As the GTD experts often kindly say. . . .

G

gtdstudente

Registered
As the GTD experts often kindly say:

"You don't have problems . . . you have Projects [outcome thinking . . . what does done look like]"

Kind of likewise?

Projects are "Figuring Out(s)" . . . like 'figuring-out' the Next Action

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
Last edited:
Not to discourage you, but sometimes determining "what it should look like in the end" is much easier than determining the path to "what it should look like in the end".
 
That’s an interesting way to frame it. “Figuring out” really does capture the spirit of how GTD encourages constant clarity. It’s like every project starts as a question we’re slowly answering through each Next Action.
 
Palgent said:
That’s an interesting way to frame it. “Figuring out” really does capture the spirit of how GTD encourages constant clarity. It’s like every project starts as a question we’re slowly answering through each Next Action.
Click to expand...
Project: Explaining the quantum theory of gravity.
Next action: Er..., um ..., well ... ;)
 
Tom_Hagen said:
Project: Explaining the quantum theory of gravity.
Next action: Er..., um ..., well ... ;)
Click to expand...
What would you like to know? How to quantize the standard Einstein-Hilbert action? How to start from flat-space spin-2 perturbations of the metric tensor and go from there? Renormalization of gravity? Maybe an explanation of Hawking radiation from black holes?
 
René Lie said:
Well, for starters, the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42...
Click to expand...
In fact, the first person to come up with the idea of calculating the final result was the Polish writer Stanisław Lem in the 1960s. I mean the story "How the World Was Saved" from the collection "Fables of Robots". In this story, a machine constructed by Trurl is supposed to calculate the entire meaning of the Universe. The result? The machine finally "began to growl, snort and thrash internally, and then suddenly fell silent and spat out the result:

one.

Interpretation:
This "1" is a humorous, philosophical summary - that everything comes down to unity, to being, to something absolutely simple. It is also a satire on the human need to find one, ultimate meaning - and to try to measure it mathematically.

Douglas Adams was the second...
 
Tom_Hagen said:
In fact, the first person to come up with the idea of calculating the final result was the Polish writer Stanisław Lem in the 1960s.
Click to expand...
@Tom_Hagen Thank you for remembering this great Polish science fiction writer. The Iron Curtain and Philip K. Dick (who claimed that LEM is a communist disinformation network) have made it very difficult to popularize his insightful novels, short stories and fables in the West. In 1960s he has foresaw the dangers of the global information network – that it would make us dumber since it would increase the availability of stupid things.
 
Last edited:
TesTeq said:
@Tom_Hagen Thank you for remembering this great Polish science fiction writer. The Iron Curtain and Philip K. Dick (who claimed that LEM is a communist disinformation network) have made it very difficult to popularize his insightful novels, short stories and fables in the West. In 1960s he has foresaw the dangers of the global information network – that it would make us dumber since it would increase the availability of stupid things.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. I like the one he predicted the most: Kindle, although he called it Opton:

"I spent the whole afternoon in the bookstore. There were no books in it. They hadn't been printed for almost half a century. And I was so looking forward to them, after the microfilms that made up the "Prometheus" library. Nothing. You could no longer browse the shelves, weigh the volumes in your hand, feel their weight, announcing the size of the reading. The bookstore was more like an electron laboratory. Books were crystals with fixed content. You could read them with the help of an opton. It was even similar to a book, but with one, single page between the covers. When you touched it, subsequent pages of text appeared on it."

It was 1961 :)
 
mcogilvie said:
What would you like to know? How to quantize the standard Einstein-Hilbert action? How to start from flat-space spin-2 perturbations of the metric tensor and go from there? Renormalization of gravity? Maybe an explanation of Hawking radiation from black holes?
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I've been wanting to ask you! It's like you read my mind!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top