Amateur Science!

Zooniverse provided a very simple layout for some quick citizen science. I found it rather easy to start on some of the tasks. It was a learning curve that I feel could be overcome by many children especially if they were accompanied by an instructor. I feel like that would be a good way to collect data for this. There are a ton of galaxies in the universe, and if this was included as part of the education system, then there would be a much greater range of data out there. If every school made each student classify galaxies for an hour a year, one would think the data pool could improve significantly in just a few years.

Citizen science is one of the more obscure facets of science. The vast majority of what gets done in scientific experimentation is almost an insult to the intelligence of a scientist. They have to do very repetitive tasks, which may seem brilliant for just a few hours at a time, but for a 40 year career it would be quite draining. This is why I think that having citizens carry out some of the experimentation could be quite useful. A simple competency test may be required, as the people who are completing the data for projects such as galaxy zoo are anonymous people on the internet. It seems to me like a great way to reduce the cost of carrying out science and adding entry level jobs that aren't restaurant related to the economy. Sounds like a win-win.

In terms of adding to the scientific community citizens can be a great resource of time. Carrying out trials simultaneously and increasing the efficiency of the scientific machine could put science, and as a result society, on the fast track to a better future. It would help further science just by making it something that happens more quickly. It could be as significant in the improvement of science as the industrial revolution was to transport. Everything would happen in far less time. Cures for diseases wouldn't be drawn out over twenty years, and people would be able to contribute more to the curing of them than just jogging 5 kilometers.

It could help the general public simply by being a source of understanding. More people would learn about what scientists do. The public image of a scientist might change significantly, and we could end up with a much larger pool of people interested in joining the scientific community in more serious terms. It could also prevent people from injuring themselves in the following manner.

Science Fiction and Fantasy

Science fiction and Fantasy are the two genres that I will most often read if it is not for a class. I have about twenty books by Asimov alone. Early in the summer I reread Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card, and I even read his next book in that series. That pales in comparison to the amount of fantasy reading that I did over the summer. I read the entire available parts of the series A Song of Ice and Fire by George RR Martin. These books are currently being adapted to the show Game of Thrones airing on HBO, which comes with the necessary warning that the show is less than safe for children. They are some of the longest, most emotional books I have ever come across. He will kill off your favorite characters when you least expect it, so if you want a happy story with no tragedy you may want to steer clear. However, if you want brilliant character development, bawdy japes, and a deep examination of moral justifications this is the series for you.

Seriously, this is a really good show.

I find these two genres to have massive parallels. They are both written about worlds completely different from ours, yet the human concepts remain the same. These themes are what take these stories from interesting to captivating. Some of the stories from either genre have very little that is not believable. Not all fantasy has to have magic, and not all sci-fi has to have teleportation or faster than light travel. It is important to note that the quality of the story doesn't depend on the quantity of unreal happenings. Take the original Star Wars trilogy versus the new one. The new one depends on special effects, whereas the old one just used it as a device to help tell the story.

A grave error in judgment about special effects over strong character development.

Now which of the genres is preferable? I can’t answer that sadly. Everyone has different preferences on it. It’s easy to make a movie or television series in either genre, but making it good is the difficult part. We have numerous examples of cheesy science fiction movies from the mid to late twentieth century with disastrous special effects. They become the subject of Mystery Science Theater 3000 lampooning. Fantasy is a genre less explored. If you were a young boy in the sixties or seventies you would probably get a social pass if you liked spaceships, but not so much if you liked dwarves and orcs. Casual fans of both genres get a pass these days thanks to brilliant adaptations such as the Lord of the Rings movies, but the hardcore fans still garner some ridicule.

A preliminary photo from the Hobbit movie

I don’t think of fantasy as a genre that would ever command mutual exclusivity of fanbase over sci-fi. I also don't think there is a deep seeded need for escape from the throes of scientific monotony. It's just entertainment in the end. They are both stories that use different worlds as a tool for telling a story that perhaps couldn't be told in the modern world. Maybe it tackles a social issue that is not acceptable in modern society. Whatever the reason the effect remains constant. We are transported to a vastly different world where we find characters just as human as ourselves, even if they’re actually aliens or elves.