Philippines: Beauty in Land and Sea

Paramecium

This is a beautiful Paramecium under the high power objective of a compound microscope.

  

Copyright 2014
Photo by Louie Dy

Mathemagic

Awesome. From the author of the book "Secrets of Mental Math".

Bubbles!

BUBBLES. I AM DEAD SERIOUS.
BUBBLES. IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, BUBBLES.

...

"Bubbles" could be the ultimate euphemism to any strong word, emotion or expression. I can't seem to get mad whenever I say bubbles. Maybe if I, along with everybody could apply this in every emotional outburst, the world will be a better place to live in.

Slowing Down the Speed of Light

This is awesome. The invariance of the speed of light (in a vacuum) as postulated by Einstein in his Theory of Relativity has been disproved. There are many implications to this.

Special Relativity hinges on the invariance of the speed of light (in a vacuum). Since the speed of light (in a vacuum) is no longer invariant, then there is a necessity to reformulate theories that supersede this.

What about tachyons? What about black holes? What about relativity of time and traveling through time?

The notion that the very color a person is seeing is the identical as another person as supported by the invariance of the speed of light (in a vacuum) is no longer plausible.

To think that a person in my country proving that - this is definitely astounding!

Post by Rappler.

Syllogism and Love

While I'm tired and exhausted, let me write this post about syllogism, which I think is inseparable from that hoity-toity feeling that people call love.

Basically, a syllogism contains two premises that are assumed to be true, and a conclusion. Let P1, P2, P3 and so on be the premises and C be the conclusion. Here are some common valid forms and examples:

1.      Disjunctive Syllogism

P1: P or Q

P2: Not Q

C: Therefore, P.

Example:

I love you or you love me.

I don’t love you.

Therefore, you love me. #weh

2.      Hypothetical Syllogism

P1: If P, then Q.

P2: If Q, then R.

C: Therefore, if P, then R.

Example:

If I love you, then you love another guy.

If you love another guy, then I’ll wait for you.

Therefore, if I love you, then I’ll wait for you.

3.      Modus Ponens

P1: If P, then Q.

P2: P

C: Therefore, Q.

Example:

If I love you, then you love me.

I love you.

Therefore, you love me. #weh

4.      Modus Tollens

P1: If P then Q.

P2: Not Q

C: Therefore, not P.

Example:

If I love you, then you love me.

You don’t love me.

Therefore, I don’t love you. #hugot

Syllogisms aren’t limited in those forms. There are what we call categorical syllogisms, and there are fifteen valid forms. As for how the names are derived, how validity is proven, I’ll leave that either to the books or Wikipedia. Here are some of the fifteen valid forms and their examples: (Also for the examples, assume that all that are in the subject or the predicate are nouns.)

1.      Datisi (AII-3)

P1: All M are P.
P2: Some M are S.
C: Therefore, Some S are P.

Example:

All chocolates are romantics.

Some chocolates are bitterness’s.

Therefore, some bitterness’s are romantics. (Only a little…)

2.      Darii (AII-1)

P1: All M are P.

P2: Some S are M.

C: Therefore, Some S are P.

Example:

All friend-zones are forever.

Some only-friends are friend-zones.

Therefore, some only-friends are forever. (Hence, only-friends doesn’t mean forever friend-zone.)

3.      Camestres (AEE-2)

P1: All P are M.

P2: No S are M.
C: Therefore, No S are P.

Example:

All romances are nonsense’s.

No love’s are nonsense’s.

Therefore, no love’s are romances.

4.      Festino (EIO-2)

P1: No P are M.

P2: Some S are M.

C: Therefore, Some S are not P.

Example:

No good things are tragedies.

Some heartbreaks are tragedies.

Therefore, some heartbreaks are not good things. (Does it actually mean that some are?)

5.      Fresison (EIO-4)

P1: No M are P.

P2: Some M are S.

C: Therefore, Some S are not P.

Example:

No heartbreaks are happiness.

Some happiness are beings-together.

Therefore, some beings-together are not heartbreak. (…and some beings together are heartbreak due to friend-zone…)

6.      Celarent (EAE-1)

P1: No M are P.

P2: All S are M.

C: Therefore, No S are P.

Example:

No heroes are cowards.

All lovers are heroes.

Therefore, no lovers are cowards. #preach

7.      Cesare (EAE-2)

P1: No P are M.

P2: All S are M.

C: Therefore, No S are P.

Example:

No materialisms are everlasting.

All love’s are everlasting.

Therefore, no love’s are materialisms. (Ideally speaking…)

8.      Ferison (EIO-3)

P1: No M are P.

P2: Some M are S.

C: Therefore, Some S are not P.

Example:

No relationships are forever-lasting-types.

Some relationships are friendships.

Therefore, some friendships are not forever-lasting-types.

9.      Ferio (EIO-1)

P1: No M are P.

P2: Some S are M.

C: Therefore, Some S are not P.

Example:

No romances are forever’s.

Some flowers are romances.

Therefore, some flowers are not forever’s. (That’s why cacti are better. They withstand tribulations. Relationships should be like the cacti, not the flower.)

10.   Dimaris (IAI-4)

P1: Some P are M.

P2: All M are S.

C: Therefore, Some S are P.

Example:

Some love’s are affections.

All affections are expressions.

Therefore, some expressions are love’s. (That’s why we need to take expressions seriously…)

11.   Disamis (IAI-3)

P1: Some M are P.

P2: All M are S.

C: Therefore, Some S are P.

Example:

Some moments are temporary’s.

All moments are experiences.

Therefore, some experiences are temporary’s. (Just like heartbreaks…)

To conclude, although logic isn't always the best way to arrive at an emotional conclusion, it still proves to provide good insight.

Nice Guys Finish First?!

The following informative video, by virtue of game theory, scientifically defied the popular notion "Nice Guys Finish Last".

2015

Today

In front of our joyful eyes,
the setting sun waves goodbye.
In front of our crying and tearful eyes,
our memories rippled through the waters.
Amidst our ravishing reveries,
tomorrow permeates our today.

Seeing the smiles from our sanguine hearts,
we wished today to forever last.
Still, just as today is ephemeral,
these moments are just as sadly short-lived.
How can I alleviate this stupor?
For when our today dies, so do those smiles.

Tomorrow eagerly awaits for us;
why do smiles have to be so transient?
Yet with the wind breezing through our temples,
with our arms onto each other's shoulders,
with courage we smile for what we call “Today” –
something that can never be grasped ever again.

Five (More) Misconceptions on Philippine History

The second book of Renato Constantino - The Continuing Past, along with lectures and discussion, made a completely different perspective such as:

1. April 9, the Bataan Day, is a commemorative day of the Death March, where many Filipinos died because of their bravery.

False. April 9 ought to be called the "Bataan Day rhetoric". The reason why the Japanese conducted the Death March was actually a 'lame reason'. The Japanese, when they invaded the Philippines, was expecting that we would be defeated in around six or more months. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case; Philippines capitulated (surrendered) within two months. Hence, there were A LOT of prisoners of war, and the Japanese had to find a way to dispose of the 'excess' prisoners of war. Indeed, they came up with a perfect way to dispose the excess prisoners of way - through the Death March. Yes, you can probably say that they did it for fun.

2. General MacArthur played a vital role in fighting against the Japanese.

False. His army only existed on paper. Manuel Quezon at first gladly accepted him and gave him 16 million pesos to build up his army. Later, MacArthur boasted of having a large army, which only existed on paper. The rest of the money is, well, "lost" in his hands.

3. Philippines finally got its independence in 1946.

False. As Renato Constantino quoted, we had our "Sham Independence" primarily because the Americans had already set up the neo-colonial blueprint using four agreements:
a. Bell Trade Act together with Parity Rights Agreement, where the US will still be allowed to exploit our natural resources for another 20 years, giving Americans and Filipinos equal rights to exploit resources.
b. Military Bases Agreement, which allowed the US to set up bases on Philippine soil but outside Philippine sovereignity.
c. The pegging of the Philippine peso to the US dollar.
d. Military Assistance Agreement
Therefore, we have liberty (political independence) but not total independence (political AND economic independence).

4. If Philippines would be conquered by China, the US will assist, side or help the Philippines.

False. We are a non-entity to the US. The US has this "Europe-first policy", where they won't even bother the Philippines.

5. Ferdinand Marcos played a major role in the industrialization of the country.

False. Ferdinand Marcos was responsible for halting the industrialization of the country. Being a collaborator of the Americans, he declared Martial Law. In fact, US President Lyndon B. Johnson congratulated Marcos for "adhering to the democratic principles of government". He closed the Steel Mill industries which were products of nationalistic Carlos P. Garcia's "Filipino First Policy". The Steel Mill industry is fundamental to industrialization and economic growth; that's why Vietnam, Taiwan and South Korea, despite being devastated due to recent wars, were able to quickly recuperate.

The following are other thoughts that were mentioned in the book:
* Manuel Roxas, Manuel Quezon, Benigno Aquino I, Ferdinand Marcos were all collaborators of the Japanese or Americans.
* Ramon Magsaysay was a bus line manager and a collaborator, made a president of the Philippines by the CIA of America. He was to "voice out American propaganda in Asian colors".