Mathematical Modeling of COVID-19 addendum

We are now over a month into the pandemic crisis in the U.S., and - with more data now to work with- it is becoming possible to more easily and accurately extrapolate the end result of this cycle. We seem to have just a few days ago- around April 10- reached the inflection point in terms of total cases, and are just now reaching the inflection point in terms of total deaths. Insofar as that marks the halfway point of the cycle, we can thereby project a total of 1 to 1.1 million total cases in this country, with a resulting 50,000-60,000 American deaths by the time the virus is contained. We can likely anticipate containment around mid-May. Most mathematicians - if asked to project given current data- would likely offer a similar projection. However, we would need the medical professionals and other scientists to provide further data to consider the future beyond that. What is the potential of subsequent waves of infection? How long until there is a vaccine to protect the public from this virus? We can only work with the data we are given.

2020 MathWorks Math Modeling Challenge- Electric Vehicles and the Environment

As mentioned in an earlier post, I (and probably many others with a math background) have a keen interest in the annual math modeling challenge managed by the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. We have had math teams representing our school (California Virtual Academies) competing in this event during the last 5 consecutive competitions. My interest in the topics chosen is not merely as a math team coach, but in considering the major challenges facing our civilization which are hopefully surmountable via a combination of mathematical and scientific knowledge, coupled with proper ethical conduct and implementation by our leadership. The topics covered are tackled by our country's teams, representing some of the most gifted high school students in the United States. Their mathematical modeling yields results which are worthy of our government's serious consideration. Do they have the wisdom to examine these results, or at least consider the basic conclusions of the winning teams? Or will they brush aside the results, and simply develop the legislation based on their party lines' positions? This year's competition- like that of 3 years ago- is related to the oft-covered issue of global climate change. We see this issue in the news almost daily. Climate change is unfolding before our eyes. Very bizarre weather patterns are increasingly manifesting themselves- record heat waves, increasing intensity of severe storms, wildfires, rising ocean levels as our ice caps are melting. Meanwhile, extinction of numerous species is acceleration Long-term concerns include a continuation of the above, coupled with rising sea levels, flooding of human coastal communities. While this is occurring, we are also depleting our nonrenewable resources- especially fossil fuels, the primary culprit of climate change (via increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere). These facts are undeniable. The argument is no longer one of environmentalism versus denial of the threat of climate change. Instead, the argument is between ardent environmentalism versus those who concede the threat of climate change but quite ironically portray the situation as too hopeless to address, owing to the financial cost of addressing these issues. Moderation and pragmatism - as exemplified (hopefully) by mathematicians- is all too lacking. Whereas the problem of 2017 examined the evidence of climate change as exhibited by rising sea levels, this year's competition instead focuses on a major piece of the solution- namely, conversion of gasoline-powered diesel trucks to electric-powered ones. The competitors were challenged to examine the speed at which diesel-powered trucks would be converted to electric. Next, they were instructed to determine the number of charging stations needed, and the number of chargers needed at each station, to accommodate the needs of semi-trucks along 5 major corridors. These corridors were San Antonio, TX, to/from New Orleans, LA; Minneapolis, MN, to/from Chicago, IL; Boston, MA, to/from Harrisburg, PA; Jacksonville, FL, to/from Washington, DC; Los Angeles, CA, to/from San Francisco, CA. Lastly, they were challenged to prioritize which corridor was most important to develop first. This problem is not a mere theoretical exercise. For those who have been following, the Doomsday Clock- which represents the danger of humanity's self-destruction- this January was moved forward from 11:58 PM to 11:58:20. It is now 100 seconds to midnight. The primary danger to our civilization is nuclear war, followed by climate change. These are interrelated, insofar as climate change would likely lead to competition for resources, leading to a situation in which war is increasingly likely to occur. This is a grave long-term danger that we need to tackle in a reasonable and pragmatic way. It is not a Democratic issue, or Republican issue, but rather an American issue and, indeed a Human issue. At the moment, we are witnessing how humans behave during a comparatively minor crisis. Hoarding and human indecency are manifesting themselves, even as shortage of supply begins to occur. It is not my intention in any way to minimize the impact of tens of thousands of deaths, millions of seriously ill people, and social isolation over a period of many months. Eventually- within the next 12-18 months- this situation will resolve. However, climate change looms ahead as a much bigger crisis which should be regarded as an existential threat. We have resources- not merely financial and technological resources, but also brilliant students to figure out the best methodology to tackle these issues. God willing, our leaders should have the wisdom to turn to our scientists and mathematicians (of all ages) and figure out a pragmatic set of policies to implement their recommendations. Of course, we need policies that will stick permanently, not ones that will be implemented by one party, dismantled by the next administration, while we find ourselves sinking deeper and deeper into a hole. If we learn just one thing from this present crisis, it should be the need for proper planning and working together with our scientists and mathematicians who have been charged with the task of tackling society's greatest threats.