I greatly appreciate the kind remarks, Leo KoGuan.

I am very happy that you find my message agreeable, and that my telling of the story resonates with you. It is important that we do give our researchers enough freedom to play and explore the possibilities, if we hope to have great discoveries, and it is important that students of all ages can approach learning playfully.

Like yourself, and like Pete and Toshi Seeger for that matter; I think higher education should be available to all those who have the mind and mindset to consider the deeper questions about the universe and how nature works. Unfortunately; not all do get the opportunity to learn the scientific basics. I think certain topics in Science are essential knowledge, but sadly learning or teaching how nature works is often neglected - so that more time can be spent memorizing facts or later training the specific skills of a given job category. But people need to learn how to think, for what they know to be of value.

Thank you again for your thoughtful regard of my essay. Hopefully, with this contest, more people will learn of the value of play.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Thank you Eckard, for asking about the relevance.

What I mean by play in my essay is this. There is an essential amount of freedom that must be accorded the individual for them to be effective at carrying out any task, but the freedom to learn by open-ended exploration has been eroded in modern society. Unless the people in a position of power come to learn the value of play for learning in general, the human race is likely doomed - because the alternative is a kind of enforced stupidity, whose backlash is the sad stories of Chinese parents who are desperate to save their child from the system.

I don't think all play is created equal. In some ways, the play of a child is most like the activity of a scientist at work, but any type of research is greatly enhanced by the presence of mature adults who understand the win/win philosophy and the point of adult games that require cooperation as well as competition. However; the focus of our society, and especially of our leaders in politics and business, seems to be at the level of competitive adolescent games - which humanity must outgrow to survive.

So my opinion is that as a race, humanity must outgrow the adolescent phase of unending competition, and adopt forms of play that allow for innovation that contributes to humanity's sustainability and growth.

Warm regards,

Jonathan

4 days later

Hi Jonathan,

I like very much how describe the role of play, for children and adults, for scientists, for the evolution of mankind. I very much agree with

"The challenge, then, is to inspire more people to seek higher education, to make Math and Science more fun to learn, and thus to elevate the general intelligence of the populace, in the core STEM subjects. To do this; we must acknowledge that these are playful pursuits by nature, and make it OK for scholars in these fields to play. Play is far more universal, being the root source of all learning, and indeed of all consciousness and cognitive intelligence, but it finds expression in these subjects. While Math and Science are full of hard topics to learn; they are, at their heart, fun! But this is only one reason I say that Science is play."

Best regards,

Cristi

    Hi Jonathan,

    we have no alert service for replies, so I returned here just because you have recently written in my forum page (find an answer there too). Thanks.

    Your mentioning that music keeps us alive (which I fully subscribe) has reminded me of the closing sentences of the novel 'Il Baol' by the italian novelist Stefano Benni (not translated in English, I am afraid, so I translate it for you):

    I am here, listening to the pianist. I am sitting at the last table at the bottom, on the left. [ ] If you can`t sleep, or if you are sleeping, come. [ ] I will be here as long as the pianist plays. And as long as I am here, he will play.

    Thanks very much Cristi,

    I am happy you enjoyed the essay, and I appreciate that you were able to find a chunk of it that sums up the overall topic matter so well. I only wish the people who influence funding for Science Research and Education had a little more of the perspective I enjoy or offer. For folks like yourself, who are actually exploring the frontiers, it already makes sense that play is essential.

    All the Best,

    Jonathan

    Jonathen,

    Big improvement on last year, doing the subject full justice. An ancient Aunt used to use the phrase "find a job you enjoy and you'll never do a days work in your life". I've always remembered that, and she was right. You well identify the blurred boundaries.

    But I found limits; As a race yacht helmsman I got to the top, but when then offered a job editing a yachting magazine, ..I drew a line. That may be a chore, and I was well paid already doing a job I enjoyed. As you point out, for professional sportsmen play becomes work.

    What's most important in my view is improving intellectual education, in which area 'play' in all its senses can play a critical role and is undervalued. The thought processes of scientists are evolved at school, where we really don't teach how to think. (clearly!) The important difference between childish and childlike behaviour needs more discerning.

    I'd hoped you may have had a go with my colourful A4 'experimental' kit for producing so called quantum correlations classically. Only a few did, and repeated the result. I've been thinking about making it a board game, but better as a teaching aid. (Of course heretical as things stand).

    Very well done for yours this year. I really couldn't find anything to take issue with! I look forward to your comments on mine if you can find the time.

    Very best wishes

    Peter

      Thanks Peter,

      I'm lucky in my vocation. My work is often rewarding and sometimes almost like play, but I also get to work with folks that get paid to play. Last week Monday; I recorded a drummer who has played on over 2000 albums - Terry Hampton, son of Lionel. So both of us got paid to do something we love, but neither of us made a lot of money - so we had better love what we are doing!

      Now, if only people like you or I could only be paid to do independent research in Physics. Or if only there were more opportunities for people in general to explore the sciences in first-hand participation. I think a lot of folks thought they could pursue independent research after retiring from academia or industry, but found themselves shut out. So the problem Phil talks about can leave them bereft of opportunities to publish.

      I will look at your paper soon.

      More later,

      Jonathan

      Hi Jonathan,

      We are companion travelers in this world, at least in the cyberspace. Happy to meet you here and thanks for your kind remark.

      You wrote below that I completely in agreement: "The possibility for such a future remains open, but there is a danger we will undermine our capacity to engineer this outcome, unless certain trends are reversed. Science can help us create a positive future for humanity, but we must be willing to apply what we have learned more broadly, and to exalt the search for knowledge and the process of learning over the information learned and the specific insights gained. To do this; we must recognize the value of play." We do need to reverse our learning and working practices, from works to plays.

      If you read my essay Chinese Dream is Xuan Yuan's Da Tong, I designed in the Scientific Outlook Free-Lunch Economic System that all works and learnings must be plays. Life is a Shakespearian play in the world's stage. Not just a "few get paid to play" but all free from slavery that all have nothing else to do but play all days long even in sleeping.

      As you powerfully stated that "Play is far more universal, being the root source of all learning, and indeed of all consciousness and cognitive intelligence, but it finds expression in these subjects."

      Yes for "from each to each according to his/her dreams and aspirations."

      Jon, congratulation on your another master piece and I rated it a ten (10).

      Best wishes,

      Leo KoGuan

      Hi Jonathan,

      It is very nice to re-meet you here. You wrote a fantastic Essay, congrats. Here are my comments:

      1) Playing is the main reason for which I work like a researcher. In general, it is very s difficult for scientist becoming rich people, but they have the good luck to play in all their life!

      2) I think that it is important to teach youngest children, starting from childhood, that science is playing. That is the best way to initiate them to science. I were lucky from this point of you as I had a teacher in my elementary school who initiated me to science in that way.

      3) I did not know the nice Einstein's aphorism that "Play is the highest form of research", thanks for introducing me to it.

      4) I completely agree with your statements that "We need to communicate that is isn't all hard work or memorization, that Science is and should be fun". In fact, I consider popularizing science as a kind of mission.

      5) Your statements that "But once the developmental landmark is reached, allowing them to accurately estimate the dimensions of things around them, children also acquire an increasing ability to recognize and employ symbols, and to develop symbolic reasoning" is exactly what I am seeing with my son David, 3 years old!

      6) I completely agree with the conclusions by Joseph Chilton Pearce and Michael Mendizza that emphasize the value of play for learning at all ages.

      7) Although the notion that knowledge has value for its own sake is unpopular these days, it is my life philosophy.

      8) I agree with my friend Doug Osheroff that researchers should question the wisdom of today's theorists. Sadly, this important point is made difficult by "political" and economic reasons.

      As your departed friend Ray Munroe would say I had fun in reading your Essay. Thus, I am going to give you an high score. Congrats again and best luck in the contest!

      Cheers, Ch.

        Thank you again Leo KoGuan,

        To the extent that I have attempted to highlight what is the highest and best of humanity, I accept your praise and high rating as an indicator that I have succeeded in this goal. I am humbled by your generosity of spirit and action, but I know we are indeed kindred spirits - trying to teach others that learning and prospering don't have to be a struggle, and that sometimes a playful approach yields successes not possible through hard work alone.

        Many people are enslaved by a work mentality, as if they were trying to fulfill the motto of "no pain, no gain" and the freedom to approach things more playfully is then liberation from slavery. I expect that I will enjoy your essay, because your "Chinese Dream.." is every man and woman's aspiration - the freedom to realize the promise of the Divine, of happiness and prosperity for all who would seek it. We both want humans to be able to enjoy the blessings of harmony and plenty, in a world where it is safe to play, and we both see this as a real possibility we can help come into being.

        All the Best,

        Jonathan

        Thanks so much Christian!

        I am pleased you found so much to relate to in my essay. I am also very glad you caught the 'Science bug' at an early age, and had teachers and elders who encouraged you to pursue that direction. I was lucky too, both at school and at home, to get the encouragement I needed to keep on exploring and experimenting, but sadly too few of today's youngsters get the nurturing they need to keep that spark alive. So I'm happy that we are kindred spirits, in our desire to make science more accessible and more popular.

        In reply to comment number 8, I think that while scientists generally understand that it is important to question the conventional wisdom; there is tremendous pressure by society for experts to maintain an air of certainty commensurate with their knowledge or station. For some people to admit that there is a lot we don't know, they must be subjected to a lot of uncomfortable questions, and risk appearing weak and stupid to people who view science simplistically.

        Somehow; the valuable attributes of open-mindedness that makes scientists qualified in the first place seem to be a liability in the eyes of those who are funding research, or who decide which projects should receive funding. Thus ideas that offer small incremental progress are often chosen over projects that might yield important breakthroughs - but offer no benefit until the experiment is done and the discoveries do or do not come.

        Unfortunately; unless we can explore outside the parameter space of what is known, and have the freedom to play with different possibilities, the breakthroughs and discoveries we hope for may never come. Scientists need to be bold, but the economy and politics of the modern world compel them to be timid instead. So honestly; it is the leaders and finance folks who need to recognize the value of play to Science.

        All the Best,

        Jonathan

        Dear Jonathan,

        I agree with your comments on my point 8). Another key point is that it is very difficult, for people who are famous as they work in a particular theory, to accept that theory could be partial, if not completely wrong. On the other hand, there are various crackpots who claim that an important theory is wrong without really understanding nothing of that theory. In fact, being open mind in science is a good thing, but accepting crackpot nonsense is evil instead. Notice that I also criticize some points of modern mainstream science and I am all in favour of being open minded about alternatives, but they must be properly formulated and plausible scientific proposals.

        Cheers and have fun, Ch.

        P. S. I hope you will find the time to read my Essay.

        Absolutely!

        People must do their homework, and give the subject due diligence, before asserting that their alternative formulation is better than the model the mainstream endorses. In today's Physics, however, we are at a point where a large percentage of the questions we seek answers for require knowledge that spans the traditional boundaries of disciplines, so tackling these problems (like questions about Black Holes) requires one to know Relativity well and also Quantum Mechanics - because the nature of the problem necessarily involves both streams of thought.

        I look forward to reading your essay soon!

        All the Best,

        Jonathan

        Dear Jonathan,

        Congratulations on being at the top of the heap. Apparently your focus on play as the essential aspect of life appeals to many, as it should. Your abstract says you "never grew up". In grad school I bought my first motorbike, a 90 cc wonder, and let my major professor ride it. When he came putt-putting back from a short jaunt his wife asked, "do little boys ever grow up?" He responded, "if they do, they never amount to anything." I believe Newton said something like this--and sea shells.

        My essay focused on avoiding the totalitarian future, based on a false premise, (no play in the totalitarian world) and at the end I propose a system whereby one is paid to learn. That is, if done right, almost indistinguishable from being paid to play. To get a sense of what I have in mind, if you have an iPad check out "The Room" and "The Room Two" by Fireproof Games.

        And I fully agree with your appreciation of Steven Kenneth Kauffmann. Thanks for mentioning him. I also hope you find time to read and comment on my essay.

        With best regards and wishes for good luck,

        Have fun,

        Edwin Eugene Klingman

          Thanks very much Ed,

          I enjoyed the story; it is priceless actually. And your essay is near the top of my heap of reading material, at this point. I hope we can avoid a totalitarian future, and most totalitarian societies are based on false premises, but it may be difficult - considering the present day world political climate. The idea of being paid to learn sounds appealing, though. This seems hard to justify in the modern world, however.

          There was an author who wrote an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, a year or so ago, talking about the tragedy of the over-educated. He cited statistics showing that a large percentage of people with advanced degrees now find themselves working as store clerks, auto mechanics, and so on; and argued that this shows that a lot of money is being wasted to train people with skills they can't use on the job, or use to find a better job. I think he has some things backward.

          While there should be some attention given to learning skills that will help you on the job, or in your chosen profession, there is also a need for learning more in general, or acquiring a general knowledge about a broad range of things and disciplines, in order to see how each thing fits with the larger whole, or is part of a spectrum. This is sadly what is most lacking, and what leads folks like James Dunn to propose that people need training and certification in common sense. I think that attribute only comes from a broader, less vocation-centered approach to learning.

          All the Best,

          Jonathan

          Thanks very much Ajay!

          I noticed your essay right away, but I have been busy, and I had already picked out some to read before it appeared. But I am very pleased that we are both champions of play, as a way to increase innovation and enhance people's interest in Science. I hope to visit your page soon, and I am sure I will have something good to say, after reading your paper.

          All the Best,

          Jonathan

          Hello to all,

          One individual who expressed his approval of this essay, in private correspondence, is play researcher Dr. Stuart Brown. I'd like to return the favor, by introducing you to his work.

          He is the author of a book Play: How it Shapes the Brain, Opens the Imagination, and Invigorates the Soul which I would have included as a reference, if I'd read it before finishing this essay. I would recommend his TED talk Play is more than just fun which is just wonderful. Dr. Brown is also the director of the National Institute for Play.

          All the Best,

          Jonathan