In der Medizin, im Wissenschaftsbetrieb und in den populärwissenschaftlichen Medien ist Reich heute kaum mehr als eine belächelte Kuriosität.

2005 fand sich in der wöchentlichen Standeszeitschrift Deutsches Ärzteblatt (S. A1459) eine Notiz „Sexualität und Medizin – Orgasmusreflex“, die aus einem längeren Zitat aus Reichs Die Funktion des Orgasmus (1942) über den Orgasmusreflex besteht: eine einheitliche Gesamtkörperzuckung, zuckender Plasmahaufen, Orgasmusforschung führte zum biologischen Kern der seelischen Erkrankungen, der Orgasmusreflex findet sich bei allen Lebewesen, bei Einzellern in Gestalt von Plasmazuckungen. Das Deutsches Ärzteblatt kommentiert:

Hier wird auf das Paradigma der Amöbe angespielt. – Reich (1897-1957) war 1922 bis 1930 am psychoanalytischen Ambulatorium in Wien tätig, ab 1928 Mitglied der Kommunistischen Partei; 1933 Ausschluß aus der Psychoanalytischen Vereinigung und aus der KP, im Exil ab 1934, von 1939 bis zu seinem Tod in den USA; Wegbereiter der späteren Gestalt- bzw. Körpertherapie. Seine Definition des „Orgasmusreflexes“ offenbart ein strikt biologistisches Menschenbild.

Das findet sich unter der Rubrik „Medizingeschichte(n) – ausgewählt und kommentiert von H. Schott“ neben einem zweiten kurzen Artikel, „Ärzte als Patienten – Schlaflosigkeit“. Er behandelt als medizinhistorische Kuriosität ein Zitat des Arztes Giralomo Cardano aus dem Jahre 1643.

Die aktuelle Dezember-Ausgabe des populärwissenschaftlichen Magazins P.M. macht mit der Überschrift auf „Das Geheimnis der kosmischen Lebensenergie“. Im ersten Absatz wird der „umstrittene österreichische Psychologe Wilhelm Reich“ abgehandelt:

Wie er vom nicht nur genialen, sondern auch „höflichen“ Einstein in Princeton empfangen wurde, nachdem er kurz zuvor aus der Psychoanalytischen Vereinigung wegen seiner „spleenigen Ideen“ ausgeschlossen wurde. Einstein habe Reich leider bescheinigen müssen, daß der „Lichtschein“, durch den das Orgon sich manifestieren würde, eine rein subjektive Empfindung sei.

Reich nahm sich später das Leben, immer noch fest davon überzeugt, mit Orgon die „Lebensenergie des Kosmos“ sichtbar gemacht zu haben.

Reichs Tragik sei gewesen, daß er ganz dicht dran war, an dem was die meisten Menschen auf der Welt als Tatsache betrachten. Der Rest des Artikels handelt dann von „Prana“, Schamanismus und der chinesischen Medizin. Ich kann nicht beurteilen, ob das eine ähnliche Scheiße ist, wie die substanzlosen Phantasien, die der Autor Karsten Flohr über Reich zusammengeschmiert hat. Für so einen Mist 3,50 EUR auszugeben… Allein schon das mit dem Selbstmord ist eine ungeheuerliche Frechheit! Typischer Qualitätsjournalismus!

Immerhin gibt es hier und da Ausnahmen. So beschäftigte sich 2004 Dr. Ulfried Geuter (FU Berlin) im Organ des Berufsverbandes Deutscher Psychologen (Report-Psychologie 2/2004) mit der Geschichte der körperorientierten Psychotherapie. Er mahnte:

Die Körperpsychotherapie muß die Verbindung zur Forschung suchen. Wilhelm Reich hat dies getan, da er seine Gedanken aufgrund von experimentellen und klinischen Forschungen als bessere Theorie in der Psychoanalyse verankern wollte. Es ist sicher kein Zufall, daß ausgerechnet zur Wirkung des Orgonakkumulators eine Doppelblindstudie vorliegt, die wahrscheinlich den Kriterien des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats genügen würde; ihr zufolge erhöht sich im Akkumulator die Körperkerntemperatur (Müschenich & Gebauer, 1996).

Hier bezieht sich Geuter auf ein kurzes Referat in DeMeos Orgonakkumulator-Handbuch. Das Original von 1987, Der Reichsche Orgonakkumulator, war ursprünglich die Diplomarbeit von Dr. med. Dipl.-Psych. Stefan Müschenich.

Dr. Müschenichs umfangreiche Doktorarbeit von 1995, die weit umfassender ist, als ihr Titel Der Gesundheitsbegriff im Werk des Arztes Wilhelm Reich andeutet, ist demnächst direkt über diesen Blog zu beziehen.

I had planned to write a post venting about my day.  See, there were a lot of reasons for me to hate today. 

First off, it was Monday, which automatically gives it negative points. 

Second, I had to work.  See, I normally have Monday’s off…which I love, by the way.  However, I had to work today so that I could have the day after Thanksgiving off. 

Third, I began this Monday at work by unintentionally providing my arm as a doggie chew toy.  Said doggie had big teeth and he knew how to use them. 

Oh, and the list goes on.  But…I’m not venting, remember?

I decided to try to make this a positive post.

Or, at least a thoughtful one.  Mr. Albert Einstein’s going to assist me with that one.

This is the quote I’ve been reflecting on this evening:

I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.”

~Albert Einstein

See, I want very much to be “smart”.  Most of the time I don’t feel intelligent though.  I’m constantly thinking of all the things I don’t know.  Or the things I used to know, but have since forgotten.  (Periodic Table, whhaat!?)  I know I’ll never be an Einstein (the man was the living definition of genius-ness), but knowing that HE didn’t know everything there is to know makes me feel a tiny bit better about my (far greater) intellectual shortcomings.

What brought this line of thought on, you ask?

Grad school.

Honestly, it scares the beejeebees out of me, but I’m becoming increasingly more game the longer I ponder the possibilities.

A human being is a part of the whole, called by us Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest-a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty. – Albert Einstein

„Time is relative“, a famous Quatschtronaut with messy hair once discovered. But he didn’t find out how this relative perception can be transferred from one person to another, without the need to travel through space by the speed of light. Even though the solutions is so simple.

Dear “Buchwolf”, you asked: How to make a schoolteacher understand that you need a break in order to be productive?

We have approached this problem with practical means. First, we cut a quarter of an hour out of your clock, and pulled the gap together. You will like the result! Each hour, time will stand still for fifteen minutes! In addition, the hands won’t move between noon and three o’ clock, in order to let you enjoy your siesta.

As a side-effect, we discovered a new physical law: The law of conservation of time. Not just energy remains constant over time, also time cannot simply disappear.That means, that the minutes that we took from your clock, had to be transplanted by way of plusutes in another clock, in order to keep the subjective perception of time constant. Your teacher’s watch seemed to be ideal for this purpose. He will have to teach three extra hours a day, and each lesson will last fifteen minutes longer!

Soon he will beg you for permission to take a break.

The Quatschtronauts

„Zeit ist relativ“, hat mal ein berühmter Quatschtronaut mit wuscheligen Haaren herausgefunden. Was er aber noch nicht entdeckt hatte war, wie sich diese relative Wahrnehmung, ohne mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit durch das All reisen zu müssen, von einer Person zu einer anderen übertragen lässt. Und dabei lag die Lösung doch so auf der Hand!

Lieber „Buchwolf“, du wolltest wissen, wie du einem Lehrer beibringst dass zum Arbeiten auch richtige Pausen gehören.

Wir haben uns dem Thema mal mit einfachen Mitteln genähert. Zuerst haben wir aus deiner Uhr ein Viertel herausgesägt und das Loch zusammengezogen. Das Ergebnis wird dir gefallen! Jede Stunde bleibt die Zeit von selbst eine akademische Viertelstunde stehen! Außerdem werden die Zeiger sich zwischen zwölf und drei Uhr nicht bewegen und du kannst deine Siesta ungestört genießen!

So ganz nebenbei haben wir auch noch ein neues physisches Gesetz erfunden. Nicht nur Energie bleibt zu jeder Zeit gleich, auch die Zeit selbst bleibt erhalten. Das heißt, wir mussten die Minuten, die wir aus deiner Uhr entnommen haben, in eine andere Uhr als Plusuten transplantieren, damit die subjektive Zeitwahrnehmung in ihrer Summe gleich bleibt.

Dazu bot sich die Uhr des Lehrers als geradezu ideal an! Er wird jeden Tag drei extra Stunden unterrichten müssen, und alle Unterrichtsstunden werden sich um einer Viertelstunde verlängern!

Bald wird er dich anflehen, eine Pause machen zu dürfen!

Die Quatschtronauten

Really, I don’t know that I need so much “call display” as I need “call compare”.

I think we’ve all heard of certain applications for phones that, when the situation is dire, diluted or deluded (such as that 4am call to an ex, rambling drunkenly about how much better you are without them, but that that they are really, really great. “Cood you haggon fer jus a sekkind?”), debate the users level of intellect via breathalyzer or a quick series of successive math calisthenics. Those applications always struck me as idiotic, as I can barely count the fingers on a single hand when sober, and I’m essentially a pillar of intellectualism. So what If I can’t read analog clocks.

I was thinking of the “new changes to your fido voicemail account!”, announced in decibels consistent with supersonic jets or “sell your gold” commercials, when I called my service provider. I was lost, hypnotized in the mist of that perky, digitized, 40+ voice (as per usual set to “Unoffensively Chipper North American”), when I suddenly tweaked to the jackpot phone service — which of course now I’ll hand over on a silver platter, like all my other brilliant ideas. CALL COMPARE.

Now, we ali had that little black book, though it might have been blue, or grey, or shellacked in pictures of Victorian kittens giving elocution lessons, so we all know the system – one star is “meh”, two stars usually indicate the third star you’ve crossed out – downgrade! Three stars = true love forever. You know, that kind of thing.

THIS IS WHAT I REQUIRE: Why not a service that will catalog and screen potential callers and rate their suitability?! Genius! Brainiac! I submit to you killer idea 4,765,936.

Picture it. Brandon Walsh is calling at the same time as I’m on the phone with Dylan McKay. The application thinks for a minute. Brandon is a “nice guy”. I mean, he might have his goodnatured faults, but overall, he’s a nice kid with a sideburn problem. That’s okay! In between working at the school newspaper and getting a high GPA he’s likely willing to hunker down and sort it out the old-fashioned way — by working his way to the top of the Beverly Beach Club, where eventually office gossip will hurt his feelings into shearing those badboys down.

Dylan, on the other hand, is a rebel who plays by his own rules, and doesn’t care WHO gets hurt. Oh, wait, but he does, because underneath all that bravado, he’s actually a sensitive lost little boy. Dad didn’t come home much, because he was off becoming a felonious Zillionire. Dylan grew up in a hotel, so his beach-bum attitude won’t be helping him unload the dishwasher when I get in from being a model/cheerleader who heads the top of a multinational corporation dealing primarily in a miracle skincream that coverts cancer into Botox.

The application weighs the pros and cons. Brandon, good family values. Dylan, hot motorbike, can pay for my SATs to be done by a really smart fat kid exchange student. Brandon, possible affinity for state fairs, home décor may include Grandma’s needlepoint. Dylan, modular Italian bachelor furniture, constant catering to Kelly Taylor’s predisposition to coke addiction. Or was that Brandon? Redo. Dylan, SON OF FELONIOUS ZILLIONAIRE. Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

Poor Brandon. His call is dumped, Dylan’s is picked up, and (blatantly stealing the patent-pending on this one) B-Dog’s redial is connected immediately to this, The New York Rejection Hotline, where he is offered cocoa and a safe place to get fetal and release his prisoner tears from their eye-jail.

Here’s the thing.

Now that I’ve thought of this, I need this ALL THE TIME, not just on the comparative phonecall between hot babes, but in order to make basic decisions, PERIOD. Moet or Veuve? Paper or Plastic? Jennifer Garner or Jennifer Aniston? (Trick question: the application would immediately lock down due to boredom overload.) Basically my genius-brain is scheming already on finding a sexy physicist with the interest and ability to create an orbiting decision-making system for me — and before you apply, sexy physicists, I’m NOT looking for utility-belt format. So put your pocket protecter away, Hot Poindexter, Stud Einstein’s coming through.

If you need me, I’ll be shellacking my old Palm Pilot with pictures like this.

The final session explored leading social change. Again, Chatham House Rules were in effect.

Leading social change requires addressing the strategic roles and outcomes resultant rather than simply the funding model. Governments, foundations, corporations and the community all have a role to play, individually and collaboratively. By identifying best and next practices, along with successful strategies, funding will become more widely available.

Adopting these strategies necessitates identifying synergies that exist currently and could exist in the future. In doing so broad social innovations and change can occur in the development of new thinking, processes and leadership.

Leadership within social innovation will address the changing needs as we march toward deeper economic, political and social integration. Realizing that the challenge is not the development of new ideas rather one of making them work. Leadership directly deals with this challenge by successfully bridging the gap between a ‘good idea’ and execution. Great leadership will harvest the seeds of innovation to address ‘wicked problems.’

Recognizing the truth of Einstein’s assertion: “ We can’t solve problems with the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Traditional methods, like a top down approach, have not served to advance the innovations that will lead to broad and lasting social impact. Therefore true leadership recognizes that widespread input is required and will actively seek collaboration.

Greater citizen engagement is needed to aid in the creation of an appreciative culture for community assistance. Serving further the ability to identify new leadership and new areas for innovation within the communities themselves.

To do this requires that capacity building in local, regional and national hubs of excellence be recognized and nurtured. It stems from the community itself and opens the pathways to transparency, accountability and funding.

There is not a shortage of capital out in the ether. However a shortage of investors exists willing to sacrifice hard returns on investment for impactful social returns. While this is changing, it is slow, and requires a greater effort by all sectors to open the door to capital through whatever means are possible.

It is paramount that the Canadian Federal Government, Provincial and Territorial governments take steps to unleash the charitable sector. These steps include the creation of new financial instruments and regulations that make social enterprises easier to create and operate. Unnecessarily restrictive and antiquated rules should be removed or reformed to aid in these developments.

In conjunction with this it is necessary for a fundamental reframing of the meaning of ‘fiduciary’ duty to encompass the broader economic and social impacts as outlined in the triple bottom line – people, planet and profits.

One speaker made two beautiful references: We all need to become “Billionaires for Good,” and, we need to create “Sustainable Peace Rooms” as opposed to war rooms, as illustrated in political campaigns around the world.

Currently in the throes of building the next economy a great emphasis needs to be put into finding new efficiencies and innovations to reduce our current carbon footprints. Recognizing this shift to the ‘new economy’ a need exists understanding the conversion of the current industrial sector is going to lead to turbulent if not in the moment unwelcome yet necessary change.

Our generation has created more wealth and become more productive than any in history. We have done so at the cost of being, by far, the most destructive.

Social innovation offers an opportunity for us to stem the tide of that destruction and solve many of the ‘wicked problems’ that face us today.

The next post will summarize the previous six.

“As the births of living creatures are at first ill-shapen, so are all innovations, which are the births of time. “ Francis Bacon

Be Inspired Today!

The New Currency SDM “Change…At the Speed of Thought”

A 1952 photo of a robot called "Sabor" frightening a baby in Hamburg, Germany

Socrates envisioned western philosophy

Do you have any problems with your vision? I don’t necessarily mean “vision” in the sense of seeing with your eyes. I’m talking about your vision that uses your imagination. The vision that allows you to “see” what you want the world to look like in the future. If you have such a “vision,” then what does it look like? Is it blurry or clear? Is it the way you want it to be and/or the way you think it will be? Is it a vision that allows you to be what you want to be? Do bigger dreams or visions generally mean big results?

The previous paragraph points out, in question form, some of the different ways we deal with vision. Many successful people have big dreams and have manifested those dreams or visions in various ways. Isaac Asimov, a popular science fiction writer from the twentieth century, had monstrous dreams or visions. He wrote over 300 books, wrote numerous short stories and won many awards while always manifesting a vision or dream that allowed him to go back and forth from fiction to non-fiction. When he wrote fiction, he very seldom expressed himself through a character that we might remember. Instead, most of his characters would be discreet, while allowing us to envision the story through their minds.

Da Vinci envisioned and lived the renaissance.

Asimov’s ability to have the reader see his vision was powerful. Through his writing, one could see into his mind. At least, that is the way I felt as I read some of his books. I remember reading, “I Robot” while in high school and then later on, seeing films based on some of the short stories from the book. Asimov’s vision and the vision I had in my mind regarding robots, were one and the same. Of course, my vision was most likely strongly influenced by his writing. That alone was great, but after I saw a short story from the book portrayed on the movie screen hosted by Boris Karloff, I realized how good Asimov was at clearly revealing his vision to us. The screen version was almost identical to what I had in my mind.

Of course, most of what I read from Isaac Asimov was science fiction, yet he wrote in such a way that my friends and I felt it was real and we understood it. He wrote from a point of view that all could understand science. That was a big vision.

Einstein envisioned a different order for the universe.

People who have big visions have had great impacts on civilizations. Examples like Socrates, da Vinci and Einstein come to mind. Socrates for his vision of a Western Philosophy, da Vinci for his Renaissance vision and Einstein for his special vision of physics.

We also have had people whose visions were negative. Hitler comes to mind almost immediately. He had a grandiose vision, but from my point of view, it was an irrational model for our society. His New Order was a vision that excluded many people for reasons of birth, relationship and/or ethencity. It was a vision that wasn’t good for a world that is as diverse and rational as ours. Again, Hitler’s vision was wrong for our world, but was somewhat a reasonable vision, if applied to, for example, animals in a zoo.

Hitler envisioned a world of exclusion.

So, what kind of world would you like to see in the future? I believe your vision for the world helps shape your life. It helps give you purpose and a sense of accomplishment.

We need to create a vision for our world that, unlike Hitler, is inclusive, fair-minded and positive. It should be a vision that enables all of us to contribute toward the improvement of everyone in our world. It should be a vision that helps our world be in “good shape.”

What’s your vision?

“Que dirá el pez del mar donde siempre ha vivido.”

Albert Einstein – Aportada por Charly

“El hombre encuentra a Dios detrás de cada puerta que la ciencia logra abrir.”

Albert Einstein – Aportado por Charly

spotify:album:1tc29pVXNVBacxo0ZJKPuZ

Granada es una ciudad muy espiritual, tanto para lo positivo como para lo negativo…ahora hay bastantes obras por la inclusión en la gama de transportes públicos, al metro…o al menos lo intentaremos jaja

Lo curioso es que si te acercas a un pueblo interferido por las genuinas obras encontramos que está incomunicado y se ha generado un movimiento hacia atrás en el tiempo, ¡apenas hay ruido! jaja, además, la gente cierra los negocios porque apenas se puede transitar por las calles principales por donde se están construyendo las vías del afamado tren “cercanías a la andaluza”.

Es cuestión de tener paciencia dicen…sobre todo los abuelillos que se acercan a las alambradas para observar como los obreros trabajan cada día, ¡espectáculo asegurado! y esto ha sido así desde hace años…seguimos siendo unos cazurros, vamos a tocar otros temas, vamos a avanzar rápidamente, vamos a conocer el presente como budas, gracias a gente como este profesor que se adentra en la boca del lobo por nosotros:

Parte 1

nos ayudará a conseguirlo

Más vídeos:

A disfrutar!

Parte 2:

Parte 3:

Parte 4:

Parte 5:

Parte 6:

Parte 7:

Parte 8:

Dudas? comentarios? XD

Hari Minggu tanggal 15 November Akhirnya sesi pertama workshop Sains bersama Bang Muzi bisa dilaksanakan di Gedung P4TK. Tema yang diambil pertama kali adalah tentang bunyi. Berikut adalah dialog dan keriangan dari peserta. Untuk photo-photo silahkan bisa dilihat di:

1. http://facebook.com/prasastiimani
2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/9183741@N08/

Pak Muzi memulai dengan beberapa pertanyaan…

• Apa tujuan anak belajar science?
• Apakah pembelajaran science itu efektif?

“Einstein: salah satu cara mengajak anak belajar adalah dengan memberikan contoh”
Berikut adalah jawaban guru-guru ketika ditanya manfaat belajar sains:

• Mengenal lingkungan
• Mengenal kebesaran tuhan •

Pak Muzi bilang,

• saat ini anak-anak lulus hanya menghasilkan generasi penghafal.
• Sejarah science yang mandeg, contohnya sejarah bajak sawah hampir tidak berubah lebih dari 2000 tahun di Indonesia. Padahal di Amerika sekarang seorang petani bisa mengerjakan sawah 2 hektar.
• Indonesia butuh masyarakat science bukan berlian science.
• Pengalaman putranya yang bertemu kakak kelasnya di NTU Singapura yang pernah juara olimpiade fisika. Dia bilang negara Cina dan Indonesia itu dikondisikan sedangkan Jerman tidak pernah melakukan hal itu.

+++++

Pak Muzi memulai dengan memberikan kesempatan kepada peserta:

1. 1. Mengapa manusia bersuara?
2. 2. Bagaimana handphone berbunyi?

I. Percobaan 1 (getar) dengan pukulan

Dilakukan dengan menggunakan penggaris. Lalu peserta diminta untuk menjelaskan apa yang terjadi, kemudian peserta diminta mengisi modul dan melakukan diskusi. Berikut adalah munculnya pertanyaan-pertanyaan liar dari para guru:

1. - Apakah semua penggaris yang bergetar menghasilkan bunyi?
2. - Apakah semua benda yang bergetar menghasilkan bunyi?
3. - Apakah banyaknya getaran mempengaruhi bunyi?
4. - Adakah perbedaan bahan akan menghasilkan bunyi?
5. - Apakah udara yang ada di sekitar mempengaruhi suara?
6. - Apakah di ruang hampa berbunyi?
7. - Apakah bunyi dapat dipantulkan?
8. - Apa yang menyebabkan jumlah getarannya berbeda?
9. - Apakah panjang pendek atau besar kecil mempengaruhi getaran?
10. - Apakah bunyi harus berasal dari benturan?
11. - Apakah pulpen atau pinsil bisa menghasilkan getaran?
12. - Kenapa kayu dipukul bunyi?

- Tips Pak Muzi: Kita harus berani menjadi orang bodoh untuk mendapatkan ilmu!

II. Cara apa yang dapat menghasilkan bunyi?

Percobaan dengan menggunakan marakas (alat musik tradisional dari amerika latin). Benda itu menghasilkan bunyi dikarenakan adanya benturan atau pukulan.

Contoh lain:

• Gong
• Rebana
• Tepuk tangan
• Gendang

Bunyi itu muncul ketika terjadi benturan Contoh Pak Muzi: tulis cara yang unik sebuah percobaan yang dapat menghasilkan bunyi dan harus berbeda dengan yang lainnya. (ini gunanya untuk mendorong imajinasi anak).

Pengembangan ide:

• - Apakah hubungan bunyi dan getaran?
• - Dengan kekuatan apa benda itu dapat bersuara?
• - Bagiamana kalau kacang ijo diganti beras?
• - Bagaimana dengan biji yang beragam?
• - Bagaimana jika tabungnya dari kaca?
• - Bagaimana kalau digenggam?
• - Bagaimana jika tabungnya persegi?
• - Bagaimana kalau membuat konser dengan kacang ijo?
• Tebak-tebakan dengan marakas: Bunyi tersebut diganti dengan biji-bijian dan itu akan menginspirasi

III. Gelas Mendengkur (gesekkan) Suara dihasilkan karena gesekkan.

Apalagi suara yang dihasilkan karena gesekkan:

• - Biola, rebab,
• - Rem
• - Menarik meja di lantai
• - Serutan
• - Resleting (bunyi resleting ada dua: pertama sreeeeeeeetttt, kedua awwwwwwwwwwwww hahahaha)

Ide pengembangannya:

• - Bagiamana jika talinya besar (tambang)
• - Bagiamana kalau gelasya dari kaca
• - Mengapa bunyinya ketika diurutnya
• - Mengapa air berpengaruh?
• - Bagaimana kalau penampangnya besar?

IV. Suara dengan cara ditiup (balon dijepit dengan dua stik eskrim)

Alat musik yang menghasilkan bunyi

• - Harmonika, saxophone, Terompet, suling
• - Siul, tangan,

Pengembangan ide:

• - Bagaimana kalau kayunya satu
• - Bagaimana kalau tumpukkannya lebih dari 1
• - Bagaimana kalau balonna lebih tinggi
• - Bagiamana kalau balonnya diganti dg: kertas, daun, plastik, seng tipis

V. Terompet Peserta membuat terompet dengan sedotan, balon, dan cangkang film

Caranya ditiup, “ujiannya adalah: siswa diberikan alat2 dan bahan2 sains untuk dirangkai oleh mereka” Pertanyaan life skills: “seandainya Allah hanya memberikan sedotan kepada kita untuk bekal hidup apa yang harus dilakukan untu itu?”

Pengembangan ide:

• - Semakin sempit celah semakin nyaring
• - Kenapa ada lilin?
• - Bagaimana jika tabungnya diisi dengan air?
• - Bagaimana jika tabungnya diganti dengan kaleng?
• - Bagaimana jika lubangnya ditambah?
• - Bagaimana jika lubang ditiup dengan yang keluar?
• - Bagaimana jika balon diganti benda lain (plastik, kertas minyak, dll)?
• - Bagaimana jika sedotan output dipotong?
• - Bagaimana jika sedotan output diberi lubang banyak?
• - Bagaimana jika sedota diganti dengan bambu?
• - Bagaimana jika tabungnya diganti kaleng susu? Lihat prinsipnya

VI. Bunyi dering

Bunyi yang dihasilkan seperti ada benturan yang berulang

• Pengembangan ide:
• - Bagaimana jika tabung diganti botol susu?
• - Bagaimana jika simpulnya pendek?
• - Bagaimana kancingnya kalau disimpan di dalam?
• - Bagaimana kalau kancingnya dari besi?
• - Bagaimana kalau simpulnya berbeda-beda?
• - Bagaiman kalau tabungnya diganti galon dan talinya dari tambang?

Bagaimana cara mengajarkan perbedaan mahluk hidup dan mahluk mati.

Metode mengajarkan science

• P= perangkat
• A= aplikasi
• G= games
• E= experiment
• S= software

Untuk apa mengajar ciri-ciri mars padahal dilingkungan sekitar ada banyak hal yang belum diketahui siswa.

VII. Mendeskripsikan percobaan (ruang hampa dengan menggunakan cangkang bekas film yang sudah dilapis dengan kain panel) Konsep berpikir disederhanakan

VIII. Membuat terompet dari sedotan

Mengapa pangkal sedotan harus digunting? Karena harus ada dua bagian yang bergetar Semakin pendek ujung sedotan maka akan semakin tinggi nadanya.

Ide pengembangan:

• - Mengapa stik balon tidak bisa digunakan?
• - Tidak bisa dipipihkan tapi bisa dipasangin kertas…

Bagaimana ciri-ciri pembelajaran sains itu berhasil?

• - Tugas guru di tingkat dasar adalah ketika anak2 mulai ribut dengan pertanyaan dan ekspresif
• - Anak2 yang tidak putus asa kalau gagal
• - Anak yang imajinatif
• - Kritis
• - Tugas pembelajaran sains adalah mengembalikan karakter anak

IX. Membuat telpon

• - Mengapa suara merambat? Karena ada media: udara, benda cair, benda padat.
• - Mengapa astronot bisa berkomunikasi? Karena diubah dulu menjadi gelombang elektromagnetik lalu dirubah lagi menjadi gelombang. Itulah mengapa telefon seluler pake tower
• - Mengapa pake nylon lebih baik daripada benang? Karena nylon lebih padat
• - Potongan bambu, cangkang korek api, cangkang susu,
• - Bagaimana kalau benangnya bercabang?
• - Bagaimana kalau tanpa tabung
• - Kalau dicoba pake kawat

Semua tulisan yang berkaitan dengan pengembangan adalah jawaban dan keusilan guru MI yang begitu antusias mengikuti workshop. So, its a wonderful session with them.

Cheers,

Sopyan

Prologue

This story deals with a seeming paradox in the world of quantum physics. That is, that light can be proven to be both a particle and a wave, depending on how you look at it. It stems from theories and experiments from the mid-twentieth century; Einstein and all that.

Story

It was the big day for this photon – there he sits, snugly, in the particle accelerator, waiting for the green light.

For months he has been preparing for this moment; hanging out with the larger electrons, learning ow they came to be as big as they are, while he was still barely a nucleus.

To the mesons and bosons he had spoken, whilst they raced along backwards and forwards, (and sometimes both!). From them he learned the order of things, the ‘elimentariness’ of the world.

And now he was ready, sitting there, waiting for the electromagnets to warm up. Soon he would be journeying, at the speed of light, towards the most important event of his life!

Soon it came – the hum in the background, the green light came on – he was off! Out through the barrel of the gun he went, out into the unknown, out into the world!

And there it was – the famous dark screen that his contemporaries had whispered about. ‘Be careful,’ they had said, ‘for a choice awaits you there. Beware of That Which Watches.’

Onwards he hurtled, and then he saw them – two there were, many many orders of magnitude larger than himself – looming, gaping holes in the screen. He knew his purpose then, he knew what he was here to do. He braced himself,preparing for that most sacred act that a photon can perform.

He concentrated and, slowly but surely, as he sped along, his whole being stretched, blurred, smoothed and spread. He was going for it! He was now truly a wave, spreading though the ether, a movement of energy, not of particles; propagating himself towards the voids in the screen.

But wait! What is this? As he approaches the screen he can see, concealed behind each hole – particle detectors!

‘Oh no!’ he thought – ‘if That Which Watches’ is expecting a particle, how will It notice me, if am but a wave?’ Losing his concentration completely, the photon collapses back into a single particle, and just scrapes through one of the holes in the screen…

And there he is picked up by one of the detectors, like an all-seeing orb, as passes on to the sensitive plate beyond.

the photon hits this new plate and comes to rest, the agony of the journey and the energy expended in collapsing from wave to particle finally spent, all remaining of him a single spot on a photographic plate.

Epilogue

In another world a human being looks up from a small photographic plate and turns to another human, saying ‘You see, Albert, I told you light was a particle…’

Thanks to Sarah de Nordwall and the Scanners crew for inspiration and support.

Disclaimer: I know the physics isn’t bang on; it’s just a story x

The Crazy Ones…

~ Ayn Rand ~

This makes me want to give standing ovations and do handstands.

Are you a crazy one?

It reminds me of this wonderful passage:

To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting.
e. e. cummings

And that’s the thing, isn’t it?  To each of us discover what makes us crazy…what lights the fire of our passions…what would call us to be anything but normal.  Do you know what that is?  Are you pursuing it courageously or are you waiting for “someday”?

The crazy ones don’t wait.  They sally forth.  They fail.  Their hearts are broken.  They heal up and leap right back into the fray.

That’s why we call them crazy.

That’s why crazy is such a precious commodity.

Einstein speaks on theoretical sciences; (Nov. 15, 2009)

I intend to write a series on “Einstein speaks” on scientific methods, theoretical physics, relativity, pacifism, national-socialism, and the Jewish problem.

In matter of space two objects may touch or be distinct.  When distinct, we can always introduce a third object in between. Interval thus stays independent of the selected objects; an interval can then be accepted as real as the objects. This is the first step in understanding the concept of space. The Greeks privileged lines and planes in describing geometric forms; an ellipse, for example, was not intelligible except as it could be represented by point, line, and plane. Einstein could never adhere to Kant’s notion of “a priori” simply because we need to search the characters of the sets concerning sensed experiences and then to extricate the corresponding concepts.

The Euclidian mathematics preferred using the concepts of objects and the relation of the position among objects. Relations of position are expressed as relations of contacts (intersections, lines, and planes); thus, space as a continuum was never considered.  The will to comprehend by thinking the reciprocal relations of corporal objects inevitably leads to spatial concepts.

In the Cartesian system of three dimensions all surfaces are given as equivalent, irrespective of arbitrary preferences to linear forms in geometric constructs. Thus, it goes way beyond the advantage of placing analysis at the service of geometry. Descartes introduced the concept of a point in space according to its coordinates and geometric forms became part of a continuum in 3-dimensional space.

The geometry of Euclid is a system of logic where propositions are deduced with such exactitude that no demonstration provoke any doubt. Anyone who could not get excited and interested in such architecture of logic could not be initiated to theoretical research.

There are two ways to apprehend concepts: the first method (analytical logic) resolves the following problem “how concepts and judgments are dependents?” the answer is by mathematics; however, this assurance is gained at a prohibitive price of not having any content with sensed experiences, even indirectly. The other method is to intuitively link sensed experiences with extracted concepts though no logical research can confirm this link.

For example: suppose we ask someone who never studied geometry to reconstruct a geometric manual devoid of any schemas. He may use the abstract notions of point and line and reconstruct the chain of theorems and even invents other theorems with the given rules. This is a pure game of words for the gentleman until he figures out, from his personal experience and by intuition, tangible meanings for point and line and geometry will become a real content.

Consequently, there is this eternal confrontation between the two components of knowledge: empirical methodology and reason. Experimental results can be considered as the deductive propositions and then reason constitutes the structure of the system of thinking. The concepts and principles explode as spontaneous inventions of the human spirit. Scientific theoretician has no knowledge of the images of the world of experience that determined the formation of his concepts and he suffers from this lack of personal experience of reality that corresponds to his abstract constructs.  Generally, abstract constructs are forced upon us to acquire by habit. Language uses words linked to primitive concepts which exacerbate the difficulty with explaining abstract constructs.

The creative character of science theoretician is that the products of his imagination are so indispensably and naturally impressed upon him that they are no longer images of the spirit but evident realities. The set of concepts and logical propositions, where the capacity to deduction is exercised, correspond exactly to our individual experiences.  That is why in theoretical book deduction represents the entire work.  That is what is going on in Euclid geometry: the fundamental principles are called axioms and thus the deduced propositions are not based on commonplace experiences. If we envision this geometry as the theory of possibilities of the reciprocal position of rigid bodies and is thus understood as physical science, without suppressing its empirical origin, then the resemblance between geometry and theoretical physics is striking.

The essential goal of theory is to divulge the fundamental elements that are irreducible, as rare and as evident as possible; an adequate representation of possible experiences has to be taken into account.

Knowledge deducted from pure logic is void; logic cannot offer knowledge extracted from the world of experience if it is not associated with reality in two way interactions. Galileo is recognized as the father of modern physics and of natural sciences simply because he fought his way to impose empirical methods. Galileo has impressed upon the scientists that experience describes and then proposes a synthesis of reality.

Einstein is persuaded that nature represents what we can imagine exclusively in mathematics as the simplest system in concepts and principles to comprehend nature’s phenomena. Mathematical concepts can be suggested by experience, the unique criteria of utilization of a mathematical construct, but never deducted. The fundamental creative principle resides in mathematics. The follow up article “Einstein speaks on theoretical physics” with provide ample details on Einstein’s claim.

Critique

Einstein said “We admire the Greeks of antiquity for giving birth to western science.” Most probably, Einstein was not versed in the history of sciences and was content of modern sciences since Kepler in the 18^th century: maybe be he didn’t need to know the history of sciences and how Europe Renaissance received a strong impulse from Islamic sciences that stretched for 800 years before Europe woke up from the Dark Ages. Thus, my critique is not related to Einstein’s scientific comprehension but on the faulty perception that sciences originated in Greece of the antiquity.

You can be a great scientist (theoretical or experimental) but not be versed in the history of sciences; the drawback is that people respect the saying of great scientists even if they are not immersed in other fields; especially, when he speaks on sciences and you are led to assume that he knows the history of sciences.  That is the worst misleading dissemination venue of faulty notions that stick in people’s mind.

Euclid was born and raised in Sidon (current Lebanon) and continued his education in Alexandria and wrote his manuscript on Geometry in the Greek language.  Greek was one of the languages of the educated and scholars in the Near East from 300 BC to 650 AC when Alexander conquered this land with his Macedonian army.  If the US agrees that whoever writes in English should automatically be conferred the US citizenship then I have no qualm with that concept.  Euclid was not Greek simply because he wrote in Greek. Would the work of Euclid be most underestimated if it were written in the language of the land Aramaic?

Einstein spoke on Kepler at great length as the leading modern scientist who started modern astronomy by formulating mathematical model of planets movements. The Moslem scientist and mathematician Ibn Al Haitham set the foundation for required math learning in the year 850 (over 900 years before Europe Renaissance); he said that arithmetic, geometry, algebra, and math should be used as the foundations for learning natural sciences. Ibn Al Haitham said that it is almost impossible to do science without strong math background.  Ibn Al Haitham wrote mathematical equations to describe the cosmos and the movement of planets. Maybe the great scientist Kepler did all his work alone without the knowledge of Ibn Al Haitham’s analysis but we should refrain of promoting Kepler as the discoverer of modern astronomy science. It also does not stand to reason that the Islamic astronomers formulated their equations without using 3-dimensional space: Descartes is considered the first to describing geometrical forms with coordinates in 3-dimensional space.

Instructions on how to get this image onto your iPhone:

1. Save the image to your laptop.
2. Email the image to an email account on your iPhone.
3. View the email with the image attachment on your iPhone.
4. Save the image to your iPhone Photo Library.
5. Set the image as your wallpaper.

Success will look like this:

VIVE “EINSTEIN”

“La Ciencia sin la Religión es coja; la Religión sin la Ciencia es ciega”. Einstein

En el marco de la IX Semana de la Ciencia, un grupo de alumnos de 1º Bachillerato matriculados en Religión y su profesor, acudieron el 11 de noviembre a la mesa redonda: Ciencia y Religión: la falsa polémica.
Ver: PULSAR AQUÍ .

El siglo XX fue el siglo de profundos replanteamientos científicos, desde Gödel hasta Einstein. En el Salón de Actos de la facultad de Humanidades de la Universidad San Pablo CEU, tuvo lugar esta mesa redonda. Los ponentes fueron: Dr. Francisco José Soler, del grupo de investigación de la Filosofía de la Física de la Universidad de Bremen. Dr. Javier Borrego, profesor de Historia de la ciencia de la Univesidad CEU San Pablo y el Dr. Manuel Alfonseca, Catedrático de Inteligencia Artificial de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Moderó D.Juan Carlos Nieto, profesor de Periodismo especializado de la Universidad CEU S.Pablo

“Los cielos dan cuenta de la gloria de Dios y el firmamento anuncia la obra de sus manos . El día habla al día y la noche comunica sus pensamientos a la noche. No hay discursos ni palabras, no es audible su voz. Pero su pregón sale por la tierra toda, y sus palabras llegan a los confines del orbe de la tierra (…)” (Sal 19, 2-5).

Einstein era deísta. Creía en un Dios que daba orden y armonía al Universo. Siempre rechazó ser ateo, incluso rechazó ser panteísta. Dios no estaba en el Universo, sino detrás del Universo.
En EEUU se acaba de publicar una nueva biografía de Einstein a cargo de Walter Isaacson, que además ha publicado algunas líneas en TIME (www.time.com) sobre la fe de Einstein.

“A lo largo de su vida, Einstein fue constante al rechazar la acusación de ser ateo. ‘Hay gente que dice que no hay Dios, pero lo que realmente me enfada es que me citan para apoyar su punto de vista’, dijo a un amigo. Lo que me separa de la mayoría de esos que se llaman ateos es un sentimiento de radical humildad hacia los secretos inalcanzables de la armonía del cosmos’, explicaba.

Einstein nació en una familia judía sin fe ni práctica religiosa. El único pariente que iba a la sinagoga era agnóstico y decía al joven Albert que acudía porque “nunca se sabe”.

A los 6 años, sus padres metieron al niño en una gran escuela católica. Era el único judío entre los 70 alumnos de su clase. Como todos ellos, cursó la asignatura de religión católica y según Walter Isaacson la disfrutó.

En una charla en el Seminario de la Union Teológica de Nueva York, fue donde dijo que “la ciencia puede ser creada sólo por quienes están profundamente imbuidos por la aspiración hacia la verdad y el entendimiento”. Y que “la fuente de este sentimiento, sin embargo, brota de la esfera de la religión”. Su frase más famosa de ese día se cita a menudo: “la ciencia sin la religión es coja; la religión sin la ciencia es ciega”.

Perhaps you have noticed that the tag line for this blog is a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson: “All the great speakers were bad speakers at first.” Great quote. (And perfect for a blog about public speaking.)

Here’s a slide of the quote and a picture of Emerson that I have used in courses that I have taught on public speaking and presentation skills:

Question: Would the slide be as effective if Emerson’s picture were flipped the other way as in the slide below?

Most people (and all of my students) prefer the first slide. Why? Because Emerson is “looking” at the words. In the second slide, he is looking away from them.

Psychologists have found that most people have their vision “pulled” in the same direction as that in which the person in the picture is looking. Yet we also want to read the words; thus when they are on the other side, we are simultaneously pulled in the opposite direction.

Another example; this one a little more nuanced. Have a look at the two slides below. Do you have a preference for one over the other?

Some of the people in my classes had no opinion; however the vast majority preferred the first one. Now, in the first slide, Lisa – if I may be so presumptuous as to be on a first-name basis – has her face turned away from the words. However, her eyes are looking at them. In the second slide, the reverse is true.

This makes sense. Have you ever spoken with someone who is facing you but whose eyes at one point look elsewhere? You will almost certainly turn and look in the same direction to see what is there.

Admittedly, today’s tip is a subtle one and most people would not have difficulty with any of the slides above. However, as speakers our job is to make it as easy as possible for our audiences to understand and remember our message. Thus, everything that we can do to add a little more “spit and polish” to our presentations tilts the balance in our favour.

The next time you combine pictures of people and words on a slide, make them work as effectively as possible by having the people look at the words. And be creative. You do not have to limit yourself to pictures of people looking directly left or right. With a bit of thought, all kinds of pictures can be used.

Just ask Albert Einstein, someone who did his fair share of thinking.

MIRENLO

DEMASIADO HABIL EL LORO