Pun Salad

The author, Ulf Danielsson, is a Swedish theoretical physicist, but (it turns out) he's also quite the student of philosophy. The book was originally published in Swedish, and the translation to English was done by Danielsson himself. (Which I'd like to think explains some of my head-scratching at some of his phrasings. There is an obvious alternative explanation that I'd prefer not to entertain.)

Near the end of the book, he characterizes his theme as a "single long argument" against dualism. Not only classic Cartesian mind-body dualism; that's an easy target. But more subtly, for example, the desire of (some) theoreticians to look for "beauty" or "simplicity" in their models of the Way The World Works.

He also (gently, politely) inveighs against confusing those models, and their associated mathematics, with reality. After all, to a pretty decent approximation, Newton's laws of gravity describe how planets move, how satellites orbit, and how apples fall on your head. But it's not like those objects have some sort of internal computer that tells them where to go and how fast; they just do it.

Or to use an example I saw in this book: solving Schrödinger's equation for a thulium atom's 69 quantum-entangled electrons is daunting for even the fastest computers; but each and every tiny thulium atom just… does it.

The book jumps around a lot, is slightly repetitive, and (as I said above) the prose seems murky at times. One interesting bit: Danielsson seems to think that "consciousness" is a real thing, not a mere illusion. But his final five-page chapter looks at "free will" and says—as near as I can telli—says nej. That's a bold stance, and I have to admit I did not follow exactly what he was trying to say.

I will say he had a pretty jaw-dropping anecdote about Douglas Hofstadter dropping by his institution and posing the following puzzler, to be solved with integral A, B, and C (this may not translate well on Goodreads, sorry):

"The answer may surprise you."

This is the fourth in Richard Osman's "Thursday Murder Club" series. I've been hooked from the first; it's a definite get-at-library for me. Newbies should start with #1; it's not something you want to jump in the middle of.

This entry is (I think) darker than its predecessors. I'm pretty sure the body count is higher. And there's a very serious and somber subplot; be warned that it's not all tea and cakes for the club members.

But the main plot thread is straightforward. An antiques dealer known to the club, Kuldesh Sharma, has a small but profitable sideline as a go-between for heroin dealers. It's been low-risk for a while… until it isn't. Not much of a spoiler: on page 2, he's killed by a gunshot to the head. The box containing the heroin has gone missing, however. Concerning both the people who gave it to Kuldesh, and the people who expected to get it from Kuldesh.

The core group from the Cooper's Chase retirement community are all here: Elizabeth the ex-spy; Joyce the ex-nurse; Ron the ex-labor activist; and Ibrahim the shrink. And the allies (and some antagonists) they've managed to pick up along the way: a couple of cops that have been bigfooted out of the investigation of Kuldesh's murder by the British equivalent of the FBI (I think).

An amusing subplot involves another resident, Mervyn, who has fallen in love with a Lithuanian lady on the Internet. Which involves him sending her a lot of money. It is completely obvious to everyone he's being scammed; can they rescue him and retrieve his cash? Yes, they can, as it turns out, and there's a cute interaction with their main case near the end.

Osman's next book doesn't involve the TMC, but he promises they'll return someday.

Because he's in the tank for President Dotard:

Me hate shrinkflation! Me cookies are getting smaller. 😔

— Cookie Monster (@MeCookieMonster) March 4, 2024

Notably that brought some huzzahs from government figures who would greatly prefer to point their shaky fingers at their designated scapegoats in the private sector…

C is for consumers getting ripped off.

President Biden is calling on companies to put a stop to shrinkflation. https://t.co/4bkX8o3irI

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) March 4, 2024

… instead of accepting responsibility, admitting "shrinkflation" is just another symptom of government-caused inflation. Their media allies also quickly fell in line. But not everyone was pleased:

I'm shocked to see a news article on Cookie Monster talking about "shrinkflation". Jim would NEVER have allowed this. The SS Muppets need to live in their own pure world. Not our world. What has happened to the integrity of the character and the integrity of Sesame Workshop?

— Frank Oz (@TheFrankOzJam) March 5, 2024

All this via David Strom at Hot Air. Cookie Monster Gets Political, and Frank Oz is Angry About It.

Any suggestions for further things Sesame Street could do? Perhaps Elmo could decide he's trans, change his name to "Elma" and Big Bird could use the wrong pronoun…

Also of note:

• An unexpected glimmer of seacoast sanity. And to think it happened on Junkins Avenue. As reported at NHJournal, a Portsmouth Stunner: 7-2 Council Vote Shoots Down 'Ceasefire' Resolution.

  A late-night vote saw an overwhelming majority of Portsmouth city councilors conclude a controversial resolution backing a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was “not germane” to city business, delivering a blow to pro-Palestine progressives who had passionately lobbied for it.

  That sanity did not extend ten or so miles to the northwest, where the Durham town council fired up the Virtue-Signal, and passed its resolution 6-2.

  “It was a thoughtful and respectful conversation with points of view aired on all sides of the issue,” [Town Administrator Todd Selig] said.

  The Town Council “thoughtfully listened to all of that and worked hard to integrate different perspectives into the discussion,” Selig said.

  He described the process as “the very best of an open transparent and Democratic process … where residents were able to express their strongly held views in a safe environment.”

  Everyone was thoughtful, and listened thoughtfully.

  It's unclear whether Selig capitalized the "D" in "Democrratic", or that was something reporter Jeff McMenemy assumed.

• Urgent, urgent, emergency! Check to make sure you've taken your blood pressure medication before you read Emma Camp: Congress Wastes Billions With Bogus Emergency Declarations in Spending Package.

  What constitutes an emergency? According to Congress' new spending package, research equipment and facilities for the National Science Foundation is an emergency. So are the 2024 Democratic National Committee convention and the Republican National Committee convention. So is NASA space exploration.

  By classifying all these line items as emergencies, Congress can get hundreds of millions of taxpayer funding for them with reduced oversight.

  Congress' latest spending package, released this week, is hardly the first time obviously nonemergency projects have been given this special funding designation. According to a January report from the Cato Institute, Congress has approved over $12 trillion in spending for emergencies over the past three decades, making up around 1 in 10 federal budget dollars spent—more than both Medicaid and veterans programs combined.

  Congressman Lepetomane no doubt carried the day when he demanded "We have to keep our phony baloney jobs here, gentleman!"

• Maybe double up on those blood pressure meds… Eric Boehm looks at a … well, he calls it a "gimmick", but that's kind of insulting to gimmicks: Congressional Budget Deal Includes $12 Billion 'Cut' That Doesn't Actually Cut Anything.

  As part of a new budget deal working its way through Congress this week, lawmakers have proposed to cut $12 billion of spending that would never occur—and then use the "cuts" to offset new spending in another part of the budget.

  Clever magic trick or massive budget gimmick? The answer probably depends on whether you're a member of Congress or a taxpayer.

  On Sunday, House and Senate leaders announced a deal to fund about half the government's discretionary budget through the end of the fiscal year, and lawmakers are now working to pass that agreement into law before the March 8 deadline. (The other half of the discretionary budget is good to go until March 22.) Because Democrats and Republicans have previously agreed to cap the discretionary budget this year, the 1,000-plus-page bill unveiled Sunday includes a lot of cuts to planned spending—known as rescissions—that are being used to offset spending increases in other areas.

  One of those rescissions, however, is an illusion.

  Will "this one weird trick" balance the budget? No, of course not. Not even close. But it does demonstrate the rank dishonesty involved in spending taxpayer money.