It's not through the help of God that we get through thickness, as God gave us the tools before as well as after he has brought us here. It is through each other that water binds to form a strong yet changing bond as well as the element of life. A water molecule is just a chemical in it's own; but when combined with others of it's kind, it creates a beautiful coordination of creativity. As well as it morphs into different forms, just like an individual cell of our bodies, is no different than another part.
The beauty is in the connection, not in the separateness.
So many times people have fought to be different, when in fact they have fought to find a connection. Physics determines that there is no individuality in absolute matter...only the relation of energy to each other.
Finally, something that actually makes sense.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Guilt Is A Lesson Not Learned
When we expect things to be different than they turn out to be we get disappointed. At the same time when others have different expectations of us they must feel the same way... disappointed.
The pressure of disappointment turns into guilt. Which means we still have not learned the lesson and processed it; which turns into guilt. What a terrible feeling that is.
Release yourself from that feeling by contemplating the lesson. If you cannot figure it out, you must go through it once again.
Maybe guilt is a gift, in the sense that it tells us we have not yet learned our lesson yet, and must resolve it still.
It is still my belief we are here to live our lives so that we could learn the most out of it. May we be given the courage and strength to accept this wisdom.
I pray for the health of my family, my friends, and the ones closest to me.
The pressure of disappointment turns into guilt. Which means we still have not learned the lesson and processed it; which turns into guilt. What a terrible feeling that is.
Release yourself from that feeling by contemplating the lesson. If you cannot figure it out, you must go through it once again.
Maybe guilt is a gift, in the sense that it tells us we have not yet learned our lesson yet, and must resolve it still.
It is still my belief we are here to live our lives so that we could learn the most out of it. May we be given the courage and strength to accept this wisdom.
I pray for the health of my family, my friends, and the ones closest to me.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Consolidating Short Term to Long Term Memory
This is a Fantastic article that explains the process of turning short term memory into long term memory (scientifically) in a fantastic way involving a key ingredient which is the passage of time:
Memory consolidation
Memory consolidation
Saturday, August 14, 2010
New Ways to Learn
Scientists now know that there really are no particles. Meaning that there is no physical particle, and when you examine those particles closer and closer the only REAL part that exists is a relationship between particles. So a particle would not exist without its relationship to another particle.
This makes complete sense and can be applied to learning. Learning has been studied and debated for hundreds of years, with only marginal victories that are clearly not applied; just think about the question: “is our educational system good?”
Some of you might disagree, but we all know it is still flawed.
Applying the discovery from above, I believe that to learn you need Relevance. You need a relationship to the material or new skill.
Once you make that connection/relationship-true learning can occur.
NOTE: the relationship, just like an ordinary one, must give a positive impression.
It can also give a negative impression but learning will be diminished unless you can salvage and turn into a positive, which is more likely that the worst relationship kind; one which made no impression at all.
This is a Neutral impression-in which no relationship was created because of the poor impression, not even a poor one; just think of meeting a person who gave you neither a good nor a negative impression. You will remember the good and the bad, but you will not remember the floaters, or people that made no impression.
Here is my attempt at relating the science of particles to learning:
Two particles meet:
A and B
A+B is a positive impression= A—B =strong relationship
A-B is a negative impression=A- -B=weaker relationship (but still has one)
A |B is a neutral impression=A B=no relationship created
That’s why language or examples in learning material we can relate to are effective. They bypass the lack of relationship by coming in through the back door, or a different avenue:
Think about this network
New particle Existing Relationships
D 3- -2—1—A—B—C
Let’s say we want to introduce C to D, let’s say that D is Algebra and we want to introduce the subject of algebra to C which is our learner.
We can introduce them directly such as go to school and someone tells you, you have to learn this. Some might make an instant connection but some will definitely not.
A way to create a relationship between C and D would be an example that shows D that there is a relationship between D and 3.
C then makes the association (although a weak one) from C—B….3 and thus creates a new relationship to D.
This would be the equivalent of introducing examples from our daily lives where we would apply 3 (such as when adding numbers in a basketball game) which is related to D.
The more disparity between particles, or the weaker the example and the association of the example to the object, the weaker the relationship.
ALTHOUGH, the relationship is STILL stronger than merely introducing C and D and hope that a relationship might occur.
Think about meeting someone on a blind date, or meeting up with a close friend who brought their friend.
Sparks might fly on a blind date but the chances of that are slim.
However, when you meet your friend’s friend, you create almost instant credibility and hence the relationship occurs.
Our challenge when learning is to bring a strong introduction or bring a strong association when trying to learn something new.
The strongest type of introduction is relevant to the subject.
Let’s say you want to learn architecture.
The best thing to do before you start getting into the technicalities of designing, you would take the student for a tour in an architectural firm where they are directly introduced to their methods, activities, and results.
The learner now has created a new relationship which is strong. It might be negative or positive, but the chances of it being neutral are slim. Let’s name the new relationship Y.
Next in class, when the student starts learning new material, they will associate every bit of information, whether it’s A, B, C or whatever; they will associate it to their strong Y relationship.
Like the friend bringing a friend, now every learning material that is RELEVANT will be associated to Y for easier access, and easier learning.
NOTE: if the subject course gets more complicated, and goes into things like calculus, you need to make a NEW RELEVANT introduction that the student can relate to.
In an ideal world, this would translate into taking all students in every different class, at the beginning, to a location where that class’s material is applied.
A real life meeting makes a much stronger impression than one that is read on paper, and hence is intangible to most students.
The next best thing would be strong examples and associations such as video and hands on interaction, or simulations.
The weaker of these would be academic texts with weak examples that show up sparingly throughout the course. That is why the best teachers related the subject to their students and their interests, a quality which can be learned and developed, but only where interest (or a relationship) is established.
These can be applied to a plethora of subjects as they should. This example came from the most basic natural occurrence (the particles existing only in relationships) and hence can definitely applied anywhere else.
This makes complete sense and can be applied to learning. Learning has been studied and debated for hundreds of years, with only marginal victories that are clearly not applied; just think about the question: “is our educational system good?”
Some of you might disagree, but we all know it is still flawed.
Applying the discovery from above, I believe that to learn you need Relevance. You need a relationship to the material or new skill.
Once you make that connection/relationship-true learning can occur.
NOTE: the relationship, just like an ordinary one, must give a positive impression.
It can also give a negative impression but learning will be diminished unless you can salvage and turn into a positive, which is more likely that the worst relationship kind; one which made no impression at all.
This is a Neutral impression-in which no relationship was created because of the poor impression, not even a poor one; just think of meeting a person who gave you neither a good nor a negative impression. You will remember the good and the bad, but you will not remember the floaters, or people that made no impression.
Here is my attempt at relating the science of particles to learning:
Two particles meet:
A and B
A+B is a positive impression= A—B =strong relationship
A-B is a negative impression=A- -B=weaker relationship (but still has one)
A |B is a neutral impression=A B=no relationship created
That’s why language or examples in learning material we can relate to are effective. They bypass the lack of relationship by coming in through the back door, or a different avenue:
Think about this network
New particle Existing Relationships
D 3- -2—1—A—B—C
Let’s say we want to introduce C to D, let’s say that D is Algebra and we want to introduce the subject of algebra to C which is our learner.
We can introduce them directly such as go to school and someone tells you, you have to learn this. Some might make an instant connection but some will definitely not.
A way to create a relationship between C and D would be an example that shows D that there is a relationship between D and 3.
C then makes the association (although a weak one) from C—B….3 and thus creates a new relationship to D.
This would be the equivalent of introducing examples from our daily lives where we would apply 3 (such as when adding numbers in a basketball game) which is related to D.
The more disparity between particles, or the weaker the example and the association of the example to the object, the weaker the relationship.
ALTHOUGH, the relationship is STILL stronger than merely introducing C and D and hope that a relationship might occur.
Think about meeting someone on a blind date, or meeting up with a close friend who brought their friend.
Sparks might fly on a blind date but the chances of that are slim.
However, when you meet your friend’s friend, you create almost instant credibility and hence the relationship occurs.
Our challenge when learning is to bring a strong introduction or bring a strong association when trying to learn something new.
The strongest type of introduction is relevant to the subject.
Let’s say you want to learn architecture.
The best thing to do before you start getting into the technicalities of designing, you would take the student for a tour in an architectural firm where they are directly introduced to their methods, activities, and results.
The learner now has created a new relationship which is strong. It might be negative or positive, but the chances of it being neutral are slim. Let’s name the new relationship Y.
Next in class, when the student starts learning new material, they will associate every bit of information, whether it’s A, B, C or whatever; they will associate it to their strong Y relationship.
Like the friend bringing a friend, now every learning material that is RELEVANT will be associated to Y for easier access, and easier learning.
NOTE: if the subject course gets more complicated, and goes into things like calculus, you need to make a NEW RELEVANT introduction that the student can relate to.
In an ideal world, this would translate into taking all students in every different class, at the beginning, to a location where that class’s material is applied.
A real life meeting makes a much stronger impression than one that is read on paper, and hence is intangible to most students.
The next best thing would be strong examples and associations such as video and hands on interaction, or simulations.
The weaker of these would be academic texts with weak examples that show up sparingly throughout the course. That is why the best teachers related the subject to their students and their interests, a quality which can be learned and developed, but only where interest (or a relationship) is established.
These can be applied to a plethora of subjects as they should. This example came from the most basic natural occurrence (the particles existing only in relationships) and hence can definitely applied anywhere else.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
How Long Do We Have
Around the time our original 13 states adopted our constitution in 1878, Lord Woodhouselee Alexander Fraser Tyler, A Scotish historian/Professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say:
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years.
During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith
2. From spiritual faith to great courage
3. From courage to liberty
4. From liberty to abundance
5. From abundance to complacancy
6. From complacancy to apathy
7. From apathy to dependence
8. From dependence back into bondage
Where do you believe the United States is now?
Many people believe somewhere between the complacancy and the apathy stage of professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with a significant percentage of the nation's population already having reached the dependency phase.
Apathy and dependency is the greatest danger to our freedom
This is from a previous posting on my facebook page
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years.
During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith
2. From spiritual faith to great courage
3. From courage to liberty
4. From liberty to abundance
5. From abundance to complacancy
6. From complacancy to apathy
7. From apathy to dependence
8. From dependence back into bondage
Where do you believe the United States is now?
Many people believe somewhere between the complacancy and the apathy stage of professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with a significant percentage of the nation's population already having reached the dependency phase.
Apathy and dependency is the greatest danger to our freedom
This is from a previous posting on my facebook page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
