John 3:22-26

"After these things..." refer to the Passover and Nicodemus's visit. It is important to note that Jesus was gathering quite a crowd here, and that there was quite a religious sentiment going on in the Judean region, especially in Jerusalem. Also note that Jesus' disciples were baptizing. Referring back to the section in the John posts on baptizing we see that it was quite a common practice, however, its origins are not clear, and what Jesus' disciples were baptizing the people for is also not mentioned. It might be that while they were baptizing, Jesus was also teaching, since it is mentioned that He Himself did not baptize. This also tells us that Jesus' disciples at this time might have some religious status and recognition, being associated with a popular teacher, Jesus.

In any case, there arose a debate. How often, when there is a large crowd of believers, even religious leaders, there will also be a debate. And note that it was a purification, a debate about rituals probably between John's disciples and the Jews (probably the Pharisees), a dispute about who is doing what and who is right about it. Perhaps we can get the sense here that while the Pharisees were in legal religious authority, there were bands of teachers who might have disagreed with them, and there was constant voicing of religious ideas. Can we map this on to the way churches and religious organizations behave now?

But note even more surprising is that while the dispute was about purification, what John's disciples asked John about was nothing about purification but they were concerned about Jesus having more followers than John! Perhaps they were not really concerned about purification after all, perhaps it was bothering them that this thing was happening, and the unrest made them choose a topic just to vent? Again, do we do that ourselves? This is a call to re-examine our motives, no matter how admirable, we may have the best of intentions to dispute about religious motives and practices, but is that really our concern, and even more important, is that really what matters? Did we miss the point about what Jesus is doing?

Examine John's response deeply, because it seems in contrast to his disciples' and perhaps may be what John the author is putting as an example for us to follow in response to the Christ.

"He must increase, but I must decrease".

We are but witnesses to a more glorious Light. Always remember that. Be humble. Especially in the presence of One who comes from above and testifies to that which He has seen and heard. This statement constitute another testimony from John the Baptist as quoted by John the author, another testimony about the Christ. And Christ's testimony, through His actions, about Himself.

CNS 2007: New York City

New York, New York. The greatest city on earth...lah. We walk here walk there, walk everywhere. This photo show the city from the New Jersey side. A dense fog is covering the midtown area. Very thick, very mystery one.

Anyway, someone may is being asking me, why you go there ah? So I have to tell you, is not for fun one ok! Is for work. We is actuallying doing work lah. Conference. CNS Conference. Stand for Cognitive Neuroscience Society lah. Is for people who do my kind of work one, neuroscience. About the brain lah. Anyway, as you can see, we are very busy. So cannot talk very long. We are constantly finding out new, and interesting and important things, so also have to keep ourselves fit in order to maximize productivity. This next photo is showing Wenjing eating the duck bones, then Blair is eating the fish bone. See we very poor, eat only bones.

The the city also very one kind, the sell us jiu. Then got so many kinds. We dunno what to get, so we see this one, must be super good lah. Because the name is SIMI. So we think this one is asking us "Kua Si Mi?" That's means is got very stylo right? Because got attitude. Then you know this one is for when you dunno what jiu this is, you ask the store owner, he will recommend and say "Simi jiu you want?" Then of course you say "yes!"

Then not say I say what lah, but there is a very good sushi place called Yuka in the Upper East Side, this is in the upper side, in the east. That side. Is eat all you can one, anytime. Most New York eat all you can is only on certain days only and at some times only. This one is everyday, anytime also can. Only about $20. Is cheap already lah for New York. Only thing is you must not over order. So if you order, then never eat, then must pay the full price for ala carte. Remember ah, don't order too much, then no more siao mei mei price.














The next time is we go to the statue lah. Here is the poem they write about it. Acherly, not they lah, is one xiao jie write one. Is talking about the liberty, the freedom, is so good. Everyone also is like.













Then hor, lastly but not least lah, is the brunch in the West Village in place call Manteno, or Man something lah....and dinner in Le Petite Bistro.













This one is the You've Got Mail restaurant where the guy pretend to dunno the girl like that, then sian her from there lor.













So you can see we is very busy lah. I also recommend you see this movie lah. Is very good, but because take on phone may give you headache. [movie] And no say I never tell you ah, this movie is quite long one...about 20min long!

Why did Jesus Christ have to die?

There are many aspects to this question, but I would first deal with the most direct one and leave the rest for later comments and feedback.

Christ died because of our sin. Therefore, first we have to know what sin is. Sin is not just doing "bad" things like stealing, lying, or even killing. The core of sin is not knowing God as God. We all have sinned in that we all are born into this world not immediately knowing who God is, and not immediately acknowledging Him. All of us, at one point in our lives, were separate from God. This is a result of the original sin from Adam. But the sin also lies on us as well.

The result of our sin, is our death. Not just physical death, but death as separation. That is, once we are separated from God, we remain always separated. The problem is that God does not have sin, and therefore there is separation. On the other hand, God does not think that this separation is totally good. It is better for us to be with Him. So He worked out a way for us to be with Him again, even though we have sinned. The answer is Jesus.

Jesus Christ is God. Although He is God, He took on our sin, and died. This at once forms a bridge. It is both shocking as well as beautiful all at once, because God who cannot even have a hint of sin, took on our sin. And God, in whom is life itself, died. This might sound impossible, or ridiculous, or contradictory at first. But consider that there is a lot about God we don't fully understand. Furthermore, what is impossible to man, is possible to God. To live and die at the same time, to be pure but tainted at the same time. This is a radical concept, that perhaps we can slightly identify with in the form of our own emotions. How we can feel so completely elated but hollow, sad and happy, worried but at peace, angry yet in love, hate but respectful. How we can be many persons yet the same person at one time. Is it any more impossible for God to have this characteristic too but in infinite terms?

In any case, once Christ died, we see that the separation is made null, because God crossed over to our side, and in doing so, brought us back to Him. There is identification and acknowledgment. There is also a form of payment, as it were. A ransom for the price of sin. Sin meant death for us, but in our stead, Christ died. Ironically, it is Christ/God that defined that sin means death. So in essence, He was both fulfilling His own law as well as abolishing Himself and His law.

The story doesn't end there of course, because Christ also rose again from the dead.

Parko Cho-O

No, this isn't a tribal dance. No, this isn't us burning the house. It is us saying goodbye to a dear friend. Parting is never easy. Which is why we do it with some partying. Parko Cho-O was held at Hessel Park, 6pm. BBQ, good food, good company. At first, the weather forecast threatened to thunderstorm, but, I quote someone, "60% chance for thunderstorm means, 40% chance". It all turned out well. People gathering wood, people burning marshmellows. Everyone just being plain crazy. We wish you all safe journey, and a better road ahead.

Check out the awesome pyro fest [movie].

Galactica Finale

There's a reason for him grabbing you...its because it is the end. The final five...the return of Starbuck...the silly music...Earth!

Ending episode of Galactica 3rd season finale.

Goose on Roof

Walking along the Beckman Quad, it was a breezy Spring evening. When something caught my eye on the right. Two geese. Flying in tandem, barking! They swooped past behind and landed on the roof of the computer science building. Tension ruffled in the air. What would they do next?

Click [here] to find out!

Press Release: Culture and Aging fMRI Study

Culture, Aging fMR-Adaptation press release in UIUC News Bureau.

http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/07/0501culture.html

Culture, Age and Eye-Movements

We repeated the same experiment as in the culture and aging adaptation fMRI study. Only this time, we were recording subject eye-movements. We know that there were already cultural differences in old adults in terms of brain activity. Specifically, old East Asian adults did not engage the object processing regions to the same degree as Old Westerners. But how do we really know for sure that this was related to visual processing and not some other form of cognitive operations at work. A way to understand this better was to use eye-tracking. Which is what mainly motivated this study. In parallel, this eye-tracking version of the paradigm allowed to examine three main questions:

1. Cultural experience with age predicts that individuals become more different as they become more developed in their culture (assuming that the cultures are different on some dimensions and levels). However, aging also leads to a phenomena called de-differentiation, which refers to the fact that cognitive processing in older adults becomes less individually distinct due to general decline and increased variability in performance. So it would seem these two forces are in opposition. Thus, one question was whether cultural difference diverge or converge with age.

2. Another question was whether these cultural differences are robust to environmental biases. Cultural biases are such that East Asians are context-oriented and Westerners are object-oriented. These are sweeping statements of course, and should in no way be understood as stereotypical. However, there is evidence that suggests that, for whatever reason, there are visual processing differences that are related to the cultural background of individuals, including this current study. The question though is if we were exposed to visual environments that biased us to attend to objects or backgrounds, how would we behave given our own cultural biases to one component over the other?

3. Finally, the last question is whether these cultural biases in visual processing is just an inconsequential behavior, or if it does indeed have impact on other cognitive processes, perhaps an obviously important process such as memory.

In sum, we found that cultural differences diverge with age, these cultural biases remain despite environmental biases, at least in a passive viewing case, and these biases also impact on memory such that the item we attend to less is subsequently less well remembered.

[CNS Poster 2007.pdf]

Sonic Route 44 Lemon Berry Slush

It is 77 Fahrenheit. It is hot. It is sunny. It is Spring. You haven't seen the sun in months at this intensity. Your tongue is dry. Your throat is dry. You are driving. Where do you go? What do you do about your life problems?

YOU GO GET A ROUTE 44 LEMON BERRY SLUSH FROM THE SONIC ON NEIL ST, THAT'S WHAT YOU DO!!!!! DO IT!!!

Courier Breakfast

Ahhh, the smell of pancakes, coffee, omelettes, and bacon in the morning. And to have it in an old fashion place that seems to have some sense of history soaked into its seats. This is a winner here in terms of identity and character. Home-grown, no franchise, Champaign-Urbana place to eat. Breakfasts are great. I had the steak and omelette, there's other great stuff of course!

Check out the movie here [movie].

Check their website out too:
http://www.couriersilvercreek.com/couriercafe/

Texas Roadhouse, Champaign, IL

Standard Texas steak dinner here. They throw their peanut shells on the floor. Quite a busy place, very popular. Food is not bad. Not gourmet, but think of it as upper-class comfort meat food place. What was fun though, was the peanut shells and the noisy crowd. And they celebrate birthdays there by making the birthday person sit on a horse saddle, and yell out their name, and shout "Yee Ha!" They also do this quirky looking dance. Oh, and although they are Texas Roadhouse, they originated in Indiana. Check out the movie here [movie].

Crash!

It happened again! This is the second time I have witness a truck crashing into the train bridge across Springfield Ave. The first time was when we were walking along Springfield on the way home. And then, BAM! This truck's container hits the bridge because it was to low. That truck ended up stuck underneath because it was going fast enough so that the momentum got it through a little under the bridge. But then it was unable to move forward or backward anymore.

This one happened before we got there. But again, we were walking to work when we say this truck there. When will they ever learn? Is the signage of the bridge height inaccurate? Do truck drivers not know the height of their trucks? Do truck drivers not believe in the laws of physics? Are train bridges invisible to truck drivers? Is there a gravitational singularity in the Springfield train bridge that draws large bodies such as trucks to itself uncontrollably?

Stay tuned next time, when we find out the answers to...The Mystery of the Crashing Trucks

SPRING 2007!

It took a while lah. At first the weather turn hot, then it suddenly snow again. But now it look like it is here to stay lor. The flower all come out again. This shot is of a tree outside my apartment. The flower bloom white one. Quite the very impressive lah. More thing happening now.

Feedback about recent heated Intelligent Design debate

Here are some recent articles in CNN about the science and intelligent design debate. The first article [download] considers a scientists reasons for why he believes in God as a scientist. The second article [download] talks about the possibility that religion is simply a matter of evolutionary necessity.

Recently, this author has heard about some incidences which reflected a bias of non-religious scientists who think that religious people do not consider what the evidence is suggesting. This comment arose out of a scientific discussion on how our personal beliefs do affect the way we interpret objective data.

I think I will have to comment on this as I feel that the discussion has a very crucial point, and the remark made by non-religious scientists may not be a fair one. Firstly, I do not think that the discussion point was wrong. In fact, I agree with it. Beliefs most certainly bias our interpretation of the world, and of reality. In fact, that is fundamentally what belief is. It is attributing meaning and cause to what we see around us. In this sense, the idea that belief is a psychological state innate in human beings (since we do not seem to see animals that have beliefs) out of evolutionary necessity. One theory is that if we do not have something to believe in, human beings would not function, we would in fact go crazy. Thus, to resolve this state, we developed religion.

This might be true, it might not. Scientifically, we cannot prove that it does not exist. No science can prove that anything does not exist. I think scientists have to conceed to this. This author is a scientist too, and I think there is no reasonable argument to suggest that science can ever get past this problem of proving non-existence, at least with current empirical methods. Similarly, science cannot prove the non-existence of God.

But back to religion as an evolutionary outcome. If in fact this is true, it says nothing about whether God is real. Just because we think our ideas of God are a result of our neurons firing, which are a result of our DNA "directing" our neurons to wire in a certain way, that results in this "feeling" or state of thinking there is a God, these do not have bearing on whether God exists or not. If God exists, he exists whether I think he does or not, he exists whether my thoughts about his existence arise out of a reflection of truth or if they arise due to pure chance.

That being said, religious people, specifically Christians, do not necessarily disagree with the existence of evolution. In theory, God could implement evolution as his way things should work? Is it not also a theory that he did not? What I mean is, these are theories, not facts. And science has yet to show that it can prove that evolution = no God.

So, in sum, we all belief something. For the non-religious scientist, it is simply that they believe that all they can observe has no intelligent cause. For the religious scientist, we also need to look at the objective evidence that there is intelligent cause for everything we see. No one is spared this burden. And surely, which side we are on, will bias the way we see thing. The point is not to say the other side believes what they do because they are not objective. The point is to recognize how we ourselves are biased, and how others might have different biases, and consider the data together.

If God exists, then the data will show it, if indeed this method can show it. If he does not, then the data will show it too, if this method permits, however, we know that this method cannot show that something does not exist. So perhaps we should be thinking if there is ever any way to show that something does not exist?

Binding and Bandwidth

This is an idea about what might happen if different types of information were attended to. Consider this thought experiment:

There is an item A, and another item B. A and B both contain sub-features A1...An, B1...Bn. When we attend to A or B, we are in fact binding A1...An, and/or B1...Bn, to represent A, B.

Now, we have limited bandwidth. Which means, we can only process a limited amount of information at any one time. Consider for the moment that we can only process 4 bits of information. So, if we attend to A, we only process A1-A4, and if we process B, we process B1-B4. We could, by way of divided attention, process A1,A2,B1,B4. Assuming that there is minimal cost in having to dissociate between two different groupings of features (which is rarely the case, but lets just assume that this is possible for argument's sake). This also means, we do not process the other information about the other features that are present.

Now, consider another type of processing, or rather, another level. If in fact we process something called A-B. That is, we bring the binding function up from the item level of A and B, to a higher representation that binds both A-B. What would this result in terms of the amount of information we can process at a time?

This is now only 1 bit of information. We would have more capacity left over (3 bits) from our initial 4 bits. Furthermore, within the 1 bit, we might be able to reinstate the original A1-A4, and B1-B4 via past experience. However, we will suffer from interference in this case, since we did not explicitly process A1-A4 or B1-B4, but rather A-B. Thus, there should be a cost of attending to this higher level at the expense of the lower levels. Likewise, there is a cost of attending to the lower levels at the expense of the higher levels. This is also known in the literature as chunking.

Thus, in summary is that the level of binding should be inversely related to the bandwidth, or the amount of information we can process at any one time.

Unsupervised Learning

Here's an R code that implements unsupervised learning.

vdmulearning.R

Here's the code to display the hexagonal outputs you see in this page.

vdmhexplot.R

This is a specific instance of an unsupervised learning network used by Von Der Malsburg, hence VDM. He was interested in getting the network to exhibit similar behavior to what is observed about the human primary visual cortex. In humans, the primary visual neurons are organized in a columnar fashion according to their sensitivity and selectivity to visual line orientations. That is, each neuron in the primary visual cortex is maximally active for a specific orientation of lines that it receives visual signals from in the environmental space. Furthermore, these neurons are grouped together such that adjacent neurons are each sensitive to close orientations.



This R code implements the VDM network specifically using the following line orientation stimuli. The stimuli consist of 19 input units selectively made active (1 or 0) to give rise to "orientation". In fact, the input stimuli is realized in R as a matrix of 1s and 0s in the right positions.





At first, the network outputs a roughly clustered pattern of activity to a particular orientation (bottom left). But after several training iterations (about 100 cycles, which is quite fast!), it displays columnar organization (bottom right).













Interesting directions to pursue from this code are: object-level representation, color, moving stimuli, 3D representation, binding, repetition suppression.

Here's my paper which describes the model in greater detail [VDM.pdf].

Perceptron Neural Network: Backpropagation

Here's an R [http://www.r-project.org/] implementation of a backpropagation network.

trainnet_perceptron.R
testnet_perceptron.R

The network learns by propagating the input activity to the output layer, then comparing the resulting output with desired outputs. The difference is computed as an error which is backpropagated to the lower layers to effect a weight change that will reduce this error magnitude.

The network is then tested with original or distorted inputs. In general, this network can compute input-output mappings effectively (within network limits which are a function of the number of bits of information required to distinguish inputs, and the number of hidden layers and units). However, it is poor at generalization and distorted inputs compared to the Hopfield network.

Check out my paper that explains in greater detail [Backprop paper].
Also check out this website http://www.gregalo.com/neuralnets.html

Hopfield Neural Network

Here's an R [http://www.r-project.org/] implementation of the Hopfield, auto-associative network.

trainnet_hopfield.R
testnet_hopfield.R

Here's an brief on how it works. Every unit in the network is connected to every other unit (see weight matrix configuration in figure). Input patterns are used to trained the network using Hebbian learning. The network learns by additively changing its weights to reflect instances of unit co-activation. Unit dissimilarities and inactivations are ignored.

The network is then tested on original or distorted inputs, and it will robustly return one of the original trained inputs (within limits).

Check out my paper that explains in greater detail [Hopfield paper].
Also check out this website http://www.gregalo.com/neuralnets.html

Parko Beero!

The blind pig. Here lor. Even though hor, its Spring break lah. This is a one week holiday. So we all supposed to be relax lor. But then suddenly got so many works to do. Is very siao one. Suddenly is Thursday already. The whole like disappeared like that. I dunno why. So I say lah, we all go Blind Pig to have a beer to relax. How can not relax? Is Sprint break mah! So the lab came. Fun fun. I had two beers, one is call er...dunno what, an India pale ale (7.2%), and the other is the famous Delirium Tremens (8%). Blind Pig very good lah. I think so is my favorite pub in Champaign. Got character. Feel like an old English pub. Got one of the most selection of beers in town. You even got beer you dunno inside got what. Anyway, we talk talk talk, and then we go home. At least got relax a little bit lah.

Soba Tempura

This is a set meal consisting of cold soba noodles, vegetarian tempura, and miso soup. I will be explaining how to make this as a set, rather than as individual portions, so the descriptions will overlap as I found this the best way to save time and hassle while making the meal. It is worth it though. Really really good!

Ingredients
For soba:
Soba
Soba sauce
White radish

For miso soup:
Spring Onions
Silk Tofu
Miso
Fish stock (dashi)
Dried seaweed (kombu)


For tempura:
White onion
Carrots
Shiitake mushroom
Anything else you want to fry
Flour
Oil
White radish
Sesame oil
Soy sauce
Fish stock

Method: Initial preparation
Batter
Place a bowl of flour into the freezer, this is to make the batter, and it is lighter cold. While waiting, prepare the soba.

Soba
Boil the soba noodles until soft. Drain the noodles and rinse with cold water to stop the cooking. Place the noodles on ice cubes in a bowl and put in the freezer. Prepare the tempura pieces.

Tempura
Slice the onions, carrots, mushrooms and others into bite size pieces.

Method: Ready for the frying
Prepare the batter. Take the cold flour out and set aside a small portion on a flat surface, this is the coating flour. Take the rest and pour water to mix in small amounts while stirring. Add and mix only enough water so that you get a sticky mixture with some lumps in it, this is the dipping batter.

Heat up enough oil so that the tempura pieces can float in the fry. Heat the oil hot enough by testing it with some of the dipping batter. Throw some in and if it floats, then the oil is ready.

Take one tempura piece and coat it in the dry coating flour, then dip it into the dipping batter. Make sure it is well covered. Fry the tempura in the oil for about one minute, constantly turning and watching. The tempura is done when it becomes relatively stiff and floating freely in the oil. Remove it and drain the oil on a napkin. Prepare the miso soup.

Method: Miso soup
To make the miso soup, prepare the fish stock by either dissolving some pre-made fish stock or powdered dashi. Boil the stock. While waiting for the boil, prepare the seaweed by soaking bits of it in cold water. Cut the spring onion into small pieces for soup, and the tofu into small cubes. Dissolve the a spoonful of miso into one cup of cold water. Once the stock is boiling, add the miso mix under low heat. Add the seaweed and cubed tofu and let the soup warm under low heat. Do not over boil miso soup, it will taste bad. Serve the miso soup with the chopped spring onions.

Method: Sauces
Soba sauce
Shred some white radish and chop some spring onions. Pour some soba sauce in dipping bowl and add the spring onions and the shredded white radish. The soba sauce is ready. You can add wasabi and raw egg in it if desired.

Tempura sauce
Prepare the tempura sauce. Mix the soy sauce, a little sesame oil, the fish stock, and boil the mixture. Add shredded white radish. Serve in another dipping bowl.

Method: Serving
Take the soba out from the freezer. Serve the soba on ice cubes, the tempura pieces on a plate, the miso soup, and the soba and tempura dipping sauces. Recommended to serve with a cup of green tea or roasted tea (hoji-cha).

Enjoy your meal!