Happy anniversary to us

Monday was our seventh wedding anniversary. Mary and I celebrated by going to the Santa Cruz Boardwalk. Our favorite rides are the Giant Dipper (roller coaster) and the Space Race (bumper cars mounted on large inner tubes so they really bounce). We also went on the Haunted House ride, and we played a round of miniature golf, which Mary said she really hates, but only when it becomes competitive. So we didn't even keep score, which is probably just as well because she would have beat my pants off.

Then we went to Logos, my favorite Santa Cruz used bookstore. We didn't find any books, but I did buy a relaxing CD of Laurence Juber playing Beatles tunes, and another CD by Martin Simpson, which I haven't listened to yet.

We ended our day at the Crow's Nest, our favorite restaurant in Santa Cruz. They always do a fantastic job of accomodating our food allergies. And they have creme brûlée for dessert, which meant we had no room left to make our usual stop at Marianne's for ice cream on the way out of town.

Oh, well. I think Mary is going to sign us both up for Weight Watchers soon anyway ...

Stanford Scholars use x-rays to read hidden text in Archimedes manuscript

After more than 1,000 years in obscurity, the last unreadable pages of the works of mathematician Archimedes are being deciphered, thanks to the X-ray vision at Stanford University's Linear Accelerator Center.

Letter by letter, ancient Greek that was hidden for centuries by neglect, damage and abuse is being revealed by a powerful X-ray light emitted by the synchrotron at SLAC, then transmitted to computer screens for analysis by an international team of scholars.

The discovery is giving researchers the most complete record since the Middle Ages of the works of the legendary mathematician, who famously exclaimed "Eureka!" upon discovering how to measure volume while sitting in his bathtub.

Only faint outlines of Archimedes' words and diagrams can be seen by the unaided eye. First copied in 975 A.D. by a Christian monk onto goatskin parchment, the work has barely survived fire, water, acid, mold, wax, glue and even forgery.

But the synchrotron's X-ray is able to detect the iron in the ancient ink, causing it to fluoresce. In work guided by Stanford physicist Uwe Bergmann, the X-ray creates patterns of electronic signals, which are converted by computer into shades of gray, readily recognizable as Greek characters.

Preliminary interpretation of the text offers several new insights into the mind of Archimedes, who lived in the 3rd century B.C.

For instance, it suggests that he understood and set rules for infinity, previously considered a problem too difficult for ancient Greek mathematicians. It also contains a treatise on combinatorics, a field of problem-solving now used in computer science.

https://www.slac.stanford.edu/gen/com/slac_xrayimaging.html

God by the Numbers

Three numbers in particular suggest evidence for God's existence. They are 1/10¹⁰¹²³, 10¹⁶², and e^πi.

The fine-tuning of the four physical forces and the presence of one habitable planet are just two of the components that would go into a formula to predict the probability of a life-supporting universe. Oxford professor Roger Penrose discusses it in his book The Large, the Small, and the Human Mind. Penrose says the number is 1 in 10 to the 10 to the 123.

The second number that points to God comes from the field of biology. William Dembski, in The Creation Hypothesis, suggests the following argument. The odds against getting 1,000 beneficial mutations in the proper order is 2¹⁰⁰⁰. Expressed in decimal form, this number is about 10³⁰¹. 10³⁰¹ mutations is a number far beyond the capacity of the universe to generate. The chance of getting 1,000 beneficial mutations out of all the mutations the universe can generate is 10¹³⁹ divided by 10³⁰¹, or 1 chance in 10¹⁶².

A mathematics professor at MIT, an atheist, once wrote this formula on the blackboard, saying, "There is no God, but if there were, this formula would be proof of his existence."

e^πi + 1 = 0

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/003/26.44.html

What is an evangelical?

My good friend Bill M is helping contact pastors regarding the Harvest Crusade that will take place in San Jose later this year.

He said he is contacting pastors of "evangelical" churches. I asked him what is an "evangelical" church. We tossed it back and forth for a while, but we didn't really come to a firm decision. In the end, we decided that pastors of non-evangelical churches would probably "self-select out" of involvement in the Harvest Crusade. That is, pastors that choose to be involved are probably evangelical, and pastors that choose not to be involved are probably not evangelical.

It can be confusing. "Evangelical" is not the same as "fundamentalist" is not the same as "right-wing" is not the same as "moral majority" (or whatever they like to call themselves these days). And some churches that call themselves evangelical, like the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, might have their evangelical credentials questioned others in the movement.

The term fundamentalist refers to churches who believe the Bible is totally without error. These include most Pentecostal and Baptist churches.

The term moral majority refers to churches who oppose abortion and homosexuality. It includes some non-evangelical Christian churches, for example Catholics, and some non-Christian groups, for example Mormons.

The term right-wing refers to churches who align themsevles with right-wing political ideals. This goes beyond "moral majority" politics because it includes support for defense and war, support for the death penalty, opposition to immigration, and other right-wing political ideals.

But the term evangelical does not allow such a simple definition. Some would try to say that any church that believes in the gospel is evangelical. But many non-evangelical churches, like Episcopal, Methodist, and Catholic, believe in the gospel. And they believe in preaching the gospel. And they would like to think of themselves as evangelical, even if they are excluded by other churches that
call themselves evangelical.

Historians David Bebbington, Mark Noll, and George Rawlyk have identified four characteristic marks of "evangelicalism":

1. a stress on conversion, 
2. a focus on Christ's redeeming work as the core of biblical Christianity, 
3. an acknowledgment of the Bible as the supreme authority, and 
4. an energetic and personal approach to social engagement and evangelism.

I'd say that overall this is a reasonable starting point for a definition. But it does seem to work by principle of exclusion. In other words, it defines evangelicalism by contrasting it to what it is not.

The focus on Christ's redeeming work excludes some groups that would like to call themselves Christian, such as Unitarians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses.

The acknowledgement of the Bible as supreme authority is a device that goes back to the reformation of the 1500's, designed specifically to exclude Catholics.

The stress on conversion is the requirement that is most germane to the upcoming Harvest Crusade. Why would a group that doesn't believe in conversion support an outreach that attempts to convert people? It may surprise you that some Christian groups do not overtly believe in conversion. Many groups believe in catechism ... that is, if you teach the gospel to children and young adults, they will "grow into" a relationship with God, without the need for any conversion experience. Gerberding, in /The Way of Salvation in the Lutheran Church,/ (Lutheran Publication Society, 1887) says exactly this.  (The book is available online through Project Gutenberg.) In general, Catholic, Lutheran, and Anglican/Episcopal churches do not believe in conversion. Reformed and Presbyterian churches claim to believe in conversion but many do not act like it ... and some extreme Calvinist churches say that "choosing Christ" is impossible because predestination requires that Christ choose you instead.

Personal social engagement and evangelism seems to exclude just about everyone. Most Christians believe in personal engagement but do not practice it. Most conservative Christians (those who believe in a personal relationship with Jesus) claim to believe in evangelism but few practice it. Most liberal Christians (those who believe in living like Jesus did) believe in social engagement but not evangelism. Only missionaries get even close to doing this.

But maybe that's the point. It's not enough to just have a personal relationship with Jesus, one must also "be Jesus" to the world without. And it's not enough to want to live according to the ethical ideals of Jesus, one must also have the personal relationship with Jesus that makes that kind of lifestyle possible.

(The Christianity Today article is about Richard Baxter;  it is worthwhile in and of itself, and it describes these four characteristics of evangelicalism as they were displayed in Baxter's life.)

Gene variants make women see red

Women see one color differently than do men: red. She sees crimson, burgundy, and tomato. He sees red. Just plain ol' red. Why? It turns out there's a perfectly good reason why men can't see what is so obvious to women: the many variations--some subtle, some bold--of the color red. Reuters reports that researchers from Arizona State University in Tempe have determined there is a gene that allows us to see the color red, and that gene comes in a high number of variations. Because the gene sits on the X chromosome--and women have two X chromosomes and so two copies of this gene, compared with only one for men--the gene aids women's ability to perceive the red-orange color spectrum. The study findings were reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

---

A new gene study may help explain why she sees crimson, vermillion and tomato, but it's all just red to him.

In an analysis of the DNA of 236 men from around the globe, researchers found that the gene that allows people to see the color red comes in an unusually high number of variations. And that may be a boon to women's color perception in particular, study co-author Dr. Brian C. Verrelli told Reuters Health.

That's because the gene, known as OPN1LW, sits on the X sex chromosome. Women have two X chromosomes, one from each parent, while men have one X and one Y chromosome. Because women have two different copies of the "red" gene, the fact that the gene can have so many variations means it may especially aid women's perception of the red-orange spectrum.

Past research into color-vision genes has focused largely on variations related to color blindness. The red gene routinely swaps bits of genetic material with its neighbor on the X chromosome, the "green" gene. Sometimes this exchange goes wrong and results in a defect that causes color blindness.
An estimated eight percent of men are color-blind, while few women have the condition because the odds are they will have at least one good copy of the red and green genes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3929071.stm

Paradoxical Resolutions

Found while looking for other things ...

The Paradoxical Commandments were written by Kent M. Keith in 1968 as part of a booklet for student leaders. For more than thirty years, the Paradoxical Commandments have circled the globe. They have been put on walls and refrigerator doors, featured in speeches and articles, preached from pulpits, and shared extensively on the web. They have been used by business leaders, military commanders, government officials, religious leaders, university presidents, social workers, teachers, rock stars, parents, coaches, and students. Mother Teresa thought the Paradoxical Commandments were important enough to put up on the wall of her children's home in Calcutta.

At a time when we make New Year's resolutions, these might form a useful template.

The Paradoxical Commandments

by Dr. Kent M. Keith

People are illogical, unreasonable, and self-centered.
Love them anyway.

If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives.
Do good anyway.

If you are successful, you will win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.

The good you do today will be forgotten tomorrow.
Do good anyway.

Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable.
Be honest and frank anyway.

The biggest men and women with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest men and women with the smallest minds.
Think big anyway.

People favor underdogs but follow only top dogs.
Fight for a few underdogs anyway.

What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight.
Build anyway.

People really need help but may attack you if you do help them.
Help people anyway.

Give the world the best you have and you'll get kicked in the teeth.
Give the world the best you have anyway.

© Copyright Kent M. Keith 1968, renewed 2001

http://www.paradoxicalcommandments.com/

Mix and match churches

This article by Neela Banerjee in the New York Times indicates that a number of Christians, particularly youth, are comfortable participating in multiple churches.

As examples, it tells about teenagers who attend a traditional church with their parents, then another more contemporary church service or youth group with their friends.

Particularly in the case of youth, but also more generally, it is my opinion that it is healthy for believers to expose themselves to more than one Christian tradition. I grew up in the Lutheran church, but while in high school, I started attending a Pentecostal church that was part
of the Charismatic movement. In later life, I believe I am now more informed by having participated in both traditions. I can see the validity of both points of view. I can understand why people can become comfortable with a church or tradition that they've been associated with for a long time. And, most importantly, it's easy now for me to allow others to enjoy their own tradition, without having to consider them suspect in order to bolster my own beliefs.

Of course, as I read the article, I was waiting for the other shoe to drop. The other shoe, of course, being that religious leaders don't like for people to attend more than one church. And why would that be? Well, of course, they don't want to risk your money going to another church. Anyone who tries to say it's any more than that is fooling himself.

"Some critics, particularly conservative evangelicals and the ministers of various denominations, decry such practices as a consumerist approach to faith." OK, so I should keep going to a church, perhaps my parent's church, even if it puts me to sleep, if I disagree with what is being taught or how, or if I disagree with how the church is being run. Not.

<blockquote>"If families spread their loyalties around, it's been my experience that they don't benefit as well as they could," said Peter Beringer, a youth pastor at Pulpit Rock Church, which has about 1,000 adults in attendance every Sunday. "They don't seem to have relationships in the church that are as deep. From what I have seen of students who have done this, they find it easier to disengage and be the kid on the fringes."</blockquote>

I couldn't disagree more. The kids who are on the fringes are the ones who attend only one church, and that just barely. Why would someone who wants to stay on the fringe attend two different churches? Perhaps if they are dragged to both by their parents. But even in that case, the kids are getting double the exposure to the message, and they are likely getting that message in two different ways ... perhaps one of those ways will be effective at reaching to them.

Even the terminology Mr. Beringer uses, "families spreading their loyalty," confirms that each church wants to keep you close by to retain your loyalty, that is, for the well-being of the church, not to further your spiritual well-being. A church that is concerned about your spiritual condition will want you to be exposed to the gospel in as many settings as possible, so that perhaps the message might take root.

And when families attend multiple churches, it is usually the case that one is the "primary" church where strong relationships are formed, and the other is a church where other spiritual needs are met. In time, perhaps the roles of the different churches in one's life might reverse, and the formerly "primarly" church will take on a more secondary role. But this doesn't necessarily mean that personal relationships are being sacrificed. It simply means that new relationships are being formed.

Turning to Bibles for Divine Returns

By Colleen DeBaise, Dow Jones Newswires

More people are turning to the Bible as a safe refuge from a struggling stock market and rising inflation, pouring large sums of cash into rare 1611 King James Bibles, centuries-old Matthew-Tyndale Bible leaves, Hebrew scrolls, prayer books and other ancient liturgical texts.

At Sotheby's Western Manuscripts sale in London in June, a three-volume, 13th century Bible in Latin with prologues attributed to Saint Jerome sold for $1.8 million, while an 11th century Bible sold for $164,081, well above the estimate.

Rare biblical work "is like California coastline real estate -- there's a finite quantity of it," says John L. Jeffcoat, Greatsite's owner, who estimates that the value of most rare Bibles appreciates by 15 percent each year, and first editions sometimes rise 25 percent.

"The biggest concern could be the hassle of protecting it," said Mark Ferris, an Old Saybrook, Conn., financial planner. "If you really had a Gutenberg Bible -- could you keep it in your house on a stand?"

But as collectibles go, some people swear on the Bible for its steady and stable returns. "There is probably nothing out there that has done better as an investment than rare Bibles," said Tom Cloud, founder of Turamali Inc., a Duluth, Ga., tangible-asset investment manager.

A popular investment -- the rare 1611 King James Bible -- sold five years ago for $50,000. Now, the same Bible would sell for between $250,000 and $400,000, according to Cloud. Meanwhile, pages from an original Gutenberg Bible are selling for $100,000 to $150,000 a page, almost double what they sold for five years ago, he said.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2005/nov/27/turning-to-bibles-for-divine-returns/

Spam Strategy

Eudora allows me to filter messages into separate mailboxes based on various criteria. I can filter a message directly into the trash if I think it is spam. Here's how I deal with spam:

• First, make sure I filter out all the mail I know is good. Emails from my wife, my friends, and mailing lists I'm subscribed to. Don't forget good commercial emails like Ebay or Amazon if you're a customer.

Now, anything that's left is suspect.

• Filter out any message that has an attachment of type PIF, SCR, or ZIP. It's spam. Not only that, it's a virus. Get rid of it. Only my known friends would send me a ZIP file attachment. Those were filtered out in the first step.

• Filter out any message that has a link. Yeah, I know my own messages almost always have a link to my blog. But you've already filtered out my messages as a friend in the first step, right? RIGHT? GOOD! Anyway, the easiest way to find a link is to look for "html" or "http".

• There are words that are more commonly contained in spam emails I receive than in legitimate emails I receive. You might think they would be words like body parts or "Rolex." But no. the two most common words that spell SPAM to me are "free" and "best." Searching for the string "est " will also find variations like "fastest," "strongest," etc.

• Spam emails frequently have characters like []|*@#! in the subject of the email. Get rid of all those. Especially "!"

• Lots of spam comes from certain domains, actually certain countries. I get rid of anything from ZY (???), SE (Sweden), SG (Singapore), PT (Portugal), RU (Russia), NO (Norway), PL (Poland), MX (Mexico), NL (Netherlands), HU (Hungary), IT (Italy), ES (Spain), FR (France), CN (China), DE (Germany), AR (Argentina), and AU (Australia).

You might know people from those countries. I don't, except Susie R from the Netherlands, and I filter her out as a friend in the first step.

Don't forget that if you use a service like Ebay or Yahoo where you might buy things from someone in another country, you won't want to filter out their emails. So you must treat Ebay or Yahoo as a mailing list and filter those emails into the "good" pile.

• Lots of spam comes from certain IP blocks. I filter out anything from 61, 211, 217, and 218. It's all spam.

Floor It

We got a quote of $250 to "possibly" fix some small damage to our vinyl floor near the dishwasher, but the repairman never called back. Sigh. We also got a ballpark quote of $2500-3500 to replace our 200 square foot kitchen floor with anything else. Bah.

Well, after pricing out laminate flooring at Home Depot, Lowe's, and Costco, we found this place in Fremont, Universal Floor Covering at 4500 Automall Parkway near Fremont Blvd. We worked with a gentleman named Sam, and his number is 510-659-9553. He had some Armstrong brand laminate flooring for only $1.74 per square foot. The entire price including underlayment and tax came to less than $500. When we picked it up, we bought an extra couple of boxes with which we hope to later replace the hallway tile as well.

Mary found this web page that shows how to install an Armstrong laminate floor:
http://www.internetfloors.com/armstrong_laminate_installation.asp

She also found this page that shows how to remove a ceramic tile floor, possibly the hardest part of the process, but something we will save until later anyway:
http://www.homedepot.com/prel80/HDUS/EN_US/diy_main/pg_diy.jsp

Mary's brother-in-law Jerry Bacho installed a floating hardwood floor when they remodeled last winter. There are some big differences between hardwood and laminate, mostly when it comes to cutting, but the preparation is the same and the installation procedures are similar. I'm sure he will be big help to us when we start this project. Jerry? Jerry? Where are you?

The nice guy in the "Tool Corral" at OSH found us the proper circular saw blade for cutting laminate. It takes a little searching to find the right one.