Friday, March 21, 2014
Link to original post on Issuu.com
As nanotechnology continues to develop, numerous fields have integrated the advancements that it has produced into their own innovations, resulting in unique, "small-but-terrible" solutions for significant problems. In line with this, this project takes a look at how nanotechnology plays a role in three critical fields- - namely, electronics, the environment, and medicine.
FOUR the Win
De Guzman, De Luna, Dungca, Evangelista, Fabula,
Galunan, Garcia, Lejano, Perea, Rillo
Thursday, March 20, 2014
It was interesting to see the different experiments that can be conducted at home using only household products which you use every day. In my opinion, it would be very effective if science was taught in a lively and enjoyable manner like what we experienced during the lecture where activities were done by the speakers which included the participation of the students.
It will give the chance for students to learn science from a different perspective other than only through a series of lectures. It will also give the chance for the students to participate more or be more interested in the lectures.
I haven’t been able to go to the Mind Museum, but based on the background/information given by the speakers, I think that it would become a wonderful experience for children/students to go there because of the activities which they do and the inventions they showcase.
I am intrigued by the classes they conduct which allow anyone who is interested to join such as summer science camps where you can learn how to investigate and the like. When I get the chance to, I would love to visit the Mind Museum so I can explore what else they offer myself.
Since “The Bride of Frankenstein” is a film from 1935, the quality of the movie isn’t as good as compared to the movies in the present time. The supposedly “horror” film came out as a comedy film to some of us students because of how “Frankenstein” or the monster acted such as smoking a cigar, drinking a beer, and being all friendly or “lovey-dovey” with the blind man who befriended him.
One of the lessons I’ve learned from the film is how science and technology can be used in a dangerous way by using it to tamper with life and death. There is a reason why the dead remains dead and what was shown was that the effect of resurrecting the dead can make what used to be a human into a monster.
Although the movie showed that “Frankenstein” can be friendly or become a good monster when approached in a calm and nice manner, what people seem to fail to notice is that it’s also possible that one of the effects of this experiment is creating something which cannot be controlled or even harm the human civilization.
Science and what it can do both amazes and scares me since I have seen in the film, even though it is fiction, that it has no boundaries. Also, the ability of people, scientists, inventors, etc. to continue on experimenting and inventing things beyond their grasp will never stop as long they have curiosity in their minds and can wait as long as it takes to prove their theories or achieve their goals.
When the Marcoses were in power, I was still inexistent, my mother was only 10 years old and my grandfather worked in a government people see as both progressive and corrupt. I’ve only heard stories during their time and have a lot of questions as to which side to believe in. Based on the documentary we watched, a side of the Marcoses were shown through Imelda Marcos.
Imelda Romualdez Marcos is a woman who appreciates beauty whether it is the physical or inner aspect of beauty. Even in the “ternos” that were custom-made for Imelda, each design was unique and carefully embroidered to suit her taste.
It was seen in the documentary how much Imelda appreciated the culture of the Philippines and saw how little attention Filipinos are giving to cultural arts. I was able to see how much priority she gave to the construction of cultural and health institutions for the need of the public, although there were still some issues as to how much sacrifices were made for the completion of each.
In my opinion, Imelda was a remarkable person in her own way. She appreciated the beauty of our culture and how important it was for our culture to grow and be noticed more by our fellow Filipinos and even foreigners. So maybe she was a little (or too much?) narcissistic, but aren’t we also like that sometimes?
Imelda Marcos is a mythical figure. The Filipino consciousness has blown her up to herculean proportions, as Ferdinand has also been. The documentary Imelda, which the lady herself has tried to censor, provides a straightforward account on the character and history of Imelda as both the myth and the reality.
Her youth was not short of spectacular as her later years were. She was acquainted with some of the most preeminent historical figures, including Douglas MacArthur. She was the epitome of beauty, grace, and talent. The people who surrounded her were no less convinced that she was, in fact, perfect.
More so were her life as Mrs. Marcos, when she graced Ferdinand’s presidential campaign and led him to win by landslide. There was no doubt that she was used as a mechanism for the win, but she was immediately paid in power, ruling beside (and not behind) her husband.
Everything she’s done in the Marcos Regime – from the manifestation of her so-called edifice complex to controlling the birth rate – had a massive impact, even after they had fled to exile. Imelda saw life from the point of view of beauty, and even her perception of Martial Law was such.
When asked before what the biggest contribution of Martial Law was, Imelda answered that it was the ‘restoration of democracy,’ sincerely and charismatically, as if she believes it. This is what surprised me most: Imelda saw history differently, she absolved her family of any guilt, and chose to blur out the not-beauty, when the whole world saw a dictatorship and the destruction of democracy.
All in all, Imelda painted a picture of the Steel Butterfly with all her beauty and crooked edges, realistically bringing to life the myth that is Imelda Marcos to the mortal comprehension.
Christine Joy L. Galunan
Christine Joy L. Galunan
If you ask children what their favourite subject is, most would answer science. However, as they enter primary school towards high school, there seems to be a decline in their interest, particularly because science instruction has transformed from magic to concepts and theories to memorize.
This is what the Mind Museum is trying to revive – science as magic. I was genuinely surprised when the speakers revealed that they were actual science practitioners and not merely runners of kiddie shows because we grown-ups basically believe that science is locked up in labs, exclusive only to those who can, if not locked away in textbooks.
When they showed us a few experiments, after such a long time, the science-curious child in me came out, anticipating the magic, and there it was as we all watched wide-eyed. That attempt to bring science down from its ivory tower was successful without undermining the actual understanding and appreciation that near-adults could get.
This is actually a manifestation of the larger problem that disciplines are in, most especially science. It is almost automatic that once higher education comes into the picture, science becomes less accessible, less stimulating, less comprehensible not because it is but the current educational system frames it so. I do admire those who opt to study the natural sciences for further study, but as long as it does not foster a more resonant call for younger students to take consistent interest, the future of science is uncertain.
Christine Joy L. Galunan
To what reason do we owe man’s struggle to master time?
Being an ardent follower of several science fiction essentials related to time travel (i.e. Doctor Who, 12 Monkeys, HG Wells’ The Time Machine, etc.), the details in the documentary were not of general surprise. Fiction has already transcended the facts of time travel’s physical possibility; that we are continually amazed by the hard science and continue to speculate the what if of controlling past, present, and future.
What was surprising, though, was the interest with which these physicists explained and convinced their audience, as if it assumed that we were already hooked in the first place – and we were. Time travel is as attractive to man as is the thought of immortality. The fact that it is one of the most commonly used science fiction tropes only confirms man’s obsession with this phenomenon.
Is our attachment to life tantamount to our attachment to time? As humans, most certainly, we are bound to our mortality as we are to the normalcy of the ticking second. Our lives are governed by time as we are by the prospect of death; we are all going to die someday, as we are supposed to wake up at a certain time the next day.
Both are proofs of our limited humanity, and time actually bears the heavier scale because the course of our lives (towards death) is linear, defined by time. Our being death-bound is dependent on our being time-bound.
What does time travel have to do with all this? Like most developments in science and technology, time travel is an attempt to tip over the scales of humanity, to overcome these limits that keeps man chained to the laws of nature regarding his life and how he travels through it. Additionally, if time travel were possible, man would overcome the struggle of not knowing certain things like the backdoors of history or what he is bound to be in the future. He can even save himself from a certain direction of fate if only he knows where he’s heading; he can live a life that spans a million years with just one visit to the past, and another to the future. He can immortalize himself, leaving a mark all through the universe, that man the unlimited has done what he thought he cannot.
But one of the reasons why we still continue to struggle for it is not because we cannot, but because the laws of nature themselves are restraining humans from exploiting the most organic forces of the universe. Order will be disrupted as every change causes ripples through the time-space continuum, and knowing this, we ask ourselves: were we really meant to control time, or is this the universe’s way of controlling us and reminding us that after all, we still are humans?
Christine Joy L. Galunan