Analogies are weak forms of arguments. They cannot be used to convince one who is out rightly against the very foundations of the belief. It only works on people who are more or less able to accept the foundational concepts behind the belief, and an analogy can help to make it easier to understand, or more interesting to read. It also helps people notice something they would not usually notice. With the ability to categorise, analogies are powerful tools in helping people understand the idea behind many concepts with just a study of one sample that this analogy applies to.

For example, by using the analogy of colliding balls on gas particles, physicists are able to make many useful predictions and manipulations of gases. Even though gas molecules are not exactly like colliding balls, this analogy helps to enforce understanding in physics of gases for people who already have some knowledge on the physics of collisions.

Another example would be the flow of water from a hole at the bottom of a bucket. The rate of flow is determined by the amount of water still in the bucket, and the rate of flow determines how fast the water flows out. On closer analysis, the amount of water in the bucket decreases exponentially with time. By analogy, the discharging of a capacitor is like the flow of charge out of the plates, and the rate of flow is determined by the amount of charge remaining in the capacitor. From the analysis of the flow of water out of a leaky bucket, one can more easily understand the discharging of a capacitor, without needing to work with a capacitor.

From here, I shall attempt to use analogy to find out more about myself. It is difficult to find out about myself by myself. By the study of other objects by other people, I hope to be able to understand myself better.

Before I can use analogy, there must be certain similarities between me and the object I’ll draw parallel to. I would try something that is already quite well understood: electricity.

1. I am motivated by joy or expectation of joy and the prospect to being able to avoid pain, and I act in this direction. (Charge distribution?)

2. This motivation encourages me to act in certain ways. In the process I achieve other objectives that may or may not benefit me. (Work done?)

3. While I am motivated to do certain things, I cannot do all of them, because of external factors. (Resistance?)

4. When I do not have what I want, or I am currently suffering, I feel the need to do something. (Positive potential?)

5. When I have a goal in sight, the goal is at a state of less suffering and more joy than the current state. (Lower potential?)

6. I would only be motivated to do something if I do not reach my goal yet. (No Potential difference = No Work done?)

This looks like nonsense so far. But with the amount of understanding people have about electricity, if a working analogy can be made between electronic circuits and me, there would be so much for me to learn about myself. Exciting.

Okay so here is an attempted continuation from the previous entry. Attempted because I don't have much else to say.

This theory is based on experience. I cannot sense my own thinking process. Therefore I propose that thinking is subconscious. However, if you can sense your own thinking, then I can only say that my theory doesn't work for you. The only people I can try to convince are the people who, like me, cannot sense their own thinking process. I can only use examples here, because "thinking", "feeling", "subconscious", "conscious" and "I" are abstract concepts that I don't understand myself either. Any argument that attempts to bring reason into the picture would need to define these terms. I would dread doing so. Hence, my "argument" shall comprise of mainly examples and not much reasoning.

If you look at a phrase written in English, do you see the individual letters one by one, or do you see a word, or do you see the phrase? In my case, I normally see the phrase. In occasional lapses of broken concentration I see the letters as pictures. At that very instant I can't comprehend the phrase at all! I see the paragraph as a picture with many details. Yet when I sort of recover, there seems to be something about the letters that make them different from pictures, which I would take for granted again. When I read, I can somehow make sense of the words, even though the meanings of each individual words do not pop up in my head. I may even read a phrase, remember the idea, but forget how to phrase it the next time I recall the idea (it happens quite commonly in chemistry and economics). It seems that much of the comprehension in reading takes place subconsciously. I do not need to tell myself what each word means to understand a phrase. If a phrase is poorly phrased I'll just spend more time looking at it, and somehow I just get it. I do hear whispers in my head now and then, but they are not constructive to the understanding of the phrase.

In my case, it seems that when I understand something, I just "get it". I can't really control what I think. There are times when I hear something and I tell myself "don't think dirty, don't laugh" but really, I can't help it.

If thinking is like feeling, then perhaps we can extend some empiricist arguments to include thinking as one of the senses. Never mind that empiricist arguments are not foolproof, let's just see if it makes sense first.

1. Basic ideas: Complex ideas are made up of basic ideas. I cannot conceive of a complex idea based on a basic idea I had never experienced.
2. Certainty of sensation: At that very instant I am sure I felt that way.
3. Incorrugibility of sensation: What I feel is always correct.
4. Tabula rasa: No sensations at birth.
5. All ideas are linked to sensations: If you can't trace an idea back to a sensation then you are just confused about the idea.

Now if I am to include the "Eureka" from thinking process as a sensation, I would need to provide examples.

1. If I cannot comprehend logic, I cannot analyse arguments for validity.
2. At the very instant I saw my teacher with a stack of paper, I was sure I thought we were going to have a quiz.
3. I think Alwyn is gay; therefore Alwyn is gay.
4. (what is there to say?)
5. Mathematical ideas can be linked to thinking processes. The idea of complex numbers is linked to the thought processes associated with negatives and square roots. The concept of derivative is linked to the thought processes associated with gradient.

Note that point three doesn't make much sense with "thinking" in it. This is not because "thinking" doesn't fit in well with that empiricist argument. It is because point 3 already doesn't make much sense without "thinking" in it.

Hmm "thinking = feeling" makes sense to me. Does it make sense to you? If it does, I might be able to draw analogies from feeling to thinking.

- Thinking cannot be controlled.
- It is impossible to know how someone else thinks.
- Thinking can be shaped by experience.
- No one can doubt how you think.
- Thinking is a fallible process.
- Thinking cannot result in undubitable synthetic truths about the noumenal.

Ok... this is weird. The last point seems to contradict what we have been learning so far!

Before I proceed, I hope someone can tell me if I'm on the right track, and guide me along.

I wonder if I think.

Whenever I seem to be thinking, I am more like talking to myself in my head.

Tell me, what goes in your mind when you see

1 + 2 = 4 ?

In my case, nothing. It just seems wrong. I don't have think that the answer is 3 before it looks wrong to me. If you ask me if it is wrong I'll say it is wrong. If you ask me why, frankly speaking it just feels wrong. (But of course if marks are given I'll say that the answer is 3. Or if it is some challenging problem in H3 Basic Math I'll give up.)

But if you are like me, you look at the expression and nothing goes through your mind other than the gut feeling it looks wrong, then I shall continue. If not, tag that this is wrong.

So it seems that the "thinking" process that led to the conclusion that 1 + 2 is not 4 is subconscious. I am not aware of the reason why I feel that 1 + 2 is not 4.

How about 254 + 549 = 803 ?

Now in my case, this isn't just a gut feeling. In my case, I do not immediately feel that 254 + 549 is 803. Now I do "see" some numbers popping up here and there as I think. I am aware of this happening. I am aware that I am adding up 9 and 4 first to see if the unit digit is 3. Does that constitute thinking? It seems that I just had a gut feeling that I should add up the last digit first. I was taught that in primary school. Now, this teaching has become a gut feeling.

Now it seems to me that I have been taking it for granted that when I look at some problems the answer appears. Apparently it isn't due to any merit of my own. It is a gut feeling. I cannot explain it. Perhaps this gut feeling gets enhanced by practice. With enough practice gut feeling becomes faster and more accurate than thinking. Just like I cannot understand how others feeling, I wouldn't be able to understand how Jin Wei can look at the maths problem and see the answer.

Really! In his tutorials, questions that demand numerical answers only have a numerical answer next to it. When I ask him how he did it he would scratch and tilt his head and say, "You just... see lah." or "It's just... like that lah!"

Perhaps certain forms of thinking is not conscious. Perhaps, when I say I think, I just feel, or I am just talking to myself in my head. Perhaps, thinking is just an inner sensation.

Okay, this is weak, but another point to note is that "I think that Alwyn is gay." means almost the same thing as "I feel that Alwyn is gay."

In some weird part of china there was this hero who wanted to eat apple very much. However, he lived in an area where apple is very rare. So rare that only one hermit in the high high mountains had an apple. So, this hero when all the way up and finally found this hermit. Now, this hermit was of course wouldn't be willing to give up his precious apple for free, so he asked the hero to give him some items in exchange.

"You must find me these few things in exchange for my apple.
- A water dragon's head
- An ice chimera
- Phoenix claw."

And so the hero when down the high high mountain, and after a day, managed to find the items required.

When he finally met the old mermit, he handed the old chinese hermit a tap(shui3 long2 tou2), an ice cream(bing1 qi2 lin2), and chicken feet (feng4 zhao3).

And he got an apple.

How to make an absurd theory that somehow makes sense.

1. Start off with an absurd statement and assume it is true.
2. Tell someone about it.
3. When the absurd statement is under attack, invent something not so absurd to account for it.
4. The new not-so-absurd statement becomes part of the theory, which you would assume to be true.
5. When the not-so absurd statement is being questioned, invent something that makes sense to account for it.
6. The statement-that-makes-sense becomes part of the theory and you assume it to be true.
7. When doubts are cast about the statement-that-makes-sense, use something widely accepted to be true to account for it.
8. Repeat steps 2-7 until you can account for everything.
9. Once the absurd statement can account for everything, you wouldn't need to assume that the absurd statement is true anymore, the widely accepted truths can be used to justify it.

There! Now you have a coherence set of beliefs based on an absurd statement!

Practice time!

1. Alwyn is gay.
2. Alwyn: "No I'm not!"
3. "Yes you are. Look at the way you act!"
4. Alwyn is gay because of the way he acts.
5. Alwyn: "Huh? How do I act that makes me gay?"
6. "Because of the way you act around jimr last year!"
7. Alwyn is gay because of the way he acts, especially last year, when he was around jimr.
8. Nah I shan't be so bad to Alwyn.
9. From the way Alwyn behaved around jimr last year, we can easily conclude that Alwyn is gay.

If a genie would grant you a wish, would you wish to be happy, or wish for something that you think would make you happy, or something else?

Random thoughts.

There are things I don't understand. Even if I ask, I wouldn't understand. Even if I understand, it wouldn't matter.

I have no future.

There are so few things to think about once I stopped asking why.

It is strange that in math you can show that a number doesn't exist, yet in science you can't show that something doesn't exist. Once you show a number can exist, it exists. But even if the existence of an object makes logical sense, it doesn't necessarily exist.

Humour seems to be subjective.

"...but the ambulance driver also drive very fast what, knock into someone then how?"

This would be an interesting read. This is not to say that it reflects any of my views.

http://www.princeton.edu/~nbishop/physics_is_easy.html

And to potential critics: it is all in the name of humour. Cheer up.

Yesterday kena-ed two april fool jokes. One of them almost gave me a heart attack. Good one.

From browsing other ppl's blogs, it seems that a few others I know are having the same problems as I! Hahaha I feel better already. Misery loves company.