It’s perfectly logical

You may remember that yesterday, I said how logic was basically the math of formalized ideas, so I thought I might draw a few comparisons between the logic as the math of ideas and the math of numbers.

Now instead of talking about the mind-numbingly easy parts of math like arithmetic and stuff, I’ll just jump into the fun stuff.

So in math, you have functions, which basically take a number of variables as input, crunch the numbers, and spit out the output (that was quite possibly the coolest description of a mathematical thing that I’ve ever made :D). Now, in logic, we have almost the same things. You have things like ‘Statement P AND Statement Q NOT Statement R’ which is a bit like the equation in the function. You then have the truth table, which basically substitutes the values of all the statements (either true or false) and then outputs the values (which are also true or false).

Now, in ‘number math’, you can also express the output of the functions in a graph. And while you can’t strictly ‘graph’ logical statements, there are certain subparts in logic that you can ‘graph’. Take, for example, sets, which is basically logic with a bit of math thrown in. Now, when you draw venn diagrams, they are essentially to show exactly how certain groups are structured and how their different elements intersect. You can also add the number of elements there are in a set to the diagram, but at the end of the day,the venn diagram basically shows the structure of all the sets. The intersections between these sets can be viewed as logical statements, for example, the intersection between two sets P and Q can be written as ‘P and Q’, and the part of P that is not a part of Q can be written as ‘P not Q’.

There is a large part of logic that is just simply structured thinking and reasoning, but that too is just a more abstract form of this. It’s hard to capture the logical processes that go on in a brain with ‘mathematical’ or logical notation, but at the end of the day, most of our decisions are made using cost-benefit comparisons, which are a whole bunch of logical statements (for example, this AND this will happen but this will NOT happen’.

So it’s interesting to see how fundamental mathematical concepts can be applied to our ideas, and how we can even think of our own thought processes like this.

Well, that’s about it 🙂

49 down, 317 to go

311 days remaining

Physics is awesome

I still remember when I decided I wanted to be a physicist. I was reading the dead famous biography of Isaac Newton, and I read the story of how he discovered gravity when an apple fell on his head. And in my typically naive 8 year old mind, he had basically become famous because an apple had fallen on his head. And so I basically thought ,” I want to be famous, and having an apple fall on my head doesn’t seem to be too difficult’. So being a physicist rocketed to near the top of my list. It then went to the very top of my list when I saw einstein’s hair. I wanted hair like that!

I still want to be a physicist, but since then, my reasons have matured somewhat. I’m no longer too eager for apples to be rocketing towards my head, and Einsteins hairdo would look ridiculous on me.

So I now have rather more sophisticated reasons for wanting to be a physicist:

• Physics is (almost) the core of all the sciences: a friend of mine said something very, very, interesting, and very, very true. He said that as you grow older, psychology turns into biology, biology turns into chemistry, chemistry turns into physics, and physics turns into math. Now, math is my favourite subject, but you can’t really have a career devoted specifically to math, so I want to devote it to physics, which to me is capturing mathematical rules and patterns in the real world and analysing them.
• You always know exactly what is happening with physics: Down to the very subatomic level, almost anything can be explained. And what can’t be explained is either being researched thoroughly or on the verge of being explained. There’s a gradual revolution happening in physics, right here, right now, and I want to be part of it.
• The skill set you require is filled by me: I think that to be a physicist, you need a couple of ‘qualifications’: A good comprehension of physics (duh!), a head for math, a deep appreciation for how even the most subtle of nature’s reactions are governed by math and an ability to accept unconventional truths (think quantum physics). I like to think that I do indeed possess these characteristics, though whether they are the results of my desire to be a physicist is unknown.

And just one more thing that suddenly just randomly popped into my head. There’s this story going around that Einstein failed in math at school. THIS IS NOT TRUE. In fact, by the age of 13, he had mastered integral and differential calculus. Pretty impressive. O.o

Soo yeah. I’ve tried not to descend to much into science-jargon, so I hope this post was understandable to more than just 1% of you 🙂

Later 🙂

29 down, 337 to go

337 days remaining

The future of computing

WARNING: IF YOU ARE GOING TO READ THIS POST, I REALLY RECOMMEND YOU READ THIS ARTICLE. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

Just in case you were foolish enough not to read the article, here’s a quick summary:
Scientists have managed to make a transistor out of 7 atoms. 7 atoms. This is the first time an electrical device has been formed by deliberately placing atoms in specific places. For those of you who don’t know, a transistor is basically an electronic device that can switch and amplify electrical signals and power. If that definition doesn’t satisfy you, or has awakened the desire to know more, go to the Wikipedia page.

Like any self- respecting tech nerd, I fell of my chair when I heard about this. Like literally, I reeled back and my chair went faster than me. Not fun. But anyway, I had legitimate reason to be excited.

So what does this tiny transistor mean? To put it quite simply, it’s a technological revolution. It is one of the first steps towards quantum computers (read: really, really tiny computers). This means that computers will be able to be put just about anywhere. The second thing it means is that computers will become a whole lot more powerful. This is basically because more transistors will be able to fit in the computer.

It also heralds a new era in science, and the overall trend of making devices smaller. Now I’ve conducted no research into this whatsoever, but it seems to me that maybe screens the thickness of a piece of paper may actually become a reality. Who knows? Maybe one day, we’ll be able to read the news simply by looking at the screen embedded into our contact lenses…

Every so often, something happens that revolutionises a whole field. For physics, it was the discovery of the neutrino that travelled faster than light and the possibility of the discover of the Higgs boson. I think that possibly for technology and all things quantum, this may be it.

I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m waiting with baited breath for what happens next…

So this wasn’t a very long post, but I’m
excited about this! I’ll probably blog about it again 🙂

17 down, 349 to go
346 days remaining

Our mind is,well, kinda stupid.

Blargh. For the last two days, the WordPress ‘New post’ page on the website has been glitching, so I haven’t been able to make a post. in fact, it’s still glitching, so I’m making my post on an iPad. I now have to make three posts today on an iPad. Challenge accepted. So here we go:

I read a book a few months ago. This book was titled “My life as an experiment’ and it basically detailed the exploits of this one dude name A.J. Jacobs. he conducts all these social experiments on himself, like telling no lies for a month, not multitasking for a month and (this is my personal favorite) masquerading as a celebrity at the Oscars. (to find out who he was posing as, read the book :D).

But one of these experiments was really interesting. It was called ‘the rationality project’ and it basically talked about how he was trying to overcome all the biases and irrational behaviors that he had. The thing I found really interesting about the experiment was how common these biases are. I mean, we like to thing of ourselves as at least semi rational, but these biases make us seem like blubbering nincompoops. Here’s a few of the ones I found the most interesting:

The Availability Fallacy: when we think of danger, we tend to think of things like plane crashes and terrorist attacks, even though the probability of getting hit by a car is 84 times greater. This is because our mind automatically jumps to the worst-case scenario. So technically, we’re all pessimists.

The reactance bias: I’m going to ask you a favor. Don’t look at the top of this entry.

If you actually didn’t look at the top, you are among the 1% of the people who didn’t. This is the reactance bias- the uncontrollable desire to do what you’re forbidden from doing. It’s among the strongest of all human emotions, right up there with envy and love. It’s embedded into everyone when they’re born and it takes an extremely throng mindset to go against it.

source amnesia: What’s the capital of the United States?

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last twenty years, you would know that it’s Washington D.C. However, you probably don’t remember where or from who you learnt this fact. If you’re interested in the science behind source amnesia, it’s basically when the facts are moved from the hippocampus of the brain (where facts are initially stored) to the cerebral cortex. According to the book welcome to your brain by Sam Wang and Sandra Aamodt, this is when the fact is ‘separated from the context in which it was originally learned’.

the halo effect: this is one of the most harmful of all the biases. It is when we unconsciously associate good qualities with physically attractive people. The example used in the book is pretty good- the author has just bought a coffee at Starbucks, and has $1.50 left in change. He is deciding whether to tip the $1 or the 50 cents, and decides to tip the $1. he then realizes he tipped the $1 because the barista was moderately attractive. As he so eloquently puts it, if the barista ‘looked like Vladimir Putin’, he would have gone with the 50 cents.

the confirmation bias: this is also a pretty common one. It’s basically continuing to do something in a particular way, simply because you don’t know what will happen if you don’t. For example, let’s think about brushing your teeth. You’ve probably used the same brand of toothpaste for most of your life. Why? You probably haven’t conducted any major research into it, so here’s what most peoples thought process is: I’ve been brushing with for a long time, and my teeth are in moderately good condition. Therefore, I should continue using it, because I might not have such good teeth if I change.

So that’s a few of the most interesting biases. If you want to know more, I really suggest buying the book.

But yeah, that’s about it for this post. I’m pretty sure that at least one of these has struck a chord with you, and if it has, it would be interesting to see what you thought. If you can be bothered, you can leave a comment on this post or something.

Until next time, which, come to think of it, will be today.

15 down,361 to go
349 days remaining

Ooooh…The fourth dimension

I was just thinking about the 4th dimension today and what exactly it would be like. Needless to say, I failed miserably to even remotely grasp what it was all about. But I did have an interesting idea.

You know how in quantum physics, particles are in multiple places at once and so form a sort of ‘wave’? Well I thought that in that time, the particles might be travelling in the fourth dimension.

Crazy, I know. But until I get proven wrong, I’ll keep thinking about it. So here’s my reasoning:

Any object in a 1d line occupies several points

Any object in a 2d plane occupies several 1d lines.

Any object in a 3d space occupies several 2d planes
and therefore, it follows that:
any object in the 4th dimension occupies several 3d spaces.

Now when these particles act as a wave, they are essentially occupying several different 3d spaces. So them being in the 4th dimension while this happens may be an explanation for that.

And you know the phenomenon when the particles move through only one slit when they are being observed? Well, my 4th dimension model also accounts for that. Any observational device will not be able to comprehend the 4th dimension, and so it will only detect the stream of particles in the third dimension.

Now I’m probably being really stupid because I don’t know something, but it seems to work right now, and it won’t stop working until it gets proved wrong. So please, PROVE ME WRONG!!!!

Ooooh, 2 posts in one day. That means I can relax some other day 🙂 Yay!

11 down, 355 to go

355 days remaining

CERN, here I come…

Dr. John Ellis is a very cool person.

Not only is he the director of CERN (which automatically makes him a legend in my books), he has the rare ability to dump the uber-complicated physics that is part of his everyday life so that even a moron can understand it, but he also doesn’t make the moron feel insulted.

Today, at my school, he talked about a few recent developments in CERN, and explained things like the Higgs field, antimatter and dark matter. He really explained it well.

When he spoke today, I was there, hanging onto every word. The fact that someone akin to the Pope of Physics was there, talking to use was enough to blow my mind.

And when I asked a question, holy crap. I was talking to the freaking director of CERN, one of the most important people in the whole of physics, he was actually answering one of my questions. It was actually really incredible that someone like that would be answering one of  my questions.

So while he was talking, I made a resolution to myself. I told myself that one day, I will work at CERN. It seems like an awesome place to work, It’s basically like a little city, dedicated to science, and seems perfect for what I want to do.

Be it as a theoretical physicist, astrophysicist, quantum physicist or cosmologist, I will one day be a physicist at CERN.

10 down, 356 to go

356 days remaining

Quantum Physics is weird

Don’t get me wrong. Quantum physics is awesome. But, damn. It’s freaking weird. I mean, the only thing I don’t get about Quantum Physics is how since there is a probability of the particle being in every place, it is in every place. Apart from that, I understand everything. Which is irritating. Because the only reason that I understand everything else is that I accept that preliminary fact to be true. Then, it’s easy to understand all that stuff about interference patterns and observations and stuff.But until I fully understand the first bit, I won’t feel like a bau5. Granted, I probably won’t feel like a bau5 even when I do figure it out, but it’s good to know you have something to look forward to…

But anyway, like I said, Quantum Physics is AWESOME. Some of the stuff you see is so counter-intuitive but it’s amazing. I mean, particles behave really weirdly sometimes. When physicists first discovered all this weird stuff, they must have been SO confused, irritated or possibly a combination of the two.  I mean, everything they assumed to be true was disintegrating in front of their very eyes. They probably felt the same way as when the people at CERN discovered the particle that moved faster than light. But that’s another story.

Imma be cool now, and do a wikipedia search for Quantum Physics

later