This will likely be my last Mothers Day with my mum alive. I consider myself fortunate to have had the chance to connect with her again today and indeed to have had such a wonderful, kind and caring mum during my lifetime on this Earth.
My wife has often got the kids name wrong, says one daughters name when she's talking about the other, been that way for years... I also worry
if it's a sign of things to come.. #head+sand=denial:)
And then we generally ask trivia questions, after that. Or,
rather, I ask everyone else trivia questions because I can
use a thing that's published in a newspaper I subscribe to.
It's interesting to see what holes in knowledge people
have.
E.g., science is a reliable category for me, but other
people, outside of my brother, can struggle with things
like the order of the planets in the solar system. Which I
tend to think of as grade-school knowledge, at least for
the major planets.
That is, many years ago when I was pre-teen, someone taught me a simple way to O> remember them with this phrase: "Man Very Early Made Jars Stand Up
Nearly Perpendicular." And THAT is what I remember because it triggers
Early-Onset is horrible. One of my highschool classmates developed
this, and it has been aweful to watch.
They tried to get her some help when family started seeing signs,
perhaps they slowed it down at best.
Miserable disease.
That's what a lot of people don't understand. It takes a lot for someone to dedicate 24/7 care. Even the care giver needs a break, as it's very phisical, and mental.
I'm very glad that my parents are still at home going along as they age. (74/75).
I'm glad you're getting whatever connection you can, while you can.
And we played more minigolf together, which is fun. We tend to explore
and see the new courses together, as they're released.
That said, on the less-pleasant aspects, my mom's memory isn't great, so most every game I wind up re-explaining some game mechanic.
And then we generally ask trivia questions, after that. Or, rather, I ask everyone else trivia questions because I can use a thing that's
published in a newspaper I subscribe to. It's interesting to see what holes in knowledge people have.
E.g., science is a reliable category for me, but other people, outside
of my brother, can struggle with things like the order of the planets in the solar system. Which I tend to think of as grade-school knowledge, at least for the major planets.
Is it normal? Is it age? Is it dementia?
Thankfully, in this case, I think there are plenty of examples of people in their 30s doing what you're describing, where they didn't develop dementia in the next 30 years after that.
"holes in knowlege" is relative to you, maybe. Basically, it
boils down to "we tend to remember what we care about, and/or
what stimulates us."
Some people don't even care to remember the name of the planets
either. Science is pretty good for me too, but I don't remember
I'd be pretty bad at some arbitrary test that asks me to
remember random numbers in a particular order or some "objects"
that someone wants me to repeat.
Aging with Grace: What the Nun Study Teaches Us About Leading
Longer, Healthier, and More Meaningful Lives | Paperback
E.g., science is a reliable category for me, but other people, outsid of my brother, can struggle with things like the order of the planets the solar system. Which I tend to think of as grade-school knowledge, least for the major planets.Remind me not to play a competitive game of mini golf with you :)
But if you're ever over in New Zealand there's at lest two places we
could have a game, but perhaps minus the trivia questions as I'd suck at them too :)
Yeah I agree, we all do it, it's just some more than others.
Good chatting with you Ken :)
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto!
(Pluto has been banished though)...
I'd be pretty bad at some arbitrary test that asks me to
remember random numbers in a particular order or some "objects"
that someone wants me to repeat.
That is, many years ago when I was pre-teen, someone
taught me a simple way to remember them with this phrase: "Man
Very Early Made Jars Stand Up Nearly Perpendicular." And THAT
is what I remember because it triggers a fond memory of that
moment when it was taught to me.
Remind me not to play a competitive game of mini golf with you :)
Oh, me saying, "I tend to think of as grade-school knowledge" is not
meant to be me saying, "Oh, clearly everyone is an idiot", just that
it's obvious that I have an incorrect view on what's a normal level of knowledge for various science stuff.
But if you're ever over in New Zealand there's at lest two places we could have a game, but perhaps minus the trivia questions as I'd suck them too :)
Hah! Sounds neat. What do the minigolf courses look like, over there?
I tend to be hard on German mini-golf courses. Mostly because they have some _really_ bad ideas on course design. E.g., instead of using carpet, they'll have a course that's all wood. So the ball just keeps rolling,
and you wind up having to hit perfect shots or will have an extremely difficult next shot. Makes it much less fun.
Good chatting with you Ken :)
Yeah, Sharon, it's been good talking about the good ol' days back in Mexico.
Thats so sweet avon, your mother is most definatly a awesome lady.
Was mothers day here too. the one of 2 days I call my mother. the other being christmas. lots of bad memories as a child to its hard to call at times. she sobered up a few years back so I really should try harder..
[...]Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto!
(Pluto has been banished though)...
I like to think of it as Pluto getting more interesting, since Charon is _also_ a minor planet, since the center of gravity between Pluto and
Charon is _between_ them. All the other planets have moons, since the center of gravity is in the larger body.
decided Pluto couldn't be a planet. But instead of making all those
other things planets, they did the "dwarf planet" thing, which still
just seems odd to me as a dividing line.
That's what a lot of people don't understand. It takes a lot for
someone to dedicate 24/7 care. Even the care giver needs a break, as
it's very phisical, and mental.
I agree, and for the burden of care can sort of sneak up on people and
then wallop them before they know what hit them.
I'm very glad that my parents are still at home going along as they
age. (74/75).
:)
Avon wrote to All <=-
This will likely be my last Mothers Day with my mum alive. I consider myself fortunate to have had the chance to connect with her again today and indeed to have had such a wonderful, kind and caring mum during my lifetime on this Earth.
I'm sorry to hear you're going through this. My mom is 84, and she's starting to have memory issues. We're starting to have conversations regarding driving, her desires for how care is going to look over the
next couple of years, and managing her finances (and her sister-in-law, who's in full-time memory care and my mom is taking care of *her* finances...)
That reminds me of a time in college when we were studying networking.
We were being taught the OSI network layers and the teacher gave us the phrase to help remember them all: "Please Do Not Throw Sausage Pizza Away"
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical
Similar to you, the phrase is what stuck in my head and now if I ever
need to remember all the layers in the OSI model, I just use that
phrase. Even as a kid I still remember "Never Eat Shredded Wheat" when having to draw a compass.
N
W-|-E
S
Mmmm well I'm no expert but they I would say are likely to be a disappointment to you. The ones I see around here feel a bit run down. There is a nice one over in Mosgiel that's attached to a cafe and plant shop so that does a nice trade.
I'm not really qualified to talk about their technical level of
difficulty but when I play them I need to whack the ball often :)
So in the end we have eight planets, plus a number of minor ones! <-;
Adept wrote to Vorlon <=-
in the solar system. And that their existence is _why_ some people
decided Pluto couldn't be a planet. But instead of making all those
other things planets, they did the "dwarf planet" thing, which still
just seems odd to me as a dividing line.
Warpslide wrote to Ogg <=-
That reminds me of a time in college when we were studying networking.
We were being taught the OSI network layers and the teacher gave us the phrase to help remember them all: "Please Do Not Throw Sausage Pizza Away"
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical
We new NESW in Australia as "Never Eat Soggy Weet-Bix", well, at least some of us did.
I wonder if they still teach the OSI model. On a syadmin reddit, people
So in the end we have eight planets, plus a number of minor ones! <-;
Yep! And there are probably a few more to discover. Possibly even a
bigger planet, that would explain the orientation of some of the objects fairly far out there.
But I'm kind of losing hope on that bigger one.
Regardless, we're just getting started with all the planets around other stars.
I wonder if they still teach the OSI model.
You'd think they could have grandfathered PLUTO in as a planet. :(
But I'm kind of losing hope on that bigger one.
It would have been found by now....
mnemonic. There was a mnemonic I made up to remember the orders of taxonomy, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species, but
I ended up remembering both very well, and never really needing the mnemonic.
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical
I wonder if they still teach the OSI model. On a syadmin reddit, people were asking what skills were important in networking, and the first
thing that came to my mind was problem isolation. The OSI model goes
along with that, being able to figure out from a user report of a
problem to the offending system is a discipline.
They still teach the OSI model around here but I have noticed a number of students and professionals forget what it is quite quickly.
Then you have guys writing TCP/IP dissectors that don't know ARP is
layer 2.
We new NESW in Australia as "Never Eat Soggy Weet-Bix", well, at leas some of us did.
Is that Weetabix, or is Weet-Bix something different?
Nightfox
I mean, I'm against them having demoted Ceres, too, and that was only a planet for about 50 years, ending around 1850.
Got demoted for similar reasons, too. Asteroid belt was discovered, so it wasn't as special. And Pluto got demoted because of a variety of stuff
in the Kuiper Belt.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Storm BBS (21:2/108)
mnemonic. There was a mnemonic I made up to remember the orders of taxonomy, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species, b I ended up remembering both very well, and never really needing the mnemonic.
This reminds me of the time when I had a class, where we were allowed to put whatever we wanted to onto our graphing calculators for use on the test.
So there was one particular formula that I decided would be reasonable
to make into a program, so that I'd be able to answer any questions
about it.
But, of course, writing a program generally means you have to know what you're doing, so by the time I got the program working I knew the
formula _really_ well and in no way needed the program to help me on the test.
I mean, I'm against them having demoted Ceres, too, and that was only planet for about 50 years, ending around 1850.
Got demoted for similar reasons, too. Asteroid belt was discovered, s wasn't as special. And Pluto got demoted because of a variety of stuf in the Kuiper Belt.
As upset as I am (actually not all that much) about Pluto's demotion, it makes sense to differentiate between planets which have regular circular (or close to it) orbits, and other objects which don't.
I mean, I'm against them having demoted Ceres, too, and that was planet for about 50 years, ending around 1850.
Got demoted for similar reasons, too. Asteroid belt was discover wasn't as special. And Pluto got demoted because of a variety of in the Kuiper Belt.
As upset as I am (actually not all that much) about Pluto's demotion, makes sense to differentiate between planets which have regular circu (or close to it) orbits, and other objects which don't.
well, thankfully you can't be incorrect in the grand scheme by calling
it a planet. humans made up the classification.. and it's not scientifically relevant (it doesn't impact the results of science. and
our classifications wouldn't be relevant to aliens, for example, who
might not call gas giants planets either, etc)
unlike say, the speed of light, which would be easily obvious to all observers.
at that point imo your opinion is as easily relevant as anyone else's (even experts)..
Warpslide wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
They did as of ~2012. This was for a CCNA course and OSI was required.
He did mention that most people use the "collapsed" OSI model which
only has four layers.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Warpslide <=-
Warpslide wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
They did as of ~2012. This was for a CCNA course and OSI was required.
He did mention that most people use the "collapsed" OSI model which
only has four layers.
We had a 10-layer model. it added, to the top of the model,
RELIGION
FINANCE
POLITICS
But I'm kind of losing hope on that bigger one. It would have beenfound by now....
You'd think, with a bigger planet, but it's probably not very bright,
and the search area is _massive_.
But, yeah, it's also hard to find something that's not there.
Maybe one day we'll find Planet X, and it will all change again.
The only other differentiation which makes sense, that I can think of straight away, is to differentiate between planets which are spherical
and those which aren't. Rocky objects must reach a particular mass
before gravity is strong enough to force it into a sphere.
As upset as I am (actually not all that much) about Pluto's demotion, it makes sense to differentiate between planets which have regular circular (or close to it) orbits, and other objects which don't.
On a side note, this is what I consider a serious problem with schooling and rote learning. We learn by practical application, because that is
how things then make sense.
Adept wrote to boraxman <=-
As upset as I am (actually not all that much) about Pluto's demotion, it makes sense to differentiate between planets which have regular circular (or close to it) orbits, and other objects which don't.
That's not the difference, though -- planets can have terribly
elliptical paths, even if Pluto doesn't. But there can't be other similarly-sized objects in the vicinity.
The demotion of Pluto is actually one of the reasons I now question "scientists" more. The original demotion reasoning included the bit
So instead of coming up with a theory and then proving it, they developed a theory to specifically prove what they wanted it to (Pluto is not a planet) while not proving anything they didn't want to (other planets are not planets).
My daughter has told me that Pluto isn't really a planet, some think it is b it really isn't. We may hold our views, but the next generation are taught differently.
Is that Weetabix, or is Weet-Bix something different?
Yeah, that's the rule I'm good with, as it makes sense as a dividing
line, because there aren't really weird exceptions. About as weird as
it'd get is that something that's more solid would require a bit more
mass than something that's looser.
That's not the difference, though -- planets can have terribly elliptical paths, even if Pluto doesn't. But there can't be other similarly-sized objects in the vicinity.
Which makes _some_ amount of sense, because, e.g., Jupiter winds up pulling in or tossing out anything in its vicinity.
But it certainly seems plausible that we'd find planets _somewhere_ that are Earth-sized, but in an asteroid-belt sort of situation.
But I guess we haven't, yet, so the definition could change again at that point.
The demotion of Pluto is actually one of the reasons I now question "scientists" more. The original demotion reasoning included the bit
Eh, science is messy, and people argue theories and whatnot all the time.
And this is definitely an area where reality doesn't care about our definitions, so fundamentally it doesn't matter. Just a way of categorizing the knowledge we have.
My daughter has told me that Pluto isn't really a planet, some think it it really isn't. We may hold our views, but the next generation are tau differently.
I thought the space community changed the ruling on Pluto back to a planet?
Pluto's orbit is a bit irregular in that it crosses the orbit of
Neptune. Which other planet has a highly elliptical orbit?
I question scientists a lot more now too. I think is a profession,
isn't all the more reputable than others. We see scientists as
objective seekers of truth who stand apart from interests, but this
isn't actually the case.
I question scientists a lot more now too. I think is a profession,
isn't all the more reputable than others. We see scientists as
objective seekers of truth who stand apart from interests, but this
isn't actually the case.
Fair enough. I'm a fan of the scientific method. Scientists are humans, and humans have their weaknesses. But the scientific method has been _super_ useful in advancing our collective knowledge.
So the more scientists can get to that ideal, the better.
boraxman wrote to Adept <=-
Pluto's orbit is a bit irregular in that it crosses the orbit of
Neptune. Which other planet has a highly elliptical orbit?
boraxman wrote to Hustler <=-
They did? I didn't get the memo! On what basis was it changed back?
Adept wrote to boraxman <=-
I'm sure it points to a slightly different origin story for
Pluto/Charon over the 8 major planets with near-circular orbits,
though.
| Sysop: | digital man |
|---|---|
| Location: | Riverside County, California |
| Users: | 1,045 |
| Nodes: | 15 (1 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 63:40:34 |
| Calls: | 500,408 |
| Calls today: | 11 |
| Files: | 95,209 |
| D/L today: |
1,680 files (496M bytes) |
| Messages: | 465,006 |
| Posted today: | 2 |