Khan I guess the 2011 US Open Champion?

2011 US Open men's tennis champion. Can I predict it?

It's all in the numbers. The more the numbers, the better. The more fiddling with them, the fancier.  Fanciness will lead to concealment. From there the plausibilities are endless.  Of course, I joke: I am eager for you to understand.  To that end, I hope to make these crazy charts understandable.

To get at the numbers and what I'll conclude from them, it will take some explaining first.  Hold tight; it'll all make sense and lead to a thrilling conclusion.

I describe the performance of Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic over the period 2008 to the middle of 2011.  The three men have been selected because together they have held the number one ranking in men's professional tennis from 2004 until today; by 'today' I mean this very morning.  Roger himself maintained the equivalent of this 'Superbowl champion' status -- that's what an achievement #1 is -- for five years running.

In the charts below I record results in the four 'majors' over the years, 2008 through the middle of 2011.  For a player to enter and to be seeded properly depends upon points he acquires in the year dated from the last day of the prior November.  The players that play in the four 'major' tournaments are selected by the total number of points listed on the ladder or by special selection (top amateurs, for example).

Here are the major tournaments' names and locations (plus the headers I'll be using).  In calendar order: the Australian open (Melbourne, Australia - AUS), the French Open (Paris - FRE), the Championships at Wimbledon -- really, please -- Wimbledon (London -WIMBL, WIMBLE) and finally the US Open (New York -- USOP).





<September 19, 2011 --  While the tournament has passed, the mechanism I developed and the predictions were already written; so, just to show the method, I reproduce here the results and comparisons to show how well the what was predicted. >

We would conclude from the numbers that Federer  is a long shot among the three.  Further, that if Nadal and Djokovic play the final the match will be ultra-tight and a toss-up.  What actually happened, that Federer took Djokovic to two Federer match points before being overwhelmed after Djokovic finally relaxed (at a joke he himself made that brought much merriment and applause from the crowd).

Therefor the 4.3 versus 2.3 matchup came at one point to a razor's edge.

The final pitting Nadal against the #1 Djokovic was a blister-barrage of Novak over Rafael, a straight sets victory never in question over the three sets.  A four of seven set match, taking no account of fatigue, might have gone to Nadal, as he was conceding less and less each set (6-1, 6-2, 6-4); however, this scenario takes no account of the distress he'd experience over how hard it was to win service games.

My poor prediction came down to a couple of errors.  I gave Nadal a point in intangibles, for his likely extra drive to regain the number #1 ranking.  This was a thin rationalization in that this drive was clouded over by a spoken pessimism of Nadal's I can reproduce with some accuracy, "I have not year found a solution for Djokovic."  This, based on five straight defeats.  Roger had been one of the only two players on tour to have beaten Novak this last year.  

So, I'd now replace the reductions in Nadal's chart from 1 to 0, bringing his prediction to 3.4. 


I ommited one more measure: to account for the chance of the field to win.  Using an arbitrary total  of 12.0 for winning for all players, let's complete the arithmetic.  Federer (4.3), Nadal (3.4), Djokovic (2.4)
 account for 7.0 of the probability.  Tsonga, Soderling, Isner and the rest of the field together would stand a 5.0 chance.


Interestingly, yet to be proven or even examined, to reduce each of our three players numbers by 2.0 yields a number corresponding to the coding system): Federer (2.3 = semifinalisist), Nadal (1.4 =finalist ), and Djokovic (0.4 = winner).  How this really stands up to the method might just be an anecdote.  But??


That's it.  Enjoy the charts.

The chance of each player is expressed in a prediction number given in decimals to one place, a lower number showing a better chance.

From the charts below, the chance of Roger Federer is 4.3.  Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic emerge with only the barest difference in likelihood to win (2.4 to 2.3).  The chief determinants between the two are in reductions and US Opens with Nadal scoring a 1 for US Opens won and Djokovic having 3 points for reductions to Nadal's with 1 point.

Abbreviations used below:

yr-maj = total for all scores for the majors for one of the years in the timeframe

maj-tot= of scores for the majors for a given year, the average

avg-major = average of all the scores for a specific major over the four-year span

tot-avgs = sum of averages for all majors over the four-years

factor = amount by which avg-major (avg of majors' score over 4 years) will be multiplied

tot-wtd = finally, the sum of all weights derived by using (factors times yearly weights) minus the number of US Opens won over period)

-->


-=-=-

Player
FEDERER
Majors
	AUS	FREN	WIMBL	USOP	yr-maj
Yrs
	S 3	F 1	F 1	W  0	5
2009	F  1	W 0	W 0	F   1	2
2010	W 0	Q 5	Q 5	S  3	13
2011	S 3	F 1	Q 5	prediction^	9
				`
maj-tot	5	7	11	4	29
yr 2008	avg-maj	1.25	minmzg 2008	factor 1/5	.25
yr 2009		.5	lessng 2009	1/3	.17
yr 2010		3.2	cutting 2010	1/2	1.6
yr 2011		3	leaving same	1/1	3
	tot-avgs	7.25		tot-wtd	5.29
			minus Opens	1
					4.3
			maj-tot	29
			yr-avg	7.3
			total-wtd	4.3
reductions*			reductions*	0
momentum	0
intangibles	0		Prediction^	4.3^
-=-=-

Player
Raf NADAL
Majors
	AUS	FRE	WIMBL	USOP	yr-maj
Yrs
2008	S 3	W 0	W 0	S  3	6
2009	W 0	10	---	S  3	13
2010	Q 5	W 0	W  0	W  0	5
2011	Q 5	W 0	F 1	prediction^	6
By Major:	13	10	1	6
yr 2008	>	1.5	minmzg 2008	factor 1/5	.3
yr 2009		4.2	lessng 2009	1/3	1.43
yr 2910		1.25	cutting 2010	1/2	.63
yr 2011		2	leaving same	1	2
	avg	7.25		tot-wtd
					4.36
			minus Opens	1
					3.4
			maj-tot	29
			yr-avg	7.25
			total-wtd	3.4
reductions*			reductions*	1
momentum	0
intangibles	1		Prediction^	2.4^

-=-=-

DJOKOVIC Majors AUS  FREN   WIMBL USOP yr-maj Yrs 2008 W 0 S 3  10  SF  3 16 2009 Q  5 10  Q 5  SF  3 23 2010 Q  5 Q 5  S 3   F  1 14 2011 W  0 S 3  W 0 pred^ 3   By Major:  10  21  18 7 56  yr 2008 avg-maj 4 minimzg 2008 factor 1/5 0.8  yr 2009 5.8 lessng 2009          1/3 1.91  yr 2010 3.2 cutting 2010          1/2 1.6  yr 2011 1 leaving same         1 1 tot-avgs 14 tot-wtd 5.31 minus Opens 0 5.3 maj-tot 56 yr-avg 14 total-wtd 5.3 reductions* reductions* -3 momentum -2 <<record intangibles -1  <<#1 Prediction 2.3

Khan Sharapova regain the It factor on the grounds of Wimbledon?

Commentary begins with Maria Sharapova evening the score in the second set of the Ladies final of the 2011 Wimbledon championship; more properly "The Championships, Wimbledon".

Sharapova is twenty-four years old.  At seventeen she won the title, its seemed, by waves of unconscious brilliance.

Her opponent today, Petra Kvitova of Belarus, is swinging her substantial pony-tail side to side while she returns the wide, flat returns that have been the key to Sharapova's game.  Martina (Navratilova, if I must include her last name) is Kvitova's idol.  Like the early Martina, Kvitova is  playing off the base line and goes for shots from every angle and depth of the court.

Kvitova won the first set at 6-3.  She ran out to a 3-2 lead and served for 4-2.   Sharapova repelled her and brought the set to 3-3.  Because the women play the the best out of three sets, Sharapova's serves and ground-strokes in this game could get bring her into a winning rhythm.  Instead she gets broken again.

Kvitova to serve.  At 15-15, Kvitova drives the ball long. It's 15-30.  Next Maria is wide and then long.  40-30, advantage Kvitova.   Just one point for Kvitova to win the point and set: 6-3.   Kvitova wins this game and wins Wimbledon.

Sharapova squwheezes shouts from her esophagus three times and produces three points on her serve.  With the fourth serve, she invites a miss wide from Kvitova.   Thus, it's Petra's turn to serve.   Here she must serve herself.  Two unhittable serves from Kvitova.  The third point: first serve into the net, second serve, Maria dumps into the net.  At forty-love, Kvitova serves for an ace.


Bingo. That's it: Petra Kvitova is the Wimbledon champion. What's more, she used an ace to win it all.   She smiles the smile of a relieved daughter and jubilant victor, hands stretched up a hundred and eighty degrees into the air.

The camera then turns to a close up, shoulder to top of the head, of her father, whose tears well up and throat appears to be choking for lack of oxygen.   Back and forth the lens moves from a frozen father to gamboling daughter.

Once the victory stand goes up, one final sweep to Kvitova's father.   His face is not so red -- after the adrenalin flow, his exposed skin has turned grey.

Khan Tsonga keep winning at Wimbledon?

Results of matches at Wimbledon on Wednesday could have brought the top four players into the semifinals OR could have seen all their less well-known opponents get through.  The outcomes spoiled the pattern I was looking for.  The only improbable ending was a win by Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (12th-seeded) that spoiled an inconceivable Roger Federer record of 178-0 when leading by two sets.

Today, Tsonga is playing Novak Djokovic (2nd-seeded, 2nd in the world, 46-1 in matches this year -- you can close your mouth now).  Djokovic took the first two sets from Tsonga, the first set by a width of a hair.  The loss of the first set hurt Tsonga, but the losing the second was debilitating.

Jo Willy swings his forehand like a club, serves well and hard, plays with utter abandon, and he takes little time between serves.

In the third set, he fell into a lethargy so deep, his snoring was louder than the impact of balls off the rackets.  Suddenly, with Djokovic's tires squeaking over his back, Tsonga regained the full-on energy that had fed him in the hair-raising first set.  He drew even with sweeping flat forehands and monster serves, peppering in some sweet drop shots.  Djokovic covers the court like a hoarder at a flea market; it is not easy to fiind spots to land the ball.  But this is what he did.  He took the set in a tie-break.

As I started this piece, I knew I couldn't get out five lines without one player getting to 2-0.  I thought it would be Djokovic.  I had barely spit out three lines and it was 3-0, Djokovic.  But as in the Federer match, Tsonga swings, lays out, gives a lie to the maxim that 210 men can't dig out 110 degree shots  and has gotten back one game to get the score to 5-3.

To catch up. Djokovic is serving for the fourth set and the match, which, if he wins it, will push him to world ranking of number one.  He has wanted this all his life.

He's serving at 40-15, match point now. No sound is heard because the crowd has shifted its loyalty capriciously from the underdog to the winning side: they clap rhythmically for Djokovic to finish Tsonga off.

In the time I think the word, Djokovic has thrown the ball up, struck it, homed it into the service court.  Tsonga swings and slaps it into the net.

Djo beats Jo.  The last of the new trees falls.

Khan the new players do it at Wimbledon?

As I write, four unlikely players line up against the top 4 men at Wimbledon.  Two have morning slots: Jean-Wilfried Tsonga and Bernard Tomic.  Tsonga is playing the third-seeded Federer while Tomic, an unseeded eighteen year old Australian, faces second-seeded Novak Djokovic of Croatia.

Tsonga has just won the third set at 6-4 after Federer's earlier domination, 6-3, 7-6.  Tsonga's forehand and serve have been parachuted down to Centre Court, just in time.  He moves with fluidity and an easy bounce, his feet getting set just before striking the ball.  In his native France he's likened to Mohammed Ali: the same focused face riding on solid shoulders.  He and Federer split two games for 1-1 in the third.  Tsonga has the lead at 40-30, break-point ... ah, he just broke serve for 2-1.

Tomic and Djokovic have scored in the opposite order, with the younger player winning the first sets.  In the third, the balls Djokovic has been hitting have been floating  langorously, leisurely over the net, matching the strokes Tomic had used from the start.  He adjusted in veteran fashion and changed the nature of the match at the time

NBC has not chosen to update the Tomic match in a half-hour.

Later, Mardy Fish, a US veteran of 29 and a late bloomer, will take on Rafael Nadal, who is ranked #1 in the world and seeded first here.  Fish awoke, he says, in the last several years to a new sense of maturity and began to play seriously.   It has paid off; he's #10 in the world.

The last match of the day is a battle between Andy Murray and  Feliciano Lopez of Spain.  Murray carries the pressure of representing the hopes of Great Britain to capture the men's Wimbledon championship for the first time in seventy-five years.  Fred Perry, a man whose name was an endorsement on polo shirts 50 years ago, was the last native man to win the tournament.  The joke out of England is that he's called an Englishman when he wins and a Scot when he loses.

Tsonga won the third set, 6-4, and now is serving for the fourth step.  NBC commentators had set up the match by speculating whether he would take a single set from Federer.  The question now in play is whether -- Tsonga having just won his serve and the fourth set -- Federer will win the single set he must win to secure the win.

Still no word on Tomic.  I suspect Djokovic must be sqashing him.  Or NBC is maintaining sole focus on the match here.

The greatest thing about Wimbledon this year is that the top four men's players could reach the semifinals.  Then again, four players (given that the momentary blackout of Tomic-Djokovic means nothing) that don't leap off the tongue, reach the semis, one of them getting their name on the clunky gold Edwardian jug.

Tsonga served perfectly in the opening game for 1-0, has just broken Federer for 2-0 and stands at 40-0 in the third game, second serve ... double-fault ... oops, out ... Federer breaks.  Now this could go either way.  Seriously, Federer just needs a scintilla of fire and whoosh!!

But not today, not so much.   And Tomic, and why they haven't referred to him, Djokovic did squash him.  All pretty prophesies in shreds.

The Devil Khandoit

Works of the Devil: the Division of Labor in Hell      

The Devil doesn’t work too hard.  Anytime this is called sloth, He is pleased.   One key to the Devil’s relaxed state is that He is satisfied with handsome chance to capture a human soul. With almost no effort, He gets a crack at sixteen percent of humankind for his eternal pleasure.  Let’s break down this sixteen percent, classifying the candidates into smaller groups according to their qualifications.

Eight per cent of souls dwell in people who are simply evil.   At their arrival the Devil breathes deeply, absorbing their putrid breath with his eyes widened.  He feels the blood rush of his destiny; his sense of purpose comes flying back to him like a falcon to the falconer.  

On earth, the truly evil are rarely spotted: their powers of manipulation, the way they replicate the faces of cordiality, grief and empathy take in ordinary people.  Evil souls work particularly well on people who claim to be particularly keen or sensitive.

Another 7% include the agnostic (or ‘Confused’), Buddhists, fanatics and corporate executives. Of these, more in a moment. 

Atheists make up the last fraction, the last 1%.   Dealing with them involves a logical black hole because no one in Heaven believes in them.  What’s more, if Celestial Functionaries uncovered their existence, they would not be welcome at the Gates, for there is to be no philosophizing in Heaven: answers relevant to matters once important on earth, under the sea and in the air, were provided in the Original Operating Manual.  A stray atheist could produce a fatal crack in the Celestial Aether.

The three groups account an overall sixteen per cent:  His arithmetic is a shade off, but the Devil is not into details.  In the form of a fraction of mortal souls, the Devil claims a share of one-sixth (a repeating decimal of 01666etc. or 16.667 for short).

St. Peter’s expert panel of saints (activated after the Second Council of Nicaea in 787AD) rule on the Confused and the Buddhists – Amida, OK; Tantra, no way! and Zen, depends.  Fanatics are treated case-by-case.  Where the snake-handling or phrases such as ‘eternal fricasee’ are de riqueur, Heaven rules against.  Corporate executives are judged by the panel regarding their fitness for Heaven, with an average drop rate of 7 in 10.

All immigrants to Hell present their credentials at the customs house next to the Gates of Hell.  Due to Heaven’s very generous measuring stick, a small number of the dead are presented to Customs at the Bakin’ Ranch.  Even as they check in bearing their earthly baggage, permanent guests get an invitation to the Devil’s Ball.

The Atheist deserves comment. As a thoroughgoing non-believer, he or she has several options.  Oblivious to the processing experience, she can return to Earth or another planet in an infant state with a clean sheet, or based on native disposition can resume a earthly path whether in scientific accomplishment, central banking, elite military status or as an archaeologist.  Or – and this serves the Devil well – the individual can make ad-hoc contracts with Hell for work on Earth.  The Atheist may at his discretion also attend the Devil’s Ball.

Despite the small increments by which Hell grows, the Devil’s domain, His Wretched Ranch, reaches its metaphysical limits from time to time.  To get more space, He has to petition Heaven.  After an eternity of rounds, He has tired of the ritualistic bargaining with the bureaucrats from the office of the Archangelic Real Estate Commission.  His trusted atheists cannot be his proxy.

This week, from the brilliant ruminations of his broiling brain the Devil has again shown why he is the Boss of Bosses, the King of Kaka, the Sultan of Sloth.  He will use the resources to hand to solve two of his three annoyances at the same time.   The basic simplicity of the answer requires us to understand the work processes, talent, and incentives that lie beneath the Division of Labor in Hell.   When changes are made, it melts a little cotton-candy cloud in the heavens – a small bonus.  The key stratagem will be vetting the Morally Dubious at the Devil’s weekly Bouncing Ball.

The group will be regaled by the sweetly chaotic music the band pukes out.  They’ll mingle with the standard ugly souls, eat delicacies of the underworld and drink flaming cocktails while they bellow over the music.  The ebullient will socialize widely from the start of the party; the shy will gain confidence.  The Devil’s devious will focus on the guests who are too genuine or pure or earnest.  Milder attendees might drink too little but and fail the simple tests set out at the party; they’ll stick out by asking that the music be turned down or attaching to a single person

Selfish and boorish guests among the Morally Dubious will grade out as successful Hellions and receive a promotion to full citizens of Hell.  The Devil foresees that the best of the worst will turn over tables, mouth off to the band, mob the bars and try to break up couples that have been forming during the event.    For someone who sincerely misbehaves at the ball, Hell has a career path. 

Such a soul is a godsend in solving the one of the Devil’s current problems: real-estate acquisition.  For some weakness survives in every soul.  Equipped with finer skills of deception but cloaked in modesty, the corrupt soul can present himself to St. Peter’s Land Commission as a lamentably lost lamb while hiding an aggressive hidden agende. Such a miscreant will come out of the meeting with handsome gains the Commission will charitable and fairly dealt with.

The second problem has two dimensions: maintaining the Devil’s cred and keeping spirits up in his domain.  Whenever his reputation suffers as a result of land negotiations, the Devil wants to reinforce his reputation as a Hell-raiser and as a Punisher. 

Middle management has historically assumed most of the charge for the suite of punishments and humiliations, and with the new blood of the perverted being infused regularly into Hell, degradation always takes new forms. Often, Managers act on imaginative ideas from individual Hellions.  

Vacations get approved swiftly, from select Heavenly locations for the advanced to drop-ins at malls and NHL games.  This philosophy, in the opinion of the Devil, further demonstrates the superiority of Hell.  A new twist is the working vacation.  Rising supervisors may choose to visit such places as Omaha, Singapore, and Brussels to disrupt their orderly operations.

The Devil has always looked to reward the crackerjack red souls.  Any steady job would be little compensation for a job ill-done on earth: for boredom itself is used on the patrons as a part of the torment used on the Morally Weak.  The evil sould be occupied with a continuing variety of tasks, the chance to innovate and a regular change in career stimulate the resident in Hell; here the two Afterworlds differ completely.  A distinguishing characteristic of Hell is this emphasis on quality of life: work and play provide variety. .

Germinating these ideas has taken more effort from the Devil than he likes.   Millennia ago, when He wore the hats of both Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executing Officer, every day was both fruitful and exciting.  He now has designees in both offices.  In keeping with His personal management ideas – generated in the late three millions BC (this mode of telling time is repulsive but convenient) – the Officers have immediate reports that work on the firing lines. 

Despite the mental strain involved in changing policies and procedures, the Devil has experienced a momentary flush of the old excitement He felt during hands-on direction of the Excremental Empire.  Revisiting the many contours of his domain must be done more often, He thinks. 

.

Changes are coming at a millennial rate: anything could happen at anytime.  Whenever something does, we will bring you more news.

Yours sincerely,

Teddie von Teufel

Ultimate khandoer: a Shaolin kung fu fighter

Today's Dayriffer lead points to a March Nat Geo article on the methods of  a centuries-old martial arts training center at Shaolin Monastery in China. Feast your eyes on this action figure:

(Nat Geo photo, cropped)

Turing & Oppenheimer: WWII Khandoits

Waves and Particles

Civilians as well as soldiers carried the conflict against Germany, Italy and Japan in WWII. In this entry, I will demonstrate some parallels between two exceptional scientists who tilted the war toward the Allies. In the name of their countries, they seized their opportunities to help.

Prometheus’ nephews

At the same time in history, during the last three years of WWII, two scientists worked on tools to defeat the Axis allies, Germany and Japan, but their respective work would have a deep impact on their fields and on humanity. The effects are dramatic still. The two were Robert Oppenheimer in the US and Alan Turing in England. Turing’s product would be an intellectual one: a computer method to decode German codes and so anticipate the movements of German forces. The team led by Oppenheimer would make a physical tool: an ignitable nuclear bomb to be used on the most populous island of Japan.

Oppenheimer tends his flock

By late 1944, Robert Oppenheimer had constructed a laboratory complex and complete living facilities at Los Alamos, New Mexico, and been named its director. Under his astute management, physicists and technicians worked at creating a chain of nuclear reactions on such a scale that it could destroy an entire city.

Oppenheimer himself was a first-rate scientist whose research anticipated developments in quantum behaviors and in black holes.

The high and strikingly beautiful land of New Mexico deeply affected Oppenheimer, with its expanse of multi-colored rocks and skies. In contrast to this openness, the compound of the Manhattan Project was was to be strictly closed, more secure than any base operated by the US military. Yet, Oppenheimer, a left-leaning reader of Eastern philosophical thought and master of many languages, received the very highest security clearance. The chain of command ran like this: Oppenheimer, then Major General Leslie R. Groves, then up to Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, and finally to President Franklin Roosevelt (and, later, to President Harry Truman).

Because of the graceful management Oppenheimer provided, scientists and technicians (to include Fermi of Italy, the Hungarians Edward Teller and Leo Szilard, and Neils Bohr from Denmark) didn’t need to bother with paperwork, funding or approvals.

Work began in September 1942 and reached success in mid-July of 1945. It was built on original principles worked out at Harvard, Columbia, the University of Chicago and the Oak Grove Laboratory in eastern Tennessee.

What they did

Having no science training, I will simplify, I hope accurately, the essence of the Los Alamos work. The aims were to a) take purified U-235, a fissionable isotope of Uranium, and b) pack a tiny amount in very tight quarters. Then they were expected c) to initiate a nuclear reaction that would split one atomic nucleus and set off an imbalance, a nuclear reaction. Such an action, under the law of physics would bring on further nuclear reactions (little explosions over nanoseconds) until the material reached immense power and a huge explosion occurred. The final step d), was to devise a method of igniting the first reaction. (Packaging the bomb would be a matter divided between engineers and physicists).

Oppenheimer’s directive was to oversee the development of such a bomb. To get an idea of the atomic bomb’s power: when one atom is split the resulting energy is on the order of 100s of millions of volts.

Prometheus Starts the Fire

Three years prior, in the fall of 1942, FDR had approved the start of the project. Under Oppenheimer, it succeeded with the detonation of the first atomic bomb at Alamogordo, New Mexico, on July 16, 1945. Harry Truman would ponder its use during the succeeding weeks.

From a site named “History of the Atomic Bomb & The Manhattan Project” under the heading “Testing the Gadget AKA the Atomic Bomb” comes this dramatic testimony.

The brilliant light from the detonation pierced the early morning skies with such intensity that residents from a faraway neighboring community would swear that the sun came up twice that day. Even more astonishing is that a nearly blind girl saw the flash 120 miles away.

Oppenheimer’s work was done. As a result of this success, Oppenheimer would gain the title of ‘Father of the Atomic Bomb’.

Turing, ULTRA and the Code

In England, Alan Turing reported every day to a gray and green London suburb, Bletchley Park, where secretaries recorded German radio traffic for decryption, technicians handled computing machinery, and mathematicians and logicians wrestled with the codes. The secret project at Bletchley was called ULTRA. Turing was a principal member of the math team (His closest colleague was Gordon Welchman. Also at Bletchley, was Ian Fleming!).

Day after day, in the manner of their physics cousins in New Mexico, Bletchley Park theorists and experimenters would formulate a promising trial. Output from these trials was evaluated – what had worked was kept (often amounting to nothing at all). Depending on the results, the decoders scrapped the prevailing theory, kept moving or started at another point. When a series of logical operations worked, they’d retest it the next day against new data. The pattern here is no surprise; it refers to the looping figure traced by applying the scientific method.

Code-breakers at Bletchley rode these curving loops at breathtaking speed, driven by the urgency to understand Nazi radio transmissions. One obstacle was the delay of a day – the unknown code-key of the “Enigma” machine, the complicated ‘typewriter’ that composed German messages, remained a mystery on any given day; therefore, that night’s radio transmissions could not be decoded. The project’s efforts aimed at finding the coding method and, at the same time, making sense of the physical control mechanisms of Enigma — four-plus settings, both physical and electrical.*

Standing on Solid Shoulders

In an act of extreme courage three British sailors retrieved a then current (1943) naval Enigma machine and codebook. The three sailors dove the U-Boat, U559, naked. The ship was sinking while they were looking to take anything of use to the Allies. The sailors saw a strange machine and notebook lying next to it, things that looked worth capturing. One of the sailors got out undetected, laboring under the burden. Two sailors would not survive and received posthumous recognition. Bletchley scientists delved into the codebook and the captured device and saved months of brute force work.

ULTRA received a great benefit from the solid theoretical and practical work of Polish logicians and mathematicians, who were ‘deciphering’ versions of pre-war Enigmas.

Cross-Eyed

Once German codes had finally been broken, Churchill, FDR and Stalin would have the advantage of anticipating the Enemy’s movements.

Despite the vivid and exciting challenges math and technical personnel faced, daily life was a nervous grind. Along with the anxious boredom of constant security came the tedium of entering test data and programming, which first required setting on and off light bulbs of a machine called ‘Colossus’, one of several types of ‘Bombe’ (an eerie coincidence here) that Turing and Welchman had colleague made. Once the program had run through Colossus, a pattern of lighted and dark bulbs formed the electrical ‘answer’. (The lights were read as ‘lighted = 1 and unlighted = 0.).

Finally, led by Turing’s ULTRA team, a code-breaking method was found. In this way current exchanges in the Luftwaffe, the Army, and (from a later-decoded Enigma) the German Navy, were read and passed on to Allied commanders and the civilian leadership.

Significance of signs

As a result of Bletchley work and earlier academic research Turing had proven the concept of a General Purpose Computer, in which algorithmic steps and data were coupled to form the first Internally Stored Modifiable Program in history.

John van Neumann, originally Hungarian, wrote an article at Princeton based on these principles just months before Turing’s write-up. The substance depended heavily on Turing’s work in the 1930’s. particularly the 1936-7 paper on computable numbers and ‘undecidability’ in mathematics (a proof produced by the German Kurt Goedel. (While showing that not all numbers can be be produced by computers that he himself could imagine, it seemed possible to make computer procedures to duplicate any logical process.

The Lights that Shone

From his early training in logic and math at Cambridge, Turing's genius pushed him to to write revolutionary, create brilliant experiments, and perform a critical wartime task. His extraordinary practical accomplishment is the invention of computer software and design. Papers he wrote which talked of a General Purpose Computer**, and a test he created to liken a computer’s answers to a person’s (the ‘Turing test’), cement his place as a pioneer of computer science. It is legitimate to call Alan Turing, ‘the Father of Computing’.

To review all competitors to Turing’s title, see Andrew Hodges’ authoritative site on Alan Turing’s life and work.  Hodges wrote the exemplary Enigma, a definitive work in print, and is Turing’s principal biographer.

Suspicion

In a coming post, I will share some notes on the later lives of Oppenheimer and Turing. After the Allied victory, their nations showed other responses besides gratitude.

No matter where his boat was to go, each had started a tide that comes in — gray rocks splitting incoming waves, particles spraying into the air –and goes out again.

*These variables are initial position of the rotors, wheel order, ring settings and plug settings.

**The sole rightful competitor is the team of Atanasoff and

Berry at Iowa State University, whose work incorporates all the primary theoretical elements of a General Purpose Computer. They furthermore built a working machine incorporating these elements, making them the builders of the first full-fledged modern computer.