Introduction to Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

In her magnum opus Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand narrates a lengthy tale of an eccentric railroad executive Dagny Taggart in her quest to confront a world that consistently preys upon her individualistic ambitions and essential values. Running a colossal railroad corporation by the name of Taggart Transcontinental alongside her antagonistic brother James Taggart, she embarks upon a journey to discover the true identity of the mysterious and enigmatic individual who is believed to be the source of the truth within her heart and mind, John Galt. As the novel's recurring inquiry heavily ponders "Who is John Galt?", Ayn Rand sets readers on a philosophical voyage to grasp in meticulous details about the central tenets of her Objectivist philosophy particularly its worldview upon reality and inherent relationship with the mind of man. Indeed as such, Rand views the mind of man as the central most important entity in all of human existence.

The novel is composed of three parts: Non-Contradiction, Either-Or, and A is A. The entire plot of the novel is a gradual revelation of Rand's elusive and unorthodox philosophy. Within the first segment of the novel, the protagonist Dagny Taggart is introduced along with her role as an executive of the Taggart Transcontinental that was founded by her ancestor Nathaniel Taggart. Through a series of economic setbacks and governmental regulations, Dagny heroically manages to maintain her business and her struggle centralizes Ayn Rand's perception of the philosophical dichotomy of individualism and collectivism in what she regards as the embodiment of evil.

The sophisticated and complex plot introduces an eclectic multitude of secondary characters each harboring their own strengths and weaknesses respectively. One of Dagny's strongest and most loyal ally is none other Hank Rearden, a self-made steel magnate and inventor of a brilliant alloy product known as Rearden metal. Together Rearden and Taggart become intimate lovers with one another and persist in their endeavor to challenge the opposing societal momentum that befalls upon them. They eventually stumble across an unidentified motor device in the remains of the Twentieth Century Motor company an abandoned factory that is capable of generating electricity in an unprecedented manner. They seek to discover the inventor of this newly discovered mysterious device. Eventually after flying for some time, Dagny's plane unexpectedly crashes into an unknown valley known as Galt's gouch where she meets John Galt for the first time. As the inventor of this enigmatic motor device, Galt is the one reviled individual who abandoned the world that betrayed his vision and ultimate purpose. At long last, Galt returns to New York City along with Dagny where he hacks into a national radio broadcast and delivers his prodigiously long philosophical speech that divulges Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism and its perception of reality along with its interrelation with the human mind and soul.

The title of the novel "Atlas Shrugged" is an allusive reference to the statue of Atlas, the Greek Titan who's colossal size and structure metaphorically symbolizes not merely the exploited industrialists but even more so the individualistic minds as the foundation of civilization. The shrugging of Atlas connotes the action in a figurative sense of letting go of a world that depends upon their primary existence to prove that without them, the inherent structure of the society they serve inevitably collapses and disintegrates.

Francisco D'Anconia: "If you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulder, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down on his shoulders - what would you tell him to do?"

Hank Rearden: "I... don't know. What...could he do? What would you tell him?"

Francisco D'Anconia: "To shrug."  

Journal on the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918

The Spanish Flu Influenza Pandemic of 1918

Around a century ago, near the cessation of World War I, an unusually deadly and virulent pandemic spread rampantly across the globe. In contrast to the other endemic outbreaks that have plagued humanity, this particular one was extraordinary in certain ways. Aside from the fact that the flu epidemic wiped out an unprecedented 50-100 million lives (3-5% of the world’s population at the time) in the course of a single year (more than HIV/AIDS has in three decades), the 1918 Influenza pandemic has perplexed scientists and health officials with many unanswered questions since.

Unlike conventional flu seasons and epidemics where the most vulnerable are often as common knowledge would suggest the very young and old due to the possession of a weak immune system, the 1918 flu victims were surprisingly those in the prime of life around the ages of 20 to 40. This sinister and ominous virus rather invoked a cytokine storm or a surge within the activity of the immune system. As the victim's defense mechanisms began to overreact, their lungs absorbed fluids and slowly built it up to the point where they could no longer breathe. They essentially drowned by their own body fluids. It was for this reason why the young and healthy in the prime of their lives were the most liable to this nefarious malady.

With the passing of time, the 1918 Flu pandemic gradually faded away from memory. In the years that followed with the advent of other epidemic outbreaks, a variety of questions have been evoked about the elusiveness of the Spanish flu influenza virus. What was particularly unique about this malicious virus that took away the lives of nearly 50 - 100 million people in the span of a few years? Where did it ultimately originate? How did it evolve and mutate into the precarious nature that targeted the young and healthy rather than the elderly? The answers may lie within the state of current research on influenza viruses and their evolutionary mechanisms.

Unfortunately at that time, scientific knowledge was nearly devoid about viruses and so many deemed the malignant disease was induced primarily by a bacteria. The lack of the essential knowledge regarding viruses burdened the development of any vaccinations along with any formal investigations of the flu. It was not until after the discovery of viruses that serious speculation and research began on the nature of the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. In order to obtain a better understanding regarding the characterization of the virus, a team of scientists voyaged to Alaska in the late 1990s. There buried under permafrost, they extracted lung tissue samples from a native Alaskan woman frozen for eight decades. Being well preserved, the lung samples which contained tangible pieces of the pernicious virus were brought back to a lab. After several years with the application of advanced laboratory techniques known as reverse genetics, the scientists involved in this research were able to successfully sequence the viral genome as well as literally reconstruct the actual flu specimen from scratch. In other words the 1918 Flu Pandemic virus has been resurrected from the grave and vigilantly kept under highly secure quarantine. In spite of ethical concerns regarding the implications of a novel approach, it is hoped that such research on the virus will culminate in the necessary knowledge to preclude another deadly pandemic from ever recurring again.

One major question that has haunted many is whether such an apocalyptic plague can ever possibly occur if not in our lifetime? While the odds are at best slim and remote, there is always the possibility that such deadly man-made specimens can be genetically engineered in laboratories as a method of bioterrorism. If there is any valuable lesson that can be obtained from the 1918 Flu Pandemic, it is that nature itself is capable of being far more unforgiving and portentous than previously thought and envisioned.

Essay Blog on Forgiveness and Eternity:

On the Nature and Essence of Forgiveness and Eternity

The three monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam along with countless other faith traditions and philosophies have sought to address the grand concept of eternity and its central meaning within existence. The task of explaining eternity presents an arduous challenge since its essence is infinitely great for a mere mortal harboring a mind of limited proportions to fully comprehend and appreciate. The eclectic global religions who seemingly borrowing elements from ancient polytheistic mythologies have devised their own narrative accounts of an individual’s ultimate fate upon death usually involving reward or punishment primarily on the basis of karma. Strict adherents of a particular faith would be inclined to defend their religious dogma of an indefinite heaven or hell for those who apparently deserve it. Nevertheless none seem to fully realize what eternity would encompass even if such individuals claim out of sheer vain on the basis of their faith.

The Abrahamic monotheisms possess differing yet similar accounts of reward and punishment upon the death of an individual’s physical body. The idea of heaven is an eternal state of paradise and happiness where those who lead a good and benevolent life are destined for while the idea of hell is a place of eternal torment, agony, misery, and misfortune for the wicked ones who lived a life of sin and evil. Those who are rewarded a place in heaven are eternally blessed while those who are punished in the flames of hell are eternally damned for all of eternity until the end of time. But is it so? Does the human mind really envision an eternity of inflicting everlasting punishment and anguish for those who seemingly deserve it on the basis of their actions they have committed during the course of their limited lifetime? Or as the old and familiar saying goes, does time heal all wounds? Such a thought provoking question begs a serious philosophical discussion.

All of the billions of human beings that have ever been here on Earth, lived only for a limited time. With the exception of some living a little more than a century, no human has ever lived long enough for even an insignificant fraction of a percentage of the four and a half billion year duration of the planet’s existence. Furthermore no single human being ever in all of history has lived or endured a “perfect” life free of guilt and wrongdoing. Every single one of us are guilty of some form of transgression or “sin” as the monotheistic religions would describe in one way or another. The idea that some actions though finite in proportion may warrant an eternity in damnation is one that should be questionable and dealt with by simple common sense.

There are perhaps an endless variety of wrongdoings that the human mind can conjecture. Such wrongs or transgressions can be placed on a spectrum that characterizes the intensity of the offense. They can range anywhere from a simple impolite word to smacking someone across the cheek to robbery to actual murder and even to the most heinous crime which is none other than perhaps genocide. But regardless of the severity of the criminal action, no such ‘evil’ is of infinite proportion. There are undoubtedly crimes that are grotesquely abominable but even the most monstrous and heinous ones are all limited in scope and magnitude. As a knee-jerk reaction to such horrific crimes, it is psychologically common to respond in a way of extreme anger and vetting that often desires and wishes vengeance upon the wrongdoer with expressions that involve the inherent absurdity of eternal damnation.  

The ancient ideologies have beheld a variety of differing principles regarding appropriate punishment towards any individual wrongdoers. The most commonly well-known concept is the law of retaliation or the more familiar phrase “an eye for an eye”. Such a rule was enacted by the ancient Code of Hammurabi which is known to predate the Hebrew bible. The idea was later passed onward for generations to come as its emergence was noted in several biblical verses. Simply put the principle of an “eye for an eye” essentially states that the punishment must fit in proportion and magnitude towards the particular crime. Even if such an ethical precept is assumed to be true, the doctrine itself would effectively and conceptually nullify the biblical rule of eternal damnation. For someone to deserve an eternity of torment, anguish, and punishment would require the individual to commit an offense of infinite proportion for which there is no such thing.

Everyone of us has committed an offense. Perfection is not confined within any particular individual. Every particular wrongdoing we commit is limited and therefore cannot be extended to a perpetual psychological state of forever hating someone. An interesting point to conjecture is that each of our wrongdoings can be idealistically represented by mathematics and to estimate how long each offense could take in principle to actually be forgiven.

For that very reason, it is thereby here assuming that all things are equal in proportions, where I have conceptually concocted a somewhat humorous and simple mathematical equation that can estimate the approximate duration of time it would theoretically take to forgive a crime, specifically one that involves the wrongdoing of homicide. The equation is preceded by a formal theorem that I have mentally self-conceived. The theorem which is known as the Forgiveness Theorem harbors two central axioms.

The Forgiveness Theorem:

1. No crime or wrongdoing is infinite in scope and proportion. All crimes and wrongdoings are finite in magnitude.

2. Given enough time any crime committed or even imagined is theoretically capable of being forgiven by anyone.

The equation therefore is as follows:

Time duration for Forgiveness  =  Number of Victims  x  Number of Years to forgive per victim.

Let us assume for the sake of argument that some stranger murdered someone I knew and loved whether it be a relative or a friend. How many years will it take me to forgive? Honestly speaking for virtually any average person, it will be probably take at most a hundred years to forgive another for murdering one particular person. In that case, one should theoretically ‘forgive’ the transgressor after a mere century. For two victims it would take two centuries, for ten a thousand years, and so on. Yet the average person can often be heard replying “I’ll never ever forgive the person who killed my family member! I hope that person will burn in hell for all of eternity!” But will the victim’s relative really out of sheer vengeance or desire wish an ‘eternity’ of torment upon the wrongdoer for just a single crime of murder? It could be that perhaps when someone insists “I’ll never ever forgive” is really just another way of greatly exaggerating their true intentions of saying that “I will not forgive you for a very very long time”. Desiring and wishing an eternity of endless torture, pain, misery and agony upon someone else is infinitely worse than the crime that the individual inflicted upon in the first place.

Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

To further explore this conceptual equation formula, let’s consider a thought experiment by applying it to perhaps the most vile, vicious, heinous, and despicable human being to ever walk the Earth. That person who easily comes to mind is that insane shithead and disgusting animal from Austria who is none other than the all-powerful fuhrer of Nazi Germany or the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler! The existence of Hitler, who in his finite lifetime initiated the second World War and was the central force behind one of the largest and horrific genocides in modern history that is the Holocaust poses an extreme scenario behind this conundrum of eternity and justice. Without question his crimes were beyond reprehensible and appalling to human imagination and would easily nominate him for the supreme douchebag of the universe who is most deserving of an everlasting eternity of divine punishment! But even Hitler’s crimes which involved millions of deaths in the Holocaust as well as millions more in World War II, are finite in proportion. Statistics indicate that anywhere from 50 million to perhaps 85 million people perished during the Second World War including the victims of the Holocaust. Assuming that for each and every single life lost it will take a century to forgive, the hypothetical ‘forgiveness equation’ would calculate an approximate average of about 5 to 8 ½ billion years to forgive. Though several billion years is an unfathomably long period of time, it is never close enough in the slightest amount to what the full extent of ‘eternity’ would entail. The average person would often express his or her utmost hatred towards Hitler and his minions by saying something like: “Hitler and the Nazis were evil scumbags who will never be forgiven! I hope they all burn in hell and get tortured by Satan and his demons forever and ever and ever for the rest of eternity!!” The central problem behind this banal pattern of thinking lies within the context of eternity. Since it is impossible for a mere mind to grasp the concept of eternity in its entirety, no mortal could ever possibly imagine an eternity of endless torture.

If one would possibly object to the obvious fact that eternity itself carries forth a paradox then consider the following imaginative scenario involving Hitler himself. After being cast into the realm of hellfire that will leave him with a punishment of terrible agony, torture and pain, he is left there for an unimaginably long period of time.

One hundred billion years later! I mean that in the literal sense of the term! A period of 100 billion (100,000,000,000) years, which is several times the current age of the universe (13.7 billion years) passes by. Imagine enduring that length of time. One surely would be incapable of grasping what it will be like to experience such a prodigiously lengthy duration of time to flow by unless one single-handedly experiences it first-hand. At this point the Sun has long since burned out tens of billions of years earlier. The Earth assuming it still exists is now nothing but a cold deserted and barren wasteland. The Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies have merged together long ago. The distant galaxies beyond the Milky Way and local group have expanded way beyond the cosmic horizon and are no longer visible within the scope of the observable universe. The descendants of mankind if they are still on the radar have most likely colonized the entire observable universe several times over.

Two individuals walk past the chamber of hellfire and witness Hitler burning there. It has been a hundred billion years since the last time they saw him.

Individual A says: “Hey look it’s Hitler! That despicable bastard! Do you remember what he did a hundred billion years ago?!! That is World War 2 and the Holocaust?!!”

Individual B (Looking confused): “Eh... wait what? World War 2? The holo...what? I don’t remember any of that or such a thing at all. In fact I’ve forgotten anything from even a billion years ago, never mind a hundred! Can you please remind me again why is he still being tortured?”

Individual A: “Oh yeah I don’t remember either but who cares let’s still torture him baby! Right on!”

Individual B:  “Um...sure ok...even though I don’t see any purpose at this point on.”

Individual A: “There is most certainly no purpose from now on, but he still must burn for eternity! Just keep him there to fry and suffer!”

Individual B: “Ok but...I fail to see any point to his continued suffering.”

Individual A: “Just keep on burning and torturing him goddamn it! It’s that simple!”

The scenario described would clearly be problematic on so many levels. First of all, is it remotely possible that these two random individuals will remember anything from billions of years ago? Common sense can easily indicate that it is highly unlikely that even Hitler’s name will be faintly recognized to say the least. Although one could still in principle argue that some crimes can never in fact be redeemed regardless of the amount of time endured, it is far more probable that crimes or wrongdoings will rather be forgotten instead of merely being forgiven eventually after the passing of enough time. As the old metaphorical saying goes, “Time heals all wounds” or are there exceptions to the age old phrase? Anyone with the slightest amount of basic reasoning can perceive the situation involving the reaction of the two random individuals especially the first one to be inherently fallacious. A hundred billion years is an incomprehensibly long period of time that a mind cannot fully understand unless one literally experiences it. No one by definition has the authority to describe enduring an extraordinary period of eons on the magnitude unless one has genuinely experienced it flow by.

Strict religious fundamentalists would be enthusiastic to defend the idea of an eternal hell often adhering to their sacred texts and would passively search for biblical verses in defense of their extreme sadistic views. But it is highly unlikely that even the most ardent religious fanatic would sincerely believe in a vicious idea of an eternity of everlasting damnation. If one would still object then let’s consider an extension to the original scenario itself.

Eventually another 100 billion years passes by! This essentially adds up to a total of 200 billion years of torture and torment for Hitler! At this point the problem is clearly self-evident. Isn’t 200 billion years of suffering for Hitler excessive and enough? Nothing lasts forever. Eventually everything must come to an end including an individual’s suffering and torment. The same two individuals reappear and their upcoming response is one of hysteria and interesting.

Individual A: “Well look what we have here! It’s um...yea Hitler! That worthless son of a bitch deserves what he’s receiving for the way he treated his victims in World War 2 and the Holocaust!”

Individual B: “Dude what in bejesus name is World War 2 and the Holocaust?! When the heck did such a thing even happen? How do you even remember such a thing?! I don’t remember any of those at all! Yo man this shit ain’t cool anymore! Yo ding dong yo!”

Individual A: “I...but...I....hey I actually....think you’re right....buddy pal...this shit definitely ain’t cool at all. Yo ding dong yo!”

Individual B: “I think we should just forgive him and let him off. All of his victims whoever they were have long since forgiven him and they’re up there in heaven now hoping to reconcile. I think God himself would forgive him.”

Individual A: “Yea I agree. Let’s just forgive him baby!”

The two individuals walk to the chamber where Hitler is. They release him and all three hug each other.

Individual A: “Listen whoever you are Hitler, we forgive you. Whatever you did it was a shit long time ago! We forgive you now.”

Individual B: “I’m sure everyone else who suffered from you has long since forgiven you.”

Hitler: “I’ve finally repented many billions of years ago. I have been awaiting for this moment to reconcile to heaven and all of the victims who suffered at my inhumanity.”

The two individuals and Hitler go back to heaven and all of the victims of World War 2 and the Holocaust from billions of years ago have reconciled and are thus forgiven. God finally granted Hitler amnesty for his sins committed eons ago.

So there we have it. If an unimaginable monster and disgusting evil individual like Hitler does not deserve eternity in torment then who does? The most assured answer is that no one deserves to be punished and tortured endlessly regardless of the crimes committed. Nobody deserves an eternity of everlasting torment for a finite lifetime of wrongdoings. Not you, not me, not that jerk who you hate, not Hitler, and not even the Devil/Satan. An eternity of punishment is infinitely immoral and unjust. 

No actually if 200 billion years of torture isn’t enough for Hitler how about 500 trillion years? What about 700 quadrillion? If not how about 100 quintillion? Why not wait until the final supermassive black hole evaporates in a googol (10^100) years from now?

Take a minute and sit back and try to grasp exactly what “eternity” even means. Don’t try it! I repeat do not even try it! Do not even try to try to pretend to understand “eternity”! Imagine billions of years followed by hundreds of trillions and quadrillions and quintillions of years passing by and nowhere are you near eternity! Multiply that by a googol years and even by a googolplex (10^googol) and nowhere are you near eternity! The concept of eternity is patently absurd and serves as an embarrassing and humiliating theme for monotheistic religions to even attempt to address to its followers! 

Consider the list of victims to see how long it could theoretically take to forgive a list of some of the worst crimes ever committed in the history of humanity. The simple idea is that all crimes regardless of the severity or heinousness are limited and therefore forgivable after enough time passes by.

Below is a Table chart of some of the worst crimes and the approximate time duration for forgiveness:

Name of Crime/Perpetrator	Number of Victims	Time to forgive (100 years/victim)	Time to forgive (1,000 years/victim)
Suicide bombings	~50-100	5,000 – 10,000 years	50,000 – 100,000 years
Oklahoma City Bombing (Timothy McVeigh)	168	16,800 years	168,000 years
9/11 attacks (Osama Bin Laden)	~3,000	300,000 years	3 million years
Saddam Hussein’s Regime crimes	~100,000 – 300,000?	10 – 30 million years	100 – 300 million years
Idi Amin’s Regime crimes	~300,000 – 500,000	30 – 50 million years	300 – 500 million years
The Holocaust (Hitler and the Nazis)	~11-17 million	1.1-1.7 billion years	11-17 billion years
Genghis Khan’s Mongol Conquests	~45 million	4.5 billion years	45 billion years
Stalin’s Communist Regime	~30 to 60 million	3 – 6 billion years	30 – 60 billion years

One of the early Christian theologians, Origen of Alexandria expressed belief in a doctrine known as Apocatastasis in which he himself devised. The theological principle stresses that eventually after enough time, all sinners and wrongdoers including the devil and his fallen angels will be restored to grace and be reconciled with all others in heaven. The torment and fires of hell are not eternal but rather corrective in punishment much analogous to the process of purifying gold. Other Christian thinkers including St. Gregory of Nyssa and Clement of Alexandria expressed similar beliefs in universal reconciliation.

In order for anyone to sincerely believe that a place like hell even if it exists is truly and literally everlasting with no shred of hope of redemption for any crime or wrongdoing of finite proportion, one must believe that no matter for how long whether it be until every star burns out in the universe in a 100 trillion years or until the last supermassive black hole evaporates via hawking radiation (after a googol or 10¹⁰⁰ years), or even until the literal absolute end of space and time after endless eons, that the transgressor will never be pardoned even after having repented and asked for forgiveness trillions of times over where his or her victims have long since forgiven the transgressor. My personal take is that only a non-existent being of infinite psychopathy and lunacy could possibly believe and firmly hold unto such an absurd nonsense.

Isaac Asimov's Foundation Series

An Introduction to Isaac Asimov's Foundation Series

The epic space opera series known as the Foundation Series by Isaac Asimov has become a reputable classic of the science fiction genre since it's publication. The novels have firmly established Asimov's legacy as one of the "Big Three" of science fiction along with Arthur C. Clarke and Robert Heinlein.

The storyline takes place thousands of years in the far future where humanity has explored and colonized a sizable portion of the Milky Way Galaxy. The Galactic Empire has endured for twelve thousand years with millions of planets under its benign sovereignty. The fate of civilization has been sealed as foretold by the scientist and mathematician Hari Seldon, whilst residing on the capitol world of Trantor near the center of the galaxy. With the creation and application of a revolutionary field known as Psychohistory, Seldon predicts and foresees the imminent fall of the Galactic Empire which will ultimately be subsequently followed by a dark era of barbarianism lasting a prodigiously long time period of thirty thousand years before another empire arises. In order to influence events and shorten the interregnum to a mere millennium, Seldon decrees the resettlement of the greatest minds within the Empire to a bleak and enigmatic world known as Terminus at the edge of the galaxy. It is this world where Seldon hopes would serve as a sanctuary for the inception of an establishment to preserve knowledge in order to initiate the salvation of human civilization. The organized plan would henceforth be declared to be known formally as the Foundation. The haven of the proposition would culminate in the development of an Encyclopedia Galactica that will become the guardian of humanity's collective insight.

Journal on Chess Grandmasters

The Nature and Mind of a Chess Grandmaster

Chess is an extraordinary enigmatic game between two opposing minds in a duel to determine psychological superiority. Setting out over a sixty-four squared checker board, the sophisticated sport is generally an abstract strategy board game with one central objective: to capture the opponent's king in a trap referred to as a "checkmate." Besides having the goal of mating the opposing king, chess is commonly observed as a game of wisdom, intuition, calculation, abstract thought, an art, and even of theory. The amount of literature on chess exceeds that of perhaps any other board game or sport known to man. The world of chess is repleted with a horde of information and concepts that it is merely impossible for even the strongest player to have perfect knowledge or understanding. In tournament mode, active players are granted a title after achieving an attained status with a designed rating that quantitatively measures their relative skills amongst one another. Of all the chess titles, the most prestigious and highest one can acquire is none other than the Grandmaster (GM) title.

Other than the term having resemblance to the title of a professional martial artist, the title of a Grandmaster is most often recognized as a chess player who has accumulated enough skill and talent that places him or herself significantly apart from the average player. Some argue that obtaining a Grandmaster title is more or less equivalent to earning a Ph.D degree from an accredited university. Nevertheless the two processes are completely different in structure and scope and it is therefore agreed that becoming a professional chess player is far more challenging than receiving a doctorate degree from a higher institution of education. Becoming a Grandmaster in chess is by no means an extraordinarily difficult achievement. Amongst the hundreds of millions worldwide who play chess casually, a few million play competitively with an active rating. Of those several million who are at the competitive tournament level, only a mere 1,400 Grandmasters exist in the world as of today. It takes years of hard work, practice, commitment, and some degree of raw talent to reach the ultimate stratosphere of the world of chess.

However even with all of the persistency, most will not make it there. This is where talent plays a central role in separating the trained experts from the brilliant ones. Like other artistic pursuits in the humanities including painting, music, literature, and poetry, chess can be discerned as a distinct form of art. However the interesting aspect about chess that distinguishes it from other varieties of art is that most individuals will likely not have much appreciation of it particularly at the professional level. Unlike music where even the most creative works such as Beethoven’s symphonies can be appreciated by anyone, the average person will probably not be capable of grasping the intuitive ambiguity of a top level game played between grandmasters. To be able to understand it requires a solid background of chess as well as years of experience that is beyond simplistic rudimentary rules. In a rare recorded audio interview with former World Champion Dr. Alexander Alekhine, the preeminent player of the Second World War expressed his thoughts on the essence of a chess player and how he felt that the game itself is analogous towards a unique form of artistry requiring unparallel ingenuity:

Alexander Alekhine (1892 - 1946)

Interviewer: Now Dr. Alekhine, tell me, would you say that chess players are born, or do you think a great chess player can be made by hard practice?

Alexander Alekhine: No, frankly, I think the ideal chess player is born. Of course, I look upon chess as an art, and just as you cannot make a great painter or a musician, unless the gifts of painting or music are innate in a person, so also I believe that for anyone to become outstanding at chess the ability must be born with the player. There is something much more in championship chess than just following the somewhat limited rules of the game. To play a really good chess, you must have vision. Vision is something of the same way that a creative artist must have if he would lift his performance out of the common realm.

Interviewer: Well, of course, as well as vision, I expect first class chess needs a very well trained memory too, doesn't it?

Alexander Alekhine: Oh, no. That is where chess is just unlike bridge. One does not require an, uh, an outstanding memory. Look forward all the time is the thing to do.

Interviewer: Sounds to me like the perfect game for optimists.

Alexander Alekhine: Yes, you might say so. I never look back on a game or a match but try all the time to see how I may improve my play. Soon, I shall have been playing [?] chess for 30 years. I became a chess master, you know, at 16.

Interviewer: 16? That's amazing!

Alexander Alekhine: Yes. I won then the vase of the Tsar which I still am keeping. It was..., I was allowed to bring it out. As a matter of fact, it was the only thing I was allowed to bring out of Russia in 1921 when I left. But even my 30 years experience has not yet taught me all I should know of chess.

Interviewer: Well, I suppose by now Dr. Alekhine, you must know all the answers, as they say.

Alexander Alekhine: Oh no, believe me, a lifetime is not enough in which to learn everything about chess. If it were, I should soon be getting ready to stop playing altogether. The technique, yes, that can be mastered. But there is always so much more to know about the actual art of the game. So for instance, take my opponent in the last match, Dr. Euwe. He's considered as being one of the outstanding experts in the opening play. And even being that, in our last match, in one game, he got a lost position after already five moves. So you see, every one of us has quite a lot to learn.

As Dr. Alekhine noted the truly outstanding chess players are born with an innate talent for the game. Anyone can get better at chess with practice but to become a Grandmaster level player or even World Champion like Mikhail Botvinnik, Bobby Fischer, Anatoly Karpov, Garry Kasparov, or Magnus Carlsen it would require a kind of gifted virtuosity that cannot really be taught to the common individual. As one progresses on in chess, the game is seen more of an art in which players can develop an employ their own style of choice. Just as music encompasses many styles and genres including classical, jazz, rock, pop, country, and rap, a myriad of styles exist in the game of chess. Besides the more common ones such as positional, attacking, or all around, some players often play with a bold defensive style as former World Champion Tigran Petrosian was well known for. Others utilize a balanced style while others usually employ gambit openings and some even are imaginative tacticians.

Regardless of the style that professional chess players adopt, Grandmasters possess strong extraordinary abilities that set them far apart from many novice and intermediate level players. An average rated tournament player often can see or calculate three or five moves ahead in a given position. Chess masters and grandmasters when glancing at a chess board commonly can calculate and see as many as ten, fifteen, or twenty moves ahead along several different lines of variation. This impeccable form of perception gives Grandmasters the advantage of knowing well in advance the long term consequences of a chosen move much later on in the game. The ability to look a dozen or more moves ahead is a skill that can to some degree be learned after years after practice and to some degree cannot. Besides having the competence to calculate multiple moves ahead, Grandmasters not only think intuitively about the game being played but also are mentally asking themselves serious questions that may often break conventional standards that amateurs have been taught. From what Dr. Alekhine implies "There is something much more in championship chess than just following the somewhat limited rules of chess" besides knowing the basic rules and movements of each piece as well as simple tactics like forks, pins, skewers, penetrating open files, and pawn structure professional chess requires a far deeper understanding of chess in general and of theory. This level of chess becomes much more than an art but mainly a kind of philosophy. The abstract thinking involved in chess with Masters and Grandmasters can be viewed on a part with the level of higher cognition concerning philosophy.

There exists a few different ways to achieve the title of a Grandmaster. The usual and more common way is for a player to attain an elo rating of at least 2500. The elo rating is a mathematical rating system devised by American physicist and chess master Arpad Elo. With chess skill conflated by a somewhat complicated mathematical formula, the elo rating is manifested by a number which increases or decreases based upon the actual outcomes of games between rated players. Once earned, the title of Grandmaster (GM) is held for life. Nevertheless any rating above 2000 is in and of itself an extremely difficult goal to accomplish. Even chess masters themselves may spend years and years trying to reach the highest title in chess but in the end come short of their ultimate objective. Grandmasters in chess are in some sense equivalent to a professional athlete in a sport league whether it be the NBA, NFL, or MLB. Most grandmasters often start out as prodigies in their earlier years and earn the title sometime in their twenties. It is not only hard work and determination that qualifies a person to become a grandmaster in chess but more so a raw gifted talent that is innate within the individual.

The Myth of the “One True Love”

The Myth of the “One True Love”

Once upon a time an ever so beautiful princess was blissfully lurking in the woods enjoying the wonders of nature with a genuine smile on her face. Along came a handsome and charming prince and the two instantly fell in love at first sight with a romance like never before. Together they embraced in what is commonly referred to as “true love’s first kiss”. They joyfully left together and eventually married. Thus they lived happily ever after. The end!

Such a scenario is a common trope of fairy tales particularly Disney movies including Snow White (pictured above), Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, the Little Mermaid, and Beauty and the Beast. Many of us have probably developed a preconceived notion from our childhood that we are destined to meet that special “one person” that we will share a never ending romantic passion with for all of eternity. Most do not seem to understand that such an expectation is not only unrealistic but almost if not impossible. As depressing as it may sound, the truth is that whether we want to accept it or not, is that there is probably no such thing as true love.

What exactly does one mean by “true love”? A general commonly accepted definition would be that true love involves a couple who share a consummate romantic attachment that lasts a lifetime or even more so forever. Someone’s own true love can be considered a person whom no one else can be better in comparison towards. A person whom can be commonly thought as a “soul mate” does not exist due to the nonexistence of perfection. In general nobody is perfect for anyone. We all may have imagined at some point in our lifetimes that image of an ideal companion whom we can romance with for as long as we live. A lot of us strive for impractical relationships that are often delineated in fairy tales or romantic comedies. The romance and love that we observe in movies are often exaggerated and fantasized from our creative minds. Romance does exist but the way it is portrayed in movies particularly Disney films is often in the highly idealized form of true love. The idea of true love stems from a premonition that the purpose of our lives is to seek out that one flawless individual with whom we can share a lifetime of joy and happiness with. Given the fact that there are billions of human beings living on this planet and a nearly infinite potential ones from the sequence of the human genome, the idea of true love makes much less sense since there will always exist another person who can be another potential soul mate.  

Psychologists who specialize in the field of love and interpersonal relationships have had their say on this subject matter. Former Yale Professor of Psychology Robert Sternberg has conceptualized his theory of love by applying a geometric visualization of a triangle. In developing his theory, Sternberg has broken up the abstraction of love and interpersonal relationships on the basis of three defining factors: passion, intimacy, and commitment. The central notion behind Sternberg’s triangular theory of love is that a relationship that’s based on one factor is less likely to survive in the long term than another which is based on more factors.

In the triangular visualization above, the three elements of love which include passion, intimacy, and commitment can blend together into several combinations. A connection based upon any of these elements individually is less meaningful and unlikely to endure as time progresses. Intimacy would mean liking as in a simple friendship. Infatuation refers to a passionate feeling one develops towards another. Empty love is a love in which the passion and intimacy have disappeared and only commitment has survived. In combining these components, romantic love is the result of passion and intimacy merging together. Companionate love involves only intimacy and commitment. Fatuous love combines passion and commitment. Within the heart of his triangular theory of love, Sternberg has formulated an ideal and complete form of relationship known as consummate love. Often identified with the “perfect couple” or more commonly known as “true love”, consummate lovers have all the three components of intimacy, passion, and commitment together which assists their relationship to endure onward for a long time possibly even a lifetime. Couples who are identified in a “consummate love” are probably extremely rare to come across. An important note is that Sternberg himself mentions that maintaining a consummate love is even harder than achieving it. As Sternberg cautions without expression “even the greatest of loves can die”. True love from Sternberg’s triangular theory would clearly fit with the definition of consummate love. While Sternberg has established his triangular theory of love, applying it in the real world may not be plausible. A relationship is much more than just these three factors. Trust, communication, goals, dreams, aspirations, and even lifestyle are other potential factors that are important to maintaining a successful interpersonal relationship. Given the many factors that arise in a relationship it is impossible for two people to have everything in common. As mentioned before, perfection does not exist. No one can be perfect for you.   

Consider the following imaginary situation as an example.

John is a businessman who lives in England. One day he travels to Italy for a conference. During his visit he meets a woman named Sarah and the two instantly are found to have a lot in common. They date for a few years and their relationship enhances. The two eventually marry and start a family. They remain strongly in love with a powerful romance until death had done them apart. They were considered by many including themselves to be complete “true lovers” and that their romance was reminiscent of the fairy tale story of Cinderella.

One could argue that yes, John and Sarah’s story was akin to a classic fairy tale romance and that they were indeed “true lovers” much like Snow White and her beloved Prince Charming. However critically speaking, if one were to argue that position, one must believe that it is not possible that any other woman who currently exists, had existed before in the past, or will ever exist in the future, will be an even better match for John than Sarah. If Sarah was indeed John’s “true lover”, no woman could possibly be more compatible with John! The same thought applies with Sarah. If John is Sarah’s “true lover”, then no man who exists at the moment, had existed before, or has yet to exist will be better for her. The very concept and idea of “true love” shuts off the possibility that there could be someone else out there in the vast ocean or who will one day exist in a different time era that is even more compatible to you romantically.

The imagined situation raises a variety of questions that one can conjecture. What if John never met Sarah in the first place? What if Sarah was born five hundred years earlier than John or came into exist thousands of years in the far future? Or what if either of them never existed? Would that mean that John or Sarah could not have found someone else as their “true love”? The answer must surely be no. It is completely possible that there is another woman out there in the world amongst the several billions who is just as or even more compatible with John than Sarah. The fact is that John was not fortunate enough to meet another potential “true lover” if not for Sarah.

Or even consider the example of Snow White. What if Prince Charming too never met Snow White? What if the wicked Queen had succeeded in her evil scheme to murder Snow White with an impenetrable spell that even Prince Charming was incapable of breaking with the so-called “true love’s” first kiss? What if it was revealed that the two later on broke up after they reportedly lived “happily ever after”? The most plausible answer is that even if Snow White never met Prince Charming, she could have met another “prince charming” who is even more compatible romantically with her. If the two never met, they could both still have found someone else on their own. If Snow White was incapable of being revived when Prince Charming kissed her, he could have found another princess and he would have arguably been as happy off as he had been with Snow White.

Let’s take the presumption that Snow White and Prince Charming together are true lovers and in fact soul mates. If that is the case then how long would their romantic passion last? What if both of them lived together for millions of billions of years assuming they were immortal? Would they still have the same romance as they did when they first started off? Would they still kiss, hug, or even make love with the same joy and happiness?  How long could romantic passion last in a relationship? These questions have no complete answers and are open ended with many different viewpoints.

There are more than seven billion humans on this planet. Even so, many more billions have existed ever since our species came into its current form in the past 200,000 years. There is a great possibility that many more billions or trillions of humans will exist in the far distant future especially if our civilization spreads outward towards the stars in the galaxy. Even more astonishing is this interesting phenomenon.

The human genome accord to geneticists contains about three billion nucleotides. Of those several billion nucleotides, approximately 1 in a 1000 (0.1%) separates each individual from the other leaving about three million nucleotides that defines each unique human being. Mathematically the total possible number of human beings that could exist in terms of different arrangements or combinations of DNA is astronomically high. It is prodigiously larger than all the atoms in the known universe. The number of different human beings that could theoretically exist in terms of DNA sequencing is an unfathomably and inconceivable number.

When one looks at the concept of “true love” from this genomic perspective, the idea makes no sense because it is a hundred percent possible that there is another greater “true lover” and even another out of the nearly infinite number of different potential human beings that are theoretically allowed by the different unique arrangements of human DNA.

Each and every one of us exists for a limited time here in this world. Our days are numbered. We do not have time to meet every single person amongst the billions that exist for it will take many lifetimes. Furthermore it is impossible to meet every single potential human that could ever exist simply because the number of humans allowed by the genome of our DNA is much larger than what the human mind can conceive. When finding a potential lifelong partner or spouse, we seek to find that one person who is the most compatible amongst all others that we have met during the course of our lifetime. In the end no matter which person one ends up with, there will always be someone out there in the vast ocean who is even more compatible than the individual in which one shares a romantic and companionate bond with.

True love in the crudest terms exists predominantly in the realm of human imagination. It is not reality but rather a mere childlike fantasy. Of course, others may disagree with this position and might strongly believe in the existence of a quintessential romantic companion. However if one thinks critically, the so-called myth of the one “true love” or “soul mate” holds the premise that there is one perfect person out there for each and every one of us. Believing in such a viewpoint is not only ignorant but highly arrogant and narrow minded. Saying that someone whom you’re powerfully in love with and have shared a lifetime of romance together is your true love means that no one else amongst the billions of humans that have existed or will ever exist can be an even greater lover for you.

The Journey to the World of Professional Athletics

 The Extraordinary Nature of Professional Athleticism 

           

We've all played sports whether it be baseball, basketball, football, soccer, hockey, golf, tennis, swimming, or even winter sports like skiing, snowboarding, and more. From a young age we've all encountered at one point a sport we had passion for and played extensively well into our secondary school years only to let go and pursue other worldly interests. The vast majority of us have played at least one sport or more with a solid percentage playing competitively in teams either in high school or college. While many of us have participated in sports teams and have developed a sense of sportsmanship, an inconceivable low number will ever make a living career in the athletic universe. A lot of us especially people in their adolescence sometimes dream of having a prestigious career as a professional athlete. Little do they and the rest of us realize how incredibly difficult and unrealistic it is to emerge as a preeminent athlete in any sport whether it be basketball, football, soccer, baseball, swimming, ice hockey, or any kind of physical activity. Truth be told, the odds are extremely unlikely that you or anyone else you know will ever have a career as a professional or Olympic athlete. To play a sport at the highest level, it takes extraordinary athletic ability, intensive training, perseverance, natural talent, patience, and a genuine passion for the sport one is competing in.

Many sports fan often watch ESPN (the central sports network), and check out the top teams of a sport competing against one another. The most popular are often football, basketball, and baseball. Watching sports is an activity almost all of us enjoy, yet at times dream of actually playing competitively live on television in front of millions of viewers and fans across the nation. The chances that each one of us can make such a dream a reality is almost next to none. Let's review in terms of statistics the actual probability of making it into the world of elite athleticism.

According to an article penned by Tony Manfred from the chronicle Business Insider, the following phrase states the harsh reality: "Even if your kid is good at sports in high school, gets a scholarship, and excels in college, there's almost no way they are going to go pro" [1]. The statement is accurately proven as the data compiled from the NCAA reveals in six different sport areas. The table below summarizes the information brought by the article and gives a rough idea of what it actually means to be a professional athlete competing at the elite level.

Table for percentage of high school and college players that qualify as a pro [1].

Sport	Baseball	Football	Men’s Ice Hockey	Men’s Basketball	Men’s Soccer	Women’s Basketball
Number of High School Players	471,025	1,108,441	36,912	545,844	398,351	438,933
Number of College Players	31,264	67,887	3,944	17,500	22,573	15,708
Percent of High School students who play Professionally	0.6%	0.08%	0.1%	0.03%	0.04%	0.03%
Percent of College students who play Professionally	11.6%	1.7%	1.3%	1.2%	1.0%	0.9%
Number of Draftees by Professional Leagues	806	255	11	48	49	32

 

Glancing at this data table, we can get a good feeling of the prodigious nature of the professional world of sports. Let's take football as a starter. Approximately 1.1 million high school students play competitively in teams. Of those million high school students, no more than nearly 70,000 of them get to play at the college level or slightly 6.12% (~3 in 50). From there on, the numbers get even smaller when it comes to making the cut to professional. About 1.7% of the college students who play football, qualify as a professional or nearly 1,000 players. Nevertheless the NFL (National Football League) has room to draft no more than a few hundred players in any given season. With 255 drafts in one season out of 67,887 college players, only 0.3756% (~1 in 266) of them actually get picked by the NFL and are able to start a career as a pro.

In Men's basketball, the numbers are even lower. Of the half million high school players, no more than 17,500 will play at a college level (3.206%). Slightly more than a few hundred college basketball players perform at a pro level (1.2%). In the end, the NBA (National Basketball Association) on average in any given season has fewer than 50 draftees selected which is around 0.2743% (~1 in 365). While someone may have exceled in basketball during their secondary years, it barely meant that they will gain entry into the NBA league. Professional leagues are looking for the best amongst the best and so getting drafted is a significant achievement an athlete can hope for.

Of the sports listed in the table, the one that is the least competitive of all is baseball. With nearly half a million high school players, only around 30,000 will qualify to compete in college (~6-7 percent or 3 out of 50). Of those 30,000 players, 11.6% of them perform at a professional level (slightly more than 3500 players). Finally the Major Leagues are able to draft slightly more than 800 college players (~2.58% or 1 in 40). Baseball may be the easiest amongst the several other sports to obtain an enlistment in the professional field, but it is still extremely difficult to be even considered by the Major Leagues.

You can begin to get a sense of where I'm heading with all these statistics. While some of us at one point in our lives had a triumphant moment of exceling in an athletic field, it hardly translated into the possibility of starting a path towards the ultimate level of sportsmanship. We can see so many outstanding and talented college athletes that have worked tremendously hard with long hours put into intense routine practice only to miss the cut to the top level of the professional leagues in the end. Succeeding in the drafting process would mean that one college sportsman has to prove him or herself to be the best amongst all other collegiate players. Achieving such a feat is by no means an incredibly arduous goal. Unless you have genuine athletic ability, natural talent, are physically gifted, and have a tireless passion for sports, no matter how hard you try for how long, you can never become a professional athlete in any sport.

So in conclusion, I'm not trying to shatter the hopes, dreams and aspirations of young amateur athletes who participate in sports competitively in high school or college as to one day they would like to land a multi-million dollar career as a top-notch sportsman on a par amongst the best of the best. I'm just penning down this journal to give a general sense of what the reality is and exactly how unimaginably competitive and grueling the athletic world is especially at the highest level of performance. Rather than setting the bar to unrealistic and absurd levels of expectations, it is much better to realize what realistically we're capable of potentially achieving in our lives.

Mathematically speaking, the odds of anyone becoming a professional athlete are according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics around 24,550 to 1 (0.00407%) [2]. Becoming one almost never depends upon one single factor but rather requires a highly improbable combination of several factors that are sometimes beyond individual control. Whether or not you have what it takes is usually indicated either early on in life or during adolescence. In order to really increase the chances of entering the competitive world of professional athletics one must start at an early age, work endlessly for countless hours, and must really desire the dream in order to make it a reality.

References:

[1] Manfred, Tony. "Here Are The Odds That Your Kid Becomes A Professional Athlete (Hint: They're Small)." Business Insider. N.p., 10. Feb. 2012. Web. 09 June 2013

[2] "11 Hardest Jobs to Get in America." 15,436 College Reviews from Real Students. N.p., 18 Nov. 2009. Web. 09 June 2013.