Linguistics: The Mystery Of "Um"

     It's the word we use everyday to fill awkward pauses and gather our thoughts. It's a simple word with many variations such as "ugh" or "uhh". The word I speak of is commonly known as "um", and by definition it is an interjection used as a "common sound when hesitating in speech". Although we as people use it in everyday speech, is there more to this simple word than meets the eye? It would seem as though there is according to ancient Hindu Sanskrit teachings.

The Hindi mantra Aum encircled by the flower of life

     Aum (or Om) is a Hindi mantra which is chanted during meditation to connect to Brahman or God in a sense. You see in Hinduism, Om is the sound of the creator; it is the sound by which everything derives from. Om is the vibration by which everything was based off of; the earth, the sky and even nothingness can be attributed to the "Om" sound in Hinduism. Hindus believe the universal consciousness manifested itself in a vibration in the form of "Om", therefore all of existence vibrates at the same frequency Buddhist monks famously chant in.

     So why do we always see these monks chanting "Om"? Om is a mantra, a series of words which have "psychological or spiritual power". In the Hindu religion, the "sacred utterance" of Om is said to have physiological healing powers. A 1970's study done by Herbert Benson of Harvard reveals the actual relaxation mechanism of such "Om" chanting. Such "magical" chanting of Om actually lowered blood pressure, respiration rates, anxiety levels and metabolic rates. The world was stunned when Dr. Benson published his findings in his book The Relaxation Response. No one could believe the healing effects of such a powerful word!

     Even if Om is a powerful mantra, what relevance does it have in linguistics? As we know from before Um is an interjection used to connect thoughts as well as fill silent pauses in speech. There seems to be two reasons as to why "um" and "om" have a connection.

     Firstly, since om is the sound that "everything derives from", linguistically it might be a way for humans to gather their thoughts and tap into the place where knowledge "derives from". In my past I have noticed that people who do not know what they are talking about use the word "um" frequently in their speech. Since "om"/"um" is the source of all that exists in Hinduism, when a person says "um" it may be a way for that person to psychologically delve into all knowledge that subjectively exists. Repeating this sound may make it easier for information retrieval and memory recall, because that person is accessing all known information. Just like "Om" is the source of everything in Hinduism, "Um" maybe the source of specific knowledge retrieval from all knowledge. Although this is a highly psychological thesis, it may explain why humans lost in thought use the word "um" to get back on track!

A man tapping into brahman/ all knowledge by using the "Aum" mantra!

     A second hypothesis for the "um/om correlation" may be to physiologically calm a nervous talker down. Nervous talkers will usually use "um" a lot to fill in the blanks of their speech. A nervous talker may instinctively use "um" as a means to calm the body down during a speech because of its holistic healing properties mentioned earlier in the post. Buddhist monks use the "aum" mantra as a means to lower blood pressure, drop anxiety levels and even slow down metabolic rates, so why couldn't a nervous talker do the same? 

     Although these are but mere theories, I couldn't help but notice the simple etymological correlation between "aum" and umm". Could "um" be the basic root for all sound just as the hindis described "aum" as the basic root of everything?

What are your thoughts? Could these hypotheses hold true in a clinical setting? Leave any additional hypotheses in the comments section.

References:

1.  Benson H (Dec 1997). "The relaxation response: therapeutic effect". Science 278 (5344): 1694–5.

The Allegory of the Dark Knight: Batman & Philosophy

(Left: A bust of Plato)  (Right: Batman)

In his most infamous work The Republic, Plato describes of a tale that sounds all too familiar to us; The Allegory of the Cave. Socrates asks Glaucon to picture a cave where many prisoners are chained and live in the dark with a single blaring fire in the distance. The tale prompts Glaucon, a fellow philosopher, to imagine there are shadows cast by fake creatures. The prisoners are not sure of what is real and what is not; only of the reality of the dark cave. But Plato points out there is more to life then living in the cave. Once a man sees the light; he will be hesitant to accept it but will slowly learn to embrace the new reality of sunlight.

In The Dark Knight Rises, Batman seems to be living a lie. Alfred (his butler) wants to see Batman move on from a life of crime-fighting into a simple reality with a wife and kids. Batman however is torn between two realities and must make a choice; choose a life of crime fighting or another reality in which he is happy. The only problem is Batman knows the city of Gotham needs him. Batman is still stuck in the "dark" as he is unsure of himself and his reality. He knows the light is better than the dark but the dark is calling his name. (Hence the dark knight)

During the course of the movie this struggle does not surface completely until Batman is captured by Bane. Bane also knows too well of dark conditions, as he was raised in a cave similar to the prisoners in the allegory. Seeing the similar struggles they both face, Bane sends a wounded Batman to the same prison where he (Bane) never saw the light.

As Batman sits in the cave, he realizes that the dark city of Gotham needs a hero. Despite his own struggle he realizes that from Gotham's point of view, Batman is the sun. He is the glimmering fire of Gotham that gives the people hope. Realizing this; Batman climbs out of the cave and slowly comes to the realization that reality is subjective. His vision of the "sun" is a reality where he does not fight crime and is retired. But the citizens of Gotham picture a perfect reality where Batman is the "sun" and the protector of the cave. Batman cannot please everyone and he realizes a choice must be made.

So how exactly do these two stories link? How do you compare a blockbuster film and an ancient anecdote? Bane, being a prisoner, does not see the light. Bane only sees the reality of a dark cold world just as the prisoners in Plato's "Allegory" do. He is resilient towards anyone else who is opposed to his ideals. Bane believes he is "liberating" the people of Gotham from their reality by substituting his own; and in turn shows ignorance like the prisoners from the allegory because he does not understand reality is subjective.  Batman sees both the dark and the light but is torn between the two; just like the prisoner in the allegory who sees the sun for the first time. Batman is not an advocate for freedom, but rather an advocate for freedom of thought.

Even though it may not seem clear, both stories have a similar moral.  The Dark Knight Rises and The Allegory of the Cave teach us that reality is what you make of it. There is no one "correct" way to live your life. Everyone's way of living is subjective and Batman allows the citizens of Gotham to choose their path. By fighting crime and killing bad guys, Batman allows the citizens of Gotham to decide between a life in the sun or a life in Plato's cave. As for the Dark Knight? His path towards "the sun" is also determined by his own decisions; even if that means hanging up the bat-cape and pursuing his own perfect reality.

(Above: The cave where Batman was held prisoner)

Psychology: Social Media

     We all use it religiously, communicating with our friends and talking to new ones. On the surface social media is a great idea! It is a fantastic tool to network, stay connected and advertise. However what we don't realize is that humans are social beings and need to satisfy our need to interact with others, and social media takes this away from us in a sense. What exactly would psychologists such as Maslow and B.F. Skinner think about social media and its impact on society?  To answer that question we can take a look at Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

     As you can see on the chart, social media has nothing to do with physiological needs and safety. 10 years ago one's belonging needs only consisted of "tangible" social interaction but in today's day and age, a person must also consider social media as an outlet for attaining a need to belong.

     But this begs the question, is sitting behind a computer really beneficial to an individuals development? I would say no, social media is in fact the opposite. It ostracizes people and does not promote confidence growth. One gains a fake sense of love, affection and belonging just by setting up an account and "friending" other users. In essence social media actually makes people less social. Try this: look at your list of friends on Facebook. Are you friends in real life with half of these people? The majority of younger Americans would say no.

     Lets take a psychological approach on the subject. Imagine you are at home on a rainy day with nothing to do. Miserable; you begin to browse through your friend Katie's photos of her Bahamas trip. You can see she is having the time of her life; smiling and playing in the sun. Are you going to feel happy for Katie? My best guess is no. In fact, I guarantee you will begin to feel depressed about your "boring life" and become envious/jealous of Katie in the Bahamas.

     In our capitalist society, people are concerned with accolades and status. In a way, Facebook and LinkedIn both allow people to flaunt their accolades and experiences without being judged. These platforms actually allow people to instantly get any information about a user that they have provided such as phone numbers, job history, schooling and much more. On top of the fact this is a safety hazard, people tend to include any information that makes them look more decorated. The photos, statuses and information you see on your "timeline" or "newsfeed" can alter your perception and easily change your mood. And if your like me, most of the things I see on my "newsfeed" are irrelevant and mostly negative. So I try not to use Facebook that much.

     So what exactly can a reader take away from this? Put the phone down once in a while! You don't need to check Facebook and Twitter every second. Keep it simple and use Facebook to communicate and share with real friends. Let us remember that Facebook is not a real place nor is Myspace; and although the information you see is legit, it's all 1's and 0's in a computer! 

Marijuana & Tinnitus?

Yes, a strange combination indeed. But what does smoking have to do with hearing and ear function?


Studies by the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology at the University of Otago have shown that Cannabinoid neurons specifically known as CB1 receptors are active in the Cochlear Nuclei; located in your brain stem.

The Ventral (Left) and Dorsal(Right) Cochlear Nerve.

In 2007 Dr. Yiwen Zheng and his team studied how the desensitizing of CB1 receptors in the ventral cochlear nucleus is affected by injecting rats with Salicylate (Asprin), a Tinnitus inducing agent. When injected, the rats showed a decrease in the number of neurons expressing CB1 receptors, a process known as Downregulation. Zheng came to the conclusion that, "CB1 receptors in the cochlear nucleus may be important for auditory function and that a down-regulation of CB1 receptors in the ventral cochlear nucleus may be related to the development of tinnitus"

So what does all this mean?! Well first off it is important to understand that downregulation is a biology term for "gaining tolerance". Tolerance for a drug is built when the drug is smoked in large amounts over a long period of time. Over this time the receptors will become less sensitive to the cannabinoids and not work as well.

This study begs the question: "Does smoking Marijuana cause tinnitus?"

A study done in 2010 by Zheng injected Salicylate-induced rats with synthetic cannabinoids to look for behavior changes associated with Tinnitus. Rats who were given more of the synthetic cannabinoid displayed some worsening of symptoms. Zheng noted, " These results suggest that cannabinoid receptor agonists may not be useful in the treatment of salicylate-induced tinnitus and that at certain doses, they could actually exacerbate the condition".


This most recent study shows how Marijuana can actually worsen tinnitus in some rats. On top of the fact that Marijuana can amplify symptoms of Tinnitus, long term abuse of marijuana can heighten the risk of tinnitus.


Although I'm sure this phenomenon will be further researched, I believe people should be educated about these little developments even if they are not confirmed. Just remember the next time you want to get a "buzz", your wish might literally come true!

References

1. Zheng, Yiwen. "Cannabinoid Receptor Down-Regulation in the Ventral Cochlear Nucleus in a Salicylate Model of Tinnitus." PubMed.org. NCBI, 16 Feb. 2007. Web. 10 July 2012. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17376618>.
2. Zheng, Yiwen. "The Effects of the Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists, WIN55,212-2 and CP55,940, on Salicylate-induced Tinnitus in Rats." PubMed.org. NCBI, 01 June 2010. Web. 10 July 2012.

"Mentadent" vs. "AdvanceWhite": Which is better?

As we all know, the best toothpastes contain fluoride (Fl) which is a valuable tool for dentists and other professionals. By looking at the box, I noticed that both "Mentadent" and AdvanceWhite" (Arm & Hammer Co.) had % 0.243 Sodium Fluoride; the main active ingredient. Despite having the same active ingredient, both toothpastes are also peroxide-group  [O-O] and baking soda [CHNaO3] based. The problem with this is that "Mentadent" keeps peroxide and baking soda separate until the reaction is initiated (the person begins to brush). "AdvanceWhite" still has the sodium fluoride, but it is a mixture of baking soda and peroxide.  People might ask, what is the difference? If it has the same ingredients, why does it matter? This is where chemistry comes in.

Let's take a look at "Mentadent". The initial conditions of the system give us the reactants of a peroxide (hydrogen peroxide in this case) and baking soda reaction,

2(OH) + NaHCO3 

The bellow peroxide reaction (theoretically) should take place in the brusher's mouth given that friction is being supplied,

2(OH) --> 2H2O + O2 [Enthalpy =  + Energy from brushing]

These oxygen bubbles are great for cleansing and brushing teeth, and the water does have an effect, but it is an intermediate in a mechanism that cannot be observed given standard brushing conditions.

So as for the "AdvanceWhite"? You can say the exact same thing. The reaction still occurs in both toothpastes, just at different times on the reaction pathway of the hydrogen peroxide and baking soda reaction.

Given the figure above as an example, I could say that "Mentadent " is at point "y" on the reaction pathway (because the reactants are separated). As for the "AdvanceWhite", I will say is halfway from point "y" to point "w" on the chart. No matter how the reaction progresses, both reactants must reach an activated complex and thus eventually reach the same product point on the line. Yielding the same amount of product (Given of course both solutions have equal mass and molarity).

The Verdict

Both toothpastes are equally as effective due to the same yield at the very end of the reaction. As Niccolo Machiavelli said, "The ends justifies the means". This is completely true in the case of "Mentadent" vs. "AdvanceWhite", because both clean your teeth equally well, just on different chemical "timelines". On a personal note, I would say that "AdvanceWhite" is my favorite choice because it costs less! I would also recommend "AdvanceWhite" because it takes a shorter period of time for oxygen bubbles to develop, as I just proved above.

So next time you shop, don't just buy "Mentadent" because it looks bigger. Buy "AdvanceWhite" because this blog proves why less is actually more; or equal in this case.