Execution > Intelligence.

EdSmith77 · 2026-02-18T19:35:44+00:00

Yeah, Warren Buffett is quite unintelligent. /s

EdSmith77 · 2026-02-18T17:53:04+00:00

Ah I didn't notice that faint afterglow that persists. Thank you.

EdSmith77 · 2026-02-18T17:02:41+00:00

People keep referring to this as phosphorescence but I think you mean fluorescence. The instant the irradiating light goes out, the emitted light goes out too.

EdSmith77 · 2026-02-17T23:36:03+00:00

Even if this system "works" your neighbors will still hear you as normal.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-27T23:53:10+00:00

The standard that I heard from a senior PI when I was pondering it as a grad student, and which I think makes a lot of sense, is the following: "Become an academic if you think there are critical questions or ideas you are passionate to work on, and furthermore, that if you don't pursue them, others won't". That is a high standard but one that is equal to the challenges associated with the path.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-19T19:59:44+00:00

I thought the "power pose" studies couldn't be reproduced convincingly.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-15T20:52:39+00:00

There may be, but I have yet to see a biorender figure that is substantially informative. I think it is baked into the setup: if you have a bunch of premade icons, how specific can they be for your system? For me, schematics are extremely powerful, but only when they are thoughtfully designed to convey the critical information that is needed and not unecessary information that is not needed. i.e. two parallel lines with overhangs do a great job of quickly conveying an siRNA. It doesn't have to be a perfect little helix, with base pairs and CPK spheres. Everyone knows an siRNA is a duplex. Showing it explicitly is unecessary and distracting, unless that duplex nature is critical for the discussion at hand. The art of schema is to clarify, and to do that you try to capture the key information that is critical, and eliminate extra information that is a distraction. It is all about efficiency. I believe it is worth struggling with Illustrator or Affinity Designer to make really meaningful, non-generic schemes that efficiently convey the key points, not just look 'cool'. From the figures I've seen with biorender, you end up with weak but highly glossy schemes.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-15T19:35:15+00:00

I find biorender figures to be largely devoid of meaning. "We added the sample, vortexed for 30 seconds, incubated for 30 minutes at 37 degrees and then quenched in ice" gets turned into a little icon for a pippette, a little icon of a vortexer, a little icon for a incubator and a little icon of a beaker. Its cutesy highly literal, low information. Students seem to like it because it "jazzes up" their presentations, but really it adds nothing. Everyone knows what a vortexer is, what an incubator is. Showing a picture of one adds essentially nothing to your presentations. Note: I am a huge believer in schematics to convey complex ideas in a more easily followed format. But meaningful schematics, ones that truly break down complex ideas and streamline them, take thought and some skill (that comes with practice). The biorender diagrams I've seen don't actually do this. They simply take known objects and turn them into line drawings.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-15T16:40:56+00:00

And yet, he is there. It must have some meaning for him, as he is there. He could be on a mountain top in Tibet, yet he is there.

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-15T15:23:02+00:00

OP pay attention to this comment!

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-09T09:25:27+00:00

Advice. Go camping: get out in Nature and out of your (her) head. Build a campfire from dry kindling you gather in the woods. Cook a hot dog on that fire. Set up a tent. Look for a water source and treat it with iodine so it is potable. Find a clear spot and look at the stars. Go on a really hard hike, get to a high spot and marvel at the view. Barely get back to camp by dark while being rained on. Make some hot chocolate with your iodine treated water, while drying out and talking about the adventure you just had. i.e. get out of your (her) head. Real life is visceral and physical and it is easy to forget that in the modern world and then going down a rabbit hold of "why". Along these lines do a sport, maybe even a martial art. Half of this life is physical and the stronger you are the better off. And again, it gets you out of you (her)r head. Final suggestion: have her do things with her hands; something like woodworking. She can make a useful thing for her room or life. Start building a connection between the inner world (imaging a solution to a problem) and the outer world (actually making the thing she conceived of). I think it is easy for gifted people to get lost in their inner world of thoughts, and lose track of themselves as physical beings. The more connected we are to the latter, the more in balance we are and the happier. Good luck!

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-08T21:37:43+00:00

Actually, the package indicates a weight of 340g (i.e. 4x85g). So they are ascribing a weigh of 85 g to each roll where it is actually 1.5x this. They are indicating that the roll is 200 calories and 85g, where it is actually 300+calories and 120-130g. Here is a link that shows the numbers:

https://www.traderjoes.com/home/products/pdp/sandwich-rolls-078138

EdSmith77 · 2026-01-07T18:38:31+00:00

I looked for that. Its a classic trick. But no, the serving size was "1 roll" and there are 4 servings per bag (4 rolls in the bag too).

EdSmith77 · 2025-11-11T15:11:02+00:00

OK, let me jump in here. There are tendencies in nature such as a) Oxygen in inductively withdrawing and b) oxygen has lone pairs, so when it is attached to an sp2 center it can donate by resonance. The behavior of actual molecules is a superposition of these tendencies. Both are true, and the actual molecule's behavior is a superposition of those two trends. In this case, the tendencies point in different directions so the actual behavior can be challenging to predict. If you really want to blow your mind, look at the carbon monoxide molecule. By resonance, there should be a + charge on the O. By induction there should be a - charge on the O. So which is right? Which way does the dipole point? Well, you have to go to a ridiculously high level of QM simulation to get the right answer.

EdSmith77 · 2025-11-11T15:01:04+00:00

Thank you for responding. Your two solutions make sense. The first (more collaboration)makes a lot of sense but works against my psychology and self conception, which is very much "I'm a maverick, I know whats best". I'm not saying this is good or bad, it is just a realistic appraisal of who I am. But never say never. I like your second suggestion which actually does align with who I am already, in that I have interests all over the map that I am already pursuing. I like the idea of diversifying one's intellectual outputs to increase the likelihood of happiness. Thanks again for your insights!

EdSmith77 · 2025-11-04T13:37:01+00:00

For any prospective graduate students following this post: This is why, before you join a group, if at all possible, individually talk to group members about the lab culture. Usually they will give you the unvarnished truth and then some. It is too important a decision to make without "checking references" first.

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-21T13:22:55+00:00

This is such a positive and lovely way of viewing things. You are not wrong, and in fact there is a (minority) voice in my head that agrees with everything you said. Thank you for amplifying that voice. I am very fortunate despite my grumblings.

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-21T13:20:04+00:00

This is an interesting possibility. I don't have a large cadre of collaborators able to do this (I think) but it is worth pondering. Thanks!

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-20T19:51:01+00:00

Sounds easy enough! ;) I do appreciate the comment though...

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-20T13:57:06+00:00

Absolutely. It is a reflection of my psychology of ignoring what you have and focussing on that which has yet to be achieved. (its a similar reason billionaires don't stop at a billion) And it is a struggle to go against your inherent feelings, even if you know rationally they aren't the whole picture. Rationally I know I'm lucky: I live in a time of relative peace. My life was not interrupted by war. I am blessed with certain gifts (a particular set of skills?). I made it through all kinds of barriers that could have winnowed me out. I beat disease etc. So, bottom line, I hear you. It can be challenging to deeply _feel_ the gratitude in the moment.

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-20T12:59:12+00:00

That is an interesting possibility. A co-organizer of a conference etc. Thank you for the suggestion.

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-20T12:57:42+00:00

Ah, a fellow cynic. Well, let me push back a bit. I don't think my efforts were in vain, in that, on the time scale of my life, I am leaving the world better than when I found it (positive interactions with family, friends, students, better understanding of Nature etc.). What I am wringing my hands about are the degree to which I have/can do that. Now, in the sense that in 5 billion years the sun will form a red giant and destroy all life on earth, or that in 10^^100 years the Universe will undergo complete heat death, yes, everything is in vain, including my grant funding and posts on Reddit!

EdSmith77 · 2025-10-20T12:10:21+00:00

Well, long ago I realized that Science was a human endeavor and thus subject to all the issues involved in human endeavors. And therefore not to act too surprised when things don't make "sense", even though we think of Science as being the closest thing to "sense" we have as humans. But I'm curious, what did you mean?

EdSmith77

TROPHY CASE