2012

...it's been an interesting year.

If you told me on New Year's Eve 2011 that I'd be in the position in which I currently am, I would probably believe you, but only because the Spirit would have testified to me of the truth of it.  Some things were expected, like making some progress in my master's degree and finishing out my coursework.  Other things, like temples and missions, were much less expected.  This year was also my least active blagging year, particularly because grad school has imparted to me a spirit of procrastination and a strong desire to write no more than I really have to.  Here are some of the highlights of the last calendar year.

• Structural Dynamics - Oregon State brought in a new professor last winter and assigned him to teach the graduate-level structural dynamics course during the winter term.  It was terrible.  In addition to the assigned textbook for the course, the professor gave us another 1.5" binder's worth of notes.  No one finished the midterm or the final.  One of the assignments that the previous professor had assigned was incorporated into one of our homework assignments as Problem 3.
• Paris - This Spring, I was privileged to finally use the Passport I've had since 2009 and go to Paris, France.  It was awesome.

• Temple - Later in the Spring, my bishop realized that I hadn't taken out my own endowments, so he wrote me out a temple recommend.  When I made my previously-scheduled trip to Denver in the summer, I went through, and it was glorious.
• Mission - On the day of a return trip to the temple I felt a distinct prompting that I should try again to serve a mission.  I did the medical evaluation again.  I was cleared.  I'm planning to turn in papers in May, or so to leave in the Summer.  I've changed my official prediction to Houston, Texas East, speaking Spanish, with other probabilities including Philadelphia, PA; Lubbock, TX: and Québec, PQ.
• Last Class - This fall, I took my last formal class ever and received an A.  My final master's GPA will be 3.70.
• Research - It's been a constant struggle.

 Plans for 2013

• Research
• Thesis
• Graduation
• Plan A: Mission
• Plan B: Engineering Job
• Plan C: Taco Bell

Hooray 2013!

Inconvenient Truths

I've decided that I never want to run for political office.  In order to give myself proper incentive to this end, I've decided to post of list of what I consider to be politically incorrect truths that would be a nightmare to clean up if I did run. All potentially quantitative claims will be unsubstantiated inasmuch as I believe the data associated with such statistics to be unilaterally biased, one way or another.  Enjoy.

• On average, black men are more athletic than white men.  
• On average, white men are smarter than black men.
• Young black and/or Latino men are more likely to engage in criminal activity than others not meeting those three criteria.
• I don't care what your upbringing was like, if you engage in socially unacceptable behavior, you need to suffer the consequences.
• Prison should be hard work... with no healthcare.
• I'd bring back firing squads.
• Selective abortion is murder of the most innocent individuals by those whom he/she should be able trust most.
• Inasmuch as it's no more socially harmful than alcohol, marijuana should be legalized, subject to similar restrictions as alcohol, and have the piss taxed out of it.
• There's a special corner of Hell waiting for investment bankers.
• In our society, capital gains are often used as a sole source of income, and thus, should be taxed as income.
• "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." -Robert A. Heinlein
• People are just not really designed to be functional past 50.  A mandatory retirement age of 50 should be set and the privileges of healthcare (minus morphine injections) and driving would be revoked at age 70.  At that point, in the words of Auric Goldfinger, "I expect you to die."
• I'd give illegal immigrants 2 options: 1) Leave.  2) Die.
• Two words: English Only.
• Build the wall... put machine gunners on the top.
• While we're at it, put a mile-long minefield just north of the Mexican border... that would be entertaining if nothing else.
• The high population densities would make China really easy to nuke, should that be necessary.
• Anyone who takes a camera into a war zone should be shot on site.
• I'd support a "separate but equal" initiative that would extend similar privileges to gay couples as straight couples, but call it something that didn't have the word "marriage" in the name.
• We have two options to maintain healthy forests: 1) Log. 2) Let forest fires burn, unrestrained. Personally, I like my wood products.
• Labor unions, while serving a useful purpose, have become too powerful.
• I like a couple of Nickelback songs.
• Capitalism is not a universally extollable virtue.
• Nuclear power is great in aseismic areas, assuming all precautionary procedures are followed. 
• Ohio and Florida both really suck.
• If the Eastern Seaboard was cut off and allowed to float out to sea, it would make the United States of America a better place.  (Yes, I realize that this is not scientifically feasible.)
• "The only way to redeem the south is to burn it up and baptize for the dead." -J. Golden Kimball
• I miss natural selection.
• Speaking of which, I don't think creation and evolution are mutually exclusive.
• I think FDR was the best president.

Potassium.  I think that should do it for now.

On Capitalism

It's been a while since I've posted anything philosophical on my blag and my homework that was due tomorrow is now due next Wednesday, so I have a little free time to blag.

I'll be speaking on these issues as an American, but many of the ideas that I present will be applicable to all of western society.

Let me start off this post by saying that I'm a registered Republican and I voted for Mitt Romney (somewhat begrudgingly).  I'm an almost universal social conservative, being pro-life, pro-gun, pro-religion, pro-self sufficiency, pro-drilling, pro-fracking, and pro-logging.  I'm aligned with the conservative base of the Republican party on basically every issue... except one.  Unfortunately, that one issue is the hottest topic in the entire political sphere of western society.

Many of my super-conservative friends seem to extol capitalism as if it's a universal virtue sent by revelation from Heaven for the benefit of mankind.  In reality, capitalism is an extreme on the opposite side of the economic system spectrum from socialism.  Either one, in pure form, is just as likely to collapse in on itself and to leave society in ruin.  Many pundits on both sides of the aisle would have you believe that these two ideals are mutually exclusive, when in reality, any functional society requires balanced elements of both self service (capitalism) and social service (socialism).

Any blue-blooded American who's not a clove-smoking hippie can tell you why pure socialism, aka communism, doesn't work.  Under this sort of system, all people work for the benefit of the whole and resources are distributed as evenly as possible.  Any individual's prosperity is not based on how hard or how effectively that one person works, but on how well people work around him or her.  Under a purely socialist system, it's easy to give a minimal effort and receive a similar reward, because everyone around you can pick up your slack.  However, when too many people do this, the system collapses because nothing actually gets done.  Communism is the liberal extreme of the economic system spectrum and does not provide sufficient individual incentive to be sustainable.

In contrast, many Americans seem to have difficultly identifying why pure capitalism doesn't work, even though the answer should be more obvious to an objective observer (if such a person exists).  Part of this phenomenon is probably due to the fact that essentially pure socialist economies have existed for relatively short periods of time.  Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and Red China (until more recently) are all good examples of societies that existed for a time with more or less socialist economies and eventually collapsed or, in the case of China, transitioned to a sort of pseudo-capitalism.  On the other hand, a purely capitalist society has either never existed or didn't last long enough to create any lasting records.  There are basically two reasons why.  One should be obvious, though people seem to have a hard time grasping it, and the other is more subtle.

First, I have two words for you: Market Failures.  A purely capitalist economy is incapable of providing certain public goods that are essential for a healthy, functional society.  Two excellent examples of market failures of public goods are the military and civil infrastructure.  There are several others both in and out of the realm of public goods, but these two are among the best simple examples.  These public goods can only be provided by a socialist system.  Many conservatives would balk at the idea that the military is a socialist program, but these folks haven't really thought about it.  For this program, the government is taking a little bit of wealth from everyone in order to preserve the nation as a whole.  The military is certainly not the most socialist system set up by the federal government, but it's along the same lines.  As far as public infrastructure goes, I'll let POTUS speak for himself.  Mitt Romney's heyday of taking this quote out of context made it slightly painful to vote for him.


If a society has a system that provides for these essential public goods, it is not a purely capitalist society.  These things can only be provided by a system that is inherently socialist in that it takes some proportion of the wealth from the populace in order to provide for the general welfare.  If a society does not have these public goods, there is a very high probability that it will soon collapse and be replaced by a society that does.

Now that we've covered what should be obvious, let's move on to the more subtle.  I've said for a few years now that an economist is also a political philosopher, even if he/she is a really bad political philosopher.  The ideas and analyses of wealth and trade cannot be totally divorced from those of power.  Not only does material wealth, in and of itself, bring power with it, those who are powerful are also more capable of obtaining material wealth by virtue of their power.  Free-market economics assumes that men would rather trade than steal.  While this is often true, there are clearly those who are willing to break to rules for the sake of wealth and increased power.

Any society that doesn't, at least somewhat, regulate the exertions of the powerful upon the weak, will eventually fail.  Power held by individuals and small groups leads to isolation of those individuals and groups from the rest of the populace.  Essentially, the very few ruling elite sit in a gated inclosure atop a hill and manage the numerous lower classes remotely.  A society in this state is volatile and there are many ways in which it can fail.  One way is that the powerful do not allocate enough of their wealth for public goods, resulting in a market failure, as previously mentioned.  Another is the small groups of the powerful spending resources to fight against each other, attempting to shrink the others' wealth and power, until the society collapses by attrition (see next paragraph).  There's also my personal favorite, which is united rebellion by the weak against the powerful.  Though few individuals may hold large quantities of power, a large majority is almost always more powerful in aggregate.  This rebellion can manifest itself as a peaceful refusal to work for the powerful, at some personal risk, or blood can flow down the streets of Paris (figuratively speaking:).  Regardless of the precise circumstances, a society that does not prevent the powerful from becoming too powerful will fall eventually.

It's been asked before how deregulation of economic players can possibly lead the economy to shrink.  I have another word for you: Rent-seeking.  Economic regulation is only universally bad if it's assumed that all participants in a capitalist economy are acting to grow their wealth in absolute terms and not merely relative to the wealth of others.  Rent-seeking is essentially using one's wealth and power to gain a larger proportion of the existing wealth, rather than creating new wealth.  Left unchecked, rent-seekers will almost universally shrink the total wealth available and cause a society to decline.  A purely capitalist society has no checks for the power plays of rent-seekers that can lead to economic and societal decline and collapse.

I said at the beginning of this post that both pure capitalism and pure socialism are extremes in the spectrum of economic systems and neither can exist in a functional society, at least not for very long.  As such, there is a need for balance between elements of both self service and social service.  For the political problems faced in much of the western world, I like the application of the far eastern philosophy of Yin and Yang.  For the description of this philosophy, I give mad props to whoever wrote the opening line of the Wikipedia article I just linked above.  It's pure gold.  "In Chinese philosophy, the concept of Yin-Yang, literally meaning 'shadow and light,' is used to describe how polar opposites or seemingly contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world, and how they give rise to each other in turn in relation to each other."  Capitalism and socialism are polar opposite and seemingly contrary ideas that necessarily have to be applied in tandem in order to maintain a healthy and functional society.  Without essential elements of both schools of thought, a society will collapse sooner, rather than later.

You can consider capitalism to be light and socialism to be darkness, if that helps you.  It really doesn't matter.

BYU vs. Oregon State Gameday

Today, my Alma Mater plays my new, substitute Alma Mater in football.  I'll be cheering for the team that would win an IRL mascot cage match (in impressive fashion).  I have the unique opportunity of knowing both of these teams very well, so I will offer an extended preview of today's matchup.

Prediction:
Even Sean Mannion would have had trouble with BYU's defense in Provo.  Cody Vaz, making his first career start, in LaVell Edwards Stadium against this monster of a D, has little to no shot.  I'm assuming that Riley Nelson is going to start and play most of the game.  If that's not the case, we're looking at 3-0 game in 3OT.  BYU's offense has struggled, but should be able to find some renewed life behind a renewed Riley Nelson.

BYU - 13, Oregon State - 6

Player to watch: BYU QB Riley Nelson
Matchup to watch: BYU WR Cody Hoffman vs. OSU CB Jordan Poyer
Stat to watch: Cody Vaz Turnovers

Keys to the Game

BYU
Play smart on offense
Take advantage of turnovers
Kick the ball through the uprights

Oregon State
Protect Cody Vaz
Contain Riley Nelson
Execute in the Red Zone

Favorites

So, it's the time of year when professional and collegiate sports abound and everyone can follow their favorite teams.  I've recently been thinking about what my favorite teams are in each of the sports I follow... and conversely, which teams are my least favorite.  Here are a few lists of my top 5 favorite and most despised teams in each of the 4 sports leagues I enjoy watching most.

NCAA Football
Favorite
1. BYU Cougars
2. Whoever's playing SpUtah
3. Oregon State Beavers
4. Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets
5. Air Force Falcons

Least Favorite
1. SpUtah SpUtes
2. Another Ohio State Buckeyes
3. University of Spoiled Children (USC) Trojans
4. Texas (not so) Christian Horned Frogs
5. Florida Gators

Major League Baseball
Favorite
1. Colorado Rockies
2. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
3. Houston Astros
4. Texas Rangers
5. Toronto Blue Jays

Least Favorite
1. Arizona D-bags
1. Los Angeles Dodgers
1. San Francisco Giants
4. Atlanta Braves
5. New York Yankees
5. Boston Red Sox

NFL Football
Favorite
1. Denver Broncos
2. Baltimore Ravens
3. Houston Texans
4. Atlanta Falcons
5. Arizona Cardinals

Least Favorite
1. Oakland Raiders
2. New England Patriots
3. Green Bay (Fudge) Packers
4. Kansas City Chefs    (Yes, I misspelled that on purpose)
5. Pittsburgh Steelers

NHL Hockey
Favorite
1. Colorado Avalanche
2. Montreal Canadiens
3. St. Louis Blues
4. Winnipeg Jets
5. New York Rangers

Least Favorite
1. Detroit Red Wings
2. Vancouver Canucks
3. Anaheim Ducks
4. Calgary Flames
5. Minnesota Wild

Some of these have interesting stories behind them, but I'm not going to go into detail.  If you're curious about any of my selections, I'll be glad to reveal my reasoning.  It's also noteworthy that there are a couple of cities with which I have a very ambivalent sports relationship, namely LA and Atlanta.

Bombshell

Before I begin, I want to make sure that you're caught up on the back story.

When I was 18.75 years old, I turned in papers to serve a full-time, proselyting mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  A couple weeks later, I was asked to complete an additional medical evaluation to determine if I could serve in the field without the medication I was taking at the time.  The evaluator determined that I was in need of the medication in question and, thus, could not serve a mission, because this substance was not allowed in the mission field.  My branch president pulled me into his office and told me I wouldn't be getting a call in April of '07.

After this, I went to BYU, met a couple crazy girls, made some great friends, and made tons of people feel awkward in social situations.  Best time of my life (so far).  I graduated, couldn't find a job, sat around for a while and now I'm in grad school at Oregon State.  You know that part of the story.

Now fast forward to the 24th of August 2012, almost two months after I had been through the temple for my own endowments.

During the previous days, I had been contemplating what I should do with my life and what my plans should be after graduation.  As I awoke that morning, I had a very distinct, unmistakable impression that I should try again to serve a full-time, proselyting mission in my youth.  I tried to dismiss this impression like Jonah and hop the next ship to Tarshish.  This wasn't the first time since I'd been deemed ineligible that the thought had occurred to me. However, at other times, it has been easy to push out of my mind and dismiss as a stupor of thought.  This time it stuck with me.  I had already planned to return to the temple that day to do an endowment session.  As I was sitting in the celestial room, I prayed as to what I should do in my future and if I should again try to serve a mission in my youth.  I received another impression in accord with the first.

As it turns out, I actually took two different medications when I was 18.75 years old.  For semantics' sake, we'll call one of them Pyridoxine and the other Tocopherol (not their real names).  For years following my non-call, I had always assumed that it was the Pyridoxine that had kept me from serving.  This is most likely from my own, internal bias resulting from the fact that that medication was more vital to my well-being than the Tocopherol.  In reality, Tocopherol was a newer, more powerful, and more closely monitored medication (though it had received FDA approval, for what that's worth).  In the years following, I've continued to take the Pyridoxine, but stopped taking the Tocopherol a couple years back, as it was no longer particularly necessary.

I talked with my bishop the following Sunday and asked him to contact the missionary department on my behalf.  It turns out that a young man is allowed to serve while on the medication that I've code named Pyridoxine, assuming that he can pass the same medical evaluation I underwent 5 years ago.  Yesterday, I went to Eugene to undergo another evaluation.  The evaluator said that she'd be glad to recommend me to serve a mission.

As I contemplate this concept, it makes the whole of my life since I turned 18 make much more sense.  I was not called when I was 19 because the Lord wanted my grandfather to be able to supplement my education.  When I sought to marry a young woman (or two) the answer was a resounding 'no' because the Lord still wanted me to serve.  The Lord lead me almost forcibly to Oregon State University so that I could be prospered financially and be around people who would help me come to the conclusion that I should try again to serve a mission.  I even think the Lord prompted my bishop to ask when he did if I wanted to go through the temple for my endowments so that my spiritual eyes could be more fully opened and I could receive these revelations.  Without the clarity the endowment has brought me, I would almost certainly not be making this post.

Then there's the financial prosperity the Lord has brought me itself.  For the last year, or so, I've kind of been wondering what I'd do with the big pile of money with which I've been blessed.  I figured I'd use it to pay down my student loans and/or help get myself set up when I graduated and/or get myself a motorcycle.  I was wrong on the last two accounts and mostly wrong on the first one.  At this point the two biggest hurdles to my missionary service are the aforementioned student loans and some dental work.  My teeth aren't nearly as pristine as they were in 2007.  (Seriously, I had gorgeous teeth.)  Now, I'll need at least 2 fillings, probably a[n inlay], and hopefully not too obscenely much in my roots.  With the big pile of cash with which I've been blessed, I should have enough to make 25+ payments on my student loans, get the dental work done, and pay for most of my mission, assuming the dental work isn't absolutely obscene.  My path has clearly been blessed by the hand of God.

At this point, my plan is to finish my master's degree as planned and graduate in June of next year.  It's unlikely that I'll be ready much before that time, regardless.  I will probably begin papers in February or March and submit them in May for a July availability date.  At no point in this process will I absolutely assume that I will be getting a mission call.  I have learned to not be pretentious.  Though it seems very likely that I will get a call, I'm perfectly willing to accept the possibility that I, again, won't.  I ask that you take a similar approach for me and any other prospective missionaries.  I'd really appreciate it.

However, I'm more than happy to accept predictions.  If you're going to make one, I recommend taking into account that I will be taking a medication, though that medication is fairly easy to get and fairly cheap.  Still, I think somewhere in the US or Canada would be the most realistic prediction.  If I had the luxury of hand-picking a mission, I'd want to go to Winnipeg, Manitoba, because I like Canada and Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and western Ontario seem like good places.  Yes, I know it would be wicked-cold there; hand warmers would be a must.  If I was to log a more realistic prediction, I'd say [Arcadia], California speaking Spanish, because that's where East LA is and I have a sneaking suspicion that the Lord wants me to learn to love illegal immigrants, even if I don't accept their life choices.

Updates will most certainly follow.

Mistborn Trilogy, take 1

In my life, I haven't been known for reading works of fiction very often, nor of particularly enjoying them when I do.  However, there are key exceptions, like semi-physics-based sci-fi/fantasy novels that address realistic human concerns.  In recent years, I've read both the Harry Potter septology and Ender's Game and enjoyed both of them very much.

This June, I asked my lovely, awesome friend Bridget what her book recommendations would be for me this summer.  Her and I have similar interests in books, but she reads more than I do, so I can always count on her for a good recommendation.  She said that I absolutely had to read the Mistborn Trilogy, by Brandon Sanderson and that it had replaced Ender's Game as her favorite book in the history of books.  Naturally, I went down to the bookstore and picked up the entire trilogy in a paperback box set.

They were awesome.

The remainder of this post will be dedicated to my thoughts on each book in the series without giving away too much.  If you haven't read this series, go out and get it right now, because it's just that good.  I'll try my best to avoid the worst spoilers, but in order to adequately describe my thoughts on these books, I have to give a few things away.

Mistborn: The Final Empire

Sanderson describes this story as a fantasy/heist story/kung fu epic, and I think that's a pretty good description.  The story is about a young, orphaned street urchin named Vin who gets recruited by a specialized thieving crew to try to pull off an almost impossible task in assassinating their world's emperor god.  Vin is pulled into this thieving crew because she possesses a rare form of magic called Allomancy, which allows the user to harness power from metals they ingest.  Because she possesses all of the powers, as opposed to just one of them, she is called a Mistborn, the namesake of the series.

Throughout this book and its two sequels, I was really impressed with Sanderson's efficiency in telling a story with only a few words.  Though this book is fairly long, it packs a large quantity of plot and character development into each of its pages.  There are almost no wasted words and at no point in this novel did I question the author's decisions in placing words, sentences, or section where they were. This novel and this series were very well done and I can appreciate basically everything that Sanderson chose to do throughout.

Having finished the series, I can really appreciate the contrast that Sanderson gives with symbols and character development.  A large portion of this story is given to Vin's development as she changes from an abused, paranoid shell of a person into the confident, trusting young woman she becomes.  I particularly appreciated her internal monologs in which she states that the 'real' her is neither the street urchin that she was, nor the young country noblewoman she was pretending to be, but something in between.  I found that particular contrast to be impressive. 

My favorite character throughout this novel and throughout this series was Sazed, the Terrisman.  He is first introduced in chapter 8 (I believe) of Mistborn and remains an important character throughout the series.  Almost immediately, he is shaped as a tall, but gentle scholar who seeks to fulfill his role in life, but also seeks to effect change however he can while living that role.  Needless to say, I felt an immediate connection and followed him closely as I read each book.

The resolution to this book is unexpected.  Unless you're somehow clairvoyant or have already read or heard a spoiler, you won't see the end to this book coming.  It was probably even more so for me.  For good or ill, I often like to read the last sentence of a book before I even start just to give me a feel for how the book with end.  Sometimes this reveals epic spoilers, but more often, it just gives me a general idea of the feelings the author is trying to convey by the ending of the book.  (I read the end of chapter 38, not the epilogue.)  In this case, it was something of a spoiler, but not unforeseen, given the context of the book.  However, I managed to misread the pronoun in the last sentence replacing a 'he' for the 'she' that was actually there.  This lead me to believe that Kelsier took up Vin's role at the end of the book.  As the resolution unfolded, my mind blew apart, leaving little chunks of brain all over my apartment.  It was that good and made even better by my initial misread of the final sentence.

The Well of Ascension

This book is a continuation of the story from the first Mistborn book.  Vin, Elend, and much of Kelsier's crew try to establish a government in place of the Lord Ruler's regime and face many challenges to their authority and legitimacy.  Additionally, Vin has to struggle through her feelings of love and affection for Elend and another man who she believes might understand her better.  And they do, eventually, find the Well of Ascension.

Of the three books in this trilogy, this one was my least favorite as a stand-alone novel.  It proved to be an excellent bridge between the premier, Mistborn, and the finale, The Hero of Ages, but I didn't particularly enjoy it, in and of itself.  Of the three books, this one is the longest (just slightly) and contains the least change from beginning to end in setting, scope, and plot.  At the end of the story, the characters are basically in the same place they were left at the end of Mistborn, except with one big, new problem on their hands. I thought the parts of establishing and re-establishing the government of the land and Vin's love triangle, particularly, took too long and could have used to be more concise.  Brandon Sanderson was still good at fitting a lot of plot and character development into a few pages, but I thought he could have done better with those two particular parts.

This story is not as much about the plot itself as it is about the character development.  This is another problem with this book as a stand-alone novel: it serves as a great prelude to the Hero of Ages with some excellent character development that sets up that story very well, but doesn't accomplish that much in its own plot. I generally appreciated the character development of Vin, Elend, Breeze, and Spook, but I cannot say the same for the development of my favorite character.  In this book, Sazed is given a brief taste of that one thing he's wanted all his life, then has it ripped away from him, leaving him a sad, empty shell of a man, doubting even his most firm internal convictions.  Objectively speaking, the character development is probably good, it just hit way too close to home for me to really appreciate it.

In the end, Vin, Elend, and Sazed do find the Well of Ascension, and we're left with something of a cliffhanger as to what will happen to the main characters and the world in which they live.  Again, this gives great setup for the epic finale, but does not lead to a great resolution for the novel itself.

The Hero of Ages

Instead of the main plot conflict coming from physical armies, it is derived more from intangible powers.  There is still plenty of physical confrontation, as this is a theme of all three books, but the primary conflict comes mostly from outside, metaphysical powers.  Just when everything seems hopeless, the Hero of Ages is able to ascend and to make things right.

This is pretty much now my favorite book in the history of books.  Everything that seemed to go wrong in The Well of Ascension was corrected in The Hero of Ages.  It blew my mind all over the place, and I love it.

The theme of contrast that I appreciated in Mistborn was even more apparent in Hero of Ages in the contrast between Preservation and Ruin.  The mists, which are of Preservation, are white, while the ash increasingly coming from the ashmounts, a tool of Ruin, are black.  Additionally, I like that Sanderson made Vin a type of Ruin with her ability to destroy and to wreak havoc on her enemies and Elend a type of Preservation with his desire to maintain peace and order.  This effect is magnified when one considers that Vin predominantly wears black and Elend wears his white suits given to him in the previous novel.  That particular effect is easier to catch when you read the paperback version as opposed to the hardcover.

I also really like that Sanderson was able to convey a sense of absolute hopelessness through the pages toward the end of this novel.  In most stories, one can tell that everything is going to be alright in the end and that the main characters will all be fine.  Near the end of this novel, I couldn't help but wonder if everything was going to come crashing down and the resolution would be one that is unhappy, but fitting for the context.  I love those kind of books, but I didn't really think this one was going to be one, thus I was supremely pleased with the resolution that Sanderson was able to create.

I also really liked the character development of Spook in this particular novel.  Throughout the first two books, Spook is a mostly unimportant and forgettable character.  However, in this one, he becomes one of the central characters, overcoming much of his forgettability to become integral to the plot and the well being of the other characters.

The Hero of Ages was just plain awesome.

Over the last couple months, I've really enjoyed reading these books.  I've even read the Alloy of Law as well, but I think that'll be a blag post for another day.  Though I don't often enjoy fiction, these books are of a genre and style that appeals to me as no other novels really have before.  Brandon Sanderson is truly a remarkable author and is able to do things that most other creative writers are just not capable of.  These books have captured a place as my favorites and will probably remain so for the foreseeable future.

PS - If you want to check out more of Sanderson's stuff, click here.

That Time of Year Again

With my two favorite baseball teams being, unquestionably, the worst two teams in the league, it's time for me to look forward, once again, to football season.  Before I really begin, some notes on the coming season:

• There are about 33 days until the whited out kickoff of my BYU Cougars against the Cougars of Washington State in a game I've affectionately dubbed the 'Cougar Bowl.'  I'm going to try to get a pair of tickets to this game and head over to Provo to see it. 
• I hate Utah.
• My BYU Cougars, again, take on the Oregon State Beavers, whom I've come to know and love.  I'm a Beaver believer when they take on any other opponent, but against my Alma Mater, they're just another team to slash down.
• Both Oregon State and BYU look very similar to what they were last year, for good or ill.
• Though I love OSU, I think I want to travel down to Eugene to take in a Ducks game at Autzen Stadium.  I've heard it's loud and awesome, and I'd like to see it for myself.

Oregon State

Unfortunately for the Beavers, looking very similar to what they were last year means that they'll probably look about as bad as thy did last year.  I don't think they'll slip against Nicholls State, like they did last year against Sacramento State, but the outlook is still bleak.  This team has a lot of young players on both sides of the ball that still haven't quite meshed into a teamed.  Though the Pac 12 is largely overrated, it contains good teams with many more talented and more experienced players than OSU's squad.  The Beavers are a better team at home than on the road, and this year's home schedule is tougher than last year's, with more teams that are capable of beating OSU.

Record: 3-9
Wins: Nicholls State, @Arizona, Wazzu
Losses: Wisconsin, @UCLA, @BYU, Utah, @UW, Arizona State, @Stanford, Cal, Oregon

This year's civil war game will, once again, go to the Ducks.  The Beavers always play well against the Ducks and usually play very well at home.  However, the University of Oregon doesn't have to worry about things like "academics," and thus, like much of the SEC, are perennial national championship contenders.  The Beavers will, likely, finish last in the Pac 12.

Ducks - 38, Beavers - 24

BYU

With the abomination of a quarterback know as Jake Heaps now being Charlie Weis' problem, the BYU Cougars are set to do at least as well as they did last season.  This year's schedule has a good balance of teams throughout, with there being a bit of a cakewalk there at the end.  I think (as objectively as possible) that BYU is capable of beating any team on their schedule this year.  The games against Utah, Boise State, Notre Dame, and Georgia Tech will be tough, but I think BYU is capable of winning all of those games.  Much like last year, the offense should be capable of making plays and the defense will bend occasionally, but won't break often.

Because the Cougars are very likely to win at least six games, they should earn and accept a bowl bid, likely the Poinsettia Bowl in San Diego against a second choice from the Mountain West.  Though San Diego State may not finish second in the Mountain West Conference, an SDSU v. BYU Poinsettia Bowl would probably sell as many tickets as any bowl game is going to sell, including the BCS bowls and the National "Championship."  Therefore, I'm picking San Diego State to go up against BYU in the Poinsettia Bowl.

Record: 11-2
Wins: Wazzu, Weber St., @Utah, Hawai'i, Utah St., Oregon St., @Georgia Tech, Idaho, @San Jose St., @New Mexico St., (@)San Diego St.
Losses: @Boise St., @Notre Dame

Believe it or not, Riley Nelson hasn't really had a chance to go up against Utah.  We can all see that the abomination of a quarterback known as Jake Heaps didn't have what it takes to take on a bitter rival, especially at home.  However, Riley Nelson, like the acclaimed, mobile lefty that came before him in BYU history does have it... in abundance.  I think Utah goes into this game confident that nothing much has changed in the BYU squad since the end of last year and will realize that they've never actually faced Riley Nelson when the team around him hadn't already given up.  Riley, in his one and only opportunity, should be able to go into Rice-Eccles Stadium and bring the Cougars home victorious... by more than 7 points...  for the first time in 16 years.

Cougars - 38, Utes - 28

Oregon State @ BYU

This one is going to be no-contest.  Last season, BYU beat Oregon State by 10 in Reser Stadium despite not playing their best game.  Like I said before, Oregon State plays much better at home than they do on the road and BYU defends LaVell Edwards Stadium well.  Riley Nelson will plague the Beavers' defense with his running ability and the Cougars defense will be able to shut down OSU's running game handily.  The Beavers will get their points and stay in the game for a while, but it won't be close in the end.

Cougars - 41, Beavers - 20

I'm excited.

The House of the Lord

Disclaimer: This post is about LDS (Mormon) temples.  As such, this post will be geared toward an LDS audience.  If you're not a Latter-day Saint, feel free to read it. There's nothing secret here, but be prepared to be bored out of your mind.

Over the years, I've had a somewhat complicated relationship with the temple of the Lord.

When I was baptized and received the Aaronic priesthood, I was able to go to the temple to do baptisms and I thought it was the coolest thing ever.  I felt like I really had a connection to those who had passed on and like I was doing something that was good and right in the eyes of God.  That experience was also the topic on which I gave my first sacrament talk.

The Denver Colorado Temple

I went on another couple of trips to the temple to do baptisms and I felt equally awesome about those.  However, as they always do, things changed.  When I was called to not serve, it also meant that I would not be taking out my own endowments when I was 19, as most young men do.  I would have to wait.  I went to BYU in the fall, and went to do baptisms a couple of times at the Provo temple.  As much as the workers in that temple tried, they just couldn't make me feel welcome.  Each time I went, I had to explain, in gross detail, why I wasn't going on a mission to like seven different ancient dudes who couldn't hear.  I felt sad and demoralized in a place where I was supposed to feel the greatest joy.  The last time I went to do baptisms for the dead was in about March of 2008, over 4 years ago.

Would I tell you a story if it didn't have a happy resolution?  The answer is yes, but that isn't the case this time around.

A few weeks ago, my bishop realized that I hadn't actually been through the temple, despite being the ward clerk.  That's not a rule, it's just a generally accepted practice.  Unendowed men are chosen to be ward clerks about as often as women are chosen to be ward mission leaders, but that's a total tangent.  The next week, my bishop had the executive secretary set up an appointment with me.  I figured that we'd start the long road to preparing for me to go the temple, but when I walked in, my bishop talked a little about the temple ceremonies, asked me the interview questions, and filled out a living ordinance recommend for me.  It took a little effort, but I got the stake president's signature as well and I was ready to go.

This last Wednesday, I went through the temple for the first time to take out my own endowments.  I went with my dad and my best friend during my time in Provo, Hyrum, who flew out especially for the occasion.  After many years of living with and being around the endowed, I was very well-prepared for the ordinances that took place in the temple.  Several people told me that it would be weird and/or slightly difficult to do it the first time, but it all came very intuitively to me and I enjoyed the whole thing.  Despite not trying particularly hard to remember the elements of the ceremony, I have a great memory at this time in my life, and I felt like I remember quite a bit.  While I was there I recaptured some of that zeal that I'd had when I was a new convert and was able to go do baptisms for the first time.  I feel like the temple changed my life a little bit that day, and that it will change my life a lot as I continue to go back.  I look forward to going to the temple again many times in the future and trying to dissect and glean all the elements of the ceremonies.  I also look forward to being sealed to an eternal companion in that holy house, whenever that might come.

At the temple with Hyrum... and his gold medal.

The temple is the house of God here upon the earth.  It has taken me years longer to get there than I ever thought it would, but now that I've seen it, I know that it was worth the wait.  In fact the blessings of the temple are worth whatever sacrifice must be made.  The sacrifices of time and money are often concerns, but these are often small, especially for saints in North America.  The sacrifice of sin may be one that is much more difficult to make.  The Lord has asked us to give up certain behaviors in exchange for those that will bring us greater happiness.  If we are like King Lamoni and are willing to give away all our sins so that we can come to know God, we will greatly blessed and will be able to find this happiness eventually.  We must give up our sins in order to enter the temple and participate in the sacred ordinances that take place therein.  I testify that the blessings of the temple are worth it and will bring you to a state of everlasting happiness.

I know that this is the case for me.

The Marriage Relationship

I should probably start this post with the disclaimer that I've never been married and will undoubtedly not be married within the next year.  However, I've gathered some things from eternal truth revealed from God, the observation of other people's marriages, and the wisdom that I've accumulated over the last 23+ years of life on this Earth, so I think I have a pretty good basis to make the commentary that I'm about to.  Also, if this doesn't reflect the reality of things as they are, I will gladly live a life of celibacy and never think about any woman ever again.

There are two things that I absolutely hate to hear from married people.  The first is almost irrelevant and the second is of dire importance, such that I believe that the eternal life of man and woman rides upon it.

First, I really hate it when married people say, "Oh my gosh, I married the (wo)man of my dreams."  All I can think is, "Really?  You had the entirety of your imagination at your disposal, and *that's* what you came up with?  I'm disappointed."  If you married the person of your dreams, I applaud you on keeping your expectations low, but I have to wonder about your sense of creativity and imagination (and I'm an engineer).  Like I said, this is almost irrelevant, but I felt like I should share as long as we're on the topic of things I hate hearing married people say.

The second is far more common and far more important.  I really hate hearing married people say, "My [spouse] made me do [insert activity name here]," or "My [spouse] doesn't let me [insert activity here]."  I hear this most often from men speaking of their wives.  I assume it's usually in jest, but sometimes I have to wonder if the speaker actually believes it.

I find this to be patently false the vast majority of the time.  I don't think I've ever seen a person being physically forced to do something by their spouse.  I'm positive that it happens in certain situations, but that's the topic for another post (yeah right, not on this blag).  I think that, in the vast majority of cases, the true reasoning can actually be boiled down to two possibilities.  A better way of saying this would be either, "I fear the natural and/or contrived consequences that would be imposed if I (don't) [insert activity here],"  or "I am (refraining from) [insert activity here] because I love my [spouse] and am willing to make that sacrifice."

While the first statement is sufficient to keep a marriage relationship together and both members reasonably happy, it should be made clear that the second statement is the higher law.  For example, it's good for a man to say, "I'm not going to go out on a boat with a pair of hookers and a briefcase full of blow because I'm afraid that my wife would shoot me in the junk and take half my stuff."  That will, indeed, keep a marriage together and keep both members relatively happy.  However, it's much better if that man was to say, "I'm not going out on a boat with hookers and blow because I sincerely love my wife and it would break her heart. (And I don't want to give her herpes!)"  I use such an extreme example because "I'm not allowed to go out on a boat with hookers and blow," just sounds ludicrous.  Feel free to substitute a more appropriate example to your life.

The gospel of Jesus Christ teaches men and women that personal sacrifice is an essential part of happiness in this life and vital to the life hereafter.  To love someone is essentially to willingly make sacrifices for their benefit.  Christ performed the ultimate act of love when he laid down his life so that we could live eternally.  We should do the same in our lives and our marriages.  I believe that it is by small and simple sacrifices each day that we show love for one another and that we should not frame these sacrifices as acts of compulsion in our speech.  If you're doing something because you love your spouse, you should say it that way. In reality, no one can force their spouse, or anyone else, to do something contrary to their own will.  If you're doing or refraining from doing something, it's because you are making a choice to do so; and hopefully this choice is motivated by love rather than fear of consequences, though both are sufficient.

If and when I get married, this will be my approach to marriage.  I refuse to approach it any other way, and I will ask my wife to strive to approach our marriage the same way.  And, as I stated before, if I'm totally off base on this, I will gladly join a monastery.  That's just how I roll.

A Secret Combination

A few weeks ago, I received an email from someone associated with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) about joining the Order of the Engineer.  This organization is a group of engineers who take an oath to be ethical in their designs, and to generally do what is right and best for the profession.  All who have graduated with at least a bachelor's degree in engineering are welcome to join.  The members of this organization wear a stainless steel (or wrought iron in Canada) ring on the pinky finger of their dominant hand to remind them of the oath they've made.

The Engineer's Ring

I thought it was a good idea in principle, but something felt just slightly off about it (in addition to the fact that I'm allergic to Chromium (II) Oxide).  I then read the Order of the Engineer website about the engineer's ring itself:

"In Canada, the Engineer’s Ring is a wrought iron ring accepted by engineers inducted into the Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer in a secret ceremony."

And it struck me that this order was basically a group who had covenanted to do good, but not in the name of the Lord.  Though this group is almost entirely harmless in both the temporal and eternal scheme of things, it still qualifies as a secret combination.

As a latter-day saint, I believe that I've made a set of covenants of a higher order that includes not only ethical design behavior, but a strict moral code to go along with it.  My hesitance to join the Order of the Engineer was inspired by my oath to do good not only in the sight of society, but also in the eyes of God.  I've been called not only to honestly design things to the best of my ability, but also to abstain from substance abuse and sensuality, to help those who cannot help themselves, and to do all that the Lord asks of me.  The covenants of the Gospel of Christ are inclusive of those made by the Order of the Engineer and include many others.

Even though the Order of the Engineer is a secret combination, I still liked the idea of wearing a ring on one's dominant hand to remind him or her of their obligation to society and/or to God.  Then I was hit with a stroke of genius inspiration.  Mormons have a very similar thing called a CTR ring, (for Choose The Right, a popular hymn that almost all members know by heart) which are often made of silver.  Though it is not directly associated with the covenants made, it can be worn to remind one to do what it right.  So, I bought one and and now wear it on my right pinky finger.

A CTR ring.  Not quite the same as the one I got.

And, as a disclaimer, despite the abominable label I've given to Order of the Engineer, I actually think it's a great organization that encourages engineering ethics, particularly for those who aren't necessarily religious.  You should join if you're interested... and have at least a bachelor's degree in engineering... and aren't allergic to Chromium (II) Oxide.

A Child's Game

When people first meet me, they are often led to the conclusion that my favorite sport is football.  During the fall, I eat, sleep and breathe college football and my emotions for the next weeks are directly impacted by the results of the BYU Cougars football game the previous weekend.  I can also throw and catch a football like nobody's business and at 6'2" and a hair over 250 lbs, I look the part.

However, football is not the sport with which I feel the strongest connection, though it's a close second.  That distinction belongs to the quintessential American child's game, baseball.  Though most people find it boring and there's something of a lack of athletic prowess to the game, it's captivated my heart since I was very young.

I still remember the first professional baseball game that I ever went to.  Our neighbors had come across several tickets to a game between the Colorado Rockies and the visiting Kansas City Royals.  They weren't going to be able to go, so they gave them to my dad, who accepted and took me down to downtown Denver to see the game.  I don't remember many of the circumstances of the game, but I remember that I got to see Larry Walker and that the Rockies won 13-3.  Clearly they hit well and pitched decently... which is pretty much their M.O. most of the time.  Since then, I've been to many more games and have seen the Rockies win the majority of them.

Many of my fondest birthday memories were in Coors Field watching the Rockies take on various opponents.  I've been to numerous games either on my birthday or in close temporal proximity to it.  Last year, my mom even spotted me and one of my best friends tickets to the MLB All Star game in Arizona, which was the day after my birthday.  I feel fairly confident that this will remain one of my most cherished birthday memories throughout my life. Let's just say it'll take a lot to unseat it from the #1 slot.

One of the biggest reasons I like baseball more than any other sport is that I played it for several years.  I still remember Mrs. McGriff handing out flyers for Northern Lights Little League to her 3rd grade class.  It took a little bit of persuasion to get my mother on board, but she eventually came around.  Sometimes I played better than others... and I was in right field more than a few times, but I see the whole as a positive experience.

Though I'm a big fan of football, hockey, rugby, and lacrosse, there will always be an extra-special place in my heart for the sport of baseball.  I love watching the game and I probably love playing it even more. It captivated me when I was young and it will continue to captivate me well into the future. 

Go Rockies!  :)

Grad School Lessons, Take 2

As I finish up the winter quarter at Oregon State University, I've been able to pause an look back on the things that I've learned over the last 3 months.

• Sometimes you have to throw out style points and just grind through it.  Because I've already blagged twice about structural dynamics, I won't go into too much detail.  Suffice it to say that it wasn't pretty, but I managed to get through it by little more than pure tenacity.  And I'd even say that I learned a thing or two in the process.
• Only trust people to do your work as far as you can throw them.  This term, I had one class for which the homework was too be done in pairs.  My partner was a not-too-bright structural major (see previous post) who was in his last term and had already mostly moved to Portland.  Needless to say, I didn't trust him too much with the workload.  I let him spin his wheels on certain parts of the assignments, but in the end, I fixed everything that he did wrong and made sure that it was all up to my standards before turning it in.
• You'll probably adjust to your surroundings, eventually.  I already felt pretty comfortable at Oregon State when I walked through the doors, but it still took some adjustment from life at home and at BYU.  After six months, Corvallis pretty much feels like home (minus the spatially convenient Wal-Mart) and I've even gotten used to smell of coffee that penetrates the entire OSU campus.
• Sometimes, self motivation is hard to find.  Before I started grad school, I read most of the archive of Ph.D. comics and chronicled the pronounced theme of procrastination and not working all that urgently on research.  When you've got over a year (or several if you're a Ph.D. candidate,) to complete your research, there's a tendency in most people to put it off and read the College Football Nation blog on ESPN instead.  I'll finish the rest of this point later...
• Calling in sick isn't always an option.  I was sick for like the last quarter of this quarter (a sixteenth, if you will).  It wasn't anything out of the ordinary; just a common cold and/or upper respiratory infection.  However, it was quite miserable.  My throat burned and I was tired all the time as my immune system tried valiantly to stave off the illness. Then it somehow managed to skip right past my sinuses and go straight to my ears, causing swelling and mucus buildup that left me all but deaf for the last 2 weeks.  In a 10-week quarter, it's not possible to just take a week or two off.  I just had to suck it up, take lots of cough syrup, and ask people to speak up so that I could hear them.

Overall, this term wasn't too bad.  My first grade has even been posted; I got an A in my advisor's class.  Spring term holds Earth Structures (Seepage and Consolidation), Earth Retention, and Bridge Design, but I'm not going to think about that too much until after Spring break.  

Straining at a Gnat

Near the beginning of my undergraduate soil mechanics class, the instructor taught us the mnemonic device "Structural Engineers are Weird Guys" to help us remember the equation S*e = w*Gs.  It was hilarious and it will help me to remember that equation until my dying day.  (It was also ironic, considering that this guy was like the alpha nerd, but that's a story for another day.)  In my experience with structural engineers, there is a very bimodal distribution of capability in engineering among them.  They're all either really bright and capable engineers, or quite engineering challenged.  There are almost no average engineers (so to speak) in the mix.

Yesterday, I felt like I got to experience both ends of this distribution simultaneously.  In my structural dynamics class, the professor showed us the computer model of a 12-story reinforced concrete building in Berkeley, California that he had been working on for several months.  He had gone to great ends to carefully model all of the columns, slabs, and shear walls in this building.  He built a 3-dimensional computer model that had thousands, if not tens of thousands, of lines of code to carefully track all of the components of the response of this fairly complex building to an earthquake that actually happened in the area in 1989.  On an ordinary personal computer, the analysis of the response of this structure to maybe 20 seconds of earthquake motion took the better part of a month to complete.  The instructor of my class then wrote probably another couple thousand lines of code to make a graphical presentation of the numbers he was coming up with.  This presentation was slick, too.  He had a model of the skeletal structure of the building in both 2D and 3D moving according to the model outputs along with graphs of the accelerations, displacement, forces, and moments in the building all varying simultaneously as the model time progressed.  I've included a low-quality (i.e. one that won't have the sponsors of this research seeking out my name to put on the cease and desist order) picture of this graphical representation.  It took not only a good bit of intelligent thought, but quite a bit of dedication to make this high-quality of model.

Crazy-complicated model with rigid base.

So what's wrong with it that I say it's both smart and dumb at the same time?  Like many other analyses that structural engineers perform, the instructor of my class used a rigid base on this model.  Basically, he assumed that the soil on which the structure sits is much stiffer than the materials used in the building.  Indeed, he assumed that something commonly referred to as "Bay Mud" is significantly stiffer than concrete and steel.  I'd think this next part would be pretty intuitive, but I'll spell it out anyway: that's a terrible assumption.

Yes, I am a geotechnical engineer, and, like most geotechnical engineers, I think that the soil on which a structure sits deserves much more attention than it often gets.  And yes, soil-structure interaction is the topic of my research and I am a little biased in that sense, but hear me out.

I know that the effects of the soil that supports a structure can often be neglected for simple structures that are subjected to simple loading.  Under these conditions, the effects of soil-structure interaction don't warrant an in-depth geotechnical analysis for the design of the structural members.  (There should still be some investigation for shear strength and settlement, but not necessarily for structural design.)  However, a 12-story reinforced concrete building is not a simple structure, neither is earthquake loading a simple load case.  I really can't justify, in my mind, spending months to build an enormously complicated model that doesn't reflect reality as much as is reasonable because I've omitted a key factor that clearly affects the reality of the situation.  If I'm going to go to all the trouble of building a crazy-complicated structural model, I would at least try to model some flexibility in the soil.  It would make the analysis much more reflective of reality and would probably only add a few hours to an analysis that's already going to take several weeks to run anyway. 

I respect structural engineers.  I think that the work they do in practice and in academia is just as important as the work that other engineers, including geotechnical engineers, to society.  However, they, like other engineers, often make very complicated, precise analyses for structural members while, at the same time, minimizing or totally ignoring important constraints and boundary conditions.  I think it's important for all engineers to take a step back occasionally and look at the entire scope of the system they're designing instead of focusing so intently on the one specialized concept to which they are assigned to attend.  This way, we, as engineers, can avoid straining (pun intended) at a gnat and swallowing a camel in our designs.

A Dynamic Relationship

This term in school, I'm taking a class that has challenged me more than any academic pursuit has in while.  This class is called structural dynamics.

At its core, structural dynamics is simple: it's merely the analysis of structures like buildings and bridges as they move.  However, the devil is in the details.  Even to analyze the response of a structure to a well-behaved loading pattern is fairly complex.  This endeavor involves use of 2nd order differential equations to solve an equation of force equilibrium called the 'equation of motion.'

Earthquake motions are not well-behaved like a sine wave or an impulse.  These involve complex motion with many cusps and various frequencies of vibration.  What it comes down to is that, in order to make even a remotely reasonable approximation of a structure's response to earthquake loading, an engineer must use some sort of mathematical computer program and an approximate numerical model.

Up to this point, the advanced math and numerical models themselves haven't been what's made the class challenging.  It has been laborious trying to remember material that I studied 3 years ago (and never learned that well to being with), but this hasn't been the worst part.  The thing that has made this class challenging is that, even though the equations used are based on physical principles, it's difficult to visualize how changes in one particular parameter will affect the model of the actual, physical structure.  Engineers as a whole, and especially civil engineers, like to be able to visualize what they're working with.  A good civil engineer will be able to conjure a mental picture of an entire physical system, all of its component parts, and how physical changes will modify the system and its components.  This is often very difficult if not outright impossible to do with many of the principles of structural dynamics because they are based on advanced mathematics.

This is also why mathematical proofs and coding were a challenge for me during my undergrad and so far in grad school.  With mathematical proofs, it's also difficult to find motivation, because honestly, who cares?  Coding, on the other hand, is an integral part of life for anyone who doesn't aspire to a career that involves french fries and/or garbage.  Both of these fields are quite ethereal and don't necessarily have any convenient visual representation for many problems.  I've developed some simple visual representations for principles of coding like if statements and loops, but I still find them challenging.  I will never be a l337 coder as much as I will be a good civil engineer, just because coding is, at least somewhat, inherently unvisualizable.

I should also mention that my professor in structural dynamics is new (like received his Ph.D. in December new) this term and is still trying to feel out the landscape.  The homework assignments have been long and the exam was difficult to decipher.  The professor is a good teacher, but he just doesn't have a good idea yet of how much time is takes students to finish assignments when they're new to the concepts.  I think he'll get it, but he's not quite there yet.  Though, he has assured us that we will get at least Bs if we give the appropriate effort, so I think I'm going to make it.  : )

The moral of the story?  Knowing how you learn and how you reason through concepts is important if you want to optimize your learning and become more knowledgeable with minimal effort.  I learn and reason through things by visualizing them.  Things that are difficult to visualize will take slightly more effort to grasp, and I'm planning on being prepared when they come around.

Being Under-appreciated

A little less than two weeks ago, the BYU Cougars took on the Golden Hurricane of the University of Tulsa in the 2011 Armed Forces Bowl.  The game was a hard-fought slugfest between two equally-matched opponents.  Near the end of the game, BYU drove down the field and scored a touchdown on a fake spike, Dan Marino style to win the game.

The official MVP as well as the Player of the Game awarded by ESPN went to wide receiver Cody Hoffman, who caught all 3 touchdown passes for BYU in the game.  Though Hoffman's performance was impressive, I wouldn't have given him the MVP.  The commentators for the game suggested that they might vote for Matt Reynolds for MVP after an impressive block that he made late in the first half to set up Hoffman's first touchdown pass.  While I think that offensive lineman are among the most underrated and under-appreciated players on the gridiron, I still would have given the MVP to another player for his outstanding performance.

That man's name is Riley Stephenson.  He wears number 99 and punts for BYU.  Yes, I would have given the game MVP to the punter. (As a side note, that's a sharp-looking suit.)

Punting is probably the most underrated and under-appreciated position in football (with the possible exception of long-snapping, though it's pretty much the same idea).  No one likes to punt.  Teams would much rather keep their offense on the field and continue trying to score.  In leagues with less maturity and less defense, punting is rare and teams almost always elect to go for it on 4th down.  However, punting is also key to the game of gridiron football.  Especially when a team is in its own territory, punting puts more distance between the opposing team and their end zone.  If a coach has any faith in his defense, he will usually elect to punt the ball away when his team is on its own side of the 50.  If he doesn't have any faith in his defense, it's going to be a long game, either way.  Coaches will tell you that field position is important in any football game.  It is universally better to start at your own 45 than at your own 5 yard line.  The closer a team is backed up to its own goal line, the more conservative play calling usually is.  On complicated plays, it's too easy to get tackled for a loss and give up a safety or cough up the ball for an easy touchdown.  Winning the field position battle helps a team win the game.

In the 2011 Armed Forces Bowl, Riley Stephenson had an exceptional game punting the football.  BYU sent him out onto the field to punt 8 times throughout the game.  Of those 8 kicks, none were brought out to the 20 on a touchback, 7 of them landed inside the Tulsa 20 yard line, and 3 made their way inside their 10 yard line.  Riley only had one non-amazing kick all game: a 36-yarder that went out of bounds at the Tulsa 42 yard line.  Even that kick didn't look all that bad.

The biggest risk in punting is that the punt returner will be able to make a play and carry the ball for a large gain or even a touchdown.  However, a punt is not really returnable if it hangs up in the air long enough for the coverage team to get down the field and get in the face of the returner or if it goes out of bounds before it can be fielded.  This is the part of Riley Stephenson's punting game that impressed me the most in the Armed Forces Bowl.  Of his 8 punts, 7 were not returned and either went out of bounds or were downed by the BYU punt coverage team.  The one that was returned was a poor decision by the return man inasmuch as he only made it 1 yard before being hit by a BYU defender and fumbling the ball.  This fumble was recovered by BYU and led to the Cougars' only touchdown in the first half.

I relate to Riley Stephenson and punters in general because I'm a civil engineer.  If you live in something that's not a naturally-occurring cave, you're the beneficiary of the work of multiple civil engineers all at once and you probably never recognized it.  Civil engineers design structures like buildings and bridges so that they don't fall down and kill you.  They design the drinking water and sewer systems that keep you from contracting dysentery.  They design roads and traffic signals to be as stupid-proof as possible to try to keep idiots from running into and killing you on the roadways.  They (hopefully) even analyze the dirt underneath a structure so that it doesn't get reclaimed by its mother Earth.  And you know who gets credit for all of it?  The architect (and maybe a little bit the construction crew... maybe).  Yes, the nancy with an art degree who does nothing but make the building look pretty gets all the credit.

So, thank you Riley Stephenson, for your MVP-worthy punting performance and helping the BYU Cougars to a 3rd consecutive bowl victory.  Few others seem to appreciate it, but I know I do, because I'm in the same boat.

I Demand a Manual Recount of Your Blessings

You know those corny things where people make a list of their blessings on their blag?  Yeah, this is one of those things.  I took the title from my recollection of a Jay Leno joke from the 2000 US Presidential Election:

"George W. Bush sits down with his family to Thanksgiving dinner.  They sit around the table and start counting their blessings.  Then, all of the sudden, Al Gore breaks down the door with his lawyers at his back, pounds his fist down on the table and says..."

...wait for it...

"'I demand a manual recount of your blessings!'"

I thought it was pretty clever.

So, today I was thinking about how I've seemed to be so much luckier than my dad in most things in my life so far.  Then I started thinking about how I'm a pretty lucky guy in general.  That led me to think that, as a man who esteems himself to be a Christian, I shouldn't consider myself lucky as much as I should consider myself blessed (though you can't totally discount pure happenstance).  So, here we go:

• I left my car unattended for three weeks and the only difference in it compared to when I left was a spider web that had been spun on the passenger-side mirror.
• I have a car that's paid for in its entirety and is warrantied bumper-to-bumper for the next 4 years.
• Today, I traveled over 1300 miles in under 12 hours for less than $250.
• Oregon State University pays me $1700 a month (before taxes) to get a master's degree and occasionally grade a few assignments.
• Speaking of Al Gore, I have a blazing-fast internet connection that gives me access to endless concourses of information, both of a factual and social nature.
• Though it may appear to be in decline, I live in a point on the time-space continuum that's among the most prosperous in human history.
• I have a bachelor's degree from a highly-respected institution of higher education.
• My parents cared enough about me to teach me many of the important skills to a prosperous life in this world.
• I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I have a testimony of the Gospel of Christ.
• I'm pretty smart, but sufficiently humble that I can recognize when people are smarter and/or more knowledgeable than me. (barely)
• Today, I wore a pair of 95-dollar shoes that were made by small children in a sweatshop in China.
• There are still single women who flirt with me every now and then.
• Duct tape.
• Knowledge that God did not abandon us to find our own way and let nature take its course, but continues to reveal the right way through prophets.
• BYU football just wrapped up another 10-win season.
• Despite its flaws and the raging viral infection currently wrecking havoc on my upper respiratory system, my body works pretty well, for the most part.
• I have really good hand-eye coordination.  That's why they call me The Hands.
• There are pills you can take that mostly negate the effects of a lack of vegetables in your diet.
• Antiseptic mouthwash does wonders.
• I've had the opportunity to learn another language (mostly) and have been able to keep it bouncing around in my head with relatively little outside practice.
• I can read and write in both languages that I speak.
• There's a postal system that will take some crap that you wrote and, for 42 cents, send it to some random dude in Wyoming within 3 days.  (Thank you Jon Stewart)
• People who have come before me have refined the body of knowledge on clay and stone and steel so that I could understand what I do now.
• Someone thought up glasses for vision correction and someone else thought up sunglasses for light dimming.
• I have a telephone that fits in my pocket.
• I have a calculator that also fits in my pocket (kind of) that does calculus and matrix algebra, graphs functions in 2- and 3-space, and adds.
• Drafting erasers for when I royally screw up engineering calculations.
• An outright unhealthy abundance of food.
• Clean drinking water that's piped to a tap in your house, essentially for free.
• A Savior who lived a life that was beyond reproach from God, suffered incomprehensible pain, and died so that I and 15 billion of my closest friends and family can by happy for the rest of eternity.
• And, undoubtedly, many more.

The Problem

Based on whatever knowledge you have of my life, you might have already formulated some ideas on why it lacks romance and/or spousage.  Based solely on what you read in this blag, you can justifiably come to the conclusion that I have a few emotional issues.  However, the more distance I put between myself and my mother, both temporally and spatially, the less of a problem this really is.  You might also come to the conclusion that I'm somewhat passive around women.  This is also much less true than it used to be.  At age 16, I wanted nothing to do with girls and they pretty much reciprocated that desire.  However, at 23, I'm much more comfortable around women than I've been before.  I've also come to the conclusion that I'm less approachable to women because of my size (~6'2" and 250 lbs) and the Native American blood that gives me something of a disapproving scowl on my face even when I'm not unhappy.  You could also think that I might have trouble finding a woman who's as smart as me, who gets my sense of humor, etc.  The list goes on and on.

I do not consider any of these 'typical' issues to be the biggest problem between me and women.  This biggest problem is that both they and I move.  In the last five years, between Denver, Provo, and Corvallis, I've probably moved 7 times.  Some of those were very temporary, but there has been large uncertainty about exactly where I would be in the not-so-distant future.

For the sake of completeness, let's first discuss long-distance relationships: they don't work.

Now moving on, from about February of '10 to September of '10, I met 3 women that I could have definitely seen myself marrying.  Two of these were in Provo before I graduated and one was in Denver after I moved back in with parents.  In all three cases, I had no idea where I was going to be living a year from the date I met them.

In the case of both the women in Provo, I was getting ready to close out my time as an undergrad student and didn't really know what I was going to do afterward.  During this time, I just wasn't concerned with women because I had more pressing issues like how I was going to eat in 6 months' time.  I still held the delusion that I was going to find a job somewhere in industry, which wasn't the case.  In addition, asking a women whom you only met 3 months ago to move with you is asking a lot, even when you're 100% certain about the location.  When you have no idea where you're planning on moving, it's just downright socially unacceptable. 

In the case of the third woman, I was still totally uncertain about where I was going to be in a year's time.  I had not yet started applying for grad schools, though it was apparent that that would at least be a backup plan.  I was still not particularly concerned with women until about April of '11 for the same reasons as before I graduated from college.  By the time my future became secure enough to feel comfortable dating again, I knew that I was going to be moving to Oregon in the fall and didn't really feel the need to ask any woman to move with me.

A component of these conundra is the fact that, in 2012, women can easily lead their own lives.  In 1952, it was likely that many women were basically just waiting around for a husband.  In 1972, there was still a statistically significant chance that a woman (especially a Mormon) would not be doing much in preparation for marriage.  In 2012, more women go to college than men.  (This is largely a racial issue, but that's a post for another day.)  Women have plans for their lives like work, school, or a mission that they don't necessarily want to drop just to follow a potential spouse around.  This is another reason that it's harder to get married now than when your bishop got married.

As I move forward, I have the better part of a year and a half in Oregon before my future will, again, become uncertain.  If I find a woman who I want to marry, I have enough time to court her an build a relationship.  The prospects don't necessarily look all that bright at the moment, though I hold out hope.