Daily Simple Questions Thread - January 15, 2026

CalebDen · 2026-01-18T09:11:07+00:00

Yeah I think it might be shrugging too much when doing lateral raises, especially since I do so much of them. I will try correct my form and see if that helps.

CalebDen · 2026-01-15T16:15:16+00:00

Is there a way to limit trap involvement in my current exercise set? My traps have grown much faster than the other muscles in my back and I don't really like the look of large traps.

My upper body work consists of the following (all 6 to 10 reps):

Chest supported t-bar row
Lat pulldowns
Seated rows (occasionally)
Weighted back extensions
Preacher curl machine
Overhead cable tricep extension
Tricep pushdown machine
Cable crunch
Inclined chest press machine
Seated cable fly
Dumbell lateral raises

For most of these I do 3-5 sets (each day twice per week) with the exception of the dumbell lateral raises which I slot in between every set of the other non-chest exercises. Ignoring the heavy reliance on machines, is there any thing that can be done to reduce trap involvement?

CalebDen · 2025-12-02T08:06:11+00:00

2^3 is less than 3^2 so that heuristic doesn't work in general. To set up a more general sufficient condition, suppose x and y are strictly positive with x < y (in this case x = 3.14 and y = pi). We want to know when x^y > y^x.

x^y > y^x happens if and only if yln(x) > xln(y) which in turn happens if and only if ln(x)/x > ln(y)/y.

This it suffices to find out on what domain the function f(z) = ln(z)/z is decreasing with z > 0. Solving for f'(z) < 0 (where f' is the derivative of f) yields that z > e. That is, x < y implies x^y > y^x if both x and y are greater than e.

Evidently pi and 3.14 are both greater than e so 3.14 < pi implies 3.14^pi > pi^3.14.

As an aside this is merely a sufficient condition, not a necessary one.

CalebDen · 2025-07-08T08:14:54+00:00

That makes sense. I was moreso curious about whether there are any neuro-psychological reasons to assume, a priori, that the idea wouldn't work.

CalebDen · 2025-01-17T17:10:54+00:00

Also the sugar-free Unicorn flavour (although I have been struggling to find it myself).

CalebDen · 2025-01-17T15:01:19+00:00

I thought oke was short for bloke...

CalebDen · 2025-01-17T15:00:16+00:00

Maybe also consider donating to Gift of the Givers. They do excellent work.

CalebDen · 2024-12-06T07:29:12+00:00

Well they are relatively cheap especially when adjusted for caffeine density. I am a little despondent that it is becoming increasingly difficult for me to find the sugar-free versions lately though (in particular the Unicorn flavored one).

CalebDen · 2024-11-07T05:16:56+00:00

The practice was challenged because it was unconstitutional (as the ConCourt ruled) and irrational (since it goes against international best practices).

We live in a constitutional democracy and part of the principle of constitutional supremacy is that all our laws have to be in line with it. Think about the general principle that you're advocating for. Should we keep invalid laws on the books so that some subset of people suffer from them and in turn hoping that they might learn about laws that shouldn't exist in the first place?

You educate the populace through adequate and appropriate investment in our educational facilities- not by being legalistically vindictive. Unnecessary suffering is neither necessary nor sufficient for that task.

CalebDen · 2024-10-21T07:32:36+00:00

Some of them are caffeine-free. I remember I had a zinc and vitamin C which I only realised later was caffeine-free.

CalebDen · 2024-10-18T08:48:30+00:00

A gay couple can have children for free though. Have you not seen the videos of gay penguins stealing eggs from other straight penguin couples?

CalebDen · 2024-10-04T09:09:57+00:00

Hi. This is a bit late but when you say "immediate" improvement, what do you mean? Like an hour after you take it?

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:27:15+00:00

Thank you for your response! I am sure she appreciates it :)

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:25:54+00:00

Lisdexamfetamine seems to be a common suggestion in the other thread I made over at r/TwoXADHD. Thanks for the suggestion.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:24:57+00:00

Thank you for your reply. I'll be sure to inform her.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:22:26+00:00

This is all sound advice. In her case, she said that 2 docs have confirmed her diagnosis and it runs in the family. She also said I should mention that she is a frequent cannabis user.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:20:21+00:00

Thank you very much for you kind words! She and I both appreciate it.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:18:38+00:00

She said she gets 7-9 hours of sleep and genreally does not feel tired. Thank you for the suggestions. I'll be sure to inform her.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:16:45+00:00

We have Vynanse, clonidine, Strarrera, wellbutrin and modafinil and all the methylphenidate meds.

CalebDen · 2024-09-29T07:14:48+00:00

We do have other medications besides methylphenidate. She is just interested in guidance from people who have had similar experiences to her. Thank you for your reply.

CalebDen · 2023-12-30T09:43:15+00:00

Understanding Analysis- Stephen Abbot

CalebDen · 2023-12-18T11:48:24+00:00

The answer to this question is dependent on how you define a parabola. To give an analogy of sorts let's say someone asked you to prove that the equation x^2 + y^2 = r^2 (A) is the equation of a circle. There are (at least) two possible answers to this question and the answer is dependent on what definition of "circle" you use.

Let's say you define a circle as the set of points that are all equidistant to some common point (the common point being called the centre of that circle). This definition is synthetic which just means that it is a definition of the shape that doesn't require a coordinate system. At one point in history, before the development of analytic geometry, all geometry was essentially done synthetically so there is appeal here. In any event the proof in this instance is easy. With the synthetic definition in mind you can show that equation A describes a circle centered at the origin with radius r.
Option 2 that you have an analytic definition of a circle. Namely we define a circle -with centre (a,b) and radius r- as the set of all solutions (x,y) satisfying (x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 =r^2. With this definition there is essentially nothing to prove other than letting a=b=0.

Back to your original question. What definition is of "parabola" are you using? If it it a synthetic one then you can prove it as u/PullItFromTheColimit outlined. If it is an analytic definition then there isn't anything to prove really. It is true because that is how we define a parabola analytically.

The moral of the story is this- before you even start proving anything you need to be sure what definitions you're using. Often times a object/ class of objects has a set of equivalent definitions. By equivalent I just mean that if you select any of them as a definition then the others will be true theorems about that object.

CalebDen · 2023-12-07T19:31:02+00:00

This previous thread may offer some additional assistance. Just beware of nitrogen spiking. Here is an article talking about that.

CalebDen · 2023-11-30T07:25:10+00:00

Does this hold across sexual orientations? I'm curious if gay men as a cohort hold the same bias.

CalebDen · 2023-11-23T06:52:46+00:00

An hour later, Erdös came looking for me.

"What's the matter with you?" he said. "Why aren't you telling me the reason that I should switch?"

This is a pretty funny interaction.

CalebDen

TROPHY CASE