In the last few days, I’ve refined one of my models for classifying events. I’ve always thought that events seesaw back and forth between good and bad, strange and normal, like a pendulum. However, I’ve now refined this metaphor from one that uses a simple pendulum to one that uses a Foucault’s pendulum. Whereas a simple pendulum does what pendulums are wont to do, swinging back and forth in a two-dimensional plane, a Foucault’s pendulum uses a third dimension to demonstrate the rotation of the earth.

The point is that I used to conceive of events as bouncing from one extreme to another. Thus, given enough time during abnormal periods, things tend to not only return to normal but also to swing to the opposite end of the spectrum. i suppose you could also call this an example of regression toward the mean, but let’s stick with the pendulum metaphor for a moment.

This additional dimension has been helpful in sorting things out, since that third dimension can be a catch-all category for understanding the vagaries of things you can’t understand with the simple pendulum model. Try it with something as simple as going out for the evening: sure, the answer is either yes, you do, or no, you don’t, but what about all the ancillary factors? Shouldn’t you get to bed for work in the morning? But don’t you want to see your friends? Dammit, you were going to do laundry tonight, etc. Sure, it’s simplistic, but work with me. I’m still ironing out the kinks.

In any case, it’s been a great few days, but I’ll have to spend some time sorting out the long-term implications. Good party, tho.

Diversion of the moment: Describing yourself in five adjectives. It’s harder than you think. Thus far, I have one descriptor I’m satisfied with, and that would be ‘inquisitive.’ Not an easy exercise.