Quoteworthy


...quaecumque sunt vera, quaecumque pudica, quaecumque justa, quaecumque sancta, quaecumque amabilia, quaecumque bonae famae, si qua virtus, si qua laus disciplinae, haec cogitate.
-- Phil. 4:8

Chrysalis [ 04. It's Raining Outside -- and Inside ]

[See entire]

Alphonse is a ghost.
He appears and disappears as he likes. Come to think about it, I've never seen him in the university grounds. Sometimes it's as if he's transparent. There, but not there.
Sometimes I would not see him for a few weeks. "Where did you go?" I would ask, but in response he would mumble something inaudible. Transparent words. I never press the issue, but somehow I could sense the change in him after such disappearances. He is more talkative. But the kind of talkative that is sadder; like a cover, a distraction from the cause of the sadness itself. This repeated quite frequently.
Repetition.
I don't like the sound of it; its meaning, either. Rinse, lather, repeat. Like you are stuck in a vicious cycle, a never-ending loop, a snake eating its own tail, a downward spiral into oblivion.
This happened to me quite a few times: sometimes you consider a word, repeat it several times, say it aloud, spell it out on a paper, dissecting the syllables. Suddenly the word loses its meaning; suddenly the word becomes foreign; suddenly it is disjointed from the rest of the knowledge inside the head.
Isn't it ironic? Maybe you intend to repeat the word endlessly, its variations, visiting every possible meaning, considering every nuance, like Edgar and his bastardy soliloquy. But in the end the meaning is exhausted, the meaning is thrown into nothingness -- after that, nihil ex nihilo fit, nothing comes out of nothing, my fair Cordelia, so speak it again, again, again, spiralling to the selfsame nought.
Like a droplet of rain, coming down, coming up, stuck in the eternal cycle. "But, Jake," Alphonse would say, in a manner that always tries to neutralise my dour philosophy, "Every droplet of water is different, just like every snowflake is."
"As a big drop of rainwater condenses from the cloud, it plunges down. When air resistance is so great due to downward acceleration, the drop bursts into numerous droplets. The explosion of this water bomb goes to every which way. Jake, the water may be stuck into an eternal cycle. But it's not grumbling. Once in a while it goes parachuting. It must be feeling really happy."
I chuckled. As usual, I'm no match for Alphonse.
As I'm looking out of the window, it started to rain lightly. A runner ran past, droplets off his back, like a choreographed slow motion; like a dancer, gracefully, solemnly.
A boy and an old lady on a bench. A fountain nearby. The lady put down her newspaper and took off her glasses; something must have been caught in her eyes. The boy had his cheeks on his knees, shivering? The downpour was getting heavier. But the pair on the bench stayed, perhaps, it was not very clear, my vision obscured by layers of rainwater curtains.
I closed my windows.

Physics Limericks

Space
Seven steps each ten million to one
Describe the whole space dimension
The Atom, Cell’s girth
Our bodies, the Earth
Sun’s System, our Galaxy – done!

Time
The Creator, seen as Army Sergeant Major, barks out his order for the week.
First thing on Monday morning, Bang!, Light
Sun and Earth, form up, Friday night
At a minute to twelve
Eve spin, Adam delve
In the last millisecond, You, right?

Speed
A child cycles ‘round the schoolyard
Which lies on the Earth turning hard
The Earth rounds the Sun
As Sol does “the ton”
And our Galaxy flies – Gee! I’m tired

– Tim Rowett, Three Limericks – On Space, Time and Speed
Note:
Space
10⁻¹⁴ m : Atomic nucleus
10⁻⁷ m : Cellular nucleus
10⁰ m : Human body
10⁷ m : Earth's diameter
10¹⁴ m : outer Solar System
10²¹ m : Galaxy's diameter
10²⁸ m : Universe, and a bit more
Time
A week is 7 days,
Each day 2 billion years
A minute is 2 million years
A millisecond is 23 years
Speed
7 mph : A child cyclist
700 mph : Earth's rotation speed
70,000 mph : Earth's revolution speed
700,000 mph : Galaxy's turning speed
1,400,000 mph : Galaxy's speed through debris of Big Bang

I think it's really amazing that if you downscale the age of the Universe to one week, then we humans would only occupy the last minute of it (and of course Earth itself only formed on "Friday night").
Such displays of logarithmic leaps never cease to amaze. And of course, if we are talking about space dimension, the classic documentary Powers of Ten (directed by Ray and Charles Eames) comes to mind. Even though it was produced back in 1977, it is still a wonderful sight to behold. This is so famous that one of The Simpsons' episodes featured a parody of it. Sadly, it has already been removed from YouTube because of copyright issue.





Again, we are reminded of the very long scale of space, time and speed; and our tiny, insignificant place in it.

Connections

Since words are containers of meaning, it is not difficult to imagine that some containers are bigger than others and some containers are small enough to fit inside others. That's right, in other words, some words are subsets of others. This hierarchy is usually referred to as hypernymy/hyponymy. For example; maroon, vermillion, crimson, scarlet, magenta are hyponyms of 'red'. Conversely, 'red' is a hypernym to them. Moving up the hierarchy, 'red' is a hyponym of 'colour'. Note that hypernym/hyponym doesn't mean anything if a word is not viewed relative to another.
Now, imagine this colossal tree of word hierarchy, its branches numerous, branching to finer branches still down and below. I always wonder, what is at the top of this tree? In other words, the ultimate hypernym, the word that include every possible meaning?
The answer is probably different for every person, but to me almost everything can be summarised as 'connections' and 'information':
Language is a means of transmitting information, connecting a person with another.
Science is the study of the laws governing observed systems. Information gathering; connecting hypotheses and observations.
( Basically all -ologies are all about 'information' or more appropriately, knowledge, since the etymology itself suggests logos [λόγος] )
Philosophy is literally 'love of wisdom', which means it is about, again, 'information'. It goes without saying that epistemology, which is a subset of philosophy, is also all about 'information' or knowledge.
Love is all about relationships, people say. Love itself is already a massive hypernym, considering its vast meaning. But then, 'connections' is still a bigger one.
Metaphors are all about drawing parallels; making connections. More about that here.
If you think about it, it is only natural for everything to be distilled into knowledge and relationships. Our brains themselves are networks of information, linked in numerous permutations. Our memory is triggered by things associated to that particular memory.
The worldwide web itself has garnered the current level of success because it's all about connections and information, acting like a global brain, each of us its neuron. Note all the hyperlinks on this page, enabling you to view related pages with a click.
Update: There is a really nice diagram to see: The Internet. It is also good to depict the aforementioned colossal tree of the word hierarchy.
And now, when the world is more interconnected than ever, it is important to make use of it. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown talked about confronting "the challenges of poverty, security, climate change and the economy" in the recent TEDGlobal2009. Watch it; and be aware of what we can do that was impossible only several years back.


Spirit of the Law

Think about it this way. Language is conveyor of information, but it is, of course, imperfect. You have ambiguities, misinterpretation, definition issues, and so on. For this reason, rules are also imperfectly conveyed. You can try writing down every single restriction and define every word, but this is impractical. The consequence of this imperfection is that people can always find loopholes in the written law, questioning proper definitions of ambiguous words and make use of them to get around the law.
For this reason we differentiate between the letter and the spirit of the law. To follow the law "to the letter" means obeying it according to the literal interpretation; while following the spirit of the law is obeying it according to its intent, which may not be identical with the literal interpretation.
Example? Now that's difficult because formal laws are worded as such that loopholes are very difficult to find. Let's talk about grammars instead.
"You can't begin your sentence with a conjunction."
"But, I don't understand, Sir."
"Mr. Finn, you just begin your sentence with a conjunction. Stand outside."
I remember red markings on my English composition papers highlighting the offending conjunction-initiated sentences. But, of course you know that this rule is broken all the time in all kinds of writing. Why so? This is because conjunctions are supposed to conjunct clauses in a sentence. And then, why is it alright to break this rule? Remember that we are concerned with the spirit of the law. The purpose of grammars is ultimately clarity.
Compare
I remember red markings on my English composition papers highlighting the offending conjunction-initiated sentences but of course you know that this rule is broken all the time in all kinds of writing.
and
I remember red markings on my English composition papers highlighting the offending conjunction-initiated sentences. But, of course you know that this rule is broken all the time in all kinds of writing.
The first sentence is too long and this obfuscates the meaning. It is better to put a period to give the reader a break. The use of conjunction to precede the sentence indicates that the sentence that follows it still continues the idea from the sentence before. A good writer does this: giving the reader bite-sized information and not confusing him/her with long-winded sentences; he prioritises brevity and clarity.
You can see how are letter and spirit of the law different. Otherwise you can see it as the rule of clarity overrides this rule.
If you know a little bit of jazz, you may know that jazz is a genre that doesn't obey the rules. Before jazz came about, there are certain ways melodies sequence and group together. In jazz, however, improvisation is imperative. This means there is no one fixed way to play a piece: a performer is free to interpret and tweak melodies, harmonies and time signatures. The spirit of the law? To produce nice sound; it's that simple.
In forensics, there is a principle called corpus delicti, which is translated as 'body of crime'. A British serial killer, 'Acid Bath' Haigh, infamously mistook this principle. He thought that he could not be convicted with murder without the bodies of the victims, so he dissolved their corpses in acid bath. But of course corpus delicti is not to be taken literally. It refers to evidence that the crime has taken place. Corpus delicti is not even necessarily tangible. Circumstantial evidence is often enough to convict. This is not really about the spirit of the law, but it illustrates how laws should be understood clearly.
Lastly, there is a reason to break rules. In the grammar example, you have to be clear about the big picture. That grammars exist as a guide, and occasionally breaking them for the sake of clarity is alright. In the same way, if you encounter rules that don't make sense, stop and think about what the spirit is; see the big picture.
I recommend reading How to Break All the Rules by Dustin Wax down at Stepcase Lifehack:

There's a scene in Kurt Vonnegut's Bluebeard that sums up perfectly this approach to the rules. Rabo Karabekian, an artist reknowned for his giant canvases covered with single colors of household latex paint applied with a roller, is talking with his friend Slazinger in his studio:

"Tell me, Rabo," said Slazinger, "if I put on that same paint with the same roller, would the picture still be a Karabekian?"
"Absolutely," I said, "provided you have in reserve what Karabekian has in reserve."
"Like what?" he said.
"Like this," I said. There was dust in a pothole in the floor, and I picked up some of it on the balls of both my thumbs. Working both thumbs simultaneously, I sketched a caricature of Slazinger's face on the canvas in thirty seconds.
"Jesus!" he said. "I had no idea you could draw like that!"
"You're looking at a man who has options," I said.


For the "wild child" who just can't be bothered to learn the rules, because they were meant to be broken anyway and because his or her creative spirit is too strong to be held down by rules, man, there are no options. There is only a string of broken rules and all the misunderstanding, chaos, and incoherence that goes along with them. The master, though, knows that the rules are not only options, but usually the best options. And when they aren't, s/he knows. S/he has in reserve what Karabekian has in reserve: true mastery.