Several items of interest to Telugus in Maganti site http://www.maganti.org/newgen/index1.html.. Recent additions include several programs from All India Radio. For the recent additions check the site
జానుతెనుగు సొగసులు .
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Gandhi in Abbottabad
From Gopalakrishna Gandhi's aricle Once in Abbottabad..., it seems to be an area where the Frontier Gandhi was popular at one time and Mahatma Gandhi visited thrice and on one occasion wrote to Hitler.
More from Amitabh Pal, and Ashish Vashi.
More from Amitabh Pal, and Ashish Vashi.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Dan Quillen RIP
A great mathemacian passes away unnoticed and Steve Landsburg is outraged The Architect.
A description of some of his work here with the following comment of Hyman Bass:
"Mathematical talent tends to express itself either in problem solving or in theory building. It is with rare cases like Quillen that one has the satisfaction of seeing hard, concrete problems solved with general ideas of great force and scope and by the unification of methods from diverse fields of mathematics. Quillen has had a deep impact on the perceptions and the very thinking habits of a whole generation of young algebraists and topologists. One studies his work not only to be informed, but to be edified."
Algebraic Topology mailing list carries a message from his widow.
From Mathoverflow Which of Quillen’s Papers Should I read?
A description of some of his work here with the following comment of Hyman Bass:
"Mathematical talent tends to express itself either in problem solving or in theory building. It is with rare cases like Quillen that one has the satisfaction of seeing hard, concrete problems solved with general ideas of great force and scope and by the unification of methods from diverse fields of mathematics. Quillen has had a deep impact on the perceptions and the very thinking habits of a whole generation of young algebraists and topologists. One studies his work not only to be informed, but to be edified."
Algebraic Topology mailing list carries a message from his widow.
From Mathoverflow Which of Quillen’s Papers Should I read?
Sunday, May 08, 2011
A review of 4 books about Pakistan
by Ahmed Rashid Cry, the Beloved Country
The endlessly deepening crisis that is Pakistan (via 3quarksdaily)
P.S. Reading recommendations from Nilanjana Roy Speaking Volumes: The Bin Laden bookshelf. The list includes a book by Ahmed Rashid
The endlessly deepening crisis that is Pakistan (via 3quarksdaily)
P.S. Reading recommendations from Nilanjana Roy Speaking Volumes: The Bin Laden bookshelf. The list includes a book by Ahmed Rashid
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Hot Hands and Reasoning
Jonah Lehrer writes in The Reason We Reason:
"Why, then, do we believe in the hot hand? Confirmation bias is to blame. Once a player makes two shots in a row – an utterly unremarkable event – we start thinking about the possibility of a streak. Maybe he’s hot? Why isn’t he getting the ball? It’s at this point that our faulty reasoning mechanisms kick in, as we start ignoring the misses and focusing on the makes. In other words, we seek out evidence that confirms our suspicions of streakiness. The end result is that a mental fiction dominates our perception of the game.
Here’s where things get meta: Even though I know all about Tversky and Gilovich’s research – and fully believe the data – I still perceive the hot hand. I can’t help but watch the NBA playoffs and marvel at the streakiness of shooters, from Kobe to Rose. (Personally, I’d love to see an analysis of Ray Allen. If that man doesn’t show the hot hand, then it really doesn’t exist.) And I’m not alone in my stubborn skepticism. Red Auerbach, the legendary coach of the Celtics, reportedly responded to Tversky’s statistical analysis with a blunt dismissal. “So he makes a study,” Auerbach said. “I couldn’t care less.”
The larger question, of course, is why confirmation bias exists. This is the sort of mental mistake that seems ripe for fixing by natural selection, since it always leads to erroneous beliefs and faulty causal theories. We’d be a hell of a lot smarter if we weren’t only drawn to evidence that confirms what we already believe.
And this leads me to a fascinating and provocative new theory of reasoning put forth by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber. In essence, they argue that human reason has nothing to do with finding the truth, or locating the best alternative. Instead, it’s all about being able to argue with others"
One of the authors of the new study Hugo Mercier comments "The production of arguments is biased--as you describe. But argument evaluation ought to be fairly objective: after all, in many cases you're better off being convinced rather than clinging to false beliefs. One of the commenters suggests "Hopefully at some point winning an argument will become more correlated with having the truth on your side." In fact, this is already the case. When people are in groups and argue about logical, mathematical or factual problems, they robustly converge on the best solution.
If the production of argument was unable to influence other people, it would be pointless. But if listeners were not mostly influenced for their better good, they would not be listening. The evolutionary logic suggests that reasoning can lead us towards the truth, if only we reason with people who disagree with us to start with."
But I still believe in 'hot hand', partly because I have not studied the work of Amos Tversky and Thomas Gilovich and do not know the assumptions involved. It would be also interesting to study these biases in complex cases like the recent death of Osama and what happenned. About Pakistan's knowledge or lack of Osama's whereabouts, two secular people of Pakistani origin seem to have different opinions The curious case of Osama Bin Laden..(Omar). The case may not matter to some but is of importance to many in various decision making processes. The information is incomplete or distorted for security or other reasons. One can expect a whole spectrum of opnions and beliefs on various aspects of the case and I wonder what lessons can be drawn from them about cognitive biases.
P.S. Slate's complete coverage of the fall of al-Qaida's leader.
"Why, then, do we believe in the hot hand? Confirmation bias is to blame. Once a player makes two shots in a row – an utterly unremarkable event – we start thinking about the possibility of a streak. Maybe he’s hot? Why isn’t he getting the ball? It’s at this point that our faulty reasoning mechanisms kick in, as we start ignoring the misses and focusing on the makes. In other words, we seek out evidence that confirms our suspicions of streakiness. The end result is that a mental fiction dominates our perception of the game.
Here’s where things get meta: Even though I know all about Tversky and Gilovich’s research – and fully believe the data – I still perceive the hot hand. I can’t help but watch the NBA playoffs and marvel at the streakiness of shooters, from Kobe to Rose. (Personally, I’d love to see an analysis of Ray Allen. If that man doesn’t show the hot hand, then it really doesn’t exist.) And I’m not alone in my stubborn skepticism. Red Auerbach, the legendary coach of the Celtics, reportedly responded to Tversky’s statistical analysis with a blunt dismissal. “So he makes a study,” Auerbach said. “I couldn’t care less.”
The larger question, of course, is why confirmation bias exists. This is the sort of mental mistake that seems ripe for fixing by natural selection, since it always leads to erroneous beliefs and faulty causal theories. We’d be a hell of a lot smarter if we weren’t only drawn to evidence that confirms what we already believe.
And this leads me to a fascinating and provocative new theory of reasoning put forth by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber. In essence, they argue that human reason has nothing to do with finding the truth, or locating the best alternative. Instead, it’s all about being able to argue with others"
One of the authors of the new study Hugo Mercier comments "The production of arguments is biased--as you describe. But argument evaluation ought to be fairly objective: after all, in many cases you're better off being convinced rather than clinging to false beliefs. One of the commenters suggests "Hopefully at some point winning an argument will become more correlated with having the truth on your side." In fact, this is already the case. When people are in groups and argue about logical, mathematical or factual problems, they robustly converge on the best solution.
If the production of argument was unable to influence other people, it would be pointless. But if listeners were not mostly influenced for their better good, they would not be listening. The evolutionary logic suggests that reasoning can lead us towards the truth, if only we reason with people who disagree with us to start with."
But I still believe in 'hot hand', partly because I have not studied the work of Amos Tversky and Thomas Gilovich and do not know the assumptions involved. It would be also interesting to study these biases in complex cases like the recent death of Osama and what happenned. About Pakistan's knowledge or lack of Osama's whereabouts, two secular people of Pakistani origin seem to have different opinions The curious case of Osama Bin Laden..(Omar). The case may not matter to some but is of importance to many in various decision making processes. The information is incomplete or distorted for security or other reasons. One can expect a whole spectrum of opnions and beliefs on various aspects of the case and I wonder what lessons can be drawn from them about cognitive biases.
P.S. Slate's complete coverage of the fall of al-Qaida's leader.
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
From Timbuktu Chronicles
I came across this post in the Seed Magazine Opening up Science . It has a video:
"The video below looks at scientific knowledge building using wikis and other web 2.0 tools to pass along agriculture methods at the local level, but it also hints at how one could pass along science at the local level if there was the language to talk about it."
"The video below looks at scientific knowledge building using wikis and other web 2.0 tools to pass along agriculture methods at the local level, but it also hints at how one could pass along science at the local level if there was the language to talk about it."
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Some reactions to Osama's demise
Kristen Breitweiser in Huffington Post Today Is Not a Day of Celebration for Me :
"When my husband was killed on the morning of 9/11, television stations around the world ran split-screen video. They showed the buildings still burning juxtaposed against young Arabs celebrating in the streets. That disturbing vision left me incredulous; it was forever emblazoned on my psyche.
Ten years later, now fully awake in the bright sunlight of the day, when I contemplate the definition of victory for our country when it comes to the death of Osama bin Laden, I can only think about the damage that has been done.
I think about the thousands of lives lost -- American, Afghani, Iraqi. I know firsthand the sorrow those families have felt. I ponder how the billions -- maybe trillions -- of dollars could have been better spent. I remain alarmed about the continued expansion of absolute Executive power in the name of fighting this seemingly ongoing and never-ending "war on terror." I worry about the further erosion of our constitutional rights. I wonder when our troops will ever be called home. I know all too well, that thousands of young American men and women soldiers will never have the opportunity to return home. And of course, I fear reprisal.
But more than anything, I cannot seem to remove the optics of the giddy, gleeful throngs of Americans who took to the streets celebrating in the early morning hours."
Amanda Marcotte in Slate Bin Laden's Dead, Let's Party (via 3quarksdaily):
"I understand the urge to silence and shame people for being ecstatic that we finally got Bin Laden. The fear that jubilation could turn into nationalism and then to bloodlust has real world evidence to back it up. But I would argue that liberals do ourselves no favors by shushing and shaming people's joy. There's another option that is both more humanistic and more productive in the long run: grappling with this celebratory mood and channeling it toward policy goals such as shutting down Gitmo and getting out of Afghanistan.
One reason the war on terror has dragged on and on with no end in sight is that Americans have been deprived of a victory, and politicians both Republican and Democrat are afraid of being seen as losers who backed out of a fight without obtaining that victory. Well, now we have it. And if you doubt that, we have the crowds of celebrants in the street to back it up. That is, after all, what victory looks like in the American imagination. We think of the end of WWII and we don't think about the bomb or Hitler in a bunker. We immediately think of a sailor kissing a strange woman on the street. We think of joy. Joy provides emotional closure, which we never got after 9/11 and the distraction in Iraq. Maybe this joy at Osama Bin Laden's death can provide that for us. And maybe then we can finally have politicians say that we won, and so we can finally shut down the illegal prisons, the ongoing war, and maybe even the ridiculous security theater at airports. But if we scold and silence the joy away, we'll never get a chance to find out."
More at The Econmist Killing bin Laden: Let's call it a day (via Rajeev Ramachandran's google reader)
"When my husband was killed on the morning of 9/11, television stations around the world ran split-screen video. They showed the buildings still burning juxtaposed against young Arabs celebrating in the streets. That disturbing vision left me incredulous; it was forever emblazoned on my psyche.
Ten years later, now fully awake in the bright sunlight of the day, when I contemplate the definition of victory for our country when it comes to the death of Osama bin Laden, I can only think about the damage that has been done.
I think about the thousands of lives lost -- American, Afghani, Iraqi. I know firsthand the sorrow those families have felt. I ponder how the billions -- maybe trillions -- of dollars could have been better spent. I remain alarmed about the continued expansion of absolute Executive power in the name of fighting this seemingly ongoing and never-ending "war on terror." I worry about the further erosion of our constitutional rights. I wonder when our troops will ever be called home. I know all too well, that thousands of young American men and women soldiers will never have the opportunity to return home. And of course, I fear reprisal.
But more than anything, I cannot seem to remove the optics of the giddy, gleeful throngs of Americans who took to the streets celebrating in the early morning hours."
Amanda Marcotte in Slate Bin Laden's Dead, Let's Party (via 3quarksdaily):
"I understand the urge to silence and shame people for being ecstatic that we finally got Bin Laden. The fear that jubilation could turn into nationalism and then to bloodlust has real world evidence to back it up. But I would argue that liberals do ourselves no favors by shushing and shaming people's joy. There's another option that is both more humanistic and more productive in the long run: grappling with this celebratory mood and channeling it toward policy goals such as shutting down Gitmo and getting out of Afghanistan.
One reason the war on terror has dragged on and on with no end in sight is that Americans have been deprived of a victory, and politicians both Republican and Democrat are afraid of being seen as losers who backed out of a fight without obtaining that victory. Well, now we have it. And if you doubt that, we have the crowds of celebrants in the street to back it up. That is, after all, what victory looks like in the American imagination. We think of the end of WWII and we don't think about the bomb or Hitler in a bunker. We immediately think of a sailor kissing a strange woman on the street. We think of joy. Joy provides emotional closure, which we never got after 9/11 and the distraction in Iraq. Maybe this joy at Osama Bin Laden's death can provide that for us. And maybe then we can finally have politicians say that we won, and so we can finally shut down the illegal prisons, the ongoing war, and maybe even the ridiculous security theater at airports. But if we scold and silence the joy away, we'll never get a chance to find out."
More at The Econmist Killing bin Laden: Let's call it a day (via Rajeev Ramachandran's google reader)
Sunday, May 01, 2011
Two reviews by William Easterly
Measuring How and Why Aid Works—or Doesn't , a review of More Than Good Intentions By Dean Karlan & Jacob Appel and Poor Economics By Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo (via Chris Blattman):
"Unfortunately, the books also indulge another sort of irrationality: the demand for big, general statements even if you're discussing limited, context-specific matters. The authors criticize over-promising and generalizing in the aid business, but they too often do their own exaggerating when it comes to what their methods can deliver. Both books end with overselling, "five key lessons" (Banerjee and Duflo) or "seven ideas that work" (Karlan and Appel), ignoring their own previous cautions about sensitivity to context and the limits to each intervention. Other economists criticize overselling as a common fault of those who do these small experiments.
But let's extend the same consideration to these authors that they show for the people they study. They have fought to establish a beachhead of honesty and rigor about evidence, evaluation and complexity in an aid world that would prefer to stick to glossy brochures and celebrity photo-ops. For this they deserve to be congratulated—and to be read."
The Happiness Wars , a review of International Differences in Well-Being, edited by Ed Diner, Daniel Kahneman, and John Helliwell
via the post Money buys happiness after all
"Unfortunately, the books also indulge another sort of irrationality: the demand for big, general statements even if you're discussing limited, context-specific matters. The authors criticize over-promising and generalizing in the aid business, but they too often do their own exaggerating when it comes to what their methods can deliver. Both books end with overselling, "five key lessons" (Banerjee and Duflo) or "seven ideas that work" (Karlan and Appel), ignoring their own previous cautions about sensitivity to context and the limits to each intervention. Other economists criticize overselling as a common fault of those who do these small experiments.
But let's extend the same consideration to these authors that they show for the people they study. They have fought to establish a beachhead of honesty and rigor about evidence, evaluation and complexity in an aid world that would prefer to stick to glossy brochures and celebrity photo-ops. For this they deserve to be congratulated—and to be read."
The Happiness Wars , a review of International Differences in Well-Being, edited by Ed Diner, Daniel Kahneman, and John Helliwell
via the post Money buys happiness after all
Ravi Kannan wins the Knuth prize
A description of some of his work by a colloborator with the recent royal wedding thrown in here
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Greater specialization makes innovation much harder
From Innovation Shortfall, Low Hanging Fruit, and the Frontiers of Knowledge via a link in Adapt*, by Tim Harford:
"Big takeaway: “The shorter the period that innovators spend innovating, the less their output as individuals over their lifetime. If innovation is central to technological progress, then forces that reduce the length of active innovative careers will reduce the rate of technological progress. This effect will be particularly strong if innovators do their best work when they are young.”
These facts ought to give us pause. Jones postulates that the main reason we see an age shift is because the frontiers of knowledge are farther and farther away. The shoulders of giants are higher. The low fruit has been taken. Because of how complex and specialized our knowledge has become, Jones says the young must spend more and more years training and acquiring knowledge to reach the cutting edge.
Now it may be that the “burden of knowledge” is heavier than it used to be. But my own take is that we shouldn’t confuse the accumulation of credential crud for the difficulty of reaching the frontiers of knowledge. On the macro scale, we often cite the Mancur Olson thesis that special interests sap the dynamism of economic growth over time. I believe the Jones data and Cowen’s arguments present further evidence supporting the Olson story. For instance, why should we believe PhD programs are designed to efficiently move students from ignorance to the frontier of knowledge as quickly as possible? Academics are not mainly truth-seekers. They’re incentivized to pursue other aims such as pleasing their advisors, their tenure review panel, or a grant making body. These aims do not coincide with discovering new and useful knowledge. Secondly, we can go back further. A lot of education from K-12 to college core requirements is a waste of time. How much of this knowledge is relevant to future work making discoveries? If anything, Jones should suggest we try to make education more efficient.
But I digress. In all this discussion, Cardwell’s Law looms in the background. No country stays technologically superior forever. As yesterday’s innovators becomes today’s vested interests, stagnation follows. There are reasons for that. All of these arguments–Thiel’s, Cowen’s, Jones’s–suggest we may need a thousand nations sooner than we think. We will soon find not the singularity, but the stagnation is near."
"Big takeaway: “The shorter the period that innovators spend innovating, the less their output as individuals over their lifetime. If innovation is central to technological progress, then forces that reduce the length of active innovative careers will reduce the rate of technological progress. This effect will be particularly strong if innovators do their best work when they are young.”
These facts ought to give us pause. Jones postulates that the main reason we see an age shift is because the frontiers of knowledge are farther and farther away. The shoulders of giants are higher. The low fruit has been taken. Because of how complex and specialized our knowledge has become, Jones says the young must spend more and more years training and acquiring knowledge to reach the cutting edge.
Now it may be that the “burden of knowledge” is heavier than it used to be. But my own take is that we shouldn’t confuse the accumulation of credential crud for the difficulty of reaching the frontiers of knowledge. On the macro scale, we often cite the Mancur Olson thesis that special interests sap the dynamism of economic growth over time. I believe the Jones data and Cowen’s arguments present further evidence supporting the Olson story. For instance, why should we believe PhD programs are designed to efficiently move students from ignorance to the frontier of knowledge as quickly as possible? Academics are not mainly truth-seekers. They’re incentivized to pursue other aims such as pleasing their advisors, their tenure review panel, or a grant making body. These aims do not coincide with discovering new and useful knowledge. Secondly, we can go back further. A lot of education from K-12 to college core requirements is a waste of time. How much of this knowledge is relevant to future work making discoveries? If anything, Jones should suggest we try to make education more efficient.
But I digress. In all this discussion, Cardwell’s Law looms in the background. No country stays technologically superior forever. As yesterday’s innovators becomes today’s vested interests, stagnation follows. There are reasons for that. All of these arguments–Thiel’s, Cowen’s, Jones’s–suggest we may need a thousand nations sooner than we think. We will soon find not the singularity, but the stagnation is near."
Friday, April 29, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Links, April 28, 2011
David McKenzie's review Banerjee and Duflo’s Poor Economics: Micro-steps towards a quiet revolution? ( short and the best I have seen so far, via Chris Blattman)
Genius at work Bob Dylan’s Blood on the Tracks: The Untold Story ( from Tabula Rasa comment in Flotsam)
Mark Changizi:The next giant leap in human evolution may not come from new fields like genetic engineering or artificial intelligence, but rather from appreciating our ancient brains. (From Seed Magazine)
Herman Daly applies a biophysical lens to the economy and finds that bigger isn’t necessarily better. (From Seed Magazine)
Genius at work Bob Dylan’s Blood on the Tracks: The Untold Story ( from Tabula Rasa comment in Flotsam)
Mark Changizi:The next giant leap in human evolution may not come from new fields like genetic engineering or artificial intelligence, but rather from appreciating our ancient brains. (From Seed Magazine)
Herman Daly applies a biophysical lens to the economy and finds that bigger isn’t necessarily better. (From Seed Magazine)
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Robin Dunbar revisits Dunbar Number
in Friends to count on.
More discussion in Local & Distant Friendships – A Dunbar Number Conundrum (via Rajib Khan):
"If we can handle only 150 substantive relationships, how can we increase and strengthen local connections of the sort Dunbar speaks of here while still maintaining the extra-local connections many of us need to work in an extralocal information economy?"
More discussion in Local & Distant Friendships – A Dunbar Number Conundrum (via Rajib Khan):
"If we can handle only 150 substantive relationships, how can we increase and strengthen local connections of the sort Dunbar speaks of here while still maintaining the extra-local connections many of us need to work in an extralocal information economy?"
Rajib Khan summarizes the recent research on
The genetic origin of Indians:
"What’s the biggest surprise from these results? For me I think it is the deep and incredibly thorough biological synthesis which characterizes the Indian subcontinent. We all know that there is a big difference between a Kashmiri Pandit and an Adivasi from South India. But about one third of the Pandit’s ancestry is “Ancestral South Indian,” which is almost absent outside of the subcontinent. And about one third of the Adivasi’s ancestry is “Ancestral North Indian,” which connects this individual with the populations which span the Atlantic, to the Urals, to the Sahara. The past is a strange and mysterious land. But the veil of ignorance is slowly lifting…."
Omar Ali gives links to other posts of Rajib Khan in Science sheds light on population history and living standards
.
P.S. See also Rajib Khan's South Asian endogamy predates the British.
"What’s the biggest surprise from these results? For me I think it is the deep and incredibly thorough biological synthesis which characterizes the Indian subcontinent. We all know that there is a big difference between a Kashmiri Pandit and an Adivasi from South India. But about one third of the Pandit’s ancestry is “Ancestral South Indian,” which is almost absent outside of the subcontinent. And about one third of the Adivasi’s ancestry is “Ancestral North Indian,” which connects this individual with the populations which span the Atlantic, to the Urals, to the Sahara. The past is a strange and mysterious land. But the veil of ignorance is slowly lifting…."
Omar Ali gives links to other posts of Rajib Khan in Science sheds light on population history and living standards
.
P.S. See also Rajib Khan's South Asian endogamy predates the British.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Satya Sai Baba passes away
I never met him; I heard about him from my mother around 1958 when he assured her that I would go back to college. He seems to be allright as far as godmen go. The following write up in The Hindu A secular spiritual leader.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Links, April 24, 2011
Obama’s Young Mother Abroad
The Psychology of the 'Birther' Myth
Why economists study what they do — and how the crisis might change it
Google Uses My Credit Card Without Telling Me
Review of 'Poor Economics' by A. Banerjee and E. Duflo, which will be available tomorrow from Kindle
The Other Temple Entry
: "Ask the Dalit crorepatis, and they say they don’t see the need for reservations for their children. Let others not as fortunate as us avail of its benefits, they say. They are set on consolidating on the gains they have made so far. And maybe get into Fortune’s list of billionaires. With a firm named Fortune Constructions, Kamble just might make it there."
The Psychology of the 'Birther' Myth
Why economists study what they do — and how the crisis might change it
Google Uses My Credit Card Without Telling Me
Review of 'Poor Economics' by A. Banerjee and E. Duflo, which will be available tomorrow from Kindle
The Other Temple Entry
: "Ask the Dalit crorepatis, and they say they don’t see the need for reservations for their children. Let others not as fortunate as us avail of its benefits, they say. They are set on consolidating on the gains they have made so far. And maybe get into Fortune’s list of billionaires. With a firm named Fortune Constructions, Kamble just might make it there."
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Reading recommendations for psychologists
The books and journal articles all psychologists should read. William James’s The Principles of Psychology (1890)among the most recommended. Strangely most might have a read a few of those books.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Robert Sapolsky lectures on YouTube
Links to these and others in Robert Sapolsky and Human Behavioral Biology (via Ed Yong)
Thursday, April 21, 2011
On 'brain time'
and other things in this portrait of neuroscientist David Eagleman The Possibilian via the MindHacks post Time flies when you’re having fun.Some excerpts from the article:
"Time isn’t like the other senses, Eagleman says. Sight, smell, touch, taste, and hearing are relatively easy to isolate in the brain. They have discrete functions that rarely overlap: it’s hard to describe the taste of a sound, the color of a smell, or the scent of a feeling. (Unless, of course, you have synesthesia—another of Eagleman’s obsessions.) But a sense of time is threaded through everything we perceive. It’s there in the length of a song, the persistence of a scent, the flash of a light bulb. “There’s always an impulse toward phrenology in neuroscience—toward saying, ‘Here is the spot where it’s happening,’ ” Eagleman told me. “But the interesting thing about time is that there is no spot. It’s a distributed property. It’s metasensory; it rides on top of all the others.”
......
One of the seats of emotion and memory in the brain is the amygdala, he explained. When something threatens your life, this area seems to kick into overdrive, recording every last detail of the experience. The more detailed the memory, the longer the moment seems to last. “This explains why we think that time speeds up when we grow older,” Eagleman said—why childhood summers seem to go on forever, while old age slips by while we’re dozing. The more familiar the world becomes, the less information your brain writes down, and the more quickly time seems to pass."
And so on... to Francis Crick's advice and brains of drummers.
"Time isn’t like the other senses, Eagleman says. Sight, smell, touch, taste, and hearing are relatively easy to isolate in the brain. They have discrete functions that rarely overlap: it’s hard to describe the taste of a sound, the color of a smell, or the scent of a feeling. (Unless, of course, you have synesthesia—another of Eagleman’s obsessions.) But a sense of time is threaded through everything we perceive. It’s there in the length of a song, the persistence of a scent, the flash of a light bulb. “There’s always an impulse toward phrenology in neuroscience—toward saying, ‘Here is the spot where it’s happening,’ ” Eagleman told me. “But the interesting thing about time is that there is no spot. It’s a distributed property. It’s metasensory; it rides on top of all the others.”
......
One of the seats of emotion and memory in the brain is the amygdala, he explained. When something threatens your life, this area seems to kick into overdrive, recording every last detail of the experience. The more detailed the memory, the longer the moment seems to last. “This explains why we think that time speeds up when we grow older,” Eagleman said—why childhood summers seem to go on forever, while old age slips by while we’re dozing. The more familiar the world becomes, the less information your brain writes down, and the more quickly time seems to pass."
And so on... to Francis Crick's advice and brains of drummers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)