Lucy Movie with Scarlett Johansson Based on Ridiculous 10% of Brain Myth: We Only Use Part Our Brains
16 May 2014 14:14
It's a long debunked myth but it is still one of most popular questions posed to neuroscientists and psychologists: "Is it true was only use 10% of our brains?" The new Summer movie "Lucy" starring Scarlett Johansson and Luc Besson asks us to "Imagine if you were able to unlock 100% of your brain power." This is another example of Hollywood's tradition of science fiction based on fantasy.
09 May 2014 22:17
This is not the first post where I talked about how numbers can easily impress and mislead us. I mentioned numbers and "proofiness" in The Data Dump in Fitness Information: Time to Get Back on Track. Another closely related post is Quantitative Measurements and Quality Evaluations.
Our [western] culture is a bit obsessed with measurement. In all sorts of fitness realms we see measurements - numbers - being assigned to things that cannot readily be measured, and sometimes things that cannot be measured at all. Numbers have, perhaps, too much power to impress. Science guys will tell you all about statistical significance, and maybe statistical correlation (a little on that below) but we can be mislead by much more mundane and easily understood numbers. It often starts with what we can and cannot measure. Before we begin, note that since this is about numbers, which I am not very good with, I could have screwed up some of the example figures. So, don't hesitate to let me know.
18 Mar 2014 14:07
You know, we often hear that we should "keep it simple." That is good advice. It really is. As you read this post, it may seem to come down to a fancy way of saying keep it simple. Well, many of today's "simple" strength training programs have sort of scooted past simple and sat down hard on simplistic. So, I want to say before I even begin, that elegant solutions, which I am talking about here, are not the same thing as simplistic solutions! We're trying to take out the complications, not to prove how very simple it all is.
09 Jan 2014 18:32
The standard definition of a stall is a temporary stop in progression. When most people talk about a stall or plateau they are talking about failure to progress on one or two exercises.
09 Jan 2014 18:24
Each exercise or strength related thing that you do is an individual skill. They, in and of themselves,are not "strength" but are a display of skill which shows specific strength. You put a bunch of these diverse skills together and you have something that can be called overall strength.
09 Jan 2014 18:18
There are many ways of looking at linear progression. The term itself is just a bit of meaningless babble that has somehow become vogue in the strength training world. All progression is linear. It's just not all a straight line. But this is not what people mean by linear progression, what they really mean is linear loading. However, a huge misunderstanding in strength is that your training will continue to be a simple journey from point A to point B and there will always be a straight line between those points.
09 Jan 2014 18:10
There are two parts of this title and both contain a common misconception. However, the source of the misconceptions may not be what you think. I'll get into the weight training (strength training) part first. Strength trainees come in all shapes and sizes. Clear? You've got tall and lanky ones, short and fireplug shaped ones. Big ones with huge guts. Little guys with lean and wiry bodies. Little guys who are stronger than they look. Big guys who are not defined and look a bit flabby but are unnervingly strong. And of course, I don't mean to leave out the females, I just know better than to talk about female body shapes! You look good. Honest! What else? Oh, guys that have blocky waists and are very strong. Guys who have tapered and thin waists but are also very strong (another myth don't ya know).