These photos (below) show the new blinds that were installed, Thursday, in (left-to-right) our living room, breakfast room, and kitchen. The photos reflect the actual layout of the rooms. In fact, you can see a piece of wood about 1/2-way up on the right-hand side of the living room blinds that also appears on the left-hand side of the breakfast room photo. The two rooms are separated by a stub wall (on which one of three pairs of binoculars is kept for easy access.)

The living room and breakfast room blinds replace nearly-identical blinds that had previously hung there. The kitchen blinds, on my little window to the world (note the binoculars - another of the three pairs that we keep within arm's reach in the three rooms pictured), replaced the home-made curtains that did not look nearly as good nor function nearly as well. I had just not figured out how to get blinds to fit into the physical woodwork configuration of the little bay window panes. (People who know what they are doing are wizards at this sort of thing; but, I had never before called them in!) The new blinds are two-layer cellular, top-down/bottom-up blinds.

The following photos of the home-made curtains at the kitchen window were posted in April, 2006; but, the links to the photos were not working, so I am repeating a portion of that posting, below.

This is a detail showing the ribbon loop on the pewter knob.

The full panel is shown, here. Obviously, I haven't learned to set the controls to get a fill-flash picture. (I am in a hurry!)

And then the Roman shade effect. (Just above the date/time stamp, on this and the previous photo, you may see a Sibley birding book that stands on the counter top.)

Hunky Husband tells me that it is my imagination; but, I find it much cooler in the kitchen with the cellular shades installed. It is definitely much *lighter* in the kitchen when the blinds are fully closed; and, we have much better control of view/versus sun-blocking. You can see that the blinds are required on that side of the house (the southeast wall of the house that faces northwest) to block the morning sun. The photos were taken at about 8:00 am and the sun will be hitting these windows until about 1:00 pm. During the winter, the sun hits the windows virtually all of the daylight hours and we open the blinds, fully, to welcome the warmth.

*"What does this have to do with the title of the piece?"* I hear you ask. Nothing! Except that the young man who installed the blinds was named David - as was the electrician who, a few weeks ago, installed the new range hood and new doorbell system. It struck me, this morning, that the one thing that they had in common was that they were tall and thin. David-the-blind-installer installed the blinds without ever using a ladder or step-stool and David-the-electrician was equally tall. (I used a 7-foot stepladder to take the old blinds down the afternoon before David came! Of course, I could have used a 5- or 6-foot ladder.)

Having thought the deep thoughts about the similarities between the two Davids, I extended the thoughts to other Davids whom I know/have known: a member of my extended family, an engineer at The Little Airplane Company, a social worker. Yep! I have five data points. As a physicist/engineer, that constitutes sufficient data from which I extrapolate that "All people named David are tall!"

There is an old joke, that varies according to the proclivities of the person telling it, about extrapolation. At *CaseInterview.com*, a version of the joke is posted in an article *"The Skill of Extrapolation as a Consultant".*

**How many data points do you need to extrapolate a trend line?**

Business Analyst / Associate: 150 data points

Engagement Manager: 25 data points

Partner: 4 data points

Director: 1 data point

This joke as an example of extrapolation accuracy vs. sample size.

Another version of the joke is more mathematical - and longer. At* RationalWiki, *a version of the joke is posted in an article* "Fun:Proof that all odd numbers are prime". *(Note that I have tweaked the formatting to improve readability.)

ChallengeDemonstrate that all odd numbers greater than 1 are prime.

Responses by profession or category

Mathematician:3 is prime, 5 is prime, and 7 is prime. By induction, all the odd integers are prime.Physicist:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is experimental error, 11 is prime, 13 is prime, 15 is experimental error, 17 is prime, 19 is prime. The empirical evidence is overwhelming.Engineer:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is a good approximation, 11 is prime...Architect:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, the engineers will figure out how to make 9 prime, 11 is prime, ...MBA:Tom Peters told me all odd numbers are prime, therefore that will be the corporate direction for prime numbers.Accountant:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime; uh, did you really need 9 to be prime? Because I could shift 2 more into this account and you'll have 11 which is prime, ...Chemist:3 is prime, 5 is prime... hey, let's publish!Psychologist:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is latently prime but repressing it, 11 is prime, ...Quantum field theorist using renormalization:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is...uh, 9/3 is prime, 11 is prime, 13 is prime, 15 is...uh, 15/3 is prime, 17 is prime, 19 is prime...College Professor:3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime. The rest are left as an exercise for the student.Confused Undergraduate:Letpbe any prime number larger than 2. Thenpis not divisible by 2, sopis odd. QED.Measure Theorist:There are exactly as many odd numbers as primes (Euclid, Cantor), and exactly one even prime (namely 2), so there must be exactly one odd nonprime (namely 1). Therefore, all odd numbers other than 1 are prime.Computer Scientist:10 is prime, 11 is prime, 101 is prime...[I think the first number should be "01" rather than "10". Anyone who disagrees should stay after school with me to dust the erasers, during which time we shall discuss it! CC]Economist:Assume 9 is prime...English Major:2 is prime, 3 is prime, 4 is prime...Mythbusters:Some people think 4 is prime. We divide it by 2 and itdoesn'texplode! Therefore all odd numbers are prime. (What do you mean "one data point isn't enough?")Cultural Marxist:The fact that nine is not prime indicates a deprived cultural environment which can only be remedied by a federally funded cultural enrichment program.Conservative:What's nine got against being prime? I'll bet it won't allow the pledge of allegiance to be said in our schools either. Also, it wants the terrorists to win.Creationist:Only ungodly Darwinists believe One, that which is Unity, is not prime.Keynesian Economist:Any quantity can be made prime by introducing more units of fiduciary mediaAustrian Economist:Any number may be called "prime": it is entirely up to each person's subjective evaluation as to whether a number has been divided fairly.Rationalist:The hypothesis that all odd numbers greater than one are prime has stood up to scrutiny. Experimenters distributing clusters of bananas noted a statistically significant elevation in baboon fatalities when the number of bananas is 3, 5, or 7.Liberal:It means nothing to say that a number is prime: any number can be redistributed.Theologist:God, being omnipotent, can make any number prime if He so chooses.Fundamentalist:Every odd number greater than one is prime. For example, consider nine. Since Pi is equal to three (Chronicles 4:2 “a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim... thirty cubits did compass it round about”), nine is equal to Pi squared - an irrational number. As it is not a composite number, it must be prime.Meteorologist:3 is clearly prime. If you add one, it becomes non-prime. If you add one again, it goes back to being prime. We predict that 7 and 9 will be prime.Climatologist:Ancient mathematical records suggest that 3 was prime. Based on the clear trend of alternating between prime and non-prime, computer simulations extrapolate that 37,541 will be prime.New Ager:All odd numbers - such as the three eyes, the five fingers, the seven chakras, and the nine orifices - are inseparable from the primal unity.DeMyer:Gentlemen! A certain search engine whose name begins with "G" has confirmed that the Christian numbers 3, 5, and 7 are certainly prime numbers, and we have just learned that one of youtube's greatest Christian apologists may certainly soon be posting a video highlighting Conservapedia in regards to the possibility that 9 and other odd numbers will be prime too! Operation Vuvuzela Cornucopia will be launched by the Ides of September. Will this be the Waterloo for the liberal idea that not every odd number is a prime number? Stay tuned for further details! Olé olé olé!TK:3, 5, 7, ...apply range block... Sorted.[I'm guessing here, but I believe that TK, in this context, is supposed to be Team Killer. If you know better, please share with us. Obviously, there are some "inside jokes" that this old fossil doesn't get. CC]Hypnotist:Prime numbers are those not divisible by 2... And you're back in the room!Right-wing chain email:^{[1]}

A liberal professor at a famous university lectured his class on what numbers were and were not prime. He started out by saying that the odd numbers 3, 5, and 7 were prime, but went on to say that 9 was not. A certain student, disapproving of simply being told by an "expert" what was or was not prime, raised his hand and asked a question.

"You say 9 is not prime, correct?"

"Correct," replied the liberal professor, who did not like being questioned by his students who obviously were nowhere near as smart as he was.

"But 9 is the sum of 7 and 2, is it not?"

"It is" replied the professor.

The student continued "But 7 and 2 are both prime, so how can anything which is the result of adding two similar things together have traits different from those it is the result of without adding new information?"

The professor's draw dropped at this, and he fled the classroom without a word. The remaining students cheered the logic of the brave student, and his willingness to stand up to liberal indoctrination.

- The name of that student:
Albert Einstein.[Well, I don't know if this really happened; but, by that logic, four is an odd number since it is the sum of two odd numbers, one and three. I don'tthinkso! CC]

RationalWiki:The numbers 3, 5, and 7 have been shown to be prime. Further odd numbers will be submitted to the mob for up or down voting, and any number receiving 50 or more "up" votes will be added to RationalWiki:Best of Prime Numbers.

With that, I bid you a good day and great weekend. Try to stay cool. *(We are to equal yesterday's 106 degree temperature, so I shan't be doing cartwheels on the front lawn.)*

"Computer Scientist: 10 is prime, 11 is prime, 101 is prime... [I think the first number should be "01" rather than "10". Anyone who disagrees should stay after school with me to dust the erasers, during which time we shall discuss it! CC] "

But 10 is prime - it represents "2" in binary, which is what a computer scientist should be counting in (11=3, 101=5).

Posted by: bogie | July 24, 2011 at 06:08 AM

Bogie: But 2 isn't an odd number unless odd numbers are defined differently in the binary system! I find in an article,

The Binary System, by Christine R Wright (with some help by Samuel A Rebelsky):"All binary numbers are in the form

a[n]*2^n + a[n-1]*2^(n-1)+...+a[1]*2^1 + a[0]*2^0

where each a[i] is either a 1 or a 0 (the only possible digits for the binary system). The only way a number can be odd is if it has a 1 in the 2^0 column, because all powers of two greater than 0 are even numbers (2, 4, 8, 16...)."

Truly, I should have written that "I think the first number should be 11 rather than 10 since 11 is an odd number greater than 01."

[Well! We got

someof our erasers dusted, didn't we, Bogie? And you neatly led everyone into thinking base 2. Thank you!]Posted by: Cop Car | July 24, 2011 at 08:37 AM

I love your new window treatments!! And my recovering brain shut down on the tech stuff.

Posted by: Kay Dennison | July 24, 2011 at 02:45 PM

Thank you, Kay. BTW: Most of us techies get so absorbed in technical problems that we completely escape worrying about the real world. I feel for you!

Posted by: Cop Car | July 24, 2011 at 05:19 PM

Ah, I forgot what the "Challange" was. I got caught up in the Prime part.

Posted by: bogie | July 25, 2011 at 03:40 AM

Love your blinds. I really need to do that in the office. I think about it all the time, but have never pursued it. They really are beautiful. Like Kay....I think my brain is trying to recover.....from little kids and craziness; so that tech stuff is just a blurr right now. Hugs, Joy

Posted by: Joy | July 25, 2011 at 09:08 AM

Bogie--Wish I could say that I never get tunnel vision. Unfortunately, as you well know, I cannot say that - at least not truthfully! We can, next, go into hexadecimals, eh?

Joy--Thank you! I priced the vertical blinds at two places, JCPenney and Budget Blinds (don't know if they are a national chain - they are a supporter of our local public radio station). Budget Blinds' price was considerably less than the JCPenney price. The top-down/bottom-up blinds on the little kitchen bay window cost about the same (total) as the two vertical blinds (total); but, I think they are/will be worth it!

All--If you've not already done so, do yourself a favor by checking out Baby Olive's photo and video at

The Joy of Six. (One needs to scroll downward to the video in the left land sidebar.) Hunky Husband and I certainly enjoyed it them.Posted by: Cop Car | July 25, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Oh CC....you are so sweet....thank you for your thoughtfulness. ~Joy xoxo

Posted by: Joy | July 25, 2011 at 08:13 PM