Knowing which lifestyle improvements to make (1)
I enjoy and endorse the many recent articles on, for want of a better phrase, lifestyle improvements. Better diet, more exercise, more creativity, more socialising, positive thinking and so on. However, the proposals are statistical in nature and probably written by researchers under 60. As one ages past 70, there is an increasing awareness that life is binary, not statistical (27 December 2025, p 36).
My wife exceeded me in all of the above measures: diet, exercise, creativity and social life. Yet at the end of 2024, aged 77, she died from pancreatic cancer. This isn’t a plea for sympathy, nor a suggestion to reduce or change the lifestyle recommendations. It is merely a request that everyone be aware that no amount of lifestyle improvements will ultimately defeat the binary nature of life.
Knowing which lifestyle improvements to make (2)
In recent issues of 快猫短视频, I have learned that I might improve my biological and/or mental health by a variety of methods 鈥� exercise, fermented foods, deep rest, cold-water swimming, deep breathing, gardening and stargazing. The obvious question is whether any combination of some or all of these would have a cumulative effect. Personally, the question is academic, as I have reached 94 years of age without doing any of the above, apart from playing squash into my mid-70s.
Is there purpose behind the laws we discover?
Much is made of the deep principles that appear to generate elegance in the universe. Yet what remains striking isn’t just that the cosmos is orderly, but that it is intelligible 鈥� describable by abstract mathematics that the human mind can readily grasp. This remarkable correspondence between thought and reality raises a quiet question: is such coherence adequately explained by impersonal processes alone, or does it hint at purpose behind the laws we uncover? As physics progresses, it seems we encounter not randomness beneath appearances, but ever deeper and more comprehensible order (17 January, p 28).
On the science and spirituality of nature
Richard Smyth’s article “Our true nature” is a valuable corrective to overly mystical interpretations of nature and the claim that a “sense of oneness with nature” is associated with “greater spirituality” and scepticism about “science over faith”. I contend that while science informs and expands our knowledge and love of nature, spirituality, in the sense of connection to something greater than oneself, may emerge unbidden from it, rather than being bolted on. We might experience it through individual proclivity, or even as a beneficial evolutionary trait, which enhances apprehension of our dependency on nature in all its beauty and violence (10 January, p 19).
The struggles of comparing cars
Ian Smith criticises my comparison of modern SUVs with older small cars. But I didn’t make that comparison. Rather, it was made by Anthony Laverty in his opinion piece. I simply pointed out that, counterintuitively, the switch in public preference had probably led to a substantial reduction in fossil-fuel consumption. In my personal experience, that was indeed the case (Letters, 10 January).
Smith suggests that I should instead compare my Audi Q5 with a “smaller, modern diesel hatchback”. A major problem with his suggestion is that such a vehicle doesn’t seem to exist. Looking through the list of new cars available in Australia, put out by our major motoring association, I cannot find a single diesel hatchback. The class is overwhelmingly petrol, with a praiseworthy sprinkling of hybrids and EVs.
Why we can't escape the simulation
Some letter writers seem to have missed some of the implications of living in a simulation. It is provably impossible to detect that we are in a simulation. Should anyone discover a “fact” that reveals the simulation, the system admin can stop the run, edit out the rogue fact and restart from a backup (Letters, 17 January).
In a simulation, events can unhappen. We can’t rely on the laws of physics to reveal flaws in the simulation, because we don’t know anything about them. We only have access to a simulation of them. We can’t use the complexity of the calculations needed, either. The simulation isn’t necessarily running in real time. We have only our perception of time passing. We don’t even know with any certainty whether the “real” universe possesses a property analogous to time or what limitations there are on computing capabilities. Neither the real nor simulated realities are in any way constrained by our inability to understand them.
Small changes only produce small effects
Paul Whiteley writes about the value of small changes in averting the climate crisis. But small changes, however much they are multiplied, produce only small effects. If every person and business in the world were to reduce their energy consumption by 1 per cent, the global decrease in energy consumption would be just that 鈥� only 1 per cent (Letters, 10 January).
Yes, we need to do the small and easy things, but we mustn’t let that lead to complacency about the need to do the large and difficult things. The small things are necessary, but they aren’t sufficient.
Reflecting sunshine away from Earth
The article on Reflect Orbital’s plan to use satellites to provide sunshine on demand raises the at least equal chance of reflecting sunshine away from Earth, which would be far more desirable to reduce global warming. The areas that should be the first to be shaded should be areas with the most rapid ice cap melting, since reflectivity of ice is much higher than that of the darker, more heat-absorbing ocean beneath (3 January, p 11).
For the record
The Bornean orangutan pictured is named Badul (27 January, p 7).