Showing 517 to 520

Antoine Lavoisier (1743–1794)

(Paraphrasing www.greaterwrong.com/posts/LaM5aTcXvXzwQSC2Q/universal-fire)

At the time:

  • There was no cell theory of biology
  • Nobody knew about DNA
  • Nobody knew about thermodynamics, that "matter can't be created or destroyed". If you focus the Sun on a goop of antimony, it'd billow a thick white smoke for a while, and then weigh 10% more than before, and people thought why not? They saw no reason the sun couldn't add weight to some things.

It was a time when you'd look at your hands, flex them, and have absolutely no idea what moves them, why they move, while clay molded into the shape of hands just sits there.

Lavoisier discovered fire, i.e. combustion, and that we organisms also do some form of combustion, because like a fire, we consume "vital air" (oxygen) and replace some of it with "fixed air" (carbon dioxide), and the more so when we do physically demanding work. Here was why we need oxygen just as badly as a fire does: we operate by the same process! Amazing!

He discovered that if you weigh not only the thing being burned but also the gases in the room, the total weight of both stays the same before and after a fire. Burning wood releases the wood's matter into the air, while burning antimony sucks some matter out of the air, hence why the burnt antimony weighs more.

Reality is laced togetherđź”—

In the book The Incomplete Enchanter, the hero is transported to a magical world based on Norse myth, where technology doesn't work, so naturally when the hero tries to strike a match, it fails to catch aflame.

But if you were transported into such a system of physics, you would die… because your cells live on combustion too.

This is an example of why you usually can't retcon any part of our physics, because you end up with an universe that can't support life. All the physics laws tie into each other; reality is laced together a lot more tightly than people realize.

What links here

Created (2 years ago)

How to enact a robust exercise routine?

Do not blow through the newbie-gains period, milk it

You know situations like when you deadlifted 115 kg last time, and today you come into the gym feeling particularly good, thinking you can shoot for 120 kg to 'leap ahead'?

Even if you're sure you can do 120, shoot for 117.5 kg anyway according to plan.

The problem with leaping ahead is you rob yourself. You need to make sure you enjoy every gym-visit, and a part is 'seeing the numbers go up'. One 5-kg leap creates about as big a burst of satisfaction as two 2.5-kg leaps, and you miss out on the second burst.

Not to mention that it often goes like this: 115, 120, … 115 again and suddenly you're not having as much fun. If instead you have patience and go 115, 117.5, 120, … then you've also done two separate days above 115 so your body is better prepared for the attempt at 122.5, and in any case you'll backslide less often.


In the "newbie-gains" period, the numbers easily go up, and that's actually a luxury—why rush it? Milk it for the positive feedback loop as long as it lasts.

Plus, hypothetically, if 120 kg is going to be the end of your newbie-gains, then if you spend 2 months on the path from 90 kg to 120 kg, you're much more able to continue beyond, than if you'd only spent 1 month on an accelerated path.

On the accelerated path, you ride a strong upward curve and suddenly hit a plateau – no fun! Avoid facing this contrast. By calming down with the upward curve, you also won't plateau later.

When gains are easy, slow down. Slow down and enjoy.

Don't "start" to do exercise "again"

"Starting" seems an overwhelming commitment. Of couse you'll put it off.

What if you never officially start? You're just working out today, for fun, not to advance a planned progression.

Don't use reminders

You set yourself up to feel guilty at some point once an app reminds you "hey it's been two weeks since your last workout"… bad idea.

Instead of being on the wagon so you can fall off it, consider yourself to always be off the wagon. There is no wagon.

On any given day, you can go or not go, as you prefer.

The question of gym memberships

I suspect it can be a good strategy to just pay for once-off visits. For the same money that a membership costs, you can do around 4 once-off visits per month, depending on the gym.

Without membership, you're free of all the mental crap associated with "gotta make use of this membership", which may not be a good mindset, compared to going every time because you want to. And observing yourself pay for the session will crank up your subconscious valuation of the session.

What links here

  • Portal: On my mind
Created (2 years ago)

Handwriting at speed

Most online material about fast handwriting directs you to learn a so-called shorthand system, like Gregg or Pitman. I don't want to do that, so here are some other tricks to speed up writing.

Mix cursive and print styles

Some research showed that the fastest writers do this, instead of sticking only with cursive or only with print.

I believe your basic approach would be cursive-first, and just changing some letters for the print version. I'm guessing the following print letters tend to be faster:

  • b, h, k, l, q

It also probably depends on what letter came before, so it's a bit of an art.

Simplify your print-letters

Omit the initial stroke on these letters: m, n, r, u

Draw these in a single stroke instead of two strokes: d, g, p, q

Draw s as a backwards c.

Omit the step where you "cross the T's and dot the I's". It looks weird but you get used to it. Letters affected: f, i, j, t

Do all the above, and I expect you'll need no cursive at all.

Make a personal list of standard abbrevs

For example:

  • the -> ·
  • you -> u
  • your -> ur
  • these -> dz
  • this -> ds
  • that -> dt
  • make -> mk
  • are -> r
  • and -> n
  • with -> w
  • without -> w/o
  • people -> ppl
  • conversation -> convo
  • them -> em
  • because -> bc
  • explanation -> xpl
  • have -> hv
  • high -> hi
  • is -> s
  • habit of dropping a vowel letter here and there
    • everything starting with "ex" -> start with "x"

Get in the habit of using ad-hoc abbrevs

It can be either an acronym you make on the spot, like if you're writing about the Second Law of Thermodynamics then the acronym "SLOT" will be clear from the context, or it can be a clipped word like "ind." for "independence".

Trust in your future-self to make sense of it.

If you're worried your future-self won't make sense of a particular abbrev, I guess you can add a legend for that one in the margins, afterward. But I'll bet usually as long as you make it obvious this is an abbreviation (clipped words should always have a dot at the end), that's enough to cue future-you into searching the context for meaning.

Break grammar rules

Sentences needn't be complete. Many word-classes can be omitted. "Chair on table" is equally clear as "a chair on a table".

Use the first word your mind coughs up

For example, you can write "A sentence needn't be grammarly…" even though you know you can't find "grammarly" in any dictionary. Future-you will probably understand, and that's all that matters.

Created (2 years ago)

Default to null

Sarah Constantin writes:

The mental motion of “I didn’t really parse that paragraph, but sure, whatever, I’ll take the author’s word for it” is, in my introspective experience, absolutely identical to “I didn’t really parse that paragraph because it was bot-generated and didn’t make any sense so I couldn’t possibly have parsed it”, except that in the first case, I assume that the error lies with me rather than the text. This is not a safe assumption in a post-GPT2 world. Instead of “default to humility” (assume that when you don’t understand a passage, the passage is true and you’re just missing something) the ideal mental action in a world full of bots is “default to null” (if you don’t understand a passage, assume you’re in the same epistemic state as if you’d never read it at all.)

—srconstantin.wordpress.com/2019/02/25/humans-who-are-not-concentrating-are-not-general-intelligences/

A 21st-century Nullius in verba, and more important than ever… can you not make a Gears-level understanding, then don't even try to meet the text halfway. Don't retain propositions you cannot explain.

Created (2 years ago)
Showing 517 to 520