(Excerpts of dialogues with Alan Shore (casted by James Spader) taken from the television series “The Practice - Comings and Goings (Season 8, Episode 20))
(Conference Room at Crane Poole & Schmidt)
District Attorney: It was an assault. The fact that it took place during a professional hockey game doesn’t meanthis guy . . .
Hannah Rose: Oh, come on, Jeffrey. You have 4,000 reported assaults every year—less than half lead to charges.
District Attorney: Hannah, if you were still here, you’d prosecute.
Hannah Rose: I certainly would not.
District Attorney: He repeatedly punched a defenseless man. He doesn’t get some special exemption because he did it during a sporting event.
Alan Shore: That’s just simply not true. We grant such exemptions all the time.
Hannah Rose: Excuse me a minute.
(Soto voce to Alan Shore) New guy?
Alan Shore: It would be illegal to run somebody down and flatten ‘em, yet in football? Boxers try to knock each other unconscious—the actual intent of the sport is assault. Imagine throwing a hard object a hundred miles per hour at somebody’s head. That’s grounds for attempted murder. But if the victim crowds the plate? Fighting is part of hockey.
(to Hannah Rose) May I speak for a second?
District Attorney: You are speaking.
Alan Shore: Oh. Sometimes I become so rapt with my own words, it feels more like a listening experience. Look, we’re gathered here today because of the media. I suspect if the firestorm died down, so would your urge to be Javert. Suppose this man were severely punished by the League? How ‘bout we get our justice that way?
District Attorney: First of all, I’m not the commissioner of the league.
Alan Shore: I’m offering you the chance to be. Name your punishment. Name it.
District Attorney: Out of the play-offs. And the next two years.
Alan Shore: Done.
District Attorney: Done? How are you . . .
Alan Shore: I’ll meet with the commissioner. My client will be suspended for two full seasons, plus play-offs.
District Attorney: (Chuckles) I hate to break your momentum, but the player’s union will never let . . .
Alan Shore: Yes, they will.
District Attorney: Because you say so?
Alan Shore: Because I say so. Congratulations, Mr. District Attorney. You’ve just helped to change hockey for the better. By the way, I may need to invoke the power of your office a little. Not to worry.
(Nods, and then gathers up his papers)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Conference Room at Crane Poole & Schmidt)
Hockey League Commissioner Burke: There is no precedent for a two-year suspension. And even if I were to sanction that, I can assure you, the player’s union wouldn’t. If you only knew . .
Alan Shore: What would they do? Pull your jersey over your head and pummel you?
Burke: Mr. Shore, the idea of . . .
Alan Shore: Mr. Burke. You will suspend Mr. Sears for two years. In consideration for that . . . Forgive me, I’m parched.
(Takes a sip of water from his glass)
In consideration for that, I’ve worked it out with the D.A. for the League not to be criminally prosecuted.
Burke: The League? How are we liable for that . . .
Alan Shore: Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 274, Section 2, Aiding and Abetting. “Anyone who assists, encourages or promotes an assault can be charged as a principal.”
Burke: We don’t do that.
Alan Shore: You don’t do that? (Smiles knowingly)
Burke: No, we don’t.
Alan Shore: In your highlight videos, you show the brawls. You also show them on the big jumbo Trons between periods. A Gordie Howe hat trick is considered to be a goal, an assist and a fight.
Burke: We penalize fighting.
Alan Shore: But you don’t ban it. Every other professional sport does. If a player fights in football or baseball, he’s gone. In your sport, he gets a standing ovation.
Burke: Mr. Shore, I’m sure you’re a fine attorney, but you have no appreciation for what hockey is, its history, its tradition . . .
Alan Shore: I have enormous appreciation for your sport, Mr. Burke. In fact, I have season tickets. Hockey is Bobby Orr. Hockey is Bobby Hull; Stan Mikita; Wayne Gretzky. Hockey is speed, finesse, skill and power. None of which has anything to do with mayhem. Hockey is being debased with thuggery, that your league not only condones, but encourages.
Burke: And you think if we just change the rule, it will stop?
Alan Shore: Yes. In college hockey, it’s banned. The players don’t fight. In the Olympics, it’s banned. They don’t fight. It can absolutely be legislated out. You choose not to do so. And with all the vicious muggings happening on the ice today, you are daring a district attorney to prosecute the League. I have that district attorney, Mr. Burke. Mr. Sears will be suspended for two years. You need to have appreciation for your sport, Mr. Burke. We need your league to rise up and mirror the dignity of the game itself. Tell your players, “No more fighting.” And if they still insist on violence, lt them beat up their coaches, like the basketball players.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Friday, August 04, 2006
Boston Legal Briefing Notes – Death Penalty
(Excerpts of dialogues with Alan Shore (casted by James Spader) taken from the television series “Boston Legal - Death Be Not Proud (Season 1, Episode 17))
N.B. Chelina Hall asks Alan Shore to assist her in Texas because her former client, Ezekial Borns, is getting executed but may be innocent of the crime.
(In a courtroom.)
A.D.A. Glenn Jackson: Ezekial Borns murdered a man in cold blood for a few dollars. He confessed to it. The Petitioner has gone up and down State and Federal courts, exhausting his appeals, losing his habeas arguments, and failing on claims of constitutional violations. Four different courts of appeal have reviewed and rejected each and every one of his arguments. Now is the time for this man to pay the penalty imposed on him fairly and legally. A Texas jury had decided that Ezekial Borns is a dangerous killer. He has forfeited his right to live. Thank you.
(Alan moves to get up. Chelina stops him to softly remind him.)
Chelina Hall: With all due respect, may it please the court.
(Alan nods.)
Alan Shore: Good afternoon. My name is Alan Shore.
Judge Christopher Serra: Mr Shore. What are new issues being raised here?
Alan Shore: The first issue before the court concerns the absence of any African-American jurors.
Judge Lance Abrams: That was previously argued and ruled on council.
Alan Shore: Yes. Before the lower courts. This bench has never considered…
Judge Christopher Serra: We’re not persuaded that the absence of a black juror is in violation of due process. What’s your next issue?
Alan Shore: I would turn the courts attention to the fact that the Grand Jury which indicted Mr Borns, similarly, was all white. This raises equal protection laws that…
Judge Christopher Serra: That issue was never raised and is therefore waived.
Alan Shore: Your Honor, Texas Law requires that the jury recommend death only in cases where they find that the defendant poses a threat, a future dangerousness to society. We maintain this is unconstitutional. Juries are supposed to find on elements of guilt and innocence based on facts beyond a reasonable doubt. Not on the basis of perceived probabilities. Moreover as a practical matter, since Ezekial Borns will remain in prison for life, he couldn’t possibly constitute a future threat to society, unless the law assumes prison breaks.
Judge Christopher Serra: That’s an interesting issue council, but uh, that also was never raised and therefore it is deemed waived. Next?
Alan Shore: May it please the court. Mr Born’s trial lawyer has recently admitted he was ineffective council. He was abusing cocaine and alcohol during the trial, and...
Judge Martha Brenford: Not legally inadequate.
Alan Shore: I believe if you examine the transcripts…
Judge Lance Abrams: Mr Shore. Representation can always be better. Especially when we play Monday morning quarterback.
Alan Shore: With all due respect, this lawyer never gave an opening statement, he never questioned several of the prosecutions witnesses, he failed to pursue a number of leads and important sentencing issues. This court right here today has recognized that many valid grounds for appeal were never raised.
Judge Christopher Serra: This court is satisfied that representation was adequate. Is there anything else?
Alan Shore: Yes. Mr Borns may be innocent. The jury disagreed. And legally that issue has been settled.
Alan Shore: The DNA evidence shows somebody else was there.
Judge Christopher Serra: But it does not disprove that your client was also there. And, your guy confessed by the way.
Alan Shore: My client has an IQ of 80; he was interrogated for 16 hours.
Judge Lance Abrams: Coercion was never raised.
Alan Shore: It was never raised because he lawyer was an inadequate hack! Though the 9 of you seem quite satisfied with his performance. With all due respect.
Judge Christopher Serra: Mr Shore? You came down here from Massachusetts?
Alan Shore: Yes. Sir.
Judge Christopher Serra: We in Texas have been living with this case for 8 years.
Alan Shore: You’ve been living with it personally? May it please the court.
Judge Christopher Serra: You first met Mr Borns, when?
Alan Shore: Yesterday.
Judge Christopher Serra: And you are proposing to us, that you know him. You know what I’d like to propose? I’d like to propose that you got a problem with the death penalty in general. Now, is that why you came here sir?
Alan Shore: I am here. With all due respect, may it please the court, because I have a problem with the State executing a man with diminished capacity. Who may very well be innocent. I’m particularly troubled, may it please the court, with all due respect, that you don’t have a problem with it. You may not want to regard my client’s innocence, but you cannot possibly disregard the fact that 117 wrongfully convicted people have been saved from execution in this country. 117! The system is hardly foolproof. And Texas! This state is responsible for a full third of all executions in America. How can that be? The criminals are just somehow worse here? Last year you accounted for fully half of the nation’s executions. 50% from 1 State! You cannot disregard the possibility, the possibility that something’s up in Texas.
Judge Lance Abrams: I would urge you to confine your remarks to your client, and not the good state of Texas.
Alan Shore: Zeke Borns never had a chance. He was rounded up as a teenager, thrown in a cell while he was still doped up on drugs, brow-beaten and interrogated, until his IQ of 80 was overcome, he confessed to a crime he had no memory of, still has no memory of, for which there is no evidence, other than two witnesses who saw him pumping gas around the time of the murder. He was given a coked-up lawyer, who admittedly did nothing. I’m now before 9 presumably intelligent people in the justice business, who have the benefit of knowing all of this. Add to that, you know DNA places somebody else at the scene, and you’re indifferent! You don’t care! Whether you believe in my client’s innocence, and I’ll assume, with all due respect, may it please the court that you don’t! You cannot be sure of his guilt! You simply cannot! And failing that. How can you kill him? How can you kill him?
(Walks away from the podium.)
Alan Shore: And I would sincerely, sincerely, sincerely, hope that you don’t penalize my client, simply because his lawyers happen to be from Massachusetts.
(He moves to sit down, then rises.)
Alan Shore: The home of the New England Patriots, who could kick ass with any football team you’ve got in the good state of Texas. May it please the court.
N.B. Chelina Hall asks Alan Shore to assist her in Texas because her former client, Ezekial Borns, is getting executed but may be innocent of the crime.
(In a courtroom.)
A.D.A. Glenn Jackson: Ezekial Borns murdered a man in cold blood for a few dollars. He confessed to it. The Petitioner has gone up and down State and Federal courts, exhausting his appeals, losing his habeas arguments, and failing on claims of constitutional violations. Four different courts of appeal have reviewed and rejected each and every one of his arguments. Now is the time for this man to pay the penalty imposed on him fairly and legally. A Texas jury had decided that Ezekial Borns is a dangerous killer. He has forfeited his right to live. Thank you.
(Alan moves to get up. Chelina stops him to softly remind him.)
Chelina Hall: With all due respect, may it please the court.
(Alan nods.)
Alan Shore: Good afternoon. My name is Alan Shore.
Judge Christopher Serra: Mr Shore. What are new issues being raised here?
Alan Shore: The first issue before the court concerns the absence of any African-American jurors.
Judge Lance Abrams: That was previously argued and ruled on council.
Alan Shore: Yes. Before the lower courts. This bench has never considered…
Judge Christopher Serra: We’re not persuaded that the absence of a black juror is in violation of due process. What’s your next issue?
Alan Shore: I would turn the courts attention to the fact that the Grand Jury which indicted Mr Borns, similarly, was all white. This raises equal protection laws that…
Judge Christopher Serra: That issue was never raised and is therefore waived.
Alan Shore: Your Honor, Texas Law requires that the jury recommend death only in cases where they find that the defendant poses a threat, a future dangerousness to society. We maintain this is unconstitutional. Juries are supposed to find on elements of guilt and innocence based on facts beyond a reasonable doubt. Not on the basis of perceived probabilities. Moreover as a practical matter, since Ezekial Borns will remain in prison for life, he couldn’t possibly constitute a future threat to society, unless the law assumes prison breaks.
Judge Christopher Serra: That’s an interesting issue council, but uh, that also was never raised and therefore it is deemed waived. Next?
Alan Shore: May it please the court. Mr Born’s trial lawyer has recently admitted he was ineffective council. He was abusing cocaine and alcohol during the trial, and...
Judge Martha Brenford: Not legally inadequate.
Alan Shore: I believe if you examine the transcripts…
Judge Lance Abrams: Mr Shore. Representation can always be better. Especially when we play Monday morning quarterback.
Alan Shore: With all due respect, this lawyer never gave an opening statement, he never questioned several of the prosecutions witnesses, he failed to pursue a number of leads and important sentencing issues. This court right here today has recognized that many valid grounds for appeal were never raised.
Judge Christopher Serra: This court is satisfied that representation was adequate. Is there anything else?
Alan Shore: Yes. Mr Borns may be innocent. The jury disagreed. And legally that issue has been settled.
Alan Shore: The DNA evidence shows somebody else was there.
Judge Christopher Serra: But it does not disprove that your client was also there. And, your guy confessed by the way.
Alan Shore: My client has an IQ of 80; he was interrogated for 16 hours.
Judge Lance Abrams: Coercion was never raised.
Alan Shore: It was never raised because he lawyer was an inadequate hack! Though the 9 of you seem quite satisfied with his performance. With all due respect.
Judge Christopher Serra: Mr Shore? You came down here from Massachusetts?
Alan Shore: Yes. Sir.
Judge Christopher Serra: We in Texas have been living with this case for 8 years.
Alan Shore: You’ve been living with it personally? May it please the court.
Judge Christopher Serra: You first met Mr Borns, when?
Alan Shore: Yesterday.
Judge Christopher Serra: And you are proposing to us, that you know him. You know what I’d like to propose? I’d like to propose that you got a problem with the death penalty in general. Now, is that why you came here sir?
Alan Shore: I am here. With all due respect, may it please the court, because I have a problem with the State executing a man with diminished capacity. Who may very well be innocent. I’m particularly troubled, may it please the court, with all due respect, that you don’t have a problem with it. You may not want to regard my client’s innocence, but you cannot possibly disregard the fact that 117 wrongfully convicted people have been saved from execution in this country. 117! The system is hardly foolproof. And Texas! This state is responsible for a full third of all executions in America. How can that be? The criminals are just somehow worse here? Last year you accounted for fully half of the nation’s executions. 50% from 1 State! You cannot disregard the possibility, the possibility that something’s up in Texas.
Judge Lance Abrams: I would urge you to confine your remarks to your client, and not the good state of Texas.
Alan Shore: Zeke Borns never had a chance. He was rounded up as a teenager, thrown in a cell while he was still doped up on drugs, brow-beaten and interrogated, until his IQ of 80 was overcome, he confessed to a crime he had no memory of, still has no memory of, for which there is no evidence, other than two witnesses who saw him pumping gas around the time of the murder. He was given a coked-up lawyer, who admittedly did nothing. I’m now before 9 presumably intelligent people in the justice business, who have the benefit of knowing all of this. Add to that, you know DNA places somebody else at the scene, and you’re indifferent! You don’t care! Whether you believe in my client’s innocence, and I’ll assume, with all due respect, may it please the court that you don’t! You cannot be sure of his guilt! You simply cannot! And failing that. How can you kill him? How can you kill him?
(Walks away from the podium.)
Alan Shore: And I would sincerely, sincerely, sincerely, hope that you don’t penalize my client, simply because his lawyers happen to be from Massachusetts.
(He moves to sit down, then rises.)
Alan Shore: The home of the New England Patriots, who could kick ass with any football team you’ve got in the good state of Texas. May it please the court.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Boston Legal Briefing Notes - Preservation of Life
(Excerpts of dialogues by Denny Crane (casted by William Shatner) and Alan Shore (casted by James Spader) taken from the television series “Boston Legal - Finding Nimmo” (Season 2, Episode 3))
N.B. Reeling over his break-up with Tara Wilson, Alan Shore heads to Nimmo Bay in British Columbia with Denny Crane for some fly fishing and male bonding in an effort to cure his pain. When they learn that the salmon population is being threatened by sea lice produced by fish farms, Shore and Crane feel compelled to act.
(Alan comes out from the cabin with a drink in his hand and joins Denny and a fellow-guest sitting out on the deck.)
Alan Shore: Excuse me. Is it unusual to catch five cohos in one day? I mean…
Guest: I’d say you had a bit of luck
Denny Crane: Beginners luck.
Alan Shore: You’re not competitive over this sort of thing, are you Denny? Could you pass me the ashtray please? Denny passes the ashtray. Ahh. Thank you. I’d have reached for it myself but my shoulders are a bit sore from all that reeling. He looks to the guest. How many did you catch?
Guest: I didn’t fish.
Alan Shore: Ah! That would put you about even with Denny.
Guest: I’m sorry. Are you Denny Crane?
Denny Crane: Yes I am. And I’m not your father.
Guest: I’m Peter Barrett. I’m an attorney actually and I’m a big admirer.
Denny Crane: Fine. I’m still not your father.
Peter Barrett: You’re a salmon catcher, Mr Crane?
Denny Crane: Catch em in my sleep.
Alan Shore: That must be the only place he catches them.
Denny Crane: I see why Tara dumped you. I’m about to.
Alan Shore: There’s no Tara. Don’t be deceived. Denny and I are lovers.
Denny Crane: I’m a heterosexual. And I catch salmon like one.
Peter Barrett: Well, you won’t be catching them for long I’m afraid. Wild Pacific salmon are being wiped out.
Denny Crane: What are you talking about?
Peter Barrett: Sea lice are killing them. The weight of evidence points toward the fish farms.
Denny Crane: Fish farms?
Peter Barrett: The penned fish in the fish farms host the lice, which attach themselves to the baby wild salmon migrating past the pens and it’s destroying them. I’m actually here because I’m going into court in Port McNeal tomorrow to try to enjoin another fish farm from going in. Boy! Would I love to go in with the Denny Crane by my side?
Denny Crane: You one of these environmental lawyers?
Peter Barrett: Is there something wrong with that?
Denny Crane: They’re evildoers. Yesterday it’s a tree, today’s is a salmon, tomorrow it’s ‘Let’s not dig Alaska for oil cause it’s too pretty?” Let me tell you something. I came out here to enjoy nature. Don’t talk to me about the environment.
Alan Shore: All reality. None of it scripted.
(Alan and the guide are coming out of the water. Denny is sitting on chair out of the water.)
Denny Crane: Can I fish yet?
Guide: You still have a timeout. You just sit there.
Alan Shore: Alan sit down next to Denny. As you said yourself, these fish are positively majestic. Sacred even. And you shot one.
Denny Crane: Sometimes I get incompatible.
Alan Shore: Really? You’ve upset the guide. I’ll tell you this Denny. I see it now how this kind of nature can renew you spiritually. I really see it. I’ll tell you something else. In our day jobs we’re lawyers and we’re good ones.
Denny Crane: What’s your point?
Alan Shore: My point is. Given this. Given those salmon. There’s a hearing going on in Port McNeal. We need to go be lawyers now.
(Tara is sitting at a desk talking on the phone.)
Tara Wilson: Your first logistical obstacle is the robes. Canadian lawyers appear in black robes.
Alan Shore: We should be able to borrow them.
(Alan is talking on a cell phone as he and Denny walk up to a helicopter.)
If all else fails we could stop at a costume shop. What else?
Tara Wilson: The judges are called, “My Lord.” It’s not, “Your honor” but, “My Lord”. It’s a lot like in England.
Alan Shore: What time is the motion?
Tara Wilson: According to the docket. Eleven AM. How far away are you?
Alan Shore: Twenty minutes!
Tara Wilson: Well you probably join in progress then. Good luck.
(Alan shuts his phone.)
And Alan? I miss you.
(In Judge Sean O’Bryne’s courtroom.)
George Knott: There’s just no scientific evidence that the sea lice are causing the death of wild salmon.
Peter Barrett: That is ridiculous! Sea lice wiped out the stock in Norway, they wiped out the stock in Scotland.
D.A Valarie Murrow: All we’re saying is let’s wait and do the research. This is a vendetta against the farmed fish.
Peter Barrett: This is no such thing. We have no issue with farm fish all long as they can raise their stock in an environmentally sustainable manor and not host millions of sea lice. Closed containment systems have been shown to work.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Okay gentlemen. I’ve heard your arguments. I have your briefs. I’ll review the matter as well as the science.
(Alan and Denny march in.)
Denny Crane: Greetings! Oh Canada. Denny Crane.
Alan Shore: Good morning, my Lord. My name is Alan Shore, and Mr Crane and I are attorneys from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We seek permission to be heard on this issue as friends of the court.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Mr Shore. We don’t wear wigs in Canada.
Alan Shore: Oh!
(Alan takes off his wig.)
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Nor do we wear waders.
Alan Shore: My Lord. We’ve just spent the last two days in your rivers. In your countryside. It is the most spectacular nature I have ever seen. And the fish! They’re enough to make one believe in a Higher Power.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Yes. How many of the Higher Power’s creations did you torture?
Alan Shore: Fifteen. Denny didn’t catch any. I get your implication Judge, and I acknowledge the hypocrisy of a fisherman pleading for the survival of a species only so that he’ll be able to continue dragging them to shore by the lip in perpetuity. But causing a fish discomfiture and cause it to become extinct are two very different things. And when talking about Pacific Salmon! This is a species that goes back to the ice-age. One that is born in a river, migrates up to two thousand miles in the sea, then returns to the very place of birth to spawn. Against enormous miraculous odds, bringing nutrients on it’s journey to sustain the bald eagles, the grizzly bears, the wolves, even the Rain Forest’s themselves. An entire ecosystem depends on them. If Charlotte the spider were still alive today she’d be writing in her web, “Some fish”.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Yes. Well, forgive me, but I find it insulting to be lectured by an American on the environment.
Denny Crane: Watch it Judge. We’re a super power. Don’t make us add you to the access.
Alan Shore: Being from the United States I have an expertise on the issue.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Do you?
Alan Shore: Yes! Remember! We’re the country that’s practically wiped the grizzly bear off our maps. We got rid of bull trout. To see a Florida panther? You have to go a hockey game. We seek to count hatchery salmon as wild so the numbers go up and we can take the actual wild salmon off the endangered species list. Almost a hundred different bird and animal species have gone extinct in the last thirty years. While our national policy remains, “It’s not a priority.” I know all about economic interests trumping the environment. And truthfully, if we were talking about the Virgin Island screech owl or the Fresno kangaroo, I might not care, but this is the Pacific Salmon! The sea lice are killing them! Once they’re gone Judge, my God! They’re gone! Oh! Yes. Mindful that abroad people tend expect shock and awe when Yankees arrive on the scene, we shall leave you with two small, but lasting words.
Denny Crane: Denny Crane eh?
(Denny and Alan leave.)
N.B. Reeling over his break-up with Tara Wilson, Alan Shore heads to Nimmo Bay in British Columbia with Denny Crane for some fly fishing and male bonding in an effort to cure his pain. When they learn that the salmon population is being threatened by sea lice produced by fish farms, Shore and Crane feel compelled to act.
(Alan comes out from the cabin with a drink in his hand and joins Denny and a fellow-guest sitting out on the deck.)
Alan Shore: Excuse me. Is it unusual to catch five cohos in one day? I mean…
Guest: I’d say you had a bit of luck
Denny Crane: Beginners luck.
Alan Shore: You’re not competitive over this sort of thing, are you Denny? Could you pass me the ashtray please? Denny passes the ashtray. Ahh. Thank you. I’d have reached for it myself but my shoulders are a bit sore from all that reeling. He looks to the guest. How many did you catch?
Guest: I didn’t fish.
Alan Shore: Ah! That would put you about even with Denny.
Guest: I’m sorry. Are you Denny Crane?
Denny Crane: Yes I am. And I’m not your father.
Guest: I’m Peter Barrett. I’m an attorney actually and I’m a big admirer.
Denny Crane: Fine. I’m still not your father.
Peter Barrett: You’re a salmon catcher, Mr Crane?
Denny Crane: Catch em in my sleep.
Alan Shore: That must be the only place he catches them.
Denny Crane: I see why Tara dumped you. I’m about to.
Alan Shore: There’s no Tara. Don’t be deceived. Denny and I are lovers.
Denny Crane: I’m a heterosexual. And I catch salmon like one.
Peter Barrett: Well, you won’t be catching them for long I’m afraid. Wild Pacific salmon are being wiped out.
Denny Crane: What are you talking about?
Peter Barrett: Sea lice are killing them. The weight of evidence points toward the fish farms.
Denny Crane: Fish farms?
Peter Barrett: The penned fish in the fish farms host the lice, which attach themselves to the baby wild salmon migrating past the pens and it’s destroying them. I’m actually here because I’m going into court in Port McNeal tomorrow to try to enjoin another fish farm from going in. Boy! Would I love to go in with the Denny Crane by my side?
Denny Crane: You one of these environmental lawyers?
Peter Barrett: Is there something wrong with that?
Denny Crane: They’re evildoers. Yesterday it’s a tree, today’s is a salmon, tomorrow it’s ‘Let’s not dig Alaska for oil cause it’s too pretty?” Let me tell you something. I came out here to enjoy nature. Don’t talk to me about the environment.
Alan Shore: All reality. None of it scripted.
(Alan and the guide are coming out of the water. Denny is sitting on chair out of the water.)
Denny Crane: Can I fish yet?
Guide: You still have a timeout. You just sit there.
Alan Shore: Alan sit down next to Denny. As you said yourself, these fish are positively majestic. Sacred even. And you shot one.
Denny Crane: Sometimes I get incompatible.
Alan Shore: Really? You’ve upset the guide. I’ll tell you this Denny. I see it now how this kind of nature can renew you spiritually. I really see it. I’ll tell you something else. In our day jobs we’re lawyers and we’re good ones.
Denny Crane: What’s your point?
Alan Shore: My point is. Given this. Given those salmon. There’s a hearing going on in Port McNeal. We need to go be lawyers now.
(Tara is sitting at a desk talking on the phone.)
Tara Wilson: Your first logistical obstacle is the robes. Canadian lawyers appear in black robes.
Alan Shore: We should be able to borrow them.
(Alan is talking on a cell phone as he and Denny walk up to a helicopter.)
If all else fails we could stop at a costume shop. What else?
Tara Wilson: The judges are called, “My Lord.” It’s not, “Your honor” but, “My Lord”. It’s a lot like in England.
Alan Shore: What time is the motion?
Tara Wilson: According to the docket. Eleven AM. How far away are you?
Alan Shore: Twenty minutes!
Tara Wilson: Well you probably join in progress then. Good luck.
(Alan shuts his phone.)
And Alan? I miss you.
(In Judge Sean O’Bryne’s courtroom.)
George Knott: There’s just no scientific evidence that the sea lice are causing the death of wild salmon.
Peter Barrett: That is ridiculous! Sea lice wiped out the stock in Norway, they wiped out the stock in Scotland.
D.A Valarie Murrow: All we’re saying is let’s wait and do the research. This is a vendetta against the farmed fish.
Peter Barrett: This is no such thing. We have no issue with farm fish all long as they can raise their stock in an environmentally sustainable manor and not host millions of sea lice. Closed containment systems have been shown to work.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Okay gentlemen. I’ve heard your arguments. I have your briefs. I’ll review the matter as well as the science.
(Alan and Denny march in.)
Denny Crane: Greetings! Oh Canada. Denny Crane.
Alan Shore: Good morning, my Lord. My name is Alan Shore, and Mr Crane and I are attorneys from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We seek permission to be heard on this issue as friends of the court.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Mr Shore. We don’t wear wigs in Canada.
Alan Shore: Oh!
(Alan takes off his wig.)
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Nor do we wear waders.
Alan Shore: My Lord. We’ve just spent the last two days in your rivers. In your countryside. It is the most spectacular nature I have ever seen. And the fish! They’re enough to make one believe in a Higher Power.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Yes. How many of the Higher Power’s creations did you torture?
Alan Shore: Fifteen. Denny didn’t catch any. I get your implication Judge, and I acknowledge the hypocrisy of a fisherman pleading for the survival of a species only so that he’ll be able to continue dragging them to shore by the lip in perpetuity. But causing a fish discomfiture and cause it to become extinct are two very different things. And when talking about Pacific Salmon! This is a species that goes back to the ice-age. One that is born in a river, migrates up to two thousand miles in the sea, then returns to the very place of birth to spawn. Against enormous miraculous odds, bringing nutrients on it’s journey to sustain the bald eagles, the grizzly bears, the wolves, even the Rain Forest’s themselves. An entire ecosystem depends on them. If Charlotte the spider were still alive today she’d be writing in her web, “Some fish”.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Yes. Well, forgive me, but I find it insulting to be lectured by an American on the environment.
Denny Crane: Watch it Judge. We’re a super power. Don’t make us add you to the access.
Alan Shore: Being from the United States I have an expertise on the issue.
Judge Sean O’Byrne: Do you?
Alan Shore: Yes! Remember! We’re the country that’s practically wiped the grizzly bear off our maps. We got rid of bull trout. To see a Florida panther? You have to go a hockey game. We seek to count hatchery salmon as wild so the numbers go up and we can take the actual wild salmon off the endangered species list. Almost a hundred different bird and animal species have gone extinct in the last thirty years. While our national policy remains, “It’s not a priority.” I know all about economic interests trumping the environment. And truthfully, if we were talking about the Virgin Island screech owl or the Fresno kangaroo, I might not care, but this is the Pacific Salmon! The sea lice are killing them! Once they’re gone Judge, my God! They’re gone! Oh! Yes. Mindful that abroad people tend expect shock and awe when Yankees arrive on the scene, we shall leave you with two small, but lasting words.
Denny Crane: Denny Crane eh?
(Denny and Alan leave.)
Monday, June 05, 2006
All I Need To Know I Learned In Kindergarden
(By Robert Fulghum)
All I really need to know about how to live and what to do and how to be, I learned in kindergarten. Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate school mountain, but there in the sandpile at Sunday School. These are the things that I learned:
Share everything
Play fair
Don't hit people
Put things back where you found them
Clean up your mess
Don't take things that aren't yours
Say you're sorry when you hurt somebody
Wash your hands before you eat
Flush
Warm cookies and cold milk are good for you
Live a balanced life; learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some
Take a nap every afternoon
When you go out into the world, watch out for traffic, hold hands, and stick together
Be aware of wonder
Remember the little seed in the styrofoam cup
The roots go down and the plant goes up and nobody really knows how or why, but we are all like that.
Goldfish and hamsters and white mice and even the little seed in the styrofoam cup
They all die
So do we
And then remember the Dick and Jane books and the first word you learned the biggest word of all
LOOK
Everything you need to know is in there somewhere The Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation Ecology and politics and equality and sane living. Take any one of those items and extrapolate it into sophisticated adult terms and apply it to your family life or work or your government or your world and it holds true and clear and firm
Think what a better world it would be if we all - the whole world - had cookies and milk about three o'clock every afternoon and then lay down with our blankies for a nap. Or if all the governments had as a basic policy to always put things back where they found them and to clean up their own mess And it is still true, no matter how old you are... when you go out into the world, it is best to hold hands and stick together.
All I really need to know about how to live and what to do and how to be, I learned in kindergarten. Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate school mountain, but there in the sandpile at Sunday School. These are the things that I learned:
Share everything
Play fair
Don't hit people
Put things back where you found them
Clean up your mess
Don't take things that aren't yours
Say you're sorry when you hurt somebody
Wash your hands before you eat
Flush
Warm cookies and cold milk are good for you
Live a balanced life; learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some
Take a nap every afternoon
When you go out into the world, watch out for traffic, hold hands, and stick together
Be aware of wonder
Remember the little seed in the styrofoam cup
The roots go down and the plant goes up and nobody really knows how or why, but we are all like that.
Goldfish and hamsters and white mice and even the little seed in the styrofoam cup
They all die
So do we
And then remember the Dick and Jane books and the first word you learned the biggest word of all
LOOK
Everything you need to know is in there somewhere The Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation Ecology and politics and equality and sane living. Take any one of those items and extrapolate it into sophisticated adult terms and apply it to your family life or work or your government or your world and it holds true and clear and firm
Think what a better world it would be if we all - the whole world - had cookies and milk about three o'clock every afternoon and then lay down with our blankies for a nap. Or if all the governments had as a basic policy to always put things back where they found them and to clean up their own mess And it is still true, no matter how old you are... when you go out into the world, it is best to hold hands and stick together.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Random Thoughts – The Aesop Philosophy
(Extracted and reproduced in full from the Aesop Thinking)
As we refrain from further processing, our plant-derived ingredients create products that reflect the current seasons crops and, like the best wines, our results will vary from year to year. We consider this phenomenon an inherent feature of our line, and do not endeavour to synthetically disguise nature’s seasonal variations. From product batch to batch, therefore, you may note subtle shifts in aroma, colour and texture. We consider these seasonal nuances to be one of the pleasures of working with quality botanicals.
N.B. The above paragraph was extracted and reproduced in full from the philosophy essay of Aesop, an alternative beauty system of skin and wellbeing products developed for men and women seeking effective, botanical-based solutions. The entire write-up can be found under the Thinking section of the Aesop website http://www.aesop.net.au/
I have never encountered such prolific literary skills which sells an inherent weakness in a product as its strength so effectively and unabashedly. And I meant this as a compliment of the highest order.
As we refrain from further processing, our plant-derived ingredients create products that reflect the current seasons crops and, like the best wines, our results will vary from year to year. We consider this phenomenon an inherent feature of our line, and do not endeavour to synthetically disguise nature’s seasonal variations. From product batch to batch, therefore, you may note subtle shifts in aroma, colour and texture. We consider these seasonal nuances to be one of the pleasures of working with quality botanicals.
N.B. The above paragraph was extracted and reproduced in full from the philosophy essay of Aesop, an alternative beauty system of skin and wellbeing products developed for men and women seeking effective, botanical-based solutions. The entire write-up can be found under the Thinking section of the Aesop website http://www.aesop.net.au/
I have never encountered such prolific literary skills which sells an inherent weakness in a product as its strength so effectively and unabashedly. And I meant this as a compliment of the highest order.
Monday, April 03, 2006
Redemption
(By Joan of Arc)
"O God that madest this beautiful earth, when will it be ready to receive thy saints? How long, O lord, how long?"
N.B. This is Joan of Arc’s last spoken line in the play “St. Joan” which was written by George Bernard Shaw in 1923.
"O God that madest this beautiful earth, when will it be ready to receive thy saints? How long, O lord, how long?"
N.B. This is Joan of Arc’s last spoken line in the play “St. Joan” which was written by George Bernard Shaw in 1923.
Saturday, March 18, 2006
世界上最遥远的距离
(By 张晓娴)
世界上最遥远的距离
不是生与死
而是
我就站在你面前
你却不知道我爱你
世界上最遥远的距离
不是我就站在你面前
你却不知道我爱你
而是
明明知道彼此相爱
却不能在一起
世界上最遥远的距离
不是明明知道彼此相爱
却不能在一起
而是
明明无法抵挡这股想念
却还得故意装作丝毫没有把你放在心里
世界上最遥远的距离
不是明明无法抵挡这股想念
却还得故意装作丝毫没有把你放在心里
而是
用自己冷漠的心
对爱你的人
掘了一道无法跨越的沟渠
世界上最遥远的距离
不是生与死
而是
我就站在你面前
你却不知道我爱你
世界上最遥远的距离
不是我就站在你面前
你却不知道我爱你
而是
明明知道彼此相爱
却不能在一起
世界上最遥远的距离
不是明明知道彼此相爱
却不能在一起
而是
明明无法抵挡这股想念
却还得故意装作丝毫没有把你放在心里
世界上最遥远的距离
不是明明无法抵挡这股想念
却还得故意装作丝毫没有把你放在心里
而是
用自己冷漠的心
对爱你的人
掘了一道无法跨越的沟渠
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Game theory: Prisoners’ Dilemma
Game theory is a branch of applied mathematics that deals with the analysis of games (i.e., situations involving parties with conflicting interests). It is a mathematical method of decision-making which involves searching for the best strategy contingent upon what another player will or will not do. Typically, a competitive situation is analyzed to determine the optimal course of action for an interested topic. It is generally taught in mathematics classes such as applied combinatorics, and in economics classes such as industrial organization. In addition to the mathematical elegance and complete "solution" which is possible for simple games, the principles of game theory also find applications to complicated games such as cards, checkers, and chess, as well as real-world problems as diverse as economics, property division, politics, and warfare.
Game theory has two distinct branches: combinatorial game theory and classical game theory.
Combinatorial game theory covers two-player games of perfect knowledge such as go, chess, or checkers. Notably, combinatorial games have no chance element, and players take turns.
In classical game theory, players move, bet, or strategize simultaneously. Both hidden information and chance elements are frequent features in this branch of game theory, which is also a branch of economics.
The Prisoners’ Dilemma is a non-zero sum problem founded in game theory initially discussed by Albert W. Tucker. Tucker's invention of the Prisoners' Dilemma example did not come out via a research paper, but in a classroom. In 1950, while addressing an audience of psychologists at Stanford University in his capacity of visiting professor, Tucker created the Prisoners' Dilemma to illustrate the difficulty of analyzing certain kinds of games.
Tucker’s actual Prisoners' Dilemma example is as follows:
Two burglars, Bob and Al, are captured near the scene of a burglary and are given the "third degree" separately by the police. Each has to choose whether or not to confess and implicate the other. If neither man confesses, then both will serve one year on a charge of carrying a concealed weapon. If each confesses and implicates the other, both will go to prison for 10 years. However, if one burglar confesses and implicates the other, and the other burglar does not confess, the one who has collaborated with the police will go free, while the other burglar will go to prison for 20 years on the maximum charge.
The strategies in this case are those of whether to confess or don't confess. The payoffs or penalties in this case, are the sentences served. We can express all this compactly in a payoff table as follows which has become quite standard in game theory. Here is the payoff table for the Prisoners' Dilemma game:
The above table is interpreted as follows:
Each prisoner chooses one of the two strategies. In effect, Al chooses a column and Bob chooses a row. The two numbers in each cell tell the outcomes for the two prisoners when the corresponding pair of strategies is chosen. The number to the left of the comma tells the payoff to the person who chooses the rows (Bob) while the number to the right of the column tells the payoff to the person who chooses the columns (Al). Thus (reading down the first column) if they both confess, each gets 10 years, but if Al confesses and Bob does not, Bob gets 20 and Al goes free.
A dilemma arises in deciding the best course of action in the absence of knowledge of the other prisoner's decision, as in what strategies are "rational" if both men want to minimize the time they spend in jail. Each prisoner's best strategy would appear to be to turn the other in. Al might reason as follows: "Two things can happen: Bob can confess or Bob can keep quiet. Suppose Bob confesses. Then I get 20 years if I don't confess, 10 years if I do, so in that case it's best to confess. On the other hand, if Bob doesn't confess, and I don't either, I get a year; but in that case, if I confess I can go free. Either way, it's best if I confess. Therefore, I'll confess."
But Bob will presumably reason in the same manner. Therefore, given that both of them confess, both will go to prison for 10 years each. Yet, if they had acted "irrationally" and kept quiet, they each could have gotten off with one year each.
What has happened here is that the two prisoners have fallen into something known as "dominant strategy equilibrium".
A dominant strategy is defined as follows:
If we were to allow an individual player in a game to evaluate separately each of the strategy combinations he may face, and, for each combination, choose from his own strategies the one that gives the best payoff. If the same strategy is chosen for each of the different combinations of strategies the player might face, that strategy is called a "dominant strategy" for that player in that game.
Therefore, dominant strategy equilibrium occurs if, in a game, each player has a dominant strategy, and each player plays the dominant strategy, then that combination of the dominant strategies and the corresponding payoffs are said to constitute the dominant strategy equilibrium for that game.
In the Prisoners' Dilemma game, to confess is a dominant strategy, and when both prisoners confess, dominant strategy equilibrium occurs. In this case, the individually rational action results in both persons being made worse off in terms of their own self-interested purposes. This revelation has wide implications in modern social science. This is because there are many interactions in the modern world that seem very much like this, from arms races through road congestion and pollution to the depletion of fisheries and the overexploitation of some subsurface water resources. These are all quite different interactions in detail, but are interactions in which individually rational action leads to inferior results for each person, and the Prisoners' Dilemma suggests something of what is going on in each of them.
A number of critical issues can be raised with the Prisoners' Dilemma in view of its simplified and abstract conception of many real life interactions, and each of these issues has been the basis of a large scholarly literature:
1. The Prisoners' Dilemma is a two-person game, but many of the applications of the idea are really many-person interactions;
2. We have assumed that there is no communication between the two prisoners. If they could communicate and commit themselves to coordinated strategies, we would expect a quite different outcome;
3. In the Prisoners' Dilemma, the two prisoners interact only once. Repetition of the interactions might lead to quite different results;
4. Compelling as the reasoning that leads to the dominant strategy equilibrium may be, it is not the only way this problem might be reasoned out. Perhaps it is not really the most rational answer after all.
The Prisoners' Dilemma has wide applications to economics and business. Let’s take an example of two firms, say A and B, selling similar products. Each must decide on a pricing strategy. They best exploit their joint market power when both charge a high price; each makes a profit of $10 million per month. If one sets a competitive low price, it wins a lot of customers away from the rival. Suppose its profit rises to $12 million, and that of the rival falls to $7 million. If both set low prices, the profit of each is $9 million. In this case, the low-price strategy is akin to the prisoner's confession, and the high-price akin to keeping silent. Let’s term the former cheating, and the latter cooperation. In this case, cheating is each firm's dominant strategy, but the result when both cheat is worse for each than that of both cooperating.
On a superficial level the Prisoners' Dilemma appears to run counter to Adam Smith's idea of the invisible hand. When each person in the game pursues his private interest, he does not promote the collective interest of the group. But often a group's cooperation is not in the interests of society as a whole. Collusion to keep prices high, for example, is not in society's interest because the cost to consumers from collusion is generally more than the increased profit of the firms. Therefore companies that pursue their own self-interest by cheating on collusive agreements often help the rest of society. Similarly cooperation among prisoners under interrogation makes convictions more difficult for the police to obtain. One must understand the mechanism of cooperation before one can either promote or defeat it in the pursuit of larger policy interests.
Would the Prisoners be able to extricate themselves from the Dilemma and sustain cooperation when each has a powerful incentive to cheat? The most common path to cooperation arises from repetitions of the game. In the above example, one month's cheating gets the cheater an extra $2 million. But a switch from mutual cooperation to mutual cheating loses $1 million. If one month's cheating is followed by two months' retaliation, therefore, the result is a wash for the cheater. Any stronger punishment of a cheater would be a clear deterrent.
This idea needs some comment and elaboration:
1. The cheater's reward comes at once, while the loss from punishment lies in the future. If players heavily discount future payoffs, then the loss may be insufficient to deter cheating. Thus, cooperation is harder to sustain among very impatient players.
2. Punishment won't work unless cheating can be detected and punished. Therefore, companies cooperate more when their actions are more easily detected (setting prices, for example) and less when actions are less easily detected (deciding on non-price attributes of goods, such as repair warranties). Punishment is usually easier to arrange in smaller and closed groups. Thus, industries with few firms and less threat of new entry are more likely to be collusive.
3. Punishment can be made automatic by following strategies like "tit for tat," which was popularized by University of Michigan political scientist Robert Axelrod. In this case, you cheat if and only if your rival cheated in the previous round. But if rivals' innocent actions can be misinterpreted as cheating, then tit for tat runs the risk of setting off successive rounds of unwarranted retaliation.
4. A fixed, finite number of repetitions are logically inadequate to yield cooperation. Both or all players know that cheating is the dominant strategy in the last play. Given this, the same goes for the second-last play, then the third-last, and so on. But in practice we see some cooperation in the early rounds of a fixed set of repetitions. The reason may be either that players don't know the number of rounds for sure, or that they can exploit the possibility of "irrational niceness" to their mutual advantage.
5. Cooperation can also arise if the group has a large leader, who personally stands to lose a lot from outright competition and therefore exercises restraint, even though he knows that other small players will cheat. For example, Saudi Arabia's role of "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel is an instance of this.
Game theory has two distinct branches: combinatorial game theory and classical game theory.
Combinatorial game theory covers two-player games of perfect knowledge such as go, chess, or checkers. Notably, combinatorial games have no chance element, and players take turns.
In classical game theory, players move, bet, or strategize simultaneously. Both hidden information and chance elements are frequent features in this branch of game theory, which is also a branch of economics.
The Prisoners’ Dilemma is a non-zero sum problem founded in game theory initially discussed by Albert W. Tucker. Tucker's invention of the Prisoners' Dilemma example did not come out via a research paper, but in a classroom. In 1950, while addressing an audience of psychologists at Stanford University in his capacity of visiting professor, Tucker created the Prisoners' Dilemma to illustrate the difficulty of analyzing certain kinds of games.
Tucker’s actual Prisoners' Dilemma example is as follows:
Two burglars, Bob and Al, are captured near the scene of a burglary and are given the "third degree" separately by the police. Each has to choose whether or not to confess and implicate the other. If neither man confesses, then both will serve one year on a charge of carrying a concealed weapon. If each confesses and implicates the other, both will go to prison for 10 years. However, if one burglar confesses and implicates the other, and the other burglar does not confess, the one who has collaborated with the police will go free, while the other burglar will go to prison for 20 years on the maximum charge.
The strategies in this case are those of whether to confess or don't confess. The payoffs or penalties in this case, are the sentences served. We can express all this compactly in a payoff table as follows which has become quite standard in game theory. Here is the payoff table for the Prisoners' Dilemma game:
The above table is interpreted as follows:
Each prisoner chooses one of the two strategies. In effect, Al chooses a column and Bob chooses a row. The two numbers in each cell tell the outcomes for the two prisoners when the corresponding pair of strategies is chosen. The number to the left of the comma tells the payoff to the person who chooses the rows (Bob) while the number to the right of the column tells the payoff to the person who chooses the columns (Al). Thus (reading down the first column) if they both confess, each gets 10 years, but if Al confesses and Bob does not, Bob gets 20 and Al goes free.
A dilemma arises in deciding the best course of action in the absence of knowledge of the other prisoner's decision, as in what strategies are "rational" if both men want to minimize the time they spend in jail. Each prisoner's best strategy would appear to be to turn the other in. Al might reason as follows: "Two things can happen: Bob can confess or Bob can keep quiet. Suppose Bob confesses. Then I get 20 years if I don't confess, 10 years if I do, so in that case it's best to confess. On the other hand, if Bob doesn't confess, and I don't either, I get a year; but in that case, if I confess I can go free. Either way, it's best if I confess. Therefore, I'll confess."
But Bob will presumably reason in the same manner. Therefore, given that both of them confess, both will go to prison for 10 years each. Yet, if they had acted "irrationally" and kept quiet, they each could have gotten off with one year each.
What has happened here is that the two prisoners have fallen into something known as "dominant strategy equilibrium".
A dominant strategy is defined as follows:
If we were to allow an individual player in a game to evaluate separately each of the strategy combinations he may face, and, for each combination, choose from his own strategies the one that gives the best payoff. If the same strategy is chosen for each of the different combinations of strategies the player might face, that strategy is called a "dominant strategy" for that player in that game.
Therefore, dominant strategy equilibrium occurs if, in a game, each player has a dominant strategy, and each player plays the dominant strategy, then that combination of the dominant strategies and the corresponding payoffs are said to constitute the dominant strategy equilibrium for that game.
In the Prisoners' Dilemma game, to confess is a dominant strategy, and when both prisoners confess, dominant strategy equilibrium occurs. In this case, the individually rational action results in both persons being made worse off in terms of their own self-interested purposes. This revelation has wide implications in modern social science. This is because there are many interactions in the modern world that seem very much like this, from arms races through road congestion and pollution to the depletion of fisheries and the overexploitation of some subsurface water resources. These are all quite different interactions in detail, but are interactions in which individually rational action leads to inferior results for each person, and the Prisoners' Dilemma suggests something of what is going on in each of them.
A number of critical issues can be raised with the Prisoners' Dilemma in view of its simplified and abstract conception of many real life interactions, and each of these issues has been the basis of a large scholarly literature:
1. The Prisoners' Dilemma is a two-person game, but many of the applications of the idea are really many-person interactions;
2. We have assumed that there is no communication between the two prisoners. If they could communicate and commit themselves to coordinated strategies, we would expect a quite different outcome;
3. In the Prisoners' Dilemma, the two prisoners interact only once. Repetition of the interactions might lead to quite different results;
4. Compelling as the reasoning that leads to the dominant strategy equilibrium may be, it is not the only way this problem might be reasoned out. Perhaps it is not really the most rational answer after all.
The Prisoners' Dilemma has wide applications to economics and business. Let’s take an example of two firms, say A and B, selling similar products. Each must decide on a pricing strategy. They best exploit their joint market power when both charge a high price; each makes a profit of $10 million per month. If one sets a competitive low price, it wins a lot of customers away from the rival. Suppose its profit rises to $12 million, and that of the rival falls to $7 million. If both set low prices, the profit of each is $9 million. In this case, the low-price strategy is akin to the prisoner's confession, and the high-price akin to keeping silent. Let’s term the former cheating, and the latter cooperation. In this case, cheating is each firm's dominant strategy, but the result when both cheat is worse for each than that of both cooperating.
On a superficial level the Prisoners' Dilemma appears to run counter to Adam Smith's idea of the invisible hand. When each person in the game pursues his private interest, he does not promote the collective interest of the group. But often a group's cooperation is not in the interests of society as a whole. Collusion to keep prices high, for example, is not in society's interest because the cost to consumers from collusion is generally more than the increased profit of the firms. Therefore companies that pursue their own self-interest by cheating on collusive agreements often help the rest of society. Similarly cooperation among prisoners under interrogation makes convictions more difficult for the police to obtain. One must understand the mechanism of cooperation before one can either promote or defeat it in the pursuit of larger policy interests.
Would the Prisoners be able to extricate themselves from the Dilemma and sustain cooperation when each has a powerful incentive to cheat? The most common path to cooperation arises from repetitions of the game. In the above example, one month's cheating gets the cheater an extra $2 million. But a switch from mutual cooperation to mutual cheating loses $1 million. If one month's cheating is followed by two months' retaliation, therefore, the result is a wash for the cheater. Any stronger punishment of a cheater would be a clear deterrent.
This idea needs some comment and elaboration:
1. The cheater's reward comes at once, while the loss from punishment lies in the future. If players heavily discount future payoffs, then the loss may be insufficient to deter cheating. Thus, cooperation is harder to sustain among very impatient players.
2. Punishment won't work unless cheating can be detected and punished. Therefore, companies cooperate more when their actions are more easily detected (setting prices, for example) and less when actions are less easily detected (deciding on non-price attributes of goods, such as repair warranties). Punishment is usually easier to arrange in smaller and closed groups. Thus, industries with few firms and less threat of new entry are more likely to be collusive.
3. Punishment can be made automatic by following strategies like "tit for tat," which was popularized by University of Michigan political scientist Robert Axelrod. In this case, you cheat if and only if your rival cheated in the previous round. But if rivals' innocent actions can be misinterpreted as cheating, then tit for tat runs the risk of setting off successive rounds of unwarranted retaliation.
4. A fixed, finite number of repetitions are logically inadequate to yield cooperation. Both or all players know that cheating is the dominant strategy in the last play. Given this, the same goes for the second-last play, then the third-last, and so on. But in practice we see some cooperation in the early rounds of a fixed set of repetitions. The reason may be either that players don't know the number of rounds for sure, or that they can exploit the possibility of "irrational niceness" to their mutual advantage.
5. Cooperation can also arise if the group has a large leader, who personally stands to lose a lot from outright competition and therefore exercises restraint, even though he knows that other small players will cheat. For example, Saudi Arabia's role of "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel is an instance of this.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
霍家剑法之平息干戈
(霍氏家宗家传武学)
剑招看来柔弱似水，
但竟管凌厉的来势，
也无法攻入半分。
所为曲蝉之进，以其能屈，
就如无力的水面，
却能将沉重的石块弹开，
直至力尽而衰，
堕入水中。
剑主退让，意走包容。
剑法的要义是，
寓变化于平凡，
容无限于实在。
就如水之为物，
不弃涓滴细流，
始能成就浩瀚无际。
杀人者胜，
固为世俗之强。
但平息干戈者，
才是强中之强。
乎为无求，
天下莫能与之争。
唯有不求一胜，
方能永立于不败之地。
剑招看来柔弱似水，
但竟管凌厉的来势，
也无法攻入半分。
所为曲蝉之进，以其能屈，
就如无力的水面，
却能将沉重的石块弹开，
直至力尽而衰，
堕入水中。
剑主退让，意走包容。
剑法的要义是，
寓变化于平凡，
容无限于实在。
就如水之为物，
不弃涓滴细流，
始能成就浩瀚无际。
杀人者胜，
固为世俗之强。
但平息干戈者，
才是强中之强。
乎为无求，
天下莫能与之争。
唯有不求一胜，
方能永立于不败之地。
放下
在一个著名的寺院里，
住着一位非常有道行的静修道长。
他每天都要在傍晚 6时去喂他的狗。
他的狗的名字很奇怪,叫做“放下”。
每到日落时分,
静修道长就为 “放下”送饭了,
嘴里还一边呼唤着: “放下！放下！”
小弟子觉得很奇怪,就问道长:
“为什么要给狗起这个奇怪的名字,
人家的狗都叫阿黄、来福什么的,
为什么您的狗叫 ‘放下’？”
静修道长不语，
让他们自己去悟。
小弟子就观察老道长，
终于发现：
每天当道长别喂完狗后，
就不再读经书，
到院中打打太极拳，散散步。
小弟子到道长面前，
诉说了他们观察的收获，
老道长微笑地点点头说：
“你们终于明白了。
其实我在叫狗的时候，
其实也是叫自己‘放下’，
让自己放下许多事情。
因为人们不可能在一天内做完所有的事情，
你只要将一天中最很重要的事情做完就已足够了。
N.B.
在人们越来越习惯动辄高呼残酷竞争时，
其实学会“放下”的意义就越大。
正仿佛当你自觉遭遇灭顶挫折时，
不妨手搭凉棚，你一定会发现：
天并不会塌下来。
这并不是不求上进，
恰恰在于懂得放下的，
才最终会赢；
而整日忙碌不休的人，
收获的往往只是焦虑和疲惫。
住着一位非常有道行的静修道长。
他每天都要在傍晚 6时去喂他的狗。
他的狗的名字很奇怪,叫做“放下”。
每到日落时分,
静修道长就为 “放下”送饭了,
嘴里还一边呼唤着: “放下！放下！”
小弟子觉得很奇怪,就问道长:
“为什么要给狗起这个奇怪的名字,
人家的狗都叫阿黄、来福什么的,
为什么您的狗叫 ‘放下’？”
静修道长不语，
让他们自己去悟。
小弟子就观察老道长，
终于发现：
每天当道长别喂完狗后，
就不再读经书，
到院中打打太极拳，散散步。
小弟子到道长面前，
诉说了他们观察的收获，
老道长微笑地点点头说：
“你们终于明白了。
其实我在叫狗的时候，
其实也是叫自己‘放下’，
让自己放下许多事情。
因为人们不可能在一天内做完所有的事情，
你只要将一天中最很重要的事情做完就已足够了。
N.B.
在人们越来越习惯动辄高呼残酷竞争时，
其实学会“放下”的意义就越大。
正仿佛当你自觉遭遇灭顶挫折时，
不妨手搭凉棚，你一定会发现：
天并不会塌下来。
这并不是不求上进，
恰恰在于懂得放下的，
才最终会赢；
而整日忙碌不休的人，
收获的往往只是焦虑和疲惫。
追影
有一支西方的考察队深入非洲腹地考察，
请了当地部落的土著人做背夫和向导。
由于时间紧，需要赶路，
而这些土著人很吃苦耐劳，
背着几十公斤的装备物资依然健步如飞。
一连三天，
考察队都很顺利地按计划行进，
大家都很开心。
可是第四天早上，
考察队准备出发的时候，
土著人们都在休息不走了，
好说歹说就是不愿出发。
队员们很奇怪，
这几天大家相处得很好啊，
是不小心触犯了他们还是要坐地加钱？
这时，土著人的头领解释道，
按照他们的传统，
如果连续三天赶路，
第四天必须停下来休息一天，
以免我们的灵魂赶不上我们的脚步。
这个现代人也许看来很难理解的解释，
让我很受触动。
我们的生活太忙碌了，
工作和生活的压力，
让我们日复一日地在赶路，
以至于我们很少停下来思考一下，
就不断地被很多东西推着走，
或者追逐着眼前的东西而去，
而我们的灵魂早已落后，
在我们匆匆赶路的身影后面无影无踪。
没有了自己的灵魂，
我们的生活就交给了外物去控制。
又到了一周，
我们是不是也放缓脚步，
等一等我们的灵魂？
请了当地部落的土著人做背夫和向导。
由于时间紧，需要赶路，
而这些土著人很吃苦耐劳，
背着几十公斤的装备物资依然健步如飞。
一连三天，
考察队都很顺利地按计划行进，
大家都很开心。
可是第四天早上，
考察队准备出发的时候，
土著人们都在休息不走了，
好说歹说就是不愿出发。
队员们很奇怪，
这几天大家相处得很好啊，
是不小心触犯了他们还是要坐地加钱？
这时，土著人的头领解释道，
按照他们的传统，
如果连续三天赶路，
第四天必须停下来休息一天，
以免我们的灵魂赶不上我们的脚步。
这个现代人也许看来很难理解的解释，
让我很受触动。
我们的生活太忙碌了，
工作和生活的压力，
让我们日复一日地在赶路，
以至于我们很少停下来思考一下，
就不断地被很多东西推着走，
或者追逐着眼前的东西而去，
而我们的灵魂早已落后，
在我们匆匆赶路的身影后面无影无踪。
没有了自己的灵魂，
我们的生活就交给了外物去控制。
又到了一周，
我们是不是也放缓脚步，
等一等我们的灵魂？
追影
有一支西方的考察队深入非洲腹地考察，
请了当地部落的土著人做背夫和向导。
由于时间紧，需要赶路，
而这些土著人很吃苦耐劳，
背着几十公斤的装备物资依然健步如飞。
一连三天，
考察队都很顺利地按计划行进，
大家都很开心。
可是第四天早上，
考察队准备出发的时候，
土著人们都在休息不走了，
好说歹说就是不愿出发。
队员们很奇怪，
这几天大家相处得很好啊，
是不小心触犯了他们还是要坐地加钱？
这时，土著人的头领解释道，
按照他们的传统，
如果连续三天赶路，
第四天必须停下来休息一天，
以免我们的灵魂赶不上我们的脚步。
这个现代人也许看来很难理解的解释，
让我很受触动。
我们的生活太忙碌了，
工作和生活的压力，
让我们日复一日地在赶路，
以至于我们很少停下来思考一下，
就不断地被很多东西推着走，
或者追逐着眼前的东西而去，
而我们的灵魂早已落后，
在我们匆匆赶路的身影后面无影无踪。
没有了自己的灵魂，
我们的生活就交给了外物去控制。
又到了一周，
我们是不是也放缓脚步，
等一等我们的灵魂？
请了当地部落的土著人做背夫和向导。
由于时间紧，需要赶路，
而这些土著人很吃苦耐劳，
背着几十公斤的装备物资依然健步如飞。
一连三天，
考察队都很顺利地按计划行进，
大家都很开心。
可是第四天早上，
考察队准备出发的时候，
土著人们都在休息不走了，
好说歹说就是不愿出发。
队员们很奇怪，
这几天大家相处得很好啊，
是不小心触犯了他们还是要坐地加钱？
这时，土著人的头领解释道，
按照他们的传统，
如果连续三天赶路，
第四天必须停下来休息一天，
以免我们的灵魂赶不上我们的脚步。
这个现代人也许看来很难理解的解释，
让我很受触动。
我们的生活太忙碌了，
工作和生活的压力，
让我们日复一日地在赶路，
以至于我们很少停下来思考一下，
就不断地被很多东西推着走，
或者追逐着眼前的东西而去，
而我们的灵魂早已落后，
在我们匆匆赶路的身影后面无影无踪。
没有了自己的灵魂，
我们的生活就交给了外物去控制。
又到了一周，
我们是不是也放缓脚步，
等一等我们的灵魂？
晚餐
你吃『晚餐』了嗎?
如果可以 , 我希望我能再吃一次『晚餐』。
我記得去年的時候, 想要待在家裡吃飯。
那或許只是我懶得出去而已吧。
我走下樓梯, 走進廚房 ,
看見老媽依舊在站在那煮飯。
這麼多年來 ,都是如此 …
我坐在客廳那看著電視 ,
等著老媽煮好飯。
老媽煮好以後, 叫我去吃飯。
我添好飯坐在飯桌前。
想叫老媽一起吃飯,
老媽說:「你先吃就好 ,我等你爸回來再吃。」
我依舊的回答說 :「喔 ,那我先吃了。」
為什麼說依舊呢?
因為就當我偶而幾次待在家裡吃飯的時候 ?
每當我問老媽, 她都是這樣的回答我。
這麼多年了, 從未變過。
而我…
卻也一直不知道為什麼。
有一次 , 我問老媽: 「為什麼你不先吃呀?」
老媽回答我說 :「你老爸 他每天在外面辛苦工作,
回來又一個人在那吃飯 , 我會不忍心啊。」
我這時候不知道說什麼了…
我那時候, 好像是默默的把飯吃完吧。
過不久 ,有天晚上, 老媽的舊病又復發了,
在晚上11 點多的時候,送往急診室。
我也是隔天回到家裡才知道的。
那天, 我總覺得少了什麼。
我那天的晚餐就隨隨便便的吃了 ,
吃完後, 我騎著車到醫院去,
我走進病房內 , 老媽就問我 :「你晚餐吃了沒阿? 」
我回答說 :「我剛剛有吃了。」
說完以後, 老媽似乎才露出安心的表情。
這時候 ,老爸把我叫到病房外,
用著很嚴肅、很悲傷的語氣跟我說 :
「你媽的病 ,大概是不會好了。」
那時候, 是我第一次看到,
老爸的眼睛紅紅的。
回到家裡 ,我發現,
原來我還記得怎麼哭泣。
我忘了我哭了多久…
過不久 ,老媽死了 …
老媽在醫院的時候,
最後跟我一句話 :「以後晚餐要記得吃喔 ,
別再隨便在外面吃了, 試試自己煮煮看。」
「不要讓你爸一個人孤獨的在那吃飯。」
說完以後,老媽死了 …
我又再一次哭了,
眼淚 …沾滿了病床上的床單 ,
似乎也沾滿了老爸
跟一旁的醫護人員。
如果可以 ….
我多麼希望老媽可以再煮晚餐給我吃。
N.B.
『晚餐 』是要跟家人一起吃, 才能叫做『晚餐』。
我地經常比藉口話自己好忙好忙好忙,
其實食一餐飯又用你幾多時間呢 ?
好好珍惜父母親及關心你的人。
如果可以 , 我希望我能再吃一次『晚餐』。
我記得去年的時候, 想要待在家裡吃飯。
那或許只是我懶得出去而已吧。
我走下樓梯, 走進廚房 ,
看見老媽依舊在站在那煮飯。
這麼多年來 ,都是如此 …
我坐在客廳那看著電視 ,
等著老媽煮好飯。
老媽煮好以後, 叫我去吃飯。
我添好飯坐在飯桌前。
想叫老媽一起吃飯,
老媽說:「你先吃就好 ,我等你爸回來再吃。」
我依舊的回答說 :「喔 ,那我先吃了。」
為什麼說依舊呢?
因為就當我偶而幾次待在家裡吃飯的時候 ?
每當我問老媽, 她都是這樣的回答我。
這麼多年了, 從未變過。
而我…
卻也一直不知道為什麼。
有一次 , 我問老媽: 「為什麼你不先吃呀?」
老媽回答我說 :「你老爸 他每天在外面辛苦工作,
回來又一個人在那吃飯 , 我會不忍心啊。」
我這時候不知道說什麼了…
我那時候, 好像是默默的把飯吃完吧。
過不久 ,有天晚上, 老媽的舊病又復發了,
在晚上11 點多的時候,送往急診室。
我也是隔天回到家裡才知道的。
那天, 我總覺得少了什麼。
我那天的晚餐就隨隨便便的吃了 ,
吃完後, 我騎著車到醫院去,
我走進病房內 , 老媽就問我 :「你晚餐吃了沒阿? 」
我回答說 :「我剛剛有吃了。」
說完以後, 老媽似乎才露出安心的表情。
這時候 ,老爸把我叫到病房外,
用著很嚴肅、很悲傷的語氣跟我說 :
「你媽的病 ,大概是不會好了。」
那時候, 是我第一次看到,
老爸的眼睛紅紅的。
回到家裡 ,我發現,
原來我還記得怎麼哭泣。
我忘了我哭了多久…
過不久 ,老媽死了 …
老媽在醫院的時候,
最後跟我一句話 :「以後晚餐要記得吃喔 ,
別再隨便在外面吃了, 試試自己煮煮看。」
「不要讓你爸一個人孤獨的在那吃飯。」
說完以後,老媽死了 …
我又再一次哭了,
眼淚 …沾滿了病床上的床單 ,
似乎也沾滿了老爸
跟一旁的醫護人員。
如果可以 ….
我多麼希望老媽可以再煮晚餐給我吃。
N.B.
『晚餐 』是要跟家人一起吃, 才能叫做『晚餐』。
我地經常比藉口話自己好忙好忙好忙,
其實食一餐飯又用你幾多時間呢 ?
好好珍惜父母親及關心你的人。
Monday, January 30, 2006
Pareto's Principle (80/20 Rule)
The Pareto principle, also known as the 80/20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity, states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from only 20% of the causes.
The principle was suggested by the Quality Management pioneer and thinker, Dr. Joseph M. Juran, in the late 1940s. Juran inaccurately attributed the 80/20 Rule to a phenomenon who was first proposed by the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who in 1906, created a mathematical formula to describe the unequal distribution of wealth in his country. He observed that 80% of all properties in Italy were owned by only 20% of the Italian population. In other words, 20% of the Italians owned 80% of the country’s wealth.
After Pareto made his observation and created his formula, many others, like Juran, observed similar phenomena in their own areas of expertise. Juran, recognized a universal principle which he called the "vital few and trivial many" and reduced it to writing. In an early work, a lack of precision on Juran's part made it appear that he was applying Pareto's observations about economics to a broader body of work. As such, the name Pareto's Principle stuck on.
As a result, Dr. Juran's observation of the "vital few and trivial many", the principle that 20% of something always are responsible for 80% of the results, became known as Pareto's Principle or the 80/20 Rule.
The 80/20 Rule means that in anything a few (20%) are vital and many (80%) are trivial. In Pareto's case it meant 20% of the people owned 80% of the wealth. In Juran's initial work, he identified 20% of the defects causing 80% of the problems. Experienced project managers will know that 20% of the work (the first 10% and the last 10%) consume 80% of the time and resources available. One can apply the 80/20 Rule to almost anything, from the science of management to the physical world.
The value of the Pareto Principle for a manager is that it reminds the manager to focus on the 20% that matters. Of the things the manager do during your day, only 20% really matter. Those 20% produce 80% of the results. It is critical that the manager identifies and focuses on those things. When it comes to the crunch, the manager needs to remind himself of the 20% he needs to focus on. So if something in the schedule has to slip, if something isn't going to get done, the manager must make sure that it's not part of that 20%.
Pareto's Principle, the 80/20 Rule, should serve as a daily reminder to focus 80% of the time and energy on the 20% of the work that is really important. So the wise manager should not just work smart, he should work smart on the right things.
The principle was suggested by the Quality Management pioneer and thinker, Dr. Joseph M. Juran, in the late 1940s. Juran inaccurately attributed the 80/20 Rule to a phenomenon who was first proposed by the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who in 1906, created a mathematical formula to describe the unequal distribution of wealth in his country. He observed that 80% of all properties in Italy were owned by only 20% of the Italian population. In other words, 20% of the Italians owned 80% of the country’s wealth.
After Pareto made his observation and created his formula, many others, like Juran, observed similar phenomena in their own areas of expertise. Juran, recognized a universal principle which he called the "vital few and trivial many" and reduced it to writing. In an early work, a lack of precision on Juran's part made it appear that he was applying Pareto's observations about economics to a broader body of work. As such, the name Pareto's Principle stuck on.
As a result, Dr. Juran's observation of the "vital few and trivial many", the principle that 20% of something always are responsible for 80% of the results, became known as Pareto's Principle or the 80/20 Rule.
The 80/20 Rule means that in anything a few (20%) are vital and many (80%) are trivial. In Pareto's case it meant 20% of the people owned 80% of the wealth. In Juran's initial work, he identified 20% of the defects causing 80% of the problems. Experienced project managers will know that 20% of the work (the first 10% and the last 10%) consume 80% of the time and resources available. One can apply the 80/20 Rule to almost anything, from the science of management to the physical world.
The value of the Pareto Principle for a manager is that it reminds the manager to focus on the 20% that matters. Of the things the manager do during your day, only 20% really matter. Those 20% produce 80% of the results. It is critical that the manager identifies and focuses on those things. When it comes to the crunch, the manager needs to remind himself of the 20% he needs to focus on. So if something in the schedule has to slip, if something isn't going to get done, the manager must make sure that it's not part of that 20%.
Pareto's Principle, the 80/20 Rule, should serve as a daily reminder to focus 80% of the time and energy on the 20% of the work that is really important. So the wise manager should not just work smart, he should work smart on the right things.
Monday, December 26, 2005
I carry your heart with me
(By Edward Estlin Cummings)
i carry your heart with me (i carry it inmy heart)
i am never without it (anywhere i go you go, my dear;
and whatever is done by only me is your doing, my darling)
i fear no fate (for you are my fate,my sweet)
i want no world (for beautiful you are my world, my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you
here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;
which grows higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart
i carry your heart (i carry it in my heart)
N.B. The above poem was read out during one of the most poignant scenes in the movie "In her shoes" by Maggie Feller (Cameron Diaz) to the Professor (Norman Lloyd). The Professor, who taught college English, was especially important to Maggie. He wanted her to read to him, gently helped her understand the technique and purpose of reading and guided her through possible dyslexia. He needed a reader because he was blind. She read him "One Art," a poem by Elizabeth Bishop that was about "the art of losing," and as a woman who made a life style out of misplacing people, possessions and responsibilities, Maggie found it strangely comforting. She later did some reading on her own, setting up the powerful appearance later in the film of the e.e. cummings poem.
i carry your heart with me (i carry it inmy heart)
i am never without it (anywhere i go you go, my dear;
and whatever is done by only me is your doing, my darling)
i fear no fate (for you are my fate,my sweet)
i want no world (for beautiful you are my world, my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you
here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;
which grows higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart
i carry your heart (i carry it in my heart)
N.B. The above poem was read out during one of the most poignant scenes in the movie "In her shoes" by Maggie Feller (Cameron Diaz) to the Professor (Norman Lloyd). The Professor, who taught college English, was especially important to Maggie. He wanted her to read to him, gently helped her understand the technique and purpose of reading and guided her through possible dyslexia. He needed a reader because he was blind. She read him "One Art," a poem by Elizabeth Bishop that was about "the art of losing," and as a woman who made a life style out of misplacing people, possessions and responsibilities, Maggie found it strangely comforting. She later did some reading on her own, setting up the powerful appearance later in the film of the e.e. cummings poem.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
CERK Radio 40Mhz - Ashes To Ashes
(By the Nightcrawler Lucien Lacriox)
The cruelest evil is not some wretched entity manifested in cloven hooves and leering goat's head. The child, its soft cries - the sound of all that should be cherished and protected. The father takes the child into his heart in pure love. Unaware.
The child's innocence and purity knows no bounds, and neither does its cruelty when evil comes upon its soul.
The cruelest evil is not some wretched entity manifested in cloven hooves and leering goat's head. The child, its soft cries - the sound of all that should be cherished and protected. The father takes the child into his heart in pure love. Unaware.
The child's innocence and purity knows no bounds, and neither does its cruelty when evil comes upon its soul.
Monday, October 03, 2005
The Legend of the Thornbird
(By Colleen McCullough, Great Britian, 1980)
There is a legend about a bird
which sings just once in its life,
more sweetly than any other creature
on the face of the earth.
From the moment it leaves the nest
it searches for a thorn tree,
and does not rest until it has found one.
Then, singing among the savage branches,
it impales itself upon the longest, sharpest spine.
And, dying, it rises above its own agony
to outcarol the lark and the nightingale.
One superlative song, existence the price.
But the whole world stills to listen,
and the gods in their heaven smile.
For the best is only bought at the cost of great pain...
Or so says the legend..
N.B. I undertstand that the Legend of the Thornbird is derived from an actual legend that exists in Welsh mythology.
There is a legend about a bird
which sings just once in its life,
more sweetly than any other creature
on the face of the earth.
From the moment it leaves the nest
it searches for a thorn tree,
and does not rest until it has found one.
Then, singing among the savage branches,
it impales itself upon the longest, sharpest spine.
And, dying, it rises above its own agony
to outcarol the lark and the nightingale.
One superlative song, existence the price.
But the whole world stills to listen,
and the gods in their heaven smile.
For the best is only bought at the cost of great pain...
Or so says the legend..
N.B. I undertstand that the Legend of the Thornbird is derived from an actual legend that exists in Welsh mythology.
Sunday, October 02, 2005
刺鳥傳說
(Inspired from the lyrics of "The Legend" by Fairyland In Reality or FIR)
聽說是源至於居住於大不列顛及愛爾蘭居爾特人的古老傳說：
傳說中有一種鳥，歌聲甜美舉世無雙，然畢生僅歌唱一次。這種鳥離巢之後，就不停尋覓帶著最長刺的樹，直至尋得的時刻，牠將往樹最長、最尖的刺撞去並在極度的苦痛中引吭高歌，而牠臨死前的謳歌，超越了自身的痛楚，非但感人至深，連雲雀與夜鶯都相形失色。牠以生命為代價所換得的動人歌聲，令全世界的人均願傾聽，亦令上帝在天堂展顏歡笑。因為，唯有最深沉的痛楚，才能夠換取最美好的事物！
N.B. The above commentaries were reproduced in full from D!♥r 小妞 under the website http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/?qid=1105060606370
聽說是源至於居住於大不列顛及愛爾蘭居爾特人的古老傳說：
傳說中有一種鳥，歌聲甜美舉世無雙，然畢生僅歌唱一次。這種鳥離巢之後，就不停尋覓帶著最長刺的樹，直至尋得的時刻，牠將往樹最長、最尖的刺撞去並在極度的苦痛中引吭高歌，而牠臨死前的謳歌，超越了自身的痛楚，非但感人至深，連雲雀與夜鶯都相形失色。牠以生命為代價所換得的動人歌聲，令全世界的人均願傾聽，亦令上帝在天堂展顏歡笑。因為，唯有最深沉的痛楚，才能夠換取最美好的事物！
N.B. The above commentaries were reproduced in full from D!♥r 小妞 under the website http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/?qid=1105060606370
Friday, September 30, 2005
CERK Radio 40Mhz - Trophy Girl
By the Nightcrawler Lucien Lacroix
They say no two persons are alike. Never is that more true than when it comes to our desires. Some cherish what others abhor. One man's precious cargo is another man's poison. Some prize what others revile.
Prize what you will, prize what you can, but always remember, even he who dies with the most prizes still dies.
They say no two persons are alike. Never is that more true than when it comes to our desires. Some cherish what others abhor. One man's precious cargo is another man's poison. Some prize what others revile.
Prize what you will, prize what you can, but always remember, even he who dies with the most prizes still dies.
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Lt. Colonel Frank Slade's Disciplinary Hearing Speech
(By Lt. Colonel Frank Slade (casted by Al Pacino) during a discplinary hearing for the expulsion of Charlie Simms, a young and innocent scholarship student, from the school for not whistle-blowing on his classmates)
(S = Lt. Colonel Frank Slade; T = Mr Trask, the headmaster of Baird School)
S: This is such a crock of shit.
T: Please watch your language, Mr. Slade, you are in the Baird school, not a barrack. Mr. Simms, I will give you one final opportunity to speak up.
S: Mr. Simms doesn’t want it. He doesn't need to be labeled, “still worthy of being a Baird man.” What the hell is that? What is your motto here? “Boys, inform on your classmates, save your hide, anything short of that we’re going to burn you at the stake"? Well, gentlemen, when the shit hits the fan, some guys run and some guys stay. Here’s Charlie, facing the fire, and there’s George, hiding in big daddy’s pocket. And what are you doing? You’re going to reward George and destroy Charlie.
T: Are you finished Mr. Slade?
S: No, I’m just getting warmed up. I don’t know who went to this place. William Howard Taft, William Jennings Bride, William Tell, whoever. Their spirit is dead, if they ever had one, it’s gone. You are building a rat ship here. A vessel for seagoing snitches. And if you think you’re preparing these minnows for manhood, you better think again. Because I say you are killing the very spirit this institution proclaims it instills. What a sham. What kind of a show are you putting on here today? I mean, the only class in this act is sitting next to me, and I’m here to tell you that this boy’s soul is intact. It’s non-negotiable, and you know how I know? Someone here, and I’m not going to say who, offered to buy. Only Charlie here wasn’t selling.
T: Sir, you’re out of order.
S: I’ll show you out of order! You don’t know what out of order is, Mr. Trask. I’d show you but I’m too old, I’m too tired, I’m too fucking blind. If I were the man I was five years ago, I’d take a flame thrower to this place! Out of order, who the hell you think you’re talking to? I’ve been around, you know? There was a time I could see. And I have seen. Boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off. But that is nothing like the sight of an amputated spirit. There is no prosthetics for that. You think you’re merely sending this splendid, foot soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs? But I say you are executing his soul. And why? Because he’s not a Baird man. Baird men. You hurt this boy, you’re gonna be Baird bums, the lot of you. And Harry, Jimmy, Trent wherever you are out there, fuck you too.
T: Stand down, Mr. Slade.
S: I’m not finished. As I came in here, I heard those words, ‘cradle of leadership’. Well when the bough breaks, the cradle will fall, and it has fallen here, it has fallen! Makers of men, creators of leaders, be careful what kind of leaders you’re producing here. I don’t know if Charlie’s silence here today is right or wrong, I’m not a judge or jury, but I can tell you this, he won’t sell anybody out to buy his future. And that, my friends, is called integrity. That’s called courage. Now that’s the stuff leaders should be made of.
(S = Lt. Colonel Frank Slade; T = Mr Trask, the headmaster of Baird School)
S: This is such a crock of shit.
T: Please watch your language, Mr. Slade, you are in the Baird school, not a barrack. Mr. Simms, I will give you one final opportunity to speak up.
S: Mr. Simms doesn’t want it. He doesn't need to be labeled, “still worthy of being a Baird man.” What the hell is that? What is your motto here? “Boys, inform on your classmates, save your hide, anything short of that we’re going to burn you at the stake"? Well, gentlemen, when the shit hits the fan, some guys run and some guys stay. Here’s Charlie, facing the fire, and there’s George, hiding in big daddy’s pocket. And what are you doing? You’re going to reward George and destroy Charlie.
T: Are you finished Mr. Slade?
S: No, I’m just getting warmed up. I don’t know who went to this place. William Howard Taft, William Jennings Bride, William Tell, whoever. Their spirit is dead, if they ever had one, it’s gone. You are building a rat ship here. A vessel for seagoing snitches. And if you think you’re preparing these minnows for manhood, you better think again. Because I say you are killing the very spirit this institution proclaims it instills. What a sham. What kind of a show are you putting on here today? I mean, the only class in this act is sitting next to me, and I’m here to tell you that this boy’s soul is intact. It’s non-negotiable, and you know how I know? Someone here, and I’m not going to say who, offered to buy. Only Charlie here wasn’t selling.
T: Sir, you’re out of order.
S: I’ll show you out of order! You don’t know what out of order is, Mr. Trask. I’d show you but I’m too old, I’m too tired, I’m too fucking blind. If I were the man I was five years ago, I’d take a flame thrower to this place! Out of order, who the hell you think you’re talking to? I’ve been around, you know? There was a time I could see. And I have seen. Boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off. But that is nothing like the sight of an amputated spirit. There is no prosthetics for that. You think you’re merely sending this splendid, foot soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs? But I say you are executing his soul. And why? Because he’s not a Baird man. Baird men. You hurt this boy, you’re gonna be Baird bums, the lot of you. And Harry, Jimmy, Trent wherever you are out there, fuck you too.
T: Stand down, Mr. Slade.
S: I’m not finished. As I came in here, I heard those words, ‘cradle of leadership’. Well when the bough breaks, the cradle will fall, and it has fallen here, it has fallen! Makers of men, creators of leaders, be careful what kind of leaders you’re producing here. I don’t know if Charlie’s silence here today is right or wrong, I’m not a judge or jury, but I can tell you this, he won’t sell anybody out to buy his future. And that, my friends, is called integrity. That’s called courage. Now that’s the stuff leaders should be made of.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
CERK Radio 40MHz - Last Knight
By the Nightcrawler Lucien Lacroix
(The following transcript was forwarded to CERK Radio ina small cassette tape and the cassette tape was played as the Nightcrawler's final broadcast in his absence.)
Life is a gift. As sweet as the freshest peach, as precious as a gilded jewel. I have never been able to understand the logic of willfully surrendering such a treasure.
How dark can your existence be when compared to an eternal void. Unless, of course, you have faith that there is something beyond.
What do you see from where you stand? A bright light at the end of the tunnel? Is it a ray of hope? A glimmer of something better? Or will it burn you like the rising sun? Are you hearing the trumpeting of St. Peter's angels or the screams of Memnoch's tortured souls?
You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never know the answer until after the deed is done. And is your faith really that strong?
I understand the need to move on. It is something that happens to us all. But if your time has truly come, I also understand that with the beauty of this life,there comes pain and despair. No one is immune. But consider what you have in your hands! Don't trade a treasure for an empty box!
What about love? Heaven makes means to kill our joy with love . It's suffering. It's anguish. It's pain. And yet, we must have it - at any cost. But are you so enamored that you'll overlook your love of life? And you do love it. I have seen you smell the sea, gaze at the stars at night. Are you willing to sacrifice one mistress for another? Look into your heart and tell me that you're willing to make the choice!
Aren't you tired of this incessant guilt? Hasn't it swayed your back and stooped your shoulders to the point of throwing it off? You insist on taking responsibility for the actions and emotions of those around you, when they *alone* are truly responsible. It is so unnecessary. It is so mortal. And it must stop. This, and everything else that has happened tonight should make that clear to you.
It's time for both of us. we have come full circle. Nicholas, don't you see? You have overstayed your welcome. The pain that you're causing your mortal friends is no longer acceptable to them. Those that do survive will not allow your relationship with them to continue the way it was. They will demand change. and you will be compromised. One way or another. Nicholas, the time has come. I will be at your loft tonight for your decision. And then, I am leaving. With or without you.
There's a price to be paid. Love may be tasted but never savored. In our darkest moments we may envy mortality, but we should never aspire to it. Guilt is a poison. And staying past our time is death. But it need not be. If we truly care for a mortal, if we love one, then we must go. Isn't that something you taught me? Leaving is the purest form of love.
All that remains now is to lock the doors and turn out the lights. Unless, of course, you have decided to add her to our entourage. Oh, Nickolas, you have thought this through, haven't you?
(The following transcript was forwarded to CERK Radio ina small cassette tape and the cassette tape was played as the Nightcrawler's final broadcast in his absence.)
Life is a gift. As sweet as the freshest peach, as precious as a gilded jewel. I have never been able to understand the logic of willfully surrendering such a treasure.
How dark can your existence be when compared to an eternal void. Unless, of course, you have faith that there is something beyond.
What do you see from where you stand? A bright light at the end of the tunnel? Is it a ray of hope? A glimmer of something better? Or will it burn you like the rising sun? Are you hearing the trumpeting of St. Peter's angels or the screams of Memnoch's tortured souls?
You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never know the answer until after the deed is done. And is your faith really that strong?
I understand the need to move on. It is something that happens to us all. But if your time has truly come, I also understand that with the beauty of this life,there comes pain and despair. No one is immune. But consider what you have in your hands! Don't trade a treasure for an empty box!
What about love? Heaven makes means to kill our joy with love . It's suffering. It's anguish. It's pain. And yet, we must have it - at any cost. But are you so enamored that you'll overlook your love of life? And you do love it. I have seen you smell the sea, gaze at the stars at night. Are you willing to sacrifice one mistress for another? Look into your heart and tell me that you're willing to make the choice!
Aren't you tired of this incessant guilt? Hasn't it swayed your back and stooped your shoulders to the point of throwing it off? You insist on taking responsibility for the actions and emotions of those around you, when they *alone* are truly responsible. It is so unnecessary. It is so mortal. And it must stop. This, and everything else that has happened tonight should make that clear to you.
It's time for both of us. we have come full circle. Nicholas, don't you see? You have overstayed your welcome. The pain that you're causing your mortal friends is no longer acceptable to them. Those that do survive will not allow your relationship with them to continue the way it was. They will demand change. and you will be compromised. One way or another. Nicholas, the time has come. I will be at your loft tonight for your decision. And then, I am leaving. With or without you.
There's a price to be paid. Love may be tasted but never savored. In our darkest moments we may envy mortality, but we should never aspire to it. Guilt is a poison. And staying past our time is death. But it need not be. If we truly care for a mortal, if we love one, then we must go. Isn't that something you taught me? Leaving is the purest form of love.
All that remains now is to lock the doors and turn out the lights. Unless, of course, you have decided to add her to our entourage. Oh, Nickolas, you have thought this through, haven't you?
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Further excerpts from "The American President"
(The following dialogues were based on a discussion among the President's Joint Chief of Staffs in respect of an appropriate reprisal to Libya for an unprovocated attack they launched on the US troops)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. J. MacInerney:
Sir, it's immediate, it's decisive, it's low-risk, and it's a proportional response.
President Andrew Shepherd:
Someday someone's going to have to explain to me the virtue of a proportional response.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Andrew Shepherd:
What I did tonight was not about political gain.
Leon Kodak:
Yes sir. But it can be, sir. What you did tonight was very presidential.
President Andrew Shepherd:
Leon, somewhere in Libya right now, a janitor's working the night shift at Libyan Intelligence headquarters. He's going about doing his job... because he has no idea, in about an hour he's going to die in a massive explosion. He's just going about his job, because he has no idea that about an hour ago I gave an order to have him killed. You've just seen me do the least presidential thing I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. J. MacInerney:
Sir, it's immediate, it's decisive, it's low-risk, and it's a proportional response.
President Andrew Shepherd:
Someday someone's going to have to explain to me the virtue of a proportional response.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Andrew Shepherd:
What I did tonight was not about political gain.
Leon Kodak:
Yes sir. But it can be, sir. What you did tonight was very presidential.
President Andrew Shepherd:
Leon, somewhere in Libya right now, a janitor's working the night shift at Libyan Intelligence headquarters. He's going about doing his job... because he has no idea, in about an hour he's going to die in a massive explosion. He's just going about his job, because he has no idea that about an hour ago I gave an order to have him killed. You've just seen me do the least presidential thing I do.
President Andrew Shepherd's Press Briefing Speech
(By President Andrew Shepherd (casted by Michael Douglas) in his capacity as the President of the United States of America in the movie “The American President”)
For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was to a certain extent about character. And although I'm not willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation, being president of this country is entirely about character.
For the recond, yes, I am a card carrying member of the ACLU, but the more important question is 'Why aren't you, Bob?' Now this is an organization who's sole purpose is to defend the bill of rights, so it naturally begs the question, why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for president choose to reject upholding the constitution? Now if you can answer that question, folks, then you're smarter that I am, because I didn't understand it until a few hours ago.
America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad, cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say 'You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man who's words make your blood boil, and who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.' You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of it's citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free.
I've known Bob Rumson for years. And I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it.
We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things, and two things only : Making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle age, middle class, middle income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character and you wave an old photo of the president's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism. You tell them she's to blame for their lot in life. And you go on television and you call her a whore.
Sydney Ellen Wade has done nothing to you, Bob. She has done nothing but put herself through school, represent the interest of public school teachers, and lobby for the safety of our natural resources. You want a character debate, Bob? You better stick with me, because Sydney Ellen Wade is way out of your league.
I've loved two women in my life. I lost one to cancer. And I lost the other because I was so busy keeping my job, I forgot to do my job. Well that ends right now.
Tomorrow morning, the White House is sending a bill to Congress for it's consideration. It's White House Resolution 455, an energy bill requiring a twenty percent reduction of the emission of fossil fuels over the next ten years. It is by far the most aggressive stride ever taken in the fight to reverse the effects of global warming. The other piece of legislation is the crime bill. As of today, it no longer exists. I'm throwing it out. I'm throwing it out and writing a law that makes sense. You cannot address crime prevention with out getting rid of assault weapons and hand guns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I'm gonna convince Americans I'm right, and I'm gonna get the guns.
We've got serious problems, and we need serious people. And if you want to talk about character, Bob, you'd better come at me with more than a burning flag and a membership card. If you want to talk about character and American Values, fine. Tell me where and when, and I'll show up.
This a time for serious people, Bob, and your fifteen minutes are up.
My name is Andrew Shepherd, and I am the president.
N.B. This is one of the most inspiring speeches I have heard crafted from a movie script.
For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was to a certain extent about character. And although I'm not willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation, being president of this country is entirely about character.
For the recond, yes, I am a card carrying member of the ACLU, but the more important question is 'Why aren't you, Bob?' Now this is an organization who's sole purpose is to defend the bill of rights, so it naturally begs the question, why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for president choose to reject upholding the constitution? Now if you can answer that question, folks, then you're smarter that I am, because I didn't understand it until a few hours ago.
America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad, cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say 'You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man who's words make your blood boil, and who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.' You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of it's citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free.
I've known Bob Rumson for years. And I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it.
We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things, and two things only : Making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle age, middle class, middle income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character and you wave an old photo of the president's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism. You tell them she's to blame for their lot in life. And you go on television and you call her a whore.
Sydney Ellen Wade has done nothing to you, Bob. She has done nothing but put herself through school, represent the interest of public school teachers, and lobby for the safety of our natural resources. You want a character debate, Bob? You better stick with me, because Sydney Ellen Wade is way out of your league.
I've loved two women in my life. I lost one to cancer. And I lost the other because I was so busy keeping my job, I forgot to do my job. Well that ends right now.
Tomorrow morning, the White House is sending a bill to Congress for it's consideration. It's White House Resolution 455, an energy bill requiring a twenty percent reduction of the emission of fossil fuels over the next ten years. It is by far the most aggressive stride ever taken in the fight to reverse the effects of global warming. The other piece of legislation is the crime bill. As of today, it no longer exists. I'm throwing it out. I'm throwing it out and writing a law that makes sense. You cannot address crime prevention with out getting rid of assault weapons and hand guns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I'm gonna convince Americans I'm right, and I'm gonna get the guns.
We've got serious problems, and we need serious people. And if you want to talk about character, Bob, you'd better come at me with more than a burning flag and a membership card. If you want to talk about character and American Values, fine. Tell me where and when, and I'll show up.
This a time for serious people, Bob, and your fifteen minutes are up.
My name is Andrew Shepherd, and I am the president.
N.B. This is one of the most inspiring speeches I have heard crafted from a movie script.
Monday, June 20, 2005
The right to label women
(By Wendy Cheng a.k.a. Xiaxue, the blog mistress, “Why are you worshipping the ground I blog on” at http://xiaxue.blogspot.com/)
"Slut", by definition, means the woman will fuck everybody right? So unless you manage to get her to fuck you, you have no rights to say she is a slut, loser!
N.B. This is a direct link to the article from which the quotation was extracted:
http://xiaxue.blogspot.com/2005/06/chloe-cheng.html
"Slut", by definition, means the woman will fuck everybody right? So unless you manage to get her to fuck you, you have no rights to say she is a slut, loser!
N.B. This is a direct link to the article from which the quotation was extracted:
http://xiaxue.blogspot.com/2005/06/chloe-cheng.html
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
The Sleeping Prayer
As I lay myself to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
If I die before I wake,
I pray the Lord my soul to take.
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
If I die before I wake,
I pray the Lord my soul to take.
Friday, June 03, 2005
網上歌 - 他約我去迪士尼
原曲歌手: kellyjackie @ Royals
原曲作者: kellyjackie @ Royals
原曲作詞: 海藍 @ Royals ／ 庭 @ Royals
原曲編曲: 林柿 @ Royals
兜過幾個圈 看木馬旋轉 美夢似是遙遠 仍埋藏著繾綣
快樂旅途中 有沒有熱戀 看著這入場券 如同尋獲溫暖
笑問你 你話連夜候票再多的困倦 也不怨 似在平靜地說出 絲絲的愛戀
畢生也願記起 香港迪士尼 煙火璀璨夜晚定會很美
坐咖啡杯 溫馨記憶 旋轉中細味 天邊星宿也沒法比
今天心碎或痛悲 只需要記住陪伴在你身邊有米妮
始終可以幸福地 沉迷在美夢裡希冀
要是你 決定明日伴我去闖天與地 會很美 故事延續下世紀 一生都記起
不必理是與非 不需要顧忌 穿梭堡壘內陪伴我嬉戲
米老鼠 比精品店的美 輕輕靠近 都可使我快樂跳起
當 身邊掛著相機 假使到最後還未望到不准你別離
可知心裡正準備 無緣合照亦抱緊你
公主與白雪都 不需要羨慕 因可跟你在長夜裡擁抱
見阿拉丁 本想說聲坐飛氈 卻又不可媲美你待我好
星空不算是太高 假使有你在旁陪伴我一起每段路
可將一切記心內 明日共你愉快傾訴
N.B. As i understand it, the above song is available for free distribution over the internet, which is in fact the song's initial place of release. The song can be found and downloaded at the following website:
http://www.hkedcity.net/sch_files/a/tpp/tpp-a3570/public_html/dis.mp3
原曲作者: kellyjackie @ Royals
原曲作詞: 海藍 @ Royals ／ 庭 @ Royals
原曲編曲: 林柿 @ Royals
兜過幾個圈 看木馬旋轉 美夢似是遙遠 仍埋藏著繾綣
快樂旅途中 有沒有熱戀 看著這入場券 如同尋獲溫暖
笑問你 你話連夜候票再多的困倦 也不怨 似在平靜地說出 絲絲的愛戀
畢生也願記起 香港迪士尼 煙火璀璨夜晚定會很美
坐咖啡杯 溫馨記憶 旋轉中細味 天邊星宿也沒法比
今天心碎或痛悲 只需要記住陪伴在你身邊有米妮
始終可以幸福地 沉迷在美夢裡希冀
要是你 決定明日伴我去闖天與地 會很美 故事延續下世紀 一生都記起
不必理是與非 不需要顧忌 穿梭堡壘內陪伴我嬉戲
米老鼠 比精品店的美 輕輕靠近 都可使我快樂跳起
當 身邊掛著相機 假使到最後還未望到不准你別離
可知心裡正準備 無緣合照亦抱緊你
公主與白雪都 不需要羨慕 因可跟你在長夜裡擁抱
見阿拉丁 本想說聲坐飛氈 卻又不可媲美你待我好
星空不算是太高 假使有你在旁陪伴我一起每段路
可將一切記心內 明日共你愉快傾訴
N.B. As i understand it, the above song is available for free distribution over the internet, which is in fact the song's initial place of release. The song can be found and downloaded at the following website:
http://www.hkedcity.net/sch_files/a/tpp/tpp-a3570/public_html/dis.mp3
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Random Question: When you spilled the milk, did it look like the moon?
When milk is spilled onto the floor, to put it in a very clique manner, it is only natural for us to cry over the spilled milk.
All advanced species on earth, including human beings, have strong propensity towards the display of emotion, and we often use the outpouring of emotion, whether in happiness or in sadness, as a means to maintain equilibrium over our general well-being. In other words, it is only natural for us to remain upset over a loss in the past, even if there is absolutely nothing we can do to restore the situation completely to the state before the offending event that caused the loss. This is so that we can purge the unhappiness that is generated as a result of the offending event from our body so as to maintain the steady state in our body.
As in the case of the spilled milk, it is obvious that when the milk has been spilled, it is already wasted and therefore cannot be used in the normal hygienic sense. Nevertheless, the process of crying cleanses our body of the negative emotions generated so that our body can begin to heal in an effort to restore equilibrium once again. Perhaps then, we can once again see the cat playing his fiddle on the kitchen counter while the cow jumps over the moon formed from the spilled milk. The little dog then shall laugh heartily to see such fun, and perhaps even the dish will ran away with the spoon.
N.B. the imagery as described in the last sentence is taken from a nursery rhyme named “Hey Diddle Diddle”. The original version goes something like this:
"Hey diddle diddle,
The cat and the fiddle,
The cow jumped over the moon,
The little dog laughed to see such fun,
And the dish ran away with the spoon"
The purpose of introducing such a ludricious imagery in the midst of trying to come to terms with the sense of loss over the spilled milk is to encourage ourselves to try using humour as tool to resolve internal conflicts. It works surprisingly well when we are able to see the world from the funnier perspective.
All advanced species on earth, including human beings, have strong propensity towards the display of emotion, and we often use the outpouring of emotion, whether in happiness or in sadness, as a means to maintain equilibrium over our general well-being. In other words, it is only natural for us to remain upset over a loss in the past, even if there is absolutely nothing we can do to restore the situation completely to the state before the offending event that caused the loss. This is so that we can purge the unhappiness that is generated as a result of the offending event from our body so as to maintain the steady state in our body.
As in the case of the spilled milk, it is obvious that when the milk has been spilled, it is already wasted and therefore cannot be used in the normal hygienic sense. Nevertheless, the process of crying cleanses our body of the negative emotions generated so that our body can begin to heal in an effort to restore equilibrium once again. Perhaps then, we can once again see the cat playing his fiddle on the kitchen counter while the cow jumps over the moon formed from the spilled milk. The little dog then shall laugh heartily to see such fun, and perhaps even the dish will ran away with the spoon.
N.B. the imagery as described in the last sentence is taken from a nursery rhyme named “Hey Diddle Diddle”. The original version goes something like this:
"Hey diddle diddle,
The cat and the fiddle,
The cow jumped over the moon,
The little dog laughed to see such fun,
And the dish ran away with the spoon"
The purpose of introducing such a ludricious imagery in the midst of trying to come to terms with the sense of loss over the spilled milk is to encourage ourselves to try using humour as tool to resolve internal conflicts. It works surprisingly well when we are able to see the world from the funnier perspective.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Random Question: When you open your eyes underwater, do you ever worry that you'll drown?
Whenever I have the chance of opening my eyes underwater without the benefits of wearing some form of eyewear, say goggles or diving masks, the first question that inadvertably materialise inside my head is, more often than not, “what am I going to do to prevent myself from being drowned” rather than that “will I drown”, which incidentally is a thought that I do not really relish much.
Fortunately, each human being has self preservation instincts which are genetically programmed into the body at birth. These instincts serve to protect the human body automatically without conscious effort and intervention in times of peril. In cases where a human body, particularly the face, is unwittingly subjected to a medium foreign to the natural environment, say a large body of water, the mammalian diving reflex kicks in.
As the name suggests, the mammalian diving reflex is is found in all mammals, but especially in marine mammals like whales and seals. In the case of the human being, this reflex puts the human body into a sort of energy saving mode whose aim is to maximize the time that the human body can be spent under water. For marine mammals, this diving reflex is obviously rather important since they live the greater part of their lives in frigid water itself, especially the whales. For mammels like human beings, the reflex is presumably triggered so that the person could indulge in swimming extensive distances for the purpose of exercise, or perhaps to do something useful in an effort to prevent himself from drowning after suffering shock from his inability to climatise fast enough with the foreign environment he is in because he just has to open his eyes under water.
The mammalian diving reflex is generally larger in cold water than in warm water, and includes three factors:
1. Bradycardia, a reduction in the heart rate of up to 50% in human beings;
2. Peripheral vasoconstriction, the restriction of the blood flow to the extremities to increase the blood and oxygen supply to the vital organs, especially the brain;
3. Blood shift, the shifting of blood to the thoracic cavity, which refers to the chest between the diaphragm and the neck to avoid the collapsing of the lungs under higher pressure during deeper dives.
In addition to the above, the same reflex also prevents an unconscious person from actually breathing underwater. As a result of the above, both a conscious and an unconscious person can survive longer without oxygen under water than in a comparable situation on dry land. In this case, the consious person will then have some time to ponder over the question “what am I going to do to prevent myself from being drowned”. As for the unconscious person, he will just have to find some way to wake up himself, otherwise, he should be pondering over the question “will I drown”.
Fortunately, each human being has self preservation instincts which are genetically programmed into the body at birth. These instincts serve to protect the human body automatically without conscious effort and intervention in times of peril. In cases where a human body, particularly the face, is unwittingly subjected to a medium foreign to the natural environment, say a large body of water, the mammalian diving reflex kicks in.
As the name suggests, the mammalian diving reflex is is found in all mammals, but especially in marine mammals like whales and seals. In the case of the human being, this reflex puts the human body into a sort of energy saving mode whose aim is to maximize the time that the human body can be spent under water. For marine mammals, this diving reflex is obviously rather important since they live the greater part of their lives in frigid water itself, especially the whales. For mammels like human beings, the reflex is presumably triggered so that the person could indulge in swimming extensive distances for the purpose of exercise, or perhaps to do something useful in an effort to prevent himself from drowning after suffering shock from his inability to climatise fast enough with the foreign environment he is in because he just has to open his eyes under water.
The mammalian diving reflex is generally larger in cold water than in warm water, and includes three factors:
1. Bradycardia, a reduction in the heart rate of up to 50% in human beings;
2. Peripheral vasoconstriction, the restriction of the blood flow to the extremities to increase the blood and oxygen supply to the vital organs, especially the brain;
3. Blood shift, the shifting of blood to the thoracic cavity, which refers to the chest between the diaphragm and the neck to avoid the collapsing of the lungs under higher pressure during deeper dives.
In addition to the above, the same reflex also prevents an unconscious person from actually breathing underwater. As a result of the above, both a conscious and an unconscious person can survive longer without oxygen under water than in a comparable situation on dry land. In this case, the consious person will then have some time to ponder over the question “what am I going to do to prevent myself from being drowned”. As for the unconscious person, he will just have to find some way to wake up himself, otherwise, he should be pondering over the question “will I drown”.
Friday, May 27, 2005
Extremophile
An extremophile is an organism, usually unicellular but not always so, which thrives in or requires extreme conditions. The definition of extreme is anthropocentric, and this is because to the organism itself, its environment, not matter how extreme it may seem to be, is completely normal to itself. Thus, strictly, extremophilic labels should be used to describe the environment that an organism thrives in, regardless of how normal or extreme they may seem to human beings. For example, human beings are classified as a mesophilic aerobe.
When used in the context of describing organisms that thrive in environments that are extreme from human perspectives, most extremophiles are members of the Archaea family, although the terms are occasionally used interchangeably to describe the many extremophilic bacteria and eukarya. The Archaea are a major group of prokaryotes, which are unicellular (in rare cases, multicellular) organisms without a nucleus. This is in contrast to eukaryotes, organisms that have cell nuclei and may be variously unicellular or multicellular. Most prokaryotes are bacteria, and the two terms are often treated as synonyms. However, Carl Woese, originator of the RNA world hypothesis in 1967, has proposed dividing prokaryotes into the Bacteria and Archaea in 1977 because of the significant genetic differences between the two.
It is also important to note that not all extremophiles are unicellular. Examples of extremophilic metazoa are the psychrophilic Grylloblattodea (insects) and antarctic krill (crustaceans).
Different types of extremophiles
There are many different classes of extremophiles, each corresponding to the way its chosen environment differs from what is considered normal by other organisms. These classifications are not exclusive. Many extremophiles fall under multiple categories. For example, organisms living inside hot rocks deep under Earth's surface are both thermophilic and barophilic.
1. Acidophile: An organism which thrives under an environment with an optimum pH level at or below pH 3.
2. Aerobe: An organism which requires O2 to survive. There are 2 sub-categories of aerobes and they are the obligate aerobes and the facultative aerobes. Obligate aerobes require oxygen, while facultative aerobes can use oxygen, but also have other options. Almost all animals, most fungi and several bacteria are obligate aerobes. Being an obligate aerobe, although being advantageous from the energetical point of view, means also obligatory facing high levels of oxidative stress. Yeast, on the other hand, is an example of a facultative aerobe. Individual human cells are also facultative aerobes, as in they can switch to lactic acid fermentation if oxygen is not available. However, for the whole organism this cannot be sustained for long, and humans are therefore obligate aerobes.
3. Alkaliphile: An organism which thrives under an environment with an optimal pH levels of 9 or above, such as soda lakes and carbonate-rich soils.
4. Anaerobe: An organism which does not need O2 to survive. There are several sub-categories of anaerobes in existence. Aerotolerant organisms do not require oxygen, but are not affected by exposure to air. Microaerophiles are organisms that may use oxygen, but only at low concentrations (low micromolar range) and their growth is inhibited by normal oxygen concentrations (approximately 200 micromolar). Nanaerobes are organisms that cannot grow in the presence of micromolar concentrations of oxygen, but can grow with and benefit from nanomolar concentrations of oxygen. Certain anaerobic bacteria produce toxins, such as the tetanus or botulinum toxins, that are highly dangerous to higher organisms, including humans.
5. Endolith: An organism that lives inside rocks down to a depth of up to about 3 km, though it is unknown if that is their limit, or in the pores between mineral grains. Judging from the hyperthermophiles as discussed below, the temperature limit is at about 110°C, which limits the possible depth to 4 km below the continental crust, and 7 km below the ocean floor. Endolithic organisms have also been found in regions of low humidity.
6. Halophile: An organism which thrives in environments with very high concentrations of salt (NaCl) and requires at least 0.2 molar of salt for growth. Of particular note are the extreme halophiles or halobacteria, which require at least 2 molar of salt and are usually found in saturated solutions. These are the primary inhabitants of salt lakes and inland seas, such as the Dead Sea, where they tint the sediments bright colors.
7. Hypolith: An photosynthetic organism that lives inside or underneath rocks in climatically extreme in cold deserts. The rocks are generally translucent to allow for the penetration of light, such as quartz, which is one of the most common translucent rocks.
8. Mesophile: An organism that grows best in moderate temperature, neither too hot nor too cold, typically between 20 and 45 °C with an optimal temperature near 37 °C, which is the normal temperature of the human body. Most organisms that are pathogenic to humans are mesophiles. Organisms that prefer cold environments are termed psychrophilic and those preferring hot temperatures are termed thermophilic. A psychrophile is an organism which thrives at relatively cold temperatures. There are generally considered to be two groups of psychrophiles and they are name the classic psychrophiles and the psychrotrophs by food microbiologists. Classic psychrophiles are those organisms having a optimum growth temperature of 15°C or lower and do not grow in a climate beyond a maximum temperature of 20°C. They are largely found in icy places (such as in Antarctica) or at the freezing bottom of the ocean floor. Psychrotrophs, on the other hand, can grow at 0°C and up through approximately 40°C, and exist in much larger numbers than classic psychrophiles. They are of particular significance to food microbiologists as they can grow in refrigerated environments and cause food spoilage. A thermophile is an organism which thrives at relatively high temperatures, up to about 60 °C. Thermophiles have been found in various geothermally heated regions of the Earth such as hot springs like those in Yellowstone National Park and deep sea hydrothermal vents, and they are primarily responsible for producing the bright colors of the said waters. A hyperthermophile is an organism that thrives in extremely hot environments which are above 60°C. The optimal temperatures are between 80°C and 110°C. In fact, the recently-discovered Strain 121 has been able to double its population within 24 hours in an autoclave at 121°C, hence it was named as such. Many hyperthermophiles are also able to withstand other environmental extremes, such as high acidity or radiation levels. Hyperthermophiles were first discovered in the 1960s in hot springs in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. The most hardy hyperthermophiles are known live on the superheated walls of deep-sea hydrothermal vents, requiring temperatures of at least 90°C for survival.
9. Metalotolerant organism: An organism which is capable of tolerating high levels of heavy metals, such as copper, cadmium, arsenic, and zinc.
10. Oligotroph: An organism which is capable of growth in nutritionally limited environments.
11. Piezophile (also known as Barophile): An organism that lives optimally at high hydrostatic pressure, such as in high-pressure deep-sea environments, where pressure is well above atmospheric pressure. A pressure of 1 atmosphere is aproximately equivalent to 0.1 MPa. For every every km below ocean, the pressure increases approximately 10 MPa. For every km below earth’s crust, the pressure increases about 30 MPa. One strain of barophilic bacteria, Hirondellea gigas, was isolated from a sample of the world's deepest sediment, collected from the Mariana Trench, Challenger Deep, at a depth of 10,898 m. The Mariana Trench, Challenger Deep (11°22'N, 142°25'E) is the deepest ocean bottom in the world. Apparently, the Hirondellea gigas could grow only under pressure conditions of greater than 518 bars, that is approximately 50 MPa or more.
12. Radioresistant organism: An organism which is are capable of resisting very high levels of ionizing radiation, such as nuclear power plants. Please kindly refer to previous posting "Deinococcus radiodurans - The most radioresistant organism known to mankind".
13. Xerotolerant organism: An organism which can survive in environments where there is very little water. Water activity is a measure of the amount of water within a substrate that an organism can use to support growth. Xerotolerant organisms can survive in environments with water activity below 0.8. Endoliths and halophiles are xerotolerant.
N.B. Anthropocentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of regarding the existence or concerns of human beings as the central fact of the universe.
When used in the context of describing organisms that thrive in environments that are extreme from human perspectives, most extremophiles are members of the Archaea family, although the terms are occasionally used interchangeably to describe the many extremophilic bacteria and eukarya. The Archaea are a major group of prokaryotes, which are unicellular (in rare cases, multicellular) organisms without a nucleus. This is in contrast to eukaryotes, organisms that have cell nuclei and may be variously unicellular or multicellular. Most prokaryotes are bacteria, and the two terms are often treated as synonyms. However, Carl Woese, originator of the RNA world hypothesis in 1967, has proposed dividing prokaryotes into the Bacteria and Archaea in 1977 because of the significant genetic differences between the two.
It is also important to note that not all extremophiles are unicellular. Examples of extremophilic metazoa are the psychrophilic Grylloblattodea (insects) and antarctic krill (crustaceans).
Different types of extremophiles
There are many different classes of extremophiles, each corresponding to the way its chosen environment differs from what is considered normal by other organisms. These classifications are not exclusive. Many extremophiles fall under multiple categories. For example, organisms living inside hot rocks deep under Earth's surface are both thermophilic and barophilic.
1. Acidophile: An organism which thrives under an environment with an optimum pH level at or below pH 3.
2. Aerobe: An organism which requires O2 to survive. There are 2 sub-categories of aerobes and they are the obligate aerobes and the facultative aerobes. Obligate aerobes require oxygen, while facultative aerobes can use oxygen, but also have other options. Almost all animals, most fungi and several bacteria are obligate aerobes. Being an obligate aerobe, although being advantageous from the energetical point of view, means also obligatory facing high levels of oxidative stress. Yeast, on the other hand, is an example of a facultative aerobe. Individual human cells are also facultative aerobes, as in they can switch to lactic acid fermentation if oxygen is not available. However, for the whole organism this cannot be sustained for long, and humans are therefore obligate aerobes.
3. Alkaliphile: An organism which thrives under an environment with an optimal pH levels of 9 or above, such as soda lakes and carbonate-rich soils.
4. Anaerobe: An organism which does not need O2 to survive. There are several sub-categories of anaerobes in existence. Aerotolerant organisms do not require oxygen, but are not affected by exposure to air. Microaerophiles are organisms that may use oxygen, but only at low concentrations (low micromolar range) and their growth is inhibited by normal oxygen concentrations (approximately 200 micromolar). Nanaerobes are organisms that cannot grow in the presence of micromolar concentrations of oxygen, but can grow with and benefit from nanomolar concentrations of oxygen. Certain anaerobic bacteria produce toxins, such as the tetanus or botulinum toxins, that are highly dangerous to higher organisms, including humans.
5. Endolith: An organism that lives inside rocks down to a depth of up to about 3 km, though it is unknown if that is their limit, or in the pores between mineral grains. Judging from the hyperthermophiles as discussed below, the temperature limit is at about 110°C, which limits the possible depth to 4 km below the continental crust, and 7 km below the ocean floor. Endolithic organisms have also been found in regions of low humidity.
6. Halophile: An organism which thrives in environments with very high concentrations of salt (NaCl) and requires at least 0.2 molar of salt for growth. Of particular note are the extreme halophiles or halobacteria, which require at least 2 molar of salt and are usually found in saturated solutions. These are the primary inhabitants of salt lakes and inland seas, such as the Dead Sea, where they tint the sediments bright colors.
7. Hypolith: An photosynthetic organism that lives inside or underneath rocks in climatically extreme in cold deserts. The rocks are generally translucent to allow for the penetration of light, such as quartz, which is one of the most common translucent rocks.
8. Mesophile: An organism that grows best in moderate temperature, neither too hot nor too cold, typically between 20 and 45 °C with an optimal temperature near 37 °C, which is the normal temperature of the human body. Most organisms that are pathogenic to humans are mesophiles. Organisms that prefer cold environments are termed psychrophilic and those preferring hot temperatures are termed thermophilic. A psychrophile is an organism which thrives at relatively cold temperatures. There are generally considered to be two groups of psychrophiles and they are name the classic psychrophiles and the psychrotrophs by food microbiologists. Classic psychrophiles are those organisms having a optimum growth temperature of 15°C or lower and do not grow in a climate beyond a maximum temperature of 20°C. They are largely found in icy places (such as in Antarctica) or at the freezing bottom of the ocean floor. Psychrotrophs, on the other hand, can grow at 0°C and up through approximately 40°C, and exist in much larger numbers than classic psychrophiles. They are of particular significance to food microbiologists as they can grow in refrigerated environments and cause food spoilage. A thermophile is an organism which thrives at relatively high temperatures, up to about 60 °C. Thermophiles have been found in various geothermally heated regions of the Earth such as hot springs like those in Yellowstone National Park and deep sea hydrothermal vents, and they are primarily responsible for producing the bright colors of the said waters. A hyperthermophile is an organism that thrives in extremely hot environments which are above 60°C. The optimal temperatures are between 80°C and 110°C. In fact, the recently-discovered Strain 121 has been able to double its population within 24 hours in an autoclave at 121°C, hence it was named as such. Many hyperthermophiles are also able to withstand other environmental extremes, such as high acidity or radiation levels. Hyperthermophiles were first discovered in the 1960s in hot springs in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. The most hardy hyperthermophiles are known live on the superheated walls of deep-sea hydrothermal vents, requiring temperatures of at least 90°C for survival.
9. Metalotolerant organism: An organism which is capable of tolerating high levels of heavy metals, such as copper, cadmium, arsenic, and zinc.
10. Oligotroph: An organism which is capable of growth in nutritionally limited environments.
11. Piezophile (also known as Barophile): An organism that lives optimally at high hydrostatic pressure, such as in high-pressure deep-sea environments, where pressure is well above atmospheric pressure. A pressure of 1 atmosphere is aproximately equivalent to 0.1 MPa. For every every km below ocean, the pressure increases approximately 10 MPa. For every km below earth’s crust, the pressure increases about 30 MPa. One strain of barophilic bacteria, Hirondellea gigas, was isolated from a sample of the world's deepest sediment, collected from the Mariana Trench, Challenger Deep, at a depth of 10,898 m. The Mariana Trench, Challenger Deep (11°22'N, 142°25'E) is the deepest ocean bottom in the world. Apparently, the Hirondellea gigas could grow only under pressure conditions of greater than 518 bars, that is approximately 50 MPa or more.
12. Radioresistant organism: An organism which is are capable of resisting very high levels of ionizing radiation, such as nuclear power plants. Please kindly refer to previous posting "Deinococcus radiodurans - The most radioresistant organism known to mankind".
13. Xerotolerant organism: An organism which can survive in environments where there is very little water. Water activity is a measure of the amount of water within a substrate that an organism can use to support growth. Xerotolerant organisms can survive in environments with water activity below 0.8. Endoliths and halophiles are xerotolerant.
N.B. Anthropocentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of regarding the existence or concerns of human beings as the central fact of the universe.
Deinococcus radiodurans - The most radioresistant organism known to mankind
Deinococcus radiodurans is an extremophilic bacterium (a category of baterium which we will further discuss in the next posting) and it is the most radioresistant organism known to mankind. Radioresistant organisms is defined as organisms which are capable of living in enviroments with very high levels of ionizing radiation. A dose of 10 Gray or Gy, which is the SI unit of energy for the absorbed dose of radiation and one gray is the absorption of one joule of radiation energy by one kilogram of matter, is sufficient to kill a human. A dose of 60 Gy is sufficient to kill all cells in a culture of E. coli. However, Deinococcus radiodurans is capable of withstanding an instantaneous dose of up to 5,000 Gy with no loss of viability, and an instantaneous dose of up to 15,000 Gy with 37% viability.
It is not entirely clear as to how Deinococcus radiodurans could have developed naturally such a high degree of radioresistance. Naturally, background radiation levels are very low. In most places, background radiation is on the order of 0.4 mGy per year, and the highest known background radiation, which is near Guarapari, Brazil, is only 175 mGy per year. With naturally-occurring background radiation levels so low, mechanisms specifically to ward off the effects of high radiation cannot have been selected for during evolution.
Using genetic engineering, Deinococcus radiodurans has been given the abilities to consume and digest solvents and heavy metals, even in highly radioactive sites. It is now known that Deinococcus radiodurans accomplishes its resistance to radiation by having multiple copies of its genome and rapid DNA repair mechanisms.
When a creature gets hit by a high dose of radiation, the intense energy causes the large DNA molecule in each cell to fall apart. No creature can survive without its genes in working order. Most microbes have tools they can use to repair occasional damage to their DNA. The Deinococcus radiodurans, unlike other bacteria, has lots of extra copies of its genes. Deinococcus radiodurans cells have four to ten copies of their DNA molecule. Most bacteria have only one copy. These copies serve as back-ups, and when radiation hits and the Deinococcus radiodurans’ DNA becomes damaged, the bacterium has a lot more chances of finding an intact copy of each gene to use as it stitches its DNA back together.
In addition to the above, it also appears that Deinococcus radiodurans may have more of the cell repair tools that most bacteria have. Other microbes have many of the same kind of tools, although not in as high numbers and variety as Deinococcus radiodurans does. Michael Daly of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences also suggested that the bacterium uses manganese to protect itself against radiation damage.
As a consequence of its hardiness, Deinococcus radiodurans has been nicknamed "Conan the Bacterium" (after Conan the Barbarian) and its official latin name literally means "strange berry that withstands radiation".
In addition to high levels of ionizing and ultraviolet radiation, it can also survive, and acid genotoxic chemicals, oxidative damage, extreme temperatures and vacuum. It also turns out that Deinococcus radiodurans is also able to live through extensive periods with absolutely no water. It was hypothesized that the bacterium’s radiation resistance could be a lucky side effect of the ability the bacterium evolved to withstand long periods without water, which is a more common natural occurrence than being exposed naturally to incredibly high radiation blasts. This is because dehydration causes the same kinds of breaks in DNA as radiation does and requires the same stitching process to fix these breaks.
Deinococcus radiodurans was discovered in 1956 by A.W. Anderson at the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station in Corvallis, Oregon. Experiments were being performed to determine if canned food could be sterilized using high doses of gamma radiation. A tin of meat was exposed to a dose of radiation that was thought to kill all known forms of life, but the meat subsequently spoiled and Deinococcus radiodurans was isolated from the meat.
It is not entirely clear as to how Deinococcus radiodurans could have developed naturally such a high degree of radioresistance. Naturally, background radiation levels are very low. In most places, background radiation is on the order of 0.4 mGy per year, and the highest known background radiation, which is near Guarapari, Brazil, is only 175 mGy per year. With naturally-occurring background radiation levels so low, mechanisms specifically to ward off the effects of high radiation cannot have been selected for during evolution.
Using genetic engineering, Deinococcus radiodurans has been given the abilities to consume and digest solvents and heavy metals, even in highly radioactive sites. It is now known that Deinococcus radiodurans accomplishes its resistance to radiation by having multiple copies of its genome and rapid DNA repair mechanisms.
When a creature gets hit by a high dose of radiation, the intense energy causes the large DNA molecule in each cell to fall apart. No creature can survive without its genes in working order. Most microbes have tools they can use to repair occasional damage to their DNA. The Deinococcus radiodurans, unlike other bacteria, has lots of extra copies of its genes. Deinococcus radiodurans cells have four to ten copies of their DNA molecule. Most bacteria have only one copy. These copies serve as back-ups, and when radiation hits and the Deinococcus radiodurans’ DNA becomes damaged, the bacterium has a lot more chances of finding an intact copy of each gene to use as it stitches its DNA back together.
In addition to the above, it also appears that Deinococcus radiodurans may have more of the cell repair tools that most bacteria have. Other microbes have many of the same kind of tools, although not in as high numbers and variety as Deinococcus radiodurans does. Michael Daly of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences also suggested that the bacterium uses manganese to protect itself against radiation damage.
As a consequence of its hardiness, Deinococcus radiodurans has been nicknamed "Conan the Bacterium" (after Conan the Barbarian) and its official latin name literally means "strange berry that withstands radiation".
In addition to high levels of ionizing and ultraviolet radiation, it can also survive, and acid genotoxic chemicals, oxidative damage, extreme temperatures and vacuum. It also turns out that Deinococcus radiodurans is also able to live through extensive periods with absolutely no water. It was hypothesized that the bacterium’s radiation resistance could be a lucky side effect of the ability the bacterium evolved to withstand long periods without water, which is a more common natural occurrence than being exposed naturally to incredibly high radiation blasts. This is because dehydration causes the same kinds of breaks in DNA as radiation does and requires the same stitching process to fix these breaks.
Deinococcus radiodurans was discovered in 1956 by A.W. Anderson at the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station in Corvallis, Oregon. Experiments were being performed to determine if canned food could be sterilized using high doses of gamma radiation. A tin of meat was exposed to a dose of radiation that was thought to kill all known forms of life, but the meat subsequently spoiled and Deinococcus radiodurans was isolated from the meat.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Bristlecone Pines - The oldest known living species on earth
The bristlecone pines are a small group of pine trees under the Pinaceae family (genus Pinus, subsection Balfourianae) that can live up to nearly 5,000 years, an age which far exceeds any other living thing known.
There are three closely related bristlecone pines species and they are:
1. Rocky Mountains Bristlecone Pine (Pinus aristata) species which can be found in Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona;
2. Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva) species which can be found in in Utah, Nevada and eastern California; and
3. Foxtail Pine (Pinus balfouriana) species which can be found in California.
The oldest living specimen of bristlecone pines that is currently known is an individual of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine nicknamed "Methuselah" after the reportedly longest-lived Biblical patriarch. Methuselah is located between 10,000 and 11,000 feet in the lnyo National Forest within the White Mountains, east of the Sierra Nevada. The core samples of Methuselah indicted the age of the bristlecone pine to be in excess of 4,700 years old, which is 1,500 years more than the age of their nearest competitor, being the Giant Sequoia. And quite possibly, there may be even older specimens may exist elsewhere in the White Mountains and in other remote parts of Nevada.
A bristlecone pine older than "Methuselah" was cut down in 1964 by a geography graduate student performing research in an area now protected by Great Basin National Park in Nevada. The tree, posthumously named "Prometheus", was found to be about 4,900 years old by ring counting.
The other two species, being the Rocky Mountains Bristlecone Pine and the Foxtail Pine, are also long-lived, though not to the extreme extent of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine. Specimens of both types of bristlecone pine have been measured or estimated to be up to 3,000 years old.
Bristlecone pines grow in isolated groves at and just below tree-line. Young bristlecone pines are densely clad with glistening needle-covered branches that sway like foxtails in the wind. With their bristled cones dripping pine scented resin on a warm afternoon, the bristlecone pines exude all the freshness of youth. As centuries pass and the bristlecone pines are battered by the elements, they become sculpted into astonishingly beautiful shapes and forms.
The trees manage to survive in the poorly nourished, alkaline soil with a minimum of moisture and a forty-five day growing season. In fact, the trees longevity is linked to these inhospitable conditions. Between cold temperatures, high winds, and short growing seasons, the bristlecone pines grow very slowly, adding as little as an inch in girth in a hundred years. Those bristlecone pines that grow the slowest produce very dense, highly resinous wood, and it is the dense and resinous wood that enables the bristlecone pines to be highly resistant to invasion by insects, fungi, and other potential pests.
As the tree ages, much of its bark may die. However, while most of its wood is dead, growth barely continues through a narrow strip of living tissue to connect the roots to the handful of live branches. When all life finally ceases, the snags of the bristlecone pines stand for a thousand years or more. The bristlecone pines then continue to be polished by wind driven ice and sand and the dense wood becomes slowly eroded away rather than decayed.
There are three closely related bristlecone pines species and they are:
1. Rocky Mountains Bristlecone Pine (Pinus aristata) species which can be found in Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona;
2. Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva) species which can be found in in Utah, Nevada and eastern California; and
3. Foxtail Pine (Pinus balfouriana) species which can be found in California.
The oldest living specimen of bristlecone pines that is currently known is an individual of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine nicknamed "Methuselah" after the reportedly longest-lived Biblical patriarch. Methuselah is located between 10,000 and 11,000 feet in the lnyo National Forest within the White Mountains, east of the Sierra Nevada. The core samples of Methuselah indicted the age of the bristlecone pine to be in excess of 4,700 years old, which is 1,500 years more than the age of their nearest competitor, being the Giant Sequoia. And quite possibly, there may be even older specimens may exist elsewhere in the White Mountains and in other remote parts of Nevada.
A bristlecone pine older than "Methuselah" was cut down in 1964 by a geography graduate student performing research in an area now protected by Great Basin National Park in Nevada. The tree, posthumously named "Prometheus", was found to be about 4,900 years old by ring counting.
The other two species, being the Rocky Mountains Bristlecone Pine and the Foxtail Pine, are also long-lived, though not to the extreme extent of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine. Specimens of both types of bristlecone pine have been measured or estimated to be up to 3,000 years old.
Bristlecone pines grow in isolated groves at and just below tree-line. Young bristlecone pines are densely clad with glistening needle-covered branches that sway like foxtails in the wind. With their bristled cones dripping pine scented resin on a warm afternoon, the bristlecone pines exude all the freshness of youth. As centuries pass and the bristlecone pines are battered by the elements, they become sculpted into astonishingly beautiful shapes and forms.
The trees manage to survive in the poorly nourished, alkaline soil with a minimum of moisture and a forty-five day growing season. In fact, the trees longevity is linked to these inhospitable conditions. Between cold temperatures, high winds, and short growing seasons, the bristlecone pines grow very slowly, adding as little as an inch in girth in a hundred years. Those bristlecone pines that grow the slowest produce very dense, highly resinous wood, and it is the dense and resinous wood that enables the bristlecone pines to be highly resistant to invasion by insects, fungi, and other potential pests.
As the tree ages, much of its bark may die. However, while most of its wood is dead, growth barely continues through a narrow strip of living tissue to connect the roots to the handful of live branches. When all life finally ceases, the snags of the bristlecone pines stand for a thousand years or more. The bristlecone pines then continue to be polished by wind driven ice and sand and the dense wood becomes slowly eroded away rather than decayed.
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
Saffron - The most expensive spice in the world
Saffron is a commercial spice that comes from the bright red stigmas of the saffron flower, or Crocus sativus, which flowers in the fall in many different countries, including Greece, India, Iran and Spain. The Crocus sativus stigmas are the female part of the flower. During a good year, each saffron crocus plant might produce several flowers. Each saffron flower contains three stigmas, which are the only part of the saffron crocus that when dried properly, become commercial saffron. Each red stigma is like a little capsule that encloses the complex chemicals that make up saffron's aroma, flavor, and yellow dye. In order to release these chemicals, you must steep the saffron filaments or threads, which are actually the dried stigmas of the saffron flower. Powdered saffron is more efficient because it does not need to be steeped.
Since each saffron flower contains only three stigmas and the stigmas must be picked from each flower by hand. As such, more than 75,000 blossoms or 225,000 hand-picked stigmas of these saffron flowers are required to produce just about one pound of Saffron filaments, thereby making saffron the most precious and most expensive spice in the world.
Soil and weather conditions naturally vary in the saffron cultivating countries and so do the methods of drying the fresh saffron stigmas. The international measuring stick for determining the quality of saffron is called a photospectometry report, the result of a laboratory analysis of the three chemicals in the saffron stigma which relate to aroma, flavor and color. Even though saffron stigmas are red, their dye is the color of egg yolks which gives the appealing yellow to culinary dishes. The chemicals that are being analyzed in a photospectometry report are crocin (the source of saffron’s strong orange-yellow coloring property), picrocrocin (source of its flavor) and safranal (source of its aroma). The higher the saffron’s coloring strength, the higher its value, as the saffron's coloring strength determines its flavor and aroma. If saffron has the right coloring strength, it will have the right color and general appearance, whether it is in the thread or powder form.
The saffron powder, with a high coloring strength, offers many advantages over the threads. When saffron threads are ground into powder, the chemicals corresponding to aroma, flavor and color are immediately released. The powder is then stored carefully, away from moisture and light, just as the threads need to be in order to maintain their potency. When the saffron powder reaches the chef, it is ready to be added directly to any recipe. When the chef adds the saffron powder to a recipe, immediately the deep yellow dye, delicate aroma and unique flavor are released.
As for saffron in the thread form, in order to release the potent chemicals in the saffron threads, they must be inmersed in an alcoholic, acidic or hot liquid for longer than just a few minutes. This allows aroma, flavor and color to be generously extracted. Saffron threads can release aroma, flavor and color for 24 hours or more, depending on their quality.
N.B. According to Greek myth, handsome mortal Crocos fell deeply in love with the beautiful nymph Smilax. But his overtures were rebuffed by Smilax, and he was turned into a beautiful purple crocus flower.
Since each saffron flower contains only three stigmas and the stigmas must be picked from each flower by hand. As such, more than 75,000 blossoms or 225,000 hand-picked stigmas of these saffron flowers are required to produce just about one pound of Saffron filaments, thereby making saffron the most precious and most expensive spice in the world.
Soil and weather conditions naturally vary in the saffron cultivating countries and so do the methods of drying the fresh saffron stigmas. The international measuring stick for determining the quality of saffron is called a photospectometry report, the result of a laboratory analysis of the three chemicals in the saffron stigma which relate to aroma, flavor and color. Even though saffron stigmas are red, their dye is the color of egg yolks which gives the appealing yellow to culinary dishes. The chemicals that are being analyzed in a photospectometry report are crocin (the source of saffron’s strong orange-yellow coloring property), picrocrocin (source of its flavor) and safranal (source of its aroma). The higher the saffron’s coloring strength, the higher its value, as the saffron's coloring strength determines its flavor and aroma. If saffron has the right coloring strength, it will have the right color and general appearance, whether it is in the thread or powder form.
The saffron powder, with a high coloring strength, offers many advantages over the threads. When saffron threads are ground into powder, the chemicals corresponding to aroma, flavor and color are immediately released. The powder is then stored carefully, away from moisture and light, just as the threads need to be in order to maintain their potency. When the saffron powder reaches the chef, it is ready to be added directly to any recipe. When the chef adds the saffron powder to a recipe, immediately the deep yellow dye, delicate aroma and unique flavor are released.
As for saffron in the thread form, in order to release the potent chemicals in the saffron threads, they must be inmersed in an alcoholic, acidic or hot liquid for longer than just a few minutes. This allows aroma, flavor and color to be generously extracted. Saffron threads can release aroma, flavor and color for 24 hours or more, depending on their quality.
N.B. According to Greek myth, handsome mortal Crocos fell deeply in love with the beautiful nymph Smilax. But his overtures were rebuffed by Smilax, and he was turned into a beautiful purple crocus flower.
Friday, May 20, 2005
Recipe for cooking Dry Abalones
There are mainly 2 different types of Dry Abalones. They are:
Green Abalones: these species of abalone is characterized by their relatively thicker and heavier body and the quality of their meat is firm and fleshy; and
Yellow Abalones: these species of abalone is characterized by their relatively thinner and lighter body and the quality of their meat is generally poorer and tougher.
Recipe for cooking Dry Abalones:
Green Abalones: these species of abalone is characterized by their relatively thicker and heavier body and the quality of their meat is firm and fleshy; and
Yellow Abalones: these species of abalone is characterized by their relatively thinner and lighter body and the quality of their meat is generally poorer and tougher.
Recipe for cooking Dry Abalones:
- Immerse and soak the Dry Abalones in clear water for 2 full days and nights. In the midst of the soaking, change the clear water every 4 to 5 hours.
- After soaking for the above duration, if the cores of the Dry Abalones are still hard, continue to immerse the Dry Abalones in clear water and raise the temperature the clear water to boiling point, after which turn off the fire and allow the clear water to cool to room temperature. If the cores of the Dry Abalones are still hard after the boiling process, repeat the boiling process until the cores of the Dry Abalones are become soft.
- Clean the Dry Abalones again in clear water, while taking special care to clean out the intestines and the chrysanthemums shaped lip edges for sand particles.
- Prepare and clean the required other ingredients, being old hen, chicken feet, lean meat laced with fatty meat, pig ligaments, pork ribs etc.
- Prepare iron pot or clay pot by placing bamboo mat at the bottom of the pot to prevent charring the pot’s bottom. Place the required other ingredients, being old hen, chicken feet, lean meat laced with fatty meat, pig ligaments, pork ribs etc into the pot. Then, place the Dry Abalones into the pot followed by clear water until the water level covers all the Dry Abalones and ingredients. After that, place a little rock sugar into the pot. Take note that when cooking Dry Abalones, salt and soy sauce must never be used to prevent the Dry Abalones from hardening.
- Use big fire to cook the pot of Dry Abalones and ingredients to boiling point before changing to small fire to achieve a consistent small boil or simmer. Maintain this simmering for 18 hours before switching off the fire. After another 12 hours, extract the cooled Dry Abalones from the pot and cut up the Dry Abalones when cold so as to ensure that the sweetness of the Dry Abalones is released from the flesh.
- Use the resultant soup and gravy from the pot to heat up the cut Dry Abalones, at the same time, add the necessary flavoring. After that, the Dry Abalones can be served from consumption.
Venomous Mammals
There are only 2 main species of mammals which are venomous by nature. These mammals include the shrew and the platypus.
Shrews are small, superficially mouse-like mammals of the family Soricidae. Although their external appearance is generally that of a mouse with a long nose, the shrews are not rodents and not closely related and the shrew family is part of the order Eulipotyphla. Shrews have feet with five clawed toes, unlike rodents, which have four. Shrews are also not to be confused with tree shrews, which are also unrelated, and belong to their own order, Scandentia. Shrews are distributed almost worldwide and of the major temperate land masses, only New Guinea, Australia, and New Zealand do not have native shrews at all; South America has shrews only in the far-northern tropical part.
Certain species of shrew are venomous, as in these species produce a toxic secretion which are channeled via little grooves in their teeth on the outside that the venom follows into a bite wound, which probably helps to immobilise especially large prey, such as other small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish and larger invertebrates, by its effects on the nervous system. This poisonous bite has been reported from North American Blarina and European Neomys. The bite can be quite painful to a human hand for, although shrew's teeth rarely puncture the skin, the toxin in the saliva of some species seems to produce a slight inflammation and reddening of the skin which can persist for several days.
The platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) is a small, semi-aquatic mammal endemic to the eastern part of Australia, and one of the four extant monotremes, the only mammals that lay eggs instead of giving birth to live young. Please kindly note that the other three are from the echidna family. The scientific name Ornithorhynchus is derived from "ornithorhynkhos", which literally means "bird nose" in Greek, and anatinus means "duck". The name platypus is often prefixed with the adjective "duck-billed" to form duck-billed platypus, despite there being only one species of platypus.
All platypuses are born with spurs on their hind feet to inject venom. The spurs on the female fall off after the first year. The spurs on males become venomous during the breeding season.
N.B. Apparently, there is a slight difference between being vemonous and being poisonous. The definition hinges on how the toxin gets into the prey. A poison is something that has to be eaten or breathed in for it to take effect, that is ingested or inhaled. A venom is usually harmless if eaten. In order for it to do harm, it must come into contact with tissue underneath the skin, that is injected.
Shrews are small, superficially mouse-like mammals of the family Soricidae. Although their external appearance is generally that of a mouse with a long nose, the shrews are not rodents and not closely related and the shrew family is part of the order Eulipotyphla. Shrews have feet with five clawed toes, unlike rodents, which have four. Shrews are also not to be confused with tree shrews, which are also unrelated, and belong to their own order, Scandentia. Shrews are distributed almost worldwide and of the major temperate land masses, only New Guinea, Australia, and New Zealand do not have native shrews at all; South America has shrews only in the far-northern tropical part.
Certain species of shrew are venomous, as in these species produce a toxic secretion which are channeled via little grooves in their teeth on the outside that the venom follows into a bite wound, which probably helps to immobilise especially large prey, such as other small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish and larger invertebrates, by its effects on the nervous system. This poisonous bite has been reported from North American Blarina and European Neomys. The bite can be quite painful to a human hand for, although shrew's teeth rarely puncture the skin, the toxin in the saliva of some species seems to produce a slight inflammation and reddening of the skin which can persist for several days.
The platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) is a small, semi-aquatic mammal endemic to the eastern part of Australia, and one of the four extant monotremes, the only mammals that lay eggs instead of giving birth to live young. Please kindly note that the other three are from the echidna family. The scientific name Ornithorhynchus is derived from "ornithorhynkhos", which literally means "bird nose" in Greek, and anatinus means "duck". The name platypus is often prefixed with the adjective "duck-billed" to form duck-billed platypus, despite there being only one species of platypus.
All platypuses are born with spurs on their hind feet to inject venom. The spurs on the female fall off after the first year. The spurs on males become venomous during the breeding season.
N.B. Apparently, there is a slight difference between being vemonous and being poisonous. The definition hinges on how the toxin gets into the prey. A poison is something that has to be eaten or breathed in for it to take effect, that is ingested or inhaled. A venom is usually harmless if eaten. In order for it to do harm, it must come into contact with tissue underneath the skin, that is injected.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Antimatter - The most expensive material on earth
Antimatter is essentially substance composed of elementary particles having the mass and electric charge of ordinary matter (such as electrons and protons) but for which the charge and related magnetic properties are opposite in sign.
The existence of antimatter was posited by the electron theory of Paul A.M. Dirac in 1929, where he suggested that the building blocks of atoms, being electrons (negatively charged particles) and protons (positively charged particles), all have antimatter counterparts, being antielectrons and antiprotons. One fundamental difference between matter and antimatter is that their subatomic building blocks carry opposite electric charges. Thus, while an ordinary electron is negatively charged, an antielectron is positively charged (hence the term positrons, which means "positive electrons") and while an ordinary proton is positively charged, an antiproton is negative.
In 1932, the positron (antielectron) was detected in cosmic rays by Caltech scientist Carl Anderson when a positron flew through a detector in his laboratory. This was followed by the discovery of the antiproton and the antineutron which was detected through the use of particle accelerators by Berkeley scientists in the 1950s. Positrons, antiprotons, and antineutrons, collectively called antiparticles, are the antiparticles of electrons, protons, and neutrons, respectively. When matter and antimatter are in close proximity, annihilation occurs within a fraction of a second, and large amounts of energy would be produced as a result.
With the presently known techniques of production, the prevailing market price of one gram of antimatter is approximately US$62,500,000,000,000, thereby making it currently the most expensive material on earth. And if, given the annihilative properties of matter and anti matter in close proximity, antimatter were to be used today for the purpose of producing electricity, the cost from man made antimatter would be approximately US$720,000,000 per kilowatt hour.
According to the “Antimatter Energy” website’s press release number 4 on Coal Power Plants Waste Products dated 14 February 2003, which can be found at the following website:
http://www.antimatterenergy.com/release04.htm,
it says that in accordance with the U.S. Department of Energy, the United States of America generated 1,968 billion kilowatt hours of electricity in 2000 by burning 900 million metric tons of coal, thereby creating 2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide plus another 360 million metric tons of coal combustion residues of waste in the process. By comparison, an antimatter power plant would use 45 kilograms of antimatter to generate the same 1,968 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. The mass ratio between plants is 25 billion to 1 (2,223 million metric tons/45*2 kilograms).
The existence of antimatter was posited by the electron theory of Paul A.M. Dirac in 1929, where he suggested that the building blocks of atoms, being electrons (negatively charged particles) and protons (positively charged particles), all have antimatter counterparts, being antielectrons and antiprotons. One fundamental difference between matter and antimatter is that their subatomic building blocks carry opposite electric charges. Thus, while an ordinary electron is negatively charged, an antielectron is positively charged (hence the term positrons, which means "positive electrons") and while an ordinary proton is positively charged, an antiproton is negative.
In 1932, the positron (antielectron) was detected in cosmic rays by Caltech scientist Carl Anderson when a positron flew through a detector in his laboratory. This was followed by the discovery of the antiproton and the antineutron which was detected through the use of particle accelerators by Berkeley scientists in the 1950s. Positrons, antiprotons, and antineutrons, collectively called antiparticles, are the antiparticles of electrons, protons, and neutrons, respectively. When matter and antimatter are in close proximity, annihilation occurs within a fraction of a second, and large amounts of energy would be produced as a result.
With the presently known techniques of production, the prevailing market price of one gram of antimatter is approximately US$62,500,000,000,000, thereby making it currently the most expensive material on earth. And if, given the annihilative properties of matter and anti matter in close proximity, antimatter were to be used today for the purpose of producing electricity, the cost from man made antimatter would be approximately US$720,000,000 per kilowatt hour.
According to the “Antimatter Energy” website’s press release number 4 on Coal Power Plants Waste Products dated 14 February 2003, which can be found at the following website:
http://www.antimatterenergy.com/release04.htm,
it says that in accordance with the U.S. Department of Energy, the United States of America generated 1,968 billion kilowatt hours of electricity in 2000 by burning 900 million metric tons of coal, thereby creating 2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide plus another 360 million metric tons of coal combustion residues of waste in the process. By comparison, an antimatter power plant would use 45 kilograms of antimatter to generate the same 1,968 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. The mass ratio between plants is 25 billion to 1 (2,223 million metric tons/45*2 kilograms).
Friday, May 06, 2005
Medical Journals - Prosopagnosia
Prosopagnosia, or face blindness in layman terms, is a rare disorder of face perception where the ability to perceive and understand faces is impaired, although other basic perceptual skills, such as recognising and discriminating objects, may be relatively intact.
Face perception is the process by which the brain and mind understand and interpret the face, particularly the human face. The face is an important site for the identification of others and conveys significant social information. In view of the importance of its role in social interaction, psychological processes involved in face perception are known to be present from birth, complex, involve large and widely distributed areas in the brain.
Most cases have been reported following focal or localized brain injury, such as physical trauma (head injury), stroke, aneurysm or neurological illness, such as disorders of the central nervous system (brain, brainstem and cerebellum), the peripheral nervous system (neuropathy, including cranial nerves), or the autonomic nervous system (parts of which are located in both central and peripheral nervous system). More recently, cases of congenital or developmental prosopagnosia have also been reported.
Face perception is the process by which the brain and mind understand and interpret the face, particularly the human face. The face is an important site for the identification of others and conveys significant social information. In view of the importance of its role in social interaction, psychological processes involved in face perception are known to be present from birth, complex, involve large and widely distributed areas in the brain.
Most cases have been reported following focal or localized brain injury, such as physical trauma (head injury), stroke, aneurysm or neurological illness, such as disorders of the central nervous system (brain, brainstem and cerebellum), the peripheral nervous system (neuropathy, including cranial nerves), or the autonomic nervous system (parts of which are located in both central and peripheral nervous system). More recently, cases of congenital or developmental prosopagnosia have also been reported.
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Spear of Destiny - The spear that pierced Christ's side
The Spear of Destiny, sometimes known as the Lance, Spear Luin or Spear of Longinus, is claimed to be the spear that pierced the side of Jesus when he was on the cross. It is described in John 19:31-37 as being used by a Roman soldier. Later Christian tradition would give the soldier's name as Gaius Cassius, and he is later called Longinus.
It is superstitiously believed that whosoever might hold the spear would have the power to conquer the world but losing it would mean instant death. The legend states that since the Spear had pierced the body of God, that would be Jesus Christ, it became imbued with some kind of magical power and therefore was a weapon capable of defeating any opponent. It is rumoured that the spear even has the power to kill an angel.
According to its legend, it has passed through the hands of influential world leaders throughout the ages including Constantine, Justinian, Charlemagne, Otto the Great, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, the Habsburg Emperors, and Adolf Hitler.
The earliest reports of the Spear were circa A.D. 570, described as having been on display in the basilica of Mount Zion in Jerusalem adjacent to the Crown of Thorns, which was wore by Jesus Christ on the day he was cruxified on the cross. The point of the spearhead was alleged to have been snapped following the Persian conquest of Jerusalem in A.D. 615. The point was set into an icon, and found its way to the church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. It was later transported to France, where it remained in the Sainte Chapelle until the 18th century. The icon was briefly moved to the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris during the French Revolution, but it subsequently disappeared. The lower section of the spearhead was allegedly conveyed from Jerusalem to Constantinople sometime in the 8th century. It was sent by Sultan Beyazid II as a gift to Pope Innocent VIII in 1492; Innocent had the relic placed in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. It still resides there. The Catholic Church makes no claim as to its authenticity.
The holy spear that was used by the Holy Roman Emperors (cited from Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor on, the spear described above) as a part of their imperial insignia found its way to Vienna, Austria, where they are kept in a museum.
Hitler's interest in the relic probably originated with his interest in the 1882 opera named “Parsifal”, which was in turn written by Hitler’s favorite composer, Richard Wagner. The opera’s plot revolves around a group of knights and their guardianship of the Holy Grail, as well as the recovery of the Spear.
On March 12, 1938, the day Hitler annexed Austria, he arrived in Vienna a conquering hero. He made his way to the Schatzkammer in the Hofmuseum where he took possession of the Spear which he immediately sent to St. Katherine’s Church in Nuremberg, the spiritual capital of Nazi Germany.
One legend maintains that the spear came into the possession of the United States of America on April 30, 1945; specifically, under the control of the 3rd Army led by General George Patton. Later that day, supposedly in fulfilment of the legend, Hitler committed suicide. Patton became fascinated by the ancient weapon and had its authenticity verified. Patton did not go on to use the spear, as orders came down from General Dwight Eisenhower that the complete Habsburg regalia including the Spear of Longinus were to be returned to the Hofburg Palace , where it remains today. This legend has recently been shown to be quite false. The spear was not recovered until roughly six months after Hitler's suicide, and Patton never had possession of it.
N.B. It should be noted that there is a historical figure named Gaius Cassius Longinus, one of the conspirators responsible for the murder of Gaius Julius Caesar which occurred on the Ides of March, being March 15, in 44 BC.
It is superstitiously believed that whosoever might hold the spear would have the power to conquer the world but losing it would mean instant death. The legend states that since the Spear had pierced the body of God, that would be Jesus Christ, it became imbued with some kind of magical power and therefore was a weapon capable of defeating any opponent. It is rumoured that the spear even has the power to kill an angel.
According to its legend, it has passed through the hands of influential world leaders throughout the ages including Constantine, Justinian, Charlemagne, Otto the Great, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, the Habsburg Emperors, and Adolf Hitler.
The earliest reports of the Spear were circa A.D. 570, described as having been on display in the basilica of Mount Zion in Jerusalem adjacent to the Crown of Thorns, which was wore by Jesus Christ on the day he was cruxified on the cross. The point of the spearhead was alleged to have been snapped following the Persian conquest of Jerusalem in A.D. 615. The point was set into an icon, and found its way to the church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. It was later transported to France, where it remained in the Sainte Chapelle until the 18th century. The icon was briefly moved to the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris during the French Revolution, but it subsequently disappeared. The lower section of the spearhead was allegedly conveyed from Jerusalem to Constantinople sometime in the 8th century. It was sent by Sultan Beyazid II as a gift to Pope Innocent VIII in 1492; Innocent had the relic placed in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. It still resides there. The Catholic Church makes no claim as to its authenticity.
The holy spear that was used by the Holy Roman Emperors (cited from Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor on, the spear described above) as a part of their imperial insignia found its way to Vienna, Austria, where they are kept in a museum.
Hitler's interest in the relic probably originated with his interest in the 1882 opera named “Parsifal”, which was in turn written by Hitler’s favorite composer, Richard Wagner. The opera’s plot revolves around a group of knights and their guardianship of the Holy Grail, as well as the recovery of the Spear.
On March 12, 1938, the day Hitler annexed Austria, he arrived in Vienna a conquering hero. He made his way to the Schatzkammer in the Hofmuseum where he took possession of the Spear which he immediately sent to St. Katherine’s Church in Nuremberg, the spiritual capital of Nazi Germany.
One legend maintains that the spear came into the possession of the United States of America on April 30, 1945; specifically, under the control of the 3rd Army led by General George Patton. Later that day, supposedly in fulfilment of the legend, Hitler committed suicide. Patton became fascinated by the ancient weapon and had its authenticity verified. Patton did not go on to use the spear, as orders came down from General Dwight Eisenhower that the complete Habsburg regalia including the Spear of Longinus were to be returned to the Hofburg Palace , where it remains today. This legend has recently been shown to be quite false. The spear was not recovered until roughly six months after Hitler's suicide, and Patton never had possession of it.
N.B. It should be noted that there is a historical figure named Gaius Cassius Longinus, one of the conspirators responsible for the murder of Gaius Julius Caesar which occurred on the Ides of March, being March 15, in 44 BC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)