Joyful Symmetry

I received some very cool gifts this Christmas.

My lovely wife got me Death From The Skies, the new book by the Bad Astronomer Phil Plait. And my friend Shannon got me Of Pandas and People, the Intelligent Design textbook at the centre of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial.

I’ll be providing reviews of these separately once I’ve finished them. A preview: I liked one more than the other. I’ll let you guess which.

The prize for nerdiest gift goes to my sister, who made a donation to the charity Common Hope, and thereby got the right to name a mathematical symmetry group. Which she named after me.

A symmetry group is the collection of operations on a shape that preserve its symmetry: like reflections and rotations.

For example a square has symmetry under 90° rotation, and vertical and horizontal reflection:

(The darkened wedge is just to show the new position of the square after each movement).

Of course once you get beyond simple geometric shapes like squares and triangles it all starts getting a bit complicated. And all the simple ones have names already.

So my symmetry group corresponds to the elliptic curve described by the formula:

y² + 769xy + 773y = x³ + 787x .

Truly.

It’s called the Matthew Kippen Group.

I was toying with the idea of putting a picture of the curve here, but it’s tricky rendering a 2-dimensional picture of a 3-dimensional object embedded in a 4-dimensional space.

If anyone out there does know how to do this, please let me know. I'd be most interested.

Until then, you’ll just have to use your imagination. I’m sure it’s very pretty.

Proof That Jesus Heals

Well, that’s egg on my face.

 

Thanks, Jill. I mean Santa.

Chuck Weighs In

Oooh, now it gets interesting.

Entering the latest War on Christmas debate, sparked recently by that sign erected in Olympia, Washington, is none other than Chuck Norris.

Yes, the rough, tough, roundhouse kicking Walker Texas Ranger has decided it’s personal, and he’s taking it to the man.

His argument is pretty straightforward, as you’d expect from the man who destroyed the periodic table, because he only recognizes the element of surprise.

It basically boils down to “Yes, yes, First Amendment and freedom of speech is fine, but NOT IF IT OFFENDS ME”.

Which seems to be typical of your modern US Christian.

Then he proceeds to list all his grievances (both real and imagined) against atheists, while pretending that he’s not really complaining because there would be no point doing that. Or something.

It’s all a bit muddled, to be honest. But in the end, it’s just a plug for his new book.

I recommend this one instead. It’s hilarious.

The Atheists Were Here First

Before the Winter Solstice was taken over by Christians and rebranded a celebration of Christ’s birth, it was a purely secular affair.

Actually, even more than that: it was an atheistic celebration of nature for nature’s sake. A joyful recognition of the abundance of our world and the importance of looking after it.

A lot of the symbols of the original festival have survived its Christianisation, most notably the Christmas tree, which for some reason few Christians even attempt to try to fit into their story.

Given the atheistic origins of the season, it’s endlessly amusing when Christians (particularly in the US) concoct arguments against a mythical “War on Christmas” supposedly being waged by those who would have religion turfed out of public life. Most probably don’t even know that they are the invaders here.

To illustrate the point, a plaque was erected in Olympia, Washington  reading:

“At this season of the Winter Solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no heaven or hell.  There is only our natural world.  Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

Of course it was torn down after an hour after it was erected.

Freedom of religious expression is a decidedly one-sided affair in the Land of the Free.

A very merry Xmas to all

Well, merry Christmas everyone.

It's the time to enjoy the company of family and friends, to eat too much, drink too much and wish goodwill to all men. These are, after all, Christmas traditions.

One my other favourite Christmas traditions is to bemoan the overt consumerism that's taking it over, and to reminisce about a (largely fictional) past back when Christmas apparently really meant something.

How far back in the past you have to go to find this universal "meaning" depends on your point of view. In historical terms you don't have to go back particularly far before it stops being a Christian festival at all, and becomes one revolving around the pagan worship of trees.

Actually, yeah, let's do that.

The other great tradition is, of course, the Christmas movie. I'm not talking about Jingle All The Way or (God help us) The Santa Clause. Not the usual sappy Hollywood fare pitched at 12-year-olds high on sugar and excessive brand-name consumption.

I'm talking about those movies where Christmas is simply used as a convenient and somewhat subversive backdrop for some hellish horror, knockout action, or piss-funny comedy.

These might be a few to consider after packing down the turkey and champers:

Bad Santa (2003)

It's nothing to do with Christmas or Santa at all. It's just about Billy Bob Thornton being a drunken asshole. Funny as hell from start to finish. And the fact that he does the whole thing in a santa suit makes it just that little bit funnier.

The Ref (1994)

Small-time crim Dennis Leary breaks into the home of Kevin Spacey and Judy Davis on Christmas Eve. He ends up holding them hostage, but it's not long before he finds out he's the one in danger. For the family, it turns out to be the best thing that's happened to them in ages.

Die Hard (1988)

Action classic in which Bruce Willis braves terrorists, encroaching baldness and the perception that he's only a comedy actor to save his wife, Christmas and the American way. Yippee-ki-yay motherfucker.

Gremlins (1984)

Director Joe Dante meticulously recreates the town of Bedford Falls (featured in that other Christmas perennial It's a Wonderful Life) for the sole purpose of seeing it destroyed by marauding miniature demons. Brilliant.

Trading Places (1983)

Contains the iconic scene in which Dan Aykroyd, after being royally screwed over by Don Ameche and Ralph Bellamy, pathetically and hilariously fails to shoot himself in the head. While drunk and wearing a santa suit. We wouldn't see such a great bad santa again until, well, Bad Santa.

Enjoy the season folks, and don't forget to get your entries in for the 2008 Dead Pool.

Email your nominations to me at mattsdeadpool@gmail.com.

Santa's Ho's

There's been some controversy in suburbia. A decision has been taken by some Australian department-store Santa suppliers that the fat man should refrain from saying "ho ho ho".

The reasons given: it could be interpreted as being derogatory to women, and it could scare the kids.

Of course, the first one is the real reason. While this is patently stupid, here in Australia we're actually lagging about 12 months behind the US on this point. The same mandate came down for stores over there last Christmas. And then, as now, it was a simple case of legal arse-covering.

It's interesting that somewhere along the line, someone's decided to make up a second reason. Just in case the first doesn't seem sufficient.

And I would like to take issue with this second reason. I put it to you that a big fat dude in a bright red fur-trimmed coat and enormous white beard is a scary image for kids anyway. The Ho Ho Ho has nothing to do with it. Anything the guy says has a good chance of freaking them out.

Besides, kids sitting on Santa's knee and bawling their eyes out while mum and dad look on proudly is an important Christmas tradition. Isn't it?

If you're going to follow the don't-scare-the-kiddies line of logic then you'd have to get rid of the fat man altogether, and replace him with your favourite Disney character. (I'll let you consider the logistics of sitting on Nemo's knee)

Anyway, the point is that this got me thinking about Santa in the context of our Judaeo-Christian traditions. I do this sort of thing.

It's always been a little incongruous to me that Santa, a pagan figure, is so synonymous with Christmas and the celebration of the birth of Christ.

I know that the aligning the these traditions is the result of various historical political conveniences, but what I'm interested in is why it has been continued. Even the deeply devout appear to have no problem attending mass one day and opening the pressies from Santa the next.

But maybe the ongoing tradition of the Santa figure has a lot more to do with our modern view of Christianity than we might think.

I put it to you that Santa is actually promoted to children, deliberately or otherwise, as a kind of proto-Jesus.

It's all there when you think about it: he's watching all the time. He knows when you've been bad or good. You can ask him for things that you want, and he rewards your good behaviour.

Growing up with an awareness of this mythical creature, who behaves in this very specific way, primes a child's mind for later belief in God/Jesus. And this is why the Santa legend has been allowed to continue comfortably alongside the Christian tradition of Christmas.

Of course, the bits missing from the Santa legend are the terrible punishments for bad behaviour (although past incarnations of Santa would leave a lump of coal in the stocking . . . a threatening reference to the fires of Hell?) and there isn't a corresponding evil Satan figure.

But that's fair enough.

After all, we don't want to scare the kids.