**Navigate**

Johan drinks milk in slow motion to piano pop music

- Nautilus is a very interesting magazine.
- Street photography in Tokyo is fun. Nighttime film photography in Tokyo is also fun because street lights give off a teal, Fujifilm-like colour. That’s kind of also why I’m excited about all these LED lights in Mississauga; it’ll make nighttime photography look more colour-balanced.

(Source: wnycradiolab)

## The Pea And The Sun

There is an interesting theorem in set theory and geometry, called the Banach-Tarski Paradox, which proposes the following:

Given a solid ball in 3‑dimensional space, there exists a decomposition of the ball into a finite number of non-overlapping pieces (i.e. disjoint subsets), which can then be put back together in a different way to yield two identical copies of the original ball. Since I ripped this off from Wikipedia, I might as well continue to do so and post an illustration here, also from Wiki:

But wait… What? Two identical balls of the same size as the single ball they originated from? Then that means I could, in theory, somehow produce TWO slices of steak equivalent to the one they were ‘reassembled’ from. How heavenly would that be? If possible, with my grocery bills cut down, I’d blow even more money on other useless life ‘necessities’ than I already do.

Personal planning aside, the reassembly of the pieces only involves moving and rotating them, without any stretching or bending. So how does this work?

I don’t know. Hah, I am not completely familiar nor comfortable with the set theory and geometric proofs behind this interesting theorem. I do understand however that the pieces themselves are an infinite scattering of points as opposed to your conventional solid pieces.

A stronger form of this theorem states that given any two “reasonable” solid objects, you can reassemble one into the other. Take for example a pea and a sun - based on this form of the theorem, you can make a ball the size of a pea into a ball the size of the sun and vice versa.

If you couldn’t tell, all of this is a paradox because the operations being performed (translations and rotations) preserve volume, yet somehow the volume is ultimately doubled.

So this only works if you use the axiom of choice, which I will not go into here, but seems pretty self-evident (doesn’t everything these days?) when you read it. This axiom allows for “the construction of nonmeasurable sets, i.e. collections of points that do not have a volume in the ordinary sense and that for their construction would require performing an uncountable infinite number of choices.”

So there are two things to note, for me at least: the concept of infinity, and the axiom upon which this works. I really question how well-equipped we as humans are to understand the concept of infinity, or eternity. The idea itself seems simple enough - something that doesn’t have an end, or a beginning for that matter. It just extends out into… space or something. Okay, alright. That’s a straightforward enough definition, but when you begin to visualize or even attempt to grasp this extremely alien notion, your brain will asphyxiate itself with the contortions it’s done. The idea itself is breathtaking though (hence the asphyxiation) and utterly astounding the more I think about it; how insignificant and small we are in a place and time containing both ephemeral traits and unfathomable infinities (because yes, there is a hierarchy of infinities).

Coming back to my second point, it’s interesting that this theorem can only be proven with the axiom of choice. It just goes to show that anything, again in theory, is possible based on where you begin. I’m going to perhaps make a far-fetched connection and refer back to Poincaré’s description of chaos, and the unpredictability of where an event will lead you based on your initial conditions. It all ultimately comes down to how you define different ideas and concepts in your life. The disputes and such that happen in society all lie in discrepancies between how people define things. Gee, even just looking back at the past couple of years, I’ve had to rework my own “life dictionary”; I think I basically destroyed whatever I had before and started from scratch (there’s definitely no conservation of energy here).

It’s enlightening looking back and seeing how far (? Can one even measure progress like this anymore?) I’ve come; how much I (or so I think) have learned. I wonder, with this new foundation, where I’ll end up next…

Maybe I’ll be able to make two steaks from one someday.

Growing up, I’ve never quite envied anyone.

In our early lives, we are only occasionally a part of life-altering choices, and many of those were oftentimes already decided on our behalf. The playing field was level. My world was small, and everything seemed fair.

We went to school, we had similar classes, and we all had the weekends off. We chose which subjects to enrol and decided which instrument to learn, but these were roughly equal choices and I was picking my favourite. Choices seemed superficial and inconsequential.

But then somewhat suddenly, I realized that the playing field was no longer level. In fact, it hadn’t ever been; I just couldn’t see far enough to see the curvature of the rolling hills. It was only recently that I saw how our small choices shaped our day-to-day routines, dictate the types of freedom we enjoy, and leave us with particular responsibilities to bear. I gradually realized that I wasn’t able to do whatever I wanted to do, unlike how I felt I could when my world was small.

Nowadays, I catch myself feeling envious of others. Envious of people that can start their days with a cup of tea while still in bed, or of people who are in close-distance relationships, or of people who get to work outside. People who are sad and thus are able to create beautiful art. People who are hungry and thus are able to appreciate food so much more than I appreciate my weekly Whopper Wednesday meal.

I’m envious of others, but I think that’s okay. I don’t wish I were someone else, or that I had something else. I merely wish that I could feel what others feel.

I have a choice now, in the present, of whether to have my future self will envy my past self more, or to have my present self envy my future self more.

When The Sun Comes Out, This Synthetic Cloud Self-Inflates

The shape of the umbrella was also inspired by nature. “The power of solar energy inspired us to design this synthetic cloud,” Widdershoven says. The form is aerodynamic, so the umbrella won’t blow over in strong winds, and the fabric is waterproof, so it can last as long as possible.

More> Co.Exist

(via fastcodesign)

Guys I want to introduce you to Dinosaur Comics. It is totally awesome because every single comic has the same art and it’s really just a daily blog post by a rambling nerd but OH MAN IT IS SO FUNNY and its topics are sometimes enlightening.

Today I discovered that Logic Pro X comes with pop music loops galore. Mixed them into a song.

I can’t write on Tumblr because it doesn’t save my posts as I go.

Lost a post that I was writing on the subway this morning.

**About**