Re: The elixir
Posted: Thu May 14, 2015 11:24 pm
... pretty much... for all practical purposes, you can ignore the limerick in this story.jwhouk wrote:Would this be placed after the Limerick?
A place to discuss the world of Wapsi Square
https://forum.wapsisquare.com/
... pretty much... for all practical purposes, you can ignore the limerick in this story.jwhouk wrote:Would this be placed after the Limerick?
You might enjoy medicine from a more philosophical direction, with this story in a totally different universeMerchManDan wrote:Damn, but I love medical procedurals. They make me feel like I'm learning new stuff (which I suppose I am, at that). Never did have much stomach for gouts of blood, though, which is probably why I never seriously considered med school.
When the first of those books came out, I knew some people who are in Seattle's BDSM community. I STRONGLY recommend that you NEVER, in their presence, even insinuate that those books have the slightest relationship to BDSM. You're likely to get a two-hour lecture on what felony charges should have resulted from the first three chapters.GlytchMeister wrote:I'm pretty certain that was waaaay better writing than those 50 Shades books. (Never read them, but seeing as they are described as glorified BDSM Twilight Fanfics, I think I'm quite safe in this assumption)
Yes, I remember hearing a cat say that once.Dave wrote:I'd say that would depend entirely on just whom one was having just what sort of conversation with!AmriloJim wrote:try working "MMMMML" into conversation.
Well, I now stand in awe. I've just deduced that there must be somebody out there who is at least slightly crazier than I am.Dave wrote:Chlorine trifluoride as an oxidizer... hmmm. "It is of course extremely toxic, but that's the least of the problems. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with things such as cloth, wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water - with which it reacts explosively."
One chapter in, and I'm hooked. Definitely saving that for later; thanks much!Warrl wrote:You might enjoy medicine from a more philosophical direction, with this story in a totally different universeMerchManDan wrote:Damn, but I love medical procedurals. They make me feel like I'm learning new stuff (which I suppose I am, at that). Never did have much stomach for gouts of blood, though, which is probably why I never seriously considered med school.
This exactly. Oh, and read Master Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" Master Morihei Ueshiba's "The Art of Peace". Know your enemy.Sgt. Howard wrote: This isn't about speed or strength- it's about knowing how to fight. You would be surprised how few fighters, including do-trained 'martial artists', are aware of this simple fact.
Never give a bully what he wants, unless he 'wants' an ass-kicking...
Both in my library- along with Von Clausewitz, Rommel, Napoleon, Patton, Zedric, Ryan, Zhukov and Chamberlin. My Civil War collection alone is three and a half shelves. I probably have one of the largest collections of USATMs outside of the military- many of them dated, but still viable.DinkyInky wrote:This exactly. Oh, and read Master Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" Master Morihei Ueshiba's "The Art of Peace". Know your enemy.Sgt. Howard wrote: This isn't about speed or strength- it's about knowing how to fight. You would be surprised how few fighters, including do-trained 'martial artists', are aware of this simple fact.
Never give a bully what he wants, unless he 'wants' an ass-kicking...
Ah yes- Sun Tzu is excellent reading for those not yet introduced. Ueshiba I find depends on who the translator is, otherwise his subtleties are lost on the English-speaking reader.DinkyInky wrote:Sleep deprived. It should have read in addition to your excellent commentary, read these books, as knowing your enemy can help you to either finish a battle or avoid one.
Ahh. I read Korean translations first, then found English ones that closely resembled those.Sgt. Howard wrote: Ah yes- Sun Tzu is excellent reading for those not yet introduced. Ueshiba I find depends on who the translator is, otherwise his subtleties are lost on the English-speaking reader.
Excellent!!! Who's work do you recommend? Most of my deep understanding of Ueshiba came from a Japanese girl I was dating at the time- I have found that many Japanese concepts do not translate well into English due to idiosyncrasies of both languages and cultures- and I do not speak more than five words in Japanese.DinkyInky wrote:Ahh. I read Korean translations first, then found English ones that closely resembled those.Sgt. Howard wrote: Ah yes- Sun Tzu is excellent reading for those not yet introduced. Ueshiba I find depends on who the translator is, otherwise his subtleties are lost on the English-speaking reader.
So, how exactly DO you learn to throw your eyes off focus, like that?Sgt. Howard wrote:Your opponant cannot do ANYTHING without shifting his/her weight. If you throw your eyes out of focus, even the slightest and most subtle movement becomes preceptible. What's more, if you practice viewing out of focus, you will note that you can pay attention to periphrial vision at the same as your primary focus- you can see the whole picture at once.
In short- when you see a shift of weight, you know what he/she is about to do just as surely as if it was in a script. When you can see all extremities at once, none of them can catch you by surprise.
Look at something and relax your eyes. It takes practice. In my case, I remove my bifocals. While looking at something. pay attention to things at the extreme of your vision without moving your eyes... look at other things without 'looking' at them. After a while, you will notice that you see everything at once. Again, it takes practice.lake_wrangler wrote:So, how exactly DO you learn to throw your eyes off focus, like that?Sgt. Howard wrote:Your opponant cannot do ANYTHING without shifting his/her weight. If you throw your eyes out of focus, even the slightest and most subtle movement becomes preceptible. What's more, if you practice viewing out of focus, you will note that you can pay attention to periphrial vision at the same as your primary focus- you can see the whole picture at once.
In short- when you see a shift of weight, you know what he/she is about to do just as surely as if it was in a script. When you can see all extremities at once, none of them can catch you by surprise.
There's a neat trick based on the same phenomenon I learned years ago... "nightwalking". Go out for a walk on a dark night someday... no moon, no streetlights. Instead of looking down at your path to figure out where to step, look straight ahead at the horizon, or even a bit above it where there's nothing to see... and ignore where your eyes are looking. Instead, "open up" and let in all of what your peripheral vision is perceiving, without paying particular attention to any one part of it... and just walk, in the dark.Sgt. Howard wrote: Look at something and relax your eyes. It takes practice. In my case, I remove my bifocals. While looking at something. pay attention to things at the extreme of your vision without moving your eyes... look at other things without 'looking' at them. After a while, you will notice that you see everything at once. Again, it takes practice.
Now imagine if your opponent flat out told you exactly what he was going to do just before he did it- THIS is the advantage that you have given yourself... and he has NO CLUE how you are doing it.
This is because of the way the human eye is set up- when you are looking ar something, it is focused on a part of the retina called the 'fovia'. The fovia is heavily clusterd with cones, which are color receptors... and require a goodly amount of light. Rods, which are B&W receptors (and require much less light), are scattered among the cones elsewhere on the retina- this is why you periphrial vision works at night while your focal vision does not... this is also why you do not see color at night.Dave wrote:There's a neat trick based on the same phenomenon I learned years ago... "nightwalking". Go out for a walk on a dark night someday... no moon, no streetlights. Instead of looking down at your path to figure out where to step, look straight ahead at the horizon, or even a bit above it where there's nothing to see... and ignore where your eyes are looking. Instead, "open up" and let in all of what your peripheral vision is perceiving, without paying particular attention to any one part of it... and just walk, in the dark.Sgt. Howard wrote: Look at something and relax your eyes. It takes practice. In my case, I remove my bifocals. While looking at something. pay attention to things at the extreme of your vision without moving your eyes... look at other things without 'looking' at them. After a while, you will notice that you see everything at once. Again, it takes practice.
Now imagine if your opponent flat out told you exactly what he was going to do just before he did it- THIS is the advantage that you have given yourself... and he has NO CLUE how you are doing it.
After a bit of practice you'll find yourself walking through the dark quite comfortably, stepping confidently, and avoiding obstacles in your path, without ever "looking at them" or "watching where you're going". You'll be using your peripheral vision (lower resolution, but quite sensitive to motion) over a very wide field of view all at once, rather than your "foveal" vision (very high resolution, but sees only a very small area at any one time).
It's also an interesting meditative "be here now" technique. The act of "tuning in" to such a broad visual field and processing it all in parallel, as you walk, seems to induce something of an alpha-wave state... "mind chatter" quiets down. I've never been instructed formally in Zen but I suspect that this may be a bit like what Zazen (walking meditation) is about.
There is much of the human condition that we as a species have 'lost' only because we think it unnessisary- your nose, for instance, is more sensitive than you think. I can not only smell human blood, I can usually differentiate blood types. I know when a woman is pregnant... by smell. I can tell what is burning by the smell of smoke. I can identify most preditors... and track them... by scent. My nose is probably no more sensitive than most- I have simply taught myself how to identify what I smell.TazManiac wrote:Funny you should mention the 'off-focus' thing; it's a number on the long list of 'I thought I was the first (and only) one to have discovered that!..." that so makes up a great deal of my childhood.
Stuff like what we perceive is not necessarily Reality, how to pay attention to 'the little stuff', etc .
Really though, once I had a taste for it, internalized it, I didn't spend much time developing these types of thing- they are still there, just atrophied a bit.
Hmm, does it ever get so bad you taste it? I can't hunt anymore, because the taste of drinking liquefied pennies was so overwhelming. I know when an animal is hurt or giving birth by scent, but nothing amazing like what you're saying.Sgt. Howard wrote:There is much of the human condition that we as a species have 'lost' only because we think it unnessisary- your nose, for instance, is more sensitive than you think. I can not only smell human blood, I can usually differentiate blood types. I know when a woman is pregnant... by smell. I can tell what is burning by the smell of smoke. I can identify most preditors... and track them... by scent. My nose is probably no more sensitive than most- I have simply taught myself how to identify what I smell.TazManiac wrote:Funny you should mention the 'off-focus' thing; it's a number on the long list of 'I thought I was the first (and only) one to have discovered that!..." that so makes up a great deal of my childhood.
Stuff like what we perceive is not necessarily Reality, how to pay attention to 'the little stuff', etc .
Really though, once I had a taste for it, internalized it, I didn't spend much time developing these types of thing- they are still there, just atrophied a bit.
I do not wear after shave or deoderant- it leaves me 'nose blind'.
You have my sympathies and appreciation! I'm allergic to a lot of aromatics (inherited this from my mother's side of the family), and have to take a deep breath and dash past those perfume kiosks. Getting past the duty-free perfume shops at the airport is one of the more annoying aspects of traveling for me.DinkyInky wrote:I also only wear perfume on my skin that is chemical free, and hand blended from distilled oils. If I do like a commercial scent, I place some on a bit of cotton, and close it in a locket. It never touches my skin.