TerryColon.com

So then, spick-and-span means neat and clean. Nobody ever uses only one, as in "This room is so spick" or "This room is really span." They always go hand in hand like Siamese twins, which one guesses might account for the hyphens.

Though one wonders if one means neat and the other means clean. Can your house be span without being spick as well? I mean, if you're neat and not clean, organized and dirty, are you spick or span?

Now I suppose we might learn something from the word's derivation which comes from the Dutch spiksplinter nieuw meaning "spike-splinter-new". How that means neat and clean, your guess is as good as mine. Better, if you're Dutch and get how spikes and splinters are neat and clean.

File under Word Definitions & Origins

7/20/10 English English

If you've ever listened to news from the BBC you'll have heard a phrase which to American ears sounds odd, but is A-OK to the rest of the English-speaking world. Something along the lines of:

Joe Dokes was sent to hospital.

In the U.S. we'd say "to the hospital" not "to hospital." Like I say, Americans find the British way tinny to the ear, almost ungrammatical or like something spoken by someone who's first language was not English. But is it so odd? After all, "Joe Dokes went to school" sounds right. "Joe Dokes went to the school" sounds right, too, but means something else.

Then again, after getting out Joe went home. Not went to home or went to the home, just went home. Though if Joe were old and released from (the) hospital he could have gone home to the home. The retirement home, that is. There Joe might either lie in bed or lie on the couch. Or is that lay on the couch? In any case Joe doesn't lie in couch, always on the couch. Though he can lie (or lay) on the bed or in bed or even in the bed, which all mean about the same thing.

Though a younger Joe would return to his job where he'd be at work or at the office and never at the work or at office. On the other hand, in office isn't the same as in the office. Elected officials are in office even when they're not in the office but at home in bed.

Now then, Joe can be in school without being in the school. The first means he's a student, the second he's at a school building whether a student or not. This explains the British usage where in hospital means Joe is a patient, while in the hospital would mean Joe could be a doctor or visitor and is in the building. The latter use would even apply to a thing, as in the MRI machine was in the hospital, while it would never be in hospital. Yet if broken could be in the shop and not in shop.

Perhaps all this seem inconsistent. What rules cover all this I don't know. I guess grammar is in the ear of the beholder and might vary from place to place. Even if you don't know the rules, some things just sound right or wrong. After all, as children we learn to speak properly without being taught rules of grammar until we get to school. And even then all those rules don't always soak in, but we can still speak grammatically anyway.

As a final bit of triviality, being freelance I work at home. Though some folks would say I work from home. I guess both are right, but the first sounds righter than the second to me. Though maybe the word "righter" doesn't sound right to anyone.

File under Odds & Ends

7/16/10 Invasive Biodiversity

Previously in FF&T we examined how there's no such thing a weed. At least biologically. A weed is a plant you don't want to grow where it's growing. In other words, a weed is a human judgement. If there were no people there'd be no weeds.

Now we look at a related topic, invasive species. To a large extent an invasive species is also nothing more than a human judgement. What I mean is, most species at one time or another were invaders of new habitat. Only we call that colonizing. They didn't spring up all over the place at once.

Take eagles, for instance. There are various eagle species all over the world. All of them genetically related. How did that happen? Did they all spring up separately? Unlikely. Were they all one progenitor species at one time? How did that progenitor species exist all over the world? Did it spring up everywhere at once?

Somehow at some time eagles spread around the world, they colonized, they were invasive species. This can happen a few times a long time apart so you get more than one eagle variety in the same place. Like bald eagles and golden eagles in North America. They may have come from the same progenitor, but the early arrival developed separately so that when the later one arrived they were different.

This is how you get biodiversity. And isn't biodiversity a good thing? So then, colonizing species add biodiversity. Since an invasive species is the same thing, they add biodiversity, too. The adaption of the new species to the habitat and the habitat to the new species is the same process however the new species got there. This is one of the underlying mechanisms of evolution.

What usually happens when a new species arrives is an initial population explosion, followed by a crash. After that the new species settles into it's new niche as part of the habitat. That's what happened with the alewife in the Great Lakes in the 1960s. At one point this invasive species accounted for some 80% of the fishlife in the lakes. One year there was a massive die-off as they over-reproduced for the food supply. Their numbers never recovered to that level, though the numbers of the other native fish did. Now the alewife is just another part of the Great Lakes habitat.

This pattern has recurred over and over through the millennia when new species arrive. Call it invasion, or call it colonization, the process and the results are the same. So then, is an invasive species nothing more than a human judgement, like the notion of a weed?

Consider one more thing, philosophically. Is there a time when the natural world reaches perfection so it shouldn't change thereafter? Is there a point when evolution should stop? Is being against invasive species like being against evolution? Just something to consider.

File under Fun Facts & Trivia

7/8/10 A Pig Walks Into a Bar...

Do these old expressions make sense?

Make a beeline.
Sweat like a pig.
Lie like a dog

A beeline is supposed to be straight and fast. Have you ever watched bees? They don't go all that straight and fast as far as I've observed. More like a zig-zag meander. Though if you them upset them and they swarm maybe it's a different story. In which case you make a beeline out of there lickety-split.

Next, pigs don't sweat. Or so they say. That's why they wallow in the mud, to cool off. To be honest, I don't know what animals sweat like people. Dogs pant and horses lather. Is that sweat? I dunno. I also don't know the difference between a pig a hog and a boar. Though I guess none of them sweat.

In my experience, outside of tall tales and jokes dogs don't talk. So how could they lie? Besides, dogs don't have a reputation for dishonesty. A dog is man's best friend, right? That's why we name some Fido. That's from the Latin fidelis, "faithful". All the same, I'll conclude this entry with a talking dog joke.

A guy sees a sign in front of a house, "Talking Dog For Sale". He rings the bell, and the owner tells him the dog is in the backyard. The guy goes around the house and into the backyard and sees a chihuahua sitting there.

"You talk?" he asks.

"Yep," the dog replies.

"So, what's your story?"

The chihuahua looks up and says, "Well, I discovered that I could talk when I was pretty young, and I wanted to help fight crime. I contacted the FBI, and in no time at all, they had me jetting around the country, sitting in rooms with Mobsters and assorted criminal types, because no one figured a dog would be eavesdropping. I was one of their most valuable assests for eight years running. But the travel really tired me out, and I wanted to settle down. I was transferred to the shipping docks to do some undercover security work, mostly wandering near suspicious characters and listening in. I uncovered a number of smuggling rings and was awarded a batch of medals. I got married, had a mess of puppies, and now I'm just retired."

The guy is amazed. He goes back in and asks the owner what he wants for the dog.

"Ten dollars," replies the owner.

The guy says, "This dog is amazing! Why on earth are you selling him so cheap?"

"Because he's a liar. He didn't do any of that stuff."

File under Quotes & Sayings

6/29/10 What? What.

Infrequently Answered Question #48: Are any of the questions in I.A.Q. for real?

A: The questions in I.A.Q. are indeed infrequently answered. They're also infrequently asked. Though if the question is, have other people actually written in and asked these questions, I confess the answer is no.

All the same the questions are real, they take the proper form of questions as they contain the who, what, when, where, how and/or why as per usual in questions. They also end in a question mark which makes any statement a question. That makes them questions? That makes them questions. See? Si.

Anyway, if they weren't real they wouldn't show up on screen when you go to terrycolon.com. You'd have to be dreaming or hallucinating. How real are dreams and hallucinations? They're real dreams and hallucinations.

But now I'm talking in circles and parsing the meaning of is and getting into the pointless topic of is reality real. You know, like wondering if we are all nothing but brains in vats experiencing the world only in the mind. Which I say is pointless because even if we were brains in vats the world that exists in our minds works just the same as if it were a physical reality. So it's a difference which makes no difference which is no real difference.

File under Infrequently Answered Questions

6/10/10 World Cup 2010 Team Rundowns (In which I run down the teams.)

A soccer curmudgeon's view. With apologies to everyone, everywhere. Which is what FIFA should also do as they rule this misbegotten excuse for a sport.

You don't have to read between the lines to see I'm not enamored of soccer or the World Cup. I played soccer and enjoyed it. Though I found it more fun to play than to watch. To confess, I found it more fun to practice than to play. Maybe I just don't get it. Then again, maybe I do, the rest of the world doesn't get it that soccer is over-rated.

Be that as it may, here at the Casual Sportsman we feel it is incumbent to comment on the major sporting ados of the day, however casually.

The usual suspects (These four have won most of the World Cups and been in most of the finals. Don't be surprised if history repeats.)

Brazil: Poetry in motion, the embodiment of "the beautiful game." At least they try to make soccer entertaining. Which unfortunately is like putting lipstick on a pig. No surprise if they win yet another Cup.

Germany: Their game is Teutonic power soccer where they run at you, over you or through you. Would you expect anything less from Germans? Have lost more finals than anyone else, a lot like their war record actually. Could be the same this year.

Argentina: Imagine short Spanish-speaking Germans trying to play like Brazilians and you get Argentine soccer. Never as good as they think they are, but better than everyone else would like them to be. Will "the hand of God" help them this tournament or will they just get the Finger? I say the latter.

Italy: The anti-Brazil, win with defense. Motto: "winning ugly is beautiful." The world Cup will likely be ugly as usual, but it doesn't mean Italy will win it. That's just soccer.

The woulda-couldas (Won a few between them. Be surprised if one of them takes home the gold.)

Uruguay: Won two cups. 80 years ago. Their future is all behind them. The elusive third cup will elude them again.

England: The Brits seem to celebrate their glorious failures. Think Dunkirk and the charge of the light brigade. They will have more to celebrate this year. Last world cup 40 years and counting. Keep on counting.

France: Some call team France "the Brazil of Europe" for their style of play. A style which might produce more cups if they fielded Brazilian players instead of Frenchmen. Don't look for the cup in France this time around.

The also-rans (Be very surprised.)

Spain: Latin passion. Latin flair. Latin under-achievement. At least they're consistent. No mas this time around? Si, mas. No Cup.

Netherlands: They've been called the Clockwork Orange. But the mainspring has come unsprung and their time is over. No Cup for the Dutch.

Sweden: Organized, disciplined, strong, tall, blond. Look better than they play. Usually do better than expected which still hasn't won them a Cup. The Swedes won't again.

USA: All the best American athletes play real football, not futbol. What will they do in the big show on the big stage? Does America care? The answer to both questions, not much.

China: More good acrobats and divers come out of China than soccer players. If soccer were more about acrobatics and diving... wait a minute, it is. China just might win the World Cup!

Everybody else: I don't know and I don't much care. To be honest, I don't even know who qualified.

That's it, whatever it is. Hope it helps your brackets and betting pool. Though I wouldn't bet on it.

File under The Casual Sportsman

Stabilizing the Unstable.
Not an Instruction, but an Explanation.

Bike riders know it's easier to maintain balance the faster you go. But why? Some say it's because wheels are gyroscopes. Others say stability is designed into the bike from what's called trail. Still others say stability comes from forward momentum.

To know which proposition might be correct it would be helpful to know how we balance in the first place. Intuitively you'd figure riders balance by leaning side-to-side. Though according to basic physics leaning shouldn't help us balance this way. As per Newton's third law of motion, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." A rider leaning one way tilts the bike the opposite way, but the combined center of mass, the balance remains the same. There is a way for you to test this idea to see for yourself. Or if you trust my account of the same test you can save yourself the trouble.

I inserted a slat of wood up against the front wheel inside the front fork as shown. I tied the back end to the frame below the seat and tied the front to the wheel. Now the front end will not turn and the bike won't roll forward or back. About the only thing you can do with the bike like this is spin the peddles backwards, which won't get you very far.

Seated on the bike with my feet off the ground, no matter how I leaned or moved it was impossible to balance and stay upright more than about a second or so. Once it started falling one way or the other, no amount of leaning would stop it. Should you try the experiment for yourself, you will see there is no way to balance such a bike by leaning alone.

This suggests leaning doesn't help balance a bike. There is a problem though because bikes don't have slats of wood preventing the front end turning. Bikes change shape as the front end turns. Plus the front end has a wheel where the bottom, the support point or what's called the contact patch, changes when pitched. In other words, bikes have variable geometry.

Variable geometry means a bike doesn't behave like a simple unchanging object like the bike with the slat of wood. As a result leaning does help a rider balance a bike, just not in the obvious way. Explaining this is what I hope to do with this article...

Read it all

Here's another 'Last Laugh' bit I did for the Reader's Digest March 2010 issue. Parts reproduced with permission of Reader's Digest

Certain combinations just don't work. Vinegar plus baking soda causes an explosion, as do Kathy Griffen and an open mike. Here are some other questionable combinations in handy venn diagram form.

The above is the part that made it into the magazine. For the terrycolon.com reader there's more...

Read it all

A Trick Tricky Geography Quiz

Terra Incognita is Latin for 'Land Unknown.' That's what they used to put on maps of unexplored territory. Very little of the Earth's lands are incognita these days. Still, how well do you know the details? Take the quiz and test yourself.

Sometimes the geography is tricky, sometimes the question is tricky, and sometimes the answer is tricky. Sometimes by 'tricky' I mean 'silly,' though the reader might take it to mean 'stupid.' Whatever the case may be, you may find it all curious if trivial.

1. Which is further north; London, Ontario or London, England?

2. Which is further west; Los Angeles, California or Reno, Nevada?

Read it all

Half-Baked Buzz Phrases and Overcooked Terms

Are you a couch potato gobbling great gobs of un-natural junkfood washed down with lavish doses of empty-calorie soda? Are your kids tater tots stuffing their pie holes with processed non-organic foods? Do you wonder what does it all mean? Not the riddle of life, but what's the meaning of those terms scattered throughout the first two sentences like so many multi-colored sprinkles on a donut. Let's examine, shall we.

Empty Calorie. A calorie is fuel the body burns for energy, part of a process we call "being alive." So, if something is a calorie it's fuel and so not empty at all. If it's empty it must lack fuel, so it can't be a calorie. The term empty calorie makes as much sense as a full hole.

Is a calorie from a potato chip unburnable while one from a baked potato is? Consider, water has no calories or vitamins. Does that make it an "empty liquid"? You can't live on a zero calorie diet no matter what other goodies it contains...

Read it all

How the Wheels of the Bureaucracy Grind

Without government there would be anarchy and the law of the jungle would prevail, which is really more of a catch-phrase than actual law. Despite people's love of nature, it's a pretty violent and dangerous place with animals eating each other and whatnot. To prevent this sort of thing happening between people civilization was invented to organize human activity with rules. Like, no eating your neighbor's food, or your neighbor for that matter. To keep people playing by the rules they instituted government.

Over the centuries many types of governmental systems have evolved. Aristocracy: rule by an inbred class of nobles born to the job. Theocracy: rule by priests, religious doctrine, or in the name of God since God himself is very reclusive. Democracy: rule by the people, or the majority, or the majority that bother to vote. Mobocracy: also rule by the people, but usually with torches and pitchforks. Plutocracy: rule by animated cartoon dogs...

Read it all

I Will Read Your Mind

Are you worried about spyware? Do you fret over internet identity theft? Do you quake in your boots over the prospect of any miscreant with a laptop hacking the most intimate details of your life? Well, it gets worse because people can read your mind via the world wide web. And there are no firewalls to safeguard you from the spectre of internetelepathy.

The internet is a powerful and amazing thing. Maybe even mysterious and magical. I don't really know how it works, do you? So, prepare to have your mind boggled. If you'd rather not be boggled, how about amazed or amused? Here's a pair of tricks for you in which I will attempt to read your mind...

Read it all