Writing

Writing is really difficult for me at most times, and even when I want to do it, I have to first overcome the desire for perfection and trust that I will find it amazing in post-analysis. Sometimes I don't get fresh inspiration for days, and other times I am just too lazy to take it down. I keep a journal where I jot down thoughts as they come, but sometimes I get too busy to think.

When I am busier, am I happier? The feeling of satisfaction, of fulfillment. Fulfilling lowered expectations. Trick yourself to change your perspective on life.

The reason why we are scared of change is because an individual is a different person at different slices of time. We naturally identify ourselves with those who are similar to us (women saving women strangers over men). Future Vicki in one second, one hour, probably even for the whole continuum of possibilities is more similar to myself at this instant than anybody else; therefore, since we want to ensure the well-being of those most similar to ourselves, by default, we try to do what is best for our future selves. However, future Vicki in one second is more like current Vicki than future Vicki in 5 hours, as the wiring in our brain has had more time to change from the original (random walk - the longer the time passed, the further the drunk is from his origin of the lamppost). That is why we tell ourselves that we will sleep now, and finish the 10 page assignment in the morning. We frequently multiply the percent similarity of A to current with the net happiness while in the process of doing the activity (at current) and compare it to B's product (this will always result in procrastination). There are some who instead take the direct estimate of net happiness of doing the activity at A divided by the net happiness of doing the activity at B and compare it to B's result (the reciprocal). However, the more mentally advanced combine the two equations and take (the percent similarity) x (net happiness of doing activity at A) / (net happiness of doing activity at B).

A simple example:

"Future Vicki A in 1 second is 99.99%* similar to current Vicki and would be 30% less happy listening to her cell bio podcast versus baking chocolate brownies (which is what she would be doing if she were not reading). Future Vicki B in 50 minutes is 99.98%* similar to current Vicki and would be 40% less happy podcasting instead of baking delicious chocolate brownies (as it is later, and thus she is less motivated). Assume that the cell bio paper and the brownies are the only options for those two time slots.

99.99 x (0.7/0.6) > 99.98 x (0.6/0.7)

Therefore, hypothetically, she should podcast before baking."

However, more accurate results are achieved when we compare all potential slices of time for each case.

A more complicated example:

"Vicki is faced with the extremely difficult option of eating brownies or working out. She would be twice as happy eating than otherwise, and half as happy running on a treadmill (each takes an hour). Assume that the similarity of future Vickis to the current decreases linearly (y=1-.02x, x hours). Her happiness from being a quarter of a pound lighter is 1.1 times not being a quarter of a pound lighter (for the remainder of her life). Her happiness from being a quarter of a pound heavier is 0.9 times otherwise. She will live for 10 more hours.

So for the first hour,
eating - (integral of y from 0 to 1)(2)
running - (integral of y from 0 to 1)(0.5)

For the remaining hours,
eating - (integral of y from 1 to 9)(.9)
running - (integral of y from 1 to 9)(1.1)

In total,
eating - 1.98 + 7.2(.9) = 8.46
running - .495 + 7.2(1.1) = 8.415

Yay brownies!"

Nevertheless, even if the data pointed towards running as the better option, there is a large degree of uncertainty of whether my trimmer waist really increases the happiness of future Vickis. Also, I have not included in the equation the factor of how much we value those more similar to our current selves. And finally, we are often cognizant of our future selves as cognizant beings of the future as well, which then slightly changes the future net happiness in consideration.

I really hope that I don't sound schizo or something.

*percentages smaller for greater effect

Thinking

I grew up valuing the ability to think. Thinking through multiple layers, being able to think a step ahead of my competition, and later realizing that the hardest part is figuring out where to step. It is all relative, so we need a consistent and arbitrary origin, although each option is just as unimportant as the one 3 units down and 2 units to the left of it. Maybe I'll even throw in a z-axis, for kicks. My origin was unfortunately not consistent, and unfortunately arbitrary, arbitration, and arbitrage are too dissimilar of terms to make anything witty out of it. Maybe they are like opposite ends of the three axes.

Did you know that thinking is one of the greatest inhibitors to happiness? I should scientifically study this phenomenon, although I fear the potential implications. I'm lying, however; I don't really give a damn about the implications, although I do feel that nudging feeling of guilt when I think about it. But there are too many possible causes, so I'll just ignore it for now.

If a child was born without any senses, would it still think*? What a frightening yet extremely intriguing thought. What if we all had the biological prerequisites for a fifth sense, minus the wiring between the feeling and the brain? I guess that such a discovery would be the biological equivalent of the dimensions in physics.

I once had a dream that my dreams were transcending dimensions. If you consider it, it is technically feasible, but then so are your daily ponderings. I try to avoid scary movies and generally unsavory sensory input, that way I limit my potential dimension travel into relatively happier zones. And in this case, the relative is not relative.

*source: Ruby