Interesting paper

J. T. Chang, Recent common ancestors of all present-day individuals. Chang considers a statistical model in which a population of constant size n goes through successive generations, and shows that (under suitable assumptions – infra) for n reasonably large (>~200 based on numerical simulations), there exists a single common ancestor of everyone in the population log2 n generations in the past – and if one goes approximately 1.77 log2 n generations back, everyone in the population is either a common ancestor of all people in the present generation, or of nobody. That is, either a given family line has died out completely, or just by statistical diffusion, they’ve become related to everyone living.

Applied to the population of Europe, this threshold seems to happen about 1000 years in the past. So it’s fairly likely that everyone with even a single European ancestor within the past 100 years or so can, in fact, claim descent from Charlemagne.

There are two technical assumptions in this paper. One is constant population size; it seems like it would be straightforward, although a technical pain in the ass, to relax this. The other more interesting one is that it assumes a random mating model; i.e., the probability that someone in generation t is a parent of someone in generation t+1 is uniform. This obviously isn’t correct, but I can think of a good way to model something more realistic – consider a set of k populations of size fk, each of which has random mating within it, and with a cross-mating probability distribution pk k’. This could model the existence of disjoint social or geographic groups. I’m rather curious about whether this would substantially change the results. One interesting question is, given a total population size and a decomposition into subgroups, whether or not there’s a “critical size” for a subpopulation which will lead in finite time to that population dying out, becoming completely assimilated, or becoming ancestors of everybody.

Published in: on January 19, 2004 at 12:40  Comments (5)  
Tags:

Logolalia

In the past day, I’ve come across a surprising number of bizarre words in the English language.
Yes, these all are real.

Published in: on January 19, 2004 at 12:00  Comments (8)  
Tags:

Your bizarre word of the day…

Bathykolpian: Deep-breasted.

Yes, the English language has a word for everything.

Current Music: (I wish they all could be) Bathykolpian girls… [Now firmly stuck in my head]

Published in: on January 19, 2004 at 00:18  Comments (3)  
Tags:

Wall

In Israel, late at night, the government started erecting a 30-foot wall separating Jerusalem from the neighboring town of Abu Dis. (story)

I don’t know why, but this in particular terrifies me, like it’s a sign that something truly horrible is going to happen. Not in the usual politics sense – in some vaguer and more metaphysical sense. This is a bad idea, one that’s going to have consequences for ages to come, and I’m very scared of what may come next.

Published in: on January 11, 2004 at 22:41  Comments (2)  
Tags:

Rumors and reports

So this politics post is dedicated to pure hearsay and strange rumors that I’ve been hearing bits of lately. As a latest reference I’ll just point people in the vague direction of debka, a notorious rumor mill if there ever was one, but a lot of this has been showing up in a wide variety of channels – NY Times, IHT, and so on. The point of this is mostly to mull over strange ideas.
That wacky Qaddafi

Published in: on January 10, 2004 at 12:55  Comments (2)  
Tags:

Protected: To all whom it may concern:

This content is password-protected. To view it, please enter the password below.

Published in: on January 8, 2004 at 21:25  Enter your password to view comments.  

(Avoiding sleep)

66.66666666666667% of me is a huge nerd! How about you?

(TODO: Remember that under OS X, one has to actually type ‘command-C’ to copy and ‘command-V’ to paste, rather than simply selecting and center-clicking. The above took too long to insert.)

Published in: on January 8, 2004 at 00:41  Comments (1)  

Science notes

The following may be a little on the technical side. It deals with some thoughts about physics that have been going through my head lately.
Physics rambling

Published in: on January 5, 2004 at 18:02  Comments Off on Science notes  
Tags:

On the existence of time

(Summary: In a previous post, I referred to a statement made by Lee Smolin that “time does exist,” and that I disagree with him. It has been pointed out to me that this sounds like an extremely odd statement and counterstatement without its original context. I offer in my defense that he started it, and he gave no context either. So here’s a summary of what he meant by that, and in very briefly why I don’t feel confident that it’s correct.

Lee, if you’re reading this, please correct me if I’ve misstated your position!
(more…)

Published in: on January 5, 2004 at 17:35  Comments (6)  
Tags:

Interesting…

An interesting article in Edge where a large number of intellectual luminaries of various sorts – scientists, businessmen, literary people, and so on – were asked to think of interesting universal laws that they’ve observed in the course of their endeavours, and then naming those laws after the people. Some of them are good, some not so good, but by and large it’s a pretty interesting article.

(From what I’ve read so far – about a third of it, it’s long – Pollack’s First Law is the one that’s caught my eye the most, although there has certainly been competition. And Smolin’s Third is the one I most disagree with, but on that one it’s clearly necessary to wait for the experimental and theoretical results to be in before making any conclusions)

Published in: on January 4, 2004 at 23:24  Comments (5)  
Tags: