So I was reading a post on meaning and how something can have a universal meaning to all parties who consider the idea/thought/object. For example, if I simply said door, would everyone conceptualize the same thing in their head? I'm sure we'd get quite a variety of doors, but they would all have likely the same general construct so the answer is infamously "it depends". At some very basic level, I think most everyone can agree on some very general characteristics but everyone's door is likely going to be different based on past experiences with the concept "door". This is kinda like navigating with a partially drawn map. The basic general concepts are like road markers along the road or they could be major cities or landmarks. We can get to the same place generally as long as we have some major points of reference that we all agree on.
This works the same way with translating languages....to an extent. There is a literal translation of a word in most cases or at least a couple of words that describe the word you are trying to translate. Outside of memorizing the corresponding word though, you would have to understand the concept (in your head) in order to have that same major landmark to reference). Otherwise, the word is just garbled gunk to you. If I gave you the same poem in 3 different languages, you could translate it a couple of different ways. The first is literally, but that will likely make very little sense. The words would translate but they would sound "funny". Why is this? Is there something deeper than just words in a poem? Is there a style in writing in a particular language? Are there cultural pretexts that embue a piece of literature with some sort of identity? When you read a fantasy book, you develop a picture of what the far-away world and the characters look like and how they act. You do it in dreams too. What is the basis for this? There is some sort of previous experience that influences how we see the world. I particularly like the poetic example because when I lived in Siberia, I decided to write a poem in Russian for a local talent show. I would gauge how "russian" I had become by how well I was able to embue my words with the local culture and relate the local people there. Needless, to say, it was a hit but it took concerted effort to write as if I were a Russian and had grown up in Russia. A different perspective indeed.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Random Thought #126
I haven't posted to the blog in awhile but I hope this post makes up for it.
I'm currently reading a fascinating book called "Godel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid" written by Douglas Hofstadter. Its been quite a good book and the latest chapter I just read has been quite entertaining.
Let me first introduce a few terms/concepts: 1) Holism - This is the belief that the sum is more than the sum of its parts. Its a little easier to explain in terms of what it isn't. It isn't reductionism.
2) Reductionism - This is the belief that the sum is made up of its constituent parts and nothing more and nothing less.
For example, in the human body, you can break an particular organ down into its biological pieces (cells). Then you can break the cells into their chemical makeup (molecules). Then you can break those up into their physical components (atoms) and although it may be quite tedious, you could theoretically describe an organ in terms of its physical construction of atoms (or perhaps even deeper with sub-atomic particles) but you get the point.
As another example, let's take the brain to demontrate the concept of holism. A reductionist approach would be to break the brain up into smaller and smaller and more distinct or specific pieces. Let's not get too far and just say that your brain is made up of a bunch of neurons. A holistic approach would say, you can't tell me that the firing of neurons can adequately explain consciousness, or the concept of "I". The persona is that extra piece that can't be broken down into its constituent parts.
You could use the same concept with computers and programming languages. These two approaches rely on levels of abstraction. The deeper down you go, the more precise you get, but the more tedious it is to get any useful information out. You miss the forest for the trees. On the contrary, the higher up you go (the more chunking or summarizing) of groups of more detailed items, the easier it is to understand and conceptualize but the less true detail you know or understand about how the system actually works.
Let's take a little more abstract example. Hofstadter uses the following image to illustrate a point.
Unfortunately its a little small, but what do you see? Which word do you pick out? Some may say I see the words Holism and Reductionism. Others may say they see the word MU. It really depends on what level you are looking at it from. If you get a larger copy of this image, you'll actually see that the letters of the word Holism and Reductionism are curvy in nature and that's because each letter in those words is actually also written using the word MU. MU is the chinese word that means nothingness. Zen Buddhism uses the term to "unask" a question that doesn't really have a definite answer. Its their way of saying "it depends".
Let's try another one
This one is a little trickier. What do you see here? Here is what I see.
Option 1: J. S. Bach
Option 2: Fermat
Did you also notice that the letters get smaller or larger depending on how you look at them? If you look at the first have as the letters that make up the larger letters, you'll notice that J. S. Bach the letters progressively get larger and continue to do so but you have to change your perspective and use the larger letters to complete the name, but the letters do get progressively larger. If you use the name Fermat, you have to reverse the process and start with the larger letters and notice they start large, and then convert to the letters that make up the larger letters, but you'll notice they get progressively smaller.
The point here is that there is no ultimate answer. It all depends on what level you are descibing the object or sytem. The answer is MU.
Now, how is this relevant? Let's apply this to how we learn. Most times we think in holistic terms. We want to see the big picture or accomplish some goal so we think in terms of the end-goal. For example, we want to learn how to use a computer, but we don't necessarily want to learn how the software interacts with the hardware in translating code from one layer of abstraction to another all the way down until the hardware understands it. We just want to open the internet and get where we want. There are two problems with this approach.
1. If you spend all your time just using tools when they work correctly, when there is a problem, you'll be completely frustrated since you won't know how to fix it.
2. Once you get familiar with a certain program or set of favorites and build it into your routine, you'll eventuall reach the edge of what you are comfortable doing and when it comes time to extend your knowledge, or put it to the test in a different context, you'll find yourself really having a really humbling experience.
The other approach (the way I'm prone to) of pouring over 700 - 1000 page books covering every minute detail of how something works down to the nth degree when you likely won't use more than half of that knowledge can be quite boring, time-consuming, and a waste of valuable time.
So what should one do? Like most circumstances, taking a hybrid approach is the best approach. Again, MU is the answer. It depends on your circumstances. So much of the time, we are so concerned with what the right answer is, we miss all of the other right answers.
Sp what do I take away from all of this? Well, the best approach is always a hybrid approach. Use the right tool for the right job. Keep an open mind. Look at things from other people's perspectives. You may just find something you didn't realize was there before.
I'm currently reading a fascinating book called "Godel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid" written by Douglas Hofstadter. Its been quite a good book and the latest chapter I just read has been quite entertaining.
Let me first introduce a few terms/concepts: 1) Holism - This is the belief that the sum is more than the sum of its parts. Its a little easier to explain in terms of what it isn't. It isn't reductionism.
2) Reductionism - This is the belief that the sum is made up of its constituent parts and nothing more and nothing less.
For example, in the human body, you can break an particular organ down into its biological pieces (cells). Then you can break the cells into their chemical makeup (molecules). Then you can break those up into their physical components (atoms) and although it may be quite tedious, you could theoretically describe an organ in terms of its physical construction of atoms (or perhaps even deeper with sub-atomic particles) but you get the point.
As another example, let's take the brain to demontrate the concept of holism. A reductionist approach would be to break the brain up into smaller and smaller and more distinct or specific pieces. Let's not get too far and just say that your brain is made up of a bunch of neurons. A holistic approach would say, you can't tell me that the firing of neurons can adequately explain consciousness, or the concept of "I". The persona is that extra piece that can't be broken down into its constituent parts.
You could use the same concept with computers and programming languages. These two approaches rely on levels of abstraction. The deeper down you go, the more precise you get, but the more tedious it is to get any useful information out. You miss the forest for the trees. On the contrary, the higher up you go (the more chunking or summarizing) of groups of more detailed items, the easier it is to understand and conceptualize but the less true detail you know or understand about how the system actually works.
Let's take a little more abstract example. Hofstadter uses the following image to illustrate a point.
Unfortunately its a little small, but what do you see? Which word do you pick out? Some may say I see the words Holism and Reductionism. Others may say they see the word MU. It really depends on what level you are looking at it from. If you get a larger copy of this image, you'll actually see that the letters of the word Holism and Reductionism are curvy in nature and that's because each letter in those words is actually also written using the word MU. MU is the chinese word that means nothingness. Zen Buddhism uses the term to "unask" a question that doesn't really have a definite answer. Its their way of saying "it depends".
Let's try another one
This one is a little trickier. What do you see here? Here is what I see.
Option 1: J. S. Bach
Option 2: Fermat
Did you also notice that the letters get smaller or larger depending on how you look at them? If you look at the first have as the letters that make up the larger letters, you'll notice that J. S. Bach the letters progressively get larger and continue to do so but you have to change your perspective and use the larger letters to complete the name, but the letters do get progressively larger. If you use the name Fermat, you have to reverse the process and start with the larger letters and notice they start large, and then convert to the letters that make up the larger letters, but you'll notice they get progressively smaller.
The point here is that there is no ultimate answer. It all depends on what level you are descibing the object or sytem. The answer is MU.
Now, how is this relevant? Let's apply this to how we learn. Most times we think in holistic terms. We want to see the big picture or accomplish some goal so we think in terms of the end-goal. For example, we want to learn how to use a computer, but we don't necessarily want to learn how the software interacts with the hardware in translating code from one layer of abstraction to another all the way down until the hardware understands it. We just want to open the internet and get where we want. There are two problems with this approach.
1. If you spend all your time just using tools when they work correctly, when there is a problem, you'll be completely frustrated since you won't know how to fix it.
2. Once you get familiar with a certain program or set of favorites and build it into your routine, you'll eventuall reach the edge of what you are comfortable doing and when it comes time to extend your knowledge, or put it to the test in a different context, you'll find yourself really having a really humbling experience.
The other approach (the way I'm prone to) of pouring over 700 - 1000 page books covering every minute detail of how something works down to the nth degree when you likely won't use more than half of that knowledge can be quite boring, time-consuming, and a waste of valuable time.
So what should one do? Like most circumstances, taking a hybrid approach is the best approach. Again, MU is the answer. It depends on your circumstances. So much of the time, we are so concerned with what the right answer is, we miss all of the other right answers.
Sp what do I take away from all of this? Well, the best approach is always a hybrid approach. Use the right tool for the right job. Keep an open mind. Look at things from other people's perspectives. You may just find something you didn't realize was there before.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Random Thought #125
I always wonder about being philanthropic and donating to good causes because I'm never quite sure how that money gets used. Many well-intentioned organizations often try to help too much and impose their "better way" on the area or group they are trying to help and often waste money spinning their wheels. This talk from TED explains the problem quite nicely. Thought it worth the watch
http://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_listen.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2012-11-30&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Random Thought #124
Isomorphism. That's that new word I learned this week. Actually, I've been noticing new concepts in books and articles I read that explain habits I have which I was aware of but didn't really know that there was a word or concept for it. Let me provide an example. Let's define isomorphism. Isomorphism is basically being able to represent something in two different ways without changing the content via some form of mapping axiom. For example, abc and 123. These say the exact same thing assuming you have a mapping in place that says a=1, b=2, and c=3. I've basically said the same thing but two different ways. How does this relate to a habit of mine? Well without really knowing it, whenever I'm driving, I look at people's license plates as I go by them or pull up behind them. Most traditional license plates have a grouping of 3 numbers or letters followed by another grouping of 3 numbers or letters. I would simply compare the first grouping to the second grouping by developing some sort of mapping axiom. It was a fun game to play. Since that time, license plates have gotten a little more complicated. The first grouping could have a combination of letters and numbers as could the second grouping. I've even seen some license plates that have a grouping of 3 and a grouping of 4, both mixing letters and numbers and so I start trying to solve algebraic equations. For example, if I setup a certain mapping axiom such that letters have certain numerical volumes, what would the extra letter have to be in the grouping of 4 to make both sides equal. Its how I'm able to remember a multitide of license plates so well. That actually brings me to another point. Isomorphism is how we assign meaning to things. We take a known formal system (alphabet or whole number system) and try to take an unfamiliar system or pattern and map it to our known system. When we are able to do this, we make that unfamiliar system familiar to us via the linkage of the developed mapping axiom. Its quite amazing and a core fundamental of how we solve problems and recognize patterns, which partially leads to intelligence. Anyways, I know it may seem weird but I found it quite fascinating and hope you at least learned a little something too
Random Thought #123
Have you ever sat in a library or bookstore quietly reading to yourself? If you're not reading aloud, how do you know what's going on? Where are the words coming from? Have you ever taken the time to consciously listen to the voice in your head? Yeah, its actually there. Try it. The next time you're in a quiet place, try reading something quietly to yourself and listen for the voice that you "hear" reading the words aloud so that you can experience the story. It kind of caught me by surprise but I stopped and started trying to listen to the voice to see if I could make out what the voice sounded like. Was it my voice? I know I could control it because I would just stop reading and the voice went away so whether it was my voice or not, I'm not sure, but I was in control of it. It kind of relates to my thought on dreams and what goes on in dreams. Its like there is this internal "me" world that I only tap into occasionally but its definitely there. Weird.
Random Thought #122
I saw a cleaning truck today that had the catch phrase "Clean as a whistle". I thought about that phrase. How could that possibly have come into being? A whistle has got to be one of the dirtiest things in the world. Any guesses as to the dirtiest place on the human body? You may have some interesting guesses, but the answer is the mouth. That isn't just metaphorical either. It really is the dirtiest place on your body. That being said, how can something that is stuck in someone's mouth and had spit and saliva blown threw it multiple times be thought of as clean? Anyways, if anyone knows where this saying comes from, I'd be interested to know. Please comment and let me know if you find out. It intrigues me.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Random Thought #121
Have you ever wondered how babies dream? Do they speak baby language in those dreams? Does everyone speak the same language? Are the characters all 2 feet tall and wear diapers? What kinds of things happen? I think it would be quite interesting to crash a baby's dream. Also kind of makes you wonder how people who speak a different language dream. I bet they dream in their own language and the characters look different. Makes you wonder what dreams are made of. I also found a funny comic that expresses how we seem to take the concept of dreaming in stride despite its awkwardness. Since I've been told I should include a picture of two, I hope you enjoy this one.
Random Thought # 120
Have you ever wondered why your hands and feet get all wrinkly when you leave them in water too long? Well I was caught wondering that the other day so I deceided to check it out. Apparently the outer layer of your skin (epidermis) and yes, your skin has multiple layers, is filled with dead keratin. That's the same stuff as what your fingernails and toenails are made of. This outer layer is also covered by an oily substance called sebum which is what leaves fingerprints. Sebum is hydrophobic (doesn't like water) so it helps keep water from getting in all the time. Well, after awhile of soaking, the sebum washes off and underneath is this keratin. Well despite being "dead", keratin is quite hydrophilic. (it likes water). As you soak in the water, the keratin is having a field day filling up on all the water it can causing that outer layer of skin to enlarge and bulge out causing rolls in your skin. You may ask, why would you blow up all over? Why does it bulge? Well the epidermis is tied down to the under layer (the dermis) at certain spots, and so where its not tied down, it bulges out causing wrinkles. After you get out, two things happen, you feel like your skin is dry (cause you got no sebum) and you start to deflate. The water is evaporating and you are shrinking back down. That's why a lot of people apply lotion after a bath or shower, because they feel dry. Eventually your body produces more sebum and you're back to normal. Cool huh? Oh, by the way, that's also why your nails are so soft after soaking. The keratin in there absorbed water too. Just thought you'd like to know :)
Monday, October 1, 2012
Random Thought #119
This is quite an interesting video and although I think some of the questions and assumptions are a bit of a stretch, he does bring up a number of interesting points
http://www.ted.com/talks/john_lloyd_an_animated_tour_of_the_invisible.html
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Random Thought #118
We've all heard of illiteracy but after my recent rant about the lack of numerical efficiency and competence in today's generation and after an episode of UH's College of Engineering's series called "Engines of our Ingenuity" about Innumeracy, I had to post their blog spot on it. Here is the link for your reference
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2825.htm
Monday, August 20, 2012
Random Thought #117
Can you remember the last time you made a change to some account of yours and the billing department got it completely right and you didn't have to call them and explain everything to them and 10 other people as well? Yeah, neither can I. Honestly, is it really that hard to bill someone for some basic services? Who are the people these places hire to fill their billing departments? Where do they get them from? And for once, could a bill be simple and straightforward. These things are so convoluted nowadays, its impossible for a person of average IQ to even decipher them. The worst are banks when dealing with loans. If you ever try to be responsible and make extra payments towards principle, prepare for 6 months of explaining Accounting 101 to these guys they call "personal bankers". It really is a joke. I don't mean to be so negative but I think they should start giving us credits for correcting their mistakes since we're basically doing their jobs for them. Coupons are just as bad. If you use more than 3 coupons in a transaction, especially at grocery stores, you need a PhD in Applied Mathematics to figure out what is going on. See what computers have done to us? They've made us a bunch of idiots. I bet if cash registers didn't tell us how much change to give, over half of the tellers nowadays would take at least 1-2 minutes to calculate and count our change. Thank goodness for plastic huh? Next thing you know, the registers will start telling them, grab 2 quarters, a dime, a nickel, and 3 pennies so they don't have to count. Let's just hope our rising generation of programmers did well in their math classes.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Random Thought #116
I've often wondered how the apparently two "conflicting commandments" given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden was possible? How could God give Adam and Eve a commandment He knew they couldn't obey? It just didn't make sense. I recently read a book called "The Fortunate Fall" that I think helps me understand how this is possible. The key I think lies in the 2nd Article of Faith. Remember back to the days of Primary, "We believe that man will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression". What Adam and Eve did was transgess a law. They did not commit a sin. To help make the distinction, Elder Oaks made this comparison. If you murder someone, that is a sin because it is inherently and morally wrong, but if you drive without a license, it is only a crime because someone made a law that made it a crime. Driving without a license is not inherently wrong. This then begs the question, why would God make a law that He knew had to be broken? I think the answer lies in experience. He had to teach Adam and Eve right from wrong, what it was like to experience sorrow. That's why we are here in the first place, to gain experience, learn, and progress. Think about a little child, they do what you ask and do it gladly. Eventually they will test their boundaries, but sometimes we have to setup scenarios for them to see what they will do. After all, God watched all of his creations until they obeyed. He did the same thing with his children. Its this perspective and understanding the importance of the Fall and subsequent importance of the Atonement of Christ in lieu of the Plan of Salvation that helps us understand the vital role and choices that our first parents made.
Random Thought #115
Someone made a comment today at church about how the Sacrament was a covenant and an ordinance that was really a renewal of the baptism ordinance. That got me thinking about other "saving" ordinances in the church and their repeatability. The sacrament is meant to help us remember our covenants and renew them. Once we perform "saving" ordinances for ourselves, we perform them for others not only for their benefit but also for us to remember our covenants. So that got me thinking, after we perform baptism for someone else in the temple, and they receive it on the other side, do they take the sacrament each week or are ordinances only performed on earth? If you have any insights into this..please feel free to comment. I'm curious.
Random Thought #114
What does Bill Gates have to do with corn? I know...weird question right? I recall reading lately about The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsoring an event that will bring many of the brightest folks around to develop a new generation of toilet. Its supposed to generate energy, recycle feces, and not require any running water. Cool huh? Don't believe me...GOOGLE IT! Anyways, as I was reading about this endeavor, I read where they were ordering large amounts of fake poo. That started me thinking about poo (I know, I'm weird) and why it is that whenever you eat corn, it goes from mastication to extrication basically the same way. Why is it that we can't digest corn? Well, I just had to find out. Turns out, all we see is the outer shell, which like most all plant matter is made of cellulose. Humans aren't very good at digesting cellulose for whatever reason (evolution, design, who knows?) At first, I was kind of excited thinking if the human digestive system couldn't break down corn, whatever it was made of would be great for studying for indestructible material but nonetheless it was fun learning why corn shows up in fecal matter. I wonder why other plant matter (vegetables) don't show up more clearly as well. Perhaps the topic of a future post
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Random Thought #113
I am a big believer in collaboration vs competition. I try and teach it to my kids. Competition brings about winners, but it also brings out losers. There is a hierarchy instead of an even playing field. Some are better than others, all are not equal. It promotes fame, power, money, greed, selfishness, and pride. Everything in this world is about competition. Its about never being satisfied and always having to be better, faster, bigger, stronger. We are never content. It coincides with the theory of scarcity. Scarcity is relative and only apparent due to selfishness and greed of a few. The concept of everyone wearing white in the temple is to promote the idea that everyone is equal. The concept behind the United Order and the Law of Consecration is one of collaboration. Unfortunately, the reason there isn't more collaboration is because it requires that all parties are working towards a similar goal and quite often, due to the factors I mentioned above, not everyone is working towards the same goal. We all have self-interest and it often trumps the common good. We succumb to temptation. None of us is perfect but if we at least strive to collaborate and not compete, the world could at least in our view become a little better.
Random Thought #112
This guy goes a million miles a minute but he's exciting to watch and he gets your kind of excited too and he's doing great things. He's teaching kids, using green alternatives, and changing the kids and the neighborhood around him. Such an inspiration.
http://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_ritz_a_teacher_growing_green_in_the_south_bronx.html
Random Thought #111
I just saw a video from a Standford Computer Science professor who has collaborated with a colleague to develop a site dedicated to providing actual university courses online for free from some of the top universities in the country. There was also another initiative similar to this done at MIT. This is an excellent opportunity for those who are working and can't go to night school and want to increase their skills. You don't get credit for it but you do get a certificate and in some instances, it can help you in your current position. I've also added links to these sites on the side for your reference. They are called EdX and CoursEra. Check out the video below.
http://www.ted.com/talks/daphne_koller_what_we_re_learning_from_online_education.html
Random Thought #110
I really enjoyed the concept behind this lady's talk. Its about disagreeing to produce progress. I don't enjoy disagreement for the sake of disagreement but I think disagreement can open our eyes and minds to the point where we can greatly enhance our understanding and progress to higher learning. The key to disagreement is that is must be permitted and it must be embraced and encouraged with the right intent. Too many of us live in our bubble of comfort and if an idea doesn't go along with our preconceived ideas, we immediately dismiss it as incorrect. Just like my hepatitis example. If I were to believe that Hepatitis was some disease that didn't affect the liver and I refused to allow anyone to disagree with me or to even consider their ideas, I would be completely wrong and yet feel completely right and alienate a lot of people an lose a chance and learning something new. The problem with our preconceived ideas is that they are shaped by our experience. We are a product of our environment whether we like it or not. I'm reading a book by Stephen R. Covey right now called "The Divine Center" and the entire 1st chapter of his book talks about this principle. He uses a picture to illustrate his point. He has one person looks at a picture that looks like a beautiful young lady looking off to the side. Then he shows a different person a picture similar to the first but is more obvious that it looks like an old lady with a big nose. Then he shows both people a slightly modified version of the picture that has elements of both of the previous pictures and asks each to convince the other of what they see. What do you think happens? The person who originally saw the young lady naturally sees the young lady and the same for the other. So they have a disagreement and unless one opens their comfort bubble and tries to see things from the other person's perspective, they are losing out on an opportunity to learn and see things from a different perspective, which can be quite gratifying. I also think we suffer from this in the Church. We are so indoctrinated into believing and regurgitating Sunday School answers and basic doctrines, we are often dis-interested in other people's beliefs and immediately condemn them for being "wrong". However, we are conditioned by our circumstances. Consider what we experience every week in church and what we hear in the news and via media outlets about events in the Middle East. Guess how many members of the church known anything about Islam? Or what do you think they picture about the Middle East? The sad part is that the history of the Book of Mormon and the Bible comes from the Middle East. Do you know how much better we could understand the scriptures if we actually learned about that part of the world? Do you know how many similarities that are between the gospel of Islam/Judaism/Christianity? We cannot afford to sit in our comfort bubbles and tune the rest of the world out. We simply can't.
Here is the link to the talk
http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_heffernan_dare_to_disagree.html
Random Thought #109
This is a short and kind of interesting talk about screening for Parkinson's disease. I'm not so interested in the test as I am on how they conduct the test. They measure the vocal cords distance from the edge and turn that into a frequency. I'm a believer in the fact that each body part operates at a certain frequency and that illness and eventually death occur when our bodies are unable to maintain that optimal frequency. There are only a subset of frequencies that we can perceive with our senses. It wouldn't at all surprise me if those in the Spirit World operated at a much higher frequency so we are unable to perceive them without being temporarily translated (raise our operating frequency). If you consider frequency in light, the highest known frequency that we can measure currently are gamma rays, which if we were exposed to, would totally obliterate us. I'm not necessarily saying that the Lord is emitting gamma rays, but who knows, everyone describes Him as being so bright it is beyond description and if we were not protected or transformed somehow, we would be consumed, similar to how we might be if we're not righteous and ready during the Second Coming. We'll likely burn as stubble.
Here's a link to the talk if you're interested.
http://www.ted.com/talks/max_little_a_test_for_parkinson_s_with_a_phone_call.html
Random Thought #108
As I was listening to the radio the other day, I heard about how the CDC was advocating that the Baby Boomer generation get tested for Hepatitis C. I never really thought about Hepatitis before outside of getting Hepatitis A/B vaccines as a normal course of actions. I just thought it was some sort of upper-respiratory disease or blood ailment or something, but then they started talking about how effects don't show up until much later and major complications occur when someone gets liver cancer or cirrhosis of the liver. I'm thinking....what in the world is Hepatitis that it targets the liver? Then I remember looking up cysts and was wondering what a hepatic cyst was. It also referred to the liver and then a light bulb went on. Hepa refers to the liver so naturally Hepatitis is a disease that affects the liver and A/B/C are variations of the disease. This may not come as much of a surprise to you guys, especially the ones in medicine, but its funny how we just go along in our lives assuming one thing and then are completely surprised when it turns out to be something completely different. I love it when that happens though because it challenges our ideas and perceptions and that is when we have our "AHA!" moments and light bulbs go off and we actually learn. I love "AHA!" moments. They are so much fun
Random Thought #107
With all of the political news and ads going around this time of year and with all of the disagreements and party politics games in congress, I started to think how the Republicans and Democrats actually got their names and ideaologies, especially considering that the USA is a Democratic Republic. Its rather interesting but many of the Founding Fathers didn't believe in political parties and the Constitution doesn't really address them at all but it started out with the Federalists who believed in National Banks and Strong Central Government vs. the Opposition or Anti-Federalists who believed in supporting the rights of the states as a better representation of a republic. Now you may be thinking that the Opposition were the Republicans of today and those that wanted a strong central government were the Democrats. That's actually the exact opposite. In fact, the Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton and John Quincy Adams hurled the term "Democrat" at the then Opposition which later became known as Democratic Republicans (I know...oxymoron right?) led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison because that was a derogatory word following the Reign of Terror following the French Revolution in 1789. Back in the day, everyone was considered a republican so after that term had been flung out there, there were the National Republicans (Adams Republicans) and the Democratic Republicans (Jefferson/Jackson Republicans). You can read the entire history here but I think its quite ironic that the Republicans and Democrats of today support the exact opposite of what their original founders supported and in fact that we have a party system at all considering that was not the intent of the Founding Fathers. Amazing what money/power/influence can do to people.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Random Thought #106
I love everything about this lady's presentation. Not only is she intelligent, but she is humble and hopes to teach others. The details of her discovery about cancerous cells is also quite interesting.
http://www.ted.com/talks/mina_bissell_experiments_that_point_to_a_new_understanding_of_cancer.html
Random Thought #105
This guy is an interesting artist. I'll admit his form is a little odd and creepy but quite fascinating as well. It would be quite an interesting exhibit to visit.
http://www.ted.com/talks/gabriel_barcia_colombo_capturing_memories_in_video_art.html
Random Thought # 104
I wonder why there is so much salt on this earth. If you think about the Dead Sea, Great Salt Lake, Salt Flats in Utah, Salt Mines in east Africa and all of the oceans throughout the world, there is a lot of salt. I'm especially curious why the bulk of our water is salty. Water is fundamental to sustaining life. Why is the biggest source of it salty? Was the salt meant as a deterrent so that we don't waste it? Is there some use for it? How does marine life filter it out and what do they do with it? Just another random thought
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Random Thought #103
I wonder why the keys on a computer keyboard are setup the way they are. There doesn't appear to be any rhyme or reason for it. I mean why wouldn't you just set them up in order? I think I recall that the most common keys are placed so that your fingers had to do the least amount of reaching and it does seem that most of us have adapted to this model fairly well but it's interesting nonetheless. I wonder what a predecessor keyboard layout to the standard QWERTY looked like
Random Thought #102
You know how in the scriptures we read of a principal prophet that is kind of the main focus of any story or event. I was reading the Book of Mormon the other night and found myself thinking we not only have 1 prophet, we have 15. I started wondering about the other prophets that were around during the time of Lehi or amongst the Jaredites or even during the time of Abraham. Just thinking about Lehi, he was a contemporary of Jeremiah in the Old Testament and they likely knew each other and even Uriah which was fleeing to Egypt, but we didn't really find out about him until the discovery of the Lachish Letters. The search for the whole story is fun and fascinating but we must be willing to search and have a firm testimony
Monday, June 11, 2012
Random Thought #101
I had an interesting thought come into my head. What are the 3 most common degrees pursued in the university or professions in the workplace?
1. Business
2. Law
3. Medicine
Those are my three. You hardly see anyone going into education, or art, or history, or science because there is no payout at the other end. People don't follow their passions because it doesn't make sense financially. I can't say I blame them. It's in our nature to survive and be comfortable but there was a comic in the newspaper a couple of weeks ago from a comic strip artist that I usually hate but he made an excellent point.
http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2012/05/06
Decisions about what to pursue in life are driven by money. Its sad really. Dreams and passions are lost and left to rot. I can't say as though I'm any better as I graduated from business school and work for a big corporation and we're financially secure but I can't say that there isn't something deep inside of me that is frustrated and festering, an itch that needs to be scratched. I try to satiate it with Ted talks and books but it still there. I know it seems cliche' but follow your dreams and your passions. Don't let money or a certain lifestyle get in your way. Be Happy and feed your soul!
Random Thought #100
To celebrate my 100th random thought on this blog, I thought I would post a video looking at the human race and the creation as a review and then looking at what we see now in the current generation and how the two might relate. Lots of interesting stats, lots of interesting science, lots of interesting technological innovation, and a little bit of humor. Makes you think a little bit. Consider much of this in terms of the creation and scriptural passages. I thought it was interesting. I hope you think some of these things are interesting too.
http://www.ted.com/talks/juan_enriquez_will_our_kids_be_a_different_species.html
Thanks to all for following my blog. I hope you find it interesting and look forward to many more of my random thoughts in the future.
Random Thought #99
Did you ever wonder why we use the letter 'X' to represent the unknown or some kind of variable? Of course not. We tried to forget about algebra and quadratic equations as soon as we passed the class. Well I personally have never wondered about this (I suppose it would have been a matter of time) but this guy did and this short little history lesson about how 'X' came to represent the unknown is quite fascinating and is yet another example of learning something from expanding your horizons. There is much we didn't invent and borrowed from another place and another time. I'll give you a hint.....it originates in the Middle East. Enjoy!!
http://www.ted.com/talks/terry_moore_why_is_x_the_unknown.html
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Random Thought #98
This is quite fascinating, well for nerds like me it is. I especially like how they used various disciplines and technologies to restore and revive the original text (particle accelerator shooting off x-ray radiation).....pretty cool!!! Making it open source at the end of all of that effort is definitely a labor of love. This is like a fairy tale love story to me. I know...I'm weird.
http://www.ted.com/talks/william_noel_revealing_the_lost_codex_of_archimedes.html
Random Thought #97
This guy is an entertaining display of what goes on in my head on a daily basis. Wouldn't it be fun to live inside my head? HAHA
http://www.ted.com/talks/reggie_watts_disorients_you_in_the_most_entertaining_way.html
Random Thought #96
Think the invention of the LEGO was cool, these cool little toys are like an electrical engineer's LEGOs. I thought these were really cool and I would love some of these. They are called littleBits. Check it out
http://www.ted.com/talks/ayah_bdeir_building_blocks_that_blink_beep_and_teach.html
Here is their website: http://littlebits.cc/
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Random Thought #95
There are a number of great quotes from this latest book that I just read and I'd like to share them with you. They are all attributed to Henry Eyring, a famous LDS scientist and are quoted from his biography called "Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring"
1. If you insist on knowing Pi squared exactly, you are asking for the impossible, since the series never ends. Thus you can know the answer to as many places as you please and therefore to any desired degree of accuracy, but the question, "what is the exact value?" would take an eternity to answer. The statement that we can never know everything about the Gospel is thus a mathematical certainty, since here is one truth which has no answer in finite terms. There is an endless number of such questions without an exact answer. "What is the value of the square root of 3?" is another example. Still another is the question, "How much exactly will you ultimately know?" Some questions take literally forever to answer. We recognize an essential truth from these simple examples in mathematics. By diligent study-in the example above by using a computer-we can get a better and better idea of the true picture. But to ask for the whole picture is meaningless-we can't get it in a finite time.
2. This religion that we have is only truth. It is not anything else. So don't get nervous. Don't get worried about anything that you learn. Go and study geology and biology and organic evolution and anthropology and everything else that you like. The more the merrier. If there is anything I have told you that will not stand up, it is not the gospel. We do not want it anyway. Let it go. The truth is all we are standing for.
3. There is probably no better way to deepen faith in the Gospel than to try to think out how this magnificently complicated world came about. Only a profound scholar of the physical sciences is able to calculate the utter improbability of any universe arising by chance. There is, however, a deep meaning running through all that touches our lives. The gospel is to be found not only in the scriptures but in every detail of the world, if we can but read it.
4. An interesting calculation illustrates the complete improbability of a hot sun arising by chance. We suppose that in order again to become hot the sun must accumulate an amount of heat equal to that it gives off in its lifetime. This must be accumulated from its surroundings, which we shall assume in the heat death drop to a temperature of 700 degrees Centigrade. Then, using the straightforward theory of chemical reaction, we find that the length of time in years equal to a least one with a hundred thousand, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion zeroes must elapse before a hot sun has a "fifty-fifty" probability of occurring again by chance. This is almost no chance at all! Surely our hot sun did not arise by such a chance fluctuation. The Creator accomplishes His purposes by much more subtle means. Every piece of information of this kind reveals new facets of the cosmic design and increases our awe of the Supreme Intelligence operating through the universal reign of law.
5. Actually, you do not ever prove anything that makes a difference in science or religion. You set up some basic postulates from your experience or your experiments and then from that you start making deductions, but everything that matters is based upon things you accept as true. When a man says he will believe in religion if you prove it, it is like asking you to prove there are electrons. Proof depends upon your premises. In Euclidean geometry, you learn that three angles of a triangle total 180 degrees and that two parallel lines never meet; the whole argument proceeds very logically. But there are other kinds of geometry. In elliptical geometry, parallel lines do meet. If you go up to the North Pole and draw two parallels of longitude, they will hit the equatorial plane at right angles. That makes 180 degrees, plus the angle at the pole. And the lines are perfectly parallel at the equator, and the fellow that does not know they are curving will find that two parallel lines meet. It is perfectly good geometry. It is two dimensional on the surface, but it is curving in a third dimension. Analogously, we do not know whether or not this three dimensional space we live in is curving in a fourth dimension. You can build your logic perfectly, but whether your postulates apply to the world you live in is something you have to get out of either experiment or experience. Every proof in science depends on the postulates one accepts. The same is true of religion. The certitude one has about the existence of God ultimately comes from personal experience, the experience of others, or logical deductions fro the postulates one accepts. People sometimes get the idea that science and religion are different, but they are not different at all. There is nothing in science that does not hinge on some primitive constructs you take for granted. What is an electron? I can tell you some things about the electron we have learned from experiment, and if you accept these things, you will be able to make predictions. But ultimately you will always get back to postulates. I am certain in my own mind of the truthfulness of the gospel, but I can only communicate that assurance to you if you accept my postulates.
6. The more I try to unravel the mysteries of the world in which we live, the more I come to the conception of a single overruling power-God. The conception of a God ruling the universe and concerned with how it works is impossible for me without the corollary that He should be interested in man, the most remarkable phenomenon in the world. Being interested in man, it is natural that He would provide a plan for man's development and welfare. This plan is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Random Thought #94
I've often thought "what do many great leaders have in common"? I'm sure there are a number of traits but one that especially stuck with me was that they were totally committed to their cause. If they had failed, they would have failed miserably and gone out with a bang. In the book I'm reading, the subject was asked to describe what he believes a good chemist to be and the last sentence I think is relevant here. He said "There are some factors to look for. One is whether he reacts quickly. You can talk with him and tell whether he sees things and grasps ideas. But he has to be more than bright if he is going to be a good scientist. He also has to be interested. That takes longer to discover, but you can work with him for a little while and find out. Unless he just gets lost in his work and feels that knowing molecules is like knowing people, he probably won't get far. If he is a time server, if he just likes to work eight hours and then go do something else, he won't change the world." I'll just let that last sentence sink in. Is there a reason the Church sometimes feels kind of stagnant? Are its members totally interested and committed? We are committed by virtue of the covenants we make, but committed is used in a slightly different context there. Do we serve the Lord and our fellow man with all of our heart, might, mind, and strength? Are we willing to risk everything for the cause? Do we have sufficient faith that we cannot fail? If every man were like unto Moroni, the very gates of hell would tremble and fall. (or something like that). I believe we need to "stand a little taller" and fulfill our covenants which we have made and wait for the shower of blessings to follow.
Random Thought #93
Have you ever heard the expression that you needed to "take a step in my shoes"? Of course you have. It refers to seeing things from a different perspective. I think we sometimes tend to view the world only through our eyes. We don't know what its like for a blind person, deaf person, or an animal or a plant, or an insect. Imagine if you were a snake. Nobody likes you, everyone tries to kill you, and you can't even walk or grab anything and you have to smell everything with your tongue. I may be taking this a bit far but the point I'm trying to make is that we often think in absolutes and that absolute is our perspective (which in itself is ironic since each of us has a unique perspective) If you read Abraham or Moses' accounts in the Pearl of Great Price, you always hear Christ or an angel telling them that there are multiple perspectives. When speaking to Moses, the Lord is showing Moses everything that has happened and everything that will happen, and the heavens, etc. and Moses asks for more. The Lord tells him to be content with this world and its dealings but more is implied just by the nature of Moses' question and the Lord's response. Obviously there are multiple perspectives to the "universe" or whatever superficial boundary we want to put around Heavenly Father's creations. When teaching Abraham, the Lord keeps saying that (I'm paraphrasing) "these things are shown to you from the perspective of the globe upon which thou standest". Everything that was being shown to him was from the perspective of Earth vs some other place. I think this principle also applies when trying to understand God's creations. In the book I'm reading, entitled Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring, he being a chemist, talks about "living among the molecules" to best understand his work. He is looking and trying to understand his work as if he were a molecule or from a molecule's perspective. He tells a good story about a lost race horse that illustrates this point.
"The lost horse was sought for all day by the entire town, unsuccessfully. On the second day the village fool went out and in an hour returned with the horse. In response to inquiry as to his procedure, he explained that the first day he sat and thought what he would do were he a horse. On the second day he went to the point where he himself would have gone. The horse was there."
This brief story also illustrates the need for patience, careful consideration and study, and not to react immediately.
Random Thought #92
Ever consider what might be bigger than the universe? I mean solar systems and galaxies are already beyond our comprehension but we think that the universe is all there could possibly be and has no boundaries (as odd as that seems to us). But what if it does and is only one of many?
This guy goes a little over the top and makes some far-fetched assumptions, which is all too easy to do when you get all excited about this stuff, but nonetheless, it is pretty interesting and who knows...maybe its true. This kind of stuff gets me all excited too. The presentation is pretty cool and helps the talk along.
http://www.ted.com/talks/brian_greene_why_is_our_universe_fine_tuned_for_life.html
Random Thought #91
So I was viewing my weekly allotment of TED videos and this one I thought was pretty clever and has a great message. Basically a handful of studies were done to see if people were happier if they spent money on themselves vs spending it on someone else. I think the results speak for themselves. Cool study.
http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_norton_how_to_buy_happiness.html
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Random Thought #90
I recently finished Elder Bednar's latest book entitled "Increase in Learning". Its a relatively quick read but has some amazing thoughts and ideas in it. These are things which I have felt and understood inside but they never got any traction because they were considered rebel-like ideas. They didn't fit the mainstream of Mormonism. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever fit the mainstream of Mormonism very well. I'll quote Elder Bednar directly as I couldn't say it any better myself. Hopefully this will inspire you to want to read his book. I'll need to define doctrines, principles, and applications first so that you understand what he is saying. According to Elder Bednar:
"A gospel doctrine is a truth-a truth of salvation revealed by a loving Heavenly Father. Gospel doctrines are eternal, do not change, and pertain to the eternal progression and exaltation of Heavenly Father's sons and daughters. Doctrines such as the nature of the Godhead, the plan of happiness, and the Atonement of Jesus Christ are foundational, fundamental, and comprehensive. The core doctrines of the gospel of Jesus Christ are relatively few in number. Gospel doctrines answer the question of "why"?"
"A gospel principle is a doctrinally based guideline for the righteous exercise of moral agency. Principles are subsets or components of broader gospel truths. Principles provide direction. Correct principles always are based upon and arise from doctrines, do not change, and answer the question of "what"?"
"Applications are the actual behaviors, action steps, practices, or procedures by which gospel doctrines and principles are enacted in our lives. Whereas doctrines and principles do not change, applications appropriately can vary according to needs and circumstances. Applications answer the question of "how""
"Thus, the overarching purpose of this concluding dispensation is to gather together in one all things in Christ. Let me suggest that the principle of gather together in one applies in a practical way to our daily learning and living of the gospel.
Some members of the Church seem to compartmentalize the restored gospel into a lengthy list of things to do-as separate and unrelated "applications" to be accomplished and checked off. Daily scripture study-check. Personal and family prayer-check. Tithing-check. Family home evening-check. Temple attendance-check. Home and visiting teaching-check. But the purification, the joy, the happiness, the continuing conversion, and the spiritual power and protection that come from "yielding [our] hearts unto God" (Helaman 3:35) cannot be obtained merely by performing and checking off all of the gospel things we are supposed to do. Consistently completing the various tasks without experiencing the mighty change of heart and becoming more devoted disciples will not produce the spiritual strength we need to withstand the evils and opposition of the latter days. Rather, the power of the Savior's gospel to bless and guide us comes from the connectedness and interrelatedness of its doctrines, principles, and practices. Only as we gather together in one all things in Christ can we diligently strive to become what God desires us to become (see Matthew 5:48; 3 Nephi 12:48). And the framework of doctrines, principles, and applications is a tool that can help us investigate and learn about the interrelatedness of gospel truths and practices.
As we learn and link the revealed truths from all dispensations, we receive eyes that can see and ears that can hear (see Doctrine and Covenants 136:32). The gospel is not a routine checklist comprised of discrete tasks; it is a magnificent tapestry of truth "fitly framed" (Ephesians 2:21) and woven together.
The principle of gather together in one can aid us in changing the conventional checklist into a unified, integrated, and complete whole and in receiving the transforming power of the gospel of Jesus Christ in our daily lives. Let me provide several examples of what I am suggesting.
In our homes and classes, we frequently learn about the great plan of happiness, the infinite Atonement, moral agency, individual accountability, and sacred covenants. Typically, however, these vital doctrines and principles are considered separately rather than in relation to each other. As we gather together in one these eternal truths, we see and hear more clearly our relationship to the Father and the Son, our divine potential and destiny as sons and daughters of God, the nature of eternal progression, and the simplicity, order, and beauty of the Father's plan (see Alma 42:4-9, 14-23).
In our homes and classes we frequently discuss and learn about sacrifice, obedience, and consecration. Typically, however, these important principles are considered separately rather than in relation to each other. As we gather together in one these related truths, we see more clearly the pathway of discipleship and hear the admonitions to come unto the Savior, to bridle all of our passions (see Alma 38:12), "to perform every word of command with exactness" (Alma 57:21), to strip ourselves of pride (see Alma 5:28), and to "offer [our] whole souls as an offering unto him" (Omni 1:26).
In our homes and classes we frequently emphasize the importance of regular scripture study, personal and family prayer, and Church attendance. Typically, however, these important practices are considered separately rather than in relation to each other. As we gather together in one these complimentary habits of holiness, we hear more clearly the priesthood injunction to "receive the Holy Ghost." We recognize these sincere practices as essential in inviting the Spirit of the Lord into our lives. Studying, praying, and worshipping are not isolated and independent items one a checklist of things to do. Rather, each of these righteous practices is an important element in an overarching spiritual quest to fulfill the mandate to receive and retain the Holy Ghost. Fundamentally, all gospel teachings and activities are centered on coming unto the Savior and having the power of the Holy Ghost in our lives.
In the Church we have quorums, auxiliaries, effective programs, and inspiring meetings. Typically, however, organizations and functions are considered separately rather than in relation to each other. As we gather together in one all of the program purposes and reasons for gathering, we see and hear more clearly the role of these vital activities in knitting our hearts "together in unity and in love" (Mosiah 18:21) and in caring for the temporal and spiritual needs of our brothers and sisters. Programs and meetings are not events to be managed; rather, they are opportunities to minister to individuals and families.
Priesthood authority, priesthood keys, and eternal truths have been restored to the earth in the dispensation of the fulness of times. The fulness of the Savior's gospel and the work of His Church have been reestablished and are rolling forth throughout the world. Today you and I have vital roles to play in enlarging the borders of Zion (see Doctrine and Covenants 82:14). In this final dispensation we are responsible to gather together in one eternal truths about the Father's plan and the Savior's Atonement, about ordinances, covenants, discipleship, and the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost, and about knitting our hearts together in unity and in love by fulfilling our divine duty to serve and rescue the one.
The framework of doctrines, principles, and applications can assist us in asking, seeking, and knocking in such a way that we more effectively gather together in one, in Christ-in this the dispensation of the fulness of times.
Consider the following question-and answer it honestly and candidly. Please do not quickly give the obviously appropriate answer or the response you think you should give. Take a few moments to reflect on "things as they really are" (Jacob 4:13) before answering. "In your living of the gospel of Jesus Christ and in your serving and teaching both at home and in the Church, have you focused primarily on doctrines, on principles, or on applications?"
I have asked this question of tens of thousands of members of the Church, including priesthood and auxiliary leaders all over the world. The consistency of their answers is stunning. My posing of the question typically engenders a few moments of awkward silence. And then heads begin to nod and with knowing smiles come the responses, nearly always: "applications." It is interesting to me how reluctant members usually are to acknowledge the actual answer to this question-even though the answer almost always is recognized immediately.
Now please ponder some additional questions. "Why? Why do many members tend typically to focus on applications more than on doctrines and principles?" Here is a sample of some of the answers I have received to this follow-up question.
"Focusing upon applications is easier."
"Applications are more tangible."
"I can control applications."
"I can accomplish things quicker by focusing on applications."
"My professional experience has taught me to get things done and make things happen-so I gravitate to applications."
"I am not comfortable teaching doctrine."
"I do not know the doctrine well enough to teach it with confidence."
Somehow we seem to be drawn to applications as the primary way to "fix" things, to make life better, to be "doers of the word," to achieve desired outcomes, and to help the Church operate effectively. And far too often we emphasize applications without the necessary understanding and divorced from the doctrinal context.
We may focus on applications because we like to believe and feel like we are in control, because we have confidence in our own experience and expertise-"the arm of flesh" (2 Nephi 4:34)-or because we are only doing what we have seen other teachers and leaders do. We may think as we serve in a quorum or auxiliary, "I am going to make this happen; I am going to manage this the right way." We all would do well to remember that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's Church, and He is able to do His own work (2 Nephi 27:20).
I find it both noteworthy and troubling that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, a season in the history of the world during which all things are to be gathered together in one in Christ, many members are exasperatingly engaged in creating ever longer lists of detailed and disconnected gospel applications.
Whatever the reasons, emphasizing applications to the exclusion of fundamental doctrines and principles does not produce spiritual power, protection, and direction. To be clear, I am not suggesting that doctrines and principles are wholly and routinely ignored; rather I am suggesting that applications, such as some of those presented earlier in this chapter as items on the lengthy "to do" lists of many members, tend to receive disproportionate and excessive attention. I also am not suggesting that applications should never be studied, learned, or taught. Appropriate applications are necessary but can never stand alone. What is needed is a balance among doctrines, principles, and applications. And for many conscientious and diligent members, a serious imbalance exists.
Consider the basic responsibility of Melchizedek Priesthood holders to server as home teachers. What do you think would happen if each man in a congregation of 100 elders and high priests were invited to write down on a three-by-five card the doctrinal reasons for home teaching? Would the answers be similar or different? Would the same scriptural references be used to support those answers? Or would the answers vary dramatically? My experience suggests that many men can describe how to home teach; far fewer can explain why we home teach.
Men in the Church who do not perform their priesthood duty as home teachers are not lazy; they simply have not understood the relevant doctrine and principles. Such men undoubtedly have been both taught and told. They may know that a home teacher is to watch over, be with, and strengthen (see Doctrine and Covenants 20:53)-but they have not learned, they do not understand, and they are not intelligent (as the word intelligence is used in the scriptures).
If a man understands-both in his mind and in his heart, by the power of the Holy Ghost-the doctrines of the plan of happiness and of the priesthood, then he will be a faithful home teacher. Always! The reasons, the purposes, the answers are found in the doctrine. An understanding of true doctrines and correct principles will improve behavior more effectively than the study of behavior will improve behavior. The answers always are found in the doctrines and principles of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Random Thought #89
I was driving along one of the main roads near our neighborhood when I drove past a little mom & pop nursery for plants and flowers and whatnot. They had the cutest and most clever message on their sign. It was so good, I had to share it here. It said:
Spring is finally here!
We're so excited,
we wet our plants!!
Nothing like good clean humor
Friday, April 13, 2012
Random Thought #88
I watched a little video that was kind of neat and shows an interesting view of humanity and the decent and interesting people we are inside. Hope you find this refreshing.
http://www.ted.com/talks/frank_warren_half_a_million_secrets.html
Friday, April 6, 2012
Random Thought #87
I think its pretty evident by now that we are living in the Information Age. We feel so lost if we aren't connected. Ever tried going through a day without internet? It'll drive you nuts. But has it consumed us? We hear about all of these social networks, and yet many of us are socially awkward. This is an interesting talk about technology and what it has done to us. Worth the watch.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sherry_turkle_alone_together.html
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Random Thought #86
Ever wonder why renewable energy isn't catching on? Most would say greed and politics and that's probably true for the most part, but the argument made in this video is that it is an intermittent source of energy and isn't on-demand. If you need more energy, you can't just conjure up a wind storm or bring the sun back out, so you need to be able to store it somehow. This video talks about an amazing new technology developed at MIT called liquid metal batteries. Pretty awesome. Check it out!
http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_renewable_energy.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_renewable_energy.html
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Random Thought #85
Since this is a random thoughts blog, I had some random questions that I'm not sure have definite answers to them. If you have any thoughts or insights into them, feel free to comment. I've been reading a book on what things are like in the Spirit world and one of the descriptions was that since we don't have physical corruptible bodies, we have no need for rest or sleep. So I thought why do we need sleep? What causes fatigue? Why do we yawn? There are a lot of theories out there but nothing conclusive. Intriguing nonetheless.
Random Thought #84
I've often wondered what the purpose of ordinances in the church was. This question initially stemmed from the question whether baptism actually cleansed you from sin or whether repentance did that and baptism was an outward expression of your commitment and covenant made at baptism. I was always a proponent of the latter and after asking this question in Elders Quorum last week, a friend of mine sent me a great article that presents both sides of the argument as to whether or not we need ordinances and provides a great explanation.
http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/15/why-would-god-create-ordinances/
http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/15/why-would-god-create-ordinances/
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Random Thought #83
I'm all about challenging the status quo and not just going along with the crowd for the sake of it or because that's the "normal" thing to do. The speaker in this video apparently feels the same way but does something about it from a design perspective. Its really quite creative and I especially like what they did with the interactive wedding invitation and the New York Times knock-off. I think you'll enjoy too
http://www.ted.com/talks/kelli_anderson_design_to_challenge_reality.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/kelli_anderson_design_to_challenge_reality.html
Random Thought #82
So TED (one of my favorite websites) has launched a new series called TedEd meant to inspire youth to be the next generation of great thinkers. I watched this cool video that shows how the brain works using the leg of a cockroach and some cool technology. Its kind of ironic considering that when I walked into work this morning, I saw a cockroach on its back and when I left, it was still laying there. I learned a whole bunch of other things too outside of just neurons and nerve impulses. Maybe its just the science nerd in me, but I thought it was pretty cool
http://www.ted.com/talks/the_cockroach_beatbox.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/the_cockroach_beatbox.html
Random Thought #81
Here is a short little video clip about what drives folks like me to keep asking questions. Interestingly enough, many of this guy's questions are things that can be answered with knowledge of the restored gospel. Hope this short clip keeps you wondering and awe-struck inside.
http://www.ted.com/talks/questions_no_one_knows_the_answers_to.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/questions_no_one_knows_the_answers_to.html
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Random Thought #80
I was explaining certain parts of the gospel to a friend of mine when I got to resurrection. We know that Christ was the first to resurrect about 33 or 34 AD. We also know from the Plan of Salvation that after resurrection comes Judgement. We know that Judgement hasn't happened yet (or has it) so where do the resurrected beings from Adam - Jesus reside? The spirit world is here for those who have yet to be resurrected or for those who are currently living. Frequently when prophets here are given visions, they usually see past prophets sitting on a throne of glory. Examples can be Christ, Moses, Adam, Enoch, etc. Does that mean they have already been judged? Is Judgement tied to your resurrection? What about those who come down as angels such as Moroni? We know that angels are messengers and helpers to the Gods so does that mean Moroni didn't make it to the highest glory in the Celestial Kingdom? Speaking of Moroni, he died after Christ resurrected. Does that mean that select individuals who have died since Christ resurrected can also be resurrected? Lots of interesting questions.
Random Thought #79
I've been reading lately about the Tribe of Ephraim. Its actually more of a little history book but it got me thinking about the tribes of Israel and our affiliation. Most of us are from the tribe of Ephraim. We found this out through our patriarchal blessings. What does it mean to belong to a tribe? How is that determination made? If you think about it, back in the days of Jacob (Israel), there were many of people and nations that were not part of Jacob's family. I suppose you could call them Gentiles (even though the term is used in many different ways). What tribe are they from? The reason I ask that question is because everyone is entitled to a patriarchal blessing aren't they? Is it something you can trace through your bloodline? What if your mom and dad were from different tribes? Which one do you take after? Does adoption work the same way? This was actually a big deal back in the days of Jerusalem. Priests had to be of the line of Aaron or a Levite (tribe of Levi). Remember how Laban and Lehi were both from Manasseh? Apparently it wasn't just those of the tribes of Judah and parts of Benjamin that were in Jerusalem. Ishmael was of Ephraim and his family lived in Jerusalem too. Manasseh and Ephraim were part of the 10 tribes that were in the north. When the sons of Lehi married the daughters of Ishmael, were they now still from Manasseh or were they now Ephraim? Were they both? How does that work? I think it would be interesting if when doing our family history and pedigree charts, we included our lineage and linking to the House of Israel too. See if we could pick out any trends. Any of you tried this? Find out anything interesting?
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Random Thought #78
I watched this video and absolutely loved it. The message, delivery, humor, and facts were all great. I hope you enjoy it too.
http://www.ted.com/talks/shawn_achor_the_happy_secret_to_better_work.html
I especially like some of the suggestions at the end. For example, the 3 acts of kindness as well as the effects dopa mine has no the brain. When we're happy, it floods the brain and turns on all of the other learning centers in the brain. If we live by the commandments, we are happy and opens us up to receiving the spirit and revelation and we can learn directly from the one true source of truth.
http://www.ted.com/talks/shawn_achor_the_happy_secret_to_better_work.html
I especially like some of the suggestions at the end. For example, the 3 acts of kindness as well as the effects dopa mine has no the brain. When we're happy, it floods the brain and turns on all of the other learning centers in the brain. If we live by the commandments, we are happy and opens us up to receiving the spirit and revelation and we can learn directly from the one true source of truth.
Random Thought #77
This may be one of my grossest posts yet, but I can't help my curiosity. Ever wonder why things are the way they are? For example, why is urine yellow and where does the smell come from? What about fecal matter? Well, its actually part of the normal function of your body and quite interesting. Well, that is if you enjoy learning about the body or are a biochem nut like myself. Bilirubin is a big contributor in both products, which is a breakdown product of red blood cells. Ammonia also plays a part due to the breakdown of amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins. Check out an overview here
Random Thought #76
So as I read more, the people I seem to identify with and who make the most sense to me seem to have a common mantra towards learning. They are against specialization and much more for generalization. Now many think that the trade-off between the two is that if you specialize, you can study deeper and in much greater detail, whereas if you go more of the generalist route, you can only understand things at a higher level. Not so with these folks, they believe that you should study both wide and deep. The concern is that with such a narrow focus, you miss our on so much more around you. You lose the context. I watched a video once that ran a number of tests on babies and they basically found that you learn fastest in your first 6 months and that you pretty much learn most of what you're going to learn by the time you are 6 years old. Many may wonder how that is possible but if you look at them, they are always wide-eyed and always curious. They often listen and don't talk and they take in their entire surroundings. Maybe that's partly what it means when we are told to be child-like. So much of the world is naturally biased in one way or another and some to the point of excluding all other possibilities. Its the open-minded people who usually succeed and get along with others. Food for thought. He who knows he doesn't know is wise but he who doesn't know that he doesn't know thinks he knows and is foolish.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Random Thought #75
I was reading in one of my books about the history of what happened in and around Jerusalem between the Old Testament and New Testament times. Apparently when the Seleucid Empire seized control, their king Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) basically outlawed Judaism and desecrated the temple. When one of the sons of Mattithias Maccabee (Judas) led his followers to re-take Jerusalem, it was 3 years to the day of when the temple was desecrated. Only one vial of pure oil was left for burning in the menorah in the temple but the miracle that happened was that the vial should have only lasted 1 day, but instead it lasted 8 days, which was long enough to make more oil. The victory party lasted those 8 days and thus the Feast of Tabernacles or Feast of Hanukkah ("Dedication") was born. It was later renamed to the Festival of Lights. I had no idea this was the basis behind Hanukkah but its a pretty cool story.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Random Thought #74
Why is it that you can't immediately see when you go from a lit situation to a dark situation and vice versa? I thought I knew the answer, but in simple terms. The more scientific reason is kinda interesting. Wikipedia says "Pupillary response is a physiological response that varies the size of the pupil, either resulting in constriction[1] or dilation (expansion), via activation or deactivation of the iris dilator muscle. The response can have a variety of causes, from an involuntary reflex reaction to exposure or inexposure to light — in low light conditions a dilated pupil lets more light into the eye — or it may indicate interest in the subject of attention or indicate sexual stimulation.[2] The pupils contract immediately before someone falls asleep." I knew about letting in more light or less light into the eye but the others were new to me. I'm not sure how more light enables us to see in darker scenarios but its amazing how the body automatically reacts to certain stimuli. Quite fascinating.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Random Thought #73
I saw some cool TED videos recently and instead of talking too much about them, I thought I would just give you the links and you can watch them yourselves.
Making Choices
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_goldstein_the_battle_between_your_present_and_future_self.html
What is Consciousness?
http://www.ted.com/talks/antonio_damasio_the_quest_to_understand_consciousness.html
Seeing unseeable biology
http://www.ted.com/talks/drew_berry_animations_of_unseeable_biology.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/david_bolinsky_animates_a_cell.html
Making Choices
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_goldstein_the_battle_between_your_present_and_future_self.html
What is Consciousness?
http://www.ted.com/talks/antonio_damasio_the_quest_to_understand_consciousness.html
Seeing unseeable biology
http://www.ted.com/talks/drew_berry_animations_of_unseeable_biology.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/david_bolinsky_animates_a_cell.html
Friday, January 6, 2012
Random Thought # 72
I've been a little frustrated lately at work because the software that I support is so massive and all-encompassing that its nearly impossible to understand everything that it does, even within the span of a couple of years. I also came into the job knowing virtually nothing about it, so needless to say, its been a big difficult learning a piece here and a piece there and trying to understand the entire picture and how it all fits together. That got me thinking about how we learn/teach. Think about this, how much more difficult would it be to put a 1000 piece jig-saw puzzle together if you had no idea what the end result is supposed to look like. What if you had no clues because the puzzle didn't extend past the border? I personally learn much better if I know what the entire picture looks like in an ideal or completed state. This way, I have a goal to shoot towards and can sort of track my progress along the way, whereas if I didn't have that, I could only hope I'm putting the pieces together correctly, only to find out that I totally messed up and have to do it over and over again. Its the whole trial and error educated guesses concept. I've recently been reading about mantic and sophic and how they are complete opposites, yet compliment each other. Mantic implies learning from a higher source, revelation, inspiration, prophecy, etc., whereas sophic is how we learn. We use our own understanding, logic, rationale, facts, etc. to determine what exists. Mantic requires faith, and sophic requires facts. I recall a scriptures that says lean not unto thine own understanding, but trust in the Lord. I believe that's Proverbs 3:5. My sister just sent me a little plaque with that on it. Another correlation I've found is with how babies learn as compared to adults. Babies don't try to learn piece by piece, they observe their entire surroundings, taking in everything there is. We focus and specialize and get down into the nitty gritty. We learn at such an amazing rate while we are little babies. We go from doing nothing to walking and talking in 1 year's time. That's a miracle. Children trust and obsorb. Adults are skeptics and nitpick. Its no wonder the Lord keeps telling us to become as little children. Have faith, observe, learn, obsorb, trust, love, forgive, etc. Have you ever wondered why corporate training courses, university classes, and Sunday School Lessons are never successful? Ever take some time to just sit in a quiet place and watch nature and see how much you learn? Its amazing. Seek, ponder, and pray. The recipe for learning.
Random Thought #71
I don't know what prompted me to think of this but for whatever reason, I was thinking about vision and what 20/20 vision meant. I know it means you have normal good vision, but I wondered what the numbers actually meant. I found out that it represents visual acuity and that the first number is always the same. It represents the distance from the eye chart that someone stands when trying to make out the various lines of letters of different sizes. Its 20 ft. The second number is a little more complicated. According to wikipedia, it is "the size of the letters, specifically it denotes the separation at which the lines that make up those letters would be separated by a visual angle of 1 arc minute, which for the lowest line that is read by an eye with no refractive error (or the errors corrected) is usually 20 feet (6.1 m)". So the chart is designed so that the size of the letters on the last row if there were multiple lines, the space between those lines would be 1 arc minute, or 1/60th of 1 degree. Since you are reading the chart from 20 feet away, if you can read that bottom line, then the denominator becomes 20 and you have 20/20 or normal vision. If however, you had 20/10 vision, then that means you can see the same level of detail from 20 feet as someone with 20/20 vision could see at 10 feet and vice versa. If you had 20/40 vision, then you could see the same level of detail at 20 feet as someone with normal vision could see at 40 feet. I thought it was kind of interesting that they chose 20 feet. I also thought that it was interesting that everywhere else, normal vision is 6/6 because 20 feet is roughly the same as 6 meters. Bet you've never heard of 6/6 vision as being normal before huh?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)