Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

Early in 2014 Jeremy England proposed a theory, based in thermodynamics, showing that the emergence of life was not accidental, but necessary. “Under certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life,”a theory, based in thermodynamics, showing that the emergence of life was not accidental, but necessary.

From the standpoint of physics, there is one essential difference between living things and inanimate clumps of carbon atoms: The former tend to be much better at capturing energy from their environment and dissipating that energy as heat. Professor England, a 31-year-old assistant professor at the MIT, has derived a mathematical formula that he believes explains this capacity. The formula, based on established physics, indicates that when a group of atoms is driven by an external source of energy (like the sun or chemical fuel) and surrounded by a heat bath (like the ocean or atmosphere), it will often gradually restructure itself in order to dissipate increasingly more energy. This could mean that under certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life.

Giordano Bruno, who was burnt at the stake for heresy in 1600, was perhaps the first to take Copernicanism to its logical extension, speculating that stars were other suns, circled by other worlds, populated by beings like ourselves. His extreme minority view in his own time now looks better than ever, thanks to England.


Matter has to out its abstract aspects underlying in a material form that can give matter its rising in the ladder (of evolution) which is just as well that it correspondingly acquires a coherence in its abstract nature.

Light as a photon having velocity and distance to cover shall create an uncertainty principle. If Creationists and Evolutionists cannot agree on the role of God let us not get drawn into the useless polemics. Doubt is necessary in the realm of Material universe.

How did man bring out underlying abstract of nature of matter to propound a theory of anything? Man we say is capable of abstract thinking. So doubt as well as God is borne out of his imagination. What is it if it does not touch anything nor lead to anywhere? It is useless. If a man because of doubt takes a position of sceptic or a Theist it has only value for his species. Science does not prove anything else.


Read Full Post »

Common sense cannot be relied at all times. When one puts a shell to the ear and listens what sound one hears is not of sea.

Common sense made you connect a seashell with the sound. It is not the sea but requires instead scientific explanation. Spectral resonance it is called.

Common sense makes you wonder how trees can grow in the Tundra. Being covered in snow would make the trees colder, in fact, the snow acts as insulation for the trees helping them stay warmer.

Two parallel lines meet at infinity. Common sense make u balk at the idea. Does it not? Think of miracle as divine commonsense.


Read Full Post »

It has been one of my childhood fancies to imagine I could hear God’s thoughts. If he could hear my prayers it naturally means I could hear him as well. Over the years such fancies had evaporated since reason became the proof of one coming to man’s estate. Recently I came across this news item:an international team of researchers has successfully achieved brain-to-brain transmission of information between humans.

Humans just got a step closer to being able to think a message into someone else’s brain on the other side of the world.

“One such pathway is, of course, the internet, so our question became, ‘Could we develop an experiment that would bypass the talking or typing part of internet and establish direct brain-to-brain communication between subjects located far away from each other in India and France ?'”

Suppose the brain could be stimulated from outside using robot with a series of images? Using electromagnetic induction images could be beamed from person to person. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation or TMS explains the devise. Thus the team used a similar set-up to that commonly used in brain-computer interface studies. A human subject had electrodes attached to their scalp, which recorded electrical currents in the brain as the subject had a specific thought. Usually, this is interpreted by a computer and translated to a control output, such as a robotic arm, or a drone.

In this case, though, the output target was another human.

The study had four participants, aged between 28 and 50. One participant was assigned to the brain-computer interface to transmit the thought, while the other three were assigned to the computer-brain interface to receive the thought.

At the BCI end, the words “Ciao” and “Hola” were translated into binary. This was then shown to the emitter subject, who was instructed to envision actions for each piece of information: moving their hands for a 1 or their feet for a 0. An EEG then captured the electrical information in the sender’s brain as they thought of these actions, which resulted in a sort of neural code for the binary symbols — which in turn was code for the words.

This information was then sent to the three recipient subjects via TMS headsets, stimulating the visual cortex so that the recipient, with ears and eyes covered, saw the binary string as a series of bright lights in their peripheral vision: if the light appeared in one location, it was a 1, and the second location denoted a 0. This information was received successfully and decoded as the transmitted words.

This experiment, the researchers said, represents an important first step in exploring the feasibility of complementing or bypassing traditional means of communication.. Potential applications perhaps include communicating with stroke patients..

“We anticipate that computers in the not-so-distant future will interact directly with the human brain in a fluent manner, supporting both computer- and brain-to-brain communication routinely,” the team concluded. “The widespread use of human brain-to-brain technologically mediated communication will create novel possibilities for human interrelation with broad social implications that will require new ethical and legislative responses.” (Michelle Starr-C/net)

Read Full Post »

It would have been a proper gesture as well as belated recognition of the role of Aristotle by awarding him the Nobel Prize for Science.

Charles Darwin had this to say of Aristotle:“Linnaeus and Cuvier have been my two gods, though in very different ways, but they were mere school-boys to old Aristotle.”

Like Herodotus who was acknowledged as the Father of History without much of controversy Aristotle ought to have been given long ago the mantle as the Father of Science.

Herodotus lived at a time much of history of nations that loomed large for scholars was accepted as myths where gods played a crucial role. Hellenic thought accepted them as necessary. In China Will of heaven was held up by the emperor whose right to rule was a mandate from above. If a dynasty came unravelled the significance was clear: it had forfeited the right by the Will of the Heavenly Emperor. In Greek ethos no less similar conclusion was accepted as correct.

How is it then that Aristotle the tutor of Alexander the Great failed to gain due recognition from scholars who had received so much from his inquisitive mind?

One may cite so many areas where Aristotle got it wrong. Think of the following ideas proposed by him.

* too much sex causes sunken eyes because semen drains matter from the human brain.

*the right-hand side of the body is more honorable and therefore hotter than the left. (In India this idea has its variant. It is the left hand one uses to wipe the butt after going to the toilet.)

*He also believed that the human heart processes and integrates sensations from the external world.

*The brain, beyond storing the matter that becomes semen, was just a cooling device for when the heart’s fires blazed too hot.

Mingled with all the bizarre zoology, however, are many impressively accurate and detailed descriptions. His accounts of the hyena’s genitals, the parental behavior of male catfish, and the limited sensory capacities of sea sponges are just a few of the many things about which he was essentially correct.

A fascinating new book by the evolutionary biologist and science writer Armand Marie Leroi claims that Aristotle fully deserves Darwin’s high praise. In The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science, Leroi argues that Aristotle developed many of the empirical and analytical methods that still define scientific inquiry.

He was more than an encyclopedist. He collected such comprehensive data in order to analyze and interpret it. His theories and interpretations are often astonishingly insightful. One 20th-century Nobel laureate suggested that Aristotle deserved to receive the prize posthumously for his realization that the information that dictates and replicates an organism’s structure is stored in its semen. In some sense he was anticipating the discovery of DNA. His theory of inheritance can also account for recessive traits that skip generations, the contributions of both parents to the features of a child, and unexpected variations in traits that do not derive from either

Many of his observations are readily recognizable to a reader of Darwin. He notes that an elephant’s size confers protection from predators and that fish with high rates of infant mortality produce a larger number of offspring to compensate for the likelihood that most of the progeny will perish. He showed a nuanced understanding of how the forms and features of animals are adapted to their environments. Darwin even mentions Aristotle as a forerunner who anticipates the theory of natural selection in the preface to the third edition of On the Origin of Species.

Aristotle perceived some of the universal associations between longevity, period of gestation, adult body size, and degree of embryonic development that biologists still study today. He noticed the correlations among these features, but he was sensitive to the distinction between correlation and causation and sought to eliminate confounding variables. Then he integrated his findings into broader theories with deep explanatory power.

(ack: the Daily Beast)

Read Full Post »

In an earlier post I had discussed quantum computing is of a different league than digital computing. Today’s computers, like a Turing machine, work by manipulating bits that exist in one of two states: a 0 or a 1. Quantum computers aren’t limited to two states; they encode information as quantum bits, or qubits, which can exist in superposition. Having qubits means it has an inherent parallelism. It is this property that allows a quantum computer to work on a million computations at once, while your desktop PC works on one. Let me quote Scientific American: Physicists have now shown how to encode three quantum bits, the kind of data that might be used in the computers of tomorrow, using just two photons. (For those who think science is not of interest may skip over to the second section) Let me refresh about computer memory from my previous post. Atoms, ions, photons or electrons and their respective control devices are working together to act as computer memory and processor. It is vital to compress data lest it should clog up the hard drive resulting in the Internet traffic to slow down. In classical computing a series of any number of identical bits encodes essentially the same information as just one bit. For quantum objects, however, this is not the case. Because in quantum computing same measurement made on distinct, but identically prepared, qubits will yield a range values. As such, accurately recording the quantum state of just one qubit involves taking measurements of multiple identical copies and averaging the results. Now, a group of physicists in Canada has shown for the first time that it is possible to compress the kind of data that might be used in the computers of tomorrow — known as quantum bits, or qubits. For example, if three qubits can each be in a superposition of 0 and 1, measuring them would yield eight possible outcomes: 000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110 or 111. But for the averaged measurements there are just four options: 0, 1/3, 2/3 or 1. For instance, 001 yields (0+0+1)/3 = 1/3, as do 010 and 100 (the same digits, but in a different order); 110 yields (1+1+0)/3 = 2/3, just as 101 and 011 do. Because the qubits are identical, the extra information in the ordering can be simply discarded, say the researchers. To make the point, Steinberg draws a classical-physics analogy. “Keeping all of the information,” he says, “is like storing the complete works of Shakespeare just to find out the average rates at which letters are used in the English language.” The results are due to appear in Physical Review Letters.


When St. Paul writes to the Church of Corinth he writes about Moses leading the children of Israel through the wilderness. He gives the Hebraic account an altogether new twist. He explains the significance of manna and the Rock. In the books of Moses we read he did as he was commanded of God. He smote the Rock that supplied water to satisfy their thirst. Paul adds, “for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ (1Cor.10:4) Here is an example of superposition in which the coming of Jesus and his ministry was foretold. If it was divine will in the manner the children of Israel were fed the same will must be present in the miraculous ways in which gentile nations are provided for. God’s will cannot play ducks and drakes with his creation. After all God promised Abraham thus,” in thee all families of the earth be blessed.”  Gen.12.3


Read Full Post »

If we wish to colonize Mars in some distant future it may not be a far fetched idea. Teleportation of humans is a giant leap but as Niels Armstrong said, a small step’ has been already achieved. Quantum teleportation is the moving of quantum data from one location to another without having to travel the distance between them. Have qbits will travel to paraphrase a TV series in my youth.

Teleportation in general sense does away with constraints of space and time. Think today as exchange of information. We sometimes have that gut feeling and it is later proved out to be right. Or we make our needs known to God and later we may say our prayers were heard. It is borne out in the way our needs were met. We need not prove if God exists or not. But information has been exchanged just the same. Quantum entanglement as I look at it is one way Science underpins my faith using quantum mechanics. In classical physics light may open up as a glorious sunrise and with the Psalmist I say it is revealing the glory of God. Only that light is a symbol for the nature and workings of the supreme Being.

What is faith but knowing certain exchange of information could exist outside proof between either A or B?

For example, if you and a friend have two playing cards — the ace of spades and the ace of hearts — and you each blindly pick one, walk into different rooms and then look at the card in your hand, you’ll both know instantly know what card your friend has. It’s that kind of instantaneous awareness between two points — instead of cards, think spin states of an electron — that physicists call teleportation because the data point doesn’t require you to observe it directly or have someone send it back for confirmation.


A research team out of the lab of Professor Nicolas Gisin in the physics department at the University of Geneva achieved teleportation of the quantum state of a photon — in this case, it’s known as the photon’s polarization — to a crystal-encased photon more than 25 kilometers (15.5 miles) away. The distance breaks the previous record of 6 kilometers (3.7 miles) set 10 years ago by the same team using the method. This marks the latest success in a series of experiments the group, led by physicist Félix Bussières, has been conducting over the last decade in an effort to better understand quantum data transfer with ever-newer technology.

The results, which were achieved in March, were published in the journal Nature Photonics on September 21. (ack: cnet of Sept 23,’14)

Read Full Post »

The Turing machine, developed by Alan Turing in the 1930s, is a theoretical device that consists of tape of unlimited length that is divided into little squares. Each square can either hold a symbol (1 or 0) or be left blank. A read-write device reads these symbols and blanks, which gives the machine its instructions to perform a certain program. Does this sound familiar? Well, in a quantum Turing machine, the difference is that the tape exists in a quantum state, as does the read-write head. This means that the symbols on the tape can be either 0 or 1 or a superposition of 0 and 1; in other words the symbols are both 0 and 1 (and all points in between) at the same time. While a normal Turing machine can only perform one calculation at a time, a quantum Turing machine can perform many calculations at once.

The Godhead in the Trinity is as God the Father God the Son and God the Spirit. In a quantum computing God can be as Father the Son and as the Spirit. Think of a polygon box in which each side can be opened. You open one side you get God as the Father and you open another you get God the Son and so on.  There is a randomness and superpositions of values assigned normally to a symbol. When we read in the Book of Revelation we need to understand ‘I am Alpha and Omega’  it is not some  juggling of words but quantum nature of cosmos.


Today’s computers, like a Turing machine, work by manipulating bits that exist in one of two states: a 0 or a 1. Quantum computers aren’t limited to two states; they encode information as quantum bits, orqubits, which can exist in superposition. Qubits represent atoms, ions, photons or electrons and their respective control devices that are working together to act as computer memory and a processor. Because a quantum computer can contain these multiple states simultaneously, it has the potential to be millions of times more powerful than today’s most powerful supercomputers.

This superposition of qubits is what gives quantum computers their inherent parallelism. According to physicist David Deutsch, this parallelism allows a quantum computer to work on a million computations at once, while your desktop PC works on one.  When Jesus says the kingdom of God is within you  it demonstrates parallelism. From a moral standpoint secular world and moral world are parallel in which any one must be able to read from the other. (How StuffWorks/How quantum computers works-by  and )


(ack: How Stuff Works)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,417 other followers