By Pablo MPA 

Dear Readers:

I am glad to invite you to our recently born blog Unified Iberia , for the unification of Spain and Portugal.

Regards,

Pablo MPA

By Pablo MPA

It is incredible that in this day and age you have made the abysmal mistake of expressing with clarity your ignorance and carelessness in what concerns to the problem of the HEATING UP OF THE EARTH BY GREENHOUSE GASES EFFECT. I understand that you are unaware of the intricate business such as the ‘feedback gain’ or even that you are unable to see beyond your lack of culture when someone talks you about ‘non-linear differential systems’. But what I fail to understand is what on earth you where thinking to have led to you loosing thousands of votes of the people who trusted in you, but who won’t anymore. I remind you what you’ve said:

• “I’ve brought here ten of the most important scientists in the world and none of them has guarantied to me what the weather will be like in Seville tomorrow. Therefore how could anybody possibly say what will happen in the world in 300 years”

• “…there are more important problems, as the ones of the energy sector, or the CO2 emissions”

With your first sentence, I understand that you speak without knowing what you’re talking about. This is a good habit that even I like to practice; but you have to know how to do it. With the second one, … where does your worry about CO2 emissions come from?

Listen Mariano**, I regret to say this to you, but you’ll have lost my vote if you don’t change your mind. That I clarify, it won’t be addressed to PRISOE***.

By the way, what you all see in the picture is one of the hundreds of glaciers from the last glaciation that in 70 years have almost gone. I don’t know if you have realized, but plants are blooming again in October****.

NOTES:

* Rajoy is the surname of the candidate for next elections in the right wing opposing political party (PP – Partido Popular).

** Mariano is the name of the candidate.

*** PRISOE is a joke of combining both words PSOE and PRISA. PSOE is the left wing party which is now in the government while PRISA is a very powerful media group of companies that used to be driven by a multimillionaire called Jesús de Polanco. Both, PSOE and PRISA are know to have very strong ties with the purpose of reinforcing each other.

**** The plants that I mean are located in Spain.

By Pablo MPA

“All that we can do, is to keep steadily in mind that each organic being is striving to increase at a geometrical ratio; that each at some period of its life, during some season of the year, during each generation or at intervals, has to struggle for life, and to suffer great destruction. When we reflect on this struggle, we may console ourselves with the full belief, that the war of nature is not incessant, that no fear is felt, that death is generally prompt, and that the vigorous, the healthy, and the happy survive and multiply.”

Charles Darwin

‘The origin of the species’

In this article I would like to clarify that the Homo sapiens, although it has changed the selection mechanism, it hasn’t stopped evolving and, in fact, it does it in a more and more impressive way. The reason for the difference between the present mammal and the past generations of the tree (Homo rodhesiensis -> Homo antecesor -> Homo ergaster -> Homo habilis -> Australopitecus garhi -> Australopitecus anamensis -Australopitecus ramidus -> Toumai) is that now is not the “survival of the fittest” what takes part in the selection of favourable mutations, but the “triumph of the fittest”. And the triumph of the fittest obeys the laws of money, the power of the individual and, as a consequence the making of satisfactory descendants. Not having to consider isolated cases in particular (otherwise the shadow of the uncertainty of the sample variability would cover up the result of a general law), but rather doing the sum of the whole population of Homo sapiens and its habits nowadays, one must reach necessarily a force stronger than the death of the weak indeed namely, the economic thinking. It’s a common known fact that generally speaking, the population of this species in rural areas is less good-looking than it in urban areas*. I leave this case and many other related ones to the readers own personal reflexion, as it is not my concern to get into the details of how this effect takes place. I make clear at all times that the analysis is general and average with no intent to offend and verifiable.

We live in a society where the intelligent thrives. That’s the way we built it. If you attempt to find a model of cohabitation in which the evolution of our species remains static, you will not succeed. But there is no cause for alarm, it is designed so that nobody dies because of a shortage of food, and that there is no need to compete with the rest of the species anymore. You will not realize how satisfactory your contribution to physiological evolution of the human species will have been; and therefore forget everything I have told you, because it is of no importance.

NOTES:

* Although this phenomenon may not take place in other parts of the world, it does apply to the Iberian peninsula, and therefore may not be of any significance in other countries.

By Javier MPA

For some time, Europe has seen the development of a strong antiamericanism, a disporportionate hatred of everything american. We hear the word America and the only image that comes to our minds is Bushe’s. Well, and how would it be an antieuropean american? Can you imagine?…

We invented democracy, which is that word that you claim proudly everytime you say it. You say that american movies are rubbish, but they’re the only ones you go to the theater to see. You subsidize yours. You think we are bastards for having invented the Nuclear Bomb, when in fact we made it because it was necessary to avoid Hitler making it first (a european, by the way).

We helped you in the World War II and we won it together. We showed you what a telephone compny was and so an airline and we gave you our own money to let you make it, our own money, the only one you trusted. We put a man on the Moon at the same time you were making goats cheese. We pay for the military and you benefit for the fact that there are no wars in your coutries, nevertheless you demonize our army. You think that your education system is better, but we have the best universities. Some of you study there and then you come back to your country showing off. Your health care system is also better, but you use all the medicines we invent. You laugh of our election campaigns and the oly thing you do after is copying them.

I could go on, but it is not my way of thinking; it is the antiamericans way of thinking but the other way round. Don’t you think is not much impartial? Perhaps we are being a little unfair with americans and only able to say some clichés about them. We shouldn’t keep thinking that we are the centre of the world.

By Pablo MP

We often ignore the simplest way, perhaps only to be surprised when we take it. It is often so trivial that rejection is unconscious. We decide unintentionally, that multiple disjointed explanations of facts are more satisfactory than the underlying platitudes of the set of phenomena that we attempt to understand. It happened some days ago that a group of acquaintances came to me alarmed and astonished by the fact that two lemons, that several minutes ago had been thrown to the sea with a gap of a few inches between them, still remained floating with the same separation. There was a debate about the mysterious force that could be holding them apart. It needed to be of such a nature that it cancelled the tireless tendency of the citrus fruits to joint. Nature was becoming unpredictable and it was challenging the common sense of the alarmed audience of another one of her games. It was causing surprise to those who could only be amazed by a novelty, of those who had forgotten very soon that things such as fruits, pens and planets keep doing whatever they were doing until something interferes in their way. The lemons’ path was only disturbed, almost equally, by some gusts of wind and some waves that were not breaking. It was impossible that they could have approached or moved away in a noticeable distance. That would have been surprising and alarming.

I have run into the challenge, in numerous occasions, of ascertaining what underlying and more general explanation clarifies the collection of phenomena that often arises, that is connected in a suspicious way, but it is also wisely disguised. From the most humane problems to the most natural mysteries, they all conceal, from my own personal experience, a simpler and more general explanation that makes life a more rational and understandable experience for those of us who don’t have the slightest idea of what is all about. Examples such as the fact that bulbs, microwaves, common ovens, the resistance of a bridge, the transparency of a glass, fires, chemical reactions, magnets, electricity, car engines, aircraft engines, sound, computers, the Internet, prisms and springs, all of them so different apparently, have their fundamental description based on three very simple actions: a photon goes from one place to another, a charge goes from one place to another, a photon is absorbed or emitted by a charge, is one more proof of how simple things seem to be the machinery of complex things.

I will not keep on going giving demonstrations of how simple ideas can explain a collection of different phenomena, for it is a fact so habitual that it is not worth investing either your time or mine in reasserting it; it is more convenient that you observe for your self what is going on out there. Nevertheless, I would like to encourage you to try to be as imaginative as you can, to ask yourself as much things as you can and to not stop being curious as to what happens in front of your eyes when you are looking somewhere else, because it is life and as I have already told you, it is not as complicated as it seems to be.

Por Pablo MPA

Voy a comenzar este texto con una relevante cita cuya importancia radica en el hecho de que puede definir el pensamiento del determinista casual del siglo XIX. Se debe al Marqués de Laplace, cuyos trabajos matemáticos fueron de vital importancia para el desarrollo de la ciencia actual.

Podemos mirar el estado presente del universo como el efecto del pasado y la causa de su futuro. Se podría condensar un intelecto que en cualquier momento dado sabría todas las fuerzas que animan la naturaleza y las posiciones de los seres que la componen, si este intelecto fuera lo suficientemente vasto para someter los datos al análisis, podría condensar en una simple fórmula de movimiento de los grandes cuerpos del universo y del átomo más ligero; para tal intelecto nada podría ser incierto y el futuro así como el pasado estarían frente sus ojos.

Lo que Laplace quiso expresar fue que el conocimiento perfecto del estado inicial de un sistema (p.e. la posición y velocidad de sus partículas) bastaba para conocer su evolución temporal y, por tanto, para poder predecir el futuro. Hay dos razones por las que se estropea por completo esta cita; en otras palabras, por las que se vuelve inservible. Una es inherente a la naturaleza, es puramente física y se llama Principio de Incertidumbre. Con este principio, la Naturaleza establece que es imposible conocer la velocidad de una partícula con precisión infinita sin que el error en la medición de la posición sea infinito y viceversa. Quiero remarcar que es un atributo, un principio, un comportamiento de la Naturaleza, no de la habilidad del ser humano para medir cosas. Es el marco de la mecánica cuántica, una de las cosas más raras que el hombre ha descubierto nunca. En resumen, el principio de incertidumbre impide, directamente, que Laplace pueda obtener con máxima precisión el estado inicial de su sistema, lo que es un duro golpe.

Uno podría pensar, sin embargo, que pese ser imposible conocer los estados iniciales con máxima precisión, el error cometido podría llegar a ser tan pequeño que no afectase de modo significativo a los estados futuros. En otras palabras, que sería posible predecir el futuro con cierto error. Quien piense eso está en lo cierto, sin embargo, ha de tener cuidado con la magnitud del error final. Y he aquí, la segunda razón por la que se estropea la cita: el Caos. Así como el Principio de Incertidumbre se trataba de una propiedad física del Universo concerniente a los estados iniciales, el Caos es una propiedad matemática de las ecuaciones; es decir, de la manera en que evolucionan los sistemas a partir de esos estados iniciales. Cuanto más caoticidad tenga un sistema, tanto más grande se hará el error final a partir de un determinado error inicial. El colmo de esta situación es que a partir de un error inicial infinitamente pequeño, el error final sea ¡INFINITO! (en un tiempo de evolución determinado). Lo que significa que el estado final del sistema sería completamente irreconocible si hubiéramos escogido unas condiciones iniciales inapreciablemente diferentes. No importa cuan precisos sean los datos, que si el sistema es muy caótico, las predicciones serán inútiles (p.e. predicción meteorológica).

La primera de las razones activa la segunda, pues es intrínsecamente responsable de los pequeños errores iniciales en el sistema físico. En otras palabras, responsable del libre albedrío. El Marqués de Laplace se habría enfadado bastante.

Pese a todo lo anterior, ¿a qué viene el título de este texto? Mi intención fue la de activar una reflexión muy importante. Orden y Caos son dos caras de una misma moneda. Los sistemas físicos reales constituyen una mezcla de ambos conceptos. Cuando se observa el Caos real detenidamente, se encuentra orden, patrones y cuando se observa el Orden real, se encuentra caos, impredecibilidades. Pero nunca se obtiene ninguno de los extremos. Esa situación particular generalizada es la que permite a los físicos, ingenieros y científicos en general hacer predicciones con mayor o menor precisión: ¿se caerá el puente? ¿Cuál será el período de oscilación del péndulo? ¿Contraerá tuberculosis? ¿Cuál será la tendencia climática de la península ibérica en los próximos diez años? ¿Qué tiempo hará mañana?

Sin han jugado alguna vez con un péndulo predictor del futuro, habrán tenido en sus manos un claro ejemplo directo de orden en el Caos. Se trata de un péndulo imantado que oscila justo encima de una base que consta de diferentes posiciones finales con diferentes suertes de futuro. Cada una de esas posiciones finales oculta un imán en su interior. Así que el péndulo comienza a oscilar alocadamente, a darse sugerentes paseos absolutamente caóticos por cada una de las posiciones de la base hasta acabar, finalemente quieto, apuntando a una de ellas. Si se fijaran detenidamente comprobarían que el péndulo habría seguido trayectorias completamente diferentes cada vez que lo soltaron, indicador de Caos; pero si observaran aún más detenidamente, encontrarían que el tiempo que invirtió en sus paseos hasta quedar completamente parado ¡fue aproximadamente el mismo cada vez!, indicador de Orden. Este es un ejemplo en el que es más sencillo localizar el Caos que el Orden.

Quisiera remarcar una vez más, antes de irme, que nada de lo anterior se trata de una limitación humana, sino de la manera en que funciona la Universo. Y que la física no trata de hacer predicciones, sino de entender los mecanismos con los que funciona la Naturaleza.

Por Javier MPA

Por Pablo MPA

Por Javier MPA

• No hablar nunca con los terroristas, ni siquiera en caso de rendición, cuando se sientan a hablar con ellos les están otorgando la categoría de una institución.

• Modificar el código penal de tal modo que la mera pertenencia a banda armada suponga la pena máxima sin posibilidad de rebajas de penas.

• Poner a un fiscal general del Estado cuyo trabajo sea perseguir a los terroristas no exculparlos.

• Rendir homenaje a las víctimas y ser condescendiente con ellas en todo momento.

• Perseguir la Kale Borroka como gravísimos actos contra las libertades públicas y no como meras gamberradas.

• Perseguir a quien pague el “impuesto revolucionario” como un financiador del terrorismo.

• Ofrecer protección a todo el que reciba amenazas por costoso que sea.

Por Pablo MPA

La segunda cosa que dio como resultado la reafirmación de mi principio fue la siguiente: un simple cálculo nos lleva a la verdadera conclusión de que de una bombilla de cien wattios salen unos doscientos cincuenta y un mil millones quinientos treinta mil billones de fotones cada segundo. Menuda ducha, ¿no? Pues imagínense la ducha que les ducha cuando salen a la calle en un día soleado.