Reverse learning is a neurobiological theory of dreams. It is like a computer that is off-line during dreaming or the REM phase of sleep. During this phase, the brain supposedly sifts through information gathered throughout the day and throws out all unwanted material. According to the theory, we dream in order to forget and this involves a process of unlearning.

The cortex cannot cope with the vast amount of information received throughout the day without developing parasitic thoughts that would disrupt the efficient organisation of memory. During REM sleep, these unwanted connections in cortical networks are supposedly wiped out or damped down by the process making use of impulses bombarding the cortex from sub-cortical areas.

Reverse learning eliminates unwanted modes of neural network interaction acquired in the adult mammal’s learning and also in the process of fetal brain growth. Therefore, there is a possibility that abnormalities of reverse learning in the fetal brain might explain some aspects of the autistic syndromes or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

The theory is a variant upon the activation-synthesis hypothesis that a brain stem neuronal mechanism sends pontine-geniculo-occipital (or PGO) waves that automatically activate the mammalian forebrain. By comparing information generated in specific brain areas with information stored in memory, the forebrain synthesizes dreams during REM sleep.

One problem for reverse-learning theory is that dreams are often organized into clear narratives or stories. It is unclear why dreams would be organized in a systematic way if they consisted only of disposable parasitic thoughts. It is also unclear why babies sleep so much, because it seems they would have less to forget.

Multiobjective optimization or programming, also known as multi-criteria or multi-attribute optimization, is the process of simultaneously optimizing two or more conflicting objectives subject to certain constraints.

Multiobjective optimization problems can be found in various fields: product and process design, finance, aircraft design, the oil and gas industry, automobile design, or wherever optimal decisions need to be taken in the presence of trade-offs between two or more conflicting objectives. Maximizing profit and minimizing the cost of a product; maximizing performance and minimizing fuel consumption of a vehicle; and minimizing weight while maximizing the strength of a particular component are examples of multi-objective optimization problems.

If a multiobjective problem is well formed, there should not be a single solution that simultaneously minimizes each objective to its fullest. In each case we are looking for a solution for which each objective has been optimized to the extent that if we try to optimize it any further, then the other objectives will suffer as a result. Finding such a solution, and quantifying how much better this solution is compared to other such solutions (there will generally be many) is the goal when setting up and solving a multiobjective optimization problem.

Asemic writing is a wordless open semantic form of writing. The word asemic means “having no specific semantic content”.

All writing does not just contain semantic information. It also contains aesthetic information when seen as a shape or image, and emotional information such as a graphologist would analyze. Because it eliminates the semantic information, asemic writing brings the emotional and aesthetic content to the foreground.

By contrast, email is writing almost devoid of aesthetic and emotional content apart from what the words contain. Asemic works play with our minds, enticing us to attempt to read them. Some asemic works make the viewer hover between reading as a text and looking as a picture.

Illegible, invented, or primal scripts (cave paintings, doodles, children’s drawings, etc.) are all influences upon asemic writing. But instead of being thought of as mimicry of preliterate expression, asemic writing can be considered as a postliterate style of writing that uses all forms of creativity for inspiration.

Some asemic writing has pictograms or ideograms, which suggest a meaning through their shape. Other forms are shapeless and exist as pure conception.

Asemic writing has no verbal sense, though it may have clear textual sense. Through its formatting and structure, asemic writing may suggest a type of document and, thereby, suggest a meaning. The form of art is still writing, often calligraphic in form, and either depends on a reader’s sense and knowledge of writing systems for it to make sense, or can be understood through aesthetic intuition.

It can also be seen as a relative perception, whereby unknown languages and forgotten scripts provide templates and platforms for new modes of expression. Asemic writing occurs in avant-garde literature and art with strong roots in the earliest forms of writing.

Monistic Idealism is a metaphysical theory which states that consciousness, not matter, is the ground of all being. It is a monistic theory because it holds that there is only one type of thing in the universe, and it is a form of idealism because it holds that one thing to be consciousness. In India this concept is central to Vedanta philosophy.

It rejects any notion of consciousness being an accident or the mere side product of material interactions. Instead, consciousness comes before matter. Monistic idealism is the fundamental wellspring from which reality is created.

It is theorized that everything is made of matter, and everything can be reduced to the elementary particles of matter, the basic constituents or building blocks of matter. Cause arises from the interactions of these basic building blocks or elementary particles. Elementary particles make atoms, atoms make molecules, molecules make cells, and cells make the brain. But through all of this, the ultimate cause is always the interactions between the elementary particles.

The belief is that all cause moves from the elementary particles and is called upward causation. In this view, what human beings think of as our free will does not really exist. It is only a secondary phenomenon, secondary to the causal power of matter. Any causal power that we seem to be able to exert on matter is simply an illusion. This is the current view of reality.

The opposite view is that everything starts with consciousness and is the ground of all being. In this view, consciousness imposes downward causation. In other words, our free will is real. When we act in the world we really are acting with causal power. This view does not deny that matter also has causal potency and that there is causal power from elementary particles upward. It insists that there is also downward causation. It shows up in our creativity and acts of free will, or when we make moral decisions. In those occasions we are actually witnessing downward causation by consciousness.

The gudastviri is a droneless, double chantered, horn belled bagpipe played in the Caucasus region between Europe and Asia. The word comes from the words guda (bag) and stviri (whistling). In some regions, the instrument is called the chiboni, stviri, or tulumi.

It is made up of two parts, the first being a whole sheep or goat skin, or a sewed, rectangular leather bag (“guda”). The second is a yoked double chant pipe (“stviri”), terminating in a single horn bell, which makes the gudastviri a member of the hornpipe class of bagpipes.

The gudastviri is used for vocal accompaniment. A majority of recitative songs were performed with its accompaniment, in the region of Racha. The gudastviri player’s repertoire consists of historical, epic, satirical, comic, and lyrical verses, which are performed as one part songs. These songs are recitatives and it is the text, not the melody, that is the most important part of the performance.

Traditionally, only men play this instrument, and Rachian gudastviri players were strolling musicians, who were welcomed as guests at every family party or wedding. It was a profession that served as the main source of the player’s income. Gudastviri players often took part in the Georgian improvisation competition known as berikaoba, where they had to invent a witty epic, lyrical or comical poem accompanied with gudastviri music.

In the region of eastern Javakheti, gudastviri pipes are made of very young branches of a dog rose. One should possess special knowledge to design it. Jewelers are hired to make ornaments on the instrument. The gudastviri itself is nomally designed by the player. The player’s tastes and preferences determine where and how the ornaments should be attached.

Carnivorous plants derive some or most of their nutrients from trapping and consuming animals or protozoans, typically insects and other arthropods. They are adapted to grow in places where the soil is thin or poor in nutrients such as bogs and rock outcroppings.

In carnivorous plants, the leaf is not just used to photosynthesise, but also as a trap. Changing the leaf shape to make it a better trap generally makes it less efficient at photosynthesis. For example, pitcher plants have to be held upright so that only their opercula directly intercept light. The plant also has to expend extra energy on non photosynthetic structures like glands, hairs, glue and digestive enzymes. To produce such structures, the plant respires more of its biomass. Hence, a carnivorous plant will have both decreased photosynthesis and increased respiration, making the potential for growth small and the cost of carnivory high.

The archetypal carnivore, the Venus flytrap, grows in soils with almost immeasurable nitrate and calcium levels. Plants need nitrogen for protein synthesis, calcium for cell wall stiffening, phosphate for nucleic acid synthesis, and iron for chlorophyll synthesis. The soil is often waterlogged, which favours the production of toxic ions such as ammonia which can be used as a source of nitrogen by plants, but its high toxicity means that concentrations high enough to fertilise are also high enough to cause damage.

It has been suggested that all trap type carnivorous plants are modifications of a similar basic structure, the hairy leaf. Hairy leaves can catch and retain drops of rainwater, especially if shield shaped or peltate, thus promoting bacteria growth. Insects land on the leaf, become mired by the surface tension of the water, and suffocate. Bacteria jumpstart decay, releasing from the corpse nutrients that the plant can absorb through its leaves. This foliar feeding can be observed in most non carnivorous plants. Plants that were better at retaining insects or water therefore had a selective advantage. 

Pitcher plants are carnivorous plants whose prey trapping mechanism features a deep cavity filled with liquid known as a pitfall trap. It has been widely assumed that the various sorts of pitfall trap evolved from rolled leaves, with selection pressure favouring more deeply cupped leaves over evolutionary time. 

The traps of the bladderworts may have derived from pitcher plants that specialised in aquatic prey when flooded. In terrestrial pitchers, Escaping prey have to climb or fly out of a trap, and both of these can be prevented by wax, gravity and narrow tubes. However, a flooded trap can be swum out of, so in some plants a one way lid may have developed to form a door. Later, this may have become active by the evolution of a partial vacuum inside, tripped by prey brushing against trigger hairs.

Brainstorming is a group creativity technique designed to generate a large number of ideas for the solution to a problem. The method was first popularized in the late 1930s by Alex Faickney Osborn, an advertising executive and one of the founders of BBDO, in a book called Applied Imagination. Osborn proposed that groups could double their creative output by using the method of brainstorming.

Although brainstorming has become a popular group technique, researchers have generally failed to find evidence of its effectiveness for enhancing either quantity or quality of ideas generated. Because of such problems as distraction, social loafing, evaluation apprehension, and production blocking, brainstorming groups are little more effective than other types of groups, and they are actually less effective than individuals working independently. In the Encyclopedia of Creativity, Tudor Rickards provides the article on brainstorming, summarizing the controversies. He also indicates the dangers of conflating productivity in group work with quantity of ideas.

There have been numerous attempts to improve brainstorming or replace it with more effective variations of the basic technique. Although traditional brainstorming may not increase the productivity of groups, it may still provide benefits, such as enhancing the enjoyment of group work and improving morale. It may also serve as a useful exercise for team building.

There are four basic rules in brainstorming. These are intended to reduce the social inhibitions that occur in groups and therefore stimulate the generation of new ideas. The expected result is a dynamic synergy that will dramatically increase the creativity of the group.

Focus on quantity. This rule is a means of enhancing divergent production, aiming to facilitate problem solving through the maxim, quantity breeds quality. The assumption is that the greater the number of ideas generated, the greater the chance of producing a radical and effective solution.

No criticism. It is often emphasized that in group brainstorming, criticism should be put ‘on hold’. Instead of immediately stating what might be wrong with an idea, the participants focus on extending or adding to it, reserving criticism for a later of the process. By suspending judgment, one creates a supportive atmosphere where participants feel free to generate unusual ideas.

Unusual ideas are welcome. To get a good and long list of ideas, unusual ideas are welcomed. They may open new ways of thinking and provide better solutions than regular ideas. They can be generated by looking from another perspective or setting aside assumptions.

Combine and improve ideas. Good ideas can be combined to form a single very good idea. This approach is assumed to lead to better and more complete ideas than merely generating new ideas alone. It is believed to stimulate the building of ideas by a process of association.

Electronic brainstorming is a computerized version of the brainstorming technique. It can be done via email. The chairman or facilitator sends the question out to group members, and they contribute independently by sending their ideas directly back to the facilitator. The facilitator then compiles a list of ideas and sends it back to the group for further feedback. Electronic brainstorming eliminates many of the problems of standard brainstorming, such as production blocking and evaluation apprehension. An additional advantage of this method is that all ideas can be archived electronically in their original form, and then retrieved later for further thought and discussion. Electronic brainstorming also enables much larger groups to brainstorm on a topic than would normally be productive in a traditional brainstorming session.

Directed brainstorming is a variation on electronic brainstorming. It can be done manually or with computer technology. Directed brainstorming works when the solution space, or the criteria for evaluating a good idea, is known prior to the session. If known, that criteria can be used to intentionally constrain the ideation process. In directed brainstorming, each participant is given an electronic form and told the brainstorming question. They are asked to produce one response and stop. At that point all of the forms are randomly swapped among the participants. Each has possession of someone else’s form containing a single response. The participants are asked to look at the idea in front of them and create a new idea that is better than that idea on the first criterion dimension. For example, if the first criterion was low cost, the participants might be asked to improve upon the idea in front of them by creating an idea that is lower in cost. The forms are then swapped again and respondents are asked to improve upon the ideas against the second criterion. The process is repeated for three or more rounds.

Use of the term brainstorming has been criticized on the grounds that it is politically incorrect and offensive to people with epilepsy. However, there appears to be little truth to this claim. A 2005 survey by the UK charity National Society for Epilepsy found that 93 per cent of people with the condition surveyed do not find the word offensive.