Science Emphasizes Life and Peace

Every single one of us as human beings has an outlook on life. That outlook influences our code, and our code eventually determines our behaviors and our attitudes towards life. We are all in a way philosophers, every parent is a philosopher, and the advice they give their children is their philosophy, and their outlook on life.

Our outlook on life is 100% determined by our knowledge, all experience is knowledge. Our knowledge is 100% determined by our past relationships up to a second ago. Thus, our outlook on life is constantly changing according to the relationships we are experiencing.

Our experiences include a variety of relationships, and these relationships include what we read and what we think about. Every human when they read a piece of work has the right to think about the meanings behind what they have read, the meanings behind it all.

When one reads the doctrines of war, one must ponder around these doctrines of war, and what does it all mean for myself and humanity in general. When we talk of doctrines of war, to fully comprehend them we must not only understand battle tactics, but what led to the war, what led to the alliances, what led to alliances collapsing, what led to victory, and what led to the return of war, then one understands war from a theoretical perspective, but it prepares one to enter that field.

We are talking about those who want to understand, they say a more complete human being exposes themselves to as much knowledge as possible, advice from others and their experiences. Our experiences come from our actions, and the stories we have heard. We were not there when the first compass was invented in China, but we can read about it.

We were not there when Genghis Khan fought his battles, but we can read about them and be weary and look at his tactics and admire them for their time. We admire the Spartans 300 standing against the many hundreds of thousands of Persia. We understand Mzilikazi as he stood with his 500 against 40 000 equally armed, when it came down to the pure understanding of the battlefield, what happened at Midway during World War 2.

When one reads about economics, they should seek answers and questions to what they are reading. Why are some economies advancing and others seem to be running at the same spot whilst the same number of calories is being spent on looking for food as in the countries that are constantly progressing? To be a competent economist one must accept the evidence in front of them about how human beings given certain socio-economic systems perform in terms of participating in the modern economy. Each system rewards different types of activities differently. What principles does each system adhere to? What price is everybody paying, others earn $10 a day others $200 a day, how are they both living from paycheck to check yet one society can keep on advancing, that is what a concerned economist would do.

When one looks into the law, the law of the land, what does it represent? Who are the beneficiaries, one looks at the different systems of laws, all lands are about laws. You can not shit in the middle of the street in any society, anybody suggesting they alone are the people with laws is not really to be too trusted, they are denying reality in front of them with another agenda.

Merely looking at the law tells the powers and structures of a society, are all equal in front of the law, does the law say that if one commits a murder be they the lowliest or the highest will they get the same punishment. Even if the law says that what happens in practice, a law is only worth what it is in practice. Understanding this should affect one's outlook on life, what is happening.

All disciplines are like that, when one reads them and more importantly when they practice them one wants their fundamental answers, how did this affect human behavior, human thinking, in what ways does this affect how society operates, but what is the overall meaning, how much can I comprehend from this. What outlook does science give us about humanity's very existence? As a reader in any discipline, if you have the time, and you believe you have new insights you have to write and tell others what you think.

Science is more than just coming up with a theory and proving it with an experiment though that is the greatest achievement one can achieve in pure science. To appreciate science, one must look at as many scientific facts as possible and ask, what do they mean. What do they tell us about the human condition, and what do they suggest about the mode of living for humans?

Knowledge is supposed to help one with their outlook on life, let us not say life, but the reality of things. In life one does not need to accept the realities of the universe to get food, but, for the betterment of us all one needs to look at the facts that knowledge puts out there. One can either accept these facts or reject them. This podcast is for those that deal in facts and then establish for themselves a philosophy, a way of life around these truths.

Getting a theory and proving it with an experiment will always be the greatest achievement in pure science, a greater achievement than any qualification, than attending any so-called special institutions of higher learning, don’t cry, just the truth about science. But that achievement of an individual or team in the totality is but a drop on how we have got here, and more importantly, what does it all mean besides giving us material stuff. Remember you are a human, what does all this mean concerning a human being, what is a human, and what is the human’s role?

Let us take fire, we are talking of science and how science suggests peace, so why not start with fire, the control of fire was a scientific mind, accepting facts this is how to control it. Creating fire was a great scientific endeavor, and it has spread with humans wherever they go.

Fire is a big deal; it was our truly first taming of potentially dangerous radiation. The heat coming from fire is photons, like any other form of heat. The quality of heat comes only from a photon, temperature is just about how many photons are being released. All heat is thus a quantum phenomenon.

Though we are fast approaching the end of the age of fire to pure quantum heat and power, fire has powered our existence for over 200 millennia. Fire allowed us to cook food, thus nutrition that was previously unavailable was available to a human. Cooked sorghum or rice is easier to eat than if it is not cooked. Not only does cooked meat taste better, but it will last a little longer. Boiled water from a stagnant pool of water is far safer than water that is not boiled.

Fire helped preserve our food, we could smoke our food. Preserving food meant our energy source could last through the lean times.

Originally fire was just for warmth and cooking. But even then, we understood that fire burns and can be destructive if not handled with care. It could burn the whole hut down. Our ancestors from long back realized that fire could burn the hut down if not handled with care, meaning it could burn down the hut of those they saw as competitors on purpose.

With time, with much patience and observation, our ancestors realized that fires could be used to heat the earth and smelt metals. They would look at the rocks and understand which rocks likely had metals, then they understood the patterns of the rocks, humans have historically been smelting metals for a long time, thousands of years. But they could only smelt metals by understanding the rock formations and the seams in the rocks. Think about it, all those who looked for metals, be they in Africa, Asia, Europe, or America, all understood how to find metals in the rocks the seams. Thus, that sword or spear in Africa is created by a mind, a mind that first understood the seams in the rocks just as a human in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, or the Americas, we all understood how to find metals, culture did the rest.

The above is just something for you to think about, let us continue to discuss the thought, the idea that science suggests peace. Our ancestors realized that fire could not only cook but burn, must have also realized the fire can burn the next homestead and take stuff from that village. Once burnt down to survive, what could the next homestead do, go into the wild or submit, submission assured food?

But what we are missing is the reality that the next homestead also had the fire. They chose not to use it in such a manner. But just as important the original homestead that burnt down the next homestead understood that the next homestead has fire, they also can understand the complete uses of fire.  They are cooking, cooking takes fire, they have the fire.

Must reiterate, fire is a big deal, true we are leaving the age of fire to the quantum, but it is the fire that introduced us to the quantum, fire is radiation, and that is what causes the heat, all heat is a photon, only a photon has the quality of giving heat, you can put a trillion electrons they will never have the quality of giving heat unless there is some sort of relationship that releases a photon. Everything you see around you is from the heat fire creates the photons that are released from burning things.

Just think about the device you are using to listen to this podcast. It has plastic that comes from fire distilling crude oil. There are all types of metals that come from smelters. There is silicone from heat acting on sand, just from understanding what fire can do.

To burn the next village with fire is to understand that the next village is occupied by human beings, one must realize that if they organize, they too will be able to burn down your homestead. Organizing is not just retaliation, but it is about having the means to retaliate.

The mere act of having lookouts is because one recognizes that their enemy is human. They can do and achieve exactly what you can do and achieve, if you can use fire to smelt more iron for more spears, they too can accelerate the production of spears.

Humans have understood that for a long time, why has it taken atomic weapons for people to understand that we are all humans dealing with each other and should be civil to one another. Science delivers life and convenience and delivers death when weaponized. People go to war if there is no incentive not to go to war. The other society having as most destructive weapons as the other society is a great incentive not to go to war, not to rob others of their resources and opportunities, any society can organize itself and get atomic bombs, why? because we are all human beings equally capable given how a society is organized.

As a young man, one believed that why waste money on atomic bombs instead of making sure the people eat. Older and wiser every society needs an atom bomb, or be invaded, everybody needs to be armed or be constantly robbed, it is as simple as that, societies need an incentive not to go to war, to rob, it is just the way humans are.

Science itself has always warned us of the dangers. The funny thing is everybody knows we are all just human beings. It was illegal for European settlers to give guns to natives or for natives to have guns. Right there that tells you settlers knew the natives are equally capable, but after banning natives from having guns they would insult them as inferior beings. Such hypocrisy. Equal access to good education changes things. From that day over 100 000 years ago when villagers started putting out guards and lookouts, they knew they were dealing with humans equally capable, but the nature of the human being is such that only when all are equally armed will sciences call for peace be heeded.

Peace is not just a lack of state of war, it is not just about one not being robbed by the powers that be because they cannot organize cohesive armed resistance to being robbed, peace is about a healthy environment. Clean water, uncontaminated food, and a healthy ecosystem in general so that the cycles in the environment can remain suitable for human habitability.

Science has given us the tools for best practices for our ecosystem. Better farming practices, better mining practices, and better housing that is more in tune with greater efficiency in terms of use of comforts so that there is less load on things that can disturb the cycles in the environment. That is part of peace. However, we must understand that things have always changed and to be at peace is also to be able to deal with the changes.

Peace also comes from inside, one can not be at peace internally if they refuse the evidence in front of them. Doing this means others will also refuse evidence in front of them to get their way or merely just to survive, they are human beings too. It is the rejection of the evidence in front of us that we are all human beings, all a result of random relationships. These random relationships have led us all to where we are right now whether we deserve it, or we do not deserve it. Rejecting this reality, we are at war because we are not at peace with ourselves, we reject the other as human, and we lie to ourselves with all the evidence.

As humans, we all need food to give us energy which most struggle to get, waking up at 3, 4, or 5 in the morning for most is not coming easy. We need shelter, it too doesn't come easy for most. We need our space to thrive as individuals, to thrive as communities. A community with no space can not thrive. Space includes land most of all. We never learn as humans.

May we strive for life and peace for all. 

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

If you like what you read, be generous if you can it will be appreciated

What are We and Science?

Does science helps us know more about ourselves? Or should the question be, what does science tell us about ourselves, understanding that understanding the question is half the answer. To accept this question means we must understand what science says about us, and we are allowed to have extrapolations from the evidence. What is a human being, what are you, what am I? Where are we from and we are we going.

This is an interesting question, because we must remember that our outlook on life is based on past relationships. A book one has read is part of their past relationships. Questions one has asked themselves are as much past relationships, for one to ask themselves what am I and try and answer it makes them understand hopefully what is happening to them. One can ask the question what my society is, my country my nation one looks at its history, written or oral. They can then place philosophical arguments for where they should be, where their society should be, where their country or nation should be, their role and purpose, their societies purpose, their nations purpose and role in the scheme of things.

You and I, no matter what our society is what our community is for one to listen to this podcast, you are a human being, for one to read the transcript of this podcast one is a human being. Octopuses, monkeys, whales, elephants, ants are not at this moment capable of doing human things like complex languages or reading and writing. That is just not how things have turned out. When you ask what am I? at its depths it is asking what is a human being? What are we, where do we come from, what is our purpose and role in the scheme of things? To ask what a human being is, one is asking, what is the background and ultimately the purpose and role of this thing, this discrete package of information we have categorized as a human being.

Now, an adult must ask and be aware of their personal history, where they have come from and what role and purpose is their life by looking at their surroundings. One must then ask from understanding their history and the origins of their society, what is the role and purpose of their society given humanity and the history of their society. For example, I am from Impangezitha, that is my history, I must ask myself what my role is my purpose, what role and purpose would I like for myself. To be a functioning group with progress, those who come from Impangezitha must ask what their role is, their purpose, to seek knowledge and grow knowledge base of planet, or wait for other societies and groups to do the discovery, creation of patents, we all must ask ourselves our roles, our roles give us a clue of how we want to survive, our mode of survival or living.

But truthfully humanity is a little bigger than those from Impangezitha, or a Chinese, English, Indian, Native American, Latino, Japanese, Zimbabwean, Amharan, Gujarati, Han, when we ask about humanity, what is a human we are asking a much deeper question. This is because when we ask what a human is, the answer must tell us where we are from and hopefully where we could be going.

Many creation myths exist out there that tell us where a human being is from. Taoism says that after creating the first god Pang Yu died and the maggots that ate his body turned eventually into human beings.

The Sumerians believed their gods, the Anunnaki created human beings to be slave for the gods who where here to mine. Hard work, why not make humans to do it.

Adam and Eve of Middle Eastern mythology, similar to the Sumerians but not the same, here the first humans created from dust and purpose was to be overlords of all other forms of life and to reproduce and spread out. We are going to space, plenty of space.

Some San people of Southern Africa believe that humans were created by a great god and lived underground and communicate with all the other animals, but when brought to the surface mistrust came about and we lost ability to communicate with each other.

Some Hindus believe in creation as the original primeval one having a relationship with themselves because they do not want to be bored.

At first, Viracocha the creator god of the Incas made humans but left them in the earth, like the San people. Then humans were called out.

In Yoruba myth, Obatala, a god created humans out of boredom, like some Hindu myths.

There are so many creation myths and they are all interesting. I mean some Celtic creation myths have the gods creating humans from the bark of a tree, that created a war between the gods and 2 humans remained a male and a female. Think of Adam and Eve.

Some Polynesian myths have a bird giving arms, legs and a soul to maggots to create human beings, beings coming from maggots like Taoism. Japanese are the result of gods procreating. Imangezitha my people are said to have come out of a basket that fell. So much interesting things. Don’t feel left out, I could go on and on, all our creation stuff is interesting.

Myths and mysticism helped ancient humans to understand who they are and what their role and purpose was on this planet.

Myths and mysticism suggest a human is more than the environment they come from, they are special and created to be special. Humans are created after everything else is made but is created from the surroundings, be it plants, the soil, but the human is created from nature in most instances, in some instances a direct child of the creators.

Myths and mysticism, what does science tell us what we are? Most myths talk of humans being created from their surroundings; this is where the similarity ends with science in a manner. Think about it, if we are created from the soil or from a plant, it means we are made from the same material as that soil or plant. All information is made up of the same things, we are made up of the same basic materials as a plant, the soil, a rock, water, stars, planets, dinosaurs, all information is made up of the same stuff.

What does science say a human being is and what does it suggest is the role and purpose of a human. What a human being is can be answered, but the role and purpose of a human being is left to broad interpretations. Philosophy of science, and that too is a good thing. Our purpose according to mythology was to serve the creators, what does science suggest, it will be a suggestion.

Let us be simple and start of with what a human is according to science. We start with science before philosophy of science because we must first with what can be verified by observation before we make speculations, and again, those speculations must be trajectories of our observations.

A human being is an information package and all the qualities of an information package apply to a human being. All human beings are discrete information packages, you are who you are, a unique and discrete information package. You can be isolated and observed, these big tech companies are analyzing users all the time.

Humans can be used to tally or compute. 15 humans plus 15 humans is thirty humans, 25 humans times 25 humans is 625 humans. Just watch the precision stadium exhibitions in North Korea as humans make pictures of the leader, of the North Korean flag, something learnt from the Soviet Union.

Humans can be used for measuring, the distance from the earth to the moon is so many humans, a television is ten hands wide and 5 hands in width.

A human being is a consistent information package. One will not be a lion or a tree tomorrow, one will be a human being no matter the wishing and false science, false science for a political end.

Humans are the result of random events, just simply, what if your parents never met.

Humans are independent information packages, they exist because they exist, if you are there you are there and there is nothing anybody can do, sure they can kill you, then you are not there.

Human beings can be used to tell the time, the suspects description is somebody between 30 and 35 years old, or looked around 65 years old. Scientists working for the police services often can guess the time of death. Hair becomes white with time. When we cut our nails, they grow back at a certain rate. I will see you after 60 000 heart beats.

Though we are like all information packages at the very basics, to understand the universe, better that we are alive. We are not the only living things, life can be classified into flora, fauna, fungi, and micro-organisms. We would be classified as fauna.

Even though we are fauna, a human is unique from other fauna due to the patterns of our DNA. But all life is about DNA. Humans share 98.5% of their DNA with chimpanzees for example. We also share 60% of our genes with a banana, 40% with an apple, 50% with most fungi, seemingly all life has a common ancestor, scientifically we are distant cousins to grass, mushrooms, dolphins, over hundreds of millions of years all adapted to what was seen as best way to survive the planet, not me, scientific suggestions.

This scientific pondering of a human being as opposed to asking what a human being from the mindset of myth and mysteries, the unknowable is always a mystery can be said to have officially started with Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin gave us the idea of evolution. What we must ask ourselves is it still a theory of evolution or is evolution now an established fact and thus no longer a hypothesis but with evidence it has transcended that.

The theory of evolution suggests that life was a random chance, and from the beginning life has been finding a way to survive on this planet and has kept on adapting branching out into different life forms. This idea does not defy what is established around what information is, all information packages are random the result of random events. After a while, one suspects what evolution offers is highly credible. The funny thing is, even if we are created by some all powerful being or beings, it was a random event, they decided to at that moment, they could have postponed it to now, or did it a little sooner.

Evolution is about life as coming from Charles Darwin. But everything evolves to its surroundings, a rock is smoothed by a river, the rock is forced to adapt to it surroundings. Most things are constantly evolving, the universe is always evolving with the times. Just to allow us to open our minds, back to the human being.

Charles Darwin had first coined the term survival of the fittest. But wouldn’t the fittest be the ones least likely to change, that environment is working for them, that is an argument that one can and should put forward for discussion, why change if one is the fittest?

The least fit at that moment are the ones to adapt or be destroyed by their environment which is harsh towards them. If the cheetah can catch fast antelope, why would it adapt any further unless it’s prey got faster or built in new defences.

All the technology we see around us is human beings attempting to survive as best as they can to their surroundings. Our very clothes are technology, they allow us to adapt to our environment. All that smelting, drilling, factories, weapons, medicines are the result of humans adapting to their environment in a manner that human DNA allows. The DNA of a mouse does not allow a mouse to make atomic bombs and cough mixtures.

Being an information package means we can not escape the first law of everything. All information is in a relationship, all relationships lead to a loss of freedom due to the energy costs involved. Not as bad as it sounds, energy costs, thank the universe that all those quarks, electrons, protons that makes us up have lost their freedoms, sometimes the result is yourself and me. When we have relationships with our wider society we can have offspring, get food, socialize, all these cost energy.

To maintain ourselves as an information package we need energy, and we get this energy from food. We generate heat to keep optimum operation temperatures, we have an electric grid, we have sensors to understand our environment, eyes, ears, nose, tongue, skin for touch. We have a mind that interprets all this information from our senses, and we make decisions based on our external environment.

Religious interpretations often say our purpose is to serve the gods, take care of the other life as we are the superior life form and to survive.

What would science suggest is our purpose. Let us not be naive, we must ask ourselves what our purpose is, what is the purpose of humanity. These are philosophical questions, does science help. Our purpose in the universe at this moment is exactly where we are as human beings. Your purpose in life at this moment is exactly what you have done in life. Life is not as simple as if I can think it will be. Others use others for their own purposes, that’s why we have so much hatred on this planet. Think about it, a kid mining in a mine in the Congo, no matter what they wish or think, they must mine, cruel as it is, that is their purpose at that moment, we should change this, but that is unfortunate reality and must be accepted. That child, no matter the potential to do great deeds does not have people behind them strong enough to change their purpose. Other people are feeding their children from this child mining, their purpose was to be fed in such a manner. Just a fact.

If you are robbed, that was your purpose to be robbed, what one does is up to them, and what they do would be their purpose in the future. Our actions and actions of others determine our purpose.

But, given that humans might be on the first steps of traveling the galaxy, but moon and mars first. One says might because these are random events, a giant asteroid might destroy the earth soon putting changing our future purpose. When we get to the moon and Mars, that would be our purpose, to spread life into the solar system, otherwise we would not be there.  Spreading life into the solar system inevitably will cause heat, all heat comes from photons, wherever we go we will intensify the photonic cycle.

Our purpose is defined by how we use our abilities, we can learn and acquire knowledge that can send us to the stars. But when we get there say Mars or the moon, we choose our purpose. We can choose to wreck these planets environmentally to get resources we need, then our purpose would be to spread life throughout the solar system and galaxy as well as destruction because we never learnt. Yet cosmic rays have far more readily resources than any planet, this is where we should get our hydrogen, oxygen, and other resources from. We choose what our purpose is depending on what we desire and what we see or role as.

I hope this relationship got one thinking over and above the everyday mundane. Ultimately our purpose is determined on past relationships and how we handle relationships in the present. One decides on how to act ultimately.

Science if one looks at it and accepts the facts around science would appreciate that science screams peace and life, we should look into that next.

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

If you like what you read, be generous if you can it will be appreciated

Science Shapes Our Outlook

 The podcast can be found here, science shapes our outlook.

Yuri Gagarin, a Soviet cosmonaut the first human in space, once said “I looked and looked but I didn't see God.” There right there the idea of God having some sort of home in space was debunked, God had to be defined differently, now God was an alien, an ancient visitor/s to this planet and they ignited civilization and set up some moral codes for humanity. God could also be redefined as being everywhere, that Yuri Gagarin did not see him actually shows the magnificence of God and the gods.

That the gods could create lightening and rain, and humans where created through the breath of the gods, those devoted to these things would also be so blessed they themselves after much study could attain the power to create rain and throw lightening.

Yuri Gagarin did mention in an interview, one can see his visit to Finland on youtube, entitled “Interview with the first man in Space Yuri Gagarin | English Subtitles” When asked is the sky more beautiful on earth on in space his answer was simple, “We are all used to the fact that the sky is blue. We praise that sky in our songs and poems. Poems are full of lyricism when people write about the sky, when they sing songs about the sky. But, in space the sky has a completely different color, an unfamiliar color to us, black. And it is somewhat unaccustomed to the human eye. But maybe when we fly on, to other planets, maybe even to other galaxies, we will get used to a black sky.”

Gagarin influenced the human psyche in many ways. Understanding it is just a black sky out there, the sky of the universe is black, but we have our tiny little spot, let us look after it for a while, all have a stake not just the few or a few have a stake and the rest must fight for their stake.

As space exploration advances, we see barren planets, and we treasure the earth more, knowing in time with enough knowledge we must get accustomed to a black sky. “But for now, “continued Gagarin, “it is more pleasant to see the blue sky.”

Who made the aether, these questions of gods, creators, just investigate science one is a scientist to know things not bother with questions they can not possibly have the answer to, we will see him, them at Andromeda? The gods ascended to the sky, where are they?

Those who refuse science and the scientific process do so for their own ends. Be it the denying of science or falsifying of it. One usually does some harm.

In most parts of the world people do not expect to die from measles anymore, this is thanks to science. Fear for whooping cough is no longer that great, we have vaccines for it. With proper treatment, AIDS, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome is no longer a death sentence, this is thanks to science, you can touch somebody with AIDS.

From documentaries we know how other people of the world exist. We know this thanks to science. Science provided the medium that allows us to know how people in different societies exist. The medium being television, radio and of course the internet. You are listening to this podcast via the internet.

The world is not so big anymore, one can literally be anywhere on this plant within 24 hours. This is all thanks to the application of scientific principles. Gone are the days when people would say if man was meant to fly, the creators would have given them wings. Creation gave human beings a mind. If a mind is allowed to think it can stretch itself. Therefore, reasonable human beings who do not have an agenda against humanity understand that there should be liberty and freedom for humanity.

People have failed to prove they are superior through religion except for some extremely evil extremist people who have no other aim but to subdue all of humanity through trickery and they call it smarts. The idea of race has failed to suggest that a single individual is superior to another. Gone are the days when racists would boast they are stronger, faster, and smarter. But then again evil has no bounds, the same people who failed on stronger and faster and trying to insist somehow, they are still smarter than everybody else, looking for the smart gene, would somebody who is smarter than everybody else with the smart gene need to rob those with the stupid gene, all lies, refusing facts make people evil. They refuse reality to shape their outlook on the universe rather preferring mystical stuff that has no room in science, but corrupted science with an agenda.

Those who understand the randomness of relationships, pure science understanding it is all about relationships, understand why all that pseudo science, even if it makes it to mainstream media that some are genetically superior is just nonsense, besides robbing minds, that gene has not been found. Imagine been so delusional, you rob people of their works and look for a gene making you superior, is that even a sensible plot line, why would a superior mind rob? That alone reveals a lot of facts about reality.

Somebody taking the mind of another yet at the same time claims superiority, knowledge should shape your outlook, obviously they are not superior in the ways they would like to be superior. Facts should be the mind opener.

There is evidence for the dwindling rainforest, the Amazon, West Africa, Indonesia, the evidence is there, that should change one’s outlook on the world. One can ignore the facts, thus lie to themselves, or accept the facts. Accepting the facts one can decide that is not harmful or it is harmful, but they can not ignore the facts of the dwindling rainforests.

Millions of birds die every year, many going near the point of extinction. One can either accept this fact or deny this fact. If they accept the fact they can either care or not care, but the fact has changed their outlook on the world even if they do not care. The windmill electricity generation industry was created and subsidized for a better world, a healthy environment, a clean environment, environmental diversity, but they justify the killing of 3 million birds annually saying cats kill 23 million birds a year. They acknowledge the fact, but do not really care, just like the cats’ killing birds for food, these guys do no mind killing less birds than cats for their paychecks, their food.

Listening to this over the internet should allow people to appreciate science. The principles behind the internet went through rigorous experimentation over the centuries. Newtons prism experiments showing white light contains all the other colors, beginnings of the understanding of quantum phenomenon through experimentation. Nobody see’s the world as Newton saw it, we have more knowledge, publishing a paper today about the prism experiment one would not be taken seriously unless they can prove new insights.

This is in no way to say more intelligence than Newton, more knowledge. A 5-year-old can think of space and people walking on the moon, and a space station, a different outlook of this world and its place in the universe. Newton surely never imagined mining asteroids like todays 13-year-olds.

It’s on the internet all this space stuff, of late on the media as people pay millions to go to space as space tourists. A lot of the people know this on this planet. Everybody can see the knowledge and resources required. Any society can participate as long as they acknowledge facts in front of them. If a society does not want to adhere to the laws of knowledge and sound economic policies, then they do not find it a priority to participate in contributing with technology and sound economic policies that will lead to their society participating in the future space economy. One does what they like with the facts in front of them, a society does what it chooses with the facts in front of them, it will act according to the group culture, a society denouncing knowledge and reality and prefers squalor is a group decision.

When talking about culture we are talking about what type of people in that culture have the right to do, in politics all sorts of reasoning come out for a group looking for food. If denying facts means food, and prestige, one has no incentive to accept those facts. One who talks of reality must understand this.

Facts are humbling but they make one appreciate reality as long as you are not overly competing it is not difficult to accept facts. All want to claim they are from a great civilization as long as that civilization is famous. But all these great civilizations all sprung up in last 5 – 6 000 years, but a brief period in human existence. It is okay to come from a grass hut, it is okay to end up in a grass hut, the fact is that you are a human and can do anything that another human can do if relationships in the past like an education suited you for that, discover, create, teach, be mundane, be exciting, have functioning communities for today and tomorrow. It is merely accepting facts not as somebody who hates puts the reality, but as you see it.

The Egyptians and Incas once mocked the surroundings, Caesar would be amazed at the Britons if resurrected, barbarians to him, Egypt, Babylon, Persia ranking far higher as civilized people to a Roman than a Briton or a Frank. Once great civilizations fall because at some point they refused the facts around them to satisfy a few.

If Egypt, Rome, Greece where so great, how come they ceased to exist, one claims them because they feel something missing about themselves. Even if they had all the evidence, why are the Pharaohs not ruling the world. What is important is one is a human being now. One should read the poem Ozymandias, by Englishman Percy Shelly in 1817.

Just to add in, take Pythagoras, his basic training was in Egypt, but his theorems where from him. I was trained in Lesotho, my basic training, it is not as if everybody who went to that institution discovers, it just means they had qualified instructors, as Pythagoras found in Egypt. The basic unit of society is the individual. Individuals then find a way to exist together for the benefit of all the individuals, all get food.

One who talks of trade at the same time as they talk of, they enlightened the world with technology is not accepting facts. Colonialism did not benefit the world, it just put it on a different trajectory. Colonisers could have traded for what they wanted, raw commodities, and those societies instead of being colonized would have traded for pencils, railways, books thus knowledge. Now we have a world drawn up by colonizers by force for their benefit alone.

Covid led to people working from home, those that could, and technology connected the teams together, team cohesion remained. Science changes the way we look at the world, millions realized they could work from home and just be as productive. In developed countries the education curriculum was not affected, curriculum includes a time frame. Working and learning from home might be healthy for adults, but not for school kids who must interact, humans are social beings.

I am in Canada, having a podcast on a tool created Chinese in Hong Kong, and the audience is anybody on this planet. Those who desired to have this planet as theirs of course will not be happy with this technology, it is easier for all to share with humanity, some stuff bad some stuff good, this process must not be impeded so as to destroy the inquisitive nature of most human beings. People are inquisitive about something. Powerful people should not work angles for their ends, the human system should be for all, look at the evidence.

Before one sleeps on their comfortable, affordable mattresses that are improved through the patent system, far more comfortable than the ancient emperors of China had at their disposal. Minds think differently if they accept the evidence in front of them, the out look changes, the view changes. Once faith should change with evidence, the faith must not be made to fudge in with new evidence like a band aide, if ones faith has some truth, that truth will survive scientific progress. 

Understanding everything is in a relationship and all relationships are random and have a loss of freedom due to the energy involved. You are listening to this by chance, your birth was a chance, you could have slipped yesterday and ended up in hospital or won the lottery and be busy buying champagne instead of listening to myself.

 Bhekuzulu Khumalo

 

If you like what you read, be generous if you can it will be appreciated

The Mind Discovers

 A discovery is adding to the knowledge base

Science to oneself is a mindset, it is a way of thinking, being consistent in crucial things that matter to that science. Anybody can have a scientific mind; it is merely about accepting facts and not being a hoax to win an argument. Hoaxes are a waste of time, leave or lower your standards. But when hoaxes threaten humanity, they must be confronted by any means at your disposal, genuine scientists are not about pulling wool over peoples eyes.  

Anybody who accepts facts and extrapolates in a logical manner from those facts can discover. It is as simple as that. From a chain of facts, accepting these facts, thus the relationships that are known to be associated with these facts asking the right questions will lead to original thought, and that original thought can be investigated. Being an original thought because of an original question should at the very least lead to a different perspective on the relationships involved. At its height the right questions do not just lead to a new perspective on understanding what is known but to a discovery, and a discovery is solving a problem.

A new perspective, a discovery leads to questions been answered, even questions that nobody asked before the discovery. If that no new questions arise, it is because people are not looking for those new questions or do not know how to ask those new questions.

Mind you, discoveries can very well be a coincidence, one is not really looking for that discovery, but still a discovery should always lead to answering unanswered questions as well as raising new questions. That microwaves can cook and warm up food was an accidental discovery. But it answered questions about the nature of the photon, the nature of light, a photon is the particle that gives us light. Our eyes are photon sensors. The monopole was an accidental discovery, nobody was really looking for it except in expensive laboratories paid for by governments and defense departments, but it answered questions about magnetism.

When a biologist goes into a forest and is tallying fauna there and they realize they have discovered a species of frog or insect that previously was unknown, unasked questions are answered, what is role of this species, how did it evolve, the genes must answer the question. Accidental discoveries have just as much impact as discoveries that came out of investigation. The human knowledge base is increasing. Even an accidental discovery needs the mind, it is the mind that identifies we did not know this species, wow, this is a monopole, so the mind must still investigate with accidental discoveries. The mind must still look at relationships and realize this is a different relationship where does it fall into place.

Discovery is all about the mind, accidental or not. Let us take the role of a detective or a spy. They must discern all the facts, all the relationships involved in those facts the detective can eventually point out with some degree of confidence, that is the one who did it, this is the evidence I can provide, these are the facts I can show, these are the relationships involved that led to this murder, look here is the evidence.

A good spy will tell his commanders these are the facts, these are the relationships involved, that is the friend, and no harm should ever come to him by our hand. Given all the facts a good spy will say weapons are flowing in from people who hate us, we must declare war, all out for our survival. A good spy who is proud of their duty will never accept a kangaroo court for opponents, they will provide evidence why somebody should be hanged. A kangaroo court is pure love and hatred, screw my enemy, a good spy is above that, they must look at the relationships and provide proof against an individual or a group. Once enough proof is given, and people can make counter arguments to doubt those relationships a good spy believes then there is enough evidence to take action and take out the opponent, the right thing to do, or people will just be dying everywhere for no reason, even if you hate them, that is not justification enough, an emotion. I mean if a random person supports a theft, she is part of that group, evidence.

A good judge, something throughout history that is very rare, a judgement is made through a cultural lens, an aristocrat has always been judged differently from a commoner, an inferior or a political opponent who is in the process of overthrowing evil, usually for the same reason, theft of life and time, robbery and swindling by the elite, telling falsehoods on a grand scale is swindling the people,  limiting people as sub human, how many freedom fighters have lost their heads throughout this long 300 000-year history of humanity because of a judge. Those rare, 1 in 10 000 judges, will look at evidence, look at the facts look at the relationships.

Centuries ago, the original people of Peru before the conquests of the Spanish found a way to cure malaria, a discovery, chloroquine. This was a discovery by those people looking for a cure, if it was from the gods, it would have been known 1000’s of years ago, not centuries ago. That means people, those associated and having a relationship with the Inca people investigated and accepting facts rejected and accepted types of medicine.

When it comes to medicine, to finding a cure, it was about trail and error, this doesn’t work, this works.  The original people of Peru understood this long before the coming of Cortez an absolute destroyer, bringing the word Latino to the Inca and those around them. The Inca are not Latinos, they are not from Europe no matter how much the doctrine of Cortez has attempted to destroy them, but people obviously very much capable of discovering. These are just facts and to have a scientific mind one must accept facts, like they understand that they have to eat to get energy.

When chloroquine began losing some of effectiveness because of widespread use, other methods were used to find a cure for malaria, trial and error again, and a cure came from China. Those in China used the same methods of trail and error as those used by the those around the Inca centuries before.

It is all about accepting the facts and relationships in front of you. Obviously from trial and error, those around the Inca understood the relationships that affected the human body from plants, that is why they eventually got to chloroquine. The methods Tu Youyou used to get her more advanced cure for malaria where the same as those used by the Inca centuries before. All these ideas come from a mind thinking, being allowed to think.

As it is the mind that discovers, one must take care of the mind. Even the most useless addicts can take care of their mind if they follow sound advice. “Proper food, proper exercise, proper sleep, proper wakefulness – these are necessary for any success.” This is a saying from Vivekavani. A discovery is the success in science, all the PHD’s and post doctoral stuff from the most prestigious universities, prestige a matter of dominant cultures not knowledge per se. All that is secondary to a discovery and will always be.

Be proper, at the very least do some form of exercise, jog, cycle, do tai chi, do yoga, do some boxing, swim, do combinations, but you need to destress, so you are grateful, I know it sounds silly to be grateful with nothing, or you have been robbed or cheated, but you have your mind to be grateful for and life.

You have to ask proper questions, that requires a healthy mind and it will be strong enough to go against canonized thoughts. Humans are taught to get food to be unoriginal and Fyodor Dostoevsky put this best, to quote, “Lack of originality, everywhere, all over the world, from time immemorial, has always been considered the foremost quality and the recommendation of the active, efficient and practical man.” Society is against discovering, as society believes they always know what they need to know and this usually comes from the establishment, the elites who are benefitting from the status quo.

Building a bridge requiring new techniques because of the new materials will be frowned upon by the profession. They get their food from knowing the old techniques, a new technique and materials is a threat to their energy supply, a threat to their food supply, their incomes. But one who has a clear mind, has forwarded new ways, has tested them can not afford the wrong meaning of being practical, observing the status quo for food, but they must be scientifically practical, practical in terms of knowledge and demonstrate the truth. Anybody can be an engineer, a doctor, economist, machine operator, physicist, it is about how a human being uses their time, that is why the correct knowledge given to one when they are young is important.

To discover you need to know the art of listening, do not have a ready answer, first listen, only by listening can we ask proper questions with some thought. People have known this for a long time. To quote Ernest Hemmingway, “Listen Now. When people talk listen completely. Don’t be thinking what you are going to say. Most people never listen. Nor do they observe.”  Hemmingway must have been frustrated with those drunkards who know everything, and pretend due to alcohol they are some sort of special something.

All these famous scientists have the answer, they believe they don’t have to listen, imagine a theoretical physicist believing they have all the answers with zero experimental proof and are cheered as the greatest minds, a con for food, one will never have an original thought, they have all the answers, way up there in their own minds mostly because of social status not mind power. They will fall mostly in the 99.99% of scientists who never discover anything, their only triumph success being a certificate from some institutions, all they can say is I studied under so and so at this university prestigious or not, if there is no discovery, a chemist from Zambia is equal to a chemist from Harvard. They are learning from the same books, even if one gets paid more, they are doing the same thing at the rubber factory in Liberia, New York, or Shanghai.

Talking about chemistry one understands that, a mind to be original sets up a method that is consistent. That is science. You either reaffirm, or bring the new, but the new should be able to be reaffirmed consistently. Take Theodore William Richards the recipient of the 1914 Nobel prize for chemistry. This what the Nobel website has to say about him, “The result of this labour has been that no less than thirty atomic weights have been redetermined with a degree of accuracy undoubtedly never before attained, and by the employment moreover of methods that, by comparison with those in earlier use, mark a very appreciable advance.

Twenty-one of the atomic weights referred to have been determined by Richards himself or under his immediate guidance, while the determination of the others has been carried out in accordance with his methods by pupils trained under him.”

We owe a lot to a mind that broke the rules and looked for better techniques to understand our universe. His techniques allowed others to see the truth about the universe, no doubt all starting from a personal theory because he listened to the universe and was able to ask the right questions without having the answers before hand, you can not learn anything like that you will just remain in your set ways when it comes to knowledge.

One can be as brilliant as they like according to their teachers, but discovery is not something one sets out to do, it can not be commanded, innovation can be commanded. One asks a question the correct question, the question has not yet had an answer. That is a sure way of being on the path to discovering. The discovery is smelting, how one smelts becomes innovation.

Though discovery and innovation are confused the two are not the same. One can only innovate on something that has been discovered, but the basic discover remains as is. Let us take the chemist Richards, 1914 Nobel Laurette, he discovered a technique, others innovated by applying his technique to be more accurate with other elements. Innovations are incredible mind you, no doubt, but a discovery leads to something completely knew to enter the knowledge base, something new that could be used in the creation of useful commodities.

A monopole is something that was not known, now that it is known, in time as a quantum phenomenon will find its way into quantum-based technology.

A 15 year old playing with electronic components who sees something nobody ever knew, like discovering a new way to use a telescope, has done more for science than an astronomer at Cambridge who kept on regurgitating the old way. An 80 year old who discovers a new chemical reaction that was under our nose the whole time has done more for science than most teachers at Yale.

Eventually a discoveries premise is there should be something here, what is it? That something there that must be there has to be backed by a theory, there is no other way to ask what is missing, and what will this missing thing prove, it proves a theory. Discovery is about going with the flow of the evidence then saying there should be something there, or to be even riskier, to say this must be this and the jigsaw fits better, but you must then prove it.

No one way if you have time and a source of food, remember for a cure you can test every plant extract on this planet, you will find something. I did a theory and went that route but every science is different. You can be finding new principles in a laboratory if one has resources everyday, just put things in different angles and test the results for examples, this is in physics of course. Not all discoveries are a critical point in knowledge, but they take us to a critical point in knowledge, thus if one understands knowledge at the end, a critical point of knowledge has as much value as what could be considered not a critical point of knowledge. Critical points just have to do with how our perceptions of the universe are changed.

Theories and ideas take time to prove. The idea of a black hole comes from Englishman John Michell back in 1784. In 1799 French scholar Pierre – Simon Laplace came to same conclusions as John Michell. Their ideas would be proved to be real when in 2019 the Event Horizon Telescope project managed to create an image from data. Look at the time. Einstein popularized the idea of black holes, but the idea was not his. It takes time sometimes, sometimes it happens in ones life time, best to do the best work you can do whilst alive. Just have a culture that respects knowledge, meaning it accepts change due to evidence.

If you are a scientist be a scientist, most great philosophers, or those considered great, there where many philosophers just as capable I am sure, but they just never rose in fame. Great philosophers will say you are what you think, that thought must be followed with action. Science is not difficult, the basics are difficult,  it requires patience at the end when it comes to discovering you either do or you don’t but both make humans aware of the universe. As long as one knows 28 plus 11 is equal to 39, and that wood floats, that mind can do science, could have done discovering. Don’t talk about money, that is not a super excuse, save and do science, buy test tubes and start. Rent an instrument.

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

 

 

If you like what you read, be generous if you can it will be appreciated