Saturday, May 22, 2004
I should be sleeping. Instead, I'm laying in bed and listening to the last Philly Flyers/Tampa Bay Lightning conference finals on NHL game radio. I would give a whole lot to have satellite so I could have the possibility to watch the game. How I miss watching the playoffs. And wouldn't it be nice if Philly would win so it could be a Calgary v. Philly finals? Why, yes I think it would, as well.
Did loads this weekend, and feel more than productive. The motivation lasted all the way through Saturday, and it might stick around through Sunday. I already have some ideas about what I could do if I'm still motivated for the remainder of the weekend. I did nearly everything I wanted to do this weekend, plus a little more. I wanted to buy a copy of the book from the Earth from Above exhibit, but after looking through it for a bit today, I noticed that the binding was really distracting because most of the pictures were the size of two pages and since the book was bound like nearly every book is bound, the picture was split in half and you couldn't see the middle of the shot. It made me think that maybe the book wasn't that cool, so I passed on buying it. Still cool shots, but I would rather have the same book with a different binding that didn't basically ruin the good photography.
Ran into the neighbor after buying some plant requirements today. So we went to his place to sit about a bit and play with his son. He told me something that is totally intriguing... Apparently saw a documentary on BBC Prime about competition, and the interesting and intriguing bits had to do with sibling rivalry. It seems that 2nd children are better at getting parents attention, they have a better strategy than a 1st child, for example. The reason for this is that the 1st born doesn't need to fight for attention from day 1, but #2 has to fight to draw attention to themselves more frequently and more consistently starting the day they are born so they have better skills and strategies to accomplish this rather early on in their life. With this theory, first children would have to start learning the same skills and strategies after their sibling is born, therefore they aren't very good at it. This lends to the other part of the theory - 2nd children are (more often than 1st children) more innovative and more inventive than 1st borns. Statistics apparently back this up with the fact that more innovators, politically, artistically, societally, invention-wise etc etc are their parents' second child. Super interesting! Wonder how a third child influences this particular situation. And I don't wonder this only because I'm the 3rd of 3, but I can imagine that this also has some affect on the 2nd child as wells as the 1st. Of the people that I know that are 1st or 2nd children, I'm not sure that I completely agree with this theory, but I still find it pretty interesting...
Will be cooking tomorrow. Cooked last night. Sort of cooked tonight. So I'm still in a cooking freaky frenzy. No smoothies lately, but I'm prepared. Bought some fruit today. Yay me.
Okay, I'm too tired to listen to the rest of the game...Bed time.
Sweet dreams.
Did loads this weekend, and feel more than productive. The motivation lasted all the way through Saturday, and it might stick around through Sunday. I already have some ideas about what I could do if I'm still motivated for the remainder of the weekend. I did nearly everything I wanted to do this weekend, plus a little more. I wanted to buy a copy of the book from the Earth from Above exhibit, but after looking through it for a bit today, I noticed that the binding was really distracting because most of the pictures were the size of two pages and since the book was bound like nearly every book is bound, the picture was split in half and you couldn't see the middle of the shot. It made me think that maybe the book wasn't that cool, so I passed on buying it. Still cool shots, but I would rather have the same book with a different binding that didn't basically ruin the good photography.
Ran into the neighbor after buying some plant requirements today. So we went to his place to sit about a bit and play with his son. He told me something that is totally intriguing... Apparently saw a documentary on BBC Prime about competition, and the interesting and intriguing bits had to do with sibling rivalry. It seems that 2nd children are better at getting parents attention, they have a better strategy than a 1st child, for example. The reason for this is that the 1st born doesn't need to fight for attention from day 1, but #2 has to fight to draw attention to themselves more frequently and more consistently starting the day they are born so they have better skills and strategies to accomplish this rather early on in their life. With this theory, first children would have to start learning the same skills and strategies after their sibling is born, therefore they aren't very good at it. This lends to the other part of the theory - 2nd children are (more often than 1st children) more innovative and more inventive than 1st borns. Statistics apparently back this up with the fact that more innovators, politically, artistically, societally, invention-wise etc etc are their parents' second child. Super interesting! Wonder how a third child influences this particular situation. And I don't wonder this only because I'm the 3rd of 3, but I can imagine that this also has some affect on the 2nd child as wells as the 1st. Of the people that I know that are 1st or 2nd children, I'm not sure that I completely agree with this theory, but I still find it pretty interesting...
Will be cooking tomorrow. Cooked last night. Sort of cooked tonight. So I'm still in a cooking freaky frenzy. No smoothies lately, but I'm prepared. Bought some fruit today. Yay me.
Okay, I'm too tired to listen to the rest of the game...Bed time.
Sweet dreams.
notes:
Post a Comment
