The Effect of Facebook on Relationships

When Mark Zuckerberg invented Facebook in 2004, he never could have predicted that it would reach over 800 million users in seven years.¹ As forms of communication have evolved, two common elements that have improved are convenience and speed. Facebook has combined both of these concepts, and now family members, friends, or business colleagues can stay updated on each other in real time. The use of exterior forms of technology, such as laptops and smart phones, allow Facebook to be utilized anywhere. For instance, 28% of Facebook users ranging from age eighteen to thirty-four check Facebook before getting out of bed in the morning.² Just as Facebook has been influenced by previous communication technologies, it has had an even greater effect on modern culture. Through its vast amount of accessible information and convenient usage, Facebook has affected society by maintaining close contact between relatives and friends, both continuing and terminating love relationships, as well as allowing businesses to promote themselves to their target audience.

Prior to Facebook, communication was not as efficient or instantaneous. It seems bizarre to think back to a time where the primary way to contact someone was by writing a letter. Since that time, the speed of communication has greatly improved, culminating with the instantaneous updates provided by Facebook. As humans, the goal with any new form of technology is to improve upon previous models. In particular, speeding up communication has always been a focus with new technology. Speed of communication not only pleases consumers, but it also enables companies to brag. For example, Georgia Tech currently has the second fastest internet connection in the country.³ This is not only valuable to the students and faculty, but the fact that it is mentioned on tours and during orientation proves that improved speed is an essential component that drives new technologies.

Not only was communication slower and less efficient prior to Facebook, but the amount of information readily available on each person was significantly lacking as well. Besides looking up a person’s address or phone number, further information about them was acquired by direct communication or word of mouth. In addition to personal information, details about events or meetings had trouble being relayed quickly, which presented problems in last-minute changes. Facebook represents the peak of information availability, and users can become addicted to its seemingly know-all power. A clip from a recent How I Met Your Mother episode, “Mystery vs. History”, displays the current necessity to research others through technology.⁴ The clip involves the show’s main character, Ted Mosby, meeting a new woman who he will soon take out for dinner. Instantly, his friends reach for their smartphones to explore the internet for any unexpected or unusual information about Ted’s date. Ted opts for mystery to drive their relationship and does not partake in researching her. However, the fact that his friends resort to background checks on his dates, past and present, support society’s current addiction and desire for an abundance of easily accessible information. This desire has fueled technology in recent decades, and it has also enabled Facebook to maintain close relationships between relatives or friends.

http://www.cbs.com/shows/how_i_met_your_mother/video/2155337969/how-i-met-your-mother-there-s-something-wrong-with-her

Without Facebook, families, friends, and colleagues would find it difficult to maintain close contact with each other. Since one in every thirteen people on Earth has a Facebook account, users are capable of connecting with people from all facets of their lives. In only twenty minutes, Facebook experiences over one million links shared, three million messages sent, and two million friend requests accepted.⁵ This constant flow of information proves Facebook’s impact as a leading form of electronic communication in the twenty-first century. Last year, John Watson of New York encountered his very own Facebook miracle. Watson had been searching for his daughter, who he left forty years ago, for twenty years before stumbling upon her Facebook page. He originally left her because of post-traumatic stress from the Vietnam War, but he sincerely regretted the decision and spent decades trying to find her. Luckily, his daughter was very forgiving and was thrilled to be reunited with her father.⁶ Watson also had the benefit of meeting his son-in-law and four grandchildren, an opportunity that never would have presented itself without Facebook. Aside from relatives and friends, Facebook has also revolutionized the dating world with both positive and negative outcomes.

By implementing its techniques of connecting users through vast methods of communication, Facebook has been beneficial to both starting and maintaining love relationships. Two people are not considered officially dating if it has not been posted on Facebook. The fact that people turn to a user’s Facebook page to make the final say on their love life displays the dependent relationship between modern culture and Facebook. Asking another person about their current relationship status can be an uncomfortable encounter, but Facebook provides clarity on this matter. Similar to John Watson’s story, Facebook has manufactured relationships by reuniting old friends from school, as well as suggesting future friend requests through mutual friends. Moreover, if a couple is experiencing a long-distance relationship, Facebook allows them to stay close through instant messaging, sharing pictures, and even video calls. Even though these features are available in other forms of communication, only Facebook provides the detail and supplemental information that can be found in one’s profile.

Nevertheless, Facebook has been known to dismantle dating relationships just as well as it promotes them. According to a 2010 survey conducted by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, two-thirds of lawyers said that, “Facebook was the ‘primary source’ of evidence in divorce proceedings”.⁷ This wasn’t only applied to cases of infidelity, but also cases of child custody. For example, one parent claimed to not use any illegal drugs, but boasts of marijuana use were found on his Facebook page. Furthermore, suspicions of one’s spouse can lead to stalking their Facebook page or even jealousy of their significant other. In this context, Facebook’s plethora of available information becomes evidence instead of a user’s profile. When asked about Facebook’s influence on divorce, a spokesperson of Facebook said, “…Facebook is just a way to communicate, like letters, phone calls, and emails”.⁸ However, the accessibility of information in the latter forms of communication does not compare to that of Facebook.

Based on this accessibility of information, as well as the popularity of Facebook and the constant connection between users, events and groups have become effective tools in coordinating with larger masses of people. One serious instance occurred in Germany this past June as a result of a Hamburg girl forgetting about the importance of Facebook’s event privacy settings. A teenage girl, known as Thessa, posted an event on Facebook to invite a group of friends to her sixteenth birthday party. Unfortunately, she accidentally made the event public and allowed anyone to RSVP. Fifteen thousand users RSVP’d to the event and more than 1,500 showed up for Thessa’s party. One hundred police officers showed up to keep the crowd of teenagers and young adults under control, and the fire department even had to put out two fires. Just because Thessa made an honest mistake on Facebook, a riot nearly broke out in Hamburg. Luckily, no one was injured, and Thessa celebrated her birthday in secret with her grandparents. She even cancelled the event once she realized her mistake, but the damage was done and all of the guests showed up anyway.⁹ If Thessa was planning a party with older forms of communication, such as a sending out invitations by mail, this chaotic and unique circumstance never would have occurred. Even though Thessa experienced chaos from her mishap in creating an event, the capabilities of Facebook events and their ability to bring people together are clearly identified. However, most businesses that utilize Facebook would savor the response that Thessa received for her birthday party.

Aside from entertainment purposes, Facebook has been incorporated by businesses and even politicians as an effective method to reach their intended audience. Over one million entrepreneurs from 180 different countries have Facebook pages to facilitate their growth.¹⁰ Businesses constantly promote their Facebook pages because it is free advertising to their customers. Even with paid advertising on Facebook, the significant difference in expenses of advertising on Facebook compared to Google is an astounding 1:20.¹¹ By examining a user’s interests and biographical information, businesses can select who would most likely be interested in their product, and therefore ensure they are reaching their target audience. Likewise, political candidates utilize Facebook to promote their campaign and maintain interaction with voters. For instance, presidential candidate Mitt Romney has over 1.1 million users liking his Facebook page.¹² This means that all of them receive updates and can communicate with him throughout the campaign process. Even though Facebook’s effect on relationships is commonly associated with friends, family, etc., the business and advertising worlds have been successfully strengthening their ties with their consumers through Facebook.

Just as Facebook has developed from past forms of communication, it is continuously shaping how people connect with one another in the world today. By continuing trends of recent forms of technology, Facebook is one of the most efficient and convenient methods of communication ever developed. A user’s profile not only displays their interests and list of friends, but it enables them to communicate with these people in real time from virtually anywhere. Since Facebook has become such an integral part of society, it has revolutionized the ways we maintain relationships among our family and friends. These changes have been both positive and negative, especially in the case of relationships. Even though close contact is a benefit of Facebook’s networking, many still question the potential hazards of privacy, or lack of. As Facebook continues to represent the current form of communication for this generation, it is constantly shaping technology’s next great invention in the future.

Notes

1. Wyld, Adrian, “Facebook,” The New York Times, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/ mmmmmbusiness/companies/facebook_inc/index.html (accessed October 19, 2011).

2. Hepburn, Aden, “Facebook Statistics, Stats & Facts For 2011,” Digital Buzz Blog, mmmmmhttp://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/facebook-statistics-stats-facts-2011/ (accessed mmmmmNovember 5, 2011).

3. Woolley, Scott, “The world's fastest Internet access—who's got it?” CNN Money, mmmmmhttp://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/23/the-world%E2%80%99s-fastest-mmmmminternet-access%E2%80%94who%E2%80%99s-got-it/ (accessed October 15, mmmmm2011).

4. How I Met Your Mother. Season 7 Episode 6, first broadcast 17 October 2011 by CBS. mmmmmDirected by Craig Thomas and written by Carter Bays.

5. Hepburn, Aden, “Facebook: Facts & Figures For 2010,” Digital Buzz Blog, mmmmmhttp://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/facebook-statistics-facts-figures-for-2010/ mmmmm(accessed October 19, 2011).

6. “Father finds daughter on Facebook after 20 years,” ABC Local News, mmmmmhttp://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=7739245 (accessed mmmmmOctober 19, 2011).

7. Adams, Richard, “Facebook a top cause of relationship trouble, say US lawyers,” The mmmmmGuardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/08/facebook-us-mmmmmdivorces (accessed November 10, 2011).

8. Ibid.

9. “Facebook party spins out of control,” MSNBC, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/ mmmmm43284493/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/facebook-party-mmmmmspins-out-control/#.TqFEKN4g_UB (accessed October 19, 2011).

10. Hepburn, Aden, “Facebook: Facts & Figures for 2010.”

11. Anderson, Brian, “Facebook Advertising – What Makes It Unique?” Brian Anderson mmmmmMarketing, http://brian-anderson.us/facebook-advertising-unique-2.html mmmmm(accessed November 10, 2011).

12. Romney, Mitt, “Mitt Romney,” Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/mittromney mmmmm(accessed November 10, 2011).

Bibliography

Adams, Richard, “Facebook a top cause of relationship trouble, say US lawyers,” The mmmmmGuardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/08/facebook-us-mmmmmdivorces (accessed November 10, 2011).

Anderson, Brian, “Facebook Advertising – What Makes It Unique?” Brian Anderson mmmmmMarketing, http://brian-anderson.us/facebook-advertising-unique-2.html mmmmm(accessed November 10, 2011).

“Facebook party spins out of control,” MSNBC, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/ mmmmm43284493/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/facebook-party-mmmmmspins-out-control/#.TqFEKN4g_UB (accessed October 19, 2011).

“Father finds daughter on Facebook after 20 years,” ABC Local News, mmmmmhttp://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=7739245 (accessed mmmmmOctober 19, 2011).

Hepburn, Aden, “Facebook: Facts & Figures For 2010,” Digital Buzz Blog, mmmmmhttp://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/facebook-statistics-facts-figures-for-2010/ mmmmm(accessed October 19, 2011).

Hepburn, Aden, “Facebook Statistics, Stats & Facts For 2011,” Digital Buzz Blog, mmmmmhttp://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/facebook-statistics-stats-facts-2011/ (accessed mmmmmNovember 5, 2011).

How I Met Your Mother. Season 7 Episode 6, first broadcast 17 October 2011 by CBS. mmmmmDirected by Craig Thomas and written by Carter Bays.

Romney, Mitt, “Mitt Romney,” Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/mittromney mmmmm(accessed November 10, 2011).

Woolley, Scott, “The world's fastest Internet access—who's got it?” CNN Money, mmmmmhttp://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/23/the-world%E2%80%99s-fastest-mmmmminternet-access%E2%80%94who%E2%80%99s-got-it/ (accessed October 15, mmmmm2011).

Wyld, Adrian, “Facebook,” The New York Times, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/ mmmmmbusiness/companies/facebook_inc/index.html (accessed October 19, 2011).

Relationship with Nintendo

Looking back on my childhood, one of my earliest recollections of technology was receiving a Nintendo Game Boy Color for my birthday. At the time, it was the hottest gift on the market, and I could not be more ecstatic. As the years passed, technology became more integrated into my life, and it extended into other facets beyond entertainment. In particular, I explored several forms of communication technology, including cell phones, email, instant messaging, etc. The use of calculators and computers for research soon became vital tools for school as well. My father has always been the technology expert in the house, and as a child I always turned to him for help. He was responsible for introducing newer forms of technology to our household, including the latest software for computers, iPods, and more efficient home appliances. Without him, my family and I may be several years behind the latest technological innovations. However, with rapid improvement and newer forms of technology over the past few years, he now occasionally turns to me to answer his questions. As a child growing up in a generation dominated by video games, I have seen Nintendo evolve from a simple form of entertainment to an electronic lifestyle that extends far beyond the world of video games.

As previously stated, one of my earliest memories of using technology was a Nintendo Game Boy Color. This and the Nintendo 64 became less of a hobby and more of an addiction for several kids in my neighborhood. Playing Nintendo became the top priority for them, and they resented doing schoolwork or any activity that prevented them from playing. For example, my neighbor was the same age as me and he played his Game Boy at the dinner table every day. It is appalling that he was more concerned with video games than socializing with his family. I personally never used these pieces of technology to that great of an extent, but I still remember riding my bike around town to play Nintendo at a friend’s house. Besides playing sports as a child, Nintendo was one of the primary ways that kids, including myself, socialized with their friends. Since we were willing to travel to play, one could say that Nintendo 64 had a controlling influence on our lives. However, it was only used as a basic gaming device and did not include various features found in later Nintendo consoles. The relative simplicity of Nintendo 64 and Game Boy parallel my relationship with technology at the time. Besides entertainment purposes or phone conversations, technology was not as significant in my life as it would later become.

After the Game Boy and Nintendo 64, Nintendo released a new gaming console called GameCube. This was a transitional system for Nintendo, with improvements being made in memory capacity, graphics, aesthetics of the product, and a wider array of games. GameCube achieved greater popularity and demand compared to Nintendo 64 and Game Boy, mainly due to the drastic upgrades in performance and variety of games. Nintendo’s introduction of more games coincides with Elizabeth Eisenstein’s argument in The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. Eisenstein mentions that the printing press made texts more readily available to a wider spectrum of people. Everything from bibles to indulgences to maps was being published, which means that nearly everyone was directly or indirectly influenced by the printing press. Likewise, Nintendo expanded to a wider audience by presenting a greater amount of games available for GameCube. Similar to Nintendo 64, children in my neighborhood utilized GameCube as a social tool. It was evident that the technology around us was rapidly improving, but the relationship that I maintained did not change until a few years later.

In 2006, Nintendo released its latest game console, the Wii. This is considered to be their most innovative, entertaining, and state-of-the-art system yet. One of the more intriguing aspects of the Wii is its capabilities through Wi-Fi connection. The Wii allows one to play against friends, stream movies from Netflix, and even purchase classic Nintendo games. Just as Nintendo has utilized the internet more effectively in its latest game system, I have done the same through my own interaction with technology. As of late, the internet has played a more significant role in my life due to the convenience of smartphones and apps. In addition, since the Wii allows users to purchase former games from previous consoles, Nintendo has preserved the best of what their game systems have to offer. This relates to Once More to the Mountain, where Rosalind Williams and Charles McFarland return to the Bernese Alps after fifty-one years. The authors mention that even though methods of transportation have evolved since their last journey, some of the villages and towns have resisted building up larger developments to maintain their warm and intimate settings. Moreover, the fact that the Wii is Nintendo’s most complex and advanced model yet also relates to how I’ve matured up to this point. Just as the Wii has several new features, including motion-sensing technology and online capabilities, I have garnered new skills myself. These include maintaining a job, driving a car, and even surviving at college six hundred miles from home. Even though Nintendo is no longer the neighborhood gathering it once was, it still reflects how crucial technology has become in my life and how it is utilized in society today.

Growing up in my generation means that Nintendo was not merely a source to play video games, but a representation of how technology has affected our lives. In addition to the technical improvements Nintendo has made over the years, they have also extended their products to a wider audience. A decade ago, few people other than teenagers or elementary school children could be found with a Game Boy in hand or playing Nintendo 64. Nevertheless, through the introduction of adult-friendly games and programs, people of all ages can be found playing the Wii. One of these programs is the WiiFit, which is utilized for exercise and has the capability to track the user’s progress. Even though I have continuously played Nintendo over the past decade, their products have also shaped the surrounding culture. This has been driven by the desire and expectation to improve upon what already exists. With fierce competition, including Microsoft and Sony, Nintendo has risen to the occasion with their revolutionary motion-sensing technology, Wi-Fi capabilities, and additional innovations. That being said, Nintendo has not only taken feedback from the culture it is a part of, but it has also influenced the lives of millions of users around the world. I, a mere one of these users, can say that Nintendo tells the story of my relationship with technology, as well as provides a concrete example of how technology affects culture.

Title

The name of our blog has changed to the one above because I think it is more interesting and original.

Guide to Electronic Presentation

Guide:

For our group presentation we focused on the electronic aspect of WOVEN.  Specifically on how electronic communication influences our society and our decisions.  We expanded on electronic communication by addressing the impact of Facebook, smart phones, music publicity, web comics, and finally YouTube.  These different categories of electronic communication can be easily related to one another.  It is easy to see how all of these relate to the electronic aspect of WOVEN as well as other forms such as oral and visual considering we are communicating over websites and such.  Also, it is obvious to see how the written aspect is incorporated considering our topics cover communication.

For our presentation, we used prezi to easily convey the purpose of our presentation.  We are addressing what I talked about above in various forms of multimedia such as YouTube videos, pictures, as well as the design and layout of our project.  Each one of us will elaborate on one of the five topics listed above and will provide time for questions concerning our individual papers or the presentation as a whole.

At the end of the presentation, we, as a group, hope you understand why we categorize these five topics under the central theme of electronic communication, and also how we relate them to the other forms of communication that WOVEN offers such as Oral and Visual.  We have included a list of resources in the comments that are incorporated in our presentation.  We hope you enjoyed!

http://prezi.com/okysbwo6bjlb/edit/?auth_key=gl7ol5m&follow=okeznyydyd5s#0_1779643

Writers and their Audience

In my experience of writing and reading papers, I have come to the conclusion that the audience you write to is very important in many different ways.  When it comes down to who you will be writing to, the author needs to think as to how he is going to write the paper because people have varying knowledge about different subjects and writers need to take that into consideration as a means of attracting the readers attention, furthering the readers knowledge, or helping the reader with research.  When writing about science and technology, there should be many publications but ones that address different knowledge levels about the subject.  I think writers should write about whatever they want to.  If they like to be more personal in their writing and like the reader to understand the subject more for a first time then they should do that.  Scientists should record their findings even though they are not the best in conveying the findings so personally.  Their findings regardless of the degree of comprehensiveness are important because it furthers science and the future.  


When someone writes about science and technology, that writer needs to be aware of his material and to whom he is addressing.  The material may be very general or specific which makes comprehension of the material a key point when writing to an audience.  In my opinion, every writer should have his/her own target crowd to write to so they know how informative their piece can be.  For example, scientists usually write about theses, and in those writings, there are usually many difficult concepts and words that regular people are not familiar with.  Therefore it is logical for scientists to direct their writings to other scientists, who can expand on their theses, or to researches who are writing important documents that are for educational purposes.  But where does that leave the regular people who do not have much knowledge in the field?  In my opinion, when it comes to this matter of writing to people with little to no background knowledge then writers with good personal skills that write about the basics of that topic should be used.  Because they attract the reader into the subject and not confuse them.  If readers like the topic then they can progress to the rigors or reading scientists research and findings.  This just provides a good segway to the harder material.  These are my opinions on audience and writings.

Writing about Science and Technology

            There are many questions surrounding writings of science and technology. Many people have many different views on this issue. These views stem from different aspects, such as the audience of the writing. The writings can be geared toward a certain group, which would lead to diversity in opinion about them. The audience is a big determining factor in writing because writers have many different reasons for their writing. They can write to inform a certain group of people about something they are not experts in, or they could write to inform experts in a field about new developments or improvements. The problem comes in someone who is not of the target or intended audience reads one of these writings and is not able to comprehend. A paper by a scientist can be geared toward other scientists. In this kind of situation, the writer would assume some sort of knowledge in the field. Another situation is where a write writes to inform people who do not have any significant knowledge in something. In this situation an expert in the field would not find the writing interesting and would choose not to read it.

 In my opinion, experts in a certain field should be the ones to write about their field. The examples of target audiences show how there can be a disparity in the reception of the writing. To avoid this, these writings can be modified in several different ways. Scientists and journalists can make sure to explicitly state the target audience of the writing in order to avoid the problem that comes up when people who are not in the target audience read them. Another way to fix this problem would be for these scientific and technology experts to standardize their writing so that they are able to reach a broad audience without discriminating. In order to reach this broader spectrum, technology and science writings should be modified so that everyone will gain the enjoyment or satisfaction they want from reading the writing.

Target audiences and the structure of papers

When people write informative papers about science and technology, a major factor that influences how they lay out their information and how it is worded is audience. A target audience must be chosen and the writing must be focused around the chosen group (or groups) of people. For example, a scientist writing a paper exposing his or her findings will be directed at other scientists, and will be written accordingly. A scientist will assume his or her audience knows the concepts behind the paper, and therefore will be able to follow the complex material that is covered in the paper. A scientist will not waste time explaining the basic concepts behind his work, when he/she knows that the targeted audience already has all the knowledge required to understand the published work. Someone from a different audience, without a scientific background, would most likely not understand what is being covered in the paper, and, as such, would not read it.

Someone else, such as a historian writing a paper intended to be published for profit, his target audience will be more of the general population. His paper will cover more of the basic concepts behind his work, and perhaps not go as in-depth into the findings as a scientific paper would. Because of this, someone specialized in the field of study the published work covers will not be as interested, as it contains a lot of information that he already knows. Of course, these publications have different end goals. A scientist publishing a scientific paper probably wants to get it reviewed by peers in order to advance knowledge in his particular field, while the historian writing something to be published for profit wants to spread some general knowledge (usually) to the public. Therefore, when writing something to be published, it is important to take into account the targeted audience, as it will determine the content and writing style of the paper.

Who Should Write What?: Analyzing the Roles of Authors and Audiences in Scientific and Technology Writings

When perusing scientific literature, there are three kinds of authors. There are the journalists, the scientific historians, and the scientists themselves. Each is usually designated towards a specific audience: with the journalists tending to focus on the general public, the historians focusing on people more learned about the field, and scientists focusing on reaching out to other scientists. When people have little to know idea about the subject they are looking at to learn, a good starting point is to read the works of journalists and novelists. These authors may not be definitive experts in that field, but they they do have a good handle on what that topic is, and are able to explain it in a way that the novice is able to understand. This is very useful, due to the fact that the scientists know so much about their field, and have no idea what the reader doesn't knkow about the field, that it is really difficult for them to teach at a very basicc level. The journalists, however, have a fresh perspective on the topic, which is very helpful to the readers. The journalists remember what it was like not understanding the concepts that they are now somewhat familiar with, and are able to translate their learning experience into a distilled source for the reader to learn from. The historians have a firmer grasp on the topic than the journalists and are more suited towards intermediate readers. The historians not only have to know the subject itself, but have to know the history of the subject, and the history of the pioneers and researcers in that field as well. Since the history of human understanding conveniently goes from a basic to progressively more advanced as time goes by, historians in a particular field are well suited for being able to accomadate various levels of experitise even if their audience may not be as wide as the targeted readership aimed for by journalists. If I were to have an interest in chemistry and was curious on why these various equations are used, the historian can give me information on the person who discovered the principles, how they discovered it, and what uses it could be used for. This allows me to gain a much more expansive comprehension of the chemical principle, and be able to apply that understanding more on my journey for knowledge. The scientists write for other scientists, the writings that they work on are on the bleeding-edge of that field, and could be disproven or groundbreaking one day or the next. These writings would scare off most readers, and as such, are rarely ever found at the top of best-seller lists.

The main question with these writers is, "Should they write in these ways?" The answer is mostly yes, but perhaps there should be a little more “mixing” on the scientists' part. Scientists tend to detach themselves from general readership, and usually are used to thinking of their topics in specific ways. However, sometimes trying to explain a difficult topic in a basic manner can give new insight to the scientist doing the explaining. Take Einstein for example. When exploring motion and time, the general population would use traveling in a train as an example of having various points of perception and how time is experienced. Einstein wanted to prove that motion is relative to the observer but the train model did not always work. So, he came up with the analogy of a man in an infinitely tall elevator accelerating upward at a constant rate. The man inside would experience the accelaration as a “gravitational pull” and the man could potentially feel as if on Earth. Then Einstein realized that if a light was shone into the elevator, it would bend down slightly. He then thought of how if gravity was analogous to acceleration in that aspect, it should be able to been able to bend light. This then showed how gravity and acceleration can both affect frames of reference, and through continued thought processes, he was able to build even further on what we now know as general relativity. This proves that, while scientists should focus mostly on their research, being able to convey their ideas to an average person could become beneficial and help the scientists themselves in looking at their work in new light. If anyone should try and experiment with writing outside of the audience that they should be writing for, it should be the scientists, because as Albert Einstein once said, "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother."

Writings of Science and Technology

There isn’t one single purpose for writing about science and technology or one specific audience that is trying to be reached. Two types of people tend to write about science and technology, and they can be categorized as either scientists or historians. Scientists tend to write for other scientists or professionals in their field. As a result, they make several assumptions, including numerous about the reader’s prior knowledge of the topic. This is because professionals do not need specific terms or concepts explained in detail, and they are held to a higher standard than the general public. In addition, the purpose for a scientist’s writing is usually to prove a concept or defend one side of an argument. By publishing their findings, they are looking for scientific breakthroughs or the opportunity to confirm their hypothesis. They rarely write simply to inform others on what they found without drawing any further conclusions. Furthermore, scientists tend to focus solely on the facts. Scientific journals are not concerned with prose and word choice or extracting specific emotional responses from their audience. Someone who is not very familiar with the scientific world would not only say that the written work of a scientist can be difficult to comprehend, but it is also rather boring. I feel that the writing of a scientist is more useful and credible than that of a historian as well. Since scientists are reporting and analyzing their findings, their work is more productive and beneficial to the world of science. Moreover, since they are experts in their respective fields, their work can be read with less skepticism and questionable information compared to the work of historians.

Both the audience and purpose that historians focus on when writing about science and technology greatly differ from those of scientists. Primarily, historians broaden their audience to include people who may know very little about the topic. This not only breaks down technological and scientific innovation for those who have not studied these topics much, but it sparks the interest of a greater audience. The writing of a scientist is too advanced to benefit anyone who is not already an aficionado for science, and these people may lose their interest in science if it wasn’t for historians. Furthermore, historians tend to write more of a narrative when writing about science and technology. They are able to turn facts and famous events in the world of science and technology into stories driven by plot and even some suspense. For example, Miller mentions that scientists are portrayed as heroes once they make a discovery, and their breakthroughs can be described as mythical or extraordinary based on how the historian portrays them. Even though historians lack the credibility of professionals when writing about science, their contributions are still crucial to expand scientific and technological works to a broader audience. Just as scientists write to contribute to the world of science, historians make their contributions with the general public and in facets of society outside the scientific world. Likewise, the fact that their purpose is to inform the reader through narrative, which can be viewed as entertainment, proves that they are essential in maintaining a wider spectrum of interest toward science and technology.

Serendipity: More than Luck?

The word serendipity is used to describe how someone will discover something through unexpected events. This generally causes one to envision the accidental discovery of something ground breaking, and as such there is much debate on how serendipity reflects the skills and abilities of the discoverer. Some may say that it is the result of dumb luck or that whoever has experienced serendipity does not deserve to be recognized for the achievement. This however is quite a false assumption to make on serendipity, as there is much more to serendipity than just “getting lucky.”

When serendipity is mentioned or thought of, the general idea is that it jumps towards the discoverer all by happenstance. This seems like a grievous misunderstanding of what serendipity truly is and devalues the knowledge and hard work that was put forth by the scientist. One famous example of serendipity is the image of Isaac Newton sitting underneath an apple tree. Everybody knows the story of how an apple fell from the tree that he was sitting under and hit his head, and how that inspired him to produce the various equations that have tremendously guided our understanding of gravity. The thing about that story is that the apple did not 'beat' or 'pound' that information into his head. If that was how knowledge could be suddenly implanted into someone's brain, then the study sessions at Georgia Tech would be... interesting to say the least. Instead, it may have been more of a reflection of the topic that crystallized the thoughts, knowledge, and experiences that Isaac Newton had gained prior and turned it toward answering a curious observation. “Stupid apple!” Newton may have thought, “Why did you have to fall on my head!” Then after pondering that statement for a second, he may have thought, “Hmm... Why did you fall on my head? And why did it hurt more as it fell than if had merely been on top of my head? Is that because it is accelerating? It was established earlier that a velocity is constant unless acted upon by force. Does that mean a force is constantly acting on it?” This thought process could have gone on for hours as he used insight to try and understand one of the mysterious forces of the universe.

Serendipity is not a situation where the answer jumps out of nowhere and says, “Here I am!”

It instead is when the scientist notices something and says, “Wait a minute,” and starts to question even mundane things in search of answers. The scientist then uses what he or she has learned over the years to make the first steps in that search. None of which involves “dumb luck,” because serendipity is less of a a giant neon sign, and more of a nudge in the right direction.

Thoughts on serendipity.

Serendipity is a word we sometimes see used, but do we really know what it means? Some define it as an aptitude for making desirable discoveries by accident, while others define it as just luck. Horace Walpole first coined the word to describe the protagonists of a fairy tale who, through observation, made discoveries that were completely unrelated to their end goal. If we think of Serendipity as the action of making useful discoveries unrelated to one's goal through the use of observation and deduction, we can see that some issues arise with the concept.

For example, if someone serendipitously makes a discovery, should they get credit for it, seeing as it was through a sort of luck? Some people think they shouldn't but in my opinion, based on the definition, they should. Serendipity is not just a stroke of dumb luck. It requires acute observation and deduction skills.

Recently, scientists in Italy, while using a machine that detects neutrinos fired from another facility in France, observed that some neutrinos were making the trip faster than light would (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/science/23speed.html ). Their original purpose was not to see if neutrinos could travel faster than light, but because they were attentive and knew what they were doing, they were able to observe this strange phenomenon. In fact, if this were true (the validity of their claim is another thing), it would be the most significant thing to happen in the field of physics in a long time.

Now, do these scientists deserve recognition for this discovery? I would think so, as they did not just happen to see some neutrinos going faster than light, they were conducting advanced experiments, which although were not aimed at that purpose, were nonetheless likely to make some sort of discovery. They obviously knew what they were doing, so they deserve credit in my opinion. If someone were to stumble upon a discovery blindly, then that would not even be serendipity, as there was no observation or deduction. Serendipity implies previous knowledge about what your discovery is, and that is in my opinion enough to justify receiving credit for any discovery made through its “use”.

Serendipity

   Serendipity is defined as the development or occurrence of events by chance in a beneficial way. Serendipity is a very important theme in many different aspects of our lives today. There are many instances of serendipity in our daily lives. One example of the times when serendipity occurs with significant results is in scientific research. There are times when scientists are researching that they achieve results which vary from the expected conclusion. These conclusions are often credited to the individual who serendipitously achieved them.  There is some controversy on whether this recognition is deserved. Some believe that it is not deserved because of the serendipitous nature in which they were achieved, while others believe that the recognition is deserved because the serendipity was cultivated by their preparation and process of research.

In my opinion, recognition gained from discoveries made through serendipity is justified because of the work that has to go into research on a topic. Scientists put a lot of work into research, which cultivates the ideal conditions for serendipity to occur. Discoveries made through serendipity are usually in areas where prior research has been done. An example of this is the discovery of penicillin. Before penicillin was discovered, Alexander Fleming was actively in search for an anti-bacterial agent to help soldiers who were dying due to sepsis and other bacterial infections. In his research into anti-bacterial agents, he accidentally left cultures of staphylococci stacked together and discovered that one of the cultures that was infected by a fungus had killed all the bacteria around it. This was the serendipitous discovery of the world’s first antibiotic, which revolutionized medicine.

Serendipity can be in many different contexts. One example is the accidental discovery of a significant product such as penicillin. Another context may be in the discovery of a more efficient way of researching through trial and error. This can result in serendipitously finding a better way to do research. These examples of serendipity show exactly how important it is to us today, and the recognition those who achieve great discoveries through serendipity deserve.

Serendipity

Definition of Serendipity: Serendipity is when someone finds something that they were not expecting to find. Basically this means when someone has a "happy accident" or a "pleasant surprise".

Issues/Arguments related to serendipity: The question that I am answering is that if someone discovered something serendipitously, do they deserve the recognition for their finding.  Some of the main arguments that are brought up with this term are whether or not people who discover things serendipitously deserve recognition if they did not do much research or background studying in the past. The thing is that if scientists who spend their whole life striving towards a discovery or a new method to solve something lose the race to an accidental discovery by a high school chemistry student, then I think it is unfair to give all credit to the high school student.  Because even though the student may have stumbled upon the discovery, it is the scientist’s research that explains most of it.  This brings up many issues about serendipity. 

My opinion on serendipity: I think that scientists or even just others in general deserve all the recognition they desire, because in a simple sense, if they hadn’t discovered it then it would not be around for a period until someone else stumbled upon it.  Whether they were a scientist or not they have contributed to society.  However, I think that upon a discovery that person should have done a considerable amount of research or have some understanding in the field to take full credit. 

Examples/Context of Serendipity: A specific example of serendipity from the reading of “The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity” is the story of the Three princes of Sarendip. The example comes from when the three princes help out a camel driver who lost one of his camels.  The princes make inferences based on the camel when they passed it and after some questioning the driver finds out that the princes just came up with these conclusions based on what they had noticed about the camel.  In the end the camel is found with the help of these inferences.

Serendipity

Serendipity itself is defined as discovering something one didn’t expect to find. Dictionary.com even states it to be “good fortune; luck”. Based on these two definitions, I feel that luck plays a greater role than skill in serendipity. One famous serendipitous discovery, penicillin, also supports this theory. If Alexander Fleming did not accidentally leave a petri dish of bacteria uncovered, penicillin may have never been found. However, even though Fleming did not intentionally produce his results, he was still able to identify and explain them based on his education. I think education and observation are truly what make serendipity such a pivotal part of scientific discovery. Luck is still one of the greatest factors in serendipitous discovery, but without knowledge of the topic or the ability to identify obscure findings, no results would ever be published. I understand why some scientists would be hesitant to publish unexpected results, even though they may uncover a breakthrough. In the case of Fleming, he made an error in the lab and was very fortunate to find what he did. Based on my opinion of serendipity, scientists with serendipitous discoveries in the lab still deserve credit for interpreting their findings, but an asterisk should be next to their name for stumbling upon their results. Nevertheless, some inventors do deserve full credit for their cases of serendipity. For example, the invention of Velcro took George de Mestral years to develop after observing burrs sticking to his clothing. His invention took more of a keen eye than it did luck. Regardless of how results are gathered or how inventions are made, serendipity is essential for technological advances in the world. Even though these advances may not seem as impressive because they involve a great deal of luck, they are still crucial to improving society.

Name Idea

How about "From Coulomb to Cool: commentary on electric communication from experimentation to cultural dissemination."

???

Blog Names

Lets think of some other names for the Title...more creative.

Test

This is a test