Hundreds of copies of Newton’s Principia found in new census

In a story of lost and stolen books and scrupulous detective work across continents, a Caltech historian and his former student have unearthed previously uncounted copies of Isaac Newton’s groundbreaking science book Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, known more colloquially as the Principia. The new census more than doubles the number of known copies of the famous first edition, published in 1687. The last census of this kind, published in 1953, had identified 187 copies, while the new Caltech survey finds 386 copies. Up to 200 additional copies, according to the study authors, likely still exist undocumented in public and private collections.

“We felt like Sherlock Holmes,” says Mordechai (Moti) Feingold, the Kate Van Nuys Page Professor of the History of Science and the Humanities at Caltech, who explains that he and his former student, Andrej Svoren?ík (MS ’08) of the University of Mannheim in Germany, spent more than a decade tracing copies of the book around the world. Feingold and Svoren?ík are co-authors of a paper about the survey published in the journal Annals of Science.

Moreover, by analyzing ownership marks and notes scribbled in the margins of some of the books, in addition to related letters and other documents, the researchers found evidence that the Principia, once thought to be reserved for only a select group of expert mathematicians, was more widely read and comprehended than previously thought.

“One of the realizations we’ve had,” says Feingold, “is that the transmission of the book and its ideas was far quicker and more open than we assumed, and this will have implications on the future work that we and others will be doing on this subject.”

In the Principia, Newton introduced the laws of motion and universal gravitation, “unifying the terrestrial and celestial worlds under a single law,” says Svoren?ík.

“By the 18th century, Newtonian ideas transcended science itself,” says Feingold. “People in other fields were hoping to find a similar single law to unify their own respective fields. The influence of Newton, just like that of Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein, exerted considerable influence on many other aspects of life, and that is what made him such a canonical figure during the 18th century and beyond.”

Principia Found Behind the Iron Curtain

Svoren?ík says that the project was born out of a paper he wrote for a course in the history of science taught by Feingold. Originally from Slovakia, Svoren?ík had written a term paper about the distribution of the Principia in Central Europe. “I was interested in whether there were copies of the book that could be traced to my home region. The census done in the 1950s did not list any copies from Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, or Hungary. This is understandable as the census was done after the Iron Curtain descended, which made tracing copies very difficult.”

To Svoren?ík’s surprise, he found many more copies than Feingold had expected. The summer after the class, Feingold suggested to Svoren?ík that they turn his project into the first-ever complete, systematic search for copies of the first edition of the Principia. Their ensuing detective work across the globe turned up about 200 previously unidentified copies in 27 countries, including 35 copies in Central Europe. Feingold and Svoren?ík even came across lost or stolen copies of the masterpiece; for example, one copy found with a bookseller in Italy was discovered to have been stolen from a library in Germany half a century earlier.

“We contacted the German library to let them know, but they were too slow to make a decision to buy back the copy or apprehend it somehow, so it ended up back on the market,” says Feingold.

A Rare, Collectible Item

According to the historians, copies of the first edition of the Principia sell today for between $300,000 and $3,000,000 via auction houses like Christie’s and Sotheby’s as well as on the black market. They estimate that some 600, and possibly as many as 750 copies of the book’s first edition were printed in 1687.

The primary person behind the book’s publication was Edmond Halley, a well-known English scientist who made several discoveries about our solar system, including the periodicity of what later became known as Halley’s Comet. Feingold explains that, before the Principia was written, Halley had asked Newton for some calculations regarding elliptical orbits of bodies in our solar system. When Halley saw the calculations, “he got so excited, he rushed back to Cambridge and basically forced Newton to write the Principia,” says Feingold. In fact, Halley funded the publication of the book’s first edition.

Soon after its publication, the book was recognized as a work of genius. “Because Halley had already prepared the public for what was to come,” says Feingold, “there was a widespread recognition that the Principia was a masterpiece.” Later, a “mystique” about Newton started to develop, according to Feingold, exemplified in a story about two students walking in Cambridge and spotting Newton on the street. “‘There goes a man,’ one of them said, ‘who wrote a book that neither he nor anybody else understands,'” says Feingold.

The idea that the Principia was incomprehensible and little read is called into question with the new survey results. Not only does the research show that there was a larger market for the book than once thought, it also demonstrates that people were digesting its contents to a greater extent than realized.

“When you look through the copies themselves, you might find small notes or annotations that give you clues about how it was used,” says Svoren?ík, who has personally inspected about 10 percent of the copies documented in their census. When traveling to conferences in different countries, he would make time to visit local libraries. “You look at the condition of the ownership marks, the binding, deterioration, printing differences, et cetera.” Even without inspecting the books up close, the historians could trace who owned them through library records and other letters and documents, and learn how copies were shared.

“It’s harder to show how much people engaged with a book than simply owned it, but we can look at the notes in the margins and how the book was shared,” says Feingold. “You can assume that for each copy, there are multiple readers. It’s not like today, where you might buy a book and are the only one to read it. And then we can look for an exchange of ideas between the people sharing copies. You start to put together the pieces and solve the puzzle.”

Svoren?ík and Feingold hope that their census, which they call preliminary, will yield information about other existing copies tucked away with private owners, book dealers, and libraries. Continuing this line of research into the future, the historians plan to further refine our understanding of how the Principia shaped 18th-century science.

Share Button

Researchers 3D print biomedical parts with supersonic speed

Forget glue, screws, heat or other traditional bonding methods. A Cornell University-led collaboration has developed a 3D printing technique that creates cellular metallic materials by smashing together powder particles at supersonic speed.

This form of technology, known as “cold spray,” results in mechanically robust, porous structures that are 40% stronger than similar materials made with conventional manufacturing processes. The structures’ small size and porosity make them particularly well-suited for building biomedical components, like replacement joints.

The team’s paper, “Solid-State Additive Manufacturing of Porous Ti-6Al-4V by Supersonic Impact,” published Nov. 9 in Applied Materials Today.

The paper’s lead author is Atieh Moridi, assistant professor in the Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering.

“We focused on making cellular structures, which have lots of applications in thermal management, energy absorption and biomedicine,” Moridi said. “Instead of using only heat as the input or the driving force for bonding, we are now using plastic deformation to bond these powder particles together.”

Moridi’s research group specializes in creating high-performance metallic materials through additive manufacturing processes. Rather than carving a geometric shape out of a big block of material, additive manufacturing builds the product layer by layer, a bottom-up approach that gives manufacturers greater flexibility in what they create.

However, additive manufacturing is not without its own challenges. Foremost among them: Metallic materials need to be heated at high temperatures that exceed their melting point, which can cause residual stress buildup, distortion and unwanted phase transformations.

To eliminate these issues, Moridi and collaborators developed a method using a nozzle of compressed gas to fire titanium alloy particles at a substrate.

“It’s like painting, but things build up a lot more in 3D,” Moridi said.

The particles were between 45 and 106 microns in diameter (a micron is one-millionth of a meter) and traveled at roughly 600 meters per second, faster than the speed of sound. To put that into perspective, another mainstream additive process, direct energy deposition, delivers powders through a nozzle at a velocity on the order of 10 meters per second, making Moridi’s method sixty times faster.

The particles aren’t just hurled as quickly as possible. The researchers had to carefully calibrate titanium alloy’s ideal speed. Typically in cold spray printing, a particle would accelerate in the sweet spot between its critical velocity — the speed at which it can form a dense solid — and its erosion velocity, when it crumbles too much to bond to anything.

Instead, Moridi’s team used computational fluid dynamics to determine a speed just under the titanium alloy particle’s critical velocity. When launched at this slightly slower rate, the particles created a more porous structure, which is ideal for biomedical applications, such as artificial joints for the knee or hip, and cranial/facial implants.

“If we make implants with these kind of porous structures, and we insert them in the body, the bone can grow inside these pores and make a biological fixation,” Moridi said. “This helps reduce the likelihood of the implant loosening. And this is a big deal. There are lots of revision surgeries that patients have to go through to remove the implant just because it’s loose and it causes a lot of pain.”

While the process is technically termed cold spray, it did involve some heat treatment. Once the particles collided and bonded together, the researchers heated the metal so the components would diffuse into each other and settle like a homogeneous material.

“We only focused on titanium alloys and biomedical applications, but the applicability of this process could be beyond that,” Moridi said. “Essentially, any metallic material that can endure plastic deformation could benefit from this process. And it opens up a lot of opportunities for larger-scale industrial applications, like construction, transportation and energy.”

Co-authors include doctoral student Akane Wakai and researchers from MIT, Polytechnic University of Milan, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Brunel University London and Helmut Schmidt University.

The research was supported, in part, by the MIT-Italy global seed fund and Polimi International Fellowship.

Share Button

Covid vaccine: No guarantees on Pfizer roll-out but NHS ready – Hancock

The health secretary also announces that, from Tuesday, NHS staff will be tested twice a week.

Share Button

Lockdown: Will the vaccine be compulsory? And other questions

We answer some of your questions about the Pfizer vaccine for coronavirus.

Share Button

Covid ‘raises new psychiatric disorders risk’

Anxiety was most commonly diagnosed in a study of US patients for 90 days after their diagnosis.

Share Button

Diet and lifestyle during pregnancy linked to modifications in infants’ DNA

A new study has shown pregnant women with obesity could reduce the health risks for their infants through improved diet and more physical activity.

Research published today in the journal PLosMed investigates the impact of high glucose in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and changes to infants DNA.

GDM is becoming more frequent around the world alongside a rise in obesity and can increase the risk of complications during pregnancy and childbirth as well as increasing the risk of metabolic disease in the child in later life. High levels of glucose in mothers with GDM have been suggested to trigger epigenetic changes in the developing fetus (chemical modifications to the genetic blueprint of the fetus that function of genes activity) resulting in adverse health outcomes for the child.

Researchers from the University of Southampton and King’s College London studied data from over 550 pregnant women with obesity and their children, from the UK Pregnancies Better Eating and Activity Trial (UPBEAT). The trial aims to improve the diet and physical activity of obese pregnant women across the UK. Compared to women in a control group, who made no changes to their lifestyle during pregnancy, women who were supported in changing their diet to lower glycemic index foods that are broken down less quickly by the body, a reduced fat intake and increasing their physical activity put on less weight and were metabolically healthier.

In this new study, researchers compared the level and pattern of DNA methylation, a major epigenetic mechanism which controls gene activity, in the newborn infants from mothers who developed GDM with those that did not. They then looked at whether a dietary and physical activity intervention during pregnancy altered these modifications in infants born to mothers who developed GDM.

The results showed that GDM and high glucose levels in mothers were linked to changes in the level and pattern of functional modification to the infants DNA. Moreover, they found that the dietary and exercise intervention significantly reduced these methylation changes in the infant associated with GDM in the mothers.

Karen Lillycrop, Professor of Epigenetics at the University of Southampton said, “These findings suggest that improvements to diet and physical activity can have an impact on the development of their children.

“These are very encouraging finding and further studies are now needed to establish whether reducing these epigenetic changes through a healthier lifestyle during pregnancy are accompanied by improved health outcomes for the children in later life.”

Professor Lucilla Poston, Tommy’s Chair of Maternal & Fetal Health and lead investigator of the UPBEAT trial at King’s College London, said: “we have known for some time that children of mothers who had gestational diabetes are a greater risk of obesity and poor control of glucose; this new research implies that epigenetic pathways could be involved.”

Tommy’s chief executive Jane Brewin said: “Obesity during pregnancy can have lifelong negative impacts on mother and baby — so one of the best things mums can do is to improve their health, including their weight, before embarking on a pregnancy. However, this study shows that mums who are overweight and their babies can still benefit from adopting a healthy diet while pregnant. All mums-to-be need access to healthy eating advice, and those who are overweight should be given non-judgemental practical support and encouragement to eat healthily during pregnancy.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by University of Southampton. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

New insight into a placental gene pathway and its association with vitamin D

According to the World Health Organization, preeclampsia affects between 2% to 8% of pregnancies. It can cause serious, sometimes fatal, complications in the mother and child. Among other risk factors, such as obesity and diabetes, vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy has been associated with an increased risk of preeclampsia.

In an article in Pregnancy Hypertension, a team of researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) found that expression of a set of genes previously studied in the setting of early onset and severe preeclampsia is significantly affected by vitamin D status during late-stage pregnancy.

Exactly how preeclampsia develops is unclear. Recent evidence points to poor development of blood vessels in the placenta — the organ that nourishes the fetus throughout pregnancy. This leads to hypertension and several other complications in the mother. The only cure for preeclampsia is to deliver the fetus, which can be dangerous if done too early.

In a previous study that was supported by pilot funding from the South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR), the research team led by Kyu-Ho Lee, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor in the departments of Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynecology at MUSC found that the expression of three genes — NKX2-5, SAM68, and sFLT1 — are highly correlated in the setting of early-onset and severe preeclampsia (EOSPE), with sFLT1 being an identified marker for preeclampsia risk. In the current study, which also received SCTR support, the authors examined the expression of these genes in healthy pregnant women.

“Having observed the correlated expression of these genes in preeclampsia, we wanted to see the pattern of expression of these genes in normal pregnancy,” said Lee. “We had a secondary goal of seeing whether vitamin D status affected the expression of these genes.”

The sFLT1 protein interferes with the activity of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which is an important regulator of blood vessel development. This reduces vascular growth in the placenta. The amount of sFLT1 in the placenta is regulated in part by SAM68 and NKX2-5, also known as the tinman gene. This hypothesized NKX2-5/SAM68/sFLT1 gene “axis” may contribute to the development of preeclampsia.

“NKX2-5 might be controlling the regulation of sFLT1 and SAM68 in such a way that in preeclampsia, the expression levels of those genes go awry and tilt the vascular development in a direction that might trigger preeclampsia,” said Lee.

Vitamin D affects many aspects of the mother’s health during pregnancy. To investigate how the gene axis is affected by maternal vitamin D status, Lee’s team studied placental samples from 43 pregnant women enrolled in a clinical trial at MUSC organized by their collaborator, MUSC Health neonatologist Carol L. Wagner, M.D., a professor in the Department of Pediatrics. Half of the women received a high dose of vitamin D3 (4,000 IU/day), and the other half received a placebo. The study group included African American, Hispanic American and Caucasian American women.

In contrast to their previous study, the team did not detect significant levels of NKX2-5 in placental tissue samples before a healthy delivery. This finding suggests that NKX2-5 expression is important in early at-risk pregnancies but not healthy pregnancies. However, the team did observe a strong positive correlation between SAM68 and sFLT1 in all study participants.

“The tight correlation between SAM68 and sFLT1 makes us think that there’s a functional relationship between these genes,” said Lee.

Interestingly, when assessed at the last visit before delivery, women who were vitamin D deficient (<100 nmol/L of the vitamin D metabolite 25[OH]D) had significantly higher expression of sFLT1 and lower expression of VEGF in the placenta than women who were vitamin D sufficient.

This study provides novel insight into the activity of the NKX2-5/SAM68/sFLT1 gene axis during healthy pregnancies in a diverse group of women and how it may be affected by the vitamin D status of the mother.

“These results raise the possibility that vitamin D somehow directly regulates sFLT1 and/or SAM68 expression at some level,” said Lee. “However, at this point, we haven’t addressed the exact molecular relationship.”

Future studies might investigate the relationship between vitamin D status and the expression of sFLT1 and SAM68 in mothers diagnosed with preeclampsia.

“Ideally, you would want a study with an equal number of diseased versus control pregnancies that had differential levels of vitamin D,” said Lee. “Then we could look at the incidence of disease in correlation to the levels of vitamin D they achieved and the amount of gene expression that we had observed.”

The team’s current findings contribute to a basic biological understanding of the development of pregnancy and preeclampsia. Lee believes that this understanding will improve the standard of care for treating preeclampsia.

“We can begin to develop clinical markers that would help us gauge the health of a pregnancy during its course,” said Lee. “This could provide warning signs for an increasing risk of pregnancy complication.”

Share Button

Why do bats fly into walls?

Bats excel in acoustic perception and detect objects as tiny as mosquitoes using sound waves. Echolocation permits them to calculate the three-dimensional location of both small and large objects, perceiving their shape, size and texture. To this end, a bat’s brain processes various acoustic dimensions from the echoes returning from the object such as frequency, spectrum and intensity.

But sometimes bats collide with large walls even though they detect these walls with their sonar system. Researchers from Tel Aviv University (TAU) have concluded that these collisions do not result from a sensory limitation but rather from an error in acoustic perception.

The study was led by Dr. Sasha Danilovich, a former PhD student in the lab of Prof. Yossi Yovel, Head of the Sagol School for Neuroscience and faculty member at the School of Zoology at the George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences. Other participants included Dr. Arian Bonman and students Gal Shalev and Aya Goldstein of the Sensory Perception and Cognition Laboratory at the School of Zoology and the Sagol School of Neuroscience. The paper was published on October 26, 2020, in PNAS.

The TAU researchers released dozens of bats in a corridor blocked by objects of different sizes and made of different materials. To their surprise, the researchers discovered that the bats collided with large sponge walls that produce a weak echo as if they did not exist. The bats’ behavior suggested that they did this even though they had detected the wall with their sonar system, indicating that the collision did not result from a sensory limitation, but rather from an acoustic misperception.

The researchers hypothesize that the unnatural combination of a large object and a weak echo disrupts the bats’ sensory perception and causes them to ignore the obstacle, much like people who bump into transparent walls.

The researchers then methodically changed the features of the objects along the corridor, varying their size, texture and echo intensity. They concluded that the bats’ acoustic perception depends on a coherent, typical correlation of the dimensions with objects in nature — that a large object should produce a strong echo and a small object a weak echo.

“By presenting the bats with objects whose acoustic dimensions are not coherent, we were able to mislead them, creating a misconception that caused them to repeatedly try to fly into a wall even though they had identified it with their sonar,” Danilovich explains. “The experiment gives us a peek into how the world is perceived by these creatures, whose senses are so unique and different from ours.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by American Friends of Tel Aviv University. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Covid: Who will have the Pfizer vaccine first and when can I get it?

A vaccine for Covid-19 is set to be put forward for emergency approval.

Share Button

Sensitivity to Lying

Some people have a high tolerance for lying and falsehood. They can hang out around others who frequently share false information, deliberately or from ignorance, and it doesn’t seem to bother them. Either they don’t notice the falsehoods, or they aren’t much affected when they do notice.

I’m not one of those people. I used to be though. When I was younger I could hang around people who spewed nonsense left and right and be okay with it. That’s basically how I grew up, being taught lots of false religious ideas about how the world worked, only later to realize it was a pack of lies.

But just growing up in that kind of bubble didn’t make me sensitive to lying. If anything I think it made me less sensitive. Somewhere along the way, I developed numbness to lying. I could be in the presence of lying and falsehood, and it didn’t affect me much at all emotionally.

Going vegan, experimenting with raw foods, and doing lots of health-related detox significantly raised the sensitivity levels over time. I’ve written before about the many internal changes that going vegan caused, especially with respect to the heart-brain connection. Many senses and impressions became more sensitive as I made efforts to clean up my body.

I think fasting helped a little too – I’ve done a 17-day and a 40-day water fast – but that was late in the game for me. Fasting probably would have had a bigger impact if I’d done it much earlier, like during my 20s instead of my 40s.

Sensitivity Advantages

There are some nice advantages to this heightened sensitivity. I never get writer’s block because I’m sensitive enough to always tune into an abundant flow of ideas. I’ve published something new to my blog every day this year, and it’s not even difficult. The ideas mostly share themselves, and I take dictation.

I’m also super happy in my relationship with Rachelle. I adore and appreciate her so much. Each day we spend together is just delightful. I can’t help but smile when I see her. It’s wonderful being extra sensitive to feelings of love and gratitude and getting to feel those at full volume. It makes it so much easier to enjoy a beautiful relationship, especially with another sensitive person. Because we’re so sensitive to our feelings and each other, we’re really good at caring for each other.

So I wouldn’t trade this sensitivity for the world. It has added so much beauty to my life. I don’t think it’s the sort of thing you appreciate till you experience it though.

These benefits make me watch my diet and health habits and not let myself stray too far. If I eat a lot of heavier foods for a while – which for me is too many grains and beans (and foods derived from them like tofu) and not enough fruits and veggies – I can feel the sensitivity declining. But at least I know how to get back on track.

Eating more raw foods always brings the sensitivity back up again. Yesterday I had two large green smoothies and some other raw foods. This included bananas, cherries, blueberries, clementines, spinach, kale, mixed greens, celery, and cucumber. I can feel the difference this morning. I feel happier than usual. Writing feels even easier than it normally does. The simpler and cleaner my diet is, even on a day to day basis, the less friction I experience mentally and emotionally.

Sensitivity to Lying

Here’s a potential downside though. I’ve become a lot more sensitive to lying, falsehood, and deceit than I was 30 years ago. Watching, listening to, or reading lies and false statements causes a palpable reaction in my body. I’m not in control of that reaction when it happens, except that I can prevent or disrupt it by sabotaging my body itself, like by eating lots of heavier foods.

Many people joked about drinking lots of alcohol during the election, which is an effective way to suppress emotions for those who are more sensitive. Of course if you overdo it, you may just be swapping some negative reactions for others.

I have a strong negative internal reaction every time I watch Donald Trump speak. The reason is simple. He lies constantly.

I don’t exactly know why my body reacts the way it does, but it does react. I feel emotionally disgusted. Sometimes I feel a bit nauseous. It’s like I just had a spell cast on me that’s about to make me vomit up some slugs.

My body reacts similarly in the presence of Trump supporters when they talk about him. Whether intentional or not, they always resort to sharing lies and falsehoods to justify their support. There’s just such a huge abandonment of truth in that space.

I like being around people who speak the truth, and Trump and his supporters just don’t. At least I’ve never encountered one who does. Trumpism and falsehood always seem to go hand in hand, along with insensitivity to lying.

Interestingly I didn’t have this reaction to seeing Trump speak before he got into politics. Erin and I would sometimes watch The Apprentice when we were together, and while Trump was often a bit of a jerk on that show, it just seemed like ego-based entertainment and posturing. It’s different when the lying is sociopathic and directly harmful.

Trusting Your Inner Senses

At first I did my best to tolerate these feelings. And then I questioned why I should keep doing that. Is that really a wise approach? The feelings weren’t going down. They grew stronger and louder as the consequences of such lying grew even stronger, like lots of people dying unnecessarily.

In addition to being sensitive to my own feelings and senses, I also feel sensitive to other people’s feelings, and those have been especially loud this year. I could feel a lot of stress in the air.

The majority of people that I connect with regularly are also disgusted by Trump and his rampant lying, especially friends who live outside the USA. There are a lot of other sensitive people out there too, and I think many of them are good at broadcasting their feelings without always realizing it.

I opted to start trusting my body more. Otherwise I’m too tempted to disrupt my health to tone down those inner signals, and I don’t like doing that. I trust that this sensitivity exists for a good reason, especially since it produces so many other benefits that I don’t want to sabotage.

When I say that Trump supporters make me nauseous, I’m being literal about that. I recognize that it may sound like an exaggeration to someone who isn’t familiar with this kind of sensitivity due to lack of personal experience. I think many vegans and raw foodists will likely have an easier time recognizing that I’m speaking the truth here if they’ve experienced similar changes in sensitivity from dietary improvements. This effect is described in detail in some books too, such as Raw Emotions by Angela Stokes.

If you know that eating heavier foods and drinking alcohol can dull your senses and emotions, is it such a stretch to consider that eating cleaner can swing you the opposite way? How would you feel after drinking six shots of liquor? Now imagine how you could feel if you could somehow remove six shots worth of disruption from your body, starting from what you think is sober and normal. So many other aspects of life become easier, but then you have to live in a world where a lot more people seem like they’re drunk – mentally foggy, confused about their lives and purpose, and emotionally numb. It’s always tempting to want to return to the fold, but you can’t unsee what you’ve seen.

When you’re very in tune with your emotions and your inner senses, it’s hard to act against them – sometimes a LOT harder. The question then becomes: How much are you willing to trust these signals?

Trusting the Sensitivity

I do feel it was the right choice to honor those feelings, which led me to do some extra social purging during the past few years. That felt better than the alternative of engaging with bullshit again and again.

Last week I joked that I had to pay extra to upgrade my Facebook block list to 2TB. While I can look back and appreciate some of those connections for what they were, I also honor my body’s signal when it’s time to move on.

I don’t regret it. It was the right choice for me.

What I didn’t realize was that I can’t fully honor these sensitive signals while also trying to numb myself to them in some areas. If I put loyalty to friends first, I always lose something of much greater value. I have to honor the truth first and let my social circle align with that. And plenty of people do. I’ve grown closer this year to some good friends who are very sensitive too, and there’s so much more depth and beauty in relationships with sensitive people than with relatively insensitive ones.

So this has never been about politics for me. Nor is it about character either. It’s actually about trust – trusting the sensitivity that can be challenging to hear but keeps bestowing surprising gifts.

Moving on is a big part of personal growth, and it’s often difficult. I notice that when I do this intelligently, it’s a move into greater trust – trust in myself, trust in reality, or trust in the universe.

This kind of trust is hard. It’s so easy to doubt yourself. It’s easy to doubt your inner signals. It’s easy to want to numb yourself. It’s hard to let yourself sense what you’re sensing, feel what you’re feeling, and let that guide you.

Share Button