The Sad Truth About Students

Only programmers will understand. If you would like to learn how to program in C++, thenewboston has a YouTube channel with lots of beginners tutorials. You'll be hooked once you start.

Reading - A short poem

The written word – oh how it tumbles and its myriad characters rise

As if Black, Letters Like Flies rise up and Follow

The lines written on the page of sorrow

Where countless fall, die, torment, flee

As if aflame from Reality

And we, we lucky few who survive the trouble, toil and spew

That spills over into every word, chapter, verse and rhyme,

We finally sit down comfortably, sublime.

To enjoy what is left of our shattered universe,

For what we see is but the written verse.

Computers don't always do what they're told to

Thinking about computers, we know that one of these days they're going to stop obeying Moore's law, at least for silicon microprocessors. Moore's law was a prediction made by a man called Gordon Moore in a paper published in 1965. It predicted that the number of transistors on processors would double every year. Surprisingly this law stayed true for a time long after the ten year period Moore initially suggested. However, unfortunately all good things must come to an end and Moore's law was no exception. Gradually the doubling period has lengthened to 18 months and in 2010 it became 3 years. There is of course a reason for this and these are the limitations of manufacturing silicon computer processors with too many chips. Firstly is the fact that, when we have too many tiny transistors in too small a space, they will generate immense amounts of heat, hot enough to burn themselves up, which we obviously don't want. The second limitation is what I'm interested in however, and that is that there is of course a limit on how small we can make transistors, since the universe is made up of atoms which are of a limited size!

This might not have been something Moore had thought of, or even a stage he thought it was possible to get to, for which this might become a problem, but the reality is that this problem is one which is actually very close to becoming a major issue for the future of computing.

But why is it an increasing problem to have transistors made up from smaller and smaller numbers or atoms. Surely we should be able to go down to one atom transistors theoretically, since in reality this is all that is needed to either let electricity flow, or not to let electricity flow.

But in reality our limits are set to five atoms. Why you may ask? Well, it is due to the unpredictability of electrons when we look at them closely. Something which a part of quantum theory.

Quantum theory, Schrödinger's cat, electron cloud - they all make up this weird and wonderful modern model of atoms. The main principle behind this theory is that, contrary to what you might think, electrons cannot only be thought of as particles, but a more accurate description is 'clouds' of space where the negative charge might be at any point in time, and has a certain probability of existing within. Yes, probability and physics. Not something I would've thought might go hand in hand, but apparently, electrons can be anywhere. It doesn't just stop there however. At this small a level, these electrons can demonstrate having equal probabilities of existing everywhere within this cloud, and since we have no method of determining the exact position of electrons at this small a level, we simply have to RELY on this theory of chance - making it really difficult to build computers with transistors this small. But of course we can use this to our advantage in fact, and this can be seen in the modern quantum counters, but that's a story for another day.

What I'm interested in is the fact that this underlying principle of atoms becoming unpredictable at a nanoscopic level is actually present throughout the world of probability and statistics. It's actually not a remote and unexplained scientific theory, but something we experience on a daily basis. Let me explain.

Think of the age old model of probability - flipping a coin to get either heads or tails. There is an equally likely probability of getting each outcome, as many of us know from the hours well spent working out probability problems in our maths workbooks at school. And as we know, often probability is actually correct. Plotting a graph of the cumulative outcomes of an infinite number of trials would eventually give us an eerily accurate 50% outcome for both events. However, as we flip less and less coins the probability will probably become less accurate, up to the point where you have only flipped two coins and can get only four outcomes: heads then tails, tails then heads, heads then heads, and finally tails then tails. Looking at these outcomes they are all equally likely. But only two of them fit the overall model of probability, with a 50:50 outcome for heads and tails. This means there is actually only a 50% likelihood of getting an accurate probability, making it very difficult to predict the number of heads and tails. However, it doesn't stop there, since things take a turn for the worse when you get into the realms of flipping just one coin. There are only two outcomes - heads or tails - and neither fits the conditions needed for our 50% probability! It's physically impossible! The only way to get half heads and half tails would be for both to happen at exactly the same time. Sounding familiar?

Now we see that the behaviour of electrons at smaller and smaller levels is weirdly similar. At a large level, the properties of substances are quite predictable - give or take some slight universal randomness - just as the number of heads and tails are after flipping a coin umpteen times. However, just as the probability becomes less and less 'probable' as we get less and less trials for heads and tails, with less and less atoms, it becomes less and less likely for us to be able to say where the electrons are and predict how the material will behave as a result. Finally we get into the realms of just a few atoms and the probability gets very weird and out of hand, just as it did when we had just two flips of the coin. Imagine this, but on the scale of electrons having an infinite number of equally likely possible locations they can take, rather than just two outcomes as with the coin. Since there are infinite outcomes and probabilities for the locations of electrons, the probability is very hard to predict even on a large scale. We can simply say a certain number of electrons at least will PROBABLY exist in certain 'clouds' as a result, using an equation called Schrödinger's equation, which is basically an equation like "number of trials divided by two" for the number of heads in a certain number of trials of a coin, except applied to an infinite number of locations for electrons. Finally we reach the one atom scenario, where predicting where the electrons are going to be becomes an impossible chore, without saying that the electrons are at each and every point at once. Perhaps this apparent physical impossibility explains the existence of alternate universes with infinite numbers of possible events. Perhaps it might one day prove the existence of God. Who knows? Well, maybe the scientists in another universe, but none in this one - most probably not at least.

                              

The never ending end and the means justified

One question we may ask ourselves often is, 'is what I'm doing really worth doing?'. Think about the last time you might've thought this way, perhaps it was at school or at work and you were wondering whether your job or revision methods were the best way forward.

Well, I have a little piece of advice for you. STOP listening to yourself for a while and just go with it. As much as we might hate to think otherwise, life is unpredictable and unexplainable both physically and philosophically. We can never really know whether what we class as 'consciousness' is really our own beings making moral decisions, or whether we are mere spectators in the grander scheme of things, witnessing this madness through the senses and thoughts of another.

My point is however, not to try to convince you that you are not a real person, it is to tell you that since you might be you should try to achieve the most out of your life. How do I do this you may ask? How do I live the 'ideal' life?

In truth I was actually tricking you slightly, since I would like to say, and I know this for certain, that there is no more of an ideal life than the one you are living as you read this article. The very experience of your unique life pathways in itself is a wonderful thing and the emotions and experiences, good or bad, that you encounter along the way are also unique and should therefore be treasured. It's all part of being human - a richness that no other species will probably ever experience. Put this down to what you will but the statement remains.

Now, there is one thing you can do to improve your life. It may seem counter-intuitive but I think that it is the truth. That is to stop worrying about changing your life drastically and do things step by step. The most important thing is to recognise that you are never going to be the same one day as the next. You are, however you might feel, a different person every new year, every new day, every new moment. Scientifically we might attribute this to neuroplasticity and the ability of the brain to change its structure as we experience new things.

If you are still sceptical, just imagine the day you were born. Are you the same as you were then? No, of course not, but you didn't feel these changes coming on. In fact you are actually made up of a completely fresh set of atoms and particles to those that came out of your mother's womb.

Now think back to when you were just a child, aware, but still not mature. Mature. You know you became it as you grew older, but was there one day when you just woke up and found yourself to be mature? Of course not, maturity was a gradual process due to you understanding more and more about the world. And it hasn't stopped for you yet, no of course it hasn't. You are still developing second by second and there is nothing you can do to stop yourself from changing.

But you do of course have a say in the way that you change. You can change for better or for worse, depending on how you choose to think, act and say the things you do. Each small action will lead to a small change, a fact that you could use to your advantage in accomplishing your life goals.

If you want to stop smoking for example, gradually start doing more and more things to contribute towards this ultimate goal. Eventually you will come to a point where you have overcome your addiction and this is the same for everything. All things are on a continuous spectrum and nothing can be fixed in stone, just as the universe in itself is not really that fixed.

If you just keep in mind how much you want something, those clouds of dreams and aspiration will condense into a real form and you WILL accomplish your goal.

The end never comes before the means and the means will not always seem like they are working, because the changes come so gradually. Rome was not built in a day and neither will you be.

                               

About Time - what we "know" about the master of the human race

We all encounter it everyday. We think about it constantly. We can hardly say a thing without mentioning it. Yes, what I'm talking about is of course time. Time to many people is very straightforward: it's the thing that happens all the time, no pun intended. It is present throughout our lives, dictating in what order things should happen and giving the chaos that is life a certain chronological structure. It is what makes or breaks history.

But why do we never ask ourselves the serious question or whether time exists or not? It seems pretty likely that it does. Just as we know the air is there from its effects ( it moves trees and creates the winds ) we know time is there since clocks and everything else for that matter, moves forwards at a constant rate throughout the day. Every second a second hand will move, every second a heart will beat. But is this just an illusion, a great veil we have drawn up in front of ourselves to cover up a greater truth. Many people have speculated as to whether this is true or not and as to whether this "greater truth" could be God or some other spiritual being.

I ask the question - is this seemingly constant thing really a constant, or is that just how we perceive it. There are a great many mysteries surrounding time. For a start basic physics questions it. What was time before the Big Bang theory for example. What is all this 'special relativity' stuff which Einstein was on about. Apparently time would be slower for someone moving more slowly - an athlete is actually moving more slowly through time than somebody sitting still. However the difference is so small it is unmeasurable ( almost ). But WHY?

Time is something we perceive to happen. We subconsciously expect a clock to tick and predict when it is next going to tick. But could we stop it if we tried? Not likely. Try it now, sit next to a clock and try to imagine it stopping at one tick, not moving forwards. It is impossible. Our minds almost want us to believe in time for some bizarre reason, as if stopping this inevitable continuation would cause an impossible change which might alter the running of the universe. Well... Perhaps not something that drastic but the fact remains that the thought of time stopping feels just out of reach, as if it is something that we know is there and could happen, but is beyond our mental capabilities. Perhaps this is the limitation that so many religious people search for when questioning how we can never understand God.

Another interesting scenario would be to imagine the world, only in reverse. Every animal backtracking, every seismic process in the earth's core suddenly reversing. Perhaps for five seconds. The universe would return to the state it was in five seconds ago. But what about time? Has time moved forwards in order to allow this to happen? Or has it moved backwards? It is confusing. If we say it has moved forwards then that would mean time was an irrelevant measurement, redundant and something unneeded. If there was a certain amount of time left for the earth, or for the sun to supernove, that has just been e tended by five seconds. Or has its. Nobody would notice a shift in time as sudden as this, since everyone's brains would return to the state they were five seconds prior to the 'time' shift. Therefore this process could actually be happening every second of every day. In fact we could all currently exist in some form in different periods of history. Everything could rely on this fact.

Well, that is all theoretical and is of course impossible to find out. There is only one truth. That is that times is completely redundant and irrelevant and useless, that is until we introduce the human factor.

pH - Have you ever thought what it really is?

Most of us should know that the pH of a substance determines its acidity (or alkalinity). We know that both acids and alkalies are opposites of each other. An acid will react with an alkaline to neutralise it. pH is measured on the pH scale, with water being 'neutral'. However, have you ever thought what pH actually is?
In a nutshell, the pH of a substance measures how much a substance will dissociate when put in water.
This is when a hydrogen atom, attached by a covalent bond (shared electron) to a compound in an acid, breaks  free of the bond. However, with it breaking free it leaves behind its only electron: it is now a single proton with a positive charge. This little proton then attaches itself to a nearby water molecule (as the acid/alkali is in water) and forms the compound H3O. This is just water (H2O) with an extra hydrogen (H). Although the proton has now lost its electron it is still considered a Hydrogen molecule. The H3O ion (as it is now a positively charged particle - extra proton, but no extra electron) is extremely important, to the extent it has a special name of its own: hydronium. It is the measure of hydronium in a solution of an acid or base (which is an alkali dissolved in water) is rated on the pH scale. A low pH indicates there is a lot of hydronium, whereas a high pH indicates there is a smaller and smaller amount. Here's an example of an acid and water reaction, you can clearly see that H3O is left behind:
H2SO4 + H2O → H3O+ + HSO4−
The pH scale isn't just limited between 0 and 14, those are just the values which are naturally available, it can go above and below that into the minus numbers! However, if you have pure water, as much as you might like to think it is almost never pure. In fact, pure water self-ionises naturally over time. This is when one proton (hydrogen atom without its electron) transfers itself from one water molecule to another. This produces two oppositely charged ions and here is the equation:
H2O + H2O  H3O+ + OH−
However, water does not go on like this for ever, otherwise its pH would just keep falling! Eventually enough of it has undergone chemical change for it to be considerably less likely to react - a kind of equilibrium - the pH of that equilibrium just happens to be pH 7. That's why we call pH 7 neutral - its the pH of stability, and we base the scale around that.
So, any acid will naturally be a very good electrolyte (a substance which contains free ions, making it a good electrical conductor). This also explains why they use battery acid inside of batteries, as when the protons leave the acidic compounds, they make the compounds positive ions. Since electricity is the flow of charge (not electrons! That is just a very common method of transmitting charge) this means electric current can pass through!
If you have any questions please feel free to post below.

What is Mass - Really? Do we know anything?

We all know that almost everything in our universe is made up of what we so affectionately call matter. This matter makes up everything we see and use everyday, it even makes up what we've never seen or used. Distant planets, stars and galaxies - all made up of this weird substance. With every physical 'theory' there is always an element of indefinite uncertainty, and yet mass is one theory that we can almost solidly call "fact". Or can we? Have we ever really thought of what mass is? You may respond that mass is what 'is there'. But how do we know 'what's there' is there? Or what isn't seemingly 'there' is in reality... there? What is 'there'? What are 'space' and 'dimensions'? They didn't exist before the universe began. 

Mass, as you can see, is a much more fiddly concept than you might ever imagine. On a large scale, relative to us, all masses obey a set of rules which we call 'forces' and 'physical laws', and yet on an atomic level, electrons do not. They seem to inadvertently flit around, sometimes seeming to be in two places at once! We cannot predict them entirely. Due to this a new theory was developed, called string theory, suggesting that everything in the universe is bonded together by strings so small that if you enlarged a hydrogen atom to the size of the galaxy the string would be only the size of a human hair! This theory may have yet to explain these tricky conundrums which inundate us in the universe. Yet, as with any theory, it is never perfect and there are always questions surrounding it. In fact, all the facts that we learn in everyday life, that we take for granted. All of them, are probably FALSE! They are in reality just attempts at trying to explain what happens around us. You may say that many of these theories are too robust to simply discard as mere attempts! Yet, that is exactly what philosophers and scientists would have said about ancient theories long ago. Back then, everyone believed that the world was the centre of the universe, that everything was made up of just four elements (earth, fire, air and water) and were completely perplexed by why there were different 'types of air', some of which could kill you! In response to these, instead of finding the correct solution, they simply tangled themselves up in knots, experimenting and trying to find an explanation using primitive theories. We know now that if pioneering scientists such as Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein hadn't come about, we would still be living, ignorant to the world around us.

This is why I believe that we have yet to come close to touching the reality of the universe. Our generation is simply another step towards simplifying these many "proven" theories and finding the real answer to life around us. Every generation brings with it new advancements and one day I think that in someone, somewhere's head the real solution will finally click. We are all on a constant adventure of mishaps and discoveries, some completely unintentional, and yet it is these accidents that will one day let us tumble into the bliss of understanding.

It doesn't have to be genial scientists or scholars which make these discoveries. Most of their minds have all been shaped and warped by the theories which surround us today. Most of them will never have the 'ignorance' to question scientific theories. This is why I believe that to advance in science we must all be willing to completely discard all that we have learnt, have an open mind, and fundamentally question the roots of stable theories. Without that there would be no scientific advancement whatsoever. In fact it is not knowing the answer which helps us advance, it is the question. As implied by the word 'creativity', you must 'create' the question to be able to think of finding the right answer. Even then there will always be more questions coming. What's to stop me or you finding the next question?