Wendy's Biggie Fries Container

Here is one to try on your next fast food date.  My husband and I were in the airport Wendy's enjoying our fries with ranch dressing and noticed the statement on the container read, "We figured out that there are 256 ways to personalize a Wendy's hamburger.  Luckily someone was paying attention in math class."  So naturally, we asked each other how many condiments does Wendy's offer to result in 256 combinations of burgers? 

I immediately answered 8 condiments, using the notion of power sets.  2 to the what equals 256?  Meanwhile, my husband attempted to solve the equation nC0 + nC1 + ... + nCn = 256 and also got 8 (after what seemed like hours after I gave my answer).  Alternatively, I suppose, you can just take a walk over to the fixings bar and count them.  Thanks Wendy's for making our layover so entertaining!

Chuck Close Self-Portrait at the High Museum

I can't think of a better way to relax after sitting for the Algebra PhD Qualifying Exam, than to spend an evening at Friday Jazz at The High Museum in Atlanta. Galleries and special exhibitions are open for extended hours, while live jazz is performed in the Atrium lobby every 3rd Friday of the month. The past Friday was our first time attending, but certainly not our last.

High Museum's permanent collection ranges from African to European, modern to contemporary, and folk to photographaphic art. Special exhibitions have included works of artists Leonardo DiVinci, Salvadore Dali, and others. In particular, I was attracted to a self-portrait by Chuck Close. Turns out, almost all of his work is based on a grid structure for the respresentation of an image, and in this case, himself.  The result is a geometric illusion such that viewed from afar the image appears real, but as the viewer steps closer, the geometric dots and dashes and intentional tones are more apparent and the image is lost.   Amazing!

FIFA World Cup Predictions and Outcome

Congrats to the 2010 champions, ¡Viva España! What were the chances?

Well I do not know much about soccer, but I do know that JP-Morgan, UBS and Goldman Sachs issue in depth reports every fourth year calculating the next champion based on predictive modeling. Turns out, England, the team JP-Morgan's 70 page report referred to as champs lost in the Round of 16, while UBS and Goldman reports predicted Brazil would end up on the top. C'mon... did you really need a complicated algorithm to predict that?

After reviewing the reports, the questions are: Where did Wall Street go wrong in their models (and why isn't Congress investigating it)? What was the data set, assumptions, independent and confounding variables? Is it necessary to include GDP in the calculation, and how about including team performance outside of the World Cup to the data set? Can you think of a better methodology to predict a winner? Clearly, there is no absolute truth in predictions, but we can try to improve their ability to foresee the future.

Or perhaps we should save ourselves the trouble and just depend on Paul the Octopus to call the shots?! Now I'll toot my vuvuzela to that!