I started an experiment in January to create a daily publication, with the simple idea of introducing people to interesting topics. There was no goal in terms of readership numbers. The experiment was merely to see what would manifest through consistency. In doing so, I decided to post information about the site’s traffic - not to brag or bemoan, but to let readers share in the progress of the experiment. Below are this site’s statistics following the fifth month of regular publication. Past stats can be found for January, February, March, and April.

Most Visited Posts

• Sticking With Dropbox
• Maurice Sendak On The Colbert Report
• How To Auto-Post On Facebook
• Nike+ FuelBand Review
• Thank You

Most Visited Linked Posts

• The Talk Show Leaves 5by5
• Can Beer Save America?
• The Guinness Sinking Bubble Problem
• Fontroversy: What’s The Deal With Comic Sans?
• Panic Unveils Coda 2, Diet Coda For iPad

Visitors

• 2,099 page views (16,971 for 2012)
• 1,135 unique visitors (10,664 for 2012)
• 73% visits were from U.S., including all 50 States + D.C.
• International traffic remained strong, with increased visits from Germany, Australia, and Brazil

Platforms

• Windows (53%, down from 62 %)
• Macintosh (41%, up from 29%)
• Linux (5%, down from 9%)

Browsers

• Chrome (29%, down from 34%)
• Safari and WebKit (23%, up from 14%)
• Firefox (22%, down from 28%)
• Internet Explorer (19%, up from 14%)
• Mobile Safari (3%, unchanged)
• Other (4%)

A drop in page views from 11,245 to 2,099 may seem a disappointment. However, I am very happy with the result. April’s traffic increased dramatically based on two posts at the end of the month. Prior to this spike, readership increased at a monthly rate of roughly 7-8%. If I neglect the sharp increase and extrapolate that rate from March through May, 2,099 is well above expectations.

Thanks to everyone who visited the site and offered feedback via Facebook, Twitter, and email. May featured some great commentary that challenged my ideas. Keep it coming.

As we enter June, I am growing increasingly excited for what the rest of the year will hold. I look forward to yet another month of sharing and hope that June will offer interesting material. If you have any suggestions or comments, do get in touch or feel free to follow me.

The Physics arXiv Blog:

As many drinkers will attest, the bubbles in Guinness appear to sink as the drink settles and the head forms. How can this be, given that bubbles are less dense than the surrounding fluid and so should rise?

Eugene Benilov, Cathal Cummins and William Lee at the University of Limerick made numerical simulations of a pint glass to answer the question. A real-world experiment confirmed their theory.

As a scientist, I’ll have to confirm the results. Then, I will confirm again. Depending on how the day goes, I might need to confirm once more.

You can read the study here.

Jason English, writing for Mental Floss:

For the past few weeks, every time I saw an acronym or initials, I took a picture. You know the brands, authors, and pieces of legislation, but do you know what all those letters stand for?

For instance, Michael J. Fox’s middle name is Andrew.

In the past, I wondered how Amazon had a stock price per earnings ratio that was an order of magnitude larger than Apple’s. I was especially perplexed given that Apple has been profiting nearly as much as Amazon’s quarterly totals - in one day. Jean-Louis Gassée offers an explanation of why the companies are priced so differently.

On the Nasdaq stock market, AMZN trades at more than 174 times its most recent earnings. By comparison, Google’s P/E hovers around 17, Apple and Walmart are a mere 14, Microsoft is a measly 11.

This is so spectacular that many think it doesn’t make sense, especially when looking at Amazon’s falling profit margin.

Gassée’s analysis of Wall Street’s attitude toward Amazon makes sense. I also think he nails why Apple is treated differently. That said, I think analysts’ reasonings are severely flawed. Apple is treated like the rebel startup of the 1980s instead of the financial juggernaut of the 2010s. Meanwhile, a lot of trust is placed in Amazon to generate large profits - something they have yet to accomplish.

Paul Kafasis:

As part of Fenway Park’s centennial celebration, Boston Red Sox fans could purchase ceremonial bricks to be placed inside the stadium. With my chances of making the bigs dwindling ever lower, this seemed the best way to have my name enshrined in a major league ballpark. However, I was unsure of what sort of message to include alongside my name.

I’d say he made a good choice.

No amount of prose, written on one day of the year, could ever hope to fully encompass the gratitude I feel for our service men and women.

So I simply say, ‘Thank you’.

Thank you to those who gave their lives. Thank you to those who have served. Thank you to those who are still serving. Thank you to the families who have sacrificed beyond all belief.

Let the rest of us never allow ourselves to disconnect the freedom-protected society in which we live from the sacrifice-ridden hell that guarantees those freedoms.

Dan Frakes, writing for TechHive, put together a nice infographic that illustrates the various types of headphones.

Craig Mod:

The covers for our digital editions need not yell. Need not sell. Heck, they may very well never been seen. The reality is, entire books need to be treated as covers. Entry points into digital editions aren’t strictly defined and they’re only getting fuzzier. Internet readers don’t casually stumble upon books set atop tables.

Mod writes an interesting essay on the role of book covers in a digital world. The purpose that those covers served on traditional books is no longer applicable. Part of this transition extends beyond necessity and into design. It is that design that Mod states is crucial moving forward. We must now think of the book itself as the cover - we must hack the cover.

Chris Lee, writing for Ars Technica, revisits the well-known paper by David Dunning and Justin Kruger in which the lack of self awareness was found to lead to inflated self views. I found the final section, entitled What about science communication?, to be particularly relevant:

Furthermore, there seems to be an inherent misunderstanding on the part of scientists and science communicators, according to Dunning. “For example, scientists often think that telling the world a conclusion has scientific consensus settles the issue. To scientists, this makes sense. To the general public, they ‘hear’ that scientists must be colluding on an issue.” In other words, the message poisons itself. This comes back, at least in part, to education. “They [scientists and science communicators] assume some basic knowledge (and faith) in science in the general population that, in truth, is missing,” Dunning said.

Guy English:

I believe that many Apple observers have been too invested in picking off the low hanging fruit of obviously out-of-touch commentators, columnists, and analysts. Apple is winning. It’s fun to pick on the idiots, and we do tune in for the affirmation that engenders, but that’s not insight. It’s a tag team wedgie patrol. It takes a clever intellect to dismantle bullshit but, ultimately, it often just ends up with pantsing the dumb guy. Rather than doing that let’s aim to pants the A-grade quarterback.

Here are the top three problems I believe Apple faces in the near term.

There is no doubt that Apple is on top of the technology world right now. English offers an insightful look at what might hinder Apple going forward.