#### 2013 Aug 26 - *Scribblings from a late-night Megabus to Boston.*

2011 Nov 18

- Abbott, E. A.
*Flatland.* - Hofstadter, D. R.
*Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid.* - Taleb, N. N.
*The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable.*

- Dostoevsky, F.
*The Gambler.* - Dostoevsky, F.
*The Idiot.* - Dostoevsky, F.
*Crime and Punishment.* - Dostoevsky, F.
*Notes from Underground.* - Taleb, N. N.
*Antifragile.* - ...

- Dostoevsky, F.
*Demons.* - Biblica.
*New International Version.* - Chomsky, N. and Foucault, M.
*The Chomsky-Foucault Debate.*

- cv (pdf)

- in progress

- a derivation of the heat equation (pdf)
- the secant method and fixed-point iteration (pdf)
- a collocation method using chebyshev interpolation (pdf)
- the "resource curse" (natural resource economics) (pdf)
- evolutionary computation in economics and finance (pdf)
- cheong social ventures: proposal for a community technology center in baltimore, m.d. (pdf)
- computational methods and optimizations on the cox-ross-rubenstein options pricing model (pdf)
- elementary proofs:
- proving that the product of two integers is an integer (pdf)
- proving that a non-zero element of a field has at most one multiplicative inverse (pdf)
- proving that an infinite sequence in the reals can have at most one limit in the reals (pdf)
- proving that if two real-valued functions are continuous at a point then so is their product (pdf)
- proving that the common notion of "distance" is indeed a metric (pdf), then a generalization (pdf)
- proving that a subset of a metric is closed
*iff*the limit of every sequence in that subset is itself in the subset (pdf) - proving that the boundary points of a non-empty subset of a metric space is a closed subset of that metric space (pdf)

- stack overflow
- guitar

- 2014 May 04 - updated reading list, preoccupations, resume (minor)
- 2014 Mar 17 - updated reading list, reordered updates (most-recent-at-top)
- 2014 Feb 09 - updated reading list, shortened reading list
- 2013 Dec 18 - updated reading list, shortened reading list
- 2013 Sep 18 - updated reading list
- 2013 Aug 26 - updated reading list
- 2013 Aug 05 - updated reading list, preoccupations
- 2013 Jun 13 - updated cv, reading list, preoccupations
- 2012 Dec 10 - updated reading list; added cv, undergraduate output
- 2012 Nov 15 - started blog
- 2012 Oct 30 - added reading lists, preoccupations, skills
- 2012 Sep 21 - created page to serve as motivational stub

2011 Nov 18

[wdiff=a3,c1]

Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:27:52 -0400

Subject: Re:

From: Andrew Cheong <acheong87@gmail.com>

To: Brad Reiss <REDACTED>I think I was trying to get at this. We don't know beyond what we perceive. (If we advance our knowledge in this field one day, then so be it, but until then...) We can't talk about anything without language. (If we advance our knowledge in this field one day, then so be it, but until then...) If we're to define objectivity at all, it has to consider perception and language as its bounds.

Beyond those bounds, I don't know. I don't even think words like "objective" or "subjective" have meaning in that netherworld. (Like "moral choice" having no meaning in a deterministic, no-choice universe.)

But I strongly believe (based on my observations, at least!) that within those bounds, objectivity can be found. And I think the theoretical limit is the system of physics itself. Like GEB broke down the mystical barrier between the physical hardware of the brain, and consciousness, I think we can one day trace the roots of all this high-level, abstract thinking, along with all its words, to its physical roots. Billions of people reach the same conclusion and share the same sense of "truth," not even knowing how to define "truth," and without necessarily needing to coordinate that sense with one another. Something physical creates that sense of "objectivity." Unfortunately I don't know any eloquent or rigorous way of defining it, but that thing is what I'll always mean by "objectivity." And our failure to define it shouldn't stop us from using the word, as long as, upon someone's invocation of it, we can all get the general sense of the elusive thing that the person meant, and we are all led in the direction that the person intended for us to go. (Or am I being careless and romantic?)

I write for the utility of writing. These are, broadly, (i.) the utility of the present, and (ii.) the utility of the future. These are, refined, (i.a.) the utility of transcribing thoughts and feelings which in large numbers become too cumbersome to persist in my mind, like the utility of paging memory (in computing), (i.b.) the utility of satisfying my ego with words that satisfy my sense of aesthetics, and (ii.a.) the utility of recollecting forgotten reas and ideas, i.e. memories of things that happened, and memories of things that unhappened. I write for the utility of writing.