Saturday, February 13, 2016

Why talk about Einstein? Why Einstein matters?

Two weeks ago I wrote a post of “Einstein: A brief introduction”.  This post talks about the impact of his theory of general relativity upon the frontier research in physics over the past 100 years.  I have lost counts of how many Nobel laureates it has produced; just two days ago (Feb. 11, 2016) an earth-moving event was announced, again, to prove he has been right all along.
 
A solution of Einstein’s equations led to the concept of black hole

Einstein formulated the two postulates of special relativity in 1905.  The most famous formula of E = mc2 was also published in 1905.  He presented the equations of general relativity, adding gravity to it, before Prussian Academy of Science in March 1916 (announced in Nov. 1915).

While serving in the Eastern (Russian) front during WWI in 1916, Karl Schwarzschild derived the first exact solution of Einstein’s equation while calculating artillery trajectory.  This led to the initial concept of black hole.


1983 Nobel Prize in Physics: Mathematical theory of the structural evolution of the stars and black hole
There is no way I can understand Chandrasekhar’s Nobel Lecture, but I can tell it can be traced back to Einstein’s general theory of relativity.  In the section of “The mathematical theory of blacks holes," he said,

“. . . the conclusion is inescapable that black holes will form as one of the natural end products of stellar evolution of massive stars; and further that they must exist in large numbers in the present astronomical universe. In this last section I want to consider very briefly what the general theory of relativity has to say about them. . .”

This is how he concluded his Nobel Lecture,

The mathematical theory of black holes is a subject of immense complexity; but its study has convinced me of the basic truth of the ancient mottoes,

The simple is the seal of the true,
Beauty is the splendour of truth.

Chandrasekhar
Chandrasekhar (an Indian American) gave a Ryerson Lecture of “Shakespeare, Newton and Beethoven, or Patterns of Creativity” at the University of Chicago in 1975, eight years before he was awarded the Nobel Prize.  One of the most intellectual talks I ever encountered; it is saved in my FileMaker file.  He is truly a Renaissance Man.

Toward the end of the lecture, he said,

May I allow myself at this point a personal reflection? In my entire scientific life, extending over forty-five years, the most shattering experience has been the realization that an exact solution of Einstein’s equations of general relativity, discovered by the New Zealand mathematician, Roy Kerr, provides the absolutely exact representation of untold numbers of massive black holes that populate the universe . . . this incredible fact that a discovery motivated by a search after the beautiful in mathematics should find its exact replica in Nature, persuades me to say that beauty is that to which the human mind responds at its deepest and most profound.  Indeed, everything I have tried to say in this connection has been stated more succinctly in the Latin mottos:

Simplex sigillum – The simple is the seal of the true
Pulchritudo splendor veritatis – Beauty is the splendor of truth.


2011 Nobel Prizes in physics: The discovery of accelerating expansion of the universe
In his Nobel Lecture, Saul Perlmutter (one of the three laureates) said,

For most of human history, this sort of question [is the universe expanding?] was a truly philosophical question. It wasn’t until the 20th century that we began to have a scientific version of this question. This is partly because Einstein’s theory of general relativity gave us some new conceptual tools that made it possible to think about this topic in a more rigorous way. But it’s also because Edwin Hubble (1929) measured an expansion of the Universe, which meant that we started to see in more concrete terms what we could mean by the fate of the Universe.”

Edwin Hubble was the one first discovered the universe was expanding and the universe goes beyond our Milky Way galaxy.  It is of interest this discovery was first published in New York Times before presenting to his professional society meeting.  He was never awarded a Nobel Prize as the Nobel committee didn’t consider astronomy as worthy of its recognition during his lifetime.


The Big Bang theory and the theory of general relativity
To connect these two theories is beyond the scope of this post.  Einstein’s general relativity gave birth to modern cosmology.  Several Nobel Prizes in Physics are related to the Big Bang theory.

The 1978 was for “the cosmic microwaves background radiation,” considered a relic of the explosion at the beginning of the universe 18 billion years ago.

In his 2006 Nobel Lecture, John Mather began the statement of “In the beginning was the Big Bang. So we now say with great certainty.” 

The discovery of the gravitational waves confirms Einstein’s general relativity
Einstein first predicted gravitational waves based on his theory of general relativity in 1915-1916, although he did waffle on a few occasions.

Einstein went back and forth on whether his theory suggested gravitational waves. He wrote in early 1916 that, “there are no gravitational waves analogous to light waves.”  He had a different thought and published a paper about gravitational waves in late 1916. A colleague pointed out a miscalculation in the equation in that paper; he then published an improved version, “On Gravitational waves” in 1918.

In 1921, Einstein delivered a series of lectures at Princeton University, a comprehensive review of his special theory of relativity (1905) and general theory of relativity (2015), during which the gravitational waves were not mentioned at all.  Until his death in 1955, Einstein was never convinced the gravitational waves can be measured if it were indeed present. 

On September 14, 2015 the Lasr Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) picked up a faint signal that proved to be the unmistakable traces of the ever elusive gravitational waves.  It took two months for the scientists at LIGO to convince themselves it was real.  It was announced on Feb. 11, 2016.  This is an earth-moving (驚天動地) event; some said it is more important than the discovery of Higgs boson in 2012.  This is definitely a Nobel Prize work, if they can decide who (up to three persons are allowed the share the prizes) should get the most credits.

LIGO
The gravitational waves are supposedly generated by the collision of two humongous black holes about 1.3 billion years ago.  The existence of which was suggested by observing a pulsar circling neutron star in 1970s, resulting the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993. 

The Higgs boson (the elemental particle of the Standard Model of particle physics) was discovered by the scientists at the CERN’s Large Hadron Collider in July 2012.  Peter Higgs and Francois Englert were awarded the Nobel Prize in physics next year (2013).  They theorized the presence of this long-sought particle more than 50 years ago; Robert Brout should share the prizes, but he has since passed away. 

None of the scientists actually discovered the Higgs boson particle at the CERN shared the prizes.  The case of gravitational waves is different.  Einstein should get it, but Nobel Prize is not given posthumously (with one exception), so there is still hope for the scientists at LIGO.

Nobel Prize or not, right now the scientists are thrilled in exhilarating mood, one scientists said, “We are pretty much at the moment when Galileo was beginning to see the first objects around Earth.  It will have such a huge impact on the field.

The day before Valentine'd Day in 1977 (in Peanuts)

This Peanuts comic strip showed up the day before Valentine's Day in 1977; it is still fitting to use it as “Tomorrow is Valentine's Day” as Lucy, who has a crush on our greatest classic pianist, Schroeder, said at the beginning of this comic strip.  Charles Schulz’s Peanuts is timeless.

Being Lucy’s love interest, Schroeder can barely tolerate her.  Like many great men in literature or science, the likes of T.S. Eliot and Einstein, the difficulty in love life drives Schroeder to become a great musician.

Sunday, February 7, 2016

Atilla the Huns and the Germans during the Wars: How to call your enemy’s name

A friend sent me an email reporting the outrage of the world renowned historians as China lays claim to Genghis Khan, basically said “元朝” is not part of Chinese history.  This inspires me to write this post.

The author made a good point, but I think the problem lies in “Who is the Chinese?” This calls for an expert opinion, not mine.  But I do know how the Westerners (namely British and American) perceive Genghis Khan (成吉思汗).  If the Americans know my name that has a “” (Yuan), as in “元朝”, I may be in trouble.

Churchill
Churchill once said, he “hated nobody and he didn’t feel he had any enemies—except the Huns, and that was professional!”

Huns is the derogatory term for the Germans.  When in war one needs a bad name for one’s enemy to show one’s utmost contempt.  Atilla the Huns fits it well.  In the memory of Europeans he was barbarous, savage, most feared and most hated and that is the enemy one should fight at all costs.  Calling Germans Atilla the Huns began in WWI and continued to be used during WWII; it was Churchill’s favorite word.

It could be from Kaiser Wilhelm’s own remark, when sending German soldiers to China during the 1900 Boxer Rebellion, he exhorted his troops, “No mercy will be shown! No prisoners will be taken! As the Huns under Attila made a name for themselves which is still mighty in traditions and legends today, may the name of Germany be so fixed in China by your deeds that no Chinaman shall ever again dare to look at a German in askance.”

Dick Brown in the Hagar the Horrible comic strips also used Atilla the Huns extensively; like Hagar himself, Atilla the Huns is also lovable.  I love Hagar so much; sometime I wonder this may be why I love Pirates so much.  Ladies and gentlemen, here are Hagar the Horrible and his perpetual arch-rival, Atilla the Huns.





negotiate with strength
General Patton always call Germans Kraut, another derogatory term, again its used began in WWI.

On 4/12/1945 when the Third Army (under Patton) liberated the first of Nazi death camp, Patton insisted Omar Bradley to go to take a look, “You'll never believe how bastardly these Krauts can be,” Patton said, “until you've seen this pesthole yourself.”

German forces launched a surprise attack thru Ardennes Forest in Belgium and Luxembourg on 12/16/1944, thus began the Battle of the Bulge.  Patton, upon Ike’s urgent request, agreed to turn his Third Army (from Saar) to Bastogne to relieve General Hodges, he said “But what the hell, we'll still be killing Krauts.”

In his A Soldier’s Story, Omar Bradley wrote,

Bradley, Ike, Patton, all West Point graduates
Patton lighted a fresh cigar and pointed to the Bulge [this is how The Battle of the Bulge got its name] where it pierced the thin blue lines on our war map, “Brad,” he exclaimed, “this time the Kraut's stuck his head in a meat grinder.” With a turn of his fist he added, “And this time I've got hold of the handle.”

During the peak of the Battle of the Bulge, Patton prayed [he prayed often] in the Pescatore Chapel in Luxembourg on 12/23/1944, “Sir, this is Patton talking.  The past fourteen days have been straight hell—rain, snow, more rain, more snow—and I am beginning to wonder what's going on in Your headquarter.  Whose side are You on anyway? . . . . I am sick of the unnecessary butchery of American youth, and in exchange for four days of fighting weather, I will deliver You enough Krauts to keep Your bookkeepers months behind in their work.  Amen.”

I throw this in so you will love (this is more than like or admire) Patton as much as I do.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

No one but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money

How can anyone say Peppermint’s answer is wrong when she is of opinion same as Samuel Johnson who said, “No one but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”



Peppermint’s answers might not be off the mark when she was not sleeping in the classroom.  Au Contraire” (on the contrary) must be Charles Schulz’s favorite French; we came across it every so often.

Saturday, January 30, 2016

Einstein: A brief introduction

Being a history buff and spending the first 15-20 years after coming to the States reading science and medicine only, I naturally was in love with history of science; that is why I am still subscribing the Scientific American with an access to all its 170-year content online.

There was a special issue of Scientific American celebrating 100 years of general relativity last September.

I have been talking about the life and science of many scientists (yes, medicine is 100% science. as Dr. Osler said, “the practice of medicine is an art, based on science"; i.e. medicine by or in itself is not an art; practice of medicine is.) Rarely did I ever mention Einstein in my blog, lest the mention of “general relativity” scaring the readers away.

Einstein took a great interest in the history of science; in fact, his last interview (done two weeks before his death, published in Scientific American 7/1/1955) was with a historian of science.  He wrote many articles about Newton and other great scientists in history.

But come to think about it, there are many interesting things to talk about this Man of the last Century.

Einstein got his Nobel for photoelectric theory, not general relativity theory
When Einstein was formulating the idea of general relativity that will re-write the century-old Newtonian gravity law, even Max Planck advised him not to try it, “As an old friend, I must advise you against it. . . . You will not succeed, and even if you succeed, no one will believe you.”

The exact date of birth of quantum mechanics/physics is December 14, 1900 when Max Planck announced his revolutionary idea that energy emitted by a resonator could only take a discrete value (quanta, hence quantum mechanics; E = hf; E=energy, f=frequency, h=Planck constant).  Based on Planck’s concept, Einstein proposed in 1915 that light is also quantized—his photoelectric effect (E = hv) that earned him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921, ad Planck was so honored in 1918.

In fact, Einstein never got another Nobel Prize for his general relativity; I think part of the reason was that Nobel committee was so cautious and had no intention to make a fool of themselves by awarding something that might turn out wrong.

Charlie Chaplin once told Einstein, “The people applaud me because everybody understands me, and they applaud you because no one understands you.”


Einstein wrote an article for Scientific American (published in the issue of 4/1/1950, part of my collection) that came with a letter, saying “The article is somewhat long and not quite easy to grasp. I should, therefore, not be astonished if you find it unsuited for publication in your magazine.”  That letter is framed and displayed at the Scientific American’s office now.

Einstein is an ultimate pacifist during WWI
Einstein is an ultimate pacifist; a great man is often great in many aspects.  While reading WWI, I discovered how great an effort he made in trying to stop the war.  As I always said WWI shouldn’t have happened and WWII should fight at all costs.

Many intellectuals, including Bernard Shaw, Bertrand Russell, Romain Rolland and Einstein (all Nobel laureates) in Europe tried to stop the war, but to no avail. Einstein wrote to Rolland on 3/25/1915, “When posterity recounts the achievements of Europe, shall we let man say that three centuries of painstaking cultural effort carried us no further than from religious fanaticism to the insanity of nationalization? In both camps, today even scholars behave as though eight months ago they suddenly lost their heads.”

When observations of the total eclipse in 1919 detected the light was indeed bent by the gravitational force that confirmed his general relativity theory was correct, Einstein used that fame to speak out many issues to right the wrong and advocate a just world government.

Einstein's hand written E = mc2
Manhattan Project
In 1939 when the physicist Leo Szilard wrote a letter to warn FDR that Nazi might be building an atomic bomb, leading to the Manhattan Project. Szilard asked Einstein to sign the letter and he did.  But, Einstein never actually participated in the project as the government never trusted him, as many of his views were that of a socialist and leftist.

As we all know that the tremendous energy of an atom is revealed by his most famous formula: E = mc2, that c is speed of light; there is nothing can be faster than speed of light).  After Hiroshima, Einstein remarked, “If I knew they were going to do this, I would have become a shoemaker!”

Esoteric general relativity
An article about Einstein will not be complete without talking about his general relativity.  I will only mention a few very basic concepts as higher calculus will be required to have a better grasp.

In Newton’s gravity law the gravity force is merely from the mass, but in general relativity gravity is the “curvature of space due to the presence of mass”, as physicist John Wheeler said, general relativity shows that “space tells matter how to move; matter tells space how to curve.”

Space and time are not fixed absolutes; they are relative to one another, and influenced by observer’s motion. In particle physics experiments, it has been observed that unstable particles moving at a very high speeds take longer to decay [as time passing much slower] than those moving at much slower velocities.

Road to relativity: crises in life drive the creativity in science and in literature?
Einstein began an affair with his cousin in 1912, whom he later married. He and his first wife separated in 1914 and his wife moved to Zurich with their two sons.  Anti-Semitism was rising.  Einstein lived alone in Berlin, where “he ate intermittently, slept randomly, played his violin and waged his solitary struggle.” There was rivalry in work, especially with David Hilbert.

One article implied that Einstein’s most productive and creative years corresponded to his most trying time of his personal and family life.

This reminds me of the story of T. S. Eliot.  By all accounts, he had a happy second marriage (1957 until his death at age of 76 in 1965) during which he wrote no plays or poetry of importance, in contrast to what he had produced during his melancholy 17 years with his first wife, Vivienne.  The Waste Land came out in 1922.

Sunday, January 24, 2016

“Stupid cat” is a talented artist

There are lots of unrequited loves in the Charlie Brown Peanuts comic strip: Sally loves Linus, who tries hard to disclaim it in vain; Lucy loves Schroeder (the classic pianist) who cannot stand her; Charlie Brown can only admire the red-haired girl from a distance.  We never got a chance to see the beauty of the red-haired girl, whose beauty must have been beyond Charles Schulz’s pen.

Another character in the Peanuts series is that “stupid cat”, according to Snoopy.  We are never fortunate enough to meet with the cat; Schulz also never drew it.  Stupid though the cat may be, it is very talented, creating many artistic works on Snoopy’s house.  Here are some examples.

 
 





 
 
 



Home is where you should be during a snowstorm

This 1978 Peanuts comic strip tells home is the place where you should be when the snowstorm comes.  I have enjoyed many of the field trips of Snoopy and his troops; of course, we know Woodstock is the smart one and is Snoopy’s favorite.  Snoopy is the only one in the whole world that understands bird’s language.


Wednesday, January 6, 2016

This is Bertrand Russell: An introduction

Bernard Shaw said, “Hamlet is a half-dozen characters rolled into one”, the same can be said of Bertrand Russell who is a mathematician, philosopher, logician, writer/Nobel laureate (in literature), atheist, and advocate for social reform/pacifist.

Noble and aristocratic origin
He was born into an aristocratic family; his grand father, John Russell, 1st Earl Russell, was twice the Prime Minister for Queen Victoria. He was left an orphan at age of 3 and was raised by his grand parents.  Queen Victoria once stopped by to visit his grand father and Bertrand Russell was sitting on the Queen Victoria’s lap. I’ll quote some of his family myth of interest; he wrote in his autobiography:

"Edith [his 4th wife, an American, as was his 1st wife] and I each had family myths to relate.  Mine began with Henry VIII, of whom the founder of my family had been a protégé, watching on his Mount for the signal of Anne Boleyn’s death at the Tower.  It continued to my grandfather’s speech in 1815, urging (before Waterloo) that Napoleon should not be opposed.  Next came his visit to Elba [where Napoleon was exiled to], in which Napoleon was affable and tweaked his ear. . . ."

He succeeded to the earldom in 1931 when his brother died; he wouldn’t use the title except when strictly necessary for formal occasions.  Friends asked Alfred North Whitehead (Russell’s teacher/colleague/friend) how to call him, Whitehead answered, “Well, it is difficult to say, I always call him Berti.”  In a letter to his publisher friend, Russell wrote,

You will have seen my brother died suddenly in Marseilles, I inherit from him a title, but not a penny, as he was bankrupt.  A title is a great nuisance to me, as I am at a loss what to do, but at any rate I do not wish it employed in connection with any of my literary work.”

Alfred North Whitehead:  mentor, colleague, collaborator, and friend
an excellent book
Thanks to Harry and Peggy’s giving me Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, I came to know Bertrand Russell.  Whitehead and Russell collaborated on the epochal Principia Mathematica.  Whitehead was 11 years his senior and recruited him to the elite, prestigious and intellectual Apostles Society at Cambridge University.  Russell at one time moved into Whitehead’s house working on the Principia Mathematica, the 1st of 3 volumes was published in 1910. (Carnegie Library does have these books, bur are considered reference books and are not allowed to be checked out.)

But, the difference in temperament and political view pulled them apart.  In his autobiography (Volume II, 1914-1944) he wrote, “The first days of the war [WWI] were utterly amazing.  My best friends, such as the Whiteheads, were savagely warlike.”

While serving a six-months imprisonment in 1918 for his pacifistic action, Russell wrote a letter to the Whiteheads whose youngest son, Eric, was killed serving in the Royal Flying Corps. (the letter didn’t survive) Mrs. Whitehead, Evelyn, replied,

“. . . Hearts don’t break so here we are; indeed, I will try to make life sweet still for North and Jessie, but I am not clever at facing it without my Eric. . . I cannot tell you about Alfred, he looks much older. . . Dear Bertie, which ever one of us you prefer to see will go; just choose the one who will best fit your mood—You will hold out—old friendships strain but do not break.  Later on we will talk of all this time of divergence and of my beloved Eric—With dear love from us all, Yours affectionately . . .”

In his biography, The Life of Bertrand Russell (by Ronald Clark), it was mentioned that Russell and Mrs. Whitehead, Evelyn, might have something romantic more than affectionate friendship.  Russell kept silent in his 3-volumes autobiography, but in one of his letters to Ottoline Morrell (his “soul mate” so to speak), with whom he had a long affair, he wrote,

Much my strongest affection after my love for you is affection for Mrs. Whitehead.  This is rooted in years of difficult and very painful cooperation in tasks which both think very important—chiefly keeping Whitehead from knowledge of things which upset his balance.  It is not a feeling in which there is anything to cause you jealousy but it is quite indestructible and very deep."

When Alfred Whitehead died in 1947, Evelyn burnt all the letters Bertrand Russell wrote to Alfred or her.

Why I am not a Christian – by Bertrand Russell 1927
Russell lectured at Peking University for one year in 1920.  It is reputed that both Mao Tse-tung and Chou En-lai attended his lectures.  During his visit to China, 趙元任 was his translator, accompanying him traveling across China.

He wrote in his autobiography,

I was told that the Chinese said that they would bury me by the Western Lake 西湖, and build a shrine to my memory.  I have some slight regret that this did not happen, as I might have become a god, which would have been very chic for an atheist.”

His letter to Colette or Ottoline (both had affair with Russell) echoed his eerie sentiment.
I have missed much by not dying here, as the Chinese were going to have given me a terrific funeral in Central Park; then bury me on an island in the Western Lake 西湖, where the greatest poets and emperors lived, died and were buried.  Probably I should have become a God.  What an opportunity missed.”

When asked what he would say to God if he found himself before Him, Russell answered, “I should reproach him for not giving us enough evidence.

Many of the great minds whose work attract me are all atheists:  Bernard Shaw, Bertrand Russell, Alfred North Whitehaed (an agnostic at one time), Richard Dawkins, James Watson, Francis Crick, Lin Yu-Tong, . . . the list goes on.  The thought of it at times frightened me until one day it dawned on me that I was attracted by their being among the greatest intellectuals in general, not by their atheistic views in particular.  They are men of courage, of superman power; they are superhuman being, and not the ordinary mortals.  They can be sustained in times of sorrow without the mercy and comfort of the Almighty; they can “walk through the valley of the shadow of death and fear no evil’ even though they do not feel “thou art with them.”

Reading science is to seek the ‘truth’ of Nature, and that of humanity/literature, beauty of life and yet neither science nor art can provide the strength or comfort in time of sorrow and trial, which comes from the merciful Almighty, and that is where religion/faith comes into play.

Immoral personal life for one with strong moral conviction
He was awarded Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950 (Churchill was his runner-up then, and had to wait another 3 years for his laurel) “In recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humantarian ideals and freedom of thoughts.”  He fought ferociously with force and style for his strong moral conviction, however unconventional and unpopular it might be. 

However, it is ironic, in my view, that his personal life leaves a lot to be desired as far as the morality goes.  While reading his biography and autobiography, it is not a small task to keep track his four marriages and numerous affairs/liaisons that include Lady Ottoline Morrell, Colette (Lady Constance Malleson), T.S. Eliot’s wife, the list goes on.

He went to China with Dora Black (his former student and eventually 2nd wife) in 1920 while still marrying to his first wife, Alys Pearsall Smith (an American quaker).  During his one-year stay in China, he got Dora pregnant while writing love letters to both Ottoline and Colette staying behind in England.  He probably should have listened to the lyric of Jolene (by Dolly Paton) “Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, I 'm begging of you, please don't take my man even though you can.” Something you don't do it just because you can.  On emerging from his delirium (from pneumonia) his first action was to write to Ottoline:

Dear O,
I am just able to write again so I want to tell you how profoundly you have been in my thoughts all this strange time.  I am told I tried to write to you during my delirium but of course I could only produce a meaningless scrawl.           . . . My most true love, B

His affair with Ottoline began at a dinner’s invitation by the Morrells and her husband, Philip, was unexpectedly called away, and after dinner Russell and Ottoline sat talking over the fire until four in the morning.  Russell wrote recording the event, “I did not know I love you till I heard myself telling you so.”

He didn’t admit some of the affairs in his autobiography (He might be brutely honest at time, he is still no Jean Jacques Rousseau after all and was not writing a Confession), he wrote, “I became great friends with him [T.S. Eliot], and subsequently with his wife, whom he married early in 1915.  As they were desperately poor, I lent them one of the two bedrooms in my flat, with the result that I saw a great deal of them.  I was fond of them both, and endeavoured to help them in their troubles until I discovered that their troubles were what they enjoyed.”  T. S. Eliot was Russell’s student when he was lecturing at Harvard, as J. Robert Oppenheimer ('Oppei') was Alfred North Whitehead's, also at Harvard.

Russell, not a man without blemish
Russell is not a man without blemish; he might twist the fact or conveniently ignored evidence to make his point.

He was denied a passport to lecture at Harvard in 1916, upon hearing the news he wrote, “I loathed the thought of the exile.  But you cannot imagine how it infuriates me as a piece of tyranny.  I want a fuss made about it.  I want it pointed out that I was going to teach logic that the Government thinks logic wd. put America against us.”  The fact is that Professor Woods of Harvard Philosophy Department explicitly stated on his invitation that the courses based on his political views of War would be included.

Woods also made arrangement of lecture-engagements at half a dozen other universities, and only University of Michigan wanted Russell only on philosophy, “owing to the strong local feeling for the Allies”.

He wrote in his autobiography (Volume 3, 1944-1969),

When I was called to Stockholm, at the end of 1950, to receive the Nobel Prize—somewhat to my surprise, for literature, for my book Marriage and Morals—I was apprehensive, since I remembered that, exactly three hundred years earlier, Descartes had been called to Scandinavia by Queen Christina in the wintertime and had died of cold.”

I read the Nobel presentation speech, which emphasizes he ‘champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought”  Several of his nearly 100 books were mentioned including A History of Western Philosophy, but not Marriage and Morals (1929) in which he expressed very liberal views that shocked his contemporaries or even the fainthearted of our time.  He argued that “a lapse into sexual unfaithfulness by either married partner should not, necessarily, be a ground for divorce.” (from his Biography) Admittedly, he might be just ahead of his time; some of his proposals in the book were made into laws in England.

If you can read only one book of his, pick A History of Western Philosophy, you’ll be ‘entertained’ intellectually. (I use 'entertain' instead of 'enlighten', as it may be more enticing to get one to read.)  It was a ‘best seller’ in America when it was published in 1946.  Russell wrote, “I had no idea it would have a success which, none of my other books have had, even, for a time, shining high upon the Americanlist of best sellers.”

No pacifist can survive Hitler, not even Bertrand Russell
He was a staunch pacifist during the WWI, but he realized there will be no peace as long as Hitler is around; he wrote,

". . . But Hitler’s Germany was a different matter.  I found the Nazis utterly revolting—cruel, bigoted, and stupid.  Morally and intellectually they were alike odious to me.  Although I clung to my pacifist convictions, I did so with increasing difficulty.  When, in 1940, England was threatened with invasion, I realized that, throughout the First War, I had never seriously envisaged the possibility of utter defeat.  I found this possibility unbearable, and at last consciously and definitely decided that I must support what was necessary for victory in the Second War, however difficult victory might be to achieve, and however painful in its consequence."

In a letter to a friend, he wrote on Dec 22, 1939, “I try hard to remain a pacifist, but the thought of Hitler and Stalin triumphant is hard to bear.

To the same friend, he wrote on May 19, 1940, “Perhaps it would have been better if the Kaiser had won, seeing Hitler is so much worse.  I find that this time I am not a pacifist, and consider the future of civilization bound up with our victory.  I don’t think anything so important has happened since the fifth century, the previous occasion on which the Germans reduced the world to barbarism.”  He was talking like a Churchill!

He was an outspoken critic of the American military intervention in Viet-Nam (and, for sure, Iraq, if he were still with us.)  This is his broadcast after the explosion of the first hydrogen bomb, “Remember your humanity and forget the rest.  If you can do so, the way lies open to a new paradise:  If you can not, nothing lies before you but universal daeth.” 

In the end, Russell prevailed and the true character shown on those supported him in time of trials
Being an atheist, pacifist and political activist advocating provacative, unpopular, liberal, or revolutionary views on all things, Russell ran into trouble at all times:  imprisonment twice, dismissals from Trinity College (in 1916 and was reappointed in 1944) and the City College of New York.  But, in the end, he prevailed.  He was bestowed on the honors of the Order of Merit (OM) in 1949 and Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950.

During the debacle of the City College affair in 1940, John Dewey, Whitehead and many other academics came to Russell’s defense.  Aldous Huxley sent him a letter.

Dear Bertie:
     Symapthy, I am afraid, can’t do much good; but I feel I must tell you how much I feel for you and Peter in the midst of the obscene outcry that has broken out around your name in New York.
                                                                                                Aldous Huxley

When the Student Council of the City College sent him a letter of support, Russell replied,
I am very happy to have the support of the student council in the fight.  Old York was the first place where Christianity was the state religion, and it was there that Constantine assumed the purple.  Perhaps New York will be the last place to have this honor. . . “

I am afraid that if and when I take up my duties at the City College you will all be disappointed to find me a very mild and inoffensive person, totally destitute of horns and hoofs.”
In a long letter, John Dewey wrote,

“ . . . If men are going to be kept out of American colleges because they express unconventional, unorthodox or even unwise views (but who is to be the judge of wisdom or lack of wisdom?) on political, economic, social, or moral matters, . . . I am heartily glad my own teaching days have come to an end.

When Russell was reappointed as a Fellow at the Trinity College, Whitehead sent him a letter on Jan. 3, 1944, saying “ . . . Our warmest congratulations.  It is exactly what ought to have happened.”

Bertie is a fervid egoist
Bertie is a fervid egoist.” Virginia Woolf wrote in her diary about her friend.  What a great observation!  Russell's own assessment, “Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life:  the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind.”

He died of influenza on February 2, 1970 at age of 98—a long, arduous life, “not entirely uneventful.” as Churchill spoke of his own.

Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Flirting with French

I am reading an eBook (borrowed from Carnegie Library through OverDrive) called “Flirting with French” (by William Alexander).  Earlier this year I wrote a post of “Bill Gates is trying to take up French, so am I”.

I first downloaded a “sample”; I was sold when I read the following paragraph.

A rainy afternoon with my wife at a Left Bank brasserie, watching the city scurry home, the drizzly streets an impressionist canvas come to life.  Anne and I drunk on cold beer, on Paris, on love, happy as happy gets, neither of us speaking much, just enjoying the scene, and realizing how lucky we are to love the same things, and Paris, and each other.

This is not really a learning French book, but the author (an American) talks about French while touring France with his wife.  The following paragraph gives you a feel of it.  The blue/italicized words are French.

. . . even before tackling French I already knew a number of French words, in addition to petit and problème. How much of our vocabulary is shared with French?  To get an idea, take a stroll through an English garden (jardin), where you may find a fleur in bloom, perhaps an insecte perchè atop a rose, enjoying the soft petales.  Attention! Some of these plantes might be dangereuses, while others are quite     dèlicieuses. A quarter to a third of all English words come from French.

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Albert Speer deserves no forgiveness: My letter-to-the-editor was published at Observer-Reporter today

On Monday (Dec. 7) a headline article reporting the story of a retired California University professor (Dr. Leonard Siegel) who corresponded with Albert Speer for 12 years after he was released from Spandau prison.  Professor Siegel also interviewed Speer for three days at Speer’s residence in Germany.


In my early days of reading WWII, I was of an opinion that Speer was a decent gentleman, among all the Hitler’s thugs, the likes of Goring, Goebbels, Himmler and Ribbentrop.  Many years of reading later, he became a sly, despicable and immoral figure.  He “escaped a death sentence by presenting a subtle and sophisticated mixture of self-exculpating [exonerating] and self-blame.”  (From Richard Evan’s The Third Reich at War.)  He obviously tricked the judge at Nuremberg trial to spare him from the noose.


Professor said Speer was “an avid gardener who turned a vegetable garden at Spandau Prison into an elaborate garden with paths, and a variety of flowers.”  He also showed the professor his garden as he did Hitler 35 years earlier.

Speer would have liked our garden, no wonder I “liked” this guy in my earlier days of reading.  Reading is to find the truth and beauty; the beauty of people, of mind and of language.  Truth is hard to come by especially reading the history.


Saturday, December 5, 2015

Tantalizing 可望不可及: Reading history, learning English

“The ruins of the village of Vaux changed hands thirteen times during March, and yet the fort itself still lay tantalizingly beyond the German reach.”

The above quote is from John Keegan’s (a British military historian) The First World War.  It epitomizes the characteristics of the WWI: stalemate and attrition resulting in enormous casualties for nothing.

There is hardly a day went by without my learning of  how an English word is beautifully and effectively used.  tantalizingly” here caught my attention.

“Tantalize” originates from Greco-Roman mythology. “Tantalus” was a king who for his sin was condemned to stand on Tantarus up to his chin in water that receded whenever he stooped to drink.  So “tantalize” means “to tease or torment by presenting something to the view and exciting strong desire but continually frustrating the expectation by keeping it out of reach”

The German force very much wanted the fort in Vaux and fought for it ferociously with tenacity and yet couldn’t get it.  可望不可及, so to speak. 

(Many English verbs turn into adjective by adding “ing” to it: ‘tantalize’ is a verb and’ tantalizing’ is adjective)

I was surprised to learn (from Charles) that “serendipity” evolves from an ancient fairy tale.  I bet few people are aware of the origin of “tantalize”.  While I am at “tantalize”, I might as well say something about “tantamount”.

The Lend-Lease is a Bill enacted by Congress, empowering the President to send war supplies to the allied countries fighting the Axis.  This Act was passed (3/11/1941) before America plunged into the war.  It greatly delighted Churchill, who reportedly said the Lend-Lease Act was “tantamount to a declaration of war by the U.S.”

“Tantamount to” is the same as “equivalent to”.

Friday, December 4, 2015

Churchill quoted Scripture with effect

Churchill was not a particularly religious man; he didn’t quote Scripture often, but when he did, it was done superbly.  The following is my favorite.  (One of his great-grandsons has a book with a title of “God & Churchill”.  I didn't read it, but after reading some of the review articles and based on what I have read, I feel there is some imaginative stretch.)

While Cairo Conference was being planned, FDR cabled Churchill that their “meeting place is known to enemy” and suggested moving to Khartoum.  Churchill thought Cairo well protected and cabled FDR, “See St. John, Chapter 14, Verses 1 to 4”; the passages are:

Let not your heart be troubled:
Ye believe in God,
Believe also in me . . .
I go to prepare a place for you.

No sooner had the cable sent out, than Churchill began to regret, as he was afraid that people might be thinking he was so grandiose that he thought he was Jesus.  FDR agreed with Churchill’s plan in no time.

We heard the following in his first speech to the Joint Session of Congress on December 26, 1941, a bit over one year before Madame Chiang Kai-Shek did.

As long as we have faith in our cause and an unconquerable will-power, salvation will not be denied us.  In the words of the Psalmist, “He shall not be afraid of evil tidings; his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord.”  Not all the tidings will be evil.

Churchill was hesitated to quote the Scripture in the speech and mentioned his concern to FDR, who gave his approval; at which time Churchill was living in the White House.

Historian Arthur Marder wrote, “A stream of memoranda, virtually ultimata, issued from the Private Office covering every aspect of the war at sea and leaving the recipient in no doubt as to what the First Lord [Churchill was the First Lord of Admiralty during WWI and WWII] wanted.” These memoranda became irreverently known as the First Lord’s Prayers because they frequently opened with “Pray inform me . . .” or “Pray why has . . . not been done.”

In the old days “pray” was often used, instead of “please”.

Churchill’s first speech as the Prime Minister through BBC on May 19, 1940 is known as “Be Ye Men of Valour” as it was concluded by quoting 1 Maccabees 3:58-60 in Apocrypha.
Today is Trinity Sunday.  Centuries ago words were written to be a call and a spur to the faithful servants of Truth and Justice: “Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar.  As the Will of Gods is in Heaven, even so let it be.” (1 Maccabees 3:58–60)

By teh way “ye is the plural form of “thou.  I think this is from Hebrew Bible written at the time after the conquest of Judea by Alexander the Great.  But one doesn’t need to know the story behind it to appreciate how good a quote for the occasion.

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Did Madame Chiang Kai-shek conduct sexy and seductive diplomacy?

I was hoping to learn some modern Chinese history by reading Hannah Pakula’s The Last Empress: Madame Chiang Kai-Shek and the birth of modern China, but I was disappointed as I have my doubt about some of the material she used.  As the New York Times Book Review said of the book, “Pakula uses no source in Chinese and offers little evaluation of the ones she does use.”  Pakula is no historian; she may not have the professional training to evaluate the material she uses.

In the book Pakula was making a case that Mme. Chiang and Wendell Willkie had an affair and even a one-night stand when Willkie visited Chongqing in October 1942.

After losing to FDR in his Presidency bid in 1940, Willkie traveled the world representing FDR.  He was a very respectful and influential political figure, advocating Lend-Lease (a 1941 Act by Congress, empowering the president to send war supplies/money to the allied countries).

Madame Chiang understandably wanted to charm and woo such an important figure from USA, from whence their war supply and money came.  But the book portrays her as a seducer and that she wanted to come to USA with Willkie.  When Gardner Cowles (a publisher, who accompanied Willkie on the trip) told May-ling that she could not come to the States with Willkie.  May-ling scratched her long fingernails down Cowles’ cheeks, so deeply that the marks remained for a week.   Sensational story if it were true.

In Hannah Pakula’s The Last Empress, we read the following paragraph (at Cairo Conference),

May-ling, who was wearing a black satin sheath dotted with yellow chrysanthemums, continually arranged and rearranged her feet in order to give glimpse of what Brooke called “the most shapely of legs” via the long slits in her skirt. “This caused a rustle amongst those attending the conference,” he wrote, “and I even thought I heard a suppressed neigh come from a group of some of the younger members!”

The following paragraph is from William Manchester/Paul Reid’s The Last Lion: Defender of the Realm 1940-1965 Volume 3 (Churchill’s biography).  Paul Reid, using Manchester’s material after the latter was stricken by stroke, to complete the book.  Manchester was a respected historian, who apparently felt Alan Brooke’s diary (Churchill’s right hand man—Chief of Staff during WWII) was credible and trustworthy.

Madame Chiang, who spoke perfect English, translated for her husband, leaving Brooke with the impression that Madame “was the leading spirit of the two, and I would not trust her very far . . .The more I see of her the less I like her.”  Not so the other staff officers, whose collective breathing almost stopped when Madame’s “closely clinging dress of black satin with yellow chrysanthemums displayed a slit which extended to her hip bone and exposed one of the most shapely of legs.”

In the Volume V (Closing the Ring) of Churchill’s The Second World War, with which, I feel, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, Churchill wrote about his impression of Mme. Chiang during Cairo Conference (Nov. 1943).

I had a very pleasant conversation with Madame Chiang Kai-shek, and found her a most remarkable and charming personality.  I told her how much I had regretted that we could not fix an occasion for a meeting at the time when we had both been in America together, and we agree that no undue formalities should stand in the way of our talks in the future.  The President had us all photographed together at one of our meetings at his villa, and although both the Generalissimo and his wife are now regarded as wicked and corrupt reactionaries by many of their former admirers, I am glad to keep this as a souvenir.

In the Volume IV (The Hinge of Fate) of Churchill’s The Second World War, we read why Churchill and Mme. Chiang did see each other when they both were in America (also in 1943).

On this weekend was discussed the question of my meeting Madame Chiang Kai-shek, who was making and extensive tour of the United States.  She was at this time in New York, and intimated that she would be glad to receive me there.  Amid the pressure under which we were working and in the few days that remained before I must leave I did not feel able to make so long a journey.  The President therefore invited the lady to lunch with him to meet me at the White House.  The invitation was refused with some hauteur.  Madame was of the opinion that I should make the pilgrimage to New York.  The President was somewhat vexed that she had not adapted his plan.  It was my strong desire to preserve the unity in the Grand Alliance, and I offered to go half-way if she would do the same.  This offer was however considered facetious, so I never had the pleasure and advantage of meeting this lady until the Cairo Conference.

In Hannah Pakula’s The Last Empress, we read the following conversation between Churchill and Mme. Chiang, (so far I cannot verify this conversation indeed happened.)

Churchill: You think I’m a terrible old man, don’t you?
Mme. 
Chiang: I really don’t know.  You believe in colonialism and I don’t.
Churchill: Now tell me what do you think of me?
Mme. 
Chiang: I think your bark is worse than your bite.