Inspired By an Owl's Head
What do I need to cultivate?
I Turned From the Building and Left
I still had that pulling sensation in my right hip. I wondered if the Bay would help. What do I need to cultivate? Perhaps I should simply go and visit the Bay.
I knew that I was making moves to keep the fire burning. This was a good thing to celebrate, and from which, create art.
I still feel pulling in my right hip
I wonder if my daily changes will help.
What do I need to cultivate?
I need to visit my new situation. And keep fires burning.
You are making moves and that is good. You know that this is a good thing you’re doing. Celebrate, and create art.
Tuesday
- Today’s goal: one hour of exercise.
- Tai Chi = 22 min, 19 sec
- Qigong = 21 min, 1 sec
- Power Walk = 1 hr, 5 sec
- TOTAL = 103 min, 25 sec
- Drank 60oz of water.
Wednesday
Today’s goal: drink 2 liters of water (67.6 ounces)
Today’s water total = 78 ounces
Connect to Your Whole Self: I am rooted in who I am. My branches do not define me.
- Cordycep & B-Complex taken
- Requested my absentee ballot
- Census completed
- Washed dishes 3 separate times
- Quigong. At home. 8 min, 22 sec.
Inspired By Me, tai chi in the park. 34 minutes. Random "Tai Chi" followed by "Indigenous" music playlists on Spotify.
I made nicecream, inspired by one of my favorite vegan channels, Healthy Crazy Cool. I used a coconut based creamer with bananas, dates, blueberries...blended and froze. It came out so good.
Thursday
Today’s goal: drink three cups of tea.
I only had two. Tomorrow’s the day.
Meditation
- Ground and Soothe Yourself. Ground, breathe, soothe.
- Cordyceps & B-complex. Taken.
- Dishes. Done
- Home brewed iced tea. Made.
Janji: Call to Challenge (3)
Vinegar Hill to Red Hook
3 miles. 53 min, 3 sec
Friday
Today’s goal: 3 cups of tea
Completed: all home brewed and iced
Meditation
On Healing Trauma and the Four Bodies. “My healing is a journey.” @ogorchukwuu
- Journey incense. Lit
- Cordyceps & B-complex. Taken.
- Dishes. Done X2.
Ran 1.83 miles to meet a friend in Owl's Head Park. I did bagua with her. I'm still not exactly sure what bagua is, and perhaps I should have done my research. But I trust my friend. We're co-workers as well, and ride the same bus. So she has seen me do tai chi, sun salutations, and meditate. She has been after me to try bagua for three years.
We circled around a tree. My friend listened to her app, and I listened to indigenous drumming. Every so often she would instruct me to change directions, or alter the positioning of my hands.
After thirty five minutes, I had to step off. I either lost my concentration, or focus, or both. But I refused to quit. I knew that she had 20 minutes left, so I spent the rest of my time stretching, and doing tai chi.
It was amazing, beautiful, and I loved it.
I also dropped the latest "My Inner Kaz" podcast episode, in which I spoke more of my bagua experience.
Episode 11 - Friend, Neighbor, Co-worker
I am feeling tired but good. I feel like I got rest. I feel good sore from yesterday's run.
I feel protective of my heart, and my alone time. I feel protective of myself since no one else will do that for me.
I am the one who stops myself. Although my fears have grown since COVID started.
I'm afraid of having that thing shoved up my nose. I don't want anything shoved up my nose.
About the Creator
Karen Lichtman
Plant based. Runner. Young widow.
Keep reading
More stories from Karen Lichtman and writers in Longevity and other communities.
Day 4 of Quitting
If this is how sobriety feels, maybe it’s better to go through life a little buzzed… this, along with other hits like, I want to kill myself, I wish I was dead, and I’m going to throw myself off a bridge have been the only thoughts on rotation these past few days. I promise myself that if, in a month, I still feel like this (‘this’ meaning despondent, full of rage, and simultaneously numb) I can go back to smoking. Until mid-February though? Nicotine is off the table.
By sleepy drafts7 days ago in Longevity
The Return of the Aircraft Carrier Truman Is Being Seen as a Snub to the Navy in the War of the Future
The return of the U.S. aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman to active deployment has sparked debate far beyond naval circles. While some see it as a show of enduring American naval power, others interpret the move as a symbolic snub—particularly in the context of how modern warfare is rapidly evolving. In an era dominated by drones, cyber warfare, hypersonic missiles, and artificial intelligence, the decision to once again lean heavily on a traditional aircraft carrier has raised uncomfortable questions about whether the Navy is preparing for the wars of tomorrow or clinging to the strategies of yesterday. A Floating Symbol of 20th-Century Power For decades, aircraft carriers have been the ultimate symbol of U.S. military dominance. These massive floating airbases project power thousands of miles from American shores and allow the U.S. to strike almost anywhere in the world. The Truman, like other Nimitz-class carriers, represents this legacy—housing nearly 5,000 sailors, dozens of fighter jets, and unmatched logistical capability. However, critics argue that what once made carriers indispensable now makes them vulnerable. Their sheer size, cost, and visibility turn them into high-value targets in a battlefield increasingly defined by precision strikes and long-range weapons. The “War of the Future” Looks Very Different Modern conflict is no longer limited to sea, land, and air. Cyber attacks can cripple infrastructure without a single shot fired. Drones can swarm targets at a fraction of the cost of traditional aircraft. Hypersonic missiles can reach targets faster than current defenses can respond. In this context, sending a massive carrier strike group into contested waters can appear less like a strategic necessity and more like a risky gamble. Critics argue that the return of the Truman reflects an outdated mindset—one that prioritizes visible force projection over adaptability and technological evolution. A Snub to Naval Innovation? Many analysts and serving officers believe the Navy’s future lies in distributed lethality—smaller, more agile platforms networked together, harder to detect and cheaper to replace. Unmanned surface vessels, autonomous submarines, and land-based missile systems are increasingly viewed as the backbone of next-generation naval warfare. Against this backdrop, recommitting to a traditional carrier is seen by some as sidelining innovation. It sends a message that, despite years of discussion about transformation, the Navy still defaults to familiar tools when tensions rise. This perception has led to frustration among those advocating for faster modernization. They argue that resources devoted to maintaining and protecting carriers like the Truman could instead accelerate investment in emerging technologies that are more relevant to future conflicts. The Strategic Signal to Allies and Rivals Supporters of the decision counter that the Truman’s return is not about nostalgia—it’s about deterrence. Aircraft carriers remain powerful political tools. Their presence reassures allies, signals commitment, and demonstrates readiness in a way few other assets can. Yet even here, the message is mixed. To technologically advanced rivals, the deployment may signal predictability rather than strength. Adversaries have spent years developing strategies specifically designed to neutralize carriers, including anti-ship ballistic missiles and advanced surveillance systems. Cost Versus Capability The financial reality cannot be ignored. A single carrier strike group costs billions of dollars to build, maintain, and operate. In contrast, drone fleets and missile systems can be produced and deployed at a much lower cost, often with greater strategic flexibility. Critics argue that continuing to rely on carriers drains resources from areas where the Navy needs to grow most urgently. In a future conflict defined by speed, dispersion, and digital dominance, the cost-benefit equation of aircraft carriers looks increasingly questionable. Why the Carrier Still Matters—For Now Despite the criticism, aircraft carriers are not obsolete—yet. They remain unmatched in their ability to sustain prolonged air operations without relying on foreign bases. In regions where access is limited or politically sensitive, carriers still provide options no other platform can. The real issue, many experts say, is not the existence of carriers like the Truman, but over-reliance on them. Using them as one component of a broader, more flexible strategy may still make sense. Treating them as the centerpiece of future war planning may not. A Turning Point for Naval Strategy The return of the USS Harry S. Truman highlights a deeper tension within modern military thinking. It represents a crossroads between tradition and transformation, between proven power and emerging threats. Whether history views this moment as a wise assertion of strength or a missed opportunity for innovation will depend on what comes next. If the Navy pairs legacy platforms with bold technological change, the carrier’s return may be justified. If not, it risks becoming a powerful symbol—not of dominance, but of reluctance to adapt in a rapidly changing world.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 2 days ago in Longevity
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.