Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta interview. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta interview. Mostrar todas las entradas

Michio Kaku - About Physics - in English


Theoretical physicist and author Michio Kaku spoke at UTA in a sold out Maverick Speakers Series lecture on Thursday. Kaku is known for his appearances on the Science Channel, and his continuing work on Einstein’s unified field theory. Before taking the stage, Kaku spoke with The Shorthorn in an exclusive interview about his experiences as a burgeoning scientist, his thoughts on the unanswered questions of science and his biggest fear for the future of humanity.

Source:
http://www.theshorthorn.com/news/kaku-explores-future-of-physics-during-lecture/article_edaac1ea-b8c6-11e4-b701-df720d6bdc9c.html

The Shorthorn: There is a story that, while you were in high school, you built an atom smasher in your garage. What drove you to take on that project?

Michio Kaku: That’s right. Ever since I was 8 years old, I was fascinated by the fact that Einstein could not finish his greatest work. What could be so hard? So I wanted to be part of this great mission to complete the theory of everything, which of course is the basis for an Oscar nominated movie, The Theory of Everything. I said to myself, “That’s for me.” But I had to do something, to be worthy of the theory of everything.

So, when I was 17 years old, I went to my mom and I said, “I’m going to build an atom smasher in the garage.” So she said, “Sure! Why not?” I assembled 400 pounds of transformer steel, 22 miles of copper wire and I built a 2.3 million electron volt betatron particle accelerator in the garage. It consumed all of the energy in the house, blew out all of the circuit breakers every time we turned it on. And my mother would say, “Why can’t he find a nice Japanese girlfriend? Why does he have to build these gigantic machines in the garage?” But you see, that got me a scholarship to Harvard. Can’t complain.

It earned the attention of a physicist, Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb. He took an interest in me, and arranged for me to go to Harvard and to pursue my professional career. Now he of course wanted me to work on hydrogen bombs, so when I was applying for grad school, he made a big play for me to work at Los Alamos National Laboratories, working on hydrogen warheads. But you see, I wanted to work on something bigger. A hydrogen bomb, for me, was puny compared to the Big Bang – the creation of the universe. That’s what I really wanted to work on – the nature of the universe itself, and that’s what I do for a living.

TS: Several years ago, Texas was almost home to the Superconducting Supercollider, but these plans were scrapped. With the success of the Large Hadron Collider, what can the U.S. do to bring back these types of technology and research?

MK: Dallas was supposed to be the Vatican of physics, now it’s Geneva, Switzerland. All the publicity of the Higgs-Boson, the Large Hadron Collider, the theory of everything, all that publicity is going to Europe. And why? Well, Congress gave us a billion dollars to dig the hole, this gigantic hole. Bigger, much bigger than the hole in Geneva, Switzerland. Then they canceled the machine and gave us a second billion dollars to fill up the hole. Two billion dollars to dig a hole and fill it up. That is the wisdom of the United States Congress and it really makes you wonder: Is there intelligent life on the Earth? Certainly not in the United States Congress.

TS: What can we do to pull those technological advances back to the U.S.?

MK: Well, the Large Hadron Collider found the Higgs-Boson. Next will be dark matter. We want to create dark matter in the laboratory. So already now, different nations are competing for the next machine. The next machine may be a linear collider, we’re not sure. Japan has already said that they would like to host the next machine, beyond the Large Hadron Collider. Now for us, it means that our machines are old. We have an old machine at Brookhaven Long Island, another one at Fermilab. They’re old, and they may be shut down. The Congress is always tinkering with the idea of shutting down our great set of national laboratories, because all the thunder now is going to Switzerland. Which would be a shame, because we lost a generation. A generation of physicists was lost, because of the lack of funding here.

TS: What do you see as the most important, unanswered questions in science?

MK: The first is the origin of the universe, and that is what the LHC and the SCC is all about. We want to create a miniature universe – a miniature Big Bang. The second is the origin of the mind.

We’ve learned more in the last 15 years about the brain than in all of human history combined. Think of all the nonsense you had to learn in psychology courses. None of which was testable. None of which was measurable. We had behaviorism, Freudian psychology, all of these theories that you learn in psychology. Totally untestable. Now, we can test it, because physics allows us to calculate energy flows in the brain. From that, we can actually construct pictures of what you’re thinking. I can actually put you in an MRI machine, and you can see me and I’ll have the computer print out a picture of what you are looking at. That’s what we can do. So telepathy, telekinesis, recording memories, uploading memories, we can do it now. All this stuff you see in science fiction movies like The Matrix, Star Trek, we can do on a small scale, many of these things in the lab. And it’s all because of physics.

TS: What scares you the most about the future?

MK: I think we’re headed for what is called Type 1 Civilization, planetary civilization. Type 2 would be stellar civilization, like Star Trek. Type 3 Civilization would be galactic, like Star Wars. We are Type 0. We get our energy from dead plants, oil and coal. But we are about 100 years from being Type 1, and the question is: Will we make it? Will we make the transition from Type 0 to Type 1? It’s not clear.

A Type 1 Civilization would be progressive, scientific, multicultural. But you see, there are some people who don’t like it. They can’t articulate this, because this is a physicist’s analysis. There are some people who do not like a Type 1 Civilization. They do not like a civilization that is scientific, multicultural, progressive. These are the terrorists, and God forbid that they get access to an atomic bomb. So it’s not clear that we’ll make the transition from our fragmented Type 0 Civilization to a Type 1 Civilization, which is truly planetary.

Kaku explores future of physics during lecture

Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku presented a possible glimpse into the future during his sold-out Maverick Speakers Series lecture Thursday.

The author and frequent media personality spoke about technological and research advances with the potential to alter human civilization.

Technology that provides the ability to view information through a contact lens in real time and other devices such as smart toilets, and smart wallpaper, Kaku said, have the potential to provide up to the minute details about the user’s body and the outside world.

Before taking the stage, Michio Kaku spoke with The Shorthorn in an exclusive interview about his experiences as a burgeoning scientist, his thoughts on the unanswered questions of science and…

“What we’re seeing is a transition to what I call perfect capitalism,” he said. “In other words, the consumer knows exactly what things really cost. In your contact lens, you scan all of the items and you see exactly what things cost.”

By possessing these technologies, Kaku said, the balance of power switches to the consumer, and this transfer of power will create clear winners and losers.

“When you choose a job, be sure you don’t choose a job like being a blacksmith or a wagon maker,” he said. “We don’t have blacksmiths anymore. We don’t have wagon makers anymore, but nobody cries about this.”

The lower prices of technology, combined with faster production methods, will allow consumers to work directly with producers on personalized products, Kaku said, and this one-on-one work with the producer means middlemen, such as brokers and agents, will disappear.

Theater arts junior Jasmine Davis said she wasn’t familiar with Kaku before his lecture, but attended at the insistence of a friend.

“I don’t really know much about physics, but I really liked how he made a lot of it understandable,” she said. “Also, being a theater major, I was really interested in the weird, future clothes the actors were wearing in the short movie he showed.”

Martin High School student Thomas Davis said he heard about the lecture from his physics teacher, and couldn’t resist seeing him live.

“I’m the president of the physics club, and our teacher, who is a UTA alum, told us about it,” he said. “I see him on TV all the time, so seeing him in person was amazing.”

After the lecture, Kaku took questions from the audience, and expanded on his views about the need for scientists to engage the public and show how science can drive and create new industries.

“The engine of prosperity runs on science,” he said.

@mattsfulkerson
matthew.fulkerson@mavs.uta.edu


Michio Kaku - About Physics - in English


Theoretical physicist and author Michio Kaku spoke at UTA in a sold out Maverick Speakers Series lecture on Thursday. Kaku is known for his appearances on the Science Channel, and his continuing work on Einstein’s unified field theory. Before taking the stage, Kaku spoke with The Shorthorn in an exclusive interview about his experiences as a burgeoning scientist, his thoughts on the unanswered questions of science and his biggest fear for the future of humanity.

Source:
http://www.theshorthorn.com/news/kaku-explores-future-of-physics-during-lecture/article_edaac1ea-b8c6-11e4-b701-df720d6bdc9c.html

The Shorthorn: There is a story that, while you were in high school, you built an atom smasher in your garage. What drove you to take on that project?

Michio Kaku: That’s right. Ever since I was 8 years old, I was fascinated by the fact that Einstein could not finish his greatest work. What could be so hard? So I wanted to be part of this great mission to complete the theory of everything, which of course is the basis for an Oscar nominated movie, The Theory of Everything. I said to myself, “That’s for me.” But I had to do something, to be worthy of the theory of everything.

So, when I was 17 years old, I went to my mom and I said, “I’m going to build an atom smasher in the garage.” So she said, “Sure! Why not?” I assembled 400 pounds of transformer steel, 22 miles of copper wire and I built a 2.3 million electron volt betatron particle accelerator in the garage. It consumed all of the energy in the house, blew out all of the circuit breakers every time we turned it on. And my mother would say, “Why can’t he find a nice Japanese girlfriend? Why does he have to build these gigantic machines in the garage?” But you see, that got me a scholarship to Harvard. Can’t complain.

It earned the attention of a physicist, Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb. He took an interest in me, and arranged for me to go to Harvard and to pursue my professional career. Now he of course wanted me to work on hydrogen bombs, so when I was applying for grad school, he made a big play for me to work at Los Alamos National Laboratories, working on hydrogen warheads. But you see, I wanted to work on something bigger. A hydrogen bomb, for me, was puny compared to the Big Bang – the creation of the universe. That’s what I really wanted to work on – the nature of the universe itself, and that’s what I do for a living.

TS: Several years ago, Texas was almost home to the Superconducting Supercollider, but these plans were scrapped. With the success of the Large Hadron Collider, what can the U.S. do to bring back these types of technology and research?

MK: Dallas was supposed to be the Vatican of physics, now it’s Geneva, Switzerland. All the publicity of the Higgs-Boson, the Large Hadron Collider, the theory of everything, all that publicity is going to Europe. And why? Well, Congress gave us a billion dollars to dig the hole, this gigantic hole. Bigger, much bigger than the hole in Geneva, Switzerland. Then they canceled the machine and gave us a second billion dollars to fill up the hole. Two billion dollars to dig a hole and fill it up. That is the wisdom of the United States Congress and it really makes you wonder: Is there intelligent life on the Earth? Certainly not in the United States Congress.

TS: What can we do to pull those technological advances back to the U.S.?

MK: Well, the Large Hadron Collider found the Higgs-Boson. Next will be dark matter. We want to create dark matter in the laboratory. So already now, different nations are competing for the next machine. The next machine may be a linear collider, we’re not sure. Japan has already said that they would like to host the next machine, beyond the Large Hadron Collider. Now for us, it means that our machines are old. We have an old machine at Brookhaven Long Island, another one at Fermilab. They’re old, and they may be shut down. The Congress is always tinkering with the idea of shutting down our great set of national laboratories, because all the thunder now is going to Switzerland. Which would be a shame, because we lost a generation. A generation of physicists was lost, because of the lack of funding here.

TS: What do you see as the most important, unanswered questions in science?

MK: The first is the origin of the universe, and that is what the LHC and the SCC is all about. We want to create a miniature universe – a miniature Big Bang. The second is the origin of the mind.

We’ve learned more in the last 15 years about the brain than in all of human history combined. Think of all the nonsense you had to learn in psychology courses. None of which was testable. None of which was measurable. We had behaviorism, Freudian psychology, all of these theories that you learn in psychology. Totally untestable. Now, we can test it, because physics allows us to calculate energy flows in the brain. From that, we can actually construct pictures of what you’re thinking. I can actually put you in an MRI machine, and you can see me and I’ll have the computer print out a picture of what you are looking at. That’s what we can do. So telepathy, telekinesis, recording memories, uploading memories, we can do it now. All this stuff you see in science fiction movies like The Matrix, Star Trek, we can do on a small scale, many of these things in the lab. And it’s all because of physics.

TS: What scares you the most about the future?

MK: I think we’re headed for what is called Type 1 Civilization, planetary civilization. Type 2 would be stellar civilization, like Star Trek. Type 3 Civilization would be galactic, like Star Wars. We are Type 0. We get our energy from dead plants, oil and coal. But we are about 100 years from being Type 1, and the question is: Will we make it? Will we make the transition from Type 0 to Type 1? It’s not clear.

A Type 1 Civilization would be progressive, scientific, multicultural. But you see, there are some people who don’t like it. They can’t articulate this, because this is a physicist’s analysis. There are some people who do not like a Type 1 Civilization. They do not like a civilization that is scientific, multicultural, progressive. These are the terrorists, and God forbid that they get access to an atomic bomb. So it’s not clear that we’ll make the transition from our fragmented Type 0 Civilization to a Type 1 Civilization, which is truly planetary.

Kaku explores future of physics during lecture

Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku presented a possible glimpse into the future during his sold-out Maverick Speakers Series lecture Thursday.

The author and frequent media personality spoke about technological and research advances with the potential to alter human civilization.

Technology that provides the ability to view information through a contact lens in real time and other devices such as smart toilets, and smart wallpaper, Kaku said, have the potential to provide up to the minute details about the user’s body and the outside world.

Before taking the stage, Michio Kaku spoke with The Shorthorn in an exclusive interview about his experiences as a burgeoning scientist, his thoughts on the unanswered questions of science and…

“What we’re seeing is a transition to what I call perfect capitalism,” he said. “In other words, the consumer knows exactly what things really cost. In your contact lens, you scan all of the items and you see exactly what things cost.”

By possessing these technologies, Kaku said, the balance of power switches to the consumer, and this transfer of power will create clear winners and losers.

“When you choose a job, be sure you don’t choose a job like being a blacksmith or a wagon maker,” he said. “We don’t have blacksmiths anymore. We don’t have wagon makers anymore, but nobody cries about this.”

The lower prices of technology, combined with faster production methods, will allow consumers to work directly with producers on personalized products, Kaku said, and this one-on-one work with the producer means middlemen, such as brokers and agents, will disappear.

Theater arts junior Jasmine Davis said she wasn’t familiar with Kaku before his lecture, but attended at the insistence of a friend.

“I don’t really know much about physics, but I really liked how he made a lot of it understandable,” she said. “Also, being a theater major, I was really interested in the weird, future clothes the actors were wearing in the short movie he showed.”

Martin High School student Thomas Davis said he heard about the lecture from his physics teacher, and couldn’t resist seeing him live.

“I’m the president of the physics club, and our teacher, who is a UTA alum, told us about it,” he said. “I see him on TV all the time, so seeing him in person was amazing.”

After the lecture, Kaku took questions from the audience, and expanded on his views about the need for scientists to engage the public and show how science can drive and create new industries.

“The engine of prosperity runs on science,” he said.

@mattsfulkerson
matthew.fulkerson@mavs.uta.edu


Una propuesta interesante - Entrevista


Entrevistamos al profesor Daniel Galatro, radicado desde hace unos años en la hermosa ciudad de Esquel, provincia del Chubut, Patagonia argentina, donde dirige el Complejo Cultural virtual que lleva su apellido en Internet.

Con el comienzo del 2015 y habiendo entrado en su septuagésimo primer año de vida, puso en acción un proyecto original sobre el que deseábamos realizarle algunas preguntas. Es que nos pareció que tenía aspectos tan novedosos que era necesario analizarlos con algún detalle.
---

-¿Qué tienen algunas materias de estudio que hace que muchos estudiantes las vean casi siempre como con una especial dificultad a superar?

- Desde hace seguramente siglos que asignaturas como Matemáticas y Física son vistas por la mayoría de los alumnos secundarios y universitarios como obstáculos que entorpecen su tránsito por las aulas.
---

-¿Cree usted que esa dificultad especial es propia de esas materias?

-Cuando se trata de ciencias exactas que deben ser afrontadas por alumnos inexactos se produce un choque casi siempre desagradable. Alguien que está atravesando un período de socialización en el que se lo ha preparado para enfrentar situaciones de la vida siente que es lanzado a un ruedo en el que se manejan otros conceptos tales como la precisión, la exactitud, el rigor racional y cosas así.

---

-¿Y cómo puede superarse esa transición?

-Siendo el desarrollo humano actual como parece que es y seguirá siendo, quien desea participar exitosamente en el futuro debe amigarse con un mundo en el que la ciencia y la tecnología tienen un papel preponderante. “Quien no sabe computación es un nuevo analfabeto” decían allá por los ‘80s”.

Por supuesto, era una exageración sustentada por los que apoyaban esas nuevas industrias, pero su pronóstico pegó en la gente porque en todas las actividades aparecían elementos como los chips, las PC, etc. con la que los antiguos protagonistas debían amigarse para no quedar fuera.

---

-¿Cómo debió adaptarse la capacitación para que esos alumnos inexactos fueran dejando de serlo?

-Lamentablemente el proceso comenzó desde arriba hacia abajo. En Japón se pudo seguir ese proceso. Unas pocas universidades de ese país formaban líderes exitosos que irían a capitanear los nuevos desarrollos. Entonces esos centros de estudio eran los más buscados por los aspirantes. Pero las vacantes disponibles allí no eran muchas, por lo que se generaron exámenes de ingreso muy duros para asegurar una selección adecuada.

Estos exámenes solamente podían pretender aprobarlos alumnos egresados de escuelas secundarias de alto nivel, que también eran pocas y muy buscadas, por lo que entrar a una escuela de ésas obligaba a superar un examen de ingreso muy riguroso. Y esa posibilidad la tenían quienes provenían de escuelas primarias de alto nivel, que solamente tomaban a niños que aprobaban una selección también compleja que ponía el problema en un “nivel cero”: exámenes de ingreso difíciles para poder asegurar una formación especial a nivel “jardín de infantes”. 

Este monumental “embudo” que llevaba a un proceso de descarte que aseguraba un puñado de egresados brillantes en los niveles máximos a través de pasos que dejaban millones fuera de esa posibilidad, motivó que la exigencia se invirtiera. La atención comenzó a centrarse en las etapas desde abajo hacia arriba y aún no se ha optimizado pero se observó que el rigor mayor no era suficiente. Y se comenzó a seguir más de cerca la formación de maestros y profesores.

---

-¿Ocurrió lo mismo en otros países?

-No. Países como Japón son “hijos del rigor” y sus habitantes se adaptan a procesos duros como el que le describí porque saben desde hace siglos que su supervivencia depende de su competitividad como sociedad. Hoy son líderes en empresas de todo el mundo. Pero muchos otros países han apostado por razones políticas a la cantidad y no a la calidad, y permanentemente bajan el nivel de exigencias para que más habitantes “parezcan estar capacitados”. Escuelas de todo tipo “contienen” estudiantes que, sepan mucho o sepan poco, terminarán “recibiéndose de algo” y generalmente estarán muy lejos de poder disponer de las capacidades requeridas para competir en el mundo.

---

-¿Y cuál será su destino?

-Individualmente deberán completar sus conocimientos en algún tema para aspirar a tener algún lugar medianamente digno en el que desarrollarse y sobrevivir. O emigrarán hacia otros lugares en los que puedan mostrar su real valor. Colectivamente como país serán víctimas necesarias del progreso de los líderes del mundo.

---

-¿Qué puede sugerir a quienes aspiran a un mejor nivel de vida?

-En primer lugar deben asumir que no basta estar en una competencia si no se dispone de un entorno que comprenda que el secreto es el nivel de la misma. Y para ser “de primera” hay que acostumbrarse a autoexigirse y a exigir al resto. La valoración de un individuo debe estar relacionada con sus dones personales y, entre esos dones, no debe faltar el nivel de sus conocimientos. Eso requiere un sistema educativo-capacitativo con recursos humanos y materiales adecuados a los objetivos a lograr. En muchos países debe cambiarse la “mentalidad” de los familiares y docentes de quienes son el sujeto y el objeto de la educación en el hogar y de la formación en la escuela y la universidad.

---

-¿Y cómo tiene relación esta filosofía que me ha explicado con su nueva técnica de enfrentamiento con las dificultades que provocan las ciencias tales como las Matemáticas y la Física?

-Como no me ha sido posible participar en forma trascendente de lo que concierne a la enseñanza de esas y otras asignaturas, pude lograr pequeñas modificaciones en sus enfoques desde hace cincuenta años como docente secundario y universitario en las aulas tradicionales pero siempre quedé insatisfecho. Y desde el lejano comienzo en la década de los ‘60s” trabajé en estructuras paralelas, esto es, en institutos privados en los que tenía funciones docentes y directivas. Eso me permitió lograr, casi siempre con éxito, aplicar mis conceptos muchas veces plenamente compartidos por mis colegas. Y hoy desde aquí, en este espacio que la Internet me posibilita, intento abrir algún nuevo camino.

---

-¿En qué consiste?

-Básicamente en un sistema de Guías de apoyo que provean conocimientos algo más que elementales en Matemática y en Física. Lo que un estudiante debe “venir sabiendo” antes de emprender una nueva etapa en los niveles medio (secundario) y universitario. 

Pero no solamente darle información sino acompañarlo en su proceso de comprensión de la importancia de estas materias en la evolución de la Humanidad. Porque motivarlo para que quiera saber más y mejor es un ingrediente fundamental. Estas Guías son un aporte pero la idea es que se reproduzcan y circulen por el mundo para que logren un efecto más significativo. Y, por supuesto, muchos colegas deberán participar aplicando esta idea u otras que consideren más eficaces.

El problema a superar era solamente buscar envases más atractivos para todas y cada una de las “materias” y dediqué mucho de mi vida a participar de su creación.

Las Guías que ya están circulando han demostrado que el producto es bueno. Pero también se aprecia el efecto limitante de las palabras “Matemáticas” y “Física”. Son apreciadas más por quienes saben del tema que por quienes constituyen el gran objetivo: el común de los estudiantes.

El contenido está aceptable, el envase nuevo en forma de Guías también lo está. Lo que quedaba era la distribución. ¿Podía este proyecto convertirse además en un buen negocio?

Creo que un rendimiento aceptable para mí y mi equipo puede lograrse aplicando a cada Guía un costo de los US$ 10 cada ebook. Como libro electrónico es sencillo y sin costo hacerlo llegar a la computadora del interesado. ¿Podré ubicarlo para 1.000 de esos interesados? ¿Para 10.000? Pero si bien me compensaría en lo personal no tendría el efecto multiplicador que realmente pretendo.

Entonces, ¿por qué no “abrir” el archivo para así “abrir” el negocio e incorporar cientos o miles de imitadores que no necesariamente puedan estar interesados en las materias que hoy abarca y en las que podrá abarcar en el futuro?

Si alguien adquiere una Guía en us$10 dólares y la recibe “abierta” en su PC sin que tenga “derechos de autor”, puede vender un ejemplar a otro y recuperar la inversión. O puede vender 10 ejemplares a us$10 cada uno y así ganar US90. O puede vender…

---

-Suena interesante…

-¿Verdad que sí? Y pese a que con un archivo “cerrado” controlaría las ventas, lo que no me interesa por ahora, de este modo reforzaría el efecto de mi nombre en la Internet, lo que me abrirá otras puertas. Seguramente en esta etapa obtendrán más beneficios económicos mis revendedores que yo, pero mis conceptos llegarán a muchos más lectores.

---

-¿Qué tengo que hacer para probar si funciona?

-Comenzar comprando una copia de alguna de las Guías (o de más de una) a US$ 10 c/u. Con el archivo ya en tu PC buscar en Internet interesados en comprarte copias a ese precio o al que creas más “vendedor”. Vendérselas y cobrárselas. Y si no sabes cómo lograrlo siempre estaré para asesorarte. Así de simple, aunque requerirá de tu inteligencia y creatividad.

---

-¿Puedo hacerlo ya mismo?

-Sí. Su aplicación se inició con el comienzo del año 2015 y toda información adicional previa puedes obtenerla vía email a danielgalatro@gmail.com , o danielgalatro44@yahoo.com , o visitando el blog http://conceptosdefisica.blogspot.com


Para pensarlo,¿verdad?
Y oportunidades así rara vez se dan.