Thinking Thursday #3 Answer

This week on Thinking Thursday I asked you to come up with the answer to Lewis Carroll’s famous riddle:

Why is a raven like a writing desk?

Yes, it is a bit of a trick question because Carroll never intended there to be an answer; it was all part of Alice asking a serious question about the, to a child, mindless pursuits of adults.
However eventually Carroll did provide an answer:

Because it can produce a few notes, tho they are very flat; and it is nevar put with the wrong end in front!

The spelling of “nevar” is Carroll’s original, being “raven” backwards, but was lost in the printed version due to an over-zealous proofreader.
Of course this hasn’t stopped many other people providing clever answers, including “because Poe wrote on both” and “because they both come with inky quills”. You can find a longer explanation at, inter alia, wiseGEEK.
But I think the answer I like best is “because neither one is made of cheese“. Nor is either a helium balloon.

Thinking Thursday #3

This week on Thinking Thursday were going to look at one of the most famous riddles of all time, and see if you can come up with an answer.
The riddle I pose is one originally penned by Lewis Carroll in Alice in Wonderland:

Why is a raven like a writing desk?

As always there is no prize except the fun of the chase but if you wish to put your answer in the comments I’d love to read it.
Answer on Sunday evening, as usual.
Oh and no cheating on this one by looking it up on the intertubes. ☺

Paris

No I’m not going to start delving into all the recent mess; there’s too much uninformed and idle garbage being talked already. But I must just highlight what Brad Warner has said — he’s American, a Zen monk and talks much sense; unlike so very many Americans. Brad has written a ferociously forthright, and also in parts highly amusing, analysis on his blog.
His final sentences are:

The lunatics who think they can overturn all of [civilisation] are using technologies that could not possibly even exist at all if the rest of the world wanted to go back to life as it was in the seventh century. They will fail.
Greed, hatred and stupidity are universal human traits. But so are cooperation, love and intelligence.
And more people support cooperation, love and intelligence than will ever support greed, hatred and stupidity.

But what is brilliant, because even Brad admits it is funny, is what he quotes from a guy called John Oliver:

croc… it is important to remember, nothing about what these assholes are trying to do is going to work. France is going to endure and I’ll tell you why. If you are in a war of culture and lifestyle with France, good fucking luck. Go ahead, bring your bankrupt ideology. They’ll bring Jean-Paul Sartre, Edith Piaf, fine wine, Gauloise cigarettes, Camus, Camembert, madeleines, macarons, and the fucking croquembouche. You just brought a philosophy of rigorous self-abnegation to a pastry fight, my friend. You are fucked.

As Brad says: “It’s a funny rant, but it’s also deeply true”.
Go read the whole of Brad’s post here, it’s not very long.

Oddity of the Week: London's Fantasy Railway

In 1939 Punch published cartoons of a fanciful railway. But little did they realise that it would become a reality in the 1950s and that it would carry some 2 million passengers.
The reality was the Far Tottering and Oyster Creek Branch Railway — a narrow gauge railway created in Battersea Gardens by Rowland Emett for the 1951 Festival of Britain.


Being Emett it was one huge piece of whimsy, from the three locos, Nellie, Neptune and Wild Goose, and the two stations to the “Do Not Feed the Bats” notices at the tunnel entrance.

Sadly the original lasted only until 1953.
Read more at , The Far Tottering and Oyster Creek Railways of Roland Emett and IanVisits.

Word: Aposematic

Aposematic
A zoological term applied to usually bright colouring or markings designed to warn or alarm, and thus to repel the attacks of predators.
According to the OED the first recorded use was as late as 1890 and the word is derived from the Greek ἀπό apo away + σ̑ημα sema sign.
Wasps are a fairly classic example of aposematic marking.

They just don’t learn

When will the Western world understand that, by their actions, they are responsible for the terrorist attacks which are happening around the world? I’m thinking specifically of Paris last Friday but there are many many others.
By interfering — usually with military force — in the Arab nations all they are succeeding in doing is further radicalising those countries’ (potentially) disaffected youth and other (misguided) religious zealots.
And why are they surprised at this? If some set of foreigners, with a different culture and religion, were launching air strikes on us, wouldn’t we be sending anyone who would into their countries as insurgents? Especially if we had poorly organised and equipped military ourselves.
Of course we would — and we have. For starters, see the WWII French Resistance and other clandestine organisations like SOE. And we have officially sanctioned and organised terrorists called the SAS.
The more we meddle, and the more we retaliate, the worse we are going to make the problem. And it is a problem which is of our making! We started meddling in the Middle East way back at the time of the Crusades and it has escalated (on and off) ever since. In After the Victorians AN Wilson makes the point that one of the underlying causes of WWI was Britain trying to prevent Germany getting access to Arab oil which we had claimed. We’ve been interfering ever since. And it goes on.
None of these countries — in fact overall very few countries in the world — have a tradition of democracy. They are nearly all used to autocratic rule in one form or another. Just as we were, once upon a time. It has taken us 800 years, starting with Magna Carta in 1215, to get our democracy to its current (fragile) state. Some of the countries of our erstwhile empire have taken the English model on board. Other European countries have got there too by their own, often bloody, routes — see, for example, the French Revolution.
So how is it we expect to be able to walk into any country, tell them to embrace democracy and expect them to jump for joy and do so overnight? Why would they? How can they when it’s taken us 800 years? To them democracy is a revolution and a totally different culture. People don’t like change and they are mostly OK with what they have because at least they understand it. Nearly everywhere we’ve done this in the last 200 years we have ended up with, at best, a bloody nose.
The Arab countries are large enough and well enough orchestrated that they can bring their resistance to us. They have a religion which, by and large, transcends their tribal divisions and they aren’t confined to their own little enclaves like many African nations. Contrary to Christianity, when push comes to shove, the Arab religious beliefs will overcome any tribal animosities.
Why is it that politicians cannot learn from history? It isn’t that hard. If I, a mere scientist, can do so then so can anyone with more than six brain cells. (Oh, hang on, do politicians even have six brain cells?)
No I am not saying we should be soft on terrorists. Yes we have to deal with them on our territory according to our laws — just as they would if the tables were turned.
What I am saying is twofold: (a) stop meddling in other countries, except perhaps through diplomatic channels, and (b) stop bombing the shit out of them at any excuse. Unless, of course, your objective is to radicalise them.
Let me leave you with two final thoughts.
(1) Never lose sight of the fact that your enemy is a human being too. He (or she) has a mother, a sister, a child, a spouse who loves them. They eat, pee and lust the same as you. They were once that carefree child playing in the street. To lose sight of your enemy’s humanity is to lose all respect for others and yourself.
(2) And in the words of Abraham Lincoln:

Do I not destroy my enemies by making them my friends?

Weekly Photograph

This week I bring you a really poor quality shot, but one for the record. n Saturday lunchtime we had a fox in the garden. This isn’t unheard of, even in daylight, but it isn’t something we see more than about once a year. But on this occasion Mr Reynard hung around for quite a while — maybe 15 minutes — sniffing around the garden and finding the odd tasty morsel which the starlings have missed. So I managed to get a few, not very good, photos. They’re poor partly because I was shooting through the study window, and the window is grimy hence the slight mistiness; but I knew if I opened the window this would be enough to scare the fox away.

fox
Reynard the Fox
Greenford; November 2015

As you can see, Reynard was in pretty good condition — as (s)he should be given the mildness of the weather. What was striking though is the paleness of the coat on the body and the conspicuous black ears and paws.

Word: Mandrel

Mandrel
1. A tapered or cylindrical axle or spindle which can be inserted into a hole in a piece of work to support it during machining.
2. A metal bar that serves as a core around which material (usually metal) may be cast, molded, forged, bent, or otherwise shaped.
3. The shaft and bearings on which a tool (as a circular saw) is mounted.
4. A miner’s pick.
According to the OED the word is usually believed to be an alteration of the French mandrin, which has the senses 1 & 2 above. However the French word has not been traced earlier than 1690 and is of obscure origin.

mandrel2

Unless one is a tool-maker or similar craftsman the most likely place most of us will encounter a mandrel is as the stick which a jeweller uses to size rings.