AB-XOR

Abstract Sculpture

2011-04-06T22:53:00.002+03:00

Some abstract sculptures as part of my AP Studio Art: 3D Design Course

Add caption

Cooper Union Hometest

2011-02-24T18:31:00.003+02:00

This is my home-test submission to the Cooper Union Architecture. The home-test is a series of visual tasks and written prompts that are the meat of the admissions decision at Cooper Union Architecture, which does not require anything else for its application (no portfolios, letters of recommendation, essays).

Chances are slim (900-1000 applicants for about 30 spots = 3% acceptance), but I can honestly say I enjoyed the tasks, and learned something about my creative process on the way.

I deliberately didn't over-work my responses, and some of them are definitely of a higher quality than others, but anyway, that's the nature of the beast, as it were.

Sketchbook 1: Architecture & Urban Planning

2011-02-22T22:10:00.007+02:00

I believe in the free exchange of ideas. I also think it's healthier to bounce raw concepts and ideas around, in order to inform them and grow them, rather than keep them protected and private. I record much of my thought process visually in my sketchbooks, where I think by writing and drawing through my ideas. I'm now publishing selections of these sketchbooks under loose categorizations partly to archive, document, organize my observations and speculations, but also possibly to inspire other people to ponder, criticize, or improve upon something I have observed or proposed.

This is the first sketchbook - Sketchbook 1, which deals with Architecture and Urban Planning.
Later sketchbooks will include drawings and observations on different topics.

These documents will be updated fairly regularly with higher-quality scans, new images, and multiple installments
I will try to keep the installments relatively short, for the sake of density.
Eventually I plan to post a complete, high-quality, un-edited version of my notebooks for archival purposes.

The Office: A Monumental Architectural Concept

2011-02-18T13:55:00.001+02:00

Add caption

This is an architectural concept that started out as an assignment in academic composition to draw my "dream room."

When I discovered the Indigo Renderer plugin for Google Sketchup a few months back, I modeled and rendered the concept in Sketchup - playing with the lighting and rendering capabilities of Indigo, which turned out to be quite powerful, if a bit clunky to use.

The idea of "The Office" is an imposing interior space, that humbles the entrant, who walks the central carpet to the desk where I would be working.

The space uses subtle tricks of perspective to fool the eye into perceiving the space as much larger than it actually is.

Descriptions

Some more views

MOONWATER

2011-02-14T17:42:00.017+02:00

MOONWATER official advertisement

I recently created a business concept for bottled water company called MOONWATER for Economics class. MOONWATER is a Chinese-based bottling company that harvests water in the form of ice crystals on the poles of the moon, and distributes it as bottled water to consumers on Earth around the year 2050.

The project was largely an excuse to play with rendering and lighting in Google Sketchup with the Indigo Renderer plugin, but the concept is in fact, not as outlandish as it may sound. NASA recently discovered water in polar craters of the moon - enough supposedly, to support a human colony. A significant amount of "volatiles" - substances that freeze and vaporize in the high temperature differences on the moon - such as methane, ammonia, hydrogen gas, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide were also found, which could mean potential fuel sources for Moon-Earth shuttle systems.

I am hoping to eventually expand this brand to include the whole lunar water-harvesting operation.

A .pdf of the presentation I gave can be found here. (Has a few typos)

Disclaimer: The Chinese characters on the MOONWATER logo do not mean "moon" or "water." I chose them because they looked nice.

Some renders from the design process - more can be found here.

The following is a letter from the CFO of the company addressed to potential and current investors in MOONWATER.

Dear Citizen of Earth and Investor in MOONWATER,

As CFO of MOONWATER corporation, allow me to relate a short history of the rise of our new lunar phenomenon that is changing the way we see water, and challenging the perceived limitations of our world.

In the land grab for lunar property that took place in the 2030’s, MOONWATER Corporation was among the first investors to see the potential of polar properties, which had hitherto been under the control of a joint coalition of the Chinese, Russian, and African Governments. These governments sought to fund their lunar colonization efforts with the aid of private investors, and so made opportunities for large-scale investment. With full property rights guaranteed under these governments, MOONWATER invested in over 2,500,000 acres of land at both the south and north poles of the moon. Buying these properties at an exceptionally low price, and having bought highly efficient water harvesting technology patents from privately funded research companies seeking to privatize NASA research technologies, MOONWATER was positioned to become the first major water harvesting company to have a functioning water mining operation on the moon.

   Initially developing water harvesting techniques to provide water for hydrogen fuel cells and oxygen for Chinese polar colonies, MOONWATER soon began to see economic opportunities elsewhere. As the persistent toxification of water resources all over planet Earth became more and more ubiquitous, and more potent, it became more and more expensive to purify water, and ensure that dangerous chemicals, heavy metals, and other pollutants did not enter the general drinking supply. Nearly all of the Earth’s major ice flows were now in the form of sea water, and therefore expensive to gather, due to the energy-costly process of desalination. As many terran water utilities and bottling companies were bought by energy companies in vertical mergers in part of their restructuring to match the demand for hydrogen fuel cells, simple, clean, trustworthy drinking water was increasingly demanded.

   In 2037, MOONWATER Corporation began operations in commercial water bottling. Targeting financially well-off ecologically conscious individuals and organizations, MOONWATER set off to establish a new name in bottled water, and be among the first to establish a functioning lunar-terran economic model. MOONWATER has continued to lead the industry in developing more efficient, safe, and cost-effective means of harvesting, processing, and transporting water from the moon's polar craters to the water-conscious of earth.

   Drinking MOONWATER, you are not taking water from the poor and disadvantaged of Earth. Drinking MOONWATER, you have no ecological impact on our already ravaged planet. Drinking MOONWATER, you are tapping into molecules that have witnessed the rise of life on earth, the evolution of humanity, and the totality of human experience on our planet.

   We hope that you will join us on our journey through the cosmos, and become of a part of the group that dares to go further than any other in the quest for new and ancient worlds – all in the name of clean, fair, and safe drinking water.

Sincerely,

-Song Mei Jingxi, CFO, MOONWATER Corporation

MOONWATER HQ, < 14.55 N ; 74.12 > Sea of Tranquility

My Portfolio - DOWNLOAD HERE

2010-11-23T20:03:00.007+02:00

I'm posting a .pdf version of my portfolio, showing samples of my work in drawing, painting, sculpture, graphic design, and architecture. It includes 25 works, and it is approximately 12 MB in size. Feel free to download --> here <--

Ink

2010-11-16T21:38:00.000+02:00

Here's an ink drawing I recently did of the view from my school's second floor.
Looks a bit old fashioned...

Summer 2010 Paintings

2010-11-08T21:34:00.000+02:00

Here is a selection of paintings done this past summer, in Maine.
I wish I had more time to paint!

Under the pier at Aspasia Marina.

At the beach in South Portland

A finger in the morning at Aspasia Marina

Seguin Island in evening

Portland skyline in evening

Morning fog at Aspasia Marina

Academic Drawing 2009-2010

2010-09-01T21:19:00.000+03:00

Here is some of my work in my academic drawing class done in the past year.
(Sorry for the bad quality photoscans. I'll be taking shots in better lighting conditions later and replacing these.)

Socrates

Antony?

The Eye of David

Brutus

Anthology Book Project

2010-06-27T20:53:00.002+03:00

I recently completed a massive project - the design and layout of my school's student writing anthology, a 90-page collection of the best student writing of the year and some graphical artwork.I started working on this project in the late fall, trying to discover a stylistic vocabulary for the visual appearance of the book. In the final design of the book, I diverged from my original ideas, especially those on the cover, going for a more inky, messy feel. The book is included here as a .pdf for your viewing.
Some of my own writing is included in the book.

(Please note all content of this book is legal property of its writers, editors, and designer[me] )

The cover.

A chapter spread: Poetry:

A sample content page from the poetry section.

The Nonfiction chapter spread.

Here's how it looks printed.

(We got nice glossy paper.)

The inside leaf.

Yearbook Class Page Design

2010-06-26T21:36:00.001+03:00

Here is a design I did for our class page in our school's yearbook.
It is inspired by the Apple Nano-chromatic ad.
Each member of the class is represented in an iPod nano of a certain color, with album art depicting them.

My version.

The original ad.

The album art.

Here it is in print.

Painting in Vilnius

2010-06-24T22:36:00.002+03:00

I have been doing some more painting - now in Vilnius.

A sort of warm-up sketch of a portrait of some British military man

-- or Lenin, depending on which you prefer (w/o reference)

A painting by the Vilnele river with two of my friends posing.

Painting by the Neris river looking over Vilnius, near the

bridge over the junction between the Vilnele and the Neris.

The Vilnele again, from the other side, and in a different part of the park.

A path in the woods near Antakalnis

Oil Painting in Crete

2010-04-05T10:19:00.002+03:00

I recently returned from an absolutely incredible trip to Crete with a group of art students from my school.
These are some oil paintings done around the area of Myrtos, a small village on the southern side of the island.

Painted in the afternoon/evening between the rocks of the coastline near Myrtos:

Painted in the afternoon/evening looking down from atop the hills above the town of Myrtos:

Painted at 7:45 - 9:00 AM from the rooftop of the town school in Myrtos, looking at the sunrise to the East:

Aurimo Sketchbook 8 Italy 4

2010-03-21T22:16:00.013+02:00

These are some pages from my Italy sketchbook - they explore fluid dynamics, passive solar heating and cooling, alternative methods of energy capture and storage, and other functional aspects of building design.

These are observations of turbulence in the river at the Ponte San Trinita, Florence.

Some ideas on alternative energy:

This is my way of understanding problems - drawing through them. I understand then the different ways they have been solved, and can better approach finding my own solution.

These are the beginnings of some of my ideas on passive solar heating/cooling. I am trying to develop simple systems using water, gravity, convection, conduction, radiation, cohesion/adhesion, evaporation to solve complex problems of thermoregulation in spaces.

OpenSim Architecture - The Temple Monument

2010-02-27T16:33:00.000+02:00

There's a neat little opensource version of SecondLife called OpenSim. I use it to to experiment with architectural ideas. Here is one structure I put up to try out an idea I had drawn out on paper, when given the assignment in Architectural Composition. The assignment was to create a temple, a nonsectarian place of worship or meditation. This building was my response to the assignment.

I hope eventually to do some higher-quality, more realistic renderings in Rhino or some other software.
As you may notice, the "shininess" quality I applied to the surfaces of the building are a generalized blur of a gradient representing the environment.

Baby Heads 3D

2010-02-25T22:24:00.000+02:00

The baby heads have gone 3D! Here are some photos of a recent plastiline sculpture of mine.

Aurimo Sketchbook 7

2010-02-13T22:31:00.002+02:00

Some more pages from my notebooks. Enjoy!

Some hasty faces drawn in class (no reference):

Aurimo Sketchbook 6

2010-02-13T22:00:00.002+02:00

Here are the latest pages from my notebooks. Enjoy!

Some typography ideas:

Some good old shading fun:

Some faces drawn in History. (no reference).

Portrait Series

2010-02-07T16:01:00.002+02:00

These are few sketchy portraits I've done this past year.
These are the some of the few drawings I've done from photographs - I generally abide by the principle that
true drawing is best executed from a real subject. Copying from a photograph can lead to simply recording the values captured by a camera sensor rather than really being forced to understand what one is drawing.
Anyway, these are some exceptions to my rule:

Robinson Jeffers:

A self-portrait.

Obama (the only decently lit portrait I could find without much effort)

MATHEMATICS.ttf

2010-01-24T20:45:00.003+02:00

I've created my first font! Using Adobe Illustrator and FontCreator 5.5, I digitized a font I had doodled in my notebook a few days ago. I've only created capital letters and some symbols so far. In the next few days/weeks, I intend to post a more complete version of this font as well as a handwritten variation.

Download MATHEMATICS.ttf here.

Michelangelo's David

2010-01-13T17:23:00.001+02:00

Lest you think my drawings skills extend only to hasty sketches and doodles, I'm posting one of my academic works, done several months ago. I recently saw Michelangelo's original sculpture of David in person in Florence, at L'Accademia. Having drawn a plaster copy of his head for hours on end, seeing the real sculpture was quite something.

Aurimo Sketchbook 5 - Italy 3

2010-01-13T17:13:00.001+02:00

Here are some moooore pages from my Italy notebook. Enjoy!

These are some notes on my ideas about the vertical organization of a city based on function.

Aurimo Sketchbook 4 - Italy 2

2010-01-12T21:29:00.002+02:00

Here are some more pages from my Italy notebook. Enjoy!

These are some drawings done at Fontane di Quattro Fiume (Fountain of Four Rivers), sculpted by Bernini. They are located at the Piazza Navona in Rome.

Piazza Navona appears in the film, Angels and Demons, as the fountain where the supposed Illuminati villain is to kill one his victims.

These are some drawings of the angels adorning the Ponte San Angelo (Bridge of Angels), which spans the Tevere (Tiber) and leads up the Castel San Angelo (which also figured prominently in the film Angels and Demons. These angels are also briefly shown. )

Some more baby heads.

I believe this is the papal crest. I saw it adorning many buildings, I sketched it quickly to make note of it.

Aurimo Sketchbook 3 - Italy

2010-01-09T14:12:00.006+02:00

Sketchbook entry number 3! How exciting!

Here are some pages from my notebook drawn in Italy.

The following three pages are based on observations made from atop the bell tower of the Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore of roofs below.

The next page consists of observations of Piazza San Pietro, and experimentations based on the Renaissance idea of the search for "Divine Proportions." (These are the proportions of the bases and capitals of columns, pillars, and walls.)

In Italian Renaissance art, babies seem to figure prominently. The following are some of my own exploratory sketches of baby heads based on what I had seen.

Bernini, Brunelleschi, Botticelli.... Oh my!

2010-01-07T16:57:00.001+02:00

Buon giorno, reader(s)! I've just returned from a two and half week journey around Italy - we visited Venice, Florence, San Gimignano, and Rome. As expected, this trip through Western Europe's original center of civilization was a veritable blast of artistic and creative stimulation, and so it will receive due attention on this blog. I had considerably more time to draw, take photographs, and write while there, so I'll be posting a lot of this material while it is still fresh, in the next few days. Enjoy!

Aurimo Sketchbook 2

2009-12-13T22:53:00.001+02:00

Some more snaps from my notebook - my drawing is getting obsessive!

Flying Santa

2009-12-07T22:17:00.001+02:00

Nothing like some digital illustration to relax after a long day - here's a doodle I did in math, reincarnated in technicolor!

Here's the sketch from math class:

Here's the semi-finished colored work. If I get time I'll try to finish it.

Merry Christmas!

or, if you prefer,

Happy Holidays!

Aurimo Sketchbook 1

2009-11-28T02:23:00.010+02:00

This is the first installment of my Aurimo Sketchbook section.

These are scans from my AP World History notebook.

The drawings are of a house design that I have been working on (plus some cubes?):

Introducing - "Aurimo Sketchbook"

2009-11-25T22:03:00.012+02:00

This past week I constructed my very own photoscanner from a cheap wooden stool, 2 desk lamps, and my humble Olympus SP510UZ. I now have a quick and easy way to photograph and digitize all of my documents, and anything under 8*8*8 inches in size. With this new tool, I'll be honoring one of my most persistent and enjoyable habits: doodling. Because I doodle so much in my notebooks these days, especially in calculus, I'll be starting a new section of my blog, called "Aurimo Sketchbook." ( Aurimo is the Lithuanian form of Aurimas's - yes this is English, but we all have our habits)This will, as often as my schedule permits, contain regular installments of photographs of pages in my various notebooks.

To start, I have a few pages from my history notebook:

I'm published! (Sort of)

2009-11-23T21:34:00.003+02:00

Last spring I worked with a publisher to create a cover design for a children's book. The project fell through because of some turn-over in management, and my design, which was nearly finished at that point was dropped, and I was never paid. Months later, the publisher revived the project, and hired a new designer for the cover. They decided, interestingly, to use my cover graphics, but cut me out of the finalization of the project. It remains to be seen whether I will be paid for the use of my creative property. In any case, the book was published using my (unfinished) cover graphics, but a slightly different layout (the author's name was added by them) - and it looks pretty good (at least as good as one might expect from such a small publisher). At my request, my name is mentioned under "Cover art," so I am satisfied that at least the book can serve as an advertisement for my work. It would have been nice to have my finished work on display, however.

Speech and Debate in Moscow

2009-11-23T20:42:00.003+02:00

Our school recently competed in a Speech and Debate competition in Moscow. Our team performed fairly well, collecting top prize in debate and original oratory (6 minute speech of one's own writing), and 3rd in impromptu speaking. The speech that won 1st place, given by me, was, interestingly enough, on atheism, a recurring topic on this blog, and was received well at the event. I have had multiple requests for a copy of the speech by people in at the event, so I'm posting it here for their convenience. The speech is, in fact, a shortened version of the essay entitled "I am an Atheist" posted a week or so ago.

Aurimas Bukauskas

I am an atheist. I must admit, I entertain some guilty pleasure in mentioning this, offhand, in conversation, and seeing the blood begin to boil in the faces of my peers. There is something sinister and stomach-turning about the word. Although I myself was raised with none of these connotative associations, I have come to learn that many people, especially those with a strongly Christian or Jewish upbringing, upon hearing the word atheist, think of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, the embodiment of all evil, and the antichrist. Amusing as this is to me, my atheism is not merely a provocative ploy for attention. I solidified my worldview – specifically, the rejection of the existence of the supposed supernatural, after a childhood of Catholicism and Protestantism, and I take it very seriously. As an atheist, I do not believe in any gods, supernatural energies, or the existence of a soul. I believe that not worshiping any gods, but rather embracing humanity as a whole, and opening one's mind to the endless possibilities of the universe made possible by rational inquiry, is the most fulfilling life one can lead.

I understand that, because of the profound personal investment in their faith, religiously people are often personally insulted by discussions of religion. I would like to stress that I do not intend to convert anyone, rather I would like to present an atheist’s perspective on the question of faith. The question I pose today:

Morality. In my experience discussing religions, most people(we‘ll put aside creationists, fundamentalists), confronted with the impossibility of the literal truth of their religious convictions, take the moral stand for religions. “Never mind the literal truth of the bible, or the existence of any gods or spirits,” they say, “religion is good for people”. Religion teaches us the basic principles of right and wrong, right? Wrong. Morals and ethics are all well and good, if your religion is the only one around. However, over humanity's long history, there have been positively thousands of religions. Each one of these religions teaches a different right and wrong. In some cases, they teach a mutually incompatible view of morality – as in the case of Islam and Christianity. It is precisely this view, and the religious-centric conviction of all worshipers that their religion has been conceived by divine forces – (note: you can't prove divine things wrong, they're supernatural – above natural law) – that causes so much strife in the world today.

Most of us today believe strongly in the importance of kindness, love, and the golden rule. We also believe in non-discrimination, tolerance, inalienable human rights, and democracy, but most of us don't realize that this revised system of ethics that we have come to is the result not of religious wisdom, but of secular social advancement. Human rights and the democratic system of government created by the founders of the United States, emancipation of slaves, women’s suffrage, tolerance towards people of other ethnicity, religion, sexuality, mental or physical handicaps do not represent some revolutionary development in religious thinking – they are the products of rebellious secular thinkers who have had the courage to break with the norm. In fact, through all of the moral progress since their writing, the Bible, the Quran, and most other religious texts have not changed a letter (other than mistranslations here or there.) This is because religions represent an absolute moral statement. The final word. Imagine what our world would be like had that word remained unchanged.

So, instead let us take a secular view of morality and ethics. First, we must make the assertion that there is no universal code of morality – there simply are no infallible rules that we are bound by some energy or holy spirit to follow. This is precisely the point that so many religious people fear so much. But it is the logical truth, and is actually much more productive than pretending that there are absolute moral laws that must be found out – and never challenged. Instead, let us look at morality from a practical perspective.

Historically, in the evolution of early civilizations and moral systems (I‘m most well acquainted with the 10 commandments), respecting your neighbor, mother, and father, not committing adultery, not stealing, lying or cheating have been and continue to be simply useful rules, the social glue that keeps society from descending into utter chaos. As a way to ensure these rules were followed, their writers added a wrathful omniscient god or two to smite the disobedient and maybe even promised eternal happiness or damnation in the afterlife. Now, with a broader understanding of history and social sciences, we have the luxury of understanding exactly why some of these laws are important, and why some of them are useless (from a moral standpoint).

In fact, I would propose a few additions to our historic moral laws, adding a few things that we have learned in the couple thousand years.

Here are my atheist commandments:

1. Don't lie, cheat, steal, kill, or commit adultery.

2. Practice tolerance and respect (of all cultures, peoples, ethnicities, sexuality, gender, handicap).(Not just Christians, or Jews, or all white males, or all whites)

3. Challenge everything (intellectually speaking) -- Pursue in your life the advancement of truth, based on the system of review known as the Scientific method.

4. Be nice (to everyone)(not just people who believe in the same things as you.)

What you'll find is, my radical atheist views, including my revised secular moral system, are in fact very similar to yours, no matter what your religion or culture. You probably already completely believe in this particular code of ethics, and would even vehemently defend it if it were challenged. The fact is – you don't need religion for your morality.

I am an atheist, but this does not mean that I do not have a reverence for the human condition. Rather I believe that rational inquiry can inform our morality – and empirical study can replace superstition and mysticism in the search for right and wrong.

Chinese Architecture Study

2009-11-23T15:21:00.004+02:00

I recently have started to follow through on a long time interest in Chinese / Japanese architecture, planning, design, and art. I have been scouring the internet, trying to find out more about what I like to call the "ethnoarchitectural" side of Chinese design - the proportions, materials, and techniques refined over generations of trial and error and cultural transmission - that make these buildings perfectly attuned to their environmental and social context. So far, I have not found much better than the wikipedia article on Chinese architecture and several other sources that give a fairly superficial overview. I was able to find enough to do some quick sketches of Chinese buildings, based on the highly standardized layout of the single-story urban dwelling or complex.

Here are some links to sites that I found on Chinese Architecture:

http://delicious.com/aurimasmb/china+architecture

How to Socialize in America

2009-11-17T20:05:00.003+02:00

A (somewhat) sarcastic piece on American adolescent culture. The assignment was to write a "how-to" piece.

How to Socialize

in America:

New England Edition

(For Young Men)

Dr. Aurimas Bukauskas, Ph. D.

This detailed, step-by-step guide on socializing in New England and the greater United States will teach you everything it takes to get your social life here up and running in no time. You will learn the in's and out's of numerous social clichés that you can select from, including history, common vocabulary, proper dress, social etiquette, and DO's and DON'T's of each one of them. Having read this guide, written by Nobel Prize-winning social primate scientist Aurimas Bukauskas, Ph. D, you will have the tools, and skills to have the adolescent social life you've been dreaming of.

Socialization: “Where to begin?”

Millions of American teens every year are faced with this question, as they move up the ranks from the blissful ignorance of their preteen years and are forced to make the difficult decision of which social cliché they wish to adopt as their own. Whether it be jock, nerd, or even emo, millions of teens learn what it takes to be a social winner in an American high school. This guide breaks it down in easy to follow instructions that you can use to help you with this difficult choice.

Social Classifications: What suits you?

To understand what it takes to traverse the treacherous waters of socializing with teens in New England and the United States, one needs a short history of the social clichés that have developed in the country from mere stereotypes, to unwritten rules of classification. For one unfamiliar with the cultural climate of the United States, it is important to note that these terms represent very real social niches, and one should not approach choosing one lightly. Here is an abridged list of some of the most common social classifications of American teens, particularly those living in the Northeast.

The “Jock:”

The Jock is a classic American icon. Athletic, not prided for his wits, combative, and somewhat ape-like in nature, the Jock represents a marked regression in human social evolution. Groups of jocks have been witnessed beating their chests at one another in competition for mates. They generally congregate in something that has been described as “guffaw circles” referring to the unique guttural noise they make while exhibiting social behavior. Jocks have also had a long history of persecution of the Nerds (see “The Nerd”)

The Jock falls into these subcategories:

“Hockey Jock” The Hockey Jock is generally Caucasian, and with access to substantial monetary funds, as the equipment his family will have to buy to support his sporting career is the most expensive of all sports. He exhibits particularly aggressive behavior, and is generally recorded as having a slightly reduced intelligence due to the degree of heavy contacts to the head that he sustains during locker room fights. The hockey jock will often be seen sporting his team jacket, and carrying his hockey stick and puck around in places where it is entirely inappropriate and unnecessary to do so.

“Winter Track/Cross Country Jock” Tall, lanky, and with extraordinary amounts of leg hair due to the time spent running in subzero weather during winter, the Winter Track and Cross Country Jock is less aggressive than the Lacrosse or Hockey Jock, more often choosing to lope swiftly away rather than fight if in any danger.

“Lacrosse Jock” Similar to the Hockey Jock, Lacrosse jocks carry their sticks on their person almost everywhere, and are best known for their constant reversion to violent “dodge and roll” tactics when walking in the halls, or even sitting down.

The “Nerd:”

The Nerd is another classic, in some cases formerly known as the “Geek.” Before the age of computers or videogame entertainment, the nerd was often known as a reclusive academic, usually spending his days assembling internal combustion engines, researching the entire extended history of the Lord of the Rings, or defeating foes with other Nerds in the role playing game Dungeons and Dragons. Nowadays, with the advent of digitized entertainment, the Nerd's history has changed, and he has become the master of all things computerized.

The “Nerd” falls into these subcategories:

“Halo Nerd:” The Halo Nerd has in recent years, eclipsed the Quake, Doom, and even Counterstrike Nerds in population. The Halo Nerd is confident in his gameplay, recording his kills religiously to compare against the performance of fellow Halo Nerds. His existence in an academic environment is usually that of bleary eyed dishevelment, as he will have probably had 2-3 hours of sleep the previous night. Be careful not to trigger the lightning fast melee reflexes of the Halo Nerd. Do NOT by any means attempt to sneak up behind him, because he may involuntarily spill your innards on the floor with a swift sword gouge without even realizing it.

“Computer Programmer Nerd” This nerd spends his time in code, executing conditional statements, weighing matrix rendering calculations, or doing vector math in his head that would make your AP calculus teacher cry. Be aware, this nerd can and will hack you.

“WOW Nerd:” The WoW(World of Warcraft) Nerd is currently the most abundant nerd in existence, with his recorded numbers ranging in the upper 7-10 millions. The WoW Nerd is by far the most addicted nerd in existence. His reliance on the videogame WoW surpasses any known drug addiction – do NOT get between a WoW Nerd and his WoW account and Internet connection. WoW Nerds are known for their practice of engaging in strange gatherings across the country, where they will transport their desktop PC's across states to congregate in basements, consume borderline-illegal amounts of caffeinated energy drinks and pizza, and play WoW until their eyes bleed and their vision is impaired, or their bodies enter a coma-like state of catatonic arrest.

“Band Nerd” The Band Nerd is a less common breed of Nerd, associated with the school brass Band. He spends his time with other Band nerds, usually talking about half-notes, and how annoying it is to have transpose orchestral pieces to B flat.

“Orchestra Nerd”: An extremely rare brand of Nerd is the orchestra Nerd, who will often be seen hauling a large black instrument case with him. He is classical music thick and through. Silent, tall, reserved, he wears a bow tie, has large frizzy hair, and probably has a German last name.

The “Prep:”

The Prep is better than you, and he knows it. He wears more expensive, neat (usually pastel colored or plaid) clothes, gets better grades than you, and is in every drama performance, school art show, and musical performance (usually doing a solo on some wind or brass instrument). The Prep is on first name terms with all your teachers, loves sitting in the first row in class, and gives you disapproving looks whenever you complain about the amount of homework you've been assigned.

“The Pink Polo Prep” The Pink Polo Prep is an elite brand of Prep. He alone is allowed to wear the uniform of the most powerful and influential Preps – the notorious pink polo shirt. He will sport it on casual Fridays, at school events, on school trips – whenever possible, as he might well deserve to. The Pink Polo Prep has worked his way up the ranks from White Polo, to Yellow Polo, Red Polo, Blue Polo, Slightly lighter shade of Yellow Polo, Horizontal green striped Polo, Horizontal blue striped Polo, Vertical blue striped with lighter blue stripes and bar of white Polo, Thin horizontal pink striped Polo with some other color between orange and pink that no one really knows what to call, to finally attain his status of Pink Polo, the highest honor a Prep can hope to achieve in his high school career.

The “Emo ”

The Emo, sometimes considered as an offshoot of the older Goth class, is an unprecedented phenomenon that has sprouted up in recent years which interestingly makes use of a previously untapped social resource - “self-pity.” The Emo has so mastered the art of self-pity, he can mope for days on end, sometimes without talking the entire time. After weeks of this sort of enforced solitude, the Emo will often come back to the world of lesser mortals from his foray into asceticism having gained great insight, concluding that life does indeed suck. So far beyond common understanding is the Emo's mastery of self-pity, the guiding force of his religious practices, that the Emo is largely a mystery to the rest of society.

The “Goth”

The Goth is best known for his style of dress – black, with several pounds of chains hanging from his pockets. He is angry, listens to music generally associated with death and suffering, and doesn't like you.

“Chill”

The “Chill” kid is somewhat of an outlier in the adolescent social community. He is so utterly disconnected from the everyday world, that almost no other social group has any gripes with him. You may see him in the halls, usually with long unkempt hair, sometimes in a bandanna, but don't expect a greeting – he's off in places you couldn't dream of.

Female Classifications:

It should be noted that classifications on the female side of the fence are much more nebulous, and involve a complex system of alliances, betrayal, rumor-circulation, and a hierarchy not yet entirely understood by the male race. With further study, we may be able to unravel the mysteries surrounding adolescent female socialization. In this guide, however, female classification will not be covered, as this author believes that there is not yet sufficient data gathered on this subject to form conclusive categorizations, and maintains the belief that there may never be.

Guide to US/New England Idiosyncrasies:

The English language has long been known for its colorful and expressive usage in literature and high society. Nowadays, the same diversity of expression is seen in the conversational language of the American (and specifically New England) youth. Here is quick reference to help you understand the social dialogues you will encounter.

US(General): (PG Version: vulgar language omitted)

“sweet” : adjective meaning approval. A good staple phrase that has been in use for a long time, on par with “cool.”

“to chill (out)” see “to chillax” : 1. verb meaning to relax or socialize. 2. to calm down. Ex: “Woah, dude, chill out, I was just messing with you...”

“lame”: adjective meaning opposite of “cool,” “sweet,” or “ballin”: “uncool.” “Dude, no way man, that's so ____in' lame. ”

“ballin'”: adjective meaning approval, generally in sports competition. “That _____'s ballin.”

“popo”: slang for Police. Somewhat derogatory. “Oh ____ man, the ____in' popo's here!”

“hanging out”, “to hang out”: verb meaning to relax or socialize: “chill out”

“to bounce”: to leave, to go. “Ok y'all, I gotta bounce.”

Specific to New England:

Here follows a list of words used in New England meaning approval (syn. “cool”) not yet mentioned:

“wicked”: wikiiiid

“sick”:

“nasty”:

“narsty”*:

“solid”:

“ill”*:

“chill”:

“dank”*: should be said with an accompanying hand motion for greatest effect.

“off the hook”:

“unreal”:

“crazy”:

“b___in'”:

“ridic”:

“epic”:

“twink”:

Please note: the use of words such as “epic” and “twink” is only acceptable amongst WoW, and sometimes Halo Nerds, and will usually have negative results when socializing with any other group. Also: use “dank”,“ill” and ”narsty” with caution, as they are fairly new additions to the collective vocabulary of the Northeast, and not yet widely accepted.

General Usage (New England):

“dude”: the most common form of address: syn. “man” Should be used at least twice in conjunction with “man” in any sentence (a good rule of thumb is a ratio of 1:3 “dude”'s to other words) Ex: “Dude, oh my god, man, that is wicked chill dude... ” “Dude” can also be used as an expression of awe, amazement, reverence, approval or disgust. Ex:“Dude...”

“peace out”,“to peace out”: to leave: syn.“to bounce”. Also used as synonym of goodbye. Ex: “Peace, man.”

“I'm all set” see “I'm all good”: No thank you. Warning: do not use south of Boston, as you may encounter problems.

“aight”: shortening of “alright” meaning affirmative: syn. “Okay”. Pronounced with as little enunciation as possible. Syn. “'k” or “'kk.”

“prolly”: shortening of probably. Used both in conversation and in instant messaging communication.

“to head out”, “I'm heading”: to leave or go: syn. “peace out” origin: sailing term: “heading” meaning compass bearing of a vessel.

“sketchy”: when referring to a person: awkward, creepy, intrusive or of a dubious character or origin. When referring to an object: dangerous, of low quality. See: ghetto Ex:“He__ no man, I'm not jumping off that dude, that ___'s sketchy!”

“flip out”: to become distressed, alarmed, or angry: syn. to “freak out.”

Insults:(New England) (PG version):

“tool:”

“___head:”

“____:”

“dip___”:

“_____”:

“______________________________”:

“_____”:

Proper Dress:

Jock: A sports jersey whenever possible, your team jacket, and some “sick kicks.” (usually Adidas or Nike basketball high tops with extra springs built in.) Do NOT ever wear a collared shirt, dress shoes, or a knitted sweater of any kind.

Nerd: Depending on which type of Nerd you are, your clothing choices will vary. Generally, you will be either dressing for comfort (Halo,WoW Nerds) or in short sleeve patterned dress shirts (bow tie optional) pocket protector, khaki pants, and semi-formal shoes(Computer programmer and Orchestra Nerd). Any kind of comfortable shoes, a T-shirt and sweatshirt should suffice for a WoW or Halo Nerd, which allow the most comfortable transition to semi-conscious “gamer's coma” as it is called. Other nerds dress more formally, a carryover from their more academic days.

Prep: As previously mentioned, the wardrobe of any self respected Prep should consist of at least 80% Polo’s. You may want to devote a special closet to your Polo’s (sort them carefully by color.) You should also acquire Bermuda shorts(which you will be wearing throughout the winter months), and at least a dozen pairs of multicolored flip-flops.

Emo: Black hair dye, gel, skinny jeans, and equally constrictive shirt should be worn at all times.

Goth: Black. Chains. Black makeup, lip, earlobe, ear, tongue, nose, other ear, eyebrow and belly button piercings. More chains.

Chill: Rolled up torn pants, a Grateful Dead or Allman Brothers T-shirt, a bandanna, and probably dreadlocks (if you are indeed chill enough).

Socialization: “How do I start?”

Once you have selected your social cliché, studied your vocabulary, and purchased your wardrobe, it's time to get out there and socialize. Here are some quick rules for getting started.

1. Try to join conversations that you are not a part of, but don't look like you are.

2. Try to appear cool, but don't look like you are trying.

3. Show off, but don't look like you are.

4. If the majority of other people are making fun of someone else behind their back, agree vehemently with them, especially if you don’t know the person.

5. If someone asks you what music you listen to, say “Oh, a lot of stuff... how 'bout you?” When they respond, enthusiastically say “Oh yeah man, me too. That's some ill/dank/wicked/sweet stuff.” Then upon going home promptly download that artist's discography.

If all goes well you will have acquired some Social Capitol. Social Capital is the currency of socialization, acquired by making a funny comment, insulting someone that nobody likes, defeating someone else in WoW, having even more vision-obstructing black hair than any other Emo, or totally “decking” a kid in hockey. You spend SC whenever you drop the ball in lacrosse, agro the pats in DM, or just generally bungle in a social sense. SC is your buffer zone that protects you from utter social ruin; it's your standing in the rankings. A person with maximum SC is known as “too cool for school”. It is the highest honor any social classification can achieve. Being “too cool for school” is the enlightenment, the golden plains, the ascent into the world of immortal social beings that have maxed out their SC during their high school careers. A rare few can ever reach this state, so it is important to start acquiring SC as early as possible.

Social Events and Appropriate Etiquette:

Prom: Prom, short for Promenade, is the annual school dance held in most high schools, both the most dreaded and anticipated night of the year. Immortalized in pop culture, Prom constitutes the entirety of female's lives for 5 months prior to the “big night”, and instills gut wrenching terror in male's lives for about a week. As a boy, you should assure any other boy that you meet that “Prom is so lame, dude....” to buy you time before considering who you want to ask. Be aware that for a girl, Prom represents the most important ritual of adolescence: in other words: DO NOT ____ IT UP. Ask someone early, be incredibly nervous about it (girls think its “cute”), and buy your girl flowers.

WoW Party: If you should choose to select the WoW nerd as your social classification, be aware that once you have acquired enough SC you will be obliged to participate in something known colloquially as a WoW Party. You will bring your computer (desktop or laptop) to the specified basement or attic of a fellow WoW Nerd, as well as a sufficient amount of caffeinated soda and energy drinks to stop the heart of a large bovine. Pizza will also be supplied. Upon arriving at the party, find an Internet connection as soon as possible, and enter the World of Warcraft. Do not expect to leave for at least the next 32 hours. As a rule, you should expect to sleep in your desk chair, generally an hour or less per 24 hours. Most experienced WoW players describe a similar progression of symptoms you will may experience:

1. The “Buzz”: The caffeine boost you receive from your energy drinks will keep you going for 8-10 hours at least.

2. The “Slump”: Your body will start to slow down. A shot of about 500-1000 mL of Red Bull: Extreme Power Force Body Defibrillator should keep you going for another 12-14 hours.

3. The “Shivers”: At this point your body will have suffered from severe nutrient loss, and you will be shivering slightly as your circulation begins to slow. 2-3 microwaveable Hot Pockets, with another shot of Mountain Dew: Pro Gamer will recharge your circulatory system.

4. The “Sniffles”: This is the stage where many gamers go unconscious. WoW gamers, however, persevere. The word “sniffles” describes the feeling of nasal congestion you will start to feel at this stage. Don't worry, this is just the lower part of your frontal lobe (a useless bit of your brain responsible for language, and general motor skills) – at this point it will begin to break down, and exit through your nasal cavity.

5. The “Reds”: Once you start to see a slight reddish haze in your vision, you have reached the state few gamers can hope to achieve in a lifetime. The “Reds” start when small amounts of blood start to run out of your cornea, obscuring vision. Many WoW gamers keep a standard laboratory eye-wash station in their basements for just this purpose.

Socialization DO's and DON'T's

Jock:

DO:

-Haze Nerds, Emo’s, Goths, and every other group except for “chill” kids. They’re chill.

-Work out a lot. A lot.

-Go out with cheerleaders. They are your female counterpart.

DON'T:

-Perform well in academics. It has been scientifically proven to reduce your athletic performance.

Nerd:

DO:

-Level to 80 in WoW and PWN all the NUBLETS.

-Mention the word “Battlestar Galactica” whenever possible in the presence of other nerds.

-Everything you like is “epic.” Everything that you don't like is “nub.”

DON'T:

-Ever, ever, ever, ever insult the sanctity of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or Star Trek. Emo:

DO:

-Nothing.

-Learn emo songs on the guitar to sing, so everyone knows how much your life sucks.

DON'T:

- Attend any school events.

-Enjoy anything.

-Appear in public with the top half of your face uncovered by hair.

My New Social Life: A Golden Opportunity

Congratulations, you are now ready to enter the exciting world of American High school socialization! You have learned all about the different social classifications, their mannerisms, proper dress, hobbies, skills, and general conduct. You've learned the key steps in starting to build Social Capitol, and you've learned the most important DO's and DON'T's of your social life. All that's left to do is get out there and socialize! Just remember, socializing in America, (and especially New England) isn't about having fun, creating meaningful relationships, or even just relaxing – it's about acquiring Social Capitol, the most important way to save for your future. As an adult, the Social Capitol that you accrued in high school determines everything about you: how respected you are, how attractive you are to women, and even how successful your career will be. Fortunately, you have this guide to help!

So get out there, and chillax!*

I am An Atheist

2009-11-17T20:00:00.005+02:00

A paper I wrote for Literature last quarter:

I am an Atheist

By Aurimas Bukauskas

I am an atheist. I must admit, I entertain some guilty pleasure in mentioning this, offhand, in conversation, and seeing the blood begin to boil in the faces of my peers. There is something sinister and stomach-turning about the word. Although I myself was raised with none of these connotative associations in mind, I have come to learn that many people, especially those with a strongly Christian or Jewish upbringing, upon hearing the word atheist, think of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, the embodiment of all evil, and the antichrist. Amusing as this is to me, my atheism is not merely a provocative ploy for attention. I solidified my worldview – specifically, the rejection of the existence of the supposed supernatural, in my 15th and 16th years, and I take it very seriously. As an atheist, I do not believe in any gods, supernatural energies, or the existence of a soul. It is my opinion that religions in a modern setting – that is, in a world that has access to education, the Internet and modern medicine, have been superseded by secular social development, and at this point only continue to exist because of their ability to resist social change. I believe that not worshipping any gods, but rather embracing humanity as a whole, and opening one's mind to the endless possibilities of the universe, is the most fulfilling life one can lead.

As a child, I had always always held a certain disdain for Catholicism and Protestantism (our family attended both churches in our town, depending on which pastor tolerated my baby sister's very vocal additions to the sermon at the time). It is a rare 8 year old who enjoys sitting still and listening quietly on a hard wooden bench for an hour and a half surrounded by his neighborhood's old folks' home. I did however see the genius in having refreshments after the service – the promise of cookies, cakes, and chocolate kept me in attendance every Sunday. At some time around 9 or 10 years old, however, I stubbornly put my foot down – I simply wasn't going to go to church anymore. After some argument, and considerably more foot stamping, I had escaped, and have only attended church on rare occasions since then, on holidays, or out of politeness.

Throughout my childhood attendance of the Christian church, I had gone through several stages of belief. At first, I didn't entirely understand what everyone meant by “god”. Later, after I had undergone first communion, I began to conceptualize god as a voice that I could speak with at will. To me it differed very little from childhood imagination games – games where I wanted my imagined characters to become reality. Like my imagined fantasy worlds, however, god never became real for me. I clearly remember hurriedly transmitting guilty apologies to “god”, asking him to forgive me for stealing my brother's Legos, or not going to church – but god never answered back.

My experience is like that of many Americans who practice a rather harmless, a benign strain of Christianity or Judaism. Interestingly, it is these people who are often most offended when an atheist claims that religion is the cause of so much world strife. “We aren't like the fundamentalists, our type of religion can only be good”. There is a stigma surrounding the questioning of religion. Religion is a no-go subject for most people, because it is simply too sacred. My parents looked at it this way: going to church is character-building; it teaches you morality, and how to sit still. Although I disagree with this, I count myself fortunate that I was not subjected to fundamentalist indoctrination from childhood, and rather was raised on the rather bland and neutered form of New England Christianity (our congregation was more like a town bingo club than any devout religious organization.)

In the fifth grade, I had my first meaningful encounter with an other religion. I was given the opportunity to do a report on a topic of my choice. I had discovered lying around my house a book called the “Tao te Ching.” I read through most of it, struggling sometimes with meaning, sometimes immediately identifying with the unknown author – he made such perfect intuitive sense in every statement. Any ideas that may have impinged upon me in the slightest in Christian church were cast away, for the perfect balance and logic of the Tao. At 10 years old, I was an aspiring Taoist, and I entertained an introspective kind of worship of nature's beauty and purity. Though I did not have the discipline at 10 years old to pursue my contemplation of nature (though I did try to meditate many times unsuccessfully) the fundamental, intuitive truths of the Tao stayed with me.

At about 15, I underwent somewhat of a renaissance of thought. I had discovered the Internet, and all the intellectual riches it could offer me. I took it all in in a feverish rush, bookmarking all my favorite blogs as I went, spending countless hours watching TED videos, sometimes writing my own pieces on conclusions based on the work of others. As I careened through a new world of knowledge, I soon discovered one subject that always was able to call my attention back – evolution, namely evolutionary biology. Here I found a lens through which to view my world in a whole new way. Evolution, and the principles of natural selection completed the philosophical puzzle my mind had been toying with since childhood. Presumably, everyone experiences some kind of similar search for and eventual discovery of their guiding world-view, the intellectual framework on which their mind, consciously or subconsciously assembles the entirety of their experience and knowledge. The questions that bothered me in my early teens were vague and abstract in nature, but the answers that I found through science were crystal clear, and fit together so perfectly, that as I felt them morphing, growing, solidifying over months of scouring academic texts, watching TED talks, reading books, I positively exclaimed with joy at times upon making a momentous realization. I decided then: there is no good or evil, consciousness exists only as an interesting (but not supernatural) neurological phenomenon in the brain, there is no purpose or intent in the universe, and there is by no means any universal moral code of man, discoverable or not. I still get a rush of pure happiness contemplating the pure beauty of a universe that exists only because it exists; a universe that does not intend anything; a universe that is infinite. How wonderfully breathtaking it is to live in a world where everything is as it seems, where all one can do is be humbled and awed by the very fact that he is living, breathing, and the innumerable trillions of atoms that make up his body are in a constant chemical dance of epic proportions at every instant, just for him to exist.

My atheism, and my confidence in calling myself a non-believer arose partly out of my love of debate. At some point in middle school I discovered I had the ability to form a coherent argument, and defend it. Often, this landed me in more trouble than simply being proven wrong would have. Personally, I have had to struggle with myself, always remembering to remind myself of the distinction between an opinion or an idea, and the person defending it. Real, dispassionate debate is about hashing out a concept, revising it, testing it – not about two people arguing. Keeping my ego in check, and having the strength to accept being proven wrong has been, and continues to be a challenge for me.

In talking about religion, I find that many people are very much personally insulted by atheism. Some people take it upon themselves to argue for religions, and I happily oblige. The result, however, can get ugly, as religious people have much more at stake, if their argument crumbles. Their entire worldview, purpose for living they have poured into their faith. If that faith begins to fail, so does their guiding perception of life, everything that they and others do, say. This kind of monumental collapse of a mindset is painful, maybe traumatic, and wrenchingly transformative. I have learned over time that I must be personally responsible for judging whether it is worth it to pursue an argument, when the subject does arise – because of the consequences if I were to convince someone who is so deeply entrenched in their doctrine. Although I would hope that people would understand my views, and possibly change theirs in light of them, I am now more sensitive to how invested people truly are in their religious belief – something which has led me to understand that some people may never change – they would give everything, maybe even their lives, to prevent the crumbling of that perfect mental picture, that comfort, that grounding bedrock that they take their strength from. If someone is able to get past his/her own faith however, I believe that they may find an infinitely wider, and more gratifying world of knowledge, and spirituality.

When discussing religion with people, I have found that there are often multiple levels of defense for religious belief. Depending on where one starts, these protective layers are peeled away, one by one, to reveal the flaws of faith. The most obvious defense, and (usually) the one most easily addressed, in my experience, is the literal truth of faiths – whether or not there is actually, physically (or non-physically) a god or gods.

Evolutionary biology, through the scientific method, connected the distant scientific world of atoms, cells, organisms to that murky, confused world of humanity for me. It was through that connection, that I came to realize the fallacy inherent in modern religions. People in the developed world today can simultaneously understand what cholesterol does to their bodies, and believe in supernatural beings. The two views are by definition incompatible. Part of the reason why religions can survive today, even in a climate of unprecedentedly good scientific education (in the developed world), is because of the perceived distance between the worlds of science and religion. Many people claim that science cannot hope to address the issues that religions do. Religion is something outside of science. In my opinion, the two are inextricably tied. Religions have historically been worldviews (and the resulting beliefs, rituals, and, and customs) based on a culture's literal perception of the fundamental structure of their universe. Religious convictions arose out of literal belief – from an understanding of the world that we now know to be innacurate. Before the start of hyper-accelerated scientific progress after the 17th century in understanding precisely natural laws of the universe, people did not have the luxury of a coherent system of mutually compatible natural laws to base their belief system on. They instead built a haphazard Jenga tower of moral laws, improbable causality, and theistic associations and anthropomorphisms. The scientific method has, conveniently, over the last several hundred years, provided a framework for generations of scientists to carefully construct, piece by piece, an unprecedentedly accurate and practical understanding of the natural world. Religions today squander this wealth of knowledge, and people offhandedly discard parts of science's discoveries for the backwards and outdated conclusions of prophets from 2000 years ago, while becoming utterly dependent on the things that science has given us – everything from synthetic fabrics, to cars, advanced agriculture, and computers. It is doublethink to claim that God is our creator ( either that he/she/it exists in a physical sense or as a guiding spirit or energy in the universe) and at the same time trust wholeheartedly in the effectiveness of the airplane, as one hurtles at 500 miles an hour 30,000 feet up.

Morality. Most people (those who are not completely indoctrinated into their systems of belief, i.e. creationists, fundamentalists, ), confronted with the impossibility of the literal truth of their religious convictions, jump to the next level of defense. Never mind the literal truth of the bible, or the existence of any gods or spirits, religion is good for people. Religion teaches us the basic principles of right and wrong, right? Wrong. Morals and ethics are all well and good, if your religion is the only one around. However, over humanity's long history, there have been positively thousands, maybe millions of religions(including tribal animism, ancestor worship, and paganism). Today there are at least several hundred practiced widely. Each one of these religions teaches a different right and wrong. In some cases, they teach a mutually incompatible view of morality – as in the case of Islam and Christianity. It is precisely this limited view, and the religious-centric conviction of all worshippers that their religion, has been endowed by divine forces (note: you can't prove divine things wrong, they're supernatural – above natural law) the true vision of morality. Just like there is always bound to be a fight if everyone in the room unflinchingly and vehemently believes in their own righteous political figure, band, or sports team, moral religions are bound to be at eternal odds with one another. History is thick with religious wars, fought to a great degree because of the complete moral infallibility of all peoples involved. The Crusades are the most famous example. Today, some fundamentalist Muslims believe completely that they will be rewarded in the afterlife if they die a martyr – fighting an “amoral” evil. The fact is, every religion has its own code of morality, and each religion is given by a supernatural force or being confirmation – beyond all doubt – that it represents the truth,. Now, who is to say, which religion is correct? The answer is: none of them.

Most of us today believe strongly in the importance of kindness, love, the golden rule, non-discrimination, tolerance(of religion, sexuality, ethnicity,social condition, retardation and handicaps), but most of us don't realize that this revised system of ethics that we have come to is the result not of religious wisdom, but of secular social advancement. Since the Renaissance, secular thinkers, revolutionaries have fought to build a world that is better for all. The founders of America (who did not deem the United States one nation under god, and who were actually decidedly non-religious) emblazoned on our collective consciousness the notion of true equality, and the presence of inalienable rights for all humanity, as well as a democratic system of government, founded on discourse and fair election by the people. The religious texts of the world, however remained unchanged. The rights of African American slaves, women, and the mentally and physically handicapped had nothing to do with religious teachings. Today, the fight over non-discrimination against homosexuals sheds light on exactly how regressive religions, in this case, primarily Christianity and Islam can be. The continued intolerance of homosexuals is perpetuated today primarily because of the backwards religious texts that three quarters of the world tie themselves to – Christians, Muslims claim that homosexuality is an affront to god, and, in the words of many Americans, that gay marriage “just ain't right.” Their religion, not surprisingly, as it a moral handbook conceived in the violence and brutality of Israel 2000 years ago, cannot provide them with a moral framework for the modern age. Ironically, most Christians do not understand indeed how horrific their lives would be if they actually followed the prescribed laws of their holy text. In biblical times, the primary punishment for misdeeds such as adultery or stealing would have been amputation of a limb or death by stoning, and in some cases, crucifixion. Interestingly, although Christians villainize Jesus's captors, who tortured and crucified him, they practiced very similar methods of punishment for religious heretics all throughout the Middle Ages. Indeed much of Christian history after Jesus's time was rife with horrible brutality and atrocities. Today, we live in a time of unprecedented moral advancement – and yet, have the moral teachings of the prophets changed? Clearly – religions are not responsible for this positive development.

So, instead let us take a secular view of morality and ethics. First, we must make the assertion that there is no universal code of morality – there simply are no infallible rules that we are bound by some energy or holy spirit to follow. We are not indeed answering to any god, in this life in the next. This is precisely the point that so many religious people fear so much – they don't even want to conceive it being possible, and entirely block it from mental view. But it is the logical truth, and is actually much more productive than pretending that there are absolute laws that must be found out – and never challenged. Instead, let us look at morality from a practical perspective. My infatuation with evolutionary biology and anthropology has led me to understand that societal organization, that is, man's ability to rise from hunter gatherer tribes through farming communities to vast civilizations and empires depends on his ability to coexist in a social context. Respecting his neighbor, mother and father, not committing adultery, not stealing, lying or cheating are simply useful rules, the social glue that keeps society from descending into utter chaos and reverting to a primeval state, not the will of a supernatural being. Let us word our moral laws this way:

It is probably a good idea to:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Not lie, cheat, or steal.

Not commit adultery, covet another, etc.

Be nice.

Notice the absence of a big brother to scold you when you have done wrong. Moral rules should come from an understanding of their societal function (all of these rules serve to maintain societal stability), and supreme importance, rather than fear of some celestial magnifying glass.

Now, let us enhance these laws even further, by adding a few things that we have learned in the 2000 odd years that have passed since Jesus(1600 for Muhammad):

Challenge everything (intellectually speaking).

Practice tolerance and respect (of all cultures, peoples, ethnicities + sexuality, gender, handicap).

Pursue in your life the advancement of truth, based on the system of review known as the Scientific method.

Be nice (to everyone).

What you'll find is, my radical atheist views are in fact very similar to yours, no matter what your religion or culture. You probably already completely believe in this particular code of ethics, and would even vehemently defend it if it were challenged. The fact is – you don't need religion for your morality.

Next, upon admitting that religion may indeed not survive a productive moral purpose, people will defend the beauty of religion, the poetry of the bible, the churches, the music,the paintings, etc. Maybe it doesn't have a purpose, but it's beautiful, and it's a part of culture. My answer is yes, religions have been a part of history for a long time, and through them, gifted people have channeled their creative energies to productive ends. This however, is not justification for the continued existence. Plenty of artists – in fact, most artists, writers, musicians nowadays, do not create work inspired by religious convictions. Rather they use their own insights, experiences, inspirations to create work that is truly creative. In my opinion, the restrictions of religious commissions on work in fact limited many artists. Religions have been associated with art throughout history, but artistic expression would continue unaffected in their absence, as it has since the decline of religions in the last two centuries in the West.

Lastly, when religion has been separated even from artistic expression, people will jump to their last stand of defense – that indeterminable feeling, or power of religions. The belief in the spirituality of religion is what separates atheists from half-believers who are reluctant to reject their belief entirely on account of their fear of living a life without spirituality. People crave something deeper than their everyday experience to infuse their life with meaning – that gap is in many cases filled by religious devotion. People often ask me, upon learning that I am an atheist, “so you don't believe that your life has a purpose.” My answer is no. No god has prescribed a purpose for my life – and I am glad of it. I exist only because of the ability of my genetic ancestors to reproduce successfully in successive generations up to my own birth, and the continued function of the cells of my body to keep me alive. The fact that I am alive, and possess the consciousness to realize it, is so monumentally awe-inspiring as it is – why add a middle man to moderate my contact with the infinity of existence? Although its linguistic root suggests something supernatural, I am of the opinion that the modern usage of the word 'spirituality' refers to a state of human experience entirely independent of religion, a state of reverence for the human condition. I, as do most of us today, practice a type of spirituality satisfied by entirely non-religious aspects of life. Art, music, literature, love, nature – these are things that truly complete us in some inexplicable way. They have no functional purpose – but we could not survive without them. The spirituality of religion is really the same profundity of experience that one may have upon reading great poetry, seeing an artistic masterpiece, hearing a symphony. People who seek greater meaning in their lives in our world today have a much wider range of choices than ever before in history. They have access to an infinity of wondrous and rich works by thinkers and artists of human history,and are not limited to the indoctrination of one religion to be spiritual.

Although I am not religious, I would describe myself as spiritual in this way. I am deeply affected by art, spending time in nature, listening and performing music, etc., and my life is given meaning through this experience. I feel in no way lacking because of the fact that this meaning is not given to my life by some god or other supernatural being. I would in fact go so far as to suggest that religion limits the potential for spiritual experience in believers. First of all, for believers, all experiences, especially important or life-changing realizations or events have to fit into the limited world model of particular religious belief. Second, religious belief in many cases completely denies or rejects many aspects of a full life that can be meaningful to people. Religion is just one way to fulfill man's craving for meaning and profundity in a world of chaos – and certainly not the best way.

Humanity. As an atheist, this I think is where feelings ranging from pity, to disgust, to loathing stem from. I am godless, therefore I care not about the nature of the human condition. I do not care for people's hopes, dreams, the beauty of existence, and I because I am godless, I am predisposed to moral corruption. I wish to convince people otherwise.

My view of humanity – that nebulous, and obscenely complex mess of thought, culture, belief, and morality that makes us human – is that we are precisely what we are made of, and what we are made up of is an exceedingly complex colony of cells, that have evolved together for billions of years to reach the state of complexity they are at now. Every tiniest shred of thought, every instinct, impulse, every moment of transcendence, every pang of guilt, desire, love is the result of the sum of the chemical activity of our body. It is our body – that ancient relic of evolutionary history, carrying with it vestiges of billions of years of life on Earth. It is the the cells in our body, the cells that still today carry the ancient watery world of prelife within them, a remnant of their birth in the vast oceans of a young planet – that make us who we are.

When you think of your soul, where do you visualize it? For most, it is somewhere within their chest – maybe in the heart. A glowing orb, suspended somehow in the epicenter of your body, a part of you that cannot die, that is destined to go to heaven, and join other souls, friends, family perhaps, that have already passed. This is the view the majority of people on earth maintain – that of the Abrahamic faiths. I propose another, more earthy perspective:

In my worldview, founded on the infinite wonder inherent in the objective, empirical study of the universe, there is no soul or essence that continues after death. Rather, human beings are exactly what they are, human beings. For the shortest moment, the materials required to make a human are assembled, and soon thereafter collapse back into cycle of nature, to become any other organism in existence. This is how I visualize life, life without a god, or an afterlife:

On the surface of the sun, at about 9000 degrees, a wave of photons is flung into the freezing infinity of space. It hurtles through subatomic space for a few minutes, before a blue planet, watery and looming, explodes into view. The photons penetrate the gloss of its atmosphere in nanoseconds, and collapse through a a canopy of leaves, bouncing around a new, green world, as successive legions of light march through with morning sun through myriads of dewy leaves to a cool forest floor. Through the transparent membranes of a billion cells, the photons enter chloroplasts, and the cells churns with life. In a year, full, red fruit began to swell on the laden branches of the tree. With the blustery winds of autumn, they fall to the forest floor, their nutrients to be soaked back into the forest. A thousand years later, a man tills the earth where the trees once stood and from the dense black soil coaxes a tiny, beautiful harvest – rough grains which his children grind to paste, and eat with fervent gratitude. Someday his children will till the earth. A hundred generations later, man still tills the earth, and his crop is good, fat, grain. A hundred more generations; an egg lays still, warm and protected in the belly of a woman. The egg meets sperm, and furiously begins to divide. In nine months, a squirming, swimming baby finds its way to the light, and meets the eyes of its makers. The baby will grow, grow long wild hair, scrape his knees, climb trees and toughen. His muscles will swell, chest expand – he can run now. He will fight in distant lands, and return to his patch of black soil. He is an old man. He lays to rest, peaceful and waiting. His body returns to the earth.

He is the photon, he is the leaf, he is the tree, he is the fruit. For an infinitesimal moment he is man, but mostly, he is the earth.

I am an atheist, but this does not mean that I do not have a reverence for the human condition. Rather I believe that everyone living in our modern age has the opportunity to open their eyes to a limitless world of humbling beauty possible in shifting one's perspective from an anthropomorphic interpretation of reality, to a scientific, empirical one.

My worldview is not so radical. You may already have noted similarities, even if you are religious, between what I, and you hold dear. Looking even further, you may have noted similarities between my worldview, and that of religions more ancient than Christianity, Islam, or Judaism. Indeed, much of what many thinkers intuitively believed to be true thousands of years ago, in the foothills of the Himalayas, or the great plains of North America, is today being confirmed by empirical, scientific study. The world is infinite, everything is connected, and man is but a tiny piece of the giant mosaic of the universe. In our modern age, we may all come to adopt something like an informed intuition, a scientifically spiritual belief in the great unknown of our world. Someday, we may have the strength to worship not gods or spirits for guidance in life, but the very fabric of our own thoughts, dreams, and desires – our own humanity. Let us worship a humanity rooted in the rich black soils, deep waters, crisp white snows of our Earth, from which come all men, and all the things we hold dear. Let us worship, then, being human.

PEER Magazine cover design

2009-10-01T15:31:00.002+03:00

This is a magazine cover design I did last year for a Health project on "peer relationships"

Hurray!

2009-10-01T15:24:00.002+03:00

Hello faithful readers. Doubtless you have arrived here from the AISVilnius group. You may have already noticed the complete absence of posts since last September. Never fear! There is a negligible chance that I may make several posts within the next few months - so never fear - add this blog to your RSS feed readers subscriptions, and you may have a post appear at some point within the year. Hurray!

Scans

2008-09-15T16:35:00.003+03:00

Some more scanned images:

Viruses

2008-09-15T16:33:00.003+03:00

A paper on the classification of viruses as living or non-living (we were given 8 characteristics):

Viruses: Living or Non-living?

Based on the eight fundamental characteristics of biological life, this paper will analyze and discuss the classification of viruses as living or non-living replicators.

1. Cellular organization:

This is the characteristic that most firmly places viruses in the realm of non-living, on strict biological terms. Viruses famously have no membrane, like bacteria and other micro-organisms. One of the most fundamental attributes of living organisms is the membrane that is ubiquitous to all life. This membrane protects and encapsulates all internal processes within the cell, allowing for metabolism and homeostasis. At its most basic level, a membrane allows the conditions within a cell to be different from outside, by regulating what is absorbed and excreted. When studying the origin of the first organic molecules on earth, one of the first questions to be asked is how and when was a membrane formed, because without a membrane, metabolism is considered to be impossible.

The structure of the virus instead consists of a protein and lipid layer, protecting the precious nucleic acid that is the essential unit of the virus. This lipid layer acts as protection when the virus is not within a cell's membrane. Viruses outside of cells are known as inert macromolecules, as all of their functions can only occur using a cell's resources. As Dan Dennet put it: "viruses are strings of nucleic acid with attitude." There is a diverse array of structures and shapes that various strains of viruses assume, based on the bonds between specific proteins and the RNA strand. Some examples are helical, isometric, enveloped, and complex viruses. Each consists of a capsid and nucleocapsid containing genetic material. Some include spikes to help the virus attach itself to cells, and others, tails or complex protein shells.

2. Reproduction:

Viruses do not contain the necessary metabolic prerequisites for self-reproduction. Instead, the virus relies on the innate metabolic functions of cells to provide it with the materials and energy it requires to replicate. Firstly, during the penetration stage of a viruses life cycle, when the virus attaches itself to a cell. Viruses usually have specific protein shells that allow them to bond with or be absorbed into specific types of cells. Next is uncoating, whereupon a viruses protective lipid layer is broken down by cellular enzymes, releasing its DNA or RNA genetic information. In some viruses, the nucleic acid then causes self replication within the cell until it dies, whereupon all the viruses inside are released. In others, viruses replicate on the membrane of the cell and are released without killing the cell. As viruses leave the cell, they take a portion of the lipid membrane with them. This fuses with proteins within the virus to become the protective layer or capsid surrounding the nucleic acid molecule. Essentially, the only part of the virus that is being perpetuated is information, the information stored in the DNA or RNA nucleic acid.

3. Universal genetic code (DNA/RNA):

This is one of the only characteristics in which viruses can hope to make themselves out to be living organisms. Every virus in existence has a package of genetic code, the most fundamental replicator. Viruses can posses either DNA or RNA as a genetic code, the medium of their replication. Arguably, viruses are essentially stray bits of genetic in themselves, protected by a thin layer of proteins and lipids, only existing to move on to the next cell and replicate, becoming another bit of nucleic acid with protein cover. Within the structure of the virus, there are proteins surrounding the genetic material, which directly interact with the reproduction of the virus. Both DNA and RNA are used in various forms for the replication of the virus. Animal DNA viruses use the process, endocytosis, by which cells intake materials through their membranes to infect the cell, and their reproduction differs slightly in relation to the use of proteins from that of RNA viruses. RNA viruses are somewhat simpler, not requiring as much protection of their genetic code due to the make-up the RNA, which is much more resistance to damage from enzymes, and fares better under radioactive conditions. Interestingly, under the right conditions, disintegrated RNA placed in a solution will reassemble itself, proving the powerful simplicity of the virus. The simplicity of the virus allows it to have significantly less genetic code than a cellular organism might have.

4. Growth and development:

Viruses go through a number of stages of development throughout their life cycle. Attachment, penetration, uncoating, replication, assembly, and release. Though this term is rather ambiguous and somewhat difficult to define as a trait unique to biological life, I will assume that the intended meaning of this characteristic was to suggest cyclical development periods, as in growth processes that recur generationally. Defined thus, a virus satisfies this criterium. The life of each generation of virus follows a recognizable cyclical pattern, and this is different from say geological process, which occur without accurate repetition.

5. Metabolism(Use of materials and energy):

As previously mentioned, viruses have no metabolic processes whatsoever. No processed requiring cyclical chemical reactions are used. Instead, all living functions are carried out within the membrane of a cell, using the metabolic processes and materials found there as catalysts for the perpetuation of the virus.

6. Responsiveness to environment:

Viruses have no responsiveness to their environment, other than the chemically occurring processes that happen automatically, such as when the capsid of the virus is broken down by enzymes in a host cell, and the genetic information of the virus is copied.

7. Homeostasis:

Viruses maintain no homeostasis, other than the containment of nucleic acids inside a protective lipid or protein layer. The conditions within the virus are not maintained actively however, as the virus when not occupying a host cell becomes an inert macromolecule. To constitute true homeostatic status, viruses would require metabolic processes to sustain homeostatic reactionary functions.

8. Change through evolution:

Evolution does govern the life of all viruses, especially notably, in comparison to other organisms. When replicating at such a fundamental level, viruses are essentially playing out evolution at its simplest. Evolution is a genetic phenomenon, and no matter how tempting to observe it from the point of view of cells, multicellular organisms and processes, or even populations, the only accurate monitor for its course its a gene-centric perspective. Therefore, viruses are beautiful examples of evolution, as they are very literally, floating bits of genetic information, jostling for resources, and replicating incessantly. Viruses, like other microscopic self-replicating phenomena, evolve at a much faster rate than larger organisms because of the huge amounts of genetic noise at that particular scale of life. Viruses and other bacteria are constantly exposed to a battering barrage of radiation, stray DNA such as plasmids, and the effects of horizontal gene-transfer. At that scale of life, the tree of life looks more like a network or web, with genetic connections made chaotically all over the place.

Viruses are thought to have evolved by several different avenues.

1. Regressive theory: Viruses may have evolved from small cells that were parasitic to larger cells. As the cells became simpler, more and more genes were lost, resulting in the fundamental form of the virus.

2. Cellular origin theory: Viruses may have arisen from stray bits of DNA or RNA, that, having been detached from cells was able to survive on its own.

3. Coevolution theory: Viruses may have evolved at the same time as cellular organisms, and have been dependent on cells for their entire existence.

An Alternate Set of Characteristics:

At this point, I would like to provide an alternate definition for life, a more broad definition, not limited necessarily to the strict biological definition of the term, but rather more hinging on evolutionary theory itself. This particular definition I borrowed from neo-darwinism, which cites these characteristics as possible guidelines for other forms of life, based on different mediums of replication. These traits could apply to any replicators of any medium of information, including digital information. They are independent of biological properties, instead using biological traits or patterns as metaphors for different forms of life. I will describe the rules and, briefly, how the virus would be defined by them.

1. Longevity: A replicator must be able to survive long enough to reproduce. This may entail homeostasis, metabolism, membranes in biological organisms but could have completely different forms in other mediums. A virus satisfies this trait in that it exists long enough to attack itself to a cell and reproduce. Obviously, life unable to do this is very quickly eliminated.

2. Reproduction: A replicator must be able to self-replicate. The rate of its reproduction relates directly to its success. This applied to biological life could mean prolific and effective reproductive systems. In digital information, this could mean something much harder to identify, especially depending on the exact resources of the medium. For a Meme (a theoretical replicator of information or ideas jumping through human hosts), this could be believability, consistency with existing ideas, the catchiness of a song.

3. Fidelity: And finally, the replicator must have the capacity to reproduce itself with enough copying quality to survive the next generation. Take the example of a photo-copying machine. If one were to copy the copy of a document ten or twenty times, the original text or image would be almost completely obliterated by random noise, thus ending the functionality of the copy. Organisms must evolve at a rate that both allows them to be adaptable enough to their environment, but not mutate out of existence.

These characteristics would place viruses in the realm of living organisms. Whether or not they are accurate for the description of biological organisms is debatable, but they do provide food for thought on the definition of life, and its possible existence outside of a purely biological realm. Based firmly in evolutionary principles, our examinations of other mediums of information in our universe may yield the discovery of countless new modes of life, evolving in our minds, in the silicon of computers, or in the slow wash of geological time.

Darwin

2008-09-09T07:09:00.005+03:00

I'm posting a segment of a paper I recently wrote for biology.

The Beagle:

During the five year long expedition, Darwin cataloged an immense amount of geological, zoological, taxonomical data in his field notebooks, which he would later compile into a book, several books, most notably “Journal of Researches.” In the world of zoology, Darwin witnessed especially in his extensive travels not only the wide variation between species but the inescapable similarities between them. He discovered fossils as well, that appeared very similar to the living species he was cataloging, adding time to the equation. With a geological understanding of cumulative change, Darwin presumably guessed that similar incremental changes were occurring among biological populations at that time long before he began formulating his own theory of evolution. Most famously, Darwin would spend time in the Galapagos, recording in his notes observations on the distinct biological life there. He noted in particular that the species of the Galapagos appeared to be morphologically related to species he had observed on the mainland of South America, but with traits specifically adapted for the unique conditions of the Galapagos. Coupled with the theory that the islands had been connected to the mainland by volcanic formations and then isolated, Darwin soon became convinced of the idea of evolution by natural selection. The natural selection of the species, exposed to different environmental conditions over a long period of time favored different traits than those on the mainland of South America. A task remained however: to gather enough incontrovertible evidence to support such a theory would consume decades of Darwin’s life.

Darwin’s Influences:

Darwin was not the first to suggest evolution, rather, he was influenced by a wide variety of scientists making conclusions about the natural world around his time. Among the most influential was Charles Lyell, a geologist who was a pioneer of an entirely new understanding of geology. Most importantly he posited that the earth was in fact much older than previously thought, and that changes to its geology occurred at slow incremental paces. His book, “Principles of Geology” (1830-3), greatly inspired Darwin’s understanding of change in the natural world, and the kinds of scales he was observing. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, a outspoken zoologist, was among the first propose the idea of “inherited acquired traits.” Lamarck observed that animals and plants seemed to have particular traits specifically adapted what they needed to survive, e.g. giraffes had long necks to reach high growing leaves, turtles had hard shells for protection. His ideas of inherited cumulative change were much respected and referenced by Darwin and other evolutionist scientists of the day, but before Darwin, there was no vehicle for hereditary transmission. Lamarck postulated that possibly the continual strain of a giraffe reaching for high plants would cause its neck to grow longer: Lamarck’s “First Law” of Evolution. Use or disuse of an appendage or organ would cause it to grow or shrink. Lamarck’s “ Second Law” stated that such changes were inherited generationally, and thus a species would evolve. This theory was almost identical to that of Erasmus Darwin, of the same time period. Darwin cited them both as “useful” for evolution, but the key difference between Lamarckian and Darwinian evolution was the vehicle of heredity: natural selection.

Darwin drew his ideas of natural selection in part from the world of statistics and mathematics. Thomas Malthus’s essay, “On the Principle of Population” (1798) argued that unchecked human population growth would as a mathematical certainly surpass global food production. He expressed this growth geometrically. If for example, each family produces 4 children, and each child produces 4 children, the numbers accelerate geometrically. Darwin understood that there had to be immense amounts of waste in nature, and many offspring would die, if a population were to remain at a stable size. There is intense competition between those offspring, both direct and indirect, that results in the survival of some (hence the perpetuation of those better-adapted genes) and the death of others. So in witnessing and observing this phenomenon in nature, Darwin eventually realized that it was through chance, and minute variation, that statistically, an entire species changed gradually over time. Darwin also knew from personal experience with “artificial selection” what heredity meant. As an avid pigeon breeder, he witnessed firsthand the inheritance of traits.

On the Origin Of Species

In 1856, after twenty years of publishing various scientific papers on the study of barnacles, coral reefs, volcanic formations, and molds, Darwin was suggested by Charles Lyell to write up his ideas of natural selection and evolution. Darwin, in part worried about his health, began work on a book, “Natural Selection.” The exhaustive text includes immense amounts of evidence and explanation, supporting the fairly simple concept of evolution by natural selection. Two years later, before he had finished, Darwin received a letter from Alfred Russel Wallace, presenting his own independent conclusions of natural selection, strikingly similar to his own, and with a similar geological background. Finally, in 1859, he publishes the book, entitled: “On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” awaiting the ensuing chaos of controversy and debate.

Canal Transportation System

2008-09-05T20:45:00.006+03:00

I am currently working on a transportation system based on the use of cyclical canals, as concentric rings of energy neutral transport around a city. The idea for this evolved out of my original intention to toy with different applications of mechanical wind energy. This canal design would use only mechanical wind power, and never store any electricity generated from wind. The process of the storage of energy as electricity in batteries is inefficient, and other methods have been designed, such as the usage of underground air-tanks, storing energy in the pressure of air. The canal system would use direct wind energy as means of propelling water around the canals, where transport vehicles would be moved by the water itself. The energy of the system is stored constantly in the total inertia of the water in the canals. Millions of tons of water, moving at even a slow rate, with non-obtrusive canal walls and shape would continue to circulate for days. On rails on the canal walls, large ferries would move at the same speed as the water, never stopping (doing so would slow down the overall canal water speed ) but with one side constantly in contact with the sidewalk, so pedestrians could embark and disembark at will. On average days, these rail-ferries would probably travel at running speeds, and the transition from the sidewalk to the deck could be eased by a moderating floating sidewalk in shallower water between the ferries and the sidewalk which would move slower (the speed of a current relates directly to depth).
This, at its very initial stages, is just one incarnation of many possibilities involving wind energy, moving water, and transport. This particular model is scalable, and is not limited to specific technologies or applications. For example, in a single block, it could be used as a simple method for transporting food from local markets, waste, materials or anything that was too ungainly or heavy for conventional transport. At those small scales, the shape of the canals could be much more variable, as counter-currents aren't as much of an issue. In essence, a wind-powered canal is like an urban river, with constant movement as long as there is sufficient wind. On massive scales, such as across entire cities, this system may not be as practical for providing useful transport, because it would probably be too slow
for the kinds of distances it would have to cover. However, if time is not a factor, such as in some ongoing distribution process, this could be useful to transport large loads without using anything but the wind.

Some Scanned Images

2008-09-03T19:58:00.006+03:00

I will be posting some scans I have done this past summer of beautiful illustrations and images that I have discovered lying around my house. I will continue my search and hopefully have more scans to present in the future. All of these scans can be accessed http://picasaweb.google.com/abxor.blog1/Scans#5241848647440480754

Some of you may recognize the magic cards...

Sail Power

2008-08-30T20:51:00.005+03:00

Inspired by Inhabitat's article on the Greenbird, the current record holder for fastest land-sailor , I started pondering the applications of wind and sail locomotion technology to land vehicles or transportation systems.
Because wind is so universally present, and is an entirely renewable resource caused directly by heat generated by the sun, it makes a good candidate for power in transportation systems. Vehicles would never have to carry their energy in inefficient forms of storage far from its original source, which grants bonuses in weight. Wind is readily harnessed in many diverse methods, which do not require a centralized system of distribution, nor does it involve any sophisticated technology (in the case of a sail or mechanical turbine). Its easily identifiable drawbacks are: limited directional mobility, variable speed and direction, limited total energy, and local disruption (harnessing the wind with a sail or turbine causes turbulence, which can lower the productivity of wind generators or sails downwind of it). I will be posting various designs and ideas during the next few weeks.

Intentionality

2008-07-26T18:56:00.004+03:00

I watched a discussion between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss this morning, in which, without a moderator, they had open dialogue about science, evolution and atheism, and its social effects. Fairly standard and predictable. One point they came to however, Krauss mentioned the notion of purpose in the universe, and although Dawkins gave him a curt rebuttal, they both accepted that ultimately, there could be purpose and meaning to the universe. One example they gave of a visualization of a purposeful universe was that a giant 'Turing machine', in which we were all just minor components built to calculate pi to an indefinite number of digits. I profoundly disagree that the universe in any way could be guided by some form of purpose or intent, and I crystallized my argument into three points.

1. Negative evidence: Although negative evidence cannot by definition prove anything, it is important to understand why so many peoples have been so completely convinced that there is purpose in existence, and are so averse to the notion of chaos, even afraid of it. I attribute this to natural propensity of the human mind, in its utilitarian efficiency, to simplify complex phenomena in its environment to easier calculated methods of data compression. Dennet's stances illustrate this fundamental tool of the human mind quite elegantly. The physical stance is essentially the direct scientific brute force interpretation of something. A mass of particles following the fundamental laws of physics. Theoretically, the actions of such an entity can be predicted exactly if one were to commit immense amounts of processing power and calculate the movements and changes of every single particle. The design and intentional stance make use of shortcuts in processing to make less accurate but much faster predictions. The design stance presumes a goal intended by an object, a 2nd order intentional object. The function of a car and all of its components are much more efficiently calculable when the assumption is made that the car and all of its parts were intended to execute the function of driving, as opposed to employing the physical stance. The intentional stance interprets direct motives of a 1st order intentional entity, i.e. that wolf intends to eat, so it may attempt to eat me. In the biological context the human species evolved, the intentional and design stances are indispensable, and allow the brain to make semi-accurate decisions on much less processing capacity than the physical stance would entail. In reality however, every species, every human object of design has no intentional purpose to it, and is merely a immensely complex cluster of atoms acting partly on the pre-programmed physiological capacities it possesses and partly on the effects of the environment upon it. It has no independent purpose, no sovereignty of intention, and no objectivity. The human mind, so cleverly evolved to make sense of its world, has difficulty at times letting go of the illusion of intention that it has and continues to rely on for daily life.

2. Endless regression: If we take the example of a giant Turing machine universe, created specifically for the task of calculating pi, then we find ourselves with a macrocosm, a scaled up version of our own world. An intentional entity, in some way independent (a purposeful entity by definition cannot be all encompassing, for to act it must do so relatively to the universe around it) from its surroundings, must act in a purposeful way to create or assemble the Turing machine of our universe. The obvious question arises, how was the purposeful body conceived if other than by chaotic natural processes? (I will not waste time elaborating on the endless regression of supernatural creator beings.) The problem degenerates into an all too familiar ceaseless regression - a purposeful Turing machine, created by a being inside another purposeful Turing machine, created by... and so on.

3. Math: Basic statistics, or even common sense will tell you it is impossible to accurately measure an infinite set. Statistics can determine accurately the properties of a finite set, and even make predictions as to the future behavior of that set. It is used fairly effectively (though inherently only an approximation, even when the properties full representation of the set are recorded) in some circumstances. However, the reason for inaccuracy inherent in measurements in the real world is that fact that no set can be isolated from its surroundings, the universe. Take the example of a long and convoluted marble machine, where marbles tumble down through it, bouncing over nails and obstructions, eventually to come to rest in one of several bins at the bottom. In this finite model, physical laws, and the exact measurements of the properties of all the particles in the machine theoretically would grant the observer a perfect prediction of the exact path of every marble. However, no matter how isolated in the deep vastness of space, this marble machine is never truly isolated, and is always affected by the rest of the universe, however minutely, therefore rendering the set infinite, and impossible to calculate. In this way, there is no predictable path to the universe, because of its infinity, and inherent chaos. Purpose is dissolved by chaos.

Chaos.

2008-06-22T18:14:00.002+03:00

The universe is infinite. Therefore, it is incalculable. Likewise, any part or compartmentalization of space or time of the universe is also incalculable. Therefore, the universe is infinitely chaotic, and we know nothing.

Neutral Buoyancy Locomotion

2008-05-31T11:14:00.004+03:00

A very unconventional but visually beautiful way to get around at neutral buoyancy. The tank is normal air. The creatures are equipped with helium bladders to maintain near-weightlessness.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1155269982?bctid=1517401883

Adobe Illustrator in Black and White

2008-05-03T11:45:00.003+03:00

Every week on AB.XOR, I will be posting a new title image, created in Adobe Illustrator (or photoshop). An album on Picasa has been made to store all of these images, and the slideshow is running on this page.

An Alternate Form of Life: Memes

2008-05-02T09:27:00.005+03:00

Since Richard Dawkins' book, the Selfish Gene, the word 'meme' has been circulating in public channels, reproducing like the selfish meme it is. It will, indeed, be circulating this blog a lot in posts to come, so it would be prudent to make a small introduction to the topic of memetics, before diving into the scientific debate concerning its finer points.

Wikipedia's definition:
A meme (pronounced /miːm/^[1] or /mɛm/^{[citation needed]}) consists of any unit of cultural information, such as a practice or idea, that gets transmitted verbally or by repeated action from one mind to another. Examples include thoughts, ideas, theories, practices, habits, songs, dances and moods and terms such as race, culture, and ethnicity. Memes propagate themselves and can move through a "culture" in a manner similar to the behavior of a virus. As a unit of cultural evolution, a meme in some ways resembles a gene. Richard Dawkins, in his book, The Selfish Gene,^[2] recounts how and why he coined the term meme to describe how one might extend Darwinian principles to explain the spread of ideas and cultural phenomena. He gave as examples tunes, catch-phrases, beliefs, clothing-fashions, and the technology of building arches.

Meme-theorists contend that memes evolve by natural selection (similarly to Darwinian biological evolution) through the processes of variation, mutation, competition, and inheritance influencing an individual entity's reproductive success. So with memes, some ideas will propagate less successfully and become extinct, while others will survive, spread, and, for better or for worse, mutate. "Memeticists argue that the memes most beneficial to their hosts will not necessarily survive; rather, those memes that replicate the most effectively spread best, which allows for the possibility that successful memes may prove detrimental to their hosts."^[3]

Also important to conceptualize the evolution of memes (and genes for that matter), is an understanding of the basic principles of evolutionary theory. There are 3 basic traits that define life, biological or any other kind. Theoretically, any inanimate medium in which self replicating units posses these traits can be said to follow the rules of evolution, such as selection pressures, competition, mutation, inheritance and so on.

1. Fecundity: There must be a way for the organism/structure, however simple, to copy itself and produce offspring similar to itself. Something as a simple as a tiny metabolic cycle of several nutrients interacting is life if it reproduces. In memetics, those memes that are particularly good at reproducing from one mind or computer to another, like fundamentalist religion or cake recipes will outlive the less reproductive memes.

2. Longevity: The organism must survive long enough to reproduce. A meme must be retained to some degree in some memory medium long enough for it to copy itself onto another medium and begin its life cycle again

3. Fidelity: The organism must be able to copy itself at a high enough quality to ensure that it does not mutate out of existence in several generations. Human genes mutate very slightly from generation to generation, and it is this genetic 'conservatism' that keeps our evolution somewhat steady. This is a topic that in memetics is widely debated. Memes would seem to have extremely poor copying fidelity; for example: a rumour generally is so mutated after several generations it doesn't resemble the original meme at all. However, as mentioned in the Selfish Gene and elsewhere, because of our limited knowledge of the physiology of the human brain, it is much more difficult to establish a 'unit of measure' for memes. How many meme bytes make up a rumour, or a song? There are some examples of self corrective memes, or digital reproduction. In the game telephone, where a word or phrase is whispered down a chain of people, the meme being transfered is not the raw sound data of a voice, but words from a vocabulary of finite letters. Even if one player speaks in a different accent, or mispronounces a word, the next will understand his meaning, and the meme reverts to its original version.

What's important to note here, as it tends to be a topic of controversy, a 'selfish meme,' or meme that evolves and reproduces without any direct positive relationship to its human hosts is no different than a 'selfish gene' in that neither one has any 'desire' or intention to survive and reproduce, but rather, those memes / genes that happen to posses the traits that let them survive longer and reproduce more, outlive those that do not. In fact, some propose that all biological life can be observed as having no real intentions or desires, but I will post in greater length on my opinions on this in later posts.

Atheism

2008-05-01T23:12:00.007+03:00

Having not read all of the current literature of Atheist scientists that has flooded the bookstores in the last year or so, I cannot say that I am totally aware of all the arguments of secular criticism of religion. But I have read some books, including the God Delusion, and I'm currently reading Breaking the Spell , as well as a fair amount of online material, and I have conclusions on the debate. I will be writing more on my ideas on the subject as a whole in later posts, but this will serve as an introduction for the theme. From my experience, the argument of religion seems to be observed from several distinct standpoints.

At one end of the spectrum, there are those, regretfully, well represented in America, who liken Atheists with the work of Satan, and deem it their holy duty to wage holy war (hopefully limited to the blogosphere) against non-believers. For my purposes, I'm not going to bother chasing down petty blogger spats on this level, and try to focus more on the scientific and intellectual study of religion as a whole.

Some feel a little queasy about questioning religion, wary of 'breaking the spell' as Dan Dennet puts it in his book. There is a cultural aversion, instilled in all of us that religion is something that simply should not be messed with, and acts independently from the rest of society, so therefore does not need to be evaluated as positive or negative.
Others are quick to point the accusatory finger at fellow atheists in the debate who may have stepped over some imaginary line, declaring them simply another dogmatic religious-like following, without any real improvement over religion.

Another contingent believes that research should be conducted on religion as a natural phenomenon, just like any other facet of our lives, and that it should be granted no privilege or protection from the light of scientific study. Deliberate action concerning it should be withheld until conclusive study yields results. However, it is agreed that education of factual religious history is vital, no matter what the actual effects are. Dan Dennet, as one of the 'four horsemen of the anti-apocalypse' falls into this category.

Others still believe that though study is surely needed, religion is such a negative aspect of our world today that it deserves to be actively countered and either forced out of its dangerous form into a more benevolent 'sports team fan' manner of belief, or eliminated altogether. The God Delusion fits into this category, and the term 'militant atheism' is used to describe Richard Dawkins' views on religion.

I will analyze these different viewpoints, though I would describe myself as an advocate of the 'further study + education' group, through posts on the subject, and various angles of study that are being undertaken.

Welcome

2008-05-01T22:16:00.002+03:00

As I cruise the web in search of interesting bits of information, I find the criteria of which topics interest me grow and evolve. I'll be posting the latest articles, videos, blogs, etc. that catch my attention, partly as a way for me to record and archive my findings, and partly as my particular filter of information into a unique form for your benefit. The topics followed in this blog will be primarily memetics, cultural evolution, religion, and environmental design and architecture.

Darwin Essay

2007-09-08T19:51:00.000+03:00

For a recent biology assignment I wrote this paper on Charles Darwin:

DARWIN

Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) was born fifth of six children into a wealthy Shrewshire family. As a child, he was an unremarkable student, and instead spent much of his time reading and collecting specimens: bird’s eggs, shells, beetles, minerals. He began his formal education at Edinburgh University in 1825, with the intention of following his father footsteps into medicine. However, he did not like the study of medicine, and under the recommendation of his father, went into the church, an acceptable alternative to academic study. It was study that intrigued the young Darwin, just of a different kind. To Darwin, being a country parson was a non-demanding occupation which would give him free time for his more consuming interest: natural history.

To be ordained, he needed a B.A. in English, so he attended Cambridge University, where he soon became absorbed in the study of naturalism, with the guidance of J.S. Henslow, the professor of botany there. They became personal friends, and it was through Henslow that Darwin got the opportunity of his lifetime. Captain Robert Fitzroy of H. M. S. Beagle in preparation for a circumnavigation of the globe, was looking for a “gentleman companion,” someone to talk to during the long voyage, and who had some knowledge of geology and natural history and would be able to catalog any finds throughout the journey. Henslow recommended Darwin for the post, and after some reluctance from his father, Darwin was offered the position and accepted it.

The Beagle:

Darwin’s Influences:

On the Origin Of Species

Conclusions of Evolution

Susan Blackmore, in her 2008 TED talk, paraphrases “On the Origin of Species:” “If you have creatures that vary [evidence]… … and if nearly all of these creatures die [evidence]… …and if those that survive pass on whatever it was that they had that allowed them to survive to their offspring… then they must be better adapted to the circumstances than their parents were.” This in short, is the core of “Origin” and is what defines all biological understanding today. The vast implications of such a simple idea are still reverberating today, and arguably, are even mounting in their frequency. What evolution at its core provides us, is an explanation for all biological diversity (and possibly other kinds, as some new fields suggest) in a simple, mathematical way. Most importantly however, evolution provides an explanation for complexity, a way to explain how simple chemical substances could gradually over time become increasingly complex biological compounds, nutrients, tissues, muscles, limbs. No other theory has come close to solving this problem( as will be discussed later in this paper). The conclusions of Darwin and Wallace are so earthshaking that there are now entirely new fields, new modes of thought being applied to the universe every day. Memetics and evolutionary psychology are just a few examples of Darwin’s natural selection blooming into further scientific speculation. Today the battle of creationism vs. a naturalistic universe rages on still. Fundamentalist and creationist movements such as intelligent design are grappling now with new minds such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Dan Dennet, and others, the argument centering on the crucial issue of evolution. With the aid of Huxley’s “Evolution: The Modern Synthesis (1942)” to bring together various ideas from different biological disciplines, and Francis Crick and James Watson’s Discovery of DNA as a vehicle of hereditary transmission, evolution has become undeniably accepted by almost all respectable scientists of our time.

The Modern Offspring of Darwin

Today there are multiple branches of the basic theory of evolution, with some disagreement over particular parts of evolutionary theory and its more advanced applications. One subject of debate is the explanation of larger changes, “speciation events.” To this day, there has been no scientific experiment able to prove observably that evolution by natural selection can cause an entirely new species to arise. The theory of natural selection works up to a point, but the incremental changes simply aren’t enough to account for all of the incredibly diverse species on our planet within the timeframes involved. For example, the evolution of humans from a common ancestor to that of the chimpanzee has to have occurred within several 1000 generations, as fossil evidence tells us. However, mathematically, if only random changes of DNA were to occur and by evolutionary drift we were to arrive at the biological state we are at now, the amount of change required would be impossible. This suggests that the changes would need to be guided somehow in a particular direction by some non-random force. Contrary to the belief of most people only casually acquainted with the concept of evolution, mutations are widely considered by biologists to in fact be non-random. In organisms that use DNA as a genetic storage medium, there in fact many tiny DNA repair and modification mechanisms surrounding the chemical data. The procedural growth of an organism is affected both by the DNA itself and the mechanisms that manipulate it. For example, a study has recently been published about

Religion and Evolution:

The most controversial and dangerously sensitive subject of the implications of evolution is undoubtedly its complete non-reliance on supernatural forces for the explanation of life. In the Bible, it is written that the world was created in 6 days, 6000 years ago by God. All species are immovable and distinct subjects of this one supernatural being, who, through omnipotent omniscience, ensures the continued stability of the Earth. Over the centuries of scientific discovery, this view has eroded somewhat under the weight of incontrovertible evidence stating otherwise. Few people today still believe what is literally written in the bible, instead most subscribe to some intermediation, i.e. ‘adaptation happens, but God started all life’, or ‘God helped evolution past the more difficult adaptive leaps’. In America especially, creationism and intelligent design, both arguments from the position of some sort of artificer, hold sway among the population. The ongoing debate of which view should be taught in schools gets lots of publicity still, and the famous case of “The Scopes Trial” is brought up time again. Recently, several books have been published on the subject, written by accomplished scholars and self-proclaimed atheists: “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins, discusses logic arguments for the existence of a god, or a creator, with a strong focus on evolution. Dawkins essentially says that evolution is not only the best, but the only possible explanation for biological complexity. He cites the problem of infinite regression. If a creator had designed all biological life, he, by definition, would have had to have been more complex than what he is creating, thereby creating another problem: who created the creator? An infinite regression. Evolution on the other hand, can explain, how through gradual variation, organisms can consistently acquire new traits that add up to greater and greater complexity. Not only is complexity possible, it is a definite trend of evolution. Stephen Jay Gould is famous for having called for a reconciliation of Science and Religion, stating that were “non-overlapping magisteria.” Many religious moderates hurry to agree with him, acknowledging that evolution is completely compatible with religious belief. However, in the wake of constant attack from followers of a dramatically literal interpretation of the bible, many non-believers feel that a final conflict is inevitable, and both sides draw all intellectual (and some not very intellectual) weapons it can to its aid, with the eventual triumph of scientific study or religious faith.

Social Darwinism:

Today, the name Darwin has been stained by the term “Social Darwinism.” Essentially Social Darwinism is the idea that “social evolution,” or “survival of the fittest” causes groups to progress evolutionarily, stating that inequalities between nations, racial and ethnic groups are not meant to be dealt with, but rather are the natural process of selection acting on human populations. This and the other interpretation, an enforced version of selection are grossly unpopular today and are cited regularly as arguments against Darwin and his ideas as a whole. Whether or not the ideas of Social Darwinism can be said to be based on Darwinism is a much debated point. Though Darwin himself deposed the idea of enforced “survival of the fittest” in his writing, saying it would be impossible to instate a system based on genetic fitness in modern society. Social Darwinism was in fact, more influenced by the work of Francis Galton, Arthur de Gabineau. Herbert Spencer, and Thomas Malthus, all of whose work were not directly related with Darwin’s and some, like Arthure de Gabineau, whose writing (which appeared before Darwin’s “Origin”) are directly in conflict with Darwin’s theories. Most famously however, is the association of Social Darwinism with the racial ideas of Nazism and Fascism. Some writers have made the claim that racial ideology of the Nazi regime were directly influenced by Darwin, but this case has been disproven on several accounts. If Darwin were to be a key factor in the belief system of Fascism, why was there not one mention of his name in “Mein Kampf?” If the only connection were through Social Darwinism, then it is unfounded, because Social Darwinism, regardless of the name, was based much more on ideas preceding the work of Darwin. The institutionalization of this bizarre justification for ethnic cleansing was in fact, closer to “artificial selection,” or selection by humans. This is much more akin to breeding, and domestication of species, where choices by humans favor certain traits over others. The Nazi application of “Survival of the Fittest” was indeed no different than any other ethnic conflict, in that there was inferred superiority by genetics. If there is any one lesson that evolution can teach us, is that there is no superiority or inferiority, no progress or direction to life, just blind chance, and existence. Humans are no more ‘evolved’ than earthworms. Both species have been evolving for the same time, from one origin of life, and both species continue to survive, proving that earthworms are just as successful as humans. Artificially selecting a human population would only weaken it by limiting genetic diversity, and Darwin understood this.

Memetics: A New Frontier

One of the most exciting modern applications of evolutionary theory is the field of memetics, a term first coined by Dawkins in his 1976 book, “A Selfish Gene.” Memetics is the study of “memes” or units of cultural transmission, data that can be reproduced and has a life of its own, just like genes. A meme is a concept, a song, an essay, a belief, even a religion (a group of cooperating memes is known as a memeplex.) The resource of competing memes is human brains, literally, storage space, attention. Memes compete to be recorded by communication, stored in a brain, and eventually communicated once more, replicating the meme. Less-adapted or ineffective memes will die out. Memes that know how to replicate more successfully will tend to be more prevalent in societies. The principle behind memetics is taking the same principles of natural selection of gene-based organisms, and applying them to information. “…does the information have to be molecular at all? Memes. This is not something that I’ve ever wanted to push as a theory of human culture, but I originally proposed it as a kind of... almost an anti-gene, to make the point that Darwinism requires accurate replicators with phenotypic power, but they don’t necessarily have to be genes. What if they were computer viruses?”-Richard Dawkins. Memetics can be used as a way of viewing culture as an organism, or even an ecosystem. Religions and belief systems act as simple single celled organisms, each meme working together to form a coherent structure of thought which is competitive in nature. As an example of memetic selection, take the spread of religions over the globe. Taking an anthropocentric view of religion, missionaries, and the conversion of peoples from one faith to another seems like the planned work of the followers of that religion, completely in control of the beliefs they hold. Through an evolutionary lens however, we can peer into the Petri dish of human thought, and witness the ferocious adaption and competition of religious memes. For a few examples of memes belief system memeplexes use to survive: belief in your one true God, promise of an eternity of paradise (72 virgins included), the vocation of missionaries. All of these directly aid the survival and self-perpetuation of religions. The effects of these memetic viruses are apparent today. All major religions today are extremely effective at getting themselves replicated and enduring in human minds. For examples of religions that did not fare as well, take the vast majority of animist or pagan religions, which generally did not incorporate exclusive pantheons, militaristic duties to expand one’s faith, and methods to ensure survival in a mind. They were largely overrun by more virulent strains- the Abrahamic religions, and Buddhism, Hinduism. Though memetics does not claim to be a full-blown theory of human culture, it most certainly is a novel way to look at cultural evolution. Other theories of societal and cultural processed are generally based on the discipline of economics, which is quite different from evolution in this case. Evolution studies culture on the basis of fundamental simple competing genes, which through growth and development result in a functioning phenotype (a phenotype is the physical appearance and functioning body of an organism based on its genotype.) Behavioral economics cites basic human needs, and an inherent selfishness as the sole motivator and power for any societal process. Superficially evolution can appear as such, but in fact, it is much more complex. Organisms can be altruistic by nature, and this can even be beneficial for them evolutionarily, contrary to popular belief, and again why the gene-centric view is an important distinction to be made. Memetics is still a fledgling discipline however, and there are several strong cases against it that cannot be dismissed. Further study will yield us more results on the workings of the human brain, and the nature of the information passing between those brains.

Conclusion

These are just a few of the vastly interesting modern applications of evolutionary theory, and in the future there can be expected to be many more. Darwin, through careful empirical research, methodical approach, logical reasoning, and rational conclusions, made a discovery that has changed the way we can observe our entire universe, not just biological life. Evolution has consequences for all of us, in the way we choose to see our world. Will we choose to ever adopt a stance of ignorance of anthropocentric assumptions, or will we delve into another era of fascinating scientific discovery, armed with the tools of our knowledge to unravel the great unknown of our universe.