Hi, July...

...you're back.  And, I see that you're better than ever - good!
==========================================================================
by PAM


Yep, July is my favorite month... and for a very good reason, too: it's my birth month! :)  As many of my close friends would know, I dislike 'celebrating' my birthday with all that

They call me by a different name these days, so weird.

stressful fun fare, me being a 'mild anti-social' who prefer a quiet gathering with family and very close friends... just being ourselves, enjoying a quiet meal, laughing at our really shallow jokes.  This year, I spent the day... uhm, working - from home!  Nevertheless, a few people insisted on making sure that I felt how special the day was... they sent very nice text messages, e-mails... and some left little mementos on my desk in the Office.  But I had a tough mission on my birthday, that I had to work very hard not to be distracted (translation: emotional) by all the very warm greetings, and go all sappy and sentimental about the whole birthday 'celebration' thing, and how my current circumstance was not allowing me to have a celebration... and I wasn't fighting to have one either!  

Nah, I'm not training to be a heartless hermit or something.  I just feel like I am in that situation where I feel there is so much blessings coming my way that I honestly feel I don't

Now, that's a nice wish that I appreciate.

deserve... just because I didn't pray for any of them!  Therefore, while I try very hard to make the most of all the blessings, turning them to an offering to God, I can't help but feel all paranoid, and asking, "dear Lord, what's the catch?" :)  And then, I remember, it's God... there's no catch.  There never is a catch when He is concerned.  And so, I decided to spend some hours on my birthday... just enjoying the beauty of never having to worry about 'the catch' in quiet contemplation. And, as always, it feels indescribably great... I won't trade it for fancy gifts - ever!

Anyway, on my birthday, in my quiet contemplation, I can't help but think about "Too much Happiness", a compilation of short stories by the great Alice Munro - the latest recipient of the Nobel Prize for Literature.  There was a passage in one of the short stories there that would usually fill my head when I close my eyes to contemplate on something these days:

"Be quiet, be quiet, she wanted to tell them.  It seemed to her that silence was necessary, that everything in  the world outside the boy's body had to concentrate, help it not to lose of its duty to breathe.
"Shy but steady whiffs now, a sweet obedience in the chest.  Keep on, keep on."

It was one of those short stories, where the protagonist, Doree, while on her way to perform a 'routine self-imposed obligation' that effectively rendering her life on unfair stand-still, saw a vehicular accident.  She tried to help the boy in the accident to survive by administering first-aid while they waited for the ambulance.  She didn't realize that

Now, that's a shape and color I prefer. Soon....

the 'distraction' actually took her away from the acceptance of an empty existence - her routine... suddenly realizing the precious gift of life she had all the right to enjoy rather than throw away in favor of an empty routine. 

Sometimes, I feel that way... that I am taking care of "someone" who met an "accident", while we wait for the "real" help, and get the victim regain his health, be back on his feet... and run again.  The only difference is that, in my case, the victim, the accident and the help is one and the same.  The happy thing is it's breathing now, it's helping itself, and it looks as though it will progress steadily to get on its feet soon... and then, I'd be free to disentangle myself from my 'distraction'... and run a 'different race'.  It's only a matter of time now.  :)

***
   

Bizarre Triangle

...on a bizarre day.
======================================================
by Philipina A. Marcelo

The day that just ended was rather bizarre for me. I’ve been sick, so I spent the day at home. I was planning to take it easy and sleep all day… but, instead, I was drawn into a dramatic three-way tug-of-war among my favorite me-time activities: watching sports (most of the time tennis), reading philosophy, and admiring photography.

On the blue corner: Rogers Cup was on… World #1, Roger Federer - the newest dad in the tour - was not exactly just working out in the second round; two former World #1, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Lleyton Hewitt, were battling it out to advance to the third round; the 2007 Rogers Cup champ, Novak Djokovic, was hanging on to dear life in the second round; UK's #1, Andy Murray cruised to the third round while Nikolay Davydenko struggled to get past his opponent; and defending champ Rafa Nadal began his much awaited comeback in the tennis scene since falling in the semis in Paris this year through the men’s doubles. Bizarre that seven of the very best of today's men’s tennis were out there, on the blue hard court of Montreal, doing their thing - drama por drama - so early in the tournament!

On the white corner: I’ve been so mesmerized by my former student Michelle Pangilinan's photographs of the white sand beaches of the Philippines. From the nearby Puerto Galera beaches of Mindoro, to the cheerful clear waters and dramatic sunset of Boracay, to the enigmatic and captivating beauty of Camiguin Island beaches, to the crystal clear waters, nestled in beautiful green islets, of Coron, Palawan – totally drowning! It was bizarre that, out of 493 friends, my mouse should take me to her Facebook photo albums... when my eyes were watering from intense fever.

On the gray corner: Ah, those gray alleys of philosophy coming to an intersection with economics and social issues… there could only be one point of intersection: Amartya Sen! There he was, in his quiet and dignified Nobel Laureate form, sitting on the set of "HARDtalk" no less, talking about his new book, "The Idea of Justice". Hah... so that was what it was like to watch philosophy... I've always wondered. Bizarre that one of the people I've appreciated from a distance and now beginning to admire as an Academic role model should come for an interview on one of my favorite talk shows on a day when I can actually watch it with undivided attention! But what's bizarrely upsetting was that Stephen Sackur, Sen’s fellow Cambridge alumnus and Harvard guy, was not interviewing him! Where's the joy in that?

Speaking of bizarre… people have been wondering all day about a Russian cargo vessel that left Finland en route to Algeria that “seemed to disappear on the face of the earth”, as per BBC news anchor's amazed declaration. Before this, I was lulling myself to sleep on Discovery Channel's Extreme Engineering feature story on "aerodynamic (cable suspension) bridges"... reiterating structure reinforcement to withstand wind. I heard keywords (or catch phrases?) like "natural excitation limit" and "synchronous lateral excitation"... uh, yes, pertaining to bridges.

Bizarre day, I tell ya!

.

Photo credits: (1) Roger Federer: I grabbed from the Rogers Cup website (2) Bulabog Beach, Boracay, Philippines by Michelle Pangilinan.

.

Nobel-ish

=============================================================

Relaxing on a Friday evening, I stumbled upon the on-line article below:

http://www.slate.com/id/2201447/#return

Ah, the beautiful land of 9 million people that is Sweden, and the amazing melting pot that is the United States of America!  Having lived in both countries for considerable period of time – as a student, and therefore an outsider who voraciously took advantage of every opportunity to learn the two countries' respective cultures that their home-grown artists muse about, I cannot help but burst out laughing while reading the article.  I feel I know a little secret that Adam Kirsch doesn’t that I find his rants totally amusing.  This doesn't mean I don't respect his opinion, because I do.  For all I know, he's actually humoring his readers!  For sure, Kirsch merely strengthened my resolve to spend the next two weeks of semestral break to reach some sort of intimacy with Philip Roth’s Nobel-ish literary genius.  I can't wait….

Nobel Forum in Manila

January 9, 2008: Four Nobel Laureates graced the 10th Eurasia Conference on Chemical Sciences with their presence and I was lucky enough to catch them.  

(Photo: The all-excited Philipina with Prof. Hartmut Michel of Germany, the 1988 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. photo credits:  E. C. Quinto, 10th Eurasia Conference on Chemical Sciences, Philippine International Convention Center)
=============================================================

Stepping aside from behind the podium to show the audience that he was wearing jeans, Prof. Aaron Ciechanover of Israel, the 2004 recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for his contribution in the discovery of ubiquitin-mediated protein degradation cheerfully said, “Nobel Laureates are humans, too… see, they wear jeans just like everyone else.” This, as he delivered his 10-minute speech during the Nobel Forum held at the Philippine International Convention Center in Manila on January 9, 2008, in conjunction with the 10th Eurasia Conference on Chemical Sciences. Representing the University of Santo Tomas scientific community, I was one of the lucky few who experienced the rare opportunity of interacting with four Nobel Laureates in a forum where thought-provoking ideas were tossed on the table and challenging questions that are relevant to today’s scientific frontiers were raised.

When asked about the potential of biofuel as a solution to the world’s current quest for alternative fuel, Prof. Hartmut Michel of Germany, the 1988 recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for his contribution in the determination of the three-dimensional structure of a photosynthetic reaction center, commented that biofuel may not be the long-term solution. He explained that the amount of energy stored by plants during photosynthesis is only about 1% of the sun’s energy, and therefore, the maximum energy they can provide is very little. He added that, considering the cost of planting and soil fertilization as well as the elaborate extraction and purification processes that plant oils have to undergo before being utilized as fuel, may be too expensive for the little energy they can provide. He suggested that the use of fuel cells may prove to be a better alternative for a more long-term and sustainable solution. Prof. Yuan Tseh Lee of Taiwan, the 1981 Nobel Prize winner for Chemistry for his contribution to the dynamics of chemical elementary processes, added that biofuel as an alternative fuel may work for countries where there is vast land for plant cultivation, such as the United States of America (USA). However, in countries were agricultural land is scarce and just enough for food production, such as Taiwan, other alternatives have to be explored. He jokingly commented that America’s problems usually become the world’s problems. But American solutions are usually just for America and are rarely applicable for the whole world. To me, this comment is a challenge for all the nations in the world to develop their own scientific capabilities to come up with solutions to problems, local or global, that are most appropriate to them, at the same time, a challenge to use science in making better the plight of all the peoples of the world, rather than using it to get ahead.

Prof. Ryoji Noyori of Japan, the 2001 Nobel Prize winner for Chemistry for his work towards the understanding of chirally catalysed hydrogenation reactions, emphasized the importance of instilling fundamental knowledge and discipline among young people through education. He stressed the importance of equal emphasis on basic and applied sciences in the role of technological innovations to solve the most pressing problems of the world today. Prof. Ciechanover agreed and, in fact, stressed the importance of collaborative science for a more productive scientific community. Prof. Michel pointed out that a deeper understanding of fundamental scientific concepts take patience and time, that’s why, scientific breakthroughs take longer than what some may appreciate. He commented that this is the very reason why the most important scientific findings came out from Europe rather than the USA – because of the tenacity of European scientists to patiently nurture a seed of idea with solid evidences until it becomes a mature fruit of understanding that does not erode with latest advancements, as opposed to the rat race-driven approach of the Americans to bring a scientific concept to commercialization. 

Having studied and been engaged in research in both Europe and the USA, I do have a very strong appreciation of the “contemplative approach” to scientific pursuits that defines the European scientific psyche – it makes those “eureka moments” such immeasurable delight that fuel one’s will to keep going no matter how hard the quest is. Perhaps, the American approach is a more practical one, which seeks to put a solid scientific concept to good use within the shortest possible time... although, I have to admit, that the “competition factor” is way too heavy for a scientist to bear to fully experience and appreciate those “eureka moments”. It would be great to do science just for the love of it and its benefits to humankind, rather than just to get ahead, or get the patent for the technology, or being the one to sell the technology to the highest bidder, or just to win the Nobel Prize - all superficial reasons for doing science. As Prof. Lee said, although money can be a driving force of innovation, creativity, which roots from intellectual curiosity, is stifled when intellectual superficiality persists. Prof. Ciechanover put it very candidly but meaningfully, "winning the Nobel Prize was not my objective, rather it was a consequence of ardently pursuing a passion." And, what a wonderful and fulfilling consequence it must have been!

If I were to sum this argument up having been immersed in both the European and American scientific communities, I would say that if one wants to specialize in the basic sciences, such as Chemistry and Physics, perhaps, the European approach would be the most fulfilling approach, but if one wants to specialize in applied sciences where commercialization is usually the end, perhaps, the American approach would suit him better. Just to illustrate, when I asked the Laureates of their opinion on the remark once made on nanotechnology being a “shotgun wedding” between the basic and applied sciences, Prof. Lee commented that nanotechnology is nothing new to the basic scientists because they have been studying this since many years back, but no one has called the area “nanotechnology” until recently, to which I agree completely. In fact, I would say that John Dalton is among the frontliners of “nanochemistry” - the "nano building blocks" of nanotechnology! But, I believe that the first person to actively put forward nanotechnology and its relevance to today’s technological innovation-driven world was an engineer from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology – an applied scientist from an American institution – when he was pointing out the exciting applications of the then young scientific area. From then on, the “nano pursuit” had been relentless!

To me, whether basic science or applied science, pursued by the European or American approach, the bottom line is always whether our scientific pursuits are geared towards the betterment of humanity or just towards personal gain. As Prof. Ciechanover said, “I don’t know basic science and applied science. I only know good science and bad science.”