Role of food entropy in weight loss

I have lost ~12 kilograms in 2.5 months. My rule of thumb so far has been to avoid anything that can be made into white powders or be made from white powders. e.g. sugars, grains, foods that grow under the ground, fruits, etc are avoided.

My current opinions about what works for weight loss are:

  • Exercise without dieting is useless and maybe even harmful.
  • Dieting without exercise works. In other words, diet is more important than exercise
  • Dieting with minimum exercise seems to work the best for the later stages of weight loss.
  • Dieting without protein intake leads to muscle loss.
  • Dieting without fiber intake leads to constipation.
  • Dieting without water intake leads to darker urine, and may cause renal issues.
  • Calories In Calories Out (CICO) is thermodynamically sound but psychologically it is harder to practice for some type of diets. e.g. a carbohydrate centric CICO diet is harder to adhere to without a lot of self-control.
  • Carbohydrate centric CICO diets e.g. an Indian vegetarian diet requires a lot of small meals per day. For people who have many meetings per day or labor outside this is impractical.
  • Protein-centric CICO diets require fewer meals per day (as low as 1 meal per day). This is because proteins give satiety faster than carbohydrates, and require less self-control or conscious management of food intake.
  • I do not think fat-centric CICO diets are possible because it makes people drowsy. But if such a diet exists let me know.

My favorite formulation right now is the role of food entropy. The more information you need to completely describe the molecular structure of your food, the better it is for weight loss.

For example, a crystalline substance usually requires very low information to completely describe its molecular structure compared to say a piece of meat. While both a crystal of sugar and a piece of meat can have the same amount of calories, meat has a higher entropy i.e. lower usable energy available in it. More work needs to be done, to create order out of the mess that is meat. For this reason, it is better for weight loss. Even within the meats, a nicely minced meat has more uniformity and hence higher bioavailability than a block of meat cut from an animal. Hence a steak is better than a hotdog for weight loss.

I am going to test this hypothesis after reaching my ideal weight. I plan to use low entropy meat to gain muscle.

The nature of my mistakes

When I am in a new platonic realm e.g. the realm of vectors as opposed to numbers, I am lost in the minutiae instead of being aware of my surroundings. I do not realize the bigger changes happening like how matrices are changing the whole space I am working in.

I make that same mistake in relationships and in any type of interactive discovery e.g. chess. I get so involved in my own platonic abstractions of my own plans that, I lose track of what the other person’s abstractions and plans.

Why don’t Liberals practice “real” liberalism?

Liberalism is premised on the idea that people are inherently good in some sense, and therefore worthy of liberty and equality in some domains. This applies to modern liberals who only care about social liberties and social equality (a.k.a social justice), classical liberals who agree with everything modern liberals say, but they additionally want economic liberty and equality as well. Anarchists can also be considered a type of liberal arguably because the only difference between them and the liberals is that anarchists don’t think there should be an agency which reserves the right to violence in all affairs (a.k.a a state) which is a form of inequality.

The reason liberalism is hard to practice is that there are contradictions between liberty and equality. As people have more liberty, they are free to prefer some people to others for various reasons. This leads to various forms of inequalities depending on the type of preference being exhibited. If the preference is by merit we have meritocracy which leads to people of merit being unequal to people without merit. If the preference is based on race it leads to racism in which some races are unequal to others in certain human endeavors. If the preference is by sexual orientation we get homophobia in which some sexual orientations are unequal to others. If the preference is by wealth we get various forms of inequality in forms of justice, political power, education, healthcare etc.

So liberals resort to various illiberal requirements like enforcement of equality of opportunity (e.g. Social justice extremism, affirmative action) and even enforcement of equality of outcome.

Liberals also end up in a purity spiral in which the more they care about minor infractions of their ideology the greater standing they have in their community. So much like Catholics who avoid condoms are more pious than Catholics who avoid murder, liberals who use preferred pronouns are purer and have a higher standing than a liberal who avoids murder/rape.

BTW this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to difficulties of liberalism. For example, many forms of liberalism believe in the ability of laws and lawmakers (a.k.a legislature) to handle all governance scenarios including the foreseen and unforeseen. However, laws cannot work when the unforeseeable happens so even liberals allow illiberal ideas like allowing one individual (a.k.a the president/dictator) to suspend the law, and rule by whim and extra-legal force until normality has been restored. This is yet another contradiction that happens when people try to establish liberal governments. People show this desire for extra-legal heroes in superhero fiction in which one person acts for the good using extra-legal force.

How to subvert the scientific method

The Scientific method can be subverted using inherent problems in the peer review process like Publication bias.

Statistically Significant results are three times more likely to be published than papers with null results.

So if you give research grants to check a hypothesis, papers confirming said hypothesis will be published 3 times more often than papers confirming the null hypothesis.

By framing the hypothesis to align with your agenda, you can get anything to be science. And from that point onward scientific legitimacy is equivalent to political legitimacy, because all that matters is who gets to gather enough legitimacy by political means to frame the hypothesis.

It would take political clout to grant money to only one type of hypothesis but it can be done, if you are a rich enough donor in grant-making NGOs or a rich lobbyist in government agencies.

The great thing about this technique is that you do not have to ask the scientists to meddle with p-values and create data mining bias because that is prone to whistleblowing. This method is also resistant to meta-analyses and reviews.

Ten commandments of propaganda

Anne Morelli has summarized and systematized the contents of Ponsonby’s classic in “ten commandments of propaganda”:

  1. We do not want war.
  2. The opposite party alone is guilty of war.
  3. The enemy is the face of the devil.
  4. We defend a noble cause, not our own interest.
  5. The enemy systematically commits cruelties; our mishaps are involuntary.
  6. The enemy uses forbidden weapons.
  7. We suffer small losses, those of the enemy are enormous.
  8. Artists and intellectuals back our cause.
  9. Our cause is sacred.
  10. All who doubt our propaganda, are traitors.

Passengers movie review (with spoilers).

In an age of sequels, prequels, remakes, spin-offs and politically correct retellings, the movie Passengers stands out as a scientifically sound fairy tale complete with traditional metaphors and explorations. The politically correct establishment will, of course, blame the movie for being sexist and rape-apologetic. I would not even be surprised if the movie is banned in a few neo-puritan states of America.

These are the metaphors in the movie (here lie the spoilers):

  1. The ship in deep space is a metaphor for reality surrounded by nothingness.
  2. The 5000 people in the hibernation pods on the ship are all the possible people this reality can offer and are yet to be born.
  3. 100 years before reaching the destination (a paradise planet), The Man is woken up by the ship’s AI or perhaps by the ship’s malfunction. A (random) sequence of events leading to power failure of his hibernation pod and he is woken up. This is a metaphor for how you come to be in this reality, through a series of events which seem random or perhaps chosen by an intelligence (we are not sure).
  4. The Man is alone and it ruins him. He deliberates hard and chooses a Woman from the pods and wakes her up. They fall in love, and when she finds out she woke up because of the man she hates him and avoids him. She hates him for waking her up before the ship reached its destination and forcing her to die before the ship reaches the paradise planet. This one seems to be the Abrahamic narrative of Adam and Lilith.
  5. The ship shows signs of progressive failure. This one seems to be about how the world itself is impermanent and how the second Law of Thermodynamics affects everything.
  6. One of the Crew is woken up accidentally or by design by the ship and He figures out what is wrong with the ship (it is failing) and dies because of problems in His hibernation pod reviving Him improperly. While He is dying, He leaves the keys to the Man. This one seems to be a metaphor for the Messiah.
  7. The ship starts failing, and the Man has to almost die trying to fix the ship with the help of the Woman. The Man mentions how he has to die because it is about the 5000 hibernating souls also. He is resuscitated to life by the Woman. Both the man the woman use the keys left by the dead Crew member to fix the ship. This is a metaphor for how men lost their nature by fixing the problems of this world through science and technology. This is also a metaphor for how women step in when men lose their nature. Both the Man and Woman use the keys left by the Messiah to do everything.
  8. The Man volunteers to put the Woman back to an alternative to hibernation which only one person can use. The Man lives in solitude for the next 100 years being a steward of the ship while it reaches its final destination. This is a metaphor for men who do not need women but are stewards of the world trying to take Reality to its Omega Point a.k.a Final Cause.
  9. The remaining crew members are awoken 4 months before the destination and realize everything that happened on the way.

The movie has a distinct Judeo-Christian-Islamic flavor to it. And it hints at rebirth and other similar ideas seen in Eastern religions. I liked how the Woman complains to the Android butler how robots have a purpose. What was left out is how she had the burden of discovering her purpose.

But I am sure the social justice crowd can only see sexism, rape, and the tropes of movies everywhere. Perhaps that is why all the professional reviewers gave the movie a low rating while the audience loved it as seen from IMDB ratings.

Julian Assange on the nature of power

Question: What have you learned about power in 10 years of WikiLeaks?

Answer: “My conclusion is that most power structures are deeply incompetent, staffed by people who don’t really believe in their institutions and that most power is the projection of the perception of power. And the more secretively it works, the more incompetent it is, because secrecy breeds incompetence, while openness breeds competence, because one can see and can compare actions and see which one is more competent. To keep up these appearances, institutional heads or political heads such as presidents spend most of the time trying to walk in front of the train and pretending that it is following them, but the direction is set by the tracks and by the engine of the train. Understanding that means that small and committed organisations can outmanoeuvre these institutional dinosaurs, like the State Department, the NSA or the CIA”.