I’m trying to learn the big idea of quantum physics. Here’s a classic thought experiment involving a cat.Put a cat named Schrödinger in a box with a radioactive device. Close and seal the box. Give the cat a 50% chance of being alive when you open the box an hour later. At the time you open the box the has a 50% chance of being alive and a 50% chance of being dead — therefore, the cat is both alive and dead. It’s only when you open the box and observe, or measure, the cat that you’ll know it’s fate. Well what if our problems were the same way? What if our stuck’ness had a 50/50 chance of being real or a product of our fear? What if it’s through our critical analysis of the problem (our measurement) that we discover what we think might be getting in our way is in fact not there? Learn more about Schrödinger’s Cat here.

I began learning about type. I want to learn more about how type is used, what makes good type, and ideas for how I might think about type as a function of communication. I am reviewing the blog, and noticing all kinds of opportunities to clean it up. I may do that soon. I am thinking about power point decks I have to create. How might type choices better communicate the story I am trying to tell?I think about posters, books, and all the places type shows up in my life. How many small details, like type, do we stop to notice each day? How many of those details influence the way we see the world?

The pressure to ship work that’s building up inside of you is generous and beautiful. You are ready to enjoy the rewards of time invested in collecting, noticing, reading, learning, and thinking. It’s not safe to remove the top from an active pressure cooker. The best practice is to release the pressure using the prescribed methods on the cooker. Your mind is like a pressure cooker. Gradually release the pressure and direct your energy towards mindfully shipping your work. The world needs you and your voice. However, we can’t take all of your ideas at once.

When the ideas are running fast, the leg bounces to an unknown beat, and the eyes dart across the room as if every little thing surprises them; then you might have too much energy.Too much energy may be a sign of a restless mind. A mind that cannot be content in its present. Take all of the energy and simplify it. Focus it on one thing. Tell yourself, “I’m going to give this thing my full attention and energy for 5 minutes.” Then go at it.When five minutes are up, see if you can give yourself another five. Go at it.Give the mind’s eye a target to look at. Use your hands - write out what’s in your head. Make your eyes see that you’re doing something with your thoughts.When the time is up, get up and walk away. Don’t look back.Go at the next thing.

Protect your mind from over investing in passing interests. It doesn’t make sense to put your money in something that is here today and gone tomorrow. Better to invest in ideas that will likely stand the test of time.

I struggle to make ideas simple. I don’t always want to take the time.I have an idea. In my head it makes sense. The words flow out of my consciousness through my hand and onto the keyboard with ease. When I stop to wonder, “is this as simple as I can make it,” I freeze.

I met a blog reader, like you, the other day for coffee. Amidst sips and conversation I noticed a friend (fellow musician) out of the corner of my eye. I had to say “hi.” While we were exchanging greetings and quips, the reader noticed a person attempting to leave the coffee shop. My friends didn’t realize it, but they were blocking that person’s exit. The reader said: “I want to advocate for this lady attempting to leave, please take a step over.”I love that language. I write often about verbs and how our behaviors may tie to our perception of our life’s meaning. The verbs I often use for myself are help, connect, serve, write, or think. Clearly this reader uses advocate. What verb(s) do you use?

To quote Indigo Montoya, “I don’t think it means what you think it means.” Do you know people who like to quote that famous line from Hammurabi’s code? The famous judgment 196 reads, “If a superior man should blind the eye of another superior man, they shall blind his eye.” What’s more interesting is that if a man of lower class were to blind the eye of a man with lower class, 60 shekels of silver should be the punishment.What’s most interesting is that in many of the judgments involving women, the highest judgment is 30 shekels of silver if a woman dies because a man beats her. I believe that you and I can do more to know the history of our language - the framework we use for communicating our ideas and our history. I use questions as my starting point for the journey. Questions I’m asking myself to better understand:Why has “an eye for an eye” stood the test of time but the other judgments haven’t? Was Hammurabi wrong? By what standard? When was that standard set? Who set the standard? What if, given his worldview, his code was an appropriate and palatable framework?How might we encourage those closest to us to look at other frameworks? Or evaluate their existing frameworks for every angle possible? How might Hammurabi write that code today? Who did Hammurabi’s code best serve? If Hammurabi wrote it today, who would Hammurabi be serving? Who wins? Who loses?

Start the day with the hardest thing first — get out of bed.Perhaps I’m speaking from experience, but I wonder if “getting out of bed” is one of the hardest motions many people do each day. I wonder if the second most hardest thing is: “don’t pick up the phone.”If we lose the first and second battles, how many more battles will we lose that day? How much motivation will we have to win?

If you fold, you deny the questionee the opportunity to enjoy thinking about what it would mean for them to answer your question. If you ask, you invite someone to step into possibility. A world where imagination meets practicality. Why would you ever want to hold back the generous gift of your question?