It’s all real to the brain

In interesting article in the Daily Mail last Saturday. Link

As all top sports people will tell you rehearsing the moves sends the same messages and creates the same muscle response as actually doing the moves, something sports scientists have proven, so this latest research should not come as too much of a surprise.

An interesting aspect of it is that it would, seemingly, lend weight to the argumant that violent computor games will have a physical affect on brain development.

It seems to me that development and progress often outpaces research and knowledge. There is, obviously, a lot we have still yet to discover regarding our own brains and it seems rather foolish to create games, devices and new technologies before we really understand the affect they may have upon us. I guess it is called progress and science has always supported it but it seems a rather short sighted form of progress to me: A great leap forward followed by two leaps back (in the form of unforeseen side-effects or damage) is, hardly, what I would call progress.

Science can dismiss these concerns but we only have to look at science’s track record to see the warning signs. Listen to the scientists of the 1950’s with their almost religious fervour, by the year 2000 we should have been living in a world of abundant, safe and free energy, 9 to 5 would be a thing of the past and we would all be taking vacations on the moon.

Feel the strain

I would be interested to know how much extra grime, dust and dirt the average Londoner is breathing in due to the countless building sites that are manifest throughout the city. Add to this the work to replace water mains, roadworks and, in my neighbourhood, a number of roof replacements and front gardens being concreted over and you have a whole ton of extra pollution.

A lot of it is new housing: The government is very keen on extra houses, what they like to, laughingly, refer to as “affordable housing”. We do not need extra houses but what we need is such a political hot potato that they are reticent to declare it.

Or, perhaps, they really are too naive to realise it.

What we need is less people.

It is not a racist declaration, not a statement of hatred or intolerance and not prejudice towards any section of the community, indeed it could be argued that putting a premium on the price of housing because of the demand is prejudiced towards a considerable percentage of the population, those on average or below average salary who can not afford to step onto the property ladder.

It is simply logistics and common sense.

London can sprawl a little but there are limitations, one hopes. The U.K. is an island. The area of land, in both cases, is finite. Finite has one important property, it has limitations.

Take an easy example of a limited space: A lift (elevator).

A number of people can ride in it comfortably, a few more people and it still functions but is a little less pleasant. Crowded and squeezed in and it starts to become unpleasant. If you continue to pack enough in that the cables break, everyone gets hurt.

There is already a concern that there is not enough water to service London and the population is forecast to rise. Think of rush hour tubes, think of them with yet more people.

It is shortsighted and dangerous to just throw houses up on every spare plot of land. Let us say that, on average, each new house has one car, that needs a parking place, it needs a road infrastructure that can cope with it. Say every other new house has a child or two, they need a school and teachers to teach them and someone driving them on the school run..and the whole family, all the increasing population need doctors, nurses, hospitals, GP surgeries with room on their books, sewage systems, water, supermarkets……

Every time you hear that announcement that a train is cancelled, every time you hear the sound of houses being built and every time you see a grinning politician telling you increase is the right way to go…I suggest what you are hearing are the cables snapping.