Seqram's New Writeupshttp://everything2.com/?node=New%20Writeups%20Atom%20Feed&foruser=Seqram2002-07-24T16:31:40Zcynarin (thing)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/cynarinSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2002-07-24T16:31:40Z2002-07-24T16:31:40Z<p>
A strange <a href="/title/food">food</a> <a href="/title/acid">acid</a> peculiar to <a href="/title/artichoke">artichoke</a>s. It has an unusual <a href="/title/effect">effect</a> on the <a href="/title/taste+bud">taste bud</a>s, making everything taste <a href="/title/sweet">sweet</a> for a short time (for most people). It's been said this makes it hard to pair with a <a href="/title/wine">wine</a>.
</p>
<p>
There are other <a href="/title/health">health</a>-related effects claimed for cynarin, but I am not familiar with them.
</p>God of the Gaps (idea)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/God+of+the+GapsSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2001-03-21T15:15:32Z2001-03-21T15:15:32Z<p>
And indeed this <a href="/title/concept">concept</a> has made for a lot of the <a href="/title/friction">friction</a> between <a href="/title/religionist">religionist</a>s and <a href="/title/scientist">scientist</a>s. After all, with every new <a href="/title/discovery">discovery</a>, the <a href="/title/gap">gap</a>s get smaller and thus <a href="/title/God">God</a> becomes less. So explaining the <a href="/title/universe">universe</a>, just by using your <a href="/title/sense">sense</a>s and not saying one thing about God one way or another becomes <a href="/title/blasphemous">blasphemous</a>. It was easy enough when our gaps were so much bigger, but as the gaps started narrowing in the past few <a href="/title/century">centuries</a>, people become more <a href="/title/zealous">zealous</a> in defending those that remain.
</p>How can an atheist have morals? (idea)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/How+can+an+atheist+have+morals%253FSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2001-03-21T14:59:49Z2001-03-21T14:59:49Z<p>
I've heard it said that things like <a href="/title/game+theory">game theory</a> threw <a href="/title/theologist">theologist</a>s into a <a href="/title/tizzy">tizzy</a> because it provided a way for there to be <a href="/title/moral">moral</a>s without <a href="/title/God">God</a>. I'm not sure if this argument works with <a href="/title/TheLady">TheLady</a>'s <a href="/title/definition">definition</a> of morals, but it does for other ways of looking at them.
</p>
<p>
The morals-implies-God argument runs as follows: if there were no God, there would be no <a href="/title/reason">reason</a> for anyone to do anything against his own immediate <a href="/title/self-interest">self-interest</a>. As <a href="/title/TheLady">TheLady</a> puts it, morals have to be imposed externally. God provides the ultimate <a href="/title/authority+figure">authority figure</a> who lays down the basic laws to force people to work together and think as a group rather than as <a href="/title/individual">individual</a>s. Without such an <em>external</em> imposition of order, people's self-interest would tear any <a href="/title/society">society</a> apart. Therefore, no society could exist without some sort of <a href="/title/divine">divine</a> influence to get it started: <a href="/title/law">law</a>s must come from God.
</p>
<p>
But studies of game theory and such things as the <a href="/title/Prisoner%2527s+Dilemma">Prisoner's Dilemma</a> give an <a href="/title/alternative">alternative</a> (jus<!-- close unclosed tag --></p>…Rokusaburo Michiba (person)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/Rokusaburo+MichibaSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2001-03-19T15:33:25Z2001-03-19T15:33:25Z<p>
Former <a href="/title/Iron+Chef">Iron Chef</a> <a href="/title/Japanese">Japanese</a>; his post was taken over by <a href="/title/Koumei+Nakamura">Koumei Nakamura</a>, who was himself <a href="/title/succeed">succeed</a>ed by the more-familiar-to-Americans <a href="/title/Masaharu+Morimoto">Masaharu Morimoto</a>. Michiba <a href="/title/retire">retire</a>d in <a href="/title/January">January</a> <a href="/title/1996">1996</a>. He's seen here and there on later <a href="/title/episode">episode</a>s of the <a href="/title/show">show</a>; I recall the time he brought in his top <a href="/title/assistant">assistant</a> to challenge Morimoto, and he worked with and advised Morimoto before his battle with <a href="/title/Bobby+Flay">Bobby Flay</a>.
</p>
<p><small>Details provided by http://www.ironchef.com/ironchefs.shtml</small></p>Kevin Clash (person)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/Kevin+ClashSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2001-03-19T15:11:12Z2001-03-19T15:11:12Z<p>
The <a href="/title/muppetteer">muppetteer</a> who plays and <a href="/title/voice">voice</a>s <a href="/title/Elmo">Elmo</a>, the high-pitched red <a href="/title/monster">monster</a> so beloved of the <a href="/title/youngest">youngest</a> of the <a href="/title/Sesame+Street">Sesame Street</a> audience.
It's <a href="/title/amusing">amusing</a> to watch <a href="/title/reaction">reaction</a>s to seeing him--at least he finds it amusing too--as he is over <a href="/title/six+feet+tall">six feet tall</a>, <a href="/title/male">male</a> and <a href="/title/Black">Black</a>, not what most people imagine Elmo's <a href="/title/actor">actor</a> would be like. An in an <a href="/title/interview">interview</a> with him I saw last night, he <a href="/title/recount">recount</a>ed being told "<a href="/title/I+didn%2527t+know+Elmo+was+black%2521">I didn't know Elmo was black!</a>" To which he <a href="/title/answer">answer</a>ed that Elmo was not black, but <a href="/title/red">red</a>.
</p>
<p>
<small>This was a <a href="/title/nodeshell">nodeshell</a></small></p>Omega (idea)http://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram/writeups/OmegaSeqramhttp://m.everything2.com/user/Seqram2001-03-19T15:01:11Z2001-03-19T15:01:11Z<p>
In <a href="/title/computer+science">computer science</a>, specifically <a href="/title/complexity+theory">complexity theory</a>, the <a href="/title/capital">capital</a> Omega is used to represent a particular <a href="/title/complexity">complexity</a> <a href="/title/class">class</a> of <a href="/title/functions">functions</a>. Specifically:
</p>
<pre>
f(n)=Ω(g(n)) <a href="/title/iff">iff</a> there exists <a href="/title/constant">constant</a>s c>0 and N>0 <a href="/title/such+that">such that</a>
f(n) <a href="/title/%2526gt%253B%253D">>=</a> c*g(n) for all n>N
</pre>
<p>
That is, f(n) is "at least as big" as g(n), <a href="/title/up+to">up to</a> a constant <a href="/title/factor">factor</a>, for <a href="/title/sufficiently+large">sufficiently large</a> values of n. (There are some slightly different <a href="/title/definition">definition</a>s as well; some researchers require only that there there be <a href="/title/infinitely+many">infinitely many</a> values for which the relationship holds, not all n>N, and so forth. The various versions are not <a href="/title/equivalent">equivalent</a>, but they're similar enough for most purposes). Thus, <a href="/title/Big-Omega">Big-Omega</a> is the <a href="/title/opposite">opposite</a> of <a href="/title/Big-oh+notation">Big Oh</a>. The latter states that g(n) is at least as big as f(n) up to a constant factor. Between the two is <a href="/title/Big-Theta">Big-Theta</a>, which basically means that the two functions can bound each other for sufficiently large values of n and suitably chosen<!-- close unclosed tag --></p>…