The future already exists, you just have to look for it.
I was watching a video, and in the comments I found that someone said, ” If you want someone to learn about something, why don’t you turn it into a video game? So many people play video games! “ And I find that I can’t really disagree with him.
It’s not necessarily true for everyone, but I think there are many people who would much rather throw themselves into an interactive world then delve into a textbook. Sure, there would be many subjects that would be very difficult to put into game format, but I think it could be done.
Instead of reading a textbook, a person could learn ” the rules of the game”, and then be put into a semi- realistic scenario where they could use their best judgement and apply that knowledge.
People do this with video games all the time. You have to learn how the video game works before you can play it, and then you are ready to go. And you are not an expert right away, but with practice, and with being challenged with progressively harder scenarios, you become better at the game.
I know I would play a video game that taught me things about different fields.
While there would be problems like ” the game scenarios are predetermined, and it doesn’t vary, it’s already programmed into the game”, it would still be interesting, maybe even useful.
What’s more important than understanding what something is, is to understand why something is. What’s a hovercraft? Well, it’s a mechanism that hovers over the ground. But why does it hover over the ground? If you understand why, then you begin understand how. To understand why something works, means you truly understand the properties at hand, and as a result you understand how to do it yourself. If you understand the steps to recreate, then you truly understand the object.
A lot of the answers to our questions lie right in front of us. The perfect model is Nature itself. Nature has been around longer than us, it already has constructed properties based on the effects of forces around it. We are a part of it. If we can understand the what, why, and how of Nature, then we can solve a lot of problems that we face.
New from me at Wired, a graphene inspired photovoltaics breakthrough:
Two things hold back the mass adoption of solar energy as a source of sustainable energy. One is the need to store and transmit excess power, a problem people like Danielle Fong are working on solving by developing innovative new ways to store power. The other is the high cost of solar panels. One of the reasons solar panels are so expensive is that it’s tricky to extract electric currents from semiconductors, the materials used to convert solar radiation into electrical energy.
Up til now, this could only be done with a few materials — usually silicon. But a new breakthrough will enable manufacturers to make efficient photovoltaics using almost any semiconductor, including cheap and abundant materials like metal oxides, sulfides, and phosphides.
A typical photovoltaic cell is built with silicon and treated with chemicals. This treatment is called “doping,” and it creates the driving force needed to extract power from the cell. Photovoltaics can also be built with cheaper materials but many of these can’t be doped chemically. But a method developed by Professor Alex Zettl’s research group at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California at Berkeley makes it possible to dope nearly any semiconductor by applying an electric field instead of chemicals. The method is described in a paper published in the journal Nano Letters.
Photo courtesy of Paul Takizawa, the Zettl Research Group, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California at Berkeley.
I need inspiration just as much as anyone else, so if anyone ever wants to just send me a message and talk to me about anything science/philosophy/engineering/ nanotech/ robotics / futurism/etc, go ahead. I love talking about those things; and I feel like I haven’t been able to find people who actually do for awhile.
I need help.
Since nanotechnology is not a major in most universities, since it’s still kind of ’ new ‘, I need to take classes that will lead to me telling them my specific direction ( being nanotechnology). I was thinking that I would have to take engineering courses, since it is, technically, a type of engineering. I was thinking that taking chemistry/biochemistry classes would be necessary; Physics classes too, I think. But what about biology?
Any ideas? Opinions? It’s hard to say, with nanotech.
I’m thinking a dual major engineering + Physics with a biochemistry minor would make sense.