Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learningfrom the world's big
thinkers
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter
The Difference Between a Fixed Mindset and a Growth Mindset
When you tell a child "You’re so smart," you’re unwittingly encouraging a fixed mindset.
One of the most interesting things that’s happened in psychology in recent years has been the realization that the way we typically praise children in this country is not only ineffective, but in many cases it's actually counterproductive. And the basic idea is that there are two mindsets. You can think of your characteristics as fixed or you can think of them as capable of growth. And when you tell a child "You’re so smart," what you’re unwittingly doing there is encouraging a fixed mindset. This is a characteristic of the child, the smartness.
On the other hand, if you say "Wow, you really worked hard, you kept at that math homework until you got it right," you’re encouraging a growth mindset so you’re teaching the kid that being able to stick to something and work through a difficult task will lead to growth and improvement.
Now the problem with the fixed mindset is that when things get difficult, kids who have been performing in order to get praise for being smart suddenly get very insecure. "Oh, I don’t know the answer. I’m not smart." It causes them to back away from difficult tasks and fail to apply themselves.
In Their Own Words is recorded in Big Think's studio.
Image courtesy of Shutterstock
Live today! Unfiltered lessons of a female entrepreneur
Join Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and best-selling author Charles Duhigg as he interviews Victoria Montgomery Brown, co-founder and CEO of Big Think, live at 1pm EDT today.
06 August, 2020
Big Think LIVE
Add event to your calendar
<p>
Women today are founding more businesses than ever. In 2018, they made up 40% of new entrepreneurs, yet in that same year, they received just 2.2% of all venture capital investment. The playing field is off-balance. So what can women do?
</p><p>
<strong>They can get candid with each other. </strong>In this Big Think Live session, <a href="https://youtu.be/vJNpOHQdSsg" target="_blank">Victoria Montgomery Brown</a>, co-founder and CEO of Big Think, and Charles Duhigg, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, will discuss entrepreneurship, decision-making, and leadership lessons from Victoria's new book, <a href="https://www.harpercollinsleadership.com/digital-goddess/#order?utm_source=bigthink&utm_medium=authorsite&utm_content=preorder&utm_campaign=digital-goddess-bigthink" target="_blank"><em>Digital Goddess</em>: <em>The Unfiltered Lessons of a Female Entrepreneur</em></a>. The book is a raw and real roadmap for any woman who has ever thought about striking out on her own, and will empower you to get meetings, raise money, and make hard choices—and never get so serious that you can't still have fun doing what you love.
</p><p>
<em>Ask your questions for Victoria Montgomery Brown during the live Q&A!</em>
</p><p>
<em>Join the live stream at 1pm EDT on Friday, 7 August.</em>
</p><h2>STREAMING LINKS</h2><p>
<strong><a href="https://edge.bigthink.com/live_streams/106" target="_self">Big Think Edge</a> | <a href="https://youtu.be/_jb0pM9FrZk" target="_blank">YouTube</a> | </strong><strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom/posts/10157549491758527" target="_blank">Facebook</a><a href="https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom/posts/10157549491758527" target="_blank"></a></strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom/posts/10157549491758527" target="_blank"></a>
</p><p>
--
</p><p>
<strong>Victoria Montgomery Brown</strong> has built and run <a href="http://www.bigthink.com/" target="_self">Big Think</a> for the last 12 years. It's become the leading digital media knowledge company, making people and companies smarter and faster with the world's best thinkers and doers. It wasn't a venture-funded tech darling, born and raised in a Silicon Valley incubator. It's a scrappy, creative, labor of love that was born in a New York City bar and raised in a rented closet in someone else's office. It's had to fight for its existence most of the time. Her new book is <a href="https://www.harpercollinsleadership.com/digital-goddess/#order?utm_source=bigthink&utm_medium=authorsite&utm_content=preorder&utm_campaign=digital-goddess-bigthink" target="_blank"><em>Digital Goddess</em>: <em>The Unfiltered Lessons of a Female Entrepreneur</em></a> (available for preorder).
</p><p>
Brown graduated from Montreal's McGill University in 1997 and received her MBA from Harvard Business School in 2003.
</p><p>
<strong>Charles Duhigg</strong> is a Pulitzer-prize winning reporter and the author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0812983599?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>Smarter Faster Better</em></a><em>,</em> about the science of productivity and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/081298160X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>The Power of Habit</em></a>, about the science of habit formation in our lives, companies and societies. Duhigg studied history at Yale, received an MBA from Harvard Business School, and was a reporter at <em>The New York Times</em> for a decade. Today, he is a leading writer on the nature of habits and productivity. He writes books and magazine articles for <em>The New York Times Magazine</em>, <em>The New Yorker</em> and <em>The Atlantic</em>.
</p><div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="235cee081340897abf765d4cf877a093" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1400220610?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51m2Nh4qmOL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Digital Goddess: The Unfiltered Lessons of a Female Entrepreneur</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1400220610?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$27.99</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$27.99</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p class="media-headline">
<br>
</p><div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="51c80e7df1c81b3e4a70c13ea9f673f7" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/081298160X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/517FwF49v+L.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/081298160X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$13.64</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$10.45</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$7.11</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
Two MIT students just solved Richard Feynman’s famed physics puzzle
Richard Feynman once asked a silly question. Two MIT students just answered it.
18 August, 2018
Surprising Science
Here's a fun experiment to try. Go to your pantry and see if you have a box of spaghetti. If you do, take out a noodle. Grab both ends of it and bend it until it breaks in half. How many pieces did it break into? If you got two large pieces and at least one small piece you're not alone.
<p>
<br/>
</p>
<div class="video-full-card-placeholder" data-slug="physics-in-the-days-of-einstein-and-feynman" style="border: 1px solid #ccc;">
<br/>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.richardfeynman.com/" target="_blank">Richard Feynman</a>, world-class physicist, bongo player, and <a href="https://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/the-most-beautiful-letter-richard-feynman-ever-wrote" target="_self">writer of letters</a>, once spent an evening trying to break spaghetti into two pieces by bending it at both ends. After hours spent in the kitchen and a great deal of pasta having been wasted, he and his friend Danny Hillis admitted defeat. Even worse, they had no solution for why the spaghetti always broke into at least three pieces.</p>
But science loves a good challenge
<p>The mystery remained unsolved until 2005, when French scientists <a href="http://www.lmm.jussieu.fr/~audoly/" target="_blank">Basile Audoly</a> and <a href="http://www.lmm.jussieu.fr/~neukirch/" target="_blank">Sebastien Neukirch </a>won an <a href="https://www.improbable.com/ig/" target="_blank">Ig Nobel Prize</a>, an award given to scientists for real work which is of a less serious nature than the discoveries that win Nobel prizes, for finally determining why this happens. <a href="http://www.lmm.jussieu.fr/spaghetti/audoly_neukirch_fragmentation.pdf" target="_blank">Their paper describing the effect is wonderfully funny to read</a>, as it takes such a banal issue so seriously. </p><p>They demonstrated that when a rod is bent past a certain point, such as when spaghetti is snapped in half by bending it at the ends, a "snapback effect" is created. This causes energy to reverberate from the initial break to other parts of the rod, often leading to a second break elsewhere.</p><p>While this settled the issue of <em>why </em>spaghetti noodles break into three or more pieces, it didn't establish if they always had to break this way. The question of if the snapback could be regulated remained unsettled.</p>Physicists, being themselves, immediately wanted to try and break pasta into two pieces using this info
<p><a href="https://roheiss.wordpress.com/fun/" target="_blank">Ronald Heisser</a> and <a href="https://math.mit.edu/directory/profile.php?pid=1787" target="_blank">Vishal Patil</a>, two graduate students currently at Cornell and MIT respectively, read about Feynman's night of noodle snapping in class and were inspired to try and find what could be done to make sure the pasta always broke in two.</p><p><a href="http://news.mit.edu/2018/mit-mathematicians-solve-age-old-spaghetti-mystery-0813" target="_blank">By placing the noodles in a special machine</a> built for the task and recording the bending with a high-powered camera, the young scientists were able to observe in extreme detail exactly what each change in their snapping method did to the pasta. After breaking more than 500 noodles, they found the solution.</p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTkzMzQwNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwMDIzMjM4Mn0.GYLgsHzcmoUjl5s1POC7bkrSTj0XoZVeIplBle8px0Y/img.jpg?width=980" id="084aa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c9ccab5f42488079e9a069f1d4308c7e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
The apparatus the MIT researchers built specifically for the task of snapping hundreds of spaghetti sticks.
(Courtesy of the researchers)
<p>The spaghetti will break into two pieces if the snapback is properly dispersed through the noodle by twisting it while it is bent. The twist must be rather severe though, nearly 360°. The two ends of the noodle must then be bought together very slowly.</p><p>The twisting adds another wave of energy to the snapback, one which tends to make the noodle straighten out again. When both waves are going through the noodle at the same time, the most intense pressure on the noddle is reduced and the second fracture is prevented.</p><p>The results hold true for spaghetti noodles of different diameters, though the scientists note that other pasta noodles might act differently. Having solved the problem of how to properly break spaghetti, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/08/16/this-spaghetti-breaking-problem-stumped-physicist-richard-feynman-two-mit-students-have-now-solved-it/?utm_term=.de16c87b3c85" target="_blank">they plan to focus on linguine next.</a></p>
What possible application could this have?
<p>The snapback effect is not limited to uncooked pasta noodles and can be applied to rods of all sorts. The discovery of how to cleanly break them in two could be applied to future engineering projects.</p><p>Likewise, knowing how things fragment and fail is always handy to know when you're trying to build things. Carbon Nanotubes, <a href="https://bigthink.com/ideafeed/carbon-nanotube-space-elevator" target="_self">super strong cylinders often hailed as the building material of the future</a>, are also rods which can be better understood thanks to this odd experiment.</p><p>Sometimes big discoveries can be inspired by silly questions. If it hadn't been for Richard Feynman bending noodles seventy years ago, we wouldn't know what we know now about how energy is dispersed through rods and how to control their fracturing. While not all silly questions will lead to such a significant discovery, they can all help us learn.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
How meditation can change your life and mind
Reaching beyond the stereotypes of meditation and embracing the science of mindfulness.
07 August, 2020
Videos
- There are a lot of misconceptions when it comes to what mindfulness is and what meditation can do for those who practice it. In this video, professors, neuroscientists, psychologists, composers, authors, and a former Buddhist monk share their experiences, explain the science behind meditation, and discuss the benefits of learning to be in the moment.
- "Mindfulness allows us to shift our relationship to our experience," explains psychologist Daniel Goleman. The science shows that long-term meditators have higher levels of gamma waves in their brains even when they are not meditating. The effect of this altered response is yet unknown, though it shows that there are lasting cognitive effects.
- "I think we're looking at meditation as the next big public health revolution," says ABC News anchor Dan Harris. "Meditation is going to join the pantheon of no-brainers like exercise, brushing your teeth and taking the meds that your doctor prescribes to you." Closing out the video is a guided meditation experience led by author Damien Echols that can be practiced anywhere and repeated as many times as you'd like.
<p class="media-headline"><br></p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="e12d258db1ace9a75a4058ccaec36f0a" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0399184392?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51PlKGUQgqL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your Mind, Brain, and Body</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0399184392?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$13.19</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$9.21</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$8.98</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<ul class="ee-ul"></ul>
Keep reading
Show less
Improving Olympic performance with asthma drugs?
A study looks at the performance benefits delivered by asthma drugs when they're taken by athletes who don't have asthma.
06 August, 2020
Image source: sumroeng chinnapan/Shutterstock
Culture & Religion
- One on hand, the most common health condition among Olympic athletes is asthma. On the other, asthmatic athletes regularly outperform their non-asthmatic counterparts.
- A new study assesses the performance-enhancement effects of asthma medication for non-asthmatics.
- The analysis looks at the effects of both allowed and banned asthma medications.
<p>The most common chronic disease among athletes competing in the Olympic Games is asthma. It's not a coincidence — asthma is a risk associated with activities that require increased ventilation, such as high-performance athletics. One treatment for the condition is the inhalation of <a href="https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=24664" target="_blank">β-agonists</a> prior to exercise as a means of warding off asthma symptoms. The drugs relax the airways that provide oxygen to the lungs.</p><p>But β-agonists pose a problem for World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) officials — drugs have been tied to performance enhancement. In fact, asthmatic athletes, who have a sound medical reason to use β-agonists, have consistently outperformed non-asthmatic athletes at the Games. There has been unconfirmed speculation that athletes who don't have asthma may also be taking β-agonists in hopes of gaining their own performance boost.</p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/08/04/bjsports-2019-100708" target="_blank">British Journal of Sports Medicine</a> seeks to be the most comprehensive look yet at the effect of β-agonists on athletic performance, looking at a broad selection of β-agonist drugs, including medications both allowed and banned by the WADA.</p>
WADA uncertainty
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUzNzU0OS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMDc4NjUwN30.fFTvRR0yJDLtFhaYiixh5Fa7NK1t1T4CzUM0Yh6KYiA/img.jpg?width=980" id="01b1b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2fd91a47d91e4d5083449b258a2fd63f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="urine sample for drug test" />Image source: joel bubble ben/Shutterstock
<p>When inhaled β-agonists first came out just before the 1972 Olympics, they were immediately banned altogether by the WADA as possible doping substances. Over the years, the WADA has reexamined their use and refined the organization's stance, evidence of the thorniness of finding an equitable position regarding their use. As of January 2020, only three β-agonists are allowed — salbutamol, formoterol, and salmeterol —and only in inhaled form. Oral consumption appears to have a greater effect on performance.</p>The study
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUzNzU0Ny9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MTIzMDQyMX0.Gk4v-7PCA7NohvJjw12L15p7SumPCY0tLdsSlMrLlGs/img.jpg?width=980" id="d3141" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ebe7b30a315aeffcb4fe739095cf0767" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="runner at starting position on track" />Image source: MinDof/Shutterstock
<p>Of primary interest to the authors of the study is confirming and measuring the performance improvement to be gained from β-agonists when they're ingested by athletes who don't have asthma.</p><p>The researchers performed a meta-analysis of 34 existing studies documenting 44 randomized trials reporting on 472 participants. The pool of individuals included was broad, encompassing both untrained and elite athletes. In addition, lab tests, as opposed to actual competitions, tracked performance. The authors of the study therefore recommend taking its conclusions with just a grain of salt.</p><p>The effects of both WADA-banned and approved β-agonists were assessed.</p>Approved β-agonists and non-asthmatic athletes
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUzNzU1MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMzkxODk0M30.3RssFwk_tWkHRkEl_tIee02rdq2tLuAePifnngqcIr8/img.jpg?width=980" id="39a99" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b1fe4a580c6d4f8a0fd021d7d6570e2a" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="vaulter clearing pole" />Image source: Andrey Yurlov/Shutterstock
<p>What the meta-analysis showed is that the currently approved β-agonists didn't significantly improve athletic performance among those without asthma — what very slight benefit they <em>may</em> produce is just enough to prompt the study's authors to write that "it is still uncertain whether approved doses improve anaerobic performance." They note that the tiny effect did increase slightly over multiple weeks of β-agonist intake.</p>Banned β-agonist and non-asthmatic athletes
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUzNzU1Mi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNjI3ODU5Mn0.vyoxSE5EYjPGc2ZEbBN8d5F79nSEIiC6TUzTt0ycVqc/img.jpg?width=980" id="de095" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="02fdd42dfda8e3665a7b547bb88007ef" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="swimmer mid stroke" />Image source: Nejron Photo/Shutterstock
<p>The study found that for athletes without asthma, however, the use of currently banned β-agonists did indeed result in enhanced performance. The authors write, "Our meta-analysis shows that β2-agonists improve anaerobic performance by 5%, an improvement that would change the outcome of most athletic competitions."</p><p>That 5 percent is an average: 70-meter sprint performance was improved by 3 percent, while strength performance, MVC (maximal voluntary contraction), was improved by 6 percent.</p><p>The analysis also revealed that different results were produced by different methods of ingestion. The percentages cited above were seen when a β-agonist was ingested orally. The effect was less pronounced when the banned substances were inhaled.</p><p>Given the difference between the results for allowed and banned β-agonists, the study's conclusions suggest that the WADA has it about right, at least in terms of selection of allowable β-agonists, as well as the allowable dosage method.</p>Takeaway
<p>The study, say its authors, "should be of interest to WADA and anyone who is interested in equal opportunities in competitive sports." Its results clearly support vigilance, with the report concluding: "The use of β2-agonists in athletes should be regulated and limited to those with an asthma diagnosis documented with objective tests."</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Surprising Science
Weird science shows unseemly way beetles escape after being eaten
Certain water beetles can escape from frogs after being consumed.
Scroll down to load more…
