elfs: (Default)
I discovered something important this past week while I was out camping in the woods. I had no Internet and no network connectivity. What I did have was a folder full of math papers and a notebook full of story ideas, and while Omaha and I did spend a lot of time either hiking, cooking, swimming, or playing card games, I also spent a lot of time just reading. Mostly trashy stuff, but reading.

It’s also important to know, perhaps, that I didn’t take any of my ADHD meds with me on this trip. I didn’t think I’d need them. And you know what?

I didn’t.

I’m starting to think that the kind ADHD described by normal people, that is, the ADHD which impacts the witnesses and not the person with the condition is, like depression, triggered by the environment in which we live. That its utility, in moments of hyperfocus and manic productivity, is swamped and broken by the regimentation of modern schooling and the conflicting multifaceted demands of office work.

I came up with four great story plots. I also grokked something deep and important about the fundamental theory of computation, something that links the Kleene Algebra to everything from regular expressions (where they’re most commonly used) to the basic descriptions of what a programming language is. (I could hyperfocus geekily on this right now, but I’ve learned not to.)

Omaha and I agreed not to discuss the world while we were out. It was impossible to keep that promise completely; sometimes, while driving from the campsite to an active trailhead we’d pass through a zone with radio and snatches of what was going on in the world would filter into my imagination. I don’t know about Omaha, she’s the event-driven, extrovert type; but I learned just how long it takes to get my imagination back into the groove of whatever it was I wanted most to think about.

The answer, sometimes, was all day. I’d have to go read something ridiculous (I read a lot of Lovecraft) just to flush all the world’s anxieties back out of my head.

I’m currently riding high on a week of being well-rested as well as alcohol and drug (even prescription drug) free, at least for the cognitive drugs. (I still took my statin and allergy meds, duh.) I gave my future self a list of to-dos that, so far, future self has agreed are sensible and workable. Some are more challenging than others, and today has been little more than “get re-aligned with all projects, both professional and personal, after being off-line for 9 days,” so we’ll see how far I get on any of them for realz of course.

This is a thing I have to remember, this is the thing all those “do your big thing first thing in the morning before anything else” stories are about: you do your best work when your mind is uncluttered, and the one thing the black slab in your pocket and the email queue on your desk want to do, the one thing they want, is to grab your attention for their purposes not yours, and if you have any intellectual life at all, there are a lot of processes out there vying for your attention.

They create the very clutter they’re trying to break through and, in the process, they deny you your rightful control over your own attention.
elfs: (Default)
Last night, while fairly drunk on a New Year's Eve party, I tweeted out: That's really flippin' inartful, so let me unpack it further.

The other day I read one of those Christian supremacist articles about Paul Verhoven, the director of Robocop, Starship Troopers, and Showgirls, among other films. Verhoven wrote a rather moving piece about how once, tired and heavily depressed over a relationship he had that was falling apart, he stumbled into a church and had a very numinous experience. Sunlight poured through the stained glass windows, and Verhoven experienced something very much, he described, like the Presence of God.

After the experience, he was even more committed to making secular, highly visceral films with as little religious content as either. The Christian writer claimed Verhoven had had a real taste of the one true God, the one everyone who's not a Christian knows in the truth but denies it because "they want to live in sin." (Apparently, abstemious Muslims fasting through Ramadan know they are "living in sin," as do vegetarian, celibate Buddhists, Native American drum speakers and even Australian aboriginals.)

According to those friends of mine who are serious potheads, I've never been high. I've tried marijuana but I've never been, as they put it, "Y'know, high high." A few times I have experienced it strongly enough to have very mild visual hallucinations when I closed my eyes. The visuals have always been highly geometric, mostly two-dimensional, with strongly repeating motifs. And they've always been heavily informed by animation. Specifically, the highly geometric animation styles of late 1970s through mid 1980s, along with the glossy metallic look that was so popular when the Video Toaster was the hottest rendering tool around.

For a while, I wondered if my trips were informed by animation, or if the animation itself had been informed by early digital experimenters who were also into marijuana or heavier psychedelics. As far as I can tell, it's the former; reports of people tripping in the sixties are heavily informed by the static visuals available to them at the time, hence the popularity of colorful, random illustrations like tie-dye and the like.

In the early 1990s, I had the pleasure of going out to dinner with Timothy Leary. During that dinner, he regaled us with his ideas that churches were built as hallucination inducing centers; that the physicality of a church, it's massive stone structures, were not merely to emphasize a church's arrogant claim to the eternality of stone in a village of straw, and that it's gorgeous stained glass windows were not just to emphasize a church's command of the time and wealth of artisans, but that the overall impact of this huge enclosed space with the glowing, colorful light and magnificent choral sounds, were designed to induce and reinforce an experience most people didn't get from any other place in their lives.

Paul Verhoven knows what happened in that church. He was tempted to give up all rationality and hand over his experiences to the part of his brain that was heavily informed by the influences of his youth and his culture, the part that wants him to come over and grant power and privilege to a thought pattern, religious devotion, that has yet to prove its worth to humanity in the large. Glomming onto it to claim that "This proves my religion is the best one" misses the numinous experience of Muslim circling the Kaaba, or the meditator who has achieved a measure of sati. I don't deny that they happen; I don't deny that they're meaningfully numinous experiences. I just don't believe that any one of them is more than what mere human brains are capable of being and doing, without supernatural help.
elfs: (Default)
Quentin Hardy is the "technology culture" writers for the New York Times. He graduated from Columbia with a degree in Journalism, which qualifies him to be a journalist, but not necessarily a mathematician. In a recent review of the new biopic about Alan Turing, Hardy makes a couple of interesting claims about how Hollywood depicts brilliant mathematicians as having a "cold relentlessness." He writes
We lesser mortals, we tell ourselves, feel more authentically, with something essential that they lack. In each of these movies, there is an emotional climax when the hero discovers the limitation of his analytic approach. He is saved, or ruined, in relation to his ability to learn how to feel... At some point in almost every math movie, the hero stares at formulas in the air, bewitched by a world the rest of us can’t see. Then he talks to regular people, and becomes an enchanted, but disconnected, visitor. ... The depiction of all these people, essentially diminishing inner lives almost certainly as rich as our own, signals our ambivalence toward living around computers.
He may be right about how Hollywood makes an emotional crisis the heart of such movies, and he may be right that Hollywood depicts these people as having "diminished inner lives" is essential to the shorthand of the mathematician.

I'm no amazing mathematician. I'm at best an okay programmer. A few years ago, for no reason other than curiousity, I started working my way through an understanding of the Church-Turing Theory, and there were times when, yes, I would stare into the air, enchanted by a world no one around me could see. It wasn't a new world; certainly, hundreds of developers before me, the ones who gave a damn about the theoretical basis of procedural computer science, had all seen similar visions, of how the universe actually works underneath all those layers, the basis of automata and complexity theory and all those wonders.

For the past year, I've been distracted by Category Theory, that terrifyingly new and clever layer on top of of Church-Turing that tells us about declarative computer science, that allows us to say exceptionally precise things about how we want our programs run, such that our tools can actually write much of the error-prone procedural stuff for us. My vocabulary is full of new words like morphism, endofunctor, and the terrifying monad. And all throughout the year, when I've hit on one of those inflection points where I can suddenly see how this thing has been put together, see how we can describe things to computers such that they do our bidding in new and powerful ways, see how the math becomes much more than just arithmetic... yes, I'll stare off into space, enchanted by a world I can't share with very many, disconnected for the time being from the ordinary world.

So, in some regard, Hollywood gets that right. We do see things that are different from ordinary people. We do spare off into space, enchanted by things most people will never see, have no interest in seeing. (For all the angry indifference fans have toward Iron Man 2, Downey's look when he's trying to solve the visualization problem his father left him is absolutely spot on.) And unlike any mystical variations on this theme, when we bring what we've seen back to Earth and apply it, the math works, and the world changes.
elfs: (Default)
I commented in part one of Reassembling my fragmented mind that the NY Times article "Hooked on Gadgets" was "tragically named," but never explained why.

I own an e-book reader. I've had it since 2002, so I guess I count as a very early adopter. By now, it has thousands of books on it. I have no trouble concentrating on and reading one book at a time on the thing. The idea of leaping into another book instead of the one I'm reading has no appeal to me.

It isn't the content, or the container, it's the network. It is the sense that what's happening now is urgent, important. I've been rewarded with enough frission over the past decades worth of use to have developed bad habits about clicking and reading. I'm sure many of you have as well.

The need to know the news every day is a nervous disorder. The "fierce urgency of now" has "become a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment."

Profile

elfs: (Default)
Elf Sternberg

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 12345 6
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 29th, 2025 03:00 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios