Monday, July 2, 2012

Paradoxes Are Wonderful Brainstrainers, Braintrainers!

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .




The mind secretly craves paradoxes that defy reconciliation. These little pieces of self conflictory speech are to the mind what a painting by M.C. Escher is to the the eye. Some Paradoxes get the mind running iteratively to the point of exhaustion, but not a single revolution of mental turnover is wasted. The mere cycles make the mind more resilient, the imagination more expansive, the ability to visualize keener, and general problem-solving skills more powerful. The mind strives for stability -- a one-root solution -- but is stimulated by the exercise of arriving at the point of stability through its own internal logical machinations.

From a more mysterious and possibly sinister perspective, the mental fatigue caused by repetitive anti-logic and the essential bouncing from wall to wall effect can put the mind into a trance-like or increasingly suggestible state. This is excellent for meditation, but under certain controlled circumstances, it can provide an opening for elements of brainwashing and mind control. Mental fatigue without any rest can be a form of torture. People who never think are blissfully ignorant of this type of pain (sigh...).

Additionally, certain simple perceptual puzzles (usually simple pictures which require that the mind re-examine them from various unconventional perspectives, or re-context them new ways in also exercise the same mental muscles. Some of these puzzles are merely optical illusions which cause a variety of interpretations or of the same data to yield different interpretive results, and some require an added element of conscious mathematics skills or logical thought.

Here are a few things to ponder or play with for our beloved readers of The Braintenance Blog:

1) A person is chronically unreliable. Can he be relied upon to be consistently unreliable?

2) If a person says, "I keep my friends close and my enemies closer," what is your standing with this person when he embraces you, and offers you a seat and some pleasant private conversation, are you his friend or enemy? How can you be certain?

3) If an empty ten-ounce glass is filled with more water, each time as follows: firstly, with 2 ounces; secondly with 1 ounce; and with each fill thereafter comprised of half the amount of the previous fill, how many fills will it take before the glass is exactly 7 ounces full?

4) How many equilateral triangles are there in the picture below? (hint: sometimes a triangle can be made of other triangles)

5) How many squares do you see in the picture below?

6)  What is the maximum number of times that you can fold any piece of paper of any size, of any thickness, in half. [THIS IS MADDENING, THIS 'UN IS].


7) Why?


Enjoy the workout.

Coach Douglas E. Castle




View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle
Follow Me on Pinterest

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Enhance Creativity With Novelty And Challenge

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .



Note: We are currently in contractual negotiations with the bluebird to get him to be the spokesbird for THE BRAINTENANCE BLOG -- "The Bluebird Of Braintenance."


Two of the greatest variables which enhance creativity (which happens to be a close cousin of problem-solving) are novelty and challenge.

Novelty is simply doing something which is a departure or disruption from your usual routine, thought patterns or subject matter which consumes a great deal of your time ordinarily. By the way, novelty can be a departure from physical routine as well as psychological or intellectual routines.

Challenge is the exercise of pushing your psychological, intellectual or physical envelope or self-imposed 'comfy cube'

Where novelty forces you to focus on those different skill sets or muscle groups, challenge has to do with applying and exercising them. By analogy, novelty is like exercising a new and formerly neglected muscle group (i.e., exercising your triceps where you've been only exercising your biceps for years), and challenge is actually doing more repetitions, more sets and using increased weights as you integrate this whole new regimen into your routine.

The following twelve somewhat zany but very effective exercises were created by Dorothea Brande, and were mentioned by Gretchen Rubin of The Happiness Project:


1. Spend an hour each day without saying anything except in answer to direct questions, in the midst of the usual group, without creating the impression that you’re sulking or ill. Be as ordinary as possible. But do not volunteer remarks or try to draw out information.

2. Think for 30 minutes a day about one subject exclusively. Start with five minutes.

3. Write a letter without using the words I, me, mine, my.

4. Talk for 15 minutes a day without using I, me, my, mine.

5. Write a letter in a “successful” or placid tone. No misstatements, no lying. Look for aspects or activities that can be honestly reported that way.

6. Pause on the threshold of any crowded room and size it up.

7. Keep a new acquaintance talking about himself or herself without allowing him to become conscious of it. Turn back any courteous reciprocal questions in a way that your auditor doesn’t feel rebuffed.

8. Talk exclusively about yourself and your interests without complaining, boasting, or boring your companions.

9. Cut “I mean” or “As a matter of fact” or any other verbal mannerism out of your conversation.

10. Plan two hours of a day and stick to the plan.

11. Set yourself twelve tasks at random: e.g., go twenty miles from home using ordinary conveyance; go 12 hours without food; go eat a meal in the most unlikely place you can find; say nothing all day except in answer to questions; stay up all night and work.

12. From time to time, give yourself a day when you answer “yes” to any reasonable request.

These are actually tremendous novelties paired with potentially enormous challenges for most of us. I would suggest that you review the whole list before embarking upon any of its proposals. How often have you ever actually done any one of them? How often has anybody whom you may know done of any of them -- or at least to the extent that you noticed?

When you've finished evaluating the list and thinking "Come On... Does that snooty Douglas E. Castle really expect me to do these things?" My answer is "Yes. Do every single one. Also, don't call me snooty."

p.s. If you enjoy Braintenance, please follow us on Twitter at @Braintenance. For a whole selection of other Twitter feeds regarding an amazingly diverse list of topics, you'll find a whole bunch truly worth keeping up with at The Twitterlinks Hubspot Blog.




View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle
Follow Me on Pinterest

Sunday, June 17, 2012

Braintenance - The Many Types Of Learning - Douglas E. Castle

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .



Dear Readers:

I will be returning from a brief assignment out of town on June 21st, and will begin posting regularly then. Thank you for reading me and for taking some time to view The Twitterlinks Hubspot Blog in order to find some of our information-packed Twitter feeds which suit your interests to follow.

Douglas E. Castle

p.s.  Please feel free to visit my Linked In profile at Linked In - Douglas E. Castle











View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle
Follow Me on Pinterest

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Mazes: Build Intelligence.Stay Sharp.

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .






Solving problems involving mazes builds intelligence, keeps you sharp, wards off dementia, clears (broadens) old neural pathways and paves new ones, greatly expands your possibility thinking abilities, decision making abilities and your ability to visualize using your imagination. As an added bonus, working through mazes is a meditative-type exercise and actually helps discipline your ability to focus without 'wandering off' [like your eccentric Uncle Ned at a family barbecue].

Mazes are actually pictorially analogous to the structure of the physical brain. Navigating a maze might just be similar (on a very small and simplified scale) to navigating neuronal corridors of the mind...

Another amazing (pun intended) by-product of the repeated exercise of escaping (i.e., running through or navigating) mazes is that despite the element of trial and error which may necessarily be involved  -- you find a way that doesn't work, go back to the point where you believe that you might have taken a fateful wrong turn, and go in a different direction -- many maze champions are very good at somehow "anticipating" the tricks and techniques used by certain maze designers. This is a fascinating phenomenon.

If you look at a maze from a vantage point, reasonably high above it, so that you can view the entire layout, it will be mush easier to navigate when it comes time to actually run it. This is a dramatic example of perspective, and how it influences the way people think. If you are just thrown into a maze that you have never scanned from above in totality, the whole exercise becomes less a study in memory and navigation than a test of trial and error, learning curves and intuition.

You can find a variety of mazes with which to test yourself with at these sites:

http://www.mazes.org.uk/

http://www.clickmazes.com/

Now have some fun.

Douglas E Castle for The Braintenance Blog

p.s. Please follow us by going to The Twitterlinks Hubspot Blog and selecting a few Twitter feeds of interest (varied subjects). ***This week's recommendation is the brand new EXPANDEDMINDS1. Click and follow -- we'd be honored to have you.





View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle
Follow Me on Pinterest

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

The Human Brain And God - The Debate Continues...

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .







A fascinating article follows from BigThink, a wonderful source of intelligence, information and imagination. When you've finished enjoying it, please return to this page for some (in)famous last words. We'll wait.

Is The Human Brain Hardwired for God?
Why do we care whether or not God exists? And why do so many people believe? A new generation of neuroscientists is addressing those questions directly, with the ambitious goal of measuring what happens to the human brain during spiritual experiences. Dr. Andrew Newberg is the Director of Research at the Myrna Brind Center for Integrative Medicine and a pioneer in the field of neurotheology. He's studied the brains of Franciscan nuns during prayer, Tibetan monks during meditation, and Pentecostals speaking in tongues in his lab. His surprising finding -- belief is not as invisible as it seems. Read »

My personal opinion is that the Human Brain is not hardwired for God, per se, but that it is hardwired for a connection to a greater consciousness -- perhaps a spiritual awareness, perhaps a certain type of perception-altering experience, or perhaps to the Collective Mind, where we, as individuals, become holons, or complete cells which are self-contained components of a much greater, multi-dimensional consciousness or massive mind.

We have a center (or two) anatomically built into our physical brains which would indeed seem to be highly receptive to some greater power. But precisely what the nature of this greater power actually is still seems to be highly subjectively-defined force, depending upon the background and programmed religious and spiritual teachings and beliefs of the person to whom you are posing the question.

In other news, please take a moment and visit a recent post about DISRUPTION THEORY. That should provide enough material to challenge your cranial capacity!

Douglas E Castle for The Braintenance Blog





View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle
Follow Me on Pinterest

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Serial Killers And Bad Science - Braintenance Reports: Question Everything!

Share this ARTICLE with your colleagues on LinkedIn .



The fact of the matter is that correlation dies not necessarily imply causality. Just because two things tend to be correlated positively (one usually accompanies, or is associated with the other), doesn't necessarily mean that a 'cause and effect' relationship exists.

In the extreme case, take this correlative study, which I just conducted myself in the The Braintenance Blog Laboratories (located in a concrete and lead bunker located deep below the desert in Area 52 -- as Area 51 was already spoken for when we were working with the realtors in our search for cheap laboratory space.):

In my experiment, I found out that in excess of 95% of all heroin addicts were given milk or formula when they were babies. Therefore, milk and/or formula, given to someone as an infant, will cause eventual that infant to graduate to heroin addiction.

Stupid, yes. Bad science always is. Numbers don't lie, but the inferences drawn from them can be manipulated or interpreted in many, many ways. The results of some studies could never, ever pass the common sense test.
---------------


The article excerpt and the video which are embedded below are made available though SmartPlanet, a wonderfully informative publication:

####

Scientists have found a curious similarity between a serial killer's murders and the firing patterns of brain cells.
Read the article which follows; After doing so, please hit the "BACK" button on your computer's browser to come back and read some interesting observations about this type of "science" and its drawing of sadly useless conclusions!
Serial killer's behavior explained with mathematics
As interesting (yawn) and informative (yawn) as this correlative (as opposed to causative) "study" seems, the refreshingly informed readers of this bit of "oh so what?" had quite a bit to say in criticism of this inactionable and ridiculous "study" of the obvious. Their comments, replete with misspellings, tangential campaigning, and off-topic wisecracks, follow for your pleasure:
----------------
Not very interesting
So the scientists have found that serial killing is somehow associated with becoming agitated. Well that's quite a revelation. I guess we can rule out that they did it in their sleep.
You put the cart before the horse
Neurons do not "fire" and then we have thoughts. We have thoughts and then neurons "fire". This is not the first time scientists have been able to model some behavior mathmatically. This same law of distributions could apply to the race car driver, one night stander, or any of a myriad things that result in a rush of adrenaline and other neurotransmitters. This guy some how latched onto murder as his high of choice. The problem will be that if this particular link is made then anytime scientists can show this particular neural activity pattern then the association that the person is a serial killer.
bumps on the head
Yeah, and Phrenology was once considered real too!
It's only a matter of time...
Ok... So now it's only a matter of time until some lawyer uses this as a defense in a murder case. "My client was the innocent victim of misfiring neurons."

Wait for it... wait for it...
Fitting the curve
I wonder how long it took to find a mathematical relationship that the data would fit?

1) Define the data points
2) Run the software to find the curve
3) Publicise the curve

It really sounds like a "Publish or lose tenure" situation. You get into the soft sciences and they can play some real games with data. I remember seeing a Biology (borderline hard/soft science) paper where an R factor of 0.3 was considered good. I'm a chemist. If I got results like that I'd service my measuring device.
Pareto principle
Your offhand throwing in of the 99% slogan of the occupy movement is off base.

If 20% of people controlled 80% of wealth, that would be a stable, or normal situation. The problem now and either a symptom of or cause of instability is the fact that 80% of the overal wealth is controlled by a much smaller group than 20%.

Every time such a disparity has occured historically, a correction (or war or revolution) has occured.
The pareto law applies to optimum functioning of the economy
The problem being that if the distribution of wealth to owners reaches or exceeds a parato distribution, the economy fails to function optimally. It also doesn't function optimally at a totally level(1 to 1) distribution of wealth to owners. The optimum being a small dynamic range lying between those two extremes.

Unfortunately, the majority of economists and financial experts are too stupid (i.e. unable to be trained out of it) to understand this concept and usually adhere to the fallacy of unlimited markets.
---------------

Now, back to Douglas E. Castle (who I happen to be)...

A statistical relationship is only a means, ultimately, of lending credence and credibility to a common-sense 'cause and effect' hypothesis, and even then, only if the proper experimental controls and conditions required by the Scientific Method are rigorously adhered to.

When it is doctoral thesis time, or when a batch of university professors get a publish-or-perish ultimatum, expect a rash of bad science to make its way into the news. I'll bet you that my reasoning here is right.

I could go a step further and make some emotionally-charged comments regarding the large pharmaceuticals companies and the FDA, but I wouldn't want to get myself put on a pseudo-ephedrine restriction list in the event that I have nasal congestion from whatever it is that I have been breathing...or perhaps reading.

Grow that brain. Ask questions. Stray off of the main roads. The world is your laboratory. Your life is a learning opportunity - have some fun with it. 

-DC





View DOUGLAS E. CASTLE's profile on LinkedIn


Douglas E Castle
All Blogs & RSS Feeds

Share this page
Contact Douglas Castle

Bookmark and Share