tokiokobayas's blog

    For as long as I can remember I love cafes. I go often in order to study, and I find the smell of coffee very relaxing and stimulating. It’s in my opinion one of the most perfect places you can go to in order to study. For the longest time I enjoyed going to Cafe Nero, because my friends always recommended it. The interior is nice enough that I can get my work done, but from the countless times I’ve gone, I have never had a drink there that I’ve enjoyed. Yet even though I had never gotten a drink I liked, I still ended up going because my friends have always said “Cafe Nero is great”. Then for the first time yesterday, I went to a cafe that a lot of my friends have always said wasn’t good, and for a while I have actually avoided. Yet the drink I ordered was fantastic, the ambience was nice, and I got a lot of my work done. I was pleasantly surprised that I had been avoiding this place this entire time all because of verbal marketing, and would most likely have never have gone to if I wasn’t in dire need of a place to study the other day.

    In terms of mass producing food for large groups of people, like in dining commons or buffets, it can be very difficult for cooks to feel a passion for cooking when the dishes are not made to order. Instead, in these kinds of environments the food is made in batches, and then kept warm in some form of a warmer until near closing. For a lot of cooks, that is probably one of the worst feelings, knowing that people are only going to be eating your food after it has been sitting for about an hour. Part of the passion that comes from cooking, is displaying a part of yourself that is a slice of your best self. In a dish there was thought and labor that was put into making the dish, and being able to eat it right when its finished so it can be eaten fresh is an important aspect of the dining experience. For your food to sit in a pan with seran wrap for an hour or two before being able to be eaten, affects how the food tastes overall. If a place like UMass Amherst wants to retain its spot for #1 dining for the college masses, a change could be implemented in order to keep the quality of the food fresher, while keeping the cooks of the hall more happy and passionate about their cooking. As of right now, the dining commons are using an outdated system (buffet style) in order to get food to the students, and a change should be implemented in order to maintain the quality and service that the title of #1 dining should have.

    The theory of splitters and connectors states that everyone lies on a spectrum between two extremes when it comes to logical thinking. One side of the spectrum is a group of people that are known as splitters, and they are people who tend to have more difficulty connecting ideas on their own accord. For example, if a child was taught how to subtract two large numbers using the traditional method, one child may ask “why do we have to carry the one?”. When the same concept is taught to a different child, that child might understand why without them having to ask. This second child is an example of the opposite side of the spectrum; a connector. A person who naturally is able to connect ideas without them being explicitly told. This concept is usually discussed about in regards with academics, but it can also relay into daily life as well. For example, a person may dine at a restaurant, and notice that due to their water glasses not consistently being filled up, they may complain explicitly about the service a busser or a server. Other people dining may notice that there are only two waiters in a restaurant seated for 40 people, and may think “they must be understaffed”, so they are able to sympathize and do not complain. Then there are those who before even walking in, notice there are only two waiters in a busy restaurant and decide to dine somewhere else. These three examples represent one person who is a splitter, another who is in the middle, and finally one who is a connector.

    In our society, there exists multiple cultural ideas that stemmed purely from commercial greed. For example, the idea that men must propose using a diamond ring, came about from western commercialism and the need to sell diamonds. Suddenly, diamonds are very expensive because of this tradition, even though most diamonds are actually surprisingly cheap. They’re constantly sold for thousands of times their actual worth; when in reality, even the most fancy diamonds are only worth three to four hundred dollars. The same thing goes for milk. Although it is true that milk contains a lot of calcium and vitamin D, it actually isn’t that healthy to drink. Yet through commercials and advertising, marketing companies were able to put a spin on the idea that milk is actually great for you. The reality is that milk is only good for you if your body is able to readily digest it, and that only goes for a very slight portion of the actual human population. For the most part, everybody is lactose intolerant to a certain degree, east asians especially. It’s incredibly to think that some of these traditions and ideas are not even a hundred years old yet, yet most people do not even think about it, and eventually believe that it’s been a cultural aspect of our society for centuries.

    The theory of splitters and connectors goes like this, there are essentially two types of people, and it’s possible to be inside the spectrum between these two kinds. One type of these people are known as splitters, and they are people who tend to have more difficulty connecting ideas on their own accord. For example, if you were to teach a child how to subtract two large numbers using the traditional method, one child may ask “why do we have to carry the one?” when it makes sense to another child without them having to ask. This second child is an example of a connector. A person who naturally is able to connect ideas without them being explicitly told. This concept connects with academics, but it can also relay into our daily lives as well. For example, you can dine at a restaurant, and if you notice that you aren't getting water--some people may complain about the service explicitly to a busser or a server. Others may notice that there is only two waiters in a restaurant seated for 40 people, and may think to themselves “oh, they must be understaffed” so you are able to sympathize and not complain all together. Then there are those who before even walking in, notice there are only two waiters in a busy restaurant and decide not to dine there at all. These three examples represent one person who is a splitter, another who is in the middle, and finally one who is a connector.

    Why are people in need of a reason in order to start something? Why is a reason required in order to start doing something? Something as simple as getting up and starting to study, there’s a commonality that exists amongst most younger people where we like to start work when the time is at a even 5 or 0 (like 6:15, or 9:45). There’s no real reason behind it, we just do it because it “feels better” than starting at say, like 4:23. Do we need a reason to pick up the guitar, or to go out and meet new people? Do we need a reason to pursue a new career path because we’re fed up with our current jobs? I think it’s ridiculous that sometimes people search for a reason to start or end something, when in the end the happiness that’s derived from starting or ending something should be more than enough of a reason to do it.

    Walking through the COOP, there is an abundance of different books and novels that a person can choose to read. Yet even though there is debatably thousands, if not tens of thousands of books in the store, how does a passerby choose what to read? Which book to pick up? In the end, it all comes down to what grabs the attention of the shopper. Is it the interesting choice of font on the cover? Or the size of the book? What about where the book is located in the shop, and who is the one who decides which books to promote and which ones should get less “seen time”? It’s unfortunate because there is a lot of incredibly deep and interesting literature that is available, but because as humans who care about their time, we rely on heuristics and shortcuts in order to shorten the time that’s required to reach a reward (in this case, a good book) that provides a beneficial use of our time. Is that really the best way for us to figure out what to read?

    Parenting is without a doubt one of the most difficult and ambiguous phases of life. For a lot of people, parenting does not come easily for them. Not many parents get the privilege to take a couple child psychology courses in high school or college, or even get the chance to be prepared to be parents in some cases. It’s difficult to have the patience to deal with children, or to deal with the idea that you have to compromise on “their level” in certain cases. The entirety of parenting ranges a huge spectrum of different problems and situations that it cannot possibly be entirely encompassed within a crash course of any sort. Because there’s no way to “cheat” when parenting, no one knows how to do it perfectly. It’s almost like as if it’s a craft that does not have a single perfect craftsmen, and everyone has their own ways of doing things.

Nissl stained neurons viewed under 100x magnification in the ventral horn of a mouse. The general shape and cellular pattern is visible, along with some glial cells as well. Image provided by Flickr, uploaded by Berkshire Community College.  

    In organic chemistry, the concept of aromaticity is very important in determining the stability of a compound. In order to determine if a compound is aromatic, anti-aromatic, or non-aromatic (there is a difference between anti- and non-), the number of pi electrons must be determined. This can be done by  using 3 rules that follow a hierarchy system. This means that out of the three rules, if one rule applies compared to the other, one of the rules will override the other due to it having a higher priority. The three rules are as follows; if a carbon is bonded to a double bond, then it’s counted as 1 pi electron. If the carbon has a lone pair of electrons, it is counted as 2 pi electrons. If the the carbon as a positive charge, then it is counted as 0 pi electrons. The priority of the rules follow the order in which the rules were explained earlier. For example, if a carbon was bonded to a double bond but had a positive charge, that carbon would be counted as 1 pi electron instead of 0. When a compound demonstrates 4n + 2 (n=number of pi electrons) pi electrons, then the compound is aromatic. If the compound is antiaromatic, it will exhibit 4n pi electrons. Any other number of pi electrons means that the compound is non-aromatic. In terms of stability, aromatic compounds are the most stable, non-aromatic compounds are the second most, and antiaromatic compounds are the least stable.