"For Jordan, success stems from the mind. 'The mental toughness and the heart are a lot stronger than some of the physical advantages you might have. I've always said that and I've always believed that.' But other people don't. They look at Micheal Jordan and they see the physical perfection that led inevitably to his greatness."
I appreciate the author trying to prove 'Brains over Brawns' which I believe is encouraging to aspiring athletes. In my opinion, one should not be surprised that the first things coaches/people look at will be the physical appearance of a potential player. They able to have a sense of what they are getting, and can assume that some person is bound to have X amount of agility because he has Y length of legs. The mind can be unreliable and you're not necessarily guaranteed anything when it comes to sports.
This whole idea of mindset was not something I was aware of until I read this. It made me reflect back to my Circus Classes, where almost everyone is some kind of contortionist. I've seen different people with different body types have the core strength to do things I've been trying months to achieve. Sometimes they are people who've trained for years, while others get it on their first day. When it talks about how Muhammad Ali researched his opponent and 'figured him out', It reminds of how I've recently been trying to 'figure out' my handstands. When I practice, or watch others, I can begin to put things together as to what works for me. Sure, practicing everyday is bound to make me better, but not solely because of just practice, but by thinking about the differences in a handstand where I stayed longer versus one which I couldn't stay up for a second, and testing out different techniques.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Welcome to the Solar System QQC
"We won't get to the solar system's edge until we have passed through the Oort cloud, a vast celestial realm of drifting comets, and we won't reach the Oort clod for another- I'm so sorry about this-ten thousand years. Far from marking the outer edge of the solar system, as those schoolroom maps so cavalierly imply, Pluto is barely one fifty thousand of the way."
What technology do astronomers use in order to calculate/estimate the distance and/or time it takes to get from earth, to another planet?
Once again I feel like a tiny dot in a vast galaxy (or is it 'universe'?). I am also brought back to the video I saw in class (where the video zooms out from earth). Looking at that video, I wonder, just how do they know all of that actually exists. I understand that astronauts are sent out in to space, but if they are going to the Moon, or Mars, that seems like a plausible distance.
In this quote, it says it would like ten-thousand years. If this is true, then how do we have pictures of these stars that are farther out of our solar system? From what this article says, it's impossible to send out anything that far into space fast enough for us to still be alive by the time it reaches the edge.I know that there are some extremely powerful telescopes that exist, but I find it hard to believe that those are where we have gathered the information that shows images beyond our solar system.
I also will say that I still like to think of Pluto it a planet (mostly because I'm just stubborn)...I read an article that basically said that scientists voted on a new definition for the term "planet" and as Pluto did not fit within this definition thus the reason Pluto is no longer considered a planet. This article was written 5 years ago, I had found out about the Pluto situation last year! Other than this, I'm very much interested in astrology although I lean towards the 'reading the stars' aspect of the subject, I am enjoying these chapters. Very enlightening.
What technology do astronomers use in order to calculate/estimate the distance and/or time it takes to get from earth, to another planet?
Once again I feel like a tiny dot in a vast galaxy (or is it 'universe'?). I am also brought back to the video I saw in class (where the video zooms out from earth). Looking at that video, I wonder, just how do they know all of that actually exists. I understand that astronauts are sent out in to space, but if they are going to the Moon, or Mars, that seems like a plausible distance.
In this quote, it says it would like ten-thousand years. If this is true, then how do we have pictures of these stars that are farther out of our solar system? From what this article says, it's impossible to send out anything that far into space fast enough for us to still be alive by the time it reaches the edge.I know that there are some extremely powerful telescopes that exist, but I find it hard to believe that those are where we have gathered the information that shows images beyond our solar system.
I also will say that I still like to think of Pluto it a planet (mostly because I'm just stubborn)...I read an article that basically said that scientists voted on a new definition for the term "planet" and as Pluto did not fit within this definition thus the reason Pluto is no longer considered a planet. This article was written 5 years ago, I had found out about the Pluto situation last year! Other than this, I'm very much interested in astrology although I lean towards the 'reading the stars' aspect of the subject, I am enjoying these chapters. Very enlightening.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Bryson Reading Chap 1 QQC
"Atoms are so numerous and nessacary that we easily overlook that they needn't actually exist at all. There is no law that requires the universe to fill itself with same particles of matter or to produce light and gravity and other physical properties on which our existance hinges. There needn't acutally be a univere at all. For the longest time there wasn't. There were no atoms and no universe to float about in. There was nothing- nothing at all anywhere."
In a world of nothingness, how could atoms form and create life the earth and life?
I feel as if people are so hooked on the idea of atoms, that they don't tend to look farther than it. When everything is summed up, the existince of anything all comes down to one thing, and that's atoms. I wonder if any scientist has thought past atoms. Also, tying this in with religious beliefs, I find it hard to believe that in a place where nothing existed, all of a sudden atoms appear and then some Big Bang happens and they start creating life.
It might sound strange coming from a I, an religious person, but this theory is far fetched to me. The Bible which explains that God created the heavens and the earth, animals, humans, etc sounds exccesively more plausible than the Big Bang Idea, and especially more plausible than the whole "We evolved from monkeys" theory that so many people are convinced about. (I also simply am not a fan of monkeys).
Other than this, I actually REALLY enjoy this quote. The last two sentences made me a imagine just a vast black of nothingness. Gave me one of those 'woah' feelings. It also brought me back to the video I watched in class, which basically started off at the earth, and then began to zoom out until we were space, and it kept zoomin out farther and father to the point of which our solar system (or glaxay?)was no longer visible.
On this note, with a universe as vast as hours and also the amazing technology we have to fly out in to space, why haven't we found other lifeforms on other planets? Why aren't we living a Star Wars like life yet? Or atleast, why isn't the knowledge of extraterristial life common? Surely, the government keeps secrets. And if extraterritals do exists, I wonder if they would be made up of atoms as well? Are atoms the only kind of particles that can make up life?
In a world of nothingness, how could atoms form and create life the earth and life?
I feel as if people are so hooked on the idea of atoms, that they don't tend to look farther than it. When everything is summed up, the existince of anything all comes down to one thing, and that's atoms. I wonder if any scientist has thought past atoms. Also, tying this in with religious beliefs, I find it hard to believe that in a place where nothing existed, all of a sudden atoms appear and then some Big Bang happens and they start creating life.
It might sound strange coming from a I, an religious person, but this theory is far fetched to me. The Bible which explains that God created the heavens and the earth, animals, humans, etc sounds exccesively more plausible than the Big Bang Idea, and especially more plausible than the whole "We evolved from monkeys" theory that so many people are convinced about. (I also simply am not a fan of monkeys).
Other than this, I actually REALLY enjoy this quote. The last two sentences made me a imagine just a vast black of nothingness. Gave me one of those 'woah' feelings. It also brought me back to the video I watched in class, which basically started off at the earth, and then began to zoom out until we were space, and it kept zoomin out farther and father to the point of which our solar system (or glaxay?)was no longer visible.
On this note, with a universe as vast as hours and also the amazing technology we have to fly out in to space, why haven't we found other lifeforms on other planets? Why aren't we living a Star Wars like life yet? Or atleast, why isn't the knowledge of extraterristial life common? Surely, the government keeps secrets. And if extraterritals do exists, I wonder if they would be made up of atoms as well? Are atoms the only kind of particles that can make up life?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)