Film Review of We Live in Public for Soc 1010

Personally, I was most attracted to the film’s music selection.  I have seen hundreds (possibly thousands) of documentaries.  In my experience, documentaries generally tell a story from a one-sided perspective, most of them have an agenda (i.e. make the primary character look good, incite anger against “injustices”, etc...) and most of them use music to appeal to the emotion of the audience.  It’s hard to deny that music can intensify or even create the emotion the filmmaker was looking for.  For example, most horror movies are much less suspenseful when on mute; it’s the music that creates an atmosphere of suspense.

We Live in Public used this technique of emotional appeal through music, but in a very choreographed way.  The music selected for the scenes were typically popular songs from the same era as the scene and also had the emotional appeal to compliment the content of the scenes.  This is a brilliant idea to appeal to the audience of the same era while encouraging emotion and at the same time setting a chronological frame of reference.

While music can strongly encourage an emotional connection this can also be a weakness.  To the conscientious observer, music can also expose the motives of the filmmaker.  Throughout the film, when Josh is speaking about himself or when someone is speaking about Josh, there is soft, ambient music in minor keys, which is generally used to incite sympathy or sadness.  In the opening scenes when the film is talking about people losing their identities and becoming a statistic, the music is eerie, strings driven, offset chords, which is generally used to encourage suspense and/or fear.

According to the music, the film was meant to sympathize with Josh Harris as a person and condemn the influence of the internet in our society.  In a way, it seems like an apologetic film as if we (the audience) should forgive Josh Harris for his foresight and contribution to the advancement of technological society.  It urges us to acknowledge the separation between Josh (the person) and the ever advancing internet (the monster).  It’s a little bit like Dr. Frankenstein.

Josh’s “social experiment”, Quiet, fell a bit short of the experimental standards.  Even Josh admitted that he didn’t know what to expect as a result of the experiment.  According to the Scientific Method, an experiment should have a theory, hypothesis, variables, data and an explanation of results.

Quiet had a theory, but that was about it (as far as we understand from this film).  There was no hypothesis, there were no variables, there was a lot of data, but no explanation of results.  From a scientific standpoint, Quiet comes off as more of an eccentric person’s personal party than a true experiment.

That personal party did have some revealing responses, however the responses were never explained and there was seemingly no sociological advancement or understanding as a result.

Quiet did have a very interesting insight on culture.  By creating this isolated group of people (some more exhibitive than others, but all probably had some sort of exhibitionism) Josh’s experiment showed how cultures and/or sub-cultures adapt.

The people in this experiment adapted to their conditions of no privacy and no identity.  While some people seemed to struggle with this more than others, it seemed the majority learned to adapt to the situation.

However, it was stated in the film, “If you ask someone to take off their pants, they won’t do it.  If you have a camera and ask someone to take off their pants, they probably will.”  This suggests that the idea of being watched (or “fame”) causes individuals to act in “unusual” behavior.

So perhaps Quiet was an experiment to see if a culture’s “unusual” behavior can or will adapt and become usual and at what pace.

The Mass of the Earth for AST 1040

Statement of Purpose:  Estimate the total amount of matter which makes up the earth (mass) using a pendulum of one meter under the influence of gravity.

Statement of Procedure:  I created a pendulum of one meter (measured from center of weight (or “bob”) to anchor point).  Using this pendulum I calculated the acceleration of gravity by timing a 15° angle of swing and finding an average time per swing (out of 10 swings).  Taking the (rounded) average time per swing (T) and the length of my pendulum (1 meter) (L), I used the equation T=2π√ (L/g) to find the acceleration of gravity (g) in m/s².  Then using the found acceleration of gravity (g), the known Universal Gravitational Constant (6.673 x 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2) (G) and the known radius of the Earth (6378km or 6378000m or 6.378 x 10⁶m) (R) I found the mass of the Earth in kilograms (M) using the equation M=g(R²/G).  I repeated this ten times to average my results for the mass of the Earth.

Data:

Trial	Length  in Meters (L)	Time of 10 swings in seconds	Time of 10 swings in seconds (rounded)(t)	Average Time per swing in seconds t/10 (T)	Acceleration of Gravity in m/s2 (g)	Mass of Earth in Kilograms
1	1	19.85	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
2	1	19.66	19.5	1.9	11	6.67 x 1024
3	1	20.10	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
4	1	19.93	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
5	1	19.89	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
6	1	20.21	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
7	1	20.24	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
8	1	20.02	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
9	1	20.38	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
10	1	20.26	20	2	10	6.02 x 1024
					Average Mass =	6.08 x 1024

Statement of Conclusion:   My final conclusion is that the Earth has a mass of approximately 6.08 x 10²⁴kg.  After looking up the actual mass of the Earth (5.9722 x 10²⁴) I am fairly pleased with my estimation.  I was estimating 15°, my measured string may not have been precisely one meter and my stop watch times were probably a little off due to response time, plus I rounded them anyways.  If I had more accurately measured 15°, somehow measured exactly one meter of string and somehow automated an instantly reacting stop watch and used those accurate measurements, my final calculations would probably be much closer to the known acceleration of gravity on Earth (9.807m/s²) and mass of the Earth.  Also, using Newton’s Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum (angular momentum(g) = mass x velocity(T) x radius(L)) I was able to find that the mass of my bob was about 5kg, which I had not previously measured but would estimate is accurate.

1)      What is the effect of the length of the string on the period of a pendulum?  That is, how do the periods compare for pendulums of different length?  Would pendulums of different length give the same or different values for the mass of the Earth?

a.       Newton’s Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum (angular momentum = mvr) says that as the length (or radius) of an orbit increases, the mass or velocity must decrease to maintain angular momentum.  Since the mass of the pendulum bob cannot decrease, the velocity must.  So a longer string on the pendulum (radius) must result in a longer period.  The opposite would be true if the pendulum string were shortened, the swing period would be shorter in order to maintain its constant angular momentum.

b.      In this activity pendulums of different length should have the same results for the mass of the Earth.  The equation to find the acceleration of gravity takes the length (L) and the average time per swing (T) into consideration T=2π√ (L/g).  As the length of the pendulum increases, the time should increase proportionately.  Also, the law of conservation of angular momentum (see “a”) states that length is proportional to velocity but not mass.

2)      Is the strength of gravity the same everywhere?  Put another way, does the acceleration of gravity – the rate at which things fall – different on different planets?  Why or why not?

a.       According to the Universal Law of Gravitation (F_g=GM₁M₂/R²), the strength of gravity(F_g) weakens with distance(R) in a squarely inverse proportion (2x distance = ¼ gravitational force) between two objects.  We feel the same pull of gravity because we (average human) generally do not travel a distance far enough from the center (or surface) of the Earth to feel a noticeable change.  So the strength of gravity is the same everywhere on the surface of the Earth, but it does change when there is a notable distance between two objects.

b.      The acceleration of gravity(F_g) will change on another planet that does not have the same mass and radius as Earth.  While all objects (regardless of mass) will accelerate at the same rate (providing no other forces act on it) no matter which planet you are on, the rate of acceleration will be determined by the radius and mass of the planet.

c.       The Gravitational Constant (G) is the attraction between two objects and it is the same everywhere.

3)      Would the period of a one meter pendulum be the same on Earth and the Moon?  Why or why not?

a.       Because the Moon is less massive (7.36 x 10²²kg) this experiment would have very different results.  The lesser mass of the Moon creates a much weaker gravitational pull (1.63m/s²), so a pendulum of one meter would swing (accelerate) much slower on the Moon than it does on the Earth.  Using the same formula as before (T=2π√ (L/g)) but plugging in the moon’s gravitational acceleration, the same experiment would have an approximate swing period (T) of about 5 seconds on the moon as opposed to the swing period (T) of about 2 seconds on the Earth.

4)      Why do you think we refer to the Universal Law of Gravity and the Universal gravitational Constant?  Why “Universal”?

a.       Gravity is everywhere.  It may lose strength over distance, but every object which has mass has gravity and is thusly attracted to and attracts other objects of mass.  This is what we refer to as the Universal Law of Gravity.  This law does not only apply on Earth or in our solar system, it is a Universal Law that applies to all massive objects in the universe.

The Universal Gravitational Constant (big G) is the measure of the attraction between any two (or more) massive objects.  This attraction is constant throughout the universe, however depending on the mass and distance of the objects will determine the acceleration due to gravity (small g).

Altitude & Azimuth for AST1040

Statement of Purpose:  This activity will demonstrate my ability to properly submit an activity write up for this class, as well as my ability to properly locate and record the location of a given object in the sky.  This activity will also show that objects in the sky (in this instance, the moon) change location and appearance throughout a given time period as seen from a given point on earth.

Statement of Procedure:  This activity required that I step outside, locate the moon and estimate it’s altitude (horizon being 0°, zenith (point directly above head) being 90°) and azimuth (360° horizon according to true north – true north being 0°, south being  180°), and to record this data along with the time of the observation and the appearance of the moon at that time.  The next step of the activity was to incorporate the observed data into a complete activity write up in such a way as to explain the activity, complete with analysis of the data to complete a statement of conclusion, and demonstrate a proper activity write up simultaneously.

Data:

Date	Time	Location	Lunar Altitude	Lunar Azimuth	Appearance
9/2/2011	9:20 PM	Home, N Denver	15 deg	210 deg	first quarter, half full, slight lean to the right
9/5/2011	7:02 PM	Home, N Denver	40 deg	180 deg	waxing gibbous, slightly more than half full, straight vertical
9/8/2011	6:34 PM	Home, N Denver	15 deg	140 deg	waxing gibbous, more than half full, slight lean to the left
9/11/2011	9:16 PM	Home, N Denver	25 deg	125 deg	Full Moon

Statement of Conclusion:  Throughout a period of nine days, the moon changes location and appearance as seen from a given point on earth.  The most noticeable change is my first and last recordings.  Both observations were made around the same time in the evening, but the results were drastically different, both in location and appearance.  The data would probably show more incremental changes if the observations were made closer together.  If I were to observe the moon on an hourly basis, I believe my data would reflect the moon’s altitude and azimuth changing more subtly while the appearance would stay nearly the same.  If I were to observe the moon on a daily basis, I believe my data would reflect the moon’s altitude, azimuth and appearance changing.  The observations that I collected could be broken down into smaller increments to show the subtle but steady motion of the moon across the sky as seen from a given point on earth.

1)      After having done your observations, do you think you could repeat these observations exactly in two weeks?  Why or why not?

a.       I could repeat the observations; however, they wouldn’t be exactly the same.  The moon would not be in the same place nor would it appear the same.  As the moon revolves around the earth and the earth around the sun, the moon will appear in different phases and locations in the sky from a given point on earth.  For instance, my first and last observations were only one week apart and they vary drastically.  In two weeks from my last observation, the moon would not be visible because the sun’s glare would blot it out (new moon).

2)      Must these observations be done during the night-time?  Why or why not?

a.       The observations can be done during the day-time as long as the moon is not in its “new moon” phase.  For instance, the Full Moon rises at about sunset, a Waning Gibbous Moon sets at a few hours after sunrise, a Third Quarter Moon doesn’t even set until about noon.  The New Moon is in the sky during the day, however it cannot be seen because the sun’s light “washes it out”.  So, no, the observations do not be done during the night-time, they can also be done during the day, providing the moon is in the appropriate phase(s).

3)      How accurate do you think your observations are? (Just how you feel about it)

a.       I would guess my observations are accurate to within about 20°.  It is difficult to see the horizon from my point of observation, as it is obstructed from view by trees, houses, mountains, etc.  Also, my estimations of azimuth are based on another estimation of where I am in relation to “true north”.  I feel like the appearances are accurately observed.  Ideally, these observations should be made from a large flat, unobstructed viewpoint.

4)      Imagine that another student made the same observations at the same time as you, except from a location 10 miles away from you.  How do you think that would affect the observations?  In other words, how different do you think they would be from yours?

If another student made observations at the same time(s) that I did, the results would be different, but not by much.  The appearance of the moon would stay the same; however the altitude and azimuth might be subtly different, maybe one or two degrees difference.  Also, the observations would depend on how similarly the other student and I estimate.