La motivazione per questo articolo nasce dal mio interesse per il retro-computing connesso, da una parte, alla rivalutazione delle mie esplorazioni giovanili del calcolo scientifico in linguaggio BASIC e dall’altra, alla popolarità che, negli ultimi anni, stanno avendo nel settore amatoriale e della didattica i microcomputer su scheda singola  (single-board computer, quali, per esempio  il Raspberry Pi).  Questi piccoli computer hanno una potenza considerevolmente maggiore a un costo decisamente inferiore dei microcalcolatori degli anni 80. Questo ha reso possibile l’emulazione su questi calcolatori dei sistemi operativi di mitici modelli di home computer della Commodore e i modelli MSX.

Pertanto sta prendendo piede anche un rinnovato interesse nel linguaggio di programmazione BASIC. Questo interesse nel retro-computing riflette la nostalgia nelle grandi emozioni che negli anni 70-80 lo sviluppo della tecnologia informatica consumistica ha portato alla mia generazione. Ricordo che rimasi folgorato dalla creatività nell’uso e nella programmazione di questi microcomputer al punto che ha ridiretto i miei interessi scientifici e la mia carriera accademica. 

Ho raccontato in altri articoli delle mie prime avventure di programmazione con  home computer della Commodore e i sistemi MSX alla fine degli anni ’80 e inizi degli anni ’90 e delle mie riscoperte di archeologia informatica. Tra i reperti ho rinvenuto un piccolo programma che ho usato per studiare le titolazioni acido/base sviluppato in MSX BASIC. Pertanto ho colto l’occasione per scrivere delle note sull’equilibrio acido base  e la titolazione e quindi fornire una versione restaurata e migliorate del mio programma, a gli studenti appassionati di programmazione  che sono  alle prese con questo importante concetto della chimica analitica.

This year marks the 150th anniversary of the periodic table of the elements (TPE) which currently has 118 entries, the latest arrival (the Tennessine) was discovered 10 years ago (announced in April 2010), and I feel obliged as a chemist to give some a small informative contribution to celebrate this important event.

“… Mitchell Feigenbaum was an unusual case. He had exactly one published article to his name, and he was working on nothing that seemed to have any particular promise. His hair was a ragged mane, sweeping back from his wide brow in the style of busts of German composers… At the age of twenty he had already become a savant among savants, an ad hoc consultant [at Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA] whom scientist would go to see about any expecially intractable problem.”

James Gleick, Chaos: the amazing science of the unpredectable.

This year, on June 30th 2019, Mitchell J. Feigenbaum died at the age of 74. Feigenbaum was an American mathematician that became famous with the discovery of the universal constants that bear his name. In the middle of the ’80, reading Le Scienze magazine (the Italian edition of Scientific American) I got to know of the contribution to the chaos theory of this charismatic mathematician. In particular, I was delighted by reading the Douglas Hofstadter’s article in the rubric “Temi Metamagici” ( Methamagical themes) (Scientific American, November 1981). The article explained the emergence of the chaos in the iteration map of the logistic equation, the same equation deeply studied by Feigenbaum. The full story about the Mitchell Feigenbaum and his discovery of his universal constants is delightly narrated in the beautiful book Chaos:the amazing science of the unpredectable by J. Gleick [1]. Here it is just another small extract:

“… in the summer of 1975, at a gathering in Aspen, Colorado, he heard Steve Smale [another key mathematicial in the developing of the chaos theory, NDA] talk about some of the mathematical qualities of the same quadratic difference equation [the same studied by Robert May, NDA]. Smale seemed to think that there were some interesting open questions about the exact point at which the mapping changes from periodic to chaotic. As always, Smale had a sharp instinct for questions worth exploring. Feigenbaum decided to look into it once more.”[1]

This article was inspired by the beautiful 2016 movie Hidden Figures (based on the book of the same name by M. L. Shetterley) which tell the dramatic story of three talented black women scientist that worked as “human computers” for NASA in 1961 for the Mercury project.

In the movie, the mathematician Creola Katherine Johnson (or Globe) (interpreted by Taraji P. Henson), had a brilliant intuition on how to numerically solve the complex problem to find the transfer trajectory for the reentry into the Earth atmosphere of the Friendship 7 capsule with the astronaut John Glenn on board. In the particular scene, she was standing together with other engineers and the director of the Langley Research Center (a fictional character interpreted by Kevin Coster) in front of the vast blackboard looking to graph and equations when she says that the solution might be in the “old math” and she runs to take an old book from a bookshelf with the description of the Euler method [UPDATE, May 2022: I just come across another excellent youtube video by the Tibees about the mathematical work of K. Johnson at NASA, and at the end of the video she reveal that the book shown in the movie is the classic H Margenau & G. M Murphy, The Mathematics of Physics and Chemistry. Published by Van Nostrand, 1956]. The scene is also nicely described in the youtube video lesson by Prof. Alan Garfinkel of the UCLA. A detailed description of the numerical solution based on the original derivation of K. Johnson is in the Wolfram blog website.

Katherine Globe was using for these complex calculation her brilliant brain with the support of a mechanical calculator (the Friden STW-10, in the movie, this machine is visible in different scenes). In a scene of the film, she revealed that her typical computing performance was of 10000 calculations per day and probably for calculations, she was not referring to single arithmetic operations! These exceptional mathematical skills have given a significative contribution at the beginning of the American space program, but it became insufficient to handle the more complex mathematics necessary to land the man on the Moon, and the other fantastic NASA achievements.