הבלוג של Bent - REBIRTH OF BENT

חמש צורות למחשבה

לפני 21 שנים. יום רביעי, 24 באוגוסט 2005 בשעה 6:15

לא ממש זוכר מאיפה, למה ואיך למדתי את המשחק/פילוסופיה הנ"ל. הרעיון פשוט, חמישה גפרורים, וחמישה סידורים שונים ממחישים את חמשת האופנים בהם אנו חושבים. באופן פרטני, איך אנחנו מנסים לפתור בעיות.

אז מהם הצורות המחשבה:

1. ליניארי, מחשבה א' מובילה אל מחשבה ב' משם ל.... עד לסיום חוט המחשבה.
2. מעגלי, מלכודת עצמית של מחשבות.
3. מפוזר, יורה לכל הכיוונים.
4. מכוונן ורב ערוצי (לא מכיר הרבה אנשים שמסוגלים) , נע לכיוון אחד במספר ערוצים במקביל.
5. הקפיצה האינטואיטיבית.

מה שנחמד בהמחשה ושבירה לצורות המחשבה (גם עם זה קצת כוללני, למרות שאני לא הצלחתי למצוא צורה נוספת ברת משמעות), זה הכלי שזה נותן, היכולת לנסות ולבחון בעיות שבהם אני נמצא, ולבחון את אורח המחשבה שלי.

הדבר הנפוץ שיוצא מזה, אני מזהה את עצמי במעגל, נעול.

למה כל (ה קשקוש ההנדסי) הסבר הנ"ל.

בינתיים סתם חומר למחשבה.

3

בוקר טוב,

לפני 21 שנים. יום רביעי, 24 באוגוסט 2005 בשעה 4:43

הבנתי משהו היום, למה בלוג.

עם רק יהיה לי זמן היום אני אשתמש באופציה החביבה הזו.

נ.ב. החלטתי והפסקתי שוב.

נראה כמה זמן הפעם (לעשן).

1

hot emec

לפני 21 שנים. יום ראשון, 21 באוגוסט 2005 בשעה 18:06

למי שלא מבין, ינאל דין דין דין אמא של ספק האי****** שלי.

חוץ מזה הכל טוב.

אני לא שורט, אני מכין תקליט.

את המחט יש למקם ליד העיגול הקטן.

לא ללחוץ התקליט עדין.

BENT

1

The Thermodynamics of Hell

לפני 21 שנים. יום שישי, 12 באוגוסט 2005 בשעה 20:34

The Thermodynamics of Hell Register soon for: ENGS 666-01

Students are dying to get in.

"Smoking or nonsmoking" Theorem: Hell is Isothermal

Hell: That Place Dante wrote about in The Inferno section of his book The Divine Comedy.

Isothermal: A term used by those engineering types meaning constant, uniform temperature.

Proof by the Contrapositive If Hell is not isothermal, there are temperature differences in hell.

Note: This is in accordance with Dante's version of hell. If there are changes in temperature, heat can be transferred from one medium to another.

If heat is transferred, there can be changes in entropy (S). In other words; heat can leave or enter a specific medium.

This is an extension of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

According to the 2nd Law the total change in entropy of a system must be positive. SHot SCold QHot / T Hot > Q Cold / TCold

Since the assumption is that there are differences in temperature, THot can be greater than TCold. If THot can be greater that TCold, QHot can be greater than QCold. If QHot > QCold energy is released in the process of heat transfer.

If energy is released in the process of heat transfer, it can be used to power things like an air conditioner, or heater; thereby, making Hell comfortable for any engineer, who would know how ot utilize the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Therefore; Hell must be isothermal unless all engineers are virtuous just because they are engineers.

1

דילמה מטופשת- תודה יקירותיי

לפני 21 שנים. יום שני, 8 באוגוסט 2005 בשעה 16:47

התעללתי קצת בשפיות שלי , שלחתי סיפור, ישן אבל כזה שידעתי שיעבוד חזק עליה.

עבד.

קבלתי פידבק מחמם לב.

השמיעה הצעה (והיא יודעת מה זה עושה לי (: )

"תרגם, שים באתר שיראו".

דברתי עם מישהי יקרה, סובלת, נראה לי כמו "צלילת סאב" ( שם זמני ל - SUB DROP ).

שלחתי אותה לקרוא על הנושא, קראה, הפנימה? אמרה "זה חשוב שמישהו יכתוב על זה, וישים באתר, שידעו" נו מה קודם? באין זמן שלי.

מחר תדעו מה התחלתי או כמה עצלן היייתי.

לילה טוב לכולם.

1

Applying Pareto’s Principle to Happiness

לפני 21 שנים. יום שלישי, 26 ביולי 2005 בשעה 17:51

Happiness is easy. ↓ Everyone can be happy. ↓ In order to be happy you must be able to do two things, do the things that make you happy, avoid the shit that doesn’t (1) (arguably these two are one and the same). ↓ Even avoiding most of the bad and having some of the good is enough (for most) to be happy or at least content (2). ↓ Identifying the shit pile is easy. ↓ Avoiding the shit pile is hard (observation). ↓ Avoiding most off the shit is enough (3). ↓ Doing a few things that make you happy each day/week/month is easy (4). ↓ So? (Inner self screaming now - Stop writing you fool, go do some thing happy) Pareto principle From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The misnamed Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena 80% of consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it's also commonly and unthinkingly misused. The principle was suggested by management thinker Joseph M. Juran. It was named after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who observed that 80% of property in Italy was owned by 20% of the Italian population. Since J. M. Juran adopted the idea, it might better be called "Juran's assumption". That assumption is that most of the results in any situation are determined by a small number of causes. That idea is often applied to data such as sales figures: "20% of clients are responsible for 80% of sales volume." This is testable, it's likely to be roughly right, and it is helpful in your future decision making. It is important to note that many people misconstrue the principle (because of the coincidence that 80+20=100): it could just as well read that 80% of the consequences stem from 10% of the causes. Many people would reject such an "80-10" rule, but it is mathematically meaningful nevertheless. Some hold that the principle is recursive, and may be applied to the top 20% of causes; thus there would be a "64-4" rule, and a "51.8-0.8" rule, and so on. A clear misuse of "Juran's assumption" is this example: "20% of individuals in an organization perform 80% of the work." A less clear misuse is this common example: "20% of our advertising creates 80% of our increased sales." That may or may not be true; in either case it's not helpful. This is a special case of the wider phenomenon of Pareto distributions. The Pareto principle is unrelated to Pareto efficiency, which really was introduced by Vilfredo Pareto. To sum the whole thing up: Sturgeon's Law : Ninety percent of everything is SHIT

1

nothing to read here

לפני 21 שנים. יום שבת, 23 ביולי 2005 בשעה 18:26

I found out that writing is only hard when it needs to original, nothing new here, just another C to V marriage falling apart, or is just my sanity that is breaking down. the worst of any thing is the lingering doubts, those that sit in the back of my mind, coward, slut, your only here to make sure she cant stand you, this is your easy way out. experience is gained, slowly by hard work, being smart as an engineer don’t help, being people smart don’t help, friends don't help, family didn't either, talking didn't help, laughing didn't help, crying did nothing- I was done crying a long time ago, damm. There’s a thin line between love and hate, have we crossed it? breathing is easy when she is not around, I saw my self today in the mirror standing next to her, my body language is all wrong, I slink, I hide, I make myself smaller, I took a breath, released the air, stretched my back, enjoyed me for a sec…… , her voice dropped back to this world. Silence is golden, I just never learned to shut up. I have learned to handle people, army, work, I have read so many books about leadership, about management, I have managed 7 figures projects, why cant I manage my time ? I need four more hours a day. Will I ever post this? Whining fool. Shit lets see what happens.

0

thoughts

לפני 21 שנים. יום ראשון, 17 ביולי 2005 בשעה 18:31

What a scary though, I mean some actually reads these blogs (at least it is not my mother, yuppi). Moreover, there is a whole thread dedicated to the blogs people like, and they grade them too. I still haven’t figured out what I write in here, but one thing I know for sure, it is a vent, a new form of a vent for me, so lets see what happens. The problem of blogging, some one out there has written it before, and better, I know I have read some too. Not just blog’s, I hate to admit but any original thought I can put here has been said by some one, and far more eloquently then I can, so? Revert to poetry?. A state and condition, I leak poetry only when I am blue. Happiness is just around the corner. Therefore, I am looking for a corner. Logic is the only weapon in mans arsenal that is worthless when fighting a woman. in someone else's word's: "Love is at first not anything that means merging, giving over, and uniting with another (for what would a union be of something unclarified and unfinished, still subordinate-?); it is a high inducement to the individual to ripen, to become something in himself, to become world, to become world for himself in another's sake." "Like so much else, people have also misunderstood the place of love in life, they have made it into play and pleasure because they thought that play and pleasure were more blissful than work; but there is nothing happier than work, and love, just because it is the extreme happiness, can be nothing else but work." -Letters to a Young Poet, Rilke

1

הנחות בסיס

לפני 21 שנים. יום רביעי, 6 ביולי 2005 בשעה 9:43

Occam's Razor (pronounced OCK-um, also spelled Ockham's Razor or any of several other spellings), is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham that forms the basis of methodological reductionism, also called the principle of parsimony or law of economy. In its simplest form, Occam's Razor states that one should make no more assumptions than needed. Put into everyday language, it says The simplest explanation is the best. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. For example, a charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions. Variations The principle is most often expressed as Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, or "Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity", but this sentence was written by later authors and is not found in Ockham's surviving writings. Ockham wrote, in Latin, Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, which translates literally into English as "Plurality should not be posited without necessity". This can be interpreted in two subtly different ways. One is a preference for the simplest theory that adequately accounts for the data. Another is a preference for the simplest subset of any given theory which accounts for the data. The difference is simply that it is possible for two different theories to explain the data equally well, but have no relation to one another. They share none of the same elements. Some would argue that in this case Occam's Razor does not suggest a preference. Rather Occam's Razor only comes into practice when a sufficient theory has something added to it which does not improve its predictive power. Occam's Razor neatly cuts these additional theoretical elements away. The principle of Occam's Razor has inspired numerous expressions including: "parsimony of postulates", the "principle of simplicity", the "KISS principle" (keep it simple, stupid), and in some medical schools "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras". A re-statement of Occam's Razor, in more formal terms, is provided by information theory in the form of minimum message length. "When deciding between two models which make equivalent predictions, choose the simpler one," makes the point that a simpler model that doesn't make equivalent predictions is not among the models that this criterion applies to in the first place. [1] Another variant of this law is Thargola's Sword from Nightfall, (originally a short story by Isaac Asimov and later expanded to a novel in conjunction with Robert Silverberg): We must drive a sword through any hypothesis that is not strictly necessary. Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) lived after Ockham's time and has a variant of Occam's razor. His variant short-circuits the need for sophistication by equating it to simplicity. Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. Occam's Razor is now usually stated as follows: Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred. As this is ambiguous, Isaac Newton's version may be better: We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. In the spirit of Occam's Razor itself, the rule is sometimes stated as: The simplest explanation is usually the best.

1

Bentחשבון מאומת

Bent