We are beginning to be able to map some parts of the brain. In the very foreseeable future, it may be possible to simulate an entire brain, and to feed it with the world info that may surround it. That (simulated) person will believe it is in a real world, or may believe, like I do and basically like Descartes did, that the question is immaterial. Perhaps some of us are real and some are not, in a sort of Truman Show-like simulation. But there are problems when it comes to simulations at a large scale. Our universe and the knowledge we have is fairly large (to my imagination), so if this was a simulation, that would mean that the simulating universe would have to be infinitely larger. Otherwise there would be the Borges mapping problem: http://3stages.org/c/gq.cgi?fi...
By the way, just got back from the slashcott, and was immediately redirected to the beta. It's awful. It's trying to be like the rest of the new web, e.g. arstecnica, pinterest-style multi-column graphics-heavy at the top, giant text, and tons of scrolling to get thru content. Have you seen Drudge's new design? Nah, didn't think so, because it isn't needed. Google's search methods were nice, but more importantly the simplicity was easy on the eyes.
comments are a double-edged sword. There's a lot of junk on here nowadays, but if you're willing to wade thru it you can still get a lot of good stuff, especially if you ignore the ratings. Ratings used to work, but it seems like they've been gamed and a lot of idiots are holding the reins. Afraid to say it, but it would be nice to socialize it, say, and let you follow half-decent commenters (but definitely not via fb). That actually might incentivize me to log in and contribute to the discussion more often, as opposed to being ignored with low scores while dorks give 3rd-grade level responses and get 5's and insightful.
For scientific computing, you will be doing a lot of collaboration and very likely sharing codes with other scientific programmers, very few of whom enjoy learning new programming languages all the time. To simplify/enable collaboration, you should follow what the community uses. In physics, generally that means Fortran. Anything past Fortran90 is basically modern, it's really not too bad to learn and even has basic object-oriented stuff, though not as good as C++. F77 is mostly obsolete and a major pain in the neck, but you will see it around in older codes, as well as a lot of the libraries. There are C/C++/Python/f77/etc codes around, but most physicists use >F90, especially in high performance/parallel computational work. But there are subfields of physics with their own popular tools too. My advice is to go with whatever the majority of your colleagues are using, placing a very big premium on what your adviser and group members use, which is who you will collaborate with the most. What the majority in the field uses is usually suitable for the job anyway.
It sounds like you're interested in parallel computing as well. Fortran is probably the best option then, mostly for the libraries, but you can still interface from C/C++ or whatever. Also, if you have a lot of computationally intensive stuff, you should try to get supercomputer access. Ask around, you should be able to work something out. You'll need to decide on OpenMP or MPI for parallel programming, depending e.g. on your memory, shared/distributed etc. Here's a quick rundown: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rc/classes/intro_mpi/parallel_prog_compare.html Most scientific hpc (high performance computing/supercomputer/parallel) is on unix/linux.
What field are you in exactly, and what is the nature of your data mining?
How can the U.S. eliminate its nuclear arsenal without becoming militarily inferior to other countries, even to minor powers who possess (or may someday possess) nuclear weapons (e.g. Iran/North Korea)?
When you begin working on your PhD, you will continue working on your PhD until it is complete, at which time you will either directly enter industry or a postdoc. A gap in a resume is a serious concern to many employers, unfortunately. If you do a postdoc, you will continue doing postdocs until you get a job and then you will work for the rest of your life, with bills to pay and mouths to feed. A three-month vacation is not in your forecast at any other time in your life other than after you retire. Now would be a good time, not just to vacation, but to have the best vacation of your life. Go where you've always wanted to go with someone you'll have a great time with. The probability that you will ever have another opportunity like this is slim to nil. And go ahead and spend some money. It's okay. You won't be as poor being a grad student as you were when you were an undergrad.
That doesn't mean some preparation won't help. First of all, you should try to think about what kind of biologist you want to be. You should try to be good at it, whatever it is. It's going to require some planning and introspection. One thing to anticipate is that you're going to be very busy and under a lot of pressure. You should plan for ways to deal with that in advance. One way of dealing is to have some hobby or something as an occasional escape. Be careful though in choosing your hobby. Try to choose something that doesn't take much time, and that isn't intellectually taxing. My hobby was learning Japanese, a bad choice on both grounds. If I was to do it over, I would try a sport or something physical. That gets your mind off your work, and it can release a lot of stress. Another thing to prepare for is planning time for your own personal study. You're going to be terribly busy studying for exams and doing homework, etc. Find something that you're interested in, and look into that. Figure something out on your own that is not required work. This actually helped me a lot at the times when I felt overwhelmed. Another thing you're going to want to work into your schedule is some career planning. Do something once every few weeks. Look at indeed.com, craigslist, jobiology or whatever, and see what companies are looking for. As bad as it sounds for biologists, as I'm looking for jobs, there are many more options there than for physicists. If you're reading slashdot, you likely have some technical abilities. Programming often comes in handy. In physics, some programming was used in about 80% of PhD's, and I'd guess it's somewhere around 60-70% of biologists, but don't quote me on that. Anyway, if you like programming, it couldn't hurt to get a little more experience here. Scientific programming is different from sys-admin or soft-dev, so maybe look into some of the well-known programs in your field and get to know them. Chances are, these days, a lot of them will be open-source. At least many in physics are. Personally, I think it's a good idea to program in a language that is common in your field. If it's Fortran, then it's Fortran (it's not as bad as it used to be). But go with the group on this so you can cooperate with your colleagues.
In your PhD, the three keys to success are not location location location, it's Adviser Adviser Adviser. This is one of the big choices you will make in your life. Do it carefully. Your adviser will be your parent, prosecutor, parole officer, and savior (or destructor), all in one. There are some very excellent advisers out there and there are some real assholes too, and it's actually kind of hard to tell even after being there fore a couple of years. Other commentors have mentioned some useful ideas for selecting an adviser, so see those too. It's sometimes hard to get an honest comment from current students of some advisers because of the conflict of interest, so really ask around and talk through your ideas with some of the older grad students, but definitely more than one. One other point I'd like to make is that you should select someone as good/prestigious as possible. I opted not to go w
I'm not sure which trait you're referring to. That they're topological, having "a full pairing gap in the bulk and gapless surface states"? That's not the case for superconductors, generally.
Topological Insulators (2D and 3D) are strange, but definitely not an "IF". Check this: http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3895 from 2010. Several have been predicted and confirmed experimentally previous to this.
SmB6 is great because it's not based on weak interactions (like other topological insulators) but on strongly-correlated electrons, and the new relation of the Kondo insulator to the Topological Insulator.
Look at top-film lists for any genre or time-period and then see which of those are available on Netflix (streaming). It's less than 1 in 10. Then look at new releases. Very few are available on Netflix for download. Selection is a big divider for Netflix and brick/mortars. These two areas (popular/classic favorites and new releases) are Netflix weaknesses that are local video store strengths. Hang on to these and try to do them well.
Common weaknesses are general selection. The fact is there are millions of movies out there, and not even Netflix can offer all of them. I'd really like to see all the films of Francois Truffaut, for example, but you can't on Netflix. You also can't at your local video store. But this is where I like what another slashdot commentor said: let the user sponsor the dvd. I think they said through buy-back, which is a good option if the store wants the disc, but if not, I'd also let them purchase the dvd and share in any profits from rentals and let them own the disc after a time if no one's renting it.
One area where video rentals could have innovated 10 years ago but are still resisting is in video research. Put up a kiosk in your store where people can do movie research and that shows them whether the movie they want is available (for rent, and whether currently in-stock) in your store. Put this online too, so people can look it up before they drive all the way to your store. You already have computerized systems that tell the store the same info, so it can't be too hard to make it available to the customers. Even Netflix is squandering this possibility, especially since they split the dvd and streaming business lines. Now when you search for a movie that is not in their streaming-only system, it doesn't show you the title and say 'sorry-not available for streaming' or give you the option to rent-by-mail, it actually suggests totally different movies, making you think you entered the wrong title or something. And while you're at it, give the users a flat-screen tv to watch movie trailers on while they're there.
There are ways for brick/mortar's to survivce for a bit longer, but I give dvd/hd rental companies 3-5 years max, for the ones that really try to hang on. The ideas I've given above are areas where locals can offer big advantages over digital streaming services, but those wrinkles will be ironed out soon enough in streaming. I guess then you could try to target poor areas where the net isn't ubiquitous. Long-term, perhaps there is a way to take advantage of the meat-space aspect of local stores, but I can't think of any, except for the general fostering of community. Sorry I can't help in this area, but if you want to survive long-term, it's got to be in the community--something that puts customers face-to-face and interacting in a fun way.
I'd like to be able to select only the newscast segments I'm interested in, queue them up, and watch them all at once. In addition to removing bloat and irrelevant segments, it also would cut out those annoying teasers.
Added bonus (next gen): selecting to hear either the long or the short story for each bit.
First off, you should pick up an undergraduate text on "Modern Physics," which should include a really basic intro to both special and general relativity. Any text will do, but I own the one by Tipler/Llewellyn. This kind of text will be fairly light on the math, but will include some. This will also get you started with some really basic problems which should show that while you may not fully understand General Relativity (GR), you can do some really basic problems (e.g. gravitational redshift).
I. Calculus. Sounds like you already know some.
II. Differential Equations
A. Ordinary
B. Partial
III. Linear Algebra (Some texts teach ordinary differential equations and linear algebra together)
IV. Math Methods for Physicists (Arfken and Weber). Use this more for reference than for learning. Any math you need beyond the above set will be fairly specialized, so you can study by topic.
V. The best intro to relativity is in David J. Griffiths "Intro to Electrodynamics", a widely used textbooks for undergraduate physics majors. This only covers special relativity, but it's probably a really good place to start. For the graduate level, refer to Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics," or possibly an easier equivalent.
VI. Another text by Griffiths is "Introduction to Elementary Particles", which includes some really useful stuff on relativity at the undergraduate level but for physics majors.
VII. (admission: I haven't studied General Relativity because I'm in another area of physics (CM), but I've harbored a secret desire to study it and maybe someday will steel away and do it.) A really common book is "Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity" by Sean Carroll. I've flipped through this and it looks extremely well written, so when I do go ahead with my study, this is probably the book I'll select. Another good one is "A First Course in General Relativity" by Bernard Schutz. These are both graduate level texts, and I can't imagine there being an undergraduate level text.
This may take a long time and will be occasionally difficult, but it is certainly doable. Good luck.
The first immortal cell line ever grown was that of Henrietta Lacks in 1951, who had cancer, and her cells are still living in many labs throughout the world--about 20 tons worth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks)! Scientists, literally, won't let her die.
It's also common in Japan to say "the west" (seiyou (characters won't render on slashdot--why?)), to refer to what we also mean by 'the west,' meaning specifically europe instead of asia, but also referring to the U.S., and culturally, yes, it's fairly ambiguous. For example, in Murakami Haruki's 'All God's Children Can Dance', in the first vignette Omura is brought to a love hotel that looked like a "seiyou no shiro" (a western castle).
The Japanese word for west itself, nishi is commonly used for referring to Spain, as in nissei (a conjunction of nichi (nippon) and sei/nishi (west) meaning Japan-Spain (eg. Japan-Spain relations).
Of course, in spherical polar coordinates, north and south have non-circular definitions, but east/west is 2Pi-periodic. On the other hand, we do get a sort of branch cut with the International Date Line, so that to Japan, all the rest of the world is to the west. I'm guessing Japan is okay with this idea since it fits in with 'the Land of the Rising Sun', which it's too bad has nothing to do with Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises."
On the topic of the article, I don't think this means the actual demise of game development in Japan, just the expansion beyond its own borders, which I think will be interesting to see how it turns out.
It's the most popular Japanese food tailored to Americans, other than sushi, but it's nowhere nearly as tasty as lots of Japanese food that Japanese people actually consume themselves.
I posted elsewhere before I saw penguin_dance's post. Please see the above link for an excerpt of David Foster Wallace's 'Infinite Jest' that discusses this topic, e.g., 'a return to good old telephoning not only dictated by common consumer sense but actually after a while culturally approved as a kind of chic integrity...' more at the above link... Remember, this was published in 1996, so written like 15 years ago. Who had cell phones then?
Before I had read this part in Infinite Jest, I had already given up my cell phone because it wasn't worth the high cost. It's not that I couldn't afford it, just that it's such a ripoff. I'm actually really enjoying being able to focus on my work when I need to, and I can still make and receive calls with skype, email, or otherwise communicate when it's convenient for me. I do borrow my spouse's cell phone occasionally when I really need one, and if I needed it any more, I'd probably get a pay-go, but I haven't had a real need for that yet.
This plain-old phone would make a great pay-go if it wasn't so expensive. Other pay-go phones are cheaper, and almost as devoid of features. In fact, they're probably worse because they place the 'data/web' button precariously so that you regularly hit it accidentally and have to pay the daily rate for web that's totally useless on the pay-go. At least with the plain-old phone you wouldn't be getting hit with 'crappy-interface' surcharges all the time.
"a return to good old telephoning not only dictated by common consumer sense but actually after a while culturally approved as a kind of chic integrity, not Ludditism but a kind of retrograde transcendence of sci-fi-ish high-tech for its own sake, a transcendence of the vanity and the slavery to high-tech fashion that people view as so unattractive in one another. In other words a return to aural-only telephony became, at the closed curve's end, a kind of status-symbol of anti-vanity, such that only callers utterly lacking in self-awareness continued to use videophony and Tableaux..."
When we talk about getting in the zone, I think there are two types of problems that need to be considered. First, there is the abstract, technical, or otherwise difficult problem that can only be solved with a short-term burst of extreme concentration and mental effort. Then there is the type of problem that requires a great deal of familiarity with disparate variables, classes, objects, or other pieces to a puzzle. When these pieces are all loaded into your personal RAM, a solution becomes tractable, but which if you try to look at the issues piecemeal, some here and some tomorrow, you may not be able to solve. These generally take a large chunk of devoted time in a single sitting. Both of these problems are mentally taxing.
I've found in my computing/coding/developing that these periods of solid work can really zap my energy, not because they're not interesting or because I'm not up to the task, but occasionally it just requires a great deal of mental effort. Even when a problem is technically simple, it can require much mental energy, as if I were just multiplying large numbers in my head--the process is known to a first grade pupil, but it still takes a special effort to actually do it.
So, I think I know how you feel about programming, but I'm sorry I can't answer your question about whether it's okay to surf the web and etc while you're on the clock. On the one hand, it doesn't appear to be fair to the employer, and on the other hand it appears to be a nice mindless respite required for you to relax so you can get back to your work refreshed and ready for another heave-ho. An employer might say something like, well, how about if you work on less intense programming for your breaks -- clean up a script, or change the appearance of one thing or another, type up a report, answer some email, or find something mindless which contributes to the company/community.
I think there has been some hyperbole here, saying if you can do in 1 hour what others do in 8, then why not--I see what they mean. You seem pretty reasonable, so I think you're handling it alright. Your maximum efficiency level should be a high priority for you, but another should be how you are perceived by your managers and coworkers, so keep this in mind as well, since it may affect your pay or your career. Of course, your sanity is also important, so try to hang on to that. I think you should try reading Tracy Kidder's book "Soul of a New Machine." http://tiny.cc/bv3sf It's the story of the workers in a company that designed and built a new 32-bit computer in one year in the late 70's. Their lives were totally committed to cranking this out, and they did it, but some of them cracked. Oh, and it's extremely well-written. (Note: no conflict of interest here, except that I liked this and another of his books, "Mountains Beyond Mountains.")
Helena Bonham Carter (a la Marla Singer in Fight Club or Mrs. Lovett in Sweeney Todd) would do a good Faye. She's got the perfect look and personality, kinda dark, but vivacious.
Slashdot Mirror
We are beginning to be able to map some parts of the brain. In the very foreseeable future, it may be possible to simulate an entire brain, and to feed it with the world info that may surround it. That (simulated) person will believe it is in a real world, or may believe, like I do and basically like Descartes did, that the question is immaterial. Perhaps some of us are real and some are not, in a sort of Truman Show-like simulation. But there are problems when it comes to simulations at a large scale. Our universe and the knowledge we have is fairly large (to my imagination), so if this was a simulation, that would mean that the simulating universe would have to be infinitely larger. Otherwise there would be the Borges mapping problem: http://3stages.org/c/gq.cgi?fi...
By the way, just got back from the slashcott, and was immediately redirected to the beta. It's awful. It's trying to be like the rest of the new web, e.g. arstecnica, pinterest-style multi-column graphics-heavy at the top, giant text, and tons of scrolling to get thru content. Have you seen Drudge's new design? Nah, didn't think so, because it isn't needed. Google's search methods were nice, but more importantly the simplicity was easy on the eyes.
comments are a double-edged sword. There's a lot of junk on here nowadays, but if you're willing to wade thru it you can still get a lot of good stuff, especially if you ignore the ratings. Ratings used to work, but it seems like they've been gamed and a lot of idiots are holding the reins. Afraid to say it, but it would be nice to socialize it, say, and let you follow half-decent commenters (but definitely not via fb). That actually might incentivize me to log in and contribute to the discussion more often, as opposed to being ignored with low scores while dorks give 3rd-grade level responses and get 5's and insightful.
seconded. If possible this is a nice route.
For scientific computing, you will be doing a lot of collaboration and very likely sharing codes with other scientific programmers, very few of whom enjoy learning new programming languages all the time. To simplify/enable collaboration, you should follow what the community uses. In physics, generally that means Fortran. Anything past Fortran90 is basically modern, it's really not too bad to learn and even has basic object-oriented stuff, though not as good as C++. F77 is mostly obsolete and a major pain in the neck, but you will see it around in older codes, as well as a lot of the libraries. There are C/C++/Python/f77/etc codes around, but most physicists use >F90, especially in high performance/parallel computational work. But there are subfields of physics with their own popular tools too. My advice is to go with whatever the majority of your colleagues are using, placing a very big premium on what your adviser and group members use, which is who you will collaborate with the most. What the majority in the field uses is usually suitable for the job anyway.
It sounds like you're interested in parallel computing as well. Fortran is probably the best option then, mostly for the libraries, but you can still interface from C/C++ or whatever. Also, if you have a lot of computationally intensive stuff, you should try to get supercomputer access. Ask around, you should be able to work something out. You'll need to decide on OpenMP or MPI for parallel programming, depending e.g. on your memory, shared/distributed etc. Here's a quick rundown: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rc/classes/intro_mpi/parallel_prog_compare.html
Most scientific hpc (high performance computing/supercomputer/parallel) is on unix/linux.
What field are you in exactly, and what is the nature of your data mining?
How can the U.S. eliminate its nuclear arsenal without becoming militarily inferior to other countries, even to minor powers who possess (or may someday possess) nuclear weapons (e.g. Iran/North Korea)?
Could you speak about the origins of the Dyson-Maleev transformation?
When you begin working on your PhD, you will continue working on your PhD until it is complete, at which time you will either directly enter industry or a postdoc. A gap in a resume is a serious concern to many employers, unfortunately. If you do a postdoc, you will continue doing postdocs until you get a job and then you will work for the rest of your life, with bills to pay and mouths to feed. A three-month vacation is not in your forecast at any other time in your life other than after you retire. Now would be a good time, not just to vacation, but to have the best vacation of your life. Go where you've always wanted to go with someone you'll have a great time with. The probability that you will ever have another opportunity like this is slim to nil. And go ahead and spend some money. It's okay. You won't be as poor being a grad student as you were when you were an undergrad.
That doesn't mean some preparation won't help. First of all, you should try to think about what kind of biologist you want to be. You should try to be good at it, whatever it is. It's going to require some planning and introspection. One thing to anticipate is that you're going to be very busy and under a lot of pressure. You should plan for ways to deal with that in advance. One way of dealing is to have some hobby or something as an occasional escape. Be careful though in choosing your hobby. Try to choose something that doesn't take much time, and that isn't intellectually taxing. My hobby was learning Japanese, a bad choice on both grounds. If I was to do it over, I would try a sport or something physical. That gets your mind off your work, and it can release a lot of stress. Another thing to prepare for is planning time for your own personal study. You're going to be terribly busy studying for exams and doing homework, etc. Find something that you're interested in, and look into that. Figure something out on your own that is not required work. This actually helped me a lot at the times when I felt overwhelmed. Another thing you're going to want to work into your schedule is some career planning. Do something once every few weeks. Look at indeed.com, craigslist, jobiology or whatever, and see what companies are looking for. As bad as it sounds for biologists, as I'm looking for jobs, there are many more options there than for physicists. If you're reading slashdot, you likely have some technical abilities. Programming often comes in handy. In physics, some programming was used in about 80% of PhD's, and I'd guess it's somewhere around 60-70% of biologists, but don't quote me on that. Anyway, if you like programming, it couldn't hurt to get a little more experience here. Scientific programming is different from sys-admin or soft-dev, so maybe look into some of the well-known programs in your field and get to know them. Chances are, these days, a lot of them will be open-source. At least many in physics are. Personally, I think it's a good idea to program in a language that is common in your field. If it's Fortran, then it's Fortran (it's not as bad as it used to be). But go with the group on this so you can cooperate with your colleagues.
In your PhD, the three keys to success are not location location location, it's Adviser Adviser Adviser. This is one of the big choices you will make in your life. Do it carefully. Your adviser will be your parent, prosecutor, parole officer, and savior (or destructor), all in one. There are some very excellent advisers out there and there are some real assholes too, and it's actually kind of hard to tell even after being there fore a couple of years. Other commentors have mentioned some useful ideas for selecting an adviser, so see those too. It's sometimes hard to get an honest comment from current students of some advisers because of the conflict of interest, so really ask around and talk through your ideas with some of the older grad students, but definitely more than one. One other point I'd like to make is that you should select someone as good/prestigious as possible. I opted not to go w
I'm not sure which trait you're referring to. That they're topological, having "a full pairing gap in the bulk and gapless surface states"? That's not the case for superconductors, generally.
Topological Insulators (2D and 3D) are strange, but definitely not an "IF". Check this: http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3895 from 2010. Several have been predicted and confirmed experimentally previous to this.
SmB6 is great because it's not based on weak interactions (like other topological insulators) but on strongly-correlated electrons, and the new relation of the Kondo insulator to the Topological Insulator.
Look at top-film lists for any genre or time-period and then see which of those are available on Netflix (streaming). It's less than 1 in 10. Then look at new releases. Very few are available on Netflix for download. Selection is a big divider for Netflix and brick/mortars. These two areas (popular/classic favorites and new releases) are Netflix weaknesses that are local video store strengths. Hang on to these and try to do them well.
Common weaknesses are general selection. The fact is there are millions of movies out there, and not even Netflix can offer all of them. I'd really like to see all the films of Francois Truffaut, for example, but you can't on Netflix. You also can't at your local video store. But this is where I like what another slashdot commentor said: let the user sponsor the dvd. I think they said through buy-back, which is a good option if the store wants the disc, but if not, I'd also let them purchase the dvd and share in any profits from rentals and let them own the disc after a time if no one's renting it.
One area where video rentals could have innovated 10 years ago but are still resisting is in video research. Put up a kiosk in your store where people can do movie research and that shows them whether the movie they want is available (for rent, and whether currently in-stock) in your store. Put this online too, so people can look it up before they drive all the way to your store. You already have computerized systems that tell the store the same info, so it can't be too hard to make it available to the customers. Even Netflix is squandering this possibility, especially since they split the dvd and streaming business lines. Now when you search for a movie that is not in their streaming-only system, it doesn't show you the title and say 'sorry-not available for streaming' or give you the option to rent-by-mail, it actually suggests totally different movies, making you think you entered the wrong title or something. And while you're at it, give the users a flat-screen tv to watch movie trailers on while they're there.
There are ways for brick/mortar's to survivce for a bit longer, but I give dvd/hd rental companies 3-5 years max, for the ones that really try to hang on. The ideas I've given above are areas where locals can offer big advantages over digital streaming services, but those wrinkles will be ironed out soon enough in streaming. I guess then you could try to target poor areas where the net isn't ubiquitous. Long-term, perhaps there is a way to take advantage of the meat-space aspect of local stores, but I can't think of any, except for the general fostering of community. Sorry I can't help in this area, but if you want to survive long-term, it's got to be in the community--something that puts customers face-to-face and interacting in a fun way.
I'd like to be able to select only the newscast segments I'm interested in, queue them up, and watch them all at once. In addition to removing bloat and irrelevant segments, it also would cut out those annoying teasers.
Added bonus (next gen): selecting to hear either the long or the short story for each bit.
First off, you should pick up an undergraduate text on "Modern Physics," which should include a really basic intro to both special and general relativity. Any text will do, but I own the one by Tipler/Llewellyn. This kind of text will be fairly light on the math, but will include some. This will also get you started with some really basic problems which should show that while you may not fully understand General Relativity (GR), you can do some really basic problems (e.g. gravitational redshift).
I. Calculus. Sounds like you already know some.
II. Differential Equations
A. Ordinary
B. Partial
III. Linear Algebra (Some texts teach ordinary differential equations and linear algebra together)
IV. Math Methods for Physicists (Arfken and Weber). Use this more for reference than for learning. Any math you need beyond the above set will be fairly specialized, so you can study by topic.
V. The best intro to relativity is in David J. Griffiths "Intro to Electrodynamics", a widely used textbooks for undergraduate physics majors. This only covers special relativity, but it's probably a really good place to start. For the graduate level, refer to Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics," or possibly an easier equivalent.
VI. Another text by Griffiths is "Introduction to Elementary Particles", which includes some really useful stuff on relativity at the undergraduate level but for physics majors.
VII. (admission: I haven't studied General Relativity because I'm in another area of physics (CM), but I've harbored a secret desire to study it and maybe someday will steel away and do it.) A really common book is "Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity" by Sean Carroll. I've flipped through this and it looks extremely well written, so when I do go ahead with my study, this is probably the book I'll select. Another good one is "A First Course in General Relativity" by Bernard Schutz. These are both graduate level texts, and I can't imagine there being an undergraduate level text.
This may take a long time and will be occasionally difficult, but it is certainly doable. Good luck.
The first immortal cell line ever grown was that of Henrietta Lacks in 1951, who had cancer, and her cells are still living in many labs throughout the world--about 20 tons worth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks)! Scientists, literally, won't let her die.
It's also common in Japan to say "the west" (seiyou (characters won't render on slashdot--why?)), to refer to what we also mean by 'the west,' meaning specifically europe instead of asia, but also referring to the U.S., and culturally, yes, it's fairly ambiguous. For example, in Murakami Haruki's 'All God's Children Can Dance', in the first vignette Omura is brought to a love hotel that looked like a "seiyou no shiro" (a western castle).
The Japanese word for west itself, nishi is commonly used for referring to Spain, as in nissei (a conjunction of nichi (nippon) and sei/nishi (west) meaning Japan-Spain (eg. Japan-Spain relations).
Of course, in spherical polar coordinates, north and south have non-circular definitions, but east/west is 2Pi-periodic. On the other hand, we do get a sort of branch cut with the International Date Line, so that to Japan, all the rest of the world is to the west. I'm guessing Japan is okay with this idea since it fits in with 'the Land of the Rising Sun', which it's too bad has nothing to do with Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises."
On the topic of the article, I don't think this means the actual demise of game development in Japan, just the expansion beyond its own borders, which I think will be interesting to see how it turns out.
Two words: Teriyaki Chicken
It's the most popular Japanese food tailored to Americans, other than sushi, but it's nowhere nearly as tasty as lots of Japanese food that Japanese people actually consume themselves.
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1872738&cid=34264944
I posted elsewhere before I saw penguin_dance's post. Please see the above link for an excerpt of David Foster Wallace's 'Infinite Jest' that discusses this topic, e.g., 'a return to good old telephoning not only dictated by common consumer sense but actually after a while culturally approved as a kind of chic integrity...' more at the above link... Remember, this was published in 1996, so written like 15 years ago. Who had cell phones then?
Before I had read this part in Infinite Jest, I had already given up my cell phone because it wasn't worth the high cost. It's not that I couldn't afford it, just that it's such a ripoff. I'm actually really enjoying being able to focus on my work when I need to, and I can still make and receive calls with skype, email, or otherwise communicate when it's convenient for me. I do borrow my spouse's cell phone occasionally when I really need one, and if I needed it any more, I'd probably get a pay-go, but I haven't had a real need for that yet.
This plain-old phone would make a great pay-go if it wasn't so expensive. Other pay-go phones are cheaper, and almost as devoid of features. In fact, they're probably worse because they place the 'data/web' button precariously so that you regularly hit it accidentally and have to pay the daily rate for web that's totally useless on the pay-go. At least with the plain-old phone you wouldn't be getting hit with 'crappy-interface' surcharges all the time.
David Foster Wallace, Infinite Jest, c1996
"a return to good old telephoning not only dictated by common consumer sense but actually after a while culturally approved as a kind of chic integrity, not Ludditism but a kind of retrograde transcendence of sci-fi-ish high-tech for its own sake, a transcendence of the vanity and the slavery to high-tech fashion that people view as so unattractive in one another. In other words a return to aural-only telephony became, at the closed curve's end, a kind of status-symbol of anti-vanity, such that only callers utterly lacking in self-awareness continued to use videophony and Tableaux..."
When we talk about getting in the zone, I think there are two types of problems that need to be considered. First, there is the abstract, technical, or otherwise difficult problem that can only be solved with a short-term burst of extreme concentration and mental effort. Then there is the type of problem that requires a great deal of familiarity with disparate variables, classes, objects, or other pieces to a puzzle. When these pieces are all loaded into your personal RAM, a solution becomes tractable, but which if you try to look at the issues piecemeal, some here and some tomorrow, you may not be able to solve. These generally take a large chunk of devoted time in a single sitting. Both of these problems are mentally taxing.
I've found in my computing/coding/developing that these periods of solid work can really zap my energy, not because they're not interesting or because I'm not up to the task, but occasionally it just requires a great deal of mental effort. Even when a problem is technically simple, it can require much mental energy, as if I were just multiplying large numbers in my head--the process is known to a first grade pupil, but it still takes a special effort to actually do it.
So, I think I know how you feel about programming, but I'm sorry I can't answer your question about whether it's okay to surf the web and etc while you're on the clock. On the one hand, it doesn't appear to be fair to the employer, and on the other hand it appears to be a nice mindless respite required for you to relax so you can get back to your work refreshed and ready for another heave-ho. An employer might say something like, well, how about if you work on less intense programming for your breaks -- clean up a script, or change the appearance of one thing or another, type up a report, answer some email, or find something mindless which contributes to the company/community.
I think there has been some hyperbole here, saying if you can do in 1 hour what others do in 8, then why not--I see what they mean. You seem pretty reasonable, so I think you're handling it alright. Your maximum efficiency level should be a high priority for you, but another should be how you are perceived by your managers and coworkers, so keep this in mind as well, since it may affect your pay or your career. Of course, your sanity is also important, so try to hang on to that. I think you should try reading Tracy Kidder's book "Soul of a New Machine." http://tiny.cc/bv3sf It's the story of the workers in a company that designed and built a new 32-bit computer in one year in the late 70's. Their lives were totally committed to cranking this out, and they did it, but some of them cracked. Oh, and it's extremely well-written. (Note: no conflict of interest here, except that I liked this and another of his books, "Mountains Beyond Mountains.")
Helena Bonham Carter (a la Marla Singer in Fight Club or Mrs. Lovett in Sweeney Todd) would do a good Faye. She's got the perfect look and personality, kinda dark, but vivacious.