Latest heo news

heo

Topology and Elementary Electric Circuit Theory, I

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Full Article

heo

Topology and Elementary Electric Circuit Theory, II: Duality

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Full Article

heo

Topological Quantum Field Theory for Vampires

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Full Article

heo

Advances in Representation Theory of Algebras

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

David J. Benson, University of Aberdeen, Henning Krause, University of Bielefeld, and Andrzej Skowronski, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Editors - A publication of the European Mathematical Society, 2013, 378 pp., Hardcover, ISBN-13: 978-3-03719-125-5, List: US$98, Institutional Member: US$78.40, All Individuals: US$78.40, EMSSCR/9

This volume presents a collection of articles devoted to representations of algebras and related topics. Dististinguished experts in this field...

Full Article

heo

Capacity Theory with Local Rationality: The Strong Fekete-Szego Theorem on Curves

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Robert Rumely, University of Georgia - AMS, 2013, 437 pp., Hardcover, ISBN-13: 978-1-4704-0980-7, List: US$119, All AMS Members: US$95.20, SURV/193

This book is devoted to the proof of a deep theorem in arithmetic geometry, the Fekete-Szegö theorem with local rationality conditions. The...

Full Article

heo

Hodge Theory, Complex Geometry, and Representation Theory

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Robert S. Doran, Greg Friedman, and Scott Nollet, Texas Christian University, Editors - AMS, 2014, approx. 318 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-0-8218-9415-6, List: US$113, All AMS Members: US$90.40, CONM/608

This volume contains the proceedings of an NSF/Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS) regional conference on Hodge theory, complex...

Full Article

heo

Ring Theory and Its Applications

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Dinh Van Huynh, S. K. Jain, and Sergio R. Lopez-Permouth, Ohio University, and S. Tariq Rizvi and Cosmin S. Roman, Ohio State University, Editors - AMS, 2014, 311 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-0-8218-8797-4, List: US$113, All AMS Members: US$90.40, CONM/609

This volume contains the proceedings of the Ring Theory Session in honor of T. Y. Lam's 70th birthday, at the 31st Ohio State-Denison Mathematics...

Full Article

heo

Perspectives in Representation Theory

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Pavel Etingof, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mikhail Khovanov, Columbia University, and Alistair Savage, University of Ottawa, Editors - AMS, 2014, 370 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-0-8218-9170-4, List: US$126, All AMS Members: US$100.80, CONM/610

This volume contains the proceedings of the conference Perspectives in Representation Theory, held from May 12-17, 2012, at Yale University, in honor...

Full Article

heo

Group Theory, Combinatorics, and Computing

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Robert Fitzgerald Morse, University of Evansville, Daniela Nikolova-Popova, Florida Atlantic University, and Sarah Witherspoon, Texas A & M University, Editors - AMS, 2014, 187 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-0-8218-9435-4, List: US$78, All AMS Members: US$62.40, CONM/611

This volume contains the proceedings of the International Conference on Group Theory, Combinatorics and Computing held from October 3-8, 2012, in Boca...

Full Article

heo

Topology and Field Theories

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Stephan Stolz, University of Notre Dame, Editor - AMS, 2014, 176 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-1-4704-1015-5, List: US$78, All AMS Members: US$62.40, CONM/613

This book is a collection of expository articles based on four lecture series presented during the 2012 Notre Dame Summer School in Topology and Field...

Full Article

heo

Operator-Valued Measures, Dilations, and the Theory of Frames

By www.ams.org
Published On ::

Deguang Han, University of Central Florida, David R. Larson, Texas A&M University, Bei Liu, Tianjin University of Technology, and Rui Liu, Nankai University - AMS, 2013, 84 pp., Softcover, ISBN-13: 978-0-8218-9172-8, List: US$65, All AMS Members: US$52, MEMO/229/1075

The authors develop elements of a general dilation theory for operator-valued measures. Hilbert space operator-valued measures are closely related to...

Full Article

heo

Four Theories and a Philosophy: Self-Management Education for Individuals Newly Diagnosed With Type 2 Diabetes

By spectrum.diabetesjournals.org
Published On :: 2003-04-01

T. Chas Skinner
Apr 1, 2003; 16:
Lifestyle and Behavior

Full Article

heo

Episode 13 - The Internet of Bitcoins (IoB) Vive VR, Bitcoin theories and Sky Q

By play.acast.com
Published On :: Fri, 06 May 2016 10:01:13 GMT

On this week's UK Tech Weekly podcast host Matt Egan is joined by Macworld UK and PC Advisor Staff Writer Lewis Painter, who has spent the past week in virtual reality, and is beyond excited to tell us all about the amazing HTC Vive. Then regular podder David Price, acting editor of Macworld UK, brings us tales from the murky world of Bitcoin, and explains how the crypto-currency is bringing about new tech that may revolutionise the finance industry (16:30) Finally, producer Chris throws aside his mic stand to discuss Sky Q and the current options in media streaming and TV. (25:30).

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Full Article

heo

Rethinking youth bulge theory in policy and scholarship: incorporating critical gender analysis

By feedproxy.google.com
Published On :: Thu, 07 May 2020 09:26:03 +0000

7 May 2020 , Volume 96, Number 3

Lesley Pruitt

Read online

For decades ‘youth bulge’ theory has dominated understandings of youth in mainstream International Relations. Youth bulge theory has also become part of some public media analyses, mainstream political rhetoric, and even officially enshrined in the foreign policy of some states. Through the ‘youth bulge’ lens, youth—especially males—have been presented as current or future perpetrators of violence. However, this article argues that the youth bulge thesis postulated in mainstream IR is based on flawed theoretical assumptions. In particular, supporters of youth bulge theory fail to engage with existing research by feminist IR scholars and thus take on a biological essentialist approach. This has led to theoretical and practical misunderstandings of the roles youth play in relation to conflict, peace and security. These partial and biased understandings have also resulted in less effective policy-making. In critically reflecting on the ‘youth bulge’ thesis, this article argues that applying gender analysis is crucial to understanding the involvement of young people in general—and young men in particular—in conflict. Doing so will contribute to advancing more accurate analysis in scholarship and policy-making.

Full Article

heo

Northrop Grumman, Raytheon partner for Next Generation Interceptor bid

By www.upi.com
Published On :: Mon, 04 May 2020 13:19:43 -0400

Northrop Grumman Corp. and Raytheon Missiles and Defense will partner to develop the Defense Department's next missile interceptor, they announced on Monday.

Full Article

heo

Raytheon awarded $325M for repair of ATFLIR system for Navy Super Hornets

By www.upi.com
Published On :: Tue, 05 May 2020 19:29:57 -0400

Raytheon was awarded a $325 million contract for repair of the Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared System in the F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft Tuesday, according to the Pentagon.

Full Article

heo

Raytheon nabs $19M for RAM missiles, GMLS launchers

By www.upi.com
Published On :: Thu, 07 May 2020 20:03:58 -0400

Raytheon Missile Systems was awarded a $19 million contract modification to exercise options for Navy Rolling Airframe Missile and Guided Missile Launching Systems, according to the Department of Defense.

Full Article

heo

A Social Theory of Violence Looks Beyond the Shooter

By www.washingtonpost.com
Published On :: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Like most people in Virginia, Donald Black was horrified by Seung Hui Cho's shooting rampage last week that left 33 people dead, including the shooter.

Full Article

heo

Picking a Theory is Like Building a Boat at Sea

By decisions-and-info-gaps.blogspot.com
Published On :: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:14:00 +0000

"We are like sailors who on the open sea must reconstruct their ship

but are never able to start afresh from the bottom."

Otto Neurath's analogy in the words of Willard V. Quine

Engineers, economists, social planners, security strategists, and others base their plans and decisions on theories. They often argue long and hard over which theory to use. Is it ever right to use a theory that we know is empirically wrong, especially if a true (or truer) theory is available? Why is it so difficult to pick a theory?

Let's consider two introductory examples.

You are an engineer designing a robot. You must calculate the forces needed to achieve specified motions of the robotic arms. You can base these calculations on either of two theories. One theory assumes that an object comes to rest unless a force acts upon it. Let's call this axiom A. The other theory assumes that an object moves at constant speed unless a force acts upon it. Let's call this axiom G. Axiom A agrees with observation: Nothing moves continuously without the exertion of force; an object will come to rest unless you keep pushing it. Axiom G contradicts all observation; no experiment illustrates the perpetual motion postulated by the axiom. If all else is the same, which theory should you choose?

Axiom A is Aristotle's law of inertia, which contributed little to the development of mechanical dynamics. Axiom G is Galileo's law of inertia: one of the most fruitful scientific ideas of all time. Why is an undemonstrable assertion - axiom G - a good starting point for a theory?

Consider another example.

You are an economist designing a market-based policy to induce firms to reduce pollution. You will use an economic theory to choose between policies. One theory assumes that firms face pure competition, meaning that no single firm can influence market prices. Another theory provides agent-based game-theoretic characterization of how firms interact (without colluding) by observing and responding to price behavior of other firms and of consumers.

Pure competition is a stylized idealization (like axiom G). Game theory is much more realistic (like axiom A), but may obscure essential patterns in its massive detail. Which theory should you use?

We will not address the question of how to choose a theory upon which to base a decision. We will focus on the question: why is theory selection so difficult? We will discuss four trade offs.

"Thanks to the negation sign, there are as many truths as falsehoods;

we just can't always be sure which are which." Willard V. Quine

The tension between right and right. The number of possible theories is infinite, and sometimes it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff, as suggested by the quote from Quine. As an example, I have a book called A Modern Guide to Macroeconomics: An Introduction to Competing Schools of Thought by Snowdon, Vane and Wynarczyk. It's a wonderful overview of about a dozen theories developed by leading economic scholars, many of them Nobel Prize Laureates. The theories are all fundamentally different. They use different axioms and concepts and they compete for adoption by economists. These theories have been studied and tested upside down and backwards. However, economic processes are very complex and variable, and the various theories succeed in different ways or in different situations, so the jury is still out. The choice of a theory is no simple matter because many different theories can all seem right in one way or another.

"The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." Archilochus

The fox-hedgehog tension. This aphorism by Archilochus metaphorically describes two types of theories (and two types of people). Fox-like theories are comprehensive and include all relevant aspects of the problem. Hedgehog-like theories, in contrast, skip the details and focus on essentials. Axiom A is fox-like because the complications of friction are acknowledged from the start. Axiom G is hedgehog-like because inertial resistance to change is acknowledged but the complications of friction are left for later. It is difficult to choose between these types of theories because it is difficult to balance comprehensiveness against essentialism. On the one hand, all relevant aspects of the problem should be considered. On the other hand, don't get bogged down in endless details. This fox-hedgehog tension can be managed by weighing the context, goals and implications of the decision. We won't expand on this idea since we're not considering how to choose a theory; we're only examining why it's a difficult choice. However, the idea of resolving this tension by goal-directed choice motivates the third tension.

"Beyond this island of meanings which in their own nature are true or false

lies the ocean of meanings to which truth and falsity are irrelevant." John Dewey

The truth-meaning tension. Theories are collections of statements like axioms A and G in our first example. Statements carry meaning, and statements can be either true or false. Truth and meaning are different. For instance, "Archilochus was a Japanese belly dancer" has meaning, but is not true. The quote from Dewey expresses the idea that "meaning" is a broader description of statements than "truth". All true statements mean something, but not all meaningful statements are true. That does not imply, however, that all untrue meaningful statements are false, as we will see.

We know the meanings of words and sentences from experience with language and life. A child learns the meanings of words - chair, mom, love, good, bad - by experience. Meanings are learned by pointing - this is a chair - and also by experiencing what it means to love or to be good or bad.

Truth is a different concept. John Dewey wrote that

"truths are but one class of meanings, namely, those in which a claim to verifiability by their consequences is an intrinsic part of their meaning. Beyond this island of meanings which in their own nature are true or false lies the ocean of meanings to which truth and falsity are irrelevant. We do not inquire whether Greek civilization was true or false, but we are immensely concerned to penetrate its meaning."

A true statement, in Dewey's sense, is one that can be confirmed by experience. Many statements are meaningful, even important and useful, but neither true nor false in this experimental sense. Axiom G is an example.

Our quest is to understand why the selection of a theory is difficult. Part of the challenge derives from the tension between meaning and truth. We select a theory for use in formulating and evaluating a plan or decision. The decision has implications: what would it mean to do this rather than that? Hence it is important that the meaning of the theory fit the context of the decision. Indeed, hedgehogs would say that getting the meaning and implication right is the essence of good decision making.

But what if a relevantly meaningful theory is unprovable or even false? Should we use a theory that is meaningful but not verifiable by experience? Should we use a meaningful theory that is even wrong? This quandary is related to the fox-hedgehog tension because the fox's theory is so full of true statements that its meaning may be obscured, while the hedgehog's bare-bones theory has clear relevance to the decision to be made, but may be either false or too idealized to be tested.

Galileo's axiom of inertia is an idealization that is unsupported by experience because friction can never be avoided. Axiom G assumes conditions that cannot be realized so the axiom can never be tested. Likewise, pure competition is an idealization that is rarely if ever encountered in practice. But these theories capture the essence of many situations. In practical terms, what it means to get the robotic arm from here to there is to apply net forces that overcome Galilean inertia. But actually designing a robot requires considering details of dissipative forces like friction. What it means to be a small business is that the market price of your product is beyond your control. But actually running a business requires following and reacting to prices in the store next door.

It is difficult to choose between a relevantly meaningful but unverifiable theory, and a true theory that is perhaps not quite what we mean.

The knowledge-ignorance tension. Recall that we are discussing theories in the service of decision-making by engineers, social scientists and others. A theory should facilitate the use of our knowledge and understanding. However, in some situations our ignorance is vast and our knowledge will grow. Hence a theory should also account for ignorance and be able to accommodate new knowledge.

Let's take an example from theories of decision. The independence axiom is fundamental in various decision theories, for instance in von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theory. It says that one's choices should be independent of irrelevant alternatives. Suppose you are offered the dinner choice between chicken and fish, and you choose chicken. The server returns a few minutes later saying that beef is also available. If you switch your choice from chicken to fish you are violating the independence axiom. You prefer beef less than both chicken and fish, so the beef option shouldn't alter the fish-chicken preference.

But let's suppose that when the server returned and mentioned beef, your physician advised you to reduce your cholesterol intake (so your preference for beef is lowest) which prompted your wife to say that you should eat fish at least twice a week because of vitamins in the oil. So you switch from chicken to fish. Beef is not chosen, but new information that resulted from introducing the irrelevant alternative has altered the chicken-fish preference.

One could argue for the independence axiom by saying that it applies only when all relevant information (like considerations of cholesterol and fish oil) are taken into account. On the other hand, one can argue against the independence axiom by saying that new relevant information quite often surfaces unexpectedly. The difficulty is to judge the extent to which ignorance and the emergence of new knowledge should be central in a decision theory.

Wrapping up. Theories express our knowledge and understanding about the unknown and confusing world. Knowledge begets knowledge. We use knowledge and understanding - that is, theory - in choosing a theory. The process is difficult because it's like building a boat on the open sea as Otto Neurath once said.

Full Article

heo

Jabberwocky. Or: Grand Unified Theory of Uncertainty???

By decisions-and-info-gaps.blogspot.com
Published On :: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:30:00 +0000

Jabberwocky, Lewis Carroll's whimsical nonsense poem, uses made-up words to create an atmosphere and to tell a story. "Billig", "frumious", "vorpal" and "uffish" have no lexical meaning, but they could have. The poem demonstrates that the realm of imagination exceeds the bounds of reality just as the set of possible words and meanings exceeds its real lexical counterpart.

Uncertainty thrives in the realm of imagination, incongruity, and contradiction. Uncertainty falls in the realm of science fiction as much as in the realm of science. People have struggled with uncertainty for ages and many theories of uncertainty have appeared over time. How many uncertainty theories do we need? Lots, and forever. Would we say that of physics? No, at least not forever.

Can you think inconsistent, incoherent, or erroneous thoughts? I can. (I do it quite often, usually without noticing.) For those unaccustomed to thinking incongruous thoughts, and who need a bit of help to get started, I can recommend thinking of "two meanings packed into one word like a portmanteau," like 'fuming' and 'furious' to get 'frumious' or 'snake' and 'shark' to get 'snark'.

Portmanteau words are a start. Our task now is portmanteau thoughts. Take for instance the idea of a 'thingk':

When I think a thing I've thought,
I have often felt I ought
To call this thing I think a "Thingk",
Which ought to save a lot of ink.

The participle is written "thingking",
(Which is where we save on inking,)
Because "thingking" says in just one word:
"Thinking of a thought thing." Absurd!

All this shows high-power abstraction.
(That highly touted human contraption.)
Using symbols with subtle feint,
To stand for something which they ain't.

Now that wasn't difficult: two thoughts at once. Now let those thoughts be contradictory. To use a prosaic example: thinking the unthinkable, which I suppose is 'unthingkable'. There! You did it. You are on your way to a rich and full life of thinking incongruities, fallacies and contradictions. We can hold in our minds thoughts of 4-sided triangles, parallel lines that intersect, and endless other seeming impossibilities from super-girls like Pippi Longstockings to life on Mars (some of which may actually be true, or at least possible).

Scientists, logicians, and saints are in the business of dispelling all such incongruities, errors and contradictions. Banishing inconsistency is possible in science because (or if) there is only one coherent world. Belief in one coherent world and one grand unified theory is the modern secular version of the ancient monotheistic intuition of one universal God (in which saints tend to believe). Uncertainty thrives in the realm in which scientists and saints have not yet completed their tasks (perhaps because they are incompletable). For instance, we must entertain a wide range of conflicting conceptions when we do not yet know how (or whether) quantum mechanics can be reconciled with general relativity, or Pippi's strength reconciled with the limitations of physiology. As Henry Adams wrote:

"Images are not arguments, rarely even lead to proof, but the mind craves them, and, of late more than ever, the keenest experimenters find twenty images better than one, especially if contradictory; since the human mind has already learned to deal in contradictions."

The very idea of a rigorously logical theory of uncertainty is startling and implausible because the realm of the uncertain is inherently incoherent and contradictory. Indeed, the first uncertainty theory - probability - emerged many centuries after the invention of the axiomatic method in mathematics. Today we have many theories of uncertainty: probability, imprecise probability, information theory, generalized information theory, fuzzy logic, Dempster-Shafer theory, info-gap theory, and more (the list is a bit uncertain). Why such a long and diverse list? It seems that in constructing a logically consistent theory of the logically inconsistent domain of uncertainty, one cannot capture the whole beast all at once (though I'm uncertain about this).

A theory, in order to be scientific, must exclude something. A scientific theory makes statements such as "This happens; that doesn't happen." Karl Popper explained that a scientific theory must contain statements that are at risk of being wrong, statements that could be falsified. Deborah Mayo demonstrated how science grows by discovering and recovering from error.

The realm of uncertainty contains contradictions (ostensible or real) such as the pair of statements: "Nine year old girls can lift horses" and "Muscle fiber generates tension through the action of actin and myosin cross-bridge cycling". A logically consistent theory of uncertainty can handle improbabilities, as can scientific theories like quantum mechanics. But a logical theory cannot encompass outright contradictions. Science investigates a domain: the natural and physical worlds. Those worlds, by virtue of their existence, are perhaps coherent in a way that can be reflected in a unified logical theory. Theories of uncertainty are directed at a larger domain: the natural and physical worlds and all imaginable (and unimaginable) other worlds. That larger domain is definitely not coherent, and a unified logical theory would seem to be unattainable. Hence many theories of uncertainty are needed.

Scientific theories are good to have, and we do well to encourage the scientists. But it is a mistake to think that the scientific paradigm is suitable to all domains, in particular, to the study of uncertainty. Logic is a powerful tool and the axiomatic method assures the logical consistency of a theory. For instance, Leonard Savage argued that personal probability is a "code of consistency" for choosing one's behavior. Jim March compares the rigorous logic of mathematical theories of decision to strict religious morality. Consistency between values and actions is commendable says March, but he notes that one sometimes needs to deviate from perfect morality. While "[s]tandard notions of intelligent choice are theories of strict morality ... saints are a luxury to be encouraged only in small numbers." Logical consistency is a merit of any single theory, including a theory of uncertainty. However, insisting that the same logical consistency apply over the entire domain of uncertainty is like asking reality and saintliness to make peace.

Full Article

heo

New Theory & Psychology: Early Critical Theory and Beck’s Cognitive Theory

By ahp.apps01.yorku.ca
Published On :: Fri, 01 May 2020 12:21:00 +0000

Two articles in the most recent issue of Theory & Psychology may interest AHP readers. Full details below. “How lost and accomplished revolutions shaped psychology: Early Critical Theory (Frankfurt School), Wilhelm Reich, and Vygotsky,” by Gordana Jovanovi?. Abstract: On the occasion of recent centenaries of revolutions in Europe (1917, 1918–19), this article examines, within a … Continue reading New Theory & Psychology: Early Critical Theory and Beck’s Cognitive Theory →

Full Article

General

heo

Prospect theory in the Moneyball movie

By nudges.org
Published On :: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 19:18:11 +0000

“I hate losing more than I even wanna win.” – Oakland Athletics General Manager Billy Beane (or some creative Hollywood writer channeling Billy Beane) Around 40 seconds in.

Full Article

heo

Talking Across Divides And Quashing Conspiracy Theories: The Week’s Best Psychology Links

By feedproxy.google.com
Published On :: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:53:08 +0000

Our weekly round-up of the best psychology coverage from elsewhere on the web

Full Article

Weekly links

heo

Knowledge sharing for the development of learning resources : theory, method, process and application for schools, communities and the workplace : a UNESCO-PNIEVE resource / by John E. Harrington, Professor Emeritis.

By www.catalog.slsa.sa.gov.au
Published On ::

The Knowledge Sharing for the Development of Learning Resources tutorial provides a professional step forward, a learning experience that leads to recognition that your leadership is well founded as well as ensuring that participants in the development of learning resources recognize they are contributing to an exceptional achievement.

Full Article

heo

Forum 2019 : 3A Parliamentary committees : in theory and practice : slides / presented by Iain Evans, Former Member of Parliament.

By www.catalog.slsa.sa.gov.au
Published On ::

Full Article

heo

Animal Nutrition : From Theory to Practice.

By www.catalog.slsa.sa.gov.au
Published On ::

Nutrition is the key driver of animal health, welfare and production. In agriculture, nutrition is crucial to meet increasing global demands for animal protein and consumer demands for cheaper meat, milk and eggs and higher standards of animal welfare. For companion animals, good nutrition is essential for quality and length of life. Animal Nutrition examines the science behind the nutrition and feeding of the major domesticated animal species: sheep, beef cattle, dairy cattle, deer, goats, pigs, poultry, camelids, horses, dogs and cats. It includes introductory chapters on digestion and feeding standards, followed by chapters on each animal, containing information on digestive anatomy and physiology, evidence-based nutrition and feeding requirements, and common nutritional and metabolic diseases. Clear diagrams, tables and breakout boxes make this text readily understandable and it will be of value to tertiary students and to practising veterinarians, livestock consultants, producers and nutritionists.

Full Article

heo