I've come to be functioning on a 4-hours-a-day, inconsistent sleep schedule. And it's alarmingly so hard to fix.

@Færd That's not good.

Sleep more.

Indeed not. And I should.

The main challenge is to make my body conform to a regular sleep cycle. Then I can work on expanding it.

It's weird. I'm coming back from work, tired and groggy, and naturally nod off for a bit on the subway or in the taxi, and then I'm virtually unable to sleep for another six hours.

Going back to 5-6 hours shouldn't be so hard.

I'm going to try saving the bits for a good chunk.

@Færd Many people here do not stick to regular or normal sleep cycles.

So when you do fall asleep, are you able to remain asleep?

Or is it just that the alarm goes off too early for you to make more than 4 hours?

@Cerberus Not at night.

I tend to sleep more during the day.

But abything more than 3 hours gives me a headache, and will shorten the nocturnal sleep.

I think it best to recover the old early-night sleep.

@Cerberus Yours seem to be regular, if not normal.

@Færd That's annoying. It may improve if you get a regular cycle.

Not that I have ever managed that since primary school, but I've heard some people do.

Yeah. Takes a lot of rescheduling.

@Færd I don't know what that graph is, but I don't think I am ever awake before 13.30.

And I am always awake until sixish.

It shows your typical chatting activity over a 24-hour period. The current time is highlighted.

If I go to bed two hours earlier than the day(s) before, I'll be wide awake after about 2 to 4 hours of sleep too. And I can only get back to sleep after 4 additional hours of waking.

@Færd But it's nowhere near 0:00.

It's 3:38.

It's based on some kind of standard time. GMT maybe.

I couldn't be...

@Færd Did you just say he's regular but not normal?

No, not that.

He's normal to the channel, which means he sticks straight out from it at 90 degrees.

@tchrist His sleep cycle seems to be.

@tchrist That's right (angle-wise).

@Færd I've seen little evidence that he has one of those.

My bed times are similar to those of Tchrist.

The graph seems evidence enough.

And he lives, what, 15,000 km to the west?

What's a little distance between friends.

@Færd First, I am not active on SE whenever I'm awake.

@Færd It's 15,000 km.

@Cerberus It's an average over seveeral years of activity.

Could we have that in minutes of the equator, please?

And you're the most active user of this room.

Huh, it's only 7,750 km away.

I wonder how you were off by a binary order of magnitude.

@Færd But I'm usually not active in the hours before bed.

@tchrist I can think of several things.

For starters, I aequated latitude with distance around the aequator, which is obviously very wrong.

You were measuring the distance both ways?

That's why you should use equatorial minutes. :)

I think it's sleeping hours, rather than minutes, that are the problem.

mac(tchrist)% units '7750 km' nmiles
	* 4184.6652
	/ 0.00023896774

@Cerberus OK. So let's say you're normally awake in the gray areas and sleep sometime during the white areas.

You're around 4,000 equatorial minutes away.

Each equatorial minute corresponds to ...

I'm thinking he's more abyssal than crepuscular.

@Færd One nautical mile.

Perhaps he's hadalpelagic; I hear it rains a lot there.

@Færd Even that is not true.

OK. Each 'hour' corresponds to 4 hours. So 4 seconds.

There is a correlation, but especially the boundaries are wrong.

I didn't make that graph.

But I need someone to blame for it!!

How about your miscalculation? :)

Just kidding.

WRAAAAHHH

I mean, <noncommittal gesture>

wræððu

I screwed up my calculation‌​.

Each degree corresponds to 15 minutes.

I mean seconds. Damn.

I mean each equatorial minute corresponds to 15 seconds.

I must stop talking about that.

Seriously?!

360*60 (equatorial minutes) /(24*60 (temporal minutes)) = 15 (equatorial minute)/(temporal minute).

Such a gauche. Always correcting myself.

Whatever. What are you gonna do.

@Cerberus Is that a known utterance?

@Færd It is now!

(Try to) sleep well!

'Gauche' is not a noun. lol

@Færd I would advise reading too deeply into that Færd. The matter at hand that should probably be considered is that there just aren't very many people on E.L.U. chat at these times period for some reason, so there is very little point in saying anything at these times except to have a conversation with yourself. However that might violate the no flooding chat rule.

There is some occasional activity during this period of time, but for the most-part, I'm willing to bet that nobody else is here right now, even though I'm sure we all live in at least somewhat different time zones.

@Tonepoet You advised the opposite of what you were supposed to, if you read carefully.

@Tonepoet I just visited merriam-webster.com and guess what, they are discussing a new word promposal lol. Makes me wanna go back to high school and start all over, but I guess that will have to wait till the next life.

@JasonBourne Ah right, over a 24 hour period. Still though, to be fair, I'm not sure if it'd change my overall advice...

@Tonepoet I was referring to your first sentence.

@JasonBourne To be fair, I'm not sure if much can be inferred from Cerberus' chat data if it matches the overall E.L.U. chart. I need to learn how to parse that thing.

@Tonepoet I think you meant to say 'I would advise not...', lol.

@JasonBourne Oh.

I meant to say against. As in "I would advise against reading too deeply into that."

@Tonepoet I didn't expect you to miss it after I mentioned it, lol.

@JasonBourne I could've sworn I typed it, but this sort of blunder is not uncommon for me, unfortunately.

@Tonepoet I thought you would be very precise when it comes to such things. =)

@JasonBourne I'm no exemplar in any respect.

@JasonBourne However, I also figured you meant to reread Færd's statement, rather than my own. I didn't see the point in it.

@Tonepoet How do you produce the ae symbol?

is this correct grammar : The second type is hearable sound by humans which is between 20 Hz up to 20 kHz

am I using "which" in correct place?

any body knows?

@Joe I would rewrite that as 'The second type is sound hearable by humans (between 20 Hz and 20 kHz).'

thank you

@Joe You should write 'anybody' and not 'any body'.

ok :)

I vaguely remember that middle C is 256 Hz.

@JasonBourne I used the auto-fill function from pinging, and then deleted the at symbol.

I suppose that's really not the answer you wanted but that is how I did it nevertheless. =P

æ is U+00E6, so you can produce it in Ubuntu with ctrl+shift+u then typing e6 then space

is this sentence ok : Electrical lead from back surface

it is not a sentence as one typically defines it.

text

unless "Electrical" is a noun

and "lead" is a verb

not verb

I mean wire

is it correct?

then, as sentences go, it's not OK, because it doesn't have the required parts

I want to put it in a figure to describe it

add a verb in, and maybe a determiner or two

it is not like text in a report

@Joe what would the full sentence be, if it wasn't the title of a figure?

the electrical lead from the back surface of the metal

well, those are still not full sentences, but I get what you mean

yes

@Joe I think those are fine for figure titles

ok thank you

Is there anyone here who knows much about grammar?

I know a little about grammar.

so there was this thing we were discussing yesterday

concerning the grammar behind the phrase "there is/are"

my belief is that the subject is the noun phrase behind it, and "there" is an adverb in inversion

however, terdon disagreed with me (don't want to ping) and said that it is just a phrase.

did you have an example sentence you were talking about?

there is an apple

well, the original question was "there is/are you"

I argued that logically it should be "are", although native speakers would use "is" for that case.

??? neither "there is you" nor "there are you" is correct, as far as I'm concerned

@LeakyNun I can't claim great grammar knowledge, but I'd say "there" is a preposition

What would you use then?

@MattE.Эллен it's far from a preposition

if you say so

@LeakyNun you are there

if I'm guessing what you mean correctly

no you aren't

which is why neither are correct, because as sentences go they don't mean anything

my full sentence was "in my eyes there is/are only you"

ah, that's completely different :D

it's grammatically identical

obviously it should be is

I'm surprised how two grammatically identical sentences got interpreted differently

but I would have made the same judgment

@MattE.Эллен now could you give me an argument?

not particularly. I mean, I'll try, but it probably will be wrong.

What are your languages by the way?

Just English at the moment, but hopefully I'll know Greek in the next couple of years

I thought you were Russian

:D I can see why, but that's just a bit of fun in spelling my name in Cyrillic

If Matt is Russian then I am Antarctican.

"There is [x]" doesn't work with pronouns, only nouns. "There is only [x]" works with singular nouns or singular pronouns, and uncountable nouns. So, technically you could say "there are only you" if you're talking to a crowd, but I think native speakers would probably still use is. "There are only [x]" works with plural nouns and pronouns.

@Cerberus Yes, it's odd isn't it? I know what's right but can't explain why.

@MattE.Эллен I mean, an argument, not a regurgitation.

The thing about grammar is that it tries to describe what is considered right, but it's not the reason why something is right.

@LeakyNun because that's how it works

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer: Should I use " related" or "-related" by Annie on english.SE

@Tonepoet Not trying to nitpick but " at these times period" doesn't seem natural sounding to me tonepoet.

Correct me if my perception is wrong though.

@LeakyNun if you don't follow these rules you won't be speaking grammatically

at the moment

alright

until English evolves into something else

I have another question now

when I say "can you prove it?", they answer "yes".

However, I would like them to actually prove it instead of answering "yes"

what should I have said instead?

Just say 'Prove it!'

@JasonBourne nice idea, thanks

I only answer simple questions, because I can't answer hard questions. I am simple-minded.

Not many people know that Merriam-Webster also has an advanced learner's dictionary.

In fact, it is the only American dictionary that uses the IPA that I know of.

It is in print and online at learnersdictionary.com

what is wrong with this sentence : The conclusion of this work that the quality of ultrasonic images is depending on three main factors.

"depending" should be "dependent"

@Joe It is not a complete sentence.

@Joe The conclusion of this work is that the quality of ultrasonic images depends on three main factors.

The conclusion of this work is that the quality of ultrasonic images is dependent on three main factors.

what above me also works

"is" needs to go between "work" and "that"

Even better of course: In conclusion, we have shown that the quality of ultrasonic images depends on three main factors.

ok thank you all

This work concludes that the quality of ultrasonic images depends on three main factors.

@terdon I would say instead In conclusion, the quality of ultrasonic images depends on three main factors.

A barrage of answers, lol.

> The conclusion is left as an exercise to the reader

For the conclusion, buy the next volume, lol.

> If you don't know the conclusion you haven't been paying attention

I have watched 24 Bond movies, so there are 2 more to go.

If you ask for the conclusion, the copy you have is a pirated one.

what happens when you've watched them all?

Then I can tell the producers to make you the next Bond. =)

excellent. I've always though bond should look more realistic

I think Roger Moore is the nicest Bond and Diana Rigg is the nicest Bond girl.

Diana Rigg plays the only woman to have married Bond, but she died five minutes after the wedding in the movie.

That is perhaps why Bond never married again.

Didn't he marry again in the Daniel Craig films?

is this correct : The US-key itself produces noise artifact when it is used to do ultrasonic testing so that is why US-key was excluded from making of the linear array transducer.

@MattE.Эллен He did? I haven't watched all the Craig ones yet.

@JasonBourne oh, I thought it was in the first one

and then his wife betrayed him?

boat chase

drowning

something something

@MattE.Эллен Oh, that is not his wife. Just his girlfriend. =)

oh. ok. :D

> The US-key itself produces noise artifacts when it is used to do ultrasonic testing so that is why the US-key was excluded from the making of the linear array transducer.

unless artifact is meant to be singular, then "a noise artifact"

Well done!

my first answer here received a downvote lol

@LeakyNun The entire SE network, especially Math and English, is full of drive-by downvoters. If you want to continue participating you must just ignore them, lol.

@JasonBourne on the other hand, on math.SE I don't receive many downvotes

thank you Matt E.

no probs

How are taboo topics in this site treated?

i.e. sex

@MattE.Эллен

@LeakyNun sex is off-topic.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I mean, questions about particular sex-related terms

You can ask about anything so long as it relates to EL&U. Titles must be censored if they include profanity

@englishstudent It's fine. I know that random internet posts aren't a very definitive resource, but I consider it proof sufficient for the purposes of chat, esp. if we consider when I was saying it warrants the closeness imparted by these as a demonstrative, rather than those.

@LeakyNun language is on-topic.

I'm talking about this post which I answered.

@LeakyNun that should probably be closed as lacking research

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 alright

I'm not sure if "boners" needs to be censored, but the question itself doesn't have enough research

But the OP claims to have searched it on youtube and google

@MattE.Эллен I'd say no

@LeakyNun youtube is not a dictionary

@LeakyNun They do, but I find it hard to believe that this is the best question they could write after searching

It's hardly an obscure term. Google's built-in dictionary shows the definition!

I know that dictionary doesn't show up for everyone world-wide, but come on

@MattE.Эллен I would not be so sure about that. A verbatim search for "give someone boners" only returns two results, and the only other one other than E.L.U. is an imageboard post that does not attempt to explain what the phrase means. No dictionary entries or anything. You'd have to know to research the word boner specifically, which is perhaps reasonable but perhaps something that eludes the questioner's grasp. 'Tis a borderline case to me...

Part of that might be because "gave someone a boner" is probably the more usual form.

> unclear what you're asking

@Tonepoet but giving up after that single search is not enough reseach

Are you people really serious?

You were unable to understand what the OP was asking?

Then how come it is immediately clear to me and, I think, almost everybody else?

@Tonepoet surely if you don't understand the phrase "give someone boners" you look up the word "boners" first

if your problem is with "give" or "someone" you need to start there

@Cerberus is it clear that it was "problems" or "erections" that were given?

Let's see, the only things that seems like a giveable object is the "low-grade slaughtered animal". It would make sense, because of the zombies in the context.

So that must be it. But it still doesn't make sense.

@Cerberus if it's clear to you and eveyone else, why isn't it clear to the OP?

@MattE.Эллен I...can't parse this.

@MattE.Эллен No, the question is clear to me any everybody else.

You closed it as "unclear what you're asking", which I simply refuse to believe.

@Cerberus if it helps, I voted "show your research"

He said he Googled it.

That seems reasonable enough?

The op replied that "of course" there are boners on google, but that didn't answer the question to them, except that the accepted answer just restates the definition

@Cerberus I refuse to believe that you could google the definition of a word like "boners" and not find an answer.

I mean, come on.

@Cerberus no. Google is never enough.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 He means probably means "Oh! Of course!" as in he's shocked that he didn't consider doing that.

are we still talking about the boners?

@Cerberus you say the question is clear. from the context given (none at all) can you decide which meaning of boner is useful

It seems to me that they're saying that Google didn't provide the answer.

By the way, is asking for history of English off topic? (i.e. asking for the earliest attestation for something)

@MattE.Эллен It's extremely likely that it is about erections, so I think an answer can reasonably state that.

That question really isn't "unclear what you're asking" at all.

Can you imagine what people will think who come to this site and see that a super clear question is closed for that reason?

Besides, the Youtube video he added is clearly about erections and not about low-grade animals.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Right. What probably should've been done is showing us which google search they performed in my opinion...

added after I closed. and no, Cerb, the question is not clear. without context, it is difficult to be sure. that's why I closed it

@Cerberus The question was closed before that edit was made.

It's not difficult at all to be sure.

Neither before nor after the edit.

@MattE.Эллен A link was added to fix that and I'm making an edit to include the text now...

Cerb: should the question be open? Is that what you're saying? Or are you just complaining about the close reason?

It's just not true.

Because even with context it's still gen-ref

I am complaining about the closing reason.

I think the question belongs on ELL.

So if Matt re-opens then re-closes as gen-ref....?

Because it's too simple.

does ELL accept questions like this?

If it doesn't, then it should stay here.

"what does give someone apples mean?" "what does give someone punches mean?" "what does give someone X mean?"

It's a totally plain, straight-forward sentence with no evidence of any subtext or metaphor or anything!

you just need to look up what X means

You know that.

everyone knows that

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That's probably a good reason it should be on E.L.L.

you know it too

@Tonepoet no, I'd guess it's too basic even for there

But do you think the OP knows it?

@Cerberus yes. they ought to know it.

Would he ask this question if he did?

reps

"Ought"?

and: if they don't know it, they should state what they know.

@Cerberus laziness

The question is just not unclear.

If you think a sentence's true meaning doesn't match its literal meaning, then ask THAT

The default context makes it clear enough.

"Does the phrase gave someone boners refer to causing a male erection in this context?" would be a perfectly valid question

@MattE.Эллен I think a better close reason is "gen-ref" because even though we don't know which meaning the OP needs, they're BOTH commonly known and in dictionaries.

It's simply not true that we cannot understand what the OP is asking.

@Cerberus Well, with no context, can you guess what sense of a word is needed?

I was true until the context was given

now there is context I'm happy to let the community decide that it's gen ref.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Of course I can, because the default context is clear enough.

@Cerberus the default context?

you can feel good because you guessed correctly, but that doesn't change that you're wrong about me closing it

We should hold a survey among people who don't happen to be high-reps on ELU.

"Do you think you understand this question?"

What do you think the results will be?

and that wouldn't prove a thing

because they guessed correctly this one time doesn't mean that the question is clear

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 When little explicit context is given, one assumes a default context. In this case, frequency alone is enough context to tell you what it must be about.

@Cerberus The OP is asking for the definition of a commonly-known word. Why would they even ask that if the default context makes it clear what definition is needed? Either the question is unclear or it's extremely gen-ref

next time we have a question as vague as this and we tell them it's about penises when it's about problems I'll know I'm doing my job correctly and you are wrong

The context is clear to people who know English well, the target group.

@MattE.Эллен I look forward to that day.

Don't forget to ping me.

:D

@Cerberus frequency alone should make it less likely that that definition is what is needed, otherwise the OP should already know it.

No, because the OP's English is not very...developed.

The OP is not the target group.

@Tonepoet are you still editing?

@MattE.Эллен Just finished.

Suppose you were babysitting your nephew, and he asked you, "uncle, what does give someone boners mean?".

@Tonepoet thanks!

Would you answer, "I really have no idea what you're asking; your question is impossible to answer"?

everyone can feel free to vote to reclose

@Cerberus ELL requires research. teaching your nephew doesn't.

@Cerberus Well, first, I would ask for context. Second, I would tell him to look it up in a dictionary.

@Cerberus I would say "who told you the word 'boners'?"

i.e. I would request more context

arg! I can't re-vote to close

it's still gen-ref

You would not tell him you had no idea what he meant.

@Cerberus we aren't teaching our nephews here.

@Cerberus and I didn't do that to the OP here. I spelled out what I wanted to know

we expect them to conduct research on their own before asking on ELL.

@Cerberus I might, if I didn't know what definition he needed. "What does X mean" often needs context.

I frequently tell my kids that I can't understand what they're saying, and ask them to rephrase or provide more information.

@LeakyNun So...you answered him anyway?

@Cerberus shhhh.

remains silent

@LeakyNun I was wondering, is that actually your name?

@terdon no it isn't

Ah. Phew :)

a clergy woman by any other name would still drip as ... much?

lol

It's a subject close to my heart :)

@MattE.Эллен They have diapers and sachets these days, you know.

Sachets?

@Cerberus I did, but only because of advertising. I don't need them. I'm not a leaky nun.

@terdon I tried to come up with a word that sounded like a euphemism, for the bags one uses to receive the fluids leaking from a stoma...

@MattE.Эллен Not yet!

I didn't know such a thing existed.

I know such bags exist.

But not what advertisers would call them.

I only know about the panty-liners, not the bags

You're missing out!

well, if I become a leaky nun, I'll know who to ask

Just make sure your question is clear.

just make sure to ask clea- doh.

@Cerberus otherwise you'll answer it anyway?