So after three and a half years of editing and typing, then a further six months of limbo + editing I'm finally done with my PhD. I'm relieved and somewhat tired, it was a massive effort of ading through a topic that isn't so well documented or even actively pursued by current researchers. After seeing how academia works I can safely say that I'm not desperate to get back into it. Long hours, little pay and no real security. It's a no brainer.

The thesis is available online for free, in pdf format, from my university library. I may make it available on a self-publishing website in case people want a printed/bound version, although I think that is a naive hope. While I found my topic interesting, as others may too, I doubt many will be willing to take up the challenge. Below is the abstract to the thesis (copied and pasted from the LaTeX file).

This post is was originally posted to Facebook on October 5th 2011. I'm reposting here for a potential wider audience. I was curious to find some numbers of who held what debt and what the ratios of debt to GDP looked like. Ultimately, I'm curious to know who the net creditors and net debtors are. From this I argue in favour of defaults and letting bankrupt sovereign states go bust.

I'm not a language expert but I do enjoy reading about language and how it has evolved. So I put this interest to good use by examining a common misspelled family name. I try to examine the possible evolution of spelling and pronunciation of Thomson, or at least compare spellings and pronunciations with other Germanic languages. I argue that Thomson is the correct spelling while Thompson is a strange mistake that I can't figure out how it came about it.

Etymology:

Thomson has a typical patronymic form where the adoption of the subject's father's first name is the surname (typical of Norse family names). This name has likely Scandinavian roots. Although the progenitor name, Thomas, is older and there is a suggestion that the surname has a more general origin: possibly a crusader surname. The first known record of the name is 1318, in the Annals of Scotland (according to that link).

Highly topical debate in Scotland. Independence, nay or yay? I'd like to have a look at the arguments for and against for an economic point of view. Those that are pro-independence see no question here, there is really only one solution. Those that doubt independence mostly cite economic reasons which is why I decided to think through some rough numbers. No one gets to see the official numbers and we're essentially fed a line by the media and from the politicians telling us what they want us to know. If Scotland is not able to support itself then one has to ask why not? How can a affluent first world country not support itself? I'd like answers to that and know why we've been crippled. If our nation is not able to support itself then there has been a failure of leadership, in this case there is only one real source of blame. I see no reason that any nation should not be able to rule themselves without outside intervention, certainly no first world country.

I posted the following text on Facebook and received some interesting comments. One poster added more facts / figures that I had to hand. I've posted (with mild editing for ease of reading) the comments from Facebook below.

I'm going to link to some articles that I've posted on another website that revolve around the financial markets and economics. The articles are hosted on the website of my university's investment club website. I'm linking them here for the benefit of a wider audience. They are at a basic level and intended for a general audience. This is another in my line of articles that takes something relatively complicated and tries to explain in simple terms.

Since the internet is already awash with unread reviews, I'll add some more noise to the mix. I wanted to get my own thoughts to paper and will probably be used for my own reference more than anything. These are books that I've read in 2011, or books that I'm currently reading. They are not books that are necessarily written in 2011. I intend to update the list as I read more until year's end. I'll also add that I read most of these on Kindle which I tout a great medium for reading. It has helped my reading productivity enormously and I like being able to carry around several books at once and without fear of damaging them. I don't tend to read just one book at any one time, so Kindle is perfect for that.

[Updated 27/11/2011]

I should have posted this months ago but I didn't see it until now. Now that I have some more free time I hope to most more interesting links like this. In short: Google have provided a platform for non-programmers to create apps without any knowledge of programming. I think that is admirable but opens up the field to a lot of people that want to get involved but have no programming skills. On the back of this, I think more people will become interested in programming and I think it will (or should) shortcut a lot of the donkey work involved in creating new apps.

Here is a news link from Zdnet: Should Android programming be open to non-programmers?

This is about a particular instance of intuition that I had while writing my thesis. I was going to call this post simply 'intuition' but I don't give much discussion about the intuition itself. I probably should have labelled this post with just the mathematical statement that I guessed to be true but that would be very abstruse and not likely to attract (m?)any readers.

This is what I guessed to be true (and subsequently have found to be true, I *think*): that a symplectic manifold is topologically simple.

This is another lazy post from me but I think it is well worth sharing a link to the Zero Hedge website. They aim to provide an objective look upon economics and associated politics. Some of the posts are opaque for those that don't know economic / investment lingo (or know how to read a graph). Anyone that suffers from normalcy bias (that everything in the world is fine and will always be fine) will find this website to be on the same level as a conspiracy theory website. However, this is not the case as all predications in economics are testable. The problem with economics is having people agree on the premise first and then latterly the conclusion. This rarely happens. That said, I'll nail my colours to the mast and declare that the overall sentiment from the site's admin is one that I share: things don't look so good.

Due to a lack of time and motivation I haven't posted anything here for a long time. It is perhaps ironic to come back to announce a departure.

There is a lot that I could say about the state of science in the modern world, I could rant about what is perceived to be science and what I believe science actually is. However, I'm not going to do that. I could discuss the issue of funding being cut to science in the UK, but I won't. There are many places out there on the web that tackle this. Instead, I'm merely going to link to a blog post about someone leaving science. The author was a researcher in Chemistry at Oxford but has decided to leave on account of science not fulfilling his expectations. I agree with the sentiment but my own experience has been slightly different. I'm not satisfied or fulfilled with academia hence I also intend to leave. Oddly, the comments are surprisingly well written (odd for the internet at least).

Oct. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Gold’s rally to a record shows commodity investors remain concerned that the U.S. economic recovery will spur inflation even as Wall Street forecasts and government bonds suggest stable prices.

I think Gold will rise despite what Wall Street or the US Government say but I suppose Bloomberg have to do their best to remain neutral and factual.

I'm not a fan of blogging. I don't like the implications of the word. In the vernacular sense of the word a blog is a diary or journal of personal events. Using the general definition of the word 'blog' then even this website is a blog. I'll admit to knee-jerking everytime someone mentions the says 'blog' or 'blogging'; I can't help but think about all those mundane blogs detailing people's personal lives. The events and thoughts of most personal blogs are dull. Even my own daily routine is uninteresting but that's not to say what I study is dull.

This is a re-publishing of an article I found on the web, it originates from a controversial website called amerika.org. I found this article insightful because it approaches philosophy: a useful and necessary subject for all people.

Some two or three weeks have passed since my last article. Laziness and busy-ness (not business) have consumed my time, I've had plenty ideas for articles but little motivation to type one out. Well, I've found some motivation after having an interesting lunchtime discussion at my university's research club. Highbrow conversation start to finish = I'm happy.

There was talk of physics, computing, philosophy and a brief pejorative monologue of the Sun newspaper.

I've been pleased with the NY Times as a good source of interesting articles so naturally I found this recent article about Warren Buffett to be of high interest to myself. Mr Buffett is an investor that I respect and believe the principles of his investment strategy are sound; however, his recent support of the bail outs and of quantitive easing (printing of more money) is questionable in my book. I can't help but see the reason that Mr Buffett supported Obama and the financial stimulus as self-serving. Good for the few, not the many.

This is an article that continues my dislike of modern atheism. Most people fail to understand my dislike. Do I dislike the anti-religious stance? No. Is it the militancy of their convictions? Sorta but not exactly. An apt parody is this: "The immutable truths that I believe are valid because I believe in science and rational thought."

Scientists are human, too. They are error prone and are just as irrational as anyone else. You might say that over time such irrationality will 'come out in the wash'. Unfortunately I have little faith in group thinking (truth by commonality), and the notion that it will lead society to discovering deeper truths about the universe. Truth is not always the most popular idea. I've observed enough of the scientific community, particularly in my own branch of science, to know that the most popular idea isn't always the 'best' but the one that receives the most propaganda and hence becomes the most popular.

Some investment gurus are suggesting that investing in gold is good hedge (bet) against inflation and/or stock market collapses. While the dollar / pound weakens then your savings will also decrease in value as measured against stronger foreign currencies and against commodities such as oil or gold.

The economists that I like to follow are bullish on Gold and are bullish on China. Read on for why.

This follows on from an NY Times article with the same name. The article is worth a read and points out many ugly truths that most people won't try to consider: the guys in charge of the Obama administration's economic policies don't know what they're doing. They never had a clue and still don't have a clue.