Thanks, Bob.

> But I think that it does show the magnitude of the effect this topic is
beginning to have on our lives.

My mistake to choose a topic that's too important. But they do say it's
worth capturing the interest of the class.

Also I was concerned to leverage the magnitude of the problem for its halo
effect on two very mundane tasks:
++ copying data across correctly
++ making sure the code works (…once you've loaded all the J-words it needs
:-)

Most people just dismiss the issues arising as the way of the world.
But never has so much hung on getting these simple matters right.

Ian

On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 19:26, 'robert therriault' via Chat <
[email protected]> wrote:

> You made your questions very clear Ian,
>
> But I think that it does show the magnitude of the effect this topic is
> beginning to have on our lives. It would be like you had asked someone to
> check trajectory numbers on incoming enemy fire. The first response may be
> to be strategies on getting away from the danger, rather than to determine
> the nature of the danger. It gives me hope that people react this way
> initially, although I agree with you that the important part may be to look
> at the situation more analytically.
>
> I will take a look at your project when I get a chance because I think
> that the question of accuracy is important, but also because the subject
> affects the entire planet.
>
> Nice application of the J resources.
>
> Cheers, bob
>
> > On Jun 7, 2019, at 11:14 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm going to put myself in the "not enough interest to try to figure
> this
> > out" category, for now.
> >
> > Whoa, folks. It's only an example! Let's not carried away by the
> magnitude
> > of the problem domain to refuse to focus on the two limited questions
> I've
> > asked.
> >
> > Let me repeat them, hopefully clarifying them…
> >
> > ++ are the input figures reliable, i.e. has the data been corrupted when
> > moving it from web to SAMPLE9?
> > ++ is TABULA calculating it right?
> >
> > These are purely questions of data integrity and code reliability. I
> > thought everyone on this list was keenly interested in such issues.
> >
> > The first question arises from the deceptively simple task of looking up
> a
> > quantity on the web and transferring it into a calculating engine.
> Simple,
> > but errors can arise. Issues arise about where such-and-such a physical
> > constant or observation comes from. How the end-user can verify its
> source.
> > Would it have helped if I'd phrased it in terms of looking up the current
> > $/£ exchange rate?
> >
> > TABULA is distributed with tables of physical and chemical constants. Are
> > they up-to-date? Have they been copied across correctly? Built-in tables
> > are an inherently unsatisfactory solution. I'm now considering an
> > interactive specialised browser, with which the user can locate any of
> > these quantities on a given webpage, draw a box round them, and leave
> > TABULA to fetch the numbers and units at the point of use. Hey presto:
> > keying errors eliminated, up-to-date figures, near-perfect assurance of
> the
> > integrity of the data being fetched. Warning if the webpage has been
> > corrupted or pulled.
> >
> > These, and only these, are the questions I'm interested in here. I just
> > fail to see how I could possibly have made it clearer.
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 18:43, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 12:18 PM Ian Clark <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>> Would anyone fancy checking my calculations?
> >>
> >> I don't, but if I did, I'd try to find an alternate way of getting the
> >> same information and see if the numbers land in the same order of
> >> magnitude.
> >>
> >> (For example, when talking about global temperature change over the
> >> last century, I like double checking those kinds of numbers with rise
> >> in sea level. Weather stations tend to be near airports, which tend to
> >> have lots of asphalt, but sea level doesn't have that issue and the
> >> thermal expansion coefficient of water is something I can easily find,
> >> as are NOAA numbers on sea level...)
> >>
> >> So, if I were be double checking numbers related to CO2, I'd try to
> >> find some similar thing. For actual levels, I don't have any good
> >> ideas - maybe something optical?
> >>
> >> For cost of pulling it back out? The big mechanism there has always
> >> been trees and similar vegetation. So maybe I'd check forestry service
> >> records, or lumber statistics. I'd probably have to put some thought
> >> into it though - maybe a few weeks before I had any really good ideas
> >> on what to look for. Hopefully someone else has been doing this
> >> thinking, but most people aren't really interested in doing that kind
> >> of thinking.
> >>
> >> (Related: It takes about 60 years to grow a typical crop of trees for
> >> lumber -- maybe 10 times that for something like Sitka Spruce -- and
> >> during that time they relatively large amount of CO2 out of the
> >> atmosphere. So if enough land is earmarked for vegetation, we should
> >> be seeing a lot of CO2 being pulled out of the atmosphere. Well, that
> >> and don't let them burn up in forest fires, for example.)
> >>
> >> Anyways, good luck, but I'm going to put myself in the "not enough
> >> interest to try to figure this out" category, for now. Maybe if I
> >> think up a good approach I'll change my mind.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> --
> >> Raul
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to