Been quite a while since i last posted, yet not that long in terms of the history of man's existence.
in the past couple of weeks, some changes took place, for the better or worse? depends on how one's perspective.
maybe if it was possible to communicate and analyze how good or bad those changes were by using mathematical equations, things might be much easier to understand. before a decision is being made, we would know thoroughly the statistics of the problem/situation, thus giving us further insight into it and enabling us to make wiser choices in our lives.

It never is simple or easy to put ideas and thoughts into words that appropriately do them justice, no matter how agile one is with words and linguistic skills. hence, i suggest using other forms of communication. the most ideal would be to transfer information from an individual to another by linking neurons located in the brain between the 2 individuals? do the nervous pathways of everyone of us run along the same paths or go through similar processes? if they do, then is it possible to actually fuse neurons together or join pathways between the 2 people? hmm..however, human biological processes and functions are not as simple as it seems due to its dynamicity and lack of accurate scientific methods to study the body. What occurs in vitro is very much unlike the reality of it happening in vivo. Hence, the preferred method to study the body would be in vivo but how many scientists can achieve that wouldnt affecting the results unconsciously? Like some say, observation in an experiment itself spoils the results. The most ambiguous and least reliable step in conducting a study is the observation of results. Maybe because scientists are too caught up with their theoretical hypothesis, that the importance of the actual results are lost. Pity that it often is the case. If they had taken notice of the results with respect to other situations and scenarios, they might have landed themselves with a nobel prize. Looking at the prize winners and the various discoveries in nobel prize history, one can note that the most important discoveries are through so-called accidents. An example is the discovery of penicillin, an antibiotic against bacteria. It was first discovered by Alexander Flemming but he was not able to prove its therapeutic value and hence was dismissed as anything worthwile by his knowledgeble self. Later Ernst Chain, Howard Florey and Edward Abraham succesfully proved it's therapeutic effects. And all 3, Flemming, Florey and Chain went on to receive the Nobel prize for the discovery.
From this, i conclude that having an open mind (an ideal state) is one of the crucial qualities a good researcher should possess.

I shall end my long writing here with this quote i "happened" to find over the internet.
Louis Pasteur wrote, "In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind."