May 6th 2015
Today, after spending the entire day in the library, when I got home I decided to torture myself a bit more.
I walked in, dropped off my bag, took off my glasses, turned round, ran out the door and kept running.
Fortunately I was already in joggers and a hoody because I no longer care to put the effort into changing into proper and presentable clothes when I go to the library. My headphones were in my pocket and I was ready to run.
And I did. I ran fast. I sprinted. And therein lies my problem with running. When I’m running on pavements and on the road, as opposed to on a treadmill, I have no awareness of speed. On a treadmill I can set it to run at 6 or 9 or 11 [whatever that specific distance unit is] per [whatever that specific time unit is] and I can adjust according to how difficult I am finding it.
On the roads I can’t do that. I can’t set myself to run at a 6 or a 9 so instead I just run as fast as I can. And, inevitably, and shortly thereafter, I have to stop. Because I’m dying.
And then I pant and heave and try to figure out in what order I’m supposed to be breathing, is it in first and then out or our first then in, and then I pant and heave and then I’ve figured out some sort of rhythm of breathing and then I start running again so I forget how I was breathing and I know there’s some reason you’re supposed to breathe in through your nose and out through your mouth but that takes far too much coordination so I end up breathing both in and out through my mouth and then I have to stop again and Jesus Christ this is a long sentence, I’m out of breathe just writing it.
Pant. Heave. Breathe.
What I’ve just described is a pretty accurate portrayal of my personality as a whole. I’ll build myself up to do something, put a lot of effort in right at the start and then peak early, and fizzle out towards the end.
The following is a graphical representation of a lognormal distribution.
Now, that probably doesn’t (and nor should it) mean anything to you. But it’s a pretty good representation of how that run went. As well as being a pretty good visual for how my revision day goes.
After eventually convincing myself to start revising I start off really keen, and productive, do some good work, and then I die. And then I fizzle out and get demotivated and annoyed at myself for doing so.
And then I build up the motivation to start again and the process repeats.
Perhaps the above starts off a bit quickly, it usually takes me a while to get going as well.
Maybe a more accurate one would be the Chi-squared distribution.
At this point, I’m just rambling about maths and hoping you understand, but what I’m saying is that there is a direct correlation between how I run and how I revise, and that it can be graphed.
If I could make my running and revising graph look something like the inverse-Pareto distribution, then I’d be a lot fitter, and a lot smarter.