Skill Set
You know what's going to be awesome? When I have to get a normal job.
"So, why do you think you'd be great at Jimmy John's Sub Shop?"
"Ummmm... I can compute first-order perturbations to degenerate Hamiltonians. Please hire me?"
"What else?"
"I can design your web site and ordering system..."
"Nope, already got one."
"I can be thrown around safely!"
"Next please."
I have the weirdest skill set on the planet.
0 comments
Transverse Laser Modes
These are pictures of various transverse electromagnetic modes for the laser we're working with.
Laser beams aren't constrained to being nice little smooth dots, though that's one of the possible modes (TEM00). Since TEM00 has the most tightly focused beam, and the fewest irregularities, it's the one many laser manufacturers force their device to operate at. There are other possible solutions, with varying patterns. The subscripts here indicate the number of divisions in the beam—I'm guessing on some of the higher ones. There's also a strange pattern which looks like it has radial, not rectilinear, divisions; I'm not sure what that is, exactly.
TEM00
|
TEM01
|
TEM02
|
TEM11
|
TEM22
|
TEM23
|
TEM33?
|
TEM35?
|
Radial mode?
|
These pictures are taken by projecting the beam through an enlarging lens onto a whiteboard. Kind of a hack, but it works surprisingly well. Images are enhanced to show contrast; in reality, they're just red.
IPCC challenge/response
Some recent reports have suggested incidents of scientific misconduct in the climate science community. While that is not evidence of incorrect conclusions, it does cast some doubt on the findings of the organizations involved--and right so, I believe. The APS newsletters for December and January have been chock-full of climate discussion--arguing for the retraction of the APS's climate change statement or alteration to reflect uncertainty, counterarguments, and so forth.
My personal take on it is this: climate is really effing complicated. I know a little about the scientific method, publishing, data analysis, and review, but basically have no awareness of the intricacies of modeling the world's atmosphere and hydrology. I'm also aware that plenty of people have significant personal and economic interests in the matter, and an underabundance of understanding. The only reasonable conclusion I can come to is this: trust the people who spend their lives trying to understand climate, and maintain some awareness of their methods. It is my belief, from the limited reading I've been able to do, that the vast majority of climate researchers are doing good science, and working hard to understand and explain to others a very complex problem.
Anyway, that's why I think RealCimate's analysis of the recent challenges over the IPCC's AR4 is a good read.