Philosophical Friday

Are You Really You?

Although it may seem nonsensical to even consider, have you ever really wondered whether or not you are the same YOU from when you were born?

“Well, of course I’m me! I have the same eyes, same hair, same body... sure I’ve grown, but...”

NOPE. I’m going to spoil it for you right here. You AREN’T the same you from when you were born, you’re literally a physiologically different person. No, I’m not talking about the kind of “different person” you become after a weekend Bible retreat that your mom made you sign up for, I’m talking biologically different. You essentially get an entirely new body not just once, but several times throughout your lifetime.

The human body is pretty rad. Hair constantly falls out and grows back. Every 35 days the entire surface of your skin replaces itself, every 7 years the entire human skeleton regenerates, our cells chronically grow, die, copy, regenerate, and so forth. So where does this leave us? What implications does this have on our existential crisis of figuring out WHO WE REALLY ARE? Think about it. Your entire SELF, your whole body, every single cell and molecule of it as you sit here and read this mediocre article is COMPLETELY different than it was as short as a few years ago. How can you still be you if none of you is the same stuff that made you before?

We’re not the first to ponder this stimulating question about life. This little conundrum that we’ve begun to reflect upon is described in a thought experiment called “Theseus’s Paradox.” The paradox basically goes as follows: you’re sailing across the ocean blue like a happy little Captain Ahab, and every once in a while, a piece of your ship falls off into the ocean. Naturally, you fix the ship by replacing whatever fell off. Eventually, you’ve sailed around the sea for so long that you’ve replaced every single little piece of the ship with another piece. One day you look upon your grand junkyard-esque ship, and wonder: “Is this really the same boat that I started with?” Well… is it? There are countless ways to look at it. Dead philosophers have given a bunch of really boring names to what they consider to be their own ‘clever’ answers, but every postulation boils down to one determining factor — what one means by “the same.”

The Ship of Theseus

So unfortunately for ‘Mr. Romantic Idealist,’ we must admit to the fact that we are not the same identical cluster of super-organized atoms we were a relatively short time ago. We are, in a literal sense, a “different” person. This knowledge that we indeed are not ourselves, but an agglomeration of what’s around us, is — in a way — sort of beautiful. As we go on in life, we constantly add to the flow of the world, recycling our own atoms with those all around us, and remind ourselves that we are, in fact, the Universe!

Theoretical Thursday

What If We Live in a Computer Simulation?

You've probably heard of the Sims -- a video-game in which the player controls digital people's lives and decides what activities they perform. Now picture this: we are the Sims in our own universe, simulated by much more powerful beings.

The idea might seem crazy, but hear me out. Suppose that a billion years from now, our race and technology still exist and have become unfathomably advanced. Our humble beginnings as humans would be long obscured by time, so we'd want to simulate our history. By Moore's law, computing power doubles every year. We can currently simulate about 1/4 of an atom and all of its properties. In a billion years or less, it's easy to see that we'd eventually have the computational power to replicate the whole universe.

However, a problem arises: Seth Lloyd, a quantum-mechanical engineer at MIT, estimated the total number of events that have ever happened. He found that to simulate this number of events would require more energy than we have in our entire universe! This set our theory aside for a while, but not for long. Just as iTunes allows you to make songs smaller by changing them to a lower-quality  format, future programmers of the simulation we're living in could have "dumbed it down" to make it possible. When we decide to observe distant stars, the simulation would add them in, taking them away again when we stop. We shouldn't be able to tell that what we're living in is fake. Now you may ask, how would we ever find out anyways?

Just like Windows, or Mac, or your Internet browser, this simulation would need updates -- and updates mean glitches. Constants like the speed of light -- things we can detect -- may suddenly change. Another possible observation would be the distribution of super high-energy cosmic waves throughout the universe. A simulated world would be built on a grid-like system much like pixels on a TV. Because of this grid, high energy waves would be uniformly distributed, unlike in a perfectly-smooth real universe that would have an uneven distribution.

"I Hope They Didn't Notice..."

The simulation theory would explain a lot of things going on, such as the Fermi paradox. In our infinite universe, we should have made contact with aliens, or at least discovered some, but we still have not. Perhaps it's because we're programmed in as the only life forms. Also, those that programmed our simulation would probably be living in a simulation of their own. We'll eventually go on to create a simulation of our past in our distant future, and this pattern would continue to the simulation that we create.

"Hello.....? Aliens? You There?"

Many scientists actually think that it's more likely we're living in a simulated universe than a real one because of these explanations. Even if we are, there's really nothing to worry about because it's programmed to seem completely real. Our programmers wouldn't interfere with us: they'd let it play out because they're interested in their own history, not playing games with fake people. Whether we're in a simulation or not wouldn't have any affect on us or our lives. It's still an interesting idea to ponder. What do you think?

Wild Card Wednesday

The 'Shock Watch' -- A Portable High-Voltage Capacitor Bank

An Early Prototype of the Device Built into a Glove

Over the past year or so, I created many small-scale electrical circuits and prototypes that led to the conceptualization of a device that uses only the energy of a single double-A battery to power tazers, railguns, coilguns, and EMPs. This project finally reached fruition over Winter break. I give you the Shock Watch -- a wrist-mounted gadget capable of outputting a 330 Volt pulse of electricity.

You may be wondering how the low voltage of a AA battery (which is about 1.5 V) powers something over 200 times more powerful than itself. The answer is a cylindrical electrical component called a capacitor. Think of a capacitor as a rechargeable battery that produces a really big current for a very short time. While a regular battery can keep a low-energy circuit (such as a small bulb or LED) running for hours, a capacitor does the inverse -- it runs out of power in a fraction of a second, but can power something much greater.

One of the 330 Volt Capacitors

A charging circuit does what the name suggest: it charges the capacitor. The AA current flows through a step-up transformer -- a component that raises voltage -- and sends the energy into the capacitor until it's full. It then connects to an appliance just as a battery would, sending its electrical current through the appliance.

To make a stronger device, I hooked up eight capacitors in parallel to make what's called a capacitor bank -- a bank that holds eight times the energy of one capacitor and releases it all at once. I then wired three charging circuits together to charge the cap bank more quickly. After adding an 'on/off' switch and a 'start charging' switch, I only had to connect the output wires.

An Example of the Output Power -- Now That's a Spark!

 

I put it all together into a nice little watch-like shape, added a wrist strap, and finally it was complete. I can connect the output wires to whatever I want to power -- a tazer, a strong strobe light, an EMP -- anything that requires a high voltage pulse of energy to work. The coolest part is the ability to power these things from my wrist, with the room to make add-on attachments. Perhaps the next addition will be a wrist-mounted railgun!

The Finished Product, Lit-Up Like a Christmas Tree

Look for future posts about some of the technology I mentioned in this article. I plan to talk about railguns, coilguns, EMPs, and more -- maybe with some demonstrations of the Shock Watch's capabilities!

Trending Topic Tuesday

Super Bowl XLVIII Analysis

'The Duke' Super Bowl XLVIII Game Ball

Once again we find ourselves in late January, anticipating the last Pigskin Battle of the year. Super Bowl XLVIII (48 for those who can’t read Roman numerals) features the NFC Seattle Seahawks vs. the AFC Denver Broncos. Now, if you want to watch this game for the commercials — or even worse, the halftime show — and have as much interest in the game as you do in a trip to the local DMV, this article is not for you. The Puppy Bowl is on Animal Planet that morning. Perhaps you’d find that better suited to your tastes. However, if you always find yourself watching the big game but unable to keep up with your football-savvy friends, or better yet, are a true American and religiously follow the great NFL, then you’re in for a treat.

Defense

The Seattle Seahawks have the best defense in the NFL, hands down. Seattle leads the league in least points, passing yards, and total yards allowed, making them a truly remarkable defensive unit. You may have heard Richard Sherman (Seattle cornerback… the guy who covers the guy trying to catch the ball) in the news recently, notoriously claiming to be the best there is. I hate to break it to you, but he is the best, BY FAR. Though you may have been offended by his comments, facts don’t lie. Sherman leads the league in interceptions and least receptions allowed, the two categories that make a corner. In addition to superstar Sherman, the Seahawks have a pair of pro-bowler safeties (guys in the back), Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor, giving Seattle an overall loaded secondary. It's worth mentioning that the rest of the Seattle defensive cast are certainly not your typical bums… you don’t get to number one in the league without a full team of stars.

In comparison, the Broncos’ defense leaves much to be desired. Denver ranks in the middle of the NFL herd of defensive stats, having only one clear star on D: cornerback Champ Bailey. And as the 15 season veteran is recently coming off an injury, Bailey cannot be depended on. Other than Champ, the Broncos have a so-so defense at best. They seem to have adopted the strategy that ‘it’s ok to let the other guys score some points, because we can just score more.’ This clearly contrasts with Seattle’s lockdown defense, and is the first of many factors that make for an interesting matchup this time around.

Seattle Seahawks CB #25 Richard Sherman

Offense

Next up is offense — and this time I’ll start with Denver. As I previously said, Denver seems to afford a run-of-the-mill defense because of their high-octane offense. The Broncos play the best offense in the NFL. Denver leads the league in most points scored, most passing yards, and most total yards. Sound familiar? It’s the powerhouse Broncos’ offense against the lockdown Seahawks’ defense — the best vs. the best. If that doesn’t raise your interest in this game, ye fairweather fans, I don’t know what will.

Denver Broncos QB #18 Peyton Manning

As for Seattle’s offense, much like the Denver defense, they’re about average in the NFL. And much like Denver’s defense can allow points because its offense can score more, Seattle doesn’t need to score many points because its defense can stop teams from scoring better than any other defense in the league.

The most interesting position in the offensive breakdown is quarterbacks (and if you’ve made it this far and don’t know that the quarterback throws the ball, I commend your endurance). Rather fittingly, Denver quarterback Peyton Manning and Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson have very different styles. While both have been undoubtedly great this year, Peyton has been undoubtedly better, putting up ridiculous numbers and breaking the record for most touchdown passes. Russell is a young quarterback in only his second season; Peyton’s a veteran, in his sixteenth season. Wilson can run, and likes to make things happen by moving around; Manning stands in the pocket and throws — nothing more, nothing less. Russell has never been to the Super Bowl; but this will be Peyton’s third time there. Sounds like Manning’s got this one, right? Before you jump on his bandwagon, consider this: Russell excels in the nasty cold, wind, and rain of Seattle; Peyton likes to play his game on a chessboard, with the elements controlled in a dome or temperate climate. This year, the Super Bowl is in an outdoor stadium in New Jersey, and it’s February — still on the Manning train?

Seahawks QB #3 Russell Wilson

While both quarterbacks have fair arguments, and Wilson should, at least, be able to hang with Manning, the Broncos’ wide receivers and tight ends (guys who catch the ball) clearly outrank those of the Seahawks. I can’t specifically name one Denver receiver who is the best in the league. That’s because they’re all among the best, and dilute the numbers amongst themselves. The top three receivers on Denver, all all-stars, are Wes Welker, Demaryius Thomas, and Eric Decker. In addition, Denver tight end Julius Thomas shines as an offensive star. With Peyton Manning throwing to this incredible corps of receivers, the one question remains: can the all-star Seattle defenders stop them?

To be fair, I’ll comment on Seattle’s receivers, even though none of them come close to Denver’s. Golden Tate (slightly above average) and Doug Baldwin (solid, nothing special) lead Seattle’s WRs. Tight end Zach Miller? It’s tough to comment on him since they rarely use the guy except for blocking.

Manning and his receivers: Welker #83, Thomas #88, Decker #87

If I just swung you in favor of Denver, then take a step back, because I left something out — running backs (self-explanatory, they get the ball and run). Denver is certainly not lacking in this category, offensively or defensively. At the beginning of the season, Denver thought their RB Knowshon Moreno was burnt out, and brought in RB Montee Ball to phase him out. Nevertheless, Moreno surprised everyone when he emerged as a star running back, and has certainly proven that he’s a force to be reckoned with. As for the Broncos’ backup RB Ball… well, he’s only average; I suppose above average compared to other backup backs. Defensively, the Broncos are in the middle of the pack when it comes to stopping the run, and there’s not much more to say. Seattle, however — well that’s a whole nother story. Seattle holds a superstar running back, Marshawn Lynch, who could prove to be a huge game changer in the Super Bowl. Lynch is incredible, definitely at the top of the league, and better than Moreno. And in an outdoor stadium up North in Winter, the run game could prove to be more valuable than the passing game. As for defense, Seattle ranks seventh in stopping the run… not too shabby.

Seattle Seahawks RB #24 Marshawn Lynch

That’s the rundown on the major phases of the game. Special teams? Denver’s kicker, Matt Prater, is exceptional; some say the best there is. Seattle’s kicker, Steven Hauschka, is above average, and can certainly get the job done. Coaching? The Broncos’ head coach John Fox plays conservatively, nothing out of the ordinary. However, Pete Carroll, coach of the Seahawks, is interesting — much more likely to take a risk.

Prediction

Obviously, it seems like Superbowl XLVIII is shaping up to be an unusually remarkable game, with rather well-matched teams. Clearly Seattle wins defensively, and Denver wins in passing. Seattle also has an advantage in rushing, but Denver holds a slight edge in special teams. One factor that will dramatically affect the game is the weather. Current reports forecast temperature somewhere in the 30s, with little chance of any precipitation. If it was going to be a blizzard or raining, I’d easily choose the Seahawks — a team that thrives in Seattle’s elements, is based defensively, and has a fantastic ground game. But since it should be clear, I’m giving this one to Denver. Peyton just has too many offensive weapons at his disposal, so much so that the Seahawks’ defense, no matter how good they are, cannot cover everyone. If Sherman covers Demaryius, Manning will throw to Welker or Decker; even if all the stars are covered, Manning will occasionally use guys like Caldwell or Tamme. In addition, Denver should be able to establish a pretty solid running game, perhaps exploiting the one kink in Seattle’s D. The Seahawks will definitely put up a fight, but Wilson and Lynch can keep pace with the Peyton and the Broncos’ receiving tank. I’m advising Eli to watch out, because his big bro is about to tie him in Super Bowl rings.

Metlife Stadium in NJ, site of Super Bowl XLVIII

Macho Monday

Working out certainly builds physical strength, but it more so increases mental toughness. Pushing past one's corporeal breaking point strengthens the mind. As the body wants to quit, fighting the urge to do so and continuing to expend the energy that the muscles attempt to hide makes the activity an internal conflict between one's mental and physical halves, and each workout strengthens both by waging a war within oneself. 

This mental (and occasionally physical) strength can then be replicated in every facet of life, making old chores trivial matters. Vacuuming the floor is much less of physical and mental burden compared to that of lifting heavy weights in the gym for hours each day!

The classic Arnold Schwarzenegger, best of the best.

This mental capacity to push through arduous work, putting mind over matter, helps one in the work force and throughout school or any other rigamarole by generally decreasing procrastination and laziness. 

Working out also relieves stress. Exercise makes the body release endorphins that make you feel good, and a change in body can boost self-confidence.  

Most classify the gym as a place for only 'meat heads' to gather -- people who do not necessarily fall into the category of brainy. However, successful businessmen make the time to stay in shape (you can read about that in an about.com article here) as it helps them perform.

So this year, keep your resolution to get fit -- it will help you in more ways than just by decreasing your waist size.

How to Get a Flappy Bird High Score

Flappy Bird can be very difficult to play, but unlike most infinite games, it never gets harder. It is just as easy to lose on the second barrier as it is on the 305th. The hard part comes from trying to flap between the narrow gaps.

Tips for a Higher Score

• flap as close to the bottom barrier as possible
• flap as little as possible -- staying lower and following a steady line is good!
• flap rapidly to climb from a low gap to high gap
• when going from a high gap to a low gap, resist the urge to flap and do so just as you reach the top of the bottom barrier
• practice -- like most games, it takes time to become a pro! Don't be discouraged if you start as a noob.