Dusk till Dawn, Sunset to Sunrise

Okay, I thought this would be a great post because there's a TON of ambiguity about dusk, dawn, sunset, sunrise....How long is a "sunset"? When exactly is dusk? Can there be a set time for dawn and dusk or is always "when things get darker or brighter outside"? And what about twilight, how does that fit into all of this?

Crepusclar celestial events refer to everything when the sun is "close" to the horizon. This is the time when you get the most beautiful colors in the sky as the sun's rays become filtered in through the atmosphere. So why not learn about those actual phases so you can know more precisely what's going on when you see that magical palette of rich oranges and reds off your favorite beach at sunset?!

First off, sunrises and sunsets.

This one is simple. Sunset is the exact moment trailing edge, which would be the "upper edge" of the sun sphere disappears below the horizon. The moment you can no longer see the "orb of the sun" is the last second of a sunset and "sunset phase" is over. Therefore, a sunset lasts exactly how long it takes for the trailing edge of the sun to disappear from the horizon after the leading edge of the sun first hits the horizon. Sunrise, the exact opposite, is the exact moment the trailing edge of the sun full emerges from the horizon. A sunrise "commences" when the leading edge first appears on the horizon, but the sphere is not yet visible, and a sunset "commences" when the leading edge first touches the horizon, but the full sphere is totally visible. Technically sunrise and sunset is when the geometric zenith distance of center of the Sun is 90.8333 degrees, but that's "hyper technical".

The reason why I mentioned sunrises and sunsets were so simple is because there's only one definition of them. Whether your into civil, nautical or astronomical "sky stuff", a sunset and sunrise has a universal definition.

Things get a little more complicated with twilight, dusk, and dawn. Those special times of day are when cats totally freakout because they'e crepuscular! Okay, huge non-sequitor, but I love cats and you'll have to read my post on Cat Vocalizations to learn more about cat sleep patterns. Back to the complications with twilight, dusk, and dawn. There are three types of "getting dark" or "getting light" phases. All measurements agree that day is when the sun is in the sky, night is when their's no light from the sun visible, and sunrise and sunset when the visible sun orb is appearing or disappearing off the horizon. But when the sun disapears off the horizon, after sunset, for example, there's still light! The sun's illumination is not an on-off light switch! Light fades. It dims or slowly illuminates! So, let's start with the categorizations of light. But before we do let's just define the three terms of twilight, dusk, and dawn.

The Sequence of "low horizon" patters of the sun are:

1. Dawn
2. Twilight
3. Sunrise
4. Sunset
5. Twilight
6. Dusk

I'll flesh those out in greater detail, but just know that each sun emergence in the morning has three phases and each sun submergence in the evening has three phases as well.

Now there exist three key types of measurement and each of these have their own unique definition of daytime twilight, nighttime twilight, dusk, and dawn. Fortunately, the only difference is the angle measurement of the sun's position off the horizon. In other words, the different between civil, nautical, and astronomical solar "in between light" hour measurements is purely mathematical!! Phew! I bet you thought we'd have to go through ridiculous parables like "When the sun's bun can no longer be won, then do not fright without light" or some idiotic imprecise, fable. Nope, don't need to worry about that. These solar measurements are precise! So let's get started on those!

Twilight -- The "in between time" when there's scattered sunlight in the sky off the horizon, but the actual sun orb technically just set or has not yet risen. Therefore, twilight kicks in immediately after sunset and ends immediately at dusk, while daytime twilight kicks in immediately after dawn and ends immediately at sunrise.

Civil -- I don't really care about civil twilight because of it's inaccuracy and misleading measurements. Technically, its "dusk" isn't really dusk and it's "dawn" isn't really dawn because there's still light. Nevertheless, civil dusk is when the sun is 6° below the horizon in the evening, while dawn is obviously 6° below the horizon in the morning. Because of its misleading measurements, that's all we'll discuss regarding civil measurments.

Nautical -- Nautical crepuscular measurements are more precise. They reflect "real darkness" and "real morning". Simply, or should I say mathematically, put , nautical twilight is the time period when the sun is between 6° and 12° below the horizon. If the center of the sun is between 6° and 12° below the horizon and it's night, that's nighttime nautical twilight; if it's morning, that's daytime nautical twilight.

Astronomical -- This is the measurement I like the most because it represents "real" light. Civil is purely misleading and Nautical is great because it represents visible objects. The nautical dusk, for example, is when you can't see anything well enough to navigate! Pretty useful. But for those of your who just are appreciating solar light, you've gotta use astronomical! It's the real times of day and night that reflects exact amounts of solar light! So astronomical twilight is when the sun is between 12° and 18° below the horizon; in the morning that's daytime twilight, in the night, that's nocturnal twilight.

Dusk and Dawn -- contrary to popular belief dusk and dawn only occur for a few seconds!! It's morning twilight and nighttime twilight that actual last for as a half hour each depending on which measurement you use. Again, there are three definitions of dusk and dawn: civil, nautical, and astronomical. But again, fortunately, it's all mathemtical clear and clean-cut.

Civil Dusk and Dawn -- Dawn is the exact moment when the sun's ascending center hit's 6° below the horizon, while dusk is the exact moment when the sun's descending center hits 6° below the horizon.

Nautical Dusk and Dawn -- Dawn is the exact moment when the sun's ascending center hit's 12° below the horizon, while dusk is the exact moment when the sun's descending center hits 12° below the horizon.

Astronomical -- Dawn is the exact moment when the sun's ascending center hit's 18° below the horizon, while dusk is the exact moment when the sun's descending center hits 18° below the horizon.

So to our same skeleton framework from before we can add:

1. Dawn -- Astronomical
2. Twilight -- Astronomical
3. Dawn -- Nautical
4. Twilight Nautical
   
5. Dawn -- Civil
6. Dawn -- Civil
   
7. Sunrise
8. Sunset
   
9. Twilight -- Civil
   
10. Dusk -- Civil
11. Twilight -- Nautrical
12. Dusk -- Nautical
13. Twilight -- Astronomical
14. Dusk -- Astronomical
    

So there are 14 distinct key exact, defined phases of what you may have previously caused "sunrise-and -unset"! So when someone says "check out the sunrise" they could be referring to 1 of 7 phases of that sunrise, from astronomical dawn to the actual sunrise!

So now let's put all of this together to visualize it starting with the first peep of light to the last.

1. It's Night. The Sun is > 18° below the horizon.
   
2. As the ascending sun hits 18° below the horizon, Astronomical Dawn Occurs.
3. Astronomical Twilight Starts.
   
4. As the sun hits 12° below the horizon, Astronomical Twilight Ends & Nautical Dawn Occurs.
   
5. Nautical Twilight Starts.
6. As the sun hits 6° below the horizon, Nautical Twilight Ends & Civil Dawn Occurs.
7. Civil Twilight Starts.
   
8. Civil Twilight Ends & Sunrise Starts as the suns upper limb first appears on the horizon.
9. Sunrise ends as the sun's lower limb ascends off the horizon & Daytime starts.
10. As the Sun hits the zenith, it is temporally furthest and equally away from sunrise and sunset. The daily zenith is analogous to the annual equinox! This means that the time after the daily sunrise and before the daily sunset are equal at the zenith, just as the time from sunrise to sunset is equal to the time after sunset to sunrise, which is the definition of an equinox. Far out! Symmetry between daily zenith and annual equinoxes! See my note on "Zenith and Nadir".
    
11. Sunset starts as the lower limb of the sun is tangent with the horizon
12. Sunset end as the suns upper limb is tangent with the horizon.
13. Civil twilight starts.
14. As the sun hits 6° below the horizon Civil twilight Ends and Nautical Dusk Occurs.
15. Nautical Twilight Starts.
16. As the sun hits 12° below the horizon, Nautical Twilight Ends and Astronomical Dusk occurs.
17. Astronomical Twilight Starts.
18. As the sun hits 18° below the horizon, Astronomical Twilight Ends and zero light is visible in the sky.

It's kind of poetic isn't it? I mean in that highly mathematically astronomically precise way! So isn't that shocking? There are 18 key phases to the sunrise and sunset process! You can't really say, "Wow, check out the sunset!" anymore because you've got to ask yourself "which part?!". Is it nautical twilight? Is it actual sunset? Are you referring to astronomical twilight when the sun orb has disappeared, but there's still light in the sky? Now you have answers to all these questions and can appreciate our the beauty and precision of our astronomical celestial rotations, or in layman's terms "sunrises and sunsets", more completely!

Note: Zenith and Nadir. While on the topic of zenith's and nadirs, it's important to note that regardless of civil, nautical, or astronical measurements, daytime length will always be the same for those three measurements because the cut-off point is the sunrise and sunset. In other words, if you're using civil (god forbid!), nautical, or astronomical measurements, the time from sunrise to zenith and from zenith to sunset will be identical. However, flip over the sphere and focus on the nadir. Now, it changes. The time from dusk to nadir and nadir to dawn will always be equal, but those arcs, although identical in length, will be shortest for astronomical and longest for civil. This is just a geometrically precise (which I feel is just more lucid) method of saying that civil night is longer than astronomical night.

Here's a very VERY informal diagram I made of the 14 key phases of crescular solar activity:

Let's talk about Dawn and Dusk. If you switch to astronomical dawn and dusk, something I highly recommend, you have "real light" time measurements to work with. It's true that you can be out "doing stuff" outside without flashlights before sunrise and after sunset! Astronomical dawn and dusk gives you more of a safe estimate of how much light you still have to work with. In other words, civil dawn and dusk is so pointless because it's still light out at civil dawn and dusk! Nautical dawn and dusk is a most practical for knowing exactly when you can see well enough to navigate without man-made light, but it's still the best to know when the first peep of light is illuminated and when it's "extinguished" and astronomical celestial measurements is the only way to do that! Generally -- and mind you this is severely grotesque generalizations -- astronomical dawn gives you VERY roughly 1.5 hours of light before sunrise and after sunset, nautical gives you about 50 minutes of of light before sunrise and after sunset; and civil gives you a mere 30 minutes of light at best, which is just highly false, before sunrise and after sunset. Try it out. Get your local sunrise times, subtract 1.5 hours and you'll see astronomical dawn around that time! Subtract 50 minutes and nautical dawn will kick in abou then! Don't even bother with civil, though, nautical and astronomical are precise measurements and all you need to be concerned about!

I just needed to revise something here, people. I heralded astronomical dusk and dawn measurements because, after all, those truly are the MOST accurate absolute measurements of knowing precisely when the first sun ray of light illuminates the dawn or when the last inkling of light is "extringuished" at dusk. However, let me say, Nautical dusk is DARK!! I was just out hiking on a trail in Santa Barbara, CA called Cold Springs Trail. I watched the sunset at 5:34pm and then around 6pm it was DARK! Like I could barely see the rocks and trail infront of me in highly-tree-covered areas. Blotches of moonlight shone through on the trail, but by 6:15 I was fortunate to have reached a better known part of the trail. I finally found the main road at around 6:25pm, Nautical dusk was at 6:29, so 4 minutes before Nautical dusk. Let me tell you, Nautical dusk is IT! If you're out manuevering around -- surfing, walking, hiking, jogging, any of those activities -- without a man-made light source PAST Nautical dusk, you're screwed for visibility! So I just wanted to revise my previous statements that Nautical dusk and dawn is the measurements we should be using all the time. Feel free to use civil dusk and dawn, but don't plan on being MY friend! haha! Civil dusk and dawn is just ridiculous because you can still see and navigate well past, often up to half an hour at least, past civil dusk and dawn, but if you're out past nautical dusk in astronomical twilight, without a manmade light source, you'll be visibly blind! Astronomical solar low-horizon measurements should only be considered for observing actual celestial bodies and needing the night sky. If you're using stars to navigate or looking at constellations, Astronomical dusk and dawn is all that matters, but most of the time we're navigating so Nautical low-horizon solar measurements are the most practical and the most necessary. That said, I still LOVE the precision of knowing the EXACT moment light emerges or submerges off the horizon via astronomical measurements, but nautical low-horizon measurements should be the defeault. Civil measurements are absurdly stupid because of their misleading inaccuracy (why label something as "dusk" when there's still a lot of light around? It's not cool and dumb); nautical should be the default; and then if you go into "star-gazing" mode, then check out the astronomical measurements.


So Bottom-Line: Although Astronomical Measurements are the coolest because of their precision. There exist a thousand and more reasons why astronomy is awesome. Books have been devoted to that discussion. The top reason, though, is astronomy is INVARIATES! There are few things in life that are constant! Moon phases, star constellations, and celestial-astronomical events are alive, real-time, but consistent and reliable! However, Nautical low-horizon solar measurements should be our default for living on planet earth. Use Nautical Measurements!! Vine Vidi Vici!

Technically, you could turn to your best friend and say "let's watch the astronomical twilight" even though you can't see any orb in the sky. That's pretty cool! Additionally, "astronomical celestial measurers" start their day the earliest and end the latest. They have the longest days. They soak up the marrow out the light they experience because their "day" reflects the total amount of light down to the last drop. There's no cutting corners with astronomical measurements. It's quite cool to base sunrise and sunset on such precise measurements! Additionally, use this example. We just had a Winter Solstice a few months ago in December. It's february now. I'm in the Northerne Hemisphere in California. Tonight, on February 11, 2008 sunset occurred at 5:33 pm and then civil dawn kicked in 25 minutes later at 5:58. If you were on a civil solar clock, you're "day" would be over at 5:58 before 6pm. Flat done, no more light for you. You only get 25 minutes of twilight, if you use civil measurements today! However, if you were using astronomical solar measurements, dusk is 6:57pm! That means that instead of a 25 minute twilight period, you get a a 1 hour and 24 minute twilight period! Your "day" is 59 minutes longer, too! So astronomical "night" therefore is always much shorter than civil night! Day is technically immediately after dawn and immediately before dusk. Night is immediately after dusk and immediately up until dawn. Astronomical "night" therefore, today, is only 10 hours, 20 minutes, but civil "night" is 12 hours, 18 minutes; nearly a 2 hour difference! The astronomical "day" therefore is 13:40 and the civil "day" is a mere 11:42! So with astronomical celestial measurements you get real-time solar light calculations, instead of just when it "seems" to start to get dark or light. Let's remove "seems" from these calculations. Astronomical dusk, dawn, and twilight is exact!! So you get increases measurement accuracy, real-time solar light calculations, longer days, shorter nights, and, personally, I think the coolest thing is to be able to look out over the horizon after soaking up and witnessing an amazing sunset and to have the knowledge to turn to your friend and say "Ahhh! Isn't that astronomical nocturnal twilight that just followed the nautical and civil twilight, all of which was preceded by that amazing array of solar rays through the atmospheric prism....beautiful?!!!" :)

War: And Why Diplomacy is Useles

Einstein:"I do not know with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones."

[Note: Read carefully, because this could be easily misinterpretted. I would never (and am not) endorse war. However, I do encourage action, and that's what this peace is about.]

English Philosopher John Stuart Mill said, "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse." The wretched thing is not the fiery and fervent politicians who defend their honorable country in war, but the decrepit, unscrupulous gents who cower behind diplomatic desks while their nation is hacked to bits.
War truly is an ugly thing. There is no doubt of that. Ben Franklin says, "There was never a good war, or a bad peace". Any time people die and live in discordance, it is bad; any time humans can live in prosperity and harmony, it is a good time. Additionally, Sartre says, "when the rich wage war, it's the poor who die". All people die in war, however. It is a repulsive phenomenon, killing other people for a cause. However, despite how repulsive that thing is, it is nowhere as near as disgusting as an impassive morally corrupt person or group whose patriotism has been deflated and whose tenacity, extinguished. Keeping the fervency of honoring your nation alive -- through war, through negotiations, through arms, through defense, through togetherness, through compromise --- is the important thing. Betraying your patriotism for the belief that war is never okay is a weak and erroneous principle.
Will Rogers writes that diplomacy is just really biding time to fight. He says, "diplomacy is really saying "nice doggie" until you can find a rock."
The revered Margaret Thatcher says diplomacy is beating around the bush: "We didn't have to do the minuets of diplomacy. We got down to business". Diplomacy, in Thatcher's book, and in my own, may be a nice dance to put a finishing touch on something or to get the ball rolling, but it is, ultimately an inferior priority in severe times.
Regarding the end of war, Plato writes, "only the dead have seen the end of war". War will continue in some form of another. Whether you cover it up and tuck it away with diplomacy or fight it out in the battleground. The intelligent thing to do is to admit it's presence and aim not to eradicate it, but to diminish its impact to negligibility. Aristotle says, "We make war that we may live in peace". When people wage war it has malicious awful, atrocious ramifications. However, when people do so to defend their country patriotically and with certainty, it creates more certainty.
You see, the problem with diplomats and affinity for diplomacy is that they are pseudo-resolutions. Diplomats more often live in a fantasy world where their own problems and skirmishes and dilemmas are piling up right under their nose, while they go prancing around preaching "a progress for peace". Yeah, they're engendering a process all right -- stewing the process for depression, even more confusion, and muddier waters. If you have an issue, get it out on the table, don't bottle it up and "save it for diplomacy". That's how people get hurt, wars start, and the real wars -- the important wars -- go overlooked.
Gandhi writes, "If we are to teach real peace in this world, and if we are to carry on a real war against war, we shall have to begin with the children". Starting with the children is vital, but fighting wars against war is the concern here. Wars against war are not fought over tables with smooth jackets, paperwork, and ball-point-pens. Real wars against war are fought with movements like Gandhi's, reforms like Teddy Roosevelt's, and the many other saintly fellows who understood that lasting change comes from resilience, a bit sacrifice, indomitable sincerity, and most importantly, believe, perseverance, and absolute trust in oneself.

Aerobic Respiration: MHR, LT, and VO2

I think the three key maximums in Exercise are MHR, LT, and V02.

Once you move above your anaerobic threshold, lactic acid starts to accumulate, which gets to a point around 85% to 90% of your MHR (max heart rate). So here's the process of how lactic acid builds up kind of like gears on a car:

1. Aerobic respiration -- Glucose undergoing glycolosis has enough 02 molecules to convert to pyruvate to ATP (the mitochondria don't max out)

2. You go very fast in a short amount of time -- Anaerobic respiration -- Glucose undergoing glycolysis struggles to convert all the pyruvate to ATP (the mitochondria max out without enough 02 molecules) resulting in lactic acid

3. You continue going very fast/hard in a short time of Anaerobic respiration resulting in -- Lactic Threshold -- where the muscles cramp up and fatigues --The lactic acid gets produced and leaks out into the blood and if continues will impair the muscles.

4. You rest/slow down -- Oxygen is restored -- lactic acid is converted to pyruvic acid then to c02, water, and ATP (normal glycolysis output)


1. Aerobic Respiration
2. Anaerobic Respiration
3. Lactic Threshold

If you're just doing aerobic respiration, it will be hard to reach the lactic threshold in under 30 minutes, but if you do a 100 MHR 10 second sprint, you could be dealing with lactic build-up already, so watch the sprints early on, that's like piling on ice on the road before you get out of the driveway, when you're moving on the high-way that's okay.

You can improve Lactic threshold by doing 100% MHR reps. (800-200 meter reps, 15,30, 45, second reps, etc.

Endurance training converts the fast twitch fibers (IIb) that have no aerobic ability into (IIa) fast twitch fibers that have aerobic ability. it also speeds up your ability to do "clearance", moving lactacte around the muscles, which is a very good thing to speed up!

Endurance training also increases the size and quantity of mitochondria.

Clearance++ -- The increased number of mitochondria ensures more pyruvic acid will get converted into ATP, C02, and water, but if some doesn't and you have lactic acid circulating the blood, endurance training actually increases the capillaries around the muscle fibers, to expedite clearance. So the lactate escapes the fast twitch fibers more quickly, recirculating back into the bloodstream where the mitochondria can give it a go.

Clearance is helpful with ALL training, game-playing, exercise, etc. even if it is (actually, especially if it is) anaerobic. So endurance training will always help long-distance events and also short-distance sprints, or all surging moves in a soccer game because the athlete literally will not fatigue easily because lactate won't have time to get to the fast twitch fibers (the cause of so-called physical fatigue)!

Fatigue is an interesting concept that has, no doubt, roots in the physical and psychological. People are astonished at how I don't seem to fatigue and that's because my writing and math focus resolves and avoids all psychological fatigue; any problem I have, I work out and don't let it bog me down and endurance avoids physical fatigue thanks to the increased clearance from the extra capillaries!

Current Politics

Just some side notes I've taken regarding the 2008 elections.

I'm only interested in democrats this election. And of democrats. I'm only interested in Obama and Hillary.

Obama is BRILLIANT politician and having his political skills for the country would be terrific. There are two downsides that I've seen to him so far: family and drugs. A 60 minutes question revealed his use of "blow", which is a pretty serious and unacceptable drug. The fact that he wrote about it and became clear with it makes this less of a concern, but still the exemplifies a poor choice. Secondly, one shot of him with his wife and kids in their kitchen looked awkward. Obama's not a family guy; he's a brilliant, smart, seemingly honesty and genuine politician, but he's about those executive decisions, not family. But considering all his strengths in leadership and always saying things "the right way" and conveying appropriate good beliefs, those two drawbacks can be somewhat trivialized, a tiny bit.

Hillary is ALL about family . "It takes a village to raise a child". In other words, she beautifully compliments Obama. Obama has the intelligent, keen, political mind, lacking close family values, and Hillary has that family awareness. Additionally, on a side note, Bill and Hillary Clinton, for some reason (demeanor, appearance, voice tone?), remind me of Larry and Kristina Diskin, and I know them well, so I feel like I know Hillary and feel affirmed that Obama has excellent leadership skills. I am indifferent to who's elected where, but it just seems like an incomparably uplifting combo to have Hillary and Obama both in executive roles because of their complementary nature, their mutual intelligence, and their general good rapport with Americans.

When I read that great author Toni Morrison thought of Clinton as the "first black president". My initial and only response was WHAT?!! What?!! I thought this was hilarious, but she supports her wild view:

In 1998, Morrison wrote a column for the New Yorker magazine in which she wrote of Bill Clinton: "White skin notwithstanding, this is our first black president. Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children's lifetime. After all, Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald's-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas." (NYT).

Whatever. People these days! Just outrageous. I'm not saying she's wrong or right. It's just an "out there" POV, which is unsettlingly unique but I appreciate that. I NEVER thought of Clinton as black, but, then again, I'm not a black author who primarily focuses on African American literature. The screen of what you communicate about is typically what you see. I'm sure a chef or Morgan Spurlock would see Bill Clinton as the "Ultimate Fast-Food Nation President"! haha! I just saw him, and Reagan, as two of the best leaders of America -- with the most grace, ease, and most importantly, personality -- in my generation!

Trusting Intuition and Engaging Only Trustworthy People

Trusting and Most Importantly LIVING OUT your Intuitive Knowings and Understandings
The crazy and most disturbing and frustrating thing about no resources in Chicago, is that I KNEW that back in 2006 when I went to CA. I knew I didn't want to go back to Chicago and when I went to my CC graduate and then on to LA, I had set in my mind that I was done with Chicago. But then biological family and other people contradicted that personal conviction. I think my uncle, my dad, my mom, etc. thought I'd be better back in Chicago. The best thing to learn from that (after spending a year CONFIRMING my original observation and truism -- that I'm done with Chicago) is HOW can I validate to such an extent that I don't let other people's views or beliefs get in my way. Life would be terrible if you KNEW things (like being done with Chicago), but then had to spend a year "validating that conviction for others". I tried my best in chicago to make it work, but knew in the back of my mind that I had made the decision to not come back to it. This created confusion. When people ask "where I'm from", I just tell my story of feeling like CA is home, having been physically born in chicago, but don't really know what to say! I think the best lesson is, when someone gives you advice on something that contradicts a personal, sincere decision you've made, then SHARE that decision! An example was when my grandmother told me not to take the care to the Thanksgiving celebration in Walla Walla. I had planned to do that and she contradicted my decision. It's great and okay to have people that contradict your decisions, but just ensure that you just look at that as "awareness of a disagreement" and not as evidence that you need to change something about your life. That's refreshing. Another example: I didn't tell my parents that I had made the decision to not go back to chicago. So I think a goal of mine should be expressing the why and how I have certain convictions about what I want to do with my life. That will accelerate my success. It's like I know, better than anyone else in the world, what I've done and where I will most likely have success. That makes sense, right? I mean how could someone else -- no matter how close -- without knowing all of my experiences, choices, emotions, and "how I work" possibly EVER "know" how I can create success for me, better than myself? Such a possibility is nearly inconceivable. Granted, many people DO seem to know me well and offer incredibly validating and aligning advice (like yourself), but ultimately you are the person who knows best. I feel like I've spent a lot of my life doing things that I know wouldn't work but enduring them because other people felt they would work (seeing shrinks, going back to chicago, etc. are examples). I've been forced to see 8 shrinks (some were great friends, some were the epitome of a problematic people), but I NEVER voluntarily chose out of my own volition to see any of them. It's time to start operating from volition and just making "a mental note" of others views or contradictions to that. I feel like my parents are tied into this, like my dad thinks he knows what's best for me and I trusted that more than I trusted my own convictions. I don't think one should ever do that. That all goes back to Saying No!!! If you can effectively say no, you end up sharing your convictions with people and don't do things that are contradictory to your life.

In fact, the past year in Chicago -- with all the things I've done for other people (therapy for parents, spectator/audience for friends' bands, brothers games, parents business events, meeting with other contacts, etc. etc. -- I just look at as Pure Service. I mean doing peace corp in Africa would be close to a vacation! Because I'd actually get official credit for that service with that program. I don't seem to have acquired that in Chicago. But it's great to know how I've classified the past year with Chicago; it's simply been one big selfless act of service. That's the only thing, for me at least, to do in Chicago! Great, that was good. But now that's done. No more selflessness, just my life, my success.

Others' Performances and Saying No = Non-Mandatory Events
You're SOOO right about saying no. Saying yes for fear of hurting the others' feelings, creating disappointment, or for fear of altering how they view and think of you. Looking it at that way I suddenly realize we just have hundreds of "invitations" (to buy this, go to that, say no to that, go in this door, out that door, etc.) to do things throughout life but NON of them are mandatory!!! You don't have to go to anyone's stuff, if you don't want to, but I still do. I'm seeing my friends' band Cobalt for the 4th time tonight. They're great, but again, its an example of yet another thing that is me spectating someone else's successes someone else's performance, when what I really want to be doing is DOING my performance, my event, that's scheduled and people are there to see John. That's not the case with going to see the band. Everyone's there to see cobalt, which is great. It's their event, just like my brothers' track and basketball games are about him, and my parents Innovation Awards were about them. I find it unsettling that I went to all of those events for them, but no one came to my college graduation except for all the students with whom I was graduating with, which was great.


Scammed Again!
I really do trust people too much. I got scammed big time. I don't understand how and why this keeps happening to me, but it must stop. This club in Chicago, Transit, charged 100 to my card, when I only bought 2 ($10 worth of drinks). I'll never go back to that place and NEVER have a concash bar tab, and hopefully with have less and less or ZERO bar tabs from now on, ever! Then on the way back from the club, the cabby scammed me for money by charging me $8.45 and then taking and additional $5, saying the card didn't go through (when it did). That was scammed and ripped off twice, in TWO totally separate incidents, by totally different people! I hate this city, I'm through and am moving to Nature. We all have our individual events and experiences that cross our lives, but I've been scammed more than most people I know. I really can't trust anyone. If you had a ton of experiences where people helped you out and never conned you, you could have a different relationship to trust. But if you're by nature, overly trustworthy, like me, and have been conned, ripped off, and stolen from, on so many times, you MUST have a different relationship to trust. In other words, one's level of trust should reflect their experiences to an extent. If you've been ripped off a lot, that's a Beautiful indicator that you need to be MUCH less trustworthy. If you've been ripped off and stolen from as many people as I have, you've been trusting the greedy, conniving, and wrong people. Before you trust, you have to create as much verification to ensure a person and/or group is aligned with your beliefs, is benevolent, genuine, and altruistic like you, because that's the way you are, and greedy thieves actually Exploit benevolence in people. It's bad enough that they lack benevolence, but the fact that they actually exploit benevolence of others, is just sickening. Saints shouldn't mingle with swindlers. haha! But I've actually trusted those people with a "blind belief" in humans in general. Like I said, we all have different relationships with trust, based on our personal experiences. If you have never been scammed or conned, you probably don't' have to worry about being overly-trustworthy. I, on the hand, have to reduce my level of trust with people drastically. This has been a blessing -- all these ripoffs, and thefts, though -- because it's shown me that everyone is not like me. Everyone is not obsessed with altruism, benevolence, sharing, and genuine exchange. In short, many people are NOT trustworthy. These have been invaluable lessons, because it's forced me to create a system that ensures that I deliberately exclude toxic, untrustworthy people from my life (I'm not talking about "liars" everyone fibs now and then, I'm talking about people who seriously lack honesty, exploit benevolence, and are only concerned with their material gain) and focus on engaging with and only with awesome, uplifting, trustworthy, altruistic people.

This city is so filthy and vile because it's full of scamming, disgusting, putrid con artists. I'm leaving this hell hole as soon as possible. EVERYONE abuses, exploits, and steals from me here. If you don't see why it's understandable to feel unsafe here -- it's an UNSAFE place!! -- then you're blind. Wow, I'm going to be so excited in a place that's warm and honest and not heartless and cruel. No wonder I've been so panicked in Chicago! I haven't' been surrounded by the benevolent, joyous, creative, spiritual people that I crave. No, I've been surrounded by conniving, greedy thieves! That's truth! So I'm looking forward to being around some great, benevolent, good, healthy people. Also, another lesson I learned is 1)rarely ever use your debit card for anything and 2)when you do ALWAYS carefully scrutinze the receipt before you sign it. That scam artist STOLE my grandmother's birthday check she gave me ($100). No use in lingering on this and being angry, I just have learned those 2 valuable lessons and will abide them. This creates a BIG distinction. I always want to be stay optimistic and never want to have a curmudgeonly view that "no one should EVER be trusted", but on the other hand, I shouldn't continue doing things the way I've been doing them and get slammed again and again by conniving, greedy rip-off people. So it's a great defining time to develop SINCERE and deliberate criteria for never trusting untrustworthy people and then somewhat relaxing around genuine, trustworthy, honest, and benevolent people.

I'm pretty mad that I lost my money, but I'm even MORE disgusted and shocked at how pathetic these people are who purposefully scam others to whittle out some extra bucks. Like their agenda is to purposefully steal from others to make their own life improved. Why am I a saint among demons? Where are more people like myself? I'm looking forward to living with people who are trustworthy, benevolent, spiritual, and as obsessed with altruism and servitude as I am. Whenever I feel uncomfortable around people and feel fearful of them, I should TRUST that! I must just listen to that intuition and avoid those people at all costs. Usually that initial fear or discomfort is so subtle, though. I can really do without more of the "learning lessons" .

All of this is a SERIOUS life-learning learning, MASSIVE critical mass realization that's changed my life forever and moved me towards connecting with only trustworthy people. Was there a pattern to all the cons? Was it primarily men or women? No, no gender discrimination. It's just city people. City people are untrustworthy. Where are my friends, Thoreau and Emerson and Einstein? Where are the genuine, selfless, people like me? Wow, I've really just seen a darker side of the world and know that I only want good, genuine, benevolent people in my life.

The Tragic Loss of Heath -- A Profound and Deep Actor

The tragic loss of Heath. This is shocking; it’s unbelievable. I feel partially mourning, partially stunned. He was an incredibly composed and immensely talented actor. My favorite role of his was in “Lords of Dogtown” as the Venice Beach “skate-boarding king”. But this, according to his father, “tragic, untimely, and accidental” incident brings with it a huge host of concerns. Did Heath become too consumed by his work? His dark projects as a heroin addict or a suicidal character? Did he ever do an emotional “check-up” after his break up with Michelle Williams? Reports say he couldn’t sleep and couldn’t “stop thinking”. Acting takes more then resilience and perseverance. It demands tremendous clarity and profound determination of the will. I’m not saying Heath didn’t possess that, at all. But what I am conveying is you have to build your foundation first.

You have to focus on your spirituality, your emotional management, you have to understand your intrapersonal knowledge, and focus years on your dreams, goals, authentic likes and dislikes before committing to a profession as tidal and tortuous as acting. We must NEVER let our work and career or relationships with other people (regardless of how intimate) ever stand before or eclipse our emotional freedom and peace, spiritual identity, and mental clarity. If you commence a full-time acting career without an infinite awareness of the your own spirit, and a tried-true-and-tested system for keeping your life organized and your core values aligned, the profession will feel like a dangerous Tsunami. Any profession to which we commit must always come secondary or tertiary to understanding our spiritual place and identity, your emotional capacity and sensitivity, and your ground-level life management skills.

We should mourn Heath’s death, but use this as an opportunity to re-evaluate our life and ensure that we perpetually meet an enormously high requirement of staying inspired and emotionally, mentally, and most importantly, physically healthy. We can learn to look at death differently by appreciating life. We must also be reminded that life always has the winning hand to death. Additionally, we must demand that our social, peer, and close friend group is intuitive, nurturing, and inspiring, but all while deeply understanding that only we can create peace for ourself. Great poet and essayist, Ralph Waldo Emerson writes, “Only you can create peace for yourself. You can only create peace through the triumph of principles.”

So after so many captivating and incredible, but bleak, dark, and emotionally-testing roles, let’s hope that Heathy Boy is now exploring his “lighter and more blithe” characters in the Heavenly Theatre of an Aussie Paradisio.

Cellphoneology

A lot of cell phone terminology and technology has confused me recently, so this aims to clarify those essentials.

3G -- The new fastest packet data network. Verizon (which is why I like Verizon the most, in addition to it being my first carrier service) was the first to employ 3G technology in the states, long before AT&T, T-Mobile, or Sprint.

Their are two "flavors" of 3G packet data modes. They're both about the same speed, but they're just called different things depending on the carrier. Verizon and Sprint's 3G is called 1xEV-DO from CDMA technology and AT&T and T-mobile's version of 3G is UMTS and HSPDA from GSM technology.

• EV-DO:CDMA:Verizon and Sprint
• UMTS/HSPDA:GSM:AT&T and T-Mobile

3G speeds are 144kps-2.4mbs (so 3x modem to cable modem speeds).

Those are the main two 3g packet data protocols (EV-DO and UMTS/HSPDA). Hopefully, there'll be more standards in the future where all this is less confusing. It seems like a lot of carriers just tried to make their "own" technology and it ended up in this jumble of mini rarely used packet data modes, but those two 3G forms are the ones that have emerged.

Chinese New Year Means Good Tidings for all New Resolutioners Catching up to '08

All this information IS going somewhere after all! Wondering why I wrote such a detailed and thorough article on Solstices and Equinoxes? Well -- in addition to my car being an Equinox, having written a screenplay called "The Solstice" about a ship, and my love for nautical science and understanding how our celestial place in the universe creates Natural calendar and seasonal occurrences -- the Chinese New Year is BASED ON Solstices and Equinoxes! So you'll need to read that article I wrote to get the most out of this.

For all those people who've slacked a bit on New Years resolutions, do not fret! On the Chinese Calendar, you still have a almost a month until New Years! New Years, you see, falls on the day after the 2nd new man after the winter solstice. Remember, the winter solstice is when our planet Earth is tilted furthest away from the sun in its elliptical orbit around our Sun star. In 2007 that winter solstice occurred occurred on Dec. 22. Yep, (by definition of a winter solstice) the shortest day and the longest night of 2007 was Dec. 22. Then just whip out your trusty lunar calendar (I know all you have one of those! haha. And if you're a nautical-celestial navigation freak like me, or some astrologer/astronomer, you probably already do have a lunar calendar) and you'll see that the 2nd lunar (after Jan. 8) new moon is February 6, 2008. So February 7th, Chinese New Years, here we come!!