How many piano tuners are there in Chicago?

Cristina Da Rold12 commenti

oxford 2011 - the first 014 It seems a simple question, but if you have no internet, it might become very hard to answer it.  This kind of question is known as Fermi Problem, because the famous physicist used to enjoy this kind of game. A Fermi Problem is a way to estimate a certain quantity, with a good approximation,  without using any type of databases.

You can see an example of Fermi Problem in the following reasoning, taken from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem):

  1. There are approximately 5,000,000 people living in Chicago.
  2. On average, there are two persons in each household in Chicago.
  3. Roughly one household in twenty has a piano that is tuned regularly.
  4. Pianos that are tuned regularly are tuned on average about once per year.
  5. It takes a piano tuner about two hours to tune a piano, including travel time.
  6. Each piano tuner works eight hours in a day, five days in a week, and 50 weeks in a year.

From these assumptions, we can compute that the number of piano tunings in a single year in Chicago is (5,000,000 persons in Chicago) / (2 persons/household) × (1 piano/20 households) × (1 piano tuning per piano per year) = 125,000 piano tunings per year in Chicago.

We can similarly calculate that the average piano tuner performs (50 weeks/year)×(5 days/week)×(8 hours/day)/(2 hours to tune a piano) = 1000 piano tunings per year per piano tuner. And then, dividing gives (125,000 piano tunings per year in Chicago) / (1000 piano tunings per year per piano tuner) = 125 piano tuners in Chicago.

Apart from piano tuners, this kind of reasoning could help us to answer scientific questions too. For example, in 1945 Fermi was able to estimate  the strenght of the atomic bomb detonated at the trinity nuclear test in New Mexico, based on the distance made by pieces of paper dropped from his hand during the test.

But maybe you are asking yourself the reason why I am interested in this kind of estimations. Well, that is because my teacher has given me a special homework last week: I have to estimate in how many places are there in Trieste, people could drink a coffee. A very hard knot to untie….but now I have understood that it is a Fermi Problem…and I am ready to take up the challenge!

So, if I have been able to intrigue you….keep waiting for the next post!

“There are many girls, but only one Bell Laboratory!”

Cristina Da Rold3 commenti

parigi 09 5eme 143

Says professor Capasso, one of the most famous Physicists at Harvard University, remembering a young Italian student who was undecided whether to remain in Italy to be close to his girlfriend or go to US for an excellent position.

Apart from gossip, today I have had a great lesson on what could be a significant aspect of the couple Slowness/dynamism, nowadays. Me and my colleagues of sissa’s master have had the possibility to pass one hour together with professor Capasso, talking with him about Physics and the possibilities for students to become researchers today.
He stressed that in this historical moment young people must be open, we must throw out the tiny idea that they have the right of studying in our native country: we must go, we must be dynamic. We must not be afraid of competitiveness, but pursue it, even if it leads us away from our safe harbor.
So, he suggests that maybe the whole category of brains drain must be reconsidered. Actually, I had never thought about this point before; we usually talk about many researchers that are obliged to leave, considering it as a failure of our society. Now – Capasso suggests – we must start considering it as a desirable character of the Research with Capital R, that consider leaving and movement in general as fundamental facets of our society, as Slowness is fundamental – as I have underlined in the last post – for being sustainable citizens.

To conclude, I don’t know which is the right choice, if the Bell Laboratories or the girlfriend; I only know that we must feel ourselves as complete as possible, and I thank to professor Capasso for this starting point for meditation.

Doha2012: an (environ)mental issue.

Cristina Da RoldLascia un commento

paris 09 8eme 028I start this part of my blog focusing on a theme that I feel so important: the awareness of climate risk.

Some days ago, I had the possibility to attend a conference at Sissa (trieste), illuminated by the energy of Luca Mercalli, one of the most active italians in the field of environmental risk communication.

 

He said that communicate sciences is like cooking,  in the sense that we must – first of all – put science communication into a wider perspective, considering the environmental problems only as the tip of the iceberg.

I agree with this idea: I think that the environmental problems we have now are the consequences of our narrow minded short-term, that considers  environmental issues only as  a column between other news.

In this sense, I link here some examples of how the most important  italian online newspapers have communicated today the beginning of the 18 ONU’s conference about Climate Changes in Doha (Qatar). To explore more the news, reflecting once again on what these environmental problems are essentially mindset issues.

ps: some national newspapers are not mentioned here. That because they have not talked about the news yet.

 And now, Mesdames et messieurs, the links:

http://www.corriere.it/ambiente/12_novembre_26/qatar-conferenza-onu-clima-doha_6f09a19e-37b8-11e2-94e7-603de4c26bba.shtml

http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2012/11/26/cop18-lobiettivo-di-andare-oltre-kyoto/427073/

http://www.lastampa.it/scienza/ambiente?refresh_ce

http://www.repubblica.it/ambiente/2012/11/26/news/conferenza_doha_clima-47473137/

http://www.unita.it/ambiente/clima-al-via-summit-di-doha-br-kyoto-2-e-intesa-globale-1.468663

The first post

Cristina Da Rold1 commento

                                                                                      Amsterdam 17-20 marzo 2012 110

Hello everybody!

I think you are inquiring yourself about the title, and maybe about the whole sense of this  blog.

In this blog you will find maybe a lot of different arguments ( it depends on what will intrigue me), but the underground goal I want to achieve is talk about Sciences.  

Of course, there is a considerable amount of facets from which one can talk about sciences. I have decided (but maybe it will change…)to concentrate myself on two “looks”: the first set is made by those positive scientific events/results, that remind us that sciences are – first of all – for us. The second one is called “perspectives on science” and it is though as a place where you can read how the most relevant sources of information have talked about the same news.

This blog is an hard exercise for me, but for this reason I find it so exciting and important for my personal development. This blog is in fact a consequence of a fundamental choice for me, that is to become a professional scientific journalist, and for this reason I’m attending a master course in scientific journalism at SISSA (Italy). Don’t worry… I will not bore you with my personal development now… I only want to specify that this blog is a starting platform for me, so, whoever you are, if you have  any kind of advices, I will accept them happily.

So, I have said that my aim is talk about sciences. Maybe a great part of you is thinking about the wonderful world of astrophysics, the deep ravines of contemporary geology, or the intriguing frontiers of molecular biology… yes, I will try to talk about  these themes, but not only.

I’m persuaded that a fundamental science we must “cultivate” is the Food Science. For this reason, I dedicate a section named “Homegrown Parnassus” which is the most “empirical” of this blog (and actually of my life…). In this part I will talk about my personal vegetable garden – that I have called “Orto del Parnaso – and the recipes I try to realize from it.

Well, it is time to explain the meaning of the title of this blog: “Peer slow, think as a flow”.

I had to decide one “direction” for this blog, and in this sense my personal perversion is to explore a possible synthesis between slowness and dynamism, in this complicated XXI century.

No pretension to be complete, no  attempt to build a philosophical system (I’m usually scared about them…). Only a personal exploration of some intriguing aspects that I meet in my own professional path.

I think slowness and dynamism must be integrated in our historical period, and I think science is an extraordinary bridge among these two trends. Scientific news are for example always the result of a close and slow examination of years of empirical results…but at the same time journalists have the possibility to pass information with lighting speed.

I am extremely fascinated about this dialectic between slowness and dynamism, as two fundamental anthropological dimensions.  And I am persuaded that they play a fundamental role even in scientific journalism, that is the profession that I have started to explore.

Now, before we begin our banquet, I would like to say a few words. And here they are:

 Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! Thank you.