Chloe Chiappetti
According to statistics, the average Us citizen
is not knowledgeable of science. I feel that math and science have always been
more challenging and difficult to understand. I was always intimidated of the
long words and the complex formulas that are apart of even the most basic of
science courses. That intimidation has prevented me from fully committing
myself to the sciences and maths of today. The last core college course I have
to pass for my major is chemistry. For the past year in a half, that I have
attended LAGCC, I have avoided taking chemistry, in fear that I would not
succeed and validate my belief that I'm incapable of passing a science class.
As the final semesters approach, I have come to terms that this is a
requirement for my degree and it will not be avoided. On the bright side, due
to a good support system, I have been motivated to diligently study, attend,
and complete all of my class work and labs. Thus far, the semester is off
to a good start. Soon I hope to completely erase my fear of the maths, science,
and the complexities that incorporate both.
Star trek is a popular Science fiction television show a lot of American
people are familiar with. With a wide fan base, and devoted fans named
"Trekker" whilst "Trekkie" is actually considered
derogatory, according to Google. For the most part the television show is
portrayed as a possible avenue of future technologies. NASA has even designed a
prototype of a possible solution of light speed travel after the "Enterprise"
the main ship of the series. Star trek has potential to be a path of technology
humanity can take. The series portrays possible technologies while some
“impossible” others are plausible as humanity progresses in science. Examples
of this are teleportation, space exploration and light speed travel. The series
portrays science and scientist in a positive light that makes you fascinated by
some of their findings and experiments. In this way Star Trek is a positive
point for science. However, we now know some technologies are impossible.
Star Trek, while showing some amazing works of science and technology, is still
a fictional television show. Throughout the years the show has not accounted to
variables that we currently know about today. Depicting some inaccurate information
about science. example: “For instance, there was a show in which Dr. Crusher
and Mr. Lafarge were forced to let all of the air escape from the part of the
ship they were in, so that a fire would be extinguished. The doctor recommended
holding one's breath to maintain consciousness as long as possible in the
vacuum, until the air was restored. But as underwater scuba divers know, the
lungs would rupture and very likely kill anyone who held his breath during such
a large decompression. The lungs can't take that much pressure, so people can
only survive in a vacuum if they DON'T try to hold their breath.” While my
example addresses the oxygen issue it does not address other numerous
problems of being in a vacuum while not being protected by a space suit. One
prime example is that the liquid in your body would boil because humans are hot
blooded and there is nothing to transfer your body heat too. Meaning your
insides would boil and your saliva would literally evaporate off of your
tongue. You would lose consciousness in an extremely short period of time so I
imagine the thought of your lungs would be a mute point. In this way Star trek
might not be the greatest television show depicting science and technology but
the fact that it brings interest to the subject should not be overlooked.
