Serendipity indeed.
Sep. 27th, 2005 01:50 amYou've gotta love it when you catch an error in your initial analysis, when trying to finish up.
An error that, while minor, and won't cause any problems now, is still an error.
But it was an error that got you thinking along the lines that made the whole thing click in the first place.
If I hadn't made misread something at the very beginning, and made that error, the conceptual leaps that ended up forming the core of my work wouldn't have been nearly so forthcoming, I don't think.
Heh.
An error that, while minor, and won't cause any problems now, is still an error.
But it was an error that got you thinking along the lines that made the whole thing click in the first place.
If I hadn't made misread something at the very beginning, and made that error, the conceptual leaps that ended up forming the core of my work wouldn't have been nearly so forthcoming, I don't think.
Heh.
Re: That reminds me of the quote that says something like
Date: 2005-09-27 03:41 pm (UTC)Yeah, I do believe it was Richard Feynman that that quote is most often attributed to. I prefer the updated "WTF?" but hey, I'm a modern kinda guy. :)
As for the lead, I'd say Christopher Reeve, but apparently that would be a bit difficult now. Stupid laws of necromancy.
Re: That reminds me of the quote that says something like
Date: 2005-09-27 03:59 pm (UTC)Man, you took even longer than Josh Landrum. He finished his last year.
Then again, I don't think his was 371 pages. Plus, he's single.
Re: That reminds me of the quote that says something like
Date: 2005-09-27 04:01 pm (UTC)