followed tags: 19
followed domains: 1
badges given: 10 of 14
member for: 788 days
style: It's only a model.
It's not even about earning more money, though I won't deny it's a nice perk. I want to be as well-rounded as possible and having an option of earning a theoretical physics degree while working along (mostly) engineers presses all the right buttons in my head.
- Sounds as though the past 3 years did a number on him as well.
It wasn't easy for anyone in the family, but I don't find his way of adjusting to it as appropriate. Switching from a laid-back academic to a raging control freak is hard to swallow. I still hope he'll turn around, just don't expect it to be easy.
For the past month, I've been mostly lurking and it's going to stay this way for at least a few more weeks. At least until graduation. TL;DR: Life is busy.
I was allowed to take two out of my five exams early, one of which is going to be tomorrow. Assuming no hiccups, I'll get to defend both of my diplomas in the first half of June. Timing is particularly important because I got heads-up from a friend about a job opening at his division of the Central Office of Measurements. They require completed higher education while simultaneously being very amenable to employing people going through grad school, which is great news for me if I'll get the job.
The paper I talked about a few months ago got sent, so now we play the waiting game with editors and peers. The next one is in the process of writing and I'm doing it my own, which is challenging and oddly fun. Anxiety-inducing, but fun nonetheless. It's the one kind of second-guessing myself that I can get behind.
Blood pressure is consistently at the low end of the normal range, which is a significant improvement despite going off one of the medications. It has been three consecutive weeks since I dipped below 90/60. Legs continue to feel slightly stiff for about an hour after waking up and get worse if I stand still for too long, but that's nothing more than an inconvenience. My cardiologist recommended looking into something like tai chi, but I'm reluctant to try it. Both of the places I checked out so far gave me a cult-like vibe; I'm only interested in getting some exercise.
My father came to pay me an unannounced week-long visit and we were sick of each other by day two. Or at least I was. By day four I was doing everything to stay away from the house. He came here only to yell and I don't like loud people. Almost non-stop, day in and day out, listening to his seemingly unending list of grievances and generally being told how everything I do is shit. I can usually pinpoint the exact moment when he stops listening, this time he didn't even start. It didn't take long for me to give up on even attempting to have a discussion. I'm still kinda pissed off and he left over a week ago.
This thing was evolving ever since my parents moved to Germany, but the shit he was saying bordered on a total personality change. Three years ago he was great. Supportive, firm, reasonable and among very few people who seemed to respect me. Now, he's just a douchebag who can only make himself feel better by putting others down. Though, it wouldn't be half as insulting if he wasn't bent on trying to leverage every argument with money. That's a bitch move, even he should know it. On the other hand, at least he hasn't threatened me with throwing me out of the house, so at least it's not the lowest move.
I get that, though I see myself leaning more and more toward physics as time passes. That said, both category and type theory help me a lot every day, even though it's rarely something I use directly.
Anyway, Arnold wrote it, so there's no surprise it's biased. I don't agree with the article, at least not in 100%. I did, however, find it has some good points and IMO it's thought-provoking enough to be shared.
Hey, I'm far from even considering myself as a beginner. My comment was motivated by what I remember from one wet/elemental chemistry lab I took.
- But if you want to heat up your piece before you dip it in liver of sulfur you have to run it under hot water because OSHA deemed a blow dryer to be a fire hazard.
Cool! Though, I thought that submersion in hot water is prefered to make sure the whole mass you work on will have an equal temperature (and get equal staining/patina because of that).
Here is a rather comprehensive list.
- I learned some interesting new facts about his work: the Circle Limit series are representations of hyperbolic space.
I seem to recall that you deduced it yourself, which is praiseworthy. Esher himself struggled with visualising infinity and it was Coxeter who showed him this exact representation of hyperbolic space.
A Study of History is on archive.org. You probably found it yourself, but I'm leaving the link anyway.
- Devac was insane enough to follow me up the mountain but it has to stop now.
You made a compelling argument for Durant in your review and I didn't see it as advertising or trying to gather a following or whatever. It looked like the kind of overview of history and ethnology (among other disciplines) that I'd enjoy and, after passing the middle-point of the series, it's still the case.
Also, I track all of my projects and the more ambitious and massive they are, the greater the chance I'll complete them. Same goes for almost all of my studies: I'm half-convinced that I'd drop out three semesters ago if I couldn't take graduate level courses. Grit >> boredom. Dunno if it makes me insane, tho.
The package I ordered was held back at customs because it said: "jacket, colour: burgundy wine" on paperwork and it took a while to explain that I'm not attempting to skip the import tax on alcohol. Then the week only went dumber from that point onward.
Both the steel and glassmaking projects I attempted last Friday failed in one way or another. Glass ended up all cloudy and with a slight grey tinge, either because it leeched some trace aluminium impurities from my earlier projects or because of my method of sand purification not being up to the task. Manganese alloys got contaminated with an excess of sulphur due to my own negligence. It's not what I wanted, but it's not as bad as it could be. Bit of a bummer about how flaky it got, almost like shale. Either way, it was a lot of fun. It also made me appreciate all the glass and metal that's just lying around that much more. My lab work made things like superconductors and graphene feel almost mundane, so it's nice to get some new perspective.
- ::Squints Angrily:: You would reduce it to a math problem, wouldn't you?
Hey, you write what you know. Stephen King's characters scarcely leave Maine, he writes about troubled authors and can't help himself from mentioning penises. I tend to frame most things as mathematics.
- So let me ask you this. Do you think the action and the reaction need to be identical to have the same value? Not necessarily in the whole framing scenario, but in that often the idea of "an eye for an eye" comes to be unreasonable for a whole list of reasons.
Honestly, the Code of Hammurabi was fairly sophisticated and among the best legal formulations until Rome came around. This isn't me defending it, but it's something worth acknowledging.
And you hit the nail on the head: nowhere in my guideline have I said anything about intent or what does it mean to get equal retaliation. That's a can of worms that hinges on contemporary morality and ethics, which are neither objective nor universal. For instance, while strict, the code of Hammurabi wasn't seen as barbaric or inhuman by Babylonians. It was the rule of law. Hell, I would postulate that Babylonians were genuinely proud of it and found it as something that separates them from barbarism and disorder. Don't even get me started on Romans.
Anyway, that's only one of the holes that one can find in what I wrote about Justice.
But to (finally) answer your question explicitly: action and reaction don't have to be identical to be fair, but should be in most cases. What are those cases? That's for people who don't boil everything down to math problems to decide. ;)
- I'm curious to hear what holes you're willing to poke into your definition.
If A will commit a crime against B, but frames C, then what? C frames A for committing a crime against B? It leaves B being wronged twice just to settle the score between A and C. So it should first act against A and then C.
Or to put it in other words: if the original crime was "A cuts B's leg off, but frames C", then after tallying all the retaliation moves we end up with A having 1 leg, C having 1 leg and B having no legs. Poor B!
EDIT: Alternatively, they all end up without any legs. I'm aware of it.