Note of the Living Deb

The physics

Because I know there are three dimensions, I put my hard-boiled eggs through the egg slicer three times, in positions that made the slices at right angles to the previous cuts. (The first cut makes slices, the second cut turns those into rods, the third cut turns those into cubes.)

Okay, technically I probably learned this from my mom, but I remember it because of physics.

The egg salad

Recently I've been scooping out the yolks first so I could smash them up nice and smooth, mix them with the mayonnaise, mustard, and spices, and then cut up the whites as best I could and mix it all together.

This time I went back to putting the whole egg through the slicer. This was much easier than just trying to cube the egg whites and it came out plenty smooth enough. Today's recipe, which I like, had:

eggs
mayonnaise and yogurt in about a 2:1 ratio
mustard (much less)
garlic powder (some)
onion powder (lots)
paprika on top

Post of the Day - Raptitude's Go Deeper, Not Wider - "I keep imagining a tradition I’d like to invent. After you’re established in your career, and you have some neat stuff in your house, you take a whole year in which you don’t start anything new or acquire any new possessions you don’t need. ... You improve skills rather than learning new ones. You consume media you’ve already stockpiled instead of acquiring more. You read your unread books, or even reread your favorites. You pick up the guitar again and get better at it, instead of taking up the harmonica. You finish the Gordon Ramsey Masterclass you started in April, despite your fascination with the new Annie Leibovitz one, even though it’s on sale." This should be much easier for people like me and my readers who have been collecting activities for a very long time.

The problem

I love chili, but only when I make it using the Carroll Shelby mix. However, I don't like to be dependent on companies that may go out of business, may change their recipes, or otherwise may no longer be available to me. Also, when I'm feeling poor or suddenly in the mood when I have the ingredients but not the mix, then I can still make it.

The givens

The recipe

The recipe tells me all the ingredients I need, but some of the quantities are missing:
* 2 pounds ground beef
* 1 8-oz can tomato sauce
* 2 8-oz cans water
* spice packet
* salt packet
* cayenne pepper packet
* masa flour packet
1/3 cup water

(I use only 1 pound ground beef or ground beef substitute and three cans of beans--the horror!--plus try to remember to finely shred a zucchini or something for extra nutrients. I also don't use the cayenne pepper, but it's still useful data.)

The ingredients

The ingredients are listed in order by quantity, I think by weight but maybe by volume. Here is the list:
* corn masa flour
* ground chili peppers
* salt
* garlic
* cumin
* oregano
* onion
* paprika
* cayenne pepper

The nutrition information

* serving size: 2T (19 g)
* servings per container: ~6
* container size: 4 oz or 113 g (19 g x 6 = 114, so that's pretty close)

Per serving:
* calories: 60
* fat: 1 g = 10 calories
* sodium: 1320 mg
* carbs: 12 g
* fiber: 0 g
* sugar: 0 g
* protein: 2 g
* Vitamin A: 30%
* Vitamin C: 0%
* calcium: 4%
* iron: 10%

Math

Measure

I tried to measure the quantities in each packet using my preferred method when I am cooking and also using a kitchen scale. Neither of these involved precision measuring, but I did my best.

* spice packet - 3/4 cup (= 12 tablespoons); 2.6 oz
* salt packet: 1 1/2 teaspoons (= 1.5 tablespoons); 0.3 oz
* cayenne pepper packet: 1/2 teaspoon; did not weigh*
* masa flour packet: 1/4 cup + 1 tablespoon (= 5 tablespoons); 1.1 oz

*I thought it would be difficult to put the cayenne pepper back in the packet for Robin to use later if I emptied it into a bowl to be weighed, so I didn't weigh it.

Test volume/weight assumption

The ounces per tablespoon for the three pieces of data for which I had both numbers were:
* 2.6/(12) = 0.22
* 0.3/1.5 = 0.20
* 1.1/5 = 0.22

These looked close enough for me to feel comfortable doing all my calculations with volume, even if the ingredient order is based on weight.

Another assumption

I assumed that only the spice packet was a multi-ingredient packet and that it had only the ingredients that were not in the single-ingredient packets.

Deduct and calculate

Masa flour is the first ingredient (5 T). Chili powder is the second ingredient, so there must be 5T or less.

Salt is the third ingredient (1.5 t), so there must be at least 1.5 t of chili powder.

Garlic, cumin, oregano, onion, and paprika were next and above cayenne pepper (1/2 t), so each of these ingredients must be between 1/2 t and 1.5 t. There are five of these ingredients, so the total volume must be between (0.5 x 5 =) 2.5 t and (1.5 x 5) = 7.5 t or almost 1 T to 2.5 T.

Subtracting from the total volume of the spice packet, this leaves between (12 - 1 =) 11 T and (12 - 2.5 =) 9.5 T. Both of these quantities are well above the 5-T limit. Uh oh.

Adjust assumptions

My best guess at the problem is that the spice packet contains additional salt. Dastardly! If so, the 1.5 t measurement for the salt would be too low.

More data and calculations

I looked up the sodium on my container of salt: 390 mg/serving; 1/4 teaspoon per serving

390 x 4 = 1560 mg sodium / teaspoon of salt

Sodium in kit: 1320 mg/serving x 6 servings = 7920 mg

New estimate of salt in kit: 7920 mg / 1560 mg/teaspoon = 5 teaspoons. Yowza!

Estimate of salt in spice packet: 5 t - 1.5 t = 3.5 t or just over 1 T.

New estimate of spice kit ingredients not including salt: 12 T - 1 T = 11 T.

Re-do deductions and calculations

Continue assuming there are 5 T or less of chili powder.

Salt is the third ingredient (5 t), so there must be at least 5 t of chili powder.

Garlic, cumin, oregano, onion, and paprika were next and above cayenne pepper (1/2), so each of these ingredients must be between 1/2 t and 5 t. There are five of these ingredients, so the total volume must be between (0.5 x 5 =) 2.5 t and (5 x 5) = 25 t or almost 1 T to 8.3 T.

Subtracting from the total volume of the spice packet, this leaves between (12 - 1 =) 11 T and (12 - 8.3 =) 3.7 T. One of these quantities is now below 5-T limit. Whew.

More data and calculations

I decided to assume that the vitamin A came virtually exclusively from the peppers. I looked up the nutrition facts for my chili powder, but it did not list vitamin A. So I looked online. Mostly I just found information on fresh chilis (which also have plenty of Vitamin C, which does not exist in the mix), but then I found The World's Healthiest Foods which lists 9% per 2 t or 4.5% per t.

The kit lists 30% per serving or (30 x 6 =) 180% for the whole kit. That implies (180 / 4.5 =) 40 t = 13.3 T. Even assuming cayenne has a similar amount of Vitamin A and subtracting that 0.5 t, that still leaves way more than 5T for the chili powder. Oh, well.

Nearly random guessing

Next, I guessed the additional quantities based on things like the color of the spice packet (it looked like a pastel version of chili powder color, implying lots of white ingredients like garlic powder and onion powder--and salt). And I also guessed based on the yumminess of the ingredients and based on my experience with other recipes.

* chili powder - 1/4 cup (= 4 T) (assuming if it was equal to the masa flour, they'd probably rather list that first, therefore it's probably less, but not much less)

That leaves (12 T - 4 T chili powder - ~1 T salt =) ~7 T (21 t) for the other ingredients, each of which must be less than or equal to 5 t, but more than or equal to 0.5 t. The average would be about (21 / 5 =) 4.2 t each.

Usually people put less garlic than onion in their recipes, so I was surprised that this kit reversed that. Tex-Mex recipes usually have just a small amount of oregano, and so I assumed that was happening here, too. So I'm guessing there's significantly more of the first two ingredients below than the other three. Only, there's not much room for there to be much difference, so:

* garlic - 5 t
* cumin - 5 t
* oregano - 4 t
* onion - 4 t
* paprika - 3 t

Conclusions

I should try making chili with the following ingredients and see if I like it:

* 2 pounds ground beef (actually, 1)
* 1 8-oz can tomato sauce
* 2 8-oz cans water
* 1/4 cup chili powder
* 5 t garlic
* 5 t cumin
* 4 t oregano
* 4 t onion powder
* 3 t paprika
* 5 t salt
* 5 T masa flour
* 1/3 cup water
* 3 cans beans
* 1 zucchini, finely shredded

I went to Nerd Nite this month even though because it's February, the same month that has Valentine's Day in it, the theme is sex and dating. I went mainly because one of my friends was doing one of the presentations, but they all turned out to be fun. I don't know how people (especially nerds) get so confident on the stage, but just like last time I went, all three of the speakers were engaging.

“Steers and Queers: Sex Toy Laws in Texas,” by Julie Sunday

I don't care about sex toys myself, so I have not paid attention to laws about them. I figured the picture would be pretty grim. It turns out that it became much less grim in 2008.

Before 2008, it was illegal to sell or to promote (or give away) sex toys. However, it was not illegal to own them, so long as you had no more than five. (If you had more than five, you were obviously a distributor.)

What was considered a sex toy? Any device designed for the stimulation of human sexual organs. This means the electronic bull ejaculator was legal. It costs $1,500. Our speaker showed us a picture and said, "I don't even know what all those parts are." "Butt plugs" are also legal, since butts aren't sexual organs.

Even now, sex toys are sold as "novelties." That's because novelties are not regulated by organizations such as the Food and Drug Administration (which regulates other things that go in the body), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (which regulates children's toys and other products), or the Centers for Disease Control (which regulates other health related things).

Even now, phthalates, banned for use in children's toys, are still routinely used in sex toys (as well as shower curtains, raincoats and rubber boots). Toys made with phthalates, which help soften plastic, have a waxy look to them and a sweet vanilla sort of smell. Also, our speaker explained that they are "totally crappy and gross." They reduce sperm count in men and in future men (fetuses). The phthalates get absorbed through the skin, and the closer they are to the sex organs, the worse the problem is. Sex toys often get close to sex organs for some reasons. Our speaker recommended that if you have any toys made with this stuff, you should throw them away and get some better ones. She recommended hard toys, or, if you prefer soft ones, go for silicone.

She also mentioned that sex toys can be therapeutic for both sexes: orgasms relieve menstrual cramps and frequent ejaculation reduces the risk of prostate cancer.

Someone asked her if it was ever okay for a mother to give her daughter a sex toy, or is it only okay for the cool aunt to do. I liked her answer. She said just try not to train them that sex is dirty or disgusting, and they will find their own sex toys. There are plenty of ordinary children's toys that happen to vibrate, for example, such as a vibrating pen she used to have as a kid.

“The Mathematics of Dating,” By Sheena Madan

What's a good way to match people into stable couples? The stable marriage problem looks at the situation where you have the same number of heterosexual men and women, and each person can rank the members of the opposite gender.

The speaker described the stable marriage algorithm as being like the math of 1950's dating. First all the men go to the balconies of their number 1 pick and sing to them. Each woman with wooers chooses her favorite one. The next night, all the remaining men go to their number two pick, etc. In the end, all the people will be matched up and there will be no rogue couples. A rogue couple is made up of two people who both like each other better than the person they are with.

Then the speaker explained that she had done ten years of field research with this algorithm. First, in the description given above, are the marriages optimized for the men or the women? For the men--they get first pick. So the lessons from that are to a) hit on everyone, going down your list and b) have a thick skin (to handle any rejections).

The speaker's field research suggested that women should not use the "club and drag" technique. Instead, it's better to try flirting (she recommends the Social Issues Research Centre's Guide to Flirting).

Here's another lesson: don't settle. If you add to the stable marriage problem the idea that people can have standards, the result is that not all the people will be matched up. And this is a good thing. It's better to be single than to be in a bad marriage. So, you should be willing to reject, even if there's only one guy.

There are several problems with the model. One is that iterations can take a long time. One is that in real life there are influxes of new people. And one is that you can change your mind.

(To me, the biggest problem is that you don't have perfect information, and so you can't actually rank people properly.)

The speaker also recommends that if you find your soulmate through other means, ditch the algorithm and go with it.

There is a similar algorithm for many-to-one matches called the hospitals/resident algorithm.

An audience member suggested that a similar situation exists for employer/employee matches. (Interesting. That implies that jobs are optimized for the employee since we are the ones showing up at the employer balconies and they are stuck choose from us or going without.)

“An Introduction to Erotic Fan Fiction For Aspiring Writers,” by F*Bomb

Why write erotic fan fiction? Because it's easier than regular fiction. As with all fan fiction, you've already got characters and setting created for you. And with erotic fiction, you already know what the characters will be doing.

The speaker explained that the general rules of good writing apply. Show. Don't tell.

In addition, erotica is not porn. It's all about the crushes and the build-up. Tease and toy with your reader.

In addition, for fan fiction, do not introduce new characters. It's cheating. And for a TV show, especially, there are plenty of secondary characters to choose from if you need to.

Working with restrictions can help you be more creative.

The speaker was asked if there was a way to make money doing this. No. a) Fan fiction is based on shows that nerds like. In other words, shows that get canceled after two seasons. Shows that themselves don't make any money. b) Fan fiction tends to be pretty crappy.

Blog Entry of the Day - Setting the bar low: Suck less at What Now? This is about how sometimes setting the bar low can help you accomplish more than otherwise.

The beauty of this new mantra ["suck less"], I now realize, is that it makes my typical self-deprecation pointless. Today, for example, I was mostly a slug all morning and then took a nap in the afternoon, accomplishing essentially nothing for hours at a time. And under normal circumstances, this would send me into a spiral of shame about how good for nothing I am. But instead, when I woke up from my nap, I thought, "Well, I've sucked thus far today; now it's time to suck less." And I did. Was I amazingly productive afterward? Well, no. But did I suck less? Darn tootin'! And I'm much more cheerful for it.

(Or "Am I Blowing This Recipe?")

I tasted this really yummy sweet potato casserole that was obviously a dessert though served as a side dish. I did not ask for the recipe because I figured it would be really super evil. But Robin did. And I was right. But I decided to leave out some of the evil stuff and see if it was still good. (That's not where the math part comes in, though.)

Ingredients

"3 cups mashed sweet potatoes" - it turns out that the sweet potatoes that come in a big can are enough to make only 2 cups and I don't have any more sweet potatoes in the house. So, let the math begin.

"1 cup sugar" - I don't think so. Just plain sweet potatoes are pretty sweet, so I'm leaving this out.

"2/3 cup margarine, melted and divided" - I'm leaving out the half that gets mixed in but keeping the half that goes in the topping. 1/3 x 2/3 = 2/9. I do not have a 2/9 cup measuring cup or a 1/9 cup measuring cup, but 2/9 is just slightly less than 2/8 which is 1/4. So I almost but not quite filled a 1/4-cup measuring cup. With walnut oil. (Yes, there are many reasons this recipe might not work!)

"2 eggs, slightly beaten" - 2 x 2/3 = 4/3 = not happening. I read somewhere that most recipes assume you are using extra large eggs. I have only large eggs, so I used the two smallest ones from the carton.

"1 tsp vanilla" - 1 x 2/3 = 2/3. My closest measuring spoon was 3/4, so I underfilled that slightly.

"1/2 cup milk" - 1/2 x 2/3 = 1/3. Easy!

"1/3 cup all-purpose flour" - I used almost 1/4 cup whole wheat pastry flour.

"1 cup firmly packed brown sugar" - Easy.

"1 cup chopped nuts, pecans" - last time I bought nuts I discovered it was cheaper to get halves than to get little pieces. That seemed odd, because I'd think the chopped ones would be cheaper because you could include all the broken parts. I figured I could chop them myself. So I measured out a bit more than 2/3 cup walnut halves, chopped them, remeasured them, didn't have enough, chopped a few more, had a little too much, and threw them all in anyway.

"1 cup flaked coconut" - easy. Except I probably used the wrong kind of coconut. I was probably supposed to use the sweetened moist kind but I used the unsweetened dehydrated kind.

"Combine sweet potatoes, sugar, 1/3 cup margarine, eggs, vanilla and milk. Mix well." - I combined the sweet potatoes, eggs, vanilla and milk.

"Spoon into a greased 1.5 quart casserole." - Easy: I used a 1-quart pie pan.

"Gradually add flour to remaining 1/3 cup of margarine. Stir until smooth, add remaining ingredients, (mixture will be crumbly). Sprinkle over casserole." - Easy.

"Bake at 325 degrees for 30-35 minutes." I set the oven for 325 but it was 350 when I put the casserole in. I set the timer for 25 minutes but didn't hear it go off. When I checked it, it was bubbling properly, but a little darker than I like at the edges, and the oven was 400 degrees. Smells good, though. And this doesn't seem like one of those picky recipes where you have to measure everything exactly.

It's for a potluck lunch tomorrow, and it's the sort of thing you can notice a bite taken out of, so I'll have to get back to you on whether it's any good. If it is, I'll try a better version later and give you a picture and nice recipe format and all that.

I almost never find opportunities to use serious math to help me solve problems in my real life. But today I joined a professional organization and that provided me with such an opportunity. Let's see if y'all get the same answer I do. Here's the situation:

If you join for one year, you pay full price. If you join for two years, you get ten percent off both years. If you join for three years, you get fifteen percent off all three years. Which deal is the best deal?

And let's throw in some simplifying assumptions. First, assume that you want to be in the organization indefinitely. Then assume that you have enough money right now to choose any of these offers, and that any extra money you don't spend now you will invest for later. Assume also that the current full price and options will never change. And add in any other obvious assumptions I'm forgetting about that will make the answer easier to calculate.

(My answer is in the comments.)

I got my lab results from my annual physical check-up for this year (via a phone call). Everything is "normal" and I am "perfect." I forgot to worry about this and so did not feel a sense of relief. I am very appreciative, though, that I am lucky enough for these kinds of results to be typical and expected.

I did ask for a few specifics. All my numbers are within my recent historical range, but none are near the top. For example, my cholesterol has gone down from 200 to 187. As if I hadn't been eating at McDonald's for the couple of weeks preceding the tests.

**

My weight yesterday was down from two weeks ago, as if not eating out is working. But the difference could easily be attributable to other factors I don't understand, i.e., random.

**

My net worth went up this month, but it's only because the value of my house increased more than enough to make up for the plummeting value of my stocks. I use the average of the value assessed by the property taxing authority and the value I get from zillow.com. Of course, the former changes only once (twice?) a year, but the latter rose 9% in one month. Odd. As a result, my house is again making up 50% of my calculated net worth. I want it to make up only 1/3 of my net worth, with retirement savings making up 1/3 and other savings making up the final 1/3. My retirement savings was just as high as the equity in my house as late as last month. No more!

About half of my retirement savings is from my IRA and half from my pension plan. My IRA savings only recently surpassed my pension savings, and after all the stock plummeting, my IRA savings are still higher, so that's good.

**

I wrote down every purchase I made this month because after my big raise last year I still don't feel richer. I did not make any purchase I regret, with the possible exception of eating fast food alone five times, but since the total amount comes to about $7.50, the regrets are not financial. (Twice I supplemented my lunch with an extra taco, so on those days I only halfway ate out.)

I guess there's just been a lot of irregular spending. This month it was for tickets to Milwaukee (which I refuse to regret until the end of the trip) and air conditioning repairs. These are both things I have saved up for already. I probably should not include these savings in my net worth because in a way that money is already spent. Certainly already accounted for.

**

We used an average of 87.5 gallons per day since we got our new toilet, versus 99.5 gallons the previous year, for a savings of 12 gallons per day. So the new toilet really made a difference!

The new toilet uses 1.6 gallons per flush. If the old toilet used 6 gallons per flush, that implies we flush the toilet about 3 times a day. Um, no. Research shows that from 1982 to 1993, toilets required only 3.5 gallons to flush (I assume in the US). That implies 6 flushes per day. Maybe. I highly suspect more.

Maybe the new low-flow shower head that we installed at the same time actually lets more water out because it isn't clogged with minerals like the shower head it replaced.

**

Any things you check up on with measurements?

I scored math teacher certification tests again today. This means you get to learn more pointers for taking tests.

Today's number one tip is that if you have a five-part question, you might want to try to answer more than one part. And if the second part looks too hard, at least take a look at parts three, four, and five, just in case.

Also, if you know what shape the graph should be, and you have calculated some points, but you can't figure out how to make that shape fit with those points, maybe you should do some more thinking. Calculating more points may help you see the shape better. Thinking more about what the shape should be may help you realize you were partly mistaken about the shape. Superimposing your notion of the shape near your notion of the points does not do a good job of convincing us that you know your stuff.

If you are graphing a function of a quadratic equation, it is most likely going to look quite different from the same function of plain old x.

And the big heart-breaker. If it says in all caps that you must put your answers on the answer sheet, do not write only this on your answer sheet: "Please see test booklet for graphs and calculations." We do not have any test booklets; we only have answer sheets. They probably have to incinerate the test booklets immediately for security reasons or something. (Thank goodness in the past ten years I've never had to read this until today.) It's bad enough when I have to read "Ran out of time," or "I have no idea how to approach this problem," or "I don't really want to teach math anyway" as the answer. I get very sad.