Noise Cancellation Earpieces

Here's another idea. I think BOSE already made it, but I don't know how theirs work. My idea though is simple. We simply have a earpiece that takes in sound from the current environment, and reverses it, and play it back into the earpiece. Then because the two sounds will cancel out, we will hear nothing.

Brain Calisthenics

New York Times article
Interesting article about "exercising" your brain.

Quality of representation: PhD Proposal

Here is an idea that I am toying with for my PhD research.

In aging, the idea is that neural representations change in several ways. Right now, we know there are changes, but we don't know what they are exactly, or why they happen the way they do. One obvious objective change we are pretty certain of is that, with age, processing speed slows down.

Now, is this a result of nerve conduction changes? Or is this more to do with changes in the processes themselves. That is, neuronal connectivity is changing, so the process computation changes as well, and changes in a way that results in slowing of the process. In addition, connectivity may also be changing in terms of a reduction in neural plasticity, the ability of neurons to form (or prune) connections based on experience.

One test I propose is related to ascertaining if the observations about neural changes with age relate to changes in processes vis a vis changes in connectivity. If neural representations are poorer with age, then it also means that they are less able to dissociate between similar representations. That is, aging reduces distinctiveness between neural representations. We should be able to measure this using the adaptation paradigm. In theory, if two representations are similar, the adaptation should be greater. To the extent that two representations are distinct, there will be less adaptation. Thus, with younger adults, there should be less adaptation to similar but different stimuli, or, there should be adaptation only when stimuli are very similar. In older adults, adaptation should happen at a lower threshold of similarity, for stimuli that are in fact quite distinct compared to that for the young.

In addition, since the neural representational quality in the lower perceptual areas feeds the cognitive processes that operate on them downstream (e.g. perceptual matching, target identification, memory, attention, decision-making etc) then it stands that if the neural representation is poorer, the cortex involved in working on these representations will either work harder to produce the same result, or be incapable of producing the same result if the representations were clearer. So, this could be measured as a correlation of frontal cortex activity with the degree of adaptation in the posterior, more perceptual areas.

The Nativity Story

This is a brilliant movie. It is well done, and the dramatization does not compromise scriptural integrity. The acting is moving. The script is delightful and thoughtful, every word has weight. And the cinematography captures the holy land in all its facets. A must see. I am making this a family tradition, to screen this every Christmas.

Movie website, IMDB website

John 1:35-51

The Calling of the Disciples

Note that all these events in these few chapters occur around Bethany. Bethany is reputedly in the south east area (3 miles away) from the Mount of Olives, which is to the east of Jerusalem (check out Google Earth around the Jerusalem area with the "relief" option on to get an idea of the topography and geography). So John was baptizing in this area, Jesus had come to this area too from His home town of Nazereth, and the disciples he gathered here, Andrew, Simon Peter his brother, Nathanael, and Philip, and one other unnamed were staying in this area currently with John the Baptist. However, Andrew, Peter and Philip were from Bethsaida, a city by the north-east coast of Galilee. Two of them, Andrew and the unnamed disciple were followers of John the baptist, up to this point. Note also that these events occured in a matter of days. It appears that first, Jesus came to the area where John was baptizing, and He had lodgings there. On the day John baptize Jesus (from the gospels), John saw the vision of the dove descending on Him and identified Him as the Messiah (but we also know that John was aware of Jesus' identity for before He was baptized and John saw the vision, John already expressed humility in that he was hesitant to baptize Jesus because of his knowledge of His divinity). Note also that John adds translations of Hebrew words into Greek, perhaps being aware that his audience may not be fully Jewish.

Thus the two followers of John must have heard from John himself talk about the coming Messiah. It is therefore no surprise that when John identified Jesus as the Messiah, the two would follow Him. It also appears then, that Jesus did not just arrive on the scene out of nowhere, but that people had already a fair knowledge of His background, who He was as a person, being from Nazereth, and perhaps, He had already showed a little of His thinking in His conversations. For John was "looking at Jesus as He walked". Consider this for yourself, what are you looking at in life?

Perhaps, this event occured over a few hours, where as the two followers were with John, John talked about Jesus, and they considered what John was saying, and then decided to follow Jesus themselves. Regardless, the followers were rewarded by Jesus turning and asking "What do you seek?" This is perhaps a very difficult question for some. What do you seek in life? Some have no aim, or seek nothing. Some seek something that is material, some even seek after something that is spiritual. But perhaps, as long as that which we seek is not God, they all fall short of the ultimate desire. How interesting then, that the disciples' reply was to first acknowledge Him as teacher, and then apparently stating that they seeked to know where He stayed. But even that is enough. To know where the Divine stays. And they saw and stayed with Him. We can only guess the wonderful conversations they must have had during this time in the evening, for it was the tenth hour from sunrise.

The first response from this interaction for Andrew, was to find Simon, and to inform him that he had found the Messiah. Note again, everyone at that time was probably teetering on their toes looking for the Messiah, so this claim from his brother must have caught Simon's attention in some way. To his credit, Simon followed and was immediately declared prophetically by Jesus to be Cephas, or Peter, the rock.

Following this, Jesus wanted to return to Galilee, nearer His hometown. He had apparently come down south for certain reasons, perhaps the baptism, but had completed His purpose here for the moment. We are not told when the 40 days of temptation fit in, but presumably it was after the baptism and before He went back to Galilee. But prior to returning, He found Philip, who was from the same city as Andrew and Peter. So it appears these disciples were not random people, but people who had interacted with Jesus on various other occasions, and were chosen probably partly based on these interactions.

Philip's call to Nathanael again centers around Jesus being the Messiah. And Nathanael's response reveals the attitudes present towards Nazereth, and the inconsistency of a Messiah coming from there, since the Messiah is supposedly good.

The interaction between Jesus and Nathanael is somewhat a mystery, because it seems to be specific to Nathanael's experience. Nevertheless, John the author placed this section here, perhaps to emphasis how the disciples were convinced of Jesus' identity, and how Jesus revealed Himself to them. In Nathanael's case, it was through Jesus revealing His divine knowledge about him in a prophetic manner. Did Nathanael see something under the fig tree? Was he asking about something then? We are not told. But we are told that Jesus promised that he would see even greater things that this simple revelation of the Messiah through a prophetic word. He would see the Messiah Himself in His reconciliatory role (the angels of God ascending and descending are reminiscent of Jacob's vision of the ladder) and in glory.

Pork Rib and Lotus Root soup

Very very healthy soup

Ingredients
1 Lotus Root (get from oriental market, its a smooth pale-colored root, if you open it up, you'll see some holes. Its like someone took a shot gun and shot through it)
A bunch of pork ribs
A handful of peanuts
If you have baby squid even better!

Method
Just cut up the lotus root into slices, then put it all into a pot of water with the meat, peanuts and squid, and boil boil boil. Keep boiling, then when you think its done, boil some more. Do this for at 3 hrs, the longer the better. Add salt to taste. Then after you've boileded it, you can drink the soup dish with rice.

Teochew Porridge

Teochew Mui
One of the easiest meals to make. Just boil the rice for a very very very long time. Boil until the rice become soft. Then just buy some canned preserved food. Like sardine lah, salted vegetables lah, salted eel lah, sweet peanutes lah, pickles lah, spicy cabbage lah, even kimchi also can, salted egg lah, century egg lah. Then just open and eat direct, or warm up in hot water before you eat, also can. Also can. All also can.

Winter comment

Acherly hor, this winter so far very the wimpy lah. Snow little little, then no more already. But then is a bit the cold lor. Like that how can!?!? Then cold for what? You want to cold, then you must snow, if not then just hot lah. Waste the cold. Anyway, maybe I speak too soon lah. Maybe suddenly the snow will all lau chut lai. So no pic or movie today. Because, nothing to see!

John 1:29-34

"The next day..."

The day after the Baptist was questioned by the priest and Levites sent from the Pharisees, Jesus comes towards John. Perhaps He was already in the vicinity, and people were curious as to who He was. Even John said "I did not know Him", but identified Him as the Lamb of God after he saw the Spirit descend and remain on Him.

This is John the Baptist's testimony as John the author reports it. John was sent to baptize with water, to make straight the path in the wilderness for the coming of the Lord. To prepare people so that the Lord can walk through the wilderness. His baptism and preparation centered around instructing people to repent of their sins and to be cleansed. This is then how John the Baptist summarized the role of Jesus in this section. Jesus is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. He is also the One who will baptize us with the Holy Spirit. Thus, there is the taking away of sin, as well as the cleansing and purification of our hearts.

This is the testimony of John the Baptist about Jesus. John's Baptism, where did it come from?

Jesus, where did He come from?

We are now faced with this mystery. The Incarnation. God with us, in the flesh, in Jesus. The sacrificial Lamb, like all the lambs sacrificed for the atonement of sin at the Jerusalem temple. And the Holy Spirit in us? Note, previously in the Old Testament, prophets and individuals were anointed, and at times, it is recorded, the Holy Spirit came upon them, for certain works. But here, we are baptized with the Holy Spirit. This is something more than just "coming upon". This is indwelling. This is the Divine in us.

Definition of consciousness

Consciousness: the state in which a cognitive system has or processes the knowledge or information that there is a distinction between the object of processing and the system implementing the process.

Defending science or religion with passion?

Here is a rather interesting article in the New York Times today about some debates about the influence of science and religion in society [download pdf]. As there are already many opinions, I do not wish to add "just" another one. Instead, I would like to plead with the scientific community as well as the religious community, if you are reading this. Please be mindful to consider the nature of your arguments, whether they stem from the self, or truly from a consideration of what can be known about the truth. Because what is at stake is not merely just who is right or wrong. What is at stake here, is your life, and the lives of others.

Consider this. If those who reject the idea of God are correct, then there is no God. If there is no God, there is no need to live according to what God says. If so, for some of us, we may find value in other things as our meaning in life (if that were possible without appealing to God). Some of us may feel that we no longer suffer under the guilt of possible judgment under God. Some of us may feel that there is no difference. IF there is no God.

If there is a God, however, then the question becomes, who is this God? And what does that mean for us? Let us assume there is a God, and this God is the Judeo-Christian God (we could pick other examples, but let us just assume this one for argument's sake). If the Judeo-Christian God exists, then, those who reject His existence have much to fear indeed! For He says that those who do not believe, there will be a cost. Some of us may not be willing to pay that cost.

Therefore, I say, consider carefully the nature of your arguments. Lay aside anything that might cloud your thinking and respect your fields of study, do not be a disgrace to it, do not disgrace yourself by failure to consider the possibility of your own lack of knowledge and understanding. Because your opinion, and the facts, are not the only things at stake.

John 1:19-28

"...testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?"

Or perhaps, "Who do you think you are?". We cannot deny a sense of suspicion on the part of the interrogators. For John the Baptist has been preaching a radical message, as we have observed in other gospels. He has also been baptizing, hence the term the Baptist. Here, John, the author, narrates the events that took place prior to the first recorded public anointing of Jesus for His ministry, being baptized by John. Remember, that as recorded in Matthew, about 30 years ago, there was a huge massacre of infants by Herod, because he was afraid of the threat of the fulfillment of the messianic prophecy. So, we must wonder, perhaps people have been thinking all this while, with much tension, hope, expectancy, and for some, fear, about the big question - WHO? It is therefore no surprise that when people noticed the radical nature of John the Baptist's ministry, they suspected him of being the Messiah. The One whom the Jews have been waiting for. The One whom the Scriptures have foretold since Genesis 3:15 and throughout all the Old Testament. Even now, those who do not receive Jesus as the Messiah (Christ, in Greek), are still awaiting and wondering - WHO will save us?

Note, that John, the author, states that the priests and Levites were sent by the Jews. Recall that John was probably writing this gospel around the time of 70-90AD. And he was writing in the midst of two teachings that needed to be addressed, that were stumbling the Christians at that time (this gospel was probably circulatory to all the churches throughout all the Diaspora, as well as to Israel). The first was the teachings of agnosticism, who basically hold the idea that there is no God. The second teaching related to Christians, whether previously non-Jewish or Jewish, were reverting back to the old Jewish practices, tied to the practices of the Torah, such as circumcision. Thus, when John pinpoints here, that the Jews were one of the first to question John the Baptist, and how throughout the gospel, these interrogators are constantly referred to as being unable to accept the Messiahship of Jesus, we can see that if we were Jewish readers, this touched a sensitive spot. Let us be sensitive to this, therefore, and be open to hear what John, the author, is truly saying about the state of our hearts with respect to the identity of the Messiah. Perhaps, the question is, why do we react the way we do, when we hear that Someone is the Messiah? Do we doubt? Do we fear? Or do we not even care about such things? Or do we receive this information without due testing and consideration? Or do we receive it with joy, and righteous faith?

Nevertheless, it is the priests and Levites, sent by the Pharisees (v24), that ask "who are you?" Such a question! How would we answer if someone were to ask us that? The interested, should at this point look up background information about the Pharisees. Here, it is useful to know that, because of their religious leadership role and position in the Jewish society, it is no surprise that they would be the ones to first jump at outstanding people to test them about their teachings. Perhaps some Pharisees were truly concerned about what these outstanding people were teaching the average Jew. And so, they exercised a paternalistic approach to people such as John, and subsequently Jesus. Testing, questioning, suspecting.

"...I am not the Christ...(not) Elijah...(not) the Prophet..."

Malachi 4:5,6 talks about God sending Elijah, before the dreadful day of the Lord. So, people then probably took this to mean that Elijah (who was taken up into heaven 2Ki 2:11) would come back before the Messiah would come back. This is where the point may have been missed. The people were looking for the Messiah as a sign for deliverance. They may have had wrong ideas about what this deliverance entails. Regardless, they were focusing on the Messiah as a sign, and were deaf and blind to the message and truth of Who the Messiah is, and what He said and was doing. Thus, even if John was Elijah as foretold, is that really that important?

John the Baptist denied association with all these signs that the people were so eagerly attending to much like the way Jesus typically responded to the peoples' request for signs. But gave the answer from Isa 40:3. Which is both specific as well as generic. In a way, we are all voices crying out in this wilderness for people to make straight the way of the Lord. But John the Baptist probably knew this more clearly than anyone else, for to him was revealed that his cousin, Jesus, was indeed the Son of God, the Messiah, the Christ. Where did he gain this knowledge? We are not told. But he expressed explicit knowledge, and declared it in the following verses.

John the Baptist's baptism
The word baptism has two related meanings. The first meaning is simply to immerse, or submerge, the second meaning is to wash, or clean. This word is used in the New Testament, but does not seem to occur in the Old Testament. However, we are reminded, when we think of cleansing, of the Old Testament commandments regarding purification rites during temple servies and sacrificial offerings. We are also reminded of submersion in the Red Sea crossing during the Exodus of the Isrealites from Egypt, the crossing of the Jordan river, when the Isrealites entered the promised land. The constant meaning that we obtain from these examples is the idea of being transformed from a previous old, dirty, inferior, unacceptable state, to one that is new, clean, perfected, and accepted. Thus, reading this into this section in John, it seems that the practise of baptism has become formalized as something done by a rabbi or teacher as a ritual representing the change of the baptizee from an old state to the new state, perhaps the state taught or recommended by that particular teacher.

Perhaps, the interrogators were questioning John's authority (see Mt 21:25, Mr 11:30, Lk 20:4) and teaching. What was he teaching the people, since he says he has no authority. And John's reply here was to indicate the baptism he performed was but a faint comparison to the true baptism to be performed by the Christ. So we are to think of our practice in church of earthly baptism with water as well.

Look also at Lk 12:50. Here Jesus talks about His own baptism, His immersion and purification by suffering on the cross. Was He not pure? Why did He need to be purified? Was He not God? How can He be immersed in anything? How can anything contain God? But recall, that Jesus was baptized by John the baptist (next section). And recall, that our sins were laid on Him. And recall, that He had to die on our behalf, the price of our sin, and the ultimate immersion, the ultimate containment from the rest of all creation, is death. Finally, the baptism we practise does not stop in immersion. For it is first immersion, then purification. This speaks of the resurrection to perfect life after the death to sin.

Going back to the Baptist. If we were so totally convinced about the identify of Christ, would we be as bold as John to declare publicly this truth? Reflect on John the Baptist's actions. How he behaved, remember his lifestyle previously mention, remember his message based on his knowledge of Christ. A voice in the wilderness, sometimes a lonely voice, sometimes unheeded, sometimes even ridiculed and mocked and placed under suspicion. Consider the Baptist's faith, in One who, at the time when he knew Him, had not yet died for his sins, but yet, he already had faith. Consider now, we who know Him in the fullness of His intentions and acts and words, our faith. And John, when ask who he was, his answer was always in relation to Christ. He never said I am John, these are my teachings, this is my thinking, that is why I do these things. Instead, it was always simply "I am His".

Cultural effects on visual processing as a function of age

Evidence shows that Westerners are more object-focused, being more individualistic, whereas East Asians are more context-focused, being more holistic. These differences are probably due to the larger historical cultural developmental influence exerted on individuals throughout their life experiences. Such influences permeate from the larger societal forces down to the everyday inter-relational communications, even to the physical habitational environment as an outward expression of these internal thoughts. With age, therefore, there is greater experience with one's own cultural development. We sought to examine these neural correlates of cultural experience with age.

The same study previously conducted with East Asians was conducted with Westerners. In summary, we found that Westerners showed similar object, background, and binding processing regions. These regions showed reduced expression with age. The most interesting contrast, however, was that Older East Asians did not show typical object processing (as measured using our adaptation paradigm; see subsequent follow-up experiments) while Young East Asians, Young Westerners and Old Westerners all showed object processing in the lateral occipital complex (LOC). This was related to changes in attentional resources with age. Furthermore, the difference was consistent with cultural expectations because the Old Westerners showed preserved object processing engagement, reflecting the more object-focused cultural background.

This study is currently in press in Cognitive, Affective, Behavioral Neuroscience journal. CNS 2006 abstract available for download.

So now, we know that differences in experiences over lifetime lead to differences in engagement of visual processing regions, and these differences are at the neural systems level as well. The next question how these patterns of neural engagement relate to what these people are actually looking at. This is important for understanding what is the actual visual information being attended. This has implications on developmental experience as a top-down modulator of the bottom-up visual information being input into higher cognitive processes. The other aspect is how external experience interacts with biological or cognitive changes related to aging.

What processes are specific to aging only? What processes are specific to long-term experience within the external developmental environment? Can short-term training alleviate processes that decline with age? What are the long-term experiences that lead to beneficial aging neural, cognitive outcomes?

This study had since had a press release [article].

Oleng Color in Allerton and UIUC

See ah, I press, then he sing
"Ahh! Ahh! Ahh!"
That's why the Sun Singer sings
Hands up high high
Butt press ring ring
That's why the Sun Singer sings

Click here for the full movie. And here for the picture album. All the color belly nice. Got gou, oleng, led, gleen, bloun. I see already also my eyes get huay huay. See already also can cry ah. I recommen Allerton park for new visitor to UIUC lah. The uni own it. Used to belong to some rich man son. Then dunno why, he sian already then he sell to the uni. Wah lau, his house is still there. Then the backyard ah, is acherly the whole forest leh! Piang! If your backside garden is a forest ah, I everyday go camping ah. Got a river flowing through some more. Can catch fish jiak sushi lah. Or else, catch deer jiak deer meat on hot plate, season with spring onion and ginger.

John 1:15-18

"John bore witness...He who come after me is preferred...for He was before me."

This statement is presumably uttered just before Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. John had a rather large following, being a radical teacher prophet, a fresh voice in the Roman colonialized Israel. For 400 years after the remnant returned from being exiled to Babylon and Persia (as narrated in Nehemiah and Ezra), not much is known about what was going on in Israel. During this time, Rome came into power and defeated the previous kingdoms, and Israel came under its power. And just at this time, possibly a very dynamic, radical period of change in terms of politics, economy, culture and religion, John the Baptist cries out this statement pointing towards Jesus Christ. If you were one of the people listening to John's words, you might be puzzled as to what he was talking about. Because he was referring to Jesus, of Nazereth, as being preferred and before him, even though Jesus was younger than John in terms of human age. Radical claims. Either John the Baptist was mad, or else what he was saying was truer than anything else we've ever known. Either way, it is clear that he was very much convinced about what he was saying. And his own ministry, the baptism of repentance, rebuking of Pharisees (seen in Matthew, Mark, and Luke) was centered around this fact.

But the John, the author of this gospel interjects this statement by the Baptist here, because in the context of these verses, the point was to declare that Jesus Christ was the Word that he had been talking about in the previous sentences. Again, the pattern is, the idea of the Word, and that the Word took on flesh as Jesus Christ, through whom came grace and truth. A repetition for emphasis, for connection, for expansions. For not only was the Word full of grace and truth. But we have received from His fullness, the same grace, and the same truth. So as He had these qualities fully in Him, so He imparts it to us through Jesus Christ.

Note the contrast between the law through Moses, and grace and truth through Jesus Christ. Some seek to find truth in the law, some even seek to find grace in it, thinking that the law is good and therefore must reflect some element of grace. That may be in some cases. However, we see here that in fact, the law is placed in juxtaposition with grace and truth. Thus, at most, the law is but a reflection of the reality. If there is any truth in the law, it is because it is merely reflecting the Truth. If there is any hint of grace, it is because it again is merely reflecting the One who is full of grace.

"No one has seen God...He has declared Him"

This statement is a continual theme for John (1 John 4:12-16) and relates to the world not comprehending Him. For God is invisible to us in all His Otherness. However, He is revealed to us in Jesus Christ. If we know Jesus, we know God. So there are two levels of testimony here. The first is the testimony of John the Baptist as to who Jesus was. And the second, greater testimony, is that of Jesus as to who God is.

John 1:14

"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory..."

Recall the tabernacle during the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt. Then, the tabernacle was the vessel for God's glory as He dwelt among the Israelites during their journey. The tabernacle was made from various materials, each having their symbolism as well as purpose. But here, here is no longer symbolism, there is no more analogy. This is the reality of those former shadows (Heb 10:1).

There is in our culture, the idea that flesh is evil, and not good. Yet, the glory of God was beheld in the form of flesh. What is glory? Even more specifically, what is His glory? There is always the idea of brightness, weight, presence. Glory. Some might think it to be about fame or credit, as we are prone to say, "He takes all the glory for himself". But that is but one aspect of the idea of glory. For throughout the old testament, glory seemed to be consistently used to represent the presence of individuals that are great, that have done great things, that are distinct in their otherness compared to us. And glory is mostly used to refer to rulers, like kings and their glory. It is also applied to men and their glory. Their presence, their legacy. It is intimately tied to their being. Where the life within them is so influential, it spills out as glory. And in contradiction to our thoughts about the evil flesh, the flesh of the Word was the vessel for His glory. How wonderful this revelation, this release, that our flesh too then, the same flesh as for the Word, has the possibility to contain or be the medium through which His glory can be known.

"...begotten of the Father..."

The Son of God. The very product of Father. One is not the Father without offspring. He would only be a being. Yet, now we have a revelation. He is the Father. First to the Word, and we will learn later, to us all who believe and have been adopted. This means that in the Word, is the essence of the Father. In the Word, the Father is seen, because His essence is at work. If God has an offspring, a true one, would that offspring not also be God? Although we are created by God, we are not true offsprings. But if one were to stem from God, He would be God as well. Not another one, but the same One. For there cannot be more than one God. By definition, there can be only One God. This is the mystery and must be deeply considered.

"...full of grace and truth."

Grace and truth! Consider the state of interpersonal values and situations that we experience. If we were to arrive at a plain summary, we might find that if there are many problems in these relationships, from the lowest to highest levels, from person-to-person, one-to-many, many-to-many, group-to-group, if there are any problems, they are due to a lack of grace and truth. Because we do not trust others, and they do not trust us, at least not completely. Because we do not show grace to others, nor are they gracious to us, again, at least not completly. But here, John states, that the Word is full of grace and truth. This cannot be repeated enough. If we are searching for truth, because of the various voices that speak in our world, we will find it in the Word. If we are looking for grace, because of the unforgiving, methodical, procedural operations of the world, we will find it in the Word. Again, contrast this to the Law. Law versus Word. The Law of Moses was written on stone, with words. Yet, here is the Word, but instead of the rigid, prescriptive tone seen in the Law, we see life, light, grace and truth. How can this be? Are they inconsistent? No. For, as it is said, all the Law and the Prophets are summed up in one commandment: love your neighbor as yourself (Rom 13:9). But we digress, in a good way.

Consider truth. What is it? It seems that John here is speaking of an absolute truth. A truth, or Truth, that everyone can regard as such. Truth that does not depend on anything. What is this? We are not given anymore detail from this verse, other than that it can be found in the Word. But we know that truth as we use the term means something that is real, that is reliable, that would apply in every situation. The concept of truth by definition would mean that whatever it is, it always is. The minute one thinks that a truth is at one time, but is not at another, it would contradict the strict meaning of truth. Truth should always be. It is as eternal as God is, as previously mentioned. And as such, might we think that then, the only real truth, is the truth of Himself. His being? Stark constrast to the current subjective truth ideas. Is truth an emergent property of collective consciousness? No. Because that would mean it depends on the collective. Is the idea of truth a product of collective consciousness? Maybe. But then who can show that it is not itself a true concept. Yet, think of the Word, and John's claim. The Word was, and is, full of truth. John simply states it with no reference to any collective idea. We must pause and consider this deeply. Is he stating an idea from the collective consciousness simply as one of the partakers? Yet, he had evidence, for all the ideas in John, John saw those ideas fulfilled in the Word. When collective ideas are fulfilled, it is a scary thing...a scary thing to the beholder, the one who realizes the fulfillment, and to those who would realize it because of the testimony of the one who witnesses.

Consider grace. What is it? As we know it, grace speaks of acceptance, approachability, beauty, fluidity. Someone defined grace as getting that which we do not deserve. In our interactions, do we not see the lack of such qualities? We are constantly trying to define ourselves in term of boundaries, personality, distinguishing ourselves from others in a struggle to be known. We are constantly wanting to get what we think we deserve, and not giving others what we think they do not. Yet the Word is full of grace. Is this not the ultimate expression of one's being, to acknowledge the being of others in the fullest possible way, that is, to consider them higher than the self. To serve them. To give to them. To accept them. And in so doing, we express ourselves in relationship to them. For if we only consider ourselves, what do we have to verify our own being with? And that relationship with others, it cannot be one of selfishness and self-obsession, the opposite of grace. For if so, we would annhilate the other, and end up with only ourselves. Which would be an unreasonable state. But of course, grace is more than this negative perspective.

Grace is positive. Just as truth is positive. Just as light is positive. There is creative power, propagation, influence, revelation, release, transformation, growth, and all these are tied to His glory. So there are two things here. Truth. Independent of everything else, having its own being. And grace. The fullest expression of that being in relation to others.

John 1:6-13

"...a man sent from God...John...witness of the Light...believe."

John the baptist. Strange man. From Matthew 3:1-17, Mark 1:1-11, and Luke 3, we obtain the general description of a man who lived quite unlike the others in his generation. He lived in the wilderness, wore camel's hair with a leather belt, and ate locusts and wild honey. His main message was "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins". This is significant. Consider John the baptist, since he was sent from God as a witness of the Light. How was he a witness? Why was he chosen? Is there even a reason he was chosen or did he grow into that role?

Consider the saying from Isaiah 40:3-5. This is the passage whose context is to speak comfort and deliverance to the people of Israel. There is also the very telling statement "The glory of the Lord shall be revealed". And John is the voice of one crying in the wilderness, "Prepare the way...make straight in the desert". Get ready! How many were unaware? How many did not comprehend the light? But more on this in later passages.

The key points in these verses seem to be about the testimony to some facts or revelations about the Light. The Light gives light to every man, the Light was not known by the world, the Light was not received by His own, those who received the Light by believing in His name, are given the right to become children of God. This is an expansion of the earlier verses. From the original idea that the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness not comprehending, John the author develops the idea of how the Light shines in the darkness.

The Light was in the world. Now, the Maker of the world is in it. Yet He was not recognized, He was not known. This is the tragedy. What has gone wrong that the world does not know its Maker? As a child does not know his or her parents. But John does not stop here, for although the world, His own, did not know Him or receive Him, those who did receive Him received something in return. And here, there is the idea of spiritual birthhood into being a child of God.

Now when we talk of spiritual birth, we refer to something fundamental, something to do with souls. For we are not talking about physical bodily birthing, but divine birthing. We are born of God. For all physical births are reflections of what is happening spiritually. A new soul is born. A new being. A new life. However, that life apart from The Life, and The Light, is sadly, because of our ignorance of Him, our lack of knowledge of Him, our non-reception of Him, that life is still just as good as death. For consider its eternal futility apart from The Light.

Yet, the good news is that if that life were to receive Him, then, there is a spiritual birth as well. One by God's own will. Consider the fundamental, qualitative difference that is now in place between these two lives. Is it a continuum? As in are there "better" lives and "worse" ones? Are not all equal? Good or bad? All die. The only distinction then must be what is eternal. Do you know the Eternal One? And, just as importantly, does the Eternal One know you?

Fall Chao and Qiu

So the color all change already. The wind blowing very strong. All the leaf fall down, like raining orange like that. Then when you walk, the floor got dry leaves, you make the shee shee sha sha sound. Very fun. But then a little bit cold lah. Probably around 15C. I like. This one all take while walking along Springfield, Elm, Prairie, White. So you see, all very nice nice like that. But then ah, its means its going to become very the cold lor. Already some qiu botak already. Ah, got poem come out.

Bua Toh
Wind blow blow
Color red red
Orange orange
Yellow yellow
Floor sha sha
Light warm warm
Air cold cold
Leaf bua toh bua toh

Time travel back to CNS 2006

Another time travel back one lah. Sorry ah. Very very busy. But I got put you should xie tian xie di already. This one is for the CNS conference in San Francisco. Very good! Also got chiak hong, but this one even better, can chiak hai also. See the golden gate, the pier 39, or issit 36? Aiyah, same same lah. 30 something lah. Then also, the whole lab got drunk. Yah man. Fun right? Dun worry lah, we know what we doing. Is good one. Here is some movie clip: CNS San Francisco 2006 [movie].

Time travel back to SFN 2005

Acherly hor, this one is last year happen one lah. But now then I put up. Because busy mah. But anyway, we go there for conference lah. And then one day, got some time, me and Lucas go there to chiak hong. Then see here see there lor. Not bad lah. Can see all these famous places. Only cannot see peh chu very clearly (check out my pics for Washington)...good lah...then like that is more safe for them. But ah, I thought I saw a sniper on the roof leh! Wah lau! I felt a little insecure...look carefully on my pics for the peh chu. You can see shadow...maybe ninja...maybe only lah. Also got movie: SFN Washington DC 2005 [movie]

Tofu Fa Man!

Liao Chor! I make one. Not bad at all...and the fried bee hoon. Bah tor yiao liao! Jia bng!

Here is the recipes (I give recipe no milligram one ah, just go by feeling lah):

Tofu Fa
Ingredients
Soya bean (2 handfuls)
Water (one pot)
Muslin cloth (go get from the fabric auntie, very cheap one, get white color hor, don't fancy fancy, if not your tow huay got color)
Soya bean curd agglutination powder (buy from the bai huo gong si)

Make
Soak the soya beans in the water over night. Go to sleep. Tomorrow then continue.
Wake up already, pour the soya beans and water mixture into a blender, and blend. Blend blend ga li song. Then pour the mix into the muslin cloth. Then squeeze the juice out of the mix in the muslin cloth into a pot. Then boil the pot of juice, get rid of the foam. This is the tow huay jui. Can drink one. Add sugar if you want when you drink.

Then mix the agglutination powder with cold water, one pack of powder put about 1/4 pot of water. Mix until powder all dissolve. Then pour the tow huay jui into the powder water and cover the pot. Let it stand for at least 15 min. Afterward, it become tow huay, or TOFU FA!

Cha Bee Hoon
Ingredients
Tang Hoon (3 packs)
Straw mushroom or shiitake also can (2 handful sliced)
Chilli (as much as you want, whole or chopped up to you, whole better lah)
Cabbage (half head sliced)
Carrot (one big one, sliced)
Egg (2 or 3 beaten)
Meat base (can be pork, chicken slices, or that fake crab stick sliced also can, or don't put meat also can)
Celery (2 or 3 sticks sliced)
Vinegar, rice wine, soya sauce, salt, sesame oil

Make
Boil the tang hoon until soft, then dry and put aside first.
Mix half cup vinegar, half cup rice wine, 1/4 cup soya sauce, a little bit of sesame oil.
Pour some oil into wok and fry some garlice, ginger, shallots (all chopped).
Wait until slightly golden color. Then put the chilli. Stir fry a while.
Then put the cabbage and carrot. Stir fry until the mix shrink a little and softer.
Then put the celery and the meat base if have. Stir fry until meat cooked.
Then put the tang hoon in. Maybe very long and dry, but patient lah. Chop up the tang hoon as you mix it into the stir fry.
Add the egg. Keep mixing. Wait until the egg solidy in small bits in the mix.
Add the vinegar/wine/soya sauce/sesame oil mix. Mix.
Add salt until you like the taste, or don't add also can.

Cha Bee Hoon win oredi.

Gluttons Bay, SG

The new eatery beside the Durian. Not bad lah. A bit the ex, but then good view lor. Also as usual got many people lah. Some more the esplanade there like every night now got something happening. So if you wan go then better be early lor.

Gluttons Bay (movie clip)

The good old kopi loti!

Ah...the good old days. Nothing beats a nong nong de kopi-o. Half boiled eggs and kaya toast. That's all you need to get your day going.

This pic taken before heading for church service one Sunday morning.

Mid-Autumn 2006

Mid-Autumn in Hessel Park, Champaign (movie clip)

Chuang qian ming yue guang
The moon big big.
The air cold cold.
The meat sweet sweet.
The grill hot hot.
The people talk talk.
The tea smell smell.
The time slow slow.
The day gone gone.
Hungry already.

The Chicago Jazz Festival 2006

Chicago Jazz! (movie clip) Very fun. Got music, got beer, got sit on the chao in the windy city. Is good. Some more best! Is FREE! They very crazy one. One time got two jazz organ ah, they play lai play ki. Plus they got showmanship. Not say I say what lah, but they damn good lor. Can go must go. Don't go you lugi.

Aging effects on visual object, background and binding processing

Earlier, we saw different brain regions involved in object, background and binding processing. Now, we see if these regions might be engaged differently in older adults. Older adults typically show poorer episodic memory but relatively preserved item processing that does not require episodic or contextual access. Might this be due to a reduced engagement of binding processes in the MTL of older adults?

We found that not only is MTL reduced, but older adults seemed to not process the entire visual stimuli in the same way as young adults. In particular, older adults seem to process only background components of the pictures while somewhat treating the objects less attentively. Abstract: Age-related changes in object processing and contextual binding revealed using fMR adaptation.

So we know that at least part of the changes in aging might be related to the partial processing of the entire picture rather than the entire central item and context. Next, we turn to consider what are some of the factors that might lead to these changes with age.

Binding information about items and their contexts

So we know frequency has bearing on how the brain works during semantic judgments, encoding, and retrieval. Now, we take a look more specifically at how the brain does the work of binding the item to information about its occurrence for subsequent memory. Previously, we showed that if you had to engage the brain more during encoding, you are more likely to remember the item's occurrence. Now, we are interested in where in the brain this occurrence information or contextual information about the item is processed.

We looked at pictures for this inquiry instead of words because they afforded more relevant ways of manipulating the stimuli, as well as the ability to test these items more easily in other sample groups of people as will become apparent later on.

When looking at pictures of objects in background scenes, we are able to process information about the identity of the object, the content or spatial layout of the background. Furthermore, we form the binding between object and background that relates to information about their co-occurrence. The brain regions involved in these respective processes are the lateral occipital complex (LOC), the parahippocampal place area (PPA), and the medial temporal regions (MTL) that includes a different region of the parahippocampal gyrus and the hippocampus. Abstract: Cortical areas involved in object, background, and object-background processing revealed with functional magnetic resonance adaptation.

Thus, we know that the brain processes the component item information and their contextual binding in seperate regions. These then give us clues about how these different regions might operate differently across people groups that show different memory behavior and/or processing of visual stimuli.

Frequency, memory formation, memory retrieval or access

Once we know that the brain works differently when making semantic judgments about words encountered with different frequencies, we can ask how the brain processes these words so that information about them can be accessed later. So, with regards to frequency, why is it that when asked to recall word lists, we tend to recall more frequent items, whereas when asked to recognize word lists, we do it better for less frequent items. Clearly, something about the previous history of these words of different frequency of encounters has an affect on the way information about a specific encounter of these words is retrieved later.

First, we can look at what the brain does differently for words of high and low frequency that leads to different memory access. In sum, the brain seems to be more active during semantic judgments for words that are later recognized. Furthermore, these words that are more active tend to be the low frequency words. Perhaps, because we have to work harder at making semantic distinctions for such words, we end up enhancing their recent representation. This makes it easier for them to be retrieved later for recogntion. Abstract: Word frequency and subsequent memory effects studied using event-related fMRI.

Next, we look at how the brain handles these words during recognition itself. Perhaps during this stage, other processes additively or interactively affect the resulting recognition response. The mechanism might operate in this manner: the top-down criteria is made active (words that appeared at a particular point in time), probe words are encountered and identified, information for these words are matched to the active set, a decision is made about the recognition memory for the word. In sum, word frequency of the test words seen during encoding did not affect brain activity differentially, however, word frequency of new words not seen at encoding did make a difference to brain activity. That is, high frequency novel words activated the parietal region more than low frequency words when subjects recognized them as such. Abstract: Recognition memory for studied words is determined by cortical activation differences at encoding but not during retrieval.

So once we encode the word recently, the word frequency does not matter anymore, at least to the recognition judgment. What matters in the recognition is trace of recency or specific time information associated with the probe word. This, presumably, is not dependent on the frequency history of the word. However, if the word is not encountered before, word frequency seems to make a difference in the parietal area, an area that is involved in attention modulation and visualization. Perhaps, the higher activity for high frequency words in this case marks the more connected representation of high frequency words compared to low frequency words. Sort of an automatic engagement of the relatively wider spread of activation for high frequency words.

Word Frequency and brain activity

One of the basic forms of information that our brains are sensitive to, is the number of times we encounter an external event. This is most easily seen in examples of learning. Such as, the more we practice doing something, it becomes easier, we get faster at doing it, and even more accurate. Another example is that the more we encounter a specific information about an item or concept, we know a little more about it, maybe in a different way, maybe in a clearer way. Prior knowledge is updated.

The brain probably represents this frequency information in terms of changes in individual neuronal activity and inter-neuronal connectivity. In terms of internal neuronal changes, neurons may form more synapses that facilitate the generation of an action potential. There might also be reductions in synapses, leading to inhibitory type responses or de-potentiation. In terms of inter-neuronal connectivity, neurons may form more synapses with other neurons, axons may travel along certain paths in order to reach target brain regions, neuronal branching becomes more dense, or even less dense depending on the nature of the stimulation and connection. In all these cases, frequency of encountering stimuli, represented as frequency of individual neurons and networks of neurons being stimulated, leads to changes in neuronal structure and activity.

We start with an evaluation of how frequency of encountering words changes the way our brains respond when trying to access semantic information about those words. By semantic information, we typically refer to all associative information (neuronal connections) that are involved when we make an inclusion/exclusion categorizing judgment. In theory, we make these judgments by first evoking a set of semantic restrictions that define the target categories and keep this set active. We then identify the words, retrieve connections of these words, then match these retrieved connections to the active restriction set. This can proceed in a top-down/bottom-up competition type mechanism whereby bottom-up perceptual information about the word representation (lexical features, semantic associative strength and density) have to be resolved with the top-down imperative to match or not match the active semantic set relevant to the task.

In sum, the brain has to work harder for words encountered less frequently during such semantic judgments. Abstract: Frequency of concrete words modulates prefrontal activation during semantic judgments.

Perhaps, while low frequency should have fewer connections than high frequency words, since they have not had that much opportunity to form these connections due to the sparsity of their occurrence, the brain compensates their lack of obvious semantic associations by engaging more neuronal processing (particularly in the frontal regions). This may mark the recurrent search or matching effort to decide the category for the probe word.

3T Siemens Allegra

This is where its all done. You put someone in there, make them do some cognitive task. Compare it to when they are doing another task or doing nothing. Then make some inferences about the brain activity and the brain regions involved in performing the task.

John 1:3-5

"All things were made through Him..."

The creation story. Here, John is clearly looking at Christ as the beginning of everything that we see and know. Not only was He in the beginning, His is also the beginning of all things. Consider this again. What we know about reality. Planets, creatures, animals, plants, the environment, molecules, atoms, physics, color, smells, sounds, movement, change, reason, logic, chaos even. Christ was the author of all these. Which means He must be incredibly smart. He is the one in whom resides perfect knowledge as those in the sciences envy. He is the one in whom resides perfect expression as those in the arts envy. He is the one in whom resides perfect thought as those in philosophy and religion seek after. Everything is found in Him because everything that exists owes itself to Him, even time.

And the culmination of this creative force is life. In Him was life. Even now, we find it hard to define what life really is. Reproduction? Awareness? Growth? Automation? These are but facets for we can always find exceptions to the rules we might devise. But here is the source of all life. If we were to take this point, then John could be telling us, here is what life is. He is. And we who live, do so because He does. And if so, there are implications that follow, such as emulation of His perfect life. Seeking after His life force.

How can we choose otherwise? Because that would be to deny life. And in the end, that would mean we are extinguishing ourselves. To not flow with His life is contradiction, and the most meaningless thing of all.

"...the light of men...in the darkness..."

Now we cross the line. From just the idea of perfect existence, life, we cross into the physical, light. This juxtaposing of life and light vs darkness. John was probably thinking about the world as we know it as darkness. The ignorance, the denial, the rebellion. And this is likened to not having light. Darkness. Not being able to see. Not having light. Not having life. So then, apart from Christ, we are in fact not alive. Recall that God said in Genesis "Let there be light", again. He started creation with light. There is therefore significance here that John speaks of Christ's life as the light of men. For in His life, in His ultimate work, He created light in us, while we were in darkness, uncreated, unformed.

"...the darkness did not comprehend it."

The ultimate failing of the human race. We did not recognize Him. Even though we belong to Him, and He made us. We have fallen so far that we cannot see the truth as it is presented in our very faces. Consider this. How have we, how has the world, not comprehended its Maker?

Cognitive Training

Two main findings emerge with research into the efficacy of cognitive training.

1. Training helps. Training improves behavioral performance in the task that people are trained in. This is evidenced in the Seattle Longitudinal Study and the Berlin Aging Study as studied by Baltes, Willis, Schaie, Lindenberger from the 70s to 90s, and even current day. Mostly, these studies train people in tasks involving spatial orientation and inductive reasoning. And they show that training in these specific domains leads to improvements post-test in that domain. This might explain why expertise exists. That is, why there are people around who are very good at what they do because they have so much experience doing it.

2. Training does not spill over to other domains as much. To be fair, there are some general transfers of learning, mostly within other tests that probe that trained domain. But across different domains, there seems to be not much transfer. Many have tried to investigate if training serves to improve general intelligence, and thus would logically lead to more transfer, since it is general. However, this has proven elusive. Most of the problem is because general intelligence itself is elusive, and is really still very much a modular thing. That is, there may not be a general intelligence at all, but specialties in cognitive abilities like spatial orientation, inductive reasoning, perceptual speed etc.

3. Perceptual speed does not improve with training. This is the general finding. However, not finding improvement with training does not mean that it is not possible. Perhaps there is a method of improving perceptual speed, but we have not found it yet.

4. These improvements with training are found even in aging!

The Freiahdim: Chapter 1.1

Kira maxed out the acceleration of the pod. He had to finish collecting all the ore by the second rotation or it would be another night of eating tapioca. Ore collection was an elaborate process in the asteroid belt. The unpredictable trajectory of the rocks required a pilot who was able to read movement and react instantaneously, and a lot of luck. The ore was basic iron, and would be purified in reactors down on the mother planet. The refineries paid good money and ore collectors needed plenty of it.

Another dive, and a swerve to the left. That was close! Kira looked back. The dragnet was just about full. One more. He arched his back and yanked at the helm. His pod pitched up in response and swung over a looming space rock. There! A glint of light. A fancy roll and a burst of speed. Kira held the pod steady and targeted the light. He fired two shots and circular blade cutters flew out of the pod's battery towards their target, spinning with jagged edges. They hit and spliced the ore loose from the base rock. Kira banked to one side, and scooped up the ore with the dragnet. That's done it. Now. Home.

The Freiahdim: Prologue

"All men must die". This was the carved inscription on the ground at the foot of the Rock of Delmonutha, a mountain of pure diamond. A giant, solitary monolith on the surface of the infamous desert asteroid Durathane. Travellers came from all the corners of the known Universe to witness this spectacular sight. Every rotation cycle, the rays of the setting Durathanian sun cut into the enormous gem and splayed out in a multi-colored fanfare. It is said that the eyes that beheld this reflected glory will from then on look upon the universe with supernatural clarity. Some devout pilgrims have left this place enlightened, and used their newfound wisdom to save many from folly. Other eager visitors, while no less passionate, were not so favored and the intensity of the revelation, the starkness of the reality, simply drove them to utter madness.

No one knows who carved the words there into the diamond rock. Even less understood is the purpose of the words. The mountain structure itself had been studied for millennia. Using magic and science, scientists and mystics tried to probe its inner contents. But the mountain of diamond remained impregnable. "All men must die", it said. They always have.

Though technically an asteroid, Durathane was large enough to contain a basic atmosphere. However, it was not spherical like the other planets, and it belonged to the asteroid belt that orbited its mother planet, Sardis. Legend has it that the asteroid belt used to be a whole planet even larger than Sardis. But a terrible war amongst the inhabitants on the planet eventually ended with its total destruction.

Identity Phones

Mobile phones that use fingerprint and retina scan to verify our identity. They can therefore contain our credit card info, our bank account info...even the "cash" we have withdrawn from our bank into our phones...and info for all the various cards we carry...train passes, office passes, discount vouchers, etc.

So all we have to do is scan the info into our phones, and if we need to make a purchase or use the info which is secure, just place our fingerprint and retina scan for access and then the money or info is accessed accordingly by the relevant external devices...

No need to walk around with big fat wallets!

iTable

Picture this, a table with the desk surface as a touch screen monitor so you can write on it with a stylus, or use your hands and fingers to "move" paper. Moreover, have the desk hot-wired so that the CPU is integrated into the drawers. Have the port built into the table too. You can have a USB port on the table, a phone or ethernet port for physical network connectivity, a built in wireless. Have all the cables fabricated into one cable, so that the user just needs to plug-in one cable for power and/or for networking.

Cool looking.

Visor Monitor

Instead of using monitors, we can use visors and monitors. This would increase the field of view with the screen being the whole visor. You can make it into a 3D interface so active windows or documents and applications are ordered in terms of depth layers. You can also detect the user's head position and move the screen in a 3D world accordingly. You can even include earphones connected to the visor. Just connect an LCD visor with a DVI or VGA cable to the CPU, with the approriate driver and softwares of course!

Sonic Boom Horn

Sometimes, people can't react in time to oncoming traffic, or they just don't notice. By the time they know how to react, it might be too late. So why not let the honk of an oncoming vehicle do more than warn? Why not enable it to actually push people away?

The sonic boom horn is a device which blasts a wave of sound that both warns people as well as pushes them away. This is because the sonic energy blast is creates a pocket of air pressure that is strong enough to displace bodies that might be in its path.

BOOM!!

Domed City

Dome an entire city in glass or plexiglass.

This would offer the advantage of climate control and protection. Imagine, having cool air when the external air is too hot or vice versa. You could also protect against typhoons and storms and UV light exposure.

The dome structure itself can be used as scaffolding for buildings, train tracks. In other words, your city could go up instead of sideways.

I'd live in that city!

Kua Si Mi Part 1

Aiyah. Talk too much also not good lah. Sometime, a man gotta do what a man gotta do lor, right? But then, what about women? So women no need to do lah? Also cannot like that say right?

Sometimes hor, this whole sex equality thing also very irritating lah. All the men want to have women who are nice nice...gentle gentle like that. Want to have wife that cook lah, clean lah, look after chewren lah. Then have already, feel bored, dowan to go home, not exciting...always go out dunno do what...then come back sian, watch tv, dun help out. Like that how can!?!? Then the women also lah. Want to be equal with men, dowan stereotype like must be housewife like that. But then, when got heavy thing to carry, always tell the men to do it.

Not say I say what lah. But biology is biology is biology hor. Men got more muscle lah. Women got more curves lah. You all got to use what you got to do the best thing, right? Don't fight anymore lah! Fight for what? Got so much time to fight, go sell char kway teow lah! At least make more money that way.

Aiyah, gong kah tao tiah lah. Go lim kopi!

Blogging with widgets

Sodesne, genius lah! Now can post things straight from the computer desktop. Liao chor manz! Not say I say what, but sometime hor, I scared that we too smart for our own good lah. Anyway, this thing very the cool. So for more good years!

John 1:1,2

"In the beginning..."

This echoes the words of Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth". Why is this important for John? Realize this, when the apostles, when John set his eyes on Jesus, he was looking at someone, some Thing, that has existed before time. To say, "In the beginning" is to packet Time within something else. Which is also to say Time is not everything, it is part of something. This is where we will find it hard to grasp. For we live in a temporal world. Things exist and happen according to some temporal order. Something leads to something else. But when presented with the idea that something just is, or is not, we are left hanging with an uncomfortable feeling of HOW? Because this is not about something that existed before Time as we know it, because that would imply some other kinds of Time that this thing existed. No. Rather, this is about something that exists as it is. Timeless, Time is irrelevant. Is.

Yet, John starts with this idea. Prior to eternity, the Word was. The Word precedes it. Let us consider this for a while. Our words are expressions of our thoughts. Our words have power to change other people's thoughts. Our words also have the power, through influencing people, to change the physical world. Our words exist within the physical world in that they are either written on materials, or spoken as sound waves. Our words also exists in allegorical and metaphorical forms, like communicating via pictures, or music. In sum, our words are a result of our being. We exist in a relation to other beings, in relation to the physical world. And as soon as we exist, we have words, even as babies.

The Word then, is a result of God being. God in His infinity relates to the finite which He made. Which He made by the power of His Word. As it is written in Genesis He said "Let there be light, and there was light". Is it hard to see how when God speaks, it is like when we speak, only God speaks perfectly, and we speak but mere reflections and shadows? When He speaks, the Word acts. The Word does His Will. The Word is His Will. Jesus, the very outward expression of God in relation to us, and to all reality. For in Jesus, everything is fulfilled of which God intends. Both in the past and in the future. In Jesus, God is revealed. Just as when we speak, people know us. By our words, we are known, and judged. By God's Word, He is known, and found to be the just judge of all.

We should therefore be mindful of Who it is we speak to, and Who it is we speak of. For this is Someone who is since before time. This is Someone who is the very essence of power, life, existence, as it is revealed here in this statement made by John. This is Someone who's words never return void but accomplish what He says(Isa 55:11).

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

And then John shifts. "He was in the beginning with God". We started with an entity, an unnamed thing and finally move to "He". A person. Jesus. So the Word of God, is not like our words that are just lifeless forms. The Word of God has life in himself, and is a person. With His own character, personality, existence, thoughts, perceptions. "He". Jesus. This person who walks in Israel when He was walking there, has been with God right from the beginning. Ponder the existence of such a person. Of such a being.

Theory about frequency and perception

All that we can see and feel requires frequency.

Our eyes see light and color reflected of objects because our retinal cells process light energy of varying frequencies. The complex integration of these frequencies of energy give rise to the phenomena of seeing.

Our hearing comes from the physical vibration of sound energy of varying frequencies that gives rise to the phenomena of hearing.

Even smell, taste, and touch, come as an phenomena that is represented as the spiking activity of neurons when an event occurs versus when that specific stimulus is not present. Frequency, on/off.

What if everything froze. For example, light. What if all the existing energy waves were stopped in whatever phase they are in. We would no longer see, because technically, there would be no frequency to which our eye cells can respond.

That is, if time stopped, there would be nothing. Because that thing ceases since it is no longer defined with respect to a phenomenon.

What is the mind?

What is the mind? How do we see, hear, taste, smell, and feel? How does thought occur? What is it? How do we remember things? How do we know anything at all? It seems that at least a large part of the answer to these big questions, lies in understanding how the brain works.

While in the past, many have tried to unlock the mysteries of this organ, they were limited in their ability to verify their ideas. In fact, the Egyptians, for all their architectural genius, did not think much of the brain. During the famous mummification process, they preserved much of the body but sucked out the brain tissue through the nose and discarded it. Centuries later, people realized that the brain was in fact a rather important organ and somehow, it carried out the phenomena known as thought. However, they were still in the dark as to how it worked. Even Rene Descartes was slightly misguided when he reasoned that the pineal gland was the center of human thought by virtue of its position deep in the brain.

Today, we are able to view the brain without having to harm even a single hair on anyone's head. Technology, such as magnetic resonance imaging and electroencephalograms, allows us to measure brain activity while a person is actually thinking. Of course, we cannot read peoples' minds as if we were gazing into some crystal ball. But we can at least verify if our theories of how the brain works are generally in the right track. Hopefully, with time, as we discover more about this complex organic machinery, we will know enough to more effectively improve human life and, more importantly, fix the machinery when it breaks down.

This blog is a meek attempt at collating and synthesizing what we currently know about brain function. While some parts of it may get technical, I will endaevor to make this knowledge as accessible as possible to the average reader.

John - Introduction

The gospel of John records Jesus' life from a very different perspective compared to the other three gospels. There are personal conversations that elaborate Jesus' thinking and teaching. There are many instances where Jesus makes claims and statements about Himself, and this is usually accompanied by signs and acts that support these claims. In fact, there are 7 signs recorded in the book. The number of perfection.

There is little doubt that this gospel was written by John, the apostle, the one whom Jesus loved. And he probably wrote it after the writing of Mark. Thus, while being able to use some material from Mark, John greatly digresses and gives us more specific records of what Jesus said in other episodes of his ministry. Amongsts these new episodes not available are: Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman at the well, and Lazarus' raising from the dead. Also, from here, we are informed that Jesus made several trips to Jerusalem throughout His ministry, probably in keeping with celebrative traditions of the various Jewish feasts. This is in contrast with the other gospels where only one general trip (the final one) to Jerusalem is mentioned.

This is a very beautiful gospel in that we see Jesus in a different, almost more personal, light compared to what is described in the other gospels. As such, we should expect to learn a more intimate understanding of Jesus' mind and heart.

Luke 1:8-10

Being childless can be quite a depressing thing. Concerns about the future, inheritance, legacy, and the possibility of dying without seeing your family line carry on weigh heavy on those who have no children. Yet despite this, we are called to still serve the Lord, according to the example of righteouse Zecharias who still served God in the order of his division. This practice had been established in the time of Nehemiah, with the rebuilding of the second temple.

He was not the only one serving. The order of the priests still rotated their duties to tend to the business of the temple, the burning of the incense, and the offering of sacrifices. Note that all the Old Testament rituals of cleansing and santification still apply to the priest who is to enter into the holy of holies. Thus, the standard of holiness, the act of offering and worship do not get neglected even if we might have unsettled business in our own lives.

From these three verses, Luke paints a picture of the drudgery of repetition, the emptiness and weariness of waiting for change, for hope, while still obeying the commands of the Lord. How we need to remind ourselves not to be sidetracked or lose hope when there are extended times of silence from the Lord. Most importantly, we live in the age where we are waiting on the return of Jesus Christ. Waiting, and continually living out our lives.

Luke 1:5-7

Here, we begin with a focus on a specific person, Zacharias, who lived in the days of Herod, king of Judea. Luke provides such useful historical detail, allowing us to appreciate the context and find confidence again that the events that are described truly did happen.

Zacharias was of the order of Abijah, the priest from the post-exilic return (Neh 10, 12). It was established at that time that the priests and Levites would take turns ministering at the temple. This practice has apparently been maintained even till the days described here in Luke. Note that Luke described both Zacharias and his wife Elizabeth as "righteous before God". What an honor to be named as such in the Bible! With the setting, Luke begins with the very first predicate of his gospel of Christ: Elizabeth had no child and was barren, and they were old.

This situation is parallel to Abraham's experience with Sarah and Isaac. This is the idea of heritage and lineage. For without a son, Abraham's line would simply die out. This ultimately led to a futility and meaninglessness of Abraham's life, his struggles, and his labor. Likewise, without continuity, all our personal endaevors are meaningless. It will pass away with death and we will remain barren.

Luke 1:1-4

This gospel is clearly written by Luke, who was referred to as a doctor in Col 4:14 by Paul. He was also deemed as one of the more faithful companions of Paul, and accomanied him on a few of his missionary journeys. Luke gives an account here of Jesus' life and later continues to write the Acts of the Apostles with the same methodical and clear style, perhaps because of his training as a physician for documenting medical information. (Note, one should look up medical practices during the time of Luke: 0-100 AD. Also note that Hippocrates was alive around 450 BC, ample time for modern medical approaches to have been developed by the time of Jesus and Luke).

Here in 1:1-4, Luke begins with a clear statement of his purpose for writing this gospel account. He was primarily writing to Theophilus, of whom the only description we are given in the entire Bible is that he was most excellent (Lk 1:3). The goal of his writing to Theophilus was to show him the "certainty the things in which (he) was instructed" (1:4b). From here, we know that Theophilus had undergone a fair amount of exposure and learning in the early Christian faith. This consisted, briefly, of believing that Christ was the Son of God who died on the Cross, in fulfillment of Scripture, for the sin of the world, and the salvation of man. Yet, despite having learned all these (and so far we have good reason to assume that Theophilus was a diligent disciple of Christ), Luke felt it necessary to buttress his current knowledge with more certainty. Thus, perhaps in our own faith, we must be careful to recognize the need to be clear of the facts, so that we will have the same amount of certainty, and not just take matters of faith at just face value. Faith does not mean we become ignorant of truth, rather, we endeavor to uncover it.

What better way to be certain of the facts about Christ, than to have a well-organized record, from the many eye-witness accounts and Luke's "perfect understanding". Just as a well written, and objectively researched work is much more valuable than anecdotal accounts, so Luke here seeks to seal the many accounts of Jesus, that must have been going around at that time, into one easy to read narrative of the Savior.

Is it really about Ones and Zeros?

After all the arguments, the thinking, the theorizing, it probably only comes down to this: its either a 1 or a 0. The question is no longer whether its a 1 or 0, really. It has to be either one or the other, there is no middle ground. There is no 0.5. Because that would still be a 1. So, the real question, I think, should be: Who decides whether it is a 1 or a 0? Do we decide? Or does something else decides it?

After all our reasoning, we come to this point. Who is in charge? Us or Something Else? If we are in charge, can we be saved? Do we need to be saved? How can we be sure we don't? Can we ever save ourselves? Or in the end, do we realize that only Something Else can save us? In that case, are we really still in charge? Should we still live as if we are?

Science and Intelligent Design II

If the thinker exists, then something exists. Which leads to the question of how something, how anything, got here in the first place. We can assume that either things came about from nothing, or that things have always been, or that things came about from something else. Lets look at these three possibilities.

The idea that things come about from nothing is at once contradictory. Because nothing, by definition, leads to more nothingness, and it cannot have something nor can it ever lead to something. A vacuum is the most physical example of nothingness we can perceive, yet that is not really true nothingness....a vacuum still exists in a space. However, it will suffice for an illustration. A vacuum has nothing in it. And no matter if you leave that vacuum for trillions of years, it will never produce anything. The same extends to true nothingness where even space does not exist. Here, we face the well known problem of ex nihilo, something from nothing. Which leads us to the next possibility.

Something has always been. There has never been a time when there was nothing. If we are willing to let go of the idea that there was a point when there was absolutely and totally nothing, then this is a plausible state of affairs. The next question is has the something we know now always been the same. Did it change? Or has it remained substantially the same throughout all time?

From our senses, we perceive that there are things that change and there are things that do not. The position of the planets relative to each other changes. The pattern of activity and behavior in people and animals changes every minute. Even a seemingly stable piece of metal consists of atoms and electrons that are constantly in a state of flux and motion. However, the forces that hold the planets together act in a predictable manner. The objective fact that people performed certained behaviors in the past remains unchanged, and is changed insofar as our subjective understanding is concerned. The fact that if you cool the metal to the point of 0 kelvins, all atomic motion stops, remains unchanged.

We see now that the issue becomes complex. We have both changing and unchanging situations. Let us first consider the easier case, which is ironically the case with change. This leads to the question, if something has been changing, then it must have had an initial state. In fact, everything that is changing now, must have had an initial state. And if there was an initial state, what made it change to the next state? Why did it not remain in the initial state?

More to come...

Impetus

Many of my friends blog. For some, it is a serious communication. A channel through which they can exchange ideas. Ideas that mean something to them. For some, it is just something to do. And yet again, for some others, it is a little bit of both. Because of this mish mash of people uploading information for various reasons, I find myself staring at one blaring and inescapable fact. Blogging is dangerous. Despite this, I decide to now contribute to the infobahn by wielding this double-edged sword. Why? Because even more dangerous, is that the Forgiven say nothing. We are on earth, let our words be few. And when we do speak, let our words change the world.