Showing posts with label the Order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the Order. Show all posts

Monday, October 05, 2009

Zaghloul ya Evolution

انتصار النظرية الزغلولية للنشوق


اكتشافات حديثة تثبت خطأ نظرية داروين للنشوء والارتقاء وتؤكد أن الإنسان أصله قُله قناوي



ملاحظة : القلة هي كائن عاش على تسقيع المياه وقد انتشر في عصور ما قبل الثلاجة ويجمعه والزير جد واحد مشترك ينتسبان إليه.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8285180.stm


http://www.bbc.co.uk/arabic/multimedia/2009/10/091002_gn_us_fossil.shtml


مقتطفات زغلولية عن الجزيرة


http://aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/54C0A6AA-246F-45DE-A79D-2042487364BB.htm


وعلق الدكتور زغلول النجار أستاذ الجيولوجيا (الجيولوجيا طبقاً للمنهج الزغلولي) في عدد من الجامعات العربية، بأن الغربيين بدؤوا يعودون إلى صوابهم (بعد الشفاء على يديه من خلال المنهج الزغلولي) بعد أن كانوا يتعاملون مع أصل الإنسان من منطلق مادي وإنكار للأديان.

وقال في اتصال مع الجزيرة إن هذا الكشف العلمي الذي وجه ضربة قوية لنظرية داروين يمثل تطورا هاما جدا.

وقال النجار إن حديث الباحثين عن أربعة ملايين سنة أمر مبالغ فيه (!!!)، متوقعا (!!!) أن يكون عمر الإنسان على الأرض لا يتعدى أربعمائة ألف سنة تقريبا.


P.S.
Even the Catholic Church accepts Evolution !



Friday, December 19, 2008

Why Sugar is Sweet

Why is Sugar Sweet?


By:

Wael Nawara




Have you ever wondered why sugar tastes so sweet?


What does sweet mean, anyway?


Is it just another "class" of "tastes"? Just like "salty" or "bitter" or "acidic"?


Or is there something special about sugar?


Did you notice how we, humans, almost in every language and culture, use the word sweet, to describe nice things, nice people or even nice words. Sweet describes the taste of sugar but we also even use the word sugar itself. Men use it to describe beautiful ladies, and vice a verse. We use it to describe nice tunes, nice talk, etc. We also use the word "honey", "honeymoon", "sweet-heart", "sweetie", to describe our loved ones. There is biological relationship between sugar and reproduction, as we see in insects and plants.


Sugar contains some of the most important energy-rich dietary components necessary for our survival. Sugar can be easily and quickly absorbed by the blood giving us vital energy to keep us alive. Energy that keeps our hearts pumping, our brains functioning, our muscles moving such that it keeps us alive and on our feet. Other foods, like fats or starch, may need first to be processed and converted into simpler forms or to sugar to be useful in the same way.


Imagine if our ancestors disliked the taste of fruits, the taste of sugar, what chances would they have had to survive?


And affinity to sugar is not limited to humans. Many animals and insects like sugar so much that they would prefer it to any other food. Children, innocent and sharper in their biological instincts than grown ups, love sugar and its derivatives. In fact, some insects, like bees, are actively producing honey, which is basically sugar. Sugar is mainly available to us through plants. Fruits, which often carry the reproductive seeds of the plant, yes honey, are the main source of sugar in our earthly ecological system. In fact, it is fair to say that Sugar is the Universally Accepted Energy Currency between living beings. It is also the most convertible Energy Currency. Sugar is truly the building block of life. A team of scientists recently discovered the presence of sugar lurking some 26,000 light-years from Earth in the center of the Milky Way [1].



Our tongues recognize the molecules of sugar by their shape! The sugar molecules fit specially-shaped cavities in our tongues. When these "pits" are filled, our nerves send a signal to the brain shouting, YAHOO, sweet! Evolution has programmed our brains to find nutritious material tasty and label organic material which we can not digest as yucky! Recent research suggests that sugar is addictive, just like drugs. Sugar and the taste of sweet stimulate the brain by activating beta endorphin receptor sites.

In 2003, studies that focused on brain chemicals, known as opioids showed that some addictive drugs like heroin or morphine activate the opioid system to produce a pleasurable response that many believe helps fuel a longing or craving for more drugs and may cause withdrawal symptoms when the drug is stopped, elements which are key to the addiction process. Whether through opioids or some other brain chemical, the scientists suspect that sweets like drugs can activate an "incentive system" in the brain that helps reinforce behaviors [2]. In 2008, Bart Hoebel , a professor of psychology at Princeton University, explained that ".. evidence from an animal model suggests that bingeing on sugar can act in the brain in ways very similar to drugs of abuse." [3]


In Arabic, Sugar is the name of the disease associated with unhealthy Sugar levels in the blood, diabetes. Sugar nowadays is seen as a main reason behind obesity. But for so many millions of years, that was hardly a problem. Finding enough food, energy enough for survival was a tough challenge.


You ask someone, why is sugar sweet, and they will most likely say, because it tastes nice. Or they will give you the answer related to the specially-shaped cavities in our tongues. Or they will say because our brains like it. All are possible answers. But I think that sugar is sweet because of its importance to survival and because of evolution. Animal species which could easily identify and develop a liking for this Universal Currency, Sugar, survived and propagated. Other species which were less sharp in recognizing and differentiating between good money from counterfeit money, just went bankrupt more easily. That is why they are sadly not with us today.


And I think that is precisely why sugar is sweet. Because those who thought sugar is sweet and likeable survived. Sugar repaid them the compliment.


How sweet was that of sugar!


Isn't sugar really sweet?!


.

.

.

.
References:


.

.

.

Friday, September 05, 2008

Probably Good, Probably Fair: Morality in a Probabilistic World

Integrating Probability and Morality
 





In a previous article, we discussed the "Order of Probabilities" which govern our universe, material universe, that is.

We observed that the universe came with a set of "Rules", which govern the workings and interactions between all matter, energy and bodies, large or small.

That these rules come in the form of "possible" paths for all things to happen. And because there are always so many paths for any single event, that we have to describe our universe in terms of "Probability", that certain paths are more probable to be taken than others. And as V would say, in Wachowski brothers' Masterpiece, "V for Vendetta", "There is no Certainty, only Opportunity".

But even if the odds are extremely high for a certain path, other paths are also taken, less frequently, but they do eventually occur. This seeming chaos is responsible for the way the universe evolved, for bringing life to this earth through a process of evolution.

Genetic mutation, is an occurence whereby "an error" takes place during the process of making genetic "copies". This error, is an example of an improbable path. Such error could be responsible for a hereditary disease suffered by the off-spring, or a deformed baby or a miscarriage. But this genetic "error" is also responsible for giving birth to a new specie in the evolution process. And as errors mount and accumulate over a period of about a billion years, life forms went through a tedious process of selection and evolution, where we stand today, watching how Man emerged as an intelligent being, capable of inventing networked computers which enable you to read this article, coming at the end, so far, of a chain which probably started with a single cell amoeba.

But if there are pre-defined "paths" for everything to happen, where would "our choice" fit into this? Or did such "Order" lay out zillions of "potential" paths, each presenting "opportunity to happen", "probability to occur"? Can one "improve such probabilities"? Is that it? Is this what it is all about? That we just have pre-defined paths, and all we can do is to work really hard to make our "chosen path" more probable than others?

Can we absolve ourselves of "responsibility" then, since the limit of our responsibility is to make desired "outcomes" more probable, not more probable than "undesired" results, but rather more probable as compared to their original chance, if we were not there to influence such chance?

If we can accept, that the limit of our abilities, is to merely improve the probabilities, can we live and function as happier human beings, more in harmony with ourselves, with others, and with the universe which surrounds us, the universe which we can not change or alter in any significant way. Is this something we can accept? Is it productive, or do we sound to be victimizing Man and denying it "a larger degree of choice"?

When it comes to morality, we have always been told that if you do good, behave yourself and be good to your neighbor, you will be rewarded with good consequences. You go to heavens. In New-age religions, where rewards take place in this life, you live a happy and healthy life achieving harmony and inner peace. Evil behavior and crime do not pay. But every once in a while, we see the opposite taking place. Crime sometimes pay. In many situations, evil behavior goes unpunished. Some people practically get away with murder.

When this happens, it just demotivates us. We have learned that when we all respect the traffic laws, everyone will arrive faster and streets will be safer. But every once in a while, we see someone who zips through on a red light and he does seem to arrive even faster still. Sure. If we all did that, chances are, no one will be able to arrive to their destination in the first place. The Order can accept deviation. An improbable, rarely-occurring deviation, just like a mutation. And just like mutations are necessary for evolution, deviation from the system are also necessary because they eventually teach us new ways to doing things. Ninety Nine point nine nine nine percent of the time, these deviations, would be as unsuccessful as genetic mutations leading to a deformed embryo or a child who suffers from a hereditary disease. But every once in a while, these deviation serve to give us a new way of doing things better!

I like to define "good" as whatever works, most of the time- that is, on the long term achieving a balance between self-interest and others' interests. Our social experience has provided us with a set of values, behaviors, norms, religious teachings and even laws defining what is "good" and what is "not". But what is "good"? How did we know what is good and what is not? It basically comes in a social context, marking those values and behaviors which the society find acceptable and supporting to its survival (survival again, as an order of evolution), as good. I had earlier mentioned a "balance" between self-interest and that of the society, a balance between an individual's survival and group's survival. But the more the person sacrifices his own interest, trades his own survival for that of the "Group's", the more good, the better, he is, until that person becomes a "hero", foregoing all self-interest and sacrificing all for the well-being of the society. On the other hand, the person who focuses only on his or own interests, survival, neglecting interests of the group, sabotaging "survival" of the group, that person is deemed "bad" and "evil" and self-serving.

So, the essence is, continue being good to your neighbor. Pay your taxes. Be nice to other people, even if sometimes you meet people who despite being evil to their neighbors and big-time offenders, yet they seem to be happy and rise to high offices of power, wealth and fame. When you meet such exceptions, such error cases, do not get alarmed or disheartned. The "Order" is still there. It still works. But it does not work every time in the same way. Do not be frustrated that you start scratching your neighbor's fender! This is a part of the Order of Probability. It is like when you go gambling. The odds are that you will always lose money on the gambling table. So, you would better not gamble, except perhaps for fun. But you see people who gamble and clean the house collecting huge wins! It does happen, but it is highly unlikely and most likely unsustainable! You can think of this as a high-risk investment or a dangeorus sport. It is enjoyable, and some people win, but more often than not, those who go down that path eventually lose.

Goodness will probably prevail, as per definition above, and life will most likely be fair. But do not get disheartened when you find that life ocassionally is not fair. You just hit an unlucky streak and it is likely to change soon. Things will just have to get better, in compliance with the Order of the universe.



Blessed be the Order, which gives existence, life, meaning and Good Probabilities!

Friday, July 04, 2008

Order of Probabilities

The Beginning, The End and

The Order

Which Makes Everything & Every Path

That Comes In-Between

Probable



By: Wael Nawara





In the Beginning came, as they tell us, the Word.

What was the word?

Was it God? Was it Light? Love? Order?

What was the "Order"?

Was it "Be"? or "Let" there Be?


For these are two different things. "Be" would imply that before the "Word" there was absolute nothingness. No matter. No energy. Not even Dark Matter. But if the "Word" was "Let there Be", then, perhaps there had been "something", just waiting for the right circumstances to happen. An egg, waiting to receive "excitation" when the probabilities will allow it.

What was the very first thing uttered in this universe? Was it actually a word? or a Bang? a Big, gigantic Bang, which we can hear until this very day, some 13.7 Billion Years after.


Or was the "Order", a path, or a number of possible paths, shapes, natures, attitudes and behaviors of the things to come?


Is there such an "Order", as opposed to "Chaos" and "Randomness" ? Or is this "Randomness", and the tendency for this Randomness to increase, "Entropy", a part of that "Order"?


Are there pre-defined "paths" for everything to happen? Where would "our choice" fit into this? Or did such "Order" lay out zillions of "potential" paths, each presenting "opportunity to happen", "probability to occur"?

Can one "improve such probabilities"? Is that it? Is this what it is all about? That we just have pre-defined paths, and all we can do is to work really hard to make our "chosen path" more probable than others?


Can we absolve ourselves of "responsibility" then, since the limit of our responsibility is to make desired "outcomes" more probable, not more probable than "undesired" results, but as more probable as compared to their original chance, if we were not there to influence such chance?


If we can accept, that the limit of our abilities, is to merely improve the probabilities, can we live and function as happier human beings, more in harmony with ourselves, with others, and with the universe which surrounds us, the universe which we can not change or alter in any significant way.
Is this something we can
accept?



04/14/06

Jason Corneveaux
Arizona State University

Recently, NASA astronomers announced new evidence supporting the Big Bang theory, which states that the universe was once subatomic in size and, in only one trillionth of a second, expanded to astronomical proportions.

The findings are based on data collected by NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) satellite. The satellite, which was launched in 2001, measures the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), or, more simply, the radiant heat left behind from the Big Bang.




Continue Reading this: http://www.thetriplehelix.org/news/446





If this is what is. Then by all means:

Blessed be the Order, which gives existence, life, meaning and Good Probabilities.

Amun!

My Page on Facebook

Wael Nawara on Facebook