have been exposed to years=
ago (since my undergraduate degree was in engineering)—but I had nev=
er heard about. As the result of their recommendations, the Hilbert t=
ransform is now part of the Mathematica software that I use to generate fre=
quency domain information, as part of the grant that I’m working with=
two medical colleagues (NIH support to do 3-axis seismocardiography). =
; And finally I want to mention the friendship that I enjoy with Chris Chap=
man, who recommended to me the lecture that I gave on the present subject, =
to the physics department at the University of Glasgow, several years ago.&=
nbsp; All of us are so glad, Chris, to see you back (almost now on all R=
16;cylinders’) following your terrifying health crisis. I never=
would have met Chris, and been hosted in fine manner by him there in Engla=
nd before going to Scotland—were it not for this group of ‘rank=
amateurs’. Moreover, I would never have encountered your true =
greatness, that is impacting even the professional world—were it not =
for the recommendation given to me by one of my physics department colleagu=
es at Mercer University. Years ago, because of the resistance to my w=
ork (not just seismology, but also from some parts of physics), Matt Marone=
recommended that I begin to interact with folks like yourselves.
These =
examples speak to the dramatic positive benefit that I have enjoyed, of doi=
ng ‘honest to goodness’ interdisciplinary research, as opposed =
to giving the concept ‘lip service’, as is so now widespread in=
academic circles. To do so, one must ‘swallow the pride’=
that so often operates around the ‘not invented here syndrome’=
..
&=
nbsp;One thing I have come painfully to recognize, “it’s not so=
much what you know, but who you know” when it comes to getting your =
ideas ‘out there’. I would have made little progress with=
my most important specialty, were it not for the internet. If you ty=
pe either ‘nonlinear damping’ or ‘linear damping’ i=
nto Google (without the tick marks for a literal search), you will see that=
my publications on the subject are ranked very ‘high’ on the b=
asis of web-visibility. This derives in large measure from the influe=
nce of Clarence W. deSilva, Professor of Mechanical Engineering (faculty of=
Applied Science) at the University of British Columbia. That he gave=
me ‘carte blanche’ liberty to write two chapters on the subjec=
t for two of his now well known engineering reference books—was a sou=
rce of great personal satisfaction, for the following reason. Clarenc=
e holds two PhD’s, one in Mechanical Engineering (Dynamic System Cont=
rol) from MIT, and the other in Information Engineering from the University=
of Cambridge in England. Considering the stature of both these insti=
tutions, I think his opinions on the subject are worthy of note.
T=
hen there is my invited article, titled “Friction at the mesoscale=
221; that was published in Contemporary Physics (by Taylor and Francis, Ltd=
, London). This paper would never have been possible were it not for =
my chance meeting years ago at Texas Tech University, of one of the highly =
esteemed leaders of the laser physics world (Peter Milonni). More rec=
ently, Peter even assisted (me and a mechanical engineering Mercer faculty =
colleague, Loren Somner) in the better writing of a paper titled “Int=
uitive derivation of Reynolds Number” (a now popular to the int=
ernet paper that was deemed by a referee as ‘worthless’). =
I mention these matters because of the peculiar scientific place in which =
we find ourselves, here in the beginnings of the 21st century.&n=
bsp; One might think that new ideas are readily embraced, when in fact my e=
xperiences have been just the opposite. My earliest encounters with t=
his unexpected trend occurred in the 1990’s while at TTU, in trying t=
o be promoted to the rank of Professor. In my letter of denial, the D=
ean of our college wrote how “she hoped I would be eventually able to=
say I told you so”—concerning my research in mesodynamics.
=
I am mystified by the resistance that I continue to meet in some circles.&n=
bsp; I mention here just two examples, because of their present relevance t=
o the poor state of science education in this country. A prominent fi=
gure in the “International Pendulum Project”, where I was an in=
vited speaker with expenses paid (in Sydney in 2002) – once told me t=
hat it was his opinion of science education in the U.S. – that =
“it was beyond redemption”. I took to heart his com=
ments, since this capable individual has traveled extensively in our countr=
y, and interacted with some of our best known educators. Of cou=
rse my thinking on the matter has been also influenced by the recent educat=
ion fiasco in Atlanta (cheating scandal in general, not involving just scie=
nce education)
=
Recently, I worked with two physics majors at Mercer on a probl=
em which is readily treated theoretically. It ought to be well =
known to the science and engineering community that the common expression f=
or the tidal force is a first order approximation. In fact, as we hav=
e demonstrated in our article titled “asymmetric tidal force”, =
there is a 5% difference between the zenith and nadir components of the cru=
stal tide due to our Moon’s influence on the earth. For a close=
r satellite this difference between zenith and nadir components can be dram=
atic. I figured this paper would be readily published, but in fact it=
was summarily rejected by arxiv—my first occasion to be treated by t=
hem in this manner.
&=
nbsp; Then there was my paper that derived also from stude=
nt interactions in the classroom a year ago, titled “inductor p=
hasor subtlety” . One would think the subtleties of that paper =
would have been recognized decades ago-- for reason of the great attention =
given to the Steinmetz phasor by both the physics world and the electrical =
engineering world.
&n=
bsp; If you have read this far in my ‘ramblings̵=
7;, then thanks for your patience with me. And as I said at the start=
, Brett—I will be glad to talk with you about some specifics of your =
questions. But I think we should do so by means of email between the =
two of us—unless some others make known their great interest for us t=
o do otherwise. And most of all—Larry, I would like to know you=
r thinking about the matter. I don’t want your list serve to ge=
t immersed in ‘politics’ that have nothing to do with your mand=
ate for existence. If you prefer to make your wishes known, only by w=
ay of my Mercer email address, that will be fine.
Thanks to all,
=
; Randall
=