Tag Archives: science

Baked just right

It would have been harder 150 years ago to bake bread or a cake to perfection. There were no thermometers in the oven, few clocks to tell how long it was in the oven, no real way to regulate the heat. It was an art as much as a science.

That idea of being baked just right comes to mind when I think about our universe. So many things had to be just right to ‘cook up’ our existence. If we live in a multiverse with countless other universes, it is likely most of them would harbour conditions impossible for a planet like earth to exist. This is for some people a way to reconcile their belief in an omnipotent and omnipresent God. For without the divine intervention of a ‘designer’ we could not exist.

But for me this is simply a game of numbers. In the billions of universes in a multiverse, we were the lottery winners. We won the grand prize of being able to harbour consciousness in a universe among so many others that did not have the right ingredients, did not have the right conditions, and/or were baked for too long or not long enough.

We exist because our universe was baked just right. And the fact that it was right enough for us, suggests to me that it is right enough on another not-so-near-by planet. We probably aren’t alone in this universe, but our universe is probably lonely in comparison to other universes.

We might not be the only one, but just like we are alone in our galaxy, our university is probably alone in being baked to perfection… for us. Maybe there are some nitrogen breathing conscious beings in another universe writing about the crazy possibility of oxygen breathing beings in a universe like ours?

We probably won’t need a couple hundred more years to figure this out. We are too inquisitive and we keep looking out into the universe and asking complex questions beyond my understanding. What I do understand is that we live in a universe that was baked well enough to produce us, and while we may not be baked to perfection, we are the lottery winners (or likely one of very few lottery winners) in the multiverse.

The future is now

I’ve shared Chat GPT a couple times (1, 2), and I really think that tools like this are going to create a massive shift in jobs, education, and creativity. It can been seen as both scary and exciting.

On another front, scientists have achieved ‘ignition’ in a nuclear fusion test. This is the creation of a fusion reaction where the energy output is greater than the energy input. For over a decade this was an unachievable goal, any reaction created required so much energy to produce that the costs were greater than the returns.

If you showed someone from 1995 the technology we had 25 years later in 2020, they would be impressed and amazed. I’m reminded of Arthur C. Clarke’s quote, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” But what I’m seeing right now seems like magic.

I think the leaps in technology and ingenuity that will happen in the next 25 years will so far exceed what we saw happen in the last 25 years that it will feel more like we are 50 years in the future rather than just 25. So, buckle up and get ready for a wild ride into the future… it’s just getting started now!

We are One

There are two ways that we separate ourselves from ourselves that I think does more harm than good:

  • Body and Mind
  • Conscious Mind and Unconscious Mind

We are one person. We have one mind, (one conscience). One.

There is tons of evidence that suggests our body influences our mind, from obvious feelings of pain distracting us and making it hard to think, to evidence that our gut biome can influence our thoughts. Our mind and body aren’t just connected, they are One.

There are also huge debates about whether we have free will or not because you can connect someone’s brain to sensors and determine the answer to a question you ask them before they are consciously aware of an answer. That’s not actually proof of some sort of determinism, it’s only significant if you separate the conscious mind from the unconscious… if you suggest they are not the same person making the decision. Our conscious and unconscious minds aren’t just connected, they are One.

Have you ever heard, “Your body is your temple”? No it isn’t, your body is you, your mind is you, it’s all you. When your body is sick, you are sick, heal all of you. When your mind is spiralling to dark places, it’s all of you that is spiralling. That’s why exercise can make you feel better. That’s why looking up (literally lifting your head up) or going for a walk can make you feel better. It’s why physical touch, like a hug, or emotional support from a friend can make you feel better mentally and physically.

Ever notice how a friend or a team can push you to physical feats you couldn’t do on your own (in the gym or in a high stakes game)? Mind and body are One.

We break ourselves up into separate objects and I think that does more to harm us than to help us… and I haven’t even spoken about spirit or spirituality, but you can guess my thoughts on this unnecessary separation… we are all One.

We will never have time travel

I’m not a physicist and I don’t play one on the internet, but I believe that we will never have time travel. My premise is simple: if it was invented 50, 250, 500, or even 5,000 years from now, there is no way that the first time we’d ever discover someone from the future was 2022. Surely if it will ever be invented a time traveller would travel to somewhere in the past before us, and we don’t have evidence of that… so at no time in the future will a time machine be invented.

The only possibility that I see for a time machine to work is that we live in a multiverse and if a person did go back in time then they wouldn’t change our history, they would create another new history splitting the history we know and creating a new one that they know… and so in this case while I’d be wrong, you and I will never know.

In the future, if we don’t blow ourselves up and send the world back into the Stone Age, we’ll get closer and closer to traveling the speed of light. A very long time from now humans will visit other planets beyond our solar system. Those travellers will experience time differently than anyone who stays on earth. But while they will age less, they won’t be going back in time.

Time travel like H. G. Wells wrote about will never exist. It’s a fun thing to think about, but the reality is that if it ever was to be invented, we’d already know about it… we wouldn’t have to wait for some time in the future to learn about it.

Doing STEM

‘Doing STEM’ or ‘Doing STEAM’… there is a saying, “Put lipstick on a pig, and it’s still a pig.”

I don’t want this to sound like a rant, and I don’t want to knock teachers for trying to do STEM projects. I do want to say that if 5 years ago a teacher did a project with kids where they broke them into groups and had them assemble a limited number of straws and a specific length of tape into the tallest possible tower, and if they do it again today it isn’t suddenly a STEM project.

Now, if that same lesson included teaching geometry and/or structural integrity; or if students had to design it such that their design had to have a function such as offices or apartments; or hold a weighted satellite dish; or if it had to factor in wind resistance (such as a blow dryer at close range); or if they had to model their design first and estimate the height they will achieve… if there was some thinking, designing, modelling, or estimating that was required before or even during the build process, well then it’s looking more like STEM.

Hands-on does not equal STEM. Building something does not equal STEM. Group challenges does not equal STEM. Meaningful integration of cross-curricular concepts, where problem solving requires thinking in more than one subject area relating to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math is STEM. It doesn’t have to check all the boxes, but it should include thoughtful integration of at least a couple of these.

It’s about making the cross-curricular connections explicit, or at least thinking through how the outcomes and expectations relate to these connections. It’s about developing competencies in the areas of STEM and not just doing a project that looks like STEM.

We don’t really understand

We don’t really understand exponential growth. It’s too hard to comprehend because when we look at growth, we tend to focus on what we’ve seen already, and project forward, but what has already happened is always less significant in length or size than what is still to come. So when we compare what has happened already to what is still to come, we are not comparing equal things.

Fold a piece of paper in half 6 times. How thick do you think the stack would be? Let’s have some fun and look at the folding paper challenge:

It was an accepted belief that folding a piece of paper in half more than 8 times was impossible. On 27 January 2002, high school student, Britney Gallivan, of Pomona, California, USA, folded a single piece of paper in half 12 times and was the first person to fold a single piece paper in half 9, 10, 11, and 12 times. The tissue paper used was 4,000 ft (1,219 m; 0.75 miles) long. ~ GuinnessWorldRecords.com

So she needed a 4,000 foot, (1,219 metres) long piece of paper to achieve this. It’s easy to look at this image of her folded paper and figure out how big it was at 11 folds and before that 10 folds, by halving the amount once then twice. But what if she were to fold the paper more times? How many more times would this image represent?

This image represents folding the paper just 3 more times… a total of just 15 folds.

At 23 folds this would be about a kilometre high (3,280 feet). At 30 folds, you would be entering space. 42 folds gets you to the moon. The 51st fold would get you to the sun. Beyond that it doesn’t matter because our brains won’t truly appreciate the scale anyway.

So I can see the difference that folding a piece of paper just 6 times (64 pieces of paper high) to 12 times (the first image of Brittany above) looks like, but I really struggle to extrapolate from this that 24 folds would be 2 kilometres high.

So when we look at things like technological advancements, we don’t really see well into the future. When I bought the 16k adapter for my Commodore VIC 20 computer to get me to a whopping 36k of memory, I could not fathom the idea that I’d one day be buying 2 Terabytes of memory to store photos that were 8 megabytes large. And I’ll have an even harder time imagining what kind of data I’ll be storing 10 or 20 years from now.

Watch out Metaverse here we come! What does this mean? It means that in 20 years we’ll look back at the technology we have right now in the same way someone who lived 160 years ago would look at our technology today.

That’s mind blowing!

Downward Spiral into the mud

My grandfather had a saying, and I’ve shared it often, “Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty but the pig likes it.”

The pig has some success no matter what. This is something that I think is playing out with anti-vax and conspiracy arguments… they have some success every time we argue. The reason for this success is that they are operating from a fixed mindset, their minds are made up… but they are often arguing with people who have a growth mindset and are open to some level of persuasion. It’s a guaranteed downward spiral, with some of their fixed and misguided ideas seeping into the consciousness of people who try to factor all things in to their understanding.

An example of this is when the twin towers fell in New York. There were all kinds of conspiracy theories that started with the premise that ‘steel towers can’t crumble like that just because a plane crashed into them’. Spoiler alert, they can. But at the time we had no examples to go by, no science to support the possibility, and so just raising this concern could put doubt into a reasonable person’s mind. Then came the videos. Google something like “twin tower conspiracy video” and you’ll see what I mean. These videos are well crafted and convincing.

If you are someone prone to the idea that there is some cabal that has a master plan to rule the world, the fall of the twin towers easily fits that narrative. However, if you are someone who looks at evidence and makes sound decisions based on the information you have, too much of this convincing misdirection and misinformation could influence your thinking. In other words the spread of well constructed fake news has influence on all parties… meanwhile simple logic and boring facts only work on those with growth mindsets willing to do the research work.

The pig wins the moment you engage you in the fight. They get you dirty. Here is a study done at MIT, ‘Does correcting online falsehoods make matters worse?‘, which looks at how pointing out mistakes doesn’t help the argument:

Not only is misinformation increasing online, but attempting to correct it politely on Twitter can have negative consequences, leading to even less-accurate tweets and more toxicity from the people being corrected, according to a new study co-authored by a group of MIT scholars.

The study was centered around a Twitter field experiment in which a research team offered polite corrections, complete with links to solid evidence, in replies to flagrantly false tweets about politics.

“What we found was not encouraging,” says Mohsen Mosleh, a research affiliate at the MIT Sloan School of Management, lecturer at University of Exeter Business School, and a co-author of a new paper detailing the study’s results. “After a user was corrected … they retweeted news that was significantly lower in quality and higher in partisan slant, and their retweets contained more toxic language.”

And the article goes on to say,

“We might have expected that being corrected would shift one’s attention to accuracy. But instead, it seems that getting publicly corrected by another user shifted people’s attention away from accuracy — perhaps to other social factors such as embarrassment.” The effects were slightly larger when people were being corrected by an account identified with the same political party as them, suggesting that the negative response was not driven by partisan animosity.

Now in this case the ‘evidence’ will often degrade, and so it may not be too convincing, but research like this suggests that the conspiracy or fake news spreader is very unlikely to change their minds given sound evidence against their ideas… but when their false ideas are well crafted and instil doubt, the same can’t be said for thoughtful people who aren’t fixed in their opinions.

Social media engagement is more likely to influence people towards believing aspects of fake news that to promote facts and sound evidence. It’s a downward spiral, and it’s getting us all a little dirty.

What are the motives?

One of my pet peeves in education is people who talk about the fact that there are bad teachers, as if to say it is somehow unique to the teaching profession and not to any other profession. I’ve met proportionately very few teachers that I would consider bad compared to bad actors in many other professions. Another profession that seems to be low in bad actors, in my opinion, is medical doctors. Most people go into these professions wanting to serve and help others.

This is why I don’t understand the blatant disregard for well-being that seems to be present in anti-vaccine doctors. I went down a rabbit hole this morning, watching a well known podcaster, professor, and researcher speak to 2 doctors that clearly have compromised stances on covid 19. It was painful. Intelligent people making moronic claims [[update]]. One of them professing that he developed the MNRA vaccine process. One of them talking about about his carpet cleaner’s ailments after taking the vaccine, and how this person could not get anyone to share the horror of his story. I couldn’t get myself to watch the whole thing.

What I don’t understand is the motivation behind these otherwise intelligent people choosing to talk about science fiction and call it science? What’s the benefit? Who gains from this? Conspiracy theories depend on so many people acting in bad faith, people across the globe in different countries colluding and keeping secrets, all for the purpose of maintaining a narrative that makes no sense.

In BC, the spread of covid-19 in senior’s homes was an embarrassment. It benefited no one: not the homes that make money by recruiting more seniors; not the health municipalities that had to count the deaths; not the families that had to watch from a distance, unable to visit their loved ones. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that senior’s homes affected by covid had significantly more deaths than those not affected. Again, this was a provincial and even national embarrassment. Yet, conspiracy theorists talk about co-morbidity and try to pass these ‘extra’ deaths off as if they would have happened anyway. It’s so ignorant to do this, and yet it becomes a blanket statement that disregards examples like this that prove how dangerous this virus is.

And again for whose benefit? That’s the big question that baffles me? Who gains from promoting these dangerous ideas? I truly don’t know.

Everyday amazing

I’ve always been amazed by airplane flight. I don’t truly understand Bernoulli’s principle and the idea that so much weight can be lifted off the ground based simply on propulsion and lift under carefully designed wings still seems unlikely to me. And yet in less than 30 minutes the plane I’m on is going to taxi down a runway and start a 4,239 KM (2,634 mile) trek across (about half of) one of the largest countries in the world… and I’ll be sitting on a runway in Vancouver in 5 hours. Amazing.

We spend a lot of our day taking full advantage of technology we don’t really understand. I’m holding a phone that will magically publish this post to the internet, where it will sit on a website, all the while not knowing how this all works or what http stands for? I can talk to someone half way around the world with virtually no delay in the conversation, but sound travels much slower than that. I will listen to my wireless headphones without knowing how Bluetooth works. All around us we use advances in technology, taking advantage of tools most of us barely understand.

But this ignorance can work against us. Without really understanding the world around us, some people make shit up and think it’s science. How can anyone believe in a flat earth in this day and age of flight? And that’s not even the craziest thing people believe! It’s one thing to be blissfully ignorant of the world around us, and yet another to think that conspiracies live everywhere and that our opinions matter as much as the science.

Two amazing things that surround us:

1. The mystery and marvels of technology and innovation.

2. The blind ignorance of humanity to how this all works.

I’m not sure the gap between these two are getting any closer. The more amazing the the technology, the greater the opportunity for conflagration of lies, deceit, and exaggeration of fears into a dumpster fire of conspiracies, ‘fake news’, and ‘alternative facts’… with people knowingly and unknowingly adding fuel to the flames.

But for now, it’s time to put my phone on airplane mode, take advantage of having a window seat, and stare out at a runway… Marvelling at how this massively heavy plane can leave the surface of the earth, and soar for hours, trusting the science of it without really understanding how it all works.