Before President Obama’s election in 2008, the advertising media overwhelmingly featured white actors almost exclusively in commercials and magazines to sell products. After the election, all that changed as more advertisements targeted a multiracial image of the American family. This all became noticeable once Obama was declared president-elect.

One can only wonder why it took the election of a black president to embrace the multracial nature of the American family, a cultural trend that has been increasing for decades. It boggles the mind to think that a few corporate executives exerted so much control over the advertising industry and that they were allowed to ignore the demographic changes in the American population.

Obama’s roots do not represent the centuries of oppression that American blacks experienced, though he was still subjected to the same prejudice other blacks were forced to endure. When he first ran for office, he was accused of being too white, as if his Caucasian lineage disqualified him from being considered black enough. Even after his election, his citizenship was questioned. This remains unprecedented in American political history.

I have had many black friends. This provided me with the opportunity to have intimate and honest conversations with several of them about race, as our close friendship made it possible. One of them is German-Haitian. I asked him to describe the differences in racial prejudice in Europe compared with the United States. “In Europe Blacks are allowed to climb the ladder, but once a certain level is reached they are barred from going to the top. In The United States, they are prevented from even getting on the ladder,” he said.

When I asked about his greatest fear as a black man in America, he responded  that he was afraid of being seen as a “Street Niggah.” Despite being well educated, this was the way he felt he was being treated in the United States.

We talked about the prejudice that light skin blacks had against dark skinned. He also commented on the inferiority complex of American blacks and how slavery continues to impact on the national consciousness, less common in the non American black community.

Being from a white Jewish background, I was particularly interested in exploring the conflict between Blacks and Jews. Both had similar histories with respect to discrimination. The difference between the two groups were skin color. Jews are able in many cases to deny their lineage by changing their name or converting to Catholicism and blending in to reach levels of acceptability not afforded  blacks because of color. Jews could attain higher levels in white society that blacks continued to be denied resulting in the contempt blacks had for Jews for taking the easy way out by not owning up to who they are, and yet African Americans still resent Jews because even if they wanted to, it would not be possible to do what the Jews could.

On the other hand, light skinned blacks, seeking the same advantages and benefits that Jews could attain also discriminated against those with darker skin primarily for the same reason – accessibility to education and economic opportunities darker skinned blacks could not hope to achieve, creating a pecking order based on skin tone.

There has been much discussion about the gridlock in Washington. Viscerally,  I strongly feel that this has been due in large part to the underlying racial  discrimination that whites in positions of power have had towards the first black president. No previous chief executive has faced this form of stalemate and it is time to cut through all the denial and bullshit and deal with it. The United States needs to open up public discussion and finally confront racial discrimination. President Obama has the bully pulpit and can use the full weight of The Presidency to initiate the dialogue, but much of the  responsibility also lies with Congress, State officials, religious leaders, educators, sociologists, anthropologists, private entrepreneurs and the American people, including, “Street Niggah.”

From a philosophical point of view, nothing is forbidden. The word itself implies that something is prohibited because a higher authority in a position of power over others has deemed it so. Historically, monarchs, dictators and religious leaders of repressive patriarchal regimes have kept the masses, especially women, from access to knowledge and education solely to maintain ignorance and control their role in society. The male and female principal, when balanced, creates the strongest union of human potential. Regrettably, there hasn’t been enough equilibrium between them, and as a result this potential has not been achieved.

From a spiritual perspective, all things are knowable, just not at the same time. The vastness of what exists goes far beyond what is thought to be the known universe. It’s not realistic to believe that the brain could contain it all. But the spirit, which has no sex, possesses the capacity to expand farther then anything physical. The goal is simple: to evolve consciousness and enable one to absorb more of what is not known and make it part of the known. This is an introspective path, esoteric in nature, solitary and often lonely. There are no words that can do justice to the experience, however symbols often contain the key to awakening the inner sight to perceive more, but each person, both male and female, must discover the symbol that resonates with their soul.

Unfortunately some mistakenly associate those with esoteric knowledge as either an elite group, usually guarding knowledge of what others cannot see, or they put them on a pedestal and expect them to tell them the right thing to do, as if they can prognosticate the future. However, one who is learned in esoteric experiences understands that even if they revealed what is sought, it would remain invisible to the untrained eye. Instead, they embedded what they knew in symbols, often archaic, left for the individual to discover if their inner nature motivated them to search. This contradicts the notion that they intentionally kept the secrets as a means to maintain power. Actually, it respects the individual’s right to find their own path and perhaps help them along the way.

One who has attained esoteric knowledge knows that it is a difficult journey, an inner search to work through the obstacles that prevents one from seeing more, confident that the knowledge gained is far more meaningful if it’s discovered by the seeker on their own when they are ready to receive it, rather that being told by someone else prematurely.

Looking retrospectively on one’s life when crucial choices had to be made, the answers rarely came from someone else. Perhaps something another said evoked a new train of thought that was a catalyst for reaching their own insight, important in and of itself. But these are the breakthrough moments on the path towards enlightenment.

The best anyone who has taken the esoteric road can do is serve as a guide to help point the way and remind the traveler that the path is perilous because it will test their devotion to the truth they discover along the way.  Beyond that, no knowledge is taboo if it enlightens and uplifts the soul. Then it is meant to be known and is not forbidden.

Currently, there is a great deal of controversy over the second Amendment to the US Constitution which, it is claimed, guarantees the right of the individual to bear arms. The impact of the amendment has been profound. Historically, it has been used by gun advocates to block any effective regulations or restrictions that aim at limiting their use as well as diverting attempts to create a national database of gun owners.

To achieve a more complete appreciation of the conflict, it would be useful to read the full US Constitution so that the second amendment can be viewed in its proper context, especially when the circumstances surrounding its creation are so crucial to forming an objective interpretation that could lead to a more realistic application of its meaning.

The history of the Second Amendment is a pervasive example that illustrates the philosophical differences between those who believed in a strong central government, the Federalists, and those who favored more power for the states, known as the Anti-Federalists, and why they so frequently clashed. This sounds oddly similar to the Democrats and Republicans and their long unresolved bitter struggle over the role of government. The philosophical divide, remnants from the past, remains fluid and less defined then either side might like, usually because of unexpected circumstances that are not always under their control such as foreign events, geopolitical realities and the global interconnectedness resulting from advancing technologies. The world is dynamic and changing at an exponential rate, a flexible approach would, perhaps, be more effective then the stalemate we have now.

By and large, most US citizens regard The US political system as an evolutionary vision vastly different from the rest of the world. This belief is based on the presumption that power should be given to the government by the will of the people. This approach, in retrospect, was revolutionary for its time, an Eighteenth Century idea inspired by the French Revolution and contrary to the widespread notion that power emanates to monarchs, emperors and conquerors by divine right.

The US, an experiment of a new type of government was a controversial approach to constructing a political system from scratch using British law as a reference point. History, the founding fathers argued, had illustrated time and again how individual rights had declined under the old European model. So they constructed the US Constitution and the Bill Of Rights to reflect their concerns by anointing the right to govern based on popular consensus via elections and fortifying individual rights as the basis of  this new democratic government. This approach directly effected the development of the Second Amendment.

The biggest concern at the time was to legalize a method that would insure that citizens could, if justified, overthrow an oppressive and illegitimate regime. This could only be possible with a guarantee of the right to bear arms that would be effective if such a situation arose. Another concern, the right of self defense, was universally accepted by both sides; so the Federalists and Anti-Federalists had finally found two things that they could both agree on, however they still disagreed on how to balance the need for an individual to be armed without creating an opening for a large minority to attempt to overthrow a legitimately elected government that did not follow what the minority or small splinter group wanted.

It is also interesting to point out to the Constitutional traditionalists and those groups that oppose more effective gun control that no where in the second amendment or the US Constitution is the word “guns” mentioned. What is used is arms, a term that reflects the need to have some means to protect one’s family and oneself from the elements surrounded by an underdeveloped landscape filled with Native Americans and an increasing population of African Slaves.

Part of the problem interpreting the amendment lies not in the words, but in the grammar. So below, for your consideration, are the two most prominent ways the amendment has appeared. Look at them carefully and determine for yourself if the grammatical differences alters the interpretation of the amendments intent.

Case 1- “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Case 2-  “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Look closely at the differences between the first case and second case. Same words (27) with a completely different meaning because of several subtle grammatical differences between the two. In the second case, a comma appears after a well regulated state militia being necessary to a free state. Arms and State are not capitalized and there is no additional comma following arms. This suggests that the right to keep and bear arms is necessarily connected to a well regulated militia being essential to the security of a free state. The absence of a comma makes the right of the people to keep and bear arms predicated on them being part of a legitimate state militia. It does not assert an individual’s right to bear arms as the NRA, or gun advocates claim.

With that being said, note that the reference to a state militia could refer to “acting collectively, ” as a states right, but it could also be stretched to refer to a  radical fringe group to justify having possession of any kind of weapon that it feels is equal to what the Federal government has for the purpose of exercising their constitutional right to overthrow a tyrannical regime. Perhaps the Confederacy used this sort of reasoning to justify seceding from the union that sparked the The Civil War against those who aimed at advocating the abolition of slavery.

The lack of trust for a central government was an outgrowth of the long history of monarchies from which immigrants fled. It also leaves open to interpretation what constitutes an oppressive regime or the kinds of weapons necessary to protect oneself against an unjust government. I doubt if the founding fathers intended to allow anyone to arm themselves with semi-automatic weapons for self defense. The obsessive fear of a tyrannical regime capturing Washington is grossly exaggerated when it is put in the context of almost three centuries by which power has been peacefully transferred from one administration to another. The possibility of that happening seems remote and the justification to be armed is more appropriate as a premise for a science fiction novel.

The first case was ratified by The Congress. The second case was ratified by the states, which means that the second amendment was never technically approved as it appears in the US Constitution, because grammar does, in this case, make a difference in its interpretation even though the words are identical in both cases. Perhaps the person who scripted the amendment made a grammatical mistake and added a comma where there should not have been one. Then the argument that the individual has the right to bear arms is an illusion.

According to many historians, Thomas Jefferson endorsed the right of people to bear arms as part of their membership to a state militia (case 2), however the conservative Supreme Court ruled in favor of the first case which included the comma. Although the Supreme Court has the last word,  the justice’s opinions in recent years have become far more partisan and conservative than one would like. Then again, the Constitution does not specify that a justice need a law degree or judicial experience. An individual  who is literate and meets the age requirement is the only qualification necessary to sit on the bench and those who do are quite capable of interpreting The Second Amendment. This is why it is important to read the document and determine the amendments intent for yourself.

What a difference grammar can make in the interpretation of the US Constitution, or anything for that matter. In this case, a semicolon would have been more appropriate. I on the other hand would have used an eraser to clarify any ambiguity in the text.

Historically, education has remained an important catalyst for change, but it’s impact on the individual and society is slow and, over time, imperceptible. Its long term goal is based on the presumption that acquiring more knowledge means one is better informed. This, as the reasoning goes, tends to increase the odds that a diverse assortment of choices, (aka free will), will appear along the way and possibly lead to far more effective outcomes and perhaps wisdom. Where these choices come from still remains a mystery, although if it lends itself to a definition, then it wouldn’t be a mystery.

One can never discount the possibility that at some point unknown factors may appear that one is not prepared for. In these situations, hopefully, instinct sharpened by the accumulation and synthesis of experiences, over time, encourages the perception that those things that are unknown can be viewed more as a challenge then as a threat; increasing the likelihood it will lead to a more positive attitude as the veil approaches. With practice and making mistakes along the way, perhaps an insight might appear that reveals itself in the form of an epiphany.

One of the philosophical questions surrounding education is, what are the boundaries that define it? More than just school, it’s life itself, dynamically reinvented on a personal and collective level as time, the illusion of duration, continues infinitely. Every lesson perceived, is a confluence of factors as it becomes an experience that is either understood, or not, as we move from physical birth to death, not knowing what will happen when all bodily functions cease. If an afterlife is anticipated, its characteristics are hoped to be defined by the familiar images that we have been taught to believe; a function of tradition, ritual and faith.

Although its unavoidable that most people associate education with school. This definition underestimates its importance. In its broadest sense, it’s the value society places on instilling its preadult generations with the character it considers important to perpetuate. Collectively it exemplifies the direction culture is taking by revealing whether global society is evolving towards a higher existence, or has gotten trapped in illusions that converge on a self centered focus, a distraction from important considerations such as, What is the point of existence?

One of the great mysteries of the 2012 movie season is why The Impossible, a true story about the Belon family from Spain all of whom survived the December 26th, 2004 Tsunami that struck off the coast of Indonesia killing over 250,000 people from sixteen countries, was overlooked by American audiences.

To call The Impossible a disaster film is to  associate it with dazzling special effects and digital imagery to create death and destruction on a catastrophic level, however this movie uses minimal special effects, no green screen or digital water.  Its a character driven journey with incredible authenticity as it focuses a lens on the mother – son relationship.

The true story is told by Maria Belon, a physician who was on hiatus and caring for her husband Henry and their three young sons, Lucas who is 12, Tomas 7, and Simon 5, on vacation in Thailand for the Xmas holiday when the Tsunami hits. Maria and Lucas are swept in one direction and find each other. Her husband Henry and their two young sons are presumed dead.

In order to survive, Maria and Lucas must rely on each other in an unfamiliar way that touches a common nerve as Lucas sees his mother seriously injured and in great pain bleeding from her leg as her breast is exposed just at the age when he is entering puberty. He reacts by turning away, unable to see his mother in so much pain, “I can’t see you this way Mum, I just can’t.” When she spits up blood he yells, “stop it, stop it,” as if she were intentionally doing this to embarrass him. Maria, painfully aware and compassionate to his reaction to her responds, “Walk in front of me.”

This is a coming of age saga for Lucas who is beautifully portrayed by newcomer Tom Holland, a talented up and coming British actor who has no prior film experience. Naomi Watts gives one of her best performances in her twenty year career that ranks along side Mulholland Drive and 21 Grams. As Maria she gives profound depth to motherhood and a fierce will to survive with dignity for the sake of her son. Ewan McGregor as the father struggles with keeping his two younger sons with him or sending them away as he searches for Maria and Lucas. He chooses the latter but admits, “It was the most difficult decision I have ever had to make.” It reminded me of Sophie’s Choice.

The film was directed by Juan Antonio Bayona , his second picture, and screenplay by  Sergio G. Sanchez with the help of the Belon family and beautifully scored by Fernando Velazquez. It was well received by the Toronto Film Festival and given high praise by critics. So, why was this film overlooked by The Golden Globe Awards, The SAG Awards, BAFTA and The Oscars. In fact the only nomination it was given by The Oscars was for Naomi Watts for Best Performance by a Lead Actress.

The box office receipts show that in the United States, the film was hardly seen. It has been far more successful in Mexico, Brazil, Europe and Asia where it is very popular. Perhaps Hurricane Sandy effected people so much, that they didn’t want to see anything that resembled a disaster film. Yet the story is so compelling and the performances so good it should be seen, hopefully, before Oscar voting ends. Naomi Watts gives a moving performance. It would be nice to see her win a well deserved Oscar, but the movie needs to be seen because in all its desolation, its a true story about this global event told through the eyes of one family and how it changed all them. It’s a beautiful film.

If every living thing, every grain of sand on the beach, every star in the sky is linked by a web of causality, and one could comprehend that web in its entirety down to the movements of the sub atomic Higgs-Boson particles, would it be enough to enable one to see where all the currents are leading and foretell the future, or perhaps change it?

From a scientific point of view, space and all it contains is dynamic and in constant motion. The Uncertainty Principle of particle physics defines a limit to the precision with which certain physical properties of a particle, such as it’s momentum (m) and position (p) can be simultaneously known especially when factoring in velocity (v). If electrons, using the atom as a model, are in constant motion around a proton, then its logical to hypothesize that even smaller as yet to be identified particles are also in continual flux. Realistically, one could only identify a cloud of potential locations defined by the path of an electron or smaller particles traveling around a gravitational focus. Even then, the scope of possible locations at any given moment does not necessarily have to be symmetrical since gravitational forces can vary in the space within the cloud.

This is one of the main reasons why most contemporary scientists discount the possibility that it would be feasible to transport an individual from one place to another. On the other hand, it still leaves open the possibility that future discoveries, as yet unknown, may very well prove its validity as much as the many scenarios  envisioned in Science Fiction that have eventually become the basis for science fact without ever mentioning Star Trek.

Gene Roddenberry’s inspiration for the transporter came from The Fly, the 1958 horror film that starred Vincent Price, David Hedison, Patricia Owens and Herbert Marshall. It was directed by Kurt Neumann with a screenplay by James Clavell and George Langelaan. The plot surrounds Dr. Andre Delambre (Hedison) who is doing research on a matter transporter model he calls the disintegration – reintegration device. In the film, he creates two large sized chambers to further his experiments on humans, but in an impulsive decision, he uses himself as the first human subject. This is a common and tragic mistake that scientists make when they become impatient with slow progress, considering it too meticulous. They intentionally skip some important steps and the results are often monstrous. In this case the worst possible scenario occurs when a fly is trapped in the same chamber with Andre when he transports himself to the other chamber. When the experiment is complete Andre has the head and arm of the fly, and the fly has the head and arm of Andre.

Roddenberry admittedly used this approach to get the actors from the Starship Enterprise to the alien planet primarily to save money and spend more time developing the plot, but he left it to the writers and the science consultants to explain the mechanics of how the transporter could actually work.

In order to successfully transport someone, scientists would have to not only be able to plot every particle and the space between the sub atomic entities contained within the individual but also anticipate the position (p), velocity (v), momentum (m) and direction of each of them, including the space between the space. This, if properly calculated, would allow them to predict their location in time and space when reintegrating them during the transporter process. Otherwise, the living web and its components would be thrown into chaos when materialization occurs.

The metaphor of the disintegration – reintegration device in The Fly suggests that the person would have to be disintegrated before being reconstituted since one of the basic principles of physics is that matter can neither be created or destroyed, although some scientists are finding evidence that a sub-atomic particle can exist in two places at the same time. This has still yet to be proven, but what would happen to the soul during this process? a valid question as we move from science into Philosophy, Metaphysics and Theology.

It’s important to note here that in the East, cause and effect and karma are one and the same. There is no distinction between these concepts except that the west is hesitant to acknowledge the eastern terminology because it had become associated with the New Age Movement of Transcendentalism that was intimately associated with psychedelics during the counter culture movement of the nineteen sixties.

According to eastern philosophy, there is no concept as good or bad karma. Rather, its just energy that we subjectively define as positive or negative depending on whether it causes happiness or pain and suffering. However when we look at the karmic events retrospectively, something that results in pain can often lead to new ways of thinking and behavior that can result in a change in the foundation of thought and an evolution in consciousness which is ultimately a positive thing.

When wondering about causality, unexpected variables may be encountered.  If it could be possible to anticipate the relationship between cause and effect early enough for it to be possible to make adjustments along the way by opening the door for free will to predict the outcome, would that alone make sense when it comes to anticipating the future? I wonder about that. It would still not guarantee that a specific future would occur or that it would unfold in a predictable manner. The flaw of this hypothesis is that it fails to consider that things rarely occur as a linear outcome of one cause leading to one effect. More likely, there are multiple causes that evoke numerous effects that in turn leads to other causes that becomes yet another karmic response as part of the infinite chain of causality.

Another insurmountable consideration is that in order to comprehend the entire web of causality one would have to presuppose that the individual would have to be conscious of the microcosm and macrocosm of everything that exists simultaneously with full awareness. In other words, one would have to be God, or at least have God potential in them.

Running into an untitled document does not necessarily mean it has no designation. Some are parts of other documents that have titles but for some unexplained reason have become detached.

The other case is when focus is placed upon the page with no name because it has something to say that is both relevant and applicable to what the person reading it is experiencing at the moment. Then, by naming the untitled document, its contents becomes part of the reader’s internal library, unless it’s a blank page.

Among the most enduring achievements of Star Trek is the advanced technology it envisioned, inspiring generations of students to become scientists consumed with creating some of the futuristic devices that became indispensable in the twenty-third century created by Gene Roddenberry. The saga has in some respects become synonymous with innovation as the list of inventions created from all its incarnations have been world changing. It also reinforces the notion that many inventions are already functionally complete in the mind’s eye of the inventor. All that is left is to figure out how to wire it all together to make it do what it’s creator intended it to do.

One of the most interesting ideas, for example, was the flip open pocket sized  communicator that was introduced by Kirk and Spock in the 1966 series. It was used to communicate with the ship, with each other and the other members of the landing party most of whom wore red shirts and said little or nothing. They inevitably became the subject of one of Dr. McCoy’s most beloved lines, “He’s dead, Jim.” It was not just a novelty item for collectors, but the design for the first new wave of pocket sized cell phones that revolutionized the way we communicate. On the Enterprise the communications officer, Lieutenant Uhura, was in charge of all ship communications.

Another important prototype was the touch tone panel of the The Next Generation, oddly similar to the iPad and iPhone, essentially a mobile computer in tablet form that provides access to vast amounts of information when linked to the Internet.

Then there was the transporter, going from one place to an other in the blink of an eye. Even today, respected physicists and biologists are considering the obstacles to find the solution and create one.There have been several episodes on the science channel devoted solely to the science of star trek, often using particle physics to understand how it could be done, including the hollow deck, a room that turns fantasy into a photon simulated reality.

The most endearing of the devices was the tricorder. There were several types. One was the standard device, issued to the crew on an away mission to determine atmospheric composition, mineral deposits, unusual energy anomalies and all functions necessary for a geological survey and data analysis.

My personal favorite was the medical tricorder, the device that Dr. McCoy held in one hand and a small scanner in the other moving it from head to toe of the patient as he read the vital signs such as blood pressure, respiration rate, pulse, blood oxygen levels; it also had the capability to scan the bones for fractures, head injuries and abnormal brain functioning, before Bones announced yet again, “He’s dead Jim.”

In The Next Generation the medical tricorder was far more sophisticated, easy to carry, sleek and light weight with a silver tone external casing and all those different colored lights and sounds that Dr. Crusher used to make a preliminary diagnosis. It became one of the most familiar devices appearing in virtually every episode.

Now, in an incredible leap into the future of medical technology, a company called Scanadu has invented the first working medical tricorder. Their team competed in the Qualcomm Tricorder Competition X  inspired by the Star Trek franchise. The challenge was for contemporary scientists and students to adapt the franchise’s cutting edge technology for twenty-first century use. They offered a ten million dollar prize for the development of the medical tricorder.

This particular device is called Scout and it may prove to be one of the most important medical tools used for the diagnosis of diseases since the development of the stethoscope. Although its the first of its kind, there will be other generations of this device with more advanced capabilities that are even smaller  as competition encourages other companies to develop their own medical tricorder.

According to Jesus Diaz who reported the invention in Gizmodo, “the Scanadu Scout is a tiny hardware device that reads your vital health information on contact. You place it on the left temple and, in less than ten seconds, it will read your pulse, respiration rate, heart rate, electrical heart activity, temperature, blood oxygenation levels and more. Then it sends this information to an application on your iPhone, iPad or Android which displays the medical analysis for you to consider. You can even store your vitals for tracking.”

It doesn’t require a medical background to comprehend some of the measurements but an understanding of some medical terminology would be helpful. Its potential value is as a home based or mobile unit that can quickly identify a person with a fever or infection and offer an initial diagnoses based on the facts in seconds. It is not meant to replace the doctor, but to be used as the first alert that something medical is going on and by providing concrete information that the average person can interpret in simple easy to understand terminology. Its most important use will be the ability to identify medical abnormalities early so that disease progression can be prevented. It is currently being evaluated by the FDA and is set to go on the market in late 2013 for a very reasonable $150. The display panel that appears on the touch screen phone is easy to read and understand and resembles the star trek interface. How fitting that Scout will be ready at the same time President Obama’s Affordable Care Act is fully implemented as one of the most important pieces of legislation for early detection and prevention of medical disease in the last century.

Walter de Brouwer, the founder of Scanadu has a history working on some high profile technological projects such as the OLPC ( One Labtop Per Child). He was motivated to develop the Scout when his own child was in the ICU. “Frustrated by the complicated devices that monitored my child’s health, my idea was to create a simple easy to use device that could turn this information into something that the average person could understand. I recognized the need for a mobile device that would be able to monitor health anywhere with ease at a low cost. I thought about instantaneous vital readings, molecular diagnostics, visualization, and storage of personal health data all wrapped into an easy-to-use device that would connect to a smartphone or tablet to show you all the information not only for yourself, but also for transmission by remote to your physician.”

De Browuer started to work on what would become Scout,  then on the ScanaFlo and ScanaFlu to diagnose other medical conditions using saliva and urine. “He assembled four teams of specialists at the NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. The team was composed of engineers, chemists, doctors, mathematicians and software engineers working together to come up with new, smart ways not only to monitor vitals, but to detect actual infections within seconds.” According to de Browuer, they used all the tricks in the book: imaging and sound analysis, molecular diagnostics and data analytics, all based on a series of algorithms to create a device that offers a comprehensive, real-time picture of your health.

The reason why this device is so important, is that it is cost effective, keeps track of your own health with the capability of storing past readings to identify patterns via data analysis. It can also be easily used to detect infectious outbreaks on a national or planetary level, with people anonymously uploading data to a cloud. The Center for Disease Control or the World Health Organization can literally keep track of whats going on around the world and identify infectious outbreaks earlier.

As Dr. Alan Greene, Chief Medical Officer at Scanadu said, “When it comes to health, averages don’t cut it. Vital signs change throughout the day and vary from person to person, so it makes no sense to assume we are all the same. Health decisions shouldn’t be based on averages, they should be based on an accurate and personalized health feed of data, which we now have the power to give to the consumer in the palm of their hand.”

The late Gene Roddenberry and the whole Star Trek team of writers, science experts and actors have much to be proud of as they watch how this device first conceived for Star Trek in 1966 could very well change the world by revolutionizing medical diagnosis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricorder

Other Tricorder Applications For The Smart Phone