#why did i get the saw autism instead of idk math | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

autisticlee · 3 months

Text

a fewish years ago (maybe 4) I learned what DID is and about systems and plurality all that stuff. I met a few systems and even befriended one. I learned a but through just talking to them, but they're so lovely and I loved them a lot, so I did research to get to know them better. I felt like I could somehow relate quite a bit to a lot of the stuff, not all, but wasn't sure how to put it into words. I tried to words to my friend, but they said it sounds different from their experience so it's not DID. I agreed and pushed it to the back of my mind. I didn't want to say the wrong thing and offend them if i tried to drag it on. especially since I couldn't figure out how to words. they told me about some of their experience and knowledge. they knew they were a system and switched with alters for most of their life and others thought they were playing pretend.

I just shared a brain with some weird little guys that I called "characters" for lack of better word that I sometimes was? but might have just made them up? and conversed with them but also was them? like they were a mask I put on? but not willingly like playing pretend? and they're still here? but what if it is all pretend? see, words are hard.

(this got very long rambly so I hide it here)

on twitter in the autism community I was browsing through, I saw many systems. some of their posts about their alters and stuff felt relatable but I wasn't sure how or still. there was a mutual I had who posted about "choosing" to be a system? or finding one something idk. anyway, they told me one day they're a system now so I might not be talking to "them" sometimes, because they have multiple "thems" basically. so I thought oh, why don't I try talking to this person about my experience, since they're new to this and trying to figure themselves out. maybe we can learn together or something. I said something like you might be talking to different "mes" as well, but i'm still trying to figure out if i'm imagining it or my brain is just very inconsistent or something.

instead of getting a curious or kind or reciprocal response like I expected, they instead got very offended. they told me to research about systems and stuff because I clearly knew nothing. then immediately tried to end the conversation, but i continued. I told them I did a bunch of research already after meeting my one close friend who is a system so I could learn about them and we talked about it together as well, which is how I realized I related, but my experience was a little different from theirs, so I'm now trying to figure out what that experience is and means. their response to that was just "......okay?" my turn to be offended.

that's such a rude response. I don't care if you thought I was trying to offend you or something. i was being sincere and honest and trying to open up because you're clearly more new to this than me (based on their posts I saw) so why not explore together, but they just 🙄 (especially offended that they posted about "choosing" to become a system, (my research resulted in you can't choose it tho? so idk) but then acted super rude to someone questioning??? the math isn't mathing with this one!) then after i didn't respond for a while, because how does one respond to that, they ended the conversation again saying they're going to bed. so I never spoke to them again because I don't appreciate people responding to me like that lmao. (cant remember specifics of the convo so it's very paraphrased but you get the idea)

this experience has just resulted in me not wanting to talk about this to anyone so I don't ~offend~ people by saying the wrong thing. i've seen other systems get mad at people questioning. since it seems most common to just know what you are from early childhood or something so anyone learning of it later in life is clearly faking. i've only thought I was faking and making it up my whole life, because what if I am? I always assumed I was.

I don't have that "one bug trauma moment" that is necessary for DID, nor do I have huge memory loss episodes/amnesia/whatever the correct term is. at least not that I'm aware of. I remember most of my childhood. I just have a bunch of cptsd and autistic/adhd memory issues and everything is fuzzy or out of order if I try to remember it. certain times I can remember random vivid childhood memories, other times its very fuzzy. but that's probably normal. so not DID obviously.

for a while, I wrongly assumed that's the only cause of plurality. I came across another dissociative disorder that can cause it. OSDD can do it but not a severely as DID apparently. i'm not diagnosing myself or even saying "I think i have this" just saying there's possibly an explanation out there for my experience of I keep digging and also figure out what this brain is doing. I didnt do deep research on OSDD. only looked at differences from DID mainly when I took a break at work. there could be other things that are similar. i'll look more into it if I remember and feel like it.

anyway, this is super disjointed and I keep rambling off topic. so my experience has been dissociating out of my mind my whole life but never knowing what it was for the longest time until fairly recently probably. out of body experiences where someone else controls the body, not feeling real or connected to reality, the world not feeling real, etc. the cptsd from being autistic and chronically bullied by every single classmate, friends being abusive bullies, teachers treating me like some good for nothing criminal. and family being the typical overbearing, poor, catholic, conservative household that bests you for doing things wrong, doesn't allow closed doors, berates you for everything, and never has anything nice to say, etc. you know the type, right? f

or 10 years I went to catholic school with the same group of 30ish kids who all hated me and made sure I knew it daily. I was undiagnosed autistic and those snobby rich catholic kids hated anyone different. I befriended the other couple semi-bullied kids, but turned out they weren't real friends and bullied and abused me worse than the other kids, but I was forced to make friends so they were my only choice (I got calls home resulting in getting screamed at when I got home, and sent to the principal nun so many times to get screamed at for not making friends or talking. it was great!)

being autistic and treated like a piece of garbage was traumatizing, but overtime continuous. not One Big Moment which is usually the cause of dissociative disorders from what i've heard I think. as well as being forced to wear the uniform dresses and skirts, parents forcing girly stuff on me and making me be girly, other kids treating me incorrectly/how I didn't want to be treated because "girl" and not feeling Gender enough but not having any lgbt knowledge didn't help at all (I was very uncomfy and got yelled at for wearing shorts "that are only for boys" and got my things stolen—pokemon keychains on bookbag, dragon ball action figures— or destroyed—another pokemon keychain, a pokemon sticker on pencil case— because "only boys can like that/it's not for girls!" so many of these experiences....) so anyway, being autistic (and adhd too) and some kind of gender gremlin (have settled on nonbinary now) led to me naturally trying to mask as a survival instinct to try to fit in, make everyone happy, and try to stop the bullying and abuse and all that. it obviously didn't work. nothing changed lmao. things like this led to me not knowing who I was. this still goes into today. I still don't know who I am or who i'm supposed to be. I have different versions of me. but I never knew which was "me" or if they're all me? at some point I had to stop and think....what ARE these different versions of me who all have different types of personalities, different likes and dislikes, different ways of talking and acting, etc. why do i seem to constantly contradict myself? how can I love something one day and hate it the next? it's like there's different little guys living in my brain and we share this meat slab. but maybe it's my childhood imagination and they are characters I made up and am acting out. maybe they are autistic masks I made. different personas for different times and experiences that for some reason don't dissipate and keep piling up. maybe they're....something else?

at some point at a young age, I became someone else, so to say. don't recall it being a conscious choice. just something that was kinds always there. there's evidence if them in my diary I had when I was around 5 years old. there's drawings of them together with "old me" and other "mes" that came after. they weren't treated like ocs, but I didn't know what else to call them so I always referred to them as "characters" even though I am "characters"

the first one that "became" doesn't have what I recall as a beginning. they just kinda "were" ?? I think they kind of took over and took the lead and tried to help me is one way you can put it. they weren't exactly "me" like the original me? but was still me? their name was Lilly. or I was Lilly? I told people to call me Lilly (they didn't. except a friend who wanted to play pretend and i gave her a pretend name. but she got bored and stopped after one summer. Lilly remained) I wasn't always Lilly. sometimes I was just that nameless and voiceless kid who was lost and just wanted to become one with nature away from people. the one I was "supposed" to be. the one that *deadname* was supposed to be? so Lilly took over for a while. but it was still hard. they didn't do the best job. but tried very hard and was able to speak a little unlike "the original" of like to say. so....of this is a plurality situation and not just me running a huge pretend hoax, I think i'm Lilly. i've changed my name and grew up a lot since 5. i'm Lee. i'm the "main personality" you could say. the one that usually is in charge of what this meat slab does and who people talk to....or....I'm very much questioning everything right now i'm sorry...

well, at some point, piercen popped up. piercen was the "innocent," "free spirit," and "silly/goofy" personality. the part of me that was sick of gender and didn't want one but didn't know how to express that. the part that just wanted to laugh and have fun and be silly and do what I enjoyed and ignore the stress Lilly was bearing. i generally always serious and depressed, but there was that piercen side that could still laugh and make jokes when Lilly was done crying.

maybe around 10 years old I want to say, Talia appeared. she was adventurous I guess. the dreaded puberty nonsense started and it freaked me (or us?) out. Talia took care of that the best she could. she shouldered it. she took over for a bit because Lilly was exhausted and broken. she was similar to Lilly in her role i suppose? while Lilly was a bit more rebellious, Talia gave in more to try to make people happy. but that didn't work too well....

ok I feel like im trying to write for someone else right now 😅 there's more of them too, but i'll stop there. I think a point was made of I was even trying to make on. but,,,,,this is supposed to be "me" but it feels so "other" at the same time. there is a disconnect between these "other mes" where they don't all feel like "me" because they are all so different from each other??? how can I like and dislike things at the same time? I don't like to wear girl clothes, it makes me uncomfy because reasons and I prefer neutral. but one of these "mes" loves cute "girly" outfits and keeps sneaking them into my cart when I buy stuff and then wears it and wants to shlw it off, but I feel like I have to hide it....that contradictory nonsense doesn't make sense of its just me in this brain. so thats one big reason i'm very questioning. there's other things too like taste in music and foods and etc.

they are, however, more connected than DID alters. those are completely disconnected or separate as in have their own memories and experiences. for me, the memories and experiences are more shared and not completely separate? there's less separation in experiences? but it still feels fuzzy between sometimes? like tryinf to write for Talia about her motives and role and stuff doesn't seem to work? like she'd need to do that herself? but yeah, it's more like a bunch of gremlins are sitting in a room togther and switching between who gets to play the video game, while the rest watch over their shoulder and backseat constantly. or a car full of people who switch between who drives and backseat constantly. they share the experience, mostly secondhand? and have their own opinions about where to go and what to do and what music to play and etc. but sometimes one wanders off idk. that's how the weird little gremlins inside my head feel to me.

are they me and i'm making this up? or are they them and i must accept them? i've tried talking to and connecting to them as i've seen suggested. either they are in there or i'm imaging this whole things and making it up 😅 who knows...I never talk about this (besides casual mentions of my brain gremlins) because WHAT IF IT IS ALL JUST PRETEND. I don't want to offend another system unintentionally. other people will judge or be very weirded out. i'm afraid i'm just faking for some reason. as a weirdass coping mechanism because I wasn't able to develop a real personality or something. how do you know the difference fdhddnssn am I even real? who am I? what am I? 😭

#lee rambles #just needed to get it out somehow in words but is so hard #how many times can i use the word “something” in a sentence. words hard. so filler words everywhere #what is brain doing???? dont know #mentioned casually to therapist few times but why not share to strangers on internet fhfdhddj #this has taken 4 hours to type. WORDS HARD. BUT CANT SLEEP 😭😭😭#ahhhhh what doooooooo #“lee” tired and done typing. only eepy baby gremlin awake. but what if they all fake and i make them up.....scary. lonely without... ah.#what if cry....ah. don't like. too wet. stuffy nose. want sleep. 😭#if they real...if me real....me “original” give “lee” controls. me “wrenn” but what if not real....ah. headache. try sleep now.

1 note · View note

testblogplzignore · 3 years

Text

Consider a coffee that is completely insulated at both ends such that

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial x} T(0,t) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x} T(h,t) =0 \)

Can you apply separation of variables?

This could work considering how non physical my other one was

\( T(x,0) = T_1, 0\leq x<h\) and \( T_2, x=h \)

to represent the ice cube which instantly melts. The problem I have with this before doing the integrating over a single point always gives zero. So I’m going to adjust it by a small amount \( \epsilon \)

Alternatively I can set it to this

\( T(x,0) = T_1 + T_2 \delta(h) \) where \(T_2\) is just the difference in temperature instead of being a temperature itself. I hope you get cosines for your Fourier decomposition (getting back into the swing of the math, I see that it would still equal zero, hmmmmmm). I can remember the concepts but I can’t remember the math. Sad! And it’s been 4 years since I did PDE’s. I was so good at it I didn’t study and ended up getting 88% on the final and in the class. If I had learned how to study it would have been different. It was amusing having the t.a. assume I was a math major because of my proficiency. Ended up minoring in math as it happens. The actual prof thought that because I was majoring in physics that I knew the boundary conditions more but I just abstracted them and solved without much thinking about it. I mean it’s not hard to figure out what the boundary conditions mean. For instance the first derivative with respect to space equaling zero says no heat is being lost to space at the endpoints. Hence full insulation. Also how the fuck was I solving those ODE’s for separation of variables if I didn’t bother writing it down. Oh wait I remember I just saw it instantly because it was just an ODE solution so I thought it was a waste of time writing it down fully. Also if you didn’t notice and haven’t seen me say it anywhere else you always assume the solution before actually trying to solve it which I find amusing. Imagine trying to solve these without knowing the solution first. Fourier for instance conceptualized the solution to quite literally be an infinite sum of sins and cosines which is legit bizarre. Why would you think an infinite sum would solve a PDE compared to an ODE (two terms usually). I don’t know why they don’t teach you PDE’s more numerically as modern PDE’s for things that aren’t extremely simplified (in this case the coffee loses zero heat to and the system is entirely closed besides the other ones. God thinking about math is fun although I suppose thinking in general is fun. But math is like mega autism for the mind. Anyhoo

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial t}T(x,t) = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} T(x,t) \)

absorbing the constant into the separation. Where is math not arbitrary. Nobody actually reads this math right

Assume \( T(x,t) = \beta \tau(t)\chi(x) \)

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial t}T(x,t) = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} T(x,t) \)

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \tau(t)\chi(x) = \beta \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} \tau(t)\chi(x) \)

\( \dot{\tau}(t)\chi(x) = \alpha \tau(t)\chi’’(x) \) (this is giggles)

\( \frac{1}{ \beta } \frac{\tau’(t)}{ \tau(t)} = \frac{\chi’’(x)}{ \chi(x) } \)

Because there is a solution we can assume? Oh the division takes away the variable dependence due to the solutions being waves which you can form as \(e^{ax+bt} \) or \( e^{i(ax+bt)} \) because the exponential is a really cool guy

i think its hilarious u kids talking shit about \( e^x\). u wouldnt say this shit to him at lan, hes jacked. not only that but he wears the freshest clothes, eats at the chillest restaurants and hangs out with the hottest dudes. yall are pathetic lol

Idk where the boundary conditions come in. I assume they’re there so you can suck up a boundary condition into one of two functions you separated it into and the other for the initial condition. After reading some notes I understand this is where the homogeneous requirement comes in as it only gives you one case of eigenvalue where the solution is nontrivial (doesn’t equal zero for any variable). And for why they equal a constant, because in our separation the left hand side is only dependent on t while the right hand side is only dependent on x so they must both equal a constant. This works even for the case of choosing sins and cosines for your waves instead of \( e^{i(ax+bt)} \) (although I consider the complex case to be the same thing ignoring the complex part) as you don’t get obvious cancellations. Another way to see how both sides are equal to eachother in this form is you have to realize that for any arbitrary \( t \) or \(x \) they equal eachother with only dependency on their respective variable. This dependency can only be achieved for any arbitrary \( t \) or \(x \) by them having to equal a constant not dependent on either.

Also I should mention that the exponential is not obviously a wave like sin or cosine (besides its complex form). If you look at a graph of \( e^x \) then take \( e^

completely waylaid 1:29 pm been looking at this for longer too but didn’t write down the time. What is the definition of a wave besides the fact it fits that its second order differential is equal to itself multiplied by a constant? Ah it’s always just a phase shift in the case of \(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} sin \big(ax \big) = a^2sin \big(ax \pm \frac{\pi}{a} \big) \) instead of using the normal negative. For \( \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} e^ax = a^2 e^ax \) is a slight phase shift up and to the left graphically. Same follows for single derivative (can you see what phase it’s shifted by? This is an interesting question instead of the rote PDE solving. The zeroes are always the same. These are graphs of green being the original wave, red being its first derivative, and blue being its second derivative where I took \( f(x) = sin(2x), 0\leq x \leq \pi \). Same follows for the exponentials \( g(x) = e^{2x} \)

As to what phase shift \( e^{ax} \) has mathematically? It’s 2:25 and I consider skipping it because it’s not obvious. Regardless if you take the ratio it’s just an amplitude shift. Been thinking about \( e^x \) for almost an hour. Besides the hand waved phase shift and the “zeroes” being the same I don’t actually know. K i’m really tired. Going to sleep 2:29 pm

7:36 pm

if you want to properly think of sin and cosine as a wave and why its amplitude/phase shifts it’s because it’s traveling and is exposed to either growth (energy given), no change, or decay (energy taken away) and for phase shifts it’s because the wave is physically traveling over the x axis. Fourier devised that the amplitude dies away after you sum enough of them hence you can solve the wave equation with an infinite amount of them. I thought this was neat. Back to the derivation of my perfect cup of coffee

\( \frac{1}{ \beta } \frac{\tau’(t)}{ \tau(t)} = \frac{\chi’’(x)}{ \chi(x) } = -\lambda \)

Separate into two ODEs (wow!)

\( \frac{1}{ \beta } \frac{\tau’(t)}{ \tau(t)} = -\lambda \)

\( \frac{\chi’’(x)}{ \chi(x) } = -\lambda \)

8:06 pm k gonna go play cs with the boys without looking i see the latex is broken

8:45 pm

Rearrange

\( \frac{1}{ \beta } \frac{\tau’(t)}{ \tau(t)} +\lambda =0 \)

\( \frac{1}{ \beta } tau’(x)(t) +\lambda \tau(t) =0 \)

\( \frac{\chi’’(x)}{ \chi(x) } + \lambda =0 \)

\( \chi’’(x) + \lambda \chi(x) =0 \)

Which form two ordinary differential equations

Again assume the solution takes the form \( e^{rx} \) (a wave)

\( \chi’’(x) + \lambda chi(x) =0 \)

\( r^2e^{rx} + \lambda e^{rx} =0 \)

dividing off the wave (notice this is effectively the same thing as before)

\( r^2 + \lambda =0 \)

\( r^2 = - \lambda \)

\( r = \sqrt{- \lambda } \)

So \( r \) depends on the 3 cases of

\( \lambda >0 \), \( \lambda = 0 \), and \( \lambda < 0 \)

I came from skipping this step in university due to it being so easy to see which case applied (the case which depends on varying lambda to get zero instead of the constants having to equal zero) to having to relearn it and actually do it. Not that it wouldn’t take long to

Case 1:

\( \lambda > 0 \)

\( r = \sqrt{- \lambda } \)

\( r = i\sqrt{ \lambda } \)

and since the characteristic polynomial takes the form where \( r \) is complex gonna take a wild guess and say the solution we assume is of the form \( \chi(x) = c_1cos \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big)+c_2 sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) \) due to \( e^{iax} = cos(ax) + isin(ax) \) and the imaginary part is poorly named. Indeed

\( \chi(x) = c_1cos \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big)+c_2 sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) \)

If you don’t have homogeneous boundaries then you can get ambiguity as to which eigenvalue case we have therefore no definite function we can assume and thus no solution. The proof of this is left to the reader as an exercise

The boundary conditions

\( T(x,t) = \beta \tau(t)\chi(x) \)

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial x} T(x,t) = \beta \tau(t)\chi’(x) \)

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial x} T(0,t) = \beta \tau(t)\chi’(0)= 0 \)

\( \chi’(x) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x} c_1cos \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big)+ \frac{\partial}{\partial x} c_2 sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) \)

\( \chi’(x) = \sqrt{ \lambda } \frac{\partial}{\partial x} c_2 cos \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) - \sqrt{ \lambda } c_1sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) \)

\( \chi’(0) = \sqrt{ \lambda } c_2 cos \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } 0 \big) - \sqrt{\lambda } c_1 sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda} 0 \big) \)

\( \chi’(0) = \sqrt{ \lambda } c_2 \)

\( \chi’(0) = 0 \)

\( \sqrt{ \lambda } c_2 =0 \)

\( \lambda = \)

\( \sqrt{ \lambda } c_2 =0 \)

Because we don’t want the trivial solution where \( \lambda = 0 \) we have to set \( c_2=0 \) therefore \( \lambda n> 0 \)

\( \frac{\partial}{\partial x} T(h,t) =0 \)

\( \chi’(x) = - \sqrt{ \lambda } c_1sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } x \big) \)

\( \chi’(h) = - \sqrt{ \lambda } c_1sin \big( \sqrt{ \lambda } h \big) \)

\( \lambda = \)

I realize that this might be pointless as using a dirac or step function might just not work for initial heat distribution. Fug. At least I practice my math. Let me check it

\( \lambda = 0 \)

\( \chi’’(x) + \lambda \chi(x) =0 \)

\( \chi’’(x) =0 \)

\( \chi(x) = mx+b \)

11:03 am 21/08/06

wtf is this part. again don’t feel like working on this

1:21 pm

\( \chi’(0) = 0 \)

\( chi’(x) = m \)

\( chi’(x) = m = 0 \)

so no that doesn’t work

Case 3

\( \lambda < 0\)

\( r = \sqrt(-\lambda) \)

\( r_1 = \alpha_1 \) and \( r_2 = \alpha_2 \)

two real roots

so we assume the solution has the form

\( \chi(x) = c_1 cosh( \ x) + c_2 sinh( \sqrt{\lambda} x) \)

\( chi’(x) = c_1 \sqrt{-\lambda} sinh(-\sqrt{-\lambda} x) + c_2 \sqrt{-\lambda} cosh{-\sqrt{-\lambda} x}) \)

\( chi’(0) = c_1 \sqrt{-\lambda} sinh(-\sqrt{-\lambda} 0) + c_2 \sqrt{-\lambda} cosh(-\sqrt{-\lambda} 0) \)

\( chi’(0) = \sqrt{-\lambda} c_2 = 0 \)

\( chi’(0) = c_2 = 0 \)

\( chi’(h) = c_1 \sqrt{-\lambda} sinh(-\sqrt{-\lambda} h) = 0 \)

\( chi’(h) = -c_2 \sqrt{-\lambda} sinh(-\sqrt{-\lambda} h) \)

1:51 fuck relearnign this

4:52 pm 21/08/15

ALRUIGT .

fixing shit

because \(sinh( -\sqrt{-\lambda} h) \) is only zero at \( \lambda = 0 \) we only have the trivial solution therefore the case where \( \lambda > 0 \) is the only nontrivial eigenfunction set we have

fuck it just going to remake this in the proper form that i’ll post

1 note · View note