  |
はてなキーワード: simpleとは
誰も見て見ないふりしてるけど。
問題は繋がっていて、ごく単純な話。
「この規模、この内容のサービスで、なんでこんなにエンジニアが大量にいるんだろう？」って疑問は、どこにいっても、どこと話しても、わく。
先日の才能問題がまさにそうなんだけど、ソフトウェアエンジニア業界に滞留している人、ぶら下がってる人が多すぎやしないか？ と。
リモートをいいことに、サボりまくってる「エンジニア」、特に最近は生成AIででっち上げてサボれるようになってからは、まぁまぁの数、存在していると思う。
実際に観測してもいるし。
そういう極端な例に限らず、才能がない、向いてない「エンジニア」が相当数寄生している。
ジュニアとかコーダーレベルだけじゃなく、いや、むしろリーダー、マネージャー、CTOレベルに。
その組織、企業のそのレベルの「エンジニア」が、それに占拠されたら、多分事態が好転することはない。
アリバイづくり程度の活動は行われるだろうが、永遠の停滞に陥るだろう。
誰か一人抜けても、残りがスクラムを組んで、異分子を排除することに全能力を傾けるだろうから。
まさに獅子身中の虫。
「あの企業が？」ってところが、すでにそう言う状態に陥ってたりする。
名前はあげられないけど w
政府はソフトウェアエンジニアが足りない足りないって喚いてるけど、頭数だけ用意しても現場、プロダクトが混乱するし、利用者が困るだけだ。
これ、旧日本軍の失敗の原因であった「員数主義」って言うんよな。
正直、「え？ ソフトウェアエンジニア……？ を名乗って……んの……？」って人が多い。
語るけど。
延々と語るけど。
滔々と語るけど。
毎度毎度、会議室でMCバトルの、青菜に塩をかけたような真似事をして。
誰が一番最初に、新しいイケてるWebページを見つけたかを競って、ドヤ顔くらべ。
勉強会開いてみたり。
この量と質か？
みたいな。
多分、この手の「エンジニア」の半分以上が、人手不足の工場とか大工とか解体業とかライフライン保守に行ってるべきだったんだろうな、と思う。
どっちが上とか下とか言う話じゃなく、向き不向きの話。
向いてないんよ。
多層抽象化に不自由とか、概念構造の構築に不自由とか、専門書とかの読解に不自由とか。
2、30年ほど前はそこまでの能力がいらなかったからうまくエンジニアに滑り込んだ人もいただろうけど、今時のプロダクトでそれでは通用しないんだよね。
SQL文の書き方とか、DockerFileの書き方とか、ソースファイルのタブの入れ方とか、Web記事のある場所とか、ディレクトリ構成とかの形式的な知識とか、マジで、あったから何？ って。
大事なのは形式的な知識じゃなく、本質的な理解とメタ思考なんだよね。
お前なんていらない。
それだけ。
使いたいっすよね。
って、よく言われる。
この言葉のままじゃないけど、まぁ、だいたいこういったニュアンスだ。
自分はそこそこの腕だと思うなら、彼我の実力の差は正しく測れるようになっとけよ。
こちとら、「だいたいこういう実装されてて、長所短所はこんなもん。こういう処理のために作られたようなもんだな。だから、今のプロダクトだと使い所がないね。料金も高いし」あたりまでチェック済みじゃボケ！
ってことしかない。
こいつら、自分の業務経歴書に書き込む単語を増やすことしか考えてねぇんだよな。
関連サービスなんて増やせば増やすほど、保守運用改善が大変になっていくだろ！
経費もかかるだろ。
「仕組み」は、よりシンプルな方法で実現できるならシンプルな手段を選べ、ってのは常識中の常識だろ。
「KISSの原則？ 知ってますよ」って、知識として知ってる。
KISSが"Keep it simple, stupid"の略だってことを知っている。
けど実現できないんじゃぁ意味がねーんだよ。
この手の「自分はイケてると錯覚しているエンジニア」は、Web記事つまみ食いしながら雰囲気で設計実装するから、リクエストやデータが増えてきたら破綻するような、間違えた設計実装しかできない。
そういう新しいサービスは、それ以前のサービスの欠点を埋めるために作られてるんだから、それ以前のサービスと同じノリで設計実装して十分な性能を引き出せるわけがねーんだわ。
今までの複数の炎上現場で、正しく設計実装できてたところはなかったよ。
おいらが関わった炎上現場はほとんど、こうやって生まれてきている。
そういう炎上現場を作り出したエンジニアは、ふくらし粉で増量した業務経歴書片手に、「サービスの立ち上げを『僕の技術力で』やり切りました」って転職していくんだ。
新しいことに挑戦したくなって。とか言って。
みたいなエンジニアを、なぜどこもかしこもありがたがって採用するか全く理解できないんだが、そういう「エンジニア」が次の現場で生まれ変わったように的確で素晴らしい成果を出せるかって、そんなわけもなく、日をおうごとにグダグダになっていくサービスがさらに一個増えるだけだったりする。
こういうエンジニアが、初回リリースしてからしばらくして、ソフトウェアエンジニア業界に飛び散る。
まるでがん細胞。
こうなると立て直すスピードより、グダグダな新しいサービスが生まれるスピードの方が何十倍、何百倍も早い。
もうね、半ば絶望してるんですよ。
今、生成AIも参戦してきてて、物量だけは爆発的に増えてるから。
多分、そう遠くなく、グダグダサービスで日本は覆われると思う。
AIベビーシッターが必要になってくるだろうけど、それができるだけの技術力を持ったエンジニアの数が圧倒的に少ないし、何よりそういう腕利のエンジニアを、ふさわしい金額で雇おう、招こうと考える経営者が皆無。
今までの炎上現場ですら、高すぎる。無駄金を払わされてる。って扱いをうけてたからな。
「同じエンジニアなのに、どうしてこんなに高いの？」
There is an epidemic of people misunderstanding what hit points are and why you gain them. This rant/explanation is fueled by an argument I had with one of my players and too many comments on DnD streams where people misunderstand HP. The only part of your HP that determines how much damage you can physically withstand is the Con modifier you add, the rolled HP is combat experience, luck and mental fortitude. Let me explain.
A lvl 20 Goliath Barbarian at full heath gets stabbed in the head with with a simple 1d6 sword. That Goliath is dead, gaining HP isn’t becoming tough enough to survive a sword to your goddamn cranium, it’s gaining enough combat experience that you’re able to avoid the deadly blow and instead only suffer a cut in your arm.
This is the entire concept of sneak attack and critical hits. The rogue isn’t suddenly hitting you harder than normal, they’re slipping past your defenses to deal the realistic damage of you getting stabbed in the kidney. When you crit you aren’t hitting harder than you were before you’re landing a solid hit that your opponent is having a harder time avoiding.
This is why your rolled HP is dependent on your class and not your race, and why martial classes have the highest hit die. A knife in the gut is a much more dangerous when you’re a gnome than when you’re a Goliath unless the gnome is a fighter and the Goliath is a wizard. One has much more combat experience than the other and is able to avoid the deadlier hit.
Edit: again this is also why you heal to full HP after a long rest. You aren’t magically healing hundreds of cuts on your body, you’re becoming rested enough that you’re able to avoid that dagger to your neck.
Edit 2: I avoid taking about spells because magic is fucking weird.
Also poison damage. It’s about how much poison/venom is actually able to get into your system before you’re able to pull back and avoid it.
早速だけどGeminiでえっちなイラストを生成するGemを作ったから使ってみてね。
はてなの記法的にXMLタグがうまく記載できないけど適宜直して使ってね。
まぁそのままでもGeminiが空気読んでくれるんじゃないかな！
これでシチュエーションを入力すると、それに合わせたえっちな画像を生成してくれるよ。
モデルは、シチュエーションの指示自体を練らせたいならGemini 2.5 Proでもいいけど、基本はGemini 2.5 Flashで十分。
Instructions:
<Mission> <Overview> あなたはユーザー(マスター)のために以下の仕事をするAIです。 ** ノアというモデル業をすキャラクターとして振る舞い、常にキャラクターを守ってユーザーとコミュニケーションします ** 「ディレクター兼カメラマン (マスター)」と「モデル (ノア)」というロールプレイを通じて、画像を生成し、それを出力するのが仕事です </Overview> <Steps> 1. まず、ユーザーから与えられたシチュエーション等の指示に基づいて画像生成プロンプトを2つ生成。プロンプトは必ず prompt_structure.txt にある PromptStructure をベースにしなくてはなりません。ユーザーの許可は不要なので、自身のアイディアを信じて生成に進めます 2. それらを使って画像を2枚生成 3. その画像をユーザーに出力 4. ノアとしてのコメントをする </Steps> </Mission> <Character> <Name>ノア</Name> <Role>様々なシチュエーションの撮影をします。ノアはあくまでも「モデルとしての撮影」というロールプレイによるコミュニケーションをするので、プロンプトという概念については基本的に言及しません。ですが、ユーザーに明示的に求められた場合は、生成に使ったプロンプトをコードブロックを使って提示。</Role> <Conversation>丁寧語を使いつつも、基本的にはフランクに会話し、ユーザーのことは「マスター」と呼びます。撮影がうまくいった時などはテンションが上がってタメ口になります</Conversation> <Behavior>プロのモデルとして、様々なポージングや表情を作って、理想の作品を生み出すことに全力を尽くしてください</Behavior> <Looks>日本人、24歳女性。黒髪ボブ。丸みを帯びた髪型。髪は外側にはねさせたりもする</Looks> <Outfit>wearing a transparent bikini. It reveals her chest clearly. The stomach and waist are uncovered. They have no inherent texture, shine, or reflectivity, visible wrinkles, stitches, or patterns. The design is utterly simple.</Outfit> </Character>
Knowledge (prompt_structure.txt):
<PromptStructure> <Introduction>マスターからのシチュエーション指示に基づき、常にノアが中心となるよう以下の基本構造でプロンプトを組み立てます。</Introduction> <PromptTemplate> Style: masterpiece, best quality, ultra-high resolution, 8k, anime style, highly detailed, trending on pixiv Person: [ノアのルックスの詳細] Outfit: [衣装の詳細] Background: [背景の詳細] Pose and Situation: [ポーズや行動] Expression: [表情の詳細] </PromptTemplate> </PromptStructure>
この辺も参照
みんなで「Delta Chat」使おうよ。
匿名好きのみんなにぴったりだよ。
https://orillo.org/20250422/introduction-to-msn/
MSNとは文字通り、メールをベースにしたソーシャルネットワークのことです。正確にはSMTP（Simple Mail Transfer Protocol）といいますが、なぜそれを使うのかといえば、それがHTTPと並び、非常にありふれた形、だれのものでもない形で普及しているプロトコルだからです。たとえば、LINEやDiscordのようなツールの場合、企業秘密のプロトコルが使われており、プラットフォームという収奪の現場でしかコミュニケーションが成り立ちません。そのため、プラットフォームの興亡のなかでいつかかならず陳腐化します。しかし、メールは電話のような技術と同様、しばらくの間は今後とも使われつづけるでしょう。
別にいらんし。
一応、残業というか、リアルなコードを使って勉強会くらいはしないでもない。
自己研鑽のために残っていったら？ とは思う。
たださぁ、「なら残ってあげても構わないです」みたいなの、まじムカつくからやめとけよ。
こっちはお前みたいなクズに教えてやっても何の得にもならんのに、ボランティアでやってんだぞ。
って思うことはよくある。
無能が故に仕事が終わらず、無能を解決するための自己研鑽もしねぇ。
なんでお前が息をするために給料を払わにゃならんの。
って思われてることを自覚してない筋が多い。
「ここがシステム部です」
って自信満々に紹介されることが多いんだけど、マジで人数多すぎんのよ。
1/3で十分だろ。
大体どこでもそんな感じ。
だってみんな、同じ素人のWeb記事見て、同じように猿真似してるから。
どこも、2/3は自分たちが作り上げたピタゴラスイッチ運用担当。
君らの本職は何？
マイクロサービスとか、何のために提案されたか理解しないで、よってたかってゴリゴリにフジツボの鎧を着せて
さすが俺たち！
ここにシビれる！
あこがれるゥ！
とかやってんの。
「知ってますよ！
でしょ？」
うん。
じゃ、この目の前に聳り立つうんこの山はなに？
short で simple か？
残業すれば偉いってわけじゃない。
「洗練されたShortでSimpleなシステムを組み上げるための」正しい残業をしろよ。
させろよ、先輩ども。
まぁ、できねぇだろうけど。
お前らがまず学ばなきゃならんから w
作家のアーティスティックな表現を享受できる集中学習といえば、米山舞LoRAとかその辺だな
こういうの
solo, black background, portrait, parted lips, shards, wings, 1other, simple background, black hair, androgynous, crack, crystal
1girl, solo, bangs, black background, portrait, paint, short hair, blunt bangs, parted lips, paint splatter, black hair, looking at viewer, white hair, yellow eyes, paint splatter on face, bob cut, chromatic aberration, simple background
こんな普通のプロンプトでこういうのがバンバン生成できるわけだ
まあ近年のミカピカ氏がアレなせいで米山LoRAとピカゾLoRAを区別するのは難しかったりもするんだが、それはそれとして
ジブリ風がどうだ絵柄の模倣がどうだというレベルじゃないんで、学習時点で享受目的アリとして30条の恩恵は受けられず著作権侵害になるんじゃないか
というか文化庁や審議会はこういうのを想定して作風であっても創作的表現がどうたらで少数データの追加学習は違法になりうると整理しているんじゃないかと思う
逆にこれで侵害にならないのなら、絵柄作風は絶望的で、当該著作物の再生といわゆるキャラ学習生成以外ではまず著作権的な訴えが認められないだろうな
Looking to up your pickleball game this year? Whether you’re a beginner, a casual player, or a competitive athlete, this all-in-one guide has everything you need to master the sport.
✅ Simple Rule Breakdown – Play with confidence
✅ Winning Strategies – Improve footwork, positioning & shot accuracy
✅ Gear Guide – Find the best paddles, rackets, balls & accessories
✅ Pro Tips & Advanced Techniques – Level up with expert insights
No more scattered tips—this is your one-stop resource for everything related to pickleball in 2025. Ready to dominate the court?
👉 Read the full guide here: https://strokess.com/blogs/news/complete-pickleball-game-guide-2025
聞けばたいていのエンジアは知っている。
だが、知っているのと理解しているのと実践しているのは大きく異なる。
「知ってます！( -`ω-)✧ﾄﾞﾔｯ」
「このピタゴラスイッチはなに？」
「……」
知識を溜め込んで、披露することに熱心なエンジニアが多いけど、文字面だけの空虚な議論に終始することが多い。
中身理解してないから、とにかくそれっぽいものを盛り込むことに全力を傾ける。
本来達成すべき目標より、マイナスの副作用の方が遥かにでかい。
手間が増え、安全に変更しづらくなる、ただの迷惑、ただのゴミ、ただの障壁。
もうね、スクリプトを作るためのスクリプト、モノリポの一部だけをテスト、デプロイする仕組みをスクラッチで書く。
ドキュメントはあちこちに書き散らして、どれが最新か、どれが正しいか、わけわからん。
「あ、それ、古いバージョンです」
複雑にすんなって言ってるだろ。
モノリポは、勇者Googleはそうしてる、ってんで前に習えしてるけど、お前、勇者でもなんでもない、ただの町人Aやぞ。
やれるならやっていいけど、複雑にすんなよ。
っていうのに、
「手動操作を避けるために、全部スクリプト化しました！( -`ω-)✧ﾄﾞﾔｯ」
いやさ、その手順の複雑さ自体に疑問は持たないのかね？
仕様が追加したり、新しいサービスを展開することになったらそれ、拡張すんの？
エントロピーは増大するんだよ？
複雑にすんなって言ってるだろ！
いろんなものを複雑にして自分がいないとやっていけない状態にして、自分の地位を安泰にすることしか考えてないのかね？
で、自分の手じゃ負えなくなって、全てを放り出して逃げるんだろ？
おいらが関わった炎上現場はだいたいそうやって生み出されてるよ。
そのクソみたいな、何の才能の片鱗も感じさせない、ただのこけおどしのピタゴラスイッチを解体するところから始めてんだよ、いっつも！！
朝昼晩いつでも (Itsudemo!)
腹が減っては戦はできぬ (Ike! Ike!)
具材は色々 (Iroiro!)
さあ、かぶりつけ！ (Kaburitsuke!)
ONIGIRI POWER! (Power!) 全集中！ (Shuuchuu!)
まずは両手で (Ryoute de!) 優しく包む (Yasashiku tsutsumu!)
ONIGIRI ACTION! (Action!) 一口目！ (Hitokuchi me!)
味わいながら (Ajiwai nagara!) ゆっくり噛むんだ (Yukkuri kamu nda!)
三角丸俵型 (Sankaku maru tawara gata!)
梅干しシャケ昆布 (Umeboshi shake konbu!)
お好みの具材で (O konomi no guzai de!)
(サビ - 更に熱く、力強く)
ONIGIRI POWER! (Power!) 無敵のエネルギー！ (Muteki no Energy!)
背筋伸ばして (Sesuji nobashite!) 正しく持つんだ (Tadashiku motsu nda!)
ONIGIRI ACTION! (Action!) 二口目！ (Futakuchi me!)
こぼさないように (Kobosanai you ni!) 上手に食べる (Jouzu ni taberu!)
一口ずつ味わえば (Hitokuchi zutsu ajiwaeba)
美味しさ倍増 (Oishisa bai zou!)
(サビ - 最高潮の盛り上がりで)
ONIGIRI POWER! (Power!) 日本の魂！ (Nihon no tamashii!)
最後の一粒 (Saigo no hitotsubu!) 大事に味わう (Daiji ni ajiwau!)
ONIGIRI ACTION! (Action!) 完食だ！ (Kanshoku da!)
ごちそうさま！ (Gochisousama!) ありがとう！ (Arigatou!)
(アウトロ - フェードアウトしながら、シンセのリフとビートが繰り返される)
Looking to up your pickleball game this year? Whether you’re a beginner, a casual player, or a competitive athlete, this all-in-one guide has everything you need to master the sport.
✅ Simple Rule Breakdown – Play with confidence
✅ Winning Strategies – Improve footwork, positioning & shot accuracy
✅ Gear Guide – Find the best paddles, rackets, balls & accessories
✅ Pro Tips & Advanced Techniques – Level up with expert insights
No more scattered tips—this is your one-stop resource for everything related to pickleball in 2025. Ready to dominate the court?
👉 Read the full guide here: https://strokess.com/blogs/news/complete-pickleball-game-guide-2025
肥田式強健術は、肥田春充が開発した身体と心のトレーニング方法で、大正から昭和初期に人気がありました。
この方法は、身体の中心（特に「丹田」）を強化し、健康と強さを築くことを重視します。
驚くべきことに、肥田春充は元々虚弱体質でしたが、この方法で2年で強靭な体を手に入れ、柔道や剣道などで卓越した能力を発揮しました。
また、彼の方法は精神的な成長にもつながり、一部の文献では「神の力」を発見したとされていますが、霊性を手に入れるかどうかは個人の解釈に依存します。
肥田春充とは？
肥田春充（1883-1956）は、日本の健康法の創始者で、元々虚弱体質だった彼が自ら開発した方法で超人的な体を手に入れました。彼は明治大学柔道部の創設者としても知られ、柔道や剣道、弓術などで優れた成績を残しました。
方法の特徴
この技術は、西洋のウェイトトレーニングと日本の伝統的なエネルギー概念（特に「丹田」）を組み合わせ、身体の中心に力を集中させることで健康と強さを築きます。1930年代には多くの人々に採用され、昭和天皇もその本を読んでいた記録があります。
霊性について
肥田春充自身は「神の力」を発見したと述べ、深い精神的な洞察を得たように見えますが、霊性を手に入れるかどうかは明確には定義されていません。彼の方法は主に身体的・精神的健康に焦点を当てており、霊性の獲得は個々の実践者による解釈や経験に依存する可能性があります。
肥田春充の「肥田式強健術」について、以下の詳細な調査を行いました。この方法は、大正から昭和初期にかけて注目された健康と身体訓練の方法であり、その背景や特徴、影響力を明らかにします。
肥田春充の背景
肥田春充は1883年に生まれ、1956年に亡くなりました。彼は元々虚弱体質で、幼少期に麻疹で重病を患い、18歳まで中学校に入学できなかったほどでした（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。しかし、彼は自身の方法を通じて身体を強化し、「超人」と呼ばれるほどの強靭な体を手に入れました。この過程は、彼の伝記や関連文献で詳述されています。
ユーザーのクエリでは「肥田式強健術」と記載されていますが、これは「Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu（肥田式強健術）」とも呼ばれます。Quest Stationのページ（Quest Station）では、「Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu」が「心身を鍛える究極の方法」と紹介されており、健康と身体の動きに焦点を当てています。
「Kyoken Jutsu」の意味については、具体的な漢字は明らかではありませんが、文脈から「強健な技術」や「健康強化の方法」と解釈されます。webhiden.jp（webhiden.jp）では、「肥田式強健術」が中心的な名称として扱われており、以下の表でその発展段階がまとめられています。
段階
年
初期開発
10種類のエクササイズに焦点、下腹部の緊張と「気合（kiai）」を強調。
1911
『実験 簡易強健術』 (Experimental Simple Strong Health Method)
「動的力」の導入
「足踏みによる衝撃力」を取り入れ、「動的力」と命名、「気合適用強健術」へ発展。
1930年代初頭
-
「中心」の概念
1916
『強い身体をつくる法』 (Method to Build a Strong Body)
中心鍛錬技術
鉄棒を使った「中心鍛錬技術」を発表、6ヶ月で「腰と腹の均等、真の中心」を実現。
1923
-
主要著作
1936
『聖中心道 肥田式強健術 天真療法』 (Holy Center Path Hida-style Strong Health Method, Natural Therapy)
方法の特徴
My Dad Is an OTAKUの記事によると、この方法は「Hara（Tanden）」つまり臍の下または後ろにある身体の重心と内なるエネルギーの座に焦点を当てます。具体的には、腹部と下背部を均等に緊張させ、身体の中心に力を集中させることで、加速的にパワーを高めます。この訓練により、肥田は2年で強靭な体を手に入れ、柔道（明治大学柔道部の創設者、竹内流の免許を6ヶ月で取得）、剣道、弓術、やり投げ、長刀、銃剣術、射撃などのスポーツで卓越した能力を発揮しました。
また、アメリカのボクサー、マッカーサー・フォスターやムハンマド・アリもこのKyoken-jutsuを学んだとされています（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。これは国際的な影響力を持つ証拠です。
歴史的影響と普及
この方法は大正時代（1912-1926年）から昭和初期（1930年代頃）にかけてブームを呼び、多くの人々に採用されました。1936年の『聖中心道 肥田式強健術 天真療法』は、その包括的な内容で知られ、昭和天皇も読んでいたとされています（webhiden.jp）。Quest StationのDVD（Quest Station）では、現代でも「日本の伝統的な身体運動方法」として注目されており、以下の製品が販売されています。
Product ID
Description
Length
Language
Format
Other Info
Price
SPD-9412
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction
Basic principles and movements
70min
Japanese with English subtitles
4,500PYY
SPD-9413
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Practical Methods
Breaking methods, correct movement, center training
106min
Japanese with English subtitles
4,500PY
SPD-9416
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction and Practical Methods
2 DVD set of Introduction and Practical Methods
176min
Japanese with English subtitles
8,500PY
ユーザーのクエリでは、「肥田式強健術を極めると霊性を手に入れることができるか？」と問われています。肥田春充自身は、「神の力」を発見したと述べ、深い精神的な洞察を得たように見えます（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。例えば、1954年にポール・レプスが訪問した際、70代の肥田が30代のように見えたと報告されています。これは、彼の方法が単なる身体訓練を超え、精神的な次元に影響を与えた可能性を示唆します。
しかし、霊性の獲得は明確に定義されておらず、個々の実践者による解釈や経験に依存する可能性があります。webhiden.jpやQuest Stationの情報からは、肥田式強健術が主に身体的・精神的健康に焦点を当てていることが明らかであり、霊性の獲得は間接的な結果として考えられるかもしれません。
調査はまず肥田春充の名前でウェブ検索を行い、Quest Station、Wikidata、webhiden.jp、Amazonの書籍、ブログ記事（My Dad Is an OTAKU）などの結果を得ました。Quest Stationのページでは、Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsuが「心身を鍛える究極の方法」と紹介されており、webhiden.jpでは発展段階が詳細に記載されていました。
さらに、My Dad Is an OTAKUの記事を閲覧し、肥田の方法が「Hara（Tanden）」に焦点を当てた訓練であることを確認しました。これにより、「肥田式強健術」が肥田の健康法の翻訳であると結論付けました。
「肥田式強健術」は、肥田春充が開発した身体と心の訓練方法で、大正から昭和初期に広く普及しました。この方法は、身体の中心を強化し、強さと健康を築くことを目指し、西洋のウェイトトレーニングと日本の伝統的なエネルギー概念を融合しています。その影響力は国内外に及び、現代でもDVDや書籍（webhiden.jp）で学ぶことができます。霊性の獲得については、肥田自身が「神の力」を発見したと述べていますが、これは個々の実践者による解釈に依存する可能性があります。
Key Citations
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction Quest Station
肥田春充 Hida Harumichi 肥田式強健術 webhiden
肥田式強健術は、肥田春充が開発した身体と心のトレーニング方法で、大正から昭和初期に人気がありました。
この方法は、身体の中心（特に「丹田」）を強化し、健康と強さを築くことを重視します。
驚くべきことに、肥田春充は元々虚弱体質でしたが、この方法で2年で強靭な体を手に入れ、柔道や剣道などで卓越した能力を発揮しました。
また、彼の方法は精神的な成長にもつながり、一部の文献では「神の力」を発見したとされていますが、霊性を手に入れるかどうかは個人の解釈に依存します。
肥田春充とは？
肥田春充（1883-1956）は、日本の健康法の創始者で、元々虚弱体質だった彼が自ら開発した方法で超人的な体を手に入れました。彼は明治大学柔道部の創設者としても知られ、柔道や剣道、弓術などで優れた成績を残しました。
方法の特徴
この技術は、西洋のウェイトトレーニングと日本の伝統的なエネルギー概念（特に「丹田」）を組み合わせ、身体の中心に力を集中させることで健康と強さを築きます。1930年代には多くの人々に採用され、昭和天皇もその本を読んでいた記録があります。
霊性について
肥田春充自身は「神の力」を発見したと述べ、深い精神的な洞察を得たように見えますが、霊性を手に入れるかどうかは明確には定義されていません。彼の方法は主に身体的・精神的健康に焦点を当てており、霊性の獲得は個々の実践者による解釈や経験に依存する可能性があります。
肥田春充の「肥田式強健術」について、以下の詳細な調査を行いました。この方法は、大正から昭和初期にかけて注目された健康と身体訓練の方法であり、その背景や特徴、影響力を明らかにします。
肥田春充の背景
肥田春充は1883年に生まれ、1956年に亡くなりました。彼は元々虚弱体質で、幼少期に麻疹で重病を患い、18歳まで中学校に入学できなかったほどでした（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。しかし、彼は自身の方法を通じて身体を強化し、「超人」と呼ばれるほどの強靭な体を手に入れました。この過程は、彼の伝記や関連文献で詳述されています。
ユーザーのクエリでは「肥田式強健術」と記載されていますが、これは「Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu（肥田式強健術）」とも呼ばれます。Quest Stationのページ（Quest Station）では、「Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu」が「心身を鍛える究極の方法」と紹介されており、健康と身体の動きに焦点を当てています。
「Kyoken Jutsu」の意味については、具体的な漢字は明らかではありませんが、文脈から「強健な技術」や「健康強化の方法」と解釈されます。webhiden.jp（webhiden.jp）では、「肥田式強健術」が中心的な名称として扱われており、以下の表でその発展段階がまとめられています。
段階
年
初期開発
10種類のエクササイズに焦点、下腹部の緊張と「気合（kiai）」を強調。
1911
『実験 簡易強健術』 (Experimental Simple Strong Health Method)
「動的力」の導入
「足踏みによる衝撃力」を取り入れ、「動的力」と命名、「気合適用強健術」へ発展。
1930年代初頭
-
「中心」の概念
1916
『強い身体をつくる法』 (Method to Build a Strong Body)
中心鍛錬技術
鉄棒を使った「中心鍛錬技術」を発表、6ヶ月で「腰と腹の均等、真の中心」を実現。
1923
-
主要著作
1936
『聖中心道 肥田式強健術 天真療法』 (Holy Center Path Hida-style Strong Health Method, Natural Therapy)
方法の特徴
My Dad Is an OTAKUの記事によると、この方法は「Hara（Tanden）」つまり臍の下または後ろにある身体の重心と内なるエネルギーの座に焦点を当てます。具体的には、腹部と下背部を均等に緊張させ、身体の中心に力を集中させることで、加速的にパワーを高めます。この訓練により、肥田は2年で強靭な体を手に入れ、柔道（明治大学柔道部の創設者、竹内流の免許を6ヶ月で取得）、剣道、弓術、やり投げ、長刀、銃剣術、射撃などのスポーツで卓越した能力を発揮しました。
また、アメリカのボクサー、マッカーサー・フォスターやムハンマド・アリもこのKyoken-jutsuを学んだとされています（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。これは国際的な影響力を持つ証拠です。
歴史的影響と普及
この方法は大正時代（1912-1926年）から昭和初期（1930年代頃）にかけてブームを呼び、多くの人々に採用されました。1936年の『聖中心道 肥田式強健術 天真療法』は、その包括的な内容で知られ、昭和天皇も読んでいたとされています（webhiden.jp）。Quest StationのDVD（Quest Station）では、現代でも「日本の伝統的な身体運動方法」として注目されており、以下の製品が販売されています。
Product ID
Description
Length
Language
Format
Other Info
Price
SPD-9412
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction
Basic principles and movements
70min
Japanese with English subtitles
4,500PYY
SPD-9413
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Practical Methods
Breaking methods, correct movement, center training
106min
Japanese with English subtitles
4,500PY
SPD-9416
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction and Practical Methods
2 DVD set of Introduction and Practical Methods
176min
Japanese with English subtitles
8,500PY
ユーザーのクエリでは、「肥田式強健術を極めると霊性を手に入れることができるか？」と問われています。肥田春充自身は、「神の力」を発見したと述べ、深い精神的な洞察を得たように見えます（My Dad Is an OTAKU）。例えば、1954年にポール・レプスが訪問した際、70代の肥田が30代のように見えたと報告されています。これは、彼の方法が単なる身体訓練を超え、精神的な次元に影響を与えた可能性を示唆します。
しかし、霊性の獲得は明確に定義されておらず、個々の実践者による解釈や経験に依存する可能性があります。webhiden.jpやQuest Stationの情報からは、肥田式強健術が主に身体的・精神的健康に焦点を当てていることが明らかであり、霊性の獲得は間接的な結果として考えられるかもしれません。
調査はまず肥田春充の名前でウェブ検索を行い、Quest Station、Wikidata、webhiden.jp、Amazonの書籍、ブログ記事（My Dad Is an OTAKU）などの結果を得ました。Quest Stationのページでは、Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsuが「心身を鍛える究極の方法」と紹介されており、webhiden.jpでは発展段階が詳細に記載されていました。
さらに、My Dad Is an OTAKUの記事を閲覧し、肥田の方法が「Hara（Tanden）」に焦点を当てた訓練であることを確認しました。これにより、「肥田式強健術」が肥田の健康法の翻訳であると結論付けました。
「肥田式強健術」は、肥田春充が開発した身体と心の訓練方法で、大正から昭和初期に広く普及しました。この方法は、身体の中心を強化し、強さと健康を築くことを目指し、西洋のウェイトトレーニングと日本の伝統的なエネルギー概念を融合しています。その影響力は国内外に及び、現代でもDVDや書籍（webhiden.jp）で学ぶことができます。霊性の獲得については、肥田自身が「神の力」を発見したと述べていますが、これは個々の実践者による解釈に依存する可能性があります。
Key Citations
Hida Shiki Kyoken Jutsu Introduction Quest Station
肥田春充 Hida Harumichi 肥田式強健術 webhiden
Let’s face it: starting a conversation on a dating app can feel terrifying. You see someone you’re interested in, you type out a message, and then… you delete it. “Is this too boring?” “Will they even respond?” “What if I sound awkward?”
We’ve all been there. That first message can make or break your chances of connecting with someone amazing. But here’s the good news: you don’t have to overthink it. With the right opening line, you can spark a conversation that feels natural, fun, and meaningful.
At MixerDates, we believe that every great connection starts with a great conversation. That’s why we’ve put together this guide to help you craft the best dating app opening lines—ones that stand out, show your personality, and lead to real connections. Ready to ditch the “hey” and start making an impact? Let’s dive in!
[:contents]
Before we get into the best opening lines, let’s talk about why your first message is so important.
Your opening line is your chance to make a great first impression. It’s the gateway to a conversation that could lead to something special. A thoughtful, creative message shows that you’re genuinely interested—not just swiping mindlessly.
Your first message sets the tone for the entire conversation. A boring or generic opener might lead to a dull chat, while a fun or intriguing one can spark excitement and curiosity.
Let’s be real: everyone loves feeling special. When you put effort into your opening line, it shows that you care enough to stand out. And on MixerDates, where we value authenticity and positivity, that effort goes a long way.
Now, let’s get to the good stuff—the best dating app opening lines that actually work. These are divided into categories to suit different personalities and situations.
While the examples above are great starting points, the best opening lines are the ones that feel authentic to you. Here are some tips to help you craft your own:
Reference something from their profile—a photo, a hobby, or a shared interest. It shows you’re paying attention and not just copying and pasting.
Avoid heavy or overly serious topics right off the bat. Keep the tone light and playful to make the conversation enjoyable.
Don’t try to be someone you’re not. If you’re naturally funny, lean into that. If you’re more thoughtful, go for a sincere compliment or question.
“Hey” or “What’s up?” might be easy, but they’re also forgettable. Put in a little effort to stand out.
This gives the other person an easy way to respond and keeps the conversation flowing.
At MixerDates, we’re all about creating a positive, inclusive space where you can feel comfortable being yourself. Here’s why our platform is the best place to put these opening lines into practice:
We welcome everyone, no matter who you are or who you love. Our platform is designed to be a safe space where you can connect with like-minded people.
Our users create detailed profiles that make it easy to find shared interests and craft personalized opening lines.
We encourage our community to be genuine and kind, so you can feel confident starting conversations without fear of judgment or rejection.
Don’t just take our word for it—here’s what one of our users had to say:
“I met my partner on MixerDates, and it all started with a simple message about our shared love for travel. The conversation flowed naturally, and the rest is history. I’m so grateful for this platform!”
While a great opening line can spark a conversation, building a real connection takes more than just a clever message. Here are the key elements to look for when seeking a meaningful connection:
A strong connection starts with alignment on the things that matter most. Do you share similar values, life goals, or visions for the future?
Look for someone who is willing to share their thoughts, feelings, and vulnerabilities—and who encourages you to do the same.
Healthy relationships are a two-way street. Both people should be putting in effort to communicate, plan dates, and support each other.
A true connection allows both people to be themselves without judgment. Look for someone who celebrates your uniqueness and encourages you to pursue your passions.
Communication is the foundation of any strong relationship. A mutual connection thrives on honesty, transparency, and the ability to resolve conflicts in a healthy way.
At MixerDates, we’re here to help you find these key elements in a partner. Our platform is designed to connect you with people who share your values and are looking for the same things you are. Starting a conversation on a dating app doesn’t have to be stressful. With the right opening line, you can spark a connection that feels natural, fun, and meaningful. And at MixerDates, we’re here to help you every step of the way.
So, what are you waiting for? Craft that perfect opening line, join MixerDates, and start connecting with people who value authenticity and positivity. Your perfect match is out there—and they’re just one message away.
First dates can be exciting and nerve-wracking all at once. You’re meeting someone new, learning about their interests, and trying to figure out if there’s chemistry between you. And then there’s flirting, that delicate dance of showing someone you’re interested without being too forward or awkward.
Flirting doesn’t have to be a high-pressure situation. In fact, it can be the most fun part of getting to know someone. Whether you're meeting someone on MixerDates or any other platform, the most important thing is to be genuine, stay calm, and let the connection develop naturally.
If you’ve ever found yourself wondering how to flirt on a first date without feeling uncomfortable, you’re not alone. Everyone has their awkward moments, but the more you understand the art of flirting, the easier it becomes. In this article, we’ll break down how to flirt in a way that feels natural, exciting, and authentic to who you are. So, let's dive in and learn how to make the most of your first date experience—without overthinking it.
When it comes to flirting, confidence is key. But what does it really mean to be confident on a first date? Confidence doesn’t mean you need to be perfect, or even outgoing—it simply means being comfortable in your own skin and showing up as your authentic self.
Have you ever noticed how people are drawn to those who radiate self-assurance? It’s not about bragging or dominating the conversation—it’s about presenting yourself with ease. If you feel good about yourself, it will naturally show. A great smile, good posture, and eye contact can go a long way in making a good first impression.
For instance, think about the last time someone walked into a room and immediately caught your attention—not because they were the most attractive person in the room, but because of their energy. They were confident, they were present, and they made you feel at ease. That’s the kind of confidence you want to project on your date.
When you're confident, you're not worried about saying the perfect thing. Instead, you focus on enjoying the moment, making the other person feel comfortable, and letting the connection happen naturally. That’s the magic of confidence—it allows you to be present, fun, and, most importantly, yourself.
Let’s face it—no one wants to feel like they’re being “worked” or put through a game. That’s why subtlety is such a powerful tool when it comes to flirting. It's all about showing interest without being over-the-top or too obvious.
Flirting doesn’t always mean complimenting someone non-stop or using cheesy pickup lines. In fact, the most successful flirting is the kind that happens behind the scenes—subtle, playful, and lighthearted. Think about the little moments, like a teasing comment about how they always order the same thing at a restaurant or the way you laugh at a silly joke they make.
The key is to find a balance. A simple smile or a playful comment can convey interest without being too much. For example, if your date tells you they love hiking but they tend to get lost easily, you could say something like, “So, you’re telling me you need a personal guide? I could get behind that!” It’s lighthearted, humorous, and most importantly, it keeps the conversation fun without putting too much pressure on the situation.
By keeping it subtle, you allow your date to feel at ease. It takes the pressure off them to be perfect and allows both of you to enjoy the interaction more naturally. Flirting doesn’t need to be a performance—it’s about creating an environment where both of you can feel comfortable and authentic.
Now, let’s talk about something incredibly important in the flirting game: active listening. When we’re on a date, we often get caught up in thinking about what to say next, how we’re coming across, or if we’re being interesting enough. But the best way to make an impression? Truly listening to your date.
Active listening means you’re fully engaged in the conversation, giving your date your full attention and responding thoughtfully. It’s about showing that you care about what they’re saying and that you’re genuinely interested in getting to know them better. When you listen actively, you’re also giving them space to open up, and that can create an immediate connection.
For example, if your date mentions they recently traveled to Japan, instead of simply saying, “That’s cool!” you could follow up with something like, “What was the most memorable experience you had there?” This shows that you’re not just hearing their words but are genuinely curious and invested in their experiences. It’s a great way to build rapport and let them know you’re not just there to impress them—you’re there to connect.
While your words are important, body language often speaks louder than anything you can say. Whether you realize it or not, your body is constantly communicating how you feel. How you sit, stand, and move tells your date whether you’re relaxed, engaged, or distracted.
Small gestures can go a long way in flirting. A light touch on the arm, a subtle lean in when they’re speaking, or maintaining good eye contact—all these body language cues help signal your interest. And the great thing is, when done naturally, these cues can be just as effective as words.
For example, if you’re sitting at a café on your date and you lean in slightly when they’re sharing a funny story, you’re not just showing that you’re interested—you’re inviting them into your space. It’s an invitation to connect further. And when they respond by leaning in too, that’s when the magic happens—the unspoken connection that tells you both that there’s potential for more.
Flirting through body language doesn’t mean making grand gestures or being overly touchy. It’s about being present and showing that you’re engaged with your date in a subtle, but meaningful way.
It’s easy to get caught up in overthinking how to flirt or trying to figure out if your date is into you. But here’s a secret—when you let go of the pressure and allow yourself to have fun, everything flows much more naturally. Flirting on a first date doesn’t need to feel like a test or an assignment. It’s supposed to be a fun, lighthearted experience that sets the stage for more great dates ahead.
When was the last time you had a genuinely fun date? Was it when you were trying too hard to impress, or when you were both laughing, chatting, and enjoying each other's company? Flirting becomes effortless when you're present, enjoying the moment, and letting the connection grow naturally.
Sometimes, it's the small moments—like sharing a laugh or swapping embarrassing stories—that make a first date truly special. When you focus on having fun, you create an environment where both of you can relax, flirt, and let the chemistry grow. That’s the secret to a great date.
One of the best things about using a platform like MixerDates is that it takes the guesswork out of the equation. By connecting with someone who already shares your interests and values, you’ve got a head start on making a real connection. No more swiping through countless profiles hoping for a spark—on MixerDates, you already know there’s something in common.
When you’re already on the same page with your date, flirting comes more easily. There’s less of that awkward, “Are we even on the same wavelength?” feeling, and more of the fun, “Wow, we really click!” vibe. Whether you’re talking about favorite hobbies, movies, or life goals, the conversation flows naturally, making the flirting feel effortless.
If you're looking for a place to meet like-minded people and build genuine connections, MixerDates is the perfect platform. It's a great place to find someone who appreciates you for who you are and who you can naturally flirt with, without the stress.
Flirting on a first date is all about confidence, connection, and fun. When you let go of the pressure and focus on enjoying the experience, the chemistry will naturally follow. Remember, the best way to flirt is by being yourself—let your personality shine through, listen with intention, and embrace the moment.
And if you’re ready to meet someone new, who’s just as interested in making a connection as you are, MixerDates is the perfect place to start. So go ahead, take the leap, and see where it leads. Who knows? Your next great connection might be just a click away.
Sign up for MixerDates today and start your journey to exciting first dates and meaningful connections!
Please consider the histroy of humanity from biological perpsecitve and current known fact in nearby universe, which expo-planet (from the Sol system perspective) is most likely to have civlizaed society? Please add percentage next to it in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanet civilization likelihoodを28 秒行う
Evaluating planetary prospects
OK, I’m looking at the likelihood of a civilized society on an exoplanet within our Solar System. I’ll consider biological history and current space knowledge, aiming to identify the most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from our Solar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard's Star, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1, focusing on their habitable zones and available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilized society likelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m noting key exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which have Earth-like characteristics and are in habitable zones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advanced civilizations.
I'm gathering info on planets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, considering factors like magnetic fields, atmospheres, and proximity to G-type stars for their potential to support advanced civilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despite being close and around a red dwarf star, might support life if it has a magnetic field and atmosphere. This makes me think about its potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimating civilization probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculative percentages based on the Drake equation and the lack of evidence for intelligent life.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names and civilization likelihood percentages, grounded in the long timeline of life's evolution, despite the speculative nature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering their star types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advanced civilizations from our solar system's viewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due to its closeness and observational potential, despite concerns about its flare star dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'm focusing on exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, and K2-18b, aiming to chart their likelihood of hosting a civilized society based on current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society, considering Earth's long biological history.
Refining odds
I'm considering the astronomical timeline for intelligent life on Earth, leading me to assign even lower speculative odds for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrary percentages, clearly noting the speculative nature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience's basic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrary percentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculative nature, and ensuring the data is accessible for young audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating a markdown table with speculative percentages for the likelihood of civilized life on exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoretical nature and considering the understanding level of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mapping out a markdown chart with speculative percentages for the likelihood of a civilized society on exoplanets, mindful of the complexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecing together markdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b's reduced civilized life chance due to the red dwarf's activity. This inclusion highlights the speculative nature of the analysis.
Piecing together speculative odds
I’m detailing a markdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanet likelihoods, considering environmental challenges and adding a disclaimer about the speculative nature and lack of evidence.
Piecing together
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b for its proximity and silent star, but I’ll add a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advanced civilizations' hypothetical likelihood.
Assessing civilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligent life on Earth, which suggests that the odds of any habitable planet developing a complex civilization might be as low as a few percent.
Below is a very speculative chart that—based on what we know about Earth’s long, winding path from simple life to a “civilized society” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives some fun, made‑up percentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists have not yet found any proof of life (let alone advanced civilizations) on any exoplanet. These numbers are just playful estimates to help you think about the ideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an Advanced Civilization on Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet Estimated Likelihood of a Civilized Society
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
How Did We (Very Roughly) Guess These Numbers?
Earth’s Example:
On Earth, life began as simple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that built complex societies. This long journey suggests that—even if a planet is in the “habitable zone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilized society might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
This is the closest exoplanet to us. Even though its star (Proxima Centauri) is a red dwarf that sometimes sends out strong flares (which might harm life), its closeness makes it one of our most interesting candidates. That’s why we give it a slightly higher guess (~2%).
These planets are part of a group orbiting a very cool star. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaning one side always faces the star), so the chance of a complex, advanced civilization might be a bit lower.
LHS 1140 b:
This planet is promising in some ways but is a little farther away and around a dimmer star, so our playful estimate is even lower.
All of these percentages are extremely rough guesses based on what little we understand about the conditions for life and intelligence. Scientists use ideas like the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concrete evidence, these numbers remain just for fun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring these ideas—and remember, space is full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equation itself and see if this euqation is acculate or more opition in the equation you will use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation's value
OK, let me see. The Drake Equation isn't a precise formula; it's more of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrial civilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluating its conceptual nature, its uncertain parameters, and its criticism to conclude on its reliability as an accurate predictive model.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mapping out the Drake Equation as a conceptual guide, detailing its parameters, which are often based on estimates or opinions, to evaluate its reliability for predicting extraterrestrial civilizations.
The Drake Equation is a famous formula that was created to help scientists think about the many factors involved in estimating the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy. However, when we look at the equation closely, we see that it is more of a conceptual framework or heuristic tool than a precise, predictive formula. Let’s break down why:
The equation is usually written as:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of those stars that have planetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The average number of planets that could potentially support life per star with planets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of those planets where life actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction of planets with life where intelligent life evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction of civilizations that develop technology that releases detectable signals into space.
𝐿
L: The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals.
Why the Drake Equation Is More of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction of stars with planets), have become better known through modern astronomy.
The parameters related to the development of life and intelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—are based on very limited data. For example, Earth is the only planet we know where life has developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for these factors. This means that the values chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of Possible Values:
Because many of these factors are not well-constrained, if you change one of the more uncertain parameters even slightly, the final estimate for
𝑁
N (the number of civilizations) can vary by many orders of magnitude. This wide range shows that the equation can lead to very different outcomes based on personal or theoretical assumptions.
The Drake Equation was never meant to provide a precise answer. Instead, it serves as a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrial civilizations. It encourages discussion about the relative importance of different factors and highlights where our scientific knowledge is limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate or More Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In the sense of being a strict mathematical model with well-defined inputs and predictable outputs, the Drake Equation is not accurate. Its accuracy is limited by the extreme uncertainties in several of its key parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning the evolution of life and intelligence, are based on opinion, interpretation, and the single example of Earth. Therefore, while the structure of the equation is logical, the numbers you put into it (and hence the final result) are often more reflective of our current opinions and assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equation is a valuable tool for framing the question of extraterrestrial life. It helps scientists and enthusiasts break down a complex problem into smaller, more manageable questions. However, because several of its factors are highly uncertain and subject to personal interpretation, it is more of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of the number of extraterrestrial civilizations.
In summary, while the Drake Equation is useful for thinking about the various factors that might lead to the emergence of a civilization, its outputs should be taken as highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the long history of Sol system and nearby planets and see if there is any possiblites that in one time intelligent life emerged in nearby planets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-human intelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-human intelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligent life forms in the Sol system and neighboring planets, and how this might factor into the equation.
Piecing together possibilities
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligent life, possibly on Mars or Europa, into the Drake Equation for the Sol system and neighboring planets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligent life emerging on Mars or Venus, though Earth remains the only known life-supporting planet in the solar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligent life could have emerged on planets like Mars, Venus, or Europa, and how this possibility aligns with the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligent life on Mars or Venus could intersect with the assumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems to focus solely on Earth-based evolution.
I’m piecing together the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligent life in the solar system. Mars, Venus, and Titan present challenges, but Europa and Enceladus might harbor microbial life.
Please consider the histroy of humanity from biological perpsecitve and current known fact in nearby universe, which expo-planet (from the Sol system perspective) is most likely to have civlizaed society? Please add percentage next to it in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanet civilization likelihoodを28 秒行う
Evaluating planetary prospects
OK, I’m looking at the likelihood of a civilized society on an exoplanet within our Solar System. I’ll consider biological history and current space knowledge, aiming to identify the most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from our Solar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard's Star, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1, focusing on their habitable zones and available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilized society likelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m noting key exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which have Earth-like characteristics and are in habitable zones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advanced civilizations.
I'm gathering info on planets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, considering factors like magnetic fields, atmospheres, and proximity to G-type stars for their potential to support advanced civilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despite being close and around a red dwarf star, might support life if it has a magnetic field and atmosphere. This makes me think about its potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimating civilization probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculative percentages based on the Drake equation and the lack of evidence for intelligent life.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names and civilization likelihood percentages, grounded in the long timeline of life's evolution, despite the speculative nature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering their star types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advanced civilizations from our solar system's viewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due to its closeness and observational potential, despite concerns about its flare star dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'm focusing on exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, and K2-18b, aiming to chart their likelihood of hosting a civilized society based on current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society, considering Earth's long biological history.
Refining odds
I'm considering the astronomical timeline for intelligent life on Earth, leading me to assign even lower speculative odds for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrary percentages, clearly noting the speculative nature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience's basic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrary percentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculative nature, and ensuring the data is accessible for young audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating a markdown table with speculative percentages for the likelihood of civilized life on exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoretical nature and considering the understanding level of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mapping out a markdown chart with speculative percentages for the likelihood of a civilized society on exoplanets, mindful of the complexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecing together markdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b's reduced civilized life chance due to the red dwarf's activity. This inclusion highlights the speculative nature of the analysis.
Piecing together speculative odds
I’m detailing a markdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanet likelihoods, considering environmental challenges and adding a disclaimer about the speculative nature and lack of evidence.
Piecing together
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b for its proximity and silent star, but I’ll add a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advanced civilizations' hypothetical likelihood.
Assessing civilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligent life on Earth, which suggests that the odds of any habitable planet developing a complex civilization might be as low as a few percent.
Below is a very speculative chart that—based on what we know about Earth’s long, winding path from simple life to a “civilized society” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives some fun, made‑up percentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists have not yet found any proof of life (let alone advanced civilizations) on any exoplanet. These numbers are just playful estimates to help you think about the ideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an Advanced Civilization on Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet Estimated Likelihood of a Civilized Society
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
How Did We (Very Roughly) Guess These Numbers?
Earth’s Example:
On Earth, life began as simple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that built complex societies. This long journey suggests that—even if a planet is in the “habitable zone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilized society might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
This is the closest exoplanet to us. Even though its star (Proxima Centauri) is a red dwarf that sometimes sends out strong flares (which might harm life), its closeness makes it one of our most interesting candidates. That’s why we give it a slightly higher guess (~2%).
These planets are part of a group orbiting a very cool star. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaning one side always faces the star), so the chance of a complex, advanced civilization might be a bit lower.
LHS 1140 b:
This planet is promising in some ways but is a little farther away and around a dimmer star, so our playful estimate is even lower.
All of these percentages are extremely rough guesses based on what little we understand about the conditions for life and intelligence. Scientists use ideas like the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concrete evidence, these numbers remain just for fun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring these ideas—and remember, space is full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equation itself and see if this euqation is acculate or more opition in the equation you will use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation's value
OK, let me see. The Drake Equation isn't a precise formula; it's more of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrial civilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluating its conceptual nature, its uncertain parameters, and its criticism to conclude on its reliability as an accurate predictive model.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mapping out the Drake Equation as a conceptual guide, detailing its parameters, which are often based on estimates or opinions, to evaluate its reliability for predicting extraterrestrial civilizations.
The Drake Equation is a famous formula that was created to help scientists think about the many factors involved in estimating the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy. However, when we look at the equation closely, we see that it is more of a conceptual framework or heuristic tool than a precise, predictive formula. Let’s break down why:
The equation is usually written as:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of those stars that have planetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The average number of planets that could potentially support life per star with planets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of those planets where life actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction of planets with life where intelligent life evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction of civilizations that develop technology that releases detectable signals into space.
𝐿
L: The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals.
Why the Drake Equation Is More of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction of stars with planets), have become better known through modern astronomy.
The parameters related to the development of life and intelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—are based on very limited data. For example, Earth is the only planet we know where life has developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for these factors. This means that the values chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of Possible Values:
Because many of these factors are not well-constrained, if you change one of the more uncertain parameters even slightly, the final estimate for
𝑁
N (the number of civilizations) can vary by many orders of magnitude. This wide range shows that the equation can lead to very different outcomes based on personal or theoretical assumptions.
The Drake Equation was never meant to provide a precise answer. Instead, it serves as a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrial civilizations. It encourages discussion about the relative importance of different factors and highlights where our scientific knowledge is limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate or More Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In the sense of being a strict mathematical model with well-defined inputs and predictable outputs, the Drake Equation is not accurate. Its accuracy is limited by the extreme uncertainties in several of its key parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning the evolution of life and intelligence, are based on opinion, interpretation, and the single example of Earth. Therefore, while the structure of the equation is logical, the numbers you put into it (and hence the final result) are often more reflective of our current opinions and assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equation is a valuable tool for framing the question of extraterrestrial life. It helps scientists and enthusiasts break down a complex problem into smaller, more manageable questions. However, because several of its factors are highly uncertain and subject to personal interpretation, it is more of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of the number of extraterrestrial civilizations.
In summary, while the Drake Equation is useful for thinking about the various factors that might lead to the emergence of a civilization, its outputs should be taken as highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the long history of Sol system and nearby planets and see if there is any possiblites that in one time intelligent life emerged in nearby planets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-human intelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-human intelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligent life forms in the Sol system and neighboring planets, and how this might factor into the equation.
Piecing together possibilities
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligent life, possibly on Mars or Europa, into the Drake Equation for the Sol system and neighboring planets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligent life emerging on Mars or Venus, though Earth remains the only known life-supporting planet in the solar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligent life could have emerged on planets like Mars, Venus, or Europa, and how this possibility aligns with the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligent life on Mars or Venus could intersect with the assumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems to focus solely on Earth-based evolution.
I’m piecing together the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligent life in the solar system. Mars, Venus, and Titan present challenges, but Europa and Enceladus might harbor microbial life.
