Member Articles and Papers

---

The discussion started on - 05-19-2006, 01:21 PM , place Hypography The discussion was initiated bySome Guy Ronthepon was the first to respond To this hallenrm responded: Infinitenow added a point i orby Mercedez Benzene: At this pointed CraigD joined the discussion : He was followed by Infamous The wise man JayQ opined : The cell is one of the fundamental structural units of which all living things are composed .. The question "what is life " .. also produces other questions .. like "what is A life?" .. These are questions designed to explain human existence and existence beyond.. and one question will almost always lead to another question .. "What is life?" .. is also one of the major questions for humanity. To define the concept of life .. one must first ask .. "What says that something lives?" .. then .. "What conditions are required for life?" .. and also .. "What does living imply?" Happythestripper played a long inning: hallenrm is not to be left behind: Ronthepon the youngone: . Someguy: Ronthepon: To that hallenrmresponded: Mercedez Benzene can't resist asking hallenrm responded: A mule!!!! Now Questor joined the discussion too, he began with:. HydrogenBond continuesHB Ronthepon continued with his probing questions: hallenrm puts in a new thought Questor made some very valid points: As did CraigD: hallenrm had this to add: How's that? Responding to the idea that only living beings reproduce HydrogenBond responded: Responding to the idea that life is based on Carbon HydrogenBond is of the opinion: Ronthepon not to be left behind added: As did hallenrm: Ronthepon: HydrogenBond responded: To the idea that all cells are living hallenrm responded: and then continued with some new thoughts: Someguy found it very interesting But HydrogenBond differed: Someguy found it still more interesting, hallenrm continued with his new thoughts: At this point Skuzie joined the discussion, he said: But HydrogenBond stuck to his guns: HB And so did hallenrm But Ronthepon finds it confusing encouraged by the response hallenrm continues: Skuzie added: Ronthepon seems satisfied hallenrm continues his discourse: Skuzie had a point to add:

An essay I had to write for a course

---

In this essay an analysis of the typical reactions of science and scientists towards pseudoscience is presented. After defining pseudoscience and dis-
cussing some arguments in favor and against the question is raised if it is really a scientific approach to condemn all pseudoscience just on the fact that it is not proven. The answer to this question I present in this paper is that it actually depends, in the sense that as a general rule it is wrong, but there are cases where it can be right.

Uncle Al

---

The Foundational Questions Institute has a public essay contest, "What is Ultimately Possible in Physics?" Uncle Al entered with "Pursuing the Limits of Failed Symmetry."

---

Millennium Ranking of the Universities Why the Millennium Ranking? Global university ranking has become a common phenomenon, but the results have been mixed at the best. The THES – QS ranking depends on subjective methods, which in turn is a reflection of personal impressions of the interested parties. The top four have been typically Harvard, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge. Even though I did not expect such a rating to be balanced and objective, it is still astonishing to see that 19 out of the top 20 universities are in the English-speaking countries, which inevitably undermines its credibility. The ENS professional ranking, on the other hand, is based on the income and power of the graduates. This pragmatic approach has been hampered by the impact of the differential cost of living that is rather difficult to calibrate to say the least. The outcome of this ranking is also highly biased, as indicated by the fact that four out of the top ten are Japanese universities, an indicator of the high cost of living in Japan rather than a better education. The so-called academic ranking by Shanghai Jiaotong University is allegedly obtained by calculating the papers on Nature, Science and those cited by SCI、SSCI、AHCI, etc. This kind of indiscriminate addition of numbers fails to take into account of the differential significance of research projects in different fields, and strongly favor those universities producing a large amount of low quality papers. Perhaps the project leaders thought that this undesirable influence could be neutralized by including papers on big name journals such as Nature and Science. In reality, it merely produces new distortions as the two journals are devoted exclusively to natural science especially life science, which is only a small part of the university research and education. Worst of all, it has been found that the results is irreproducible by independent parties. Obviously, the credibility of this ranking is in doubt. Regardless, all the existing rankings are current rankings, which could not reflect the historical contribution of relevant schools and the overall trend of evolution of the rankings. Hence, it leaves much to be desired. This is particularly obvious if we consider the fact that the modern university system has a history of approximately one thousand years, during which time a modern industrial civilization sprung up. We gained tremendous progress, if I may, in our understanding of the universe, the structure of matters, the life on earth, as well as the psychological and social phenomena, and made numerous attempts to renew our theory of ethics, belief, and philosophy. It was within the time frame that things took place and evolved; we may not be able to gain a complete understanding of it without considering the time factor as it played and still plays a critical role in determining our lifestyle and our way of thinking. For this purpose, a new method of evaluating the scholars has been devised, which would receive further treatment later, to evaluate historical performance of various institutes. The result speaks for itself on the validity of this approach. Methods and Conclusion First of all, a number of outstanding scholars were selected based on their achievements. No quota was given to any fields of study. As matter of fact, all the fields are merely divided into five areas: physical sciences, engineering, biology, medicine, and arts. A high standard was adopted to minimize the differential academic attainment by different scholars. Politicians with important influence on the history are also included. Altogether, approximately 1400 names were selected. Each selected person gives a positive score to relevant colleges and universities. The sum becomes the score of the schools, which forms the basis of the ranking. Only the existing universities are ranked. A university that have been functioning as a single entity but divided recently is treated as a single university. All the colleges and affiliated institutes are considred part of a university. I. Academic Ranking A. Millennium Cumulative Ranking The following reflects the cumulative scores from the 11th until the 20th century. 1 Université de Paris 2 University of Cambridge 3 Harvard University 4 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 5 Georg-August-Universität Göttingen 6 University of Oxford 7 University of Chicago 8 Columbia University 9 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 10 Московский государственный университет имени М. В. Ломоносова 11 Princeton University 12 University of California, Berkeley 13 University of London 14 École Polytechnique 15 Cornell University 15 Leland Stanford Junior University 17 Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет 18 California Institute of Technology 19 École normale supérieure 20 Yale University 21 Ludwig-Maximilian-Universität München 22 Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich 23 Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg 24 Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna 25 Universität Leipzig 26 Università degli Studi di Padova 27 Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn 28 Johns Hopkins University 29 Universiteit Leiden 30 Université de Strasbourg 31 Universität Wien 32 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 33 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 34 University of Wisconsin-Madison 35 Københavns Universitet 35 Московский Физико-Технический институт 37 New York University 37 University of California, Los Angeles 39 University of Edinburgh 39 University of Minnesota 39 Universität Hamburg 42 Российский государственный университет имени Иммануэла Канта 43 Università degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza” 43 Technische Universität München 43 University of Pennsylvania 43 東京大学 Tokyo U. 43 University of California, San Diego 48 Università degli Studi di Pavia 48 Philipps-Universität Marburg 50 Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg 50 Victoria University of Manchester 50 University of Calcutta (কলকাতা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়) 53 Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen 53 Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg 53 Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena 53 École nationale des ponts et chaussées 53 Technische Universität Berlin 53 Uniwersytet Warszawski 59 Universität Basel 59 Universität Zürich 59 École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris 59 University of Toronto 59 City College of New York (City University of New York) 59 University of Washington 59 Rockefeller University 66 Uniwersytet Wrocławski 66 Carnegie Mellon University 66 京都大学 Kyoto U. 69 Universidade de Coimbra 69 University of St Andrews 69 Università di Pisa 69 Universiteit Utrecht 69 Московский государственный технический университет им. Н. Э. Бауманаа 69 Duke University 69 Санкт-Петербургский Государственный Политехнический Университет 76 Univerzity Karlovy v Praze 76 Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg 76 Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz 76 McGill University 80 University of Glasgow 80 Uppsala universitet 80 Université de Genève 80 Università degli Studi di Torino 80 Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nuremberg 80 Imperial College, London 80 University of Texas at Austin 87 Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel 87 Université de Lyon 87 Case Western Reserve University 87 Washington University in St. Louis 87 Universiteit van Amsterdam 92 Universidad de Salamanca 92 Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowski 92 Università degli Studi di Ferrara 92 University of Dublin 92 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 92 Universität Karlsruhe 92 University of Virginia 92 École centrale Paris 92 University of Colorado 92 Vanderbilt University 92 University of Bristol 103 Université de Montpellier 103 Universität Rostock 103 Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem 103 Львівський національний університет імені Івана Франка 103 Budapesti Műszaki és Gazdaságtudományi Egyetem 103 Казанский государственный университет 103 Харківський національний університет імені Каразіна 103 Amherst College 103 Indiana University 103 Universidade de São Paulo 103 University of Sheffield 103 Université Libre de Bruxelles 103 Purdue University 103 Illinois Institute of Technology 103 Московский городской народный университет имени А. Л. Шанявского 103 Урáльский госудáрственный университéт и́мени А.М. Гóрького 103 Московский авиационный институт 120 جامعة القرويين‎ 120 Université d'Orléans 120 Università degli Studi di Firenze 120 University of Groningen 120 Tartu Ülikool 120 Karolinska institutet 120 Universiteit Gent 120 George Washington University 120 Санкт-Петербургский Технологический Институт 120 University of California, San Francisco 120 Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen 120 Ohio State University 120 Stockholms universitet 120 University of Liverpool 120 École Supérieure de Physique et de Chimie Industrielles de la Ville de Paris 120 Націона́льний техні́чний університе́т Украї́ни «Ки́ївський політехні́чний інститу́т» 120 北京大学 Peking U. 120 University of British Columbia 120 Australian National University 120 Московский Инженерно-Физический Институт 120 Новосибирский Государственный Университет 141 Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II 141 Université de Toulouse 141 Université catholique de Louvain 141 Université de Caen Basse-Normandie 141 Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz 141 Universidad Complutense de Madrid 141 Brown University 141 University of Pittsburgh 141 Université de Bordeaux 141 University of Birmingham 141 University of Cape Town 141 University of Leeds 141 Київський національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка 141 University of Florida 141 University of Melbourne 141 University of Maryland, College Park 141 Università degli Studi di Milano 141 Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main 141 State University of New York at Stony Brook 160 Università degli Studi di Perugia 160 Universitat de Barcelona 160 Université de Poitiers 160 Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald 160 Nancy-Université 160 Lund Universitet 160 Dartmouth College 160 Universitetet i Oslo 160 Universidad de Buenos Aires 160 University of Rochester 160 University of Sydney 160 Pennsylvania State University 160 University of Mumbai (मुंबई विद्यापीठ) 160 大阪大学 Osaka U. 160 University of the Punjab (جامعه پنجاب) 160 The University of Auckland 160 清华大学 Tsinghua U. 160 University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas 160 Freie Universität Berlin There are 178 institutions in total. B. Centennial Ranking All names are modern to avoid any confusion. 11th -12th Centuries 1 Univ. Paris 2 Alma Mater Studiorum Univ. Bologna 3 Univ. Oxford 13th -14th Centuries 1 Univ. Paris 2 Alma Mater Studiorum Univ. Bologna 3 Univ. Oxford 4 Univ. Perugia 15th Century 1 Alma Mater Studiorum Univ. Bologna 2 Univ. Paris 2 Univ. Ferrara 4 Univ. Oxford 4 Univ. Padova 4 Univ. Cambridge 16th Century 1 Univ. Padova 2 Univ. Paris 3 Univ. Oxford 4 Univ. Cambridge 5 Alma Mater Studiorum Univ. Bologna 5 Univ. Pisa 7 Univ. Leiden 8 Univ. Coimbra 8 Univ. catholique Louvain 10 Univ. Salamanca 10 Univ. Poitiers 10 Univ. Basel 17th Century 1 Univ. Oxford 2 Univ. Cambridge 3 Univ. Paris 4 Alma Mater Studiorum Univ. Bologna 4 Univ. Padova 4 Univ. Basel 4 Univ. Leiden 8 Københavns Univ. 18th Century 1 École Polytechnique 2 Univ. Paris 3 Georg-August-Univ. Göttingen 4 Humboldt-Univ. Berlin 5 École natl. des ponts et chaussées 6 Univ. Cambridge 6 Friedrich-Schiller-Univ. Jena 8 Санкт-Петербургский гос. унив. 9 Российский гос. унив. Иммануэла Канта 9 Univ. Edinburgh 11 Univ. Oxford 11 Univ. Pavia 11 Univ. Leipzig 11 Univ. Torino 11 Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Univ. Bonn There are 15 institutions in total. 19th Century 1 Humboldt-Univ. Berlin 2 Georg-August-Univ. Göttingen 3 Univ. Paris 4 Univ. Cambridge 5 Санкт-Петербургский гос. унив. 6 Univ. London 7 Ludwig-Maximilian-Univ. München 8 Harvard Univ. 9 Московский гос. унив. М. В. Ломоносова 10 Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Univ. Bonn 11 Ruprecht-Karls-Univ. Heidelberg 12 École Polytechnique 12 Eidgenössische Tech. Hoch. Zürich 12 Univ. Chicago 15 Univ. Oxford 15 Univ. Leipzig 17 Univ. Wien 18 Columbia Univ. 19 Univ. Strasbourg 20 École norm. sup. 21 Johns Hopkins Univ. 22 Univ. Zürich 22 Philipps-Univ. Marburg 22 Uniw. Wrocławski 22 Cornell Univ. 26 Albert-Ludwigs-Univ. Freiburg 26 Princeton Univ. 26 École natl. sup.mines Paris 26 Univ. Calcutta (কলকাতা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়) 30 Российский государственный университет имени Иммануэла Канта 30 Univ. Leiden 30 Karl-Franzens-Univ. Graz 30 Univ. California, Berkeley There are 33 institutions in total. 20th Century 1 Harvard Univ. 2 Massachusetts Inst. Tech. 3 Univ. Cambridge 4 Columbia Univ. 4 Univ. Chicago 6 Princeton Univ. 7 Univ. California, Berkeley 8 Leland Stanford Jr. Univ. 9 Московский гос. унив. М. В. Ломоносова 9 California Inst. Tech. 11 Univ. Paris 12 Cornell Univ. 13 Yale Univ. 14 Univ. Oxford 15 École norm. sup. 15 Univ. London 17 Univ. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 18 Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor 19 Georg-August-Univ. Göttingen 20 Eidgenössische Tech. Hoch. Zürich 20 Univ. California, Los Angeles 22 Univ. Wisconsin-Madison 22 Johns Hopkins Univ. 24 Univ. Minnesota 24 Univ. California, San Diego 26 Univ. Pennsylvania 26 New York Univ. 26 Московский Физико-Техн. инст. 29 東京大学 30 Univ. Washington 31 Санкт-Петербургский гос. унив. 31 Tech. Univ. München 33 Univ. Toronto 33 City Col. of New York (City Univ. New York) 33 Carnegie Mellon Univ. 36 Ludwig-Maximilian-Univ. München 36 Humboldt-Univ. Berlin 36 京都大学 36 Univ. Hamburg 40 Rockefeller Univ. 41 Univ. Leiden 41 Univ. Strasbourg 41 Duke Univ. 44 Univ. Roma “La Sapienza” 44 Københavns Univ. 44 École Polytechnique 44 Uniw. Warszawski 44 Case Western Reserve Univ. 44 Univ. Colorado 44 Univ. Texas at Austin 44 Санкт-Петербургский гос. ПолиТехн. унив. 52 Rutgers, The State Univ. New Jersey 52 Univ.eSão Paulo 52 McGill Univ. 52 Victoria Univ. Manchester 52 Vanderbilt Univ. 52 Univ. Bristol 52 Purdue Univ. 52 Illinois Inst. Tech. 60 Ruprecht-Karls-Univ. Heidelberg 60 Tech. Univ. Berlin 60 Univ. Sheffield 60 Imperial Col., London 60 Washington Univ. in St. Louis 60 Univ. California, San Francisco 60 Ohio State Univ. 60 Univ. Amsterdam 60 Univ. British Columbia 60 Новосибирский гос. унив. 70 Univ. Wien 70 Univ. Leipzig 70 Eberhard Karls Univ. Tübingen 70 Univ. Edinburgh 70 Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem 70 Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Univ. Bonn 70 George Washington Univ. 70 Univ. Virginia 70 Univ. LibreBruxelles 70 Univ. Florida 70 Univ. Calcutta (কলকাতা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়) 70 Univ. Maryland, Col. Park 70 Уральский гос. унив. 70 Московский авиационный инст. 70 Московский Инженерно-Физический инст. 70 Australian natl. Univ. 70 State Univ. New York Stony Brook 87 Univ. St Andrews 87 Albert-Ludwigs-Univ. Freiburg 87 Uppsala Univ. 87 Univ. Genève 87 Brown Univ. 87 Karolinska inst. 87 Amherst Col. 87 Indiana Univ. 87 Univ. Cape Town 87 Московский гос. Техн. унив. им. Н. Э. Бауманаа 87 Univ. Rochester 87 Univ. Melbourne 87 Pennsylvania State Univ. 87 Stockholms Univ. 87 Univ. Liverpool 87 The Univ. Auckland 87 Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Univ. Frankfurt am Main 87 Univ. Texas Southwestern Med. Ctr. Dallas There are 104 institutions in total. The University of Paris leads the others by a comfortable margin. This is primarily a result of its long history. It is known that Oxford essentially resulted from the split of Paris, and Cambridge, from Oxford. Harvard was derived from Cambridge since Mr. J. Harvard was an alumnus of Cambridge. In this sense, the University of Paris is the starting point of the modern university. The best graduates of Oxford and Cambridge went to Paris to complete their study. Pope Gregory IX praised the university as “the mother of the sciences” and “city of letters”. Its dominance was not challenged until the Italian Renaissance, and it remained among the top three before the rise of the American universities in the 20th century. It is interesting to note that the top two universities often belong to the same country staring from the 17th century, and could be associated with historical events. When Oxford and Cambridge toped the academic world, there was a revolution on Britain. When École Polytechnique and Paris ranked on the top, it was the time of French Revolution. The European revolution of 1848 swept through Germany, when Berlin and Göttingen bested the world. In the 20th century, Harvard and MIT were sitting on the crown, presumably as the result of the rise of the new superpower. What we have described here is a historical phenomenon, and not of minor significance. Although it is hard to prove the cause-and-effect relation, it is unlikely that the observation was merely a coincidence. It is conceivable that the European revolutions apparently had a liberating effect on academic research in that country concerned. It has little to do with the economic development since the Spanish and the Dutch empires did not achieve much in this aspect, nether did the British Empire of the 19th century when Cambridge merely grasped the 4th place. In contrast, the independence movement in the third world has little positive impact on the academic research. As matter of fact, it often has a negative impact. For example, the University of Calcutta was the best university outside Europe and USA in the 19th century, but it started to decline after the Indian Independence. Similar situation happened to the other South Asian universities. Also the Chinese universities in the mainland declined after Mao’s Revolution. Hence, the academic performance of the universities in a given country could serve as a useful indicator for the progressiveness of the social change. II. Nationalities of the Selected Scholars These scholars come from 52 countries (by birth) listed below. No. Counrty % 1 USA 16.59 2 Germany 13.89 3 France 13.41 4 Russia/CCCP 11.61 5 UK 11.06 6 Italy 6.08 7 Netherlands 2.63 8 India 2.35 9 China 2.00 10 Austria 1.94 11 Japan 1.87 12 Switzerland 1.80 13 Poland 1.38 14 Canada 1.24 14 Hungary 1.24 16 Sweden 1.11 17 Spain 1.04 18 Denmark 0.90 19 Belgium 0.83 20 Australia 0.69 21 Iran 0.62 22 Portugal 0.55 23 Brazil 0.48 23 Czech 0.48 23 Ireland 0.48 26 Norway 0.41 27 Argentina 0.28 27 Finland 0.28 27 South Africa 0.28 30 Croatia 0.21 30 New Zealand 0.21 30 Pakistan 0.21 30 Turkey 0.21 34 Bulgaria 0.14 34 Iraq 0.14 34 Lithuania 0.14 34 Philippines 0.14 34 Romania 0.14 39 Algeria 0.07 39 Azerbaijan 0.07 39 Bosnia 0.07 39 Egypt 0.07 39 Greece 0.07 39 Kenya 0.07 39 Mexico 0.07 39 Morocco 0.07 39 Palestine 0.07 39 Serbia 0.07 39 Syria 0.07 39 Tunisia 0.07 39 Uzbekistan 0.07 39 Venezuela 0.07 The distributions of the scholars from the top-six ranking countries and the total number are shown in the figure. The total curve display a clear downward trend in the 14th century, obviously related to the “Black-Death”. It was followed by a minor peak in Italy corresponding to the Renaissance. Afterwards, there was a major peak in France, corresponding to the French Revolution, followed by a sharp peak in Germany corresponding to the European Revolution and a peak in Russia corresponding to the Russian Revolutions. The rise of the US was characterised by a much greater scale and was probably a different kind of matter, possibly a result of the emergence of the superpower in the 20th century. Taken together, the evolution of the academic ranking of the nations and of the universities suggest that the western history in the last one thousand years could be divided into four periods: (1) the High Middle Age centred in Paris; (2) the Renaissance centred in Italy; (3) the European Revolutions spreading from the Britains through France and Germany and eventually ended in Russia; (4) overlapping the Russian Revolutions was the rise of the superpower in North America as the beginning of capitalist globalisation. Russia was never a superpower judging either from its academic performance or from its GDP. III. Ranking by Research Areas A. Physical Sciences 1 Paris 1 Cambridge 3 Göttingen 4 Chicago 5 Princeton 6 Berlin 7 Mosccow 8 Harvard 9 EP Paris 10 MIT 11 UC Berkeley 12 ETH Zurich 13 St. Petersburg 13 ENS Paris 15 Columbia B. Engineering 1 MIT 2 Stanford 3 Harvard 4 Moscow Tech. U. 4 Cal. Tech. 6 Cambridge 6 Columbia 6 ETH Zurich 6 Moscow Phys.-Tech. Inst. 10 Michigan 10 UC Berkeley 10 St. Pertersburg Tech. U. 10 Moscow Aviation Inst. C. Biology 1 Cambridge 2 Standford 3 Oxford 3 Berkeley 3 Cal. Tech. 6 Harvard 6 London 6 MIT 6 Wisconsin 6 Illinois 11 Columbia 11 Rockefeller D. Medicine 1 Cambridge 1 Harvard 3 Columbia 3 London 5 Johns Hopkins 6 Paris 6 Berlin 8 Padova 8 Cornell 8 U. Washington 8 Rockefeller 12 Bologna 12 Washington U. St. Louis 12 UCSF E. Arts 1 Paris 2 Oxford 3 Berlin 4 London 6 Columbia 7 Harvard 8 Bologna 10 Yale 10 Göttingen 12 Wien IV. Ranking of the Academic Cities This is based on the universities located in the metropolitan area: 1 Paris 2 Boston 3 New York 4 Berlin 5 Москва 6 Chicago 7 London 7 Los Angeles 7 San Fracisco 7 Санкт-Петербу́рг 11 München 12 Zürich Discussion Ranking of higher education institutions has always been a controversial affair, not least because the subject matter is often a matter of opinion depending on the philosophy of science and education. For some people, education is primarily a mean of investment, and comparison of the graduate’s income has been going on for many years in the US. The ENS ranking brought this matter to everyone’s attention as it is consistently dominated by the Japanese universities, presumably due to the high living cost and thus higher nominal income in Japan, which has nothing to do with the real income or the quality of the education system. As far as the academic performance is concerned, it is difficult, to say the least, to formulate a universally accepted criteria and a method of quantification, which could explain why so many rankings have been based on subjective scoring. If subjective method is still somewhat meaningful within a country, it breaks down rapidly once applied in an international setting as most people would like to rank those in their country on the top, followed by those in country of the same language. As a result, international ranking of this nature often becomes mixed with unhealthy doses of nationalism, as the THES-QS results have demonstrated. Such results are merely generated to please the reader and its value rests primarily on political propaganda and reinforcement of cultural identity. SJU made an attempt in quantifying the research output in an objective manner, but the outcome has been problematic, as already mentioned in the beginning of this article. In essence, SCI and the like were not designed to be used for this purpose. There is no way you could compare the pea paper of Mendel that laid the foundation of modern genetics with papers on those run-of-the-mill journals. Some scientists could publish as many as a thousand papers and yet achieve mo more than the single paper of Mendel. Hence, we are facing the possibility of huge distortion if we rely on paper counting to measure academic performance. Here, we are not even considering some papers involving unethical misconducts, which is not so rare in certain parts of the world. To overcome this problem, counting the outstanding scholars is a viable alternative, as it reduces the workload and allows a more careful consideration of the achievement on individual basis regarding originality, difficulty, influence, and pragmatic values. Any error that is bound to happen will only be in the scale of one instead of several hundred folds as it happens in counting papers. In addition, errors in scholar selection are generally random and could cancel out in larger samples whereas errors in paper counting are often systematic in nature and tend to accumulate in larger samples. The judgments by experts in history of science and in individual fields as shown by the honours and awards are given careful consideration, although this does not prevent necessary correction of the past mistakes in judgment. For example, Nobel prize were never given to Lise Meitner, Дми́трий Менделе́ев, Rosalind Franklin, Лев Толсто́й, Henrik Ibsen and Émile Zola, just to name a few. The ranking here is not award-based, but it takes such element into consideration to maximize the objectivity of the process and the result. Certain reader has raised the question about relationship between the proof of the education and the achievement of the scholars. This is a delicate issue, and it is considered a job of the historians and education researchers. It is obviously beyond the scale of this study. Overall speaking, the most significant contribution of this study is not about the method of scoring but the fact that it takes the entire history into account. By observing the dynamic change of the individual schools and the entire nation over time, it has been possible to reveal certain general trends of the academic performance of the schools and nations in relation to critical historical development. This achievement by itself demonstrates the validity of the methodology and provides an important point of departure for anyone interested in such investigations. (first posted on Science Forum)

---

As science strives to bridge the gap between the micro of the quantum and the macro of the cosmos, we must of course examine at what point the laws between these two dualities break down. But perhaps more importantly, we must ask what binds the two together into one harmonious universe; what is the common denominator? The answer, it seems, should be the one thing that permeates the whole of the universe on all levels: the macro and the micro; the three known physical dimensions; as well as the past, the present and the future, with the most uniformity and consistency. Special Relativity is based on the fact that we measure the speed of light as a constant and as the maximum obtainable speed in the universe. However, there are no physical properties of light that cause clocks of faster moving objects to run slower; and so the notion of the speed of light as a determining factor as to why this happen, should be reconsidered. This paper is not intended to dispute the accuracy of Special Relativity. I believe the predictions are accurate, as tests have shown. Rather, my purpose here is to suggest that there is a fundamental property of the universe that is more directly responsible for relativistic phenomena than light, and which is also the true constant and limiting-factor for the speed of light. I also believe that unrealized dynamics of this fundamental property may hold the solution to some of the unanswered questions in physics, as I will discuss in subsequent articles; but first a basis for these discussions is necessary. What follows is the first step in my attempt to more thoroughly define the nature of time and its applications to physics and cosmology, in what I call the Theory of Temporal Relativity. Temporal Relativity (Part I) Isaac Newton believed that time was constant, while Albert Einstein warped time to mold it into a universe in which light travels at a constant speed. I would argue that both are correct. While that may seem implausible at first, consider my argument that time is actually multidimensional - both constant and variable. And these two types of time, as well as others I will define, are completely different things. The logic for reintroducing an absolute variable of time is simple: On the largest scale scientists have assigned a single verifiable age of 13.7 billion years to the whole of the universe. This age is based on precise measurements of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) using NASA’s most sophisticated equipment to date. This single universal age demands that essentially all matter and energy contained within the framework of the universe have existed in some form for this precise amount of time; no more or less is possible on a universal scale. After all, there was only one beginning of time according to most major theories and there is only one present-time for the whole of the universe as well. Therefore one absolute measurable amount of time, has passed from the birth of the universe until the present. However, to express this age we use a unit of time to say the universe has existed for 13.7 billion years. It is these measurable man-made units of time that are variable, as described by Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity. However, Einstein described these units as variable relative to light speed. Temporal Relativity, on the other hand, describes them as variable within the framework of, and relative to, the larger fixed universal-time frame described above. Within this framework matter, energy, units of length, and units of time all advance in time by moving variably through universal-time, based on their relative speeds. Universal-time, on the other hand, advances in measurable units of time, but does so at a uniform rate for the whole of the universe, which is supported by the consistent age and uniformity of the CMB. Essentially, universal time is the very axis along which measurable units of time contort. Now, armed with a general understanding of these two dimensions of time, let’s examine where the differences originate from and how they came to be. All theories must address the beginning of time as best they can, and Temporal Relativity attempts to do just that by introducing two additional and practical dimensions to time. The first of these is what existed before the beginning of time as we know it - that is, a singular dimension of time that I refer to as absolute-zero time. This is a static period before time as we know it sprang into existence, in which all dimensions of time existed equally with no arrow toward the future, but with the potential for such direction. At this point all time and energy existed in a completely uniform state. Such a starting point is essential in order to currently apply one attributable amount of time to the universe as a whole. This homogenous state can apply to a singularity type of object, which could have given rise to a big bang; or it could apply to an infinite expanse that is void of matter, as in Brane Theory. It is not relevant to discuss how long such a state may have existed, because no measurable time existed - time had no forward direction. However it does make sense to assume that the potential for measurable-time and energy existed at absolute-zero time. Any catalyst that would disrupt this homogenous state would simultaneously give rise to time as well as an imbalance in, and release of, potential time and energy. Such a catalyst could come in the form of contact with a neighboring brane (Brane Theory), decay or imbalance in the “singularity” (Big Bang Theory), or the phrase “Let there be light” (Creation). Whatever the catalyst, one thing is clear: since zero-time, the past has moved into the future at a rate that has now amounted to 13.7 billion years as defined by our measurable units of time. This means that universal-time, while moving toward the future, must do so at a particular rate or speed. This may seem contradictory, since the definition of speed is generally measured in terms of time itself. So how can we define the rate of time in terms of a rate of speed, which by definition depends on a distance traveled over a specific time? This is possible because we are defining universal time in terms of its smaller measurable units of time. The relationship between these two brings to light another dimension of time, the rate at which the future unfolds or present arrives, which I call the future-time horizon. Fortunately, nature has provided us a measuring stick with which scientists have already measured and verified the rate at which the future becomes the ever-glancing present. And what they have unknowingly found is that the future arrives at a continuous and precise speed of 186,000 miles per second. Thus, the yardstick by which we measure time’s horizon is the photon, and the reason light travels at this constant speed is that it is limited by the constant rate at which time unfolds. So in essence, time is the medium upon which light flows. With the understanding that the future-time horizon arrives at this constant speed, the physical reason faster moving objects experience less time becomes clear with no need for light as a contributing factor. That is, the faster an object moves in relation to the rate of future time, the less of time’s affects, or aging, it will experience; and thus, the less measurable-time it will experience. This can be likened to the stress on a boat moving against the flow of the river, compared to a craft moving with the flow. Thus, the faster an object is traveling, the more it is moving with, or keeping up with, the flow of future-time; and the less severe the rush of measurable-time against it will be, or the less it will age. Stated another way, measured-time’s variability results from the relative speed of motion between two objects or observers within the universal framework. This also explains why our measurable units of time vary between different observers traveling at significantly different speeds but remain constant for each locally. In regard to current physics, it’s important to understand that the rate at which Temporal Relativity states that time unfolds is precisely the same constant figure at which we measure the speed of light. Therefore any experiment that confirms Special Relativity as it relates to light speed, must also confirm Temporal Relativity to precisely the same specifications. This means that Temporal Relativity already holds true for any experiments, predictions or observations relating to Special Relativity. However, it is my position that Temporal Relativity is capable of explaining the cause behind some phenomena more accurately than previous theories. I will shed light on some of these additional phenomena in the days and weeks to come.

Creator, God and mankind

---

Science and Philosophy Scientists use mathematical models to describe something, specifically those models can be used to make predictions and can be tested by experiments or observations. Scientists never claim absolute knowledge. Unlike a mathematical proof, a proven scientific theory is always open to falsification, if new evidence is presented. Even the most basic and fundamental theories may turn out to be imperfect if new observations are inconsistent with them. Critical to this process is making every relevant aspect of research publicly available, which permits peer review of published results, and also allows ongoing review and repeating of experiments and observations by multiple researchers operating independently of one another. Only by fulfilling these expectations can it be determined how reliable the experimental results are for potential use by others. Isaac Newton's Newtonian law of gravitation is a famous example of an established law that was later found not to be universal - it does not hold in experiments involving motion at speeds close to the speed of light or in close proximity of strong gravitational fields. Outside these conditions, Newton's Laws remain an excellent model of motion and gravity. Since general relativity accounts for all the same phenomena that Newton's Laws do and more, general relativity is now regarded as a better theory. For Hegel there are no independent truths and nothing is true by itself, alone. Every truth is sustained by and based on other truths. His method looking for truth is known as “Dialectic”. I understand that my knowledge and capability of thinking will not allow me to seek “The Absolute Truth”. However, I am still trying to draw a picture as if the universe was not created by God. If I accept that the universe was created by God, then I do not need to think hard for I have got all the solutions for every questions. Descartes declared” I think therefore I am”. I think so I feel my own existence. I also feel I am not free at all as I have been always under the control of my own desires, fear, anxiety, social norms, etc. but I have entirely the freedom to think. This freedom is a real one for no one can stop me to think. God or Creator Einstein believed in God. He called his god is a Cosmological God who once created the universe, does not intervene with His creation again. So I think his god does not interfere with our human world in any activities. He believed that there was a beginning and an ending of the universe. His god is more a creator rather than a god. For Spinoza, God is equated with substance that is Nature. On the other hand, God does not create anything that is different from Him, so He is Nature himself in another sense. Being does not mean being that is created by god, but simply God’s being. Man is not free and the world does not have a teleological end; everything is necessary and causally determined. Man is a slave because he believes he is free while being drawn along by necessity. Only one type of freedom remains open: knowledge. So the terms God, substance, Nature and Being describe the same thing. For Hegel, being, through its internal movement, has hurled us into nothingness, and nothingness into being, and we cannot remain stationary in either of the two. Being has passed into nothingness and nothingness has passed into being. This is becoming. Hegel’s God, the absolute, exists only in a state of becoming. Hegel concludes, it can be said that the content of the Logic (pure reason) is the exposition of God as He is in His eternal essence, before the Creation of nature. This implies that God could be an entity as an “Absolute Law” before the creation of the universe. God does not interfere with the world. God is only a Creator. God is the supreme being, creator and the ruler of the universe. The creator is an entity or being to cause something to exist. God, as the ruler of the universe, He will intervene with our human world. He will judge our thought and behavior whether we are good enough to enjoy the eternity. However, Einstein’s Cosmological God is only a creator and once the universe was created, he will leave His creation alone. The universe is self-sufficient and is capable to continue to exist. The creator would not interfere with our human affairs. Every thing, says Spinoza, in so far as it exists in itself, tends to persevere in its being. The desire or longing to continue to exist forever is the actual essence of the thing. Thus, to be means to want to be forever, to have a longing for eternity. For Schopenhauer, every object in the world manifests itself as a longing or will to be. In other words, man is entirely controlled by the will to live. The ego can be perceived as a body but also as will. Thus, reality is will. The will to exist is the essence of the universe. Every living and non-living things have struggled to exist by all means and they long for eternal existence. Thus the will to exist could be the First Cause for the existence of the universe. Again the will is just another name of God or Creator. The singularity starts the Big Bang. Before singularity would the “Will” be the First Cause or Prime Mover as suggested by Aristotole? It is known that at singularity all the laws of science will break down if General Relativity is correct. Therefore I would tend to think that before singularity spacetime could not exist. Perhaps there is only nothingness. What is nothingness? Is the will to exist is a nothingness? According to the Book of Genesis written by Moses, God created the universe by his word. Is that the “word” and the “will” means the same thing? Scientists have proved that the universe is expanding from the “Red Shift” phenomenon. If the total amount of spacetime is included in the universe, then what is the substance beyond the universe? When the universe is expanding, the stars are moving away from the center of the universe. If the space is finite then the expansion of the universe has a limit. Einstein has introduced a Cosmological Constant in his General Relativity so that the model of the universe is a static one. If the space is infinite, then the universe could be expanding forever if it is necessary. However, according to the general theory of relativity there must have been a state of infinite density in the past, the big bang, which would have been a beginning of time. Similarly, if the whole universe re-collapsed, there must be another state of infinite density in the future, the big crunch, which would be an end of time. If Einstein is right, there must be a God or Creator who has created the universe. Aquinas follows Aristotle in claiming that there must be something which explains why the universe exists. Since the universe could, under different circumstances, conceivably not exist, its existence must have a cause. It must be something that exists by necessity. If the universe has always existed, it still owes that existence to Aristotle’s Uncaused Cause. In other words, the existence of the universe requires an explanation, and an active creation of the universe by a being outside of the universe—generally assumed to be God—is that explanation. Bertrand Russell had once said “ I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods. ”For most of his adult life, Russell thought it was very unlikely that there was a god. Kierkeggaard wrote: How did I get into the world? Why was I not asked about it, why was I not informed of the rules and regulations but just thrust into this world? How did I get involved in this big enterprise called actuality? Why should I be involved? Isn’t it a matter of choice? And if I am compelled to be involved, where is the manager—I have something to say about this. Is there no manager? To whom I make my complaint? Based on this, Heidgger, and later Sartre, dubbed the term “throwness” to describe this idea that human beings are exposed to or “thrown” into existence – in that we have no choice to come into existence. Sartrean existentialism argues man exists without purpose, finds himself in the world and defines the meaning of his existence. Identities are constructed by the individual consciousness only. An “identity” can include beliefs, projects, and various other things of value. Satre argues that no one else, including God if He existed, can choose your “identity” for you. So Sartre and some other existentialism believers deny the existence of God. In the meantime, let us not to argue whether God does exist or not. Different philosophers have different concepts about God. Let me make a bold assumption that the concept of God is different from that of Creator. The Creator once created the universe He has left His Creation alone for the Creation is self-sufficient. However, God would watch and care our human world and He will make judgements whether our thought and behavior will satisfy Him. He is the only being who will decide every human being’s destiny—whether one can enjoy eternal life or throw him into the hell after death. Formation of the universe The age of the universe from the time of Big Bang is estimated to be about 13.7 billion years and most of the estimates are in the range of 13 – 15 billion years. The Big Bang started as a singularity where the universe was a single point. Singularity is a point in spacetime in which gravitational forces cause matter to have an infinite density and zero volume. Spacetime is a model that combines three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time into a single construct called the space-time continuum, in which time plays the role of the 4th dimension. During the earliest era of the big bang, the universe is believed to have formed a hot dense plasma. As expansion proceeded, the temperature steadily dropped until a point was reached when atoms could form. During the first hundredth of a second, the quarks that comprise protons and neutrons were not yet joined together, and a dense, superheat mix of quarks and gluons, with some electrons thrown in was all that could exist. During the early phases of the big bang, equal amount of matter and anti-matter were formed. However, through a CP-violation, physical processes resulted in an asymmetry in the amount of matter as compared to anti-matter. This asymmetry explains the amount of residual mater found in the universe today, as nearly all the matter and anti-matter would otherwise have annihilated each other when they come into contact. In Quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particles/antiparticle pairs. The total energy of the universe is exactly zero. At present the universe contains about 74% dark energy, 22% dark matter and only 4% matter. Prior to the formation of the first stars, the chemical composition of the universe consisted primarily of Hydrogen (75% of total mass) with a lesser amount of Helium(24% of total mass). The big bang left behind a background flux of photons and neutrinos. The temperature of the background radiation has steadily decreased as the universe expands. Our sun burns hydrogen into helium radiating energy as heat and light. The protons and neutrons would have been converted into helium nuclei and started combining atoms to form atoms of many other elements. It was thought that the nucleus of the atom was made up of electrons and positively charged particle called the proton.. In 1932 Chadwick discovered that the nucleus contained another particle, called the neutron, which had almost the same mass as a proton but no electrical charge. However, about 20 years ago, a particle called quark was discovered. A proton or neutron is made up of three quarks. Everything in the universe can be described in terms of particles. These particles have property called spin. All known particles in the universe can be divided into two groups: particles of spin 1/2, which make up the matter in the universe and particles of spin 0, 1, and 2, which, give rise to forces between the matter particles. Are these particles the ultimate building blocks of the universe? According to String Theory or M-theory, the super-string could be the elementary particle. It took more than 10 billion years before the stars and planets had formed. The earth was initially very hot and without an atmosphere. In the course of time it cooled and acquired an atmosphere from the emission of gases from the rocks. This early atmosphere was not one in which we could have survived. It contained no oxygen, but a lot of other gases that are poisonous to us such as hydrogen sulfide. There are, however, other primitive forms of life that can flourish under such conditions. It is thought that they developed in the oceans, possibly as a result of chance combinations of atoms into large structures, called macromolecules. In this way a process of evolution was started that led to the development of more and more complicated, self-reproducing organisms. The first primitive forms of life consumed various materials, including hydrogen sulfide, and released oxygen. This gradually changed the atmosphere to the composition that it has today and allowed the development of higher forms of life such as fish, reptiles, mammals and ultimately the human race. Theories of Relativity. Galileo's Theory of Relativity Galileo formulated his principles of relativity, which state: 1 - the laws of physics can be applied to the measurements made relative to any inertial frame, and they will produce correct results, and 2 - the correspondence between the coordinates in one inertial frame and the coordinates in another inertial frame is given by the Galilean coordinate transformation Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity The theory of special relativity proposed by Einstein states: 1 - same as 1 in Galileo's theory 2 - the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames, 3 - the correspondence between the coordinates in one inertial frame and the coordinates in another inertial frame is given by the Lorentz coordinate transformation Special Relativity and General Relativity Albert Einstein introduced the Special theory of relativity in 1905 and General Relativity was developed in the years 1905-1915. The concept of motion is relative. We can speak the motion of an object, but only relative to or by comparison with another. There is no “absolute” notion of motion. Motion is relative. The laws of science are the same for all freely moving observers, no matter what their speed. The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion or the motion of the source of light. Nothing may travel faster than the speed of light.(The speed of light is 670 million miles per hour) There are no absolute space and time. The three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time into a single construct called the space-time continuum, in which time plays the role of the 4th dimension. Space-time is curved. The presence of matter “curves” spacetime, and the curvature affects the path of free particles and even the path of light. Bodies like the earth are not made to move on curved orbits by a force called gravity. Instead they follow the nearest thing to a straight path in curved space, which is called geodesic. The geodesic is the shortest path between two nearby points. The light no longer travels in straight lines in space. General relativity predicts that light should be bent by gravitational fields. Gravity, according to Einstein, is the warping of space and time. In the absence of any matter or energy, Einstein envisioned that space would be flat. The sun, like the bowling ball, warps the fabric of space surrounding it, and the earth’s motion, like that of the ball bearing, is determined by the shape of the warp. The earth is kept in orbit not because it is due to the action of force from the sun; rather it is the warping of the spacial fabric caused by the sun’s presence. The earth rolls along a valley in the warped spatial fabric. It follows a path of least resistance in the distorted region around the sun. The more massive an object is, the greater the distortion it causes in the surrounding space. This implies that the more massive an object, the greater the gravitational influence it can exert on other bodies. However, influence becomes weaker as the distance between objects becomes larger. Similarly, the earth, being a massive body in its own right, also warps the fabric of space and thus the earth in the same way keeps the moon in orbit, and it is also how the earth keeps each of us bound to its surface. Newton had stated that gravity must be caused by an agent. The agent of gravity, according to Einstein is the fabric of the cosmos. Einstein showed that objects move through space (spacetime, more precisely) along the shortest possible paths or the paths of least resistance. If the space is warped, such paths will be curved. “Mass grips space by telling it how to curve, space grips mass by telling it how to move” said by the famous physicist John Wheeler. Gravity distorts time as well as space. Strong gravitational fields, such as those just outside a black hole cause the flow of time to slow enormously. To someone high up, it would appear that everything down below was taking longer to happen. Twins paradox: If one of the twins went for a long trip in a spaceship at nearly the speed of light when he returned he would be much younger than the one who stayed on earth. The length of a ruler made to move in space at a speed of 90% of light will be much shorter to the observer who stays on earth. E = MC2 Before Einstein the concept of space and time are separate and absolute. Einstein’s work showed they are actually interwoven and relative. In the same way Einstein asserted that the energy (E) of an abject and its mass (m) are not independent concepts. We can determine the energy from the knowledge of the mass by multiplying the mass twice by the speed of light. The faster something moves the more energy it has. Entropy According to the Second law of thermodynamics, the total entropy of any isolated thermodynamic system tends to increase over time, approaching a maximum value. A finite universe may be considered an isolated system so its total entropy is constantly increasing. It has been speculated that the universe is fated to a heat death in which all the energy ends up as a homogeneous distribution of thermal energy, so that no more work can be extracted from any source. Entropy is a measure of the disorder of a thermodynamic system. For example, the combined entropy of a cup of hot water in a cool room is less than the entropy of the room and the water after it has cooled, because the heat from the hot water is more evenly distributed. A system that is more “disorder” is equivalently also a system with lower amount of energy available to do work. Black holes A star that was sufficiently massive and compact would have such a strong gravitational field that light could not escape as any light emitted from the surface of the star would be dragged back by the star’s gravitational attraction before it could get very far. Such objects are what we now called black holes because it turns to be black voids in space. A cold star of more than about one and a half times the mass of the sun would not be able to support itself against its own gravity. Eventually, when the star has shrunk to a certain critical radius, the gravitational field at the surface becomes so strong that the light cones are bent inward so much that light can no longer escape. Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking showed that according to general relativity, there must be a singularity of infinite density and space-time curvature within a black hole. At this singularity the laws of science and our ability to predict the future would break down. In 1971 Stephen Hawking proved that any stationary rotating black hole would indeed have such an axis of symmetry. So after gravitational collapse a black hole must settle down into a state in which it could be rotating. Quantum Mechanics When Heisenberg discovered the uncertainty principle, physics turned a sharp corner, never to retrace its steps. Probabilities, wave functions, interference, and quanta all involve radically new ways of seeing reality. In classical physics, it was believed that if one knew the initial state of a system with infinite precision, one could predict the behavior of the system infinitely far into the future. According to quantum mechanics, however, there is a fundamental limit on the ability to make such predictions, because the inability to collect the initial data with unlimited precision. The uncertainty principle is taken to mean that the physical universe does not exist in a deterministic form—but rather as a collections of probabilities. Up to date it seems Heisenberg’s view has been the better at explaining physical subatomic phenomena. The uncertainty principle asserts that a similar frantic shifting back and forth of energy and momentum is occurring perpetually in the universe on microscopic distance and time intervals. Even in an empty region of space the energy and momentum are uncertain. They fluctuate between extremes. This inability to know both the positions and velocities of elementary particles implies that microscopic realm is intrinsically turbulent. Although light is made up of waves, Planck’s quantum hypothesis tells us that in some ways it behaves as if it were composed of particles: it can be emitted or absorbed only in packets, or quanta. Quantum mechanics is based on the uncertainty principle. In this theory particles no longer had separate, well-defined positions and velocities that could not be observed. The uncertainty principle implies that particles behave in some respects like waves: they do not have a definite position but are “smeared out” with certain probability distribution. A photon processes a duality between waves and particles in quantum mechanics. Planck’s constant (denoted h) is a physical constant that is used to describe the sizes of a quanta. It plays a central role in the theory of quantum mechanics and is named after Max Planck. It is used in measuring energy emitted by a light photon such as in the equation E = hv, where E is energy, h is Planck’s constant and v is frequency. The electromagnetic force is the force that the electromagnetic field exerts on electrically charged particle. It is the electromagnetic force that holds electrons and nuclei together in atoms and which hold atoms together to make molecules. The electromagnetic force operate via the exchange of messenger particles called photons. There are four forces of nature, namely gravity, the force particle of which is graviton, electromagnetic, the force particle of which is photon, strong force, the force particle of which is gluon and the weak force, the force particle of which is bosons. Only the weak gauge bosons have mass but the other three forces do not have mass. Gravity is responsible for keeping the earth in orbit around the sun. The electromagnetic force is the force driving all of the conveniences of modern life—lights, computers, TV, telephones etc. The strong force is responsible for keeping quarks “glued” together inside of protons and neutrons and keeping protons and neutrons tightly crammed together inside atomic nuclei. The weak force is responsible for the radioactive decay of substances such as uranium. All four forces are directly associated with principles of symmetry. As gravitational fields are reflected by curvature, these quantum fluctuations manifest themselves as increasingly violent distortions of the surrounding space. The random quantum mechanical undulations in the gravitational field correspond to such severe wrappings of space that it no longer resembles a gently curving geometrical object such as the rubber-membrane. John Wheeler coined the term quantum foam to describe the frenzy revealed by such an ultramicroscopic examination of space (and time)—it describes an unfamiliar arena of the universe in which the conventional notions of left and right, back and forth, up and down (and even of before and after) lose their meaning. It is on such short distance scales that we encounter the fundamental incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics. The notion of smooth spatial geometry, the central principle of general relativity, is destroyed by the violent fluctuations of the quantum world on short distance scales. Calculations that merge the equations of general relativity and those of quantum mechanics typically yield one and the same ridiculous answer, infinity. Einstein never think that the universe was governed by chance. His famous statement is “God does not play dice” Einstein was wrong. Electrons—and everything else for that matter—cannot be described as simultaneously being at such –and-such location and having such-and-such speed. The probability that the electron arrives at any chosen point on the screen is built up from the combined effect of every possible way of getting there. This is known as Feyman’s “sum-over-paths” approach to quantum mechanics. Quantum-mechanical uncertainty tells us the universe is a teeming, chaotic, frenzied arena on microscopic scales. General Relativity vs. Quantum Mechanics General theory of relativity describes the force of gravity and the large-scale structure of the universe. (1 with 24 zeros miles). Quantum mechanics deals phenomena on extremely small scales, such as millionth of a millionth of an inch. These two theories are known to be inconsistent with each other. General relativity describes force that of large, astronomical distance scales and implies that the absence of mass means that space is flat. But if we examine the microscopic properties of space, say distances small than Planck length (1 x 10-33 cm), the quantum mechanics do not support this concept radically. Everything is subject to the quantum fluctuations inherent in the uncertainty principle. The random quantum mechanical undulations in the gravitational field correspond to such severe wrappings of space that it no longer resembles a gently curving geometrical object such as the rubber-membrane analogy. The notion of a smooth spatial geometry, the central principle of general relativity, is destroyed by the violent fluctuations of the quantum world on short distance scales. Calculations that merge the equations of general relativity and those of quantum mechanics yield a ridiculous answer – infinity. String Theory Although the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics are not consistent with each other, they have been proved to be true and sound. The great and fast advancements of our new technologies and inventions have been indebted to these theories. We are indebted to them for an entirely new view of the universe and the world we are living in. Brian Greene has said “We are all, each in our own way seekers of the truth and we each long for an answer to why we are here.” He has a great vision that the String Theory will be a Unified Theory of Everything. Matter is composed of atoms, which in turn are made from quarks and electrons. According to string theory, all such particles are actually tiny loops of vibrating string. Just as the strings on a violin, each of the preferred patterns of vibration of a string in string theory appears as a particle whose mass and force charges are determined by the string’s oscillatory pattern. The electron is a string vibrating one way, the up-quark is a string vibrating another way, and so on. The theory will describe a universe that evolves to a form in which a background of coherent string vibrations emerges, yielding the conventional notions of space and time. Such a framework, if realized, would show that space , time and dimension are not essential defining elements of the universe. Through studies in M-theory, we have seen glimpses of a strange new domain of the universe lurking beneath the Planck length, possibly one in which there is no notion of time or space. At the opposite extreme, we have also seen that our universe may merely be one of the innumerable frothing bubbles on the surface of a vast and turbulent cosmic ocean called the multiverse. String theorists are attempting to adjust the Standard Model by removing the assumption in quantum mechanics that particles are point-like. By removing this assumption and replacing the point-like particles with strings, it is hoped that string theory will develop into a sensible quantum theory of gravity. Moreover, string theory appears to be able to "unify" the known natural forces (gravitational, electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear) by describing them with the same set of equations. Could the initial configuration of the universe just happens by chance? One possible answer is to say that God chose the initial configuration of the universe for reason that we cannot hope to understand. This would certainly have been within the power of an omnipotent being but if he had started it off in such an incomprehensible way, why did He choose to let it evolve according to laws that we could understand? The whole history of science has been the gradual realization that events do not happen in an arbitrary manner, but that they reflect a certain underlying order. The probability of finding it in any other configuration: the initial state of the universe is chosen purely randomly. If the universe is indeed spatially infinite or if there are infinitely many universes, there would probably be some large regions somewhere that started out in a smooth uniform manner. Could it be that we are living in region that just happens by chance to be smooth and uniform? There are two versions of the anthropic principle, the weak and the strong. The weak anthropic principle states that in a universe that is large or infinite in space and time, the conditions necessary for the development of intelligent life will be met only in certain regions that are limited in space and time. One example of the use of the weak anthropic principal is to explain why the big bang occurred about ten thousand million years ago—it takes about that long for intelligent beings to evolve. A strong version of the principle: According to this theory, there are either many different universes or many different regions of a single universe, each with its own initial configuration and perhaps, with its own set of laws of science. In most of these universes the conditions would not be right for the development of complicated organisms.. “Why is the universe the way we see it?” The answer is then simple: If it had been different, we would not be here. The Origin of Life Life on Earth might have evolved from non-life sometime between 3.9 and 4.1 billion years ago. Origins of life, thought to have possibly occurred over the last 13.7 billion years in the evolution of the known universe since the big bang. Charles Darwin made the suggestion that the original spark of life may have begun in a "warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, lights, heat, electricity, etc. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes". He went on to explain that "at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed." In other words, the presence of life itself prevents the spontaneous generation of simple organic compounds from occurring on Earth today – a circumstance which makes the search for the origin of life dependent on the sterile conditions of the laboratory. The basic chemicals from which life was thought to have formed are methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2) or carbon monoxide (CO), and phosphate (PO43-). Molecular oxygen (O2 ) and ozone (O3) were either rare or absent. The biologist John Desmond Bernal, pointed out. The basic chemicals from which life was thought to have formed are methane and suggested that there were a number of clearly defined "stages" that could be recognized in explaining the origin of life. Stage 1: The origin of biological monomers Stage 2: The origin of biological polymers Stage 3: The evolution from molecules to cell A monomer is a small molecule that may become chemically bonded to other monomers to form a polymer. A polymer is a substance composed of molecules with large molecular mass consisting of repeating structural units, or monomers, connected by covalent chemical bonds. The “Miller-Urey experiment” used a highly reduced mixture of gases - methane, ammonia and hydrogen, under the influence of energy such as ultraviolet light – to form basic organic monomers, such as amino acids – the building blocks of proteins. Evolution by Natural Selection Charles Darwin presented the first hypothesis, explaining the observations of evolution, which have stood up to extensive and repeated testing. Darwin’s theory is therefore properly termed a Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Evolution as explained by Natural Selection is the theory, not evolution itself. Darwin’s theory of evolution is based on five key observations and inferences drawn from them, as summarized by the biologist Ernst Mayr: 1) Species have great fertility. They make more offspring than can grow to adulthood. 2) Populations remain roughly the same size, with modest fluctuations. 3) Food resources are limited, but are relatively constant most of the time. From these three observations it may be inferred that in such an environment there will be a struggle for survival among individuals. 4) In sexually reproducing species, generally no two individuals are identical. Variation is rampant. 5) Much of this variation is heritable. From this Darwin infers: In a world of stable populations where each individual must struggle to survive, those with the “best” characteristics will be more likely to survive, and those desirable traits will be passed to their offspring; and that these advantageous characteristics are inherited by following generations, becoming dominant among the population through time. They were more adapted to their surroundings. This is natural selection. Darwin further infers that natural selection, if carried far enough, makes changes in a population, eventually leading to new species. He puts forward myriad observations as demonstrations of this, and also claims that the fossil record can be interpreted as supporting these observations. Darwin imagined it might be possible that all life is descended from an original species from ancient times. Modern DNA evidence is consistent with this idea. Further evidents to prove the Theory: Evolution occurs whenever a new species of bacterium evolves a resistance to an antibiotic which previously was lethal to that bacterium. Evolution is the observation that biological organisms evolve. In other words, descendants are seen to have gone through a type of genetic modification process when compared to their ancestors. The modification is most often the result of natural genetic synthesis, and the differential traits manifested may be translated into changes in the genetic composition of the population. As the populations of organisms change over time, the organisms are often observed to be well suited to their environments, and many different species of organisms resembling each other closely, are indicative of evolution Charles Darwin ‘s theory of evolution by natural selection is satisfying because it shows us a way in which simplicity could change into complexity, how unordered atoms could group themselves into ever more complex patterns until they ended up manufacturing people. Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” is really a special case of a more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name. Salt crystals tend to be cubes because this is a stable way of packing sodium and chloride ions together. In the sun the simplest atoms of all, hydrogen atoms, are fusing to form helium atoms, because in the conditions that prevail there the helium configuration is more stable. A crystal such as a diamond can be regarded as a single molecule since its internal atomic structure endless repeated. Before the coming of life on earth, some evolution of molecules could have occurred by ordinary processes of physics and chemistry. There is no need to think of design or purpose or directness. If a group of atoms in the presence of energy falls into a stable pattern it will tend to stay that way. The earliest form of natural selection was simply a selection of stable forms and rejection of unstable ones. Replicator At some point a particularly remarkable molecule was formed by accident. We call it the Replicator. It had the extraordinary property of being able to create copies of itself. The small building blocks were abundantly available in the soup surrounding the replicator. Now suppose that each building block has an affinity for its own kind. Then whenever a building block from out in the soup lands up next to a part of the replicator for which it has an affinity, it will tend to stick there. They will join up to form a stable chain just as in the formation of the original replicator. This process could continue as a progressive stacking up, layer upon layer. This is how crystals are formed. The replicator would act as a template but during copying process, they occasionally make mistakes, and it is ultimately these mistakes that make evolution possible. Evolution is something that happens, in spite of all the efforts of the replicators to prevent it happening. When the replicators became numerous, building blocks must have been used up at such a rate that they became a scarce and precious resource. There was a struggle for existence among replicator varieties. Ways of increasing stability and of decreasing rivals’ stability became more elaborate and more efficient. Some of them break up molecules of rival varieties chemically and use the building blocks to make their own copies. Other replicators protected themselves, either chemically or by building a physical wall of protein around themselves. This may have been how the first living cells appeared. Replicators began to construct for themselves containers, vehicles for their continued existence. The replicators that survived were the ones that built survival machines for themselves to live in. Evolution has been taken place for four thousand million years and the ancient replicators have had built their most suitable and safe survival machines for them to live in. They are in you and in me; they created us, body and mind; and their preservation is the ultimate rationale for our existence. They survive by the name of genes, and we are their survival machines. The survival machines embraces all animals, plants, bacteria and viruses. The Primeval Soup Chemists have tried to imitate the chemical conditions of the young earth. They have put the substances such as water, carbon dioxide, methane, and ammonia in a flask and supplied a source of energy like ultraviolet light or electrical sparks. After a few weeks of this, a weak brown soup containing a large number of molecules more complex than the ones originally put in., amino acids have been found-the building blocks of proteins. About four thousand million years ago, the organic substances became concentrated, perhaps in drying scum round the shores. Under the influence of energy such as ultraviolet light from the sun, they combined into larger molecules. They are building blocks of the genetic molecule, the DNA. Nucleotide A nucleotide is a chemical compound that consists of 3 portions: a heterocyclic base, a sugar, and one or more phosphate groups. In the most common nucleotides the base is a derivative of purine or pyrimidine, and the sugar is the pentose (five-carbon sugar) deoxyribose or ribose. Nucleotides are the monomers of nucleic acids, with three or more bonding together in order to form a nucleic acid. Genome In biology the genome of an organism is its whole hereditary information. More precisely, the genome of an organism is a complete DNA sequence of one set of chromosomes DNA The general structure of a section of DNA, Deoxyribonucleic acid is a nucleic acid. A DNA molecule is a long chain of building blocks which are small molecules called nucleotides. It consists of a pair of nucleotide chains twisted together in an elegant spiral- a “double helix” The nucleotide building blocks come up only four different kinds, whose names are shortened to (A) Adenine, (T) Thymine, (C) cytosine, and (G.) guanine These are the same in all animals and plants. What differs is the order in which they are strung together. A “G” nucleotide from a man is identical in every particular to a “G” nucleotide from a snail. DNA contains the genetic information that is inherited by the offspring of an organism; this information is determined by the sequence of base pairs along its length .Between the two strands, each base can only “pair up” with one single predetermined other base: A+T, T+A, C+G and G+C are the only possible combinations; that is, an “A” on one strand of double-stranded DNA will “mate” properly only with a “T”. DNA is not a single molecule, but rather a pair of molecules joined by hydrogen bonds. Each strand of DNA is a chain of chemical “building blocks”, called nucleotides. A strand of DNA contains genes, and areas that regulate genes. Genes can be viewed as the organism’s “blueprint”. Our DNA is distributed among the cells in every parts of our bodies. There are about a thousand million millions cells making up an average human body. Every one of those cells contains a complete copy of the body’s DNA. This DNA can be regarded as a set of instructions for how to make a body. A chromosome is a very long, continuous piece of DNA which contains many genes, regulatory elements and other intervening nucleotide sequences. Each cell in human being contains 46 chromosomes. They are visible under a microscope as long threads, and the genes are strung out along them in order. DNA molecules do two important things. Firstly, they replicate ; they make copies of themselves. This has gone on non-stop ever since the beginning of life. When you were first conceived you were just a single cell which contains one master copy of the DNA. These cell divided into two containing the identical DNA. Successive divisions took the number of cells up to billions. At every division the DNA codes were faithfully copied, with scarcely any mistakes. The DNA indirectly supervises the manufacture of a different kind of molecule- protein. Genes indirectly control the manufacture of bodies. A body is the genes’ way of preserving the genes unaltered. A given part of the body will be influenced by many genes, and the effect of any one gene depends on interaction with many others. A gene may be defined as any portion of chromosome that potentially lasts for enough generations to serve as a unit of natural selection. Some genes act as master genes controlling the operation of a cluster of other genes. Sexual reproduction has the effect of mixing and shuffling genes The 46 chromosomes consist of 23 pairs of chromosomes. We receive each chromosome intact from one of our two parents, in whose testis or ovary it was assembled. The sex cells in the sperms or eggs are unique among our other cells in that, instead of containing 46 chromosomes, they contain only 23.Every sperm cell or egg cell made by an individual is unique. During the intercourse between man and woman, several million sperms sailed into the mother but only one is successful to reach the mother’s egg. Then a baby, boy or girl will be conceived. Mutations are the results of the cells’ attempts to repair chemical imperfections in this process, where a base is accidentally skipped, inserted, or incorrectly copied, or the chain is trimmed, or added to. The segment of DNA(a helix chain of 6 ft.containing 3.2 billion codes; it takes 11 months to read all the codes) is called a gene Every person's DNA, their genome, is inherited from both parents. The mother's mitochondrial DNA together with twenty-three chromosomes from each parent combine to form the genome of a zygote, the fertilized egg. As a result, with certain exceptions such as red blood cells, most human cells contain 23 pairs of chromosomes, together with mitochondrial DNA inherited from the mother. DNA contains suger, nitrogen and phosphate. It gives instructions to the cells to produce proteins. Among human beings 99.90% of DNA is the same. The 0.1% of DNA equals to 3 billio pairs of bases. The twins have 100% same DNA. Parents/child is 99.95% (1,500,000 base pairs) Rat 90% Pig 98% Protein A protein is a complex, high-molecular-mass, organic compound that consists of amino acids joined by peptide bonds. Proteins are essential to the structure and function of all living cells and viruses. Proteins are essentially polymers made up of a specific sequence of amino acids. The details of this sequence are stored in the code of a gene. Through the processes of transcription and translation, a cell reads the genetic information and uses it to construct the protein. In nutrition, proteins are broken down through digestion back into free amino acids for the organism. RNA Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a nucleic acid polymer consisting of nucleotide monomers, that acts as a messenger between DNA and ribosome, and that is also responsible for making proteins out of amino acids. RNA polynucleotides contain ribose sugars and predominantly uracil unlike deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which contains deoxyribose and predominantly thymine. It is transcribed (synthesized) from DNA by enzymes called RNA polymerases and further processed by other enzymes. RNA serves as the template for translation of genes into proteins, transferring amino acids to the ribosome to form proteins, and also translating the transcript into proteins. Unlike DNA, RNA is almost always a single-stranded molecule and has a much shorter chain of nucleotides. RNA contains ribose, rather than the deoxyribose found in DNA (there is no hydroxyl group attached to the pentose ring in the 2' position whereas RNA has two hydroxyl groups). These hydroxyl groups make RNA less stable than DNA because it is more prone to hydrolysis. Several types of RNA (tRNA, rRNA, mRNA) contain a great deal of secondary structure, which help promote stability. Messenger RNA is RNA that carries information from DNA to the ribosome sites of protein synthesis in the cell. Once mRNA has been transcribed from DNA, it is exported from the nucleus into the cytoplasm (in eukaryotes mRNA is "processed" before being exported), where it is bound to ribosomes and translated into its corresponding protein form with the help of tRNA. After a certain amount of time the message degrades into its component nucleotides, usually with the assistance of RNA polymerases. CELL Our bodies are made up of trillions of cells. Every tissue from muscel to nerves has specialized cells that enable us to move, think or grow. Cells vary in shape and size but each has a nucleaus that contain the human genome. The human body produces 60 billion new cells each day. Every type of cell in the human body contains a complete copy of all the genes needed to code for a person. Genes spells out biological instrutions that direct the development and the maintenance of everything from eye,color to the arrangement of body parts. Every living thing from a bacterium to a whale has genes. Nature of the mind Both philosophers and psychologists remain divided about the nature of the mind. Some take what is known as the substantial view, and argue that the mind is a single entity, perhaps having its base in the brain but distinct from it and having an autonomous existence. This view ultimately derives from Plato, and was absorbed from him into Christian thought. In its most extreme form, the substantial view merges with the theological view that the mind is an entity wholly separate from the body, in fact a manifestation of the soul, which will survive the body's death and return to God, its creator. Others take what is known as the functional view, ultimately derived from Aristotle, which holds that the mind is a term of convenience for a variety of mental functions which have little in common except that humans are conscious of their existence. Functionalists tend to argue that the attributes which we collectively call the mind are closely related to the functions of the brain and can have no autonomous existence beyond the brain, nor can they survive its death. In this view mind is a subjective manifestation of consciousness: the human brain's ability to be aware of its own existence. The concept of the mind is therefore a means by which the conscious brain understands its own operations. The Brain The brain is not only important as the site of reason and intelligence, it is also the source of cognition, emotion, memory, and motor, and other forms of learning, and it controls and coordinates most sensory systems, movement, behavior, but it also controls homeostatic body functions such as heart rate, blood pressure, fluid balance, and body temperature. Some behaviors such as simple reflexes and basic locomotion, can be executed under spinal cord control alone. Most brains exhibit a visible distinction between grey matter and white matter. Grey matter consists of the cell bodies of the neurons, while white matter consists of the fibers (axons) that connect neurons. The axons are surrounded by a fatty insulating sheath called myelin, giving the white matter its distinctive color. The outer, visible layers of the brain are the cortex, and consist mainly of grey matter. Mind and Brain A distinction is often made in the philosophy of mind between the mind and the brain, and there is some controversy as to their exact relationship, leading to the mind-body problem. The brain is defined as the physical, biological matter contained within the skull, responsible for all electrochemical neuronal processes. The mind, however, is seen in terms of mental attributes, such as beliefs or desires. Some suggest that the mind exists in some way independently of the brain, such as in a soul. Others, such as strong AI theorists, say that the mind is directly analogous to computer software and the brain to hardware. Neuron Neurons are a major class of cells in the nervous system. Neurons are sometimes called nerve cells, though this term is technically imprecise, as many neurons do not form nerves. In vertebrates, they are found in the brain, the spinal cord and in the nerves and ganglia of the peripheral nervous system, and their main role is to process and transmit neural information. An important characteristic of neurons is that they have excitable membranes that allow them to generate and propagate electrical signals. Many neurons are highly specialized, and they differ widely in appearance. Neurons have cellular extensions known as processes which they use to send and receive information. The soma, or 'cell body', is the central part of the cell, where the nucleus is located and where most protein synthesis occurs. The dendrite, is a branching arbor of cellular extensions. Most neurons have several dendrites with profuse dendritic branches. The overall shape and structure of a neuron's dendrites is called its dendritic tree, and is traditionally thought to be the main information receiving network for the neuron. However, information outflow (i.e. from dendrites to other neurons) can also occur. The axon, is a finer, cable-like projection which can extend tens, hundreds, or even tens of thousands of times the diameter of the soma in length. The axon carries nerve signals away from the soma (and carry some types of information in the other direction also). Many neurons have only one axon, but this axon may - and usually will - undergo extensive branching, enabling communication with many target cells. The part of the axon where it emerges from the soma is called the 'axon hillock'. Besides being an anatomical structure, the axon hillock is also the part of the neuron that has the greatest density of voltage-dependent sodium channels. Thus it has the most hyperpolarized action potential threshold of any part of the neuron. In other words, it is the most easily-excited part of the neuron, and thus serves as the spike initiation zone for the axon. While the axon and axon hillock are generally considered places of information outflow, this region can receive input from other neurons as well. The axon terminal, a specialized structure at the end of the axon that is used to release neurotransmitter and communicate with target neurons. Priori A priori is a Latin phrase meaning "from the former" or less literally "before experience". In much of the modern Western tradition, the term a priori is considered to mean propositional knowledge that can be had without, or "prior to", experience. It is usually contrasted with a posteriori knowledge meaning "after experience", which requires experience. For those within the mainstream of the tradition, mathematics and logic are generally considered a priori disciplines. Statements such as "2 + 2 = 4", for example, are considered to be "a priori", because they are thought to come out of reflection alone. The natural and social sciences are usually considered a posteriori disciplines. Statements like "The sky is usually mostly blue", for instance, might be considered "a posteriori" knowledge. Modern use of a priori began with Immanuel Kant who offered the distinction between synthetic and analytic truths to supplement the distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge. He argues that propositions known a priori are necessarily true, while propositions known a posteriori are contingent, because a priori knowledge has always been true, according to Kant (e.g. two plus two equals four). A posteriori propositions will depend on external conditions, which may change in time, making the proposition false (e.g. Jean Chrtien is Canada's Prime Minister, which was once true but is now false). Intuition Intuition is an unconscious form of knowledge. It is immediate and often not open to rational/analytical thought processes. Intuition differs from an opinion since opinion is based on experience, while an intuition is held to be affected by previous experiences only unconsciously. Intuition also differs from instinct, which does not have the experience element at all. Intuition is trans-intellectual, while instinct is pre-intellectual. A person who has an intuitive opinion cannot immediately fully explain why he or she holds that view. However, a person may later rationalize an intuition by developing a chain of logic to demonstrate more structurally why the intuition is valid. Intuition is one source of common sense. It can also help in induction to gain empirical knowledge. Sources of intuition are feeling, experiences and knowledge. In the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, intuition is one of the basic cognitive faculties, equivalent to what might loosely be called perception. Kant held that our mind casts all of our external intuitions in the form of space, and all of our internal intuitions (memory, thought) in the form of time. Intuitionism is a position in philosophy of mathematics derived from Kant's claim that all mathematical knowledge is knowledge of the pure forms of the intuition - that is, intuition that is not empirical A Short Revision Different scientific facts and views from different scientists and philosophers have been illustrated in the above writings. Now it is time for me to review the materials and make a summary. One thing we are quite sure that the universe had not been created in six days according to the Book of Genesis of Old Testament. A process of evolution has been taken in a very long period of 13 – 15 billion years since the time of Big Bang for the universe including this earth to be made as what we can observe today. It took more than 10 billion years before the stars and planets had formed. Life on earth might have evolved from non-life about 4 billion years ago. According to the general theory of relativity, the Big Bang would have been a beginning of time. One day, if the whole universe recollapsed , the big crunch, this would be the end of time. If Einstein is right, there must be a creator who has created the universe. Scientists have proved that the universe is expanding and could be expending forever. This is not in consistent with Einstein’s concept of the universe. So he introduced a Cosmological Constant in his General Relativity so that the model of the universe is a static one. “God does not play dice” said Einstein. He believed that the universe is smooth and everything is in order. Einstein as a scientist has provided a solution to Aristotole’s First Cause or Prime Mover. However, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and quantum mechanics is not in consistent with Einstein’s ideal concept about the universe. The uncertainty principle is taken to mean that the physical universe does not exist in deterministic form but rather as a collections of probabilities. The inability to know both the positions and velocities of elementary particles implies that in microscopic realm the universe is intrinsically turbulent. It is a teeming, chaotic, frenzied arena on microscopic scales. Although the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics are not consistent with each other, they have been proved to be true and sound. Scientists have tried to merge the equations of general relativity and those of quantum mechanics yield a ridiculous answer—infinity. This is a good time for the String Theory to be postulated, as some scientists believe that it will be a Unified Theory of Everything. According to string theory, all elementary particles are actually tiny loops of vibrating string. Space, time and dimension are not essential defining elements of the universe. Our universe may merely be one of the innumerable frothing bubbles on the surface of a vast and turbulent cosmic ocean called the multiverse. The weak anthropic principle states that in universe that is infinite in space and time, the conditions necessary for the development of intelligent life will be met in certain regions. According to the strong anthropic principle, there are many universes and the complicated organisms could exist in one of them where the necessary conditions are provided. Would it be possible that the initial configuration of our universe just happens by chance? Whether the universe was created or it just happens by chance, one thing could not be wrong that the universe has taken 15 billion years to evolve. We owe Charles Darwin a lot for his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. He believed that all life is descended from an original species from ancient times. Modern DNA evidence is consistent with this idea. Evolution occurs whenever a new species of bacterium evolves a resistance to an antibiotic which previously was lethal to that bacterium. Descendants are seen to have gone through a type of genetic modification process when compared to their ancestors. Before the coming of life on earth, some evolution of molecules could have occurred by ordinary processes of physics and chemistry. There is no need to think of design or purpose or directness. If a group of atoms in the presence of energy falls into a stable pattern it will tend to stay that way. The earliest form of natural selection was simply a selection of stable forms and rejection of unstable ones. Life might have started about 4 billion years ago. At some point a particularly remarkable molecule was formed by accident. It had a property of being able to create copies of itself. We call it replicator. The replicators protected themselves, either chemically or by building a physical wall of protein around themselves. Experiment of the “The Primeval Soup” showed that in the presence of water, carbon dioxide, methane, and ammonia kept in a flask under the influence of the ultraviolet light for few weeks, amino acids have been found. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins. Later, large molecules were formed. They are the building blocks of the genetic molecule, the DNA. The DNA molecules have had built their most suitable and safe survival machines for them to live in. They survive by the name of genes, and we are their survival machines. The survival machines embrace all animals, plants, bacteria and viruses. When you were first conceived you were just a single cell which contains one master copy of the DNA. Successive divisions took the number of cells up to billions. DNA gives instructions to the cells to produce proteins and in turn to build our whole body. The segment of DNA is called a gene which is 6 ft long containing 3.2 billion codes. Human beings and other living things cannot survive for a long time, say 100 to 500 years but genes can survive over many billion years or forever through the selected survival machines. Indeed genes are our masters and we survive for the benefit of genes. If one day our whole world were destroyed by the nuclei wars and nearly all human beings and living things had been terminated, the genes could still survive. However, all our four or five thousand years’ civilization will be terminated as the genes do not encode any of our culture and pass to new generations. Our glorious civilization will be totally ruined but the genes are immortals. Life and culture are insignificant but the survival of genes. Genes of all different species in this earth will fight for survival under the law of Natural Selection. Human beings are the master among all the living things in this earth because we can think. Our ancestors starting from Stone Age had started to make weapons to get food and protect themselves from being killed by other animals. Later different tribes were formed as they knew this was a better way to struggle to survive in the world ruled by the “jungle laws”—Survival of the fittest. Battles between tribes happened all the time and the strongest tribe would rule the other tribes. In this way small tribes would be “united” and became a country. Different norms, cults, laws and religions were established to keep the people in the country to live more in harmony. Human beings need to adapt themselves to the ever-changing environments where they live in. Man is entirely controlled by the will to live or longing for eternity. They have been forced or stimulated to think. There are always interactions between man and nature. Through thinking our civilization has been evolved up to present stage. One important question which has kept in my mind for a long time and I could not get a better explanation. Why does the pig whose DNA is 98% similar to that of human beings could not at least have 50% intelligence as what we have? Does God or Creator has a role to be played in this part? The brain is the physical, biological mater contained within the skull, responsible for all electrochemical neuronal processes. The mind, however, is seen in terms of mental attributes, such as beliefs or desires. It is much more easy to define the brain but difficult for the mind. The brain is contained in our skull but we do not know where is the mind situated. Some suggest that mind and soul is the same thing. The mind of a child is deferent from that of an adult as far as knowledge and the way of thinking concerned. If the mind and soul are the same things, then there were at least two souls in one’s life. If the soul, as an entity, could survive the body’s death and return to God, then which soul should be counted? If the soul is immortal then the mind is immortal too. Aristotle stated that the mind is a term of convenience for a variety of mental functions. The mind is closely related to the functions of the brain and can have no autonomous existence beyond the brain. The concept of mind is therefore a means by which the conscious brain understands its own operations. More thought on the mind and the processes of thinking. 1) Language has its limitation and it could be a barrier to our thinking process or reasoning. 2) The notes used to compose a piece of music (excluding songs, for song containing words.) are clear and distinct. So music could be considered as a kind of languages which expresses ideas and emotion more distinct and accurate. 3) Mathematics is a language, which expresses our abstract ideas with pure reasoning. According to Kant mathematics are priori and intuition by nature. It is the language of science. However, it could not be a priori on following arguments. Since mathematics is a language, it is natually made by human being. Directed by our brain, our five senses will get in touch with different experiences. When the sun rises and sets, we call it one day. Next day will be another day. One plus one is two. Later we invented ten figures, one to ten. Different combinations of the figures result billions of numbers. A right angle is 90 degrees and the sum of a triangle must equal to 180 degrees because we make it to be like this. Anyway, methamatics is the most acculate language used to describe any scientific theory or proposition. 4) Before thinking we have discovered with intention or without intention the things or events which we have encountered with. There are three kinds of discoveries, namely: a) To discover by necessity accompanied by our instinct to assist us to survive and to achieve a more comfortable life. b) To discover through chances to encounter incidences to assist us to achieve better living conditions and satisfy our emotional and biological needs. c) To discover on purpose to seek knowledge. Through our thinking we invent skills, technologies, systems of management, etc. to enable us to live a more comfortable life and to satisfy our emotional needs. Any invention, which makes our life more comfortable at that moment, will appear to us that it is true and significant. The new invention appears to us a new reality. Thinking is a biological process manipulated by our brain and stimulated by our five senses, which are our eyes, ears, nose, tongue and the whole body. Our conscious and unconscious are the reservoir to store all the events occurred in our lifetime. All our memory is stored in our brain. Both of our conscious and subconscious mind make judgements for the knowledges we have acquired. 5) Mind is priori as well as posteriori. Intuition is a sudden awareness that arises from the subconscious mind. The mind is a form, which exists in the nothingness. A composer composes a piece of music (not song) and the musicians make use of the musical instruments to play the music. The composer, the transcript, the musicians and the instruments are human beings and things. What is the nature of the music? We can hear it but we cannot touch it. We could listen to it and feel its existence. (a) Thinking is a biological and electrochemical function of our brain. The brain stores different kinds of informations. The mind based on the informations makes judgements. (b) Our conscience could be part of the mind. Existence could be classified Substance-existence and Non-substance existence. The mind belongs to Non-substance existence, like music. 6) Where is the mind situated? We feel its existence, like the existence of space. There are two schools of thinking. (a) The concept of the mind is a means by which the conscious brain understands its own operations. (b) The mind is directly analogous to computer software and the brain to hardware. If the mind is analoguous to computer software, then who makes the programm? Unquestionably, it must be God. Once we come to God, every questions could be solved and we don’t need to think and search for truth any more. Dreams are so valid when we are dreaming. In our dream we also think and feel sad, happy, frightened and worried. However, dreams are composed of chaotic episodes. When we are sleeping our brain is functioning. Could it be the dream a reflection of the brain? Could it be the mind a reflection of the brain too? A girl needs a mirror to do her make-up on her face. Her brain is working and we say she is thinking.The result of thinking, like the image of the girl’s face (after her make-up) in the mirror, is a reflection. The reflection is the main property of mind. No software is needed to drive the mind to think. The Mind Methametics is a language of science; so is the mind a special language of the brain. Just for convenience, I call it a brain-lanaguage. Its purposes are as follows: (a) It gathers the informations or instructions from the brain. (b) According to the necessity or situation at that moment, it tries to make the best arrangement from the informations to form an idea or concept. (c) Simutaneously, the idea or concept is sent back to the brain which will make judgement or decision. (d) Action is taken not by the mind but the brain. (e) Stimulated by our five senses the mind restrieves useful informations from the memory stored in the brain. The mind will use the informations to create ideas and concepts. (f) Once again the ideas or concepts are sent back to our brain to carry out instructions. The mind is not an entity like the soul or spirit which survives us and enjoys eternity. Heaven and Hell If we are capable to describe what the heaven and hell look like, then they could possiblily only exist in our mind. The sources that enable us to know what are they, should come from our experiences in life, just like happiness and sadness. People who might have suffered in the hell would have been burnt by fire because we think this is one of the most untelerable sufferings. Likewise, if we could enter the heaven, we will not worry about food, accomodation, etc. but enjoy the peace of mind, without any earthly worries. Both heaven and hell exist in our human world because we have created them in our mind. If we believe in God and behave what God wants us to do, we will have the blessings from God. In reality, good people always suffer more than the bad. Indeed, God has nothing to do with us. Once we are born, Natural Selection and our genes have controlled us and we term this as Fate. The above “Short Revision” needs to be ended here as I wish to talk more about the topics concerning this earthly world. Sigmund Freud Sigmund Freud's Theory is quite complex. His writings on psychosexual development set the groundwork for how our personalities developed. He believed that different driving forces develop during three stages that play an important role in how we interact with the world. Structural Model (id, ego, superego) Id According to Freud, we are born with our Id. The id is an important part of our personality because as newborns, it allows us to get our basic needs met. Freud believed that the id is based on our pleasure principle. In other words, the id wants whatever feels good at the time, with no consideration for the reality of the situation. When a child is hungry, the id wants food, and therefore the child cries. When the child needs are to be changed, the id cries. When the child is uncomfortable, in pain, too hot, too cold, or just wants attention, the id speaks up until his or her needs are met. The id doesn't care about reality, about the needs of anyone else, only its own satisfaction. If you think about it, babies are not real considerate of their parents' wishes. They have no care for time, whether their parents are sleeping, relaxing, eating dinner, or bathing. When the id wants something, nothing else is important. Ego Within the next three years, as the child interacts more and more with the world, the second part of the personality begins to develop. Freud called this part the Ego. The ego is based on the reality principle. The ego understands that other people have needs and desires and that sometimes being impulsive or selfish can hurt us in the long run. It is the ego's job to meet the needs of the id, while taking into consideration the reality of the situation. Superego By the age of five, or the end of the phallic stage of development, the Superego develops. The Superego is the moral part of us and develops due to the moral and ethical restraints placed on us by our caregivers. Many equate the superego with the conscience as it dictates our belief of right and wrong. In a healthy person, according to Freud, the ego is the strongest so that it can satisfy the needs of the id, not upset the superego, and still take into consideration the reality of every situation. Not an easy job by any means, but if the id gets too strong, impulses and self- gratification take over the person's life. If the superego becomes too strong, the person would be driven by rigid morals, would be judgmental and unbending in his or her interactions with the world. Topographical Model Freud believed that the majority of what we experience in our lives, the underlying emotions, beliefs, feelings, and impulses are not available to us at a conscious level. He believed that most of what drives us is buried in our unconscious. The Oedipus and Electra Complex, were both pushed down into the unconscious, out of our awareness due to the extreme anxiety they caused. While buried there, however, they continue to impact us dramatically according to Freud. The role of the unconscious is only one part of the model. Freud also believed that everything we are aware of is stored in our conscious. Our conscious makes up a very small part of who we are. In other words, at any given time, we are only aware of a very small part of what makes up our personality; most of what we are is buried and inaccessible. The final part is the preconscious or subconscious. This is the part of us that we can access if prompted, but is not in our active conscious. It is right below the surface, but still buried somewhat unless we search for it. Information such as our telephone number, some childhood memories, or the name of your best childhood friend is stored in the preconscious. Because the unconscious is so large, and because we are only aware of the very small conscious at any given time, this theory has been likened to an iceberg, where the vast majority is buried beneath the water's surface. The water, by the way, would represent everything that we are not aware of, have not experienced, and that has not been integrated into our personalities, referred to as the unconscious. Human Nature Confucius did not speak directly on such issues as the nature of human beings, the rights of the people against tyrannical rulers, and the influence of the supernatural in human affairs. Two of his 4th and 3rd century BC disciples, Mencius and Xunzi , did much to clarify these issues. Mencius asserted that human nature is good and that it can be developed not only by study, as Confucius had taught, but also by a process of cultivating one’s innate (inborn) tendencies. By this, Mencius meant cultivating our inclination toward compassion for the suffering of others, our disdain for doing what is wrong, and so forth. Like Confucius, Mencius believed that the Zhou rulers held their position under a doctrine known as the Mandate of Heaven; Heaven was thought to be the impersonal authority governing all the operations of the universe. Since the Mandate of Heaven was expressed by the acceptance of a ruler by the people, Mencius stated that if the people rose up and overthrew a tyrant, it was proof that Heaven had withdrawn its mandate. In the name of Heaven, Mencius claimed for the Chinese people the right of rebellion. Xunzi took an exactly opposite view of human nature; he asserted that humans have no innate dispositions that are genuinely virtuous. Xunzi was, however, sufficiently optimistic to believe in people’s unlimited capacity for improvement. He taught that through education, the study of the classics, and the practice of ritual, virtue could be acquired and order could be reestablished in society. Xunzi also argued that ritual practices are for the sake of shaping and expressing human emotions rather than influencing Heaven or ancestral spirits. The differences between Mencius and Xunzi might be summed up as follows. Mencius thought virtue was something that must be developed, as a tree grows from a sprout. Xunzi thought that human beings must be reshaped, as a piece of wood is carved into a useful object. I agree with Xunzi that humans have no innate dispositions that are genuinely virtuous. In fact we are inborn with only the “will to survive” as long as possible. Our personality or dispositions are decided by our genes and be reshaped ourselves to live in a better way than our competitors fellowmen. Biology of love Biological models of sex tend to view love as a mammalian drive, much like hunger or thirst. Helen Fisher, a leading expert in the topic of love, divides the experience of love into three partly-overlapping stages: lust, attraction, and attachment. Lust exposes people to others, romantic attraction encourages people to focus their energy on mating, and attachment involves tolerating the spouse long enough to rear a child into infancy. Lust is the initial passionate sexual desire that promotes mating, and involves the increased release of chemicals such as testosterone and estrogen. These effects rarely last more than a few weeks or months. Attraction is the more individualized and romantic desire for a specific candidate for mating, which develops out of lust as commitment to an individual mate forms. Recent studies in neuroscience have indicated that as people fall in love, the brain consistently releases a certain set of chemicals, including pheromones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, which act similar to amphetamines, stimulating the brain's pleasure center and leading to side-effects such as an increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement. Research has indicated that this stage generally lasts from one and a half to three years. Since the lust and attraction stages are both considered temporary, a third stage is needed to account for long-term relationships. Attachment is the bonding which promotes relationships that last for many years, and even decades. Attachment is generally based on commitments such as marriage and children, or on mutual friendship based on things like shared interests. It has been linked to higher levels of the chemicals oxytocin and vasopressin than short-term relationships have. Romantic love Even though there often appears to be traces of romance and love being intertwined in various cultures and socities throughout history, Gary Zukav, best selling author of Seat of the Soul and Soul Stories, views romantic love as being an illusion, stating that the concept of romantic love can never be truly fulfilling. He states that "Romance is your desire to make yourself complete through another person rather than through your own inner work.", thusly isolating the idea of romance from the concept of "true love." His argument is that "real love" is more beneficial than romantic involvement alone. Romantic love may, then, be a sexual love that attempts to transcend, in some cases entirely, mere needs driven by physical appearances, sexual desire, or material and social gain. This transcending, ultimately, implies not just that personality is more essential, which could be considered a truism, and a view that might appear without much regard to virtue, ranging from the noble to the most shallow character. Rather, romance tends to strive to see, or suppose it can see, personality as attractive in a fundamentally higher sense. Romantic love is contrasted with Platonic love which in all usages precludes sexual relations, yet only in the modern usage does it take on a fully asexual sense, rather than the classical sense in which sexual drives are sublimated. Sublimation tends to be forgotten in casual thought about love aside from its emergence in psychoanalysis. Tragedy and other social issues of romance The tragic contradiction between romance and society is most forcibly portrayed in Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, in Flaubert's Madame Bovary, and of course Romeo and Juliet. The female protagonists in such stories are driven to suicide as if dying for a cause of freedom from various oppressions of marriage. Later modern philosophers such as La Rochefoucauld, Hume and Rousseau also focused on morality, but desire was central to French thought, and Hume himself tended to adopt a French worldview and temperament. Desire in this milieu meant a very general idea termed "the passions," and this general interest was distinct from the contemporary idea of "passionate" now equated with "romantic." Love was a central topic again in the subsequent movement of Romanticism, which focused on such things as absorption in nature and the absolute, as well as Platonic and unrequited love in German philosophy and literature. Hundreds of popular authors, poets, artists and musicians have written, painted or composed their books, paintings and master pieces of music about love. They have greatly enriched the culture of mankind and from love we could see the beauty of life. What is the drive behind them? I believe it is the sublimation of the sexual drive which Freud termed it as libido. Properties of romantic love include these: It cannot be easily controlled. It is not overtly (initially at least) predicated on a desire for sex as a physical act. If requited, it may be the basis for lifelong commitment. Anna Karenina(Tolstoy’s novel) is a married woman with a son. She felt in love at the first sight with a man. Both of the man and woman are handsome and beautiful. Without doubt they had been attracted to each other by their physical apperance. They had been entirely controlled by their own libido. At the beginning, they thought they could love each other without having sex but later it was the sex which made them crazy. Finally due to jealousy Anna Karenina committed suicide and to her this was a kind of lifelong commitment. In the novel “A Tale Of Two Cities”by Charles Dickens, Sydney Carton sacrificed his life for the husband of his beloved Miss Manette under the French Guillotine. Miss Manette had never loved him but only treated him as a friend whom could be confided with. The last moment before he was beheaded by the Guillotine, he had shown not the least the fear of death. Instead, he had comforted and given support to a woman who were next to him to be beheaded. He looked sublime and prophetic - written in the last paragrath of the novel. The libido in him had been totally sublimated for a good course. He felt the greatness in him. Leonarodo Da Vinci (1452 - 1519) one of the greatest painters in the human history , had once defenced himself against the charge of irreligion: Such carping critics would do better to keep silent. For that is the way to become acquainted with the Creator of so many wonderful things, and this is the way to love so great an Inventor. For in truth great love springs from great knowledge of the beloved object, and if you know it but little you will be able to love it only a little or not at all. His investigations extended to practically every branch of natural science, and in every single one he was a discoverer or at least a prophet and pioneer. He pointed out that the sun does not move. Leonardo had prescribed the study of nature as a rule for the painter. The passion for study had become dominant, and he had no longer wished to acquire learning for the sake of art, but learning for the sake of learning. He did not love and hate, but asked himself about the origin and significance of what he was to love or hate. He has investigated instead of loving.The stormy passions of a nature that inspires and consumes, passions in which other men have enjoyed their richest experience, appear not to have touched him. He had craved for knowledge and lost himself in admiration and filled with true humility. Freud belived that the instinct to investigate is due to sexual reinforcement. Through subliimation, the sexual drive has been replaced by other aims which may be valued more highly and which are not sexual. Love is possessive No lovers would like to share their partners with the third person. Lovers married or not would treat their partner as his or her own property. In the animal world, the animals have mattings with any partners they meet and would part without any sentiment after having satified their sexal needs. Animals are more generous as they do not have intention to possess any partner as their own properties. However, we human beings, get hold tightly on their own properties while looking for another partners to satisfy their sexal desire. It is our cultures which have been oringinated from religions and humanities to forbid us not to behave as animals do. Animal Plus Let us imagine that at one time, our earth were destroyed by the nucleus war or collided by a planet and all living things were annihilated. However, a little amount of the DNA or genes could survive this disaster. Then it will take another billion years to let human beings and other living things to be reborn but our present civilization will be completely wiped off. The first man to be born would be like our ancestors at the Stone Age starting everything from scratch again. What makes us different from animals is our civilization. Human beings are capable to create different cultures. We have found the basic unit, the family that is the foundation to build stable and prosperous societies. The reasons people marry vary, but usually include one or more of the following: legal, social and economic stability; the formation of a family unit; procreation and the education and nurturing of children; legitimizing sexual relations; public declaration of love. Without civilizations, we are just animals. Beauty In attractiveness studies, averageness is one of the characteristics of physical beauty in which the average phenotype, i.e. outward appearance, of the individual theoretically characterizes averaged phenotypes, thus indicating health and fertility. The majority of averageness studies and theories have to do with photographic overlay studies. Other factors involved in measuring attractiveness are symmetry and youthfulness. In 1883, Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin, devised a technique called composite photography. This phenomenon is now known as "averageness-effect", that is highly physically attractive tend to be indicative of the average traits of the population Another feature of beautiful women that has been explored by researchers is a waist-to-hip ratio of approximately 0.70 for women. The concept of waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) was developed by psychologist Devendra Singh of the University of Texas at Austin. Physiologists have shown that this ratio accurately indicates most women's fertility. Traditionally, in premodern ages when food was more scarce, fat people were judged more attractive than slender. Inner beauty is a concept used to describe the positive aspects of something that is not physically observable. While most species use physical traits and pheromones to attract mates, humans claim to rely on the inner beauty of their choices. Qualities including kindness, sensitivity, tenderness or compassion, creativity and intelligence have been said to be desirable since antiquity. However new research comparing what humans claim to find attractive to their actual mating habits underlines the superficiality of "inner beauty," underlining the fact that the human animal relies on physical traits and pheromones just like every other animal to find a mate. That said, whether "inner beauty" does or does not measurably affect humans' mating habits, some traits classified as "inner beauty" do give an evolutionary survival advantage to either the individual or mating couple or group or all three. In mathematics and the arts, two quantities are in the golden ratio if the ratio between the sum of those quantities and the larger one is the same as the ratio between the larger one and the smaller. The golden ratio is approximately 1.6180339887. The subjective experience of "beauty" often involves the interpretation of some entity as being in balance and harmony with nature, which may lead to feelings of attraction and emotional well-being. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is a common phrase attributed to this concept. The characterization of a person as beautiful, whether on an individual basis or by community consensus, is often based on some combination of inner beauty, which includes psychological factors such as personality, intelligence, grace, charm and elegance, and outer beauty, which includes physical factors, such as health, youthfulness, symmetry, averageness, and complexion. Symmetry may be important because it is evident that the person grew up in a healthy way, without visible genetic defects. Although style and fashion vary widely, cross-cultural research has found a variety of commonalities in people's perception of beauty. Large eyes and a clear complexion, for example, are considered beautiful in both men and women in all cultures. Some researchers have suggested that neonatal features are inherently attractive and thus likely to be found beautiful. Youthfulness in general is associated with beauty. Animal studies show that diseased mothers give birth to offspring that show greater asymmetries. From human studies, it is known that women with asymmetrical breasts are less fertile than those with greater symmetry. increasing symmetry of face shape increases ratings of attractiveness for both male and female faces. These findings imply facial symmetry may have a positive impact on mate selection in humans. This, and other recent scientific findings, have been tested empirically on perceived "beautiful people" in Hollywood and researchers found that on a percentage basis the highest rating of symmetry was achieved by actress Cate Blanchett. Youthfulness generally is associated with fertility. Men and women, however, have different fertility curves; subsequently, men and women age differently. Men, in some cases can continue to reproduce into their 70s, whereas for women, it is generally difficult to conceive past age 45. Outward physical appearance tends to exemplify inner fertility levels. In the early 20s, for example, the female breasts have become fully swollen, but have not yet begun to sag. Similarly, the age of maximum fecundity for the female, i.e. the age at which she is most likely to be successful at bringing her fetus to term is age. In terms of mate trait desireabilities, aside from such common wants such as sincerity and faithfulness, "youthfulness" tops the list for men, whereas with women "economic capacity" is the highest rated. Morality Morality means an ideal code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, whether by society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience. There is no absolute concept of morality and henceforth, morality is not a universal concept that is adaptable to different tribes, races, and countries. Morality is made and designed by man at a time during which people could live together in harmony. Indeed, morality is a kind of laws but it is not to be enforced by punishments but by the conscience of every person living in that society at that time. People are taught to believe what is good and what is bad and they should behave what they have been taught since their childhood. Society only accept the good and reject the bad. In Genesis. 19, when God decided to overturn and destroy the five cities of the plain, he sent angels to rescue Lot and his family (Lot was the nephew of Abraham). The men of Sodom sought to rape the angels (19:5). Lot offers the men his daughters instead, who he says are virgins (19:8), but the men are not interested, for they had been practicing homosexuality. Two angels were sent to Sodom to forewarn Lot of the dreadful catastrophe about to happen. The angels took Lot, his wife, and his daughters by hand and drew them forcibly out of their house, saying, "Save yourselves with all haste. Look not behind you. Get as fast as you are able to the mountain, unless you be involved in the calamity of the city." Lot entreated the angels, who consented that he might retire to Zoar, which was one of the five doomed cities. His wife, looking back on Sodom, was turned into a pillar of salt. “Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth: Come let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father.…Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father…..” Genesis,19 Lot left Zoar and retired with his two daughters to a cave in an adjacent mountain. In Gen. 19:30-38, Lot's daughters incorrectly believed they were the only females to have survived the devastation. They assumed it was their responsibility to bear children and enable the continuation of the human race. On two subsequent nights, according to the plan of the older daughter, they got their father drunk enough to have sexual intercourse with them, drunk enough that he is described as being unaware of what was happening. By him each became pregnant. “Abraham journeyed from thence toward the south country , and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur and sojourned in Gerar. And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister: and Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah. …And Abraham said, Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife’s sake. And that indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.” Genesis 19, 20 Abraham was afraid that the king of Gerar would kill him if he did not give his wife to the king. At the time of Abraham woman was probably only a property of man. The men of Sodom wanted to rape the angels so Lot offered his daughters who were virgins, to the men. However, as the men were homosexual and the two girls escaped from being raped. Later, the two daughters had sexual intercourse with their father so that human race could continue to survive. Survival of the fittest is the criteria to establish the morality of man. Virtue Virtue is moral excellence of a person. A virtue is a trait valued as being good. The conceptual opposite of virtue is vice. The four classic Western virtues are: Temperance, prudence. fortitude, justice This enumeration is traced to Greek philosophy, being listed by both Plato and Socrates. In Christianity, the theological virtues are faith, hope and love. Some virtues recognized by Western Cultures: Ease of manner, courtesy, openness, and friendliness. “Mercy” —Mildness and gentleness. "Dignity" — A sense of self-worth, personal pride. "Tenacity" — Strength of mind, the ability to stick to one's purpose. "Fragileness" — Economy and simplicity of style, without being miserly. "Gravity" — A sense of the importance of the matter at hand, responsibility and earnestness. "Respectability" — The image that one presents as a respectable member of society. "Humanity" — Refinement, civilization, learning, and being cultured. "Industriousness" — Hard work. "Dutifulness" — More than religious piety; a respect for the natural order socially, politically, and religiously. Includes the ideas of patriotism and devotion to others. "Prudence" — Foresight, wisdom, and personal discretion. "Wholesomeness" — Health and cleanliness. “Sternness" — Gravity, self-control. "Truthfulness" — Honesty in dealing with others. Virtues of Islam RIGHTEOUSNESS, GENEROSITY, CONTENTMENT, HUMILITY , KI NDNESS, COURTESY, PURITY, GOOD WISDOM, JUSTICE, RESPECT SPEECH, MERCY, DIGNITY, FIRMNESS, FRANKNESS, PATIENCE , SELF-RESTRAINT, PERSEVERANCE, BALANCE / MODERATION, UNITY, FRUGALITY, SINCERITY, LOYALTY, REPENTANCE, RESPONSIBILITY, SPIRITUALITY Buddhist virtues Buddhist practice as outlined in the Noble Eightfold Path can be regarded as a progressive list of virtues. Right Viewpoint - Realizing the Four Noble Truths Right Values - Commitment to mental and ethical growth in moderation Right Speech - One speaks in a non hurtful, not exaggerated, truthful way Right Actions - Wholesome action, avoiding action that would do harm Right Livelihood - One's job does not harm in any way oneself or others; directly or indirectly (weapon maker, drug dealer, etc.) Right Effort - One makes an effort to improve Right Mindfulness - Mental ability to see things for what they are with clear consciousness Right Meditation - State where one reaches enlightenment and the ego has disappeared Virtues and values Virtues can be placed into a broader context of values. Each individual has a core of underlying values that contribute to our system of beliefs, ideas and/or opinions. Integrity in the application of a value ensures its continuity and this continuity separates a value from beliefs, opinion and ideas. In this context a value (e.g., Truth or Equality or Greed) is the core from which we operate or react. Societies have values that are shared among many of the participants in that culture. An individual's values typically are largely, but not entirely, in agreement with their culture's values. Individual virtues can be grouped into one of four categories of values: Ethics (virtue - vice, good - bad, moral - immoral - amoral, right - wrong, permissible - impermissible) Aesthetics (beautiful, ugly, unbalanced, pleasing) Doctrinal (political, ideological, religious or social beliefs and values) Innate/Inborn (inborn values such as reproduction and survival, a controversial category) A value system is the ordered and prioritized set of values (usually of the ethical and doctrinal categories described above) that an individual or society holds. Virtue and vice The opposite of a virtue is a vice. One way of organizing the vices is as the corruption of the virtues. Thus the cardinal vices would be folly, venality, cowardice and lust. The Christian theological vices would be blasphemy, despair, and hatred. However, as Aristotle noted, the virtues can have several opposites. Virtues can be considered the mean between two extremes. For instance, both cowardice and rashness are opposites of courage; contrary to prudence are both over-caution and insufficient caution. A more "modern" virtue, tolerance, can be considered the mean between the two extremes of narrow-mindedness on the one hand and soft-headedness on the other. Vices can therefore be identified as the opposites of virtues, but each virtue could have many different opposites, all distinct from each other. Altruism and Selfishness Let me make a “scale” on one end of it is Altruism and on the other end is Selfishness. A bee could die for its own queen and race and this is an example that the altruism goes to the extreme. A man from a well-off family would not give a loaf to a child who is dying from hunger. This is another extreme example of selfishness. Man needs to live together in harmony. While we struggle to work hard to better our life, we need to mind not to hurt other people’s well being. In a more ideal society, every person could survive and enjoy at least a basic living standard. The standard and value of different kinds of virtues are different from different societies. Virtues are designed and made by people. It is not necessary to set a goal that we need to be a virtuous person. Our behavior is controlled by our thought. If we use the Scale of Altruism and Selfishness to measure and direct our thought before we act, we will not be far away from the acceptable morality of the society in which we live at that moment. By using this “Scale”, we will have more freedom to think and act. Knowledge and wisdom are the necessary tools to assist us to use the “Scale”. Human Territorial Functioning (By Ralph B. Taylor) What is the territorial instinct? According to Ardrey, it is the command to defend one’s property. The disposition to defend a territory is innate. The command to defend it is likewise innate. Thus to appropriate space is the territory principle. There are three psychological factors that motivate territorial behavior : security, stimulation and identity. Security is provided by the safe locus of the territory. Stimulation is provided by the defense and interchanges that occur at the boundary. Identification is provided by the overall meaning of the territory. Besides territory, war also satisfies all three of these needs. The territory imperative is pervasive, demanding and unavoidable. Conflicts and competition are inevitable, because we are just built that way. Differences in society, such as between the rich and the poor, merely mirror internal, genetically based differences in heritage. The poor in our society somehow deserve their position. Consequently, efforts at social reform, such as “ war on poverty” are fundamentally futile. Religions of the proto-human Religions were created to give proto-humans a feeling of security in an insecure world, and a feeling of control over the environment where there was little control. For the first time, they became aware that their life was transient; they would die at some point in their future. This knowledge produced an intolerable emotional drain. During their evolution from proto-human to full human, they developed questions about themselves and their environment: What controlled the seasonal cycles of nature -- the daily motion of the sun; the motion of the stars, the passing of the seasons, etc. What controlled their environment -- what or who caused floods, rains, dry spells, storms, etc? What controls fertility -- of the tribe, its domesticated animals, and its crops. What system of morality is needed to best promote the stability of the tribe? And above all: what happens to a person after they die? Living in a pre-scientific society, people had no way to resolve these questions. Even today, with all of our scientific advances, we still debate about the second last question, and still have no way of reaching an consensus on the last. But the need for answers (particularly to the last question) were so important that some response was required, even if they were merely based on hunches. Some people within the tribe started to invent answers based on their personal guesses. Thus developed: The first religious belief system, The first priesthood, The first set of rituals to appease the Goddess, Other rituals to control fertility and other aspects of the environment, A set of behavioral expectations for members of the tribe, and A set of moral truths to govern human behavior. Religions today: Some observers believe that the main function of religions today is to provide their followers with a feeling of security. John Shelby Spong, retired bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA has written: "Religion is primarily a search for security and not a search for truth. Religion is what we so often use to bank the fires of our anxiety. That is why religion tends toward becoming excessive, neurotic, controlling and even evil. That is why a religious government is always a cruel government. People need to understand that questioning and doubting are healthy, human activities to be encouraged not to be feared. Insecurity is something to be grasped and treasured. A true and healthy religious system will encourage each of these activities. A sick and fearful religious system will seek to remove them." David C. James, rector of St. John's Episcopal Church & Diocesan Mission Center in Olympia, WA, wrote: Many times when we think we are worshipping God, we are actually comforting our very fragile egos. I’m not so naïve as to assume that we build temple and erect altars to ourselves…directly. But our core need to been safe, secure and sound mandates that we construct reality systems that will support us. Let me quote Bertrand Russell statement: “Religion is based, I think primarily and mainly upon fear – fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand.” Fear is one of several very basic emotions and it is an instinct. It is a survival mechanism, and usually occurs in response to a specific negative stimulus. With this instinct our anciently man could survive in the world ruled by jungle laws. If someone was struck by lighting, then they would think this was the act of God. Fear has overcome them by natural disasters such as flood, bush-fire, landslide, earthquakes and many others. Religions were created to give people a feeling of security in an insecure world, and a feeling of control over the environment where there was little control. A plague, called The Black Death (1347 – 1350 AD) swept over Europe, causing widespread hysteria and death. One third of the population of Europe died. The primary culprits in transmitting this disease were oriental rat fleas carried on the back of the black rats. The Christian church said it was God’s will, but the reason for this awful punishment was unknown. “God have mercy upon us all!” said the bishop. As a matter of fact, there was nothing to do with God. God had nothing to forgive the people. The lack of medical knowledge had caused the plague. Ignorance had created fear that had overcome all the people in Europe. The virus H5N1 and SARS could have killed one fourth of the world population if our present medical knowledge could not cope with the spread of the virus. Churches and temples in fact are organizations. Like political parties, they have their own goals and the party members have faith in their parties and their leaders. The way to run a church or a temple is similar as running a political party. Power struggle among the leaders of the church exists just like that in a political party. Churches of different religions claim their God is the only true God. In the history of mankind different kinds of wars have been started by different kinds of religions when their conflicts of interests could not be compromised. Human beings were supposed to be created by God but according to Christian belief we are born sinners because our first parents Adam and Eve had committed the Original Sin. Our first mother Eve, disobeyed God and she ate the fruits from the Tree of the Kowledge of Evil and Good. After having eaten the fruits both Adam and Eve felt shameful for they found that they were naked. God does not want mankind to have any knowledge at all. Do we want our children to have more knowledge than ourselves? Shall we be jealous at our own children if they are more intelligent than us? On what ground that we should be born sinners ? Sigmund Freud’s Concept of Religion Humanity has suffered from three principle types of narcissism: the belief that we are the center of the universe, the belief that we are the center/goal of nature and the belief that we are always "master of our own house." For Freud, it is the feeling of helplessness, occurring in a number of different areas, namely external dangers, internal impulses, death, and society. As wish-fulfilling illusions, religious faith and gods had specific tasks. They must exorcize the terrors of nature, they must reconcile men to the cruelty of Fate, particularly as it is shown in death, and they must compensate them for the sufferings which a civilized life in common has imposed on them. The first, of course, would be the feeling of helplessness before the awesome and unpredictable powers of nature - mortal dangers from the external world. We are confronted in life by many uncontrollable dangers, from hurricanes to disease. Freud made much of the similarities between religious rituals and obsessional rituals (for example, the compulsive need to wash your hands in a specific pattern every time), the latter of which functioned to protect the ego from the emergence of fantasies, desires, and especially sexual impulses which were normally repressed. In the ritual, however, they gain some partial expression and release. Freud saw "neurosis as an individual religion, religion as a universal obsessional neurosis." The suppression of certain instinctual impulses, exclusively components of the sexual instinct, are socially harmful instincts. Anyone who has noticed the Christian obsession with sexual matters, and particularly with the constant efforts to repress and deny most forms of sexual expression, will find that even if Freud is not entirely correct, he has certainly hit upon something important. The issue of "illusion" is another very important part of Freud's critique of religion. At all times we must keep in mind that he drew a sharp distinction between "illusion" and "delusion," using only the former to describe religious beliefs. Illusions, including those of religion, are such not because of their content but by their sources. Calling religious beliefs illusions does not automatically deny them any sort of validity - they may, after all, even come true. Their problem lies in their source: undisciplined and uncritical human wishes. Freud was particularly dismayed at attempts to defend religious faith by arguing that if they could not be absolutely proven wrong, then people are perfectly justified in believing them anyway. Ignorance is ignorance; no right to believe anything can be derived from it. CHECKED ******************* Religion versus Philosophy Before we try to understand how important is the role, played by religion in the world, let us examine the following data regarding the distribution of different kinds of religion and the population of different countries in the world. The Christian Science Monitor newspaper in a 1998 article "Top 10 Organized Religions in the World" provides a further example, listing the largest "organized religions": 1 Christianity 1.9 billion Has the most followers and most widespread presence of all well-recognized religions. Predominant religion in Europe, the Americas, Southern Africa, Oceania, and the Philippines. 2 Islam 1.1 billion A widespread religion with many countries majority Muslim, particularly in the Middle East, South Asia, Maritime Southeast Asia, Central Asia, North Africa, West Africa and some parts of Eastern Europe. 3 Hinduism 781 million Umbrella term for various Hindu denominations forming the majority in India, Nepal, North Eastern province of Sri Lanka, and the Bali & Java sub-province of Indonesia, parts of Latin America, Eastern Africa, Australia, USA and UK. 4 Buddhism 324 million Largely in East Asia and the Mainland Southeast Asia, and small parts of South Asia and Russia. 5 Sikhism 19 million Mostly in the Indian Punjab; also large numbers in other parts of India and the United Kingdom, the USA, Canada, Malaysia and Southeast Asia, Germany and East Africa. 6 Judaism 14 million A widespread religion with a majority in Israel; large populations in North America, Western Europe, and South America. 7 Bah ' Faith 6.1 million Youngest of the group of 10, second most widely dispersed religion after Christianity; fastest growing (percentage) of top 10. 8 Confucianism 5.3 million Mostly in China proper; and in Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam. 9 Jainism 4.9 million Mostly in India. 10 Shinto 2.8 million Mostly in (and formerly the state religion of) Japan. The total number of belivers of different kinds of religions is about 4.157 billion. World Population The world population is the total number of humans on Earth at a given time. In September 2007, the world's population is believed to have reached over 6.6 billion. In line with population projections, this figure continues to grow at rates that were unprecedented before the 20th century, although the rate of increase has almost halved since its peak, which was reached in 1963, of 2.2 percent per year. The world's population is expected to reach over 9 billion by the year 2050. The following shows estimates of when each billion milestone was or will be met: Population 1 billion 2 billion 3 billion 4 billion 5 billion 6 billion 7 billion 8 billion 9 billion Year 1804 1927 1961 1974 1987 1999 2011 2024 2042 The 17 most populous nations Population by region, 2005 The 15 most populous nations From DSW-Datareport 2006 ("Deutsche Stiftung Weltbev lkerung"): China: 1.32 billion (about 20% of world population) India: 1.12 billion (about 17%) United States: 300 million (about 4.6%) Indonesia: 225 million (about 3.5%) Brazil: 186 million (about 2.8%) Pakistan: 165 million (about 2.5%) Bangladesh: 147 million (about 2.3%) Russia: 143 million (about 2.2%) Nigeria: 135 million (about 2.1%) Japan: 128 million (about 2.0%) Mexico: 108 million (about 1.7%) Vietnam: 87 million (about 1.3%) Philippines: 86 million (about 1.3%) Germany: 82 million (about 1.3%) Egypt: 75 million (about 1.2%) Ethiopia: 75 million (about 1.2%) Turkey: 73 million (about 1.2%) The total population of the above 15 nations is about 4.455 billion. The more updated world population (updated to 2007) is estimated to be 6.6 billion. Based on the above data, we could estimate 63% of the world population is the believers of certain kind of religions. I think the percentage of the believers is much higher than that. Undoubtedly, religion has tremendous influence on our societies all over the world. We should not be surprised that morality is mostly built on the teachings of religions. Religion could satisfy people’s needs. When the emotions of fear and the feelings of being helplessness, God will help us to encounter the problems and at least will render us with great comfort. If the problems could not be solved after seeking help from God through praying, then this should be the will of God. We are bound to suffer and we accept the fate for the eternal happiness is waiting for us at the other world known as heaven. What could the philosophers offer us? They tell us to seek the absolute truth and knowledge. They tell us to behave in the ways that they think are right. They are human beings just as what we are. On what ground that we should believe them. Now we could draw a conclusion that influence of religion is greatly bigger than that of philosophy on the societies all over the world. The reason is simple. We mankind need religion. Painful to be an atheist What is the origin of man's religion? Why does every culture in the world worship some divine being? Anthropologists and historians have studied this question, and presently there are three primary theories: the subjective theory, the evolutionary theory, and the theory of original monotheism. The subjective theory teaches that religion originates with man. Humans have a psychological need for a transcendent being that provides meaning and hope to their existence in this vast impersonal universe. Adherents of this view believe that this religious makeup exists below our conscious awareness. Cultures have various views of reality according to their experience, but the awareness and desire for religion is a universal phenomenon. They therefore conclude that this disposition lies in our subconscious. In other words, our beliefs about a transcendent being are not the result of external realities or interactions with such a being. Rather, these beliefs derive from our psyches. These feelings are expressed in more concrete terms through symbols and attitudes, not through a set of defined belief systems. As a culture progresses, these symbols and attitudes are developed into a set of beliefs and practices. Several proponents were important in promoting this theory. Friedrich Schleiermacher believed that religion began with a feeling of dependence. This led to a need for an object to depend on which resulted in the idea of God. Ludwig Feuerbach taught that the concept of God is really a picture of an idealized person. Sigmund Freud believed that God derived from the basic human need for a father image. The idealized father figure becomes our image of God. The subjective theory may teach us about human nature, but it does not adequately explain the origin of religion or where this universal desire to know and understand God comes from. Dr. Winfried Corduan writes, "I may carry in my subconscious mind an abstract representation of God, but I cannot on that basis conclude that there is no independently existing, objective being that is God. God may have created me with that idea so that I can relate to God." Every effect has a cause. What is the cause of this powerful desire for a relationship with God? If we are the products of a divine creator, that would explain this universal drive in all mankind to know Him because He placed this desire within us. The Bible provides answers to the questions the subjective theory cannot answer. Genesis 1 states that we are created in the image of God. Therefore, we were created in the image of God with the intent to have a relationship with Him. Romans 1:20 states that all men have ingrained in their hearts a knowledge of God. Chapter 2 states that our conscience testifies that a moral law giver exists. The desire for God is a basic part of human nature. I have attempted to argue that the universe was not created by God and I have tried not to be biased to be against God while writing this essay. It is our human nature to believe in God. I might have a more peaceful mind if I do believe in God. However, the passion for seeking knowledge and truth is stronger in me. I do respect religions but wars raised by religions should not be happened and the passion for seeking knowledge and truth should not be affected by religions. King Chung Lee 7 March, 2008

---

Amber- Inching us closer to the past as we trod on into the future Introduction Millions of years ago, when plants were injured, they secreted globs of stick resin. This aromatic resin oozed down the sides of trees. This resin filled out fissures, thereby preventing infections to the cells. Sometimes the amber has air bubbles trapped in it. This air of the prehistoric times give us conclusions to the air that the dinosaurs breathed Sometimes this amber, attracts insects, that remain or get trapped in this natural trap. The resin solidifies over them and they remain in perfect preservation. Amber is used in Ornaments, but for scientists they are priceless. Amber is a Chemical Properties Heterogeneous, it is made of several resinous bodies that are partially/wholly soluble in alcohol, ether, and chloroform. Amber is a macromolecule by free radical polymerization of several precursors in the labdane family, communic acid, cummunol and biformene These labdanes are diterpenes (C20H32) and trienes which means that the organic skeleton has three alkene groups available for polymerization. As amber matures over the years, more polymerization will take place as well as isomerization reactions, cross-linking and cyclization. The average composition of amber leads to the general formula C10H16O Life Preserved Different species embalmed in amber include: flies, ants, beetles, moths, spiders, centipedes, millipedes, termites, mayflies, lice, mites, gnats, bees, wasps, scorpions, cockroachs, grasshoppers, lizards,damselflies and fleas. One Dominican amber source reported finding a butterfly with a 5 inch wing spread; this is both a large and unusual find, most butterfly specimens are no more than a 2 inch wing spread. Inclusions in Dominican amber are numerous, 1 inclusion to every 100 pieces; Baltic amber contains approximately 1 inclusion to every 1000 pieces. Species of spore-producing (gynmosperms) and seed-producing flowering plants (angiosperms) have been identified in amber. Gymnosperm enclosures are fir, cypress, juniper, pine, spruce and Arbor vitae. Angiosperms are represented by oaks (as many as 15 different kinds of oak), beech, maple, chestnut, magnolia, and cinnamon. Remains of palms, ferns, mosses, and flowering herbaceous plants also formed a ground cover in the ancient forests. Leaf imprints with detailed vein and cell structures are preserved, along with buds and blossoms. Even mushrooms, mammal bones, feathers, and mammal hair may be preserved in amber. Uses In the 1920's one-half of the production of amber went for the manufacture of articles for smokers, cigar/cigarette-holders, mouth-pieces for pipes. The main finished products of amber can be divided into four categories: jewelry, smoking articles, objects of art, and devotional articles. Jewelry includes necklaces, bracelets, brooches, earrings, pendants, finger rings, cufflinks, teething rings for children, etc. Smoking articles were mentioned above. Another utilitarian use was with balls of amber, that were used to remove lint from clothing because of the ability to generate static electricity by rubbing! Objects of art are items like: carvings, jewelry boxes, cups and dishes, writing utensils, ornaments, chess sets, mosaic pictures, chandeliers. View the beautiful amber ship and amber cabinet. The ship was created in Königsberg by 1934, while the amber cabinet was made in Königsberg before 1742 and currently located in Dresden, Germany. A stunning ornamental amber egg was presented to Gdansk, Poland in honor of the city's 1000th anniversary (!) from a Mrs. Heidrun Mohr-Mayer. Other objects of art include devotional items, such as: Catholic, Moslem and Buddist rosaries, sacred figures, and amulets. Amber is used in skin care products, and for some, amber has magical powers so that red and green amber become metaphysical tools (page down for the amber tools). Amber and other fossil resins have a practical side too when they are used for varnish and lacquers, and burned as incense. In ancient times the aroma was appreciated in order to camouflage the odor of spoiled food. Modern resin or gum (pine pitch) is used in the production of rosin, turpentine, creams and oils for the perfume industry Fine amber varnish is applied to violins. Future Applications Future Applications for amber are diverse, But as of now they are helping greatly for scientists to decode the Earth’s mystery, and past. In future however they may be used for many purposes, there are chances that they may push us closer and closer to the prehistoric unidentified life – forms which were unknown to man.

---

Extra Sensory Perception -ESP Introduction Extrasensory perception (ESP) is the alleged ability to obtain information by paranormal means, independent of any known physical senses or deduction from previous experiences. Many of Us have come across situations such As when and Where we get the intuition, A gut instinct as some like to call it about what will happen in the immediate future. Technically what we obtain as a “vision of the future” Is called, The Phenomenal Ability of extra-sensory perception (Hereby Referred to as ESP.) We Use our five senses namely, Sense of Touch, Taste, Smell, Sight (Vision), Hearing (Auditory) Senses. However in ESP We do not use any of our five senses mentioned above ESP is also known as the “sixth sense”, Literally meaning Awareness Experienced outside the five physical senses. ESP gives us information that are normally not conveyed by our five physical senses. Experiments Conducted In This Field Usually Zener Cards are used to conduct these experiments. These Cards are similar in physical structure and have different symbols on them like a star, a cross, Curvy lines, A circle, a square, etc. Experiments are carried out in this subject exhaustively, Though they are confined to these four areas, namely 1) Telepathy 2) Clairvoyance 3) Precognition 4) Psychokinesis Telepathy Experiments In such experiments, A person tries to read the mind of the one conducting the experiment, By guessing the nature of the Zener cards the person is holding It involves the sending of thoughts, Knowledge or other similar characteristics, without any apparent medium It is often called transference Clairvoyance Experiments In such situations, a person is mentally aware of an object that is visually unreachable. Eg. an event or a person In the exp. A person tries to identify the Zener cards, through various methods without visual help(or without seeing them) When the number of correct guesses is higher than the average person achieves, that person has ESP. Precognition Experiments The Experiments conducted with help of the Telepathy or Clairvoyance abilities to correctly predict the sequence of events before they actually occur. Eg. Guessing the values obtained in the sequence when a die is thrown Psychokineisis Experiments. In such experiments a person tries to control an external physical object by concentrating on it, Eg. A person may toss a coin and concentrate to cause “heads” to appear The Current Status of ESP and Parapsychological Research Among scientists in the National Academy of Sciences, 96% described themselves as "skeptical" of ESP, although 2% believed in ESP and 10% felt that parapsychological research should be encouraged. There are immense Possibilities in this Field, If it can be harnessed successfully.

---

Gelatin is used in many products. From medicine capsules to photograhy film. I would like to start a thread so some of the chemistry brains out there may help me understand the full process that gelatin undergoes when it is crosslinked by one means or another. Below is what I have so far and I ask for any corrections, additions or deletions please. I am also favorable to any type of discussion concerning crosslinking gelatin. The writing of mine below pertains to crosslinking gelatin with Ammonium dichromate as a sensitizer and then exposed to light but many other processes/chemicals can be used to crosslink the gelatin. So here is what I have so far. As you read you will come across questions that are questions that I still need help with..hint, hint. Basics of Gelatin Type A - Acid process used in production of product. Primarily pork skins. Type B - Alkaline process used in production of product. Primarily cattle hides. Type B (bovine) - Alkaline process used in production of product. Specifically cattle bone. According to one supplier, this type may contain small amounts of silver salts which could increase speed of Silver Halide films although it was unknown how much (if any) effect this might have. Bloom Stength - This is a standard measurement that determines hardness of gelatin after a specific period of time. The higher the Bloom number the harder the gelatin. The Mechanics of Gelatin in the Dichromated Holography Process There is a lot of information available on collagen, gelatin and Dichromated Gelatin (DCG) holography but a paper that ties together these facets and can be understood by the amateur holographer is simply hard if not impossible to find. The scope of this paper is to finally bring together a concise understanding of what is happening in the DCG process. As it is impossible to footnote exact portions studied from other works because I intend to combine all research, I will simply put the credit due to the works I studied at the bottom of this paper and leave it up to the reader to research the individual papers for verification of the information I found. Collagen Collagen is a protein found in the skin, bones, tendons, cartilage, teeth, ligaments and connective tissue. It is the supporting structure for most body tissue. The collagen molecule is about 300nm long and 1.5nm in diameter. It is made up of three polypeptide strands, each of which is a left handed helix. These three left handed helices are wound together into a right handed triple helix. The strands are stabilized by hydrogen bonds. There is also some covalent crosslinking within the collagen molecule and crosslinking between molecules. The more crosslinking the less soluble to water the collagen is. The smallest amino acid is Glycine and it is this amino acid that resides on the inside of the triple helix structure with its hydrogen atom facing inward. Two more common amino acids are Proline and Hydroxyproline and face outward. This gives the polypeptide chain its characteristic helical shape(2,3,4,5). If collagen is hydrolyzed, the three amino chains are separated into a random glob, while still being bonded to adjacent chains with a peptide bonds and some hydrogen bonding. This is now the nature of gelatin. Because the structured arrangement has been broken down, the gelatin will have partial triple helices with loose ends bonded to other polypeptide strands and loose polypeptide strands bonded to other loose polypeptide strands forming a matrix of connected fully and partially broken down collagen molecules. It is this Random Coil that give gelatin its springy properties(6,7). These two images were taken from source (16). 2222 Triple helix of collagen (crosslinked to another molecule from peptides at end of molecule) 2223 Collagen molecules line-up to form a fibril in "quarter staggered" array. Gelatin Gelatin is made by using the Hydrolysis process to get water to react with the Collagen. The Collagen undergoes partial hydrolysis and is broken down into the Random Coil Globs. The intermolecular and intramolecular bonds that render collagen insoluble to water has to be broken as well as the hydrogen bonds holding the triple helix together has to be broken. The amount of water bonded directly to the gelatin is about 12% - 14% after hydrolysis and after the gelatin is allowed to dry. As the newly formed gelatin cools, hydrogen bonds reform, forming the Random Coil Globs. Gelatin dehydrated to 2% water becomes insoluble in water because of the extensive crosslinking and is achieved by dehydraion. It is this water bonding to the polypeptide chains that keeps the chains from crosslinking. Crosslinking is the covalent (sharing of 1 or more electrons) bonding of the polypeptide chains. This gelatin can be reheated in water to break down the hydrogen bonds again and then redried. It is this latter part that we use to make emulsion(6,8,9). Gel Strength of gelatin is a measure of the rigidity of a gel formed from a 6.67% solution and prepared according to certain arbitrary prescribed conditions(13,14). Bloom (named after Mr Bloom whom invented the measuring device) is a measure of force (weight) required to depress a prescribed area of the surface of the samplee a distance of 4 mm. The more rigid the sample the higher the bloom(13,14). This image was taken from source (16). 2224 Denaturation of collagen CrVI Hexavalent chromium CrVI compounds are a group of chemical substances that contain the metallic element chromium in its positive-6 valence (hexavalent) state and can be found naturally in rocks but is most commonly produced by industrial processes. It has the ability to gain electrons from other elements (a strong oxidizer), which means it can react easily with them(10,12). Research is needed using vitamin C with CrVI(11). DCG When Dichromate is added to a gelatin emulsion and then dried the compound is in a clear dissolved up state in a gelled solution. The Chromium is still in the CrVI state. On exposure to the appropriate light source (actinic radiation) the Chromium gains an electron by oxidizing some of the amino acid groups (Where from and how does it gain this electron?) and becomes CrV very quickly and easily. This CrV is bound more tightly then CrVI to the gelatin and cannot be easily washed away with just water. With continued exposure some of the CrV gains more electrons and becomes CrIII but this happens much more slowly then the creation of CrV from CrVI. After exposure the, in the light struck areas, there is a large amount of semi-strong bounded CrV and traces of CrIII causing crosslinking. If this latent hologram is allowed to sit in the dark, the CrV continues to gain electrons (from where?) and converts to CrIII causing additional crosslinking. Because the dark reaction of CrVI to CrV is also slow, more CrIII and more crosslinking in formed in the light struck areas CrV to CrIII, then in the non light struck areas, CrVI to CrV to CrIII (15). During the first step of processing (reducing agent: Fixer or Sodium Metabisulfite) the CrV is very quickly changed to CrIII and ultimately causes more crosslinking in the light struck areas of the gelatin. The CrVI is washed out as the reducing agent works much more slowly on CrVI to CrV to CrIII. So we have now just increased the crosslinking much more in the light struck areas then in the non light struck areas. And it is this highly crosslinked area of the gelatin that has a higher index of refraction then the uncrosslinked areas yielding us our phase hologram(15). The DCG hologram is then washed to remove all traces of the reducing agent, unbound Cr. and any loose gelatin. Remember, gelatin is soluble in water unless it is crosslinked. The water also has the effect of swelling the gelatin and thus the fringes so a hologram is still not visible until the gelatin and fringes have been shrunk back to their original size or at least shrunk to a size able to replay the visible wavelengths. The Hologram is then put into an alcohol bath. Many techniques have yielded good results in varying the temperature, duration, concentration and the number of these alcohol baths with each variable changing the final appearance of the hologram. The goal of the alcohol is to remove the water bound in the gelatin structure without allowing a collapse of the delicate fringe lattice structure. (Does alcohol bond where the water was bonded?) (How does alcohol absorb water?) Once the water has been unbound the hologram can be dried with forced or latent heat thus evaporating the alcohol and more of the now scarce water. Again, the more moisture that is taken out of the emulsion, the more crosslinking there is (even in unexposed regions) and the more insoluble the emulsion is. When taken below 2% water content the emulsion is insoluble at room temperature due to being fully crosslinked. References 1. Dark self-enhancement in dichromated-gelatin grating: a detailed study. Roma Grzymala and Tuula Keinonen 2. Collagen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 3. protein :: Collagen --* Britannica Online Encyclopedia 4. Gelatin 5. http://www.stanford.edu/~spark7/ 6. Gelatin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 7. Gelatin 8. The structure and properties of solid gelatin and the principles of their modification 9. Gelatin Information 10. Hexavalent Chromium - NIOSH Topic Page 11. Hexavalent chromium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 12. 3M US: OSHA Hexavalent Chromium Standard - An overview of the Chromium Six (CrVI) standard; Impacts of the New Hex Chrome standard 13. http://www.gelatin-gmia.com/PDFs/2.1%20Gel%20Strength.pdf 14. Gelatin information, news, history and more 15. Improving the remarkable photosensitivity of dichromated gelatin for hologram recording in green laser light. Jeff Blyth, Christopher R. Lowe, John F. Pecora 16. The Effects of Relative Humidity on Some Physical Properties of Modern Vellum 17. Gel: a short word with a long meaning 18. Broad Range of Types of Polymers and Composites Polymer and Composite Consulting, Contract Research, and Software

---

Big Bangs - A theory or a misconception I read and drowned in my ideas after reading the recent theory given by Neil Turok. I thought, what shortcomings it has or it will pose better answers for today's mysteries and thus I got to a conclusion after 7 days of research. How it can effect these objects and phenomenon. Acc. to this concept, several big bangs, I will call it MBB happened in the universe, but they can't happen simultaneously, some of them might might have banged after and before 13.7 bill. limit, thus Mean time of explosions can be taken as 13.7 bill.yrs. Expansion rate- A plump solitary big bang can cause everlasting expansion that the MBB can't do. Since matter in universe in both the concepts is the same therefore we can say MBB might not have produced much expansion rate many expansions of different big bangs might have collided with one another further deteriorating acceleration. Gamma Ray Bursts- Now one big bang have much larger space for expansion in comparison with little ones. Now GRB's are known to be caused by primordial black holes i.e. Hypernovae in primordial nebulae. Now the question rises that which of these theories favour the existence of GRB's. Now a solitary one have more mass, more matter, more speed thus you can't get superdense nebulae in one sight. But MBB accounts for less mass ,less speed and there it poses a possibility of such supermassive bodies. Supermassive objects- Clumps of hundred of galaxies formed by gravitational pull and collisions between objects of different big bangs can also solve the mystery of bodies like Quasars giving it a totally new concept. Shape of Galaxies- Abundance of elliptical and spiral galaxies shows that these creations can't be made by random explosions. Size of Galaxies- Size of galaxies can also pose to be strong favourer as MBB should have a large number of supermassive bodies (explained above) Shape of the Universe- The density is more than the critical density in such a case. Thus the shape of universe would be like one described in the case of density more than critical density. Light Distortion-- The distortion or space time warp is more in case of MBB. Thus distortion is to such an extent that we aren't able to see objects beyond 12 bill. Light yrs., but we are able to see those objects with some less distortion and thus here is shortcoming of this concept. Dark Matter- The proportion of dark matter is much more in case of MBB due to abundance of massive objects. Thus in such types of universe Dark Matter (present in halo around galaxies) will be dominant force in the universe to such an extent that each galaxy will develop its black hole as soon as it can. This is a personal opinion and a private one.

---

Science fiction has always played host to the idea of having large structures in space. From Dyson spheres to Death stars, these structures lay firmly in the realm of fiction, but will it always be this way? Human technology is growing at an alarming rate, now with the dawn of the space age behind us the sky is no longer a limit. If our technology continues to grow exponentially it seems logical that we will eventually be able to build such structures, but even logic must give way to physics in extreme cases. While it may follow logically, it will be physics that has the last say, whether it is physically possible to build these structures depends on a wide range of factors. Some of these factors include: size, material composition, availability of materials, stability etc. One of the most famous of these large structures would have to be Dyson Spheres. They where first put forward by Freeman Dyson in 1959, in "Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation" in Science. Freeman Dyson was a Cambridge graduate where he did his bachelor degree of arts in mathematics; he then went on to become a Professor of Physics at Cornell University. Dyson himself admitted that the idea was not entirely his own, he was inspired by a book called ‘The Star Maker’ written in 1937 by Olaf Stapleton. It is even thought that Olaf may have got the idea from J. D. Bernal. There is some confusion concerning what a Dyson Sphere is actually meant to be like. The original proposal was that by having many individual satellites orbiting about a star it would be possible to collect a large portion of the stars energy output. There are some other more fanciful theories that take a Dyson Sphere as a solid continuous sphere, which can even be lived in. The idea of a Dyson Sphere comes from the constant need for more energy. It is theorised that as humanity continues to grow it will always be in need of more and more energy. To demonstrate the progression to using solar energy, these calculations have been included. - The sun puts out 3.827*1026 Jules every second. - The Earth has a radius of 6,378km this gives it a cross sectional area of: Ae = 2*pi*(6,378x102)^2 Ae = 2.556*10^14 m^2 - The Earth orbits the sun at a radius of 1.496x10^11m, this makes the surface area of a sphere at that distance: As = 4*pi*(1.496x1011)^2 As = 2.812*10^23 m^2 - Earth makes up a percentage of this sphere: Ae/As * 100 = 9.088*10^-8% - Hence Earth can only capture a small amount of the suns total energy output: 9.088*10^-10 * 3.827*10^26W = 3.478*10^17W Albeit this is a tremendous amount of energy, but the entire Earths surface must be covered to get this energy. Even then there is looses from the atmosphere, clouds and our equipment. One day in the future we may have the need to get more energy than this and a Dyson Sphere is one such solution. For the purpose of energy collection a great many solar collectors surrounding a star would suffice as a solution. Though this solution is also going to be fraught with difficulty, imagine navigating swarms of satellites, thousands of them, each with their own individual paths. This would make maintenance and energy collection very difficult, though it remains the more physically plausible solution. There are other uses for a Dyson Sphere that would require it to be solid, or at least continuous. For example if a civilisation wanted to hide themselves for security reasons or needed more space to live, a Solid Dyson would be required. The resources required to create a solid sphere would be truly enormous. If you wanted to live in the sphere and it was around a star that is like our sun, it would have to have a radius of one astronomical unit. For a sphere of radius 1Au and thickness y meters would have an approximate volume of: V ≈ 2.812*10^23y m3 This means for a Sphere of just 1cm thick the volume of matter would be 2.812*10^21m3. This is twice the volume of the Earth. As you can imagine a 1cm think cube couldn’t be very strong, but if you increase this to even 10cm the volume quickly becomes more than that of all the matter in the terrestrial planets and asteroids in the solar system! This fact doesn’t make a solid Dyson Sphere impossible, just impractical. The impossibilities may lie in whether or not such a structure would be stable or not. The effect of the spheres gravity on the sun is not a worry, since the net gravitational force of the sun due to the sphere will always equal zero. This can be thought out logically. If the sun was at the center of the sphere it would have equal amounts of mass distributed at the same distance from it in all directions, this all cancels to a net force of zero. While if the sun was off center then the side it is closest to would have a stronger field strength due to less distance, but at the same time it the opposing side now has more mass behind the sun and though it is further away these effects perfectly cancel each other out. The suns gravity has no such cancelling effect and hence will have an effect on the stability of the structure. There have been theories that the gravitational force due to the sun on the sphere could be negated and the sphere essentially held up by radiation pressure and the solar wind. This is not to be confused with the solar wind, the solar wind is made up of high speed particles emitted from the sun. While it may have some effect and help hold up the Dyson Sphere, it is negligible, only 1% of what radiation pressure will do. It may sound absurd that light could hold up the sphere, but it may be possible for very low density materials. Radiation pressure is stronger the closer you get to the sun, this is a problem as gravity also gets stronger the closer you get, so this means it doesn’t matter how close or far away, no distance is at an advantage for this purpose. For an object that absorbs the incident radiation, which for a Dyson Sphere made for energy production it will presumably absorb most light, the force per m2 (or pressure) of the sphere due to radiation is: Fr = L/(4*pi*r2*c) N/m^2 Where L equals the luminosity of the sun (3.827*1026W) c equals the speed of light (3x108ms-1) and r equals radius of the sphere. The force per m2 of sphere due to gravity is: Fg = (Msun*Ds*x*G)/r^2 N/m^2 Where Msun equals the mass of the sun (1.99x10^30Kg), Ds equals the density of the Dyson Sphere, x equals the thickness of the sphere, G equals the gravitation constant (6.67x10^-11m^3 kg^-1 s^-2) and as before r equals the radius of the sphere. Hence the net force of the sphere would be: Fnet = L/(4*pi*r^2*c) – (Msun*Ds*x*G)/r^2 N/m^2 = (1.02x10^17)/r2 – (1.33x10^20*Ds*x)/r^2 N/m^2 = (1.02x10^17 – 1.33x1020*Ds*x)/ r^2 N/m^2 For an Fnet of zero, ie forces balanced: 0 = (1.02x10^17 – 1.33x10^20*Ds*x)/ r^2 1.02x10^17 = 1.33x10^20*Ds*x Ds*x = 7.65x10^-4 Hence if we where able to make a Dyson sphere out of aerogel - the least dense substance know to man at just 1.1kg/m^3, the sphere could only be 0.000695m thick, that’s less than a millimeter! Clearly a solid Dyson Sphere would not be able to support itself with radiation pressure alone! This means that it would have to rely on the materials own structural integrity. Whatever the material is it would have to be something with a very high tensile strength, relatively low density and also be very abundant in the solar system. Another Large Structure is a Ring World or a Halo. It is a large ring that is habitable on the inner side. This idea is most famous from the recent video game series ‘Halo’ from which so far three books have sprung. The main reason a civilisation would want to create one of these rings would be for habitation. For one reason or another, a civilisation may find that they are out of space on their home planet, or perhaps due to climate changes their world is becoming inhospitable to life. They will then need somewhere else to go. Some systems may have another planet to go to, while others may not. If travelling to another star system all together is out of the question – either due to not having the capabilities to travel the vast distances in between star systems, or not having enough ships to move a large part of the civilisation – a ring world may become an option in such a crisis. The ring could be constructed in an orbit around the sun matching that of the planet, or even perhaps in orbit around the planet itself. The ring could be inclined to the sun at such a way as to have half in darkness and half in light, so that if it is set rotating at the right speed it would have a normal day/night cycle. The concept of a ring world is much different from a Dyson Sphere, while inhabiting the inner side of a Dyson sphere was only a late addition to the theory; a ring world is solely intended for that purpose. This means that one way or another, the ring is going to have to supply its own gravity. Doing so by mass is out of the question, so we must look to more artificial means of creating gravity or at least simulated gravity. Since we have no means By far the easiest way of doing this would be to spin up the ring. The spin creates an centripetal force that makes objects stick to the inside of it, much the same way that a bucket of water spun around on Earth will not spill. The gravitational force can be calculated thus: F = (mv^2)/r ma = mv^2/r a = v^2/r Where r is the radius of the ring and v is the velocity at which it is spinning. Hence to have Earth like gravity of 10ms^-2, a ring of radius r would have to be spun at: V = √(10r) If you want the ring to resemble Earth like conditions and have a 24 hour day, then: Period of one rotation = 24*60*60 = 43200 seconds Then: V = (2*pi*r)/86400 From above: √(10r) = (pi*r)/43200 10r = (pi2*r2)/(1.866x10^6) re-arranging: r = 1.890x10^9m v = 1.374x10^5 m/s This velocity may well prove to fast to implement in practice. It may be necessary to have longer days so the ring is allowed to spin at slower rate. When building one of these rings for habitation, one of the main factors will be useable living space. Assuming that all of the operating parts can be stored within the ring, and that the inner surface is totally useable, then the habitable area would be: A = 2*pi*r*w Hence: A = 11.88x10^6*w km2 Where w is the width of the ring in km. If the ring was just 10km wide it would have 80% of the land area that Earth does. This leaves plenty of space for farming and living space; water can be stored in the ring itself, with small lakes for aesthetic purposes. Basically if you want more space to live in you have to increase the width. If you increase the width then the mass is going to go up. With increasing mass means an increasing amount of energy will be needed to make it spin. The rotational kinetic energy for a hoop is: Kr = ½mrv With the values found previously that is an energy of: Kr = 1.30x10^14m J This is a tremendous amount of energy and it may or may not be available to the race at that time, but the function of the ring depends on it, or else no gravity, no day night cycle. This amount of energy could be achievable through the use of antimatter. It could be set up to have many thousands of boosters around the outside of ring where antimatter is annihilated with normal matter. During an antimatter/matter annihilation all mass is turned into energy in the ratio of E=mc^2, since c^2 is such a large number (9x10^16), these reactions allow a high energy yield from a small amount of mass. That said for the purposes of spinning up the ring, you would require 0.72g of antimatter per kilogram of the mass of the ring. To produce such a large amount of antimatter the civilisation would have to have quite an efficient means of creating it. Recently released data by CERN stated that when their facilities are fully operational, they will theoretically be able to produce 10^7 antiprotons per second. So to produce that 0.72 grams of antimatter it would take us approximately 1.44 billion years! And that’s not even considering how the antimatter would be stored until use, that in itself could prove quite a feat. There are yet still even more problems that need working out, problems that conceivable solutions are yet to be found. For example I have not addressed how the atmosphere of such a ring would be maintained. Earth has an atmospheric pressure of 101kPa at sea level, but we can survive in much less – astronauts only have 30% of that when they go EVA but then the oxygen level is increased to compensate. This would become a problem for metals that are susceptible to corrosion. Even then, trying to maintain the atmosphere at 30% of Earths could still prove difficult, if not impossible. As one possible solution to overcome the problem of leaking atmosphere, some designs have the ring enclosed and like a giant tube, this is plausible but would require a lot more materials. In order for a ring world to be constructed many engineering feats would have to overcome. The stresses on such a structure would be enormous. It may be necessary to have supporting spokes like that on a bicycle wheel. Just like a Dyson sphere, to provide the strength needed it would probably have to be constructed out of some exotic form of matter that we are yet to discover. A fictional large structure that is also worth mentioning is the Death Star for the famous Star Wars saga. The death star has a much different function than that of the previous two I discussed; the death star is a weapon. It is a weapon of far greater power than any ‘weapon of mass destruction’ that we know of. The death star is able to destroy a whole planet, reducing it all to a floating mess of asteroids. The first death star constructed was 160km in diameter, large enough to be mistaken for a small moon. It was constructed to enforce the Imperial’s totalitarian rule over the galaxy. There is not much insight into how the weapon and manoeuvring systems, only that they are powered by a hypermatter reactor. Since there is no such thing (as yet) called hyper matter, the death star remains firmly in science fiction. However the concept that one day a weapon of this magnitude could be constructed remains evident. Isaac Newton once wrote “to myself I seem to have been only alike a boy playing of a seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” Newton had only scratched the surface of what science would one day be able to do. These days we may have lifted our head slightly and started uncovering small parts of this vast truth, but there will always be more to learn. Taken with what we know right now, these ideas of large structures may seem impossible, but with what we may know one hundred or even a thousand years in the future, these structures may become a commonplace. The sky is no longer a limit. By Jayden Newstead

---

Wave Structure of Matter and its foundation in Quantum Theories. Quantum theory requires particles to meet this requirment, that the frequency of its waves to be proportional to its mass in accordance with the formula f = mc2/h. This means that a particle acts as if it were a spherical oscillator. Now an electron can be described as being comprised of two spherical scalar waves traveling in space with velocity c, one wave traveling to the center, and the other traveling outward from the center. We define these as the In Wave and the Out Wave. The standing wave form they generate we call Standing Wave Centers, and the exibit resonance as if they were spherical oscillators. This is the base model of 1/2 spin particles like the electron and quarks. This model also shows that anti versions can exist, and would annihilate each other. Thus it conformes with the observed behavoir and obeys Feynman's Rule. As an oscillator, a Standing Wave Center resists coupling unless both have the same resonant frequency. Thus in W.S.M. the term Particle and Standing Wave Center are interchangable. Quote: Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of time, p56 on the subject of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle "It implies that particles behave in some respects like waves:...There is thus a duality between waves and particles in quantum mechanics." Particle in W.S.M. only refers to the real particles of spin 1/2, in quantum mechanics that have a Standing Wave Center, and not the virtual particles of other spins. They will be addressed latter. If you wish a more detail look at the math of this model of the electron structure go here. http://www.quantummatter.com/body_point.html It is worth looking at this just for the graph, as I will be refering to it often. A Basic Atom. When you graph the In Waves and Out Waves to produce a Standing Wave Center in this manner, you will see what looks like smaller secondary wave centers forming at harmonic intervals. Now they are not true standing wave centers, but they do provide a finite space for another Standing Wave Center to use, and interact with the Primary Standing Wave Center. This can be used to show how an atom is constructed with interacting Standing Wave Centers. We will start with the Hydrogen atom. Make a graph of a Standing Wave Center the size of a Proton, this will be our nucleus. Now add to the graph a second wave center the size of an electron at the closest orbit allowed. The number of these harmonic nodes and loops increase greatly, W.S.M. refers to this as the Wave Density of Space. The harmonic loops seen on the graph can be thought of as finite packets of quantum energy, very usefull for transmitting energy and organizing matter. This is only a simple two diminsional view of the Hydrogen atom however, so lets expand it into three diminsions, starting with the proton again. These hamonic nodes and loops now form a number of shells around the Standing Wave Center of the proton. An expanding sphericle web of quantum energy packets. Electrons can be added in at the coresponding orbits. Quote: Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time p.59 "It revealed that an electron orbiting around a nucleus could be thought of as a wave, with a wave length that depends on its velocity. For certain orbits, the length of thr orbit would correspond to a whole number ( as opposed to a fractional number ) of wavelengths of the electron. for these orbits the wave crest would be in the same position each time around, so the waves will add up: these correspond to Bohr's allowed orbits." The electron orbit shells, being spaced around the nucleus, will have a number of these nodes and loops between them and the nucleus at any given time based on the size of its orbit. When you add all the waves related to the electron to those of the proton, a three diminsional graph of even the simple Hydrogen atom becomes complex to graph. The number of scaler waves in the graph grows with every particle added to the picture. We have constructed a picture for the basic hydrogen atom in three diminsions so far, but how can we picture more complex atoms? This type of graphing every wave center will quickly become too complex, even for atoms of modest size. Groups of Standing Wave Centers can be thought of as a single wave center with the combined mass of all the individual standing wave centers within it. this helps some, but still makes a complex image. A graph from a different perspective, while leaving out some detail can be of use also, especialy with very large numbers of wave centers close together like planets and moons. Look at the graphs from our main website. http://www.spaceandmotion.com/ We can not leave the atom yet, as we have not addressed the other particles within it, as we know them. Protons, Neutrons. and the Concept of Gluons. Protons and Neutrons can not be fully explained without touching on the concept of Gluons and the Strong Nuclear Force. The gluon, a spin 1 particle, interacts only with itself and quarks. It has the curious property called confinement. They always group three quarks together. Not only that, they are picky, and only group certain quarks together. Quantum mechanics has assigned colors and names to various quarks. To represent his grouping affect, the colors of the quarks must add up to white. The proton is composed of two Up quarks with a 2/3 postive charge each, and a Down quark with a 1/3 negative charge, for a total of 1 postive charge. The neutron is composed of two Down quarks and a Up quark for a net charge of zero. Other combinations of quarks are possible, but unstable. Called mesons these particles have a short life, quickly producing electrons and other virtual particles. Another property of the qluon is Asymptotic Freedom. In short, at high energy levels, gluons allow the quarks to behave more like individual particles. This is enough for us to explore a means for the formation of protons and neutrons. Remember the harmonic loops we saw in the first graph. They look like a wave center, but they are not, they do not have a standing wave center of their own. They are just a packet of quantum energy moving through space. Just like quantum mechanics, this is a virtual particle, or a potential particle. Picture one of these loops moving through space. Fill it with fluid and eddies will start to form within it from the effects of the scalar waves defining its boundary. The center of these eddies represent possible locations for a standing wave center, like a quark to call home. There are a number of eddy formations that can occur within such a finite shape. One of the most stable formations involves a system of three centers in two forms. Two large ones with a small one between them ,and two small ones with a large one between them. Another differance will be noted also in this model. The eddy in the middle will have a diffrent spin than the other two. By replacing this simple models spin with different charges, we arrive at the same model for the proton and electron held by quantum mechanics. As the quarks which make up protons and neutrons are real particles by W.S.M. theory, this structure exibits the properties of a real particle. I will refer to structures built of quarks as Ternary Standing Wave Centers. Ternary refers to the three particles that make them up. As these three quarks are in close proximity, their combined standing wave form acts as a single standing wave center that effectivly fills the finite space they occupy. Constructs of fewer or greater number of quarks either would not fill this space, or be larger than the allowed space, thus they would tend to be unstable.Also. high levels of energy introduced to this arrangement will expand the area of confinment they exist in. With more room to roam, they behave more like individual particles. Thus they exibit the asymptotic freedom as seen in experiments. Experiments to try and detect proton decay show that the proton is very stable indeed. A closer look will show why this is so. Let us replace the fluid vortexs in our model with charged spheres to repesent the quarks. Two large spheres of 2/3 charge to represent the Up quarks, and one smaller sphere with a 1/3 negative charge to represent the Down quark. The 1/3 negitive charge will be equally attracted to both 2/3 postive charges. As the charges approach each other, the greater postive charges will start to repel each other and the curve of the finite space within the node aids this. Thus they enter into a balancing act keeping the weaker negative charge between them, while avoiding each other. Add in the forces from the scalar waves in our first model, and the spheres will begin to revolve around the center of the space they occupy. This finite region of space is first defined by the loop they start in. The form these three quarks take is very stable, so their standing wave forms combine to a single standing wave center with the apparent mass of a proton. All this helps to contain the quarks within a finite region of space. The other Ternary Standing Wave Center we call a neutron is also a very stable structure, though perhaps not quite as stable as the two small quarks would have a little more freedom of movement around the larger intervening quark. So we can see that the Wave Structure of Space is a very effective and selective means of organizing matter. To qoute an old physics textbook of mine, "Of the different ways in which energy can be transfered, the wave-tranfer mechanism is unique in that energy is transmitted without the physical transfer of material from the source." The Neutrino. The neutrino is a good example of virtual particle. This strange little creature has no mass or very little mass to speak of. Yet the energy it contains leaves little doubt of its existance. How can you have a particle with no mass to speak of? As you remember, W.S.M. relates real particles to a Standing Wave Center, no Standing Wave Center, no particle, or solid matter. W.S.M. also has virtual particles like quantum mechanics. These virtual particles are no more than energy being transported through space in discreet packages defined by the wave structure of space. These finite quantum areas of space can turn into real particles, like the proton, or they may not. Either way, the energy they contain is a real effect we can measure. The 'real' particles of quantum mechanics with 1/2 spin are standing waves centers, so virtual particles of other spins must have another origin. We have already spoken of the gluon, a spin 1 virtual particle, and showed how it could be accomplished by the harmonic loops of the waveform. So let's look at other spin 1 virtual particles to see of they could be related to the harmonic nodes also. The Photon. The photon and the electromagnetic force. The photon, a virtual particle of spin 1 is the main exchanger of the electromagnetic force. Many physicists believe it to have a non-virtual form as well because it can be emitted from an atom, travel through space, and impart its energy to another atom. From a W.S.M. viewpoint, it is always a virtual particle, so lets see how the wave structure of space can explain this one. Remember our basic atom model earlier and how there are shells of harmonic nodes and loops that form shells of electrons around the nucleus. For any given orbit of an electron, there will be a given number of harmonic nodes and loops between it and the nucleus. When an electron drops to a lower orbit, there will be fewer of these nodes and loops between it and the nucleus. The lost nodes and loops represent the amount of energy no longer needed by the electron to maintain its orbit. This excess energy is then carried away from the atom as part of its Out Waves, in accordance with the wave structure of the universe. We see this as the atom emitting a photon. When this packet of quantum energy impacts another electron, it passes this energy to the electron, which then moves to a higher orbit to compensate for this sudden increase in energy. It may then drop back to its old orbit, repeating the process. So we can see that the wave structure of the universe is very good at transfering energy through space as well as particles. Other Virtual Particles. Bosons and the weak Nuclear Force. Bosons are another of the spin 1 virtual particles used in quantum mechanics. They come in a number of types, but the Weinberg-Salam theory states that all bosons are in fact one particle observed in differant states. As this is close to W.S.M. theory, we will proceed from there. All bosons only affect real particles of spin 1/2. These facts give us a good starting point to look for them in W.S.M. theory. As they have spin 1 like the photon and gluon, we can assume that they arise from the harmonic nodes discussed earlier. First one important piece of information from quantum mechanics on virtual particles. They do not have to obey Pauli's Exclusion Principle. This principle implies that no real particle of 1/2 spin can have the same position and velocity, within the limits of Heisenbergs Uncertainity Principle as another real particle. Virtual particles, unlike real particles, can overlap in this manner, they are free to stack their effects in a single location. This is clearly seen from a simple harmonic graph. The hamonic loops from two standing wave forms can freely pass through one another. Now back to bosons and another model. Place a number of spheres close together to repesent the nucleus of an atom. The spheres themselves represent the ternary standing wave centers of the particles in the nucleus. It is easy to see that they do not fit together perfectly. There are small gaps within the model that are not filled. Each of these particles have In and Out waves that make them up. The waves that are facing away from the nucleus look normal. However there is little room for them that are emitted towards the center nucleus. Thus the only space for them to ocuppy are the little voids in our model between the spheres. Because the In and Out waves are no longer uniform, the force they impart will will be percieved as a vector effect on the particle. This we detect as massive vector bosons. However in real life, the wave centers may not be touching as in our model. One or more sets of nodes and loops could be seperating the wave centers. This would be detected as the naught boson. So we see that the virtual particles of spin 1 in quantum mechanics can be explained as the effects of the wave structure of matter, by means of the harmonic loops. Wave Structure of Matter and Gravity. The effects of gravity has always been a problem for quantum mechanics, but not so for W.S.M. theory. W.S.M. states that all particles will be drawn together as a result of the wave structure of the universe. This can be easily seen from the graphs on our main web site. But what is the quantum mechanical means by which this occurs? We have seen the connection between real particles of 1/2 spin and standing wave centers. We have also seen how the virtual particles of spin 1 all seem connected to the harmonic loops produces by the standing waves. How does the spin 2 virtual particle known as the graviton fit into this model? There is one region of space we have not explored yet, and that is the region of space between the harmonic loops and the wave centers. If scalar waves are condensing energy on one side of the wave form to create the real and virtual particles, then the conservation of energy would suggest a partial vacuum on the other side. The magnitude of this vacuum would be equal to the mass/energy displaced. This also explains why gravity is attractive in nature. Particles, when they encounter this part of the field, would be drawn towards the emittting wave center by the vacuum, the intensity of which is related to mass. This is percieved as gravity. See "Gravity and the quantum vacuum inertia hypothesis http://www.calphysics.org/articles/gravity_arxiv.pdf and http://www.calphysics.org/articles/Cole_Rueda_Danley.pdf So in closing, all the affects seen by quantum mechcanics can be explained by the wave structure of the universe and all matter within it. Of course this essay is by no means an compleat or detailed explaination, as that would take far more room, but it should give sufficent explanation for those who wish to consider it, and delve into it deeper. http://www.spaceandmotion.com/ plenty of information and links.

---

Science is fascinating for anybody who values knowledge, because it is a body of knowledge as well as a method to acquire more knowledge. Indeed the word science is derived from the Latin word scire, meaning, “to know.” Science is dynamic, which means it is constantly developing, the science today is not exactly the same as it was, say, fifty years ago. This is so because scientists are always on the look out for new knowledge. To gather new knowledge, scientists have to constantly ask questions, starting with What, Why, When, Where and How. Asking such questions is curiosity. You must be curious too, all children of your age are. But in science there is a particular way to answer such questions. As you will proceed through the science taught in your school you will discover that certain words like energy, force, cells, charge, etc. are used very frequently. Such words are the concepts of science. A concept is an abstract, universal idea, notion, or entity that serves to designate a category or class of entities, events, or relations. For example, God is a concept, so is length or height. Concepts like substances; animals; plants; food; electricity; information; communication; sky; universe etc. make science possible. Concepts help us to explain phenomenon. It may be a strange word, for some readers of this article, but it is important to know its meaning because it is central to all science and technology. A phenomenon (plural: phenomena) is an observable event. Phenomena constitute the world as we experience it, as opposed to the world as it exists independently of our experiences (thing-in-themselves. Phenomena make up the raw data of science. It was an attempt to explain phenomena like: seasons, earthquakes, lightening, rain, fire, sunrise, thunderstorm, rusting, blooming of plants, similarities between parent and offspring (heredity) etc. etc. that lead to the development of science. How do we know that what we see, hear or sense is a phenomenon? We say it is phenomenon if it can be observed by almost everybody. The word observation is familiar to most science students. Textbooks and teachers of science often use it. Observation is an activity of an intelligent living being, to sense and assimilate the knowledge of a phenomenon in its framework of previous knowledge and ideas. Seeing, listening, feeling the happenings around carefully is observing. In science observation is an important activity, because science attempts to explain observations made by people. To gather new knowledge, scientists follow a certain method known as the scientific method. Most of the common observations and phenomena can indeed be satisfactorily explained by using the known concepts, theories, hypothesis and laws of science. You must be aware of The Newton’s law of gravitation, and perhaps, the law of conservation of energy or law of constant proportions. What is common between these laws? Are they any different from the civil laws and criminal laws? A scientific explanation does not use a motivating agent, such as God, most often it is through a mathematical relationship between several observable quantities. A law in science summarizes observed experimental facts—it does not explain the facts. Scientific laws, are built on concepts, hypotheses, and experiments. They are as trustworthy as the concepts of science and as complete and accurate as the experiments on which they are based. Since human beings formulate scientific laws, they are neither eternally true nor unchangeable, like the divine laws. In fact with the advance of knowledge and experience, many laws of science prove, sooner or later, to be too limited or too inaccurate. An example is the law of conservation of mass, which today we recognize as having only limited applicability. Thus to explain any observation or phenomena, scientists take recourse to the known laws of science, or hypothesis and theories. In most cases, most observations extend what is currently accepted, providing further evidence that existing ideas are correct. For example, in 1676 the English physicist Robert Hooke discovered that elastic objects, such as metal springs, stretch in proportion to the force that acts on them. Despite all the advances that have been made in physics since 1676, this simple law still holds true. Similarly, all physical laws are based on 25 fundamental constants; prominent scientists have wondered whether these constants have remained constant ever since the eternity. They have studied emissions from very remote objects, so remote that the light emitted from them takes several million years to reach us. They have recently concluded that there is no reason to doubt that a particular constant, called alpha, has changed its value for the past 10,000 million years. But, this need not be always true, sometimes, an observation or a phenomena cannot be explained by the either existing laws of science, or any known theories. In such a case scientists advance new theories. If a theory is found useful to explain all such observations in general, it becomes a law. Thus you can see that scientists are in a constant pursuit, of knowledge, to discover new laws or substances. That is the indeed the fascination of science!