Walking a Thin Line

Up until this point, I have blogged purely about secular topics. However, since Judaism is in integral part of my life, it is something I spend a lot of time thinking about.

There were two reasons I previously chose not to deal with Jewish topics. The first reason stemmed from my belief of universal accessibility. I believed that by delving into Jewish topics, non-Jewish readers of my blog would feel alienated. However, upon reflection, I feel that there are many Jewish topics which have much in common with topics from other religions and therefore accessible for any religious person to reflect upon.

This brings me to my second reason for why my blog previously did not discuss Jewish religious topics; that there is a taboo against talking about religion in our post-modern society. In an era where individualism often conflicts with religious identity, the social discourse on religion becomes taboo. However, I feel that once one can look past the religious component of a concept, there is still much to learn about life and how humans experience it. 

With this preface in mind, I hope to talk about the first religious concept in my blog while proving the points I have made above. This topic is that there should be a thin line between what you think and how you act. 

As I was praying one day, I realized that it is not enough to just say the words and believe the words, but one must do those words. For example,  if we are praying about a world of peace, that means that we must seek peace (between ourselves and others, and peace within ourselves), and we must seek this peace now; not tomorrow, not later, but now. This does not only apply to Jewish religious practice, but to all religious practice. 

While this concept came to me through religious practice, it has implications for non religious practice as well. Most noticeably in my life, this concept was applied to my choice to become a vegetarian. As I realized that my reasons for eating meat diminished and that the reasons not to eat meat grew, I successfully minimized the line between thought and action and began to change my eating practices. Therefore, while this concept came through a religious medium, a secular practical implication of this concept can also be discerned if one can successfully look past this outer religious shell.

The questions to think about are as follows: (1) In what ways is religion a taboo topic? And more importantly: (2) How can one diminish the density/width of the line between thought and action?

Taking Offense to Ads

Every now an then I will be watching TV and some ridiculous commercial will vie for my attention. Usually, commercials are just uninteresting since I am not in the market for a car, and every so often you get a commercial which you think is just so interesting, you will mention it in your next conversation with a friend.

However, there are some commercials that are just so stupid, you are insulted that the company thinks so low of you. Such commercials tell you how to think, how to react. They presuppose that you lack intellectual integrity. In such instances  you might roll your eyes while lightly shaking your head side to side, or struggle to find the remote to change the channel.

Therefore, the question is: How effective are such stupid commercials? Do they do their job and successfully advertise an object you may or may not want? Or do they subtract from the product making you not want to buy it and suppress the advertisement from you consciousness?

Where's Waldo?

So I just got this great gift the other day. It was an all-in-one Where's Waldo book that had every Waldo book I've ever known. (Its Wally in England, אפי in Israel, and other names in other places)
I'm already done with two of the five books, but it got me thinking.

First, I began thinking about how busy the page is. There are so many things going on, I could look at the page for half an hour (sometimes longer) and still not take in every detail. I find that I particular like art that captivates your attention. Whether its through colors or detail, I tend to like art that I can spend a lot of time examining the details. Perhaps that why I like impressionism - specifically because the colors are not what you would expect them to be and the image still seems natural.

Second, I was thinking about puns. The clues in the back of the book often are puns relating to the pictures. For example, a flying ace was depicted as a biplane with a playing card (the Ace) in the drivers seat. Why is it that when depicted, puns are funnier than when they are spoken allowed? Why is it clever when represented in a physical form, but in the mental form it is not so amusing?

Think about it.

Cracking Knuckles

Why do people (including myself) crack their knuckles?
Its not like our knuckles hurt and need to crack them. And the "comfort" we receive after cracking them is nothing noteworthy!
Its a common habit that people have, but why do they start in the first place?
I think it has to do with the same reasons people twiddle their thumbs or absently play with things when distracted. Its just something to do with your hands (ultimately becoming a habit).
Moreover, there may be some element of OCD that a person can't just leave one knuckle cracked without cracking all the rest. I think therefore that this reinforces the habit and adds to the reason why people crack their knuckles.
Or maybe thats the reason for me. What do you think?

The Rain Formula?

When I was walking home yesterday, it began to rain. As it progressively began to rain harder and harder, people began running towards their destinations in order to get there less wet.

However, does running in the rain keep you less wet? Perhaps you are in the rain for not as much time, but then you are hitting more raindrops along the way - horizontally. I suppose that if it was really pouring, you might get wet either way - but in a moderate rain, is it better to walk and hit less raindrops, or run and hit more?

There must be some sort of equation that includes distance, speed, amount of rain and the surface area of the person. I don't know if such a formula could be applied to real life (like measuring the amount of raindrops per second - or knowing your surface area...) but I still think it is something worth pondering.

Compliments to the Chef

This has been a "problem" that has been bothering me for some time now.

If two people cook a dish together, who gets the compliments?
a. The person who thought up the overall idea for the dish? (i.e. the person who finds the recipe)
or
b. The person who measures and follows the directions?

Many times, I have cooked meals with others and usually I am the one who just measures and mixes. Then puts in the oven, and sticks a fork in the end dish, and takes it out. But I don't feel that I really did anything. Maybe all the work I put into mixing will effect the texture of a dish, but its overall taste? I doubt it.

Therefore, I think the person who thinks up the dish should get the credit. And whoever mixes and measures is just a sous chef.

Though that's just my opinion. I'm sure there are many who disagree...

The Drake Equation

I took an astronomy class a few years ago and in that class we learned about the drake equation. This mathematical formula is a theoretical formula that predicts the number of intelligent (communication-able) life forms in our universe based some known and unknown variables (that require estimations).

The equation is as follows:
R + Fp + Ne + Fl + Fi + Fc + L = N

Where,
R is the number of stars in our galaxy that form (like our sun) per year.
Scientists figured out that in infant galaxies stars form rather quickly...about 50 per year. Meaning the number here must be smaller than 50 for our older galaxy...(lets use 50)
Fp is the fraction of these stars that develop planets.
Scientists have found about 500 planets around other stars. knowing we don't have the technology to find them all, and knowing that there are between 200 - 400 billion stars in the milky way, a guess of 1/1000 or .001 stars would be more than a conservative guess (that's 200 million to 600 million stars with planetary systems...)
Ne is the number of Earth like planets in these planetary systems.
Your guess is as good as any astronomers. Lets say that like our system, only 1-2 planet will be Earth like.
Fl is the fraction where life develops on these Earth like planets?
Who knows? Lets say .2
Fi is the fraction of these planets where intelligent life develops.
Well the only life we know of is on Earth, and we developed intelligent life. but that doesn't mean anything so lets say  .25
Fc is the fraction of these planets where communication develops.
Again, using Earth as a baseline, lets go with 1.
L is the lifespan of these communicative civilizations.
There are two points to add here. first, Humans have only known about radio waves since 1865. That is about 150 years ago. With that said, we have only been listening and transmitting for a shorter amount of time. Lets say we have been transmitting for 100 years.
Second, if you ignore technological improvements that make past means of communications useless, imagine where humans were 1000 years ago. Now imagine 1000 years from now. Lets say we communicate for the same way for about 1000 years (a very very conservative estimate).

Ok, lets plug in the numbers. If my math is correct, that 500 planets with intelligent life. Now while that is completely speculative, there are more things to consider.
Forget language barriers
Forget technology barriers
Think about the size of our galaxy (100,000 light years). using simple probability, that means that in our hypothetical universe each life form is an average of  200 light years away. Meaning, if we send them a message, now, we will receive a response in 400 years (there and back)...that means we can talk to them twice in our 1000 year communication capable lifetime.

Many hypothetical possibilities and assumption, but you get the gist. Here is a handy site for your calculations:
http://www.pbs.org/lifebeyondearth/listening/drake.html
I'm skeptical about finding this life if it exists. And if it does, I probably (hypothetically) won't know about it in my life time..