Wednesday, March 10, 2010

3 American Performance Cars

Bear with me as I step back in time to formulate what I believe are three terrific American built performance cars: the Ford Mustang, the Dodge Challenger, and the Chevrolet Camaro. Currently, only the Mustang is in production with the Challenger coming back by 2009. GM hasn’t committed to building the Camaro just yet, but the company is likely to make a decision in favor of the car and its sibling, the Pontiac Firebird, by this summer. So, what is it about American performance cars that set them apart from the rest? In one word: muscle. Read on as I compare and contrast these three vehicles and share with you my feeble attempts to explain the culture behind the cars.

So, you think I forgot the Chevy Corvette and Dodge Viper when talking about performance cars? No, I did not. Both models are performance cars as well as race cars. On the other hand the Mustang, Challenger, and Camaro are mass produced performance cars with muscle. There is a difference in the way a typical race car handles, rides, and performs vs. a muscle car.

Typically, a muscle car was a coupe version of some of the larger cars that were pervasive on U.S. highways in the 1960s and 1970s. The Mustang and Camaro, however, were designed separately [although they both heavily borrowed parts from other models] and these “pony” cars were a category all to themselves. For comparison’s sake, they join the Dodge Challenger, a performance version of Mopar cars of its time. All three were compared by critics of that time and all three will once again be compared in a few years when production has been ramped up.

Ford Mustang -– Step back in time with me to April 1964 to an era when America was heavily involved in the space race, Lyndon Johnson was president, and General Motors ruled autodom. Ford, for its part, had been nipping at GM’s heels for years, but the failed Edsels of the late 1950s had cost the company dearly. Still, it was the time of the New York World’s Fair and Ford used the fair and television technology to promote its newest offering, the Mustang. A 2+2 coupe borrowing parts from the Fairlane and Falcon, the 1964 œ model was the first one sold and is widely credited with being the best introduction of a new vehicle ever. With a V6 engine standard and V8 optional, the all new Mustang quickly broke sales records and has been a hot seller ever since. Indeed, with the introduction of the “retro” look Mustang in 2005, the car once again has spawned interest in the muscle car segment as both DaimlerChrysler and General Motors craft competing models of their own.

Dodge Challenger -– After the success of earlier muscle cars including the Dodge Charger and Plymouth ‘Cuda, the Dodge Challenger was launched as a 1970 model. The car borrowed heavily from the ‘Cuda although the sheet metal was somewhat different and the wheelbase was stretched by a couple of inches. Because the muscle car era was in decline at the time of its introduction, the Challenger lasted only five model years before it was cancelled. The concept Challenger currently on display at many auto shows is based on the 1970 design and is the talk of message boards and blogs across the nation. Look for Hemi powered engines as being favored by many owners; the car is likely to share some technology with the current Magnum wagon and Charger sedan.

Chevrolet Camaro -- GM was asleep at the wheel when the Mustang came out. It took nearly three years before the company could respond and when it did the Camaro and Pontiac Firebird were the result. Although both cars sold well over the years, neither one could match the Mustang’s sales levels and by the time the last cars were sold in 2002, production dropped to a trickle. Still, the end of the Camaro after 35 years has stirred renewed interest in the name and thanks to the retro Mustang, the entire muscle car category is growing once again. Look for a 2010 Camaro to be the first Camaro since 2002; a ragtop version is also being considered.

So, just who can be expected to purchase a muscle car these days? People just like me: middle aged men who grew up with the original models. In addition, a whole new generation of younger drivers tired of the “me too” look of so many of the compact cars out there. Muscle cars of today are so much different from earlier era cars as they incorporate the look of the originals while harnessing today’s technology. Thus, fuel savings will be decent without sacrificing performance: a true win-win situation.

No, I cannot wait to see a Mustang, Challenger, and Camaro lined up at a traffic light waiting for the light to turn green. A new muscle car era is upon us and for that I am very excited.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

8 Ways to speed up airport security

Political turmoil and terrorist activities have resulted in tightening of airport security. If you are unaware of rules and regulations you could be detained or delayed inordinately while passing through security checks before boarding the plane.

Here are a few insights:

1. Never pack any banned items in your carry on luggage. Ensure that the luggage is of the right size and weight as outlined by airline regulations.


2. Before you walk through the metal detector empty your pockets and place all items like coins, jewelry, hair clips, tie clips, watches, belts and buckles into the outer pocket for your carry on luggage so that it moves through the x-ray machine and does not cause a din when you walk through.

3. Wear sensible shoes with low heels, slip on shoes are preferable. If you are asked to remove the shoes do so with grace try avoid shoes which have a metal heel arch.

4. Be prepared to switch on your mobile, i-pod, laptop, PDA and so on if asked. Keep them all together. Be sure to switch all electronics off before take off and during landing.

5. As soon as you enter the security area place the lap top and other carry ons on the conveyor belt for checking by x-ray. Ensure that all baggage including your purse has the appropriate tags.

6. Keep a valid photo ID ready along with the boarding pass. If you like you can have a travel wallet with an ID window on one side and a pocket for the boarding pass and luggage stubs on the other.

7. Never carry any banned items. Buy what you need at your destination.

8. Don’t lock your checked bags. Often, if the x-ray shows anything odd you may need to open the bag for inspection. Once it is through security you may lock the luggage.


If you keep updated on laws of the land or check with your travel agent or airline a few days before departure you will be quite prepared and will few problems. In case you are nervous about leaving your car in the lot until you return consider going to the airport by cab. Alternately ask a friend to drop you off. If you are being dropped then you can drive right up to the terminal and save yourself a long walk carrying your luggage. If you dress neatly, walk with self confidence, answer questions by security staff or airline employees with confidence and without hesitation there should really be no problem whatsoever. As a precaution try not to strike up any friendships with men or women you don’t know. If you need to while away any time buy a book or magazine or window shop at the airport. Always eat a light meal before leaving for the airport, wear comfortable clothes and carry with you a jacket or coat in case it gets cold. Give comfort priority over style.

If you are sensible and practical your flight will be enjoyable and passage through airports without problems.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

A Brief History of Creation


In spite of the fact that it is impossible to prove that anything exists beyond one’s perception since any such proof would involve one’s perception (I observed it, I heard it, I thought about it, I calculated it, and etc.), science deals with a so-called objective reality “out there,” beyond one’s perception professing to describe Nature objectively (as if there was a Nature or reality external to one’s perception). The shocking impact of Matrix was precisely the valid possibility that what we believed to be reality was but our perception; however, this was presented through showing a real reality wherein the perceived reality was a computer simulation. Many who toy with the idea that perhaps, indeed, we are computer simulations, deviate towards questions, such as, who could create such software and what kind of hardware would be needed for such a feat. Although such questions assume that reality is our perception, they also axiomatically presuppose the existence of an objective deterministic world “out there” that nevertheless must be responsible for how we perceive our reality. This is a major mistake emphasizing technology and algorithms instead of trying to discover the nature of reality and the structure of creation. As will be shown in the following, the required paradigm shift from “perception is our reality fixed within an objective world,” to “perception is reality without the need of an objective world ‘out there,’” is provided by a dynamic logical structure. The Holophanic loop logic is responsible for a consistent and complete worldview that not only describes, but also creates whatever can be perceived or experienced.

Stating that it is impossible to prove the existence of anything beyond one’s perception is not saying there is nothing beyond perception, only that if there is anything, then whatever that is, is indefinite. It could be argued that the existence of physical laws, the universal perception that the apple falls to the ground is proof of an objective reality. However, this universal agreement is also our perception. It could be argued that if we cannot decide what to perceive, and everybody perceives the same physical reality, then there must be some lawfulness that dictates how we perceive and therefore, this lawfulness could be external to our perception. However, this lawfulness, as we shall see later on, is the precise lawfulness that creates perception, the process of definition, which is not external to perception (this process creates the perceived and the perceiver, which then gives meaning to this process – a loop – but about that, later). It could be argued, that hitting our knee on the table – whether we believe in the table or not – will hurt. The table is external to our body, but not to our perception. What then is perception? It is relating, a process of definition, defining and thereby rendering meaningful what has been perceived.

What then is this process of definition? It is creating borders within which one’s perception gains meaning. The word “definition” comes from the Latin de finire, meaning, making finite or limited. In Hebrew, definition is HAGDARA (הגדרה), meaning, to border. Any definition necessarily implies what the definition is not, or stated differently, to have meaning, whatever is defined explicitly includes the meaning by implicitly excluding everything else. Consequently, to define means to place the defined object within borders that by default create something beyond the borders of the definition. What is this something beyond the defined? The implicitly excluded everything else, or in other words, the indefinite. The paramount importance of incorporating the indefinite within a consistent logical structure cannot be overemphasized. The indefinite itself is a paradox, and incorporating it within the Holophanic logical structure engenders the loop of Creation where the dynamic structure of paradoxes is both the creative force of existence, and also the proof of the necessity of existence.

To better grasp the impetus of Creation, let’s look at the indefinite and paradoxes. What does “indefinite” mean? Anything as long as it is not specified (not defined); anything that appears both within and beyond the borders of the definition and thereby rendering the border superfluous, which means, no border, no definition. If nevertheless we would attempt to define the notion “indefinite,” then that’s a paradox because if we succeed, then it is defined, which contradicts its meaning – its indefiniteness – and the word “indefinite” means that it cannot be defined. This is an example of a paradox, that in essence means, if it is what it is, then it is not what it is, yet if it is not what it is, then it is what it is. A paradox is a creature that consists of a structure (how it is defined, the dynamic process on its way to stabilization) that contradicts its significance (what it is, the stabilized entity). What characterizes a paradox is the motion between its structure and significance, where the structure implies that its significance contradicts its structure, and vice versa.

Another example of a paradox would be “wholeness.” Wholeness (totality, infinite, boundless) can only be wholeness if we can find a way to define it so that it includes everything and there is nothing beyond it. However, if we define wholeness, then to have meaning, it must be bordered within the walls of the definition, which implies that there is something beyond this border, in which case it is not wholeness. Or in more formal language, wholeness is only wholeness if it is not wholeness, which is an inconsistency. If we are satisfied with that, then we have completed the definition of wholeness. However, if we try to include the beyond created by our earlier definition within the borders of our next attempt at defining wholeness, then we gain a new definition of wholeness, which by the sheer structure of the process of defining creates a new beyond. In this case, the process of defining wholeness will be consistent but incomplete, and wholeness will remain indefinite.

Contemplating the paradox of Creation, the ancient Egyptian myth of Creation springs to mind, the myth of the self-creating god, Amun (or Amon). Amun masturbated and swallowed his semen, after which he spit it out in the form of a ball, thereby impregnating his mother, the sky. And only then, was he born. Thus Amun was his own father. Those pious who discovered the illustrated version of this myth in Karnak covered up the erect phallus of Amun, and with it, this story of Creation was laid into obscurity. The Holophanic model of Creation could regard this Egyptian myth as Amun retromorphously creating himself. I have coined the word retromorphous to mean, defining in retrospect, turning non-being into the potential of whatever the observation is made from, or in other words, creating the past from the present, creating the source from its outcome, which is the basis of complexity in the context of the loop logic. That is, only after Amun was born can he give meaning to his mother, the potential from which he emanated and to the process that created him (as represented by masturbation and incest) whereby he was born. Of course, neither the sky nor the masturbating Amun have meaning until Creation takes place de facto and Amun emerges. I find this an enticing illustration of the basic paradox of existence.

So how can there be something from nothing? What is “nothing?” Nothing is what didn’t turn into the potential of something. If there was something from nothing, then that nothing would have turned into the potential of something, because when we ask, how is there something from nothing, we ask this question from something, when something already exists. If we take a deeper look at “nothing,” we’ll discover that “nothing” is a paradox. Any definition is something, so if we defined “nothing,” then it would become something, which contradicts its essence of being “nothing.” Another way of looking at “nothing” would be by means of it being something that is meaningless. That is, “nothing” could be something that does not relate and that no thing or no one relates to. That is, if there was something totally alone in the universe, then that would be nothing, but it would be meaningless. If such existed, its existence would be external to our perception, and as such, this “nothing” would be indefinite.

We said that the indefinite could be anything, as long as it is not specified (not defined). However, if we nevertheless tried to define “nothing” (the indefinite), what would we get then? Since “nothing” is non-definable, it is transparent as the object of our inquiry. So when we attempt to define it, all we have is what we put into it, which is the process of definition. “Nothing” stayed nothing, we didn’t define it, only made the process of definition explicit. “Nothing” gains meaning when we fail to define it; but having tried, we are left with a bonus, a something, which is our process of defining “nothing.” Creation of something from nothing is not a function of defining something, but a function of attempting to define “nothing.” And then, if that process of definition – which already is an existence – looks back at its origins, if this process of defining investigates into its own genesis, then what does it see? It sees itself. It sees the process of definition – self-reference.

If there is nothing external to perception, then this process of definition is the overall wholeness, the creator of meaning when it can relate to itself. However, to have meaning, the process of definition has to be defined; this definition would be a self-referential quasi-infinite and continuous process of establishing borders that create the indefinite beyond that establishes borders creating the indefinite beyond that establishes borders… which means, wholeness would continuously and forever fail to define itself while succeeding to define something – anything but itself.

Of course, both the totally defined and the totally indefinite are idealized notions that would be inconsistent with the Holophanic loop logic, nor can they be found in nature. The totally indefinite would be the total meaningless nothing, the kind of non-being that cannot be fathomed because if we would think about it, it would already be something. On the other hand, there can be no total definition either. I have used the term uncertainty of sameness to describe the logical impossibility of total definition. A defined entity can be said to have reached sameness — it is the same as itself — which means that it is, it exists as something definite, no matter which parameters defined it. However, no sooner does our object achieve sameness than the uncertainty of sameness raises its ugly head. Could it have been defined differently? Yes, of course. Could it have additional parameters? Yes, of course. Could it have been defined more precisely? Yes, of course. This uncertainty of sameness is the indefinite included in the definition, which is the result of including the tools of definition in the definition. Since ‘a’ can only be defined as ‘a’ with meaning if it implies ‘not-a’ (the indefinite beyond the borders of the definition), and since ‘a’ can only have meaning as ‘a’ because it is different from everything else (the everything else is the indefinite beyond the borders, which actually gives meaning to ‘a’), the meaning of ‘a’ depends on ‘not-a.’

When the meaning of something depends on the indefinite, on what our defined object is not, then this indefinite is necessarily included in the process of definition. This logical implication that perception of meaning is only possible if and only if the indefinite is included within the perception is the reason why the 19th century dream of a consistent and complete axiomatic system with only well defined (explicit) empty signs had to fail (see more about that in my article, The Loop Logic). In spite of the fact that logic is the fundament of algorithms and computer science, it had neither the aspiration nor the ability to be connected to the real world precisely because its propositions were so anemic regarding meaning. In the effort to exclude any hint of the indefinite, logical inference was confined to a binary type of world of true and false and lacking any correlation with life and experiencing. However, including the indefinite in the process of definition not only makes the loop logic the fundament of existence, but determines the necessity of existence. With the birth of Holophany, Heidegger’s question, “Why is there anything at all, rather than nothing?” becomes irrelevant. When existence is relations, and relating is the act of perceiving, and perceiving is the process of definition, then existence is the overall lawfulness, the isomorphous lawfulness of the process of definition – the loop of Creation. What is being perceived, what is being stabilized, which significance is brought to the foreground from the amorphous background of the indefinite, depends on the non-linear rules of complex interactions. Thus the loop logic emphasizes the creation of essents rather than their interactions.

Is there a lawfulness responsible for any and every existence? An electron and a dog are very different creatures; so what invisible lawfulness is responsible for the existence of both? What kind of lawfulness would fulfill such demands? The answer is, isomorphism — the same logical inner structure in entirely different representations. Whether an electron, a dog or the weather, each could be a different realization of the same inner logical structure. Creation of anything is the creation of meaning, which is an act of definition. The act of definition attempting to define itself is consciousness. So consciousness, or the soul if you wish, is not some invisible copy of our body carrying our identity, but the lawfulness of Creation expressed as our individual qualitative essence. Of course, it has been endlessly stated that we are God, that we are parts of God, and similar phrases. This is true, but true in the sense that God is the lawfulness that unfolds Creation, and this lawfulness is inherent in all creation including the creatures therein. It could be argued, that a soul, a person is more than mere definitions and intellect. If this logic is the logic of anything and everything, then it should be able to delineate the logical structure of experience as well. Indeed.

Anything that has meaning has to be defined, which places it somewhere on the scale between the continuous and the discrete, between the indefinite and the definite. The indefinite, continuous, infinite tends in the direction of the meaningless, whereas the meaningful is at best imprecise. Experience is the process of attempting to define the indefinite. When we try to capture an experience in a description, we are actually defining our attempt at defining the indefinite. The experience is continuous whereas its description, the definition is discrete. Just as we can never define wholeness, we can never define experience. Any description, any definition, is by nature discrete, whereas the net experience is continuous. So when we have an experience or perception and we become aware of having that experience, then we give it meaning by defining what it is. By doing this we create a discrete replica of the experience, yet the experience remains continuous and non-definable, non-discretizable. Experience is connected to learning. The person encounters something new. How do we know that something is new? Because it is inconsistent with our system. So when we interact with it, we have to integrate it, to assimilate it into our system. If we met something that was not new to the system, then our system would recognize it as part of itself. When that recognition does not occur, the system is interacting with something new. That is the impact. The system adjusts to include the new – that is the change. One’s selfhood is the path of changes following one’s experiences.

Our knowledge of the experience – whatever it might be that we experience – makes it exist for us. We could say, one only experiences when one is aware of experiencing. How do we know that we are aware of experiencing something? By experiencing it, we experience the awareness of experiencing. In this sense, experience and awareness of the experience, experiencing the awareness of the experience, being aware of experiencing the awareness of the experience, etc. is an infinitely continuous chain, which is what defines what experience is (not the interpretation of a specific experience, but experience in its general sense). And that’s the definition of experience: an infinite loop of the process of becoming aware.

When “nothing” is the limit of both the totally indefinite and the totally defined, then that’s like a circle of going from something to nothing to something to nothing, etc. The ‘going’ here means perception. “Nothing” is only a notion that has meaning if it has been perceived, in fact, a paradox. If it really is “nothing,” then it cannot be defined, and hence, it has no meaning. Yet if I relate to it, then it is something. So whenever I relate to “nothing,” whenever I say, Creation of something from nothing, that “nothing” has meaning for me, and hence, it is significance — it is something just like any other something. That is, the structure of “nothing” is the same structure as that of something. Essentially, something from nothing is formation, not Creation, since nothing is also something. Then what is Creation? Creation is rather the creation of nothing from something, because Creation is the process of definition, and when we define, we create the indefinite beyond the definition, which at its limit is nothing, and only then can we have something from nothing… Oh yes, the loop. A true loop is only such if it contains its own source. If nothing can be proven to exist external to perception, then logic must be a loop, and existence is a logical necessity inferred by the loop.

Including the indefinite in the process of definition has far reaching consequences. It means that the tools of the definition are necessarily included in the definition. It means that meaning can only occur when there is both definition and also experience. It means that consciousness (whether it succeeds to define or not) must be part of science or any so-called objective endeavor. It means that any and all perception includes experience. The interaction with the indefinite, the experience, is what gives meaning to the defined. Perception, meaningful definition, can only occur in a highly flexible complex system that can learn and change. That’s the difference between us and an electron, which only has fixed relations, and consequently, limited interactions. An electron always succeeds in defining, or it would be more correct to say, it can only interact with what it succeeds in defining. If it encounters the indefinite, it assumes a state of superposition.

Where is God in the loop of Creation? If we wanted to define God, the totality, we could not define God, because by the act of definition we would create the beyond, what is beyond God, which contradicts God’s totality. Therefore, no definition of God would do justice to God, and every such definition would truncate God’s wholeness. If God is indefinable, then God is indefinite. If God is indefinite, then I create God by the implication of the act of definition – any definition, because every definition creates the beyond, the indefinite beyond the borders of the definition. In that sense, this is consistent with the statement that I create God by my perception (definition). This does not say that I perceive God, but that my perception implies the existence of the indefinite (God). This means that if I perceive a dog, this perception implies the existence of God. If I perceive that I perceive, then that implies the existence of God. If I perceive dust, a table, an idea, whatever, then that implies the existence of God. If I experience, then that implies the existence of God. That’s because any existence implies the existence of God. And that’s because any existence is such if it relates or is related to, if it has meaning, if even partially it has been defined, which means, its mere definition implies the indefinite beyond the borders of the definition, it implies God, the indefinable. So one cannot directly perceive God (perhaps that is why it was stated in the Bible that no one could see God’s face and live = exist – “no man shall see me and live…” – Exodus 33: 20), but only know about God by implication, which means, the implication of the indefinite – God – is what attributes meaning to any existence.

However, “God” does not equal “indefinite,” but the process that implies the existence of the indefinite is what could be said to be God, since that’s the process of Creation. This is the process of Creation that both creates something, existence, and also nothing, the indefinite. This is why this logic is a loop.

Friday, March 5, 2010

5 Surefire Tips To Better Public Speaking

If you search in Google for the term “public speaking tips” you get roughly 2.6 million responses. That seems like a lot, but when you have to be the one standing in front of the group there isn’t enough information in the world that could get you over that fear. 

Believe it or not, most of those fears are self imposed. What do I mean? The people listening to you don’t really care how the information is disseminated, they just want at the information. It’s the speaker that puts themselves through the ringer weeks before the event. Here are some tips that may seem obvious, but once completed, will really put your mind at ease, trust me. 

Public Speaking Tip #1

KNOW YOUR TOPIC! I don’t mean know your topic, I mean inside and out, upside down, what ever question someone could throw at you, you know the answer. You really need to be prepared to reach this level. You need to know your speech almost by heart; you need to know the products you will be discussing. Do your homework, you will know you have reached public speaking Nirvana when you get that “feeling”, it will come with knowledge. Believe!

Public Speaking Tip #2

Greet as many of the attendees prior to your speech as possible. Familiarity promotes confidence. Besides, think of the benefit you provide the topic you are to speak on when you take the time to meet people before you go on. 
This strategy also prevents you from pacing back and forth and worrying yourself to death until you go on. There is no point in cramming now, if you don’t know it, you wont, and it will show.

Public Speaking Tip #3

DON’T think everyone in the audience is naked, this in fact will hurt your chances of a successful public speaking outing. 

Public Speaking Tip # 4

When you find yourself with only a mouthful of uhs and ums, stop yourself, repeat the sentence as if to add importance, and replace the uhs and ums with silence to allow your points to hit home.

Public Speaking Tip # 5 

Animate your speech. Most people think that good communication is mouth-centric. Nothing could be farther from the truth! To be a powerful communicator, you have to use your entire body. Gestures and body language add energy and enthusiasm to your speech.
These are tips can really help you take your next step in public speaking. Do you realize that people pass up promotions because they will be required to speak publicly? 

Do you realize people fear speaking in public more than they fear dying? Maybe because dying is abstract and appears far away while the podium is right in front of them. Either way, you really can come to grips with your fear and maybe you won’t enjoy it, but you’ll be able to get through it easier.  I can’t emphasize enough that half of your battle will be just knowing what you are going to say, and anticipating what others are going to ask. It can be easy!

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

3 Advantages Of Hybrid Cars Over Conventional Cars

Due to the rising cost of fuel and the environmental damage it causes to our planet, many car owners or buyers are looking for an alternative way to save money. Let's face it, fuel supply is finite and the prices of gas is only going to rise higher and higher. That is where a hybrid car has its advantages

Hybrid cars have been gaining in popularity in recent years. With lower cost of production and new hybrid car technology being developed, owning a hybrid car is becoming affordable to everyone.

Hybrid Cars Saves Gas

The obvious advantage of using hybrid cars is that it saves gas. Combining the cleaner energy of an electric motor with the long range capacity of a gasoline engine allows a hybrid car to save as much as 30 miles a gallon. One feature of hybrid cars is that the gasoline engine is shut off automatically when the car stops. This also helps in saving fuel. That is also the reason why hybrid cars are so quiet why it is stationary. The gasoline engine is automatically turned on when you step on the accelerator pedal.

Hybrid Cars Are Environment Friendly

Hybrid cars emit lower toxic emissions compared to conventional gasoline-powered cars due to less gasoline being burned. It is environmentally friendly, causes less pollution and releases less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. If you do not know, carbon dioxide is one of the primary reasons for rising global warming. For example, the Toyota Prius can reduce tailpipe emissions by up to ninety percent and the greenhouse gas emissions by as much as fifty percent.

Tax Incentives For Hybrid Cars

Due to world political pressures around the world to reduce greenhouse emissions, President Bush signed an agreement in 2005 to provide huge tax relief to hybrid car buyers. The tax incentive varies by model and are based on two factors

1. How fuel efficient the hybrid car is compared to a conventional car in 2002 with the same weight class.

2. How much gasoline the hybrid car can save in its lifetime compared with an equivalent conventional car

For example, a Honda Accord hybrid car have reduced tax credits of $600 while a Toyota Prius has a tax credit of $3150. Do note that the tax credits do expire after 2010 for most hybrid cars.

Hybrid car manufacturers are continually researching for more ways to reduce fuel consumption and better fuel efficiency. Also as more hybrid cars are being adopted, the cost of hybrid cars will reduce making it more affordable for everyone.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

1st Step to Manifesting Life

Do you know at least one person that seems to make the most of out every situation? Someone who has great success at the act of manifestation (the act or product of bringing about change through the direction of consciousness)?

You may even have felt a little jealous of the person because it appears they have everything, seemingly getting these things with minimal effort as though they were born ‘lucky’.  Well, it is probably time you understand that the power of manifestation lies within each of us and it is up to you to learn more about it. 

Attracting abundance is knowledge. Just like any other skill people have, manifesting is no different.  Skills like playing a musical instrument or making gourmet meals require time and commitment to learn and practice.  So does the skill of manifesting.   How good you get, depends on how well you learn the skill and how well you apply it.

Even though some of us are better at certain skills, that doesn't mean the rest of us, with practice, can't improve or even surpass the talent expressed by another. Some seem to have learned it so well that they often times don't even realize how they do it. Manifesting abundance now comes to them so readily it appears ‘natural’ just as a well trained pianist seems to play the piano without thought or effort. They learn to believe whole-heartedly that they simply deserve something; it is now part of their reality. Those are the ones that seem to be born ‘lucky’.  Luck is not how they got there!

So, how can you start on your journey towards manifesting great things for yourself and those you love?  Here is the first step – a basic understanding of the ‘Law of Attraction’.

Gaining a good understanding of how the "law of attraction" works is the first step in bringing abundance into your life.  You can create our own reality. You can attract riches, opportunities and happiness, etc., in our life when you learn to focus or attract yourself on them.  In order to do this, you must learn to believe and think in a positive way towards those things you seek.  You probably also know at least one person (hopefully not you!), who dwells on the negative and truly will focus on having less. They are attracted to ‘less’ not ‘having more’.  When you focus on "I hate my current employment" then you will never notice the aspects of your employment that might be satisfying. You must understand that just wanting something isn't going to bring that to you if you continue to focus on the ‘not having’ of that something. You may have personally experienced that "not having" attitude and learned that it blocked your true desires.

You must learn to focus on a particular item or scenario rather than on vague goals like ‘more cash’ or ‘winning money’.  Focusing on winning the lottery, for example, is a fruitless event. Although, through luck, some win lotteries, focusing on winning the lottery is kind of like focusing on "not having." Oddly enough, many who focus on winning naturally dream of what they could do to help others, even though many of those dreams could actually already be done with their current incomes on a smaller scale, but they don't. This is probably because they focus on what they perceive as their ‘not having’ or ‘having so little’.  With this attitude they end up believing that those dreams are only possible by winning the lottery. They are literally afraid to act on their dreams for fear that they do not currently ‘have enough’ to offer.

For example, I know several decently paid professionals that repeatedly tell me that they too would really love to sponsor a foster child in another country and they would if they won the lottery.  They are afraid that they cannot currently afford $1 a day as that might leave them short of cash in case of an emergency like an unexpected auto repair.  Their focus is on "not enough" rather than being focused on sponsoring a needy child. When they are focused on "not enough" it won't ever matter how much money they have, it will never be enough.

Just talking about sponsoring a child brought their fears out into the open. It would be great if they could trust that helping a needy third world child would not put them at financial risk.

So what I would tell these professionals, who would like to sponsor a child but feel they just cannot,  is that they focus on visualizing a starving child being fed by their contribution and perhaps a wonderful letter from that child, complete with a photo to be proudly placed along side other family pictures.   This would be a positive image/thought to get that picture to become a reality. Perhaps talk it over with the rest of the family to see what they could do without to create that $1 a day.  This is the first step in learning how to manifest their lives.  This same first step will work for all aspects of life from healthy, happy relationships to personal wealth.

Is it your turn to make the most of out every situation?  Is it your turn for others to see you as ‘lucky’?  Does your lack of ability to manifest life leave your soul wounded or lacking?  Would you like to learn all the steps to manifest life?  You deserve it and it is time to take action.

Monday, March 1, 2010

7 Blocks To Creative Thinking And How To Solve Them

Each of us has the power to be creative. It's part of our natural make-up as human beings. The trouble is that, too often, we block our natural creativity and so make errors in thinking and give ourselves more problems than we should. Here are 7 ways to open up your natural creativity and keep the channels unblocked.

1. Don't Make Assumptions. When we assume, we often make an "ass" out of "u" and "me". Assumptions are examples of lazy thinking. We simply don't wait to get all the information we need to come to the right conclusions. There is the story of the customer at the bank who after cashing a cheque and turning to leave, returns and says: "Excuse me, I think you made a mistake." The cashier responds, "I'm sorry but there's nothing I can do. You should have counted it. Once you walk away we are no longer responsible." Whereupon the customer replies: "Well, okay. Thanks for the extra $20."
Tip: When you feel yourself wanting to draw conclusions, just wait until you have all the information.

2. See Things From Other Points Of View. A truly open mind is willing to accept that, not only do other people have other just as valid points of view from theirs, but that these other points of view may be more valid. A story is told that the modernist painter Pablo Picasso was once traveling on a train across Spain when he got into conversation with a rich businessman who was dismissive of modern art. As evidence that modern art didn't properly represent reality, he took out a photo of his wife from his wallet and said: "This is how my wife should look, not in some silly stylized representation." Picasso took the photo, studied it for a few moments and asked: "This is your wife?" The businessman proudly nodded. "She's very small," observed Picasso wryly.
Tip: Don't have a monopoly on how things are. Things aren't always what they seem. Be ready to consider other points of view.

3. Avoid Yo-Yo Thinking. Some people tend to have a tendency to swing from a highly positive mood one minute to a highly negative one the next, all because of what they see in front of them. It's like a yo-yo: up one minute, down the next. It's far more healthy to stay neutral and not let emotions get the better of you.
Tip: Remember that things are rarely as good - or as bad - as you think they are.

4. Get Rid Of Lazy Thinking Habits. Habit can be a major stumbling block to clear thinking and another example of laziness. Try this experiment. Write down the Scottish surnames Macdonald, Macpherson, and Macdougall and ask someone to pronounce them. Now follow these with the word Machinery and see what happens. Most people are likely to mis-pronounce it. This is because we tend to think in habitual ways and don't like what doesn't fit.
Tip: Don't think that, just because things happened in a certain way once before, that they will happen like that again.

5. Don't Think Like An Old Person, Think Like A Child. Research shows that the number of synapses, or connections, in the brain is greater in a child of two than in an average adult. The reason for this is that, while a child of two has no limiting world view, as adults we do. It's like a sculptor who starts off with a large block of clay, more than he needs, and then gradually removes the clay as he moulds his sculpture. If we use our brain like a child, accepting everything without judgment, we can actually halt and reverse the brain ageing process.
Tip: Don't worry about the myth of age. With the right stimulus and a passion for learning, you can actually improve your brain's powers.

6. See The Detail As Well As The Big Picture. You may know the poem by John Godfrey Saxe called "The Blind Men and the Elephant". This tells how six blind men of Indostan go to see an elephant and each try to work out what it is from touching it. One blind man touches the tusk, another the trunk, another the tail, and so on. Of course, not being able to see the whole elephant, they come to wildly different conclusions.
Tip: Try to keep the big picture in front of you while looking at details. It will help to put everything in its proper place and context.

7. Think For Yourself. Taking time out to think is still frowned on in many organizations that prize activity over creativity. People who work in creativity-constrained organizations are likely to think the way they are supposed to think, or as others think, or as has always been the way to think. It's like the blinkered thinking that Hans Christian Anderson describes in his story of "The Emperor's New Clothes". Everyone in the land refuses to see that the emperor is naked and has been duped into believing he is wearing a splendid costume for his coronation. Only a young boy who has been ill and not party to the cultural brainwashing can see the truth and cries out: "Look, everyone, the Emperor is wearing no clothes!"
Tip: Don't let others tell you how to think. When others ask your opinion, tell it to them straight.

Once you make these 7 techniques part of your habitual thinking patterns, you will amaze yourself with how easy it is to come up with fresh, innovative and creative solutions to all of life's problems.