You have to be "clever" to solve classical mechanics problems using Newtonian methods, and I kinda prided myself on my cleverness through high school/college. But in grad school, my intermediate dynamics/advanced dynamics prof taught us a very important principle: don't be clever
Conversation
Using Newton means getting clever with coordinate frames and algebraic manipulations. But 80% of it can be automatically done by Lagrangian formulation. Occasionally you still have to use Newton's laws directly to incorporate tricky constraints and non-conservative forces.
1
4
But as you get older and less good at being clever, applying Newton's laws no longer feels like virtuoso pleasure at doing an unnecessary difficult thing. You prefer plug-and-play brain dead easy of lagrangian equations. And as problems get harder, you *need* them to solve at all
1
5
Spoiler alert: the story ended with pure automation. CAD packages that can do all classical mechanics calculations for you are descended from Lagrangian version of Newton's laws (specifically a very modern 20th century version called Kane's equations that's ideal for computers)
1
1
7
General project management is currently at the Newton level. Or pre-Boyd fighter tactics level. It needs to get to the Kane's equations/E-M+OODA level. And the effect of getting there will feel like "automating caring" (2) so you can devote all your energy to truth+pleasure (1+3)
1
4
10
Now back to my regularly scheduled procrastination and neglect of PM backlog of activities and pretending doing a thread on twitter crosses off the "make this spreadsheet" to-do on that to-do list which is itself sinking under a pile of entropy.
1
9
Addendum: this approach should be called "designing for cowpaths" as in the UX heuristic of "pave the cowpaths." That only works if the original design was sensible enough as a potential field that the emergent cowpaths finish the job. Design the project to need no management.
1
2
11
Cowpath-only paving like crash-only programming.
1
8
Follow-on thread
Quote Tweet
61. "Project managing" network effects twitter.com/vgr/status/140
Show this thread
1
Replying to
I'm skeptical. PERT/CPM is really old conceptual machinery and not quite appropriate for what I'm going after here.
Replying to
The guiding principle is the same as you define here ->
twitter.com/vgr/status/140
The "science" is to ensure that the most important work is done in least time.
"In least time" is a pure scheduling problem. It's an optimisation on available time.
Quote Tweet
The formula to automate a project management "caring" layer is simple to state but hard to execute:
1. Separate the PM into "science" and "human factors" components
2. Build a potential-field theory of the "science" part to get rid of the arbitrary playbooks
3. UX the rest
Show this thread
1
Replying to
Well, that's an interesting direction to explore for sure, though not the one I'd go after.
1
Show replies

