Sixth Form Bulletin: Fill & Download for Free

The flow state isn't as elusive as some would have you believe, there are definitely different magnitudes of this state the lesser of which you are easily afforded.e.g. 20-30 minutes into a ping-pong bash-a-bout & I'll find that the paddle will find it's own way to the ball with barely a though of mine registered.I'm certainly no ping-pong wizard, it's just the adaptive benefit of my self finding that the precognitive bodily reflexes are superior than my laborious cognitive droll. It's a great zone to be in, you're body feeling it's way around the table while you're mind presses on with a totally unrelated topic.Yet the most profound flow state I've reached has been when I've had two unrelated tasks for my brain to process, & I've truly felt my brain faculties decouple.Twas way back when I was 14 or so, playing minesweeper, listening to a very uplifting playlist, whilst thinking about determinism. Back then I was a bit of a minesweeper wizard, computing rather simple problems merely by looking at them. Obviously my brain had to process this, yet I was so practiced this crept in the background whilst I was uplifted/inspired/moved (see the mozart effect) by the music, which augmented my reasoning abilities (I gather).Without any introduction to anything philosophical, I (like to think) synthesised my own interpretation of the fatalistic nature of the universe. It wasn't just the idea that the moment gave me, but an elation so deep I would liken it to what the Buddhist's call Nirvana.So my advice, find something you enjoy, get good at it, work yourself into the zone, bring with it some inspiring thoughts/music, different tasks for you brain to work on (yet avoiding any cognitive focus), & above all, don't take it too seriously.For extra curricula points, look into how the Buddhist's utilise koans into there mindfulness practice (Zen Koans - AshidaKim.com)I realise the question had more to do with scientific research than teenage meanderings, so I should point out that you only need to stumble across the references of the Flow (mind) wikipedia page to appreciate some of the scientific literature invested on this topic.Flow (psychology)^ Citations of Csíkszentmihályi's 1990 book about flow on Google Scholar.^ Goleman, Daniel, Emotional Intelligence, p. 91, ISBN 0-553-80491-X^ Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow theory and research. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 195-206). Oxford: Oxford University Press.^ Csíkszentmihályi, Mihály (1975), Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, ISBN 0-87589-261-2^ Csikszentmihalyi & Nakamura, Mihaly & Jeanne (2002), The Concept of Flow, The Handbook of Positive Psychology: Oxford University Press, pp. 89–92, ISBN 978-0-19-513533-6^ Schwartz, Robert C. (April 12, 2004). "No way is way: The power of artistry in psychotherapy.". Annals Of The American Psychotherapy 6(1) (1535-4075): 18–21.^ a b c d e Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988), "The flow experience and its significance for human psychology", in Csikszentmihalyi, M., Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–35, ISBN 978-0-521-43809-4^ Csikszentmihalyi, M., Finding Flow, 1997.^ a b c d Snyder, C.R. & Lopez, S.J. (2007), Positive psychology: The scientific and practical explorations of human strengths, London, UK: Sage Publications^ Csikszentmihalyi, M., Larson, R., & Prescott, S. (1977). The ecology of adolescent activity and experience. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 6, 281-294.^ Delle Fave, A., & Bassi, M. (2000). The quality of experience in adolescents’ daily lives: Developmental perspectives. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 126, 347-367.^ a b c d e f Csikszentmihalyi, M.; Abuhamdeh, S. & Nakamura, J. (2005), "Flow", in Elliot, A., Handbook of Competence and Motivation, New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 598–698^ a b Keller, J., & Landhäußer, A. (2012). The flow model revisited. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (pp. 51-64). New York: Springer.^ Moneta, G. B. (2012). On the measurement and conceptualization of flow. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (pp. 23-50). New York: Springer.^ Ellis, G. D., Voelkl, J. E., & Morris, C. (1994). Measurement and analysis issues with explanation of variance in daily experience using the flow model. Journal of Leisure Research, 26, 337.^ Haworth, John; Stephen Evans (November 14, 2011). "Challenge, skill and positive subjective states in the daily life of a sample of YTS students.". Journal Of Occupational And Organizational Psychology 68(2) (2044-8325): 109–121. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1995.tb00576.x.^ Nakamura, Jeanne; Csikszentmihalyi (2005). "The concept of flow". Handbook of positive psychology: 89–105.^ Keller, J., & Blomann, F. (2008). Locus of control and the flow experience. An experimental analysis. European Journal of Personality, 22, 589-607.^ Keller, J., & Bless, H. (2008). Flow and regulatory compatibility: An experimental approach to flow model of intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 196-209.^ a b Engeser, S., & Rheinberg, F. (2008). Flow, performance and moderators of challenge-skill balance. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 158-172.^ a b Schüler, J. (2007). Arousal of flow experience in a learning setting and its effects on exam performance and affect. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21, 217-227.^ Eisenberger, R., Jones, J. R., Stinglhamber, F., Shanock, L., & Randall, A. T. (2005). Flow experiences at work: for high need achievers alone? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 755-775.^ a b Csíkszentmihályi, Mihály (1990), Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York: Harper and Row, ISBN 0-06-092043-2^ Snyder, C.R. & Lopez, Shane J. (2007), "11", Positive Psychology, Sage Publications, Inc., ISBN 0-7619-2633-X^ Rathunde, K. & Csikszetnmihalyi, M. (2005), "Middle school students' motivation and quality of experience: A comparison of Montessori and traditional school environments", American Journal of Education 111 (3): 341–371, doi:10.1086/428885^ Rathunde, K. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005), "The social context of middle school: Teachers, friends, and activities in Montessori and traditional school environments", Elementary School Journal 106 (1): 59–79, doi:10.1086/496907^ Rathunde, K.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2006). "The developing person: An experiential perspective". In Lerner (ed.), R.M.; Damon (series ed.), W.. Theoretical models of human development. Handbook of Child Psychology (6 ed.). New York: Wiley.^ Parncutt, Richard & McPherson, Gary E. (2002), The Science & Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning Book, Oxford University Press US, p. 119, ISBN 978-0-19-513810-8, retrieved 2009-02-07^ de Manzano, Orjan, Theorell, Harmat, Laszlo, Ullen & Fredrik. "The psychophysiology of flow during piano playing". psycARTICLES.^ Young, Janet A. & Pain, Michelle D.. "The Zone: Evidence of a Universal Phenomenon for Athletes Across Sports". Athletic Insight. Retrieved 2008-05-08.^ Timothy Galwey (1976), Inner Tennis — Playing the Game^ "Yoga Sutras 3.9-3.16: Witnessing Subtle Transitions with Samyama".^ Sansonese, J. Nigro (1994), The Body of Myth: Mythology, Shamanic Trance, and the Sacred Geography of the Body, Inner Traditions, p. 26, ISBN 978-0-89281-409-1, retrieved 2009-03-06^ a b Murphy, Curtiss (2011). "Why Games Work and the Science of Learning". Retrieved 2011-07-25.^ Drpamelarutledge. "The Positive Side of Video Games: Part III". paper blog. Retrieved 11/28/12.^ Chen, J. (2008). "Flow in Games". Retrieved 2008-05-16.^ Drpamelarutledge. "The Positive Side of Video Games: Part III". paper blog. Retrieved 11/28/12.^ Drpamelarutledge. "The Positive Side of Video Games: Part III". paper blog. Retrieved 11/28/12.^ Michael Lopp (12 June 2007), "Chapter 25: A Nerd in a Cave", Managing Humans: Biting and Humorous Tales of a Software Engineering Manager, Apress, p. 143, ISBN 978-1-59059-844-3, "[The Zone] is a deeply creative space where inspiration is built. Anything which you perceive as beautiful, useful, or fun comes from someone stumbling through The Zone."^ Joel Spolsky (9 August 2000), The Joel Test: 12 Steps to Better Code, "We all know that knowledge workers work best by getting into 'flow', also known as being 'in the zone' (...) Writers, programmers, scientists, and even basketball players will tell you about being in the zone."^ "hack mode". Jargon File.^ Visser, Coert. "Good Business: Leadership, Flow, and the Making of Meaning". Retrieved 26 September 2012.^ a b Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow. The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books.^ a b Landhäußer, A., & Keller, J. (2012). Flow and its affective, cognitive, and performance-related consequences. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (pp.65-86). New York: Springer.^ Rheinberg, F., Manig, Y., Kliegl, R., Engeser, S., & Vollmeyer, R. (2007). Flow bei der Arbeit, doch Glück in der Freizeit. Zielausrichtung, Flow und Glücksgefühle [Flow during work but happiness during leisure time: goals, flow-experience, and happiness]. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 51, 105-115.^ Clarke, S. G., & Haworth, J. T. (1994). “Flow” experience in the daily lives of sixth-form college students. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 511-523.^ Massimini, F., & Carli, M. (1988). The systematic assessment of flow in daily experience. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness (pp. 288-306). New York: Cambridge University Press.^ Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in High School classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 158-176.^ Schüler, J. (2012). The dark side of the moon. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (pp.123-137). New York: Springer.^ Keller, J., Bless, H., Blomann, F., & Kleinböhl, D. (2011). Physiological aspects of flow experiences: Skills-demand-compatibility effects on heart rate variability and salivary cortisol. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 849-852.^ Peifer, C. (2012). Psychophysiological correlates of flow-experience. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (pp.139-164). New York: Springer.

There isn’t a single “next big thing” mathematicians are trying to solve. There are many next big things, and sometimes the next big thing that actually takes place isn’t any of the next big things anyone expected. But we can try, cautiously, to portray some of the most prominent challenges ahead, which are likely to attract attention and effort.How can we identify these challenges? There are a few reasonable sources:Hilbert’s famous list of 23 problems[1] is the closest thing we’ve ever had to an explicit portrayal of the greatest mathematical problems facing us. This was in 1900, but several of the problems are still only partially solved, or not at all.The Clay Mathematics Institute’s seven Millennium Problems[2] addressed a similar need in the year 2000. Only one of the seven has been solved so far.Books, articles and other publications addressing themes for the future of mathematics, such as the tome Mathematics Unlimited – 2001 and beyond[3] by Engquist and Schmid (eds.)Anyone attempting to write down such a list is bound to be at least somewhat biased, and likely often wrong. I will likely be more than somewhat biased and more than often wrong, but I’ll do my best, for whatever that’s worth.Complexity, Computability and LogicThe foundational questions of what can be computed and how efficiently are intimately linked to questions of mathematical logic: proofs, models and the boundaries of the mathematical endeavor. Indeed, one of the meta-questions here is, in my mind: what is the future of mathematics, now that computers have begun to augment our own abilities? This question will get answered, one way or another, in the coming 100 years.There are, certainly, more concrete problems we are facing. The most famous one is, of course, P vs NP,[4]which is one of the Millennium problems (and, in my humble opinion, the most profound one). Apart from this mother-of-all-problems, making any significant dent in the polynomial hierarchy and the complexity zoo is “the next big thing” for an entire industry of thinkers, working on a dazzling array of complexity classes.[5]Specifically, understanding the theoretical and practical significance of quantum computation is a major endeavor for the coming decades.One of the most intriguing (if speculative) directions in the area of computability, provability and foundations are Homotopy Type Theory[6]and Univalent Foundations[7] whose development was profoundly and tragically set back by the untimely death, in September 2017, of Fields medalist Vladimir Voevodsky.[8]Photo by Andrea KaneVoevodsky was, among many other things, a cautious intuitionist, or at least he was intrigued by intuitionism and finitism as a possible foundation for aspects of mathematics. My personal belief is that finitist methods and ideas will play an important role in the future of mathematics, not because they are somehow philosophically or morally superior, but because they are interesting.We’ve learned a lot about provability, but I think we’ve only skimmed the surface of proof complexity. What if a number-theoretic conjecture is false, but holds until some vast, uncomputable number? What if a statement is provable in ZFC, but the shortest proof is TREE(999) characters long? I believe that elucidating the fascinating frontiers of feasible thought will continue to define central pieces of mathematics for decades, or centuries.The Langlands ProgramRobert Langlands[9] is another person whose vision is deep and far-reaching enough to create an entire program, one that has guided the lives of many people since the late 1960s and is far from running out of steam. The Langlands program has been called “A Grand Unified Theory of Mathematics” by Edward Frenkel,[10] and I think this is only a slight exaggeration. It is an incredibly daring program, and it is peculiar that it’s absent from some of the sources I had mentioned.Describing the program is a daunting task. In An Elementary Introduction to the Langlands Program,[11]Stephen Gelbart writes:Herein lies the agony as well as the ecstasy of Langlands' program. To merely state the conjectures correctly requires much of the machinery of class field theory, the structure theory of algebraic groups, the representation theory of real and [math]p[/math]-adic groups, and (at least) the language of algebraic geometry. In other words, though the promised rewards are great, the initiation process is forbidding.Very, very roughly, the Langlands Program proposes that all [math]L[/math]-series, traditional objects of central importance in number theory, “come from” representations of certain groups. It connects together automorphic forms, the theory of adeles, representation theory and many other threads of geometry, algebra, analysis and number theory.The Langlands Program is not a single question or conjecture. It is an entire web of ideas. Ngô Bảo Châu’s[12] proof of the “Fundamental Lemma”[13]and Laurent Lafforgue’s[14] proof of the Langlands Correspondence over function fields were tremendous achievements that landed them both a Fields medal, but they are only steps in the grand program. Much is yet to be discovered and done, and I’m pretty sure that progress in the program will continue to happen over the coming decades.Children’s DrawingsI know this seems a little tongue-in-cheek, but it is only slightly so. The idea of “dessins d’enfants”[15]is one of Alexander Grothendieck’s[16] legacies, and I submit that elucidating, clarifying and building upon Grothendieck’s ideas is a significant outstanding challenge for mathematics.Specifically, dessins d’enfants offer a perspective on an object which (in my personal view) is one of the most mysterious and magnificent things in the deep, true universe (the one that is indifferent to the shackles of our actual, random physical world). It is perhaps the single most mysterious and magnificent of all: the absolute Galois group [math]\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})[/math]. Whatever progress is being made on understanding this profound group – and progress will, I am sure, be made – will shed light on the deepest questions in Number Theory and beyond. Grothendieck’s idea is not the only direction, but it is a promising and exciting one, like most everything this singular man came up with.Another thread of Grothendieck’s ideas, that of higher categories and topos theory, is pursued by many incredible and dedicated people, perhaps most vigorously by Jacob Lurie.[17]I don’t think we can expect him to finish it all on his own, wildly ingenious as he may be. It is hard to predict, but it is possible that higher category theory will grow in significance to play an absolutely central role in future math. It is also, by the way, closely connected to some of the ideas I mentioned in the first section (univalent foundations and so on).The Mathematics of PhysicsOne of the most ambitious, and most vague, of Hilbert’s 23 problems is the sixth.[18]It is phrased:6. Mathematical Treatment of the Axioms of Physics. The investigations on the foundations of geometry suggest the problem: To treat in the same manner, by means of axioms, those physical sciences in which already today mathematics plays an important part; in the first rank are the theory of probabilities and mechanics.Remember: this is 1900. Before Einstein’s 1905,[19]before General Relativity, before Quantum Mechanics, before the Standard Model and Quantum Field theory and Superstring Theory. Hilbert couldn’t have known how far his physics colleagues were from understanding physics, let alone axiomatizing it. And the challenge remains: to form a coherent, unified mathematical framework that describes our physical world.From this massive endeavor, the Clay Mathematics Institute picked a much more concrete, yet still profound, challenge for the Millennium Problems: the problem[20] of establishing a Yang-Mills theory corresponding to any gauge group, and showing that it has a minimal mass. A different way to phrase this challenge in a mathematical context is, perhaps: organize, axiomatize and understand topological quantum field theories.In a wonderful survey describing the Yang-Mills problem, Jaffe and Witten wrote:[21]…one does not yet have a mathematically complete example of a quantum gauge theory in four-dimensional space-time, nor even a precise definition of quantum gauge theory in four dimensions. Will this change in the 21st century? We hope so!To be sure, physics poses many other additional challenges for mathematics. Another Millennium Problem[22] seeks a proof (or refutation) that the Navier-Stokes[23] equations admit a smooth solution given any smooth boundary conditions.These are equations which describe fluid motion; they are not quantum or relativistic or anything, but they are fundamental for our understanding of the macroscopic world. Also, they are a key example of nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs), and understanding nonlinear PDEs is a huge and multifaceted mathematical challenge. We really, really want to understand if, despite their chaotic nature, such equations always have smooth solutions or if they can “break down” given the right initial conditions.Specifically for Navier-Stokes, I think many people are just waiting for Terry Tao to dispose of the damn thing already, despite the fact that he’s so far made progress on showing why the problem is harder than it may seem. Incidentally, the way he does that hints at establishing “sufficiently strong” computational models within the framework of fluid dynamics, which brings us back to the domain of computability and proofs. If solutions to nonlinear PDEs are rich enough to accommodate non-trivial logic, it may be that certain problems in PDE are as non-solvable as the halting problem.Whether it’s Tao or someone else, making progress here would be huge.The (Generalized) Riemann HypothesisAnother major candidate for “the next big thing” is the Riemann Hypothesis, the only Millennium Problem which has survived intact since Hilbert’s list in 1900. It may not be “the next big thing” in terms of being solved – heaven knows how long this might take – but it will surely continue to consume people’s minds, hopes and dreams.The Riemann Hypothesis seems kind of exotic: it deals with a specific function, the Riemann zeta function [math]\zeta(s)[/math], and asks about the location of its roots (other than a series of “trivial” ones). They are all expected to lie on the line [math]\Re(s)=\frac{1}{2}[/math].Specific functions and their roots aren’t usually a matter of universal interest, but this one is a huge exception. The Riemann zeta function has central importance in several fields of mathematics (most obviously, Number Theory). Furthermore, there’s a natural generalization of the Riemann Hypothesis which deals with other zeta functions, and has applications even more far-reaching than RH alone.This problem has now stood for over 150 years, and I don’t think it’s going away any time soon. Whenever anyone proves it, or even significantly enhances our understanding of the difficulty, that’s a Next Big Thing indeed.The ABC ConjectureSince its introduction in the mid-1980s, the ABC conjecture[24] was found to offer a unified way of understanding many old and new problems in Number Theory. In fact its proof would imply[25] many of the Fields-winning problems of the past 50 years, and papers regularly show up showing that it implies this or that open problem.The problem is unsolved. I’m pointing this out since there’s currently a pretty confusing state of affairs in which a proposed proof by Shinichi Mochizuki[26] has stood unconfirmed since 2012, and so far only a very small number of mathematicians believe that it does indeed prove the ABC Conjecture. Many questions about this have[27] been[28] asked[29] on[30] Quora.[31](This situation saddens me. The ABC Conjecture is a thing of beauty, and the deep work done around it is truly exciting and intriguing. But the general public is attracted to drama, and the drama obscures the real essence of the theory. There’s no reason to be excited by Mochizuki’s proof. Not yet, at any rate.)Developing Mochizuki’s “Inter-Universal Teichmüller Theory”, if at all possible, will be a monumental progress. Alternatively, finding other ways to attack the ABC Conjecure and the closely related Szpiro’s Conjecture[32] would certainly qualify as a Big Thing.There is no shortage of huge open problems in many other areas of mathematics, any one of which could be the Next Big Thing. We don’t know where things will lead us, or which dramatic new innovations would transform some or all of math. The last century was transformative; it’s entirely reasonable that this one will be, too.Footnotes[1] Hilbert's problems - Wikipedia[2] Clay Mathematics Institute[3] Mathematics Unlimited - 2001 and Beyond | Björn Engquist | Springer[4] Clay Mathematics Institute[5] Complexity Zoo[6] Homotopy type theory - Wikipedia[7] Univalent foundations - Wikipedia[8] Vladimir Voevodsky 1966–2017[9] Robert Langlands - Wikipedia[10] Edward Frenkel - Wikipedia[11] Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society[12] Ngô Bảo Châu - Wikipedia[13] Fundamental lemma (Langlands program) - Wikipedia[14] Laurent Lafforgue - Wikipedia[15] Dessin d'enfant - Wikipedia[16] Alexander Grothendieck - Wikipedia[17] Jacob Lurie - Wikipedia[18] Hilbert's sixth problem - Wikipedia[19] Annus Mirabilis papers - Wikipedia[20] Yang–Mills existence and mass gap - Wikipedia[21] http://www.claymath.org/sites/default/files/yangmills.pdf[22] http://www.claymath.org/sites/default/files/navierstokes.pdf[23] Navier–Stokes equations - Wikipedia[24] abc conjecture - Wikipedia[25] http://www.ams.org/notices/200210/fea-granville.pdf[26] Shinichi Mochizuki - Wikipedia[27] What is the reason why the proof for ABC conjecture of Shinichi Mochizuki has still not been generally considered as a proof passing the peer review stage as usual though it had already been examined by more than 10 mathematicians?[28] Did Shinichi Mochizuki solve the ABC Conjecture?[29] How difficult is it to penetrate the Mochizuki’s unverified proof of abc conjecture?[30] What does Terence Tao think of Mochizuki´s proof of the abc conjecture?[31] Has proof of the ABC conjecture, written by Shinichi Mochizuki, already been checked?[32] Szpiro's conjecture - Wikipedia

I think as per the consensus reports, marriage has become a liability for many people in our generation.There a lot of reasons behind it but let me try to keep it simple to some bulletin points.First, people actually don’t get or aren’t familiar with the idea of marriage. You can be in love and enjoy your time around but marriage is much more to it. You have to be or start sacrificing and get responsible as you are going a raise a family of your own kin. You are going to produce a generation of yours. Your values, virtues and support in any form will determine their future and the coming future of other generations.Second, people don’t like the idea of commitments and that’s also a life long one. You see most of the individuals are getting restless, hungry, power & peer-driven, hungry etc. They won’t settle for small.Third, during and after a divorce the male counterpart receives or gets less incentive that a female patner. This is an ideaology which I came to know from most of the divorces but personally I have less information about it.Forth, sex during or after marriage becomes not that entising. Again, a consensus report.Fifth, cheating while being married is a hefty affair than cheating while being in love. In short, easy way out.Sixth, you tend to spend less time on yourself and more time to keep the upcoming and upbringing of your family in straight or near to straight A’s.Seventh, the idea of marriage is getting promoted into an idea of fear among the youth unlike the old days or old period where marriages were given much priority. More living in relationships and having a child with out getting married are being taken as an ideal way out of nothing.These points are what I can think of now.But, I think marriage is sacrilegious and not for faint-hearted people. It’s more than your emotions. You should know better before doing it. Having temporary affairs or aspects don’t make you a man or woman of the hour. Being a loyal and faithful partner does and will do amongst most individuals.