What do you get when you mix fiction with science? You may have said sci-fi, but that's not all of it. You might also get fun science (as in, not necessarilly useful, purposeful or publishable science, just the kind of fun stuff you do in your free time).
Linked from pharyngula, I got the tip for a nice fun article someone posted in his (her?) family site. It looks like it may be a follow up to one of those meaningless conversations everyone likes to have among loved one and friends, but this guy actually did his homework to make his point - he did the math for the model, and simulations to get the equilibrium points. But that's not what I liked the most about it (although I like this kind of stuff a lot). I liked it that it's a funny
Just take a look at what I'm talking about:
In principle, ecologists might employ two basic strategies to get at a problem like this. The empiricists would go out and find a field site where they could actually observe predators and their prey, and just tally the results over time. The theoreticians would chuckle at the empiricists, and construct mathematical models that probably approximate the behavior of populations in the field, keeping their hands more or less clean in the process.
In real life, most ecologists use both strategies off and on. Unfortunately, I don’t know of any real life vampire populations in the field, so we’re going to have to pretend that we are strict theoreticians. That means that we’ll be using math: some algebra, some calculus, and some matrix theory. This is O.K.! It hurts a lot less than, say, getting bitten by a vampire as you’re trying to fit the bugger with a radio collar.
PDF of the article.
He could display little of the math and simulations, although I can see why he didn't. I would at least give the option to the curious reader to learn more, say, put the dirt in a supplemental PDF, or an appendix. Even though, it's
No comments:
Post a Comment