25 July 2014

Notes - cognitive thinking in fiction / calories / wrk on chapters

         Shortly after noon local time. You trimmed grass this morning then waited until mid-morning to mow. Carol helped. A tree specialist stopped by and gave an estimate for tree trimming. You answered some email and found an opinion article on ‘Feedspot’ from Scientific American on the brain capacity myth used in the film Lucy which you are hoping to see tomorrow morning with Carol and Mary Lou (who is coming down in the morning).

         1224 hours. Here is the article. I know the movie review said the film is ridiculous but summer fun. I love Morgan Freeman and Scarlet Johansson so I am ready for a good summer movie about revenge to the guys who gave her a sack of drugs to carry in her body.

** **
Lucy Film Hinges on Brain Capacity Myth
By Kate Wong | July 25, 2014 |
  
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Scarlett Johansson plays a woman who unlocks her brain power in the movie Lucy. Image: Universal Pictures
On July 25, French film writer/director Luc Besson’s action thriller Lucy opens in theaters nationwide. The premise is that the title character, played by Scarlett Johansson, is exposed to a drug that unlocks her mind, giving her superhuman powers of cognition.  The movie production notes [PDF] elaborate:
“…It has long been hypothesized that human beings only use a small percentage of our cerebral capacity at any given time. For centuries, speculative science has postulated what would occur if mankind could actually evolve past that limit. Indeed, what would happen to our consciousness and newfound abilities if every region of the brain was concurrently active? If each one of the 86 billion densely packed neurons in a human brain fired at once, could that person become, in fact, superhuman?”
The notion that we humans have massive reserves of gray matter just sitting there waiting to be summoned into service has obvious appeal, but there is no scientific evidence to support it. And what’s odd about Besson’s reliance on this myth is that, according to the production notes, he allegedly set out to make the storyline scientifically plausible:
“Although Besson believed that the idea of expanding one’s brain capacity made for tremendous action-thriller material, he was particularly intent on grounding—at least in part—Lucy in scientific fact.”
Apparently he missed or ignored the many scientists who would have surely informed him that the idea that we use only a small portion of our brain (10 percent, the story usually goes) is wrong. As Barry L. Beyerstein of the Brain Behavior Laboratory at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver explained in a piece for Scientific American:
“…the brain, like all our other organs, has been shaped by natural selection. Brain tissue is metabolically expensive both to grow and to run, and it strains credulity to think that evolution would have permitted squandering of resources on a scale necessary to build and maintain such a massively underutilized organ. Moreover, doubts are fueled by ample evidence from clinical neurology. Losing far less than 90 percent of the brain to accident or disease has catastrophic consequences. What is more, observing the effects of head injury reveals that there does not seem to be any area of the brain that can be destroyed by strokes, head trauma, or other manner, without leaving the patient with some kind of functional deficit. Likewise, electrical stimulation of points in the brain during neurosurgery has failed so far to uncover any dormant areas where no percept, emotion or movement is elicited by applying these tiny currents….”
Neither do we regularly use only a little bit of the brain at a time, as science writer Robynne Boyd reported in a piece for Scientific American. She quoted neurologist Barry Gordon of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine:
“”It turns out though, that we use virtually every part of the brain, and that [most of] the brain is active almost all the time,” Gordon adds. “Let’s put it this way: the brain represents three percent of the body’s weight and uses 20 percent of the body’s energy.”
Yet just because we are already using our entire brain does not mean we can’t enhance its powers. Exercise and diet can boost cognitive performance. And some researchers think cognitive training can make people smarter.
As for cognitive-enhancing drugs, the few that are available, such as Ritalin and Provigil, are quite the opposite of the compound Lucy is exposed to in the film. Rather than stimulating all of the brain’s neurons to sense everything in one’s environment, these drugs work to help people zero in. The results are a mixed bag, however, as my colleague Gary Stix has observed:
“Most of today’s cognitive enhancers improve our ability to focus—but most benefits accrue to those with attention deficits. They allow the child with ADHD to learn the multiplication tables, but for those with average attention spans or better, these drugs can sometimes usher in comic mishaps.
Instead of cramming for the [Chinese Proficiency Test], as you might have intended, you are liable to get sidetracked into the most mundane of trivialities: you might get up from your textbooks for a drink of water and spend the next two days replacing the leaky plumbing in your kitchen sink. The focus of attention ‘sticks’ to whatever is in front of your face and a friend with a verbal crowbar has to pry you away.”

From – Feedspot and Scientific American (opinion)
** **

         1246 hours. I like the article and certainly I agree with the science but the reviews say it is a fun summer movie with lots of effects and good characterizations by Morgan and Scarlett. It is certainly worth spending some matinee money on.

         How many calories do you think you expend on writing most every day orndorff – Amorella

         1312 hours. Maybe fifty to a hundred calories. It takes calories to exist, to sit in the chair, but for finger energy very little and extra thought, next to nothing, perhaps no extra thought at all because I would be thinking about something else instead. I don’t think mental fun takes much ‘work’.

         Your new dehumidifier arrived a few minutes ago. You might as well work on it orndorff, don’t you think? – Amorella

         1330 hours. I trimmed and mowed the grass. I’m taking a break. I just finished half a peanut butter and raisin sandwich for lunch. I’ll get it done.

         Post. – Amorella

         1412 hours. I’ll get to it in a bit.


         1553 hours. The new dehumidifier is up and running, the old one is setting outside the basement door for the trash Sunday night. I checked ‘livestrongDOTcom’ and this is what it says about calories spent typing.

** **
Calories Burned During Typing
Last Updated: Oct 21, 2013 | By  Bridget Coila
Many people spend a large portion of their work days typing and doing other computer activities. While the calorie burn of typing is minimal, it does expend more energy than simply sitting quietly or reading.
Calories
According to Harvard Health Publications, typing on a computer burns 41 calories per half hour for a 125-pound person. A 155-pound person burns 51 calories typing for 30 minutes and a 185-pound person burns 61 calories doing the same job.

From - http://www.livestrongDOTcom/article/308292-calories-burned-during-typing/
** **

         1558 hours. So, at 290 pounds I assume I burn about 100 calories an hour. It doesn’t seem like I burn any. I checked with ‘FitdayDOTcom’ and, for my height, weight and age I use 77 calories an hour just sitting. So accordingly, I assume I use maybe 25 calories an hour typing. Not much, just as I thought.

         I have yet to work on these last three chapters. I’m tired. I know we are going to the grocery in a bit.


         You are not required to complete the work today orndorff or tomorrow either for that matter. To save a bit of money it is best to send the eMS to BookBaby before the end of the month that’s all. Post. – Amorella


         In surprise Carol decided to eat out tonight so you headed to Smashburgers then to Graeters, the bank and Kroger’s on Mason-Montgomery Road for several sacks of groceries. Once home you finished trimming the small west square in the west back yard and have had time to complete chapter nineteen which took some time because of format problems, something you will have to deal with when these chapters are complete. – Amorella

         2004 hours. Carol is on the phone with Marsha about meeting her and David in August. It took a while to correct the format then to correct each indention in “The Brothers 19” segment. I don’t understand how these things happen from time to time. I want everything uniform before sending it in for e-publication. I do discover errors. I told Carol that I was about ready to give her money for the publication costs. She drops it in her vacation fund so I feel better paying for it out of my money and still get the use of it on vacations and trips. It works out. I don’t want any writing costs to come out of our general fund. I would feel guilty using our money for my hobby. It wouldn’t seem right to me because writing is a private adventure. Once published, I told her to go ahead and read them. The first books are upstairs but I have never seen her open one. She knows how to get onto my blog but I don’t think she ever has. Perhaps because she knows Kim is on the blog from time to time and that Uncle Ernie and Aunt Patsy have read the books. It works for us.

         Post, boy. - Amorella

No comments:

Post a Comment