• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
Progressive Gauge

Progressive Gauge

Media and Research

  • Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • Projects, Samples and Items
  • Video
  • Contact Jack
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Uncategorized

Oppenheimer at Harvard

August 28, 2023 By Jack Vaughan

Looking back today at “American Prometheus” – the book upon which this summer’s widely noted Oppenheimer film is based. Recalling I fashioned a mini tour/book review covering Oppenheimer’s Cambridge as I originally read Kai Bird’s and Martin J Sherwin’s 2005 book.

Yes, it’s still summer, so, I am sharing it here! With some editing. Editing is ever with us.

Oppenheimer’s tragedy truly is an American tragedy, and it is too little known. Worth noting: The creation of the Atom bomb is the ultimate tale of science and technology for bad and good. It redefined life for the generations that followed.

At the start, in his college days, the leader of the team of scientists that created the first A-bomb was a delicate mesh of scientist and poet. In the end, he was a heart-broken figure, done in by his lethal invention, and his soft-spot for arty friends who, steeped in the ethos of their times, promoted liberal and communist causes.

Oppenheimer did not have his roots in Boston, but he did pass through here, like so many others. It was in the air in Boston/Cambridge as much as anywhere: the mechanical, fluid and electronic sounds of a military-industrial complex based on the scientific breakthroughs and technical innovations of the mid-20th Century.

The son of a wealthy West Side New York clothier, Oppenheimer refused the fellowship Harvard offered him when he entered the university in 1922.Oppenheimer began his Harvard days as a chemistry student.

The chemist had been the epitome of the scientist – but that was changing just as he was entering college. He was not looking for a lucrative career. Oppenheimer worried his future would be that of an industrial chemist, testing toothpastes. But physics was uncovering wonder after wonder. He read prodigiously. His tenure at Harvard preceded construction of the Mallinckrodt Lab, so his chemistry studies were like in the basement of University Hall in Harvard Yard.

He looked to take as many advanced physics classes as he possibly could. He didn’t have the basic courses. But he read five science books a week. And he was picking physics texts unknown to the typical student. American Prometheus authors report that one physics professor, reviewing Oppy’s petition [replete with a list of texts he’d read] to take graduate classes, remarked: “Obviously, if he says he’s read these books, he’s a liar, but he should get a PH.D. for knowing their titles.” He was brash and precocious.

The famous figures of science and math [in which Oppenheimer thought himself deficient] passed through Harvard’s gates. Oppenheimer attended lectures by Whitehead and Bohr. Still, he nurtured a love for literature. He was a great polymath. He read The Waste Land, and wrote poetry of sadness and loneliness. He edited a school literary journal known as The Gad-Fly [under the auspices of the Liberal Club at 66 Winthrop St]. After Harvard, he discovered Proust.

He kept much to himself. Had but a few friends. “His diet often consisted of little more than chocolate, beer and artichokes. Lunch was often just a ‘black and tan’ – a piece of toast slathered with peanut butter and topped with chocolate syrup.” When he lived in Cambridge, like so many other great scientific thinkers in so many places, he took to long walks. He lived for a while at 60 Mount Auburn Street.

A mentor at Harvard could well have been future Nobelist Percy Bridgman. Oppenheimer admired a strain in this physicist noted for his studies of materials at high temperatures and pressures and his openness to imaginatively approaching the philosophy of science.

“Oppy’s” outsider status at Harvard could be laid to his sensitivity, but just as significant if not more so was his Jewish heritage. He came to the school at a time when its head was considering a quota system to reduce the growing number of Jewish entrants. Surely, the straight road to Harvard success was not fully open to him, even if that is what he’d desired. He was offered a graduate teaching position but turned it down.

Oppenheimer graduated from Harvard in three years. He wrote a friend: “Even in the last stages of senile aphasia I will not say that education, in an academic sense, was only secondary when I was at college. I plough through about five or ten big scientific books a week, and pretend to research. Even if, in the end, I’ve got to satisfy myself with testing toothpaste, I don’t want to know it till it has happened.”

From Harvard he went on to study in Gottingen in Germany, Thomson’s famed Cavendish Lab, CalTech, Berkeley, and, after the War, Princeton. Surely the Jewish Ethical Culture School he attended as a lad, which had a summer school adjunct in New Mexico, and the mesas of New Mexico, where he placed the crucial workings of the Manhattan Project, was most formative.

He and his friends skipped the Harvard commencement to drink lab alcohol in a dorm room. He had one drink and retired.

Other books on this topic worth noting include “Now It Can Be Told: The Story of the Manhattan Project” by Leslie Groves and, most particularly, “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes.

Noted Passing: Henry Petroski, technology historian who studied failures in engineering

July 4, 2023 By Jack Vaughan

Henry Petroski’s early focus was on the ideas and experience of civil engineering, but surely he became influential to all types of engineers over a long public career. He died June 14 in Durham, N.C. at 81.

As a Duke University professor, Petroski looked closely at the art and science of engineering, and I think he came up with some very meaningful conclusions. Studying the history of failures in rockets, buildings, bridges and the like was his special pursuit. His books include “To Engineer is Human,” “The Evolution of Useful Things,” and “The Pencil.”

My take-away from seeing him lecture and appear on TV, and from reading his books and Scientific American articles was this:

Styles of engineering come into use, formulated by individuals who learn first principles from (often painful) failures. Then the style becomes taken for granted. Successive engineer generations push the  barriers of the basic style, and mistakes are made that are sometimes deadly.

Among the object lessons in engineering failures Petroski would often cite were the failure of the elevated skywalks at a Kansa City Hyatt Regency hotel, the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington State, the collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York as the result of deliberate terrorist air crashes,  and the loss of two NASA space shuttles.

His writing could take the form of excessively fine-grained pedanticism – I couldn’t forge through “The Pencil” history. Still, thanks to Petroski I did learn that its history was much about finding the right combination of graphite and clay – and I continue to study the pencils I sharpen with particular attention.

Interesting to learn in the New York Times obituary of Petroski’s childhood recollection: Making towers and bridges out of pantry cans and boxes. Guess he caught the analytical bug early!

I had the opportunity to interview Petroski very briefly after he spoke to a hall of software engineers at the OOPSLA Conference in Tampa in 2001. This was just a few weeks after 9-11, when the airways had just reopened, and a pretty tense time for travel. I recall that he was open to our questions. The assembled object-oriented programming crowd was enthralled, and the questions in the scrum after his speech were questions without clear answers at that time. Engineers ask questions, and wonder, especially about catastrophic events.

I don’t find raw notes on that long-ago interview, but mark here that, when the new World Trade Center was built, there was far more use of concrete that is less pervious to conflagration.

I did find a write-up I did for Application Development Trends on Petroski at OOPSLA. I will include a bit of that and a link. I tried to draw engineering principles from his studies that might apply to software architecture issues of the day, though that bit sounds weak. There were things to be afeared of in the burgeoning architecture of web services – but not the ones I imagined/predicted in 2001.

I can’t read this piece without thinking of my indebtedness to the great crew at ADT, led by the late Mike Bucken, who gave me so many opportunities to damn the torpedoes and get something interesting out there to our readers. The list of editors that would let me run the headline “There’s No Success Like Failure” is pretty short. – Jack Vaughan

 

From “There’s No Success Like Failure” on adtmag.com

If you interviewed a system designer who admitted to his or her list of failures in design, you would probably begin plotting ways to end the meeting and get to the next job candidate, wouldn’t you? You probably wouldn’t consider hiring the person.

 

An obsession with failure could be a problem, but a modicum of fear of failure—a respect for the phenomena that can undo a design—may be healthy in a designer or developer. Maybe you should hear out a job candidate who is capable of analytically discussing a failed project or two.

 

If you are wary of this advice, I don’t blame you, but you might be more inclined to follow it if you were to hear from Henry Petroski. This Duke University professor of history and civil engineering spoke at last fall’s OOPSLA Conference in Tampa, Fla. In a kick-off keynote address, Petroski discussed success and failure in design throughout history, concluding that there is a unique interrelationship between the two.

 

“All materials are flexible if slender enough,” asserts Petroski, who noted that designers in bridge design tend to go toward the sleek and aesthetic as they get further away in time from the first principles. The Tacoma Narrows Bridge breakup of 1940 stands—well it doesn’t exactly stand, it fell—as a testament to Petroski’s assertion.

Scholar Petroski took his OOPSLA audience back to ancient Rome to make his point. He discussed Vitruvius. That author of key architecture texts went to great length to consider failures of stone-and-axle variations (that’s how they moved pillars) of the day. Vitruvius suggests that following a successful design to an ultimate conclusion is not the way to proceed.

The big ships, many failed, of the era of European exploration came in for consideration. “Ships made of wood were scaled up, every dimension doubled,” said Petroski. “At a certain size, they would break in two.”

Petroski noted that nature does not design this way (to blindly scale up); the leg bones of large and small animals are not exactly proportional. Cable stay bridges are now the rage in bridge design, noted Petroski. Their design is becoming increasingly ambitious, he added, and some failure may be in store.

“Failures in bridge style seem to repeat in 30-year [intervals],” said Petroski. “Engineers are ambitious. Everyone wants to build the largest bridge in the world. Cable stay bridges are exhibiting problems.”

Whenever the envelope is pushed, he indicated, “there is opportunity for phenomena to manifest that were not obvious in the small.”

Failure could be generational, said Petroski; when engineers start to work with new design paradigms they take great care. Then as things get familiar, they forget about the fundamentals and they push, sometimes beyond the real design limits.

RELATED
Petrowski speaks – YouTube
Obituary – New York Times
Read the rest of “There’s No Success Like Failure” – ADTmag.com Jan 2002.

Reporter’s Notebook – At MIT Tech Review Future Compute 2023: Navigating the straits of semis

May 9, 2023 By Jack Vaughan

[May 9, 2023 ] – When the US last year announced new export rules on advanced chips,  the role of semiconductors in modern foreign affairs reached a new zenith. The chips have assumed the stature of oil in today’s geopolitics and depriving China of the chips now seems a strategic objective.

Unease has only grown with the appearance of the ChatGPT AI Large Language Model, which is a chip-hungry, power-guzzling presence ready to take over the world, to hear networks of experts and Cassandras tell it. Just as unsettling are Chinese maneuvers around Taiwan, a crucial center of global chip production.

Such activity formed a partial backdrop for the MIT Technology Review’s recent Future Compute 2023 conference at the Cambridge, Mass. Campus. Semiconductor issues were probed in a Q&A session featuring Chris Miller, Tufts University lecturer and author.

Miller said the semiconductor has taken on an outsized role in strategizing on China, and that the focus now is both on economics and defense.

”China spends as much money importing chips each year as importing oil,” he said. “You can’t understand the structure of the world economy without putting semiconductors at the center of your analysis.”

This is increasingly true for economic issues, Miller continued. Semiconductors that drive computers and embedded systems are top of mind when defense ministries and intelligence agencies think about future procurements.

“What they know is that over the past half century one of the key forces that’s transformed the way militaries fight has been computing power,” according to Miller, who traced the developments leading to the present predicament in “Chip War: The Fight for the World’s Most Critical Technology,” a recent noteworthy [Financial Times Book of the Year 2022] look at semiconductor industry history and its ever-shifting role in the larger body politic.

“Chip War” is described by a New York Times reviewer as something of a nonfiction thriller in which ‘pocket-protector men’ at Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel  tamed the raw transistor, fashioned the Integrated Circuit, outdid the Soviet Union, and left a war weary Europe in the dust as they formed what’s now Silicon Valley. Many of those developments bear review as governments’ and companies’ take on present complexities.

The complexities include more seemingly modest products than high-end processors, Miller indicated. Simpler chips that complement the hot processers grow in importance as well.

“The entire electronics supply chain is actually beginning to shift. It’s not only at the chip level, it’s also electronics assembly and simpler components,” Miller said, adding that a reduction in China’s level of server assembly has led to a major increase in Mexico’s market share in that field.

The also point emergence of new market dynamics as large companies take on design of their own chips, which could be spurred for a wider range of companies as US Chips Act R&D funding addresses the need for less expensive chip design processes.

A qubit for your thoughts

Infant quantum computing looms as an adjacent technology where geopolitical ambitions may play out.

China, the US the EU, and countries such as Australia, Singapore, and Canada now devote research monies to pursue such quantum efforts. They stir this new ground at the same time they test the limits of Moore’s Law – the perceived dead end for further large-scale silicon chip integration, which Tuft’s Miller cites as a fundamental challenge facing the chip industry.

However, quantum technology is still-raw technology – the quantum researchers on the main are still found toiling at the qubit level with lab rigs and signal scopes – that is, the quantum equivalent of the lone transistor work that preceded development of the Integrated Circuit.

A high-point of the Future Compute 2023 agenda for me was a visit to MIT’s Engineering Quantum Systems Group’s labs. Smart people are working hard on this frontier technology. And, with notable exceptions, there is knowledge sharing going on.

But, in a conference panel on quantum at the event, the impression emerged that quantum computing needed a large-scale working version of a quantum computer before the international competition for quantum computing would reach a less-sanguine stage akin to that the advanced CPU, GPU, NPU and network processing chips now experience.

For his part, at Future Compute, Chris Miller hesitated somewhat in responding to an audience question on quantum computing.

“I struggle to say anything that intelligent on quantum computing, both because I’m really not an expert in computing, but also because there’s a chip industry that I can study and I know how to talk about, whereas quantum computing is still a prospective industry,” he said. “We all hope it will materialize but it hasn’t materialized in a practical form.”

My take

Global chip wars must be viewed in the context of a real war underway in Ukraine. It has exposed the pivotal role of new technology in the exercise of war, as well as the vulnerability of the supply chains that feed modern commerce. It’s also pushed diplomacy to the sidelines, narrowing the opportunity for maneuver in the semiconductor straits.

Will cloud hyperscalers react as Edge erupts?

March 31, 2022 By Jack Vaughan

When first there shook the decentralization tsunami of client-server computing, the mainframers responded successfully – well, IBM anyway. Some hemming and hawing, of course. But the IBM PC was a pivotal instrument of client-server’s move away from the domination of centralized mainframe-based computing.

But a tsunami finally hits a wall. After that, the tsunami energy reflects-back to the open ocean. When that happened (when client-server rolled over to cloud), IBM was busy promoting Watson AI. Big Blue had a heap of trouble when the elastic wave of centralization surged backwards – taking the name “cloud computing”.

The company cannot claim to an adequate response to cloud – it bought SoftLayer; it bought Cloudant; it bought RedHat. It still doesn’t have a cloud.

Its lunging stumbles are regularly chronicled by Charles Fitzgerald, who I had the good pleasure to speak with for a recent story I did for Venture Beat. Fitzgerald, a Seattle-area angel investor and former platform strategist at Microsoft and VMware — as well as the proprietor of the Platformonomics blog — holds to a notion that reported CAPEX spending is a most capable discerner of a cloud company’s true chops. I second the notion – that, and number of cloud regions.

I had reason to call on Fitzgerald for the VB article “Edge Computing Will See New Workloads”. The question was: How are the big cloud providers – often called ‘hyperscalers’ – responding to the emerging paradigm known as Edge computing?

Why ask? This could be an “IBM moment” for big cloud companies. Edge methods might  gnaw away at cloud’s recently gained hegemony.

These companies know the importance of the Edge, and are responding, Fitzgerald assured me. They take different tacks of course, but underlying their different products is a common drive to push their own cloud architecture out to the edge, he said. There’s more on Venture Beat.

In my opinion, the hyperscalers will need to keep their eyes on the Edge, and respond with paranoid energy, if they are not to fall into the kind of ranks of low-growth heavyweights from which IBM is still trying to extricate itself. One wonders if a genuinely new approach to Edge would offer IBM an egress from low-growth limbo.

The Edge is percolating. IDC estimates worldwide spending on edge computing will grow to $176 billion in 2022. That’s up by 14.8% over 2021. The analyst firm said 69% of organizations plan to increase Edge investments in the next two years. As I researched the VB article, and attended IDC Directions 2022 in Boston, IDC’s Jennifer Cooke, research director for the group’s Edge strategies, told me the Edge paradigm will play out differently than client-server did in the past, if only because the workloads involved are so much more expansive. Other presenters at the event convincingly conveyed that networking will undergo great tumult at the hands of the Edge – that the future of Edge will be wireless-first; that advanced observability will be needed on the Edge; that Edge is vital because that is where the data is created and consumed. And more.

The client back in client-server days was likely a PC on a desktop – albeit, sometimes hanging off a server at a post office in the Australian Outback. As Lou Reed said in possibly his most accessible song: “Those were different times.” 

Do me a favor and check out “Edge Computing Will See New Workloads” – then, let me know what you think!

Lesson of Cassandra in the desert: “First, model”

April 18, 2021 By Jack Vaughan

Cassandra lessons from desert deployment

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to Next Page »

Progressive Gauge

Copyright © 2025 · Jack Vaughan · Log in

  • Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • Projects, Samples and Items
  • Video
  • Contact Jack