What I read in January 2022


It’s been a while since I did this, I even forgot how to do it. After my December project fiasco, I decided to just take a break (as if I haven’t been doing that in a while) and just recalibrate. There are moments when a person needs to have a soliloquy and ask himself about the purpose of doing things. Since I am not consistent in posting about things I read, rather than be stressed by it, maybe I shouldn’t do it at all? Should I even write in the first place? That’s just encouraging me to be lazy. It’s nice to have such thoughts but I have to be careful not to entertain them. Otherwise, my writing career won’t go anywhere.

Why Nasa is exploring the deepest oceans on Earth (BBC)

What is it about: This article is NASA’s response to those who ask why such big budget is alloted for space exploration when there is so much unknown in the depths of our oceans. Challenges include preparing the equipment against underwater pressure, submarine earthquake, heat, and communication problems.

What I think about it: To explore how underwater creatures that don’t need sunlight can withstand the pressure of the depths of the ocean and survive before sending creatures to the moons and planets that have signs of liquid water makes so much sense.

What existed before the Big Bang? (BBC)

What is it about: In order for a state to exist, there must an opposing state– a state of nothingness could have given way to the state of being.

What I think about it: It may be simplistic but reading the article reminded me of Sheldon and Amy’s Super Assymetry theory. What makes this article interesting is the argument regarding endless new cycles. Imagine that prior to what we call the Big Bang, there was one Earth-like planet with its own living ecosystem. Those creatures attempted to uncover the truth about the universe, just as how human beings have been doing it for some time, only to be wiped out. Are we leading to the same direction? Learning something about the universe only to be eradicated to give way to another Big Bang? In another century or two, humans will have been able to create spacecrafts to travel from one planet to another or to design a technology that will solve Earth’s problems with pollution. In a thousand years, advance humans will have been able to device a way either to help our own planet or get away from it and live in a new one. But will these new stuff help them survive the next Big Bang? It does make one think that what we are doing now is futile. Then again, with reference to time, I may be thinking about millenias and I will have been long gone. It’s just a thought. Then, there’s no reason to leave something such as this blog behind, is there?

The people who claim to hear the Northern Lights (BBC)

What is it about: Northern Lights having an audible sound is debatable since there is little evidence and replicating the experience may only happen during violent auroral displays.

What I think about it: “How could I have missed this article in October? How? ” was the first thought that popped into my mind. The second is, though I haven’t seen an aurora, I think there is a foundation to this claim, more than the auditory illusions such as whooshing sound of meteors. Sound is made when there’s vibration or disturbance in the air, isn’t it? Since there’s interaction between solar particles and the Earth’s gas molecules, that disturbance may cause vibration. What we’ve learned from seeing lightning several seconds before hearing the booming thunder is we can’t dismiss this claim. We might not hear thunder at all or immediately, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Nick Cave on Creativity, the Myth of Originality, and How to Find Your Voice (The Marginalian)

What is it about: Nick Cave posits that creativity cannot exist from a blank state. Anything one creates is a combination of multitude experiences and influences.

What I think about it: In this era of influencers, being inspired to do something – a trick or a prank seen on a social media platform – is widely accepted as a form of creativity. I can go as far as claim that this is the realization of what Nick Cave says. Then again, I remember a very simple formula an old English teacher taught us: an output requires an input. The output even is a byproduct of the input, not the 100% replica, processed, recreated, made better or worse.

Those are some of the articles I read in January. Most of the ones I read were related to my work and I’m still not convinced I need to write about those anytime soon.

See you in my next article archive.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s