haha OMG I am so happy for my (chem) students. Congrats everyone!
Yea I know I know, this blog has been dead since halfway through 2007. And do you know why?
Cos I was working my ass off teaching. But I am glad to have worked with you all (mostly)
Anyway, I revived it specifically just so that I can congratulate everyone! Yea. Hopefully I can keep it around though. lets see how, this year is really busy for me...
Oh yea I digress. Congrats congrats!
(edit) RJC Chem %A grades: 78.8% ~830 candidates out of 1050 candidates
(edit) bkt timah contemporary %A grades: 78.5% ~ 610 out of 780 candidates
3R Chem % A grades: 100%
3R H3 chem: 10 distinctions, 1 merit, 3 passes
3H Chem %A grades: 82%
3H Chem %A&B grades: 100%
7B Chem %A grades: 82%
7B Chem %A&B grades: 95.6%
7B Chem %pass: 100%
Really good stuff. Our college average %A grades beats our friendly competitors in Bkt Timah even in % terms.
Anyway, to 3R, well done! What else do we expect from the strongest class in RJ right?(havn't heard any other class getting 100% A's yet...) That includes both halves of the class! 3R folks will know what i mean :)
And its been gratifying to teach you pple.
To 3H: Great job! Its also been nice to take you pple for Civics as well, and I'm glad to say most of you have come so far on so many fronts, not just chem, but across other subjects, and achieve so much in so many other areas like CCA and CIPs.
To 7B: I am so amazed by you people. I mean, we started out at 3rd class from the bottom in RJ during JC1 CT1 (Ya now you know. And I was so stressed) Well look where you are now?Almost everyone got an A! So you learn another thing (other than that doing chem is a painful choice), persistence and hardwork pays off, and you can apply yourself to anything, even if a task sucks, if you only see it another way and try, you may actly learn to like it or master it.
To all of you, your hardwork, especially those who've worked consistently, has really paid off.
Remember how when you first read my blog, I was also talking about the results of my previous batch? Well I'll say the same thing again, I am glad I was firm and demanded the best from you :)
So whatever you do, always demand the best from yourself even if it hurts, cos, when the day of your harvest comes, you will be happy with the fruits of your labour, with no regrets.
Take care everyone, and keep in touch..
(edit: I cant understand why word is going ard that RJ chem didn't do well;just cos we didnt publicize our results doesnt mean we didn't do well... we topped the cohort.)
In fact, we got more A students than their entire cohort (in absolute number terms).
(edit:) some people also don't understand this, considering that this is a through train batch, where the bottom 20% candidates which traditionally wouldnt be in RJ(wouldn't have done well enough at O levels to gain admission) are now part of the cohort, we have done really well! (past RJ batches obtain around 80% As); it means that with this cohort, we have value added. In addition, some people don't understand also, that the situation is that the more candidates you have, the more difficult it is to get a high %A( %A is not a random event, its probability doesn't necessarily increase with a larger cohort) Consider what happens with some through train systems that sets admission exams for their students to move from secondary to JC level: only the best candidates make it to JC level and take the A lvls, and you would have more of these scoring A's thereby increasing %As. So in fact, the stricter you select for a smaller cohort, the better. So imagine what might have happened, if we didn't admit our bottom 20%.... we'd get nearly 100% A's... But thats not the way; we take in everyone, and do our utmost to let them blossom to their fullest potential, in all areas.
anyways, I'm glad most of my students had great attitude and really put in hardwork to do well, don't discount your efforts and think otherwise!
Friday, March 07, 2008
Friday, February 16, 2007
Nice try, everyone
Just read this article in the straits times review, 16th Feb 2007.. by Janadas Devan.
Although I do not hold any presumptions that Singapore is infallible and right in everything it does, I do agree very much with this article about the situation we find ourselves in.
Again, reproduced here for your educational reading purposes.
------------------------------
Nice try, everyone
By Janadas Devan
FORMER Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad said of Singapore on Thai television recently: 'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough, they only think of themselves.'
That statement is only partly true: It is certainly important for a small country like Singapore that large countries, near and far, know they cannot get anywhere with it by being 'tough'. What that means is that they realise they cannot bully Singapore, for that is what 'being tough' means here.
Since refusing to be bullied happens to be Singapore Foreign Policy 101 - a line the country's leaders established within a minute of 10am, Aug 9, 1965, when Singapore became independent - it is excellent that Tun Dr Mahathir can recognise it so readily. It means Singapore has adhered to this line so consistently over 42 years that its obviousness is obvious - even to Tun Dr Mahathir.
What Tun Dr Mahathir does not seem to realise is that he could easily have smudged this line, converted it into a scratchy wiggle, if he had been 'nice' to Singapore.
You want water? Sure, we'll give you as much water as you want, way beyond what an internationally recognised treaty obliges us to supply, for 3 sen per 1,000 gallons - or less if you wish.
You want a common market with Malaysia, as you were promised before you joined the federation in 1963? No problem at all. Your air force wants to fly through our airspace to get to their training areas over the South China Sea? Sure, since it costs us nothing.
What if Tun Dr Mahathir and his predecessors had done all that? To begin with, Singapore may never have felt it necessary to go it alone in 1965, may never have indus-
trialised in order to leapfrog the region and link up with the rest of the world, may never have become anything more than an entrepot trading post for the region.
It would not have converted almost the entire island into a water catchment area, and developed Newater and desalination so as to become self-sufficient in water in the near future. And its air force pilots would not have become so expert in making sharp right turns immediately upon take-off, and sharp left turns soon after, to get to their South China Sea training areas. I am told those are handy skills to have for dogfights.
'Challenge and response' - that is the primary mechanism by which civilisations have emerged throughout history, said the historian Arnold Toynbee.
Why did the resource-poor North defeat the resource-rich South in the American civil war? Quite apart from the fact that right was on its side, eking out a living was a tougher proposition in the North and it was forced to industrialise earlier.
As the Greek poet Hesiod put it more than 2,700 years ago: 'The price of achievement is toil; and the gods have ruled that you must pay in advance.'
'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough' - no, that's not quite it, Tun Dr Mahathir. Singapore became tough in large part because you and your ilk were never particularly 'nice'. You might have enfeebled us if you had smothered us instead with treacly love. We should thank you for desisting.
Some sections of the Indonesian establishment have yet to catch up with the partial lesson Tun Dr Mahathir has learnt. The aim in banning the export of Indonesian land sand to Singapore was to pressure the Republic on some bilateral matters, especially the negotiations over an extradition treaty.
The calculation was: Sand is a natural resource; Singapore doesn't have any of it; so deny Singapore the sand it desperately needs and it is bound to fold.
It is the kind of calculation that resource-rich countries, especially, are prone to make, only to discover (too late, usually) that human ingenuity is the most valuable resource and it tends to thrive when it is denied easy access to natural ones. Challenge and response works on this front too.
Some Indonesians have expressed surprise in private that Singapore has not been panicked by the sand ban. They did not realise that the country's reclamation projects are mostly near completion; that there are other sources of sand for construction purposes; and, most importantly of all, that they did Singapore a favour by not being 'nice'.
The not-so-secret secret in Singapore is that construction is among the least technologically sophisticated sectors in the country. Nothing would be better calculated than the denial of sand to force this sector to upgrade, use other materials in place of sand, and become less labour-intensive. Challenge and response - it never fails.
The sad thing about all this is that our neighbours should be focusing less on challenging Singapore and more on the challenges that Asean as a whole faces.
As The Economist noted recently in commenting on the series of bilateral Asean spats with Singapore as the object of blame: 'It is hard to avoid the suspicion that the little country's unforgivable offence is being richer and more successful than its neighbours, and being not particularly apologetic about it.'
But this 'little red dot' cannot possibly make Indonesia, Thailand or Malaysia poorer or less successful. China and India can - and it is those countries, not Singapore, that they should focus on as existential challenges.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono realises this, which is why Jakarta has supported strongly the formulation of an Asean Charter as a means of hastening Asean's integration, economically as well as politically.
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and his deputy Najib Razak realise this too, which is why the latter has dismissed the bizarre claims of the Johor Menteri Besar, in the teeth of all the hydraulics laws known to man, that the reclamation works around Singapore's Tekong island had somehow caused the recent floods in Kota Tinggi and Batu Pahat in his state.
Singapore has shown over 42 years that it can survive by leapfrogging the region and linking up with the rest of the world. It can go on doing this if necessary.
The region as a whole, however, cannot leapfrog itself for it is stuck here forever, sandwiched between two rising giants, China and India.
Those are the challenges. Respond as one, for goodness' sake, instead of posing these incessant challenges to Singapore.
FORMER Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad said of Singapore on Thai television recently: 'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough, they only think of themselves.'
That statement is only partly true: It is certainly important for a small country like Singapore that large countries, near and far, know they cannot get anywhere with it by being 'tough'. What that means is that they realise they cannot bully Singapore, for that is what 'being tough' means here.
Since refusing to be bullied happens to be Singapore Foreign Policy 101 - a line the country's leaders established within a minute of 10am, Aug 9, 1965, when Singapore became independent - it is excellent that Tun Dr Mahathir can recognise it so readily. It means Singapore has adhered to this line so consistently over 42 years that its obviousness is obvious - even to Tun Dr Mahathir.
What Tun Dr Mahathir does not seem to realise is that he could easily have smudged this line, converted it into a scratchy wiggle, if he had been 'nice' to Singapore.
You want water? Sure, we'll give you as much water as you want, way beyond what an internationally recognised treaty obliges us to supply, for 3 sen per 1,000 gallons - or less if you wish.
You want a common market with Malaysia, as you were promised before you joined the federation in 1963? No problem at all. Your air force wants to fly through our airspace to get to their training areas over the South China Sea? Sure, since it costs us nothing.
What if Tun Dr Mahathir and his predecessors had done all that? To begin with, Singapore may never have felt it necessary to go it alone in 1965, may never have indus-
trialised in order to leapfrog the region and link up with the rest of the world, may never have become anything more than an entrepot trading post for the region.
It would not have converted almost the entire island into a water catchment area, and developed Newater and desalination so as to become self-sufficient in water in the near future. And its air force pilots would not have become so expert in making sharp right turns immediately upon take-off, and sharp left turns soon after, to get to their South China Sea training areas. I am told those are handy skills to have for dogfights.
'Challenge and response' - that is the primary mechanism by which civilisations have emerged throughout history, said the historian Arnold Toynbee.
Why did the resource-poor North defeat the resource-rich South in the American civil war? Quite apart from the fact that right was on its side, eking out a living was a tougher proposition in the North and it was forced to industrialise earlier.
As the Greek poet Hesiod put it more than 2,700 years ago: 'The price of achievement is toil; and the gods have ruled that you must pay in advance.'
'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough' - no, that's not quite it, Tun Dr Mahathir. Singapore became tough in large part because you and your ilk were never particularly 'nice'. You might have enfeebled us if you had smothered us instead with treacly love. We should thank you for desisting.
Some sections of the Indonesian establishment have yet to catch up with the partial lesson Tun Dr Mahathir has learnt. The aim in banning the export of Indonesian land sand to Singapore was to pressure the Republic on some bilateral matters, especially the negotiations over an extradition treaty.
The calculation was: Sand is a natural resource; Singapore doesn't have any of it; so deny Singapore the sand it desperately needs and it is bound to fold.
It is the kind of calculation that resource-rich countries, especially, are prone to make, only to discover (too late, usually) that human ingenuity is the most valuable resource and it tends to thrive when it is denied easy access to natural ones. Challenge and response works on this front too.
Some Indonesians have expressed surprise in private that Singapore has not been panicked by the sand ban. They did not realise that the country's reclamation projects are mostly near completion; that there are other sources of sand for construction purposes; and, most importantly of all, that they did Singapore a favour by not being 'nice'.
The not-so-secret secret in Singapore is that construction is among the least technologically sophisticated sectors in the country. Nothing would be better calculated than the denial of sand to force this sector to upgrade, use other materials in place of sand, and become less labour-intensive. Challenge and response - it never fails.
The sad thing about all this is that our neighbours should be focusing less on challenging Singapore and more on the challenges that Asean as a whole faces.
As The Economist noted recently in commenting on the series of bilateral Asean spats with Singapore as the object of blame: 'It is hard to avoid the suspicion that the little country's unforgivable offence is being richer and more successful than its neighbours, and being not particularly apologetic about it.'
But this 'little red dot' cannot possibly make Indonesia, Thailand or Malaysia poorer or less successful. China and India can - and it is those countries, not Singapore, that they should focus on as existential challenges.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono realises this, which is why Jakarta has supported strongly the formulation of an Asean Charter as a means of hastening Asean's integration, economically as well as politically.
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and his deputy Najib Razak realise this too, which is why the latter has dismissed the bizarre claims of the Johor Menteri Besar, in the teeth of all the hydraulics laws known to man, that the reclamation works around Singapore's Tekong island had somehow caused the recent floods in Kota Tinggi and Batu Pahat in his state.
Singapore has shown over 42 years that it can survive by leapfrogging the region and linking up with the rest of the world. It can go on doing this if necessary.
The region as a whole, however, cannot leapfrog itself for it is stuck here forever, sandwiched between two rising giants, China and India.
Those are the challenges. Respond as one, for goodness' sake, instead of posing these incessant challenges to Singapore.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Let's all bash singapore
Wow its been along time since I've been here...guess I've been rather busy lately; on top of the regular work in school, I've been involved in some planning and preparation for enrichment and competition programmes. Ok I admit a wee bit of laziness nowadays to blog haha.. I wonder if anyone even comes here anymore... heh a big hello to you who's reading this! I promise I will try to update with somemore interesting stuff..
I've also been rather busy following some investments of mine... so far things have been looking good... actually I was very tempted to post about how I trade and do technical analysis on the charts... just as a record for me to reflect on how I'm doing .. eh since its more for myself... I do wonder if such posts will be appropriate to the audience here... My most recent position has been doing really well, up by abt 25% to date and still has potential for more. If things pan out the way I projected... Whee!!!! But not enough for retirement yet hur hur so need to keep doing my research.
I was inspired to a new goal: I'm going to take on a half year to one year tour in the mediterranean region! like south of france, italy, crete, turkey.. egypt maybe..I hope I can survive the food there tho. Its probably going to be part luxury and leisure (ie nice hotel eat and drink and shop and sight see) part backpacking(a better way to get to know the local scene) and maybe even part working .. haha anyway this is some super stretch goal as in reaaally stretched out! before that its wealth accumulation to make sure everything I need to take care of is taken care of. (need to pay for parents, gf/wife, house, car blah blah)
Anyway about the title of my post...I just read an article that was carried in today's Straits Times, quoted from The Economist, and it set me thinking about the sad hard truth; The way I see it, in this world, there are lots of mediocre people trying to bring down those who are ahead/successful. People jump at the latest chance to tear down celebrities/CEOs/leaders/professors etc etc. Neighbours are upset cos your garden is nicer (did you watch that episode of desperate housewives?) Chinese have a saying "Shu4 da4 zhao1 feng1"...cos people are just not comfortable/not happy .. and mostly JEALOUS if you are different/stick out/better; they want to make you just like themselves, bring you down to their level of mediocrity.
I've also been rather busy following some investments of mine... so far things have been looking good... actually I was very tempted to post about how I trade and do technical analysis on the charts... just as a record for me to reflect on how I'm doing .. eh since its more for myself... I do wonder if such posts will be appropriate to the audience here... My most recent position has been doing really well, up by abt 25% to date and still has potential for more. If things pan out the way I projected... Whee!!!! But not enough for retirement yet hur hur so need to keep doing my research.
I was inspired to a new goal: I'm going to take on a half year to one year tour in the mediterranean region! like south of france, italy, crete, turkey.. egypt maybe..I hope I can survive the food there tho. Its probably going to be part luxury and leisure (ie nice hotel eat and drink and shop and sight see) part backpacking(a better way to get to know the local scene) and maybe even part working .. haha anyway this is some super stretch goal as in reaaally stretched out! before that its wealth accumulation to make sure everything I need to take care of is taken care of. (need to pay for parents, gf/wife, house, car blah blah)
Anyway about the title of my post...I just read an article that was carried in today's Straits Times, quoted from The Economist, and it set me thinking about the sad hard truth; The way I see it, in this world, there are lots of mediocre people trying to bring down those who are ahead/successful. People jump at the latest chance to tear down celebrities/CEOs/leaders/professors etc etc. Neighbours are upset cos your garden is nicer (did you watch that episode of desperate housewives?) Chinese have a saying "Shu4 da4 zhao1 feng1"...cos people are just not comfortable/not happy .. and mostly JEALOUS if you are different/stick out/better; they want to make you just like themselves, bring you down to their level of mediocrity.
I also find another camp of mediocre people trying to achieve the same (bring you down) by doing the opposite. They go around proclaiming, every1 is special, every1 is unique. every1 has sth valuable. Bleah. Hogwash to me. A celebration of mediocrity I say. There's this feel good element to having the underdog win, and a feeling its so politcally wrong or unpopular to criticize some1 and call a piece of crap a piece of crap. Why? Because deep down, most mediocre people feel like the underdogs. They are jealous of the elite, the high achievers. That's why they cheer when underdogs win. Just look at american idol. People boo when Simon gives a scathing critique of a contestant.. but you know what? I think very often, he's simply calling a piece of crap, a piece of crap. At the end of the day, the idol winners .. are mostly ordinary .. they can't compare in star quality to say.. mariah carey (she's got great vocals and presence k! Just a screwed up psyche..) American Idol was in a sense, a celebration of mediocrity..
Why can't people just accept that our human gene pool is not homogenous, and that some people are just more crappy/more lazy/less talented/less intelligent/less fit? Its the sad hard truth. The good news is, for most of us, although we can;t be good at everything, we can be at least proficient in a thing or two. With the right amount of effort invested and direction from a great coach, its possible to maximise, perhaps even exceed, natural potential.
I'm not saying that mediocre people are any less valuable as human lives.. in that respect I feel all men are equal(morally speaking). And those truly gifted, while celebrated, need to be thankful of what they have, and make a proportional contribution to the world.
So I say celebrate those who are really special, and not feel apologetic about it, or feel a need to do/say something "feel good" for the mediocre. (Oh yes, on a side note, bosses shouldnt hesitate to fire an incompetent employee who's been given a reasonable number of chances to improve, cos if such an employee stays around, the burden of getting a good job done falls on the shoulders of the rest.. some of my friends have suffered this sort of situation; they have to work twice as hard to do a good job cos their team mate is crap. Why? because the boss felt bad to fire the POS)
At the same time, those who are gifted need to be made aware of their enormous potential to really change our world, and not let it go to waste.
Ooops I digress! yes the article in the newspaper, reproduced here, in full, from The Straits Times (who got it from The Economist) for your educational reading pleasure.
Let's all bash Singapore
SINGAPORE won South-east Asia's football championship on Feb 4 in a final against Thailand that was mostly peaceful, despite a bad-tempered first leg in which the Thais stomped off the pitch and sulked for 15 minutes.
The players were doing no more than imitate their military-run government, which has been in a strop with Singapore since Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister met Mr Thaksin Shinawatra, the deposed Thai leader, last month.
In protest, top-level meetings with Singaporean officials were cancelled. General Sonthi Boonyarataglin, the Thai junta's leader, accused Singapore of spying on Thailand, using the telecoms business it bought last year from Mr Thaksin's family. He told his soldiers to stop using their mobiles and go back to walkie-talkies.
Despite 40 years of expressing fraternal warmth at Asean meetings, the region's leaders never miss an opportunity to pick a fight with Singapore.
In recent years, Singaporean firms, many of them state-backed, have bought businesses across the region, giving cause for paranoia. Indonesian parliamentarians claimed this month that their military secrets were also at risk because Singaporeans had bought into a local satellite firm.
Even sand is a matter of national security. On Feb 6, an Indonesian ban on sand exports came into force, following a similar move by Malaysia some years ago. Singapore buys the sand to reclaim land from the sea and increase its puny terrain. Indonesia's official reason for the ban was to stop the environmental damage caused by sand mining. But a senior navy man let slip that it was motivated by various diplomatic spats with Singapore. The Indonesian navy has now sent no fewer than eight warships to its maritime border with Singapore to intercept suspected sand-smugglers. At the same time, the Indonesian sand-shovellers' association, facing unemployment, is threatening to sue the government over the ban.
The Malaysians, always up for a row with their estranged ex-spouse (Singapore and Malaysia were in a brief, unhappy union in the 1960s), are blaming their recent floods on Singapore's land reclamation. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia's disgruntled former prime minister, has sought to undermine his successor, Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi, by accusing him of secretly negotiating with the Singaporeans to lift the sand ban. Tun Dr Mahathir also added his voice to the Thai junta's attacks on the Singaporeans. 'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough, they only think of themselves,' he said on Thai television.
There is always a plausible-sounding reason for the fights that Singapore's neighbours pick with it. The Singaporeans' kiasu (win at all costs) negotiating style does them few favours in a region where saving face is important. But it is hard to avoid the suspicion that the little country's unforgivable offence is being richer and more successful than its neighbours, and not particularly apologetic about it.
-THE ECONOMIST
Tun Mahathir has added his voice to the Thai junta's attacks on the Singaporeans. 'You'll get nowhere with them either being nice or being tough, they only think of themselves,' he said on Thai television.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Financial education
Hey people, I'm going to start a series of posts about planning for your finances; and also about planning for your future job.
Now you may be thinking, I'm still young, this really doesnt concern me. OR, I got no finances to plan for whatsoever... Now if you are thinking that, you got it all wrong!
A friend of mine started investing his savings of about SGD$2000 back in 1999. By 2004, he had close to SGD$150,000, a whooping growth of 7500% in 5 years. And he did all this while he was still an undergrad in NUS, did not take part time jobs or depend on pocket money from his parents. On top of that, he was a malaysian and didn't have a place to stay in singapore so, he had to rent and pay for all his own living expenses. He also paid for his undergraduate course fees ( about $10000 a year). To top all that off, he could afford to buy macbooks, ipods, new zealand holidays for himself and for his family these past few years. All his expenses he paid for with his investments.
He's got his own condo now; I should think he'll be getting his million soon at 27. Oh yes, in 1999, this friend of mine just turned 20, Just 3 years older than what some of my students are. So I think, its a good idea for you to become financially 'aware' right now, as a start.
What were some qualities this friend of mine had that made him successful?
1. Drive. This friend of mine was highly driven.
While the rest of us were idling our time away with games and shopping and eating, he made productive use of his time. He did what he had to do to do reasonably well in school and in hall activites, but on top of that he did a lot of due diligence on what he wanted to invest in. He read a ton of books about investing, financial management, technical analysis, fundamental analysis and so on. A year before he started investing he had already been following the markets. He did his charts, planned his entry and exit points and read the companies' balance sheets. All this work enabled him to make smart investment decisions so he was correct most of the time and wrong only occasionally. This of course translated to lower risk and higher profit.
In between all that he did find time to go out with friends and catch some concerts.
2. This brings me to my next point, focus.
He was focused on what he wanted out of his life. While I'm not going to touch on how focus impacts every aspect of your life, it's interesting to look closer at how focus impacts investment strategy. Lets take a look at a growth of 7500% over 5 years. It can be averaged in to a 50% growth per year compounded. Can it happen? Yes it can; Just this year, the stock price of Apple computer (AAPL on the nasdaq; chart ) went from $50 in mid July to $91 in early december. The price movements of smaller cap companies can be even greater.
So if your insurance broker, financial planners, unit trust managers etc tell you that they can only grow your portfolio by about 5 to 8% per annum, they're not good enough.
What is their problem? You realize most of the sundry financial peddlers recommend diversification to minimize risk; What they are not telling you is that it minimizes risk to themselves. They don't really know whats good to buy, so they tell you to buy a bunch of everything. They also don't tell you the fees they charge eat up a large part of your profits, while you invest all the capital and shoulder all the risk.
Now is it really a good idea to trust these managers? Most people don't really know what to buy or understand what investment is about; they're financial idiots, so they diversify. And they rely on funds.
What's not risky is focused investment, what's risky is ignorance.
If you really know what you are doing, you focus. Warren Buffett (go wiki or google him) didnt diversify randomly. He focused, taking large stakes in businesses one at a time after careful research and understanding exactly what he's going into ( Go read a book about him so you'll understand what I mean). Oh yes Buffett was at one time the 2nd richest man in the world after Microsoft's Bill Gate, until he recently gave away huge portions of his own wealth into the Bill and Melinda Gates Trust, which spearheads some noteworthy philantropic efforts(I'll talk about that some other time). Again even in philantropy, Buffett adopts a focused approach; he gaved a lot (US$33bn) but only to what he thought was the most effective philantropic organisation in the US; he didnt 'diversify' his giving to other philantropic organisations.
Buffett became the 2nd richest man in the world purely by investing; he didnt inherit the money or run businesses; he simply invested.
So are you going to listen to the sundry financial advisors who tell you 8% is max, and diversify? or are you going to listen to the oracle of Omaha (as Buffett is called) who tell you to focus?
3. Remember, ignorance is risky so start learning!
I think its been good to get started by looking at qualities of drive, focus, and a wilingness to learn; however, to motivate you on this area, lets pull out some numbers.
All the following has been reported in recent editions of the Straits Times or Today newspapers.
This year, Goldman Sachs, the largest invesment bank in the US, is giving its CEO $138 million for his bonus(does not include salary!)
Morgan Stanley is giving its CEO $40 million for his bonus.
Back in singapore, the banking industry has seen average wages grow by about 5% this year, and expects 5% next year. Executives can expect 6 months' to a year's bonus.
Some young investment bankers(in singapore) are taking about US$450000 this year; according to one of them, most of them, even those who just started out should expect at least $100000 to $200000.
So really, if you just want to get a job to make a living, why follow the singapore herd into the professions of medicine or law or accountancy? Just take up the job with the best pay :)
You really should go into professions only if you have real interest in them; ie you reaaaally want to heal people, so you'd like to be a doctor. For me, I like to teach.
Finally you may ask, why the focus on money? The focus is not on money. Rather, its on making wise choices, and on achieving financial freedom which means you don't have to work, but instead spend time doing what you dream of.
In almost every great endeavour, a lot of resources, money is required. You want to fight disease on an epidemic scale? Help victims of natural disasters? Feed the poor, and beyond that, help them to become self sufficient? Lots of money helps. If you have just enough money for yourself, all the talk about benefitting others and being a blessing to others is just that: talk. You can't afford to help others, and your time and energy will also be expended to meet the needs of yourself and your family ( you have to feed your aged parents, your young children, your car, your house, and your wife. It's tough.)
Even in teaching and educating people, you can make great impact if you have the wealth to spearhead programmes, as what Bill Gates has done. He's recently been voted to be the most influential in US education(ranked above the US president, Department of Education etc etc)
Of course, investment banking isn't really an easy job. But really, which job is easy? (more on that in a future post)
And even if you don't become an investment banker, it still pays to figure out how to manage your wealth. My friend's a computer programmer.
You can start by reading great articles or books about investment attitudes and mindsets to get some inspiration before going into really detailed research. A nice author to read will be Robert Kiyosaki; he;s the guy who wrote "Rich Dad, Poor Dad"
He has a column in yahoo finance, and I'll leave you to a link to one of his articles. More to come.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Hohoho
my pc is still dead :( as in my desktop.
So how do I blog? I've to use my office computer(which thankfully is a laptop). But then this being an office laptop cant be used to play PC games, listen to itunes etc etc blah blah.
So how do I while my holidays away??
well..there's the PS2..... hah well i did do some constructive things! First off there the Singapore Chemistry Olympiad! I'm so so so happy for RJC's team (which i coordinated and conducted training with). Its nice to work with a bunch of bright(ok they got brains.. but its whether they use it or not.. heh heh) kids who like chemistry. Ok ok the good news is, that its over and the results arrrrrrrre (drumrolls..)
i) all our 15 candidates made it to final round and got a medal (not true for any other college)
ii) we had 6 gold medals (out of the total of 13 awarded, that means we swept half the golds) plus assorted silvers and bronze
iii) we had the top scorer for the entire olympiad (xinyang from 6D if you wanna noe; the olympiad had 2 theory papers and 2 practicals)
iv) we had the top scorer for the theory papers (ben chen from 3K)
v) RJC team won the best team award!
hmm we didnt get top for practical.. hmm will need to look into that
wooohoo welldone!
hmmm on top of that I found time to do quite a bit of reading (eh? so geeky? yar, i'm a geek)
wikipedia's great! I read about the origin of malays and malay language, and then more ancient civilisation stuff, on mesopotamia, the phoenicians (they're the canaanites), child sacrifice, the roman empire. It also interesting to think that, while Judaism is one of the many religions amongst the middle eastern region in ancient times, its offshoots Christianity and later, Islam came to influence such large populations of peoples and geographical areas. (These religions are called the Abrahamic religions; Abraham, Ibrahim, the same you know)
For Christianity, intense persecution under the Romans forced believers to scatter, and along with that, their message spread. But 2 other important events happened to bring Christianity into such dominance over the western hemisphere. 1) Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity, 2) Emperor Theodisius I (he was the last emperor of a unified Eastern and Western Roman empire) made Christianity the state religion of the roman empire. Now if you didnt know, the Roman empire at its peak stretched from the British Isles, the whole western europe, much of the north coast of Africa (basically all round the mediterranean region) including some of egypt, Most of what is modern day turkey and iran(persia).
Western Roman Empire later collapsed under the barbarian invasions(quite a few other factors also cotributed to its fall, such as economics and currency issues, disease, and environmental degradation), in any case the Roman empire declined, but the incoming conquerors(the germans,gauls, franks, angles, saxon, vandal and visigothic "barbarians") assimilated and later adopted Christianity till modern day Europe (colonization of the rest of the workd by europeans then brought Christiantity everywhere...)
From the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire), Christianity made its to Russia. Later on, the Ottomans conquered the Byzantine Empire (The capital at Constantiople itself became Istanbul later on) and brought in Islam (which now dominates the area)
Incidentally, the Ottomans were quite tolerant of the Christian church and also of Jews(the Sultan Bezayid II actually gave refuge to Jews escaping persecution from Europe) while the Protestants and Catholics went at each other's throats in Europe, executing heretics, purging Jews and all...
ehh quite enough talk for now, you can read all these for yourselves; but really, some knowledge of history is so useful, especially for us young people who view many things, including religion in the modern world through simplistic assumptions, when in fact many factors eg social, political, geographical and cultural go into making the world what it is today.
Oh and if you like, Greek mythology is pretty fun too, think Hercules, Achilles.. ahh the body of greek gods (and goddesses) are so fantastic! Did they workout in a gyms with persoanl trainers or sth?
So how do I blog? I've to use my office computer(which thankfully is a laptop). But then this being an office laptop cant be used to play PC games, listen to itunes etc etc blah blah.
So how do I while my holidays away??
well..there's the PS2..... hah well i did do some constructive things! First off there the Singapore Chemistry Olympiad! I'm so so so happy for RJC's team (which i coordinated and conducted training with). Its nice to work with a bunch of bright(ok they got brains.. but its whether they use it or not.. heh heh) kids who like chemistry. Ok ok the good news is, that its over and the results arrrrrrrre (drumrolls..)
i) all our 15 candidates made it to final round and got a medal (not true for any other college)
ii) we had 6 gold medals (out of the total of 13 awarded, that means we swept half the golds) plus assorted silvers and bronze
iii) we had the top scorer for the entire olympiad (xinyang from 6D if you wanna noe; the olympiad had 2 theory papers and 2 practicals)
iv) we had the top scorer for the theory papers (ben chen from 3K)
v) RJC team won the best team award!
hmm we didnt get top for practical.. hmm will need to look into that
wooohoo welldone!
hmmm on top of that I found time to do quite a bit of reading (eh? so geeky? yar, i'm a geek)
wikipedia's great! I read about the origin of malays and malay language, and then more ancient civilisation stuff, on mesopotamia, the phoenicians (they're the canaanites), child sacrifice, the roman empire. It also interesting to think that, while Judaism is one of the many religions amongst the middle eastern region in ancient times, its offshoots Christianity and later, Islam came to influence such large populations of peoples and geographical areas. (These religions are called the Abrahamic religions; Abraham, Ibrahim, the same you know)
For Christianity, intense persecution under the Romans forced believers to scatter, and along with that, their message spread. But 2 other important events happened to bring Christianity into such dominance over the western hemisphere. 1) Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity, 2) Emperor Theodisius I (he was the last emperor of a unified Eastern and Western Roman empire) made Christianity the state religion of the roman empire. Now if you didnt know, the Roman empire at its peak stretched from the British Isles, the whole western europe, much of the north coast of Africa (basically all round the mediterranean region) including some of egypt, Most of what is modern day turkey and iran(persia).
Western Roman Empire later collapsed under the barbarian invasions(quite a few other factors also cotributed to its fall, such as economics and currency issues, disease, and environmental degradation), in any case the Roman empire declined, but the incoming conquerors(the germans,gauls, franks, angles, saxon, vandal and visigothic "barbarians") assimilated and later adopted Christianity till modern day Europe (colonization of the rest of the workd by europeans then brought Christiantity everywhere...)
From the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire), Christianity made its to Russia. Later on, the Ottomans conquered the Byzantine Empire (The capital at Constantiople itself became Istanbul later on) and brought in Islam (which now dominates the area)
Incidentally, the Ottomans were quite tolerant of the Christian church and also of Jews(the Sultan Bezayid II actually gave refuge to Jews escaping persecution from Europe) while the Protestants and Catholics went at each other's throats in Europe, executing heretics, purging Jews and all...
ehh quite enough talk for now, you can read all these for yourselves; but really, some knowledge of history is so useful, especially for us young people who view many things, including religion in the modern world through simplistic assumptions, when in fact many factors eg social, political, geographical and cultural go into making the world what it is today.
Oh and if you like, Greek mythology is pretty fun too, think Hercules, Achilles.. ahh the body of greek gods (and goddesses) are so fantastic! Did they workout in a gyms with persoanl trainers or sth?
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
My PC is dead
AAAAAIIIIEEEEEEE!!!!
My desktop has died. Thanks to the numerous diseases it contracted. Probably because it participated in lots of unprotected relations with other computers. Damn!
Always use protection. Be safe, not sorry.
AAAIIIEEEEE!
Now i'm using my office laptop. Cannot MSN.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
acceptable statements..
Do read my previous post first before reading this one..
..
So, whats an acceptable way to phrase our observations in the ATP example?
you can say:
1) HYDROLYSIS of ATP releases energy (automatically hydration is assumed to be involved as part of the process)
2)Formation of ADP(aq) and phosphate(aq) from ATP releases energy
See? the above 2 statements are simple but harbours no misconceptions;
However misintepretation of statement (1) often leads pple to make statement (3):
(3) Breaking of the phosphoester link/ P-O bond releases energy.
This statement is wrong.; since breaking the bond requires energy. subsequent hydration of the phosphate and ADP is what releases energy.
So now you learn, while 2 statements may seem/sound the same, they essentially mean very different things, because a statement may contain implications, assumptions(as in statement 1) and context. These subtle things are what what people misread or miss out, because of their incomplete understanding.
Remember, in making statements, beware of implications, assumptions and most importantly, context.
..
So, whats an acceptable way to phrase our observations in the ATP example?
you can say:
1) HYDROLYSIS of ATP releases energy (automatically hydration is assumed to be involved as part of the process)
2)Formation of ADP(aq) and phosphate(aq) from ATP releases energy
See? the above 2 statements are simple but harbours no misconceptions;
However misintepretation of statement (1) often leads pple to make statement (3):
(3) Breaking of the phosphoester link/ P-O bond releases energy.
This statement is wrong.; since breaking the bond requires energy. subsequent hydration of the phosphate and ADP is what releases energy.
So now you learn, while 2 statements may seem/sound the same, they essentially mean very different things, because a statement may contain implications, assumptions(as in statement 1) and context. These subtle things are what what people misread or miss out, because of their incomplete understanding.
Remember, in making statements, beware of implications, assumptions and most importantly, context.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Oversimplification breeds misconceptions
For all students who've done biology and chemistry at O lvls and Alvls, have you ever wondered about this: in biology you are taught that ATP is a high energy molecule, when its phosphoester link is hydrolysed ie ATP -> ADP + Pi (inorganic phosphate) energy is released.
Yet in chemistry you are taught that bond breaking (as happens during hydrolysis), REQUIRES energy? So which is correct? why the apparent contradiction?
This really stems from the oversimplification of the hydrolysis process taught in bio.
1) the so called inorganic phosphate is simply the phosphate PO4^3- ion or the hydrogen phosphate HPO4^2- ion. (they in equilibrium under cellular pH conditions)
2) ATP and ADP do not exist as neutral molecules either, their phosphate groups are deprotonated and so ATP and ADP are anionic.
Rewrite the eqn ATP^4-(aq) -> ADP^2-(aq) + HPO4^2-(aq)
The key difference is something as minor as the (aq)!
The P-O bond in the phosphoester link is actually quite weak so it requires little energy to hydrolyse (but energy is still required). However after the reaction, you've got TWO ions instead of just one. The phosphate ion is a small ion that forms ion dipole interactions readily with water; ie formation of HYDRATED HPO4^2- ion releases large amounts of energy.
Having two ions instead of one means more energy is release from hydration. and for those who take thermodynamics at higher levels they should also know that the entropy of the system increases.
So overall the reaction releases free energy.
Ther are many other misconceptions actually propogated in sec sch science eg ..octet rule as a driver of reactions in chem.. and in bio some people use the word oxalate for example to refer to oxalic acid, when in fact oxalate is the anion of the acid (after its deprotonated)...
I think simplification is good when it allows you to deal with issues without getting bogged down by too many details. But it should be done accurately and also set in a right context.
Oversimplification of anything, not just science but also in many current affairs issues, philosophy, religion, on the other hand, propogates misconceptions, clouds sound judgement, and mislead people.
Look at the masses of ignorant, misdirected people in this world....myself included
Yet in chemistry you are taught that bond breaking (as happens during hydrolysis), REQUIRES energy? So which is correct? why the apparent contradiction?
This really stems from the oversimplification of the hydrolysis process taught in bio.
1) the so called inorganic phosphate is simply the phosphate PO4^3- ion or the hydrogen phosphate HPO4^2- ion. (they in equilibrium under cellular pH conditions)
2) ATP and ADP do not exist as neutral molecules either, their phosphate groups are deprotonated and so ATP and ADP are anionic.
Rewrite the eqn ATP^4-(aq) -> ADP^2-(aq) + HPO4^2-(aq)
The key difference is something as minor as the (aq)!
The P-O bond in the phosphoester link is actually quite weak so it requires little energy to hydrolyse (but energy is still required). However after the reaction, you've got TWO ions instead of just one. The phosphate ion is a small ion that forms ion dipole interactions readily with water; ie formation of HYDRATED HPO4^2- ion releases large amounts of energy.
Having two ions instead of one means more energy is release from hydration. and for those who take thermodynamics at higher levels they should also know that the entropy of the system increases.
So overall the reaction releases free energy.
Ther are many other misconceptions actually propogated in sec sch science eg ..octet rule as a driver of reactions in chem.. and in bio some people use the word oxalate for example to refer to oxalic acid, when in fact oxalate is the anion of the acid (after its deprotonated)...
I think simplification is good when it allows you to deal with issues without getting bogged down by too many details. But it should be done accurately and also set in a right context.
Oversimplification of anything, not just science but also in many current affairs issues, philosophy, religion, on the other hand, propogates misconceptions, clouds sound judgement, and mislead people.
Look at the masses of ignorant, misdirected people in this world....myself included
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Last words on SPAA
Some last words on SPA
1. Make sure you study the suggested solutions to extra practice SPA. Note how each of the section is presented. Compare against you own and see the difference.
2. For theory and reliability please take special note.
3. Also note that you MUST still study for the functional groups not discussed in the extra practice.
4. So sorry I didn't manage to mark the extra practice. As it was submitted to me only on wednesday afternoon, and i had meetings for the whole wedneday afternoon still late evening; usually i would completely mark all your work. Regardless, please take ownership of your learning and work; make sure you self-mark using the answer key and correct as necessary. Good luck!
1. Make sure you study the suggested solutions to extra practice SPA. Note how each of the section is presented. Compare against you own and see the difference.
2. For theory and reliability please take special note.
3. Also note that you MUST still study for the functional groups not discussed in the extra practice.
4. So sorry I didn't manage to mark the extra practice. As it was submitted to me only on wednesday afternoon, and i had meetings for the whole wedneday afternoon still late evening; usually i would completely mark all your work. Regardless, please take ownership of your learning and work; make sure you self-mark using the answer key and correct as necessary. Good luck!
Last words on SPAA
Some last words on SPA
1. Make sure you study the suggested solutions to extra practice SPA. Note how each of the section is presented. Compare against you own and see the difference.
2. For theory and reliability please take special note.
3. Also note that you MUST still study for the functional groups not discussed in the extra practice.
4. So sorry I didn't manage to mark the extra practice. As it was submitted to me only on wednesday afternoon, and i had meetings for the whole wedneday afternoon still late evening; usually i would completely mark all your work. Regardless, please take ownership of your learning and work; make sure you self-mark using the answer key and correct as necessary. Good luck!
1. Make sure you study the suggested solutions to extra practice SPA. Note how each of the section is presented. Compare against you own and see the difference.
2. For theory and reliability please take special note.
3. Also note that you MUST still study for the functional groups not discussed in the extra practice.
4. So sorry I didn't manage to mark the extra practice. As it was submitted to me only on wednesday afternoon, and i had meetings for the whole wedneday afternoon still late evening; usually i would completely mark all your work. Regardless, please take ownership of your learning and work; make sure you self-mark using the answer key and correct as necessary. Good luck!
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
SPAz Again!
Hi pple! ready to go SPAz?
Somethings i wanna highlight so you dun go spaz during SPA. (haha i'm so punny)
1.When creating ur mtd make sure that for the test u choose you are careful to predict the correct outcomes.
Somethings i wanna highlight so you dun go spaz during SPA. (haha i'm so punny)
1.When creating ur mtd make sure that for the test u choose you are careful to predict the correct outcomes.
2. Make sure the procedure you write is IN STEP with your method! some students propose a mtd like say use 2,4 DNPH first then use Na2CO3, but in their procedure its some other order!!
3. THEORY and RELIABILITY: again pls, be specific for the question. like for eg when describing the theory abt silver halide test for R-X, since we are using chloroethane, you should adapt the theory for that compound. So you'd write that OH- hydrolyzes chloroethane, to liberate Cl- ion. Dont bother to write general things like RX and X- ion.
What I mean is, answer the question!!!
What I mean is, answer the question!!!
4. LIMITATIONS. many students are not good at this. they tend to copy wholesale from notes.
i)Please answer in proper qn context. Like for eg 24DNPH test for aldehyde, the notes limitations says that it can give +ve for ketones too... now, whats the point of writing that if there arent any ketones ard anyway?? in this context, 24 DNPH gives an unambiguous +ve
ii) note that hydrolysis requires strong heat, while acid base neutralisation does not ( for amides vs ammonium salts for eg)
5. SPELL the name of the reagents. 2,4 dinitrophenylhydrazine
6. CONDITIONS!! be specific. like especially (aq), state symbols, and warming.
7. when giving procedure, be specific about the + and - observations!!
so again dont give general statements like.. observe for gas that turn red limus blue.
You should write:
add 2 cm3 dil NaOH(aq) to 1 cm3 of sample and heat strongly for 5 mins in boiling water bath.
Test for gas evolved using moist red litmus paper.
N-methyl propanamide will evolve gas turning moist red litmus blue, while compunds x y and z will not.
Notice If you have to test for gas, you shd describe how you are going to do it, as in "test for gas using..."
You should also specifiy the observations (both +ve or - ve) for the compounds being tested on.
8. Remember to DISSOLVE SOLIDS.
9. Remember to specify, "to fresh samples of cpds..." when describing procedure
10. for safety concerns, write both the measures taken and WHY these measure are taken. eg, do expt in fume cupboard to prevent toxic fumes from escaping to environment.
ok break for now
Saturday, October 14, 2006
This is for the frenchies!
Haha you gotta watch this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NhSQARojp0
Haha la marche de l'empereur!!!
Its damn funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NhSQARojp0
Haha la marche de l'empereur!!!
Its damn funny.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
bounce!
You gotta try this! its so fun. you can pick'em up and throw them around. haha
Erm its done by this guy.
Erm its done by this guy.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
How religious words slip, slide, perish
I read this article on the straitstimes, 1 Oct 2006, sunday, by Janadas Devan. Its so good I am reproducing it here in full, for educational purposes.
---Article Begins ---
JOHN Duns Scotus, Byzantium, jihad - Pope Benedict XVI mentioned all three in his controversial address to the University of Regensburg on Sept 12. His Holiness didn't say so, but those proper nouns also gave us 'dunce' (an idiot, a dullard), 'byzantine' ('extremely complicated, inflexible, underhand', especially in politics, as the Oxford English Dictionary defines the adjective) and 'Holy War'.
How did that happen, and why? What do these transformations, or transmogrifications, tell us about religion - or rather, about some aspects of it?
Let's begin with Duns Scotus. Born in Scotland in the town of Duns, he became one of the 13th century's most eminent theologians. Doctor Subtilis (the Subtle Doctor) was the title popular opinion conferred on him, for his philosophy was thought to be especially intricate and subtle, just as Thomas Aquinas, the other great 13th century theologian, was known as Doctor Angelicus (the Angelic Doctor).
Pope Benedict criticised Duns Scotus for his voluntarism - the theory that God should be conceived as Will, not Logos or reason. In contrast to Thomas Aquinas, Pope Benedict noted, Duns Scotus believed that one 'can only know God's voluntas ordinata', or His ordained or established will.
God said, let the bird fall off the tree, and the bird duly fell off the tree; no use asking why, we can only know it was God's will. Such notions gave rise 'to the image of a capricious God, who is not bound to truth and goodness', Pope Benedict noted. Rejecting this view of God, His Holiness stressed: 'God acts with logos.'
Duns Scotus, though, didn't become a derogatory eponym - a name that becomes an everyday word - because of his voluntarism. Indeed, his influence lasted for centuries, and his followers, known as 'Scotists' or 'Dunsmen', dominated English universities up to the late 16th century.
The Dunsmen became known as the 'Duns', a byword for 'pedants', and later 'Dunce', a byword for 'dullards', because of the intemperate manner in which they had opposed the humanism of the Renaissance. No need to ask why the bird fell, they said. All one need know is that there is a first cause - God's will. An undue interest in second causes - the province of science - will only serve to diminish one's faith in the first.
It is altogether apt that our word 'dunce' commemorates the religious obscurantism that almost throttled modern science at its birth in the Renaissance. Sub specie eternitatis, or in the light of eternity, faith and reason may not be opposed, as Pope Benedict argued. But sub specie history, let's not forget, faith did indeed try to stifle reason for centuries. That the first 'dunces' were religious men registers that important truth.
Now, for our second word, 'byzantine', the adjective: It derives, of course, from Byzantium, the ancient Greek city on the Bosporus that Constantine the Great rebuilt as Constantinople in 330, and that is now known as Istanbul. It became the capital of the eastern empire when the Roman empire was split in two in 395. The Byzantine empire lasted for 1,123 years, till May 29, 1453, when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II.
John Julius Norwich, in his magisterial history of Byzantium, blames the 18th century historian Edward Gibbon for the bad press the Eastern empire has received. 'Like all classically educated Englishmen of his day,' Norwich writes, Gibbon 'saw Byzantium as the betrayal of all that was best in ancient Greece and Rome.'
Its art seemed sumptuous and intricate, lacking the balance and proportion of classical Western art; its Eastern Orthodox religious practices seemed familiar and yet bizarrely foreign; its politics were devious and complex. In a word, Byzantium seemed byzantine to the West, primarily because it was eastern.
Interestingly, Pope Benedict quoted one of the last Byzantine emperors, Manuel II Paleologus, on the subject of Islam. 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new,' Pope Benedict reported him asking a learned Persian in 1391.
'God is not pleased by blood,' Manuel II told the Persian, 'and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature.' Such a statement was self-evident to Manuel, Pope Benedict argued, because he was 'shaped by Greek philosophy'.
Manuel II, by this account, seems altogether rational and non-violent - a Byzantine Mahatma Gandhi almost - compared to the marauding Ottoman Turks who were pressing in on Constantinople.
Actually, he was nothing of that sort. 'He shared a love of literature and the traditional Byzantine passion for theology,' notes Norwich, but he was 'a man of action' - and devious and underhand, a byzantine man of action, one might add.
He fought with his father and brothers, his fellow emperors in the constellation of small states that made up the shrivelled Byzantine empire of his time. He travelled to Venice, Rome, Paris and London, trying to drum up support for another 'full-blown international Crusade' against the infidels. He made common cause with the infidels, taking part in their campaigns to expand their sultanate, even at the expense of the last remaining Byzantine strongholds in Asia Minor. Manuel II resembles nothing so much as a contemporary Lebanese Christian politician, navigating the byzantine politics of that war-ravaged, multi-religious country.
It is not in the least surprising that such a man, trapped in the politics of his time, would have said: 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'
Manuel tried to do the same himself, inviting the Western Christians to join him in another Crusade against the infidels. 'Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye,' asked the gentle Galilean in his Sermon on the Mount. Christ's words, needless to say, apply as much to Christians as they do to Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. And of course, all - Christians as well Muslims, Hindus as well as Buddhists - are united in believing that while casting out the motes in the others' eyes is a matter of the utmost urgency, casting out the beams in their own is an irrelevance for they are but mere figments of the others' crazed delusions.
Finally, jihad and jihadist, which are often translated loosely as 'holy war' and 'warrior', respectively. As countless Islamic scholars have pointed out, these translations misrepresent grossly what the words mean.
Jihad derives from the Arabic root ghd, meaning 'to strive', 'to make an utmost effort' or 'to struggle'. The struggle in question covers everything from striving to attain perfect faith to promoting justice. To equate jihad with terrorism is sacrilegious.
'While Al-Qaeda may call themselves 'jihadists' to legitimise their atrocities, I do not see why you need to trumpet their misrepresentations,' a Muslim Singaporean wrote to me recently, objecting to my use of the word in an article. My correspondent was right.
James Fallows in a recent Atlantic Monthly article listed 'an alternative lexicon', assembled with the advice of Islamic scholars, that he hoped would deny terrorists the legitimacy of sanctified language. 'These include hirabah ('unholy war') instead of jihad; irabists ('terrorists') instead of jihadists; mufsidoon ('evildoers') instead of mujahideen; and so on.'
That is sensible advice, but it is doubtful if the meanings of religious words can be cleaned up so easily. Consider, for instance, how the following simple words have come down to us: 'giddy', 'enthusiasm' and 'fanatic'.
Giddy is from the Old English gydig, meaning 'possessed by God'. Enthusiasm comes from the Greek en, in + theos, God, meaning 'inspired by God' or 'God in us'. And fanatic comes from the Latin fanaticus, 'of or relating to a temple', deriving as it does from the noun fanum, temple.
How did giddy come to mean 'overexcited, mentally intoxicated, excitable, frivolous'; enthusiasm, mere 'strong interest or great eagerness'; and fanatic, 'frenzied, mad' - and now simply 'fan', as in 'football fan', which derives too from the same fanaticus?
Religious words slip, slide, perish, lose their meaning, get distorted, become corrupt, precisely because the religious, like the irreligious, slip and slide, distort their faith, give way to irrationality, become corrupt. Corruptio optimi pessima.
Corruption of the best is the worst.
How did that happen, and why? What do these transformations, or transmogrifications, tell us about religion - or rather, about some aspects of it?
Let's begin with Duns Scotus. Born in Scotland in the town of Duns, he became one of the 13th century's most eminent theologians. Doctor Subtilis (the Subtle Doctor) was the title popular opinion conferred on him, for his philosophy was thought to be especially intricate and subtle, just as Thomas Aquinas, the other great 13th century theologian, was known as Doctor Angelicus (the Angelic Doctor).
Pope Benedict criticised Duns Scotus for his voluntarism - the theory that God should be conceived as Will, not Logos or reason. In contrast to Thomas Aquinas, Pope Benedict noted, Duns Scotus believed that one 'can only know God's voluntas ordinata', or His ordained or established will.
God said, let the bird fall off the tree, and the bird duly fell off the tree; no use asking why, we can only know it was God's will. Such notions gave rise 'to the image of a capricious God, who is not bound to truth and goodness', Pope Benedict noted. Rejecting this view of God, His Holiness stressed: 'God acts with logos.'
Duns Scotus, though, didn't become a derogatory eponym - a name that becomes an everyday word - because of his voluntarism. Indeed, his influence lasted for centuries, and his followers, known as 'Scotists' or 'Dunsmen', dominated English universities up to the late 16th century.
The Dunsmen became known as the 'Duns', a byword for 'pedants', and later 'Dunce', a byword for 'dullards', because of the intemperate manner in which they had opposed the humanism of the Renaissance. No need to ask why the bird fell, they said. All one need know is that there is a first cause - God's will. An undue interest in second causes - the province of science - will only serve to diminish one's faith in the first.
It is altogether apt that our word 'dunce' commemorates the religious obscurantism that almost throttled modern science at its birth in the Renaissance. Sub specie eternitatis, or in the light of eternity, faith and reason may not be opposed, as Pope Benedict argued. But sub specie history, let's not forget, faith did indeed try to stifle reason for centuries. That the first 'dunces' were religious men registers that important truth.
Now, for our second word, 'byzantine', the adjective: It derives, of course, from Byzantium, the ancient Greek city on the Bosporus that Constantine the Great rebuilt as Constantinople in 330, and that is now known as Istanbul. It became the capital of the eastern empire when the Roman empire was split in two in 395. The Byzantine empire lasted for 1,123 years, till May 29, 1453, when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II.
John Julius Norwich, in his magisterial history of Byzantium, blames the 18th century historian Edward Gibbon for the bad press the Eastern empire has received. 'Like all classically educated Englishmen of his day,' Norwich writes, Gibbon 'saw Byzantium as the betrayal of all that was best in ancient Greece and Rome.'
Its art seemed sumptuous and intricate, lacking the balance and proportion of classical Western art; its Eastern Orthodox religious practices seemed familiar and yet bizarrely foreign; its politics were devious and complex. In a word, Byzantium seemed byzantine to the West, primarily because it was eastern.
Interestingly, Pope Benedict quoted one of the last Byzantine emperors, Manuel II Paleologus, on the subject of Islam. 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new,' Pope Benedict reported him asking a learned Persian in 1391.
'God is not pleased by blood,' Manuel II told the Persian, 'and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature.' Such a statement was self-evident to Manuel, Pope Benedict argued, because he was 'shaped by Greek philosophy'.
Manuel II, by this account, seems altogether rational and non-violent - a Byzantine Mahatma Gandhi almost - compared to the marauding Ottoman Turks who were pressing in on Constantinople.
Actually, he was nothing of that sort. 'He shared a love of literature and the traditional Byzantine passion for theology,' notes Norwich, but he was 'a man of action' - and devious and underhand, a byzantine man of action, one might add.
He fought with his father and brothers, his fellow emperors in the constellation of small states that made up the shrivelled Byzantine empire of his time. He travelled to Venice, Rome, Paris and London, trying to drum up support for another 'full-blown international Crusade' against the infidels. He made common cause with the infidels, taking part in their campaigns to expand their sultanate, even at the expense of the last remaining Byzantine strongholds in Asia Minor. Manuel II resembles nothing so much as a contemporary Lebanese Christian politician, navigating the byzantine politics of that war-ravaged, multi-religious country.
It is not in the least surprising that such a man, trapped in the politics of his time, would have said: 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'
Manuel tried to do the same himself, inviting the Western Christians to join him in another Crusade against the infidels. 'Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye,' asked the gentle Galilean in his Sermon on the Mount. Christ's words, needless to say, apply as much to Christians as they do to Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. And of course, all - Christians as well Muslims, Hindus as well as Buddhists - are united in believing that while casting out the motes in the others' eyes is a matter of the utmost urgency, casting out the beams in their own is an irrelevance for they are but mere figments of the others' crazed delusions.
Finally, jihad and jihadist, which are often translated loosely as 'holy war' and 'warrior', respectively. As countless Islamic scholars have pointed out, these translations misrepresent grossly what the words mean.
Jihad derives from the Arabic root ghd, meaning 'to strive', 'to make an utmost effort' or 'to struggle'. The struggle in question covers everything from striving to attain perfect faith to promoting justice. To equate jihad with terrorism is sacrilegious.
'While Al-Qaeda may call themselves 'jihadists' to legitimise their atrocities, I do not see why you need to trumpet their misrepresentations,' a Muslim Singaporean wrote to me recently, objecting to my use of the word in an article. My correspondent was right.
James Fallows in a recent Atlantic Monthly article listed 'an alternative lexicon', assembled with the advice of Islamic scholars, that he hoped would deny terrorists the legitimacy of sanctified language. 'These include hirabah ('unholy war') instead of jihad; irabists ('terrorists') instead of jihadists; mufsidoon ('evildoers') instead of mujahideen; and so on.'
That is sensible advice, but it is doubtful if the meanings of religious words can be cleaned up so easily. Consider, for instance, how the following simple words have come down to us: 'giddy', 'enthusiasm' and 'fanatic'.
Giddy is from the Old English gydig, meaning 'possessed by God'. Enthusiasm comes from the Greek en, in + theos, God, meaning 'inspired by God' or 'God in us'. And fanatic comes from the Latin fanaticus, 'of or relating to a temple', deriving as it does from the noun fanum, temple.
How did giddy come to mean 'overexcited, mentally intoxicated, excitable, frivolous'; enthusiasm, mere 'strong interest or great eagerness'; and fanatic, 'frenzied, mad' - and now simply 'fan', as in 'football fan', which derives too from the same fanaticus?
Religious words slip, slide, perish, lose their meaning, get distorted, become corrupt, precisely because the religious, like the irreligious, slip and slide, distort their faith, give way to irrationality, become corrupt. Corruptio optimi pessima.
Corruption of the best is the worst.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Consultations ogay.
Dear all, if you want to see me for a consultation, please make prior appointment with me.
best is sms or write me a note.
Even those who have already made appointments with me verbally, please sms me!! Cos, I can't remember them :P bad memory
All the best to all of you out there!
best is sms or write me a note.
Even those who have already made appointments with me verbally, please sms me!! Cos, I can't remember them :P bad memory
All the best to all of you out there!
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Some useful online chem resources
Rod Beavon: one of the chief examiners in UK for edexcel exam. http://www.rod.beavon.clara.net/chemistry_contents.htm
Chemguide: Good for building foundation and explaining and visualizing concepts http://www.chemguide.co.uk/
More on tutorial 14b and proteins
Here's an FAQ on what you should do in terms of preparing for the proteins section for Chem H2 syllabus. What do you need to study??
I suggest you print this FAQ and append to your tutorial 14b. The FAQ also references tutorial 14b.
Q1. Is it important to know about how enzymes work (induced fit theory etc.)?
A1. No. However students must know that enzyme function depends on its structure, which means if the structure is lost through denaturation, function is lost too. The whole chunk about how enzymes work explains the structure function relationship.
Q2. So what is it that the students NEED to know?
A2. The tutorial is crafted according to SIOs of the syllabus. So its a good guide on what students need to know. Basically 4 major portions:
i) amides - hydrolysis, synthesis, and peptide sequencing. That’s tutorial qn 1,2,3
ii) Protein stucture - Mostly fact and recall. Definitions and esp FOCUS ON BONDING
involved. They also need to draw diagrams, which cannot be only memorized but must be practiced (to draw good diagrams) esp for secondary and tertiary. Tutorial Q4,5,6,10
Quaternary structure. Question 10: you notice there are only 6 marks awarded but 12 bullets in the answer key! Why?
Actually on the FIRST 6 bullets in the answer key are marking points. Those points give a DESCRIPTION of what the quaternary structure is.
The next 6 bullet points actually give the SIGNIFICANCE of the quaternary structure. SO students need to discern; the points from allosteric properties onward should be written if the question asks for SIGNIFICANCE of quaternary structure.
The specific use of haemoglobin as an example is an SIO. So students must know all these points.
iii) Denaturation - Students should know the process, how denaturation take place. They should also know the significance and explain: mainly loss of normal function such as structural strength(eg in rebonding) or catalytic property(rate of enzyme catalysed reactions) and solubility(coagulation). Tutorial questions 7,8,9
iv) Explaining observed phenomenon: examples are given in notes from pg44-45. They need to know them for experience. The examples are by no means exhaustive, and I do not know what's going to feature in the A lvls. The basic concept is that structural alteration(usually via denaturation)or structural differences alters observed function. So students should be exposed and familiar with as many examples as possible, and be able to explain when given any example. Tutorial Q7,8,9
Q3. What does allosteric properties mean?
A3. It means that the biochemical property of the protein is altered. If this word makes you feel uncomfortable feel free to expand. It should go something like "The significance of the quaternary structure is that the biochemical properties of the protein is changed; allosteric properties can arise in the quarternary complex."
A little bit more about allosteric properties: it has to do with altering enzyme active site property when something else binds to it at some other site other than its own active site.
So the haemoglobin example illustrates this... the haemoglobin sub-units are bound together by extensive side chain interaction, when an oxygen molecule bonds to one of the haem groups, its subunit's conformation alters. This forces a conformational change on the other subunits. The result is that their haem groups now have an increased tendency to bind oxygen.
For bio students you would have seen other egs of allosteric effects, eg from co-factors, co-enzymes, and allosteric inhibitors
I suggest you print this FAQ and append to your tutorial 14b. The FAQ also references tutorial 14b.
Q1. Is it important to know about how enzymes work (induced fit theory etc.)?
A1. No. However students must know that enzyme function depends on its structure, which means if the structure is lost through denaturation, function is lost too. The whole chunk about how enzymes work explains the structure function relationship.
Q2. So what is it that the students NEED to know?
A2. The tutorial is crafted according to SIOs of the syllabus. So its a good guide on what students need to know. Basically 4 major portions:
i) amides - hydrolysis, synthesis, and peptide sequencing. That’s tutorial qn 1,2,3
ii) Protein stucture - Mostly fact and recall. Definitions and esp FOCUS ON BONDING
involved. They also need to draw diagrams, which cannot be only memorized but must be practiced (to draw good diagrams) esp for secondary and tertiary. Tutorial Q4,5,6,10
Quaternary structure. Question 10: you notice there are only 6 marks awarded but 12 bullets in the answer key! Why?
Actually on the FIRST 6 bullets in the answer key are marking points. Those points give a DESCRIPTION of what the quaternary structure is.
The next 6 bullet points actually give the SIGNIFICANCE of the quaternary structure. SO students need to discern; the points from allosteric properties onward should be written if the question asks for SIGNIFICANCE of quaternary structure.
The specific use of haemoglobin as an example is an SIO. So students must know all these points.
iii) Denaturation - Students should know the process, how denaturation take place. They should also know the significance and explain: mainly loss of normal function such as structural strength(eg in rebonding) or catalytic property(rate of enzyme catalysed reactions) and solubility(coagulation). Tutorial questions 7,8,9
iv) Explaining observed phenomenon: examples are given in notes from pg44-45. They need to know them for experience. The examples are by no means exhaustive, and I do not know what's going to feature in the A lvls. The basic concept is that structural alteration(usually via denaturation)or structural differences alters observed function. So students should be exposed and familiar with as many examples as possible, and be able to explain when given any example. Tutorial Q7,8,9
Q3. What does allosteric properties mean?
A3. It means that the biochemical property of the protein is altered. If this word makes you feel uncomfortable feel free to expand. It should go something like "The significance of the quaternary structure is that the biochemical properties of the protein is changed; allosteric properties can arise in the quarternary complex."
A little bit more about allosteric properties: it has to do with altering enzyme active site property when something else binds to it at some other site other than its own active site.
So the haemoglobin example illustrates this... the haemoglobin sub-units are bound together by extensive side chain interaction, when an oxygen molecule bonds to one of the haem groups, its subunit's conformation alters. This forces a conformational change on the other subunits. The result is that their haem groups now have an increased tendency to bind oxygen.
For bio students you would have seen other egs of allosteric effects, eg from co-factors, co-enzymes, and allosteric inhibitors
Monday, September 11, 2006
Some exam techniques
This is with regard to time management and how extensive you need to answer your questions.
Elucidation Questions:
1) Most importantly you must give proper deduction of FG and reaction linked to observation:
eg A reacts wtih 2,4, dinitrophenylhydrazine to form hydrazone--> A has carbonyl group.
These are most important, since without proper deductions you may make mistakes in structures.
2) Give structures and label: these will be 1 mark per structure.
Normally for 10 marks, elucidating 4-6 structures plus all deductions will give full marks.
3) equations?: give these only if the question demands for them. IE the question states:" give equations for ALL reactions that take place"
If question implies that equations are optional: for eg, "deduce structures, and use eqns where appropriate", it means that the equations are used in place of deductions, so they share the same marks. IE if you are able to give full and complete deductions, equations become redundant and do not score more credit.
In these cases, I recommend especially when you are short of time not to write equations; simply do a good job with observations->deductions and structures and you will score.
But if you've got time, write the equations to secure 100% marks.
During tutorials I always demand a higher standard(120%) in order to train you up, and you need the practice to ground your foundation. But during exam, learn to discern good time management.
remember: 1 mark => 1.5 minutes. you may need to be faster than this for organic chem, because for stoichiometry, 1 mark may take a long time (calculations etc) to obtain.
That's it for now.
Elucidation Questions:
1) Most importantly you must give proper deduction of FG and reaction linked to observation:
eg A reacts wtih 2,4, dinitrophenylhydrazine to form hydrazone--> A has carbonyl group.
These are most important, since without proper deductions you may make mistakes in structures.
2) Give structures and label: these will be 1 mark per structure.
Normally for 10 marks, elucidating 4-6 structures plus all deductions will give full marks.
3) equations?: give these only if the question demands for them. IE the question states:" give equations for ALL reactions that take place"
If question implies that equations are optional: for eg, "deduce structures, and use eqns where appropriate", it means that the equations are used in place of deductions, so they share the same marks. IE if you are able to give full and complete deductions, equations become redundant and do not score more credit.
In these cases, I recommend especially when you are short of time not to write equations; simply do a good job with observations->deductions and structures and you will score.
But if you've got time, write the equations to secure 100% marks.
During tutorials I always demand a higher standard(120%) in order to train you up, and you need the practice to ground your foundation. But during exam, learn to discern good time management.
remember: 1 mark => 1.5 minutes. you may need to be faster than this for organic chem, because for stoichiometry, 1 mark may take a long time (calculations etc) to obtain.
That's it for now.
Something abt proteins
Hi all,
IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: Some texts regards -S-S- disulphide link as part of primary protein sturcture. This is from definition that primary structure is made by covalent bonding. Also certain proteins exist as crosslinked polymers, hence the inclusion of -S-S- as primary structure.
BUT PLEASE TAKE NOTE: at A lvls, the primary structure is defined ONLY by the amino acid sequence joined up by peptide links. Please do not include S-S in its definition.
-S-S- link is weak and considered to be part of tertiary structure.
Please make sure you highlight this on your notes.
IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: Some texts regards -S-S- disulphide link as part of primary protein sturcture. This is from definition that primary structure is made by covalent bonding. Also certain proteins exist as crosslinked polymers, hence the inclusion of -S-S- as primary structure.
BUT PLEASE TAKE NOTE: at A lvls, the primary structure is defined ONLY by the amino acid sequence joined up by peptide links. Please do not include S-S in its definition.
-S-S- link is weak and considered to be part of tertiary structure.
Please make sure you highlight this on your notes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)