%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |    Not for the faint of art. |
|
Complex Numbers A complex number is expressed in the standard form a + bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is defined by i^2 = -1 (that is, i is the square root of -1). For example, 3 + 2i is a complex number. The bi term is often referred to as an imaginary number (though this may be misleading, as it is no more "imaginary" than the symbolic abstractions we know as the "real" numbers). Thus, every complex number has a real part, a, and an imaginary part, bi. Complex numbers are often represented on a graph known as the "complex plane," where the horizontal axis represents the infinity of real numbers, and the vertical axis represents the infinity of imaginary numbers. Thus, each complex number has a unique representation on the complex plane: some closer to real; others, more imaginary. If a = b, the number is equal parts real and imaginary. Very simple transformations applied to numbers in the complex plane can lead to fractal structures of enormous intricacy and astonishing beauty. ![Merit Badge in Quill Award
[Click For More Info]
Congratulations on winning Best Blog in the 2021 edition of [Link To Item #quills] !](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/group-Quill_Award-1375927_6.gif) ![Merit Badge in Quill Award 2
[Click For More Info]
2022 Quill Award - Best Blog - [Link To Item #1196512] . Congratulations!!!](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/group-Quill_Award_2-1375927_6.gif) ![Merit Badge in 30DBC Winner
[Click For More Info]
Congratulations on winning the Jan. 2019 [Link To Item #30dbc] !!](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/group-30DBC_Winner-2064535_14.gif) ![Merit Badge in Blogging
[Click For More Info]
Congratulations on winning an honorable mention for Best Blog at the 2018 Quill Awards for [Link To Item #1196512] . *^*Smile*^* This award was sponsored by the blogging consortium including [Link To Item #30dbc] , [Link To Item #blogcity] , [Link To Item #bcof] and [Link To Item #1953629] . For more details, see [Link To Item #quills] .](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/type-Blogging-2180.gif) ![Merit Badge in Highly Recommended
[Click For More Info]
I highly recommend your blog.](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/Kudos-Highly_Recommended.gif) ![Merit Badge in Opinion
[Click For More Info]
For diving into the prompts for Journalistic Intentions- thanks for joining the fun!](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/genre-Opinion-1150.gif) ![Merit Badge in High Five
[Click For More Info]
For your inventive entries in [Link To Item #2213121] ! Thanks for the great read!](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/Kudos-High_Five.gif) ![Merit Badge in Enlightening
[Click For More Info]
For winning 3rd Place in [Link To Item #2213121] . Congratulations!](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/general-Enlightening.gif) ![Merit Badge in Quarks Bar
[Click For More Info]
For your awesome Klingon Bloodwine recipe from [Link to Book Entry #1016079] that deserves to be on the topmost shelf at Quark's.](https://images.Writing.Com/imgs/writing.com/writers/badges/group-Quarks_Bar-2046190_12.gif)       |
| Sundays are for reflection in here, and this year, New Year's Eve, which seems to be a popular day for reflection, happens to fall on a Sunday. The random numbers pointed me to an entry almost precisely two and a half years ago, during a somewhat memorable trip: "Elsewhere in Minnesota"  As it was a travel update, no external links to deal with. I've decided to stay in the Minneapolis area until July 5. That decision (or rather, the illusion of decision) would end up altering the course of my life. Though, to be fair, any other decision, if one were possible, could have ended up way worse. In the entry, I proceeded to briefly describe a brewery visit. And this place brewed the most delicious mead I've ever enjoyed. This is still the case, though I don't know if their quality has changed by now, or if they're even still doing mead. I don't think I meant to be cagey about the name of the brewery; it's this one. I'd call it a happy mead-ium, but I'd never stoop so low. I can't recall a single other brewery that I've been to brewing mead... And I still can't, though I know they exist. This statement may have been misleading, because what I meant to convey that it's rare for a beer brewery to also make mead. Obviously, places dedicated to mead but not beer exist, and obviously, I've visited them. Four days after this entry, my car would get totaled and that would be it for traveling for well over a year, except for some excursions in others' vehicles. So I haven't been back to Minneapolis since. |
| One reason for learning a different language is to learn wonderful new curse words. Or, as this bit from Cracked points out, just words we don't have in English. ...except it's the end of December, so all I'm feeling right now is cold, and there are perfectly good English words for that. Are you going through something right now that you’re having trouble putting into words? Feeling a little je ne sais quoi, a little pomme de terre? Okay, that made me chuckle. If you’re unable to articulate what you’re experiencing, that doesn’t make your emotions invalid. It does make you want to reevaluate your writing career. As words are kinda important to writing, here they are now: 6. Saudade: Empty Sadness for What Is Lost I never encountered this word (from Portuguese) until just over a year ago. How do I know this? Because I blogged about it: "No Geese Involved" Unlike nostalgia, saudade speaks to a longing for something you’re sure to never experience again, which is a component of your sadness you need to acknowledge. That's not exactly what that previous article stated, once again demonstrating that one should never get one's wisdom from one source. 5. Ilunga: Eventually Unforgiving In 2004, linguists convened to vote on which word, in any language, is the hardest to translate. This was before "covfefe." The hardest word comes from the Tshiluba language from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The word is ilunga. An ilunga is a person who “is ready to forgive any abuse for the first time, to tolerate it a second time, but never a third time.” That's... really quite specific. 4. Perendination: One Step Beyond Procrastination Oooh, I knew there'd be something in here that could describe me. In Latin, we have a word for putting something off for the day after tomorrow. When you do that, you perendinate, which is one step beyond procrastination. Procrastination is for amateurs. I must insist that this word be added to English immediately. Well, tomorrow. Well... one of these days. 3. Kummerspeck: Emotional Overeating When you’re sad — not just from saudade, but for various other reasons, perhaps resulting from your perendination or being an ilunga — the clichéd move is to grab a pint of ice cream and eat it, right out of the container. Can't. I don't buy ice cream anymore, precisely because it's not a pint anymore. There's a word for that process, too, but I hate it. In German, they have a word for this type of binge: kummerspeck. The -speck refers to pork fat, so the cleanest translation into English is “grief bacon.” Praise the lard! 2. Mudita: Pleasure in Others’ Joy If you take pleasure in someone else’s suffering, we have an English word for that: schadenfreude. Well, it’s not an English word exactly. It is now. If English speakers use a word enough, it becomes English. How much is enough? Depends on who you ask. But saying schadenfreude isn't English is like saying kindergarten isn't English. In Vietnamese, they call it hỷ. In Chinese, they call it xǐ. In Japanese, they call it ki. Several other languages call it mudita, which was originally a Sanskrit word and is a whole concept in Buddhism. Ironically, Buddhism (at least from this outsider's perspective) is more focused on suffering. 1. Swaffelen: Penis Smacking And this one, you're just going to have to go to the link to see for yourselves. Bonus: it's Dutch. Sort of. |
| Ever read something just to remind yourself how good you've got it? For me, that's pretty much everything from Outside, especially this article: The Joys of Cabin Living in Alaska Want to know what domestic bliss looks like? A rundown cabin with no electricity on the edge of rain-soaked Alaskan wilderness. Huh... I didn't know that "domestic bliss" was a synonym for "literal Hell," but in retrospect, it makes sense. Article is from 2013... not enough time for climate change to significantly affect the subject matter or my feelings about it. Yet. My two brothers and I, along with a buddy of ours... own a shack at a place called Saltery Cove on Southeast Alaska’s Prince of Wales Island. Morbidly curious, I looked it up. It's almost as south as you can get and still be in Alaska. The northern boundary of British Columbia is quite a ways north. The place is still way too north. The shack is about 36 feet long and 12 feet wide, with the warped shape and discoloration of a cardboard shoe box that’s been soaked in the rain. Luxury! The appeal of our shack isn’t so much the structure itself, but rather the bare-bones nature of its locality. Surrounded largely by the Tongass National Forest, it’s a place where black bears gnaw mussels from the rocks in what might be described as our yard and killer whales pass by so close that you can hear them even with the door closed. Okay, fine, that would be kinda cool to experience. For, like, a day or two. But in truth that’s only half the answer. The other half is more difficult to explain and also a bit masochistic: Saltery Cove is a place where everything—the weather, the ocean, the mountains, the people, the trees, the animals, even the buildings—seems capable of kicking your ass in a very physical way. And in today’s increasingly tame and virtual world, where our primary sensations tend to be delivered by our Wi-Fi connections, a good old-fashioned ass kicking is something worth paying for. Bullshit. I mean, okay, you feel that way, fine. We gotta have differences of opinion, or else one spot would get too crowded. But to me, this is like saying, "I built myself a beautiful mansion, but I prefer the feeling of living in a drainage ditch." I prefer the simple life. By which I mean, if I'm cold, I press a couple of buttons, and then I'm not cold. If I'm too hot, I press the same buttons in a different order. Hungry? Buttons. Thirsty? Okay, no button for that, but there's a lever. Dirty? Knobs for that. Entertainment? Back to the buttons. Couldn't possibly be simpler, at least not until we further refine AI. No, I don't yearn for the complicated lives of my ancestors; they worked their asses off so I could sit on mine all day, and I'm ever so grateful and appreciative of them for that. Another way in which the cabin kicks my ass is through my wife, Katie. She often regards my purchase of the shack with that eye-rolling sense of dismissal that people will use when confronted with the subject of their spouse’s past girlfriends or boyfriends. And yet she puts up with you. I've never really understood people, and articles like this only add to my confusion. I went there with my brother Danny to fish salmon and halibut with one of Saltery Cove’s eight full-time residents, Ron Leighton, a man of mixed Native Alaskan and Irish descent who’ll tear your head off for tangling an anchor line and then send your kid a birthday present even though the nearest mailbox is an hour’s boat ride from his house. Ron’s résumé includes a tour of duty as a door gunner in Vietnam, a career as a detective with the police force in Ketchikan, Alaska, and a parallel career as a halibut long-liner. Gotta admit, though, that's the kind of person whose life seems tailor-made for writers. The article goes on to describe why it's such a wonderful idea to buy a cabin on the coast of nowhere, sight-unseen: in summary, the place was utterly trashed and they spent months cleaning up. Oh, well. It works for them. More space in semi-civilized areas for me, then. |
| Another reason to use good grammar and spelling: you'd be contributing to public health. Unless, of course, you're an evil villain whose sole purpose is to create as much chaos, illness, and discord as you can without getting caught. Summary: A novel study uncovers our physiological response to misused grammar. Researchers identified a direct link between grammatical errors and a change in Heart Rate Variability (HRV). This appears to be legitimate science, by the way. I don't know if it's been replicated or even peer-reviewed. It gives the answer I want, though, so I'm highlighting it. When confronted with bad grammar, subjects’ HRVs indicated increased stress levels. Hm. Someone should do a similar study for puns. A new study by professors at the University of Birmingham has revealed for the first time how our bodies go into stress-mode when hearing misused grammar. So, see? It's not just me or your English teacher. HRV captures the time between successive heart beats. The length of the intervals between a person’s successive heart beats tends to be variable when they are relaxed but becomes more regular when they are stressed. Now, that seems counterintuitive, but that's why we do science. I don't really need to comment further; the article is there at the link. If I weren't lazy, I'd turn this into a villain's superpower and write stories about it. But I am lazy. |
| Think you're not special? For that matter, how do you know there's a universe and that you're not making the whole thing up? It is a central dilemma of human life—more urgent, arguably, than the inevitability of suffering and death. Which wine goes best with salmon mousse? I have been brooding and ranting to my students about it for years. You sound fun at parties. It surely troubles us more than ever during this plague-ridden era. Article is from September of 2020, but, let's be fair, there's always a plague. Philosophers call it the problem of other minds. I prefer to call it the solipsism problem. I call it Rikki. Solipsism, technically, is an extreme form of skepticism, at once utterly illogical and irrefutable. It holds that you are the only conscious being in existence. Irrefutable, sure, meaning unfalsifiable (unless we learn something new from this article). Illogical? Nonsense. It's more logical than "we live in a simulation" or "God created the universe in six days, then goofed off." You experience your own mind every waking second, but you can only infer the existence of other minds through indirect means. Other people seem to possess conscious perceptions, emotions, memories, intentions, just as you do, but you cannot be sure they do. In numerous cases, I am, in fact, pretty sure they don't. Natural selection instilled in us the capacity for a so-called theory of mind—a talent for intuiting others’ emotions and intentions. But we have a countertendency to deceive one another and to fear we are being deceived. The ultimate deception would be pretending you are conscious when you are not. Now, hang on. If others don't exist, they can't be deceiving you. Sure, you can deceive yourself, but that's trivial. And if others do exist, in order to pretend that they're conscious, they have to make the conscious effort to deceive, which means they're conscious, which doesn't necessarily mean they exist... This is why I went into engineering, not philosophy. Well, that, and the money. The solipsism problem thwarts efforts to explain consciousness. Scientists and philosophers have proposed countless contradictory hypotheses about what consciousness is and how it arises. Yes. That's what you do. You propose a hypothesis, then look for evidence against it. Lots of them will turn out to be wrong. Many will turn out to be hard, or impossible, to verify. Panpsychists contend that all creatures and even inanimate matter—even a single proton!—possess consciousness. Hard to argue against, but needlessly multiplies entities, so it's probably wrong. Hard-core materialists insist, conversely (and perversely), that not even humans are all that conscious. What's perverse about that? It's demonstrably true. But the solipsism problem is far more than a technical philosophical matter. It is a paranoid but understandable response to the feelings of solitude that lurk within us all. Even if you reject solipsism as an intellectual position, you sense it, emotionally, whenever you feel estranged from others, whenever you confront the awful truth that you can never know—really know—another person, and no one can really know you. Or you could, I dunno, get over it? Religion is one response to the solipsism problem. Our ancestors dreamed up a supernatural entity who bears witness to our innermost fears and desires. No matter how lonesome we feel, how alienated from our fellow humans, God is always there watching over us. He sees our souls, our most secret selves, and He loves us anyway. Wouldn’t it be nice to think so? No. The arts, too, can be seen as attempts to overcome the solipsism problem. The artist, musician, poet, novelist says, “This is how my life feels” or “This is how life might feel for another person.” They help us imagine what it is like to be a Black woman trying to save her children from slavery or a Jewish ad salesman wandering through Dublin, wondering whether his wife is cheating on him. But to imagine is not to know. Um, any attempt at communication, however clumsy or brilliant, can be seen that way. Art is, in part, a form of communication. Love, ideally, gives us the illusion of transcending the solipsism problem. You feel you really know someone, from the inside out, and they know you. Except that love, in all its forms, is an electrochemical process in the brain. The brain which, perhaps, being all alone in the not-universe, desperately seeks out some evidence that it's not. For the mentally ill, solipsism can become terrifyingly vivid. Victims of Capgras syndrome think that identical imposters have replaced their loved ones. If you have Cotard’s delusion, also known as walking corpse syndrome, you become convinced that you are dead. A much more common disorder is derealization, which makes everything—you, others, reality as a whole—feel strange, phony, simulated. Like I said, "this is a simulation" is a mental disorder. What if those afflicted with these alleged delusions actually see reality clearly? And what if the bearded guy on the street corner is right? Conceivably, technology could deliver us from the solipsism problem. Koch proposes that we all get brain implants with Wi-Fi so we can meld minds through a kind of high-tech telepathy. If you really think about it, though, as a solipsist, that would prove exactly nothing. Philosopher Colin McGinn suggests a technique that involves “brain splicing,” transferring bits of your brain into mine, and vice versa. This. This is why philosophers should never be allowed to do science. But do we really want to escape the prison of our subjective selves? The archnemesis of Star Trek: The Next Generation is the Borg... Here's the thing, though: Once you're a Borg, once you're assimilated, you're perfectly content. Some might even say ecstatic. Those are brain states, and, like love, are electrochemical processes which can be externally manipulated. It's only from the outside that it looks like something to fight against. Hell, that's what makes them so damn effective as scary bad guys: you know you don't want it, but presumably almost every Borg didn't want it, either, but they've achieved peace in their collective unity. You know what that sounds like to me? Death. And indeed, it parallels religious concepts of death. Perhaps that's why the Borg were so effective as villains. In any case, these things can be fun to think about, but, as the author notes, solipsism ends up leading to dark places. And since there are alternatives, why not at least assume not-solipsism? This is you, urging you to do exactly that. |
| Another Cracked article, once again illustrating the randomness of my random number generator; I have far more links from other sources. I am resisting the obvious joke. Resisting with all my might. Resisting hard, you might say. Can this article also resist? You turn around and see something behind you. Later, you turn around again, and it’s bigger now. This means either it’s following you, or it has physically grown in size. Or both. Why not both? 5. Spiders You'll want to click on the link for the illustration of what a spider might look like. Bigger spiders help cities, since bigger spiders can gobble more bugs. They also serve as more food for birds. Of course, any change in the food web can spark unpredictable consequences, and spiders eating too many bugs or feeding too many birds could be disastrous, but a thorough analysis of the side effects leads the scientists to conclude that, yes, giant spiders are good news, everyone. Spider-like typing detected. 4. Eyes Including spider eyes? One part of your body grows for your entire life. We’re not talking about fat — many parts of your body grow when you eat more, but one part grows regardless. Almost did the obvious. Almost. We have one single confirmed example of an organ that grows, forever. It’s the lens of your eye. Each lens grows by 1.38 milligrams a year, and while that sounds like nothing, we have to take into account just how small lenses are to begin with. Between early adulthood and when you die, you can expect each lens to double in size. Unless, of course, you get off the growth treadmill by having cataract surgery. Which reminds me, it's been two years now. 3. Finland As sea levels rise, countries all over the world have to reckon with losing some land. This loss will range from an inconvenience to apocalyptic. Nah, they'll just redefine the border as being 100 yards out from shore. Finland is an exception. Finland gains 7 square kilometers (3 square miles) a year. No, it’s not because they’re so militant about combatting climate change that they’ve somehow convinced the sea to recede. They’re instead experiencing a phenomenon called post-glacial rebound. The opposite of shrinkage? 2. Breasts ... ... ... I'm sorry, did you say something? 1. Zoo Animals Maybe the animals are under the influence of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, or maybe they’ve been infected with some obesity-causing virus. Maybe that’s also why we’re getting fatter, rather than the traditional explanation of overeating. But that explanation offends puritans, who are certain that everything from obesity to climate change is our fault because we've sinned. And there it is... the whole article and my commentary, without the obvious joke. I feel shafted. |
| Here's the thing: the Doctor Who special is supposed to magically appear on Disney+ at 12:55 pm EST today. Working backwards, then, I'll have to start drinking before that time in order to be pleasantly buzzed when it starts. Sure, it's on streaming, and I can watch it anytime, but it's Doctor Who, so that's not going to happen. Now, then. In order to start drinking before noon, it's necessary for me to get all my daily activities done early. This includes blogging. Not trusting myself to wake up early (i.e., before 10 am), I figured I'd better get this done now. Apropos of nothing, then, because that's what happens when you pick at random from a list, we have this highly informative article from, of course, Cracked. I'd call any health fad an error, research or otherwise. But okay, let's see which ones they're talking about. We’re probably about six months from the billionaires finding out about Elizabeth Bathory and bathing in the blood of slain maidens, but the rest of us have to rely on science for our health needs. I was hoping we'd be about six months from billionaires finding out about the French Revolution, but I've been hoping that for way longer than six months. It's kind of like fusion power, which is 20 years away and has been since at least the 1970s. Unfortunately, the science is not as, well, scientific as we’d like it to be. Food science? Rife with errors? Quick, fetch my fainting couch. 4. The ‘French Paradox’ Is Mostly Explained by Death Certification and Time If you’re thinking what we were thinking, we regret to inform you that the so-called “French paradox” is not a thought experiment involving an evil twin who wears a pencil mustache and striped shirt. You forgot the beret. It refers to the idea that French people are all walking around eating bread and cheese, smoking cigarettes and generally being French without the ill health effects that doing any of those things has in other Western countries. This has historically been attributed to their high consumption of red wine, which has been theorized to have mysterious cholesterol-removing properties, which should have been sus from the start because if wine was magical vitality juice, every fiftysomething mom would be Bruce Willis in Unbreakable. I knew someone who bought into the "red wine" thing, hook, line, and sinker, to mix metaphors beyond recognition. He chugged a gallon of the stuff a day and, as you might imagine, it wasn't the good stuff. No idea if he was buried or cremated. It turns out, however, that there’s plenty of deaths from cardiac and other cheese-caused events in France — they’re just not reported. So, I guess no one cœur. ... sigh. One of my other daily routines is learning French. I should stop making puns in that language until I learn more. Seriously, though, as someone who lives an alcohol-positive lifestyle: drink if you like it, not because you think it's some sort of medicine. 3. The ‘Small Plates’ Guy Was Fired for Fraud If you’ve ever furtively glanced at the weight-loss tips on the back of a container of low-fat ice cream as you slowly eat the whole thing, you’ve heard of the “smaller plates” theory. It comes from a study that claimed people eat more when using larger dishware, therefore using smaller plates will trick your brain into being satisfied with less food because we’re all apparently some kind of caveman baby person. I quit eating ice cream (except very rarely in a restaurant) long ago. This wasn't for health reasons, or because I don't like it, but on general principles; they started sneakily reducing the quantity in a container to trick people into thinking the price hadn't gone up. Not to mention using the absolute bare minimum of actual "cream" to be legally called "ice cream." You think (I hate portmanteaux in general and this one in particular, but) shrinkflation is a new thing? Ha. Eighteen of his papers were retracted, one of them twice, including the one that claimed people ate more pasta from larger bowls. Subsequent research has confirmed that our tummies can indeed tell the difference between 17 and 70 french fries, no matter how big the carton. Still, I'd guess that eating off of smaller plates is better than the fancy restaurants who put tiny portions on enormous platters. What's up with that shit, anyway? 2. We Think Spinach Is a Good Source of Iron Due to a Scientific Misinterpretation No, we’re not about to tell you that a misplaced decimal was responsible for the myth that spinach contains tons of iron. (Although we totally have in the past — sorry!) As I've urged repeatedly, don't get your science from Cracked. Or do, but just don't expect it to all be true. It turns out there was some confusion in the research of the 19th-century German chemist typically blamed, Erich von Wolff, but it had nothing to do with a decimal point. His data concerned dried spinach, but that wasn’t clear to future nutritionists. Gotta say, this is news to me. Not that I expect it to be true or anything. Since we haven’t yet discovered the kind of monster who eats dried spinach, they assumed he measured fresh spinach, whose iron content is pretty well diluted by all that water and flavor and stuff. What "flavor?" Incidentally, a competing hypothesis that I've heard is that iron levels in agricultural soil have decreased over time. Iron doesn't just magically appear in spinach (or any plant); it's taken up from the soil like every other element in a plant. Less iron in the soil = less iron in the leaf. I have no idea if this holds any water, either. (Pun intended, because spinach is still mostly water, which can be observed when you dump six cups of the stuff into a frying pan and it gets cooked down to about a thimbleful.) 1. ‘Blue Zones’ Are Probably Just Areas With Lots of Pension Fraud For those who aren’t familiar, “blue zones” are both a great nickname for your testicles and pockets of communities around the world that boast an unusually high number of people who live to be 100 or even beyond 110. Ah, the inevitable dick joke. If you really want to live to be 100, though, the true secret is to be born somewhere that doesn’t keep good records of such things and/or study up on identity theft. Presto, you’re 100! I also assume this sort of thing whenever an article pops up about a 35-year-old dog or cat. Whenever officials start digging deeper into blue zones, a whopping percentage of its oldsters suddenly disappears. And we do mean whopping: Japan lost 82 percent of its centenarians overnight. Okinawa isn’t even the healthiest city in Japan. If you want to adopt some part of the Japanese lifestyle, try their beer. You won’t live longer, but you’ll die happier. Which is what I've been saying. |
| Today, we're going back not very far at all, to an entry I did in May of last year: "One Great Thing" The prompt, from "Invalid Item" , was a simple one-liner: "The biggest plus for living in your town/area"I'm more used to pointing out downsides than upsides, but honestly, there aren't too many downsides here. Minor inconveniences at worst, like the lack of a Denny's, but having been all over, I know there are downsides everywhere. Denny's also isn't that great, objectively. At least we also don't have an Olive Garden. So, advantages, in this case, are easy; all I had to do was point out all the alcohol manufacturers. Still, I couldn't resist the joke in the first line: "It's not Cleveland." I don't know why I like to rag on Cleveland. I've never even been there. Maybe it's because the name is inherently funny. From all accounts, it's a pleasant enough city. Fortunately, I'm not well-known enough so that, once I do manage to visit Cleveland (which I hope to do, because it has breweries), I won't have to spend my time apologizing to the citizens there. None of the stuff I said in the entry needs updating, really. While a few breweries have disappeared, and others have popped up, the other producers that I mentioned still, as far as I know, exist. In any event, yes, I still consider this proliferation of vendors to be a big plus of living here. There are other good things here, but I won't dwell on them, lest people get the idea it's okay to move in. |
| Come on, now, the answer to this headline question should be glaringly, brightly obvious. It's right here, of course. The guy typing these words. That is to say, Me. ...oh, fine. Let's see what the article says. The farther away we look, the farther back in time we’re viewing the Universe, and the greater the amount the light from those distant objects is shifted toward longer wavelengths. A lot of people, upon hearing this, get a particular picture in their heads: the greater the amount the light is shifted, the faster these objects are moving away from us. Therefore, if you look in all directions and reconstruct, “At what point, in space, would we see all directions receding equally?” you could locate the center of the Universe. Okay, but a hypothetical observer in a distant galaxy would see the same phenomena, do its own calculations, and find a different location for the "center." Most of us understand, intuitively, that when objects move toward you, the waves they emit appear compressed, with their crests and troughs closer together. Similarly, when they move away from you, the waves appear the opposite of compressed — rarified — with their crests and troughs farther apart than if they were stationary. Although we typically experience this with sounds, as you can tell whether a fire truck, a police car, or the ice cream cart is moving toward you or away from you dependent on its pitch, it’s true for any wave, including light. We refer to this motion-based shift of the waves as the Doppler effect, named after its discoverer. Back in college, I had a T-shirt with "The Doppler Effect" in a blue font on the front, and a red font on the back. That was NOT the nerdiest T-shirt I owned. The observations are very clear: the farther an object is from us, on average, the greater the observed redshift is. But is that because the object is actually moving through space, relative to us, when it emits the light versus when we absorb and measure the light? Or is it because there’s an overall expansion happening on cosmic scales, causing the light to continue to shift during its long journey across the space that separates us from what we’re trying to observe? Just to further blow your mind, from the point of view of the photon, it's not a "long journey" at all. It takes 0 time from its own perspective. If this is what’s going on, however, then the expanding Universe isn’t like an explosion at all, which had a point-of-origin that everything — like shrapnel — flies outward at varying speeds. Instead, the expanding Universe is more like a leavening loaf of dough with raisins throughout it. If you’re a gravitationally bound object, like a galaxy, you’re one of the raisins, while space itself is the dough. As the dough leavens, the individual raisins appear to be moving apart relative to one another, but the raisins themselves aren’t moving “through” the dough. Each raisin sees itself as relatively stationary, but each other raisin that it sees will appear to move away from it, with the more distant raisins appearing to move away more quickly. Even the raisin-bread (thanks; now I'm really hungry) analogy isn't that great, unless you can somehow imagine that the loaf wraps around and joins itself on all six sides. Or something. I don't know. Perhaps a better analogy for visualization would be a polka-dotted balloon. As you blow it up, the polka dots start spreading further apart (but they also get bigger, ruining the analogy). In this analogy, though, the (3D) universe corresponds just to the (2D) surface of the balloon, and there is no center on that surface. Fact is, it's outside anything in our experience, but it's still easier to analogize than quantum physics is. Anyway. Fascinating read, if you're into this sort of thing and, as a bonus for some people, no math or equations at all. Now, I'm not actually a physicist, so I can't verify that everything in the article is accurate, but it definitely tracks with my prior knowledge. I still say they're wrong about Me not being the center of the universe, though. |
| Well, it's the start of a new year (by my preferred reckoning); the accursed daystar is happily glaring at me once again, and most of my cold symptoms have lessened. So let's get back to some semi-random articles. This one's from The Conversation, dated last St. Patrick's Day: By now, you should know that I give the side-eye to anything to do with "happiness." But let's take a look at what the author has to say. Be warned: British spelling. Work, it’s something most of us do though it isn’t always enjoyable. Not a great start, Professor. Not merely blindingly obvious, but with questionable punctuation choices. I'll let that go, though, because editing is clearly dead. Whether it’s long hours, gruelling tasks or just the repetitive nature of a day-to-day routine, work can sometimes be something we have to do rather than something we want to do. Well, there's at least part of the problem right there. As soon as you take the attitude that you have to do something, it becomes a chore, and most of us don't find happiness (or fulfillment or contentment or whatever you're going for) from chores. Say you're invited to a wild party, for instance. There will be lots of your favorite substances there, loads of people of your preferred psychosexual orientation, delicious food, loose morals, great music, etc. Would you be as happy attending if you felt obligated, that you had to go to it? I probably wouldn't. No, better to say "I really want to go to this party" rather than "I have to go to this party." That is, of course, an extreme. Most work-related things are the polar opposite of that in terms of fun. "I have to finish these TPS reports by 3:00," for instance. Still, turning that around to "I want to finish these TPS reports by 3:00" tricks yourself into greater agency, which, if not exactly increasing happiness, at least decreases misery. I rarely wanted to work. What I wanted was to get paid. To do that required work. So I'd be like "I want to do these calculations because I'll keep getting paid." Anyway. That's me. Back to the article. I was the lead scientist in a government project that looked at how our wellbeing and emotional resilience can change over a lifetime. It probably doesn't matter much, but "government" here refers to the UK government. As part of this project, the team, with help from think-tank the New Economics Foundation, identified several things that can reduce stress and enhance wellbeing and happiness – all of which can be applied to the workplace. Also a UK think-tank. Unlike most think-tanks in the US, this one seems to be a lefty pinko liberal one. Which means I'm more inclined to believe its findings... as long as they don't start in with the whole "mindfulness" crap, or whatever. 1. Be active Exercise and other physical activities won’t make your problems or stress disappear, but they will reduce their emotional intensity and give you mental space to sort out problems – as well as keep you physically fit. To my vast shock and surprise, and no doubt everyone else's too (I allow myself one day a year for optimism, and that day was yesterday), I find myself agreeing with this bit. Not that I'm a model at following it, being a sofa spud most of the time. But having gone through periods of activity and relative inactivity in my life, I can say, unscientifically and anecdotally, that the active periods have been better for my mental state. Walking to and from work is a great way to create separation from the working day. If that’s not possible you could get off the bus a stop early, make your lunchtimes active or maybe find an exercise class to do before you start work for the day. Except they lose me at squeezing in yet another activity before work. Sure, I don't have to deal with that anymore, but as a night owl, it was all I could do to wake up on time. Making that earlier to do a new thing wasn't going to happen. 2. Connect with people If you examine most of the happiness scales, relationships with others come near the top of these lists. Ugh. People. Okay, I'm not going to simply dismiss this one, but I will point out that connection feels different for different people. Introverts can't always use advice meant for the extroverted majority; nor, often, can the neurodiverse. It’s also worth getting to know your colleagues. Not... not always. 3. Learn new skills Keeping “cognitively active” is critical to your psychological and mental wellbeing and can provide you with new opportunities in terms of your career development. Can't argue with this one, either. I do have some objection to "new opportunities in terms of your career development," because I think learning shoudn't have to be merely about how you can be more productive for your employer... but that's me, again. You do you. 4. Stay present This is all about “being in the moment” rather than in the past or looking too far forward.  here we go.A more mindful approach to life is something you can practice at any time of the day, it’s just about being aware, noticing your surroundings – the sights, sounds, smells. You can do this while you’re walking, in a meeting or making a cup of tea. I mean, okay, sure, put that way, I can appreciate what they're talking about. 5. Recognise the positives Staying present also helps you to recognise the positives in your life – allowing you to be a glass half full rather than a glass half empty person. How about being a "glass that's twice as big as it needs to be" person? No, seriously, though, while it's probably bad to dwell on the downsides of things all the time, I object to the idea of mentally banishing the negative all the time, as well. Accept there are things at work or in life you can’t change and concentrate on the things you have control over. But no argument about that part from me. 6. Avoid unhealthy habits Given what we know about their long-term consequences, using excessive alcohol or coffee consumption or smoking as a coping strategy for work stress is ultimately likely to have a negative impact on your happiness, even if they seem to provide a quick pick-me-up. Aw. Too bad. Note that there's no warning about excessive tea consumption. 7. Work smarter, not longer Prioritise your workload during working hours and you will have more disposable time to do the things you enjoy. Okay, whatever. My only objection here is the idea of "disposable time." To me, there's no such thing as that, or "free time." There's only time. If you take the attitude, as I did above, that you're only doing what you want to do, anyway, then all the time is yours. If there's something you think you want to do, but never seem to have the time to do it, then maybe you don't really want to do it. The more you take control of your work life and get the balance you need, the more likely you will be happier at work. And let's keep in mind that I never got the balance I needed until I retired. |
| Winter solstice today. Well... it's the winter solstice for the only hemisphere that matters (the northern one); summer in that... lesser hemisphere. And also well... it's today for me, but tomorrow for, say, Europeans. This is because, while the solstice occurs at the same moment worldwide, the time depends on what time zone you're in. It's 10:27pm on the 21st, here in Eastern time (WDC time), but 3:27am on the 22nd based on Universal Time (e.g., England). I've seen some sources claim 3:28am UT / 10:28pm EST. I don't know why there's a one-minute discrepancy there. I'm not sure it matters. Probably some differences in how to round numbers up or down, I'd guess. We're still calculating it with greater accuracy than, say, Stonehenge ever did. This sort of thing can be confusing, I know. Time zone differences trip me up pretty easily. Want to be confused more? Great! That's my specialty! We usually think of the winter solstice as the first day of winter. Okay, that's fair; by the astronomical definition, winter stretches from the winter solstice to the spring equinox (this is true regardless of hemisphere, but for... the unfortunate upside-down people... the winter solstice is in June). But there are other definitions of winter. Meteorological winter, in contrast, is tied to the Gregorian calendar: December 1 through February 28 (or 29 if it exists) in the northern hemisphere. This roughly centers meteorological winter on what is, on average, usually the coldest period of the year: mid-January. Yes, the average low lags the astronomical season, usually by about a month. Similarly, July here is generally hotter than June. And then there's solar winter, which is related to but not the same thing as astronomical winter. (I told you this would be confusing.) This definition of winter is largely based on length of daylight, and stretches from around Halloween to Groundhog Day. Those holidays are not coincidences, either; they derived from much earlier celebrations of the beginning and end of solar winter. This is why you sometimes hear the winter solstice referred to as "midwinter." And the summer solstice has been called "midsummer," as in Shakespeare's play. There are similar days around May 1 and August 1 that mark the solar season transitions or, by the astronomical definition, the middle of each season. (Look. I already said it's confusing. Just roll with it.) The upshot of all of this is that, while the worst of winter is surely still ahead of us—personally, I dread February the most, but January objectively sucks worse—at least we'll be getting more daylight. The downside of that: more of the accursed daystar every day. Yes, I have a complicated relationship with the sun. I appreciate the warmth, but I do wish it'd stop burning me and glaring at me like I did something wrong. This, for me, ends the winter holiday season. (As I've noted before, axial tilt is the true reason for the season.) At least until New Year's, which I only acknowledge because it's International Drinking Night. |
| Picked up a cold somewhere. Pretty sure it's Just A Cold™, because there's no fever. This just makes everything more annoying; if I had a fever, I could justify going to a doctor to maybe get some of the Good Drugs. But no. My nose won't stop running, which drives me up the wall, which puts me on edge so the slightest thing can set me off. Don't tell me your home remedy, either. Or urge me to take antihistamines. Antihistamines don't do shit for me. Used to be, back in the good old days, some OTC drugs existed that helped with cold symptoms. They yanked them all for containing speed or some shit, and now nothing works. Not even the stuff that you have to ask the pharmacist and show your ID for like you're a criminal. This is all because I went (shudder) outside, and among (ick) people; I know it. If I'd stayed inside at my house as Nature intended, people wouldn't have infected me. Humans are a menace. A menace, I tell you! Consequently, no links today. I'm going to sit at home going through twenty boxes of tissues and trying not to let shit get to me. I know the advice is "drink plenty of fluids," but no one likes it when I point out that tequila is, indeed, a fluid. |
| I found this one interesting, but one needs to bear in mind that there might be an ideological agenda involved. Guardian link, so brace yourselves for British spelling: Where did they all go? How Homo sapiens became the last human species left At least nine hominin species once roamed the Earth, so what became of our vanished ancestors? Just 300,000 years ago – a blink in evolutionary time – at least nine species of humans wandered the planet. Today, only our own, Homo sapiens, remains. And this raises one of the biggest questions in the story of human evolution: where did everyone else go? Clearly, they built ships and left for interstellar space before we could take over. “It’s not a coincidence that several of them disappeared around the time that Homo sapiens started to spread out of Africa and around the rest of the world,” says Prof Chris Stringer, head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London. “What we don’t know is if that was a direct connection.” Maybe professors in England use words differently than I do, but "it's not a coincidence," to me, implies "a direct connection." There are many theories around the disappearance of our human cousins, and limited evidence to decipher exactly what happened. But recent studies are providing tantalising clues. Also, these "theories" are what I'd call "guesses." Any extrapolation from one or two "tantalising clues" is almost as much speculation as my spaceship hypothesis up there. In all seriousness, we can rule out spaceships. Despite recent sensationalist reporting, if there had been an industrial/technological civilization before ours, we would have found evidence, such as a layer of pollution in sedimentary rock. Palaeoanthropologists continue to argue (quite vociferously) over who the last ancestor of H Sapiens was, but so far there is no conclusive evidence. Also, there is no single origin for H sapiens. There are ancient remains of early H sapiens in Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, Omo Kibish in Ethiopia and Florisbad in South Africa, suggesting that our species arose from multiple sites. Yeah, okay, I'm not an expert. But this seems misleading. All it does is push back the possible date for last common ancestor. “Hominin species were likely dying out all the time,” says Prof Eleanor Scerri, head of the human palaeosystems group at the Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology in Jena, Germany. “It’s probably unusual that we are still around.” Another instance of words that might mean something different in other countries. It's not "probably unusual that we are still around;" it is, by definition, definitely unusual. From Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes, researchers have inferred that they lived in small groups and frequently interbred. Again, I'm not an expert. But the definition of "species" that I learned includes the idea that members of the species can breed together and produce fertile offspring. One classic counterexample is how horses and donkeys can breed, but the offspring is sterile. It's well-known today that most humans carry DNA from Neandertal ancestors; there was interbreeding there, too, and, clearly, their offspring weren't sterile, else we wouldn't be here. (The article mentions this, too.) Part of the problem is our nearly OCD need to categorize, label, and neatly box everything. But biology is messy and resists being pigeonholed, as illustrated by this quote from the article: Prof Rebecca Ackermann, co-director of the Human Evolution Research Institute at the University of Cape Town in South Africa, says that it depends on how you define species. This is the source of much debate among palaeoanthropologists: some recognise many species, while others acknowledge only a handful. “My take is that they probably weren’t distinct species,” she says, with the exception of obvious outliers such as small-brained H naledi. “We should really be talking about them as regional variants.” Later in the article: But some groups – whether a different species or not – definitely fared better than others, with our own direct forebears surviving. This is in large part because of luck and their behaviour, agree the experts I spoke to – and is something people living today need to recognise to overcome the challenges on the horizon. And this is what I meant by an ideological agenda being involved. Just because it happens to be one I (mostly) agree with, doesn't mean I'm going to accept all this speculation at face value. Science shouldn't work like that. Make all the guesses you want; collect evidence to rule some of them out. “Humanity will be faced with either cooperating in the face of those crises or competing. And what we see from Neanderthals and H sapiens is that the groups that cooperated better were the ones that got through.” I like the conclusion. I agree with it. I've been saying for a while that we probably owe our success to cooperation more than competition; that it's the former that truly drives progress. But that only makes me more wary of the way they reached the conclusion, lest I fall victim to confirmation bias. |
| Getting back to article-sharing (I've had a few pile up on me whilst I was away), here's a complex issue that I'm sure someone out there has a simple solution for. It's wrong... but it's simple. How millennials learned to dread motherhood To our generation, being a mom looks thankless, exhausting, and lonely. Can we change the story? I'll leave off with complaining about the "generations" nonsense for once, because that age range, as of right now, is 27-42; hence, discussions about having kids are mostly timely. One more disclaimer: obviously, I'm a man, and I'm not presuming to tell women what to do or fully understand their experience. This article, however, was written by a woman. I'm not just assuming her gender, either; her bio is right there at the link. I had been seeing my boyfriend for about a year, and though things were going well, we never talked about our feelings on having children. I have no idea what the "rules" are now. I feel like "first date" is too early, but waiting a year seems... hazardous. So one night in the summer of 2022, I finally asked him where his head was at. He looked surprised, considering the question. “I think I’ve always wanted to be a father,” he said slowly, adding, “That doesn’t mean it’s a deal breaker, though.” I can't really understand men most of the time, either. This could be a matter of "I really like the sex and I'm not ready to break up over this until you push the issue." Or it could be, benefit of the doubt here, that he was subject to society's expectations, which are still that "get married, have kids" is the default. Still, I felt nervous and even a bit lonely, because I am not someone who has dreamed of being a mother; I’ve never particularly liked babysitting or even being around little kids. One wonders if she expressed that to him. Not liking being around little kids is a damn good reason not to have any. Oh, sure, the aunties will be all like "it's different when it's yours," but that's not always the case. One of the most viral TikTok videos last year, with millions of views and some 800,000 likes, is known simply as “The List,” featuring hundreds of reasons to not have children. (Reasons included: urinary tract infections during and after pregnancy, back pain, nosebleeds, and #89, “could be the most miserable experience of your life.”) Gotta admit, I'm torn about this. On one hand, I despise DikDok with a burning passion. On the other hand, I agree with the sentiment; the downsides should be more clearly spelled out. On the gripping hand, I'm just suspicious enough to believe that someone behind TokTik might have a vested interest in reducing, or at least reducing the growth rate of, the US population. I know some women who have decided to forgo motherhood altogether — not out of an empowered certainty that they want to remain child-free, but because the alternative seems impossibly daunting. When you consider everything it takes to raise a child, compared to 100 or even 50 years ago, this shouldn't surprise anyone. For starters, you don't have help—in most cases, you don't get extended family or other close-by relatives to assist. Assuming a partnership or marriage situation, both partners are working outside the home, usually; this means paying for child care. And partnership is remarkably fragile, these days. When you factor in all the stuff you have to buy, feeding the baby-industrial complex, frankly, I don't understand how most people can even afford it. Children used to be an economic boon; now, they're a liability. On top of this, there is the well-documented aversion many millennials feel about making any sort of commitment, so conditioned are we to leave our personal and professional options open. Job security, too, is a thing of the past. Most people job-hop; it's the norm, today. Without some confidence that your job is going to be, if not with the same company, at least in the same geographical area, life is uncertain. So, no, I don't blame people for not making commitments; it's hard to do that when no one will commit to you. There's a lot more that I'm skipping, but let's pick back up at: Previous generations “did not experience the same vocal outward world that we’re living in today where everybody is telling you it’s almost crazy for you to have children,” said Sherisa de Groot, founder of Raising Mothers, a literary group focused on parents of color. “That it’s selfish for you to have children. That it’s almost, like, a morally wrong thing to do at this point, because look at the hell basket we’re living in.” I'm aware that a) we're not supposed to make fun of names and b) de Groot is a perfectly normal Dutch surname. But I'm thinking it. You know what I'm thinking, too. Anyway. I'm not saying it's morally wrong to have children. But one does need to consider that aspect, and decide for oneself. One final point from me: The article quotes a study... Eighty percent of respondents actually described parenting as enjoyable all or most of the time, while 82 percent said it was rewarding all or most of the time. I won't go so far as to call that study bullshit, but consider all of the implicit bias involved... and, for someone still on the fence, it would be easy to draw the mistaken conclusion that this means you'd have a 4 out of 5 chance of enjoying the experience. So, the article is fairly long, and raises valid points on all sides. I won't waste your time, or mine, further. Mostly, I just found it interesting that the discussion is still going on, and what it says about the state we're in. |
| Today's stumble down memory lane took me all the way back to 2007: "This Day in History" Just a couple weeks more than 16 years ago, this December entry celebrated one of my most beloved holidays: the anniversary of the repeal of Prohibition. This year marks 90 years. If I'm still alive in 2033, the century mark, that should be one hell of a party. I didn't note it in here this year, because I was traveling and other matters took priority in the blog, but you can bet I celebrated in the appropriate manner. (Get it? Bet? Because I was in Reno that day? Yeesh, tough crowd.) Apparently, it was also the Day of the Ninja, but I always forget about that part. Hell, December 5 is also Krampusnacht, but even that is overshadowed by the greatness that is Repeal of Prohibition Day.The original entry up there contains a link. It's no longer viable. Don't click on it. From what I can tell, the former site, "ninjabeergarden" wasn't about drinking, but some sort of site that sold stuff. It's just that the name combined the ideas of ninja and beer (but, sadly, not Krampus). I guess. I don't even remember what sort of shit they sold. The internet in the noughties still retained some of its weirdness. I miss that. |
A summary of my travel accomplishments and assorted notes, now that I'm back home: I visited Nebraska for the first time. Now I just need Michigan and Alaska for the completed set. I appreciate that they grow stuff in Nebraska that I eat and drink. I'm glad I don't have to be there to supervise. Is there anything more satisfying than watching someone who just blew past you get pulled over by cops? No. No, there is not. There is something about California that keeps anyone in that state from making above-average pizza. While you might not expect or believe it, Utah contains very good breweries and distilleries. I finally perfected the wording of one of my life philosophies: "Bread is food; everything else is a condiment." Driving in heavy rain or snow sucks. What sucks worse is driving directly into the accursed daystar as it is rising or setting. People need to learn how to fucking merge. When there's a reduced-speed-limit-double-fines construction zone, don't get all pissed off at me when I do the limit. On the flip side, cops, don't set up three orange cones with a speed trap and call it a construction zone just to get more revenue.In the end, I'm glad I did the trip. But next time, maybe, back roads during warmer weather. |
| As I mentioned a while back, I usually do these road trips on secondary roads. Of course, it takes longer; that's the point. The only downside is that, sometimes, especially west of the Mississippi, roadside service are few and far between, and those that exist cater mostly to local traffic. Tough to find fuel or food, sometimes, and don't even get me started on locating restrooms. The main thing you notice on the back roads, though, is the utter deterioration of everything. Crumbling towns, crappy infrastructure, empty buildings with gaping windows. If you're not by an interstate, the world has passed you by. But, this trip, I've mostly stuck to the highways because, unusually for me, time was a factor. And behold, roadside services have deteriorated there, as well. Many highway rest areas were closed; the open ones seemed poorly-maintained. Commercial services, like restaurants and gas stations, have become shabby and questionable. Not to mention the sorry state of repair of some of the highways, themselves. Certainly, there are exceptions, places that are still nice. But they're exceptions. Doesn't matter how rosy other economic indicators might be; my Road Trip Indicator is flashing, at best, a warning yellow. We're doomed, and I don't know how we can get un-doomed. But... at least there's beer. Tomorrow, probably, back home, and back to the usual in here. |
| My drive was hit by heavy rain for half the day, yesterday. Not fun, but it could have been worse. Hell, if it'd been much colder, it would have been worse. Today and tomorrow, and that'll be that. Unless something catastrophic happens. Which wouldn't surprise me. Piss me off, maybe, but not surprise. Speaking of catastrophic, you'd think I'd be immune to hearing about current events while driving, as I don't mess with radio. Nah, as soon as I take a break, there's the news, staring me in the face. But that's okay. I don't believe in disconnecting. I know some people dream of vacationing somewhere with no internet service. For me, that would be a nightmare. Not only would I lose my streaks (here and on Duolingo), but, seriously, what else would I do? No, one of my biggest concerns about, say, going to Europe, is making sure I'll have internet service over there when I go. Well, that and enduring another transatlantic flight. Those are nightmares, too. Well, I'm hoping to go, anyway. Just not sure when, yet. Certainly not this year. |
| That's four years of daily blog entries, as of today. 1461 entries in a row (365*4+1, where the 1 is because there was a leap year in there). Which is, I'll note, more than the total number of entries I made from 2007-2019. No retrospectives today, though. I'm already doing one at random every week. Can I do this for another four years? Well, no. There's only enough entries available in a blog item for another year and a quarter, assuming daily entries. So, unless something changes, that'll be that. Though, of course, I'd consider starting a new blog at that point. Might be fun to see if I can push it to five years. But I don't expect to be able to do that. See, if I expect not to, it'll be that much more satisfying if I do it; and if I don't make it, at least I'll have the pure joy of saying "I told you so." As life philosophies go, that one (I call it pessimistic optimism, sometimes, or other things other times) works for me. Other people hate it. That makes me cling to it more tightly. |
| Sometimes, while driving long distances as I've been doing, I get these flashes of insight, deep philosophical epiphanies that would surely change the world, or at least the way people see it. Naturally, I promptly forget them. Well? It's not like I can write them down. No, I'm not going to use a recording device, either. Then, I'd have to listen to myself on playback, and I hate the sound of my voice. Pretty sure everyone else does, too, which is why I write instead of talk.. I suppose one of these days one will make it out of the memory hole, but today is not that day. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
