Friday, September 18, 2015

Counting on Freeway Rick

First, a disclaimer:  There are obviously a number of hot-button issues relating to the story of former crack cocaine distributor Ricky "Freeway Rick" Ross.  This blog is not about such issues.  I'm not going to touch on them here and (not that I expect this to be an issue) I'll summarily delete comments if necessary.  Hey, it's my blog.  If you're wondering "What hot-button issues?", feel free to chase the Wikipedia link above.

With that out of the way ...

In a post on counting (see section 3), I talked about the problem of counting how many crimes a person had committed.  This might seem like a fairly academic question, but the case of Ricky Ross illustrates how it can be anything but.  Ross was originally sentenced to life without parole for buying 100 kilos of cocaine from an informant.  Since Ross had previously been convicted of two drug-related felonies, this put him afoul of California's "three strikes" law, triggering its mandatory sentencing.

Except ...

That sentencing was later overturned on the basis that Ross's previous two convictions -- in different states -- should have been counted as a single conviction as they related to a single conspiracy (or "continuous criminal spree").  That meant that the conviction for selling to the informant was only Ross's second strike, and the sentence was accordingly reduced to 20 years.  Ross was released in 2009, with time off for good behavior.

But there's more.

After his release, Ross became embroiled in a lawsuit against William "Rick Ross" Roberts, a prison guard turned gangsta rapper who had sold millions of records under the name "Rick Ross".  Freeway Rick lost the suit, but one of the legal issues that came up was whether each  of Roberts' "Rick Ross" albums should count as a separate claim, or whether the "single publication" rule applied.

Whatever else one might think about Rick Ross's legal history, it's clear from it that what might seem like a simple matter of counting can be tricky and serious business.

Sunday, September 13, 2015

More on the invisible oceans, and their roundness

Previously, in speculating about what it would take for an inhabitant of one of the several subsurface oceans thought to exist in our solar system to discover that their world was round, I said
Figuring out that the world is round would be a significant accomplishment.  The major cues the Greeks used -- ships sinking below the horizon, lunar eclipses, the position of the noontime sun at different latitudes -- would not be available.  The most obvious route left is to actually circumnavigate the world.  And figure out that you did it.
Fortunately, I was smart enough to leave myself some wiggle room: "I'm very reluctant to say 'such and such would be impossible because ...'"  After all, humanity is in a similar situation in trying to figure out the shape of our universe, though in our case circumnavigating doesn't seem to be even remotely close to an option.  Even so, we've had some apparent success.

On further reflection, there are at least two ways an intelligent species living in a world like Ganymede's subsurface ocean could figure out that the world is round.

First, and perhaps most likely, it's not necessary for a Ganymedean to circumnavigate the world, if something can.  In this case that something would be sound.  Under the right conditions, sound can travel thousands of kilometers underwater.  The circumference of Ganymede is around 10,000km, which may be too far.  Europa's is around 6,000km, which as I understand it is on the edge of what experiments in Earth's oceans have been able to detect (pretty impressive, that).

We've already postulated that sound would be one of the more important senses in such a world.  It doesn't seem impossible that someone would notice that especially loud noises tended to be followed a couple of hours later by similar noises from all directions.  This assumes that the the oceans are unobstructed, but if they're not, you have landmarks to measure by, which would make the original "circumnavigate and tell that you did it" less of a challenge.

Second, if some sort of light-production and light-detection evolve, then one of the cues the Greeks used is indeed available, at least in theory: one can see things disappear over the horizon.  To actually make use of this one would need to be able to see far enough to tell that the object was disappearing due to curvature and not behind some obstacle, or simply because it was too far away to see.  The exact details depend on how smooth the inner surface is.

Humans noticed the effect with ships because a calm sea is quite flat, that is to say, quite close to perfectly round.  If the inner surface of the ocean is rough, one might have to float at a considerable distance from it, and thus wait for the object to recede a considerable distance, to be sure of the effect.  On the other hand, floating a considerable distance from the inner surface would be much easier than floating the same distance from the surface of the earth.  For that matter, it would also be possible to note what's visible and what's not at different distances from the inner surface.

A little back-of-the-envelope estimation suggests that one would have to be able to see objects kilometers or tens of kilometers away.  By way of comparison, Earth's oceans are quite dark at a depth of one kilometer, so this seems like a longshot.  Nor does it help that it's possible to hear long distances, since sound doesn't necessarily propagate in a straight line (neither does light, but that's a different can of worms).


As I originally disclaimed, it's not a good idea to rule something out as impossible just because you can't think of a way to do it.  The inhabitants of a subsurface ocean would have thousands, if not millions, of years to figure things out, even if they wouldn't have the advantage of already knowing approximately what their world looks like.