Explaining the world
one sketch at a time

Have great conversations about ideas through simple and insightful sketches. Visual explanations that are fast to read, fun to share, and hard to forget.

This is such
a cool book.
— Bill Gates

In a Book: Big Ideas Little Pictures

5-star rated on Amazon!

Absorb big ideas with crystal-clear understanding through this collection of 135 visual explanations. Including 24 exclusive new sketches and enhanced versions of classic favourites, each page shares life-improving ideas through beautifully simple illustrations.

Perfect for curious minds and visual learners alike.

See inside the book

Hi, I'm Jono 👋

I'm an author and illustrator creating one of the world's largest libraries of hand-drawn sketches explaining the world—sketch-by-sketch.

Sketchplanations have been shared millions of times and used in books, articles, classrooms, and more. Learn more about the project, search for a sketch you like, or see recent sketches below.

Explore sketches for:

Recent sketches

The difference between Science and Engineering: quote by Theodore von Kármán "Scientists discover the world that exists; Engineers create the world that never was."

Science and Engineering: What’s the Difference?

People often ask, "What's the difference between science and engineering?" Having studied engineering but always loved science, I've come across a few perspectives I find useful to understand the two. In England at least, studying science usually comes first. In fact, you can't really study engineering until you head off to University. So discussing science and engineering together never came up when I was at school. Engineering seemed to be machines and buildings and projects and design and technology, and science seemed to be everything else. But what really makes science science and engineering engineering? Science vs Engineering: Four perspectives Here are four simple ways people have described science and engineering. Theodore Von Kármán on Scientists and Engineers Aerospace engineer Theodore Von Kármán said: Scientists discover the world that exists; Engineers create the world that never was. — Theodore Von Kármán Richard Hamming on Science and Engineering Bell Labs engineer Richard Hamming, in his book The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn, captured the difference this way: "In science if you know what you are doing you should not be doing it. In engineering if you do not know what you are doing you should not be doing it." — Richard Hamming Hamming also points out that there's a lot of science in engineering and a lot of engineering in science: "Much of present science rests on engineering tools, and as time goes on, engineering seems to involve more and more of the science part." For example, dealing with huge amounts of data, of the sort generated by weather sensors or particle colliders, requires exceptional engineering techniques. And engineering new displays or ever smaller processing chips requires a lot of scientific knowledge. The two are intertwined: science enables engineering to push forward, and engineering opens new doors for science. Richard Feynman on Computer Science Physicist Richard Feynman, in a talk on quantum computers at Bell Labs (video excerpt), said: "I don't believe in Computer Science. To me, science is the study of the behavior of nature. And engineering or applied things is the behavior of things we make. You need to know how Nature works in order to make the things, and so you use science in engineering, but you're doing it for a human purpose." — Richard Feynman Mythbusters' Adam Savage on Science vs Screwing Around Adam Savage, Mythbusters host, shared: "Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down." Adam said that the quote was actually from the ballistics expert on a shoot, Alex Jason. It doesn’t quite get to the heart of science versus engineering, but it’s a great reminder of good practice. And finally, my own phrasing in the first draft for the sketch used: Science: Study of the world Engineering: Doing things with what we've learned about the world So while there probably isn't a single neat answer to the question of what’s the difference between science and engineering, maybe these give some food for thought. If you know of other interesting framings for science and engineering, please let me know. Related Ideas to Science and Engineering Also see: The Feynman Learning Technique Data Information Knowledge Wisdom Bloom's Taxonomy for learning Hitched to Everything Else in the Universe You Get What You Measure - Richard Hamming What Gets Measured Gets Better - Richard Hamming Darwin's 5 Principles of Natural Selection Accuracy and Precision are not the same thing Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis a progression of ideas Unknown unknowns Greeble (I learned from Adam Savage)People often ask, "What's the difference between science and engineering?" Having studied engineering but always loved science, I've come across a few perspectives I find useful to understand the two. In England at least, studying science usually comes first. In fact, you can't really study engineering until you head off to University. So discussing science and engineering together never came up when I was at school. Engineering seemed to be machines and buildings and projects and design and technology, and science seemed to be everything else. But what really makes science science and engineering engineering? Science vs Engineering: Four perspectives Here are four simple ways people have described science and engineering. Theodore Von Kármán on Scientists and Engineers Aerospace engineer Theodore Von Kármán said: Scientists discover the world that exists; Engineers create the world that never was. — Theodore Von Kármán Richard Hamming on Science and Engineering Bell Labs engineer Richard Hamming, in his book The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn, captured the difference this way: "In science if you know what you are doing you should not be doing it. In engineering if you do not know what you are doing you should not be doing it." — Richard Hamming Hamming also points out that there's a lot of science in engineering and a lot of engineering in science: "Much of present science rests on engineering tools, and as time goes on, engineering seems to involve more and more of the science part." For example, dealing with huge amounts of data, of the sort generated by weather sensors or particle colliders, requires exceptional engineering techniques. And engineering new displays or ever smaller processing chips requires a lot of scientific knowledge. The two are intertwined: science enables engineering to push forward, and engineering opens new doors for science. Richard Feynman on Computer Science Physicist Richard Feynman, in a talk on quantum computers at Bell Labs (video excerpt), said: "I don't believe in Computer Science. To me, science is the study of the behavior of nature. And engineering or applied things is the behavior of things we make. You need to know how Nature works in order to make the things, and so you use science in engineering, but you're doing it for a human purpose." — Richard Feynman Mythbusters' Adam Savage on Science vs Screwing Around Adam Savage, Mythbusters host, shared: "Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down." Adam said that the quote was actually from the ballistics expert on a shoot, Alex Jason. It doesn’t quite get to the heart of science versus engineering, but it’s a great reminder of good practice. And finally, my own phrasing in the first draft for the sketch used: Science: Study of the world Engineering: Doing things with what we've learned about the world So while there probably isn't a single neat answer to the question of what’s the difference between science and engineering, maybe these give some food for thought. If you know of other interesting framings for science and engineering, please let me know. Related Ideas to Science and Engineering Also see: The Feynman Learning Technique Data Information Knowledge Wisdom Bloom's Taxonomy for learning Hitched to Everything Else in the Universe You Get What You Measure - Richard Hamming What Gets Measured Gets Better - Richard Hamming Darwin's 5 Principles of Natural Selection Accuracy and Precision are not the same thing Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis a progression of ideas Unknown unknowns Greeble (I learned from Adam Savage)

✨ Latest

The Figure Skater's Spin and Conservation of Angular Momentum Illustrated with equations

The Figure Skater's Spin and the Conservation of Angular Momentum

Why figure skaters go slower with their arms outstretched When a figure skater pulls into one of those incredible spins, they provide one of the clearest examples of the conservation of angular momentum. When they pull their arms in, they go fast, and when they stretch out their arms or legs, they slow down. What's going on? Angular Momentum You can think of angular momentum as the oomph in a rotating object, like a weight on a string. It's the rotating equivalent of linear momentum. A system's angular momentum depends on the distribution of mass around the axis of rotation, known as its moment of inertia, multiplied by its velocity of rotation. This is written as: L = I x ω Angular momentum L is the product of moment of inertia I and angular velocity ω. If you swing a weight on a short string versus a long string at the same spin rate, the one on the long string carries more angular momentum. That’s because its mass is further from the axis, giving it a bigger moment of inertia. Devices like flywheels store energy by setting a large mass spinning. The faster it spins and the heavier it is, the more rotational energy it stores. I think we know this intuitively because when we see a large thing spinning, it looks dangerous. The Conservation of Angular Momentum The conservation of angular momentum is a fundamental principle in physics that states that if no external torque (rotational force) acts on a system, then the total angular momentum of that system stays constant. In the figure skater's case, this means that when they spin with their arms in and their arms out, their angular momentum—their distribution of mass from the axis of rotation x rotational velocity—remains constant. Arms out With arms out, mass is further from the axis, so rotation slows. Arms in With arms in, mass is closer to the axis, so rotation speeds up. Examples of Angular Momentum We can see this at work in other places as well. The first three are pretty easy to test yourself, as I have done. The Swivel Chair An easy and fun place to test this is with a swivel office chair. If your office chair spins relatively friction-free, then if you set yourself spinning—or have someone else do it—you'll find that you can change your speed by extending or retracting your legs. Tuck them in and you'll go faster; stick them out and you'll slow down. You can also hold something heavy in your hands and stick your arms out. Roundabouts Set a roundabout spinning. If you move towards the centre, it will spin faster than if you move your weight to the edge. You can watch amusing demonstrations by scientists who hate roundabouts. Playgrounds tend to have other spinny-hell devices, so there may be others you can test with. Swing a Yo-Yo After making sure that you're not near anyone, you can set a yo-yo or other object swinging around you and pull the string to shorten it. You should find the speed increases just like for the figure skater, as its angular momentum is conserved. High Divers Divers that jump from high platforms spin faster when they tuck their legs and arms into their body and slower when they come out of the tuck. Planets and satellites A satellite, or planet, travelling in an elliptical orbit will tend to speed up as it comes closer to the body it's orbiting and slow down further away. Related Ideas to the Conservation of Angular Momentum Also see: The Square Cube Law—why adults are no good at the monkey bars Orbit The Doppler Effect Super Moon — perigee, apogee Buoyancy Sonic Boom Learn More Physics teachers like to demo this by holding weights on spinning office chairs, for which there are lots of videos. I thought the video of a spinning Hoberman sphere (contracting/expanding sphere) was a lovely, clear example. As an example of iterating on sketches, I produced both a more complex and simpler version of this one.Why figure skaters go slower with their arms outstretched When a figure skater pulls into one of those incredible spins, they provide one of the clearest examples of the conservation of angular momentum. When they pull their arms in, they go fast, and when they stretch out their arms or legs, they slow down. What's going on? Angular Momentum You can think of angular momentum as the oomph in a rotating object, like a weight on a string. It's the rotating equivalent of linear momentum. A system's angular momentum depends on the distribution of mass around the axis of rotation, known as its moment of inertia, multiplied by its velocity of rotation. This is written as: L = I x ω Angular momentum L is the product of moment of inertia I and angular velocity ω. If you swing a weight on a short string versus a long string at the same spin rate, the one on the long string carries more angular momentum. That’s because its mass is further from the axis, giving it a bigger moment of inertia. Devices like flywheels store energy by setting a large mass spinning. The faster it spins and the heavier it is, the more rotational energy it stores. I think we know this intuitively because when we see a large thing spinning, it looks dangerous. The Conservation of Angular Momentum The conservation of angular momentum is a fundamental principle in physics that states that if no external torque (rotational force) acts on a system, then the total angular momentum of that system stays constant. In the figure skater's case, this means that when they spin with their arms in and their arms out, their angular momentum—their distribution of mass from the axis of rotation x rotational velocity—remains constant. Arms out With arms out, mass is further from the axis, so rotation slows. Arms in With arms in, mass is closer to the axis, so rotation speeds up. Examples of Angular Momentum We can see this at work in other places as well. The first three are pretty easy to test yourself, as I have done. The Swivel Chair An easy and fun place to test this is with a swivel office chair. If your office chair spins relatively friction-free, then if you set yourself spinning—or have someone else do it—you'll find that you can change your speed by extending or retracting your legs. Tuck them in and you'll go faster; stick them out and you'll slow down. You can also hold something heavy in your hands and stick your arms out. Roundabouts Set a roundabout spinning. If you move towards the centre, it will spin faster than if you move your weight to the edge. You can watch amusing demonstrations by scientists who hate roundabouts. Playgrounds tend to have other spinny-hell devices, so there may be others you can test with. Swing a Yo-Yo After making sure that you're not near anyone, you can set a yo-yo or other object swinging around you and pull the string to shorten it. You should find the speed increases just like for the figure skater, as its angular momentum is conserved. High Divers Divers that jump from high platforms spin faster when they tuck their legs and arms into their body and slower when they come out of the tuck. Planets and satellites A satellite, or planet, travelling in an elliptical orbit will tend to speed up as it comes closer to the body it's orbiting and slow down further away. Related Ideas to the Conservation of Angular Momentum Also see: The Square Cube Law—why adults are no good at the monkey bars Orbit The Doppler Effect Super Moon — perigee, apogee Buoyancy Sonic Boom Learn More Physics teachers like to demo this by holding weights on spinning office chairs, for which there are lots of videos. I thought the video of a spinning Hoberman sphere (contracting/expanding sphere) was a lovely, clear example. As an example of iterating on sketches, I produced both a more complex and simpler version of this one.

7 Sep

Chiasmus

When JFK, in his inaugural address, said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," he wasn’t just delivering one of the most famous presidential lines ever—he was also using a rhetorical device called chiasmus. What is Chiasmus? Chiasmus is the name for arranging words, phrases, or ideas in the structure A-B-B-A. The second half of the sentence mirrors the first half, flipping the order. The symmetry of thought of this rhetorical technique makes language more memorable, striking, and often more persuasive. Chiasmus can involve just ideas, or the exact repetition of words (that special case is called antimetabole). Famous Examples of Chiasmus Chiasmus shows up again and again in political speeches, literature, music, and everyday expressions. Mark Forsyth, who is full of brilliant and entertaining examples, notes that few presidents and presidential candidates in recent memory have resisted the lure of chiasmus. Here are some well-known presidential examples: "You stood up for America; now America must stand up for you." — Barack Obama "Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done." — George W Bush (Jr) "Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate." — JFK "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." — Bill Clinton "The difference between them and us is that we want to check government spending, and they want to spend government checks." — Ronald Reagan "America did not invent human rights; human rights invented America." — Jimmy Carter "In the end, the true test is not the speeches a president delivers, it's whether the president delivers on the speeches." — Hillary Clinton Aside from presidential candidates, other examples include: Between what is said and not meant, and what is meant and not said, most of love is lost. — Kahlil Gibran All for one and one for all — the 3 Musketeers Tea for two and two for tea, Me for you and you for me — the 1925 Musical, No, No Nanette When the going gets tough, the tough gets going — Billy Ocean With my mind on my money and my money on my mind — Snoop Dogg What is a number that a man may know it, and a man that he may know a number? — Warren McCulloch Good from far but far from good I don't always say what I mean, but I always mean what I say. Never let a fool kiss you, or a kiss fool you I have never forgotten a print-out at the bottom of some stairs in UC Berkeley: "Take the stairs and add years to your life and life to your years." Why is Chiasmus Effective? I don't know if there is a scientific reason why chiasmus is appealing to us, but a few ideas come to mind. It's rhythmic. The mirrored structure is naturally pleasing to the ear, as in Edward Lear's, "They went to sea in a Sieve, they did, In a Sieve they went to sea." It's clever. Chiasmus surprises us by flipping words or ideas into a new sense, as in the use of the word "life" in Mae West's "It's not the men in my life, it's the life in my men." It's easy to remember. If you can remember the first half, you can often reconstruct the second: A place for everything...and everything in its place. Chiasmus vs Antimetabole Chiasmus is about flipping ideas, as in: The green of summer; an autumn of blue — Chiasmus (ideas inverted - colour, season, season, colour) When the same words are repeated in reverse order, it's technically antimetabole, a special case of chiasmus, as in most of the examples here: Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind (JFK)— Chiasmus and antimetabole (mankind, end to war, war will end, mankind) Have any fun chiasmus examples that you created or you've spotted? Submit a chiasmus or send it by email, and I'll add it to the list. Why is it called Chiasmus? Chiasmus is based on the Greek letter Chi (pronounced kai), which is an X. If the terms of the chiastic phrase A B B A are placed on top of each other, you get: AB BA Which gives AA and BB in an X shape, just like Chi. (I always ask my amazing aunt who taught classics for this kind of thing) Related Ideas to Chiasmus More techniques of rhetoric and curiosities of language: Anadiplosis — Yoda! Pleonasm — Unexpected surprises Ordering adjectives — green great dragon? Ablaut reduplication — hip-hop, zig-zag RAS Syndrome — ATM machines The Golden Circle — It was the "I have a dream" speech, not the "I have a plan" speech Learn More Mark Forsyth covers the chiasmus meaning and examples (and anadiplosis, pleonasm, adjective order, ablaut reduplication and others) in the entertaining The Elements of Eloquence. You can also listen to and watch him recite examples in his TEDx Talk: How to Talk Yourself into the White House (12 min). He shares most of the examples included here. Earlier versions of JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you..." exist, including from author and poet Khalil Gibran (also see Grow not in each other's shadow).When JFK, in his inaugural address, said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," he wasn’t just delivering one of the most famous presidential lines ever—he was also using a rhetorical device called chiasmus. What is Chiasmus? Chiasmus is the name for arranging words, phrases, or ideas in the structure A-B-B-A. The second half of the sentence mirrors the first half, flipping the order. The symmetry of thought of this rhetorical technique makes language more memorable, striking, and often more persuasive. Chiasmus can involve just ideas, or the exact repetition of words (that special case is called antimetabole). Famous Examples of Chiasmus Chiasmus shows up again and again in political speeches, literature, music, and everyday expressions. Mark Forsyth, who is full of brilliant and entertaining examples, notes that few presidents and presidential candidates in recent memory have resisted the lure of chiasmus. Here are some well-known presidential examples: "You stood up for America; now America must stand up for you." — Barack Obama "Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done." — George W Bush (Jr) "Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate." — JFK "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." — Bill Clinton "The difference between them and us is that we want to check government spending, and they want to spend government checks." — Ronald Reagan "America did not invent human rights; human rights invented America." — Jimmy Carter "In the end, the true test is not the speeches a president delivers, it's whether the president delivers on the speeches." — Hillary Clinton Aside from presidential candidates, other examples include: Between what is said and not meant, and what is meant and not said, most of love is lost. — Kahlil Gibran All for one and one for all — the 3 Musketeers Tea for two and two for tea, Me for you and you for me — the 1925 Musical, No, No Nanette When the going gets tough, the tough gets going — Billy Ocean With my mind on my money and my money on my mind — Snoop Dogg What is a number that a man may know it, and a man that he may know a number? — Warren McCulloch Good from far but far from good I don't always say what I mean, but I always mean what I say. Never let a fool kiss you, or a kiss fool you I have never forgotten a print-out at the bottom of some stairs in UC Berkeley: "Take the stairs and add years to your life and life to your years." Why is Chiasmus Effective? I don't know if there is a scientific reason why chiasmus is appealing to us, but a few ideas come to mind. It's rhythmic. The mirrored structure is naturally pleasing to the ear, as in Edward Lear's, "They went to sea in a Sieve, they did, In a Sieve they went to sea." It's clever. Chiasmus surprises us by flipping words or ideas into a new sense, as in the use of the word "life" in Mae West's "It's not the men in my life, it's the life in my men." It's easy to remember. If you can remember the first half, you can often reconstruct the second: A place for everything...and everything in its place. Chiasmus vs Antimetabole Chiasmus is about flipping ideas, as in: The green of summer; an autumn of blue — Chiasmus (ideas inverted - colour, season, season, colour) When the same words are repeated in reverse order, it's technically antimetabole, a special case of chiasmus, as in most of the examples here: Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind (JFK)— Chiasmus and antimetabole (mankind, end to war, war will end, mankind) Have any fun chiasmus examples that you created or you've spotted? Submit a chiasmus or send it by email, and I'll add it to the list. Why is it called Chiasmus? Chiasmus is based on the Greek letter Chi (pronounced kai), which is an X. If the terms of the chiastic phrase A B B A are placed on top of each other, you get: AB BA Which gives AA and BB in an X shape, just like Chi. (I always ask my amazing aunt who taught classics for this kind of thing) Related Ideas to Chiasmus More techniques of rhetoric and curiosities of language: Anadiplosis — Yoda! Pleonasm — Unexpected surprises Ordering adjectives — green great dragon? Ablaut reduplication — hip-hop, zig-zag RAS Syndrome — ATM machines The Golden Circle — It was the "I have a dream" speech, not the "I have a plan" speech Learn More Mark Forsyth covers the chiasmus meaning and examples (and anadiplosis, pleonasm, adjective order, ablaut reduplication and others) in the entertaining The Elements of Eloquence. You can also listen to and watch him recite examples in his TEDx Talk: How to Talk Yourself into the White House (12 min). He shares most of the examples included here. Earlier versions of JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you..." exist, including from author and poet Khalil Gibran (also see Grow not in each other's shadow).

31 Aug

Murphy's Law

When you're in a hurry and the light turns red. When your toast falls butter side down. When you visit the shop on the only day it's closed—all classic Murphy's Law. What is Murphy's Law Murphy's Law is: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Other common phrasings of Murphy's Law include: If it can go wrong, it will If something can go wrong, it will go wrong Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong. I'd always taken the meaning of Murphy's Law as a pessimistic view of the universe. A kind of "well, typical," "just my luck," "of course it would happen to me," kind of attitude. People invoke it as a convenient excuse for things not going well — a chance to complain and feel that events weren't their fault. My dad always called it Sod’s Law, the more British version of the phrase. I've come to realise that the original meaning of Murphy's Law was more optimistic than pessimistic. For instance, if a box should be a particular way up, we should assume that at some point, someone will put it the wrong way up. So maybe we could design it so that it can't be placed the wrong way up, forcing people to orient it correctly. If you think of the ways something could go wrong and plan for them, there's less chance of them getting you. The Murphy's Law Legend There's a strong—though disputed—origin story for Murphy's Law. The most common story goes something like this. A U.S. Air Force team at Edwards Air Force Base was investigating the effects of extreme acceleration and deceleration on the human body using rocket sleds. They installed new strain gauges, supplied by an engineer named Edward Murphy. But they found the gauges didn't work. Murphy was called in and discovered that someone had installed the gauges incorrectly. Frustrated, he reportedly said something along the lines of: "If that guy has any way of doing something wrong, he'll do it wrong." The team were in the habit of inventing "laws" for different members of the team. George Nichol's recalls changing the initial phrasing to If it can happen, it will happen. And in a press conference, John Paul Stapp, the inspirational team lead who subjected himself to the extreme testing, shared Murphy's Law as: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. It caught on. Murphy himself later said about the strain gauges, "I made a terrible mistake—I didn't cover every possibility for putting these together." In other words, the lesson was not that fate conspires against you, but that if something can be done incorrectly, it eventually will be—so design to prevent it. This connects Murphy's Law to concepts like foolproof design, forcing functions, or the Japanese poka-yoke (mistake-proofing). Incidentally, the team also coined Stapp's Law as: The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle. Stapp's work in understanding the limits of the body didn't just improve aerospace safety. He saw that more people, even in the Air Force, were dying in car crashes than aircraft accidents. Rather than just focusing on preventing crashes, with a very Murphy's Law mindset, Stapp instead asked, When the inevitable car crash does happen, how can we prevent people from dying? His advocacy helped bring about seatbelts, safety glass, and eventually airbags—saving countless lives. But we love a good story. Fred Shapiro, a law librarian and editor of the Yale Book of Quotations, disputes this as the origins of Murphy's Law. He also offers us these wise words: "Anytime someone tells you 'Mark Twain said this,' the one thing you know is that Mark Twain didn't say that." Misunderstanding Murphy's Law A few cognitive biases make us notice failures more than successes: The frequency illusion naturally makes us more aware of what's top of mind—if we're looking for bad things happening to us, we'll start to notice them more frequently. Survivorship bias leads us to overlook all the times that something bad didn't happen to us. And because unfortunate events easily stick in our memory, salience bias can lead us to overestimate how common they really are. For instance, my Law of Lockers is that if you're the only two people in the changing rooms, your lockers will be next to each other. But of course I'm sure I'm ignoring all the many more times our lockers weren't on top of each other. Murphy's Law as an Optimistic Viewpoint And so, in a classic Murphy's Law style example, I've concluded that I generally misunderstood Murphy's Law. It doesn't have to highlight all the bad luck I have. Instead, it can be a call to consider what can go wrong, and given there's a chance that it will, prepare for that so it doesn't. Related Ideas to Murphy's Law Muphry's Law: when criticising spelling or grammar, you'll make a mistake yourself. Plan ahead A mistake is not something to be determined after the fact Hanlon's Razor Thoughtless acts Forcing function Kitchen table survival skills Unknown unknowns Eponyms Finagle's Law: Anything that can go wrong, will—at the worst possible moment. More about Murphy's Law and its origins: Nick Spark's book A History of Murphy's Law A super Decoder Ring podcast episode on Murphy's Law by Willa Paskin, from where I learned much of the origins I did several different versions of this sketch and kept coming back to the wonderful Far Side cartoon of the penguin and the banana skin. O'Toole's comment on Murphy's Law: Murphy was an optimist. Just because someone called it a law doesn't mean it is.When you're in a hurry and the light turns red. When your toast falls butter side down. When you visit the shop on the only day it's closed—all classic Murphy's Law. What is Murphy's Law Murphy's Law is: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Other common phrasings of Murphy's Law include: If it can go wrong, it will If something can go wrong, it will go wrong Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong. I'd always taken the meaning of Murphy's Law as a pessimistic view of the universe. A kind of "well, typical," "just my luck," "of course it would happen to me," kind of attitude. People invoke it as a convenient excuse for things not going well — a chance to complain and feel that events weren't their fault. My dad always called it Sod’s Law, the more British version of the phrase. I've come to realise that the original meaning of Murphy's Law was more optimistic than pessimistic. For instance, if a box should be a particular way up, we should assume that at some point, someone will put it the wrong way up. So maybe we could design it so that it can't be placed the wrong way up, forcing people to orient it correctly. If you think of the ways something could go wrong and plan for them, there's less chance of them getting you. The Murphy's Law Legend There's a strong—though disputed—origin story for Murphy's Law. The most common story goes something like this. A U.S. Air Force team at Edwards Air Force Base was investigating the effects of extreme acceleration and deceleration on the human body using rocket sleds. They installed new strain gauges, supplied by an engineer named Edward Murphy. But they found the gauges didn't work. Murphy was called in and discovered that someone had installed the gauges incorrectly. Frustrated, he reportedly said something along the lines of: "If that guy has any way of doing something wrong, he'll do it wrong." The team were in the habit of inventing "laws" for different members of the team. George Nichol's recalls changing the initial phrasing to If it can happen, it will happen. And in a press conference, John Paul Stapp, the inspirational team lead who subjected himself to the extreme testing, shared Murphy's Law as: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. It caught on. Murphy himself later said about the strain gauges, "I made a terrible mistake—I didn't cover every possibility for putting these together." In other words, the lesson was not that fate conspires against you, but that if something can be done incorrectly, it eventually will be—so design to prevent it. This connects Murphy's Law to concepts like foolproof design, forcing functions, or the Japanese poka-yoke (mistake-proofing). Incidentally, the team also coined Stapp's Law as: The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle. Stapp's work in understanding the limits of the body didn't just improve aerospace safety. He saw that more people, even in the Air Force, were dying in car crashes than aircraft accidents. Rather than just focusing on preventing crashes, with a very Murphy's Law mindset, Stapp instead asked, When the inevitable car crash does happen, how can we prevent people from dying? His advocacy helped bring about seatbelts, safety glass, and eventually airbags—saving countless lives. But we love a good story. Fred Shapiro, a law librarian and editor of the Yale Book of Quotations, disputes this as the origins of Murphy's Law. He also offers us these wise words: "Anytime someone tells you 'Mark Twain said this,' the one thing you know is that Mark Twain didn't say that." Misunderstanding Murphy's Law A few cognitive biases make us notice failures more than successes: The frequency illusion naturally makes us more aware of what's top of mind—if we're looking for bad things happening to us, we'll start to notice them more frequently. Survivorship bias leads us to overlook all the times that something bad didn't happen to us. And because unfortunate events easily stick in our memory, salience bias can lead us to overestimate how common they really are. For instance, my Law of Lockers is that if you're the only two people in the changing rooms, your lockers will be next to each other. But of course I'm sure I'm ignoring all the many more times our lockers weren't on top of each other. Murphy's Law as an Optimistic Viewpoint And so, in a classic Murphy's Law style example, I've concluded that I generally misunderstood Murphy's Law. It doesn't have to highlight all the bad luck I have. Instead, it can be a call to consider what can go wrong, and given there's a chance that it will, prepare for that so it doesn't. Related Ideas to Murphy's Law Muphry's Law: when criticising spelling or grammar, you'll make a mistake yourself. Plan ahead A mistake is not something to be determined after the fact Hanlon's Razor Thoughtless acts Forcing function Kitchen table survival skills Unknown unknowns Eponyms Finagle's Law: Anything that can go wrong, will—at the worst possible moment. More about Murphy's Law and its origins: Nick Spark's book A History of Murphy's Law A super Decoder Ring podcast episode on Murphy's Law by Willa Paskin, from where I learned much of the origins I did several different versions of this sketch and kept coming back to the wonderful Far Side cartoon of the penguin and the banana skin. O'Toole's comment on Murphy's Law: Murphy was an optimist. Just because someone called it a law doesn't mean it is.

24 Aug

Temperature palindromes: Handy reference points for converting fahrenheit to celsius - 82-28 and 61-16

Temperature Palindromes: Converting Between Fahrenheit and Celsius

As someone who’s spent time—and has friends—on both sides of the Atlantic, I’ve often needed to understand temperatures in both Fahrenheit and Celsius. Like learning a new language or switching between miles and kilometres, the best way is to immerse yourself in a new scale so you just know what 55°F or 24°C feels like. But if you haven't reached that point, it can be helpful to have a few conversion benchmarks. Fahrenheit and Celsius Temperature Palindromes These two temperature palindromes are handy markers for gauging temperatures in both Fahrenheit and Celsius—and they’re surprisingly accurate: 82°F is 28°C 61°F is 16°C I'm partial to a palindrome—a word or number that is read the same backwards as forwards—and as far as I'm concerned, it makes these two much easier to remember. A couple of related points people shared with me, though some are less useful for the average weather forecast: 68°F = 20°C and 86°F = 30°C — useful benchmarks and 68/86 are palindromic 104°F is 40°C — almost a palindrome 11°F is ≈ -11°C (Actually -11.7°C.) -40°F = -40°C How to Convert Fahrenheit to Celsius (and vice versa) The actual formula to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius is: C = (F – 32) x 5/9 This is because: The Fahrenheit scale starts at 32° higher than the Celsius scale. So, 32°F is 0°C. The 5/9 means that each degree Celsius is just under 2 degrees Fahrenheit—it's actually 1.8°F. This is why the basic conversion from Fahrenheit to Celsius that I use is "Minus 32, divide by 2" (which handily rhymes). It's not perfect because each degree Fahrenheit is not quite half of a degree Celsius, but it's pretty close. Using this simplified formula for the palindrome figures gives: 82°F-32=50, divide 50/2 = 25°C (it's actually 27.8°C) 61°F-32=29, divide 29/2 = 14.5°C (it's actually 16.1°C) If you don't fancy some mental maths, using the palindromes is not a bad starting point. If you see a temperature around 61°F, you know it's around 16°C, and a temperature around 82°F is going to be around 28°C. Hope it's helpful! Related Ideas to Temperature Palindromes Palindromes and Semordnilap I learned about 82–28 from my neighbour when I mentioned I was working on the sketch for Temperature Scales: Fahrenheit and Celsius. Some digging gave me the 61–16 point as well. The Fun Scale: three types of fun The Bortle Scale: the clarity of the night sky The Scoville Scale: chilli heat The Goldilocks Zone Word SpectrumAs someone who’s spent time—and has friends—on both sides of the Atlantic, I’ve often needed to understand temperatures in both Fahrenheit and Celsius. Like learning a new language or switching between miles and kilometres, the best way is to immerse yourself in a new scale so you just know what 55°F or 24°C feels like. But if you haven't reached that point, it can be helpful to have a few conversion benchmarks. Fahrenheit and Celsius Temperature Palindromes These two temperature palindromes are handy markers for gauging temperatures in both Fahrenheit and Celsius—and they’re surprisingly accurate: 82°F is 28°C 61°F is 16°C I'm partial to a palindrome—a word or number that is read the same backwards as forwards—and as far as I'm concerned, it makes these two much easier to remember. A couple of related points people shared with me, though some are less useful for the average weather forecast: 68°F = 20°C and 86°F = 30°C — useful benchmarks and 68/86 are palindromic 104°F is 40°C — almost a palindrome 11°F is ≈ -11°C (Actually -11.7°C.) -40°F = -40°C How to Convert Fahrenheit to Celsius (and vice versa) The actual formula to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius is: C = (F – 32) x 5/9 This is because: The Fahrenheit scale starts at 32° higher than the Celsius scale. So, 32°F is 0°C. The 5/9 means that each degree Celsius is just under 2 degrees Fahrenheit—it's actually 1.8°F. This is why the basic conversion from Fahrenheit to Celsius that I use is "Minus 32, divide by 2" (which handily rhymes). It's not perfect because each degree Fahrenheit is not quite half of a degree Celsius, but it's pretty close. Using this simplified formula for the palindrome figures gives: 82°F-32=50, divide 50/2 = 25°C (it's actually 27.8°C) 61°F-32=29, divide 29/2 = 14.5°C (it's actually 16.1°C) If you don't fancy some mental maths, using the palindromes is not a bad starting point. If you see a temperature around 61°F, you know it's around 16°C, and a temperature around 82°F is going to be around 28°C. Hope it's helpful! Related Ideas to Temperature Palindromes Palindromes and Semordnilap I learned about 82–28 from my neighbour when I mentioned I was working on the sketch for Temperature Scales: Fahrenheit and Celsius. Some digging gave me the 61–16 point as well. The Fun Scale: three types of fun The Bortle Scale: the clarity of the night sky The Scoville Scale: chilli heat The Goldilocks Zone Word Spectrum

17 Aug

What is Grandma’s Rule? Illustration of the Premack Principle showing a child told ‘Vegetables first, then dessert’ and the First, Then Rule

Grandma's Rule: First_, Then_

It's not clear to me whether the familiar childhood refrain of "First eat your vegetables, and then you can have dessert," is borne out of desperation or generational experience. As a parent myself, I'd hazard desperation, but perhaps I was simply passing down time-tested wisdom. The technique of sequencing a preferred activity contingent on completing a less preferred one is known as Grandma's Rule. It follows the pattern: First ____. Then ____. The Premack Principle Grandma's Rule is also known as the Premack Principle, after psychology Professor David Premack. The principle is that more probable behaviours can reinforce less probable behaviours. In our grandma example, the promise of cake (high-probability behaviour) encourages eating vegetables (low-probability behaviour). For the rule to work, there has to be a clear preference difference between the two activities—a probability differential. “First tidy your room, then do the dishes” likely won’t cut it. Premack studied the principle, including when it works and doesn't, with both animals and people. He also did some remarkable work teaching language to chimpanzees using elements of the rule to reinforce correct interpretations. For example, a chimp might receive fruit if it placed a symbol in the correct spot. Alternatives to Grandma's Rule Grandma's Rule can be effective, but it's rather transactional. And it's unlikely, except through habit and repetition, to engender happy thoughts towards eating your vegetables. However, it might get some fibre into kids. A close cousin is Temptation Bundling, a self-motivation technique studied by Katy Milkman. Temptation bundling motivates you to do something you need to do by pairing it with something you enjoy. In her experiment, for example, participants were only permitted to listen to an audiobook of The Hunger Games—which is indeed rather compelling—while exercising at the gym. But you might also bundle your need-to-dos with your temptations in sequence, Grandma's Rule style. For instance, only buying a smoothie after finishing a workout. Grandma’s Rule as a Commitment Device When you use Grandma's Rule on yourself, it can act as a light-touch commitment device. For example, you might buckle down on your essay by holding a delicious snack "hostage" until it's finished. The rule helps lock you into a future course of action when you are tempted to do otherwise. Making Good Habits More Attractive By pairing the less enjoyable with the enjoyable, Grandma's Rule also makes an activity, or a good habit, more attractive. This is one of the simple habit-building strategies suggested in James Clear's Atomic Habits. You can also connect a good habit to your identity by saying, for example, "I'm the kind of person who eats vegetables first." Over time, this may have the effect of making it less about extrinsic motivation—rewards or punishment. Perhaps you'll even grow up to love your vegetables. Lastly, now we understand the full irresistible power of variable rewards, I wonder if Grandma wasn't missing a trick by incorporating some variability into dessert 🤔 Related Ideas to Grandma's Rule Here are some related concepts to Grandma's Rule: What Drives Us: Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose Temptation Bundling Extrinsic Motivation The Power of Streaks Commitment Device Public Commitment Pledge Implementation Intentions Eat the Frog The Irresistible Power of Variable Rewards Unconditional Parenting The Fun Scale The Pomodoro Technique Eat less with smaller plates Anyone would think I have a problem with getting myself to do things 🙄 PS Here's Calvin eating his vegetablesIt's not clear to me whether the familiar childhood refrain of "First eat your vegetables, and then you can have dessert," is borne out of desperation or generational experience. As a parent myself, I'd hazard desperation, but perhaps I was simply passing down time-tested wisdom. The technique of sequencing a preferred activity contingent on completing a less preferred one is known as Grandma's Rule. It follows the pattern: First ____. Then ____. The Premack Principle Grandma's Rule is also known as the Premack Principle, after psychology Professor David Premack. The principle is that more probable behaviours can reinforce less probable behaviours. In our grandma example, the promise of cake (high-probability behaviour) encourages eating vegetables (low-probability behaviour). For the rule to work, there has to be a clear preference difference between the two activities—a probability differential. “First tidy your room, then do the dishes” likely won’t cut it. Premack studied the principle, including when it works and doesn't, with both animals and people. He also did some remarkable work teaching language to chimpanzees using elements of the rule to reinforce correct interpretations. For example, a chimp might receive fruit if it placed a symbol in the correct spot. Alternatives to Grandma's Rule Grandma's Rule can be effective, but it's rather transactional. And it's unlikely, except through habit and repetition, to engender happy thoughts towards eating your vegetables. However, it might get some fibre into kids. A close cousin is Temptation Bundling, a self-motivation technique studied by Katy Milkman. Temptation bundling motivates you to do something you need to do by pairing it with something you enjoy. In her experiment, for example, participants were only permitted to listen to an audiobook of The Hunger Games—which is indeed rather compelling—while exercising at the gym. But you might also bundle your need-to-dos with your temptations in sequence, Grandma's Rule style. For instance, only buying a smoothie after finishing a workout. Grandma’s Rule as a Commitment Device When you use Grandma's Rule on yourself, it can act as a light-touch commitment device. For example, you might buckle down on your essay by holding a delicious snack "hostage" until it's finished. The rule helps lock you into a future course of action when you are tempted to do otherwise. Making Good Habits More Attractive By pairing the less enjoyable with the enjoyable, Grandma's Rule also makes an activity, or a good habit, more attractive. This is one of the simple habit-building strategies suggested in James Clear's Atomic Habits. You can also connect a good habit to your identity by saying, for example, "I'm the kind of person who eats vegetables first." Over time, this may have the effect of making it less about extrinsic motivation—rewards or punishment. Perhaps you'll even grow up to love your vegetables. Lastly, now we understand the full irresistible power of variable rewards, I wonder if Grandma wasn't missing a trick by incorporating some variability into dessert 🤔 Related Ideas to Grandma's Rule Here are some related concepts to Grandma's Rule: What Drives Us: Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose Temptation Bundling Extrinsic Motivation The Power of Streaks Commitment Device Public Commitment Pledge Implementation Intentions Eat the Frog The Irresistible Power of Variable Rewards Unconditional Parenting The Fun Scale The Pomodoro Technique Eat less with smaller plates Anyone would think I have a problem with getting myself to do things 🙄 PS Here's Calvin eating his vegetables

10 Aug

Search·Categories·Archive·List