Gordon Shaw, physicist researched effect of classical music

Physicist Gordon Shaw dies at 72
5/1/2005, 5:45 a.m. CT
The Associated Press
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/natio...nal-43/111494388554570.xml&storylist=national

LAGUNA BEACH, Calif. (AP) - Gordon Shaw, the physicist whose research on
classical music's effect on the brain produced an often-quoted study that
showed listening to Mozart raises a person's IQ, has died. He was 72.

Shaw died of kidney cancer Tuesday at his home, according to his family.
He gained national attention in 1993 when he reported that a group of
college students who listened to Mozart's "Sonata for Two Pianos in D
Major" saw their IQs increase substantially, if only temporarily.

The University of California at Irvine researcher never cared for the
media attention his work generated, however, complaining that headlines
like "Mozart's Music Makes You Smarter" oversimplified his studies.

"It is not that the Mozart will make you permanently smarter," Shaw told
the Los Angeles Times in 1993. Hearing such music, he speculated, might
only provide "a warmup exercise" for parts of the brain that perform high
levels of abstract thinking.

Such reports on his work also led to a backlash in the academic community
when other scientists reported they could not duplicate the results
uncovered by Shaw.

An expert on particle physics, Shaw began studying classical music's
effect on higher-level thinking after a chance reading of a 1973 paper on
brain theory.

With graduate student Xiaodan Leng, he devised a computer model they used
to match musical notes to brain patterns. The result was not Mozart but
something that resembled Western classical music.

Shaw decided to test the results of classical music on the brain,
initially studying 3-year-olds and then college students.

After three groups of college students were tested, one group was exposed
to Mozart, another to a relaxation tape and the third to silence. When
the students were tested again, the Mozart listeners saw their IQ levels
rise as much as nine points. But the increases began to dissipate after
10 minutes.

For the rest of his career, Shaw continued to study the effect of
classical music on the brain, though he distanced himself from the
various commercial enterprises his research inspired.

In 1998, he co-founded the nonprofit Music Intelligence Neural
Development Institute, which developed a curriculum using a computer
program and piano keyboard training to improve math learning. It is now
offered in 67 elementary schools.

He also published the book "Keeping Mozart in Mind."

--

Oh shit, I heard mozart at about 14 years of age!
I remember reading Einsteins universe at 15 while in
lying on bed in a 100 degree bedroom summer attic
way back in the early nineteen eighties.

Damn if I'm still not a Billionaire, hmmm, heck I don't
know, but I don't give a shit really to be a Gates. It's funny
how some people can stroll through life to become so
successful, their born that way while other families
will struggle with many things to slow yah down. I know
on Dads side of the familey, their is depression as I lost
one brother to drugs and alcohol because, while other
families do not have these genetic burdens, how lucky
they are.

Exercise is the key to survival here on Earth anyway.

Someday our energy will, I promise you will go to
other side just like above obituary, the energy I know
has to convert.

John

I find that jogging any exercise in the morning can help.

 

http://www.earlbanquer.com


jon

 

I have always suspected that most materially successful people are also in
some way emotionally flawed.
Hope this doesn't sound like sour grapes but something drives those people
to excel and to smash others to get what they want.

 

Well, most people are emotionally flawed, successful or not.

 

The later is not at all typical.
Cannot comment on the former.

Make grapejuice.

HTH

 

While Mozart and Einstein, neither of them were wealthy, and Gates is
he by some measure equally as creative or intelligent as Mozart and
Einstein were ?

Well anyway my news server seems to have dropped the second post,
but here's the other thing, do most intelligent people whom happen to be
super wealthy get all tied up working on a single problem such as that
which confronts in machining/engineering to at some point require -
integration for discovering a solution in SolidWorks. ?

Chances are that if your that intelligent and that wealthy would you
find yourself scratching your head about these things or better wiser to
delegate down the chain of command somebody else to find a solution to it ?

I think what we are both talking about is called this internal Pioneer self,
which can be harder to define or explain until you actually get the ball
rolling to find out for yourself what it means to do so. That which separate
a chosen few from the rest of the slaves when our job is to derive a
1 piece solution fits all that goes into the bigger puzzle. Important thing
is what does the puzzle picture eventually look like and who made that
look that way that which is only make believe but seems real enough.

While it may take thousands of workers to cut all the pieces of the puzzle only
a chosen few really know how to make them fit.

Yes that's right, what places Gates and other successful entrepreneurs into
clubs with difficult to fit shoes such as Einstein and Mozart, has to be some type
of inherent trait, meaning, that if you think hard enough and long enough,
eventually the big picture has to be real, even so with all the problems that help
to obfuscate it, there will be times which make things seem blurry but the best
is yet to come. The truth of the matter is that this picture can't be anything else
but the truth and that's what we are all told to believe.

A lot of people are simply there own worst enemy to, especially if like I mention
there is some depression involved, this means that everything above can be
great idea at the start but due to the persons hesitant nature to make clear cut
decisions, things often go to ruin because others can't or won't follow your
dream.

I think the keyboard of consistency here is to get over the peaks and low spots,
all the while keeping the chatter to a min. and rest of the team on track don't
you think ?.

Call it by any other name and we might be saying that success is based on
good day dreaming, the best day dream I ever had <g> but are we really learning
how to think, like, lets see now where are all of these positives and negatives
hiding in this picture so I can keep those parts hidden from others ? <g>

John

 

One could probably argue for Gates as being in the company of Rockefeller,
or perhaps Nobel, but I think you'd have a hard time placing him in the
company of either Einstein or Mozart.

Phenomenally successful businessman is not equivalent in any way to creative
genius.

 

And it makes one wonder throughout history, how much of making huge sums
of money is being in the right place at the right time (tripping into
profits) and how much is actually related to true management/business
skills? At least with Gates, I'd guess 99% the former.

Koz

 

Keep in mind he did write an operating system, then have the smarts to
bully, baffle, bamboozle and bullshit his way to making his various
operating systems the worlds standard, along with gutting most of his
competition along the way.

If anyone had the edge at the beginning, it was Steve Job. How many
Apples got put into schools in the 90s? Millions. So how come there
are relatively few in use today?

Bill Gates.


Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

 

.... no one or company benefited more from the dropping in prices of computer
hardware than Bill Gates & Micro$oft.
Hardware prices are a third of what they were ten years ago and the hardware
does ten times as much. The only thing on a PC that has increased in cost
over the years is the Windows OS.
IBM continued in the hardware end of the business and has taken a real
beating and has only a very small interest left in the PC market that they
created in the first place.
Apple was and still is a hardware company and thats why they continue to
lose market share - they continue to get beatup on price by Dell and others.
What is keeping Apple afloat now is the iPod which I consider an nifty but
very overpriced status symbol.
Wonder how long that cash cow will last??
Also wonder what will happen to Apple if Steve Jobs suddenly drops dead or
decides to retire to Tahiti?
I give it three years before it has to merge with something else in order to
survive if in name only.

I think you can make the case that all those companies that wanted to make
killing making computer hardware and thus created so much competition which
eventually forced the survivors to manufacture their hardware in the Pacific
Rim countries that pay their workers a dollar an hour, its those businessmen
that actually made Bill Gates a multi-billionaire many times over! If it
wasn't for them he would be just your average garden variety
multi-billionaire.

 

What one?

 

I think Gates bought QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System)
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm

:/

 

Bill Gates had two things going for him, no three:

1. His dad was a lawyer and some of that rubbed off on Bill.
2. He was a programmer in the right place at the right time.
3. He had friends to help that were smarter than he was.

And, oh yeah, he worked his butt off to meet commitments.

Microsoft's real strength is in the EULA, a melding of legaleze,
allowances for unfinished programming and an avoidance of
responsibility that no other industry enjoys.

....

....

 

My point to Gunner <G>.
Thanks.

 

Who, in turn, ripped it off from Xerox (the 8010 Star and the Alto) to
make the Lisa which beget the Mac..


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

That was Gunner.

HTH

 

And they, in turn, had sort of copied from either MIT's
X-Windows or PARC at Xerox.

Recall the "look & feel" suits?