SAMSAL SECTION Free will, free thinkers, free voices

POKUASE.. LAST ONE !

2012-12-15T14:38:00.003-08:00

By: Salifu Mutaru

I had to run through the masses of walking people at the Achimota new station to join the Pokuase van, accelerating faster and faster as the conductor kept shouting the lowering numbers of passengers left to get the van full. I first heard,”Pokuase last two,” and then, “Pokuase last one!” I was lucky to get the last seat. We hit the road after a few seconds.
I took out my handkerchief to wipe out the sweat on my face. Cold air rushed into the speeding van, hitting against my face, and just then thoughts rushed in too.

Thoughts run into my mind, and I couldn’t help but imagine “what if the conductor rather shouted the words, ‘Education towards national development!’” That would have made me the last concept to get on the van, and the most important, because without me the van wouldn’t have set off. At this point I had not realised what concept I was, and what each other person on the van represented? The driver takes the passengers to their desired destinations; but if a passenger fails to alert the conductor, who in turn fails to alert the driver where to stop, the passenger will be alighted at a wrong bus stop. It is like being in school with no aim, and watching the tides drive you to the shores. You can only tell whether the shores are rocky or sandy, or whether dangerous or safe if you have prior-awareness of the journey and the destination you desire.

The driver is the head of the school, the van is the school, and the conductor is the counselor—I figured that out. Every passenger was a student in a particular faculty of the school. Some passengers are making the journey because others are making it too, like the little girl sitting on her mum’s laps on my left. Her mother had a basket filled with empty sacs beneath her seat, I could easily tell she was heading to the market for business. As we moved on, the conductor kept calling the names of the bus-stops to remind those whose minds were busy elsewhere. It is like giving pep-talks on seminars to remind students of their aims in school and goals to meet in life. This works well because most students easily adapt to the new life in school and hardly remember why they study.

I was fair allocating the fields of study among the passengers. I named some as science, mathematics, applied science, law, art and the few I could name. Few did not represent any field at all, they were non-educational workers on campus.

There was space for me as well, one that most people would disregard. I thought that if without me the van wouldn’t have moved, then I represent something great that penetrates all other faculties, I am the culture of the people. I am a part of all, I diffuse through the thickest walls of all fields of education, and I give reason and purpose for studying. I pin-point the rich ways of solving our problems in our unique ways, and teach to meet our needs by our efforts. I am the feeling state of the woman comforted by our indigenous clothes dancing and singing the songs of our ancestors. So that makes me integral to all things that will lead us to national development.

There is much we have done to improve our education as a nation, but we can do quite more.

The ideal education will consider both the development of cognitive skills as well as the emotional intelligence. We seem to focus more on skill acquisition rather purposeful skill acquisition. How does our skills contribute to national development? There is a need for passion and enthusiasm in education, and that is a fruit of emotional background of education. Lets start building the foundation along with our fine cultures. Let the knowledge of our routes, the very details of who we are be the songs we match to, and tell us of the beauty that can only be found in our people. We can only bring back this emotional aspect of education when we fuse our culture in all fields of study, giving a reason that will guide us with the enthusiasm and passion to make the lives of our people better instead of selfishly working for individual progress.

Graduates focus on efforts to improve their lives than to improve that of their neighbours and the people they share a common story with. Introduction of education in any community is for the progress of the people, not of the individual. The only way to trigger the conscience of our students towards national success, than individual success is to teach them the reason their forefathers maintained formal education into the country. To let them know education was the weapon that got us free from colonialism. Our education is only a little evident when the students pass their examinations. The greater part of the evidence is the effect of graduates on our economy and the general life of the Ghanaian people. Every year that unleashes thousands of educated people in the system must mean a thousand-fold new mechanised ways of making life easy, of positive national growth, of improvement in the lives of the people, and finally a greater population of people of fine attitudes in the country trained through the study of our culture.

The Ghanaian citizen must look upon himself, for the struggle for something that does not relate to who we are only creates emptiness and fades the pride in our identity away. The dream of becoming westerners will long remain a dream, but the reality of focusing on ourselves will keep growing more real. The Ghanaian man and the Ghanaian woman, the Pokuase boy and the Pokuase girl have a great dream to mold into reality, one that will echo through all corners of the universe. It is all for one reason that they can do this; our power as unique people with unique ways of life. Every individual has this power, this unique way of life. Yet uniqueness is only meaningful if it speaks of the culture of the people.The Ghanaian citizen must know that we can in no way become another perfectly than being ourselves—perfection is in self realization. We cannot be the white man, nor the Indian, nor the Arabian. We can study their ways of life; what makes them progress as a nation. Gathering data will help write the story of our nation using insightful culture-inspired ideas that would not distract us from who we truly are.

Our education must help us answer our questions as a nation, and that will be possible, if we connect all what we study in the basic levels of our needs. Let us begin, it seems the foundation is shaky, so together, lets lay the foundations with our fine culture, and education will be a success with a determined direction.

I have to alight now. To you taking my seat in this van of reasoning towards an education that will develop our nation, you have a lot to do. Begin by asking yourself,”what can I do to help my country in appreciating her for educating me?”

LEAD YOURSELF

2012-11-13T08:36:00.001-08:00

What is leadership really about?

To lead doesn't require you be the quintessence of proficiency; nor does it require you be an idea box which keeps coming up with enigmatic ideas; nor does it require you to be a people's man.

Thousands of books have been written about what the perfect leader is , and the qualities he possesses.

I believe , though, that the real deal has been overlooked.

Hey! - anyone can be a leader. Sit back and take a look at your life. You would realize you are a leader in something, in someway.
The recipe to being a leader is simple; lead yourself. Start something and see it to the finish. Think a question and answer it. Sense a gap and close it.
Make a move. Take a step. Give a suggestion. Ask a question. Lead yourself - in every setting.

Its simple , right? So now tell me, why are you not doing it?

Solve a real problem

2012-11-11T00:33:00.002-08:00

Accumulating knowledge and information really amounts to nothing unless in the end you are solving a real problem.

As someone I know says; 'man, we are not reinventing the world. All the tools and information we need to solve a problem are available. So please dont waste your time thinking about a problem,thats already been solved.'

Solve a real problem right here - make a difference wherever you are.

Think about the tools you will need,if economics, then learn economics - set out to make a difference and then go on - and make a difference.

Dont waste your years gathering information and knowledge that will not help you solve any real problem. Trust me, any experience is not useful experience, unless you've set out to make a difference. Unless you've set out to close a gap you've seen.
This gap could be anything, across all the fields of study known and unknown to man.

It could be as simple as creating a more comfortable pillow or as enormous as creating a musical piece that makes people really happy - These are no real problems from where I stand, but thats the good thing. We all get to make a difference from wherever we stand.

In the end some will create more wants. Others will come close to satisfying some wants - and possibly end up creating more - but thats all good. The truth is we cant really put a cup over human wants; they are insatiable.

The commendable thing is doing something, and going the extra mile to at least see it to its finishing.

In the end the beautiful thing, is , you tried.

WE ARE COMING BACK

2012-11-11T00:28:00.000-08:00

Our last post was on DECEMBER 13, 2011. Since that time there has been a lot that we've been working on. I had barely taken time to think about what this blog meant essentially.
But no event is ever out of order.

There are no sudden happenings in this world. There is a reason to every happening.
We've been long gone, working on other issues, but we are back.

Sammy Delali

Culture Of Creation

2011-12-13T17:03:00.000-08:00

"Culture is the best that has been thought and said", this was the definition formulated by Matthew Arnold in the 19th century. We select this definition among the others because it is the best that has been thought and said. Anyone who disagrees with this definition must most assuredly be a misanthrope - he doesn't want the best for his brothers.

In addition, Arnold provided a further conception of what Culture is. Culture as the "strictness of conscience" and the "spontaneity of reason".

This definition as above fits into and animates a concept we who are lovers of Mankind love, the 'Creative Consciousness'.

We will return to this concept soon, for we are behooved by our topic to make a detour here. It could have come latterly but we will need what we discuss here to assist us in our midwifery role at the side of our darling Creative Consciousness.

A strictness of conscience and spontaneity of reason are not just concepts defined from abstract terms but gleaned from human nature. It is our nature to have a strictness of conscience and a spontaneity of reason. Strictness of conscience interprets as rationality or control or behavior according to laws and rules (right or wrong, true or false, profit or loss, lawful or unlawful). Spontaneity of reason is what usually classifies as irrationality where rules do not play a role and only the perception of something - an idea or thing - has the priority; whether right or wrong, true or false, it doesn't matter. In the normal human, these two work together so that we can judge an idea or thing we have perceived so that, for the scientist's instance, we know if it works or not.

A Creative Consciousness is oriented towards "bringing out". Bringing out what? is the question. To which we human lovers answer "bringing out what is human". You now see the reason for our little detour? We human lovers are not just seeking to see citizens or roles, we seek to see Men, Best Men. With time, we learn more and more about what 'Best' is because as our working definition says "the best that has been thought and said" which is just a general definition undelimited by time - in 2100, it will be what has been thought and said in the 2100 years, and others not included in our structured calendar, before.

In the context of a culture, the two principles govern synergistically, none is superior to the other and this gives our Creative Consciousness a greater impact because it is defined by a Unity in Diversity. Diversity because the different principles and their sub-principles (which can be deduced from their explanations) produce different thigs or ideas. These unite to produce a composite we all can be proud of as it represents our collective humanity no matter our social or geographical origin - we are humans in a nation aren't we?

In the context of an individual, however, one principle naturally predominates. If one does not, the person will be stuck. This is where we usually say "he's like this" or "she's that type of person".

What does this mean?

We have a people who create according to their talents or as my friend Simple Kay will say, "according to their desire". For him, talent is desire. You produce that which comes naturally to you. You become a tree for the rest of us to eat of your fruits. Some may be against you naturally, in actual terms, but in the context of our collective vision or humanity, we are all eating your fruit. It is contributing to the grand banquet that is the Culture (of Creation). You give us what is special to you, your gift to us.

Be proud of yourself, faith in yourself and give to us.

Some person is dominated by a "strictness of conscience", he goes where rationality is needed, where control is needed. We will call this role 'a controller'.

Another is dominated by "spontaneity of reason", like me, so he goes where what we normally call creativity - which is producing new things - is needed. 'New' can mean unconventional or weird or alternative or non-normal. Spontaneity of reason, as Arnold would say, is dominated by 'free play'. We call this role 'an artist'.

Ultimately, all are really Artists because they all create something, and they produce "from their souls" as the usual artist would say.

This is our Vision for the future and I hope to market it to as many as possible. It is an open vision because it is born from we ourselves, from nowhere but ourselves. It is an all-inclusive philosophy for we human lovers are very soft-hearted. It is not from one person's belief system nor is it from some abstract premise. These premises are from we ourselves. The Vision is Us. Can whatever change that occurs tomorrow occur outside of this Vision, a Vision that already presupposes it? I doubt it.

One will ask "why do we need to know this at all?".

As my friend The Gazer says "we are doing stuff but we are not controlling it". What he means there in colloquial lexis is we are not conscious of what we are doing. In effect, we do not know what we are doing. Two reasons for this are we are purposeless and we have no philosophy guiding us. An unconscious nation is haphazard, inhuman and can never talk to itself because it does not know what to talk about. Take into consideration, my brothers and sisters, how difficult it is to talk to someone with whom you have nothing in common. You don't know what to talk about. It is the same here: we do not know what to talk about to ourselves because we have not presented a common. Until it is presented, you have nothing in common, in objective terms - one cannot see what is in another's head until it is presented in speech or action.

This philosophy makes us do something. Because, we know 'everybody' (since everybody is represented by the vision which everyone supports) supports us.

This philosophy gives us faith, direction and freedom. It is not a nationalistic philosophy, it is a humanistic one, with no barrier to who contributes. We only need contributors to this vision. Our citizens are simply, men.

You, I'm talking to you.. Yes! You! Humanity needs you, whatever it is that you have.

(In the above post, the word 'brothers' is chosen simply because I am male and this is easily accessed in my writing. As I do not wish to be dishonest with you, I write it as it comes to me, the way it makes me feel - the bond of brotherliness. Let it be clear that woman is not left out of this but if a different word made such meaning to me as that word 'brotherliness', I would use it. I know it must be uncomfortable for you, which leaves me in a dilemma for should I give you a lie and please you or the truth and invite you into my experience? I do not presume that woman can be replaced with man in any way by my statement of 'brothers' in the way used, and it is exactly for this reason that I use 'brother'; for it is much more familiar to me than a bond that women feel - I wish not to presume myself familiar with what is obviously foreign to me - and stand in disrespect of our honorable woman)

GOD vrs SCIENCE

2011-11-04T11:36:00.000-07:00

At a recent scientific conference in New York, a student in the audience rose to ask the panelists

an expected question, “Can you be you be a good scientist and believe in God?

I find this question interesting and as I thought about it and considered how possible it would be
if I answered the question in the affirmative, though I am no scientist. I don’t know how many
up and coming scientists have already asked themselves this question but I pose it again not
only because it is interesting but also because the average Ghanaian (African) is very spiritual or
religious. Apart from the above, this question dates as far back as the beginning of science itself.
It has caused so many problems, the dreadful of it being death, to humanity. In our quest to find
our place in the world of science and in the midst of our spirituality, we need to be abreast with
the God versus science argument.

“Scientists hate God or find God very disturbing. In fact, modern science has found no evidence
of God and so it is not sensible anymore to think God exists”

The above statement is often presented as conventional wisdom but is it true? The general
issue in relation to the God versus science argument poses several questions due to the stance
various scientists take. Among these questions are; Does the study of science make belief in
God obsolete, Does God exist, What is the difference between Darwin’s evolution theory and
the creation of man according to the Bible and Do we believe the big bang theory or the creation
story according to the first chapter of Genesis? This array of questions brings about three major
arguments.

An extremist group is of the view that science and the study of nature disabuses the idea that
God exists. Belief in the super natural, especially belief in God, is not incompatible with good
science. This kind of belief is damaging to the well being of the human race. This school of

thought postulates that science has proven beyond doubt that no God exists. They apply the
basic natural laws to the various facets of life. “Science has failed to find natural evidence of
God. Natural law is all there is, No God; case closed!” “Science erases the need for God as an
explanation of our experiences and God either doesn’t exist or is at best a hypothesis.” “God:
the failed hypothesis.” These three statements are what people generally refer to as the standard
scientific lines on God. To them God’s place in science, that is if they include him, is to fill the
gaps. They only refer to God in the areas of study where the human intelligence and ingenuity
comes to a dead end. God comes in to cover for areas where man’s limitations begin.

The second group could be referred to as the “don’t mix” group. This group place God and
science as parallel to each other and there should be no way for the two spectrums to meet. To
them, science is just one worldview that has come to be accepted and science and religion need
not be at odds. They strike a contrast between science and religion by saying science speaks with
authority in the realm of what the universe is made up of (i.e. fact) and why it works this way
(i.e. theory) but religion holds sway one question of ultimate meaning and moral value. Science
and religion are two separate realms; “a non overlapping magisterial.”

The final group believes God supersedes everything including science. To them science has
proven that God exists; Science according to this group does nothing but explains the things that
God has done or created in the natural realm. Science cannot prove God’s existence because
human ingenuity and intelligence but God is greater than everything and is not limited by
anything not even science. God should not be used to fill the gaps in scientist knowledge but he
is everything science has found out and would find out. This group also says that God created
a logical, orderly universe and gave us the ability o reason and to be creative that technology is
possible. Technology has shown that sophisticated machines require intelligent designers- not
random chance. Science and technology are perfectly consistent with the bible. A scientist’s
ability to discover a thing is a step in knowing God better. The fact that science cannot prove the
existence of God tells how limited scientific knowledge is. To them to reject God because of self
contradictions and logical failings of organized religion would be like rejecting physics because
of inherent contradictions of quantum theory and general relativity.

As conclude this piece, I leave the question open to you, Can you be a good scientist and
believe in God? Since this is meant to be an interactive medium I also wish to ask that in your
development with science and your relationship with God, which of these three schools of
thought do you identify with? However, I would like to borrow the words of renowned Albert
Einstein that “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

Education and Culture

2011-11-04T11:27:00.000-07:00

Our culture slipping into the gutters

The solution is not to try to get people to realize that our culture is slipping into the gutters. But to conceptualize a culture that the new Ghanaian will embrace. A new culture that reorients our way of thinking and reconstructs our attitude towards the world.
A sort of paradigm shift.

Education is not separate from culture . Education is rather an integral part of culture. When education is separated from culture there is chaos.
Culture includes the customs,ideas and social behaviour of a society or a group of people. But its defined and determined by a very important factor and that is how a society wants to live.
Now sociology studies the structures , development and functioning of societies, And in retrospect ,societies that have lived centuries past or our own primitive societies will tell you two things.
A society that knew what kind of life, its people should lead always achieved great things and a society that didn’t know , always lost the real essence of their culture.
An example of a society whose culture is slowly slipping away , is our society. Our culture is becoming a mediocre one, because its filled with too much borrowing. A little good from here, a little bad from here, we copy blindly, following fads.

I t is important we realize what it it we want and determine how we can get there. Plato’s Republic shows an example of how first a country needs to know the kind of life they want to live. And how they can construct their customs , beliefs and etc to make that life possible.
We need to realize culture is a creative enterprise, determined by the creative consciousness of its people. In a recent discourse with friend she said and I quote;" Culture is the way of life people and in its dynamism it has no choice but to be creative. Otherwise there would be no distinctiveness among people . And a world without culture would absolutely monochromatic".
True, but we are forgetting to notice , we can consciously control the creative process. An example is what Lycurgus did with Sparta and what Plato's republic described.

The question where do we start?
We start with the integral part of culture; education.
In which modes and forms are educated through; mass media( TV, Radio,Journals,News Papers, Magazines), opinion leaders, community centres, schools.
We need a plan << a national policy>> of what life in this country should be and could be, then we work at it.

There is hope for tomorrow but we can only do something now. SO bit by bit, lets discuss how we can effect the change we all so want to see.
1.What kind of life do we want to live
2.How do we recreate the kind of culture we want
3.What kind of education should be given
4.How do we effectively create the Ghana we all drea of
We can only start now!

Wittgenstein and Me

2011-10-27T23:15:00.000-07:00

I was reading an interview with John Searle about Wittgenstein, yesterday, and it made me recall why I got more involved with philosophy despite a deep calling to it that reaches far back into my tenderest youth where I always asked 'why?' and kept on dazzling my family with imaginative arguments and observations about what life was about.

The interview made me recall that a similar thing as happened with Wittgenstein happened with me. You see, I was reading medical science in the University and while doing my learning I kept on asking questions, questions that were at the foundations of what I was learning, the background of it, and it bothered my learning somewhat. It was a similar thing that occurred in Secondary School but this time I couldn't just evade them, it was like "if you're meant to do it, you have to". I didn't even bother to ask my teachers in the University because I knew they wouldn't have the answers and I didn't want to shame them. So, I went off on my own and taught myself it - Philosophy. As can be expected, it was in no systematic way but let me say emphatically that the first philosophers learned in no systematic way, the Platonian Academy was no systematic school, the Socratic which preceded the Platonian also wasn't (the Socratic was just a loose collection of friends who liked to argue, it is quite amusing how they related to each other, Socrates talking about "I will think on it till I have defeated it" :-)), even though there was an abundance of other systematic schools like the Sophists'. (Wittgenstein was studying Engineering when he got more interested in the foundations of the Mathematics he was studying, he was lucky that his professors who couldn't answer his questions redirected him; well, I didn't do that at all so I can't say anything negative or positive about mine :-))

Discussing this with myself, the following came to mind: some people have suggested putting Philosophy away and using it for practical purposes, Wittgenstein himself made such a suggestion. Thing is Philosophy is not something we come to meet and use, we create it. It is we as men who ask the questions and we label them as Philosophical. If we are to make it practical, we miss the point of its existence, it is already practical, serving to quell our doubts as men and to help as grow our minds. I am not against the 'practical' orientation, no, far from it, I am just switching the perspective to make the field of view wider and more truthful.

What does all this matter to our little discussion here on Science? Well, I was learning Science when my concern was more with the foundations of things, our present system doesn't allow us to switch courses, it appears that our system is an instrument of confinement, intentionally constructed to intimidate, then tame and depress the souls that live within it. It's as if it is a cyanide factory come to be built around us humans..a tear comes to my eye. What I seek to say is this: I wasn't moving away from Science, I was just going below Science to better construct its base, in another world, that would be a good thing because I am an aid to Science, I am being a link between Philosophy and Science, helping to produce that comprehensive network of knowledge that is originally the case when it is in our minds and not the disjointed one we have on the ground. There was a time when these things were more in fashion as I derive from accounts of former days where it was more a 'primitive' setting but it tells us how much we have lost.

My friend, Simple Kay, was telling me about an article where they were saying our culture is being eroded and so forth. I said at that time that it was bogus with the thought that "change is necessary" but on second thought, it is this "our culture really has slipped into the gutter, we have lost our culture of questioning which is quite tied to our spirituality". While I thought of this, my mind went to the issue of the arrival of Christianity; just how much was lost by that arrival? I am not saying, like some people, that we should jettison that noble religion, far from it, I am only asking for a re-evaluation of the perimeter in which we stand, if there is any perimeter at all, as at now, with everything that has happened counted.

This is where we stand on the ground today as a people, where do we go from here?

Jack-In-The-Box

2011-10-27T23:10:00.000-07:00

Mr. President, you wanna know why we don't create big businesses, delightful inventions (a business can also be an invention) and so forth, it's because we've lost our Imagination. Now, everything has to fit into a box, into a pre-determined system. I forewarn you that if you keep doing that, that box of yours is going to explode one day. Even Jack can't stay in his spacious box. You don't predetermine things and say you want to do something, no, that is not how we proceed. I'm not saying "do away with all pre-determination", all I'm saying is "you cannot pre-determine everything, there is a point at which this must stop and allow for more blind work -- you can call it groping if you like but if you try it, you'll be astonished how much we humans can actually grope, well if you have enough Vitamin A for scotopic (night) vision, we have quite the good scotopic vision for color-dependent animals :-)". You can't plan everything, there is a point at which this must stop and give way for more 'improvisation', I put that in inverted commas because it is what it is called by people who like to pre-determine for we always tend to degrade what opposes us.

This box of yours will explode one day, and even right this minute, we can see the bulges, ever so impercptible but still there, as well as the disjuncts (disconnections).

THE SCIENTIST VS THE TECHNICIAN...

2011-10-26T23:39:00.000-07:00

It's outrageous the number of people we call scientists today, even the definition of a scientist in our dictionaries is questionable provided we let the truth of science prevail. Our self-imposed meaning of science has taken off the curtain that separated scientists from others--today we find it difficult to draw a line of separation between a scientist and an artist, and a poet, and a writer etc. Most people spend the most part of their lives in schools studying what someone wants them to know ignoring what they could learn outside the classroom, or perhaps anything which is not yet known to the world around and beyond. This is the curtain that separated scientists from those in other fields of study.... Science is like being on a journey that has no end and generally not built upon purposeful ideas such as job opportunities or financial accomplishments. Rather it's to feed the flourishing curiosity and anxiety to know beyond the known, to discover, to see what the eyes of others haven't, to taste the life beyond the superficial, to probe and to acquire so much knowledge that in the end we could as individuals through painstaking ideas make sagacious predictions of happenings that could be experienced due to our current observations being subjected to our knowledge. This is the journey that caught Einstein on his sick bed scribbling equations when he had only few days to live, he saw it wiser than writing a will.

Who is a scientist? Who is a technician?
A technician is a highly trained person whose job is to apply known techniques and principles in getting work done. He studies these principles laid down by others who didn't gear to settle on the knowledge from others but to seek the unknown. Hence the technician deals with the known while the scientist deals with the unknown. A scientist is therefore a person who seeks the true nature of physical reality, though some aspects of science are getting beyond the physical, merging with psychology and appreciating spirituality.
The technicians do well in converting ideas into materials, tools, machines, services that keep us going and growing. They make out a great deal of importance from the knowledge received. They make the scientists realize the relevance of their discoveries when they see them manifest. The connection between the two is like our feeding relationship with green plants. Green plants produce organic food substances such as starch from inorganic substances, water and carbon-dioxide. Our part is to use the food they are producing.

It will be beautiful if one can be both a scientist and a technician; we can experiment to develop ideas, discover a lot about our physical world and apply to see how effective the ideas could be. Every scientist will apply his findings perfectly since no one knows better than the founder of an idea, of a truth (it’s easier to live by your own rules than to live by rules by another). He can apply it in a better way than a technician, and could even engineer ways to advance and make the discovery better for his deeper understanding. The technician could also have a different look into the principles and techniques he knows. He could wander about the principles to find ways to get it work faster or easier. In this case the technician is also being scientific and this will help develop our country. U3nfortunately we aren't sure we even have scientists here; not even science teachers can be easily called scientists.

History tells us all scientists at a time were teachers. They taught others what they discovered, explained theories discovered by other scientists to their students. Does it mean all science teachers are scientists? No, a big no! In my country Ghana, most science teachers are technicians as well. They gather information from books in accordance to the school syllabus and pass it on to their students. They do this as a job; to earn some good money with no sense of enthusiasm guiding them... they are never passionate about the subject. The big dream of training scientists in Ghana will never be met until the right teachers--scientists who want to share their knowledge come on board.
When that happens, and when the ministry of education wants to impart the science ideology into the students, then science will be studied in my country. All we do now is mere history, storing information that is never used in the mind.
There is absolutely no need to keep the science knowledge stale. The expansive universe and all in it must be respected by expanding the subject, updating and correlating ideas perfectly so that students now wouldn't do the same old science practical done by others a decade ago. Science is meant to be a reality of understanding the world and solving its problems. We are unfortunately unable to go on that thread mill with our problems because we all want the jobs, every science student is aspiring for a job in a company to apply what he has studied for earnings.
For now most science teachers in my country are technicians, and their job is to memorize scientific information from books to share with students... no need for researches. These teachers had similar form of education years ago, and with so much in their mind, they can pour into our desperate minds...all we can afford is to acquiesce . But this can't be science for its lack of doubt. Science is doubt, and students should be allowed to explore beyond the expected. A scientist is no Rabbi to be buried in a grave of limitations subjected by others, doing the will of others.

Isidor I. Rabi, Nobel Prize winner in Physics and the former Chairman of the Physics Department at Columbia University wrote:
We don't teach our students enough of the intellectual content of experiments--their novelty and their capacity for opening new fields....My own view is that you take these things personally. You do an experiment because your own philosophy makes you want to know the result. It's too hard, and life is too short, to spend your time doing something because someone else has said it's important. You must feel the thing yourself...

As upcoming scientists, we need some independence in the methods of study and material to study. Do not restrict us to the syllables, and give us some room for doubting what you teach us, let us know all you are saying are perceptions of others but their validity is the fact that those perceptions work well in various fields in making life easy. Tell us science is easy and we could one day disprove some facts or make them better. We need to realize we are the "science", and that science is not a bunch of information. Trigger that part of our mind that leads us questioning every minuscule of observation and anything you teach us. This is what will make us scientists.

The lab technician, the chemist, the doctor, the engineer and the science teacher are still technicians working solely with the principles and techniques acquired in school. The augment received in class from others seems to be the holy grail for them, and anything outside is alien. To be a scientist is the easiest but its method of teaching has scared a lot of potential students fearing the complexity of calculation system never applied in our daily lives.

In one of our talks about science and education, three students confessed aspiring to do science because their teacher taught them rightly. Although he spent less than a year with them, he's left them in an ocean of passion for science. What did this teacher tell them to feel this way for the subject most feared? One of them said," he once told us all he taught was just information and that which we make of it is the knowledge, science knowledge is therefore subjective to every individual". We realized the teacher was a true scientist to have made them realized they could go on the journey finding their own faith, and choosing what to believe and what not to believe.

The realization of the veiled truth in our physical world must be met by being true scientist in order to find ways to walk the walk of the universe we find ourselves. Let the doctor know he is a technician when he settles only on the known, disregarding the essence that there is a light beyond what is known. And let the mechanical engineer know that classical mechanics still needs some beginners’ minds, and the chemist, and all who want to be called “scientists”. There is a light beyond the boarders of the known.
Lets traverse this path together...lets do it together.

Teach Yourself Something Unique

2011-10-24T09:35:00.000-07:00

Teaching yourself is one thing that I have always been a believer in. Because I believe you are your own best teacher and learning by yourself is very important. Why? Formal education will make you a living; self-education will make you a fortune.
Our teachers play a key role in our early education. But another truth I have found out and I would like to share with every eager mind out there is that things you teach yourself or better still discover on your own makes you stand out rather than blend with everybody; it makes you entitled to knowledge that you are the pioneer of. In teaching yourself you will have to resort to doing researches by reading books and articles written by other people, but it was your conscious effort to teach yourself what is in the learning materials that will make your knowledge unique. Discovery makes you different. And through learning and searching for knowledge on our own regarding a particular subject, we are able figure out things for ourselves that has been hidden.
The sum of all that I would like you to understand is you are your own best teacher.

When you learn something through your own research, it gives you an edge or leverage over others who are not entitled to what you have taught yourself through your own efforts. Others who never created the opportunity for themselves to learn what you already know, believe me you are one step ahead of them with the knowledge that is self-acquired.

Teaching yourself means educating yourself. For you to be reading this that means a teacher that could be a parent or a guardian gave you this knowledge of reading in school or at home-which is the foundation that you need and have already gotten. But you can also endeavor to learn on your own rather than waiting for a teacher, tutor, lecturers or teaching assistants or whatever form of instructor available at your level of education.

The truth is some teachers love their jobs and others don’t. So the level of patience that your teacher will display in making you understand something new is not what you will dedicate to yourself.

So as much as our teachers play an essential part in laying the foundation for our formal education, it is only yourself who can learn things that will take you to the heights that are known to only you.

The possibility that someone else also must have had the opportunity of learning what you have taught yourself is likely but at the end of the day you both end up learning entirely different things from the same book.
You must have read the same book from the same source but your level of understandings will be very much different. Successful people are people doing the same things right that others are doing wrong. And it is that uniqueness in knowledge that makes the difference.

The impact that self-tutorials can make on your life is limitless. Maximizing your knowledge base can turn your life around in unique ways. And it is not teaching yourself that is important but living by what you taught yourself or acting upon your knowledge is what will make you different and successful. And every aspect of life deserves some level of screening process. So you should learn how to take useful

information from the lot that you have are exposed to and make the conscious effort of sieving whatever information you are exposed to and make deductions based on your own lifestyle and your temperament to get knowledge. Formal education more often than not is based on some set of rules that do not appeal to everybody. Hence, you have people dropping out of schools to teach themselves things that improved their lives that if they stayed in schools they could not learn from a teacher. Formal education is important but the mere fact that someone has passed through the hierarchy of the system, does not mean they are definitely going to have better lives than those who have not. That is very far from the truth. I had the opportunity of reading about famous, rich and successful people who were college or high school dropouts. I will name a few here for you to know how teaching yourself can be beneficial to your life as it was to these people.

1.Roman Abramovich, richest man in Russia and dropped out of to go into business. He got a law degree only through a correspondence program Moscow State College after he was a successful business man with no degree or whatsoever.

2.Abigail Adams, was a US first lady and she had no formal education at all. She was homeschooled.

3.Bryan Adams, a famous singer and songwriter drooped out of high school

4.Andre Agassi, tennis player ,winner of 8 Grand Slam titles. Quit school in the ninth grade and turned tennis pro at the age 16.

5.Dianna Agron,singer,dancer,actress said these and I quote ‘’I didn’t take the typical path and go to college after high school .Instead I saved up money from teaching dance classes and moved to LA’’

6.Christina Aquilera,singer ,songwriter never finished high school

7.Tom Anderson,co-founder of the social networking site Myspace did not graduate high school.

8.Anthony Andrews, actor. High school dropout

9.Jennifer Aniston,actress.Never attended college. These are her words and I quote, ‘’Getting a nose job was the best thing I ever did’’

10.Julian Assange. Wikileaks founder, software programmer. Studied mathematics at the University of Melbourne but dropped out because other students were doing research for Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency

11.John Jacob Astor, multimillionaire businessman. America’s first multimillionaire. High school drop out

These are people who had never really had what society will call enough formal education but through self-education made tremendous impact on their own lives and the lives of others that some people with degrees and doctorates would never be able to achieve. Teach yourself something unique today; because you are the only one who can teach yourself something unique.

And one more important thing is that when teaching yourself something, you go at your own pace rather than under the pressure of time that formal education is based upon. Hence you improve your life in so many ways. Financially self-education is cheaper compared to formal education. And in self-education the acquisition of practical knowledge is what must be your main aim. The people that you just read about at sometime had to be their own teachers, but they educated themselves in practical knowledge as compared to the theoretical ones that formal education is keen on instilling in students. Life is practical so educate yourself that way.

Teachers are very hardworking and patient individuals but they also get bored with their students sometimes. And students also get bored of teachers. But in teaching yourself, you are the decider of the environment of your studies and there is no way you will choose a boring atmosphere or an uncomfortable one for that matter to teach yourself anything. Self-education is fun.

I will outline some means by which you can educate yourself .There are many different approaches that you can take to learning a new subject.

1. Learning through Project: a great way to learn a new set of skills is to start a project. Projects that require abilities outside your own force you to learn. Taking on the challenge of writing a book forces you to improve your writing. Designing a website can push to learn the details of HTML,PHP or MySQL. Most projects that are beyond common endeavors require an expansion of skill. If no new learning was required, the goal would probably be incredibly boring. And also try as much as you can to choose a project that sits outside your current knowledge without becoming too difficult.

2. Read books: Reading is a great method to educate yourself. Books condense understandings so you can speed up the time it would take to learn by trial and error. Books can also give crucial background knowledge that may be skipped when more practical knowledge is sought. Reference books are a good idea to get even if you do not read them through. Reference books on a particular subject can be used to find specific facts when they are needed. There are book that aren’t how-to guides, but have background information on the subject of your self-study and they are important. Background reading also broadens your understanding of a subject so you can come up with new ideas and strategies.

3. Solve problems: The words of Albert Einstein.’’ Any man reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking’’.

In other words reading also has its limits. The only way information becomes knowledge is when it gets organized for practical matters. If you have read hundreds of business books but cannot run a business, that knowledge is wasted. Reading can gather ideas but only reality creates skills. Practice and apply what you are learning. You must combine reading with projects to acquire new skills to solve problems.

Are Teachers Cheaters?

2011-10-20T16:10:00.000-07:00

"None but geometers may enter"

This was written boldly atop the entrance to Plato's Academy in Athens. I'll tell you the significance of this in a while.

Many people think Science is a tall order for them, in fact, insurmountable. Their notions may be due to teacher's incompetence. Science isn't difficult (okay parts like Modern Physics may be too abstract) and do Science on a daily basis. A child who wants to learn how the lightbulb turns on can go like this:

Observation - after the light switch is flicked or pressed, the light turns on.
Hypothesis - the switch is responsible for the light turning on.
So he watches successive flicks or presses and with the gathering evidence, concludes that his hypothesis was valid, at which point it turns into a theory and a standard then. Look at your life and see how many times you do this, the underlying concept. You most assuredly do this, this is how Science is, basically. If only it was treated as such and not deified like it is in schools.

Now, the quote; I mentioned it because education in general may be simplified if we incorporate the use of learning styles. There are three recognized learning styles (there are others which I think are valid but aren't well-accepted in scholarly environment), visuospatial, verbal and kinesthetic. I am a visuospatial thinker and learner primarily and a verbal one closely secondarily. That then, fits me into Plato's bracket of geometers. When I was taught addition, it didn't make sense to me until Abacus was brought for me to visualize the adding process. A number meant squat to me. To date, a deluge of numbers annoys me, I hated the binomial theorem in Secondary School and still do. However, I loved the probability theory which had to do with manipulations that really didn't need numbers. The binomial theorem is translatable to spatial terms but can you do that in school? The fact that there's even a 'formula' is annoying. If you connect my mind to a PC and observe how I think, you would see dots, lines and all sorts of plane and 3D figures. Alas! I am a geometer!

In our classroom environments, we alienate different learning styles, different thoughts or ideas (nice that the blog is subtitled 'freethinking', innit?) and make students less capable than they are. Such alienation dampens confidence, reduces esteem, and by such reduction in belief, the student denigrates himself so that he cannot engage his normal processes (e.g. learning style) and do well as he is wired. Or, he denigrates himself and himself comes to believe that "he is no good" so that he becomes a bad student. This mode of operation of class affects too many of our students and makes us wonder how many geniuses are truck-pushers, mates and so forth, just because of an unaccommodating atmosphere. After all, it is just "what has worked" for us that becomes the standard. It doesn't make the different thought wrong, it doesn't.

If learning styles are more engaged, I believe our education would improve, and so would Scientific education. Scientific education would also improve if we just had more patient and humble teachers who would take their time to explain to students, to not think the students dumb and to make them know of the derivations to quell their misunderstandings. There is a particular line of thought that led to any given bit of information and it doesn't make any deviating thought wrong, it is what it is: deviant.

Memory Overrated, then Underrated

2011-10-20T14:55:00.000-07:00

"Why bother committing to memory what can be looked up in 2 seconds" ~ Einstein

Well, that's the way I remember it but as I have forgotten where I read it, this is what I got right now as I searched:

"Never memorize something you can look up"

The words, the one way or the other, of the rascal, Albert Einstein. I must say I have always been an ardent believer in this. Even as a young boy in lower primary school, I detested and somehow looked with trepidation at my father's request of me to recount what the story of a novel I read was or was about. I tended to sum up works in nutshells a la Aesop's Fables (my all-time favorite book) and also tended to take my own thing from works i.e. what was actually not presented in the material.

Before I came into contact with these words by Einstein, I said these words similarly over and over again at various places viz. "why should I remember this when it's in the book" and then I'd scoff.

I have come to find that, through self-reflection and research in biographies and psychology texts, that such an attitude is one of the artist/inventor. They have no business memorizing anything, only discovering and constantly extending the bounds of the 'discovered'.

Recently, I read an article where one of the Google heads spoke about the internet dumbing us down since we could look up anything at the click of a button. That article was referring to the lack of, and bemoaning this lack, deep thinking involved in learning today. I am always one to 'deep think' so it doesn't refer to me. But, I will take my own spin on it and put it in my own context: that of memory.

I tend to keep my memory in my pocket. As a young boy, I'd argue well but because I'd forgotten my references, I couldn't prove my words when they weren't just clever guesses; you've had glimpses here, unintentional too. Nowadays, Hallelujah!!! The Internet allows me to just "put ya keywords in here" and shazam!!! that's my reference right there, my case is buttressed, busta, ha!!! I had been feeling guilty about my failing memory because of this, was even scared I'd one day forget my own name like Einstein did (allegedly) before the metioned article came along, so I decided to put in an experiment, a psychological experiment, and see. Well, well, well, the results have been telling as I expected (I didn't want to change though cos having 'flights of ideas' is so fantastic an experience) and my concentration has improved, my comprehension has improved, my patience in general has improved, my irritability too has reduced. These are the preliminary results as the experiment is on-going (I know you want to know the details of the experiment, I'll tell ya later), hit you back on it later.

This article is just a criticism of the position mentioned at the beginning and a minor exposition on 'Learning' and 'Memory' in Psychology. The position, though, can be seen more benignly as when not carried to extreme extents, it serves well for the wandering mind, the creative mind. There is a goodly amount of truth in that statement and all its variations.

Hope you enjoyed the article, my friend.

Instead of...

2011-10-20T13:56:00.000-07:00

Instead of what Science should be, I will speak of what Science shouldn't be:

1. It should not be thought of as static. New discoveries lead to new info which lead to new theories, sometimes at the expense of the old. Science is very dynamic and though we need to learn what has been found so far, let's not turn it into what is always going to be found - a sad state in our schools.

2. Science cannot and should not be the starting point of every human endeavor. Nowadays, even art is becoming formulaic; the muse-inspired artist that Plato spoke of is a rarity. However, when one looks at it closely, one realizes that it was a similar situation in Plato's time which must have occasioned his thoughts on it and his effusive criticisms of the calculator artists.

Now, every little invention becomes standard practice, 'standard practice' - a scientific way of looking at the world. Art and Science always stand counterpoint to each other so I shouldn't be speaking about this as their eternal hostilities will just show what I seek to say, but it needs a human voice to back it up. That split between Art and Science is exemplified by the artist, William Blake, who criticized Science so vehemently; he however did not hate Science as he was too intelligent for that, he saw its use. Art is a liberator, Science is law. Science has to structure things, produce 'standards' lest our world falls. Art is just a happy toddler creating and forgetting what he has created leaving a mess behind him.

3. Science should not simply be theory, science is much valued for its practical use. Except for that, there will be nothing special about science and it would remain in the cot of Philosophy for all eternity. Science is what is empirically valid, we must find that in our schools and raise creative applicators, not only applicators; for an empirical method of learning already is in line with a practical style.

4. Learning, in general, in our schools is bogged down in minutiae. One thing that dismayed Einstein and led to him leaving school was a lack of creativity. Engage the students, let them think creatively about their approaches, sometimes it might not even match the 'standards' but it does not mean it is wrong, rather, the attitude to something like that should be "let's follow it and see where it goes".

5. There is also the issue of not investigating the fundaments of what we learn in our schools. We don't investigate the philosophical underpinnings of what is there, we should allow that. I remember once in my physics class that I asked a question and my teacher was stunned momentarily but came up with an apt answer, "I don't know but this one is useful so let's go on, we can find the other out later" at which we both smiled. This is an example of an encouraging teacher and a lover of learning. I was always depressed by the way school went, you couldn't question the assumptions made in developing a theory or something like that and you were made to just gobble it all up. It never was conducive to me, to me, I hadn't understood what I was supposed to have learned.

6. The fifth point leads to this: let's not get caught in the illusion that learning invariably has to be stepwise. One inane excuse they make is "that is an advanced level so let's not go there" when you ask a question that is supposed to take you to the higher levels. We are in school to learn, let us learn; you can't predict what my mind can do too so let's go and see. School almost ruined my love for learning; we must learn so let us learn.

Educational Policy: A way forward.

2011-10-18T06:49:00.000-07:00

Vision
Inspire
Think
Notice
Practical Knowledge
Solve problems

Its dawn alright and I am starting out a new article.

Its 10th October 2011, and as I write this piece . Its been about 54years since a concise book was written on purposeful education for Africa.
Its been long road down here, and I wish to take up the subject again, because nothing has changed much since the last 54years. In the previous years a professor of Sociology Dr. K.A Busia wrote a wonderful book on what education should be. Most of the problems he saw and seeked change still exist today in most part of Africa. The purpose of this piece of writing is not to talk about how bad the education system is now or to analyze how come most of these problems exist.
I believe I am not the position to make such investigations. I am a SSS leaver and I have but experienced only a third of the whole educational process in this country.
Someone might say then I dont have even a first hand experience of what the tertiary education is like to write an article to suggest a way forward. Well that will be very true. And I dont seek to contend with the fact.
Yet still, there is a saying that whatever is within is what reflects outward. On the grounds that I see what my friends and people in my community turn out when they graduate or even their attitude towards school, I believe there is still more to be done.

As I said earlier, I have no wish to talk about the issues in our educational system that plagues us all.This information is more or less redundant and stressing even makes it more so, because it doesn't help in anyway to change the current situation.

I wish to stress rather on a way forward. Mind you, my ideas may sound subjective at first. Probably because of the way I express myself and secondly because these ideas have no scientific backing. But I believe all the ideas I shall stipulate here are logical and when looked at carefully , is a feasible a way out. And secondly which idea at first is not subjective, all ideas are first subjective until affirmed and confirmed.

VISION:
It is a very simple fact that needs to be reckon with; you can't put up any structure without a blue print. You need a dream to achieve something, that sounded vague. A dream in sight is reality at bay.
We can say this in many different ways but truth is one, without a target you are aimless.
It is very impotant that before this country can go forward it needs a dream, a dream of what life in this country should be like for the average person and what it takes to get there.
Aristotle puts it this way:The state comes in existence for the sake of life; it exists for the sake of the "good life" and imparts it to its citizens".
Vision is very important and the onus falls on the opinion leaders of this country , to work with the people and find a way forward but its all talk in the air, to stress the point again, because little has been done so far with all the talk the professor did 54years ago.

In terms of having the "good life" and imparting it to the people in what small way can we begin to turn things around?
The first block of socialization or education is the family. Considering this fact essential efforts could begin from there.
The family needs to have an idea of the good life is and what it takes to get there. When children are growing up parents are supposed to tell their children what they are capable of becoming and the efforts required to become that. Children need to be aware of the boundless opportunities that is open to them, and the need for them to experiment with ideas pertaining to the development of first themselves and then their society. Children also need to understand that their efforts go a long way to help the development of their country and that their role in this country is to leave a mark, a positive mark.

The young should be imparted with these ideas and the best place for them to start is their community. First by being introduced to volunteer works, and telling them the onus falls on them to find practical solutions to the problems they see in their community. The young will only know a situation is a problem if it conflicts with the true dream they believe in.
The community should be an organized entity where role models set a pace for the young . It should be an environment where children are guided , where children are worked with to solve challenges. This is a sure grooming future leaders.

INSPIRE:
This word is a very essential part of human growth and development. What children end up becoming is because of what they are inspired by. Even at the point of death people are inspired to do the most never thought of things.
Somewhere in all of us, lies great potentials and it always it takes some form inspiration to bring out the power that lies within. I could possibly write a whole book on inspiration and how it determines what we all become in the end... great people become great because of the sort inspiration they had and so do average men.

The role of parents is to inspire their children, the role of the community is to inspire its members, the role of the society is to inspire the people and this they can do with a dream.
The individual is the experience of the society, whereas, the society is the expression of the individual.

The teacher's role and the role of the school is to introduce the student to information and knowledge that will inspire the student to do greater things.

THINK.
Edward De Bono, invented the think tank, lateral thinking and many others, I cant possibly mention here.
He said something quite remarkarble; " the art of thinking should be introduced as a subject in schools"
Great men think and in a nation where there are thinkers, is a nation that thrives.

To be continued.............

Introduction page

2011-10-18T06:44:00.000-07:00

I think and I think. How am I going to start this piece , to introduce this journal so you understand the idea behind it all.
I realize my words are not enough, and over the years I've probably not been able to build the lexicon necessary for me to express myself the way I wish to.
Therefore I am going to say it simply.

This is the time to think.

We've come to a stage in the development of this nation, where we are in need of men and women, who think. Men and women who will think . Who are enterprising enough, to cause a change. Men and women who will think and ask the questions that will open channels to greater advancement.
Advancement in business, art, technology, language and education. There is little we can do if we refuse to think in whatever area we find ourselves.

GEM an old professor in pyschology said it simply: The problem we have with the people in this country today, is that we dont think.
The reason we dont think is because we are ignorant( lack first hand experience at many things). But reading solves the problem in many ways. Pick up a book to read today and another to peruse tomorrow and the problem is solved.
We will have men and women who are capable of thinking. Who will be able to look at issues incisively.

First be curious, read everything you see, create a filter and learn to think.
Share Your Ideas because thats the best way to learn and grow.

The main purpose of this journal is to serve as a forum for students and all likes of people to express their views and opinions about their areas of concern.
Its a platform, where views can be exprssed with no restrictions.

Feel free to express yourself on any issues that are mind-buggling that you believe needs attention.
Further, any ideas, thesis in any area that you believe will or plays an eesential part to our society is allowed.
Free will, Free voices, Free thinkers; this is our code.

Great works of art have no more affecting lesson for us than this . They teach us to abide by our spontaneous impression with good-humored inflexibility then most when the whole cry of voices is on the other side. Else, tomorrow a stranger will say with masterly good sense precisely what we have thought and felt all the time and we shall be forced to take with shame our own opinion from another.

For in every work of a genius we can recognize our own rejected thoughts; they come back to us with a certain alienated majesty.
- Emerson.

This is where Your Opinion is noticed. This is where Your Opinion matters.
Free will, Free voices, Free thinkers.

WHAT IS SCIENCE?

2011-10-06T12:23:00.001-07:00

SCIENCE.
After years of studying science in the classes, from books, audio books, biographies of the legendary scientists, researches and my own pondering about our universe, I still found a question troubling my mind after a chat with a friend. This question kept me asking myself, “What is science?”…. It was a short chat with a friend who studies aerospace engineering in Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST).
I asked him a question I later regretted. What makes you think you are reading science? He answered; because I’m reading aerospace engineering…he continued, listing things he could do with his knowledge in the field.My curiosity wasn’t satisfied, I felt I should ask more, so I asked--- What is science? This time it took him some few seconds to type, I kept counting the seconds; anxious to see what he says this time. He answered,” Science is everything!”

Though I continued typing as we talked, I was driven into a world far misty, nothing was clear. What is everything, what is nothing? We all use these words in our language, but how definite are these words. I lost the focus throughout the chat, the idea of space and time convicted me of curiosity, my mind couldn’t settle to see any clear picture; it was like being pulled into a world of fairies making you feel you are one.
I ended the chat with my friend wishing I could have confessed how immensely I was galvanized by our talk and the dimension of reality I just caught hold of. As I walked home I kept asking questions that were simple but difficult to find the answers.

If I say, everything about this girl is adorable. It could only be true if and only if at that particular place and time I know all that she is, excluding the thoughts of others about her. How do I know all about her; what joules of heat energy is loosing out of her body every second? How much radiation is she receiving and what micro organisms are interacting internally in her system?what is she thinking about in that moment? As I kept asking these questions I understood all I could know about her was only a thought dimension predetermined in my subconciousness, perhaps they could all be my responses towards her. I was not being scientific enough.To know her truly was to keep thoughts (judgments) aside and just observe her every fraction of a microsecond.
But this was more insane, every microsecond she becomes a new person with a different age, in a second her lungs filled with air, during the next second she pumps air out of her lungs, particular erythrocytes located at different points after every pulse, her senses keep changing attention to the environment as the environment changes conditions. The same happens to the rocks, plants, air molecules… every second sees a change in every constituent of this universe. If we say something is A in a moment, it cannot be A in the next moment.

If science is meant to be characterized mainly by observation, then science can never be everything due to our inability to give undivided attention to all aspects of a specimen in our experiments. Usually we focus on the part that answers our hypothesis, though sometimes we unexpectedly come across other observations leading to theories we never thought of. Science can therefore not be defined as everything! This is because all we know and our dimension of noticing is only how adept we have become in driving our senses towards the expected, yet we constitute only a part of nature---all we know is due to our response to nature (the universe) in which we constitute only a tiny part. Neither can we support our views by the assumption that we are the most complex and we are living organisms whereas others are non-living organisms. The idea of what makes a body living is what we have enumerated, still subject to the diameter of understanding of the world we find ourselves.

Science is a methodology of understanding the world around us, thus, as we have made it to be, but true observation and realization is accountable to experience. As one will say… the best lessons in life are not the ones told but the ones experienced. Our scientific analysis must therefore respect the fact that all conclusions we make are in a way our responses to the specimen, whether we are aware or not. The subject-object relationship is the reason for our result in all experiments. The questions we ask of nature leads us to what we know so far about nature. When we begin to ask different questions we will find a lot more we never could imagine. Science therefore can’t be everything since it never tapers to the pin-point; it disperses from the very point of our questioning to broader perspectives we can’t encompass in a single mind, erupting various fields from the same question that need to be specialized.

Science to me is a way of life. This way of life is beyond the superficial, it’s rather a question-answer chain of life with each fueling the growth of reality in this misty dimension. A question leads to an answer; the answer develops into suggestions which need to be examined, in that process engineering another question that may take decades to answer. Like the journey through quantum physics has bore the questions: what causes the force of gravity in the particle realm or reality; if there are any particles at all what state will they be; charged or neutral? Answers seem easy to find if we are guarded by the minds projections basing on earlier intellect... yet again though it is important building upon earlier knowing, programming the mind to forge understanding and explanation of the subject veils our sight as scientists from the clear picture.

Science needs no beautification; we have to observe what is, and not what is expected to be. We might feel disappointed realizing that most of our earlier knowledge was caged by just a single person’s perceptions, but that doesn’t get close to solving our problems. Einstein explained during his historic journey through the Theory of Special and General Relativity--- he illustrated something of importance about the way that we structure our perceptions is indicative of an inevitable trend toward the merger of physics and psychology. What has Einstein discovered that got him thinking this way? Einstein had a beginners mind; a mind that ponders with little or no much acknowledgement of the already believed; a mind that wonders if the opposite is true; a mind whose truth is in analysis, and not mere information.

If you read carefully you would realize I was just going round the topic scared of saying anything acclaiming to be science. Science is no more strictly viewed as what you must know, it’s now what do you know individually. Like Buddha saying that a man should find his own salvation, the truth in science is an individual adventure. Science is still made of pragmatic ways to solve problems in our diameter of the universe…for our solution becomes a problem to other members of the universe. This alone explains the fact that we are only viewing our part of the searched reality. This reality, this truth, we cannot find alone; the rocks, rivers, plants, animals etc know a great deal than we do. Do they?
What is science? What is science? What is science?
We can as scientist answer this question individually, yet be free to criticize my definition.
Science is the method of harmonizing with nature, to enable us understand her dance.

A Student's Reflection

2011-10-05T02:36:00.000-07:00

Being a science student was my life time dream. To invent, learn principles about the world and explore the universe.
I remember from the very beginnings of my childhood; I have always dreamt of creating something, something new. I used to dream of making bicycle out of wood and riding out on the streets with something new and never seen.
I had many dreams and these thoughts and ideas came to me at the time when I was about 8 years.
The truth is these dreams of mine were achievable. I only needed someone who understood my dreams and could lead me to explore the possibilities of these dreams.
There are many children like me, whose dreams have faded away because there was no one to inspire them; No one to lead them on the path to exploring their dreams.
In a recent article, I read from eselfone blog the author spoke about what true education should be.
“Educate comes from the Latin word educare/educat: which means, to bring out or lead out. The closest word to this in English is educe. Educe meaning to bring out or lead out something latent or potential.”
This points out clearly, education is meant for a purpose. People should be educated with an intention in mind.
I am a high school graduate and there is nothing I have achieved with all the education I got( from all the information I was fed with).
High school was the place I dreamt of being while I was at home, after having completed Junior high.
At the beginning it was great, having the opportunity to meet different students from various schools.
But class wasn’t interactive enough; in class were all these potentials. These young lads who wanted to become engineers of all sorts. And all we were ever taught were laws in physics, theories in chemistry, formulas in mathematics, most of which we couldn’t apply in real life.

I wish class could have been more interactive. I remember the first week in class, when I went to the board to teach my mates, how to make a solar panel. Everyone was so keen on listening and participating.
If teachers could make class a little interactive and help the student see all they learn in practical view. And even challenge us to use the principles in solving real life problems around us.
Learning would have been so much better; we would have become better students. Because real life tests gives one real life experiences even if he fails.
Most people come out of high school and can’t even work for any company in the field in which they studied, because there were no practical lessons.
Science class was basically a history class. We learnt about Newton’s laws but we barley understood what it really meant. We solve questions on Gravitational force, but we barely understood how gravity relates to all existence in general. The question, what even causes the pull towards earth, was never answered. Most things, we were thought were vague and incomplete and inapplicable to daily life.
Way back in junior high, I learnt about the scientific method, and the first process is observation( which actually means noticing).
But you can bet , we were never taught anything about going home with a project of observing(noticing) a phenomenon in our environment. And using the scientific method, to deduce and explain what is happening.
Science education is this poor, from the very beginning and we wonder why, our economy is lagging behind.
Life will be so much better , if things were done right, if teachers will inspire students in their various fields of study. Even if they can’t be that source of inspiration, they could introduce the young science student to a world full of possibilities. Students having the opportunity to watch or listen to some of the great scientists in the world , will inspire them to work harder.
Recently I came across very interesting videos on Richard Feynman and my goodness, the guy is amazing. In these he actually talks about he thinks and analyzes problems.
Inspiration is very important in every student’s life and the remarks and thought patterns of geniuses are good models for any “wanna be” scientist.
There is hope, for me self-learning has been a great way out. I believe if there were more public libraries in the city. It would be a very good step. A place where students can have access to information and guidance.
A step to the solution of the problem is what eselfone is doing. All they need is support.

2011-09-28T02:57:00.003-07:00

SCIENCE AND MAN (THE WORLD OF OUR PERCEPTIONS).

It’s been really long since we shared some science knowledge here on our blog. I want to take this opportunity to apologise to our honourable readers for the long wait. We are finally back and will begin with a series of articles collectively entitled: science and man... the world of our perceptions. In this we will explain science in man’s perspective, trying to draw the line of distinction between our world and that of other members of this universe. we will as we go along realise that all that we say we have gathered about other substances in the universe is just our response to the observations we have made about them, our ability to prove that experimentally still is based on the sense that we are only satisfying the observed, but nothing is truly observed perfectly unless one is the subject and object. The fact that we see stones relatively stable doesn’t mean they are not seeing as static as they move upon the surface of earth. The fact that we are observing air move from a region of high pressure to a region of lower pressure doesn’t mean the air particles are not viewing love between people as a complex interaction between mysterious particles or chemical compounds buried in the human body. I already sound insane right, there is no light in science if one fails to see madness as sanity... the madness is later refined into knowledge but pruning the ideas into comprehensible and experimentally proven knowledge.

Join me as we delve through the topics;

1. Science

2. The scientist and the technician

3. Our world of perceptions

4. When madness struck

5. Is there a destination for science

6. Science and ignorance

7. Science is becoming a religion......

More topics will emerge as we find the few interesting and contradictory to our old knowledge and perceptions about science.

Is Science an Amalgamation?(revised edition)

2011-08-23T09:27:00.000-07:00

Is Science an Amalgamation?(revised)

An essay by Salifu Mutaru

So I now have two-thirds of the metal coil of a heater submerged into water in a plastic jug, ready to prepare a cup of coffee. I need just a cup, not the whole volume of water in the jug. I need the water faster to get me reading and sipping. When will the full jug of water get hot? Hmmm. I'm not a scientist, but can I think through this? Can science answer this?

I was silent for a while. I was not talking but building a set of thoughts and imagination about how to get my cup of hot water before the whole jug of water gets hot.

Water is made up of tiny independent units called molecules. Each water molecule carries within itself two atoms of hydrogen bonded to an atom of oxygen. The convection currents according to the thermodynamics of a fluid explain: when heating fluids, molecules closer to the source of heat attain a higher energy which causes their acceleration and displacement from their original position of random vibrational motion, just as the reverse will do the opposite (a moving particle generates heat directly proportional to its momentum). When the water molecules attain a higher temperature after absorbing heat energy, the molecules expand and bear less density.

A bit of chemistry here, but physics takes over again. The expanded molecules, having a lesser density can not remain at the same depth with the fairly cold molecules; rather they will have to float over the cold molecules (a body will float when its density is lesser than the density of the fluid in which it is placed and would displace - the principle of floatation). So in time I should have the water just below the surface getting hot before the molecules at the bottom.

I expected my pondering to come up true but it was four minutes already, and the water only fairly warm. Then it hit me; if the molecules around the heater gain energy, bounce around, and float up to the surface, then the molecules remaining very close to the heater should themselves attain greater energy which may affect my expectation. If I’m right, then those molecules might be escaping to the surface carrying along with them all the heat they absorbed. The convectional currents are causing the movements of the energetic water molecules to help heat my water, but again they are causing the very heated molecules I needed for my coffee to escape.

May be I should just place a plastic spoon or something else into the water in order to block the currents. "After this, the molecules will just ascend like a helicopter does, to the surface without escaping tangentially in their cyclic movement", I thought. How do I know where exactly to place this plastic material and what will be its mechanism to help manifest what I was thinking?

First of all the spoon will start off colder and also absorb some heat energy, but its insulating plastic nature makes the absorption minimal, I smiled. Secondly it will disrupt the movement of the molecules to avoid their escape by colliding with them to reduce their speed (this can be explained by relative motion between two bodies). When a moving body collides with a stationary body, it transfers some of its kinetic energy to the stationary body during the collision. Other times it gains more energy or bounces back with the same velocity and hence same energy. Molecules rarely undergo perfectly elastic collision, meaning when a molecule collides with another molecule or body, it bounces back with a different velocity and different energy. Can we conclude that, when the very hot water molecules collide with the ladle, they will lose velocity enough to keep them stationary? No, but it should cool the water down.

This is great; hopefully soon I will have my hot coffee. I immersed a plastic ladle into the water to cause the effect I discussed.

Unfortunately it was already two minutes late and nothing I thought could be seen to have happened. Immersing the ladle into the water means nothing here; I could not identify the molecules, their momentum and speed as they moved in the convectional currents. They might have had a different direction which minimized the collisions I expected, and also a lesser speed which may have only caused very little amount of kinetic energy loss. Or, maybe it is too soon to judge and I haven't seen the full effect yet.

Science is fun and practical, but without the desire to be curious in matters of the nature around us, scientific thought oxidizes gradually into a rusted scrap. The methods used in science can be explained for the illiterate to comprehend. Solving a problem in science is like three men throwing stones to plug a ripe mango from a tall tree. Let’s name these men A, B, and C and imagine that A is very tall, B is of average height but C is very short.

All three have an aim to plug the mango. This aim can be translated physically to mean their common angle of elevation but different projectiles for each person’s throw. Since the stalk is thin and lighter than the stones to be thrown, the reaction force exerted by the stalk is negligible, making the stalk the best point to hit the mango to get it falling. The fruit is rather large, and may have to take three to four hits before getting plugged off the tree. If we watch each throw his stone and track the trajectory curve of each projective, we can make several observations.

From the curves, it can be deduced that C will require a lot of energy to fly his stone through the long curve, B requires moderate energy as A requires the least. Viewing another point, we will find out that A’s throw will have the greatest gravitational deceleration. This is because A’s throw has the shortest path to get there. The conclusion each of them wants is the mango falling off when hit by their stones. A will just have the easiest time.

All the brainstorming shows science to be an art of solving problems by using problems. Whenever there is a scientific mystery, there are a lot of ways to solve the problems, not only one identified and studied method. As in the above scenario, each person has his personal difficulties to overcome for a common goal. But if the short thrower considers the relative position the tallest makes to the three, he can manage to calculate the best position he needs for the best hit and compensate to reach the same outcome.

Scientific methods, principles, laws and theories are just like these three throwers, they keep depending on each other to help explain and solve a problem.

In 1900, Max Planck was working on the curves of radiation wavelengths at various temperatures. He came up with an equation which had an odd feature. The equation required a tiny quantity to be included for it to come up right. Later the tiny quantity was called Planck’s constant, and its one of the world’s best known fundamental constants. Planck thought his mathematical experiment and equation may not have had a real physical connection in nature, but that it did describe the effect he was studying. He came up with a model that attempted not to describe the fundamental nature of light but the action of light when absorbed or emitted by a body. The conclusion drawn at the time was that energy acted as if it is composed of definite number of equal finite packages. Planck let a then mysterious variable handle this, known as Plank’s constant - h.

There was also a dazzling topic in discussion at the time, the photoelectric effect, which caused electrons to be knocked off the surface of a metal when light is incident on the metal. In Philip Lenard’s experiment on the photoelectric effect, he observed that when he increased the frequency of the light, the electrons emitted with great energy. He decided to increase the intensity of the light. Would this produce light rays with a lot of energy to knock off electrons with greater energy? This never happened; rather a greater number of electrons were produced with no change in their energy. He kept increasing the intensity of the light but nothing happened. The problem he was left with was what was the reason change in intensity of light had no effect on emitted electrons?

Four years later, and Albert Einstein was pondering over the works of Lenard and Planck. It was 1904 when Einstein finished his work on the general molecular theory of heat. He treated black body radiations as if they were particles, as gases contain molecules. Einstein compared the change in enthalpy of a gas when its volume changes to the change in enthalpy when the volume of a black body radiation changed. The rate of enthalpy change in black body radiation was just as that in an ideal gas. So Einstein concluded that the black body radiation was made of tiny particles just as a gas was made of molecules.

He compared the work of Lenard and Planck to his work. Einstein explained that the energy of an electron emitted is proportional to its frequency. The energy, E, of the emitted electron therefore would be given by the product of Planck’s constant and the frequency, f, of light causing the emission, such that E = h * f. Increasing the intensity of light will mean increasing the number of light photons from the source of light, and each photon or packet of light energy will knock from a number of electrons other like photons.

So Einstein took two problems from others and figured out a solution - this is science.

After thinking about these things for a while, I gave up all scientific inquiry into the nature of my cup of coffee, and covered the jug partially with a lid. I started reading as I waited patiently for the water to get hot. Surprisingly it began to boil in two minutes which I less expected. Could it have been the cause of the lid? The lid should have been preventing the escape of the heat from the energetic molecules as well as warm water that evaporated, causing them to return into the water. The other molecules that remained over the surface and below the lid caused an increase in the vapor pressure exerted on the water. Therefore the water boiled earlier because the vapor pressure counterbalanced atmospheric pressure.

Science is an amalgamation of the knowledge of all aspects of nature. If a scientific idea fails be reflected in other aspects, either it or the pre-existing ideas may be untrue.

My little cup of coffee has driven me to think of the scientific possibilities in its preparation. If I want to continue about how the coffee and sugar dissolved, how my taste buds sensed its taste, and how I could smell the blackness of the coffee in my nostrils, I might leave too many problems for you and I to learn about and solve.

However, solve my mistakes in preparing my coffee and I prefer it. I don’t mind sharing a sip.

NOTICING

2011-06-24T09:49:00.000-07:00

What is noticing? , what is the essence of noticing
This food for thought: its deep.........

The Unfamiliar thought indicate mind's recognition without identification; but Familiar thought suggests not only a recognition but also an identification in relation to psychological or associative memory. In fact, in the familiar thought there is no interval between recognition and identification. It is mind's identification in the midst of perception that causes distraction and a diversion of attention. In the moments of experiencing if one could remain with the unfamiliar then there would be no distraction. One would know a totality of attention
Thought breaks the flow of experiencing and changes it into an experience....and we are trapped into the past and future feel. Present, which IS, is overshadowed........In fact we ARE!
Kind of deep....yes but Just try to watch in silence, how mind functions. Slowly the mist is diluted

BEAUTY AND PERCEPTIONS

2011-05-15T05:12:00.000-07:00

Often we smile at the sight of a person, an animal, an object, or other respects of nature as a sign of satisfaction, pleasure, or attaining a meaning of the characteristics we harvested from the observed. As to what we have seen in the source of this feeling, it depends on us, because another person observing the same thing may not find the joy we felt.
As a culture of thought, most believe the artist has more than any other to utter all that is beautiful about our nature. True beauty has interpretation which leads to attractiveness or emotional well-being. As a matter of fact, beauty is subjective and resonates to one’s own meaning of his observation (Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder).
Taking beauty as a physical law, obeying the principle of relativity; every observer’s conclusion is correct, depending on his frame of reference (taking frame of reference to mean what one expects to observe as beauty). In the sense that, if a man sees a lady to be ugly and another sees her to be pretty, they are all right. This is the magnificent attribute beauty has, and it’s the only missing ingredient in art. Art itself is a beautiful thing, studied and applied with group of laws expected to be seen in its manifestation. Quite rough in science; beauty is the meaning you give to something.
Scientists believe the brain is the reason we can all decide what beauty is. We the scientists believe there is a neurological connection between our mind and what we perceive as beauty. We can postulate that, this may have been due to evolution. If this is true, will it mean all organisms on earth went through the same depth of evolution?

The answer to this question will be very beautiful.
The cock needs to roost and show off its colorful tail feathers to attract the hen for mating. The predator is attracted by its prey, the man sees a hill and he is soaked in an emotion to write. With all these, we believe there is a connection between two for one to experience beauty. Because of this, many people dress for external admiration but not to satisfy themselves. If this is true, then there is a lot more beauty we have not discovered, a lot more smiles, a lot more satisfaction and meaning to our universe.

As I wrote this article, I decided to find some beauty in my TV. I halted, sat gently on the couch as I carefully studied the TV. It was off, and all I saw was the size, shape and colour. I took the remote controller and just before I hit the power button, ideas came in. I asked myself,” how does the remote controller communicate to put the TV on?”

There should be a special diode called a sensor that is able to transmit particular frequencies of electromagnetic radiations, known as infra red.

Infra red is a light wave, therefore should obey some basic expected characteristics of light. To test for reflection; I pointed the remote controller to a mirror and kept changing the angle the mirror made with the remote controller (glancing angle). My thumb was still on the power button. At a particular angle, the TV responded and was out of power. I tried again and the power came back. I could see myself smiling with no joker around me.

I thought; if the remote controller is giving out infra red radiations as signals, then there should be a circuit in the TV that is converting the electromagnetic radiations into electronic signals to be comprehended by the TV. I corrected myself; that the remote controller has no sensor, but a LED (Light Emitting Diode) which is able to generate and emit light with very low frequency that makes it invisible. And the TV rather has a sensor which is stimulated by radiations from the remote controller; often photo cells that give out electrons when hit by light. (Photoelectric emission by Maxwell plank and completed by Albert Einstein). I could feel the power of the coherence between my bits of knowledge and my pleasure to observe. The TV is so beautiful.

As I smiled I could see myself smiling wilder, I was answering the question; why doesn’t infra red from my body and the sun operate the TV?

Probably, this may be the reason the frequency of the remote controller is that minimal. Its frequency is so little that bodies around the TV can only produce radiations whose frequencies are beyond that which is comprehended by the TV, a deep conscious thought by the manufacturers. Now I was actually laughing, my eyes glared across the room, my dimples deepened and my teeth all out, seeming to search a bite. I wished there was some around to understand the reason for this happiness, but there was no one apart from you reading.

The laughter faded as I thought again; why can’t my remote controller communicate with my brother’s TV. Could it be that the signals are coded by the manufacturers?

I reached my computer and ‘googled’ out that my thought was just perfect. All manufacturers have secret codes added to the commands (signals) from the remote controller. If absent or perhaps different, the TV fails to understand the command and remains not operated. I was all cool now; after all I just dug out a lot of beauty from my TV and its remote controller. I walked towards the TV to put it off but again I had to answer a question. Why doesn’t the volume button put the TV off and the colour button change the channels. This time I didn’t find it easy; I sat back on the couch; my left hand clung to my left lower jaw as I still held the remote controller in my right hand.

A shower of thoughts just flooded my brain. I was thinking that the whole circuit in the remote controller might be made of tiny circuits connected commonly by the parallel method. In the essence that every button pressed represented a key or switch to a tiny circuit. All the basic circuits are supposed to be independent of each other, so as to produce different signals. I concluded that each button, each tiny circuit produced different intensity of radiation or different number of flashes form the LED. So if the LED for my TV is flashing out infra red radiations twice for volume control, it should flash differently for colour control. Likewise, hitting the button should begin the command by closing a tiny circuit as lifting the thumb or any other finger used, should open a tiny circuit to end its communication with the TV. Thus if I press the volume button, the circuit for volume begins to communicate with the TV, and stops when I lift my finger to open or put off the volume circuit. I think I love my TV.

Beauty is one magnificent thing that keeps people in theism and materialism into search for facts of what they preach. The theist believes beauty is one fact that explains the existence of an eternal being whose imagination is judged to have been poured into creation of a beautiful world. The materialist will not accept this. The materialist thinks even with no controller on the gradual metamorphosis of the world, there is no rationality that explains the world would have been ugly. His reason is that; our minds tell us what beauty is, and no two people will always see same things to be beautiful. If there is an eternal being somewhere who created a beautiful world, then we should always see things to be equally beautiful as they were created. But this isn’t true. We don’t all see same things to be beautiful.

The theist is true, and so is the materialist. The beautiful thing about our minds is that we can choose the one to believe, and no one can judge us apart from the last day believed by the theist. I was deluded by these two distinct thoughts from two sets of people. So I asked one last question; how beautiful is the mind?

So beautiful, we don’t even know what it is, and few of us confuse it to be the brain. Our mind, our power, the driver of our thoughts is so beautiful. Its beauty we can’t see, neither can we taste nor hear of, but we use. Its perfection that leads us to remember the past, observe the present and imagine the future is so complicated. We can’t use science to explain the creation of the mind, because we can’t see the mind. There will be no samples for experiment, hence no conclusion to drive us to the answer to the question: what is the mind? There must see a magnificent being out there to plan and create our mind and that makes me a theist. Again the beautiful thing is that you may not accept my idea for being a theist, because my meaning may not resonate with yours.

The best you can do is to think about the beauty that is in you. Whether its your cute face, silky hair, good body proportion, your complexion, your intelligence, faith, ability to show gratitude, to write, to talk, your pleasure of finding things out, and finally your power to love. There is a lot of beauty that is hidden in you and around you. My TV showed a lot of beauty around me. Keep thinking of that positive side of you, so you can attract more beautify in your life.

If a persons claims you are ugly, the beauty here is the fact that the person actually thought of you. Never cast energy in things you don’t want, they are the ugly ones. Focus on the joy that comes into your life; the hugs, the wealth, the love, the gratitude, the respect and the beauty.

All these I know because, you are the beholder of the images you keep in your mind.

Aesthetics, a broader subject carries within itself; art and taste, to create and appreciate beauty. Beauty is beyond this.

Take this: the next time mum scolds you, keep joy lit in your heart as you ponder how the sound waves reach you from her. You will see how beautiful it is not to retaliate.

For me, the beauty in me is my ability to love people around me.

Beauty is realized when noticed and appreciated, and our ability to notice and appreciate, is subjected to our perceptions

What is the beauty in you?

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

2011-04-05T04:51:00.001-07:00

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

I remember when I was a child , about 8years , I used to think of building my own helicopter.
In my head, I will practically bring to birth the image of the helicopter with the interior switch and everything I could think of .
I realized since I had never seen what it looked like below the dashboard of the helicopter and didn’t even know what all the gauges and indicators on the dashboard represented. My thoughts drifted towards how I was going to make the helicopter move.
Because I know I could connect cells to a motor and cause it to wheel , I thought of how I could connect a lot of cells to cause the “fan” (as I used to call it) on the helicopter to move.
My helicopter was in the form of wood , because at that time I barely understood how metal, as strong as it was could be carved to such a shape.
Everyday I found new ways in my head to cause my helicopter to conform with the idea of what it really was.

Another scenario would be how I thought to myself at the age of 6 that people had been becoming through some magical means into our room and then into our TV.
I thought for many days how this could be. My father wont allow me touch his electronic gadgets because he presumed I was too touchy, but yet still I succeeded in touching and turning the back of the TV to find the portal through which they minimized and went into our TV
As time passed I gave up , until one day when my father mistakenly touched the aerial out of its position and all the images on our TV went out blank.
I was surprised and thought of what had happened for many days. I later concluded the aerial must have something to do with the images on the TV.
Time taught me bit by bit the rest I needed to know.

As funny as these stories may seem, there are a few ideas I will like to draw from them and enlighten you.
Revisiting these past events now (14 years later), I realize whatever idea or thought I ever conceived , I tried to make sense out of it using my knowledge or whats more my understanding.
Apart from my understanding, my beliefs seemed to tell me what was possible and, and what wasn’t.
Now the whole principle and idea of science as a study is defined by the scientific method.

What is the scientific method?

Conception
Science is first a conceptualization of idea.
The birth of a new idea, could be in many as these three forms; emulation, a could be better and a problem.
Before I continue with the conceptualization concept, I will want to clarify something.
Science as we all know it, can be defined in many ways……but as far as we can all understand, we would all agree is a search for something. A search to find the truth , truth in what ?
It’s a search to find truth in our every conception.
Conception is the first and foremost instigator of the whole science process and without it there is no search at all. Since If you don’t see something could be emulated, or conceive a problem from tops of your reasoning you think worthy of solving ,then there will be no science at all, since no search will begin.
So we can then define science as the search for truth in every conception and the scientific process, formulates and tests the validity of this conception.

Noticing and drawing conclusions

The scientific method.
Before any conception is made there is one stage in the scientific method that causes a beginning . Our ability to notice…..to become aware of…..to become conscious of something. Noticing depends ones ability to observe and draw meaning from the objet being observed
The two means your ability to watch something carefully or pay close attention to something and realize what it is that is happening. In actual fact until you are able to notice , there will be no conception and no search for truth. I will have no reason to search for which portal the people on my TV took into the TV until I noticed it was awkward to have real people on my TV without knowing how they got there.
There is always a probability of a misconception, yet until we notice , until we doubt there will be nothing to prove
Therefore the first stage of the scientific method will be our ability to notice
I could possibly list the whole scientific method I know of , but I believe when one has the ability notice, something is started and that is what is most important.

Drawing meaning from what is being observed

Further after noticing and doing further investigations and experimentation , one comes to the last stage of the process where he falls on his own experience to make meaning of the data gathered. If not even so we are all prone to using our personal experience, in terms of knowledge ,beliefs and perceptions. (during the time I was thinking about building my helicopter , even in forming the image in my head, I didn’t see how a metal as hard as it was could be forged into such a shape, so I decided to use wood. Now this is where the fault lies, because then, even if the people the conclusion of the test of the validity of the conception is shared with, have the same perceptions and beliefs then a lie will become truth.

More can be said of the scientific process but I wish to drift from elaborating on the process (.....suggest links and books to elaborate further and get to a more intricating of what the scientific should be...)
“Scientific method is not a recipe: it requires intelligence, imagination, and creativity. In this sense, it is not a mindless set of standards and procedures to follow, but is rather an ongoing cycle, constantly developing more useful, accurate and comprehensive models and methods
Scientific thought therefore only proceeds to guide reasoning and questioning , in order to help us understand the principles of nature in a more exact detail”.
If science is to help us understand the physical principles of nature, an understanding which we can only conceive through the non-physical, then there is something yet unexplored of the scientific method.
The scientific method when fully realised will be an eye through which all principles can be unified, from which all understanding can be drawn. The spaces in between and from the distances where thoughts ponders(which is the non-physical), a conception is birthed , and an understanding of this conception is drawn from the physical.
This means as long as our physical barriers and perceptions exist we will refuse to see the whole truth that lies therein in our conception,

The scientific method consists in splitting up everything into minute divisions and parts and to examine each division and part separately, but its synthesis is not the perception of a thing as a whole, it is only the summation of its parts. That something which gives the quality of wholeness always escapes through the meshes of the scientific net~Subodh Kumar Misra

The scientific method will undoubtedly continue to evolve , but the end to which it must come to, is what I wish we all, should explore further.
What will then cause this evolution to be whole, and cause the creation of a complete principle that helps us see the whole truth in every conception.

These are my thoughts , whats yours?

References...
Wikipedia
Suggestions to further read
Science and common sense
The Scientific method

VIDEOS OF A GREAT THINKER OF OUR TIME

2011-04-03T04:35:00.000-07:00

I most probably wont be able to put this man in the right light necessary to introduce his talks in the following videos, but he is indeed a great mind, one thing all who watch videos will agree, he is a mind worth emulating in our world of science