A theme you’ll find repeated on this site is that everything derives from four fundamental attributes of reality:

1. Singularity

2. Asymptote

3. Paradox

4. Anomaly

CK considers it possible that everything that exists, that is to say reality itself, may be a consequence of these four.

Or maybe not. There are other contenders: Game Theory, Chaos and Complexity … whatever.

However, a consequence of my considerations is that I pay lots of attention to examples of these four. Naturally there’s plenty of content in the CK Oracle about them. Furthermore I seldom let a month go by without writing about some intriguing example of one of them, most commonly a paradox or anomaly.

Here’s one for this month.

Human Beings are faster at reacting than initiating.

Uh?

An example will help.

In a Wild West pistol dual, the one who draws second will draw faster.

Uh? Why?

Because Humans react faster than they initiate.

The famous physicist Niels Bohr was a firm believer in this. He always drew second and he always won.

And it has indeed been proven in numerous neuro-psychological studies. This link should take you to a recent study which makes these references. In case the link has been changed, I’ll extract a reference paragraph.

“This distinction between different classes of action is not merely semantic: evidence for differential neural bases for intentional, as opposed to reactive, movements is provided by neurophysiology (Kurata & Tanji 1985; Romo & Schultz 1987; Mushiake et al. 1991; Maimon & Assad 2006), neurology (Laplane et al. 1977; Halsband et al. 1993; Cunnington et al. 1995; Sumner et al. 2007) and functional brain imaging (Deiber et al. 1999; Jenkins et al. 2000; Cunnington et al. 2002). Further, behavioural evidence points to a distinction between different types of movement (Waszak et al. 2005), and switching between these two modes of operation can result in a cost (Obhi & Haggard 2004). However, here we test whether there are benefits associated with reactive movements, consistent with Bohr's intuition and the gunslingers legend.”

Is that an anomaly or a paradox? Does it make sense that when you do actions starting intentionally you perform them slower than when you are simply reacting to something?

Doubtless somewhere in the complexities of the Human brain / mind / neural system there are reasons for this. So far neuroscience hasn’t figured them out. It’s all part of the complexities of the brain and ‘mind’ that makes life so interesting.

Meantime I’ll just add it to the very long list of things that aren’t the way we would expect them to be.

What does this have to do with wisdom?

Well it shows that in many, many things, there is simply no replacement for knowledge. There is no way to guess from a basic education that these anomalies, or exceptions to the rule exist. Tomorrow I’ll write about a mathematical curiosity which evidences the point.

And that understanding is itself wisdom. The wise are constantly aware that things are not simple, and are rarely as they seem. And yet, just very occasionally, they really are simple, and we have a moment of rejoicing. That’s some sort of anomaly in itself.

Wisdom informs us that there is no lazy way to perceiving truth and reality. So many things are deceptive that one must constantly be on the lookout for the anomalies, the paradoxes, and the exceptions that may well prove the rule, or at least the validity of a generalisation.

And so to complete the information on this particular case I’d better give you the rest of the information, just in case you are ever in a pistol duel. I’d hate you to get shot just because I left some information out.

Draw first.

It is true that because he is reacting your opponent will draw faster, but …

you got to watch out for those ‘buts’

the head start you gain before he starts to react will significantly outweigh his faster draw speed.

He’ll still be dead before he can pull the trigger - assuming you are accurate.

Don’t confuse drawing a pistol from a holster with mashing buttons on a desktop, which is the way reactive time is measured in these studies. Remember the delayed reaction of the sprinters to the starter’s gun.

If you want to be really sneaky (and you have to weigh up the price of honour very carefully in life and death situations, because survivors write the history books), make sure your opponent is made aware that the reactive draw is faster, but don’t tell him this last bit.

Wait a minute … how come Niels Bohr won his duals?

Probably that alpha male thing. Quite apart from being a brilliant Nobel Prize winning physicist, it seems Niels Bohr was also a very fast and accurate shot. Apparently he liked Wild West movies, and noted that the one to draw first (usually ‘the bad guy’ as I recall) always lost. Bohr got up some toy pistols and tested the idea, resulting in the following being written.

On pistols and lead, now Bohr had to prove
The defendant is quickest to move.
Bohr accepted the challenge without a frown
He drew when we drew, and shot each one of us down.
This tale has a moral, tho’ we knew it before.
It’s foolish to question the wisdom of Bohr.



And if that doesn’t gel with your image of a physicist then you need to reconsider how you came up with that image. Stephen Hawking? Einstein? Hollywood? I hope not.