Olympics Math: 800 m Race

Alright guys, help me out here. I've been watching the 4 x 400 m relay, the 800 m race, and the other track races which require runners to start in assigned lanes and then merge to the inside lane after a certain distance. And I can't help but wonder why the runners quickly merge to the inside lane on that straight away rather than go straight for the curve. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to gradually make their way to the inside lane and time it so that they hit it just as they begin the next curve?Here's what I mean:If a runner is in lane eight as they make the curve, let's assume they're about 8 m from the inside lane. As they run down the straightaway most runners cut immediately to that inside lane and are there by about 50 m down the straightaway. I did the math, using Pythagorean's theorem, and it looks to me like timing the merge for the end of the straightaway would shave off .3 m. In an 800 m race, that adds up to about 5/100 of a second. That may not sound like much, and in an 800 m race it may not be significant, but races have been won by lesser fractions of a second.What do you think? Is my math sound? Are there other factors to consider?

Vertical Video Syndrome - A PSA

I can't say how freaking glad I am that someone finally made this video!

Favorite line: "It ain't crack or nothin', but it's still REALLY BAD!"

Vertical videos really bug me. Especially once you get the video onto a desktop computer to edit or play it back. It becomes a sea of black with a tiny bit of vertical video in the middle. Not only is it weird to look at, but it's a waste of data space (all that black doesn't come from nothing, it still has to be stored somewhere). Worst of all, it just limits the experience of what can be a great video.

That said, I won't be surprised if vertical videos become increasingly popular, just as high-quality photographs have given way to lower quality mobile photos. The fact is, most people look at media on their mobile devices as much or more than anywhere else. If you take a vertical video on your iPhone and play it back on the iPhone, you can still see it full screen in vertical orientation. With Facetime and Skype available on mobile devices, looking at vertical videos will become more and more normal.

Besides, shooting vertically sometimes comes in handy, like when recording yourself dancing and need to see the feet and upper body which just won't fit in the frame when you're up close. I still think we should all learn a little bit of good technique and use cameras like they were meant to be used.

Awesome Writing Apps

If you enjoy writing and have a Mac, you have to check out these apps.

Ok, I'm not a writer. At least not at heart. I still remember one fateful day in 3rd grade the day I learned that I hate to write. I was in Mrs. Brown's class and we had a daily journal assignment. It was probably as simple as writing 1 paragraph of what we did the day before. I wouldn't do it. I couldn't do it. I sat there in class without writing a single thing. She made me stay in during recess to finish it. I still didn't write anything. So she made me stay after school. Still, I didn't write. I tried to explain why I couldn't, how nothing came out right. After lots of stubborn fussing, and exclamations of "I can't!" on my part, and lots of firm prodding and encouragement on her part, I somehow started writing. I remember that I wrote about riding my bicycle at the park across the street. I think I fell and skinned my knee. (I was probably picking at the scab instead of scribbling in my notebook.) I also wrote a bit about my grandma who lived with us, and about my trip to the dentist. Mrs. Brown was impressed that I knew how to spell 'anaesthesia'. (What can I say? I was genius at putting letters together… just not multiple words.) Being forced to write when I felt like I couldn't was a pretty tragic experience for me. And it didn't just happen that once. It continued on through the rest of my schooling career. Paper after paper in middle school, high school, and college tormented me. It also tormented my mother who tried her best to coach me through it. I'll never forget spending my lunch hour in her classroom trying to finish a paper that was due later that day. I was stressed because nothing was coming out right. Mom was frustrated because I shot down every suggestion she gave me, saying it wasn't good enough. I guess she just couldn't take it anymore and flat out cursed at me. "#^@!, Nathan! Just write something! It doesn't have to be perfect!"

So, I'm definitely not a writer. But I'm trying to write more. I like the concept of writing that idyllic lifestyle of sitting in a café with a moleskine notebook or MacBook, sharing ideas on important subjects by combining eloquent words in creative ways. The more I read blog posts, non-fiction books, best-sellers (and audiobooks) the more I become enamored with the idea of being a writer, especially if it includes adventures like Bill Bryson's excursion along the Appalachian Trail. I just really hate the practice of writing. I am drawn to rules and structure, so I tend to edit and correct my spelling, grammar, and punctuation which slows me down. Worse than that, sometimes, if I really get into the flow of writing, it's as if a rip tide pulls me into an ocean of thoughts that I didn't even know were there, and I can't stop writing until I manage to deal with them somehow. So to overcome these challenges, I did what any Mac geek like myself would do I turned to the App Store. There are a handful of apps for Mac, and for iOS devices like the iPad, that are built specifically for writing. I've tried a bunch of them, and here are my favorites.

Writeroom

The original minimalistic writing tool. I found this app over 5 years ago when it was still free. Its simple black interface opens full screen and just lets you write. Awesome.
$9.99 Mac App Store
$4.99 iOS App Store

OmmWriter Dana II

My all time favorite! OmmWriter allows you to become one with your inner Buddha while writing. It's also a simple fullscreen app, but oh so much more elegant. You have 4 or so choices of ethereal, full-screen backgrounds along with soothing ambient music. Optional typing noises can really get you into the rhythm of writing. This is a writing experience you have to try.
$4.99 Mac App Store
$4.99 iOS App Store

iA Writer

My current pick. I wrote this post using iA Writer on my iMac, MacBook, and iPad over a few weeks extended period of time. Thanks to iCloud integration, I can access a single document on all of my devices. But the reason I was drawn to it in the first place was a unique feature: single line focus. While writing, you can enter 'Focus Mode' which fades everything but the current sentence you are typing. This is excellent for those who are easily distracted by grammar, typos, and general clutter, like me. iA Writer is also great for bloggers, since it supports Markdown formatting. That's a geeky way to type in plain-text using special codes like hashtags and stars to easily define titles, bold text, and lists without messing with formatting during the writing process. Oh, and it gives you the more relevant measure of 'Reading Time' in addition to the traditional character and word count.
$8.99 Mac App Store
$0.99 iOS App Store (promotional pricing)

ByWord

Much like iA Writer, this app keeps gaining excellent features. A beautiful interface with more custom options (font, color, etc.), it is also built around Markdown editing but also includes Markdown Preview so you can see the end result. The disappearing formatting elements fade away while typing, but are there when you want them.
$9.99 Mac App Store
$2.99 iOS App Store (promotional pricing)

Pages

An honorable mention, Pages is Apple's solution to word processing and page layout – neither of which Microsoft Word has ever been very good at. While it's designed as a beginner's tool for designing posters, invitations, and beautiful research papers, the most recent version update included a full-screen mode for writing. So, yeah, that's nice, though a bit pricey.
$19.99 Mac App Store
$9.99 iOS App Store

 

Why kids are NOT born digital natives.

I keep hearing over and over how kids these days are 'wired differently' than the 'digital immigrant' generation. Because they were born 40 years later than their parents, their genes have somehow mutated to allow them to be comfortable with technologies like the iPhone, iPad, modern computers, and video games.

Well, I call BS!

With my limited understanding of genetics and developmental biology, the idea that kids these days are somewhat different the moment they are born makes absolutely no sense. I will concede that I am no expert in the matter and will defer to anyone with appropriate credentials AND evidence to the contrary. But for the meantime, let me elaborate on my point.

There are two problems with the idea that kids are born with brains prepared to use digital devices.

1. It doesn't fit what we know about biology.

2. The comparison is being made to children who grew up over 40 years ago WITHOUT the ubiquitous technology we have today.

My argument is that rather than human beings adapting at an impossibe rate to technology, new technology has actually changed to become more natural for humans to use.

Human brains today are still genetically programmed to "solve problems related to surviving in an unstable outdoor environment, and to do so in nearly constant motion." (Brain Rules, pg. 31-32) The human genome has not changed in tens of thousands of years, and does not change on a broad scale within just a couple of generations. Children born today are just as capable of picking up a rock or interacting with an iPod as those born in the 1920s. The main difference is that those flappers-to-be were never introduced to the digital devices that babies are now exposed to within the first few years of life.

Those who claim to be of the digital immigrant generation do have a disadvantage. They were conditioned and trained over 10-20 years to use technology that is counter intuitive. It's no wonder they are confused by the simplicity of touch devices.

In an article on gaming user interfaces, by Tim Rogers, a perfect analogy is described. When Apple, aided by Xerox research and followed by other PC manufacturers, produced the first computer mouse, it had a clickable button. Windows PCs soon provided 2 – and even up to 6 – buttons on their mouse enabling the user to perform different tasks with different buttons. For years, a common complaint against Apple computers is that the mouse only has one mouse button, preventing the user from performing a right-click (the ignorance here is actually astounding since Apple has provided an alternative to the right-click for many years via software and key commands, but that's beside the point). As if to infuriate it's users even more, the newest Apple laptops actually ship without any button on the trackpad. But as Tim explains, "It's not a mouse with no buttons—it's a mouse with a million buttons." The Multi-Touch trackpad on the new MacBooks is a larger glass surface below the keyboard, every square centimeter of which can be used as a button, whether by physically clicking or simply tapping with one or more fingers. Not only that, but finger gestures can control the operating system in a number of different ways – swipe two fingers up and down to scroll through a long document, or pinch all five fingers together to see all of the applications you have installed. By getting rid of the button that long time users have grown accustomed to, Apple has introduced new ways to control and navigate their computers.

And think about it, touch control is much more natural than a button. Where else in life do we have to touch a specific part of a device to get it to work, other than poorly designed technology? When you pick up a rock to throw it, you do not have to hold a command key. To draw drapes closed, you do not have to grab them by the bottom left corner instead of the right. In our physical world we can touch any part of an object to interact with it. But that wasn't so with digital devices until the multi-touch interfaces were developed. Now on an iPad or Android tablet, the entire device serves as input and output, just like every other physical object in nature.

Young children have very adaptable minds. They have no preconceived notions of how things 'should' work but simply enjoy exploring their world to discover how things work. Adults, on the other hand, have been conditioned over many years to follow procedures which aren't always natural. Consider shutting down your Windows computer by first clicking the Start menu. Or how about the Qwerty keyboard which was actually designed to slow typists down? Adults get stuck repeating patters even though there is often a simpler way (typing apple.com into the address bar, for instance, instead of searching for Apple on Google, then clicking twice to get there). Young minds are free to learn new ways of doing things whether it is crawling, walking, speaking a language, or playing Angry Birds.

It just doesn't make any logical sense to claim that babies born today are wired differently than their great-grandparents were when they were born. 

What are your thoughts?