Numbers

Do not worry this has nothing to do with a magical mathematical theorem that will tell me who will be the next target of a serial killer -- my skills are not that advanced!

I am sure you have come across the dilemma that I am talking about. You are standing there counting the huge stack of cash in your hands while someone is trying to talk to you. You might be able to hear and understand them but answering is a whole different ball game.

I had tried to figure out what you can and cannot do while you are talking to someone or while you are read or counting and it is quite interesting. To my amazement, I came across a lecture series by Richard Feynman and turns out he did a few experiments of his own.

Feynman mentioned that some people count by seeing and some people count by talking to themselves -- those who talk to themselves can't manage to talk to other people but they can distinguish shapes around them and vice versa for the people who see.

Over the past week I have been trying something out -- I am one of those who counts by talk to myself in my head. When I have the time I start describing the objects around me, out loud (I make sure I am alone, otherwise it might seem a little strange), and this occupies my speech. While I am doing this I count in my head -- by seeing number. At first, it was hard. I would get to 4 and just freeze up while I continued blabbering about the lens on the optics table but when I was running today I managed to get up to 40. This is a pretty neat trick since it shows that you can teach you brain to think differently.

Now, I did want to see if there was some valid information as to what proportion of people count by seeing and other by talking but my searches came up a little empty handed. I came up with synesthesia, death counts from wars and illnesses, and ironically enough the survivor count for Battlestar Galactica.

- Mr. V
__________

"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." ~Carl Sagan

ET not welcome here...?

Well it seems that now Stephen Hawking is not up to meeting aliens if they did decide to come visit our little blue planet. In his new documentary series, "Into the universe with Stephen Hawking", the famed physicist portrays a fairly fearful picture of extraterrestrial life, personally I think it looks a little bit like something out of an H.G Wells novel.

The assumption that aliens would be consumers or resources is quite reasonable, if we were to compare ourselves to them -- You can't really get energy out of nowhere... But assuming that these aliens would come to our planet with the specific goal of consuming the resources we have might be a little far fetched. What is so special about our star system that would differentiate us from another. We have a sun? (apparently these aliens can suck up energy from a sun and create wormholes with it) Well I think there are a few more suns out there... We have metals? Well I think that these aliens have all the metal that they need and if need be they could probably just make whatever they need -- after all they do have stars at their disposal. Well considering it, the only thing that is truly different about our speck of dust is that we are here. If the aliens were creatures of consumption, that is to say unenlightened creatures of consumption, we would be a potential slave race for them -- I really do not think they will be up to having us pay tribute to them... really what would pay in? Metals?. Yet, I would say that prospects are not quite that grim (that is if there are aliens out there...probably...maybe a little far away though) considering we have been beaming our position out into the visible universe for the past 60 years. Now if these aliens do have faster than light travel and picked up our signal they would have been here already. Yet, if they have yet to hear our cacophony of noise, all we really have to do is lie back and wait for them to come and dominate us.

Now maybe we could make a few different assumptions about these aliens. Perhaps one could consider that if this race is advanced enough to travel through the stars they have managed to lick their global disputes and got passed the stage of blasting each other with missiles (They are probably not simulating the destruction of their global communication systems ). This race might just go for diplomatic talks before charging their phasers. It would be possible that they would want to explore and learn of us and our ways but what comes into question now is: How evolved are the aliens out there, and are we evolved enough?

If one considers the ET's to be of the advancement Hawking describes, then the moment they picked up our first radio signal (that is assuming that for some reason their have radio antennas attached to their spaceships -- a really rocking feature if you ask me) they should be able to respond. Sadly, we might not be able to listen to their form of transmission and if they replied via radio waves well we would have to wait a good 60 years to get that signal back. The latter scenario would also be true if the race was as advanced as ourselves. Finally, if they are at a stage of development that is before radio there would be no prospect of communication.

Now, the highly advanced and the radio lacking civilization situations have very distinct out comes. They respond/come here or they remain oblivious, respectively. The circumstance that is a little open ended is if the civilization is near our level of advancement. Communication with interval of 120 years (that is if they pick up the signal right now and respond) would allow room for 'dropping the call', one could say. Even now people are unsure of the immediate benefits of SETI let alone in 60 years. If we do not hear their signal they could continue to broadcast without knowing how far we are and will continue to wait for an answer. Another possibility is that we receive a signal that was sent from some planet, we would not know how far away the transmission source is, we would respond but by the time they get the response they could have advanced past radio, or simply managed to destroy themselves. Furthermore, say we do manage to establish stable communication. Our two people would advance side by side, and would eventually be able to meet. It seems that it all comes down to waiting.

Stephen Hawking's documentary has pretty neat computer graphics and is quite imaginative but really there is no real reason to fret, for if they were going to come they would have, and other than that we will have to wait and see. For all we know 'life here began out there'.

- Mr. V
__________

"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." ~Carl Sagan

BUSted

Well last week was extremely hectic even though I had the week off of work. I was happy to get back to work and get a few things done in the lab. Sadly. today the bus that I normally take did not show up and I had to take a different one to get to work. Once I got on the bus I turned to my friend and chuckled lightly when I noticed that I had forgotten to purchase the July bus pass and was sitting there with the June one. As I finished all of this 'noticing' I looked up and straight at the 'Special Constable' that just came onto the bus to check for proof of payment. Let's just say the June pass was insufficient for July.

I was promptly escorted off the bus and she quickly proceeded to noting down all of my information to give me a nice fine. The logic of these officers is irrefutable. It does not matter that I have been using the bus system for the past 5 years, or that it is the beginning of the month and it was the second day after a long weekend, or that I am going to buy the July pass anyways, or that I am a student and really really would prefer to spend my money on my studies. $150 is the fine.

So what does all of this come down to? Me having to go down to court to argue to reduce the fine. Me having to waste the time of some poor soul stuck dealing with people like me. Me having to go get a new student ID (I am not sure why they took away my pass...they did give me a ticket and a day-pass in return...how kind). All in all a large waste of time... perhaps the law should not always be 'reason free from passion'. If the officer had taken the time to consider the situation, this whole fiasco could have been avoided and I am quite sure that far less time and money would have been wasted.

Funny enough... once the three constables found me with my falsified bus-pass they stopped looking at everyone else's... I guess the quota was filled.

-Mr. V
Addition: It seems that my morning was not the worst start to the day. The guy in the office beside me got hit by a car.

________

Unknown theories

One of the most amazing things in physics is the amount of different theories that arise. Each is just (well usually) as elegant as the previous and explains observational results.

As you might know, after a bumpy start the LHC began pumping out data for the first time a few months ago. One of the main goals of the research at the massive particle accelerator is to catch a glimpse of the elusive Higgs Boson. This (or I might have to say these) particle(s) is supposed to be responsible for the mass of every particle that has the privilege of having mass. The idea is that 'popular' particles will attract more of the Higgs and as such have a higher mass (if you have ever been to a physics talk on the subject, undoubtedly you would have seen the picture on the top right where a politician is being swarmed by a group of reporters and been slowed down on his way to the other side of the room -- to do whatever it is politicians do on the other side of the room). The current Standard Model of Physics is quite dependent on the Higgs and predicts that there is only one Higgs particle. The slightest change to the Higgs could mean revision of the model -- not that there is anything wrong with that just means...well.. we were wrong, but that would not be the first time.

Now before any results from CERN of finding something close to the 'God' particle, there have been a few indications of a slight change in the theory behind the Higgs. This started off with the Higgs possibly being lighter, which would make the detection more difficult. Now the idea has expanded to having five different Higgs particles -- now talk about creating particle out of thin air.

It is amazing theories that support our idea of the universe -- in this case the very structure of it -- can change so dramatically so quickly. As Fermi labs completes its final push to look for the mass giving particle, the LHC should start shedding some light on all of these theories -- and who know what other ones. Now to paint an obscene amount of walls.

-Mr. V
__________
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." ~Einstein

Scientific mind; Artistic soul

Not too long ago I had someone tell me that ‘Scientists are boring’ and it is those that study the arts are the ones that bring a spark to life. This statement has been nagging at me for quite a while now and I decided to answer it for myself. I really think that, like many other things, this comes down to balance.

There is no point denying that art brings out one’s creativity but I must ask: When you think of a scientist what do you think? A strict, rigid, unbending mind? Someone who is guided by laws and nothing more? Yet, to be a good scientist there has to be a spark of passion, innovation and most importantly imagination (and if you do not believe me all you really have to do is listen to Richard Feynman and you might be glued to the computer for an hour). Science has always been associated with being a very clinical job, where you must present your evidence without prejudice, and this is quite true but there is a flip side to the coin. Try to imagine the flow of electrons, the movement of molecules, the formation of the universe, the rapid chemistry of a cell, the evolution from primate to human. These are all things which sprouted from science. Each and everyone of these broke convention, posed new questions, unlocked a segment of our universe and now I ask 'what could be more thrilling?' Clearly, Science is in itself an art.

The same questions can be asked but taking a look at artists. Do they operate in a void of laws? Do they simply obscure our ideas of nature? but what is our idea of nature? These laws need to be pushed and new possibilities explored. Much like science, the arts looks at us, at our origin, and at the definitions of our surroundings. The approaches taken to answer these questions are quite different. Arts allow the incorporation of humanity into the universe, while the sciences provide the definition for the universe.

It seems that the two are part of a whole, and examples are not hard to come by. History is filled with scientists who melded the two together(from Ptolemy to Aristotle to da Vinci -- and yes even Feynman ). Yet, as we move into the future we seem to have separated these subjects into very distinct division (sometimes one holding prejudice against the other -- I won't deny the slight jab here and there). This divide comes from the fact that, like many subjects, specialization is taking over. With the amount of information out there, it is difficult to be able to study all of it and science has become a key player in the development of new technologies and the advancement of our knowledge. Yet, it is crucial to understand that a synergy, personal and societal, between the arts and the sciences is required.

The leaps forward in science require an ethical perspective, someone to interpret that consequences that would be imparted onto society. Many scientist say that science is self correcting, but those who do not know science must be able to account for implication of its use. All you really have to do is take a look at a small oil puddle making big headlines to understand. People expect science to have all the answers but there are limitations to what can be done and people need to listen. There are many powerful tools at out disposal for brining this pair together and a prime example is The Symphony of Science . Ultimately, science must derive from the arts and the arts must derive from science ( Wolfram does not seem to agree).

-Mr. V
__________

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." ~Einstein

Beginning

Well... I guess here goes nothing. I have been telling myself to start one of these blogs for quite a while and I guess this is the day.

One might ask 'what is the reason for making this blog?'. Well the purpose of this is to develop ideas about life, philosophy, society, science, nature -- our Universe and our place in it. After all you can sit there all day and have a deep conversation with yourself but perhaps it might not be too bad of an idea to bounce some of those thoughts around.

I am however unsure where to start (I have always found that the first words are usually the hardest to pick). I guess a little bit about me. I am somewhat of an aspiring theoretical physicist and as a consequence I spend a good deal of my day wondering about our place in the Cosmos. I tend to have a strong opinion about many things and expressing them has never been too big of a problem --really this has never gotten me into any trouble (ehem). I believe that everyone should have a chance to have their opinion heard but not at the expense of others. With my ideals and my love for science I do not leave much room for religion -- at least not organized religion-- yet I know there are certain things I know we cannot explain and will never be able to. This leaves room for something (I have yet to find and appropriate name for this something; a presence, a being, mother nature?) but this something is far from omnipotent or micromanaging. Yet I am going off on a tangent and will save that discussion for another time.

Now since this is the first post for this Blog, I thought it appropriate to mention something about the name. Everyday we take so many things for granted, and it is easy to do so with all of the technology available at our fingertips. I am not talking about our computers, cellphones, mp3 players and so much more. I am talking about the simpler things around us, the ones that we use unconsciously and without even giving a thought as to how they work or where they come from. That is out pens, pencils, kettles, toothbrushes -- next time you use any of these try to think of exactly how they work (this is a very interesting hobby I have developed). Yet, nothing is taken advantage of more than our clocks. These instruments began as simple sun dials and developed into the complex single ion experiments of today. I have recently started working in a measuring institute and found myself a little taken aback at how little I knew about how our clocks work and the complexity that goes into it (and I am not talking about the cesium ion clock beating away in the other room). Our little time keepers have gone from the large instruments -- the grandfather clocks that ticked away the seconds with their momentous pendulums-- to the precise digital instruments of today. Our world is based on their movement, the precision of a second, the flow of time. This relative objective that is so intertwined in physics defines our lives and allows us to function -- imagine having 6 billion people all on different time zones with different definitions for seconds, minutes, hours, days -- I think you get the point. So long as we exist the pendulum will beat -- perpetually.

-Mr. V

___________________________________________________________________________

~Si nous n'avions point de défauts, nous ne prendrions pas tant de plaisir à en remarquer dans les autres.

-La Rochefoucauld