Final Course Reflection
Before taking this course, my thoughts of science and humanities were totally different than what I think of them after finishing this class. In some ways, before, I didn’t think that science and humanities weren’t even related to each other, but learning about Futurama which was interrelated to global warming; Albert Einstein, a famous scientist who I thought was just a genius who developed scientific formulas was the “father” of the atomic weapon, which put a huge dent on the humanities; “Frankenstein”, who used science to create something beautiful like a living being but this wonderful living creature who was made from science hurt the humanities also. I learned that science and the humanities are really intertwined with each other like peanut butter and jelly. One can’t really “survive” without the other.
Before taking this course, I would’ve probably said that science and technology were different, in the most different way but reading the play, “A Number” by Caryl Churchill and other scientific/technology related articles, novels and more; it has shown me that for example, cloning wouldn’t be possible without the science and technology related to each other. I feel as though I have become more of a humanities person after taking this course because this course has really opened my eyes to the consequences that scientist have to face in order to live out their dream experiments to express their ideas and theories.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Critical Thinking Blog Post #7
Critical Thinking About Scientific Progress
I feel as though the responsibilities of scientists are that when creating and developing a new experiment, they should not only look forward to what good things might come out of their experiments but be ready and be prepared for if there might come out to be consequences and malfunctions from their new developments. I believe that scientist should go forward with their experiments though there might be consequences because what new development doesn’t come along with progress that we all know about; that’s why it’s a new development. We don’t know if it’s going to work or not, the only way to find out is if we go through with the experimentation. There are many wonderful creations and theories that helped us see things now in the 21st century in a new perspective than what we might of missed out if these theories and conceptions were not created. For example, Albert Einstein’s most famous equation, E=MC2; this equation has scientist see science and scientific theories in a new and fresh perspective but however, the consequences about this equation is that it was the foundation for the atomic weapon. Einstein’s wonderful theory was used against mankind to destroy life instead of helping it in the most part. Also in the novel, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, it was shown that Frankenstein created this living being for a scientific purpose, a scientific breakthrough, but in turn, the creature that Frankenstein created ended up becoming a monster and a murderer; killing his friends, his wife and ultimately himself.
I feel as though the responsibilities of scientists are that when creating and developing a new experiment, they should not only look forward to what good things might come out of their experiments but be ready and be prepared for if there might come out to be consequences and malfunctions from their new developments. I believe that scientist should go forward with their experiments though there might be consequences because what new development doesn’t come along with progress that we all know about; that’s why it’s a new development. We don’t know if it’s going to work or not, the only way to find out is if we go through with the experimentation. There are many wonderful creations and theories that helped us see things now in the 21st century in a new perspective than what we might of missed out if these theories and conceptions were not created. For example, Albert Einstein’s most famous equation, E=MC2; this equation has scientist see science and scientific theories in a new and fresh perspective but however, the consequences about this equation is that it was the foundation for the atomic weapon. Einstein’s wonderful theory was used against mankind to destroy life instead of helping it in the most part. Also in the novel, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, it was shown that Frankenstein created this living being for a scientific purpose, a scientific breakthrough, but in turn, the creature that Frankenstein created ended up becoming a monster and a murderer; killing his friends, his wife and ultimately himself.
Critical Thinking Blog Post #6
Critical Thinking About a Scientist’s Life and Work
Of all the scientists to come to be known from the twentieth century, Albert Einstein was known mostly by all. Einstein devoted himself to solving the mysteries of the world, but few know about the captivating life that led this scientist to discover such grand achievements (“Albert Einstein” 1). While most do not understand his work, everyone knows the impact on the world of science that has become astonishing. Einstein’s theory of relativity and conception of time changed the way science that is observed today. “…[T]wo most fruitful physical theories of the 20th century is the theory of relativity [and the conception of time], which to scientists and laymen alike is synonymous with the name of Einstein” (“Albert Einstein” 4). The use of the theory of relativity eventually lead to the most famous equation of E=MC2. Einstein also dove into interesting questions and conclusions of what he thought of time and the nature of time and space; he answered the questions on how and why time flows. “A world in which time is absolute is a world of consolation. For while the movements of people are unpredictable, the movement of time is predictable” (Lightman 37). Einstein’s discoveries about time and space in Alan Lightman’s Einstein’s Dreams are all about wonder and awe. The book points to the wonder of physics solving the nature of time and space, it was a beautiful discovery. While we enjoy the book’s portrayal of different ‘thought experiments’ with time, other sources like historical newspaper articles and several scholarly essays convincingly point out the perilous side of Einstein’s discoveries in physics, which led directly to the development of atomic weapons.
Work Citation
"Albert Einstein." Encyclopedia of World Biography. 2nd ed. Vol. 5. Detroit: Gale, 2004. 228- 231. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 29 Apr. 2010.
Lightman, Alan. Einstein’s Dreams. New York: Warner Books, 1993. Print.
Of all the scientists to come to be known from the twentieth century, Albert Einstein was known mostly by all. Einstein devoted himself to solving the mysteries of the world, but few know about the captivating life that led this scientist to discover such grand achievements (“Albert Einstein” 1). While most do not understand his work, everyone knows the impact on the world of science that has become astonishing. Einstein’s theory of relativity and conception of time changed the way science that is observed today. “…[T]wo most fruitful physical theories of the 20th century is the theory of relativity [and the conception of time], which to scientists and laymen alike is synonymous with the name of Einstein” (“Albert Einstein” 4). The use of the theory of relativity eventually lead to the most famous equation of E=MC2. Einstein also dove into interesting questions and conclusions of what he thought of time and the nature of time and space; he answered the questions on how and why time flows. “A world in which time is absolute is a world of consolation. For while the movements of people are unpredictable, the movement of time is predictable” (Lightman 37). Einstein’s discoveries about time and space in Alan Lightman’s Einstein’s Dreams are all about wonder and awe. The book points to the wonder of physics solving the nature of time and space, it was a beautiful discovery. While we enjoy the book’s portrayal of different ‘thought experiments’ with time, other sources like historical newspaper articles and several scholarly essays convincingly point out the perilous side of Einstein’s discoveries in physics, which led directly to the development of atomic weapons.
Work Citation
"Albert Einstein." Encyclopedia of World Biography. 2nd ed. Vol. 5. Detroit: Gale, 2004. 228- 231. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 29 Apr. 2010.
Lightman, Alan. Einstein’s Dreams. New York: Warner Books, 1993. Print.
Critical Thinking Blog #5
Sharing and Reflecting on Two Research Sources
Einstein’s discoveries about time and space in Alan Lightman’s Einstein’s Dreams are all about wonder and awe. The book points to the wonder of physics solving the nature of time and space, it was a beautiful discovery. While we enjoy the book’s portrayal of different ‘thought experiments’ with time, other sources like historical newspaper articles and several scholarly essays convincingly point out the perilous side of Einstein’s discoveries in physics, which led directly to the development of atomic weapons.
One of the sources I found is called, “The Theory Behind the Equation” by Michio Kaku. I googled, “Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity” and I got this resource. This article describes the way that Einstein was lead to the famous equation, E=MC2. The author explains of how Einstein solved the concept of time and light which lead Einstein to write his paper in his volume 17, Annalen der Physik. This article includes information on how Einstein achieved the conception of time and that will be useful in writing my research paper. Another source I found was a book called, “Einstein’s Theory of Relativity” by Max Born. I found this book through the library’s database search for Albert Einstein. This book includes a review of classical physics; origin of time and space measurements, Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomy, laws of motion, inertia, and more. It also presents Einstein’s theories of relativity, discussing the concept of simultaneity, kinematics, and much more. This book will provide me with the understanding of Einstein’s theory of relativity and how he used the conception of time.
Einstein’s discoveries about time and space in Alan Lightman’s Einstein’s Dreams are all about wonder and awe. The book points to the wonder of physics solving the nature of time and space, it was a beautiful discovery. While we enjoy the book’s portrayal of different ‘thought experiments’ with time, other sources like historical newspaper articles and several scholarly essays convincingly point out the perilous side of Einstein’s discoveries in physics, which led directly to the development of atomic weapons.
One of the sources I found is called, “The Theory Behind the Equation” by Michio Kaku. I googled, “Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity” and I got this resource. This article describes the way that Einstein was lead to the famous equation, E=MC2. The author explains of how Einstein solved the concept of time and light which lead Einstein to write his paper in his volume 17, Annalen der Physik. This article includes information on how Einstein achieved the conception of time and that will be useful in writing my research paper. Another source I found was a book called, “Einstein’s Theory of Relativity” by Max Born. I found this book through the library’s database search for Albert Einstein. This book includes a review of classical physics; origin of time and space measurements, Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomy, laws of motion, inertia, and more. It also presents Einstein’s theories of relativity, discussing the concept of simultaneity, kinematics, and much more. This book will provide me with the understanding of Einstein’s theory of relativity and how he used the conception of time.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Critical Thinking Blog Post #4
The Promise and Peril of Robots in Film, TV and Real Life: Friends or Foes?
What seems appealing to me of the clip from the movie, “Al” is the artificial intelligent who is designed to look like a sweet little boy, searching for his “biological” mother who just “throws him away” basically. “His love is real but he is not… He is the first robotic child programmed to love and co-exist as the member of the family”. The words love, child and family all just sound every appealing and pleasant, non-threatening; as Helen didn’t seem dangerous at all in the novel, Galatea 2.2 by Richard Powers. She was just a computer software and didn’t have a body to move around with but had a mind of a child and thought like a child who seemed to fall in love with her co-creator as the little boy did in “AI”. In contrast, the clip from the movie, “I, Robot”, shows how robots are created to improve human life, “we trust them in our homes, we trust them with our children, we trust them with our lives, but can they be trusted?”. The clip shows Will Smith, the hero of the movie, interviewing a robot who is accused of murdering a human being and Smith goes around investigating the all whole system of how the robots are build and how they are programmed. In which, the scientist who built these robots tell him that the robots “cannot harm a human being, the first law of robotics” but then shows that the robots get out of control and start destroying civilization as we know it. Though, the robots might not seem dangerous, I feel as though they have the ability to harm and be threatening to the human society. Not just the movie, “I, Robot” but a lot of movies out there have the plot of their movies to be: first robots are made to improve and help the human race but somehow in the end the robots turn on them and become “evil” and harm us and so we need a human “hero” to come and rescue all of us from getting hurt from these “evil” robots.
I believe that the threatening aspect of robots were that we as humans have a hard time adjusting to things that are unfamiliar and that is why people fear or feel threatened by robots but as we introduced ‘bots’ and/or software agents as we use the internet now, we’ve gotten used to non-human contact. Whether it be playing a chess game with a computer as your opponent or talking to “live” bots online. Nevertheless, I feel as robots have become accepted to most people in real life because all these crazy robots turning on us can only be in the movies, right? Robots are created now to be small and cute. I think people accept them more because it’s something new and exciting.
I feel as though the vision of the future holds promise of advanced technology for human life because electrically engineered robots will be capable of doing things that humans can only image doing like fixing a car in record time or performing surgery with really steady “hands” but with all these amazing features that these robots might offer us, I sense that peril might come with that promise. Yes, advanced computer programmed bots seem to be helpful but those robots can’t last forever. It’ll probably last as long as the programmer will live. It can’t be perfect all the time; it might have a malfunction, say during an operation or something and kill the patient. The key is that you will never really know for sure what will happen with robots.
What seems appealing to me of the clip from the movie, “Al” is the artificial intelligent who is designed to look like a sweet little boy, searching for his “biological” mother who just “throws him away” basically. “His love is real but he is not… He is the first robotic child programmed to love and co-exist as the member of the family”. The words love, child and family all just sound every appealing and pleasant, non-threatening; as Helen didn’t seem dangerous at all in the novel, Galatea 2.2 by Richard Powers. She was just a computer software and didn’t have a body to move around with but had a mind of a child and thought like a child who seemed to fall in love with her co-creator as the little boy did in “AI”. In contrast, the clip from the movie, “I, Robot”, shows how robots are created to improve human life, “we trust them in our homes, we trust them with our children, we trust them with our lives, but can they be trusted?”. The clip shows Will Smith, the hero of the movie, interviewing a robot who is accused of murdering a human being and Smith goes around investigating the all whole system of how the robots are build and how they are programmed. In which, the scientist who built these robots tell him that the robots “cannot harm a human being, the first law of robotics” but then shows that the robots get out of control and start destroying civilization as we know it. Though, the robots might not seem dangerous, I feel as though they have the ability to harm and be threatening to the human society. Not just the movie, “I, Robot” but a lot of movies out there have the plot of their movies to be: first robots are made to improve and help the human race but somehow in the end the robots turn on them and become “evil” and harm us and so we need a human “hero” to come and rescue all of us from getting hurt from these “evil” robots.
I believe that the threatening aspect of robots were that we as humans have a hard time adjusting to things that are unfamiliar and that is why people fear or feel threatened by robots but as we introduced ‘bots’ and/or software agents as we use the internet now, we’ve gotten used to non-human contact. Whether it be playing a chess game with a computer as your opponent or talking to “live” bots online. Nevertheless, I feel as robots have become accepted to most people in real life because all these crazy robots turning on us can only be in the movies, right? Robots are created now to be small and cute. I think people accept them more because it’s something new and exciting.
I feel as though the vision of the future holds promise of advanced technology for human life because electrically engineered robots will be capable of doing things that humans can only image doing like fixing a car in record time or performing surgery with really steady “hands” but with all these amazing features that these robots might offer us, I sense that peril might come with that promise. Yes, advanced computer programmed bots seem to be helpful but those robots can’t last forever. It’ll probably last as long as the programmer will live. It can’t be perfect all the time; it might have a malfunction, say during an operation or something and kill the patient. The key is that you will never really know for sure what will happen with robots.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Critical Thinking Blog #3
Research Paper Brainstorm
All five research paper ideas sound so interesting that it’s so hard to narrow down to just two. What’s even harder is to pick just one topic out of those ideas. So far, as of right now I’ve gotten down to three research paper ideas: #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, #3 Darwin and ?????? and #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus. On #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, just from reading the possible entries, I’m interested in writing about: The vision of a car-driven future of suburbia in the New York’s, The World’s Fair (1939-1940) vs. the problem of global warming, The promise of human cloning (stem cell research) vs. potential problems (from bioethicists, etc), or The promise of the Internet vs. it’s possible negative effects on our attention span, and/or physical or mental health. For #3 Darwin and ??????, I’m curious to write about Darwinism and religion, biology, and philosophy. I’m sure there was and still are so much controversy on Darwin and what he thought of all of these humanistic areas and I would like to find out more about them. For research paper idea #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus, I am thinking about researching on Galileo Galilei, Charles Darwin, or Albert Einstein. I know little about each of these scientists so that’s why I want to do more research on their perspectives on science and what they have achieved in their life time.
After taking some time to think about which research paper idea I would like to write about, I narrowed down to #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril and #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus. For #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, I narrowed my interests to writing on: The vision of a car-driven future of suburbia in the New York’s, The World’s Fair (1939-1940) vs. the problem of global warming or The promise of the Internet vs. it’s possible negative effects on our attention span, and/or physical or mental health. For #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus, I still haven’t decided who I would like to do more research on. Galileo Galilei, Charles Darwin, or Albert Einstein, I’ll be doing a little research on all three to decide on who I would like to look ahead with if I choose to pick #5 for my research paper idea.
All five research paper ideas sound so interesting that it’s so hard to narrow down to just two. What’s even harder is to pick just one topic out of those ideas. So far, as of right now I’ve gotten down to three research paper ideas: #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, #3 Darwin and ?????? and #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus. On #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, just from reading the possible entries, I’m interested in writing about: The vision of a car-driven future of suburbia in the New York’s, The World’s Fair (1939-1940) vs. the problem of global warming, The promise of human cloning (stem cell research) vs. potential problems (from bioethicists, etc), or The promise of the Internet vs. it’s possible negative effects on our attention span, and/or physical or mental health. For #3 Darwin and ??????, I’m curious to write about Darwinism and religion, biology, and philosophy. I’m sure there was and still are so much controversy on Darwin and what he thought of all of these humanistic areas and I would like to find out more about them. For research paper idea #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus, I am thinking about researching on Galileo Galilei, Charles Darwin, or Albert Einstein. I know little about each of these scientists so that’s why I want to do more research on their perspectives on science and what they have achieved in their life time.
After taking some time to think about which research paper idea I would like to write about, I narrowed down to #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril and #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus. For #2 Science and Technology: Promise and Peril, I narrowed my interests to writing on: The vision of a car-driven future of suburbia in the New York’s, The World’s Fair (1939-1940) vs. the problem of global warming or The promise of the Internet vs. it’s possible negative effects on our attention span, and/or physical or mental health. For #5 Historical Research on a Scientist (and a Controversy) from Our Syllabus, I still haven’t decided who I would like to do more research on. Galileo Galilei, Charles Darwin, or Albert Einstein, I’ll be doing a little research on all three to decide on who I would like to look ahead with if I choose to pick #5 for my research paper idea.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Critical Thinking Blog #2
Does 'Popular Science' Today Awe Us, Inspire Us, or Threaten Us?
For today's critical thinking blog, I've chosen the famous and popular television show, 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation'. 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' is a television show about scientists who use forensic science to solve crimes and "catch the bad guys". Forensic science is part of range of sciences usually used in the legal system related to a crime. Forensic science covers the scientific methodology and rules under which the evidence about an event, or an artifact, or some other physical item (such as corpues) are determined as being the case (wikipedia.com). I'm not a scientist or anything but most, if not ll of the forensic science that is used on the show seems to be pretty accurate. Methods used to find the 'time of death', 'the cause of death', using every fabric, piece of paper, and much more appear to be very precise. I don't think the show is "dumbed down" in any perspective, not on the scientific uses of things anyway. I think that many people who watch this show would most likely agree with me. I think that's one of the main reasons why this show is so popular. because it uses real life science and things that you can really use in the 'real world' and if you are a scientist, you can really understand mostly everything that the actors are talking about in the show.
Forensic science represented on the television show gives me a sence of awe. It inspires me because it shows how much science has advanced. This program shows how science and technology come together. Yes, of course you need the people (scientists and police officers) to look and find physical evidence to solve this crimes but without technology such as computers, updated scientific laboratory equipment for DNA testing, finger printing and so forth, solving these crimes in a fast paced time would not be possible and forensic science would have a huge disadvantage.
I believe shows like 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and other programs like this in which presents and portrays science might have success with audiences because it uses real science with entertainment; it has a story to it. The anticipation of wanting to find out why the criminal committed such crimes and wanting to see if and how the "heroes" of the show will really solve these crimes. The audience wants to see them "catch the bad guys" and the relief that they feel in the end when everything is solved and over and waiting to see what's on next week is why I think shows like this have success. The failure part of it would be that the show might turn into more entertainment than facts and may be "dumbed down" enough that if real scientist and people that understand the material see that it isn't accurate, it might give those audiences a sense of failure of the show.
For today's critical thinking blog, I've chosen the famous and popular television show, 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation'. 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' is a television show about scientists who use forensic science to solve crimes and "catch the bad guys". Forensic science is part of range of sciences usually used in the legal system related to a crime. Forensic science covers the scientific methodology and rules under which the evidence about an event, or an artifact, or some other physical item (such as corpues) are determined as being the case (wikipedia.com). I'm not a scientist or anything but most, if not ll of the forensic science that is used on the show seems to be pretty accurate. Methods used to find the 'time of death', 'the cause of death', using every fabric, piece of paper, and much more appear to be very precise. I don't think the show is "dumbed down" in any perspective, not on the scientific uses of things anyway. I think that many people who watch this show would most likely agree with me. I think that's one of the main reasons why this show is so popular. because it uses real life science and things that you can really use in the 'real world' and if you are a scientist, you can really understand mostly everything that the actors are talking about in the show.
Forensic science represented on the television show gives me a sence of awe. It inspires me because it shows how much science has advanced. This program shows how science and technology come together. Yes, of course you need the people (scientists and police officers) to look and find physical evidence to solve this crimes but without technology such as computers, updated scientific laboratory equipment for DNA testing, finger printing and so forth, solving these crimes in a fast paced time would not be possible and forensic science would have a huge disadvantage.
I believe shows like 'CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and other programs like this in which presents and portrays science might have success with audiences because it uses real science with entertainment; it has a story to it. The anticipation of wanting to find out why the criminal committed such crimes and wanting to see if and how the "heroes" of the show will really solve these crimes. The audience wants to see them "catch the bad guys" and the relief that they feel in the end when everything is solved and over and waiting to see what's on next week is why I think shows like this have success. The failure part of it would be that the show might turn into more entertainment than facts and may be "dumbed down" enough that if real scientist and people that understand the material see that it isn't accurate, it might give those audiences a sense of failure of the show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)