Currently I am living in the UK before I head out to the other side. As part of my offer for The University of Queensland I had to get papers signed by a Justice of the Peace and send them out in hard copy to Brisbane.I’ve sent a lot of stuff out there, but nothing has taken this long. Obvously it went by airmail, but it took over two weeks to reach its final destination! Over two weeks! That’s a long time. So for those of you wanting to send things to the otherside of anywhere - beware, it can take a long time!
Not much to do now, send over my offer reply and I’m a winner!
As an undergraduate you will inevitably reach points where your current understanding of Physics will hold you back and make it harder for you to overcome some aspects of your course. Understanding key concepts in Physics requires a level of abstract thinking mostly unseen by other disciplines with the exception of Mathematics. Indeed, some of these concepts are mathematical in nature and for that reason alone undergraduate physicists find it difficult to make progress in many areas.
Having finished an undergraduate Physics degree I can look back at what I have learnt, literally as I have a complete set of notes, and pick out points that stumped me, caught my attention for more than a minute or simply interested me so much I had to ask questions. It is therefore my plan to deliver these aspects of an undergraduate physics education in a comprehensive manner, and in a manner seldom delivered in lecture theaters!
The areas I intend to focus on are scattered all around an undergraduate course, but mostly in Thermodynamics, Quantum Mechanics, Electromagnetism and Fluid Dynamics, I shall attempt however, to touch on many subject matters. I must stress that I have not attempted anything like this before. As such, I invite people to make suggestions as to what to include. I will be more than happy to focus on a particular area for a few posts!
All of these posts shall be made in the category Undergraduate Physics.
What role should science play in the education of young people in this country?
During the 1980’s Her Majesty’s Incorporate forcibly ensured a minimum of 20% learning time devoted to science in schools for all students aged 5-16. Throughout this decade the education system in this country underwent massive change; with the introduction of the new GCSE in 1986 and shortly afterward the National Curriculum, 1989.
The value of teaching science in schools however, was recognised decades before this and has since played a huge role in shaping young people into inquisitive and valuable members of society.
Post 16 education sees the populace opting for humanities and art subjects rather than the physical or biological sciences. What is the problem with this? Of course subjects other than science hold our nation together and strengthen its culture, but as a nation also competing on a global front, economically and technologically, science will always play a key role for a fruitful education.
After reading the report Beyond 2000, I can see why we have chosen to form a new curriculum now called Twenty First Century Science. Written in 1998, beyond 2000 is a critique of science education in the UK up to its date with conclusions on how to progress beyond the year 2000 in terms of reform of science education. It formed the basis for the changes to the science curriculum. In summary it argues that, science in school catered little for those not wishing to pursue science based careers and suggests a more media friendly approach to teaching science 11-16. This was in the hope that young people would still be able to pursue scientific careers later in life, but also enable them to make decisions about science in the media and therefore become valuable members of society.
In its essence the notion concluded by this report is ideal. The fear now is we have gone too far. Fewer and fewer students are taking up ‘hard core’ science degree courses and beyond that careers in science and technology.
“School science, particularly at secondary level, fails to sustain and develop the sense of wonder and curiosity of many young people about the natural world. This interest and inquisitiveness which characterises many primary school children’s response to science diminishes at secondary level to a degree which cannot wholly be accounted for by the onset of adolescence”
By changing the science curriculum 11-16 some feel we have taken the spark out of it, leaving it instead as a “catalogue of facts“.
Two questions now face me as well as the education system itself:
What role should science be playing in schools for our society to benefit and for our nation to progress?
What then should be the focus of a national curriculum and how do we cater for all abilities and inclinations?
I am attending this conference on behalf of and supported by The Ogden Trust.
After watching this following video I realised that in order for me to continue on my quest to better understand the Universe in terms of consciousness, I must be prepared to shift my perspective on science from time to time.
“…there is more to the world than what we are perceiving…”
This video may be a ‘pop-video’, it may be completely factual, however, what we are dealing with here is an area of scientific endeavor almost no one knows anything about. And for that reason alone I must prepare myself for a bumpy ride through a jungle of new ideas.
“We know nothing about reality…”
This quote taken from the video made me smile. Although we are delving into an area of science that is relatively new, this statement alone sums up the efforts of countless philosophers and all-round great thinkers from Goethe to Rene to Plato. Even though sometimes we may feel we understand the world around us, the fact is we see it through the eye of our mind, which of course could distort reality “The brain processes 400bn bits of information a second, but we are only aware of 2000 of them…”.
“…pure abstraction, and that’s what the unified field is, it’s pure abstract potential, pure abstract being, pure abstract self aware consciousness…”
Are they seriously suggesting that the unified field is an abstraction of consciousness? (Oops, I must remember to tame my interior think box). Yes they are. Some of the people in this video are academics and therefore hold these views with a certain level of authority. But should we trust them?
“…somehow intention is related to the output of random number generators…”
Which brings me to a big question, and one I shall return to at a later date. How should we go about our quest to better understand the Universe in terms of consciousness?
“Most people don’t affect reality in a consistent substantial way because they don’t believe they can”
Is this magic?
This last quote confused me, make of it what you will.
“Don’t make the mistake of thinking that the scientific community is scientific…”
This blog’s main purpose is to serve as a tool for global scientific collaboration. There is therefore only one rule. Anyone, and I mean anyone, should feel free to voice their opinion, thoughts and perspectives on posts and comments made on this blog.
Debate will bring us closer to the truth.
Secondly, as well as its scientific front this blog will also be used for literature and film review, sports and arts commentary, and random day to day findings on the web and around the world.
Thirdly, this blog is an extension to www.quantumbrain.info. The website is a joint project by myself and James Bennett (blog: www.quantumbrain.info/blog1). The website aims to bring two fundamental aspects of nature closer together, quantum mechanics and consciousness. In doing so we aim to support discussion and spark debate on important questions we as human beings have yet to answer.
Finally, please feel free to contact us! This blog will begin to take shape once we have both settled at our respective universities, where we shall keep you up to date with our research and joint efforts to solve the mysteries of the universe.