Pretty much the same trajectory. I started at my T420 around 2010 and that time I just main laptop, computer. Then, as I have a more powerful desktop, this T420 becomes my secondary computer and I started to experience Linux with it. After almost 15 years I end up converted it into a PVE host and run just one or two virtual machines on it and it's quite durable I can still do functional work on it, quite remarkable how a computer can last so long.
合抱之木，生于毫末；九层之台，起于累土；千里之行，始于足下。 [1]
This is not secret, almost everyone knows it thousand years ago,
but most of people won't do it. Minimum effective dose is another
way to say be consistent on thing that you feel important. The 3rd
chapter on Atomic Habit also give a very detailed explanation.
And it is so easy to find real word examples:
"Mental toughness and resilience fade if they aren't used
consistently. I say it all the time: you are either getting better,
or you're getting worse. You're not staying the same." [2]
"That’s often all that’s necessary to get the snowball rolling, the
action needed to inspire the motivation to keep going. You can
become your own source of inspiration. You can become your own
source of motivation. Action is always within reach. And with
simply doing something as your only metric for success—well, then
even failure pushes you forward." [3]
In cycling training:
- "I have always been a really consistent rider" [4]
- "The biggest difference in my training in in 2018 to today is
consistency" [5]
- "My Top 5 Tips To Increase Cycling Power: Number one is
consistency." [6]
- Let's finish up with the five key points to how you can improve
your FTP. Number one, be consistent. [7]
- I have three kind of important specs in training, so the first
one and arguably the very most important is consistency. [8]
But if most people agree with this idea, why not everybody do this
way? I think is lacking a clear goal, and a good way to measure it.
I used to be competitive as cyclist, but as I getting older, I
start lossing this part of motivition. Nowadays, I am not training
for FTP anymore, but training for "I don't want to make this f*k
run in this frozen winter". I want myself to become as hard as
Goggins.
Life is short, what would you like to be consistent with?
[1] 道德经【第六十四章】
[2] Goggins, D. (2022). Never finished: unshackle your mind and win
the war within. David Goggins.
[3] Manson, M. (2016). The subtle art of not giving a f*ck: a
counterintuitive approach to living a good life. New York:
HarperOne.
[4] 12 questions with Greg van Avermaet
https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/12-questions-with-greg-van-avermaet/
[5] 300+ Watt Ramp Test, My 66 Watt Increase - Trainerroad, Zwift,
Sufferfest https://youtu.be/HPQUgrd7zR0?t=292
[6] How I Increased My FTP By 140 Watts & My Top 5 Tips To Increase
Cycling Power https://youtu.be/FVetgOjQxak?t=313
[7] How to Raise Your FTP || Workouts and Strategies to Boost Your
FTP in 2021 https://youtu.be/ECpZ1KxUfyM?t=802
[8] How I´ve doubled my FTP in 3 years https://youtu.be/UJTHfK-hmYw?t=336
Really want to try to test that rotating cylinder case shown in the paper. Apprecitate anyone could pin point the source code to run a simple case like that.
One day, I'm working on a Linux machine with my Emacs open, I'm using a Bazel to clean my today's to-do list project. And I open the browser to find a person who wrote a blog about Boost.graph which I never heard about, but I'm really interested to look at. I finish this writing, save the buffer and =C-c g= to lunch magit to write a commit message "good day", then pushed to my git repo.
It descripts a system using the energy concept. The total energy of the system, which is the sum of kinetic energy and potential energy. Its formula often looks like H = T + V, where T represents kinetic energy and V represents potential energy.
Both the quantum mechanics and molecular dynamics have shared a similar concept.
In structural mechanics, we use the virtual method to calculate the hyperstatic structure to determine displacements in a structure, given forces acting on the structure. Another kind of Hamiltonian.
I am curious about what you mean by “classically educated.” In my undergrad physics education, computing Hamiltonians was pretty much an entire semester of classical mechanics in my junior year.
We didn’t really touch fluids though. Does “classical” mean something different there?
I still remember in high school, we only need two or three equations
to solve a free-fall problem. In another book, basically the same
question, but someone uses Hamiltonian framework to solve really
complex PDEs and couple pages with those crazy equations to basically
solve the same thing, and eventually got the same results.
I still remember that was mind-blowing. High school physics is so
simple, whereas the Hamilton is so complex. I later on notice that
Hamilton is kind of a more standard way to solve the problem. Never
mind, I'm not an expert on it, but I'm just kind of amazed by the
Hamiltonian mechanics.
The Hamiltonian is a lot more flexible with respect to frame. The Newtonian formulation works great for simple cases but as it gets more complex it's harder and harder to pick a reference frame that's easy to compute.
Effectively, by working with energy rather than force, you can avoid working with vectors. That ends up being simpler as the components add up.
After watching his speech, the first thing that came to my mind is one of the speeches that was given by James T. Kirk, which I had no idea which episode it was in, but I do remember the core meaning of that speech. So I use chatGPT to actually help me to find it by just single one question. And it works! And here's the thing I want to share with the the audiuence.
"They used to say if man could fly, he'd have wings, but he did fly. He discovered he had to. Do you wish that the first Apollo mission hadn't reached the moon, or that we hadn't gone on to Mars and then to the nearest star? That's like saying you wish that you still operated with scalpels and sewed your patients up with catgut like your great-great-great-great grandfather used to. I'm in command. I could order this, but I'm not because Doctor McCoy is right in pointing out the enormous danger potential in any contact with life and intelligence as fantastically advanced as this, but I must point out that the possibilities - the potential for knowledge and advancement - is equally great. Risk! Risk is our business. That's what this starship is all about. That's why we're aboard her. You may dissent without prejudice. Do I hear a negative vote?"
Isn't that pretty ironic, given the speech leads to the spherical intelligences to take him for a ride, manipulate and trick him, and almost kill him and four of his men?
How is that ironic? Saying "risk is our business" doesn't imply you'll be successful. It implies the risk is worth it, and you acknowledge the possibility of negative and dangerous outcomes.
no, because risk and danger is an expected outcome of what he said.
a weak situational irony would be that the crew reluctantly agrees to take on the risks of exploration, but then every single encounter they have from then on is peaceful, contemplative, and non-eventful.
a weak character irony could be that Kirk gets the crew on-board with his gung-ho antics and thirst for the unknown, they all agree -- and then it's discovered that Kirk is actually a huge wimp that was really just putting on a front because he never thought the crew would want to continue after his descriptions of danger.
I'm listening to her book The worlds i see: curiosity, exploration, and discovery at the dawn of ai. So right now, I'm just in the middle. She's Starting from physics, but eventually found something interesting internal world for a person, which lead to the road to artificial intelligence. I have pretty much the same experience like her. Starting young, falling in love with physics as I get older. I also noticed a huge motivation to learn Myself. The thing in my head, how it works, how it behaves, how I react to certain external world stimulus. Yeah I'm still in the process to to her book and try to understanding of this new technology and immerse myself in this new things and try to do some interesting stuff.
Both APIs use weather models from NOAA GFS and HRRR, providing accurate forecasts in North America. HRRR updates every hour, capturing recent showers and storms in the upcoming hours. PirateWeather gained popularity last year as a replacement for the Dark Sky API when Dark Sky servers were shut down.
With Open-Meteo, I'm working to integrate more weather models, offering access not only to current forecasts but also past data. For Europe and South-East Asia, high-resolution models from 7 different weather services improve forecast accuracy compared to global models. The data covers not only common weather variables like temperature, wind, and precipitation but also includes information on wind at higher altitudes, solar radiation forecasts, and soil properties.
Using custom compression methods, large historical weather datasets like ERA5 are compressed from 20 TB to 4 TB, making them accessible through a time-series API. All data is stored in local files; no database set-up required. If you're interested in creating your own weather API, Docker images are provided, and you can download open data from NOAA GFS or other weather models.
So for a daily user, to make it a practical usage, let's say if I have a local measurement of X, I can predict, let's say, 10 days later, or even just tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow, let's say the wind direction, is it possible to do that?
If it is possible, then I will try using the sensor to measure my velocity at some place where I live, and I can run the model and see how the results look like. I don't know if it's going to accurately predict the future or within a 10% error bar range.
