dabanese - a general introduction

Daba is the universal data base, which (potentially) contains all existing information. Dabanese is the language of daba. It is an international written language. The readers and writers of dabanese are called dabaers. For the children of the near future dabanese will be their first written language.

Dabaers can be nicely assisted by computers because computers can parse dabanese. Computers can help dabaers in many ways, to a dramatically greater extent than they can assist people in using natural languages.

Dabanese is in many ways a new Chinese language. It uses ideograms, called dabagrams, but dabanese is written from left to right, like the Western languages.

Once a dabagram is accepted by the official dabanese, it stays there, unaltered, forever. Actually, underneath each dabagram there is an invisible daba record. Daba records and dabagrams are partially ordered in a conceptual way, from the most general concept daba toward the more and more detailed notions.

The evolution of daba and dabanese is always backward compatible. The syntax of dabanese can only expand but it never changes otherwise. Once there is a dabagram or a dabatext or a daba record, they will exist forever, and a dabatext will be parsed forever in the same way. The meaning has to change over the time. There is no such thing as completely fixed meaning. The world changes, the people change, hence the notion of fixed meaning is meaningless. Nevertheless dabanese is more stable than natural languages - partly due to the stable syntax, and partly because you cannot drastically change a meaning of an existing phrase, as it happens in natural languages all the time. You can only introduce new dabaphrases and even new dabagrams. Potentially, there is an infinite supply of them.

I have described the main portion of the dabanese syntax in dabanese, 1.

Dabagrams will have their crude, legal format, and also artistic formats (fonts). At this moment I don't have proper software and graphics hence I will use pigeon dabagrams. The first (pigeon) dabagram is daba. It stands for everything. But the first two dabaphrases are:

{ }   and   ( )

where there is nothing (white space) between the parentheses. The meaning of these phrases is nothingness.

Dabaphrase { daba [ human ] } means almost the same as simply human, but it puts a stress on talking about all humans. On the other hand the dabaphrase { [ daba ] human } stands for everything which is related to humans (e.g. clothes, human emotions, science, poetry, sport, family life, friendships, ...). Indeed, this time the emphasis (brackets) is about daba, and the (pigeon) dabagram human only describes the daba in question.

The next ideogram is :=. It stands for definition. A relatively small number of dabagrams are primary, meaning that they are not defined by earlier dabagrams. The majority of dabagrams are introduced by macros, as follows:

( [ () ] := ( ) )

( [ {} ] := { } )

Thus from now on we do no need to use a whole phrase like ( ) or { } to mention nothingness - we may use one of the ideograms () or {}, without a white space between the parentheses. In general, the macro definition has the following syntax:

( [ newDabagram ] := defDabaphrase )

Once we insert this dabaphrase in our dabatext, the newDabagram will stand for defDabaphrase from then on.

The external paretheses above mean that the order of the components of our dabaphrase is important, while the order of subphrases inside braces is not essential. For instance, phrase

{ mother [ father ] }

stands for the grandfather on the maternal side, an so does the dabaphrase

{ [ father ] mother }

while

{ [ mother ] father }

stands for the grandmothher on the father side. On the other hand, phrase

( LA [ movement ] NY )

is ordered, it stands for a travel (or whatever movement) from LA to NY, while

(  LA { child [ movement ] }  [ John ]  )

perhaps tells us about a John, to whom a child moved from LA - due to the syntax of the phrase (the bold font is used only to make it easier on the eyes), the main emphasis is on John, he is the subject of the whole phrase; the emphasis on movement is not global but only local, within its subphrase

{ child [ movement ] }

A longer daba text may be still written as a single dabaphrase, for instance it may be an ordered list like this:

    (
        dabaphrase_1
        dabaphrase_2
            ...
        dabaphrase_55
    )

The first and last parenthesis indicate that the appearing order of the 55 subphrases is essential. If such a phrase is a bit expanded, like this:

  { Tuesday
    [ (
        dabaphrase_1
        dabaphrase_2
            ...
        dabaphrase_55
    ) ]
  }

then it describes what has happened on Tuesday (or what happens on Tuesdays), while dabaphrase:

  { { Tuesday [ task ] }
    [ (
        dabaphrase_1
        dabaphrase_2
            ...
        dabaphrase_55
    ) ]
  }

describes what has to be done on Tuesday(s).

dabanese, 2

As of the moment, I don't have any dabanese software nor graphics. Thus in this sequence of posts I will use dabanese pigeon ideograms. Potentially, any concatenation of unicode symbols which does not include any white space, and which is not one of the single symbols ( ) { } [ ], can possibly serve as a pigeon ideogram. We already have two pigeon ideograms: () and {} — they stand for "nothingness". I will also use English and Polish nouns, mathematical symbols, etc. It goes without saying that pigeon ideograms, and dabanese characters in general, have to be separated in a dabanese phrase by white spaces, when rendered without graphics (once we have graphics, each ideogram will reside in its own distinct rectangle).

Consider the following two dabaphrases:

{ coldness [ water ] }

{ [ coldness ] water }

Due to the different emphasis, the first phrase means "cold water", while the second one — "water-like coldness". Indeed, the emphasis tells you what the phrase is about. The first one is about water, the second one about coldness.

---

In this dabaseries of notes I will deal mainly with the strict dabanese. In the day to day communication the unordered phrases (meaningful more so than lists) will be the most common. Thus it is convenient to introduce a practical shortcut: it is allowed to remove the external braces of the unordered phrase just inside the emphasis brackets, e.g. phrase

{ John [ { mother father } ] }

can be simplified to:

{ John [ mother father ] }

Here the emphasized subphrase is an unordered list. Most likely this phrase means "John's mother and father". By the way, the latter English phrase is slightly ambigous to those who don't know English well; to them it may mean "John's mother and someone's father" (or John's mother and a priest). In general, parsing of the natural languages is not unique while it is always unique for dabanese (which is a trivial theorem).

Polish noun for "movement" is short "ruch" (approximately pronounced roogh). Let's use it as a daba pigeon ideogram:

{ { [ ruch ] { foot foot } } [ Mary ] }

{ { [ North [ ruch ] ] { foot Friday } } [ Mary ] }

Yes, good graphics would help us a lot to parse dabanese phrases. Anyway, both phrases are about Mary ("Mary" is emphasized). The first phrase tells us that she is moving her feet (most likely her own, that's a natural default). Perhaps she's walking or running, or possibly she's sitting or even lying down and swinging her feet. More detailed meaning depends on the context (on other phrases of the longer text).

The second phrase is a bit more specific. It is concerned with a Mary, who is walking or running toward North on Friday (or on Fridays). Possibly she jogs to her friend most every Friday (and gets a ride home Saturday morning, who knows). To interpret this phrase as a one-foot movement wouild be possible but rather silly. As in natural languages, we get a lot of room for interpretation, and we rely on the common sense (not always succesfully).

One more example. Let =/= be the ideogram standing for "not equal". Let's also use Yr for "year". Then (we will use two lines to write one more complex phrase):

{  { { 2002 [ Yr ] } [ John ] }  { { 2007 [ Yr ] } [ John ] }
            [ =/= ]  }

is a way (perhaps clumsy) of saying that John from the year 2002 and from the 2007 year is not the same, that perhaps he has changed, or perhaps the phrase informs us that there are two different Johns. We may switch the emphasis from the change in John to John himself (this time there will be the same John, unless a symbolic John is meant, a John of all Johns):

{  { { 2002 [ Yr ] }  { { 2007 [ Yr ] }  [ =/= ] }  [ John ]  }

or more specifically:

{  { { 2002 [ Yr ] } { 2007 [ Yr ] } [ =/= ] }
            [ politics [ John ] ]  }

Now we are informed that John has changed politically between years 2002 and 2007 — possibly his views have changed, or his political affiliations, or ....

dabanese, 1

The syntax of the relaxed, as well as of the strict version of dabanese is simple. Initially we have the notion of an ideogram and of the six symbols which are not ideograms, namely three kind of paretheses: ( ) { } [ ]. Both the ideograms and the six symbols are called characters. Given a phrase or a sequence of phrases A₁ ... A_n (possibly empty, when n=0), we may use them to create new phrases as follows:

1. a single ideogram is a phrase; it is also a strict phrase;


2. if A is a phrase then [A] is a phrase — it is called an emphasized phrase; If left bracket symbol [ is not the first character of A, and if A is a strict phrase then also [A] is a strict phrase (in plain language: strict dabanese allows only a single emphasis);


3. if A₁ ... A_n is a finite sequence of dabanese phrases then the concatenation
   
   { A₁ ... A_n }
   which inserts the sequence between braces, is a dabanese phrase; it is called an unordered phrase, and A₁ ... A_n are its subphrases; if none of the subphrases is emphasized then the resulting phrase is called an unordered list; if all subphrases A₁ ... A_n are strict, and if not more than one of them is emphasized, then the resulting phrase is strict;


4. if A₁ ... A_n is a finite sequence of dabanese phrases then the concatenation
   
   ( A₁ ... A_n )
   which inserts the sequence between parentheses ( ), is a dabanese phrase; it is called an ordered phrase, and A₁ ... A_n are its subphrases; if none of the subphrases is emphasized then the resulting phrase is called an ordered list; if all subphrases A₁ ... A_n are strict, and if not more than one of them is emphasized, then the resulting phrase is strict;



5. every phrase (relaxed or strict) is obtained by a finite application of the above rules.

---

Now remember that it took you a couple of years to learn your native language, and another couple of years to learn your next language, ... Thus please be patient and tolerate well the first dabanese phrases, after the empty (hence invisible) phrase:

( )

{ }

The meaning of the dabanese phrases depends on the society of the dabanese folks (called dabers), just like in the case of natural languages. I am a dabanese folk, and I claim that the meaning of both above dabanese phrases is "nothingness". The difference between the two is something of a joke to me, because we have here an ordered and an unordered nothingness, but it's really the same. Continuing along such amusing lines we may also consider phrases which are not easy on eyes (but I'll help the cause by using informally the bold case):

{ ( ) [ ( ) ] }

{ [ { } ] ( ) }

They mean something like "empty nothingness" or "nothingness which is nothing". To make them easier on our eyes let's introduce pigeon ideograms () and {} (no space between the parentheses or braces) which stand for the same as dabanese phrases ( ) and { }. Then we may rewrite the above two dabaphrases as:

( () [ () ] )

{ [ {} ] () }

We may say that emphasized phrases are meaningful, as opposed to phrases which are merely lists. Thus above two phrases are meaningful — silly but meaningful formally.

dabanese, 0

Dabanese is a written language, which can be read as you please. Chinese is like this too. It uses ideograms, meant in a very general sense, including all kind of common symbols, in particular mathematical symbols.

I was developing an early version of dabanese in 1985. Then a more mature version in year 2000. The present version has started not much after that.

Dabanese has a very simple syntax rather than grammar. I have recognized that the grammatical notions like nouns, verbs, adjectives, ... are not necessary, that one kind of ideograms is enough. They, and the subphrases, differ in a phrase due to the emphasis and position.

The name dabanese means the language of daba (like Chinese and Japanes are the languages of China and Japan respectively). The name daba stands for the universal data base, which is another story. Roughly speaking, dabanese is to daba what C is to unix.

Remark Until I develop software (graphics, parsers, ...), I'll use mainly the English and Polish nouns in place of ideograms in order to illustrate dabanese phrases.

We will see that dabanese phrases can be iterated, hence an entire chapter or even a monograph can be written as just one phrase. Certain devices and/or software will assist reading dabanese texts.

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 6

Let  f : Z --> Z  be a polynomial function, i.e. f belongs to Z[X]. Then  f  is a residue obeying funtion, or  rof  for short, in the following sense:

• if  x=y mod n   then   f(x) = f(y) mod n

for every integer x y and natural n.

Now let  f  be an arbitrary residue obeying function. Let's define sequence x(0) x(1) ... satisfy the following iterative equality:

• x(n+1) = f(x(n))

for every   n=0 1...

Then x(0) x(1)... is a prime residue obeying sequence, or pros for short, in the following sense:

• if   x(i) = x(j) mod p   then   x(i+1) = x(j+1) mod m

for every i j = 0 1... and prime p=2 3 5 7 11...

Thus every pros mod p is eventually periodic:

indeed, let sequence x(0) x(1)... be a pros, and let  p  be a prime; then there are nonegative integers  i < j ≤ p  such that  x(i) = x(j) mod p.  Then starting with the index  i,  sequence x(n) is periodic mod p:

• x(n+d) = x(d) mod p

for   d := j-i,   and for every   n=i i+1...

This means that if prime  p  didn't divide any of the terms  x(0) ... x(j-1)  then  p  does not divide any term of the infinite sequence  x(0) x(1)....

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 5

For the sake of reference, you may like to open the previous note, step 4, in a separate window.

Let

Par(n)  :=  { k : 0 ≤ k ≤ n and k = n mod 2}

be the set of all non-negative numbers k ≤ n, which have the same parity as n; e.g.

• Par(0) = {0}
• Par(1) = {1}
• Par(2} = {0 2}
• Par(3) = {1 3}
• Par(4) = {0 2 4}

etc.

It follows from the initial values of the sequences (g(n) and (A(n), and from the last equality of "step 4" that:

• A(n)  =  ∏_{k ∈ Par(n)} g(k)     ∀ n=1 2...
  

The first three terms, g(0) g(1) g(2), of sequence (g(n)), are pairwise relatively prime.

If every two of the terms g(0) ... g(n) (with different indices) are relatively prime then obviously A(n-1) and A(n) are relatively prime too. Since, by the very definition, g(n+1) is the difference of A(n) and A(n-1), g(n+1) is relatively prime with A(n-1) and with A(n), which means that g(n+1) is relatively prime to every previous term g(0) ... g(n). This holds for every n=2 3 ... Thus every two different terms of sequence (g(n)) are relatively prime.

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 4

I've introduced the Euclid sequence e(n), and Fermat introduced his Fermat sequence f(n). Now let me introduce sequence g(n), which again has pairwise relatively prime terms. In another post I will show that sequence g is essentially different from sequences e and f and from all sequences euf. It is also satisfying that the terms g(n) are asymptotically smaller than e(n) and f(n), that they are of the order of the square root of e(n) or of f(n).

First, let me introduce an auxiliary sequence A(n):

• A(1) := 3
• A(2) := 10
• A(n+1) := A(n-1) ⋅ (A(n) - A(n-1))     ∀ n= 2 3 ...

so that A(3) = 3*(10-3) = 21, A(4) = 10*(21-10) = 110, etc.

It is not too hard to see that

A(n) = n mod 2     ∀ n=1 2 ...

Now let

• g(0) := 2
• g(1) := 3
• g(2) := 5
• g(n+1) := A(n) - A(n-1)     ∀ n=2 3 ...

so that g(3) = 7, g(4) = 11, g(5) = 89, etc. Also:

• A(n+1) := A(n-1) ⋅ g(n+1)     ∀ n= 2 3 ...

It is a fascinating topic to me but I am tired now. I'll continue later.

neologism, 1

poe tr y

        poetry you're a difficult lover
        i know you prefer it outdoors
        you desire cold shores and tall mountains
        sun burning  rain camouflage  and soft snow

        you like fireplay randomly cracking
        ornaments moving on the wall
        puffed pillows under your convex buttocks
        never worried about closing your doors






wh,
© 1991

==================

neologism:

• fireplay

In "advancing into the sunset" (see post kenning, 3) there was another neologism:

• selfboat

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 3

Let's make our first step beyond Euclid and Fermat. Their sequences are so similar that they beg to be placed under a roof of a common generalization. Let a b be two integers. Let's define:

• euf_{a b}(0)  :=  a+b;
• euf_{a b}(n+1)  :=  (euf_{a b}(n) - b) ⋅ euf_{a b}(n) + b
  

for every n=0 1...

Then

• euf_{a b}(n+1)  =  b + ∏_k=0...n euf_{a b}(k)
  

for every n=0 1...

Of course, if  B := euf_{a b}(k) - a  for certain non-negative integer k then:

• euf_{a B}(n)  =  euf_{a b}(k+n)

for every n=0 1...

For special values of integers a b, the sequence (euf_{a b}(n) : n=0 1...) becomes the Euclid sequence, when (a b) := (1 1), or the Fermat sequence, when (a b) := (2 3); when b=1 then we suppress  b  by writing

euf_a(n)  :=  euf_{a 1}(n)
Thus:

• e(n) = euf₁(n) — the Euclid sequence;
• f(n) = euf₂(n) — the Fermat sequence.

On the other hand, when a:=0, we obtain the constant sequence of values b.

The following properties of an Euclid-Fermat sequence euf_{a b} are equivalent:

• integers a b are relatively prime, i.e. gcd(a b) = 1;
• euf_{a b}(k) and euf_{a b}(n) are relatively prime whenever k and n are different.

We may rewrite the above simple recursive formula, which expresses euf_{a b}(n+1) in terms of euf_{a b}(n) as follows:

• euf_{a b}(n+1)  =  (euf_{a b}(n) - b/2)² + b - b²/4

This formula allows to study the rate of increase (or decrease) of an Euclid-Fermat sequence.

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 2

Fermat has defined his numbers:

• f(n) := 2²ⁿ + 1 for every n=0 1 ...

hoping that all of them are prime. Following Euler, we will see in another entry to this blog that this is not so. At this time let's just compare the Euclid numbers e(n) with Fermat numbers f(n). Surprisingly, they are quite similar in more than one way:

• f(0) = 3
• f(n+1) = (f(n) - 2) ⋅ f(n) + 2
• f(n+1) = 2 + ∏_k=0...n f(k)
  

for every n=0 1...

Polya has used the last formula to partially vindicate Fermat's hope—as in the case of the Euclidean sequence, also every two different Fermat numbers are relatively prime (hence once again we see that there are infinitely many different prime numbers). It follows that:

• p(n) ≤ f(n-1)     for every n=1 2...
  

---

The iterative formula for  f(n+1)  can be rewritten equivalently as follows:

• f(n+1) = (f(n) - 1)² + 1

for every n=0 1...

a step beyond Euclid and Fermat, 1

The eternally elegant Euclid's proof of infinitude of the set of prime numbers can be rephrased as follows: let

• e(0)  :=  2
  
• e(n+1)  :=  (e(n) - 1) ⋅ e(n) + 1

Then  (e(n) : n=1 2...)  is an increasing sequence of natural numbers such that each of its two different terms are relatively prime.

Indeed,

• e(n+1)  :=  1 + ∏_k=1...n e(k)

for every  n = 0 1 ...

Let  (p(k) : k=0 1 ...)  be the increasing sequence of all prime numbers. We see that

• p(n)  ≤  e(n)   for every n=0 1...

In fact:

• p(0) = e(0) = 2
• p(1) = e(1) = 3

but

• p(2) = 5 < 7 = e(2)

and

• p(n)  <  e(n)   for every n=2 3...

kennings, 3

  advancing into the sunset

    the two dimensional surface
    and the selfboat of my body

    from another dimension
    your warm presence
    seems
           in this cool ocean
    more real
          than my own

    with every breath of the salty water
    i taste roses
      of your wavy breasts

    the ocean passes by (the sun is red)

    i wear horizon
        'round my head

wh ©
1989/1990
dec/dec

---

There is 1 diagonal and 2 non-diagonal kennings in the above poem:

diagonal:

• roses of breasts — nipples and their aureoles;

non-diagonal:

• the selfboat of my body — this kenning is an extraction. And "selfboat" is a neologism.
• breath of the salty water

The last phrase has a potential to become a diagonal kenning. In the given poem it describes the breath of the lyrical subject rather than of the ocean. The latter interpretation is possible as a secondary one. Anyway, that latter interpretation allows for a diagonal kenning of fog or wind at the sea. Thus I will include this last kenning in both categories of kennings.

---

Let me compile the kennings which have appeared in the 3 poems posted so far.

Diagonal kennings:

• breath of the salty water — sea wind or sea fog;
• God's toys — church buildings;
• roses of breasts -- nipples and their aureoles;
  
• stars' backyard — mountains or a town up in the mountains.

Non-diagonal kennings:

• breath of the salty water
  

• grass lawn

• the code of behavior

• the meadow of slumber

• the selfboat of my body -- an extraction
  

• the sheets of music

• the sky of May

Neologisms:

• selfboat -- the body of a swimmer or simply a swimmer.

kennings, 2

This time I'll present a 2-part poem which features non-diagonal kennings.

==


a concert outdoors

          the code of behavior
          --------------------


  the trees and bushes
   steal sun and shadow
    from one another
     and
  step on your toes  trip you  trip you
   till you fall
    into the narrow patch
     of the meadow of slumber
  ... you HEAR
   the sheets
    attached to branches and shoots
     by clothes-pins
  the sheets of music ...

  silence
   wakes you up
    the guys under the tree
     clean instruments
  alright  you clap


____________________________________________



         Small Girls
      Have Great Future



  the sky of May
  punishes the audience

  a small girl
  knows none of that

  the orchestra breathes
  under the oak

  the girl follows her yellow and black
  pacifier   the propeller must be rotating
                      too fast to see

  she sounds
  like a small bee

  20 years from now
  she'll marry
  a devoted bear

wh ©
1991-05-05



======================================

I am much more interested in diagonal kenning than in the non-diagonal ones. Since people tend to confuse them, I have decided to list both kinds, and to separate them. Most of the time the distinction is very clear, the obscure cases are relatively rare.

Non-diagonal kennings:

• the code of behavior

• the meadow of slumber

• the sheets of music

• the sky of May

For the sake of convenience, let me collect the kennings from the previously posted poem ("6000 feet"). There were two, and both were diagonal:

Diagonal kennings:

• stars' backyard -- mountains or a town up in the mountains;
• God's toys -- church buildings.

Actually, there was also one non-diagonal:

• grass lawn

One can see already from the above 5 examples of non-diagonal kennings that they represent several different semantical constructions, and they also have various relation to the common language--e.g. the expression "grass lawn" is simply a part of the common English, and "the sheets of music" is almost like that too. However, there is a dramatic difference between the usage of the two in the respective poems.

kennings, 1

Let me (try to) start a presentation of my poems and my kennings featured in my poems.


6000 feet

       6000 feet up plus two
       of my own
       in the stars' backyard
       surrounded by God's toys
       catholic lutheran methodist pentecostal...
       and grass lawns which grow
       cigarette butts
       will I join
       the midget trees
       in the midget town?



wh, ©
1996-jan/feb

Diagonal kennings:

stars' backyard -- mountains or a town up in the mountains;
God's toys -- church buildings.

projects?

Let me think aloud. I am considering writing here, in an ad hoc, irregular way, about some of my projects or projects of projects. Despite the chaotic, unsystematic entries, I still may collect here some materials, something like fractional data bases. This may complement and help me to develop special sites for the respective projects (more ☻) systematically.

This plan doesn't feel like a blog, it may even go against the idea and spirit of a blog, but this blog, or whatever it is going to be, is first of all for me. Also, such a who knows what may be just as interesting/boring as a regular blog.

In particular, I am thinking about starting here a data base of what I call diagonal kennings. I used to call them "skaldic kennings", and I would prefer such a nice name if it were not for the misunderstandings caused by such a name--I would use it formally, according to my own definition, while others would quote some poems, and would claim that I am wrong ☺. If I were (and perhaps I will) to have here such a data base of diagonal kennings, then I would also post here the poems which feature the respective kennings.

meeting a great man (part 2)

Professor gave me his notes to read. He was making a steady progress in a nice, tasty, delicate style, introducing neat notions on his way. On the other hand, the whole task was infinitely simpler than what he has done in the past; the problem was well within the framework of elementary computer science, it could have been an exercise for bright high school kids, or for undergraduates, or for the beginning graduate students; furthermore, Professor didn't know, and the company didn't recognize that I have already solved that problem for them; more than that, with their programmer, the two of us have programmed my solution; furthermore--with my brother, we programmed the inverse problem, which was significantly harder (but still not such a big deal). The company had the working code from us, the two of us and their programmer had tested our program.

Professor knows and has achieved in the past a zillion times more than me; the result, for which he is famous, will be a jewel of the history of mathematics forever; but these days a single man, even when he's as outstanding as him, knows only a fraction of what science and technology has to offer.

Also, Professor was not exactly young at the time. He is older than me, while I was at the time not just old, and not even ancient, but already archaeological.

meeting a great man

The last time I met a great mathematician, I'll call him Professor, was five and a half years ago, under weird circumstances. We both had consulted (independently) for a company owned and run by a crazy guy, whose obsession was to be famous for a scientific and technological break through. Unfortunately, the owner's idea was obviously totally wrong, much more obviously wrong than Perpetuum Mobile.

It was also the last time I made some money (actually, good money, which is another story). Professor made good money too but I am not sure if he got everything which they owed him (the company was a bit less stable than Microsoft or Google).

I'd seen Professor only for two days. It was enough to observe his modest but dignified, diplomatic conduct, and quiet, systematic way of working. I said "diplomatic" because Professor would never say anything critical about the company's technological trust. He just would say nothing except for calling it "NN's technology", with just a slight smile. I was telling them, all the time, that their effort does not make sense. Professor acted in a much more mature way. They didn't ask him about their "technology", hence he didn't volunteer his opinion. He was only concerned about his own task, which he had treated seriously. He came to the office in the morning, then he worked the full day. Day after day (I don't know for how long).

***

It's nearly 4am. I'll continue later.

three musketeers

It is almost 2am now. My brother and I will take our father to his doctor before noon.

Let me start and hope for the best

I have started and abandoned a small bunch of blogs at different servers already. Will I stick to this one? I hope so (again ☺) but it has to be seen.