The Multiverse Theory and what it means to try and open your mind.

Brain ShotMapping The Brain

Farmers AlmanacA How To Guide

GAlAxieS

9

15 21

3Brain Shot The Multiverse Theory

The Farmer’s Almanac

Strike of Curiosity

30 Seconds: Hinduism

President Obama announced an ambitious plan to understand the brain in April 2013, people were quick to view it as the next Manhattan Project, or Human Genome Project, or moon shot.

The Farmer’s Almanac has always remained a mystery to us, until now.

When tasked with the challenge of a creative writing assignment in school, I decided to reflect on a conversation held between my brother and I in our childhood backyard. We discuss the possibilities of multiple existing universes and where we as humans stand amongst them.

This article is a self reflection and deeper examination into my own humanity and how I have viewed my existence in such a large universe. Brace yourself and try to find the power to open your mind to a very very big question.

We took the time to interview one of the leading heads of science, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson.

In this version of our 30 Seconds article we try our best to decipher the world of Hinduism with little to no effort

Author: Laura Sanders

Author: Alexander StudholmeAuthor: Jessica Hullinger

Author: Greg RossAuthor: Charlie Jurgens

3

15

9

21

11

GAlAxieS

Dear Adventurer,

By picking up this magazine you have proven one of our magazine’s core questions: are people curious? Through the simple action of picking up this collection of pages you have opened your mind to things you may have never wondered in your life. Welcome.

We try to make every single issue of Curio Magazine an adventure of sorts, something that people can experience, rather than just sit down and read. We want you, the reader, to walk away from this magazine questioning the things around you and having a new sense of confidence in yourself for learning something new. Whether it be a random scientific fact or maybe just an essay written by the every day human, we support it all. Feel free to send us your questions, essays, and random facts because together we can improve the minds of many.

Curio Magazine’s mission is to accomadate the reader with literature that will both spark and expand their curiosity through exploring popular science and unanswered mysteries. We supply a connection between the reader’s questions with scientific fact no matter the educational background. Curio wants anyone and everyone to open their minds to what is around them.

Be Curious.

Charlie JurgensThe Chief

When the president of the United

States makes a request, scientists usually

listen. Physicists created the atomic

bomb for President Roosevelt. NASA

engineers put men on the moon for

President Kennedy. Biologists presented

their first draft of the human genetic

catalog to President Clinton.

So when President Obama announced

an ambitious plan to understand the

brain in April 2013, people were quick

to view it as the next Manhattan Project,

or Human Genome Project, or moon

shot. But these analogies may not be so

apt. Compared with understanding the

mysterious inner workings of the brain,

those other endeavors started with an

end in sight. Taking on the challenge

of the human brain however does not

supply that sort of comfort.

In a human brain, 85 billion nerve cells

communicate via trillions of connections

using complex patterns of electrical

jolts and more than 100 different

chemicals. A pea-sized lump of brain

tissue contains more information than

the Library of Congress. But unlike those

orderly shelved and cataloged books,

the organization of the brain remains

mostly indecipherable, concealing

the mysteries of underlying thought,

learning, emotion and memory.

Still, as with other challenging

enterprise prompted by presidential

initiatives, success would change the

world. A deep understanding of how

the brain works, and what goes wrong

when it doesn’t, could lead to a dazzling

array of treatments for brain disorders

from autism and Alzheimer’s disease

to depression and drug addiction that

afflict millions of people.

That’s why President Obama threw

his weight behind the BRAIN Initiative,

short for Brain Research Advancing

Innovative Neurotechnologies. The

premise is simple: Before doctors can

fix the brain, scientists must first

understand how it works. And to

understand how it works, scientists need

tools to study it. With $110 million of

federal funding in it’s first year, the

BRAIN Initiative is intended to spur

scientists to develop new technologies

to measure and manipulate the brain.

Eventually, if it is to join the list of

presidential science successes, the

project will catalog all the brain’s parts

and processes, explore how cells and

molecules create thought and behavior,

brain shotMapping Out The Brain Written by: Laura Sanders

Illustration by: Ian Patterson

3

and build powerful new weapons for

neutralizing the pathological enemies of

the brain and mind.

Yet even aside from those scientific

challenges, which are all huge in their

own right, the project faces many

major logistical hurdles. It’s not clear,

for instance, how various government

agencies and private institutions involved

in the project will coordinate their efforts.

Nor is it clear how the BRAIN Initiative will

relate to the European Union’s $1.3 billion

Human Brain Project. Some scientists say

the BRAIN Initiative’s initial funding is

too paltry to make real progress and that

future funding is a political uncertainty.

Perhaps most unsettling, the BRAIN

Initiative has no definitive goal. Unlike

mushroom clouds, a collection of moon

rocks or the software for a human being,

the BRAIN project envisions no tangible

result, many scientists say. “It isn’t clear

what victory will look like on this project,”

says Dr.Thomas Insel, director of the

National Institute of Mental Health in

Bethesda, Maryland.

“I think people have to be comfortable with that.”

Despite these caveats, though, many

neuroscientists appreciate that President

Obama’s announcement elevated the

status of brain research and captured the

attention of their community. “When the

president says it, people listen up,” says

Christof Koch of the Allen Institute for

Brain Science in St’!attle. “I think that, by

itself, is a very important thing. It really

shows that neuroscience has come of age.”

Ambitious goals

While the BRAIN Initiative’s objectives

are hard to express in concrete terms, the

project is full of visionary promise. “The

ultimate goal is to understand who we are,”

says Terry Sejnowski of the Salk Institute

for Biological Studies in La Jolla, Calif.

“How is it that our brain is able to look out

into the world and see things? How is it

that we are able to make decisions? How is

it that we’re able to coordinate enormous

amounts of knowledge?”

The people charged with translating

these esoteric goals into concrete action

are beginning to define their task more

precisely. But there is no consensus on how

to proceed. With no central organizing

entity, the three government agencies

participating- the National Institutes of

4

Health, the Defense Advanced Research

Projects Agency and the National

Science Foundation interpret the BRAIN

Initiative’s mission in their own ways. So

do the private organizations involved,

including the Salk Institute, the Allen

Institute, the Kavli Foundation and the

Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Janelia

Farm campus in Ashburn, Va.

The NIH, which is putting up $40

million in funding for fiscal year 2014,

has taken a methodical approach by

first appointing a committee of 16

neuroscientists. That group, headed by

William Newsome of Stanford University

and Cornelia Bargmann of the Rockefeller

University in New York, spent the summer

of 2013 in four workshops talking with

neuroscientists about what ought to be

included in the initiative.

In September, the committee released

a preliminary report describing nine

priorities. They were extremely ambitious.

For instance, the NIH panel wants a census

of all the different types of brain cells

and a description of how nerve cells, or

neurons, collectively give rise to behavior.

Powerful new technology also features

prominently on the wish list. One of the

goals calls for developing tools capable of

producing anatomical maps of the human

brain with unprecedented clarity.

Further priorities include developing

techniques that can eavesdrop on many

neurons at the same time and allow

scientists not just to listen in, but to

change how those neurons behave. To

make sense of all of this data, the report

calls for improved theoretical, statistical

and modeling approaches.

Each of these goals on its own could

easily take years or even decades to

accomplish. For the final report, the goals,

milestones and timeline will be sharpened.

Like NIH, DARPA also emphasizes new

tools, but with a much more targeted goal

in mind for its $50 million investment

in 2014: healing soldiers. “We serve a

constituency”- the active duty service

member- says Geoffrey Ling, deputy

director of the Defense Sciences Office.

“And the active duty service member right now has got a lot of issues medically.”

Currently, more military members die

from suicide than from direct combat

injury, says Ling. “And that’s the tip of

the iceberg.” DARPA interprets its role in

the BRAIN Initiative as alleviating some

of the pernicious mental health problems

that plague service members.

In October DARPA announced two

projects. One, called SUBNETS (Systems

Based Neurotechnology for Emerging

Therapies), seeks new ways to record neural

activity from and stimulate the brains of

people with posttraumatic stress disorder,

anxiety disorder, traumatic brain injury

and other diseases.

DARPA envisions a device that both

diagnoses and treats mental health

problems, first by listening for abnormal

electrical signals and then correcting

them. For success, the project will need

engineers to build new medical devices,

computational neuroscientists to develop

theories about how neurons transmit

information and clinicians to test the

prototype in people.

The second project, called RAM (for

Restoring Active Memory), aims to

develop an implantable brain device that

will help restore lost memories to soldiers

or veterans. Devised by Ling, the project

plans to move from idea to device quickly.

“Our timeline is four to five years, and

we’re not joking,” he says.

Seeking new tools

Achieving such ambitious goals-

figuring out how neurons create behavior,

curing mental illness and restoring lost

memory- is not possible with today’s

technology. Even though scientists have

made huge leaps in their ability to listen to

and manipulate neurons, current methods

are still far from where they need to be.

NIH’s initial plans reflect that belief.

On December 17, the agency released six

calls for projects to fund as part of the

BRAIN Initiative. Each describes a tool-

buildingplan. “What we’re trying to do is

get the tools and infrastructure in place so

we can get a much deeper understanding

of how the brain works in both health and

disease,” Insel says.

Scientists want to monitor the electrical

and chemical behavior of many neurons-

thousands or even millions- at the same

time, while being able to zoom in to see and

even manipulate those cells. One of today’s

common ways to eavesdrop on neuron

behavior relies on electrodes designed

decades ago. Neuroscience is still stuck

using technology from the 1950s, Insel

says, “while the rest of the world has learned

how to go wireless and miniaturized.”

Magnetic resonance imaging, or

MRI, allows scientists to get good

anatomical maps of the whole brain and

5

broad activity patterns. But as good as

it is, MRI technology still misses lots

of detail. A million neurons can reside

in a single voxel, the smallest unit that

functional MRI can detect. “MRI shows

you wonderful neuroanatomical details,

fantastic, but it does have a resolution

limit,” Ling says. “How can we increase

it? Easy- build a bigger magnet. Oh, good,

let’s have a 50 Tesla magnet. What city are

you going to put this in? Because you have

to wipe out about seven blocks to do it.

Supersizing existing technology won’t work.”

Radically new approaches will also

be needed to enable precise control of

neurons’ behavior. One powerful new

technique, called optogenetics, lets

researchers use light to control certain

brain cells in animals. But it’s not feasible

in people, because it requires genetic

alterations to make neurons produce

specialized light-sensitive proteins. For

now, scientists are forced to rely on less

precise methods to change the activity of

human neurons.

Psychiatric drugs can alter neuron

behavior, for instance, but the results

are imprecise, like dousing the entire

“The tools have to be the focus,” says Sejnowski. “We have to get those tools in place. There’s no way of even getting off the ground until we have those tools.”

6

engine of a car with oil. Every cell in the

brain gets dosed, when only a select few

actually need the drugs. What’s more, in

most cases scientists still don’t understand

how psychiatric drugs work.

A different, drug-free approach may

work better: newer technology called

deep brain stimulation. It serves as a brain

pacemaker. By zapping neural highways

with electrodes implanted in the brain,

deep brain stimulation has shown promise

for treating people with Parkinson’s

disease and severe depression. And yet,

as with psychiatric drugs, the technique

is still imprecise and not well understood.

“I think people understand that you’re

not going to be able to fix something as

complicated as the brain with the current

tools. They’re too crude,” Sejnowski says...

“it’s like trying to fix a computer with a wrench.”

Instead of more wrenches, scientists

need powerful precision tools, some of

which are in the works. The Allen Institute,

HHMI and others have partnered with a

nanoelectronics research center called

imec to build tiny but powerful electrodes

that can record the behavior of hundreds

of neurons with great accuracy. “That’s

going to be pretty awesome technology.”

Scientists at Janelia Farm are devising

intricate ways to illuminate neural

behavior in zebrafish, flies and mice.

By genetically engineering neurons to

produce a. protein called GCaMP, the

researchers can watch each individual

neuron fire off a message. The concept

of using proteins to detect neuronal

activity isn’t new, but the sensitivity of

this latest version is much better than

previous attempts, says Gerald Rubin,

Janelia Farm’s executive director. It awed

many in the field in March 2013 when

the Janelia Farm researchers circulated a

movie of zebrafish brain activity.

Scientists are also making progress

on mapping the connections between

neurons. Most attempts rely on powerful

microscopy. But there might be a better

way, says Anthony Zador of Cold Spring

Harbor Laboratory in New York.

Instead of using microscopes, Zador

and colleagues are attempting to attack

the problem with DNA sequencing, which

is cheap and reliable. Their method relies

on using genetic tricks to tag neurons with

unique chains of DNA. By analyzing how

those DNA tags mingle at synapses- the

communication connections between

neurons- a computer could reconstruct

all of the physical connections in a brain.

So far, the team has had success only in

cells in a dish. If the technique works in

animals, figuring out every single synapse

in the entire mouse cortex will cost just a

few thousand dollars, Zador estimates.

Making the vision real

If the BRAIN Initiative serves as

an incubator for the next great brain

technology, the payoff would be huge,

Newsome says. The ability to record the

behavior of tens of thousands of neurons

simultaneously, map the connections

between those neurons and then

manipulate those neurons, all in a fully

awake behaving animal, or person, ‘’is

not something that neuroscience has ever

been able to contemplate in its history,

“It’s kind of a breathtaking vision.” Success

in realizing that vision, though, will mean

that neuroscientists have to face a big shift. As neurotechnology improves and

produces ever more massive piles of

complicated data, neuroscientists will

need to know more about statistics,

engineering and computational biology.

To succeed, the BRAIN Initiative will

need to bring together experts in all

these different fields. It will also need

neuroscientists to coordinate their efforts

and share their data freely. “We are going

to have to reorganize the way people do

their research,” Sejnowski says. The same

goes for the nongovernmental agencies

working on the BRAIN Initiative.

Currently no one agency or person

is in charge of the initiative. Such

decentralization might make swift

progress, without duplication of effort,

difficult. Although the three government

agencies involved-DARPA, NIH and NSF-

have been aware of what the others were

doing, they haven’t merged their differing

priorities. “We’re all so busy getting these

projects launched, I don’t think we’ve had

a lot of time to think about how they’re

going to be integrated,” lnsel says.

The private groups, referred to by

the White House as BRAIN Initiative

“partners,” set their own course and spend

their own money as they see fit. Because

the goals of the Allen Institute, the Salk

Institute and Janelia Farm align closely

with federal goals, these institutes don’t

anticipate changing their previously set

research agendas.

“Partnership is a funny word,” says J

anelia Farm’s Rubin. In a sense, Janelia

Farm is a partner, he says, because it is

putting up a big chunk of money- $30

million annually- toward projects that

dovetail with the BRAIN Initiative.

7

Much of that research focuses on how

information in the fruit fly brain is stored

and processed.

“But we’re not a partner in the sense

that we’re getting together at a big table

with NIH folks and NSF and DARPA and

deciding what the goals are and then

collectively deciding what we’re doing,”

Rubin says.

Likewise, Koch says that the Allen

Institute has been working on most of

the questions the NIH group came up with.

“We are fulfilling already a part ofthe

BRAIN Initiative mission,” he says. Allen

Institute scientists have been building

detailed maps of the mouse brain, which

could help efforts to understand how the

human brain works.

Aside from the privately funded

research that is already under way,

major new BRAIN Initiative research will

require new federal money. And so far,

the new money has been scant. In 2014,

NIH is contributing $40 million to the

BRAIN Initiative, less than 1 percent of

the $5.7 billion that the agency spends

on neuroscience research each year. In

2014, DARPA will spend $50 million on

its newly announced projects, and NSF

will spend $20 million on relevant projects

already in progress.

Although to many scientists, the BRAIN

Initiative’s preliminary pot seems small,

that money is a down payment, Insel says,

meant to get the ball rolling in the hope

that Congress will provide more support

for the project.

Of course, to help sell the project to

politicians who vote on budgets (or as

has recently been the case, don’t vote

on budgets), scientists need a tagline, a

slogan, a simple way to encapsulate the

importance of the BRAIN Initiative.

“We’ve talked and thought about that a

lot in the committee,” Newsome says. But

the group couldn’t come up with a pithy

way to capture the project’s essence. “That

question, it’s a real tension. To what extent

do we try to depict this as an Apollo-like

project or a genome-like project, in which

case you have a tagline and a particular

deliverable you’re looking for? Or to what

extent do you acknowledge that this is a

more openended kind of project?”

The sell is important, says Zador. In the

current economic squeeze, funding must

be justified to politicians and the public.

If the BRAIN Initiative underdelivers,

people will be disappointed.

Instead of a promise to cure brain

disease, or unlock the mysteries of

memory, emotion and thought, perhaps

the brain project is best described as a

wedge, says Sean Eddy of Janelia Farm.

With its emphasis on sophisticated

tools, the project promises to pry open

an entirely new realm of neuroscience

research, Eddy wrote last April in Current

Biology, enabling countless labs around

the world to make discoveries in their

small corner of the brain.

This vision of the initiative’s success,

in which thousands of neuroscientists

storm the inhospitable terrain of the brain

armed with an awe-inspiring new arsenal

of tools, is staggering. Compared with any

other project President Obama could have

backed, the brain is the most worthy, Eddy

says. “This is it.”

If the project flops, scientists will still

learn a lot in the attempt. If the project

flops, scientists will still learn a lot in

the attempt. If the project succeeds,

the benefits are almost unimaginable.

Clinicians might be able to neutralize,

or even prevent, devastating disorders

such as autism, Alzheimer’s disease and

traumatic brain injury.

Computers could become ever more

powerful by cribbing from the brain’s

operating system. Classrooms, military

training camps and courtrooms could

be optimized to play to the strengths of

the human brain and protect it from its

weaknesses. These are among the motive

that drive neuroscientists, and for all

its shortcomings, the BRAIN Initiative

has already succeeded in getting people

dreaming about what might be possible.

“I can’t tell you where we’re going

to be two years from now, but I can tell you that

it’ll be far ahead.”

TerrySejnowski

8

Strike of Curiosity:With Neil deGrasse Tyson

Popularizing science has become a personal passion for astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. Director of New York City’s Hayden Planetarium and a monthly essayist for Natural History magazine, Tyson has also served on presidential commissions on the aerospace industry and the future of space exploration. His latest book, Origins, is a pocket history of the universe, from the Big Bang to the appearance of life on Earth.

American Scientist Online managing editor Greg Ross asked Tyson to discuss the latest riddles in cosmology, the prospects for discovering extraterrestrial life and the absolute best ways to inspire the next generation to pursue these inquiries.

Increasingly, the study of origins seems to rely on combining insights from astronomy, geology, biology and other fields. What challenges does that pose within the scientific community, and how can we overcome them? Neil deGrasse Tyson.

The traditional branches of science that we have all come to know from high school and college are published in separate journals, and each has developed its own methods and tools of inquiry. These habits breed a lexicon in one discipline that is typically mysterious to the next discipline. Since astrophysicists had little insight into the Big Bang without the help of particle physicists, and since chemists had little insight into the origin of the elements without nuclear astrophysicists, and since planetary geologists had little insight into how to look for life on other planets without the help of biologists, and since biologists had little insight into the environments in which extremophiles thrive without the help of geologists, and since paleontologists’ view of mass extinctions was incomplete without

the help of asteroid and comet specialists, we see that entire vistas of inquiry today would be impossible without a meaningful cross pollination of disciplines in science.

Funding umbrellas help this cause, such as NASA’s astrobiology programs, which formally bring together the astrophysicist and the biologist (and others) to inquire together about the search for life in the universe. Indeed, only after this program appeared did the search for life in the universe begin to mean something other than the search for intelligent life.

What stokes this activity today are research journals with cross-pollinated subjects like astrochemistry, astroparticle physics and, of course, astrobiology. The next generation of scientists will surely have among them the people who identify their professions by these titles.

You note that most of the mass in the universe is so-called “dark matter,” whose existence we can only deduce from its gravitational influence. You call this the longest-standing mystery in astronomy. Do you favor any particular explanation?

When you are a hammer, all of your problems will look like nails to you. So if you ask particle physicists what dark matter is, they will all tell you it’s composed of weakly interacting supersymmetric particles. If you ask a multiverse cosmologist, you might hear that dark matter is the gravity from ordinary matter in a parallel universe and so forth.

If you ask scientific iconoclasts, they might say our understanding of gravity is wrong and in desperate need of revision. I am personally agnostic on the “matter”— although my reading of the history of science tells me that such a long-standing problem,

when solved, will likely solve other problems not imagined at the moment to be related.

You point out that we probably won’t find intelligent life in our own solar system, and that interstellar distances pose great obstacles to communicating with distant planets. Does that cancel any hope of interacting with other civilizations?

If by “interact” you mean visit other stars, then there is indeed no hope: Human travel to distant solar systems lies beyond any current projection of either our technology or our science. The distances are too great, and the first rule of science research is that your experiment should not last longer than your own lifetime.

If by “interact” you mean have a conversation, that would be difficult. With light travel times of decades to the nearest stars that resemble the Sun, one does not send radio messages with the hope of engaging in witty repartee.

For many of us, the most memorable landmark in televised cosmology was Carl Sagan’s Cosmos in 1980. Did your acquaintance with Sagan influence you as you worked on the recent PBS Nova miniseries Origins?

With Carl Sagan setting the standards of science communication, my first priority was to practice how to say “bill-yun.” Beyond that crucial step, I conducted the rest of the tapings knowing that the audience can detect when you are in love with a subject. And, as Carl was quick to say, “when you are in love, you want to tell the whole world.”

Interview by: Greg Ross

9

As a planetarium director involved in outreach programs, what do you consider the most effective ways to promote appreciation of science?

It’s all about your perspective on these things. When my daughter was two and she poured her cup of milk on the dining table and watched it drizzle between the leaves, and then drip down to the floor, she was performing experiments in fluid dynamics.

Let ‘em play. When you do, the kids do not have to be reintroduced to ways of questioning nature, and the task of promoting science would be a trivial exercise.

Otherwise, at least for kids ages 10 to 16, the “cool” factor is important. Is what you showed them so cool that they want to show or tell someone else about it? If so, you have succeeded in planting a seed.

President Bush appointed you to the “Moon, Mars and Beyond” commission, charged with making recommendations for new initiatives in human space exploration. What’s the latest news there, and what are the next steps?

NASA has already begun its reorganization in response to our final report, which called for the agency to restructure itself around an exploration initiative in which the entire solar system becomes our backyard. In this way, NASA will not be specifically destination-driven.

The key difference between the 1960s Apollo era and now is that NASA will pay for programs as they arise in the service of the vision. This plan, we hope, will create a more sustainable enterprise, with goals that can be modified en route as science and technology require or allow.

In your autobiography, The Sky Is Not the Limit, you noted the success of robotic space exploration and wrote that “We should not measure our spacefaring era by where footprints have been laid.” Given the high cost and risks, why do you support a manned mission to Mars? When I wear my scientist’s hat, I do not support a manned mission to Mars. The cost versus the return on such a mission is embarrassingly low. But when I wear my public educator hat, I see and experience the public’s vicarious thrills of watching their own species go into orbit and beyond. Astronauts are the only kind of celebrity I know who can have a line of people waiting for their autograph, even if the line of people does not know in advance the astronaut’s name.

This level of interest runs deep and filters through Congress and on to funding streams. That’s why the science programs of NASA have never been more than one-third of the agency’s budget. So the social and political reality differs from how the scientific community would rather see it.

And since I spend large parts of my time at that intersection, I fully understand that urge to explore with humans and will not try to fight this basic human urge.

Cosmology still holds unanswered questions. Which ones intrigue you most, and where do you think we’ll find the answers?

My top three: What was around before the universe? Are there multiple universes? Is there a theory of everything?

String theory and related investigations in the quantum realm are hot on the trail of these questions, but I am impatient. When I

started asking the string theorists nearly 20 years ago, “How much longer?” they said, “In a few more years, we are almost there!” Every two years since then, they have given me the same answer.

So I do not know where to place my confidence. Einstein came up with general relativity within 10 years of special relativity. Johannes Kepler came up with his third law of planetary motion within 10 years of his first two laws. You would think legions of highly regarded string theorists could do better than 20 years. But it doesn’t seem so. Maybe we are barking up the wrong tree.

Dont get in the way of children who find it natural and obvious to explore the world around them even if it means they make a mess of your kitchen or living room.

10

Galaxies

Written and Photographed by: Charlie Jurgens

Fact: there are more synapses in your brainthan there are stars in the galaxy.

The Multiverse Theory

12

For years I have been fascinated by science and the different theories that exist purely to taunt our minds in the hopes of expanding our understanding of where in the universe we exist. One of my favorite theories is the relationship of “multiverses”. In laymen terms multiverse theories consist of the idea that everything is essentially universe layered upon universe and that is what constructs things like matter and space. Isn’t that mind-boggling? Think about it, right now as you read this there could be galaxies existing within you and around you, but you only consciously exist in one of them at a given time.

When I saw this little crazy fact I was blown away by it. To take the literal dissection of the statement first and foremost it is quite a skewed fact. How can someone know for sure that there are more nerve connections in your brain than there are stars in the galaxy, when we haven’t even truly begun exploring space? Even if this “fact” isn’t true I think it is a great jumping point to get your mind rolling.

Stop and think.

Allow yourself to let go of what you think you’ve come to know as true and allow yourself to embrace the belief that anything can be true (for the sake of conversation and thought of course). In a way, the human body is much like our existing galaxy as far as the systematic

basics go. You have collections of stars, planets, solar systems, etc. in the same way that the human body has atoms, cells, organs, biological systems. Every small thing has a link to a larger group which keeps getting larger and larger until your brain cannot categorize anymore.

As a challenge to yourself, stop and think about something like sand. Sand is made up of millions and billions of crushed rocks that have become soft to human touch while also being strong enough to support buildings. Now try to imagine yourself examining that sand grain for grain and having to categorize the stones. You can already feel your brain beginning to throb from the pressure of trying to grasp that task. Now apply this same idea to the human body.

What if you looked at the strains of nerves in your brain? You would just count the millions and billions of connections; like the fact states. Now what if you looked at the connective strands all on their own at microscopic levels? You would find that even that material is made up of some other material and so on and so forth. So where does the examining end?

How as humans can we know how small or large something truly is? Just

because one physicist says something is right, doesn’t necessarily mean it is absolute fact in the end.

This is where I find infinite beauty in facts and theories such as the above. It is one of those dark twisted beauties that can keep you up for nights on end and make your brain turn to absolute mush, while also possibly enlightening someone in their existence on this earth and within this universe. One of the things that has pushed this sort of theory so close to my heart is something my brother and I discussed a couple years back.

One hot summer night my younger brother and I found ourselves sitting in the backyard of my parent’s house. The large leaning oak tree had just been removed that week which exposed a grand stage in the sky full of stars and satellites that we could never view before. I had never experienced such brightness in the sky before.

13

“Maybe, we are Gods.”

sake of the conversation that humans have infinite galaxies within us,” he said slowly. I responded with a nod in which he continued saying, “Maybe we are gods. In the sense of the all-powerful being who has control over, well… a universe (or galaxy)”. My brow rose to the comment ever so slowly. “Maybe the pursuit we take as humans to find the answer to this whole mess we call existence (finding a god or reason for existence) is the same pursuit being taken by the universes inside of us,” said my brother.

I was speechless. To even brush the idea of being the very god that some form of existence might be searching for sent chills down my spine. After we hit this topic we both sat in silence for what seemed like hours, but was only twenty minutes, before turning in for bed.

That night I lay in bed wondering that tail end of the conversation. What if I was the leader of a universe or multiples universes? What if the pursuit we take as humans to find an answer to life is actually the same quest being taken by other universes but we are the sole answer? It’s an absolutely chilling thought that still follows me to this day. To think that you could be your own walking, breathing, and living universe is scary in the most hauntingly beautiful way.

The plethora of questions raged on until we came to one that struck our fancy. What are humans actually made of?

Of course we kind of looked at eachother and agreed “atoms”, but that’s just what we have been taught and told all this time. What if it was something more? So then we began a spitfire of theories in regards to galaxies.

What if earth is actually within the eye, or brain, of another human? What if humans contain galaxies? Maybe the meaning of life is to come to the understanding that there is infinite life within us. Maybe when we die and our bodies decompose we create new galaxies or universes in the process? As you can imagine this conversation lasted hours into the night without any halting.

I swear the stars began to shift until I realized that’s just how much my head was spinning like the globe in the classroom of excited geographers. Back and forth my brother and I went on throwing out theory after theory, story after made up story, and we reached the deepest pit of the conversation.

My brother and I embraced a peaceful, yet mumbled, tone. “Let’s agree for the

My brother and I were sitting in two of the most uncomfortable white plastic chairs you could ever imagine. They were the type of chair you could stack six high but the minute you leaned the wrong way a leg would snap and go flying across the yard. As my brother and I leaned back in our chairs staring at the sky we vocally pondered existence throughout space.

It started as your typical “sci-fi” conversation of extraterrestrials and silly end of the world theories but then turned into a more honed conversation discussing purpose in life.

We began exchanging thoughts in rapid succession regarding how small we truly are as humans. What seemed like a back and forth pong frenzy became one of the most humbling moments I have had in my life. Why are we here? What makes humans… human? Why do we even question existence if we will never know? Why do we think?

14

Written by: Jessica Hullinger

Earlier this year, the Farmers’ Almanac predicted that New York would be a veritable swamp this summer. “It looks like it’s going to be an oppressively hot and humid summer for the New York area,” said Sandi Duncan, the Almanac’s managing editor. As someone who hates to sweat and counts summer as her least favorite season, I found this to be

terrible news. But before lugging my air conditioner out of storage, I wondered: How can this annual publication claim to know what this summer will be like months in advance, when my local weatherman can’t even tell me with accuracy whether I’ll need my umbrella tomorrow?

Historically, almanacs are annual publications that outline the days of the year alongside factors like sunrise and sunset times, holidays, moon phases, and solstices. The calendar hanging on your wall is an example of a simple almanac. Some of the earliest almanacs referenced celestial events to tell readers whether they would have good or bad luck on certain days, much like how we use horoscopes today. By the 17th century, the only publication more popular than almanacs in England was the Bible. Around this time, they began popping up in the America colonies, offering seasonal weather predictions, tips for household management, and entertainment like puzzles and jokes.

The Farmers’ Almanac (founded in 1818) and the Old Farmers’ Almanac (founded in 1792) are two of the most popular remaining almanacs. The former offers long-range weather predictions made two years in advance. Today it claims to have an annual distribution of more than 2.6 million copies and a readership of 7 million. Both publications claim to have a roughly 80 percent accuracy rate. Their predictions are the products of top secret mathematical formulas that take into consideration things like sunspot activity, tidal action, and planetary positioning.

Duncan says the formula is so secret, even she doesn’t know it, and she’s been with the Farmers’ Almanac for more than 20 years. “I could probably access it if I gave

away my first son or something.” The Almanac’s formula is entrusted to one living being: a weather forecaster who, has gone by the pseudonym “Caleb Weatherbee.” The Almanac’s editors keep everything about Caleb’s true identity a secret. In fact, the only thing they’re actually willing to confirm is that he exists. “He is a real person,” Duncan says. “We don’t want to let everyone know what his real name is. We don’t want anyone badgering Caleb. He’s got an important job so we have to make sure he can continue to do it. ”

An important job, indeed. The current Mr. Weatherbee is the 7th in the publication’s nearly 200-year history. He’s going on 25 years on the job and will likely remain in the position for life. How’d he land such a gig? Duncan says there was “something special in the stars.” Also, he loved weather, and was already a big fan of the Almanac. Being a Caleb Weatherbee takes a very special kind of person, Duncan says, “someone who probably looks beyond the computers and radar systems and appreciates that nature and the weather formula is a little bit more accurate at times for long range forecasts.”

And so we come back to the secret weather formula, which Duncan compares to the confidential concoctions guarded by KFC and Coca-Cola. “We gotta protect it,” she says. “We don’t want anybody figuring it out.”

17

This is incredibly frustrating for skeptical scientists who, for years, have sought to put the formula to the test. “Anytime you have science that’s shrouded in secrecy or politics, something is not totally kosher,” says Jan Null, a certified consulting meteorologist with Golden Gate Weather Services. He began reviewing the accuracy rate of the Old Farmers’ Almanac in 2000 after seeing public officials like water managers base their decisions off its predictions. “It’s correct on the order of 25 percent to 30 percent of the time, which is no place close to the 80 percent of the time that is often claimed.”

Part of the problem, he says, is it’s nearly impossible to predict the weather with any kind of accuracy two years in advance, even with today’s advanced technology. “If someone really had the answer to that, think how incredibly rich they would be,” he says. “They would own the commodities market. That person is not out there. No one is showing good skill in long range weather forecasting.” Typically, he says, you can make weather predictions for the next seven days, but beyond that, your chances of being right plummet.

Duncan defends the Almanac’s efforts and cites its predictions for last winter. “We were very accurate,” she says. “We called for a very cold, very snowy winter.” But this is another problem with measuring the Almanac’s accuracy: Its predictions are so broad as to be

nearly meaningless. In areas that experience it, winter is cold and snowy by definition.

Weather prediction has always been a major feature of the Farmers’ Almanac. The Almanac Publishing Company claims readers of the Farmers’ Almanac have attributed an 80 to 85 percent accuracy rate to the publication’s annual forecasts. However independent studies that retrospectively compare the weather with the predictions have not shown them more accurate than chance.

Predictions for each edition are made as far as two years in advance. The Farmers’ Almanac publishers are highly secretive about the method used to make its predictions, only stating publicly that it is a “top secret mathematical and astronomical formula, that relies on sunspot activity, tidal action, planetary position and many other factors.” The Almanac’s forecaster is referred to by the pseudonym Caleb Weatherbee.

The U.S. retail edition of the Farmers’ Almanac contains 16 months of weather predictions for seven differentiated U.S. climatic zones, beginning in September of the publication year (always the year prior to the edition year).

18

We don’t want anybody

figuring it out.

But surely there is something about the Almanac’s methods that give it some credibility, right? Since I couldn’t get my hands on the actual formula, I asked some scientists and meteorologists if they could explain how sunspot activity, lunar cycles, and planetary positioning impact seasonal weather predictions. Herein lies another problem: they don’t. At least, not significantly.

Let’s start with the planets: According to meteorologists with the National Weather Service, our elliptical orbit and the position of the planets has little if any effect on the weather. Here’s what they had to say, smiley face included: “...we are closest to the sun during the northern hemisphere winter, and this obviously does not prevent us from getting cold. There is also a slight wobble in the Earth’s tilted axis, but the cycle of this wobble is extremely long, on the order of hundreds or thousands of years, and thus would have even less of an effect on seasonal weather conditions.”

What about the ocean tides? “Tides also don’t have any effect on the weather,” says Null. “Sea level goes up and down every six hours, that’s it.” Of all the methods the Almanac admits to, sunspot activity is the only one scientists say could have some small effect on the weather. “Sunspot activity actually is slightly correlated with Earth’s climate,” says Dr. Shane Keating, a physicist with a focus in atmosphere-ocean science.

Basically, the sun’s magnetic field switches direction roughly every 11 years. During this period, the number of sunspots varies. Some evidence suggests that periods of fewer sunspots cause at least regional, and possibly global cooling. “However, the effect is fairly small compared with the natural variability of Earth’s climate,” Keating says. And if there is an effect, it would be seen in terms of years or decades, not seasons, say NWS meteorologists. “Sunspot activity alone cannot accurately predict whether one’s summer will be hot, winter will be cold, etc.”

Duncan admits the Almanac isn’t always right, and recommends people still listen to their local meteorologists. “We’re happy when our forecasts are on the mark, but of course sometimes they’re off the mark and we do admit that,” she says. “Mother Nature likes to remind all of us no matter what kind of weather formula we use to predict the weather that she’s in charge, and sometimes none of us can predict the weather with 100 percent accuracy.”

19

20

30 SeCONDS:Hinduism

Hindus believe that we are all continually reincarnated, lifetime after lifetime. Our fate is determined by karma, the moral worth of our previous actions. The spiritual goal is to put an end to rebirth and be united with God. This is achieved through the path of knowledge (via study, yoga, meditation, and ascetic practice, one experiences the identity of one’s own soul with the cosmic spirit) and the path of devotion (praising and worshipping God). Worldly activities the pursuit of wealth, power, love, and pleasure must be performed in harmony with dharma, the natural law of the universe. Dharma has divided society into

castes, rigidly categorizing families in terms of power, purity, prestige, and occupation. The Brahmans are the priestly caste. Their scriptures, the Vedas, are some 4,000 years old and define orthodoxy. Hinduism is the meeting of this big tradition, with many other local little traditions that are adapting and absorb-ing. Mythically, this process is expressed as big gods manifesting as little gods, or marrying goddesses. Hinduism is, thus, a loose assemblage of communities and sects, of various practices and traditions, like a large extended family.

Written by: Alexander Studholme

Around the globeHighest Percent of Hindu Population

Crown ChakraWisdom and Understanding

Brow ChakraIntuition and Perception

Throat ChakraCommunication and Creativity

Heart ChakraLove and Compassion

Solar Plexus ChakraPower and Will

Sacral ChakraPhysical Desire and Sexuality

Root ChakraSurvival and Individuality

Nepal80.6%27.8 Million india

80.5%1.25 Billion

Mauritius48%1.29 Million

Guyana35%799,613 Fiji

38%881,065

indian elephantThe Form of Shri Ganesh

CowThe Vehicle of Lord Shiva

Royal bengal TigerThe Vehicle of Maa Durga

MonkeyThe Form of �anuman

indian CobraThe �e welry of Lord Shiva

Om lotus Swastika Trishula Yantra

The Sacred Animals of HinduismThe Hindu beliefs teach that all animals are sacred,

however, there are some that stand above the rest.

�onsciousnessVibration

Divine Beauty�urity

�uspicious�acred

�ast, �resent, and �uture�reation and Destruction

�piritual DiscoveryBalance of Mind

Understanding your chakras�hakras are part of the subtle body , not the physical body, and as such are the meeting points of the subtle (non-physical) energy channels, called nadiis. � adiis are channels in the subtle

body through which the life force (prana), or vital energy moves.

Quick Symbolic Guide

30 Seconds:

ConsciousnessVibration

Divine BeautyPurity

AuspiciousSacred

Past, Present, and Future Spiritual DiscoveryCreation and Destruction

The Form of Hanuman

The Jewelry of Lord Shiva

22

30 SeCONDS:Hinduism

Hindus believe that we are all continually reincarnated, lifetime after lifetime. Our fate is determined by karma, the moral worth of our previous actions. The spiritual goal is to put an end to rebirth and be united with God. This is achieved through the path of knowledge (via study, yoga, meditation, and ascetic practice, one experiences the identity of one’s own soul with the cosmic spirit) and the path of devotion (praising and worshipping God). Worldly activities the pursuit of wealth, power, love, and pleasure must be performed in harmony with dharma, the natural law of the universe. Dharma has divided society into

castes, rigidly categorizing families in terms of power, purity, prestige, and occupation. The Brahmans are the priestly caste. Their scriptures, the Vedas, are some 4,000 years old and define orthodoxy. Hinduism is the meeting of this big tradition, with many other local little traditions that are adapting and absorb-ing. Mythically, this process is expressed as big gods manifesting as little gods, or marrying goddesses. Hinduism is, thus, a loose assemblage of communities and sects, of various practices and traditions, like a large extended family.

Written by: Alexander Studholme

Around the globeHighest Percent of Hindu Population

Crown ChakraWisdom and Understanding

Brow ChakraIntuition and Perception

Throat ChakraCommunication and Creativity

Heart ChakraLove and Compassion

Solar Plexus ChakraPower and Will

Sacral ChakraPhysical Desire and Sexuality

Root ChakraSurvival and Individuality

Nepal80.6%27.8 Million india

80.5%1.25 Billion

Mauritius48%1.29 Million

Guyana35%799,613 Fiji

38%881,065

indian elephantThe Form of Shri Ganesh

CowThe Vehicle of Lord Shiva

Royal bengal TigerThe Vehicle of Maa Durga

MonkeyThe Form of �anuman

indian CobraThe �e welry of Lord Shiva

Om lotus Swastika Trishula Yantra

The Sacred Animals of HinduismThe Hindu beliefs teach that all animals are sacred,

however, there are some that stand above the rest.

�onsciousnessVibration

Divine Beauty�urity

�uspicious�acred

�ast, �resent, and �uture�reation and Destruction

�piritual DiscoveryBalance of Mind

Understanding your chakras�hakras are part of the subtle body , not the physical body, and as such are the meeting points of the subtle (non-physical) energy channels, called nadiis. � adiis are channels in the subtle

body through which the life force (prana), or vital energy moves.

Quick Symbolic Guide

Chakras are part of the subtle body, not the physical body, and as such are the meeting points of the subtle (non-physical) energy channels, called nadiis. Nadiis are channels in the subtle

body through which the life force (prana), or vital energy moves.