i'm so long aired...here i go again

there's nothing much for me to blog about actually.

the quality of my writing hasn't been good this year.

blogging has been an outlet for me...just to vent off the steam of calm down or sort out some mess within. hence most posts have not been thoughtful articles.

made a lot of notes in my notebook in the past 2 months since i started using it for the m113 operational maintenance course. but that took up only a few pages. the rest have been personal bits and pieces, technical plans and a long chunk used to record the learning process of electromagnetics.

a lot of learning has not been completed, hence no consolidation of knowledge has been done, and therefore no blogging output. but since i first picked up a book on modern physics and photocopied the chapter on quantum mechanics, i've always wanted to reorganise those facts to make them easier to understand...especially for those who have very very little knowledge and
capability in math but want to get into the math itself, not just getting contented with popular-science books. i think that while there're really bright scientists out there, they can't quite write and express their concepts properly. yes...i dare to say that most can't really teach it. the
most famous exception is probably richard feynman.

instead of a long and painful (to me) mathematical ejaculation (because it must have been pure pleasure for the mathematically gifted author), the transition to math should be gradual. and anyway, i think some books have too much math, and miss out important considerations in the formulation of the theory...giving the impression that all there is to it is just math whose
origin will always remain mysterious and obscure and solely in the hands of mathematicians.
in physics, physicists have to find the math to describe their concepts, then play with the math and relate this to the 'physics'. i hope my statements have not given the impression that math is disjointed from the physics...math and physics are ultimately dialectic in relationship, just as culture and human thinking are probably so.

i may have made my statements in grave error...wondering why ppl can live with the laplace transform in electrical engineering without needing to know what motivated its existence, and only i can't!? that took a long time to figure out, but i believe i'm right about it. OR maybe its too obvious for all but me. how can all the books not write about it? maybe that's for the math books to talk about, but i can't find it yet.

all these need-to-know urges have hindered the pace of my learning. (but is it learning or just ignorance otherwise?) it was this that got me frustrated learning about thermodynamics...for example, when we talk about speed of the gas particles, it is speed relative to what? Bulk velocity when a truckload of air moves is not part of the 'speed'...so what exactly is the speed? i've not pursued further, so i do not know if i have made a mistake in this comment, or wondered/wandered in the wrong direction.

that was how this blog was born...because i got frustrated trying to understand A level thermodynamics.