Posts

Showing posts with the label god

Norse Valkyrie vs Slavic Vila

It is hard to pinpoint the exact period in human history when the religiosity we are all familiar with today emerged and started to form itself with all of the colorful myths, supernatural stories, vivid deities, and numerous superpowered entities. It happened probably at some point around 10,000 BC in the same period of time when humans slowly progressed from being pure hunters and gatherers into the next stage of civilization and started to build modern settlements with domesticated animals and cultivated plants. No doubt, religiosity, superstition, and spiritualism existed all the way from the beginning in history when our ancestors started to paint cave walls, but only the Neolithic revolution and the invention of agriculture gave us enough free time to start daydreaming and to think outside pure survival. If we compare all previous beliefs with vignettes, we can safely say that the evolution of religiosity after Neolithic revolution began to fill volumes of graphic novels.


According to the theory, slowly after the beginning of the Holocene period, the first large prehistoric population of Eurasia that spoke Proto-Indo-European languages was formed. They were the ancestor of Indo-European languages and the source of Proto-Indo-European mythology, from which all pagan religions arose in different areas of Europe and Asia. This is why we can easily compare different deities and see all the similarities they inherited from the proto-times. Take, for example, gods of lightning, thunder, and weather in general. The deity of these properties emerged in all different mythologies, and Norse Thor, Greek Zeus, Roman Jupiter, Slavic Perun, Hindu Indra, Hurrian Tar, Hittite Tarḫunna, and many others were no doubt based on a Proto-Indo-European deity called Perkwunos.

The similarities do not end with the deities but also extend to other colorful characters from old myths. Last week I stumbled upon one amazing piece of art in Churchill Park at Kastellet citadel in Copenhagen. It was a 114-year-old sculpture of a Valkyrie by famous Norwegian artist Stephan Sinding. It was probably the best 3D/live-action street art I have ever seen before. It reflects everything about what Valkyrie really is in old Norse mythology. The word literally means "chooser of the slain", and it is portraying a female figure guiding the souls of deceased Nordic soldiers either to Fólkvangr, Freyja's afterlife, or to Valhalla, Odin's immortality hall. Old Norse literature describes valkyries either as purely supernatural or as human maidens with certain supernatural powers. Both types of beings were associated with honesty, splendor, and gold, but also with bloodshed and brutality in battle.


In South Slavic mythology, a similar being, vila, represents a female supernatural being who is sympathetic to people, but she could also be vengeful and brutal. She is depicted as an extremely beautiful girl with golden hair, dressed in long, flowing robes, and armed usually with bows and arrows. She exists on a liminal plane between nature and culture, between gods and humans, constantly travelling between one realm and the other to interact with the heroes and villains of the epics. Even though both Valkyries and Vilas developed in different religious environments, it is hard not to spot various similarities between the two. The whiteness and glowing quality of the vilas is mirrored in the description of the valkyries, and both figures are to be found in the sky in most of their depictions with connection to lightning and thunder.*

The warrior aspects of the Valkyrie are unquestionable; they are "vowed to war", and their role is primarily on the battlefield. The mythical Viles are similarly portrayed and often described as wearing armor with bows and arrows and envisioned as powerful, supernatural warriors. There are convincing resemblances in regard to the connection between Viles and Valkyries and heroes in the epics. Most often this relationship is a warrior bond, but this relationship can become both sexual and malicious. Just as a vila can manipulate heroes or villains to murder those of her choosing, so too the valkyries are reputed to play deadly games with the heroes with whom they associate.*


Although the nature of the valkyries' flight is portrayed as a magical ride on horseback, whereas the vile most often fly unmounted with the use of bird wings, it is not uncommon for the vile to ride horses or deer. Both, Viles and Valkyries, are often described as gathering in groups within the epics and referring to each other as sisters. It is fair to suggest that the Valkyrie and the Vila are rooted in the same figure; their differences lie only within the cultural differences between the Slavs and the Germanic peoples. Perhaps the most likely attestable age of the two figures lies back to the 6th century CE, when the south Slavic tribes were still located in the North of Europe.*

From there, we could push the date back even further to the time of Proto-Indo-European times, especially if we extend this comparison to apsarā, beings with similar traits from Indian religion and mythology. The various trios of birth-fate-death-associated women in Greek and Roman folklore also appear to originate from the same source. The direct ancestor of Valkyries is most likely Proto-Germanic walakuzjǭ, which stands for walaz (battle wound) +‎ kuzą (choice, decision).


Historical origins of Vilas include the various traditions, especially Celtic, Slavic, Germanic, English, and French folklore. The word "vilenski" was used as an adjective, meaning "enchanted", but also became a generic term for various enchanted creatures during the late Middle English period. Nevertheless, the proto-origin is no doubt the same as the Valkyrie's and South Slavic versions, especially in the Middle Ages. Serbia survived even Christianizing the old beliefs and ended in colorful epics and poems of the 14th century and later. Although, to be perfectly fair and precise, the mythological Vilas from the oldest myths and tales and the folklorized one in epics and poems are somewhat different in a way that folklore is centered on human affairs, heroes, and battles, and supernatural beings only serve as a side story, so to speak.

Always, when I am reading or writing about old myths and tales, I can't help but wonder what a comparison would be of a typical religious person from the old times and today. It seems to me that old stories were much more colorful and picturesque than the ones from the religious beliefs of a singular god. Even a small thing like a simple walk through the woods would be different for somebody in BC times for the simple fact that, from all they knew, not only natural plants and animals could be found there. For many, the forest behind the house could also be a magical gateway to the supernatural world, and even the smallest unexplained event of natural behavior (like a methane leak or weird animal demeanor) could be immediately linked to the supernatural. But this sounds like a nice topic for another story.


Image refs:
https://vrallart.com/artworks/milos-marko_i_vila/
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_Dadd...Yellow_Sands.jpg
https://www.saatchiart.com/...The-Valkyries

* A Treatise on the South Slavic Vila by Dorian Jurić 
https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/bitstream/11375/9407/1/fulltext.pdf
This article contains quotes/paraphrases from Dorian's theses

Goddess Zhiva (MPJ story):
https://www.mpj.one/2018/08/goddess-zhiva.html

Serbian Vampires (MPJ story):
https://www.mpj.one/2020/10/serbian-vampires.html

Fairies of Naissus (MPJ story):
https://www.mpj.one/2015/11/fairies-of-naissus.html

Refs
https://templeilluminatus.com/forum/topics/valkyrie?groupUrl=the-triple-goddess
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valkyrie
https://www.worldhistory.org/Valkyrie/
http://www.mcurtis.net/legend-of-keres
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vila_(fairy)
https://slavicmythologyandtales.wordpress.com/2020/08/15/vile-and-rusalki-part-2/
https://sr.m.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/ВилаРавијојла

Is Infinity Real?

Sooner or later, computation hardware and artificial intelligence algorithms will inevitably reach the point of enough sophistication that the creation of a simulation of enormous proportions, for example, the size of the entire universe, will be effortless. So to speak. These god-like engineers of such future simulation will indeed face a decision point regarding which degree of limitation to create for their simulated entities or artificial intelligence units in order for them to never reach the point of finding the proof that their world is in fact nothing more than just a series of electrical or optical currents of one inconceivably powerful futuristic computer.

If created right, there's no doubt that the inner world of all those hypothetical units would seem to be as real to them as our own very reality is to us. So, considering the state of obvious, the question arises by itself: if our own reality is such a simulation and we are nothing but AI units within some alien quantum computer, what exactly is the limitation?


To me, it always has been infinity. My own limited mind always struggled with understanding what it really meant. Aristotle, who buzzed his head with infinity quite a lot, concluded that infinity is only potential in nature. We can always add a number to any number to the point of infinity or divide something into infinite parts, but in reality, he thought that it was impossible to exceed every definite magnitude for the simple reason that if it were possible, there would be something bigger than the heavens or something smaller than the atoms (Greek origin: άτομο, which means without volume and uncuttable).

Today we still can't find the proof of bigger or smaller volumes than we can see or understand. If we look up toward the heavens, we are pretty sure that we cannot see beyond the Big Bang or 14 billion light years in all directions due to the limitation of light speed. The same goes with understanding the smaller volumes of microcosm for which we think the current boundary is around the scale of 10e-12 Picometres due to the quantum limitation of observable micro space without disturbance by the observer.


All things considered, as proposed by mathematics, infinity might be just the other word for really, really big, or extremely small, or very old, or too far away. In every way, simply put, infinity might be just beyond our reach. Perhaps if we are really living in the simulation, this is our limitation, and we are pretty much designed in the realm of simulated physics to never reach it and to never learn what is behind the horizon. Ironically, the ultimate truth could be that there was nothing there. It might be where simulation ends and where alien software developers' backdoor is located. Their own reality could be entirely and unimaginably different.

But what if we are not living in a simulation? What if all the laws of physics were not invented by an ingenious developer and were instead real, perfectly natural, and not artificial in origin? Would we have a volume larger than heavens or smaller than quarks and strings? Or just maybe these two extremes are somehow connected and twisted in a loop with no need for infinity at all? Perhaps, ultimately, the size could be irrelevant and not a factor in all cosmic equations.
 
1 +  = ?

http://sten.astronomycafe.net/is-infinity-real/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity

The Genetics of Human Behavior

Genetics is, relatively speaking, a very young science. After the discovery of DNA only a couple of decades ago, it stopped being solely a statistical and psychological study of heredity, and ever since then it has been given a very important component in its labs: a microscope. In simple words, we are now able to dive more deeply into the world of genes and their government of the human body and behavior. In this short time we learned a great deal about human genetics and how it works. Many genes are already identified in relation to how we act and interact with others and our environment. Let's discuss some of them that already earned cool nicknames in relation to what they are capable of or what we think and suspect they do.

The mixture of genes we own is given to us by our parents, who inherited them from their parents, who were gifted with the same from their own mothers and fathers, and so on. What is our DNA finally composed of? It basically defines us and not just our looks and physical properties but also our behavior. For example, there is a 'wanderlust gene' that some of us have that is dominant and drives a person toward adventurous behavior and an everlasting desire for travel and the search for the unknown. The other example is a 'warrior gene' that in many cases explains somebody's aggressiveness and violent behavior. There's even a 'god gene', a molecule identified with a power to direct a person to be superstitious and religious. Imagine what happens if these three genes become dominant in a single person who, by chance, becomes the leader of a country with worldwide influence.


In regards to human behavior, the main question is: what has dominant influence—the environment or genetics of a person? The best results, of course, are given by a statistical study of separated identical twins who, after reunion, showed many similarities in personalities even though they were raised in different families and environments. However, we should not underestimate environmental influence simply because if behavior came to be the result of complex multiple genes doing so, they could not have a detectable effect due to environmental impact. For example, even if you have a warrior gene, its influence could be buried if you are raised in a loving family without much violent disturbance from the others. Even more, in such scenarios it could help you with more positive influence than negative; for example, in your sport's career, it is always better to act with a sort of allowed aggressiveness.

With a disclaimer in mind of me not being a genetics scientist, please find more info in referral links throughout this post, and instead, in today's spirit, let me introduce half a dozen coolly identified genes or candidates, in many cases, responsible for various key human behaviors.

Wanderlust gene
DRD4-7R
The key word here is dopamine, a hormone and neurotransmitter responsible for many different features in our brain (including autonomous movement of muscles). However, in this particular case, dopamine is released in hedonistic situations, when we experience something nice and pleasurable. The more hedonistic we are, the smaller thing or event can trigger enough release of dopamine in our brain, like the taste of enjoyable food, reading a book, or seeing a photo. Other people have lower sensitivity to dopamine, and for those (up to 20% of the population) who contain the DRD4-7R gene, which is a variant of the DRD4 dopamine receptor, eating pleasurable chocolate is not enough to release the level of dopamine in order to receive a hedonistic reward. These people always seek more from their environment because they need more stimulation in order to hit a satisfying level of dopamine. If their environment is not enough, they take risks and move to another, much like nomadic people do or all those large migrations of people in history who moved to another area without obvious reason even though the environment they were initially inhabiting was as good as the new one. If you ever said aloud that you like very much to travel to various different places no matter what, remember it might be DRD4-7R talking.


Refs:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/the-wanderlust-gene/
https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/explainer-what-dopamine
https://www.verdict.co.uk/drd4-7r-wanderlust-gene/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-there-really-a-wanderlust-gene

Warrior gene
MAO-A
MAO (monoamine oxidase A) is the name of the enzyme that acts in nerve cells (neurons) of the brain as a recycling factor for neurotransmitters, and in the process of oxidation it breaks down serotonin, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine among all the brain chemicals it deals with. Signals transmitted by serotonin regulate mood and emotion; epinephrine and norepinephrine control the body's response to stress, while we already know that dopamine controls physical movements. The MAO-A gene is responsible for MAO regulation, and in people who have a variant of the "warrior gene" (low-activity form of the gene called MAOA-L), less MAO is produced, which means that fewer of the neurotransmitters are broken down, which in turn leaves higher levels of unwanted neurotransmitters in the brain. For all we know from various past studies, higher levels of these brain chemicals produce higher levels of aggression, and as a result, these people feel less or no empathy for others, and they basically don't hesitate to use any form of anti-social behavior, including violence, to achieve their own goals, whatever they are.


Refs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoamine_oxidase_A
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/MAOA#
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/.../triggering-the-warrior-gene-in-villain-or-hero
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090121093343.htm

Creativity gene
COMT-DRD2
If you are able to produce something that is both novel, useful, and closely related to human development, whether it belongs to an individual or societal level, you are among people with creative minds who won the genetic lottery. Similar to the hedonistic process in our brain, according to several studies in previous decades, dopamine is also the key hormone responsible for the creative process. More accurately, dopamine levels in multiple brain areas enhance interaction between frontal and striatal dopaminergic pathways (dopamine neuron location in brain), which is believed to lead toward creative thinking and reward after something new is either achieved or produced. While responsible genes involved in dopamine transmission and the generation of just enough dopamine levels needed for creativity are still an ongoing process, two genes are the most promising candidates: COMT and DRD2, both for their single involvement in the process as well as for their prior interaction.


Refs:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3995040/
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-04-dopamine-producing-areas-brain-creativity.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4718590/

God gene
VMAT2
Unfortunately, due to the sensitive subject, research in regards to spirituality is not covered enough and was more or less conducted by a single experiment. The targets were monoamines—the main brain chemicals, including serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine—that are connected with regulation of fundamental functions such as mood, creativity, and motor control, like we already saw with previous genes. They are also the main target for many antidepressant drugs and narcotics, which in turn can cause addicts to experience transcendence or experience beyond normal and even physical levels of existence. In similar but much more benevolent fashion, a variation in a gene known as VMAT2, in that single study, was identified to be responsible for all test subjects who experienced self-transcendence compared to others that didn't have that particular variant. Whether or not this is enough to call this gene a 'god gene' is debatable, but it does prove that brain chemicals encoded by specific genes can in fact affect the spiritual realm of people. In addition to external chemicals that might induce spiritual thinking and religions experiences, we also should not exclude parasitic influences such as Toxoplasma gondii, which I already mentioned in the post Who's Behind the Wheel?


Refs:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2262126/
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7147-genes-contribute-to-religious-inclination/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene
http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/.../Genetic-Basis-for-Religion.htm

Love gene
OXT
Hypothalamus activity includes the production of the hormone oxytocin encoded by the OXT gene. The 'love hormone', as it was named after its features and properties, is also linked to social behavior. Activity of the OXT gene and production of the hormone can vary from person to person, and those with low activity struggle more to identify the emotional expressions of others, including people in their relationships and family members. Perhaps more than with other genes, OXT is tested in correlation to the process called DNA methylation, in which methyl groups are added to DNA segments without changing their sequence. In life, this can be triggered by environmental influences and bad lifestyle factors such as smoking or diet. In turn, when methylation increases on the OXT gene, less oxytocin is produced, and this impacts social behavior for the worse. Like with anything else and especially with genetics, balance could be the key word, and further research could lead to potential treatments that could effectively fix social disorders.


Refs:
https://www.voanews.com/a/mht-love-hormone-gene...oxt-oxytocin/3387692.html
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/...people-form-healthy-lasting-relationships-study.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxytocin

Mad Scientist gene
DARPP-32
The coolest name for the gene goes to... DARPP-32, a variation within a gene that, not surprisingly, is also capable of affecting levels of the dopamine hormone, this time in the area that influences feelings of anger and aggression. The twist with this gene is in the fact that a particular variant is also associated with increased performance in a number of cognitive tests, including IQ and memory. Actually, three out of four people inherit a version of the DARPP-32 gene, which, by improving information processing in the prefrontal cortex of the brain, in simple words, allows and improves the brain's ability to think. These two effects combined will not give us mad scientists per se, but they do explain the strange behavior and fears of some people with high IQs from the past. I am not saying that Tesla's strange fear of shaking hands or Einstein's hatred for socks is granted by this gene, but I am sure the genetic lottery in one way or another is the one to blame in a high percentage.


Refs:
https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_91056
https://www.elitedaily.com/life/culture/genius-little-crazy/995625
https://www.medicaldaily.com/.../mad-scientist-stereotype
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1784004/

Smoking and drinking genes
CHRNA5, OPRM1
There are several genes associated with smoking, nicotine dependence, and lung cancer, but among them the variant of CHRNA5 is the most prominent candidate. The process is identified as nicotine-stimulated dopamine release in the striatum (a cluster of neurons in the subcortical basal ganglia of the forebrain), a region vital to the development of substance dependence but also a reward learning center. Combined, people with this particular variant are more likely to overcome casual and environmental intake of nicotine and become heavily addicted to smoking. Similarly, the OPRM1 gene has been associated with subjective responses to alcohol in heavy drinkers. The 'G variant' of this gene may lead to a greater susceptibility not only to addiction to alcohol but also to variations in pain sensitivity and addiction to opioid substances.


Refs:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/chrna5
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4000030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23240711
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5152594/
https://drbrucekehr.com/oprm1-gene-test-addiction-genetic-testing/

In conclusion, let's get back to the beginning: the genetics and especially the study of human behavior are merely at the beginning of understanding all the processes that govern our brain on the smallest levels within organic chemistry. However, we don't need any science to attribute human behavior with a strange ability to give nicknames to everything and anything. Genes are no exceptions, and hopefully you have identified some of them shaping who you are and how you behave.

Image refs:
https://www.eturbonews.com/238528/non-stop-travel-destinations-for-the-adventurous/
http://knrunity.com/post/general/2016/post-787.php
https://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding/warrior-based-training.html
https://blog.lifeway.com/explorethebible/blog/why-young-adults-need-bible-skills/
https://www.thebump.com/a/ways-for-dad-to-bond-with-baby
https://www.inverse.com/article/7576-best-mad-scientists
https://coach.nine.com.au/latest/red-wine-and-smoking/

Refs:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/.../what-behaviors-do-we-inherit-genes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3052688/
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/heredity/environmental-effects-on-phenotype/a/genes-environment-and-behavior
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study

Fiction and Reality of Mount Olympus

I was very young when I visited Olympus for the first time. It happened during our yearly vacation in the region back then, in the eighties of the previous century. I vividly remember there was a dangerous dirt road with not much room for two vehicles to pass by, ending near one of the mountain homes with an embedded small tavern, which can really print on its portfolio that it was built on the top of gods' heavenly entrances. For some fairly strange reasons, Coca-Cola and souvlaki on the tavern's terrace felt really tasty, just as the pure and clean water from the water stream just next to it. Unfortunately, and despite all of my efforts, I couldn't see or find anything divine, out-of-worldly items, or even a glowing, shiny rock. There were no gods whatsoever. Or naked muses. Or beasts with snakes instead of hair. Or horses with wings. Or mighty heroes. Nothing. Well, I was only 10 years old. What did I know... Maybe that pair of hawks we saw flying around the highest rock across the tavern and screeching in high tones were actually Apollo and Artemis arguing about something.

On the other end, it might be that I visited Olympus during the gods' withdrawal. Way too early...


But, before I continue with the actual glimpse into modern Olympus fiction and short reviews of one hilarious book and one extraordinary comic, I think I need to write a word or two about the photo I embedded above, which might be interesting to read. This is in fact Mount Olympus (just like the highest peak shown from the air in the post header). The most famous mountain in the entire world. The mighty one. It is not the highest of them all—just slightly lower than 3K meters and not even the highest in the entire Balkans—but it was the one chosen by gods to build their own abode during the ancient times. Sitting just next to the Aegean Sea, it is the first sight you see when you travel from Thessaloniki to Athens in modern-day Greece. I took this image in 2010 from the beach in the sea resort of Leptokarya, described by Wikipedia as "the former seat of East Olympos municipality, which is part of the municipality of Dio-Olympos". During my countless visits to northern Greece in the past several decades, all of them during summer holidays, believe it or not, all of my Olympus photographs ended with a similar heavy stream of clouds above mountain peaks. It is like Olympus is always hidden in clouds for some weird meteorological reasons. Well, that was not entirely true, as I have seen Olympus naked on an occasion or two, but still, it was not often. It's like Olympus is attracting the clouds and capturing them to stay and hide its peaks.

This summer, almost forty years after my first excursion to the famous mountain, we took the perfect opportunity to board a tourist bus and venture their Olympian route, following new paved roads carrying people to the multiple resorts within the mountain base and visiting Olympus' main attractions. At least to the point where the road limits heavy buses from proceeding. The tour included the town of Litochoro, the famous Bath of Zeus, Agios Dionysios Monastery, and Old Panteleimon, a picturesque mountainous village on the slopes of the mountain. Surely seeing the sites with your own eyes has no alternative, and the next best thing is to check a couple of those travel guides and stories you can stumble on online, but as far as this post is concerned, I will leave it to my son Viktor to tell you all about it in his channel's video log we both filmed this August. If you find it pleasing, you know the YouTuber's drill—please like and subscribe... ;-)



The mountain definitely contains a beautiful charm of its own, but we all know that Olympus is best known for its part in Greek mythology, and with all its ancient fiction, it has inspired writers all over the world ever since. With some of them, the thin line between fiction and nonfiction is not really visible at once, but in the case of Michael G. Munz's amazing novel called 'Zeus Is Dead: A Monstrously Inconvenient Adventure' one would say it is all about fiction and laugh-out-loud (LOL) moments. The gods in this comedy returned from their withdrawal after more than two thousand years with all of their entourage and got back to the active and mutual life with mortals. And they returned with a twist.

What is most interesting about the old Greek gods, compared to all of the modern religions of today, is that their godhood was not that estranged from their creation, like it is now the case with all of those Jerusalem monotheistic beliefs. Greek gods loved to mingle with mortals. And by mingle, you know what I mean, which is especially true with Zeus (probably Dionysis too). In fact, within the opening chapters of the novel, Apollo defined it best when he said that "gods are just like mortals, only... better." And that means with everything that we can use to describe ordinary people, including conspiracies, hatred, intelligence, stupidity, love, sex, affairs... It's like the Greek gods possess everything good and bad we mortals experience on a daily basis; only theirs is enhanced and powered off the charts. And of course, they could change appearances into hawks... and do other magical stuff. So, by establishing that, we can safely say that all the gods in "Zeus Is Dead: A Monstrously Inconvenient Adventure" are more than just divine creatures. They are active characters in the story, and along with amazing Michael's narrative, which is playing with the reader on numerous occasions, it is something that gives this book, at least for me, the originality I have never experienced before. The humor is everywhere, especially in the narrative, which on many points requires a fair amount of the reader's geekery and knowledge of ancient mythology. I'll stop here with no further spoilers and only my warm recommendation.


As for the other media dealing with Olympian myths, there are numerous movies, among them "Clash of the Titans" and "Wrath of the Titans", with Perseus played by Sam Worthington and Liam Neeson as Zeus. They were not that bad movies at all, despite all my reservations, and best of all, the script of the second movie offers the answer to the ultimate question of how and why gods from Olympus ended their presence on Earth. Of course, Henry Cavill as Theseus in "Immortals" was also one of the visually great movies, with heavy usage of old Greek myths and Olympian gods in main roles.

On the other hand, the world of graphic novels never disappoints, and Rick Riordan's novels with Percy Jackson adventures recently, after debuting with two motion pictures, transferred into extraordinarily enjoyable comics. The world of demigods in the two graphic books so far looks very nice and, I have to admit, much more appealing than in movies. Perhaps because reading comics was my first love from early childhood and/or maybe because these two books were my first comics reading with the Kindle way of presenting graphic novels, but nevertheless, if you are into Olympian myths and love great fiction that emerged from old tales, my recommendation for Riordan's "Heroes of Olympus" series with "The Lost Hero" and "The Son of Neptune" goes without saying.



zViktor22 YouTube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH2BtavSrxaRyvOJS5JZaHQ

Zeus Is Dead: A Monstrously Inconvenient Adventure
http://michaelgmunz.com/books/zeus/

The Lost Hero: The Graphic Novel
http://rickriordan.com/book/the-lost-hero-the-graphic-novel/

Goddess Zhiva

My great-great-grandfather was born in 1845, and he spent his entire life in the turmoil of the second half of the 19th century. Little is known about his life; after all, life in rural Serbian villages in past times wasn't really documented well, and literacy among the majority of people wasn't something our ancestors could be proud of. However, what was a major disadvantage for most people turned out to be a great opportunity for my great-great-grandfather. Besides being literate and educated, he was gifted with a human property only a few others possess. He owned a strong and melodic voice that would probably guarantee him at least a radio host job if he were born a century later. Anyhow, one of his tasks was to read newspapers, various dispatches, and communiques while standing in the center of the village square, surrounded by neighbors and people from nearby settlements. Soon enough, he earned valuable prominence in his family, and his children decided to devote our family name to him. Ever since then and after, more or less 100 years, our last name has been carrying my great-great-grandfather's, Zhiva.


Artistic presentation of Goddess Zhiva

But his name goes even further in the past. A millennium or two before my great-great-grandfather, this name belonged first to someone else entirely. Zhiva (Živa) was the name of the old Slavic goddess of life, fertility, and marriage, one of numerous terrestrial goddesses. It literally means "living, being, existing", and compared to other religions of the past, Zhiva was the goddess similar to Hera, Demeter, and Aphrodite of the ancient Olympians and very much alike goddess Sif from the old Norse mythology. Thanks to modern pop culture, especially comics and, in recent years, movie blockbusters, we are pretty familiar with the old beliefs of our ancestors in Greece, Rome, and Scandinavia, but tremendous and equally colorful stories are hiding in old Slavic mythology as well. Like with our family name, in one way or another, old stories of ancient mythology survived all these years. And not just stories—the customs, celebrations, and rituals are very much alive even today, despite all the efforts from the new Christian religion that tried or are still trying to eliminate old paganism from people's minds.

Contrary to the old Greeks, Romans, or Scandinavians, who more or less occupied smaller territories, Slavs spread to vast areas of nowadays Asia and Eastern Europe. Numerous cultures and nations emerged from several migrations and gave birth to slightly different mythology of the same deities, and in different Slavic languages and histories, Zhiva is known with different names, and the most prominent ones were Zhibog (life god), Živa, Жива, Siwa, Šiwa, etc. Along with the variety of names comes the variety of descriptions, and searching for definite and the most accurate ancient text is the mission impossible or one of those Sisyphean tasks if we want to stay in the realm of old legends and stories. However, I did find one mutual description of her that pretty much covers all sources, and it explains the goddess as: "Zhiva is the main female goddess in the world of the Slavs. Like the god Svarog, she covers the whole world with his light and closely follows the basic laws of the Kind. Goddess Zhiva gives tenderness, care, kindness, heart, and care to all pregnant women and lactating mothers." Zhiva existed as a supreme goddess, and she was the offspring of the main Slavic deities (Rod as a main supreme god, creator of everything; Svarog, god of heaven; and three great goddesses), a sister goddess to other female deities (Vesna, Morana, and Lada, terrestrial goddesses related to Earth seasons), the sister of the god of thunder and lightning Perun, and the wife of Dabog (Dazhbog), the god of sun, justice, and well-being.

Artistic presentation of Slavic temple

I can imagine that it is very hard to enumerate all Slavic gods, their relations, and all their pantheons due to the vast diversity of Slavic people, but if we consider only South Slavs who migrated to the Balkans at some point in the 6th century, one thing is for sure. They immediately collided with upcoming and already established Christianity that took heavy root in the Roman and Byzantine empires. Almost immediately, missionaries are sent to start conversion and kill old beliefs for good. It turned out it was another wave of Sisyphean tasks that required centuries to process. Serbs accepted the new religion only later in the 9th century, but not entirely. While god in plural ended with its existence almost fully with the start of the second millennium, many customs remained until today. For example, Serbian people still celebrate a family religious day called slava, which was dedicated to the god the family had chosen to be their protector in the old days. Christianity never succeeded in eliminating this custom and only managed to convert it into worshiping Christian saints instead. What was once a day dedicated to Perun, god of thunder, is now replaced with Saint Elijah (Sveti Ilija), which is also connected with thunders and lightnings in Christian tales. Old Serbs believed that gods could take the form of ordinary people who were visiting family homes at random times, and one of the related customs was warm hospitality toward strangers who knocked on their doors. The oak was the holy tree, and all the temples were built out of it instead of using heavy and everlasting stones. In the aftermath, no Slavic holy sights and temples persisted today. In temples dedicated to goddess Zhiva, high priests wore ritual hats or helmets with horns, which were symbols of fertility among Slavic people and other religious folklore throughout Europe in the old times.

Aside from Slavic deities, Serbs believed in other godly creatures who had influence over nature, like ghosts, fairies, demons, dragons, and forest mothers, and also human-like creatures that originated from people like vampires, witches, werewolves, etc. The list is endless. To better live with all those beasts and scary underworld monsters, many rituals are invented and practiced all over. One in particular is still alive in Eastern Serbia in the event called Rusalje, where women fall into trances after ritually caroling and dancing and virtually connect to the ghosts and afterlife world in order to predict future events and understand upcoming dangers. Interesting facts are that many women refused to exert 'the healing procedure' in local monasteries performed by Christian priests and willingly performed the ritual every year. Of course, these were the extremes, but there were other more benevolent rituals that were practiced in the past, and I would not be surprised if they are still alive today. For example, if we are talking about Zhiva, human worshipers were ceremonially providing bouquets of flowers, fruits, and wheat on numerous occasions, but also there was a ritual of sacrificing a rooster before the time when wheat is sown and/or after the harvest is over.

Christian church on the Isle of Bled

If we are considering the Eastern European Slavic history, perhaps the strongest sites where Zhiva was worshiped were throughout the lands of nowadays Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, and eastern Germany, but perhaps the most interesting site where the temple of Zhiva once existed was the famous Lake Bled in Slovenia. More precisely, the foundation of the temple that provided the support for a square wooden house in the 8th century was excavated under the Christian church on the Isle of Bled. Attached to the foundation was a square building with an apse from the 9th century that clearly indicates the transition from a pagan temple to an early Christian church. Christian missionaries dedicated to shutting down old Slavic sites and temples at the time almost always transferred the sites of worshiping Slavic goddesses into the worship of the Mother of God to ease the transition, and the nowadays church on Lake Bled is consecrated to the Ascension of Mary. The temple of Zhiva on the Isle of Bled and the waterfall on the nearby Savica river were commemorated and celebrated in the epic poem 'Baptism on Savica' by the 19th-century Slovenian poet France Prešeren.

Well, temples dedicated to Zhiva definitely no longer exist, but it is documented that many places, at least in Serbia, with names that survived the last millennium and have the words 'deva' or 'baba' in their roots (which means goddess mother) suggest sites of worshiping the female deity, most likely locations of Zhiva's temples. A couple of those places and nearby mountains have such words near the village where my great-great-grandfather lived and where our summer house still stands. Also, lots of people's names and surnames have the word 'Živa' in the root, and they all originate in old Slavic beliefs. Years ago, during my education in high school and faculty, Živa was my nickname, and I always turned around if I heard somebody call it.

Image refs:
https://www.rbth.com/multimedia/pictures/2017/08/10/reanimating-slavic-gods-the-man-who-breathes-life-into-deities_820264
https://www.locationscout.net/locations/6017-lake-bled
http://www.1zoom.me/de/wallpaper/156998/z349.2/

Refs:
http://www.starisloveni.com/Bogovi.html
https://www.etsy.com/dk-en/listing/550443944/goddess-zhiva-wood-birch-statue-slavic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deities_of_Slavic_religion
https://www.rasen.rs/2017/01/rusalje-ili-zene-padalice/#.W26_Kegza00
https://www.srbijadanas.com/vesti/info/misterija-istocne-srbije-ko-su-zene-koje-padaju-u-trans-i-predvidaju-buducnost-2017-05-20
https://vesna.atlantidaforum.com/?p=3916
http://lifestyle.enaa.com/horoskop/Kdo-je-bila-Ziva.html
http://vladimir-uno.blogspot.com/2015/09/ziva-goddess-of-living-water-life-love.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_Pre%C5%A1eren

Quantum Weirdness

Rarely do I get a chance and a real opportunity to revive an old article from the past and to update it to fit better in the present day. Actually, the quantum weirdness is still where it was four years ago—science is not something that changes overnight, especially with quantum mechanics, so I am not going to update the post with any new physics or breakthroughs. Instead, what's new and what pushed me to repost today is one extraordinary novel in the field. The book that kept me from sleeping last weekend was "Quantum Space" by Douglas Phillips, and in short, it is by far one of the best titles I read this year. It is one of those true sci-fi stories that follows the real science and, in this case, the weirdness of the quantum world I wrote about in this post, and I would add it is one of those articles I enjoyed writing the most in the history of the blog. But, before a couple of my glimpses at the book itself, followed by my warm recommendation, and especially if you want to read it yourself, please continue reading about physics itself. This one definitely requires some knowledge to understand it fully, so let's start with some weirdness of our own macrophysics first.

It's very well known that the world we live in is driven by two sets of rules, or physical laws. The one for big and the one for small. We don't need to be rocket scientists in order to observe our big world surrounding us and to notice all the laws we obey. For example, if we drop a book and a feather and let them both hit the floor separately, it is obvious that the book touches the floor first. However, if we put a feather ON the book and let them fall together, they will hit the carpet at the same time. Well, the book will still hit the carpet first, but if you try the experiment, you will know what I mean. This simple experiment was itching Galileo's mind centuries ago when he discovered one of the fundamental physics laws stating simply that the mass of the object has no influence on the speed of free falling. But we can ask ourselves next, why did the feather travel slower toward the floor if dropped alone? Because of the things we cannot see. The air is blocking it. To learn what is happening with the feather during the fall, we have to go beyond our eyes. We need science and experiments to discover why small molecules of the air would rather play with feathers than with heavy books.


Was the book/feather experiment weird to you? I am sure it was at least a little weird if you were seeing it for the first time. We simply accept things for granted. What we cannot see, like the air and its little ingredients in the above experiment, we tend to exclude from our perception. If this was a little strange and intriguing, let's go further to the world of the even smaller and compare it to the world of the big. For example, in a mind experiment, we have a 9mm gun and shoot toward the wall with two holes in it, both with a diameter of 9mm or a little bigger. If you are an Olympic champion in shooting, you will, of course, need only two bullets, one for each hole. In the world of little, if we use a gun that shoots electrons toward a wall with two adequate holes in it, you would probably think that we would need two electrons to hit both holes, right? Nope, we need only one. Believe it or not, one electron goes through both holes, and we don't even need to aim too perfectly. No, it doesn't split up in two and use each half to pass the holes. It goes through both holes at the same time. In fact, if we had three or more holes on the wall, one single electron would go through each one and, at the same time, use all possible paths toward the destination. Perhaps the best illustration of what happens in this experiment is presented by the "Stephen Hawking's Grand Design" documentary made by Discovery Channel.

And you thought the feather on the book was weird...

However, this is just another interpretation of the famous double-slit experiment, and even though the first theories about the duality of particles/waves originated way back with Thomas Young and his scientific paper about the properties of light in 1799, perhaps the best-known theory was proposed by Richard Feynman during the forties of the 20th century. The beginning of the last century will be remembered by the birth of quantum mechanics, part of the physics trying to describe all the laws responsible for what is happening in the inner world, or the world where the very fabric of our universe is located. Feynman confirmed Young's light theory that subatomic particles (as we call them today) and energy waves are more or less the same. Electrons are among them. In simple words, they are capable of traveling as particles (and acting as bullets in our giant world by traveling within the straight line from point A to point B) or avoiding obstacles by transforming into waves and vice versa. However, after all these years, due to the fact that we are way too big to monitor the quantum world directly, we still have no clue why and how subatomic particles choose to travel either as a wave or as a particle of the material world. For example, in a previous double-slit experiment, if we tried to add a source of photons and "light" the holes where electrons are "passing through", trying to find out what happens on the surface of the wall and how they "choose" to be either particles or waves, we only added disturbance in the system, and electrons simply stopped transforming into waves and started going through the holes like simple bullets, with many of them crashing into the wall in case of missing the holes. It's almost like they know that somebody is watching them and that they don't like to expose their secret of how they vanish into thin air, forming waves and materializing back after the wall. That skill would be something special in every magician's performance.

Feather experiment on the Moon, by Apollo 15's commander David Scott

As you probably noticed, this post is part of the "Beth's Q&A" thread, and even though quantum mechanics is not directly mentioned in Beth's and my chats, it is simply not possible anymore to stay with the standard or particle model of mainstream physics and to look to the inner world only by researching its particle-type properties. Like with me and possibly with many scientists out here (and to be fair, I am not the scientist, just a modest observer), a set of laws responsible for the entire microscopic world seems to be "under construction" today more than ever. The idea for this post came to me a couple of months ago, when Beth asked me exactly this: "Somewhere, sometime, someone figured out the inside of the atom. Quarks, they call them. What we used to call the proton and nucleus of the atom. Why can't we still call them as before? Why did a new name come into play? Who discovered quarks, and how? Did they use the electron microscope? Did they use math? Tell me what you know of quarks. How did that come about? I am interested in the electron microscope and quarks or anything else hiding in an atom. The item that was never to be broken down, as it was taught to me".

Quarked! - How did the quarks get their names?**

Before we dive into more weirdness of the quantum world, let's check a little current terminology regarding atoms with all their parts, including quarks as the smallest items within. The word "átomos" originates from the Greek word ἄτομος, and it was made by Democritus, an ancient Greek philosopher who, around the year 450 BCE, formulated the first atomic theory, or the nature of matter we are made of. Translated from Greek, "atom" means something basic and uncuttable into smaller pieces. Almost two millennia passed since Democritus, and finally, in the year 1911, it was discovered that an atom, after all, is made of even smaller particles. Ever since then, we know that an atom is now made of a nucleus with a positive electric charge surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons orbiting the nucleus. The smallest atom is the simplest isotope of hydrogen-1, with a nucleus of just one proton orbited by one electron. The heaviest atom made by nature found on Earth is Plutonium-244, the most stable isotope of Plutonium, with 94 protons and 150 neutrons in its nucleus and a cloud of 94 electrons in the orbit. For 50 years, protons, neutrons, and electrons were the tiniest particles known to the world. Then in the year 1968, the very year when I was born, experimental physicists at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center confirmed the existence of 6 different types of quarks. Much like electrons, they have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, color charge, mass, and spin. Two of them with the lowest mass are the most stable, and they are simply called Up and Down. Scientists are not very intuitive when it comes to naming stuff—the other four quarks are called Strange, Charm, Bottom, and Top. I wonder how exactly one of them behaved in Accelerator's results in order to get the name 'Charm'. On the other end, I like this much more than naming scientific stuff with only Greek letters. Anyway, within the standard model of particle physics, quarks are building blocks in the universe, and many particles are made out of quarks. Quarks can't live in solitude, only in combination with other quarks, and they are tied up with a strong nuclear force, which is extremely hard to break. A proton is made of two up quarks and one down quark, while a neutron is a combination of two down quarks and one up quark. They orbit around each other and form an entity we call a particle. The bottom line now is that, as far as we know, quarks and electrons are fundamental particles, and we don't have any proof that they are made out of even smaller internal structures.

However, we have a pretty good idea what's inside. Strings. Now comes the part of real weirdness. Are you ready to dive into a rabbit hole? It will not lead you into Wonderland, but it is certainly one of the biggest scientific adventures.

Stephen Hawking, Grand Design***

Actually, it's not easy to describe what strings are in scientifically popular terms, but I will try anyway. In the standard model, besides six quarks and an electron, there are more fundamental particles. There are two more particles with negative charges similar to electrons called 'muons' and 'tauons.' Compared to electrons, they are much heavier in size (if we can speak about size when it comes to fundamental particles). Finally, there are three types of neutrinos, or particles that are neutral in electric charge. So far, we have encountered 12 fundamental particles. But there are more. As far as we know today, there are four fundamental forces as well (gravity, electromagnetism, and the weak and strong nuclear forces), and each force is produced by fundamental particles that act as carriers of the force. The photon is, for example, a carrier for electromagnetism; the strong force is carried by eight particles known as 'gluons'; the weak force uses three particles, the W+, the W-, and the Z; and finally, gravity is supposed to be taken care of by the fundamental particle called 'graviton'. Standard model predicted existence of all these fundamental particles, including Higgs boson we talked about last year in post Beth's Q&A - The God Particle. Each one except for the graviton. All efforts to include gravity in the theory so far have failed due to difficulties in describing it on a great scale within quantum mechanics. Step by step, over the years, new theories arrived, tending to fill in the blank or to replace the standard model entirely. There are several string theories that are 'under development', with the best candidate called 'M-theory', formulated in the last decade of the last century. In short, strings are single-dimensional objects we find within fundamental particles, or, to be precise, particles are nothing more than just different manifestations of the string. Strings can move and oscillate in different ways. If it oscillates a certain way, then its name is electron. If it oscillates some other way, we call it a photon, or a quark, or a neutrino, or... a graviton. In a nutshell, if string theory is correct, the entire universe is made of strings! However, the mathematical model of a string theory, such as M-theory, is far more complex than we can possibly imagine. Even though string theory can be seen as an extension to the standard model, its background is far more different than with the universe described by the particle model. Compared to the space-time continuum we live in as a four-dimensional universe described by the standard model, in M-theory there are 7 dimensions more. Those dimensions are tiny and undetectable by big objects like us living in large three-spatial dimensions, but within the quantum world there are objects capable of spreading their existence and occupying up to 9 dimensions. Furthermore, the theory predicts that additional tiny dimensions can be curved in a large number of ways, and even a slightly different position or curvature of at least one dimension would lead to dramatic changes of the whole system or entire universe. For example, if somehow we forced one dimension to curve a little bit more, the effect could, for instance, be different oscillations of strings, which would result in slightly different properties of fundamental particles, and electrons could start behaving differently and start having different electric charges. This example is highly speculative, but the point is that with different shapes of dimensional systems, the set of physical laws in the system would be completely different.

To put it simply, if laws of the universe can be changed by, for example, God, and if string theory in the form of M-theory is correct, he would do that by some almighty computer capable of curving dimensions. A combination of changes in the curvature of miniature 7 dimensions could be able to change, for example, the value of pi, and instead of being 3.14159265359..., it could be a different number. It is unknown what that would mean further, but in the universe where pi is, for example, 5, the circle would be something entirely different, and the pupils in schools learning about it would probably look very different than in our universe. However, there is still no direct experimental evidence that string theory itself is the correct description of nature and the true theory of everything most scientists dream of.

Completing superstring theory

But if laws of the universe after creation are unchangeable (not even by the gods) and if M-theory is true, is it possible that some natural phenomenon exists out there capable of giving birth to different universes by randomly producing the shape of their inner cosmos? Yep, there is one. Appropriately called "The Big Bang". The moment of creation of everything we are familiar with, including time. In the first couple of moments, when the process was very young, we can safely say that it all worked completely under the quantum mechanics and laws of the microcosmos, and it is not far from common sense to expect that, like in a double-slit experiment, all particles during the first moments of their existence used all possible paths in their travel toward the final destination. Within M-theory, this might mean that all possible versions of universes emerged as the result, and the one we exist in is just one of many. Furthermore, theory also predicts that within one universe all positive energy (planets, stars, life, matter, and antimatter in general) is balanced by the negative energy stored in the gravitational attraction that exists between all the positive-energy particles. If this is correct, then the total energy within one universe might be zero and therefore possible to be created out of nothing only by quantum fluctuations of the primordial singularity. Quantum fluctuations are a very well-known phenomenon that is experimentally confirmed in the form of virtual particles that arise from vacuum (particle-antiparticle pairs) and cancel each other almost immediately (unless this happens on the event horizon of a black hole, where one of the particles was immediately captured by the black hole, leaving the other alive in the form of Hawking radiation).

I am sure that 'M-theory' will stay just a theory for many more years to come, as proving the existence of strings, multi-dimensions, multi-universes, supersymmetry, etc. must be very hard with our current technology, but theories improve over time as well as technology, and perhaps we will have our answer relatively soon. However, the quantum world with all its weirdness is very much real, and many predictions, no matter how strange, are already proven. For example, quantum entanglement on top of it. This is the ability of two particles (or more) that usually originate from the same source to have the same properties like momentum, spin, polarization, etc., so that even after they are separated in space, when an action is performed on one particle, the other particle responds immediately. This was experimentally confirmed with two photons separated by 143 kilometers across two Canary Islands and soon should be used in an experiment between the ISS and Earth in the form of a first wireless Quantum Communications Network and for the first time perform the connection between two points separated by more than 400 km.

D-Wave quantum computer

Finally, let's just mention one potential application of quantum superposition (the ability of a particle to exist partly in all its particular theoretically possible states simultaneously). Compared to a digital computer, where one bit can hold information in the form of either 0 or 1, one qubit (quantum computer alternative) can hold either 0, 1, or anything in between at the same time. The idea is to use this property and build a quantum computer capable of performing millions of operations at the same time. Still in the early years of development and far before commercial use, quantum computers with up to 512 qubits developed in D-Wave, one of the leading companies dedicated to the future quantum computer market is making chips specially manufactured for quantum computation. Maybe it is still too early to say, but I have a feeling that quantum mechanics is mature enough and ready for practical applications, especially in the field of communications and IT. Along with nanotechnology, this would someday in the near future be one of those truly breakthrough discoveries capable of changing the world entirely.

At the very end, let me continue the story with a few short notices about "Quantum Space", amazing science fiction by Douglas Phillips and his first novel in the series. If you read the entire post and didn't have much knowledge about the science itself, I am sure by now you are better prepared to read the book and enjoy it much more. Of course, Douglas did a pretty good job with his characters explaining the science as well, perhaps on a much better level than I did, so there are no worries about understanding the quantum mechanics to follow the book. Much of it is still the unproven theory, so it's harder to distinguish science from fiction anyway. Nevertheless, for the fiction as far-fetched as it is, and even though the theory is weird by its nature, I found it to be, well, believable is maybe not the right word, but definitely intriguing. I loved the idea of expanding the microdimension and the way of solving the Fermi paradox within the storyline. The characters and the writing are also great, so in all the effort to write spoilerless reviews, all I can say is that I will eagerly wait next year for the sequels.

Image ref:
https://futurism.com/brane-science-complex-notions-of-superstring-theory/

Quantum Space
http://douglasphillipsbooks.com/books

*Stephen Hawking's Grand Design: Action of Electrons
http://www.discoveryuk.com/web/stephen-hawkings-grand-design-action-of-electrons

** Quarked!
http://www.quarked.org/askmarks/answer24.html

*** Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinov: The Grand Design
http://www.amazon.com/The-Grand-Design-Stephen-Hawking/dp/055338466X
http://www.amazon.com/Velika-zamisao-Stiven-Hoking/dp/4095178361 (serbian edition)

Refs:
http://www.wikihow.com/Calculate-Average-Velocity
http://pratthomeschool.blogspot.com/2010/10/geometry-lesson.html
http://www.superstringtheory.com/
http://www.nuclecu.unam.mx/~alberto/physics/string.html
http://www.zmescience.com/science/physics/physicists-quantum-photons-08092012/
http://www.zmescience.com/science/physics/quantum-entanglement-iss
http://www.discoveryuk.com/web/stephen-hawkings-grand-design/videos/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

Interview With an 'X'

The 'X' is definitely one of the most important letters in the alphabet. Not only that, but it is the most valuable variable in all math equations and scientific chases for the unknown, and in the entire history of human riddles, and I mean not always related to math, it always marks the most interesting spot. Sometimes the one with the treasure. It was no coincidence that the old Romans used it for the most important number of them all. 10. The very base of our widely used numeric system. But we are not here to talk about mathematics or treasure hunting per se. It will be more about age. Of ten. My son Viktor is turning this magic number on this year's Earth Day (April 22nd), and I decided, in addition to our previous topic and post Interview With an Expert, to fire another set of questions for him to answer. This time it's more general and within various realms of life and... well, stuff...



So let's start with favorites. I guess they say a lot about personality. And they don't require a polygraph to confirm the truthfulness of the given answers. For some reason, I believe everybody, or most of us, will answer these honestly. Probably because of their benevolence (if this is even a word). Even we adults will not curve the truth with these ones. And yet, answers to these questions probably reveal a lot about a person. In the modern world, it is comparable to the browser history; if you want to learn about your friend's likes and dislikes, just have a glimpse or two of his or her bookmarks and history.

So, let's start the interview in that fashion. Here it goes:

What are your favorite subjects in school?
Physical education, sports, music, and math—because they are so much fun, and I like numbers and solving puzzles.

What sport do you like the most, and why?
Basketball: It is the best sport and great for body practice. It makes you stronger and faster.

What are your favorite regular and comic books? And why?

The best book I've read so far was '20,000 Leagues Under the Sea' because it was so mysterious and adventurous. The greatest comic book is definitely 'Il Grande Blek'—he 'and all his friends are very interesting and super funny.

What are your favorite board and video games? Why these?
Battleship and Connect 4—they are interesting and tense. The best video game is definitely Minecraft, because I can build things and make my own worlds.

What about your favorite movie and TV show? How so?

Avengers for the movies—great fight and smart play. The Flash for TV shows—because they are funny and mysterious. Also Discovery Channel's Mythbusters—they do amazing myth testing, especially what they find on YouTube.

What's your favorite food?

Rolls, pie, and pastry. Also Milka chocolate and marshmallows.

What about favorite color(s)?

Something between green and black.

Well, that was easy and nice to warm up the interviewer and interviewee. No big surprise there. To be honest, if I exclude color and food, it could be the same answers I would offer. Then again, back then, when I was around 10 years old, maybe even the food and colors would be the same. Perhaps only the movie would be different, but I have to say he nailed the book. Ok, let's move to more interesting questions and see what happens next. But not to the boring ones yet. Serious questions should be at the bottom of the pit for now... or never asked. So, let's continue with just a couple of those from the realm of movies and games. And fantasy.

What superpower would you like to possess? Don't say to be rich.

Jedi Force mastering and telekinesis.

What do you think about the greatest mystery of the universe, women?
Well, I think that... wait, what?

Sorry, it was a line from Back to the Future... But seriously, what do you think is the greatest mystery of the universe?
How did it all start in the first place?

What part of the world would you like to visit some day?

America and Germany. I would like to visit their museums.

You like museums? What kind?

Natural museums and museums about fighting machines of all kinds. Old and new.

Would you rather live at the North Pole or in the desert?

Definitely the desert. (I like warm weather better).

If you could be any animal, which one would you be and why?
Fox (they are fast and smart) or snake (because they are careful and cautious).

Okidoki, now we are getting warmer. With the exception of the snake, I would easily predict all the answers. However, even though the snake looks odd, when I think about it, there's wisdom in there. Ever since the book of Genesis, we have been taking snakes for granted and always in the realm of evil, and children's thinking is definitely not weighted with stereotypes and dogma. Museums look nice too. Ok, let's go into a more personal area now and see how the 'X' will describe himself by answering these generic questions (I found them online and changed them a little to better fit the age).

What is one of your greatest talents? What do you do best?
I remember things for a long time.

What makes you nervous, and what makes you happy?

I am nervous when I don't know what to say or how to answer questions and happy when I do things properly.

What is your happiest memory so far? 
When I bought the Darth Vader Pig plushy from the Angry Birds franchise when I was 4... I couldn't believe it when I saw it on the shelf in the store when we were on vacation in Greece.

I have to admit, as it seemed, these questions gave Viktor a hard time. He did think a lot before answering, and I had to help him a little with offering answers in the form of A, B, C... It looks like with him and probably lots of children his age, happiness is not the same as with us adults. It's more about moments and great times they enjoy the most. I guess they live in present time more than we do. Ok, that indeed was something interesting, so what is next? Oh yes, if those questions up to now were describing a young boy indetail, the following ones will go even further. Like they say... To the bone... The time is now for hard questions.

What age do you look forward to—and why?
22

Really? Can you be more precise than that?
Because I was born on the 22nd...

Ok, I give up. What do you want to be when you grow up?
Game designer and software developer in general.

What do you think you will be doing 10 years from now? 
Programming. And making more successful YouTube videos.

How do you think Earth will look when you grow up?
I am not sure. Not so different than today. Maybe there will be lots of robots?

What is God? 
There are many gods—the sea god, heaven god, and hell god (I like the sea god the most)—and I saw in Greece lots of sculptures and monuments. People say they lived long ago, and they created animals.

Who created people?
Monkeys. Over time, they rose up, lost their fur and hair, and became humans.

Ok, thanks for all the answers. Do you have anything to ask me?
Not really... Maybe on your birthday.

For the end, what advice would you give to your parents?
To play with me more often.

So there you go. I know I could have been more thorough with this interview and created more serious questions for the last section, but I thought that this post should stay in the entertaining thread on the blog and represent just one short and funny conversation between a father and son and a small generation gap in between. For the very end and to get back to the post opening, Viktor's birthday and Earth Day (unofficial Earth's birthday) are celebrated on the same day every year, and for this special occasion, I want to give them both the same message: