It was 1968
when a young college student named Dick Fosbury turned the high jumping world
on its head when he won the gold medal for the high jump in the summer Olympic Games held
in Mexico City.
High jumping
requires that you run and jump to clear a bar that is about 7 feet off the
ground. The most popular technique that was used at the time was called a
“Western Roll.” There was also a “Staddle
Method” and a “Scissor Kick” method used
to navigate the bar. As a young high school amateur Fosbury had trouble adapting
to each of these styles and decided to work on a new approach to high jumping.
His new style included running toward the high bar at an angle and then
launching himself backwards (head and back first) over the bar. It became
affectionately known as the “Fosbury Flop."
This was an
unorthodox technique that had never been used by anyone before Fosbury, and it
took some time to perfect. As he continued to master his new style, he began to
have success. He won a state championship in high school, and prior coming to
the Olympic trials in 1968, won the NCAA championship for the event. People
were starting to take notice of his early successes but it was the world stage
of the Olympics that would really catapult him and his technique to fame. When Fosbury
won the gold medal for the event, the “Fosbury Flop” became the new standard
for all high jumpers.
In
reflection on his success, I recognized that none of it would have been
possible if he had held on to the conventional wisdom of “what worked.” He had to have an openness and willingness to
change his mind and try something new.
Can you
change your mind? Are you open to a new way of thinking? Most of you would say
“SURE, I’m open minded”, and maybe you are about some things. Religion and politics
seem to a most people’s stumbling block when it comes to being open minded. Our
society strongly encourages you to “never discuss religion and politics” especially
with strangers. These two topics can be VERY polarizing so I make it a personal
challenge to always be open-minded in these areas. Is there something I can
learn from a different perspective? Can I adapt a new way of thinking? With
that mindset, when someone suggests a book in these topics, I don’t want to
prejudge it. I try to give it fair shake.
Recently I
was given a book by a family member of whom I know we share a different
philosophy on religion. To honor their gift and to keep an open mind, I wanted
to see what the book had to say. It was a book by a prominent Christian author
named Lee Strobel. It is called “The Case For A Creator.”
In the book he shares
his personal story of once being an atheist and only after he noted big changes
in his wife’s personality after she became a Christian did he become intrigued
by Christianity. So he set out to investigate the faith using his skills as an
investigative reporter. In this book he was tackling the question of where the
world came from. Was it made by a creator or did it just happen?
Being
intrigued by the origins of the universe myself, I was up for the ride of where
this book might take me. In the book, Strobel lays out his case nicely and has
reputable scientist substantiate his belief in an “intelligent designer” or “God”
if you will. Each of them use science, physics and mathematics to
systematically stake their claims and to explain the complexities of the
universe. There is nothing wrong with their method or their conclusions. They
will believe what they want to believe but I had the most interesting thought
while reading the book that took me outside the book and employed my Fosbury thinking.
The thought is
: What if our current understanding of mathematics and physics were primitive
systems of understanding and computing things?
Euclid's Elements on papyrus. Euclid is considered the father of geometry.
Is there a system beyond numbers
and algebraic and geometric equations that has not yet been discovered, much
less been employed that would further and better explain the universe? I admit
it’s hard to fathom. I mean 2+2 is 4, right? But what if & + # = @ and what would those values
represent? To further the thought, even eliminating the +, -, x, and / signs in
our computational processes and having new ways of tabulating everything. Is
there a math beyond math, or physics beyond physics that a thousand generations
from now will be employed? Furthermore, is there a math or a system that can
compute the variables of a man’s soul?
The Calibi-Yau manifold. An artistic rendering of theoretical physics and string theory
These are
all hypothetical questions that can’t be answered with any ease in this forum but
maybe you will take the time to chew on the thought and see where it takes you.
You might find yourself discovering your OWN philosophical flop!
No comments:
Post a Comment