justifier

the mating ritual is very alien as well

it's fascinating

first of all sex can be identified in octopodes(i) checking the 8th appendage

on the males this appendage has a small portion at the end without suckers, this is because the male uses this appendage to reach inside his head.. mantel cavity(ii).. remove a sac of sperm.. spermatophore.. and then place it inside the head of a woman (iii)(iv)

and i was told by a worker at an aquarium that if other males have already placed their spermatophore into a females mantel a later male can remove those when inserting his own

(o) https://orionmagazine.org/article/deep-intellect/

(i) http://grammarist.com/usage/octopi-octopuses/

(ii) http://www.asnailsodyssey.com/IMAGES/OCTOPUS/octopusMate.gif

(iii) http://www.asnailsodyssey.com/LEARNABOUT/OCTOPUS/octoRepr.ph...

(iv) https://youtu.be/4fkQZrfeYXQ?t=132

> What is your full ruleset, if you have it handy?

ha! this is a funny question.. when i first started doing this i wrote a note taking app that took in a ruleset and ensured you followed it.. i'm unable to find the code right now otherwise i could just drop in the json ;P

inevitably i'll forget something, but here are some highlights: remove negatives, remove absolutes and bias identifying markers when used unnecessarily, write timelessly, lists follow ':' and end with ';', parenthetical ideas are separated by a two dot '..' ellipsis, group ideas by comma ended groups where the last line is without punctuation.. with the exception of '?|!'.. then followed by a newline;

   hn has its own opinions about formatting,
   so this last rule is one i am unable to do on here,
   but i try to compromise as much as i can
   
   this has often gotten me in trouble on hn,
   because people get offended by all of the whitespace separating my individual lines
   
   for a while i wrote exclusively in these 'code blocks',
   but i felt the scrolling was too annoying,
   and got in the way of the messaging

to the best of my abilities it is an all the time thing.. it started as a writing thing: digital communications, journals, poetry; but then i decided to do it while speaking too

the extemporaneous aspect of speaking makes it more difficult but i find my ability to communicate clearly and in a way i feel i can be proud of is greatly improved

sometimes i am unable to find an alternative to a negative and will ask the person i am talking to to help me construct the sentence without the negative.. it's also funny when i let one slip and someone close to me calls me out on my shit and we try to reconstruct the sentence together

> Do you make exceptions for whatever kind of formal writing you might need to do (research papers, grant proposals, cover letters, posters, etc.)?

yes, certainly

i do what i can to always stay true, regardless of audience, to the content rules: negatives, absolutes, bias; but in regard to formatting i try to 'play to my audience'

when that audience is such that hypothetically i could be the one consuming my own creations: online, poetry, etc; then i use my writing style as an outlet for expression

> Are you in STEM, and if not, what is your field?

i also eschew limiting oneself to a single field, but i do involve myself in many different fields and stem are definitely some such fields

i do research in number theory, study physics and chemistry, program, do ee, write, produce visual media, play music, study health

my diversifying principle is that if i see someone doing something i greatly respect then i want to do so myself as well.. for instance, i am a huge fan of filippo brunelleschi so i designed my own dome.. i named it the domb, for dumb dome

i had to learn cad and architectural principles and also ended up developing an interesting result in euclidian geometry by working on this dome project

> When did you start writing like this? I'm already imagining some vivid clashes with teachers/professors if you started anywhere in undergrad or below.

it happened after an argument i had with a loved one over an instant messenger app

afterward, this person printed the entire thread and mailed it to me

it was a pretty intense experience, reading that argument.. especially considering when i wrote the words i was thinking they were ephemeral.. in so doing, i noticed some things about myself

first off, though i assumed the conversation was ephemeral the reality was that though the bytes indeed disappeared my words lived on in the relationship i was building with this person

in addition to wanting to nurture the relationships i am in now i also am a lover of literature and those that produce it, and as such have read many journals by writers and i just decided at that point that i wanted to only write things that i wanted a person like me in the future reading from me in some hypothetical collection of my writings

the other thing i noticed was that my best ideas were killed by my simply negating the other person.. an overly simple example: 'do you want to spend time together tonight?' 'no'vs'tonight i'm busy but what about tomorrow'

my intended message was being nullified, or mired in anger, by a lazy and impulsive reply

so this is when i started removing negative constructions from my language, from there i felt a freedom to restrict my language patterns in other ways to better match my thought patterns and help nurture my intended reception

but seriously, is that how you want to judge? and how you think people should be judged?

am i the crusader? i am just writing how i like to write, and instead of engaging with the material people question how i present my opinion?

if i were commenting on every comment: why are you using this tired grammatical dogma that is ill suited for the immediacy of our main contemporary publishing platform; then i could agree with your sentiment, but instead this effort to uphold an assumed status quo seems the real crusade here

i am sorry my punctuation offends you, i wish there was a way that i could write how i want to write and you could read it how you want to read it

the course was set up that we would read a work and then write a one page response in class

here is where i voiced my distaste for chaucer 'creating', as was presented to our class, this story while appreciating shakey's subversion of the material

this garnered the 'f' for my opinions about love forlorned

then at the end of each four week period we would, in lieu of exams, choose one work to 'dive deeper on' and write a longer piece

i chose triolus because it was the one piece i got such a low score on

while 'going deeper' i ended up finding, and reading, bocaccio and sainte-maure and wrote about how all four are similar and different and how these comparisons related to my original, correct ;P, intuition

i got a 'd' with complaints to the effects of 'stick to the course material' and 'just drop it'

i think my axe grinding became the professor's honing stone, which is unfortunate that such a circumstance can occur in an as advertised educational environment

the bigger issue was that this interaction negatively affected my relationship with the professor.. who was unaware of il filastrato as a source for chaucer?!, and unimpressed that i read two supplemental works that were beyond the scope of the course syllabus

also frustratingly tainted my association with shakespeare since whenever someone talks about academic shakespeare i immediately want to monologue

i also avoid negative constructions.. look through my comment history

you will find it is completely devoid, except now for this comment, of any instances of using: no, not, never, none

do you think plato lacks credibility? have you ever read classics(o) in their original languages? theywereflippantinevenusingspacesbetweenwords(i)

i would ask that if you care to develop an opinion as to my credibility that it be based on my content rather than if i can correctly utilise a ruleset someone else created that i disagree with

but i can respect that some people are unwilling to do so

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classics

(i) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptio_continua

i took a shakespeare course at university where we were asked to read troilus and cressida and compare it to its source troilus and criseyde by chaucer

i wrote that i disliked the piece because it just read like someone who recently got burned in love venting irrationally, noting that i liked shakespeare's version more because he gives the last word to pandarus(o) who uses it to comically complain about his health and i felt this beautifully subverted the assumed tragedy the characters felt subject to in their stories.. woe is me!

i failed the exam

frustrated i went looking for evidence to defend my claim(i).. though contrary to the linked comic i did find some interesting notes

first off chaucer was a source for shakespeare, but hardly the source of the work

chaucer's main source was boccaccio's il filastrato.. which was based off an earlier version known as le roman de troie by benoît de sainte-maure

but the interesting bit comes from boccaccio's version(ii) because the story itself is only 8 cantos long, even the wikipedia page says the work itself is only 8 cantos long!(iii), but there is an additional canto, a ninth canto, wherein the author, boccaccio, addresses the reader and apologises for writing the poem and states he's unsure where it came from but asserts that he was recently dumped

(o) http://shakespeare.mit.edu/troilus_cressida/full.html

(i) https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/06

(i/2) https://store.penny-arcade.com/products/agree-with-me-tee

(ii) http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/filostrato_griffin.pdf

(iii) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Filostrato

front page of reddit right now.. https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_i... ;P

are the stains preprint(o) identifiers?

or just good humored researchers?

or troll(i) identifiers like bad grammar often is?

or some undiscussed other?

(o) http://www.astrobetter.com/blog/2011/12/12/to-post-or-not-to...

(i) http://snarxiv.org/vs-arxiv/

> measuring current vs voltage in a new way, by applying brief voltage pulses to the STM tip.

      When the pulses lasted 10 microseconds or longer, 
    they saw NDR. 
      But when they reduced the pulse length to 10
    nanoseconds, the effect disappeared. 
    ...
      Combining this information with other data, 
    the team determined the timescale for electrons
    refilling the empty lower level.

(o) https://physics.aps.org/articles/v9/155

   because i prefer to read this way

   i wish you wrote this way,
   i think ideas are easier to absorb when separated and simplified in this manner

   why do i think it is easier to absorb this way?
   perhaps it is because i am a mathematician, perhaps it is because i am a poet, or perhaps it is because i am a programmer, or perhaps it is because i'm an engineer, or perhaps it is because i am a visual artist, or perhaps it is because i am a chemist, or perhaps it is because i am a physicist,
   or perhaps its because i like to express myself through everything i do

because i prefer to read this way

i wish you wrote this way

i think ideas are easier to absorb when separated and simplified in this manner

why do i think it is easier to absorb this way?

perhaps it is because i am a mathematician, perhaps it is because i am a poet, or perhaps it is because i am a programmer, or perhaps it is because i'm an engineer, or perhaps it is because i am a visual artist, or perhaps it is because i am a chemist, or perhaps it is because i am a physicist,

or perhaps its because i like to express myself through everything i do

i was traveling in india and went to an outdoor festival with friends

there was a merchant doing mehndi

my friend got her palms decorated then i asked to get mine done

he told me it was only for women but i insisted and he begrudgingly, with a smile of disbelief, painted my palms

the next day when we checked out of our hotel there was a man standing next to the desk

he started to laugh and grabbed my hand and said, 'this is only women, not men'

i said, 'well, i like it'

and he responded, 'in india only women try to see the beautiful, men do not try to see the beautiful'

now, i knew what he meant.. only women try to 'look' beautiful stead 'see'

but 'see' was so potent i loved it

as if to say men refuse to 'see the beautiful' so women feel compelled to adorn themselves so men will think them beautiful

whereas women 'see the beautiful' in all things and as such see beauty in men without adornment

i wanted to respond, 'you're right, you are failing to see the beauty of anyone having painted palms'

but i laughed with him and said, 'exactly, i wanted to look beautiful'

the best experience i've ever had was with meeting a reading deadline

i needed to read through a final draft of a book i was writing with friends before the publication date

i had read the book a thousand times but in pieces

so it was important for me to read it through cover to cover before it was published

i knew when the deadline was and was putting it off until three days before the day and i still had 130 pages to read and edit

i decided to dedicate a day to finishing it

130 pages, 1 day.. i could easily pull off 10 pages per hour and effectively work from 9am, to 10pm

10 pages per hour seems silly but it really is a mechanism to subvert what i call my reward response

put in the time to read 10 pages at the start of any hour and the rest of the hour is mine to do whatever i want to

stretch, workout, run, eat, context switch, information dope

sometimes those 10 pages would take 5 minutes, woot! 55 minutes to work on some other project

sometimes i would be so distracted that those 10 pages could take 40 minutes, so i'd make myself some tea and stare out a window for 10 minutes before the next hour

reading simplifies this model because you can quickly gauge how many hours you want to work, how much reading you have to do, and roughly how fast you can read

it's a bit different for other endeavors

for instance, 10 lines of code can take 2 seconds or 2 years

so instead of hard hour breaks i'll work until i finish a definitive partition of a larger project and wherever i lie in the current hour chunk determines the length of the reward, to be limited by the start of the next hour

same game different rules

mirror writing is only mirrored from a social standpoint

all writing is just random lines we ascribe context to

leonardo was a visual artist

abstracting symbols from strokes is a part of the discipline

and like finding your line while participating in a visual medium mirror writing is best developed through doing

by the time anyone gets through reading the 31 page document, let alone follow along and run the code, the mob has moved on and you are left alone with questions and comments

i had a similar thought when this was posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12901660#12903516 ; that was 50 page high concept pdf with complicated math

i'd be interested in a Read HN style offering with a link and a posted future date

the time is set in the future for when discussion will occur

giving interested participants and spectators time to take in the material and any supplemental research

could the fact that there is only one hexagon imply a consequence of the 'hairy ball theorem'?(i)

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn's_hexagon

(i) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hairy_ball_theorem

i very much disliked lolita

i'm unable to speak to story construction because i only vaguely recall the structure but i can speak to my distaste for the prose

i have a lot of respect for multilinguals and the fact that nabokov wrote lolita in english is commendable but it reads to me like posturing

i felt it was humorless yet aggressively attempting to be funny

i feel people who like it inexplicably excuse its shortcomings as intentional or representative of the narrator, and i always felt if that was the penultimate interpretation i'd rather find meaning and enrichment in work that engaged with me as a reader instead of trying to troll me while hoping i grant its assumed brilliance credence

i felt it self serving while being acutely self aware; further promoting said service

which is also why in my opinion the only thing even slightly worth reading by nabokov is pale fire

i feel it explicitly exhibits my interpretation of nabokov as an author

someone obsessed with one's own literary importance based on one's own criteria of what makes good literature

nabakov would agree with you

my opinion is Pale Fire is the only thing even slightly worth considering reading from him

i'll refrain from recommending anything in his stead due to the fear of my disliking nabakov might sully your reception of anything i recommend; instead i'll say i empathise with your experience reading in an academic setting and encourage you to keep reading and seeking what all the fuss is about in regard other authors.. you may keep finding more and more that you enjoy reading

(o) http://rhowell.ba.ttu.edu/Meehl1.pdf

is the author using a null value to inform this perception?

> The Internet: The United States government should not spy on its own citizens. That will not happen in a Trump administration. As for protecting the Internet, any attack on the Internet should be considered a provocative act that requires the utmost in protection and, at a minimum, a proportional response that identifies and then eliminates threats to our Internet infrastructure.

from buzzfeed(o):

> Trump told CNN during a debate that he would “penetrate the internet” to prevent ISIS from using it to recruit fighters and “close down parts of the internet.” Trump has, at times, expressed an interest in enhancing surveillance of Americans, saying at times that government should be tasked with with monitoring mosques and that police should create “demographics units.” “We ought to start [surveillance] up again, and we ought to start it up this morning,” he told the Breitbart News Daily radio show last year.

(o) https://www.buzzfeed.com/sheerafrenkel/silicon-valley-is-wor...

..a little sooner than that

climate actions was a part of the campaign

in the debate his vp repeatedly referenced a 'war on coal'

it's how he won some important states(o)

(o) http://fortune.com/2016/07/20/why-donald-trump-wont-bring-co...

prop 62 (o)

> Repeals death penalty and replaces it with life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Applies retroactively to existing death sentences. Increases the portion of life inmates' wages that may be applied to victim restitution. Fiscal Impact: Net ongoing reduction in state and county criminal justice costs of around $150 million annually within a few years, although the impact could vary by tens of millions of dollars depending on various factors.

prop 66 (i)

> Changes procedures governing state court challenges to death sentences. Designates superior court for initial petitions and limits successive petitions. Requires appointed attorneys who take noncapital appeals to accept death penalty appeals. Exempts prison officials from existing regulation process for developing execution methods. Fiscal Impact: Unknown ongoing impact on state court costs for processing legal challenges to death sentences. Potential prison savings in the tens of millions of dollars annually.

overshadowing two positives in regard incarcerations: 64 legalising of cannabis, and 57 parole for nonviolent offenders (ii)

(o) http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/62/

(i) http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/66/

(ii) http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/

and i worried negative apathy would play a role.. i'm free of any concerns of my own being arrested for this so why vote it legal or illegal.. but i'm glad criminality of cannabis will cease

but from the perspective of the paper i think this answers your initial question:

> It doesn't explain how gravity emerges from bits of information.

resides on large scales, infored bu flattening of rotational curves, and entanglement entropy(o)

there is a known relation, inequality, between entanglement entropy, a subsequent of quantum information, and large scale gravitational considerations

should one interpret the relation as 'emergent' or 'coincidence' it would seem a viable avenue of investigation

from the paper:

> 1.3 Hints from observations: the missing mass problem

> ...The observed flattening of rotation curves, as well as many other observations of dark matter phenomena, indicate that they are controlled by the Hubble acceleration scale a0, as first pointed out by Milgrom...

> ...Consider a spherical region with boundary area A(r) = 4πr2 that contains matter with total mass M near its center...

> ...The appearance of the cosmological acceleration scale a0 in galactic dynamics is striking and gives a strong hint towards an explanation in terms of emergent gravity, as envisaged in [38].

> To make this point more clear let us rewrite the above inequality as SM = 2πM/ha0 < A(r)/4Gh (1.4)

> The quantity on the left hand side represents the change in the de Sitter entropy caused by adding the mass M, while the right hand side is the entropy of a black hole that would fit inside the region bounded by the area A.

> Our goal is to give a theoretical explanation for why the emergent laws of gravity differ from those of general relativity precisely when the inequality (1.4) is obeyed.

> We will find that this criterion is directly related to the presence of the volume law contribution to the entanglement entropy.

> At scales much smaller than the Hubble radius gravity is in most situations well described by general relativity, because the entanglement entropy is still dominated by the area law of the vacuum.

that last quote seems to reference the apple

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_of_entanglement

the op author likens voltage to pressure(o)(i) within the water analogy and your osmotic membrane(ii) functions as a sort of pressure responsive valve

i'm sure there are some mental acrobatics to describe a capacitor's relationships: Q=CV; between charge(Q), capacitance(C), and pressure..er, voltage(V) using osmotic principles in place of the capacitance variable addressing the permittivity of the dialectric(iii)

but you'd have to describe osmotic pressure while waving away incongruencies between the two concepts and i think you'd end up so deep into enervated analogies it would just be better to explain in direct language ;P

(o) http://amasci.com/miscon/voltpres.html

(i) http://amasci.com/miscon/voltage.html

(ii) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmotic_pressure

(iii) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance

though i was merely addressing this quote your comment confuses me both in fillip and content

from cohesion wiki(o):

Water, for example, is strongly cohesive as each molecule may make four hydrogen bonds to other water molecules in a tetrahedral configuration. This results in a relatively strong Coulomb force between molecules.

from coulomb force wiki(i):

Coulomb's law or Coulomb's inverse-square law, is a law of physics that describes force interacting between static electrically charged particles.

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohesion_(chemistry)

(i) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law