Acquired Stardust
h

★
Not today Justin

No title available

tannertan36
Monterey Bay Aquarium

Origami Around
Xuebing Du
tumblr dot com
Three Goblin Art
noise dept.
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

祝日 / Permanent Vacation

JVL
No title available
Today's Document
RMH

Kaledo Art

shark vs the universe

seen from Iceland

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Pakistan

seen from Hong Kong SAR China

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from France
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Germany
@helavik
LACEMADE Silverware Era Dress pls help me get out of debt donating to: ko-fi.com/fashionrunways or dinahlance-shop.fourthwall.com
She got the idea for the study while walking with her advisor at Stanford to discuss her thesis topic, and the paper she eventually published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology in 2014 is sharp enough that it should have ended the seated meeting on the day it came out.
She ran 4 experiments on 176 people. Same person tested twice. Once sitting, once walking. The creativity tasks were the standard ones psychologists have used for decades to measure how good a brain is at generating novel useful ideas.
81% of participants in the first experiment produced more creative ideas while walking than while sitting. In the second experiment, 88%. In the third, 100%. Every single person walked into a more creative version of themselves. On average, people generated 60% more novel useful ideas the moment their legs started moving.
The skeptical question is the obvious one. Maybe it was the fresh air. Maybe it was the scenery passing by. Maybe it was the change of environment doing the work, not the walking itself.
Oppezzo killed every one of those explanations with one experimental decision. She put people on a treadmill facing a blank wall. No scenery. No fresh air. No environmental change. Just legs moving in place while staring at white drywall. The 60% boost held.
Then she ran the experiment that closed the case completely. She took participants outside in two conditions. Half of them walked through a Stanford courtyard. The other half were pushed through the exact same courtyard in a wheelchair. Same outdoor stimulation. Same scenery passing at the same speed. The only difference was whether the legs were moving.
The walkers produced dramatically more novel high-quality ideas than the wheelchair group. The outdoors did almost nothing on its own. The walking did everything.
She also tested the opposite kind of thinking. Convergent thinking. The kind where there is one right answer and you have to narrow down to it. Word puzzles where 3 words share a hidden fourth word that connects them. The seated participants did slightly better on these. Walkers got slightly worse.
Walking is not a general intelligence enhancer. It does one specific thing. It opens up the divergent search inside your brain. The part that generates options. The part that produces unexpected connections. The part that takes a problem and finds five ways into it instead of one.
When you need to converge on the single right answer, sit down. When you need to find the answer in the first place, get up.
The mechanism is now well understood. Walking selectively activates what neuroscientists call the default mode network, the system inside your brain that runs when you are not consciously focused on anything. The DMN is where mind-wandering happens. Where memories cross-reference each other. Where ideas that have been sitting in separate folders inside your head finally bump into each other.
When you sit at a desk and force yourself to concentrate, you suppress the DMN. When you walk at a natural pace, the executive part of your brain gets just busy enough handling the walking that the DMN comes online and starts doing the work that focus was blocking.
The most useful finding in the entire paper is the one almost nobody quotes. The boost did not turn off the moment people stopped walking. Participants who walked first and then sat back down stayed elevated. Their next round of seated creativity work was still significantly better than people who had been sitting the whole time. The rest lingered for at least several minutes after the legs stopped moving.
You do not need to do creative work while walking. You need to walk before the creative work. The brain holds the state.
Edited down a long tweet. (x)
If you're a writer you're supposed to write a lot of bullshit. It's part of the gig. You have to write a lot of absolute garbage in order to get to the good bits. Every once in a while you'll be like "Oh, I wish I hadn't wasted all that time writing bullshit," but that's dumb. That's exactly the same as an Olympic runner being like "Oh, I wish I hadn't wasted all that time running all those practice laps"
So Morrowind has these messages that pop up when you level up that aren't just like "wow you're so epic" but actually kind of relevant to like aging and growing as a person. My favorite one, that feels really relevant (couldn't find a screenshot): "It's all suddenly obvious to you. You just have to concentrate. All the energy and time you've wasted -- it's a sin. But without the experience you've gained, taking risks, taking responsibility for failure, how could you have understood?" Like yeah, it feels like I've wasted a lot of time on projects that may never be finished, or pursuits that I ultimately decided weren't for me. But I've learned so much just by engaging with the process of creating, I wouldn't be the same if I hadn't.
Not “Only my reading of canon is correct” or “Interpretations are subjective and all valid” but a secret third thing, “More than one interpretation can be valid but there’s a reason your English teacher had you cite quotes and examples in your papers, you have to have a strong argument that your interpretation is actually supported by the text or it is just wrong and I’m fine with telling you it’s wrong, actually.”
If the text says the curtains are blue you can argue about what that means; but if you’re going to claim they’re actually yellow you’d better have a really good argument.
i know the curtains better than the author. thank you for coming to my ted talk
Fandom has such unresolved mommy/daddy issues about authors. If you apply a little reading comprehension skills to my original post you’ll see I didn’t say anything at all about the author. You guys always make “interpretation” about your beef with the author. You’re all obsessed with the author. This post is just about deciphering what is there in canon. Figuring out what is being communicated by the canon itself with all the words and images and basic formal elements that are there in canon. That’s all it’s about. It really doesn’t matter if the author intentionally put all those things there in a pattern that might support the idea that this one character’s queer. That’s not what this is about. What matters is if you can compellingly argue there’s a pattern of evidence there. Or not. Everyone is conspiring together to make me go insane still adding shit about authorial intent on my post.
tbh a lot of my advice boils down to “hey you know that terrible horrible looming thing you’re doing your best to avoid and distract and escape as much as possible but no matter what you do it just keeps looming and looming and ruining your life”
“just, fuckign, run straight at it screaming.”
i needed this as a background
Thinking about THE GREEN KNIGHT recently
Me: Fuck, the paper towels I want are on the top shelf.
The Sir David Attenborough That Lives In My Brain: Being smaller-than-average presents an added challenge to foraging ... but necessity is the mother of invention. A little creativity turns a baguette into a tool, and voilà--
(paper towel roll falls on my face)
Sir David Attenborough, pleasantly: Success.
Happy A24 Macbeth Streaming day everyone
IG: @haileytjmclaughlin
Twitter: @haileytjmclaugh
My girlfriend and I are laying quietly in the pitch black bedroom. In a soft whisper with no inflection, I said, “Someone is here.”
My girlfriend’s whole body stiffens and they go, “What the FUCK!”
They didn’t feel the little kitty feet I felt or have the context so instead of understanding a cat was joining us in bed they thought I was signaling the start of a horror movie.
Kitten square!
[ID: sketch of two seal-point kittens snoozing together drawn in orange - brown marker and blue pastel. They're curled around each other inside of a box, forming a square together /End ID]
I often think about that post that was a fake dating profile for a cat that was all about chickens, like wanting someone with posable thumbs for opening chickens.
This is one my favourite things the internet has ever made.
!!!!!!
This remains one of the great art objects of modern times and nobody will convince me otherwise.
Common Raven Corvus corax
1/21/2024 Orange County, California
Lake Michigan by mswan777
“average person eats 3 spiders a year” factoid actualy just statistical error. average person eats 0 spiders per year. Spiders Georg, who lives in cave & eats over 10,000 each day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
#tapping the reblog button with utmost care because i’m handling a historical artifact (via @malarkiness)
holy shit OP is not only still active but is still making absolutely banger posts in this exact style 11 years later
A 2025 update