My phone contains apps for my bed, my oven, my vacuums, my heating and cooling systems, my Wi-Fi’s, my refrigerator, transit trains, flights, hotels, UBER, conventions, money, banking, email, calendar, music, statistical calculator, flashlight, credit cards, Starbucks, Walmart, eBay, weight loss, Target, Instacart, grocery stores, messenger services, games, social websites, Internet phone, Internet services, texting, cable, television channels, streaming services…and more. I grimace every time I hear that phrase, “you need you to download our app.”

I HATE it. Not only are most of these apps difficult to use, but they are also a constant reminder of my diminishing eyesight and fine motor skills.

I know, I sound like most Baby Boomers.

But first, let me give you some of my computer credentials. I went to college and graduate school during the early days of computers. I was a computer geek. The computers of the day were very primitive, especially the small ones, which were typically PDPs in the science world. Programming them required an almost intimate knowledge of how they worked. We used paper tape and programmed in hexadecimal, ASCII, assembly languages, and sometimes we even had to use binary. The larger mainframes allowed us to use higher order languages such as BASIC, SQL, and my favorite, FORTRAN. While working on several military contracts in graduate school, I had access to classified programming tools that were even more innovative. It was not unusual for me to stay up into the wee hours of the morning, debugging code.

At several points, I almost changed my major to computer science. But I saw the handwriting on the wall.

In the early years, we were allowed to write our code as our minds worked, making our code virtually impossible for someone else to debug. I knew that this was not sustainable and a concept such as structured programming (which requires programmers to follow rules and conventions) was on the horizon. I chafed at those restrictions to creativity.

But I found another area that I enjoyed almost as much as coding, understanding how humans worked with computers and designing programs to make it easier for them to use. This was called Human Factors and later Ergonomics. I loved it. Our role was to help computer programmers design an interface that was easy to use for novices, moderately skilled users, and expert users. We typically required that programmers provide 2-3 ways of doing the same task to accommodate each type of user. We focused on the needs of the aging population, the harried middle-aged user, and the impatient youth. We conducted usability studies to assess how each type of user could perform important tasks. Our measurements were the reduction of errors (especially catastrophic ones), ability to perform the task without manuals, minimizing frustration, and speed. We focused on human perceptual capabilities and limitations; designing the most important components to be placed where the eye typically goes. We looked into the issue of nystagmus (rapid eye movements required for vision), color deficiencies, motor skills, cultural differences, computer expertise, and age-related issues. We took everything that we knew about human perception and designed programs to take advantage of our capabilities and overcome our disabilities.

While working on my dissertation, I inadvertently created an early videogame. Psychology 101 students are required to sign up for several experimental credits (which gives graduate students and professors access to “human guinea pigs”). I was testing the concept of a parallel processing ability. All of the mathematical models at the time showed that humans processed serially, namely they could not do two tasks simultaneously, but instead they did each task very quickly. But after observing mothers, I became convinced that there had to be some type of parallel processing ability. To test this, I designed and programmed a computer “game,” where subjects had to do two tasks at once. One was a monitoring task (making sure a cursor stayed in a box); the other was a recall task (remembering, numbers, letters, and crudely drawn figures). Every time I put up signup sheets, they were filled with “volunteers” within in an hour. Some students would cross someone’s name out so that they could fill in the slot. While other grad students begged for human subjects, I had to turn mine away. Never got it. Never understood what I had.

At Bell Laboratories, and later as a consultant, I was able to work on cutting edge technologies and even designed a financial website that is widely used today. I helped design a lot of “back end” systems (those systems that control electronic and optical transmission, Bluetooth, and early shopping sites), decades before they came into popular use.

But, while I was working, technology development was going through a sea change. Developers left the East Coast labs and Universities and moved to Silicon Valley. And when technology moved to Silicon Valley, our time consuming usability designs became too unattractive and too slow. The new programmers were young and with Apple leading the way, more focused on style and “coolness.” To accommodate venture capitalists, technology needed to come to the market quickly. To do that, there could be no accommodations for different types of users. So, UI designers and programmers wrote code for people like themselves.

Their designs are much more aesthetically pleasing than mine were. Their “look and feel” is sophisticated and artistic. Even with the help of a graphic designer, my designs were functional, and therefore, obsolete.

Which brings us to where we are now. Apps are designed by and for Gen X and younger, leaving us Baby Boomers in the dust.

Despite my computer knowledge, I have difficulty with many apps. My eyes struggle to read the small print and when I change the phone settings to larger type, most screens become incomprehensible (my Google password screen is a jumble of words). My QWERTY trained fingers are not dexterous enough to enter the information on the tiny phone key display quickly or accurately. The microphone doesn’t appear to understand my accent (or mumbling, perhaps). And it takes a long time to enter and find information in an app.

When confronted with the need for an app, I beg the rep to give me a way to do it on the computer, instead. On a computer, my error rate is much lower, and my throughput is much faster. But more and more companies/programs, especially the smaller ones, only offer apps.

Which brings me to my current problem. My pool pump in Florida failed, so my pool service installer replaced my pump. Unbeknownst to me, he replaced it with a pump that requires an app. No more manual switches for me. Except the “geniuses” that thought it was a good idea to put pool pump controls on an app, neglected to realize that most of us do not have and do not want to have our Wi-Fi service available outside of our homes. And pool pumps are always outside and, due to their noise, as far from the house as possible. My new pump has no other means to control it other than an app and since my Wi-Fi signal is not sufficiently strong outside, I cannot turn my pump on or off, manage the flow rate, or set a time schedule. I am reduced to using my circuit breaker to turn my pump on and off, and I am unable to access the other features. Furthermore, I didn’t learn that this pump required an app until a week after its installation when I was unable to turn it off after it began malfunctioning.

I did not handle this well.

Apparently, my pool installer’s supplier no longer offers a pool pump with manual or even electronic controls. I demanded some type of control over the pump, besides the circuit breaker. The installer suggested that I pay to upgrade my Wi-Fi capabilities to extend their range. I did not agree with that solution, as one can hack even a “secure” Wi-Fi system. Fortunately, it appears that the pump manufacturer recognizes they made a mistake and are developing a new pump (more expensive, of course) that does not require an app and has the controls on the pump on an electronic pad.

Since I am returning to Maryland before that new pump can be installed and my Wi-Fi is not strong enough for my current pump, I am very frustrated, even angry, at the possibility of the damage that could happen in my absence. Obviously, I need to calm down and patiently wait for a new, controllable pump. I need to accept our new reality.

Fortunately, there is an app for that.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

Dad jokes have recently become popular, especially on Twitter.

What is a Dad Joke? A Dad Joke is a short, rarely funny, but sometimes amusing, joke. Frequently, Dad Jokes are puns or one-liners. (In my experience, the only people who think puns are funny are those who are telling them.) Since they are Dad Jokes, often the humor can be understood and appreciated by children.

So, I decided to look into the history of Dad Jokes. While these jokes have been around forever, the derivation of this term has a nebulous history—mainly because I couldn’t find its history.

Some attribute its nomenclature to a 1987 Gettysburg Times column under the headline “Don’t ban the ‘Dad’ jokes; preserve and revere them.” A sitcom and an Australian quiz show used the term regularly and may have been responsible for its current name.

Perhaps there is someone out there who has a definitive origin story, but for now, we can just say that these harmless, sweet jokes have gained popularity. You can find a daily Dad Joke on Twitter, and a weekly Dad Joke on a sports show.

It is just a light touch to the day. My nephew sends his father a Dad Joke each day and my brother-in-law forwards them to us. Here are couple of my nephew’s jokes just to make you (perhaps) chuckle.

• I’m afraid for the calendar. Its days are numbered.”
• My husband has been gone for a week. The police said to prepare for the worst, so I went to the Thrift Store and bought his clothing back.
• Plateaus are the highest form of flattery.
• Received a text from the wife saying that she was breaking up with me. Imagine how relieved I was when a couple of minutes later she texted: ‘sorry, wrong number.’
• Tesla founder Elon Must is originally from South Africa, which is strange. You’d think that he was from Mad-at-gas-car.
• Remember when plastic surgery was a taboo subject? Now you mention Botox, and nobody raises an eyebrow.
• Two antennas got married. The wedding was okay, but the reception was incredible.
• Which body part is the most reliable? Well, you can always count on your fingers.
• Did you know that Albert Einstein had a younger brother named Frank? He was a monster.
• I got in a fight with 1,3,5,7 & 9. The odds were against me.
• People call me self-centered. But that is enough about them.
• You think gas prices are high, have you seen chimneys? They’re through the roof.
• Can trees poop? Yes, how else do we get Number 2 pencils? (Kids love this one.)
• They’ve tried to improve the efficiency of wind farms by playing country music around them, but it’s not working because they’re big heavy metal fans.
• What’s the best thing about Switzerland? I don’t know, but the flag is a big plus.
• Dad, can you put my shoes on? Sorry, but I don’t think they’ll fit me.
• The salesclerk asks a customer at paint store: Do you wanna box for that? Reply: No, I am against violence, can I pay with a credit card instead?
• I used to play piano by ear. Now I use my hands.
• You know, people say they pick their nose, but I was just born with mine.
• What did the fish say when he hit the wall? Dam.

Oh well, it was a slow news day…

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

To celebrate Women’s History month, this year I am going to profile Lizzie Magie.

Who?

I hadn’t heard of her either until herstory (sic) was revealed in 2015.

Elizabeth (aka Lizzie) Magie invented the game Monopoly.

Oh no, you say, that was Charles Darrow, who created the game during the depression, was rejected by the major game companies, and produced it himself. A Philadelphia department store, Wanamaker’s, agreed to sell it and it became a hit. Only then did the major game companies take notice. Darrow claimed that he was the sole inventor and Parker Brothers purchased the rights to the game, giving the family royalties in perpetuity.

Except that is only the tail end of the story. The game of Monopoly went through several iterations before Darrow played it at a friend’s house in Atlantic City and called it his own invention.

The original game was invented and patented by Elizabeth Magie in 1904. She was the first developer of a square boardgame. Before her invention, games were played on linear boards. Her patent would have been lost to history had Parker Brothers not tried to sue Professor Ralph Anspach for trademark infringement when he offered an Anti-Monopoly game. As part of Anspach’s decade-long legal defense, he discovered that the true story of Monopoly was missing a few game pieces.

The board game, Monopoly, bears little resemblance to the game that Magie patented and even thwarts the original purpose of her game, which she named The Landlord’s Game.

But we’ll get to that. First, let me tell you why I am highlighting Lizzie Magie for Women’s History month.

Lizzie Magie was born in 1866 at a time when women had few options in life. Fortunately, she was born to a family who encouraged her to use her intellect. Her father was a newspaper publisher and an abolitionist.

Magie was an outspoken feminist and a critic of the role that women were relegated to at that time. To highlight her views, she purchased an advertisement auctioning herself off as a “young woman American slave” looking for a husband to own her. Its goal was to show the limited opportunities and status for women and African American people in America. She believed the only people who were free in America were white men.

In the early 1880s, she moved from Illinois to the D.C./Maryland area and worked as a stenographer, typist, and news reporter. She was also a short story and poetry writer, comedian, stage actress, feminist, and engineer.

At the age of 26, Magie received her first patent for an invention to make the typewriting process easier by allowing paper to go through rollers. At the time, women held fewer than 1% of all patents.

But, back to Monopoly.

Magie was a staunch advocate of Georgist philosophy, a progressive economic theory named after Henry George. Georgists proposed a single tax on land instead of income. The tax would be assessed according to the usefulness, size, and location of the land. It was to replace other taxes that are considered to be both unfair and inefficient. Wealthy property owners would pay higher taxes and those who owned no property would pay no taxes.

Many progressive political leaders at the time supported this economic perspective. In theory, it would motivate people to cultivate land and would redistribute wealth to people of low socioeconomic status. It put a premium on people’s work over their ownership of land.

To demonstrate how much better a cooperative Georgist approach was over capitalism, Magie invented The Landlord’s Game, which could be played both as a strictly capitalist game (such as Monopoly is today) or a Georgist game. The purpose of the game was to demonstrate that the cooperative Georgist approach resulted in all the players being happy vs. the capitalist version where there was only one winner.

The Landlord’s game gained a following among the intellectual elite, being played by faculty and students at colleges such as the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, and Columbia. Eventually a community of Quakers in Atlantic City adopted the game and gave it its property names. It was this game that Charles Darrow played thirty years after Magie’s patent.

The Atlantic City version game retained the core elements of Magie’s game, but also included modifications to make the game easier to play. The Quakers renamed the properties after Atlantic City streets and added fixed prices. Darrow eliminated the Georgist rules, redesigned the board, added tokens (at the time people were using whatever pieces were handy such as a thimble), designed the cards, and named the game Monopoly.

After discovering that Magie owned the original patent, Parker Brothers purchased her Landlord’s Game patent and two more of her game ideas; but there was little promotion for those games, and the games were lost to history.

In my opinion, what makes Magie an important figure in Women’s History is not the game that she originally invented, but who she was. She was an early feminist, willing to flout the conventions of her time and live a broader life. Her life goal was to increase opportunities for women and African Americans. And the fact that she invented the predecessor to the game of Monopoly, well that is just one more feather in her cap.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

As I have gotten older, driving the car 26+ hours from my Talbot County home to Key West, has gotten too difficult. My two dogs are very good travelers, but it is a long trip for all three of us. The past few years I have been leaving my car in Maryland and living in Key West without a car.

Key West is a small bicycle Island and it is not very difficult living without a car. Friends and relatives loan me a car on the rare cases when I need one…but otherwise, I can get around easily on my bicycle.  When I first moved to Talbot County, I saw the same opportunity for replacing cars with bicycles. We have a flat landscape, reasonable weather, and wide roads. Attempts to get more bicycle lanes were not successful, but, for the most part, I can get by with cycling around town and using my car twice a week. It is a lifestyle that I have been drawn to.

That leaves the problem, what to do with the car. A hybrid car is not happy unless it gets weekly mileage. Easy enough when I am here, but not so easy when I am in Key West.

This year I left it on a farm and the local caretaker agreed to drive it once a week. But last week, the car was not operating properly, lights were flashing, and it would only go 5 miles per hour.

I had it towed to the local dealer, not looking forward to the bill. The dealer called, it was a first for them, a little bunny had stowed away in the engine. ( It is hard to see her tucked away in my engine, but I hope you can see her little pink nose in the picture.) She had chewed through some wires and built herself a little nest.

“Don’t kill it,” I pleaded.

The repair crew agreed and spent several hours (cha-ching) coaxing her out of her unusual nesting choice.

It is funny how we view critters. I chase the bunnies that munch on my beloved pansies and flowers; but I want to save a little guy nesting in my engine, costing me a fortune in repairs. I wonder what it is, maybe just the sheer tenacity of this little bunny, or her cute little bunny nose…but I handed the dealership my credit card and she ran off into the woods.

And left all of us with bunny tales.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

Recently, a joint Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee unanimously approved an over-the- counter (OTC) version of the prescription naloxone (aka NARCAN) nasal spray, an opioid overdose reversal agent.

Opioid overdoses are a national crisis. In 2021, there were over 80,000 opioid overdose deaths (70–80% of all drug overdose deaths in the US). Thirty four percent of opioid overdoses happen to individuals under 34. The rise of fentanyl-laced drugs is considered a key reason for these rising death rates.

Opioid deaths occur because of respiratory depression (the victim stops breathing). Ninety five percent of opioid overdoses can be successfully reversed if naloxone is administered in time. The drug begins working right away, enabling victims to breathe normally 2 to 3 minutes after the first dose.

The drug is easy to administer and does not require inhalation, assembly, or specialized training. It’s also easy to carry, store, and does not require needles. Further, in 40% of the deaths, there was a bystander who could have administered naloxone.

Proponents argue that making naloxone spray available OTC in vending machines, convenience stores, supermarkets, and big box stores would help overcome current barriers to accessing the drug. For example, despite the rising death rates, some pharmacies still refuse to stock naloxone.

All 50 states have a Standing Order which allows pharmacists to dispense naloxone without a prescription. However, states have different liability protections and different rules for when a pharmacist can prescribe the drug.

Easier access to naloxone could also reduce the shame and stigma, especially among the young and most vulnerable, who fear that going to the ER might result in exposure or arrest. This may be their first encounter with a drug, or they may have gotten it from a friend or at a party. Widespread availability of naloxone would also reduce deaths from accidental overdoses of a prescribed opioid (deaths in the elderly population are increasing).

Opponents argue that naloxone prevents users from receiving the consequences of their actions and it does little to help users turn their lives around. They argue that it perpetuates the cycle of addiction. The data disproves these claims, in fact, it shows that those who have had a near death experience are MORE likely to enter treatment. The majority of overdose patients do not have repeated overdose events.

Naloxone also causes opioid withdrawal symptoms, which can act as a catalyst to seek treatment and maintain recovery.

Researchers investigated the traits of those who oppose the widespread availability of naloxone. In a regression analysis that adjusted for demographic characteristics, they concluded that opposition was most strongly related to authoritarianism, the perception that opioid users present a threat to the country, a belief that users have lower moral standards, and that this is a just consequence for their sins.

Fortunately, the committee disagreed.

“The unanimity of the committee is a profound statement about how important this is,” said Dr. Jeffrey Brent, University of Colorado, Aurora.

This isn’t a cure for the epidemic, but it is a cure for the deaths caused by it. It removes judgement in favor of giving users the opportunity to recover.

Of course, those who prefer punishment and judgement will not be pleased with this recommendation or the data that supports it. But most of us believe that the goal should be to reduce mortality, not prescribe morality. Notable celebrities, such as Prince, would be alive today had they had access to this life-saving drug.

Thousands of deaths will be avoided by expanding access to naloxone.

Now, that’s a win.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

Hallelujah is one of the most popular songs in recent times, with 1500 artists recording their own renditions. Leonard Cohen spent over a decade writing and rewriting the verses (over 180). Yet, Columbia Records president, Walter Yetnikoff, hated the album so much that he quashed its release in the United States.

Why did the powerful Columbia Records president hate it? His reasons are known only to himself, but to be fair, Leonard Cohen has a voice that only Bob Dylan could appreciate.

Over time, well-known musicians picked up the song, including Bob Dylan and Jeff Buckley. Gradually, the song began to enter the mainstream. But it took a famous movie (Shrek) twenty years after the song’s “non-release” to make it available to all audiences.

Today, this song is played at weddings, in movie and television soundtracks, churches, funerals, television shows, and concerts. If not for artists and their quest for outstanding music, this iconic song would never have made it into popular culture.

It seems hard to believe, but it is not remarkable in the arts or sciences.

Here are a few of the many examples.

The Beatles were rejected by the British label Decca records.

Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-1921) is often considered the most underrated composer. Even those unfamiliar to classical music would recognize his organ symphony from the song and score of the movie, Babe. (After he completed this symphony, he said, “that is the best that I can do.”) Anyone who has heard it can appreciate its greatness.

Emily Dickinson wrote her poems in obscurity. Fewer than a dozen of her nearly 1,800 poems were published during her lifetime and those were altered to fit the conventional poetic rules of the day. It was not until her death that her sister Lavinia discovered her collection of poems. They were published in 1890, to initial criticism (of course).

The great works by Claude Monet were initially deemed to be “formless, unfinished and ugly.” As a result, Monet and his family lived in poverty. His seminal work “Impression, Sunrise” eventually gave the school of painting its name, Impressionism, but it was not until the 1880s that his works began selling.

Similarly, Van Gogh produced over 2,100 artworks, 860 of which were oil paintings, which weren’t recognized or appreciated during his lifetime. Struggling with mental illness throughout much of his life, Vincent Van Gogh committed suicide at 37.

During Bach’s lifetime he was only regarded as a successful organist. His compositions were ignored. It was not until the early 19th Century that his musical compositions were finally introduced.

Kafka died at 40, without a single work published, and if it weren’t for a friend, Max Brod, his novels would never have become the classics that they are today. Dying of starvation brought on by tuberculosis, Kafka requested Brod burn all of his works after he died. Instead, Brod made it his goal to get Kafka’s works published.

Henry David Thoreau was virtually ignored in his lifetime. His focus on nature and his social activism made him an outsider. Thoreau died having only published two of his works, which had not been well-received.

John Kennedy Toole is the author of one of my favorite novels, A Confederacy of Dunces. Yet Toole’s novels weren’t accepted into publication during his lifetime. Without his mother’s perseverance, we would never have read the manuscript that won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1981.

In science, these misses have been more impactful.

Gregor Mendel’s work on genetic inheritance wasn’t accepted or understood by scientists of the day (despite his extensive efforts). His work was only appreciated in 1900, 16 years after his death, and 34 years after he first published it. Curiously, Charles Darwin had a copy of Mendel’s paper, but he apparently didn’t read it until after his seminal work on The Origin of Species.

One refusal to implement a significant scientific discovery resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and even cost us a United States president. Ignaz Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician working in the mid-1800s in Austria, observed that his hospital had a very high death rate, especially in childbirth and infant mortality. At the time physicians would deliver a baby directly after performing an autopsy without washing their hands. He suspected that this death toll could be lowered by surgeons washing their hands between patients. But he was mocked by his colleagues. Despite demonstrating that hand washing significantly reduced the death rate, it was never accepted. His own hospital abandoned the practice after he died, and its death toll increased six-fold. Twenty years and many deaths later, Louis Pasteur’s discovery of germs proved Semmelweis right.

President James Garfield suffered horribly and died unnecessarily after an assassination attempt because his physician refused to wash his hands or maintain cleanly standards.

A number of scientists and philosophers recognized that the earth revolves around the sun, including Aristarchus (310BC to c. 230 BC), Copernicus (1473 to 1543), Johannes Kepler (1571 to 1630) and most famously Galileo (1564-1642). But the church and other scientists refused to accept their conclusions.

Einstein was unable to get a job, and only his father’s connections allowed him to land a job as a patent clerk. His early work on relativity was ignored or dismissed by many scientists because it challenged the scientific theory of ether. Einstein recognized that space and time were bound together and combined it with gravity in his theory of general relativity of 1915. Despite early ridicule and disbelief, the complicated theory was ultimately recognized as a paradigm shift in physics.

These are just some of many examples of talented artists and scientists whose work was ignored, despite their importance.

Yet, most of these individuals had some form of privilege that allowed them to create and continue their work. Cohen, for example, came from a wealthy Canadian family and was allowed to do this art without commercial success. Even Van Gogh came from a privileged upbringing.

I often ponder how many geniuses were prevented from using their intellectual and artistic talents due to gender, location, status, wealth, culture, religion, race, and circumstances.

I am convinced that our society has suffered from ignoring obscure, unsupported geniuses who did not have the opportunity to help or change humanity…if only.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

There are a number of paradoxes in science and mathematics; and most are highly technical. One of those that is accessible to us is the Fermi Paradox.

First, a simple definition of paradox. A paradox is a statement that contradicts itself or a situation which seems to defy logic.

Enrico Fermi posited his paradox late in his life, by asking the question, “Where is everybody?” In other words, given the vastness and age of the cosmos why have we not detected other signs of extraterrestrial civilizations?

Fermi was a well-known Italian American physicist who emigrated to the United States to escape antisemitism (his wife was Jewish) after he received the Nobel prize in 1938. He was one of the influential scientists of the nuclear age, developing the mathematical statistics, exploring the implications of neutrons, and directing the first controlled chain reaction involving nuclear fission. He held many honors, including the Nobel Prize, the DEA Enrico Fermi Award, Fermilab (the National Accelerator Laboratory associated with the University of Chicago), and has an element named for him, fermium.

Fermi recognized that Earth was a fairly typical planet revolving around a fairly typical star. Logically, there should be civilizations out there older and more advanced than our own, some of which should have already mastered interstellar travel. Yet, to date, there is no conclusive evidence that they exist. His paradox is particularly compelling when we consider the vastness of a universe that contains over 200 billion galaxies.

So, what are the possible hypotheses to explain the Fermi Paradox?

One, is simply, there isn’t any intelligent life in the universe, we are a unique creation by God. This is proclaimed in our religious texts. And further, it is impossible to prove the null hypothesis; so therefore, while this may be true it cannot be proved.

Another hypothesis is that it simply takes a lot of time for signals to travel across the cosmos. Due to the limitations of the speed of light, their signals may not have reached ours, and ours may not have reached them. (The photos that we are seeing from the Webb telescope show galaxies as they existed billions of years ago.) Further, earth is situated in a rural part of the Milky Way galaxy. Advanced civilizations may be focusing their efforts on more accessible regions of the Milky Way.

Another supposition is that it is we have been receiving signals but do not have the capabilities of understanding or accessing them. There is no reason to assume that life elsewhere in the universe would look or operate like us. Our species has always been limited by our perception and our ability to measure. It is likely that there are other energies that we cannot perceive or access. Other advanced civilizations may be sending out signals, but we don’t have the technology to detect or decipher them. Their language, mathematics, realities, science, and consciousness could be completely different from ours.

The opposite could also be true; other life may not be as evolved as we are. It may be that intelligent beings like us are simply rare in the universe. It took billions of years for earth to create the society that we have today, so it makes sense that it would take billions of years for other species to become advanced enough for interstellar communication, intergalactic space travel, and possible colonization. Perhaps we are one of the first species to make it this far. After all, 99 percent of all species that have ever lived on Earth are now extinct, and we are the only species that has ever been able to leave the planet.

Closely related, the Phase Transition hypothesis proposes that the conditions to support life as we know it may have “just” fallen into place. Life may just be forming and evolving, uninterrupted by cosmic threats and astrological disasters, into an advanced civilization.

Another hypothesis is called the Transcension Hypothesis, namely they have already visited us, perhaps in our earliest formations and determined that intelligent life did not exist or that it was too primitive. There are many books, the most famous written by Erich von Däniken (Chariots of the Gods). Von Däniken argued that traces of alien visits were recorded in legends and artifacts of earlier civilizations (like the Nazca Lines, in Peru).

Another hypothesis, The Zoo and Planetarium Hypotheses, has proponents arguing that aliens are not only observing us from afar, but have us locked into a kind of “celestial cage,” leaving us off-limits from other advanced civilizations. Proponents contend that our understanding of the universe represents a mere illusion that has been created by civilizations that have the ability to manipulate matter and energy at cosmic scales.

Recently, in October 2017, Canadian astronomer Robert Weryk was reviewing images captured by a telescope and noticed a dot of light moving at almost two hundred thousand miles per hour. (A cornerstone of Einstein’s theory is that nothing can move faster than the speed of light…but is that an accurate assumption?) After ruling out all other possibilities, Avi Loeb, a Harvard astrophysicist, concluded that it was a byproduct of an alien civilization and represents the proof we need to conclude there are other civilizations in the galaxy.

He is one of the first highly respected physicists to become convinced that the 2017 sighting represents conclusive evidence of other extraterrestrial life. His conclusion is both controversial and ridiculed. For those who are interested, his book Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth published in 2021 is a work of courage. In his willingness to be ridiculed by the scientific community, he asks the question, “are we ready to confront the possibility that there are both more intelligent and less intelligent species outside of earth.”

He believes not.

There are many other paradoxes, a famous one is the liar’s paradox, which is, briefly: “Everything that I say is a lie.” But the Fermi Paradox is a lot more interesting. It allows us to be creative, think in abstractions, and humbly recognize our insignificance.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

A friend of mine was lamenting over her daughter’s breakup with her boyfriend. At the end of their vacation, the boyfriend pronounced that he wanted to return to his previous girlfriend. Considering that all parties (except him, of course) believed that this vacation would end with a proposal of marriage, it was a devastating time in her daughter’s life.

“But at least she has her girlfriends,” my friend said. “And that is really more important.”

She’s right, I could not get through life without my girlfriends and sisters. We share a need for these close relationships.

So, how, and why do women form such intimate partnerships? Researchers theorize that in earlier societies women had to move into their new husband’s family circle, (much like traditional Chinese, Muslim, and Indian cultures do today). Alone in their new world, it was essential for women to quickly build connections with other women for emotional support and help.

Research shows that close female friendships are more important for women than they are for men. By disclosing vulnerable information, women build trust quickly. As a result, women’s friendships tend to be more intense. These friendships thrive on intuition, intimacy, emotional support, and deep connection. This close relationship even results in the release of oxytocin and serotonin. The latter is a neurotransmitter that helps combat depression and can create a general feeling of well-being.

Male friendships are less intimate and more side-to-side. They tend to hang out in groups, while women prefer smaller, more intimate relationships. Women’s relationships are face-to-face and maintained through intimacy, communication, and support. Men are more likely to remain friends after a disagreement, but women-to-women relationships can be more fragile.

A researcher asked each gender what they were looking for in a friendship. Men preferred friends that have common interests, offer wealth or status, and can help them find dates, while women expressed more interest in friends who offered emotional support. Friendships between males are often transactional. Men have a larger number of friends, but fewer intimate ones. Men are more likely to bond by engaging in shared activities, such as sports, while women tend to bond through disclosing secrets, talking, and spending time together.

Men make friends easier as they do not feel pressure to disclose personal information. A humorous anecdote with my husband underscores this. When my husband and I were making our wedding plans, he asked me to hold off sending invitations until he told his weekly golfing partners that he was seeing someone (we had been dating for 18 months).

Why are girlfriends important to women?

Everyone who has them knows the answer…but just in case, this is what psychologists say:

• Girlfriends are the backbone of women’s support system.
• Girlfriends offer a different and honest perspective. They serve as a sounding board and offer an outsider’s viewpoint. They are a safe outlet to discuss problems and try out possible solutions.
• Girlfriends frequently act as a trusted advisor, their goal is to help.
• Girlfriends operate in a trust environment that allows them to share secrets and honesty.
• Girlfriends boost self-esteem.
• Girlfriends are dependable and loyal.
• Girlfriends are essential when life goes sideways.
• Girlfriends provide love and support as well as a safety net.
• Girlfriends are each other’s champions.
• There are medical benefits as well. Women with strong friendships have higher survival rates from breast cancer, less depression, less stress, and have a longer life expectancy.
• Same age friends offer a shared experience.
• Sharing a positive experience with a girlfriend increases excitement.
• Older women with strong girlfriends have improved self-care. When someone sincerely worries about us, we are more conscientious.
• Prolonged conversations with girlfriends stimulate brain activity.
• Overall, girlfriends serve as a crucial emotional support system: giving advice, being a shoulder to cry on, keeping secrets, listening, while boosting self-esteem.

The Memoirist, Rebecca Traister, said it best. “Female friendship has been the bedrock of women’s lives for as long as there have been women.”

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

I am one of those weirdos who still wears a mask, gets regular vaccinations, and uses hand sanitizer. But these precautions were no match for an extended family member who failed to recognize that he had COVID. Which is how I finally contracted the virus. The person claimed his symptoms were “just allergies” until he finally tested himself. (If I had a dollar for every time I got a cold from someone who said it was “just allergies,” I would be a wealthy woman.)

But my symptoms are very mild, only a headache, achiness, sore throat, and unhappy lungs. Despite having several risk factors, including asthma, my doctor, who is an expert in infectious diseases and runs the health department in Key West, recommended against taking Paxlovid. The Omicron variant, while more contagious, is less dangerous for someone who has kept current with their vaccinations and has mild symptoms. I consider myself lucky.

But COVID 19 is still a threat and for more reasons than you think. For one, monoclonal antibodies are ineffective against these new variants. And the new variants are even more contagious than previous ones.

The newest subvariant of Omicron, is so transmissible that everybody is at risk of catching it, even if they’ve already been infected and are fully vaccinated. It now accounts for 27.6% of COVID cases in the US and is especially prevalent in the Northeast, accounting for more than 70% of cases.

COVID 19 is also more dangerous than previously believed. A recent article in Nature reported the findings from autopsies of 44 unvaccinated people who died from severe COVID. The results were alarming. The virus was found in the respiratory system and 79 other body locations, including the heart, kidneys, liver, muscles, nerves, reproductive tract, and eyes.

They concluded that the virus is capable of infecting and replicating within the human brain, thus crossing the blood/brain barrier. They believe that the virus spreads via the blood in its early stages throughout the body.

The CDC discovered that COVID 19 has been in the US longer than previously thought. Apparently, the US Patient Zero returned from Wuhan Province in China and went into the emergency room on January 15, 2020. The first US fatality occurred in February 2020.

To date, almost 102 million cases have been diagnosed in the U.S and there have been more than 1.1 million COVID-related deaths. Globally, there have been more than 668 million cases and 6.7 million COVID-related deaths (and probably a lot more, because it is known that China underreports).

And now there is Long COVID.

Long COVID, long-haul COVID, post-COVID-19 condition, and chronic COVID are all names for the health problems that some people experience within a few months after being infected. Long COVID can also trigger other health conditions, such as diabetes or kidney disease.

Since recent research shows that the virus infects many parts of the body, it makes sense that the immune system could malfunction. Like most autoimmune diseases, Long COVID is most common in women. It is currently estimated 7.5% of adults who contracted COVID 19 will suffer from Long COVID (although the newest Omicron variant seems to have fewer). Some of the symptoms of Long COVID are brain fog, fatigue, body pain, shortness of breath, racing heart, sleep disorders, and mental health issues (e.g., depression). These are similar symptoms to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia, and Chronic Lyme Disease. Other Long COVID symptoms, such as rapid heartbeat, chronic pain, and dizziness fall in the category of nervous system disorders.

The causes of Long COVID are also unknown (like most autoimmune diseases) so scientists are speculating that it could be damage caused by the virus or by the body’s immune system. Others surmise that the virus may be hiding in the body, possibly the gut. Scientists suspect that this virus reactivates, causing the immune system to become overactive and attack the patient’s own organs and tissues.

Studies are not clear on who is at risk for developing Long COVID. It appears that women, those who reported more than five symptoms in the first week of infection, and those with preexisting health conditions (asthma, auto-immune diseases) may be more susceptible to Long COVID. And the newest research suggests that those infected with COVID more than once have an increased risk of developing Long COVID as well as other health complications. So being infected once doesn’t make you immune and makes you at risk for Long COVID if you get reinfected. The evidence shows that reinfection further increases risks of death, hospitalization, and damage to multiple organ systems.

People who’ve kept up their vaccinations are less likely to have a reinfection, or when they do have a reinfection, are less likely to have severe infection.

And Long COVID can kill. To date, 3,500 US deaths have been attributed to Long COVID.

This scourge will be with us for a long, long time. To protect ourselves, doctors recommend continuing to wear masks, using sanitizer, and, most importantly, keeping up-to-date on vaccines. Despite our desire to be “past this,” we must recognize that this is a novel virus to the human immune system, and scientists are only beginning to learn about its long-term impact.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.