- Benjamin Jacobs (1747-1827) - D.A.R. record
- John Jennings, Sr - D.A.R. record
- Etheredge - D.A.R. record
Remarks: Modified: 01/13/2025
01/13/2025 --
Sponsored by the Thomas Gardner Society, Inc.
Remarks: Modified: 01/13/2025
01/13/2025 --
TL;DR -- Jim Simmons has been almost a myth due to his success hidden behind the walls of the "hedge" phenomenon. However, his Simmons Foundation is non-profit and open. And, their approach is amenable to what we want to focus on, define, and accomplish. An example of the Foundation's work is shown.
--
I have followed Simmons' work from a distance for a while. Jim Simmons is an example of the mathematics and physics interest in things economic and financial which needs some scrutiny. We have written on that approach which leads to a non-sustainable economy several times. However, Simmons founded a non-profit: Simmons Foundation (SF).
That caught our attention, as an example of approaches that merits attention and as we noted with the Gairdner Foundation's work. The Gairdner focus is older and bio-medical. SF has a broader perspective which aligns with our technology thrust.
A news article got us to look at SF a little closer today. This work caught our eye, in particular. But, their overall thrust is appealing. This is an example.
What is missing is "adult" leadership in the equations underlying decisions plus any understanding that by necessity is imperative. We will get to the expected resolutions, eventually. How and why will not be subject to the extreme attempts at control as we see coming from the "numeric" camp.
Most of the material has been touched upon in our posts abetted by links ot other sources. So, the work will be more than indexing and determining proper generalizations. We have to resolve open issues which are not new, generally. The means for proper research is there after decades of maturing systems brought by the efforts of many. Processes need to follow suit and will through time and effort.
Remarks: Modified: 01/13/2025
01/13/2025 --
TL;DR -- The Nobel's can be used to learn the history of science and to discuss choices made plus their ramifications through time. 2024 showed the Nobel focus on machine learning. In general, we can find many types of warnings that are not being heeded or even discussed.
--
We mentioned the Nobel prizes this year, several times, example: Nobel Week. Because of the theme of some prizes in 2024, we finally paid attention. The Nobels can be used to trace the history of science since the Awards started so as to have philosophical discussions about choices. Why related ANN merely to mathematical physics? Wait, physics underlies everything else intellectually, one view says.
Okay, fair enough. But the mathematical frameworks related to physics go far beyond those used so far in GenAI. This is an empirical matter that can be an ongoing discussion. GenAI came on the scene in 2022. We saw 2023 as a get acquainted time where sides of the issues were established. Cautions were thrown to the wind in 2024 as things went full speed ahead. Yet, the issues of hype continued to exist in public view.
But, the use of ML (the AI of current mode) has exploded across the land. Repercussions are imminent (which timeframe?). Perhaps, we'll learn something.
So, Scientific American provided us an opinion that express a "Warning about AI" which compares things to the bomb era and race. The author has a site and partners: Not just Math; Partnership on AI.Did the Nobel choices add to the necessary conversation? We have not seen yet anything positive, but it is still early. And the topic is here to stay.
Along with its machine intelligence focus in the Prizes, the Nobel committee honored a person attempting to end nuclear war.
Remarks: Modified: 01/10/2025
01/10/2025 --
TL;DR -- The U.S.? We know when it started. We can look back before it was there. And, we can come forward. This post presents an image that covers several decades and the growth of the U.S. through acquistion and depicts some of the details for those major events.
--
This image was in a post on Facebook. Its provenance can be ascertained including the FB post. The title mentions "Western Social Studies" which we can research as well,
However, from the viewpoint of the 250th, this image shows the partitioning of the U.S. in terms of the acquistion time with some information that is particular to the events.
Remarks: Modified: 01/02/2025
01/02/2025 --
This issue of Gardner's Beacon continues our interest in regular presentation of ongoing work as well as reviews of common interests. ...
See Vol. XIV, No. 1 of Gardner's Beacon for links to Sources.
Remarks: Modified: 12/29/2024
12/28/2024 -- 1st release.
12/29/2024 -- General release.In a post this summer, the site offered the report, of General Gage who lead the British troops, about the battle of Bunker Hill. Prior to the opening of those hostilities, the General offered everyone a pardon except for two individuals, Samuel Adams and John Hancock. One we remember via beer. The other had the elaborate signature.
The second group goes back further to the first arrival on these shores of people attempting to start a new life. One might say that this is in regard to New England north however it covers most of the colonial activity along the east coast.
TL;DR -- Significant to us were the Prizes for Physics, Chemistry and Medicine. In this post, we point to the 1901 award. As such, that is a good start with van der Walls and Hoff for physics and chemistry.
--
We mentioned the 2024 Nobel Prizes earlier with more references to the Physics award which dealt with machine learning. At the time, we emphasized the importance of the one for chemistry and for medicine.
This post looks at the 1901 prize. It can be categoried as dealing with theoretical chemistry. After studying the advance of science and pondering what might bridge the gaps that are currently found in knowledge as we see observe the problems of technology, we settled upon theoretical chemistry as a central theme. Looking at the first Nobel prize in Chemistry is a good place to start.
Nobel, Chemistry, 1901 |
In Physics, van del Waals was the first Awardee for his work in thermodynmics but focused on his PhD thesis from 1873. Contemporary with van der Walls in doing the early work in thermodynamics was Josian Willard Gibbs who was an American and who we wrote of as a descendant of Thomas Gardner and Margaret Fryer through their son George.
In Chemistry, Jacobus Henricus van 't Hoff (Wikipedia) was the first Awardee for his work in the "the discovery of the laws of chemical dynamics and osmotic pressure in solutions" and demonstrated the importance of physical chemistry.
Tying back to the 2024 Prizes, we see that the mathematical aspects of physics and its kin has advanced tremendously with an acceleration that accompanied the growth, recently, of computing prowess. Both the physics and chemistry prizes acknowleged advanced computing which applied knowledge brought forth by studies in mathematical physics.
Another topic that will be constantly at hand is the Philosophy of Physics. Wikipedia provides a good overview, except the material is rated as "original research" as an indication of value, improperly source information, and perhaps even viewpoint. There is also an article on the Philosophy of Chemistry (Wikipedia) which does not have the problem. They quote Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling as their first philosopher. One interesting twist? Is it thing or action that is important? That issue resonates to this day. A resolution was to accept both and make the situation the focus.
BTW, philosophy of science is important by default, almost, to the upcoming discussions.
Note: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Chemistry; Modeling and Chemical explanation).