Death by Elevator

Here is one of the least documented, but nonetheless most devastating evils of our society: the 'DOOR CLOSE' button in elevators. It is supposed to save you time, allow you to decide who is to enter this intimate space with you, or simply give you a feeling of 'being in control' over one of the most unavoidable machines in our life.
However it simply does nothing. Except for annoying and frustrating you with its complete lack of responsiveness, and humiliating you in public.
Yes, conversely to its good mate the 'DOOR OPEN' button, the 'DOOR CLOSE' button it is simply a daily reminder of our insignificance and absence of control over our life.
The only thing you can do, is to enter the elevator and wait - and then hit the 'DOOR CLOSE' just before the elevator would have closed it's steal doors anyway. It takes some training, but at least showcases you as a person in control to your lift mates.

The Pope's 10 tips for happiness.

It doesn't matter that I am not a Catholic Christian; this Pope 'my pope', and a true guide.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/04/opinion/parini-pope-10-tips-for-happiness/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

Bioscience Faculty position outside the US

Given the ongoing deterioration of living and working conditions for US scientists in faculty positionsm more and more scientists in the US have asked me what are the options elsewhere, especially in Europe. Here is my latest answer to one of them:

Concerning research in Europe:

I think there is a north->south degradation of conditions. Research in Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Germany and maybe Finland seems ok. Especially Germany seems to do quite well, however obtaining permanent positions is very very difficult. But especially in the former eastern (and now nice) part of Germany (Leipzig, Dresden) there appear to be quite some openings. UK had some certain reductions in funding, but might still be an option. In general, the higher (full-professor) positions in Europe/UK are not as well paid as in the US, but the annex (hidden) costs of living are cheaper (health care, child care, education). However salaries in Norway and Switzerland should be high, however cost of living is extremely high too, so it balances out. Swiss is a great option, if you manage to find a position there (difficult!). Positions are well paid, and it seems that Switzerland funding success rate is around 40 %. As an insider's tip, there is Austria. Austria has been a bid 'hidden' internationally, but has some good research going on, and appears to have openings in bioscience. In particular in some institute in Vienna, maybe the IMBA, but need to check.

France is going down, steadily. A few research positions are open each year, but the salaries are appalling, funding is difficult, and governmental support for research is crumbling. Also you need to be somehow connected to a lab in France to have the necessary support. However, there are a few good places to do research in France, so if you are desperate…

Science in Spain, Italy, Portugal is on a highway to hell.

If you would still consider other countries, I can suggest Australia (still good funding available) and maybe New Zealand (low salaries but also low cost of living). If you are more adventurous: South Korea. If you don't mind heat: Middle East. Qatar is still building up new institutes with huge amounts of investments. And there is KAUST in Saudi Arabia.

You could also consider South Africa (Cape Town, I'D say.).

good luck!

Reductionism, Globalization and Faith

Dear Dr. Malki,

I have read your book Reductionism, Globalization and Faith with much joy and relief. The world needs people like you and your co-author Robert Stucky who are strong, dedicated and didactic advocates for a religion and faith that unifies, rather than divides.

Your text uses historic, logical, religious and scientific arguments to establish the Oneness of all of us, and all our expressions of faith and spirituality, under one God. By eloquently establishing that a reductionist interpretation of spirituality is in contradiction with the very basis of every religion, your essay chiefly refutes spiritual discrimination.

Why do we still need such books? Isn’t this openness, oneness, love and respect already clearly at the heart of all holy scriptures, and hasn’t this message been echoed ever since by a multitude of persons of all faiths? Isn’t the reconnection of all of us with this love and oneness the very goal of all religions? 

If so, how can it be explained that someone can very strictly follow the prescriptions of a religion, yet still no understand? Could the same type of persons read your book, and use it as a rational proof for the superiority of a strict monotheism over other religions which include veneration of multiple gods and/or statues or trees? Can even your book be used to divide?

How can so many believe that the greatness of God can never fully and satisfactorily be expressed in human words, yet be ready to kill or lose their own life in order to increase the number of persons who use their specific words for God?

As you recall in your book, a religion should show us the way to reconnect with the reality we call God. Why do the world’s religions fail for so many of their followers?

One of the prophets said ‘the beginning of the way [to God] is love and goodness’.  Most of us, however, are filled with fear, anger and frustration. We don’t understand ourselves, and hence we cannot understand God. But we can easily be misguided, and never notice that we are not on the route to God. How can we learn to understand and accept ourselves, how can we get ready to find God? An obvious answer would be by doing what all prophets have done—don’t follow prevailing misconceptions blindly, but mediate and seek relentlessly for yourself. Again, this is no secret, so we all could do it. However this spiritual path is long, requires relentless effort and awareness, and ultimately has to be found and walked by each of us on our own. Your book, and your actions, are a very valuable guide to motivate us to discover and proceed along this way. Thank you!

regards

BLT

The critical state of scientists-when do we jump?

You certainly know the image of the frog, that you can place in cold water. If you heat the water slowly, the frog will not jump out of the water, until it dies.
That is the current state of scientists in most countries, and especially in so-called first-world countries. The water has been heating up slowly for about 20 years, and is now hot enough to be life threatening. Following 6-10 years of working as underpaid graduate students or post-docs, most find no jobs, and have to drop out or convert to another profession. Those lucky scientists who obtained a faculty position now spend typically 60++ hours at work each week-but not because exciting research, but because of the permanent threat to lose everything if they do not find the next funding for their research. Facing a <6 --="" --not="" a="" almost="" and="" angst="" applications="" can="" certainly="" creativity="" does="" for="" grant="" innovate.="" live="" money="" most="" needed="" never="" not="" over="" p="" permanent="" rate="" scientific="" searching...="" stimulate="" stop="" success="" the="" to="" truth.="" we="" which="" with="" work="">As governmental funding is being reduced each year, or being only attributed to particular areas, we need to search for funds from industry sources. Although funding should not dictate the outcome of a study (but sometimes it does, just to assure that funding continues...), funding dictates the focus of our research. Hence, subjects that are of no value, or of harm, to the funding body will not be subject to scrutiny. As science loses its independent voice for the good of humankind, scientists feel increasingly frustrated for having become salesman of science. We're burned out, disillusioned, frustrated, panicked. But we don't jump. We still love science, and most importantly, we have nowhere to jump on to.
In the meantime, all those 'first world' countries slowly lose the scientific advantage they had for the last century. Without innovation and technology, there is no sustainable future. 

The World's End?

All day and night, music,
a quiet and bright
reedsong. If it
fades, we fade.

Rumi
(transl. C. Barks)

Fête de la musique in Saudi Arabia

21. of June, for the fete de la musique I managed to find a particularly dead street in a particularly derelict area next to Thuwal, Saudi Arabia. Sitting there at dusk alone between Red Sea, sand and obsolete human constructions, I listened to the intersecting chorals of three muezzins calling for prayer from different distances; this was actually one of the better musical experiences I had at the fête de la musique.

So God created mankind in his own image

Monotheistic religions somehow assume that God created humans in her own image. Hence we are the closest to God, and the most like God. I wonder how we got to this idea? Currently, we are most actively destroying our planet, which supposedly is God's creation. We know that our current behaviour is unsustainable, and will devastate our planet already in our life time, or at least in our children's lifetime. But we don't stop because of our short-term benefits of doing so. If you completely eliminate a species from our planet, typically it has negative effects on the stability and long-term survival of ecosystems. Except for us. If you take away humankind from the earth now, every single ecosystem will tremendously be relieved and may flourish. Eliminate humans, everything improves. Why would God choose such a useless and globally damaging creature as her image? Or rather, what makes us think that our behaviour is closest to God's?

truth & religion

Krishnamurthi said that 'truth cannot be given to you by someone - you have to discover it by yourself'. The same is true for spirituality - it cannot be given to you, you have to discover it. That is why mystics of all origins understand each other, whereas fundamentalists of all religions hate all those who do not use the exact same religious doctrine.
Mohammed, Jesus, Buddha, all prophets discovered their spirituality on their own; they were mystics who would have understood each other. Why don't their disciples? - Because they follow their doctrine rather than their method.

The counter-intuitive restrictions on Allah: my God or your God

A longstanding and totally nonsensical struggle has opposed Muslims and Christians in Malaysia over the usage of the word Allah in prayer. Malay and other Arab-speaking Christians have used the word Allah for centuries to refer to God; this makes sense, because in Arabic, Allah means 'the God' (Allah is a contraction of al ilah, the God). Although Muslims believe that there is only one God, Allah, they obtained a Malaysian high-court decision that forbids the use of Allah by Christians. Thus the high-court rejects an earlier appeal by Christians, based on the fact that the word Allah predates Islam by thousands of years (first written evidence of the usage of the word Allah comes from Babylonian tablets form 1700 BCE). When will we realise that we all prey to the same God? Should Christians try to obtain a ruling that forbids the usage of the word 'God' by non-Christians?

Free the Nelson Mandela in you

As political leaders and other influential figures gather in the FNB stadium in Soweto to pay homage to Nelson Mandela, they should also start to free their Inner Nelson in their future decision making. Mandela, just as many other famous leaders (including Ghandi, or even Mohammad or Jesus, if you wish) have proven that peace and forgiveness are more successful than violence and punishment. World leaders, don't just remember Mandela today, remember him each time you make decisions.

It's 'Stand By Your Nationality' month!

I feel it's time to declare a 'Stand By Your Nationality' month!
Often, people from so-called third-world countries need to struggle to obtain a first-world passport to at last be able to have a successful career - or simply to survive. All those have the unfortunate tendency to then claim to be 'French', 'English', 'Canadian', etc, rather then their first, original, nationality (typically from Africa, Asia or Latin America).
I would urge all those dual citizens to be proud of their original nationality, and stand by their roots, whenever possible (i.e. not for administrative, professional or travel purposes...). Be proud to be from whatever 'underdeveloped' country you are, because the current 'underdevelopment' is simply the result of century-long forced exploitation by a 'developed' country. Be proud of where you came from, because most likely every step on the path was difficult and required hard work, perseverance and cunningness. And each time you claim your original nationality, you will shed good light on your country. 

Everything is natural

In a simplified way, we think that ‘natural’ (without human intervention or technology) is opposed to ‘artificial’ (produced by humans). This divide may be misleading and dangerous. We are, like it or not, a product and part of Nature. Hence, what we produce is also a product and part of Nature. Currently, our actions are not sustainable, because they push the current natural system, of which we are just a minor part, out of balance. Being all linked, systems-biological feedback, provided by ‘Nature’, will act on our planet (and us). We can, and do, act on our global system, but we cannot be separated from it. Whatever we do is natural, and we cannot stop Nature from acting on us. 

Republicans, Christian values, and Obamacare

US House Republicans are trying yet another way to to block Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ('Obamacare') through voting in favour of a temporary spending bill that includes a 1-year delay for Obamacare.
The Republicans are always eager to link Christian values to their party, allowing them to get votes from people who actually don't really profit from Republican's politics. Given that Obamacre is supposed to bring affordable health care to a bigger part of the US population, let's just ask how Jesus would have voted. That should be the Republican's vote, too.

The Great Paradox Of Religions: Words

All religions agree that the highest divinity, the highest spiritual principle (God, Allah, Brahman, Yahwe etc...) cannot be truthfully and comprehensively expressed by our human words. These divinities are far greater then us, hence our words can only describe highly limited aspects, like a shade describes a tree.
We know our words can never describe God, yet we will do everything, including killing and torturing, so that another human being will use the same words as we use to refer to God.

These things the world will never know.

Two days ago, my Italian friend slipped and fell down 10 meters during a hiking trip in a remote part of Saudi Arabia. He was seriously injured and needed immediate medical treatment to survive, however we didn't have a car close by, and no cell phone connection. The only other persons in the place were two Saudi men, and a ten year old boy, the son of one of them. Without hesitation, these men offered to take my friend to the next hospital in their new car, despite the fact that my friend was heavily bleeding, screaming, and making uncontrolled movements; and despite the fact that this journey would not only ruin the whole backseat area of their car (which they had to use to travel back 400 km to their home town), but also traumatise the child. Because of them, my friend did not die that day.
Late at night, on the TV screen of the hospital next to the bed where my friend was sleeping, I saw first pictures of the victims of the Nairobi islamists. The world only saw the pictures of the islamist's victims.

Humane actions to save the Devil

The native Tasmanian human population has been exterminated by us, without the blink of an eye. But now the international community produces immense financial and human efforts to save the Tasmanian Devil. Is the Tasmanian Devil closer to us than the Tasmanian Human?

The Fête de l'Humanité ended yesterday.

Why work-life balance is bound to make you unhappy and unbalanced. And what we can do instead.

What is Work-Life Balance?

According to wikipedia:

 “Work-Life Balance is a broad concept including proper prioritizing between ‘work’ (career and ambition) on one hand and ‘life’ (pleasure, leisure, family and spiritual development) on the other.” 

However in real life, Work-Life Balance means both of two things:

1) to pay my bills, I spend most of my awake life-time with something that is neither pleasure nor leisure, that hurts my family, and transforms me into an ungodly villain.

2) if I'm stressed and overworked, than it's my own fault, because I'm too dumb to get the work-life balance right.

This is depressing. Therefore I came up with a new concept: the Balanced Worklife. 

Yes, it’s all in the word order and the absence of the hyphen. It’s a fine concept; the problem is I am not yet quite sure what it actually means.

Maybe: Rather than trying to stop the wicked ‘Work’ just seconds before it definitely crushes the jolly ‘Life’, we should attempt to have a well-balanced ‘Worklife’. An entangled harmonious Oneness. Fine – and how do we do that? Honestly, I don’t know. I guess it’s much in the intention. If I am frustrated and angry because I need to stop work to find a birthday present for my wife, and then am even more upset because this obliges me to spend the following Sunday finishing a manuscript, than that’s reasonable Work-Life balance, but an unbalanced Worklife. If I accept to work on a Sunday as a result of having made my wife happy the other day, well, then that’s much better, even though the facts are just the same.

But intention is also that: If I work hard to be recognized or rewarded (at work or at home), then this will leave me frustrated or bitter, even if I succeed. However if I am totally dedicated to what I am doing, I do not need a reward to be happy – even though I am likely to get one as a result. In a nutshell: Be dedicated, and be aware of it, at any moment, and, on occasion, do all those things wise people in baggy cloths have told us for millennia. I mean, what are the chances they were all wrong?

Sales Managers: What would humanity be without them?

Sales Managers for scientific instruments are incredible. They have absolutely no idea about the products they sell, and don't even hide it. Here is an excerpt from my (ME) last weeks encounter with one (SM):

ME: So what brought you to our institute today.

SM: I am trying to meet a few people and see if I can sell some things. - What do you do?

ME: Molecular Biophysics.

SM: I don't know this method. What do you need? [starts dropping random catalogues on my table]

ME: So what is the measuring volume of this instrument?

SM: I don't know. It's in the catalogue.

ME: We already have an instrument of the other company in our core facilities.

SM: Apparently there is a problem with this instruments. They don't like it.

ME: What is the problem?

SM: I don't know.

SM: The other company does not have customer support here. We have customer support.

ME: Where is he based?

SM: In Belgium.

ME: That is more than 5000 miles away, on a different continent.

SM: Yes, but he comes here regularly. And I only live 1 hour away. I can come too, and help.

MS: But you don't know the instrument.

SM: No sir.

ME: I thought this SPR method was patented. How did your company deal with it?

SM: I don't know.

ME: I don't think SPR is a useful method. I never had any good results with Biacore. What is the difference between your company and biacore?

SM: It's better.

ME: why is it better?

SM: I don't know. My company says so. 

ME: ...?

SM: I can put you in contact with our application specialist. He will call you.

ME: No, please just give me his contact details, and I will contact him if I need to.

SM: He will call you in the next few days.

ME: I do not need to be called. I will call if I need to.

Two days later I received a stream of email messages, including:

Dear Dr. Massimo:

Day before yesterday I met Prof Bernhard and we had a discussion about NanO ITC and, he wants to have a comparison statement on our Nano ITC with Microcal.

Secondly he has to clarify some more points with Application and so we recommend that you will call him as a courtesy.

Is it possible to call him? He is ready for a Skype Call also. Below is his contact info.

[...]

and:

Dear Dr. Bernhard:

Our Senior Application Specialist sent a mail as below.

She wants to talk to you.

Please let me know by return mail , whether this time is OK for a call?

Please let me know your convenient time

Regards

Reasons for Violence

It is astonishing what reasons one Homo sapiens puts forward to use violence against another Homo sapiens. There is how one calls god (Christian vs Muslim vs Hindu vs Jews vs ...), but also down to the very details of how one interprets the same religious text (sunni vs shiites; protestant vs catholic..). There are colour of skin, or of hair, language, if someone earns a living with livestock or with agriculture (Darfur), what kind of human one is attracted to (hetero vs homosexuality), geographic origin (especially in neighbouring regions), what kind of sports team one favours, gender (male vs female), ... and some of the worst conflicts are based on differences between people that are so similar, that even modern science struggles to find out what these differences actually are, apart from the name of the group (Hutu vs Tutsi).
Differences between humans are simple pretexts, rather than true reasons, for violence.