JamesCronen.com

Today was the start of Ramadan, the most holy month of the Islamic year. To coincide with the start of the month, King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud set ticking the clock on the highest peak of the Abraj-ul-Bait Towers.

The clock faces measure 141 feet in diameter, compared to 22 feet in diameter for Big Ben. Rather than levering the entire weight of a 50-foot hour hand or 70-foot long minute hand on the hub, the distant tip of each clock hand is supported by a guide built into the clock face that moves the hand along on a track. (This means that the outer tip of the minute hand moves along at a swift inch and a half per second.)

Photographs are available here and here.

This video gives a great sense of the scale of the operation and the clock’s features, but its fidelity is poor.

I’d love to see this thing in operation, but I don’t think I’ll get the chance. Non-Muslims are not legally permitted to enter the city of Mecca.

A long time ago, when, I was studying physics at an engineering college, I had gotten proficient at “B.S.”-ing math problems on exams.

I had nothing on Abbott and Costello:

I’d seen this clip a few years ago but had forgotten about it. Hat tip to Epic Win FTW for the reminder.

This article by Liz Tay in the Australian iTnews highlights the work of Indiana University researcher Lee Sheldon, who’s suggested that employees and teachers may need new systems to motivate their next incoming generation:

Employers: Look to gaming to motivate staff

Sheldon grades his classes on a system similar to World of Warcraft. Students start at Level 1 and zero experience points (XP), and work their way upwards towards mastery. Materially, this system isn’t that different from what’s already out there. The only difference is the viewpoint — top-down or bottom-up?

The vast majority of our school grading systems are based on the idea that a student starts with a perfect score, and works downward from there. Failed tests are a sea of red minus signs and huge X’s. By that definition, the most successful student is the one that has failed the least. Sheldon’s students start from a point of being (functionally) worthless, and slowly work their way up towards mastery.

Real life is closer to Sheldon’s model. And anything that makes school a bit more like real life is okay in my book.

Job descriptions are written in terms of competencies — i.e., “you should be able to do x, y, and z; ability to do a, b, and c is a bonus.” Any extra skills you might have are generally immaterial to the job. I’m a software developer now, and so my ability to juggle is meaningless.

I kind of wish I was still teaching, so I could try out Sheldon’s scheme. For example, I’d consider defining grades in terms of competencies, rather than points on a test. Consider grading a unit on Newton’s laws. What if the expectations, presented at the beginning of the unit, looked like this?

A student will receive a grade of D upon: (1) reciting Newton’s three laws, and (2) giving an example of each.

A student will receive a grade of C upon: achieving the requirements for a grade of D, and (3) solving basic force problems using Newton’s second law in one dimension.

A student will receive a grade of B upon: achieving the requirements for a grade of C, and (4) solving basic force problems using forces at right angles using Newton’s second law in two dimensions.

A student will receive a grade of A upon: achieving the requirements for a grade of B, and (5) solving complex force problems involving four or more forces at any angles in two dimensions.

A test would become five questions, corresponding to the numbered entries above. (Or maybe 15 questions, three for each item. The student “passes” that competency if (s)he gets at least two of three right.)

Optimistically, this system gets rid of grade inflation. Numerical grades tend to be relative to one another, and the entire class can swing up or down (usually up) as a whole. At the end of the quarter, what does a grade of ‘90′ mean? Not much.

If you’re an overachieving student, an average of 97 doesn’t tell you anything about your absolute proficiency at the subject. And worse, it dissuades you from learning even more, since the system says that you’re already at the top of the scale. Why bother?

Sheldon’s system may even result in students choosing “majors” in high school. For those who have a good sense of what their career would bring them, this isn’t a bad thing in the least. I knew I hated literature and history from a young age, and I loved math and science. What if I could direct my energy in really excelling in those fields, while attaining lesser mastery in those fields in which I had no interest? In fact, why even bother having a maximum grade? Students who can analyze literature four grade levels above their chronological grade level should be rewarded for doing so.

I don’t expect schools to take on something like this. Ironically I think parents and administrators like the fluid nature of grades. Grades can be easily manipulated and are quite subjective. Teachers and students can attempt to “explain away” the reason for a particular grade penalty. (E.g., “this question wasn’t perfectly fair,” “I talked about it in class but it wasn’t in the textbook,” “you didn’t get enough partial credit,” et cetera.)

Sheldon’s grading system would expose the disparity in achievement across genders and races. And it would show that students with learning and mental disabilities are actually not able to keep up with their peers, which is a politically incorrect result (even if it is, in most cases, true).

What do you think? Paradigm shift? Or a new way of looking at the same problem?

I always get a warm, fuzzy feeling when Google recognizes physicists in their Google doodle.

Today is Hans Christian Oersted’s birthday, and this famous physicist has been shown the love:

.

Danish natural philosopher Oersted was one of the first physicists to link electricity and magnetism. His work paved the way for James Clerk Maxwell’s revolutionary four equations that perfectly mathematically-modeled electromagnetism.

As a physics undergraduate, I never opted to take a circuit theory class. That never bothered me when I was a student. But now, as an adult, seeing the Maker movement in full swing, I’m kicking myself that I never got into electronics.

My dear wife got me a soldering iron, an Arduino Duemilanove, and lots of miscellaneous electronics-related supplies last Christmas, to help me fill this gap in my education.

And finally, last night I sat down and in two hours completed my first soldering project: the Adafruit Industries TV-B-Gone v1.1.

The TV-B-Gone is a simple device whose sole job is to turn off television sets. That might not be too useful at home, since you already have a remote for that. But, consider being out at a bar or restaurant or waiting room, trying to talk to friends or read in peace, while the incessant chatter of talking heads drills its way into your skull. (Why no, I’ve never experienced this, why do you ask?) The TV-B-Gone is a godsend.

The TV-B-Gone kit contains four infrared LEDs, driven by a microcontroller that contains the codes for all major brands of television sets. When you press the button, the TV-B-Gone flashes about 50 power-on codes in sequence, one after another. One of them should turn off the television, giving you the peace you deserve.

(Since televisions use the same codes to turn off and turn on a television, the same TV-B-Gone can be used to atone for your crime if you get caught.)

I opened up the kit and went through the parts list, as recommended. All the parts were included (a very important first step). I brought up the soldering instructions and got to work.

After about two hours of work I was finished, and ready to test my creation. I pointed the infrared LEDs into my phone’s camera, and I could see them flicker when I pressed the button. (Digital cameras can see infrared.) Success!

I liked this kit. The instructions were exceptionally clear, with plenty of photos. The printed circuit board was very clearly marked — if you’re soldering this kit, you have to really have your head in the clouds to mount a component in the wrong place. (And if your mind isn’t on your work, should you really be wielding a 700°F metal stick? Didn’t think so.)

The instructions also provided an intermediate step for testing the device half-way through the build. I understand this isn’t possible for some projects, but I liked having a point at which I could stop, take a break, and verify that what I was doing was working.

I have one very tiny complaint; I would have liked a little more of an explanation of why certain components are needed in the circuit. But I understand that this is a kit for beginners, and too much information might prove confusing.

I heartily recommend the Adafruit electronics kits. I’ll be buying one or two more kits for soldering practice before I start working on my own projects. I think I’ll try the Drawdio next, then perhaps the Conway’s Game of Life kit. If you want to buy the TV-B-Gone kit I’ve mentioned, go here.

Hats off to Ladyada (Limor Fried) for creating a fantastic product.

And, dear readers, if I come over to your house and the television spontaneously turns off? It wasn’t me.