8 ms·

I'm sorry, but studying category theory to save the planet sounds like something straight from 'the Onion'. For sure there are topics that (IMO) are worth stud

I'm sorry, but studying category theory to save the planet sounds like something straight from 'the Onion'. For sure there are topics that (IMO) are worth studying to save the planet, i.e. physics, physics of the atmosphere, geology, material science, chemistry, etc, etc, but category theory would be pretty low on the list. (it's certainly worth studying on its own, but putting a 'saving the planet' badge on it sounds disingenuous to me)

rsj_hn 5y ago
Well it can't hurt. I remember reading an article about how Germany -- a water rich nation -- has a society of extreme water-masochism in order to "save the planet". People turn off the shower as they lather their hair, they save bathtub water for other uses. All despite being a wet country that sends most of the water into the ocean every year. It's gotten so bad that utilities are fighting the problem of drying out pipes and have to spend money unplugging clogged sewer lines that don't have enough water in them. But no amount of reasoning helps, the people see stories of thirsty children in Africa and decide the best thing they can do is to take shorter showers, and re-use water from cooking to gardening. Meanwhile Germany only uses 2.7 percent of its available drinking water. When asked why they do this, answers range from "It's for the environment. And the children." to "I feel sorry for the water."[1] So on the long list of crazy things that people do to "save the planet", studying math is quite beneficial. [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/theres-too-much-water-in-germany-but-that-wont-stop-people-from-sharing-bath-water-1411957801 https://www.wsj.com/articles/theres-too-much-water-in-german...
- groby_b 5y ago
  That's a cute story, but mostly, the WSJ is absolutely full of it. Germany had 9 out of the ten last seasons net-dry. It lost 700,000 acres of forest in the last three years due to lack of water. Spruces in lower-lying regions are pretty much done for Shipping on the river Rhine had to be restricted due to low water. Germany is mostly still OK - you see most of the effects in regions with sandy soils, where water isn't retained long enough. (E.g a lot of the eastern parts) And, like everywhere around climate change, the "consumer efforts" are mostly existing to distract from the major sources of problems. (For water, in Germany, that would be electricity generation and the need for coolant) The "water masochism" is a deflection by politicians, rooted in a real problem. You know the WSJ is lying when their sublede contains "criticized by some". It's the traditional unattributed quote that's mostly made up.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    Despite the string of non-sequiturs you cited, Germany remains a wet country that doesn't consume 97% of its water. Refusing to take a longer bath is not going to increase rain in a specific area. Nor is the insistence on letting 97% of the drinking water run into the sea going to save a single tree in Germany.
    - groby_b 5y ago
      The "string of non-sequiturs" are facts on the ground. Sorry you don't like them. And nobody is letting "97% of the drinking water run into the sea". 70% of potable water is groundwater in Germany. That's kind of not really jamming with the 97% claim, is it?
      - rsj_hn 5y ago
        They are "non-sequiturs" because they have absolutely nothing to do with why Germans save water when there is no need to do so. You seem to think that a non-sequitur is factually false statement, when it is a statement that does not follow. Like when I say, Germany is saving water when it has a surplus, and you say "oh but some trees died of drought on that hill". Or if I say "this company earned a huge profit" and you say "How can that be when revenue for this product is 5% lower than last year?" > 70% of potable water is groundwater in Germany. That's kind of not really jamming with the 97% claim, is it? As to my source for the 3 percent figure: "Water is not scarce in Germany, except for occasional localized droughts. Public water utilities extract only 3 percent of total renewable water resources in Germany, or 5.4 billion cubic metres out of 182 billion cubic metres annually.[7]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in... As to your claim that if 70% of that 3% comes from ground water, then it is impossible that the water extracted be only 3% of the total, I would merely point out this is another non-sequitur. FYI, ground water is just water from aquifers fed by rain as it enters more porous rock. Sometimes the water stays on the surface and you get a river. Sometimes the water seeps into the rock and you have an aquifer. The majority of rain enters aquifers. Now it is completely irrelevant whether you are taking water from a river or an aquifer as both are fundamentally the same thing. Most nations take water from aquifers. That does not mean that the water is non-renewable or not coming from rain. What matters is whether the total new water coming in is less than the water being taken out. The remainder will fill up the aquifer, and when the aquifer is filled, it will wash out to the sea or exit underground somewhere else. And the way you can measure these things is if the aquifers are increasing or decreasing or staying the same. Guess what the situation is in Germany? Yup, you have more frequent flooding as aquifers are saturated, meaning that they are not even able to absorb above average rains very well. This means people are dying in order to feel righteous for saving water. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flooding-in-germany-europe-deaths-record-rainfall-western-europe-2021-07-16/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flooding-in-germany-europe-deat... https://www.isciences.com/blog/2021/09/22/europe-water-surplus-will-increase-in-germany https://www.isciences.com/blog/2021/09/22/europe-water-surpl... Summer 2021 has been Germany’s wettest in a decade according to the nation’s weather service. Precipitation in July was 40 percent above the 1961-1990 average and 25 percent over 1991-2020 for the month, resulting in flooding and landslides that claimed 180 lives. Ground water rising to dangerous levels in Berlin: https://www.economist.com/europe/2014/04/05/the-moisture-down-below https://www.economist.com/europe/2014/04/05/the-moisture-dow... "Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the groundwater level has risen by over half a meter." This is because, amongst other reasons, former East Berliners, price-shocked by the market rate for water and looking to save their money, and former West Berliners, motivated to conserve resources in the name of environment stewardship, both cut back quite drastically on their daily usage. Indeed, contemporary Berliners are now using only two-thirds of what they should be." As long as the aquifers are not being depleted, then the nation as a whole has a surplus of water. That is true for Germany. A huge surplus. This is true even if the total coming in is variable (shocker!) and that variability causes variability in vegetation (another shocker!). It's still true that Germany has a huge, huge surplus. Every year. Seriously, is this hard to understand? The world doesn't follow principles of empathetic magic, where people need to punish themselves each time they hear about something bad on the news. There is zero benefit to curtailing water consumption in a water-rich nation, and in fact this causes real harms in damaging the water delivery system: https://www.dw.com/en/german-water-conservation-impairs-sewage-treatment/a-4582438 https://www.dw.com/en/german-water-conservation-impairs-sewa... "Germans' well-intentioned efforts to use less water at the household level are causing problems for some of the country's sewage treatment authorities. Water conservation has been so effective that there's not enough water being flushed through sewage pipes, meaning that the system often becomes clogged and pipes tend to corrode due to the air in them." "In Cologne we have major problems because it is a very flat city," he said. "Water has to flow for very long distances, so by the time it gets to the treatment center, it is already very stagnate." Disinfecting this water requires heavy use of energy and chemicals, which in turn disturbs the ecological balance. So in end effect, saving water can actually defy the purpose of preserving the environment, said Weyand."
omgwtfbyobbq 5y ago
I think it's more that category theory could be used as a way to accurately model the complex systems in our world, which may help "save the planet." https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/complex-adaptive-system-design-part-1/ https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/complex-adap...
- lupire 5y ago
  Note that nowhere does Baez hint that he has any results showing that category theory actually helps these concrete problems, just that he wants to try. He specifically calls out that real world problems are too messy for such an approach to be a natural fit.
Zababa 5y ago
All engineers have a strong math foundation in their cursus. It's easier to recycle a mathematician into a physicist than an historian or a psychologist.
- rawling 5y ago
  Cursus?
  - Zababa 5y ago
    Sorry, I didn't realize that was a French word. The equivalent in English would be "curriculum".
    - rawling 5y ago
      Ah thanks, it comes up as some things in English but none quite made sense!
beloch 5y ago
I'd wager that the participants average funding will increase. If you read journal articles, etc. you'll find a truly surprising number go out of their way to mention climate change, green initiatives, etc. when they lack good reason to do so. In particular, these words will take places of honour in the abstract or even the title while the rest of the article pays them scant and passing notice. Why do this? Funding. Every generation of science has it's magical buzzwords. Most recognize them for what they are but, when the people with money can't decide on a difference in merit between what you're doing and what your competitors are doing, buzzwords can make the difference. Is this another case of buzzword fund-farming? I'm not qualified to say, and you'd probably need to ask the participants in this initiative to track down somebody who is. That's why this sort of thing is so hard to stop.

rsj_hn 5y ago

Well it can't hurt. I remember reading an article about how Germany -- a water rich nation -- has a society of extreme water-masochism in order to "save the planet". People turn off the shower as they lather their hair, they save bathtub water for other uses. All despite being a wet country that sends most of the water into the ocean every year. It's gotten so bad that utilities are fighting the problem of drying out pipes and have to spend money unplugging clogged sewer lines that don't have enough water in them. But no amount of reasoning helps, the people see stories of thirsty children in Africa and decide the best thing they can do is to take shorter showers, and re-use water from cooking to gardening. Meanwhile Germany only uses 2.7 percent of its available drinking water. When asked why they do this, answers range from "It's for the environment. And the children." to "I feel sorry for the water."[1] So on the long list of crazy things that people do to "save the planet", studying math is quite beneficial. [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/theres-too-much-water-in-germany-but-that-wont-stop-people-from-sharing-bath-water-1411957801 https://www.wsj.com/articles/theres-too-much-water-in-german...

groby_b 5y ago
That's a cute story, but mostly, the WSJ is absolutely full of it. Germany had 9 out of the ten last seasons net-dry. It lost 700,000 acres of forest in the last three years due to lack of water. Spruces in lower-lying regions are pretty much done for Shipping on the river Rhine had to be restricted due to low water. Germany is mostly still OK - you see most of the effects in regions with sandy soils, where water isn't retained long enough. (E.g a lot of the eastern parts) And, like everywhere around climate change, the "consumer efforts" are mostly existing to distract from the major sources of problems. (For water, in Germany, that would be electricity generation and the need for coolant) The "water masochism" is a deflection by politicians, rooted in a real problem. You know the WSJ is lying when their sublede contains "criticized by some". It's the traditional unattributed quote that's mostly made up.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  Despite the string of non-sequiturs you cited, Germany remains a wet country that doesn't consume 97% of its water. Refusing to take a longer bath is not going to increase rain in a specific area. Nor is the insistence on letting 97% of the drinking water run into the sea going to save a single tree in Germany.
  - groby_b 5y ago
    The "string of non-sequiturs" are facts on the ground. Sorry you don't like them. And nobody is letting "97% of the drinking water run into the sea". 70% of potable water is groundwater in Germany. That's kind of not really jamming with the 97% claim, is it?
    - rsj_hn 5y ago
      They are "non-sequiturs" because they have absolutely nothing to do with why Germans save water when there is no need to do so. You seem to think that a non-sequitur is factually false statement, when it is a statement that does not follow. Like when I say, Germany is saving water when it has a surplus, and you say "oh but some trees died of drought on that hill". Or if I say "this company earned a huge profit" and you say "How can that be when revenue for this product is 5% lower than last year?" > 70% of potable water is groundwater in Germany. That's kind of not really jamming with the 97% claim, is it? As to my source for the 3 percent figure: "Water is not scarce in Germany, except for occasional localized droughts. Public water utilities extract only 3 percent of total renewable water resources in Germany, or 5.4 billion cubic metres out of 182 billion cubic metres annually.[7]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in... As to your claim that if 70% of that 3% comes from ground water, then it is impossible that the water extracted be only 3% of the total, I would merely point out this is another non-sequitur. FYI, ground water is just water from aquifers fed by rain as it enters more porous rock. Sometimes the water stays on the surface and you get a river. Sometimes the water seeps into the rock and you have an aquifer. The majority of rain enters aquifers. Now it is completely irrelevant whether you are taking water from a river or an aquifer as both are fundamentally the same thing. Most nations take water from aquifers. That does not mean that the water is non-renewable or not coming from rain. What matters is whether the total new water coming in is less than the water being taken out. The remainder will fill up the aquifer, and when the aquifer is filled, it will wash out to the sea or exit underground somewhere else. And the way you can measure these things is if the aquifers are increasing or decreasing or staying the same. Guess what the situation is in Germany? Yup, you have more frequent flooding as aquifers are saturated, meaning that they are not even able to absorb above average rains very well. This means people are dying in order to feel righteous for saving water. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flooding-in-germany-europe-deaths-record-rainfall-western-europe-2021-07-16/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flooding-in-germany-europe-deat... https://www.isciences.com/blog/2021/09/22/europe-water-surplus-will-increase-in-germany https://www.isciences.com/blog/2021/09/22/europe-water-surpl... Summer 2021 has been Germany’s wettest in a decade according to the nation’s weather service. Precipitation in July was 40 percent above the 1961-1990 average and 25 percent over 1991-2020 for the month, resulting in flooding and landslides that claimed 180 lives. Ground water rising to dangerous levels in Berlin: https://www.economist.com/europe/2014/04/05/the-moisture-down-below https://www.economist.com/europe/2014/04/05/the-moisture-dow... "Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the groundwater level has risen by over half a meter." This is because, amongst other reasons, former East Berliners, price-shocked by the market rate for water and looking to save their money, and former West Berliners, motivated to conserve resources in the name of environment stewardship, both cut back quite drastically on their daily usage. Indeed, contemporary Berliners are now using only two-thirds of what they should be." As long as the aquifers are not being depleted, then the nation as a whole has a surplus of water. That is true for Germany. A huge surplus. This is true even if the total coming in is variable (shocker!) and that variability causes variability in vegetation (another shocker!). It's still true that Germany has a huge, huge surplus. Every year. Seriously, is this hard to understand? The world doesn't follow principles of empathetic magic, where people need to punish themselves each time they hear about something bad on the news. There is zero benefit to curtailing water consumption in a water-rich nation, and in fact this causes real harms in damaging the water delivery system: https://www.dw.com/en/german-water-conservation-impairs-sewage-treatment/a-4582438 https://www.dw.com/en/german-water-conservation-impairs-sewa... "Germans' well-intentioned efforts to use less water at the household level are causing problems for some of the country's sewage treatment authorities. Water conservation has been so effective that there's not enough water being flushed through sewage pipes, meaning that the system often becomes clogged and pipes tend to corrode due to the air in them." "In Cologne we have major problems because it is a very flat city," he said. "Water has to flow for very long distances, so by the time it gets to the treatment center, it is already very stagnate." Disinfecting this water requires heavy use of energy and chemicals, which in turn disturbs the ecological balance. So in end effect, saving water can actually defy the purpose of preserving the environment, said Weyand."

omgwtfbyobbq 5y ago

I think it's more that category theory could be used as a way to accurately model the complex systems in our world, which may help "save the planet." https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/complex-adaptive-system-design-part-1/ https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/complex-adap...

lupire 5y ago
Note that nowhere does Baez hint that he has any results showing that category theory actually helps these concrete problems, just that he wants to try. He specifically calls out that real world problems are too messy for such an approach to be a natural fit.

Zababa 5y ago

All engineers have a strong math foundation in their cursus. It's easier to recycle a mathematician into a physicist than an historian or a psychologist.

rawling 5y ago
Cursus?
- Zababa 5y ago
  Sorry, I didn't realize that was a French word. The equivalent in English would be "curriculum".
  - rawling 5y ago
    Ah thanks, it comes up as some things in English but none quite made sense!

beloch 5y ago

I'd wager that the participants average funding will increase. If you read journal articles, etc. you'll find a truly surprising number go out of their way to mention climate change, green initiatives, etc. when they lack good reason to do so. In particular, these words will take places of honour in the abstract or even the title while the rest of the article pays them scant and passing notice. Why do this? Funding. Every generation of science has it's magical buzzwords. Most recognize them for what they are but, when the people with money can't decide on a difference in merit between what you're doing and what your competitors are doing, buzzwords can make the difference. Is this another case of buzzword fund-farming? I'm not qualified to say, and you'd probably need to ask the participants in this initiative to track down somebody who is. That's why this sort of thing is so hard to stop.