A sketch of my thought process

Last night I thought i could write in prose about my personality, but when i failed to do so, i thought i could write it in a poem. that failed too. writing assignments simply don't work for me. it just seems that i can't write about some topic on-demand. Not even when GP A levels demands it, nor even when i demand it from myself. it just doesn't work that way.

so i proceeded to work on my alternate circuit fabrication proces project, and wondered how i abandoned an earlier process for the current one. These things happen all the time in engineering...or at least in most of my own pursuits. Millions of (okay less than that...) ideas come and go, and the surprising bit is that after you've killed an idea, its ghost comes after you and you're forced to consider it some time later. The ghost might be resurrected in physical form once again, for the same purpose, or becomes the seed of a new idea for a new purpose. Which is very good. So its good for engineers to keep ghosts as pets. They might be useful someday.

Anyway, i wondered about the reasons for abandoning that previous idea for the current one. So i wrote a document last night trying to address that issue.

Turns out that document seems like a good way of presenting myself. It shows the haphazard approach that is present on all levels of my pursuits; things come to mind at random...i may lose interest in one thing and pick up something else to chew on for a while before returning. i've got lots of projects in mind, and they all compete for brain-time. i learnt that i can't complete one thing at a time, nor read a book from cover to cover. Maybe that's why i haven't read fiction in a long time. So i won't force myself into things i feel i cannot make progress for the moment.

hmm i thought i had a lot to talk about, but i've forgotten. can only remember the above...which can be summarised as haphazard and messy.

The next two documents are about this whole circuit fabrication affair. The first is background about the latest method, which i thought would be the final version. which is why you will see an introduction that suggests its some kind of paper introducing a new method for circuit fab. It is followed by an outline of the method. I will call this method the 'plating method'.

The second document is what i wrote last night. The issue surfaced in my mind recently, so i had to address it or risk lack of peaceful sleep. that document is like a 'real-time' recording. The thought process really flows that way. Sometimes the terms used are rather incomprehensible. This is not because they belong to some highly technical vocabulary. Its just that i have mental images of some things, and i just give a short label that will immediately refer to these things. I think scientific literature is like this...of course the compactification of expression leads to incomprehension by the so-called 'layman'. Think of it as a painting. Its sometimes very difficult to describe the subtle portions of a painting. You can't just say "The Potato Eaters" is a painting of some people eating potatoes. Doesn't tell much abt the painting. You just refer to the title, and assume that the reader has seen the painting and understands the label is tagged to the painting. Hence its difficult to describe some things, so we just tag a label to a commonly-accepted-previously-tied-down meaning. Just that i'm alone in this, so no one may understand what i mean.

Still, they make interesting collections of words, albeit incomprehensible. No?

Enjoy the peek into my rotten numskull (its spelt that way??!! i dunno, just assembled it phonetically.)