FOLLOW-UP: Personal, Corporate, and In-Between Fraud

This is a follow-up to my post from last month about the VW emissions cheating scandal and the case of the arrest of the "clock kid" Ahmed Mohamed.

Regarding the VW emissions cheating scandal, VW executives blamed (link from AP, Reuters, NBC News) "a couple of software engineers". Given how the cheat was pretty much impossible without a collaboration between many engineers of different kinds (mechanical, software, electrical, et cetera), all I can say is the following: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Regarding the case of Ahmed Mohamed, it turns out that he and his family are moving (link from Jessica Contrera, Washington Post) to Qatar, and that this decision was supposedly made less than 24 hours after meeting President Obama in the White House. In my previous post, I pretty much unconditionally defended him against accusations of fraudulent behavior. I still don't believe that he personally would have brought the clock in just to incite the response from the school and police that transpired, because for one, that would require a massive conspiracy, and for another, that absolves the school and police of responsibility for their actions. That said, I am now less sure of his family's actions and motives following the arrest and its initial reporting. Clearly they took advantage of the massive publicity, and while I'm certainly not a fan of that sort of exploitation of publicity, I was hoping that would be the end of the story. Yet now, I can't believe that a Sudanese immigrant family, where the father has run for the presidency of Sudan before, would within the span of 24 hours decide to move to Qatar, unless they already had high-level connections there. My guess now is that while this story would have likely been widely shared regardless of the family's behavior, a lot of the publicity was probably due to the family's influence itself, and they were able to use that to move out to Qatar (and use the story to get the Qatar Foundation to provide Ahmed a scholarship to sweeten the deal). It probably wasn't because of Ahmed's inability to go back to school in his district, because there have been plenty of other cases of kids who have been in situations where they can't go back to school in their home districts because of similar high-profile incidents. In such cases, the family usually moves to another district within the state, another state, or maybe their home country if they immigrated here, as opposed to a totally different country. Anyway, I still do wish Ahmed the best in his studies of engineering, but I now feel at least partially duped in some way by this whole turn of events, and hope that this story finally dies once the family moves out of the country.

Personal, Corporate, and In-Between Fraud

I realize that the two (really, 1.5) main topics of this post are already somewhat old news, having happened last week and having not really persisted into the news cycle of this week. That said, I didn't have a good opportunity to write this last week, and the end of the month is coming (and I didn't have any other posts this month), so I figured now is the best time for me to write this. Follow the jump to see more.

Ramblings on Depth and Breadth in Introductory Science Teaching

About a week ago, I was having dinner with a friend, and the topic of teaching in various science disciplines came up; he got his degree in biology, while I got mine in physics. One of the things that we both noticed in our undergraduate careers was that introductory physics classes tend to go fairly deep right away, focusing only on a few broad topics, whereas introductory biology classes go much more for breadth, with the depth coming in specific topics in later classes. It took us a little time to think of why this might be. I think we came up with a reasonable explanation, so follow the jump to see what that explanation might be (along with extensions of it).

A few warnings are in order. One is that although I've gone through a full undergraduate course sequence in physics, I have only taken one introductory biology class in my undergraduate studies, so I'm essentially comparing an insider view of one subject to an outsider view of another; worse, my insider view of physics was built over 4 years so it is fairly fresh in my memory, whereas my outsider view of biology came in a single semester 4 years ago, so my memory of it is rather fading (though it is augmented by the problem sets and exams that I saved on my computer). Therefore, some things I say about biology might as well come from my posterior. Given all this, if you see that I say something horribly wrong about biology (or physics, for that matter), tell me in the comments! The other is that this post may seem rambling and incoherent at times; that's because this is more of a brainstorm than anything else.

Reflection: 2014 IAP

This IAP was quite a bit more hectic near the end of it. I was starting to wrap up my current UROP project on photonic crystal enhancement of spontaneous emission and start learning about a new project on nanoparticle absorption & scattering of infrared radiation. Also, especially in the last week, I was doing a lot for making a video for the MIT-K12 project. Finally, there was organization to be done for the SPS Lightning Lectures on the last day of IAP. Overall, it was quite productive. At the moment, I am still awaiting graduate admission results (except for one positive one so far). And I await and anticipate one last semester of classes and research as an undergraduate at MIT!

Schrödinger and Biot-Savart

There were two things that I would like to post here today. The first is something I have been mulling over for a while. The second is something that I thought about more recently.

Time evolution in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics occurs according to the [time-dependent] Schrödinger equation \[ H|\Psi\rangle = i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} |\Psi\rangle .\] While this at first may seem intractable, the trick is that typically the Hamiltonian is not time-dependent, so a candidate solution could be $|\Psi\rangle = \phi(t)|E\rangle$. Plugging this back in yields time evolution that occurs through the phase $\phi(t) = e^{-\frac{iEt}{\hbar}}$ applied to energy eigenstates that solve \[ H|E\rangle = E \cdot |E\rangle \] and this equation is often called the "time-independent Schrödinger equation". When I was taking 8.04 — Quantum Physics I, I agreed with my professor who called this a misnomer, in that the Schrödinger equation is supposed to only describe time evolution, so what is being called "time-independent" is more properly just an energy eigenvalue equation. That said, I was thinking that the "time-independent Schrödinger equation" is really just like a Fourier transform of the Schrödinger equation from time to frequency (related to energy by $E = \hbar\omega$), so the former could be an OK nomenclature because it is just a change of basis. However, there are two things to note: the Schrödinger equation is basis-independent, whereas the "time-independent Schrödinger equation" is expressed only in the basis of energy eigenstates, and time is not an observable quantity (i.e. Hermitian operator) but is a parameter, so the change of basis/Fourier transform argument doesn't work in quite the same way that it does for position versus momentum. Hence, I've come to the conclusion that it is better to call the "time-independent Schrödinger equation" as the energy eigenvalue equation.

Switching gears, I was thinking about how the Biot-Savart law is derived. My AP Physics C teacher told me that the Ampère law is derived from the Biot-Savart law. However, this is patently not true, because the Biot-Savart law only works for charges moving at a constant velocity, whereas the Ampère law is true for magnetic fields created by any currents or any changing electric fields. In 8.022 — Physics II, I did see a derivation of the Biot-Savart law from the Ampère law, showing that the latter is indeed more fundamental than the former, but it involved the magnetic potential and a lot more work. I wanted to see if that derivation still made sense to me, but then I realized that because magnetism essentially springs from the combination of electricity and special relativity and because the Biot-Savart law relies on the approximation of the charges moving at a constant velocity, it should be possible to derive the Biot-Savart law from the Coulomb law and special relativity. Indeed, it is possible. Consider a charge $q$ whose electric field is \[ \vec{E} = \frac{q}{r^2} \vec{e}_r \] in its rest frame. Note that the Coulomb law is exact in the rest frame of a charge. Now consider a frame moving with respect to the charge at a velocity $-\vec{v}$, so that observers in the frame see the charge move at a velocity $\vec{v}$. Considering only the component of the magnetic field perpendicular to the relative motion, noting that there is no magnetic field in the rest frame of the charge yields, and considering the low-speed limit (which is the range of validity of the Biot-Savart law) $\left|\frac{\vec{v}}{c}\right| \ll 1$ so that $\gamma \approx 1$ yields $\vec{B} \approx -\frac{\vec{v}}{c} \times \vec{E}$. Plugging in $-\vec{v}$ (the specified velocity of the new frame relative to the charge) for $\vec{v}$ (the general expression for the relative velocity) and plugging in the Coulomb expression for $\vec{E}$ yields the Biot-Savart law \[ \vec{B} = \frac{q\vec{v} \times \vec{e}_r}{cr^2}. \] One thing to be emphasized again is that the Coulomb law is exact in the rest frame of the charge, while the Biot-Savart law is always an approximation because a moving charge will have an electric field that deviates from the Coulomb expression; the fact that the Biot-Savart law is a low-speed inertial approximation is why I feel comfortable doing the derivation this way.

Reflection: 2013 IAP

This IAP was a ton of fun, and I was also able to get quite a bit done. The highlight was in my UROP, which is a continuation of what I was doing in the past semester. In late November, there was a power outage that reintroduced a previously-fixed bug into the computing cluster that I used, which caused various issues for my photonic crystal calculations. After trying several different workarounds, it wasn't until two weeks ago that I figured out how to properly route around the issue; when that happened, I was quite happy to have sensible, working flux spectrum calculations. Some people from the main UROP office also came to chat with me about what I am doing for my UROP, which was cool. At the same time, I was able to start wrapping up my project from the 2011 fall semester by creating more proper figures for the work I did then.
On the side, I worked on a video for the MIT-K12 initiative, which is a partnership between MIT and the Khan Academy. I was able to create a video about friction aimed at middle school students, and I'm fairly pleased with how it turned out. It should become official in a few weeks, at which point I will have either an update to this post or a separate follow-up post to include links to that and the result of the UROP chat (whenever that gets finalized).
I was also able to start typesetting lecture notes for 8.04 — Quantum Physics I for use by MIT OCW. I'm working with two other friends on that as well to get it done more efficiently.
The last week of IAP was particularly hectic. Along with the UROP chat, I was able to participate at the Diversity Summit as part of a panel of students with disabilities. Also, I helped to organize the SPS and UWIP joint Physics Lightning Lectures event.
There were a few things I was not able to do, but those can be done later, and I am glad that I gave myself enough time to rest and take life at a more relaxed pace compared to that of the semester. That said, this blog will likely reenter a sort of hibernation once the semester starts next Tuesday (and another post on that will likely occur on Monday or Tuesday of this coming week). Anyway, for this weekend, I am just going to relax and enjoy the large televised football game tomorrow!

Done with 2nd Semester!

Today is my last day of my second semester at MIT, and that also marks the completion of my freshman year in college. Woohoo! I can finally relax for a few days. Finally.
Of course, that's only going to be for a few days, because next Monday I start my internship at NIST, and that'll be for 10-12 weeks. I'm excited about that too.
This semester was definitely harder than last semester, which is why I'm so much happier that I'm done with it now. Part of that is because the classes I took this semester were harder than the ones I took last semester. Part of that is because I enjoyed the classes last semester more than I did the classes this semester. And part of that is because of the pressure of grades; last semester was Pass/No Record, while this semester has been A/B/C/No Record.
If you're in school or college, how did you feel about this semester/academic term and/or academic year? Do you have any plans for the summer? Let me know in the comments below!

Review: Edubuntu 11.04 "Natty Narwhal"

GNOME Main Screen

Before I get on with the rest of this post, I need to apologize for not having posted anything this week. It turned out to be a good deal busier than I anticipated, and even otherwise, there wasn't a whole lot to write about, at least at the beginning of the week. I did say in the latest "Featured Comments" article that I would review the latest release of Ubuntu — version 11.04 "Natty Narwhal". That is still happening, but for reasons that will become clearer, I will not write reviews of Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/Lubuntu just yet, but will wait a day or maybe a little more.

JAVA Session Welcome Screen

With that aside, I find it interesting that having written this blog for almost 2 years and having reviewed Linux distributions for almost as long, I have never formally tried and reviewed Ubuntu or any of its official other editions (Kubuntu, Edubuntu) or officially-sponsored community derivatives (Xubuntu, and hopefully soon Lubuntu as well). I've reviewed quite a few other derivatives, most notably Linux Mint, but I've never tried straight-up Ubuntu itself. I guess that's because I've always sort of taken Ubuntu for granted; I installed it on the laptop of a member of my family, I've seen people put it on their computers, and I've used it at the Athena clusters here at MIT. Well, that's changing today, with a review of Edubuntu 11.04 "Natty Narwhal".

Why Edubuntu, and not Ubuntu? As mentioned earlier, one reason will become apparent when I publish the review of Ubuntu. The other main reason is that I haven't really seen Edubuntu reviews on the Internet; that could be because of its specific target audience, but in any case, I think it deserves a review, especially given that it is an official Canonical product. For those who don't know, Edubuntu, as you might be able to guess from the name, is a packaging of Ubuntu with lots of education-related software included out-of-the-box.

Thanks to Canonical's efforts in this regard, I was able to test it in two ways: I was able to try it out online from the comfort of my current Linux Mint system, and then I tried it through a live USB made with UnetBootin. Follow the jump to see what it's like.

Grades When You Want Them, Not When You Don't?

One of the nice things about freshman year at MIT is the grading system of Pass/No Record. Letter grades are recorded, but they are for the student's personal records only, and if the student gets at least a 'C', the grade is recorded as 'Pass', while if the student gets lower than that, the grade is not recorded at all (though no credit is earned). The big benefit to this is that it helps new freshman proverbially get their feet wet at MIT and explore different areas of study without fear of getting poor grades. For the second semester, however, letter grades of 'A', 'B', and 'C' are recorded instead of just 'Pass', though grades lower than a 'C' aren't recorded at all.

I've been chatting with quite a few people on how the second semester is going generally, and one of the things I keep hearing over and over again is that they did really well and got great (hidden) letter grades, so they wish that those grades could be present on their transcript to give them a good starting GPA. At first, I agreed with this, because I also did pretty well even in terms of hidden letter grades in the first semester, if I may say so myself. But now, as I have thought about it more, it makes sense that all freshman students are treated on the same footing. Why?

Well, suppose a group of MIT students applied for an internship, and the internship organization asked for their transcripts. Furthermore, suppose that some of these students got great grades like mostly 'A's and some 'B's, while some of these students got some 'B's and some 'C's. Finally, suppose that 'A's are recorded as 'A's to give the students a good starting GPA, while 'B's and 'C's are simply recorded as 'Pass's. The internship organization will probably compare the transcripts of the applicants and see that the students with 'Pass's didn't get 'A's, or else they would have 'A's recorded just like the students who did actually get 'A's. In such a situation, 'Pass' becomes a placeholder for "I got a 'B' or a 'C', but not an 'A'", at which point there is only marginal benefit to A/Pass/No Record over A/B/C/No Record. And that's why I think it's important that 'A's are still recorded only as 'Pass's. What do you think? Please let me know in the comments below!

On a side note, I am now officially majoring in MIT Course VIII – Physics, and I further plan to pursue the focused option. Yay! I'm excited!

Magnitude 8.9 Earthquake in Japan

Unless you've been living under a rock, you know that a few days ago, a monster earthquake of magnitude 8.9 hit Japan and hit it hard. Some death toll estimates say 5000, others say 10000, and still others quote even larger numbers. It's been devastating to the people of Japan, and they need help.
This particular natural disaster has hit close to home because I have two Japanese friends from middle school who moved back to Japan for high school (and beyond). Thankfully, they are OK, but it is truly unfortunate that many people can't say the same thing.
I did my part by donating $20 to the relief effort through MIT's association of Japanese students. I strongly encourage, nay, urge, readers of this blog to do the same.
I've subscribed to the Philip DeFranco show (Sxephil) on YouTube, but I only watch it once in a while because too often it's about hot women, large breasts, and sex (or something along those lines). However, this time, Philip DeFranco has put together a truly moving video talking about the events in Japan, how to help, and how his mom called him just to make sure he's OK. I've embedded the video at the end of this post, and I encourage you all to watch it and either donate money or other supplies or send this to other friends to raise awareness in the hope that at least a few friends will donate.

Movie Review: Ferris Bueller's Day Off

Yesterday morning I watched the movie Ferris Bueller's Day Off. It's a movie that I've wanted to watch for quite a while now, more so because last year my AP Physics C teacher kept talking about how much he loves that movie and because our high school senior class T-shirts had the famous Ferris Bueller quote on the back: "Life moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it." Unfortunately, for every bit of the movie shown, there were bits of advertising that seemed to be at least as long.
The movie itself was great, and I'm glad I finally got to watch it. The premise is fairly simple: a high school senior named Ferris Bueller elaborately fakes an illness (replete with a dummy in his bed and a tired recorded voice activated whenever someone rings the front doorbell, among other things) to take a day off from school and brings his friend Cameron and his girlfriend Sloane with him to see stuff in Chicago and evade the school principal. I found the part of Ferris's absence count dropping before the principal's very eyes ironic, considering that when I was in high school, due to glitches in the attendance system, I was occasionally marked absent even when I was clearly in class. I was also a little disappointed that the movie never shows what happens to Cameron and his father at the end. Other than that, the movie is full of laughs from start to finish, and it's really sweet and family-friendly; I would highly recommend this movie to anyone.

Our School's Stupidity Regarding Microsoft

It is fairly well known that while the vast majority of servers use the open-source Apache technology (as opposed to Microsoft's closed IIS technology), the vast majority of computers hooked up to these servers use Microsoft Windows. Due to the huge price benefits schools and businesses get from Microsoft, these organizations are also partially bound to Microsoft's ideologies. Case in point: the Ubuntu forums are blocked sites in my school.
I am here to report that the situation has gotten even worse.
It is common for office workers who want to use open-source software at work but can't install such software directly to use Mozilla Firefox Portable and OpenOffice.org Portable from their flash drives to avoid using Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Office.
This is what I did for a while.
However, as of today, neither of these are possible anymore on the school computers due to new user privilege restrictions disallowing the use of any software not installed on the computers themselves.
While I appreciate the newfound appreciation for user privileges (something that UNIX started and has been continued on with Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris, Mac OS, and (more recently) Windows [Vista and 7]), this is a huge step backwards from 3 years ago, when Mozilla Firefox was preinstalled on the computers already as an alternative to Internet Explorer. I was pleased then.
I am highly displeased now.
(UPDATE: I know this is a little delayed, but I kept forgetting to add this...until now. It seems that third-party software can be run from one's "My Documents" folder, just not from a flash drive. However, I can see changes to that as well.)

RIAA, Stay of Of Elementary Schools!

It's another day and yet another blow upon freedom of creativity. Yes folks, the RIAA is at it again. This time, they are created curricula for elementary and middle schools, starting from 3rd grade.
You heard that right, 3rd grade. I'll get back to that later.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/09/back-to-school-with-riaa-funded-curriculum.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
First, I'll look at what's totally wrong with this activity guide.
The activities for elementary and middle school students are identical save the tools used, but that's besides the point. Now I only need to do half the ranting!
Songlifting.
What in the name of Kanye West is that?
It's a term the RIAA made up for the express purpose of furthering this activity. It has no other meaning outside of this context.
Next, those numbers are way off. It certainly does not cost the music industry over $7 million in lost sales due to copyright violations, and even if it did, it makes so much more money from actual sales that it doesn't really matter.
Next, who is affected by songlifting?
It's really just the RIAA. The truth is, if people are given a listen to a song, they are more likely to actually go out and buy the CD by themselves. Even otherwise, the CDs generate positive publicity which will reflect positively upon the artists in concerts and such. Only the recording industry is hurt, and they want to shout that out.

Next, draw the copyright symbol (©) on the chalkboard. Ask if students know what this symbol means and where they might have seen it (books, posters, CDs, etc.). Explain that the copyright symbol is used to identify the owner of a piece of intellectual property and serves as a reminder that it is illegal for anyone to copy or distribute that property without the owner’s permission. Students should understand that copyright law automatically protects intellectual property whether or not it is marked with the copyright symbol. You might also inform them that our nation’s Founders included copyright protection in the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8), believing that it would encourage creativity by giving the creators of intellectual property an exclusive right to profit from their artistic talents.

This preceding quote is possibly my favorite part because it's the least correct. Here's something I suggest: Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds, and Larry Lessig should all go around the country to different schools and draw the copyleft (intentionally the horizontal mirror-image of the copyright symbol) and ask them what it means. It's pretty well known in the freedomware (I'm gonna start using that term as a less ambiguous synonym of free software/software libre) community, which seems to be a mutual antagonist of industries like the RIAA. I'm pretty sure not too many teachers would get it either. Why should the RIAA be forcing copyright down 3rd-graders' throats?
Most importantly is my beef with the term intellectual property. I'll say it here, and it largely reflects the views of people like Stallman and Lessig.
Intellectual property is a near-farce.
That's right, it's a near-farce.
It's not totally a farce because initially, other people should not take credit for someone's work. However, intellectual "property" is not like physical property in that when someone else takes it, the original owner does not lose it. If I take your table, you are now minus one table. However, if I take your design for a table and tweak it a bit, you still have your original design. I will expand more upon this only if you ask me to elaborate on a specific point.
Furthermore, this interpretation of copyright completely ignores fair use. Fair use is the use of an author's work for free without the author's permission, and can be done if the author explicitly gives such permission or implicitly does so by letting a copyright or patent expire. Many artists do this in that they give away their songs for free on the interwebs. The RIAA, of course, collectively sticks its fingers in its ears and starts screaming like a siren when it hears the words "fair use".
Also, my other beef with copyright law is the term itself. It used to be that one had an exclusive copyright of 14 years with a possibility of one renewal, making a maximum total of 28 years; this has increased to 95 years. Also, before, the burden of making the copyright was on the author; now, for whatever reason, this is automatic. The former terms were implied in the Constitution and were explicitly stated in contemporaneous laws. I find it ironic that the RIAA uses the word "believes" to refer to the Framers' desire to encourage creativity through limited copyrights; then again, the RIAA makes no mention of an originally limited copyright.
Yup, the RIAA has a lot wrong in that one paragraph.
The next activity just strengthens that.

So the RIAA basically wants children to know that they must bow to its demands, and that fair and free use do not exist (and neither should limited copyrights with burden on the holder). More to the point, "piracy" is explicitly mentioned twice (in different word forms) while "fair use" is never even implied.

But my bigger problem is, why are they doing this to children?
Middle school students are fine candidates for this because they are just getting into mp3 players, CD mixes, online file sharing, and that sort of stuff. They should know about copyright law, but it should not be exclusively from one point of view; they should know both points of view and have the ability to decide between the two.
More importantly, though, is that elementary schoolers have much fewer, if any, such interests. They aren't as much into technology and probably have no idea what such things as file sharing are. So why does the RIAA feel the need to pursue such indoctrination?
I guess it's because they think it's best to get them while they're young.
But that's just wrong.
Teachers, please use some common sense and don't let private industries control public education like this.