INTP vs INTJ——如何在INT中识别J和P

INTP和INTJ们在人群中很好识别,尤其是典型的INTJ。作为与INTJ和INTP均有过(相当)大数量且深度接触的人,你一定能在人群中仅凭短暂的交流识别出一个INT,尤其是那些特征典型的。在这里,我之所以强调要是特征典型的,是因为人的性格分布像是一个连续的光谱,只有特征足够典型才有好的代表性。想象一条色带从白色渐变到黑色,你难以断定到底哪一处是黑白的分界线,然后指着那条线说,左边的便是白,右边的便是黑。你想要给人展示什么是黑色什么是白色,好的策略是在两端而非靠近中间的地方取色。类似地,今天我们要讨论如何在INT中识别J和P,应该拿具有代表性的例子作为典型,而非纠结于INTJ-INTP的过渡态,或者其他诸如于INFP-INTP的过渡态。

对于那些与INT有丰富接触的人来说,INT是很好识别的,因为他们的特征很明显。INT们偏好独处(但并不总是排斥与他人在一起)(I),想象力天马行空且思维活跃敏捷(N),不迷恋来自五官的刺激(比如美食和衣服)(N),行动和决定高度基于理性的思考而非情感的驱动(T),对于感兴趣的话题非常健谈,而对于不感兴趣的话题简直是木讷的哑巴。需要注意的是,最后一点是识别出INT的重要特征:“非常健谈”体现出INT思维敏捷活跃(而不是傻子),仅对感兴趣的话题健谈体现出INT对这一话题长期的关注和思考,对不感兴趣的话题木讷体现出他们性格内倾(I)的一面——如果你擅于观察,你会发现不是所有人都是“选择性健谈”且“选择性木讷”的。有些人似乎对所有的话题都表现的很有热情,喜欢掺上一脚,这是典型的好社交(E)的表现;有些人不论对什么话题都不苟言笑,似乎从来没有什么能让他们滔滔不绝地说上五分钟,以至于从不了解这类人的眼里来看他们表现的简直像个自闭症(是I但不是INT);还有些人一遇到感兴趣的话题便能滔滔不绝,而对不感兴趣的话题则缺乏耐心和关注,既吝于发表自己的看法也无看法可发——因为他们与他人的交流是来自于思考(T)而非社交(E)的推动,因此他们对于自己关注和思考得少的话题没有什么自己的观点可供交流。

更具体的来讲,I和T都是很好观察的,毕竟,一个人是表现得喜欢独处(I)还是群处(E)是一个很基本的社交特征;而在短暂的交谈之后也不难发现一个人是否擅于思考(T/F)——如果这个人有自己想法,对事物能发表自己的观点,那多半是T。[1] 而判断是否是N的标准则显得略微含糊,一个好用的方法是排除法:如果一个人鲜现S的特征(比如,迷恋于五官的刺激[2]),那大概便是N了。INTJ和INTP分享了很多共同的特征,这让很多不够熟悉INTP和INTJ的人(有时甚至包括他们自己,当然前提是他们知道MBTI是什么)容易将这两类人弄混。一个佐证是,一个INTP如果去看INTJ的介绍,他会发现很多INTJ的特征好像自己也有,以至于自己仿佛就是个INTJ;反之,让一个INTJ去看INTP的介绍亦然。除此之外,这种“相似性”是排他的:你只会在INT里观察到这种INT共轭现象,倘若你让一个INTP去看ISFP或者其他哪类人介绍,多半是不会出现这种迷之幻觉的。另一个类似的佐证是,一个INTP如果去一个INTJ聚集的地方(比如豆瓣的INTJ小组)看看INTJ们都在聊些什么,他会发现INTJ聊的内容他多半感兴趣,而如果让他去其他什么非INT类型的聚集地看,这不会有这种感受,如果他去完全相反的ESFJ聚集的地方看,则会对他们所聊的话题完全不感兴趣。这一点对INTJ也类似。

验证完了INT,最难的就是接下来的区分P和J了。那么,INTP和INTJ到底有哪些表观差别?如果你和他们相处的多了,你会首先发现INTJ“性格之恶劣”——至少对于典型的INTJ是如此。不同于INTP,INTJ是极难相处的(想想牛顿,如果你对牛顿的生平经历不熟,想想Sheldon和Sherlock),他们可以轻易摧毁大多数人容忍傻逼的能力。他们往往思维固执[3],行为习惯与常人不同且不愿改变。举个栗子,如果你曾关注过INTJ的@曾加,你一定会发现他的文风甚为“诡异”——几乎总是“列表式回答”。虽然我不得不说,这种组织结构能将主要观点简明扼要、结构清晰地展现出来,但是风格未免过于“自成一派”。如果换做非INTJ,即使他们发现了这种列表式回答的优势,也多半会弃而不用,向主流的风格妥协。[4] 诸如这种表现出来的不合群是大多数人与INTJ难以相处的重要原因,也直接导致了INTJ的人际关系很差(再次想想牛顿,Sheldon和Sherlock)。不过深究起来,这是因为INTJ并不在乎他们的人际关系差。他们关注的是“他们认为的”实用的东西,比如,Sherlock只关注从破案中获得的极大乐趣,他的一切其他行为习惯包括对人际关系的处理都是为这一目的服务的。

除此之外,INTJ均极度缺乏幽默感,他们大概从来不懂什么是幽默。虽然并不是每个人都有幸接触过典型的INTJ,但是接触过的人想必对他们缺乏幽默的能力印象深刻。他们不仅无法表达幽默,甚至也无法理解幽默。你能想象Sheldon或者Sherlock听见笑话后捧腹大笑的样子么?或者,你能想象Sherlock和Watson走在路上互相取乐互损的样子,就像你和你的闺蜜或者基友那样么?所以啊,和INTJ讲笑话或者互相调侃大概是世界上最难堪的事了,他们大概会一本正经的回应你让你尴尬症大犯。注意了,我这里可没有说INTJ都不会笑,也没说INTJ不会快乐,毕竟,幽默和笑是两回事,和快乐又是两回事。事实上,INTJ获取乐趣的途径只是和常人有所不同罢了。

相反,INTP则好相处得多了,这很大一部分是出于他们的随和(想想爱因斯坦不爱穿袜子,甚至不爱在相应的场合穿相应的衣服)。如果说INTJ是个强迫症,一定要按照自己的准则来(比如,如果爱因斯坦是INTJ,他则会坚持要求得体的着装,也多半无法容忍自己办公室的杂乱),那么INTP则是虽然自己有很多准则,但是依据情况可以随机应变的那类人。这里要注意了,这种随机应变可不一定就是好事,因为总有你需要坚持自己准则的情况,而这种随机应变便是坚持的绊脚石;当然,随机应变也不一定是坏事,这一点是很显然的。除此之外,如果说INTJ是罕见的难相处,那么INTP的随和则很大程度上使得INTP成为了罕见的能与INTJ相处的人。另外一个原因是INTP因为在很多方面与INTJ相似,所以能够很大程度上理解INTJ在他人眼中怪异的行为。总而言之,在常人看来INTJ是罕见的“傻逼”,而INTP是罕见的如此能容忍“傻逼”的人。在这一点上,Watson对于Sherlock的容忍做得相当不错,可惜,他并不是INTP。这里并不矛盾,毕竟不是只有INTP才会这样随和的,不然,INTP岂不是太好辨认了,我干嘛还要费这么多口舌?

那么,为什么我说Watson不是INTP?因为Watson不具幽默感。与INTJ完全相反,幽默感是INTP的一个重要特征(想想爱因斯坦吐舌头的那张照片)。这里我要再次提醒读者注意了,我可没有说有幽默感的就是INTP,我也没暗示有幽默感就是会讲段子,能互相挖苦取乐,这些都只是判定一个人是INTP的必要条件不充分条件。幽默感的内涵是丰富的,它体现在挖掘生活的乐趣的能力。你一定会发现,你身边中有一些人沉闷至极,对许多有趣的事情或者现象完全不甚关心,INTP则是一群相反的人,他们擅于从生活中发现乐趣。他们并不一定总是会把这种乐趣表现出来,但他们的确是发现了。想想《童趣》里沈复的“忽有庞然大物,拔山倒树而来”,实则“盖一癞虾蟆”,大概就能体会到何为幽默感了。

 

url

 

当然,INTP和INTJ还有很多别的差别,上面说的只是表面上容易观察到的——虽然实际上并不好观察,以至于人们常常弄混。

----------

[1] 比如,问问这个人对一些事物的看法,如果他对某件事表达出与常人不同的看法,问问这个人为什么。如果他能不错地给出论证过程,说明他是有思考的(T)。这里得注意了,他不一定愿意告诉你为什么(毕竟,你又不是他爹,凭什么你问什么他就要答什么,那样岂不是显得他很没面子?),所以你需要判断他只是不愿意给出论证还是根本没有自己的论证。

[2] 比如,对一部电影,S会更多地关注人物的样貌装扮,道具的选择,特效是否酷炫等。

[3] INTJ们注意了,思维固执可不一定值得骄傲,但也不一定是坏事

[4] 我这里可没有暗示INTJ的行文风格都很诡异,阅读障碍者请注意。

一些新发现的钢琴曲

Last Update: March 14, 2017

最近又发现了一些新的钢琴曲,不如开一文细细整理这些曲子。本文将不会把他们限制在钢琴曲中,而是收入所有的纯音乐,其中分为“古典”和“纯音乐”两类,分类不是严格的。本文将持续更新。

古典/Classical Music

  • Auld Lang Syne,友谊地久天长
  • Bach: Air on the G String,巴赫:G弦上的咏叹调
  • Bach: Cello Suite No. 1 in G major (BWV 1007): I. Prelude,巴赫:G大调第一无伴奏大提琴组曲,前奏曲
  • Bach: Minuet in G,巴赫:G大调小步舞曲
  • Beethoven: Bagatelle No. 25 in A minor/Für Elise,贝多芬:献给爱丽丝
  • Beethoven: Minuet from String quartet No. 5, in A Major, Op. 18,贝多芬:A大调第18号弦乐四重奏
  • Beethoven: Minuet in G,贝多芬:G大调小步舞曲
  • Beethoven: Piano Sonata No. 14, “Moonlight Sonata”,贝多芬:升c小调第十四钢琴奏鸣曲/月光奏鸣曲
  • Beethoven: Piano Sonata No.17 in D minor, Op.31 No.2 -Tempest,贝多芬:第17钢琴奏鸣曲/暴风雨奏鸣曲
  • Beethoven: Sonata No. 8 for Piano, Op. 13 Pathétiquein C minor,贝多芬:c小调第8奏鸣曲/悲怆奏鸣曲
  • Beethoven: Sonata No. 23, Op.57 – Appassionata,贝多芬:第23钢琴奏鸣曲/热情奏鸣曲
  • Beethoven: String Quartet No. 12, in E-flat Major, Op. 127, 贝多芬:降E大调第12号弦乐四重奏
  • Beethoven: String Quartet No. 14, in C-Sharp Minor, Op. 131,贝多芬:升c小调第14号弦乐四重奏
  • Beethoven: String Quartet No. 15, in A Minor, Op. 132,贝多芬:a小调第15号弦乐四重奏
  • Beethoven: String Quartet No. 16, in F Minor, Op. 135,贝多芬:F大调第16号弦乐四重奏
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 1 in C, Op. 21,贝多芬:C大调第一交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 2 in D, Op. 36:,贝多芬:D大调第二交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 3, Op. 55,贝多芬:降E大调第三交响曲/英雄交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 4 in B-Flat, Op. 60,贝多芬:降B大调第四交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 5 in C Minor, Op. 67,贝多芬:c小调第五号交响曲/命运交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 6 in F, Op. 68,贝多芬:F大调第六号交响曲/田园交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 7 in A, Op. 92,贝多芬:A大调第七交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 8 in F, Op. 93,贝多芬:F大调第八交响曲
  • Beethoven: Symphony No. 9 in D Minor, Op. 125,贝多芬:d小调第九交响曲
  • Bizet: Carmen Suite No 2 – Chanson du Toredor. Allegro moderato (Act II), 比才:卡门组曲,第二组,第二乐章
  • Brahms: Danses Hongroises Pour Piano À 4 Mains : No.5 En Fa Dièse Mineur,勃拉姆斯:匈牙利舞曲第五号
  • Brahms: Hungarian Dance No.4 in F sharp minor – Orchestrated by Paul Juon (1872-1940),勃拉姆斯:升f小调匈牙利舞曲第四号
  • Dvořák: Humoresque No. 7 in G flat major, Op. 101,德沃夏克:降G大调诙谐曲
  • Dvořák: Symphonie Nr. 9 e-moll, Op. 95, ‘Aus der Neuen Welt’ – Allegro con fuoco,德沃夏克: e小调第九交响曲《自新大陆》·第四乐章
  • Gavotte in D major,Rosine(arr. for violin and piano),D大调加沃特舞曲,罗西纳
  • Grieg: In The Hall Of The Mountain King,格里格:在山魔王的宫殿里
  • La Leggenda del Pianista Sull’oceano/Magic Waltz,魔术华尔兹,《海上钢琴师》
  • La traviata / Act 1 -Libiamo ne’lieti calici(Brindisi) Luciano Pavarotti,茶花女·饮酒歌
  • Les premiers sourires de Vanessa,瓦妮莎的微笑
  • Liszt: Hungarian Rhapsodies S.244 – No.2 in C sharp minor / F sharp major, with cadenza for Toni Raab: Rapsodie hongroise II,李斯特:匈牙利狂想曲
  • Liszt: La Campanella,李斯特:钟
  • Liszt: Schwanengesang, S.560 – piano transcriptions after Schubert – No.4 Ständchen (Serenade),李斯特:改编舒伯特小夜曲
  • Love Theme from “Romeo & Julia” ,罗密欧与朱丽叶
  • Maksim: Croatian Rhapsody,马克西姆:克罗地亚狂想曲
  • Maksim: The Flight Of The Bumble-Bee,马克西姆:野蜂飞舞
  • Mendelssohn, Heine: 6 Songs Op.34 : II Auf Flügeln des Gesanges Op.34 No.2,门德尔松,海涅:乘着歌声的翅膀
  • Mozart: 12 Variations on Ah, Vous Dirai-Je, Maman,  K. 265 Twinkle,莫扎特:小星星变奏曲
  • Mozart: Piano Sonata No. 11,Alla Turca,莫扎特:A大调第11号钢琴奏鸣曲,土耳其进行曲/第三乐章
  • Mozart: Serenade in G, K.525 “Eine kleine Nachtmusik” – 1. Allegro,莫扎特:第13号小夜曲/G大调弦乐小夜曲,第一乐章
  • Mozart: Sonata No 1 in C,莫扎特:第一号钢琴奏鸣曲
  • Mozart: Symphony No. 40 in G minor K550 (1996 Digital Remaster): Molto allegro,莫扎特:g小调第40号交响曲,第一乐章
  • Mozart: The Magic Flute, Queen of the Night – Aria N° 14,莫扎特: 魔笛,第14号夜后咏叹调
  • Offenbach: Jacques Offenbach: Cancan (Orpheus in the Underworld),奥芬巴赫:天堂与地狱序曲
  • Rossini: The Barber of Seville,罗西尼:塞维利亚的理发师
  • Rossini: William Tell, 罗西尼:威廉·退尔
  • Pachelbel: Canon in D,帕赫贝尔:D大调卡农
  • Schumann: Robert Schumann: Kinderszenen, Op.15 – VII. Träumerei (Arr. Christopher Palmer for Cello and Orchestra),舒曼:童年情景,梦幻曲
  • Shostakovich: Jazz Suite No.2 (Suite for Promenade Orchestra) – VI. Waltz 2,肖斯塔科维奇:第二号爵士组曲
  • Strauss II: An die schonen, blauen Donau – Walzer Op.314,小约翰·施特劳斯:蓝色多瑙河圆舞曲
  • Strauss II: Tritsch-Tratsch-Polka, Polka schnell, Op. 214,小约翰·施特劳斯:闲聊波卡尔
  • Strauss: Radetzky March Op. 228 (2005 Digital Remaster),施特劳斯:拉德茨基进行曲
  • Tchaikovsky: The Seasons, 12 characteristic pieces, Op. 37a: 6. June, Barcarolle,柴科夫斯基:四季•六月船歌
  • Tekla Badarzewska-Baranowska: The Maiden’s Prayer (Arr. Joseph Cooper),巴拉诺夫斯卡:少女的祈祷
  • Vivaldi: The Four Seasons (Spring) – 1. Allegro 01.-12.,安东尼奥·韦瓦第:四季•春
  • Williams: “The Imperial March (Darth Vader’s Theme),威廉姆斯:皇帝进行曲(星球大战)

纯音乐/Absolute Music

  • Always With Me(钢琴)
  • Another Day
  • Awake
  • Beethoven Virus
  • Between Worlds
  • Braveheart (For the Love of a Princess)
  • Brothers (Fullmetal Alchemist)
  • Butterfly Waltz
  • Canon,卡农(钢琴版,小提琴版,四重奏版,阿卡贝拉版,八音盒版,口琴版,变奏曲版,及其他各种版本)
  • Fallingstar(八音盒)
  • Electric Romeo
  • Flight of the Silverbird
  • Flower Dance
  • For the Love of a Princess (From “Braveheart”)
  • He’s a Pirate (Pirates of the Caribbean theme)
  • Horner: For The Love Of A Princess (Braveheart)
  • Journey
  • Kiss The Rain
  • Larrons En Foire
  • Let it go
  • Love Story meets Viva La Vida
  • Miles Away
  • Memory (Phantom Of Broadway album version)
  • Mirror Night
  • Nocturne
  • Nothing To Fear
  • Nuvole Bianche
  • Piano Beat
  • Poker Face
  • Por Una Cabeza
  • Purple Passion
  • Purple Passion
  • Returning Heart Garden
  • River Flows In You
  • Schindlers List
  • Secrets AMFB Onerepublic
  • Sketch Plane
  • Song from a secret garden
  • Stand & Believe
  • Stepping On The Rainy Street
  • Summer
  • Tassel
  • Tears
  • The Crave
  • The Daylight
  • The Dream Waltz
  • The Rain
  • The truth that you leave
  • Through the Arbor
  • Town of Windmill
  • Viva La Vida(大提琴)
  • Whisper Of Hope (Piano Only)
  • Wild Side
  • Yanni – Ninghtingale
  • 不论多少次(Alwasy with me的八音盒版)
  • 千与千寻(Always with me的人声片尾曲)
  • 千寻的圆舞曲
  • 夜的钢琴曲(六)
  • 天空之城主题曲 fallingstar
  • 故乡的原风景
  • 星空
  • 映画恋
  • 月光下的凤尾竹
  • 梦中的婚礼
  • 森林狂想曲
  • 水边的阿狄丽娜
  • 爱的协奏曲
  • 雪的梦幻
  • 梁祝
  • 白昼之夜
  • 童年
  • 茉莉花(萨克斯)
  • 跨越时代的思念
  • 那一天的合川
  • 4U

一个无趣且粗糙的妹子衡量量化模型

花了3天时间折腾,终于把博客的各种东西都弄好了,包括:

  • 终于修复了不能写入图片或安装插件的bug;
  • 将Startssl的证书更换为Comodo的证书[1];
  • 开启了全站强制https;
  • 对hosting搬了家[2];
  • 博客将支持LaTeX,覆盖范围包括标题、文章和评论区;
  • 开启了相册,以后hule.me/gallary终于可以用了,容我慢慢添加图片。

不过,网站的访问速度仍然是慢的令人发指,各种缓存优化都没有用。hmmm…没时间再折腾了,先这样吧,物理要没时间看了。立贴为证,在看到场论之前不再折腾网站了。

咱们来聊聊正事。这篇博文的最初的题目是“一个无趣的建模”,起因是上学期折腾Mathematica时突然(zhongyu)无师自通学会了画3D图,于是突发奇想弄了个“筛选妹子的定量化标准”……

众所周知,在广大单身狗深夜卧谈时,讨论到要如何选择妹子,至少能从两方面入手:一方面是与生俱来的,不易改变的颜值和性格;另一方面是相对较易改变并且能使之能保持长久吸引力的气质[3]、内涵、知识、三观、等因素。于是我们可以定义一个简单的评分体系,以最常见的10分为满分对妹子进行打分[4]。

如果我们将颜值的分数记为\(x_1\),性格的分数记为\(x_2\),我们可以得到一个二维向量的膜:

\(x=\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}\)

因为性格已经在“另一方面”中有所考量但又不完全相同,我们希望降低\(x_2\)的比重,于是不妨对先前定义的向量作如下小的修改:

\(x=\sqrt{\frac{c_0 x_1^2+x_2^2}{c_0+1}}\)    [5]

其中\(c_0\)是一个大于1的参数,例如4。

同样的,我们可以将第二部分的气质、内涵、知识、三观等因素分别记为\(y_1,y_2,y_3,y_4\),施以权重,我们可以得到一个高维向量的膜:

\(\sqrt{\frac{\sum _{i=1}^4 c_i y_i^2}{\sum _{i=1}^4 c_i}}\)

其中 \(c_i\)是相应的参数,在这里我们不妨设\(c_1\)=\(c_2\)=\(c_3\)=\(\frac{c_4}{3}\) [6]。以上所有\(x_i,y_i\)满足

\(x_i, y_i \in [0,1]\)

我们得到了两个向量的膜,现在我们希望定义一个函数来完成我们的打分。在对各种函数只有有限的了解和简单的尝试之后,我试着定义了这样一个函数:

\(f(x,y):=16.487 e^{-0.75 e \left((x-1)^2+(y-1)^2\right)-0.5 x}\)    \(x,y \in [0,1]\)

其中,16.487的作用是使得\(f\)最终落在[0,10]上,幂的系数是用于调节图像的陡峭程度。为了略略降低颜值的比重,我增加一个参数项\(-0.5 x\)。

如果我们以8.5分为分界线,8.5分以上的妹子是“可接受的”,那么我们可以得到如下函数图像:

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 1.40.22 AM

可以看到,函数在高分段占的面积很大,意味着满足这些条件的妹子可能很多,这显然不符合实际。于是我们再增加一个参数项\(\left| x+y\right|/2\)来压低高分段比例。于是我们现在有:

\(f(x,y):=16.487\frac{\left| x+y\right|}{2} e^{-0.75 e \left((x-1)^2+(y-1)^2\right)-0.5 x}\)    \(x,y \in [0,1]\)

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 1.41.16 AM

Figure 3

满足8.5分以上的妹子只占了一小块,看来添加的参数起作用了。另外,细心的读者可以体悟图中四分之一椭圆的意义。

hmmm……,就是一个这样粗糙的模型。最后显然地,模型不能充分代表我的想法,但是作为某种标准的定量化体验,效果好像还是不错的。

———————

[1] 360收购Startssl后,Startssl的证书不再安全。

[2] 貌似Linux的hosting要比windows的好用很多。

[3] 这里的气质更多的是心理学词汇,不同于平常的意思;其实心理学上气质是与生俱来的,与性格类似,但是这里我还是把他部分重叠地放在这里来了。

[4] 如果你喜欢,显然你也可以对汉子打分。

[5] 这里的参数是为了x的范围落在[0,10],下同。

[6]因为三观包括世界观、人生观和价值观。

随笔

凌晨2点的广州。好久没写东西了,随便写一点吧。

深夜随手谷歌了一下院里的一位同学,发现了很多有意思的东西。现在才知道原来身边的同学也不乏如此努力之人,而相比之下自己实在自惭形秽。每天写一份足迹、每月写一份小结,社团、科研、兼职、追剧、文学阅读、CS,还有巨高的GPA,多任务模式开的很精彩呀……大一就在准备GRE写作(虽然方向并不对……),完美的托福、积极乐观的心态、相当靠谱的自我管理……在QQ里聊天时的温文而儒雅。不管怎么样,都是一位十分值得欣赏的优秀女子呢。

然而在静静地浏览别人留下的痕迹的时候,不由三省吾身。大二这一年以来过得太快,申请占了差不多四分之三的时间,剩下的四分之一的大二下学期实在是没干什么事,其实即使是在申请季自己好像也没有什么动静。托福准备了快半年最后也只是刚到100分压线,被卡单项的几所学校还要狼狈的靠雅思来过。荒废的一岁。

所以要开始玩真的啦!!

说好的四年高三呢!!等7月7号考试结束和化学说了farewell,就来开始玩命的学,经典力学电动力学热力学和统计力学量子力学我全部都要学会学会学会,词汇量恢复到16k,在新大二的一年里!以此为证!7月考完试以后我会把每个阶段的计划和完成情况写上来,虽然这个网站并没有除了我以外的其他人看。

嗯…最后忍不住再评论一下那位令人尊敬的妹子…… 其实从她的日志可以看出来,她似乎并没有长远的规划,(佐证:她努力的方向比较发散)但是短期(<3 months)的规划极好(有很多短期目标),而这和我之前收集到的信息吻合。这样看来,其实这并不是特别好的情况😂。上大学以来我一直在思考这个问题:很多高中刚上大学的freshman们都是被各种形式的媒体和师兄师姐告知大学生活应该多样而精彩,应该努力学各样的技能,然而这种观点在很多情况下可能并不正确。

就我快两年的大学经历来看,前进策略这种事,因人而异。没有精明的辨别能力和足够理性的思考,很容易就会被旁人的指指点点带跑。譬如像我这种早就决定好方向的并且把未来800年都规划了一番的人,其实并没有必要浪费过多的精力在路边的风景上,而在大一一年里可以说也被“师兄师姐们”的“良言”给带歪了。对我来说,集中所有精力开足最大马力一条路走到黑就好了。而对于其他情况不同的人,则得要有自己的思考。在自己活了的20年里认识了很多人,但是发现绝大多数人(其实是几乎所有的)都没有一个足够清晰长远的目标,最多有个一两年内的短期目标,这从大尺度来看几乎是致命的。没有大目标的结果就是现在做的所有努力都要在以后真正的方向上以向量投影的形式打折扣;方向高度发散的人在先前的努力里只能地毯式撒网,最后才找出一条适合的方向,而这对于前一种人来说几乎在浪费生命。

跟其他人接触的愈多,就愈加发现目标的重要性——当然,追根揭底最重要的还是动机,这个以后再谈。身边有太多的人迷茫在人生的路途上,除了拼命努力好让自己看起来不颓废并不能做其他什么,看着可惜。

Anyway,祝愿那位女子尽早找到自己的真爱,动机吻合的。

年轻人能有终身的理想并且全力为之奋斗真是一件太幸福太幸运的一件事。

就酱。

Something about Physics and Chemistry

Note: This is the homework for organic chemistry.

Preface

With the deep love and firm dedication to natural science, I have been long time wanting to write something about chemistry and physics. In fact, as I learned more about the two basic sciences, more and more remarkable differences between these two subjects appeared and they are so significant that they push me to determine which subject on earth I should devote the rest of my life to. Fortunately, I get a chance today to share my view of points semi-officially here, and I will write down every true feeling I have when I try to learn and understand these two subjects. These feelings may not be consistent and even against with those of yours, but they are not offensive or discriminatory and just stand for my personal viewpoints.

 

Difference between physics and chemistry

Both physics and chemistry are natural sciences, but strangely, they bear too many different characteristics. Physics is more logical: it tries to establish a complete, self-consistent system using laws and logical reasoning that universally explain how the world works and why a natural phenomenon appears with experimental results as proof and supports. However, chemistry is more empirical: it tries to collect as more as experimental data from which chemists try to establish a plausible theory or formula that may partially explain chemical phenomena. One, if bright enough, can deduce a wonderful physics system using only a few basic laws, but he can never do the same thing in chemistry, and even neither can he satisfyingly explain a phenomenon using existing chemical laws or empirical formula. In this sense, physics is a more labor-saving and efficient method as a tool to understand the world. With only one single law, such as law of universal gravitation, a man can learn a great lot about this world. He must be very excited and amazed about how universe can be understood by a so concise and labor-saving way.

 

Comparison between Physics and Chemistry

Characteristics Physics(Take theoretical physics as example) Chemistry(Take organic chemistry as example)
Methods of establishment and development Logical reasoning using basic laws with experiments results as proof and support Empirically with experiments results as development resources and logic reasoning as auxiliary
Range of application Very universal Quite limited
Size of objects for study From quarks to the universe From molecules to human-size materials
Ability of prediction Quite Strong Limited, inaccurate, and uncertain, with many exceptions
More applied or more pure Totally pure More applied
Intellectual requirement Very high Quite high
Main devices for research Paper, pencil and computer Laboratory, all kinds of expensive equipment and toxic reagents
Period of research achievement Quite long (1-20 years) Relatively short (1-3 years)
impact on human life Can be overturning Quite limited and more cumulative
Subjects may be impacted by the development of this subject Engineering, astronomy, energy, chemistry, biology, mathematics, electronic, philosophy, military, materials, etc. Materials, biology, pharmacy, agricultural, etc.
Salary Quite high

Relatively low (except for chemical engineering)

 

Impact and prospect of physics and chemistry

The impact and prospect of physics much more outweighs chemistry (no matter which branches). A great physics theory or equation like law of universal gravitation or E=mc2 can overturn the life of human being, while the effect of chemistry is much more limited. For example, the most outstanding chemical achievement humankind ever made is the low-cost and large-scale industrial preparation of ammonia, but this is also the only one achievement exerted by chemistry that can overturn the lifestyle of human being——they did not have to worry about food production any more.

Besides, the prospect of physics is much brighter than chemistry. To prove this point, you imagine both physics and chemistry had developed to their ultimate stage. As for physics, all of the laws, equations, rules, and particles that can be found would had been found. We would be able to freely utilize nuclear energy and even other undiscovered energy form. Due to the huge energy released from nuclear fusion, human being would never worry about depletion of energy. What is more, humankind would have own the ability to travel across the stars and even galaxies. They can colonize other planets and exploit the resource like metals there. To put the hypothesis to the farthest, if the universe is bound to collapse or permanently expand, the only way that may save human being is to develop physics and try to find the key leading to higher dimension space or another universe.

In comparison, if chemistry developed to its ultimate stage, human beings might be able to synthesize any substance they want, and they might be able to synthesize whatever medicine people desire. Nobody would be bothered by disease and everyone would live as long as 200 years old. So what? People are still to die. The development of chemistry (or biology) would just slightly prolong the value. Even if humankind gain immortality, they are still under the risk of death by accident. People might also be able to use the best materials ever, or the best performance batteries, but nothing more. They will still be stick to the tiny earth even with the ultimately developed chemistry (or biology), and they are even fragile to an incident like the one happened 65 million years ago.

In other word, if physics develop to its ultimate stage, the humankind’s life will be totally different. They would lead a so science-fiction-like life that it will even be beyond the best science fiction writer’s imagination. However, if chemistry develop to its ultimate stage, the humankind’s life will not experience that exciting transformation, and, negatively speaking, will be quite normal compared with today’s life.

 

Why physics and why not chemistry

I prepared for eight month, planning to transfer to a US college so that I can change my major and study theoretical physics. Why theoretical physics? I have explained above. Besides strong interests in this lovely, sophisticated, and intellectually challenging subject, I also admire the great impact and bright future that physics owns. I dream that one day my theory will change the world. And also I do not want to waste my time in chemistry which is more trivial, limited in impact and less promising. Also, theoretical physics is more intellectually challenging, which will bring me more happiness when I study it.

 

Differences between organic chemistry and other chemistry branches

Since this is an organic chemistry course paper, I shall talk more about organic chemistry. The biggest difference between organic chemistry and other chemistry branches is that organic chemistry is well organized. That is, the regularity of organic chemistry is quite strong that most of the learners are able to find the regularity and utilize it. For example, one can always expect the Grignard reaction to be an organometallic chemical reaction in which alkyl, vinyl, or aryl-magnesium halides (Grignard reagents) add to a carbonyl group in an aldehyde or ketone. And in many situation he can utilize this rule to predict products of a reaction. This characteristic, which makes organic chemistry to be easier to learn, is less remarkable in other chemistry branches, no matter inorganic chemistry, analytical chemistry or physical chemistry.

 The second biggest difference is that organic chemistry is much more fragmentary than other chemistry branches. Since the sorts of substances in organic chemistry are many more, the points that students should memorize remarkably increase. This characteristic weakens the advantages brought by its regularity and makes organic chemistry more like a “philatelic science”: we are always memorizing all kinds of reactions feathered by all kinds of reagents, and it is just like collecting stamps.

 

My feelings about organic chemistry

Organic chemistry is like a jigsaw puzzle. What the learner needs to do is just to try his best to memorize all kinds of reaction formula, reaction conditions and reaction mechanism, as well as some physical and chemical properties of common substance or organic rules. And then he just need to try his best to utilize what he has memorized to synthesis a substance (like total synthesis), just like playing with a jigsaw puzzle. All is around synthesis. This business can be quite monotone and less intellectual challenging. Imagine play jigsaw puzzles for month by month and year by year. I bet it will be extremely boring. What is lucky is that organic chemistry is highly regularly organized, so learning it will not be too painstaking. But to be honest, I hate organic chemistry, and also all other branches of chemistry (except inorganic chemistry), because what they care about is really trivial (compared with what I care about). And also, what I have learned in chemistry will help me nothing in my daily life, even nothing in helping me understand the world because that is accomplished by physics. Fortunately, I get a chance to go aboard to study physics months later and this semester will be the last two months that I have to study chemistry. After early July, I will permanently get rid of chemistry and I will never have to pay even just a little attention to it. And I can spend all of my spared time in my beloved, physics.

I would appreciate if you would love to support my decision. Everyone has his own beloved and I choose physics. No any offence.