lɪŋˈgwɪstɪks

Gigili

18:46

@Cerberus I noticed you're on a diet?

Cerberus

@Gigili Well, sort of.

Just trying to not eat a lot.

Why?

Gigili

@Cerberus I decided to go on a diet.

What kind of diet is that?

If you're willing to discuss it in public.

Cerberus

@Gigili Oh, I just try to stay under 2000 kcalories every day, and a bit of exercise.

Calories are all that matters.

Ask any dietician.

But if you feel more comfortable with some kind of specialized diet, it can work fine, as long as it includes fewer kc than you normally eat.

Gigili

19:02

@Cerberus Umm, I wanted to receive advice on diet since last time I failed to have a balanced one.

Does it have a name?

Cerberus

Nope!

How was your diet unbalanced?

I recommend two things. 1. Get a kitchen scale, if you don't already have one, so that you can measure how much you are eating at all times. 2. Fill in everything that you eat in some on-line calorie counter, and make sure you stay under a certain level every day.

Go to a site that advises about calorie intake based on your weight, sex, and amount of exercise.

Gigili

I was hungry all the time, and the I gave up after a month.

Cerberus

Then subtract 20 % or 30 % (max) from what that site advises, and use that as your daily limit.

@Gigili That is a problem with any diet.

Drinking more tea can help a bit, because it makes the hunger a bit more bearable, and you have something to do and consume when you want food.

Counting also really helps me, silly as it sounds.

Gigili

@Cerberus I'm not sure what you mean by the former but the latter is quite difficult since what we normally eat is not included.

@Cerberus I hate tea.

Cerberus

@Gigili Really? There are no good Persian sites for that?

I use a Dutch site, obviously.

@Gigili Then something else that contains very few calories.

Gigili

19:09

@Cerberus Counting?

Cerberus

@Gigili I use a kitchen scale to weigh, say, how much cheese I use when I make dinner. Then I can fill it in into my calorie counter, so that I can see how many calories I eat.

Gigili

@Cerberus Not one that I'm aware of. If any, you cannot call it good.

Cerberus

@Gigili Counting calories, as in adding them up.

@Gigili All right, then you can do it by hand. At least most packaging here says how many calories there are in the product.

If you can't find it, you would have to find something that you think is comparable.

For example, a meat ball is probably comparable to a hamburger as to calories per 100 g.

You can also Google "how many calories are there in a botterbabbelaar?".

That is Dutch candy.

I nearly always find some results.

Gigili

That makes sense.

So your diet is a kind of caloric restriction diet?

Cerberus

Yes. All diets are about that.

They disguise it in other terms, but calories are really all that matters.

You lose 1 kg for every 7000 kc that you eat less than your body uses.

That is pretty much fixed.

So it doesn't matter what those calories are in, be it fat, carbs, proteins...

This is scientific fact.

Gigili

19:15

I've heard of some kinds of diets that allow a special fruit only.

Or drink diets. They sound easier.

@Cerberus Didn't you notice that after a while the body gets used to it, so no matter how much you eat less you you won't lose weight anymore?

It's not a long time, it happens after a few weeks.

Cerberus

@Gigili That is because the amount your body uses can change.

It is roughly based on 1.) your weight, 2.) your muscles, and 3.) how much exercise you get.

Gigili

So you should increase the amount again when that happens?

Cerberus

But also on some other, less consistent factors.

@Gigili If you eat less than 70 % of what you would need to keep the same weight, your body goes into "energy-saving" mode, I think. That's bad. Never eat less than 70 %.

@Gigili If you ate less than 70 %, you were doing it wrong, so just go to 70 % and keep that up. If you dieted responsibly, then it must be that you have lost so much weight that your body now needs less energy to function (the more fat you have on your body, the more energy your body needs to maintain it).

So then you would need to eat less.

But the latter shouldn't happen after only a few weeks.

Note also that water weighs more than fat: your body can erratically contain more or less water at times, and that changes your weight significantly.

Gigili

Aha, that makes perfect sense.

So I must find one now.

Cerberus

One what?

@Gigili freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

You can use this.

Of course measuring how much exercise you actually get is tricky.

Gigili

19:28

@Cerberus A diet, of course.

Cerberus

"So" you must find one?

Gigili

@Cerberus Great.

Cerberus

If a special diet helps you stay motivated, sure, do that.

Gigili

@Cerberus Because I wanted to ask you if I can follow yours.

Cerberus

As long as you realize that it's really only the calories that count.

7000 a kg.

@Gigili And you can't, because you feel counting calories is too cumbersome? (Which I can understand.)

Gigili

19:30

@Cerberus The exercise thingy is what I have problem about. I can't stay motivated, I do it a lot for a week, don't do it for a week.

Cerberus

Hmm then you need to find something that is easy enough for you get stay just motivated enough.

It is a problem for all of us.

For me, running works best, because I don't need to plan it, I can just close the door behind me and start.

But it is no fun.

How about joining a team sport, like uh field hockey?

freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm

Here you can calculate how many calories you burn with all kinds of exercise.

It helps me personally if I can say, "whew, I have just burned 500 calories!"

Gigili

Whoa, that's great. Let me see what if I can do something.

What now?

Cerberus

Well, you pick a number and make sure you don't eat more calories than that every day.

I wouldn't go below 1150, by the way.

And are you sure your maintenance is that low?

Any exercise should be added up to that number.

Gigili

Umm, it says so. How to make sure? I chose "little/no exercise".

Cerberus

19:48

OK if you don't exercise at all, no cycling, no long walks, then that is correct.

Gigili

Germany 1 - Greece 0

Juhuu!

Cerberus

Poor Greeks.

I wish them some luck at last.

AFK

David Wallace

20:05

@Gigili Eat more for breakfast and less for dinner. This helped me lose heaps without ever being hungry.

Gigili

@DavidWallace Hey!

2-1

David Wallace

Is the game still going on?

I was going to watch it later.

Gigili

Uhum.

David Wallace

I just answered your question in the ELU room, BTW>

Gigili

Second half, it is.

@DavidWallace YALT?

David Wallace

20:08

In every way.

Gigili

Right, right.

David Wallace

Are you going to tell me about you-know-what? Maybe not here.

Gigili

What a game.

@DavidWallace I'll be there in a minute.

Juhuuuuu

3-1

David Wallace

Which bit about "I'm going to watch it later" didn't you understand?

@Tames A friend of mine bought 12 identical pairs of socks. He never had a mismatch problem again.

Gigili

@DavidWallace 3-1

Note that it's 3-1 now. I'll report the final result.

David Wallace

20:17

Fine. I'm leaving this chat room. Good bye.

Gigili

@DavidWallace OK, have fun. (3-1)

4-1

Oh God, this is great.

Tames

22:26

good evening

@Gigili actually the sorts of things you eat may interfere with weight loss, it seems that is you eat "good fats", you would burn fat more easily

some even say that if you add them, but keep your total caloric account the same, you will lose some body fat

besides, the composition of what you eat probably will interfere.. for example, with muscle loss. if you go on a low calorie diet but don't eat enough protein, your body may be burning your muscle mass, as it recycles protein to mantain good functioning of organs, which are more vital than ordinary muscles

it is said also that the body expends some energy to digest and break down molecules of food, and that it burns more energy to process protein than carbs, for example

but excessive protein intake may be a burden on your kidneys, so it is not advised to eat too much of it

all in all... you should watch for quality and not only quantity - total caloric intake, c/p/f proportion, good fats instead of bad ones

fibers should help in keeping you fuller longer (e.g., if you drink a cup of orange juice, probably you will be hungry again in 20 minutes, but if you eat 3 oranges, probably it will take longer for you to want to eat again.. just a comparison.. as fruit, in general, is digested very quickly)

i've been trough different types of diet... from vegetarian, vegan and even raw foods only (for about 1 year and a half)..

avoid muscle mass loss, as this will slow your fat burning process, and when you drop your diet you will gain weight more easily

I guess you didn't ask for my opinion, but I'm a food freak with some experience

Feeds

Otavio Macedo has made a change to the feeds posted into this room

Tames

@OtavioMacedo are you there?

Otavio Macedo

Just arrived :)

Tames

hi :)

you have been using SE for a while now, right? how long?

Otavio Macedo

Two years, maybe.

Tames

22:41

have you noticed if the use of SE affected the way you think, somehow?

Otavio Macedo

I don't know...

Maybe now I can formulate questions better.

But it's hard to say, actually.

Tames

maybe as you've been using it for some time now, you can't remember precisely how it felt in the beggining?

Otavio Macedo

I think it feels pretty much the same.

But now, every time I have a question about anything, the first thing that comes to mind is:

"Is there any SE in which I could ask it?"

Tames

hahaha

Otavio Macedo

But most of the time, I realize I don't really have a question.

Or, at least, not a very well formulated one.

So, I know I have to refine it.

Tames

22:48

or you end up figuring out the answer by yourself?

because usually a good question requires research

Otavio Macedo

Yes, exactly!

But I had noticed that before I had heard about SE.

Tames

interesting

Otavio Macedo

In computer programming, they called it "rubber duck programming"

Tames

what?

Otavio Macedo

Every time you have a problem, try to explain it to a rubber duck.

He will just stay there, listening quietly to your explanation.

By the time you finish it, chances are you will have the solution already sorted out.

Tames

22:51

hahah

Otavio Macedo

It's a joke, obviously. But it's a good analogy.

Tames

as a divided person, i usually have someone to talk to inside my head. the only problem is taking myself seriously enough to start the conversation

lol

but I guess.. SE stimulates autonomy

this is very good, the opposite of what we see in education in general

that Godel-Escher-Bach book you told me about...

does it talk too much about cognitive science? does it have a biological approach?

I'm looking at some options in estantevirtual, and I'm in doubt whether I'd really like it, even though it sounds very interesting by the title

Otavio Macedo

A bit of everything. But most of the time, he talks about logic and math.

Tames

hmm nice

Otavio Macedo

The core idea is what he calls "strange loops"

All those systems that reflect themselves.

Like Gödel's theorem, the DNA, self-referential and recursive stories etc

Tames

22:59

fractals?

Otavio Macedo

Hmm, I haven't finished reading it yet.

So I don't know if talks about fractals.

But fractals are definitely that kind of loop.

The book itself is self-referential in various ways.

Tames

i've studied fractals for a while, when studying arts, my TCC was on this subject

chaos theory included

i think i'm gonna love it

Otavio Macedo

I think you will.

What he ultimately tries to prove is that consciousness is just another kind of strange loop. Only way more complex.

Tames

nice!

do you know anything about category theory?

Otavio Macedo

No.

Tames

23:12

it seems like an interesting topic for those who study linguistics... i've read something about it but i feel like i'm missing some important link

Otavio Macedo

What is it?

Tames

do you know Ducrot? he makes uses of somethings.. but he just uses them and doesn't explain

it is a mathematical theory, at first sight it seems to be deeply related to physics

but this

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/…

is used exactly in this way by Ducrot, while trying to formalize structural semantics

i'm trying to find out if it has something in common with set theory

some guy said that category theory is structural and set theory is not, i find this rather odd, but i know almost nothing about both, i don't even have an argument

Otavio Macedo

What does "structural" mean in this context?

Tames

in his terms, oriented towards relations, rather than objects

structural, in general, means something like this - you have a system, and the values of the elements are defined in relation of one to the other (a very simplistic example - you can only know what is "high" if you know what is "low", there is no "high in itself")

possibly, both "high" and "low" could be included in the same category,

if it was related to sound, "high sound" and "low sound", could be reunited in the category "pitch"

(not sure if pitch is the right word, i think you get the idea)

you may have apples and not-apples (bananas, oranges, etc), and they could be reunited in the category "fruit"

"fruit" could be opposed to "meat", "grain", and they all be reunited in the category "food"

but, category, in this sense, is close to the idea of "set"

and I don't see how wold it be like in category theory

Otavio Macedo

23:29

"the use of category theory allows many intricate and subtle mathematical results in these fields to be stated, and proved, in a much simpler way than without the use of categories."

Sounds interesting.

Tames

it seems that semantics cannot do without categorization

i want to understand what is the difference between category theory and "common" categorization, if there's any

Otavio Macedo

I suppose the term "category" is a technical term and must have a very specific definition.

Which might or might not map to the concepts we have about the "real world".

Set theory is like that.

Tames

what do you mean?

Otavio Macedo

As far as I know, in modern set theory, a set doesn't correspond very well with out intuitive notions of sets.

(which mathematicians call naive set theory)

Tames

as I had understood it.. the definition of set could be any definition possible by language, which limits what kinds of elements are in the set, and as such, even paradoxes are allowed like "set of all sets which do not contain themselves as an element"

(Russell's paradox)

Otavio Macedo

23:41

Is that part of category theory?

Tames

set theory..

i don't know how it works with c.t.

how is a category defined

Otavio Macedo

> even paradoxes are allowed

What do you mean by that?

Tames

in wiki it says that a category contains 3 elements

objetcs, morphisms (or maps or arrows) and binary operation

paradoxes come up, exactly because not every linguistic element is completely logical.. this is how I see it, and that's why Russell says that some hierarchy is needed, to avoid paradoxes

you only have to define a collection

Otavio Macedo

So, paradoxes are not allowed, right?

Tames

"apples that do not grow on appletrees", an impossibility, but it is a definition

they happen... Russell tried to develop a set theory that would eliminate them,

and then Godel demonstrated that this "absence of paradoxes" would breed other problems.. but I'm not sure about how Godel deals with this

i think the incompleteness theorem is about something like, if you have no paradoxes, some of your axioms cannot be demonstrated within the system

as if you had to reach for something outside for it to make sense

Otavio Macedo

23:48

Axioms are never demonstrated.

They are taken for granted.

Tames

then it is not axioms

let me see..

Otavio Macedo

He proved two things

That you can never know if there is an inconsistency in your system.

And that all systems are incomplete.

Tames

1 -If the system is consistent, it cannot be complete.
2- The consistency of the axioms cannot be proven within the system.

Otavio Macedo

Yes, that formulation is better :)

Tames

wiki's

lol

Otavio Macedo

23:50

But anyway, the whole point of mathematics is to avoid paradoxes.

Tames

does inconsistency imply paradoxes?

or are there intonsistencies that are not paradoxes

Otavio Macedo

That's what inconsistency means

Tames

hm

Otavio Macedo

When you can derive both P and not P from the same set of axioms.

And the same rules in a given formal system.

Tames

so I guess... if you don't want paradoxes in set theory, you have to deal with the fact that there's something missing. i don't know exactly what this means, in practice

it is like, there's a hole somewhere

(rabbit hole)

Otavio Macedo

23:56

What's missing is that there are some theorems that you can never derive in that formal system.

Tames

(i met my teacher today, and he studied a lot of logic and linguistics.. and i asked him "how can I demonstrate that a grammatical sentence lacks logical value"... and he said "huh... I don't know" -_-)

what do you mean by "deriving a theorem"?

Otavio Macedo

In formal systems, all you have are formulas (think of them as sentences)

And derivation rules, which tell you how to produce a new formula from the ones you already have.

It's like a game.

Transcript for