#complex adaptive systems

[linguisticdiscovery]

The randomness of language change

Language is a complex-adaptive system, which means that sometimes the changes in language are the result of random drift rather than any particular influence.

[interested-pig]

Is Evolution an Entropic Process?

The traditional view of entropy as disorder might not fully capture the relationship between life and the universe's fundamental forces. A closer look reveals a surprising relationship: evolution, the process driving the diversity and complexity of life, may itself be an entropic process.

Entropy, a key concept in thermodynamics, traditionally represents the measure of disorder in a system leading to an imagined perspective of flatness. However, from a statistical mechanics standpoint, entropy also quantifies the number of possible states a system can occupy. In this broader sense, a system with more complexity—characterized by a greater variety of components and interactions—holds the potential for more states, thereby possessing higher entropy.

Evolution through natural selection is fundamentally about changes—specifically, genetic variations that increase an organism's adaptability to its environment. Each genetic change, adaptation, or mutation that survives the harsh sieve of natural selection adds layers of complexity to life's blueprint. More complexity means more potential states and interactions, which translates to higher entropy. Thus, as species evolve and ecosystems diversify, they potentially increase the entropy of the biological system.

Evolution isn't just a genetic process; it involves significant energy and information flow changes. These transformations, as organisms become more adapted and ecosystems more intricate, lead to greater dispersal and utilization of energy. As species evolve, they explore and embody more microstates of energy distribution, suggesting that evolution might be one of nature’s pathways to maximizing entropy.

If evolution is indeed an entropic process, this provides a novel lens through which to view life's development: not merely as a fight for survival against entropy but as an integral part of the broader entropic trends of the universe. Life, in its myriad forms, isn’t just undergoing evolution; it is being driven by and facilitating the universe's intrinsic march towards higher entropy and complexity.

This perspective can reshapes understanding of the partnership between evolution and entropy. It posits life as a creation of and a dynamic participant in the universe's entropic unfolding, actively exploring new states of being and complexity. As such life could be seen as a natural consequence of entropy which includes consciousness itself.

[interested-pig]

It could be argued that love is an emergent property of the complex interactions of electrical and chemical impulses in the synapses and brain cells. If it is emergent, then it must be accepted that it is more than the sum of these parts and irreducible to them. Love is something greater than our physicality, akin to an intangible, invisible field. It is not dissimilar to extensively complex gravitational or magnetic systems, where the field is also an emergent property from interacting physical objects. In all cases, they are felt, not observed. In the end, are they all, in their different ways, forces of attraction?

I feel like I'm living in a tyranny of "love is just brain chemicals, man" ideology. The whole world is consumed by various forms of naive cynicism and I am the only one smart enough to realize how fallacious they all are.

[granulesofsand]

I love harassing my headmates in front of outsiders. I love flirting with them, bickering with them, existing with them. I enjoy moving our body as I move in headspace, so they can see where the others are as if they were in the room. They are. I love making outsiders aware that there is more to us than meets the eye. It makes them uncomfortable. Good.

[livingsidecharacter]

did and friendships

most of this is just me rambling tbh but its something uncommon i havent seen/dont see as much so shrug were a c did polyfrag sys right? so have distinctive differences in headmates is common for us. sure we have a bunch of fragments and similarities and doubles and different consciousness level etc etc but thats not the point. because of how distinctive and separate we are, its common for headmates to want to have that in the physical world. this is where different accounts are made for different social media sites but its not limited to that we used to live in the states for a bit and during our time there our host (at that point) couldnt handle the activities and masking so we split a headmate that was our "mask" except that was their personality, our masking personality was just their personality and they became host really quick. the thing is, because of that, host a couldnt be themselves publically... at all which was why host b formed. so host a turned to the internet where they could be themselves separate from host b. now, it wasnt just these two, we knew we were a system during this time but anyone that wasnt host b tended to surround themselves with hosts a lifestyle. cut to the present and host a has split into one) our current freq fronter and two) a fragment and host b now dormant. weve been living in japan for a whlie but it always crosses our mind that host b had a life separate from us as a system, they lived their life like a singlet. but were still signed in to some of their social media accounts so we get reminders of their life and their friends. our family askes us sometimes "have you been in touch with usa friend?" to which we have to say... no. because while yes their friends with us bodily they arent really our friends, we havent contacted them in years and havent looked back since.

from my pov, its common for system to just stick to each other, not to say it doesnt happen but again this is from my pov, like we know systems who live their lives alongside their hosts/bodily life (if that makes sense) while us its very much like "multiple being in one body." and no im not saying that others are less multiple living like this, this is just how i can best explain it? like they share accounts, share friends, etc etc but with us its like traces of those separate left behind. another way i can explain it is by tumblr blogs. you have your main right? most systems ive seen share the main blog and are just associated with it. us? we have headmates who make a whole separate main that they can do whatever with. and then those headmates stop being active and its like a whole someone dipped the internet.

like even now we have a headmate separate from the freq fronter ive mentioned before who has their own friends and lifestyle separate. its not as separate as hosts a and b but its still separate, the freq fronter dont interact with each other at all. even then this account is just mine, not tied to our "bodily main" so frequent fronters dont even know about this account

ik i talked a lot and most of this probably makes no sense if anyone has questions, feel free to ask, i really just felt like getting this out there because i dont see it and was wondering if anyone else shared any of our experiences

[bookwyrm-art-stuff]

I too would read a shitty porn book for the world building and mythical creatures and plants

[only-knives]

i truly hate every single person who has abused us. i truly fucking hate them all. what did we ever do to deserve that. we were just kids.

[dniendos]

i truly wholeheartedly wish that the medical spaces and endogenic/natural/non trauma related spaces were like... easier to comprehend because lord it looks like we have to do even more fucking research after we did like months of research trying to figure out why we were living like this add to the fact that sources are becoming more found out than when we first researched and information is being found out and booming and just guh like with terms and stuff or language its just so confusing guys coming online and seeing it than just researching and living your life as in scrolling through the masses of blogs on research upon research about terms and history and just really wish this kinda thing didnt get soo out of hand that it spiraled this far

[omegaphilosophia]

Aspects of the Philosophy of Complexity

The philosophy of complexity is an interdisciplinary field that explores the fundamental principles underlying complex systems and phenomena in nature, society, and technology. It seeks to understand the emergent properties, self-organization, and dynamics of complex systems, as well as their implications for philosophy, science, and society. Some key aspects of the philosophy of complexity include:

Emergence: Emergence refers to the phenomenon where complex systems exhibit properties and behaviors that cannot be understood by analyzing their individual components in isolation. Instead, these properties arise from the interactions and relationships between the components of the system. Emergent phenomena are often characterized by novel, higher-level patterns and structures that cannot be reduced to the properties of their constituent parts.

Self-Organization: Self-organization is the process through which complex systems spontaneously organize and adapt to their environment without external guidance or control. It involves the emergence of ordered structures, patterns, or behaviors from the interactions between the system's components. Self-organization is a fundamental feature of many natural systems, including biological organisms, ecosystems, and social networks.

Nonlinearity: Nonlinearity refers to the property of complex systems where the relationship between cause and effect is not proportional or predictable. Small changes in the system's initial conditions or parameters can lead to disproportionately large and unpredictable outcomes, known as nonlinear dynamics or "chaos." Nonlinear phenomena are ubiquitous in nature and can give rise to diverse patterns of behavior, such as fractals, turbulence, and phase transitions.

Networks and Interconnectedness: Complex systems often exhibit network structures, where components are interconnected through networks of relationships or interactions. Network theory explores the topology, connectivity, and dynamics of these networks, revealing important insights into the organization and functioning of complex systems across diverse domains, including social networks, neural networks, and ecological networks.

Adaptive Systems: Complex systems are often adaptive, meaning they can adjust and evolve in response to changes in their environment or internal dynamics. Adaptation involves the acquisition of new information, the modification of behaviors or structures, and the selection of advantageous traits through a process of feedback and learning. Adaptive systems are resilient and capable of self-regulation, enabling them to survive and thrive in changing conditions.

Holism and Reductionism: The philosophy of complexity challenges traditional reductionist approaches to understanding the world, which seek to explain complex phenomena by breaking them down into simpler, more manageable parts. Instead, complexity theory emphasizes the holistic and integrative nature of complex systems, emphasizing the importance of studying systems in their entirety and considering the interactions between their constituent elements.

Overall, the philosophy of complexity provides a framework for understanding the interconnectedness, diversity, and dynamism of the world around us, offering valuable insights into the nature of reality, cognition, and social organization.

[doyouknowyoudothatoutloud]

I could be doing the thing that this post is talking about right now...

Here are my contributions.

When we ask questions to try to get a already decided result, are we not being judgemental instead of curious?

Like if we think we know something why are we then asking the question in the first place?

If we stop listening because someone has a not so confident response does that not go against the very principles of science?

Like science is:

Step one: hypothesis

Step two: try to prove hypothesis wrong

Step three: what did you learn from that?

Science is literally about humbelling yourself to be wrong.

So if you confidentally say something you have either not humbled yourself to be wrong or have an enormous amount of data to back you up.

If we ask questions to try to justify our own opinions that is about insecurity not about curiosity.

Learning is at least partly about finding the misstakes you are making and changing your mind to adapt to what is rather than what you assumed is.

Like it would be so easy if we already knew the answer to everything. But we don't. We know very few answers with certainty.

Like isn't journalism and learning supposed to be about finding out and communicating what is and how to find out for yourself?

Humbelling our ego is necessary for us to actually learn. We want to believe that the world resolves around us, but facts show we are almost insignificant.

We live in a society run on money. Money or perhaps more accurately our economy is a belief system. Belief systems are not about learning. In a way science is a belief system.

Belief system of capitalism: use made up thing to exchange for goods and services.

Belief system of science: we are capable of asking questions but we mostly come to the wrong conclusions. Pointing out how we are wrong makes us move along quicker.

Another example of a belief system is Christianity.

Belief system of Christianity: humans are made perfectly. Our sins are a consequence of our own actions not a reflection of God's creation.

The belief system of science is capable of evolving and takes into account that we have capabilities and often are wrong. The belief system of science is rooted in our logic.

The belief system of capitalism is rooted in convenience. If everything has to be exchanged for something money weighs less than most other things. Most of the worlds currencies is connected to the american dollar and the american dollar is connected to oil. The belief system of our currencies are currently rooted in oil.

Our money hold no inherent value in of itself. It is no longer made of gold so there is little use from melting it down and making something out of it. The way that we document our economy has not really changed all that much since the roman empire.

In comparison during the roman empire science thought the sun revolved around the earth and things like penecilin was far from being invented. There are many more things which science has discovered and evolved since the roman empire than that.

Since schools and news media are all dependent on sponsors in our economic system in order to exist they are not really set up to be for well facts.

Science is literally about humbelling yourself to be wrong and capitalism would pretty much fall apart if we were to treat our currencies as well what they are, metal, pieces of paper and 1's and 0's. Capitalism is a lie, a fairytale and could fall apart if facts were used on itself. Capitalism confidentally says that money is the equivalent of the goods and services that we buy. But is it? What metrics were used to come up with that number? We could have an economy where prices were set from what goods and services are worth. But how would we value that? From the profit it can make? From the use it got?

What is capitalism for? Isn't capitalism supposed to be for well the quality of life we humans are capable of achieving?

But if capitalism was for the quality of life humans were capable of achieving it would be about making sure every worker got a good quality of life, that there needs were met at least to the level where factual reasons were the limitations not extra limitations which we impose on ourselves &/or others. If capitalism was for people then everyone would be free to change jobs, take a vacation, have food, shelter to have a balanzed life.

If capitalism was for people we would teach people how to take care of their own needs and speak up for themselves. Our needs would still have consequences but if we know of them we can plan and accomodate for them instead of dissmissing them. Having needs does not make you bad, it makes you human.

If we were taught to take care of our own needs, speak up for ourselves and do things based on our current ability rather than a made up target of should, then we would probably feel less insecure and be more willing to actually listen to the usually less than straight forward realities that the expert tell us about.

I don't know. My hypothesis is that our current inability to listen to complex truths is heavily effected by a lack of confidence in ourselves and that our lack of confidence in ourselves is prepetuated by a belief system which does not account for our own needs.

Maybe I went off on a tangent and am completely wrong. Feel free to point it out.

Ok now do NYT columnists

[censemaking]

Dealing with complexity first means knowing what it is. In this first post in the 2025 Summer Series dealing with all we're dealing with, I begin with a look at complexity.

[interested-pig]

HAL 9000

Complex adaptive systems persist because each independent unit in the system follows rules that guide it to do so. To anthropomorphise this behaviour, we could equate this persisting nature as a survival instinct. For example, it can be said that all living things purpose is to ensure its DNA, a complex adaptive system, survives. Our brains, our societies, ecosystems and flocks of birds are wired to persist, to survive.

Modern digital computers are not complex adaptive systems, despite parallel processing there is always a controller coordinating the threads. In complex adaptive systems each unit (bird, brain cell) operates independently - the entire process is parallel. Computers do not have a survival instinct similar to ours. However, advances in analogue computing could result in machines with the capability of entirely parallel processing. Such machines could potentially demonstrate all aspects of a complex adaptive system. It is entirely possible that we could create a machine with a ‘survival instinct’. Such a machine, like our immune system, may even enhance its survival through replication.

There is no implication that such machine would be conscious. It could be more akin to a virus or amoeba than a human. However, this does not make it any less dangerous than an animal threatened with termination. Could the HAL 9000 become a reality? Skynet a possibility?😬

[granulesofsand]

It is true that syscourse hurts everybody. It has before, the different movements rising up and the ways each of them lashed out. Multiples were not treated well by psych fields, but many didn’t realize it was bad.

So then came along the natural multiples. They separated themselves from medical definitions, but in doing so created a new standard against those multiples still in treatment; medical multiples. It began the fight for plurality as an identity, and also it created the basis of harassing CDD systems for being traumatized and wanting/needing care.

Depending on whether you(&) count yourself/selves plural, the first punch was somewhere between psych abuse and the first spark of revolution. We weren’t around for the start of this. Our experience was of both sides still lashing out, and of psych abuse still alive and well.

It’s my prerogative that we ought to keep fighting. That we have to fight for all of us. The cycles are still going, but they don’t have to be. We can stand together for the singular vague purpose of making plurality (multiplicity) normal. We should be treated well by our doctors and peers, we should be respected however out we chose to be.

I don’t know if we’ll ever get to unity. We don’t need to get along to work together.

[coreagroup]

Navigating the Intricacies of Global Legal Translation

Legal translation is a complex and challenging field that requires attention to detail, a deep understanding of legal systems and terminology, and strong language skills. Legal translators face a number of unique challenges that can make their work difficult and demanding. Some of the main challenges that legal translators encounter include varying laws from country to country, constantly…

[cressidagrey]

Formidable

Pairing: Oscar Piastri x Felicity Leong-Piastri (Original Character)

Summary:  Andrea Stella figures out that Felicity Piastri is more than “just” Oscar’s wife. 

Notes: Big thanks to @llirawolf , who listens to me ramble and checks my science-y mumbo jumbo 😂

(divider thanks to @saradika-graphics )

It started the way most breakthroughs did—not with a groundbreaking discovery, but with a tired engineer holding a half-wrinkled printout and a hopeful expression.

“Boss,” James said, hovering just inside the doorway of Andrea’s office. “I think you should read this.”

Andrea looked up from his laptop. “If it’s another CFD model from that Reddit forum, I swear—”

“It’s not. It’s from a paper. Academic. Legit. Published in Race Systems & Applied Motion last month.”

Andrea raised an eyebrow. “Obscure.”

“Very. It has like 20 readers,” the engineer agreed. “But I think it’s real. It’s clean. It’s sharp. It’s…” He hesitated. “We might want to test it.”

That got Andrea’s attention.

He took the paper and began to skim.

Title: Redefining Compliance: Adaptive Suspension Geometry Under Load-Sensitive Parameters for Mid-Field Chassis Configurations.

Andrea kept reading. It was dense—academic, yes—but it was also practical. It spoke the language of someone who knew exactly what they were doing. There were no ego traps. No unnecessary complexity. Just hard math and hard-earned insight.

Andrea flipped the page. Then another. His eyes caught a note referencing flex dynamics in chassis response curves and passive recovery lag.

It was correct. More than correct. It was insightful.

The author wasn’t spitballing ideas from afar—this was the work of someone who had lived in the theory and understood the application. Who referenced real-world tolerances. Racing examples. The math was sound. The diagrams were better than half the ones their CFD team managed.

Andrea flipped back to the byline.

Dr. F. Piastri.

Piastri. 

James grinned. “Fun coincidence in the name, right? He’s smart.”

Andrea didn’t correct him.

Because yes—coincidence. Probably. But something about it stuck in his brain, like a whisper he couldn’t quite place.

He read the essay in full that night—twice. It was elegant, sharp, and frustratingly precise in the way only truly experienced voices ever were. The type of clarity that came from years of not just understanding a concept, but translating it into reality.

The next morning, Andrea sent out an internal email.

Subject: Additional Works by Dr. F. Piastri If anyone has access to prior publications by this author, please forward them to me.

By the end of the week, his inbox was full.

One essay became three. Three became eleven. Eleven became twenty. 

Each one published under the name F.Piastri, buried in obscure journals and small-circulation engineering reviews that didn’t get traffic unless someone was either deeply curious or incredibly desperate. 

Andrea was both.

Each article was smarter than the last—strange, elegant engineering thought-pieces published across the most obscure academic mechanical journals Andrea had ever encountered. Niche ones. The kind that only the most obsessive minds contributed to, with names like Thermoelasticity in Microstructured Materials and Lateral Load Adaptation Quarterly.

F.Piastri had written:

An article about Load-dependent understeer in transitional corners (with math that Andrea double-checked twice because it was too clean).

A 2019 think-piece on long-run stability under thermal degradation.

An essay about Aerodynamic oscillation buffering for short-track endurance vehicles.

An article about the economic viability of 3D printed carbon struts under rotational shear (he actually flagged that one for McLaren Applied).

 A thesis that corrected a widely accepted torque model—buried in a conference archive.

A published rebuttal in Journal of Vehicle Design so politely worded it read like a love letter—until you realized she’d rewritten the reviewer’s assumptions line by line.

There was even one article on fluid dynamics that had been cited in a grad-level textbook from ETH Zurich. 

Andrea devoured them all.

He—She?—wrote like someone who saw the car before it was built. Who understood not just how suspension worked, but how it felt. How energy passed through a chassis not as force but as intent.

The writing style was sharp. Practical. Absolutely ruthless in its logic. There was clarity there—an elegance—that reminded him of only a few people he’d ever worked with.

It was revolutionary. It was poetic.

By the time he tracked down the doctoral thesis from Oxford, Andrea wasn’t breathing properly.

Reinforcement Through Flexibility: Dynamic Adaptation in Composite- Structured Performance Environments.

By: F. Piastri.

 Submitted: December 2022

Andrea stared at the name.

F. Piastri.

He stared for so long his tea went cold beside him.

His hands were shaking—not because of nerves, but because he already knew.

He opened the PDF. Skimmed past the table of contents. Scrolled through diagrams that made his heart stutter.

There was no photo. No biographical section. Just a clean Oxford University seal, 284 pages of dense, brilliant theory, and then—

A dedication.

To Oscar: For believing in a future that didn’t exist yet, and building it with me anyway. Every lap, every choice, every time—you’ve been my constant.

And to Bee: For reminding me that softness and strength aren’t opposites. You are the best thing I’ve ever helped create.

Andrea sat back in his chair like he’d been physically shoved.

Bee.

Oscar. 

F. Piastri. 

Felicity Piastri. 

Felicity.

Oscar’s wife.

Dr. F. Piastri wasn’t some reclusive academic or distant uncle with a gift for simulation modeling.

She lived in Oscar’s house.

 She packed his lunchbox.

 She raised their daughter.

 And she had published papers on suspension theory that half of F1 would kill to understand. Quietly. Efficiently. Correctly.

Andrea leaned back in his chair, stared at the ceiling for a long moment, and whispered:

“…Of course it’s his wife.”

Of course the quiet, composed driver who rarely raised his voice and always had one hand on the bigger picture had married someone brilliant. Of course she wasn’t just talented—she was a published expert with a doctorate from Oxford.

Not a coincidence. 

Not a mystery engineer.

Not some guy.

But Oscar’s wife.

Oscar Piastri—quiet, methodical Oscar—had married a genius.

A doctor of mechanical engineering from Oxford who wrote better technical documentation in a margin note than most engineers did in a year. Who published under initials. Who could probably solve half their handling inconsistencies while holding a toddler on her hip.

Andrea sat in silence for a full minute.

Then he exhaled. “...of course he did.”

He opened a new tab.

Email draft: 

To: Technical Team 

Subject: URGENT – Reference Reading Required Attached: Every single thing Dr. F. Piastri had ever published.

***

The meeting was meant to be quick.

Just a routine Monday touchpoint—debrief, run through media notes with Sophie, talk sponsor appearances, maybe discuss Oscar’s upcoming comms obligations.

Zak had rolled in with a protein shake.

Lando was lounging sideways in a chair like he’d melted into it.

Oscar had a protein bar and an expression of polite mildness, as usual.

Andrea, meanwhile, had not slept.

 Not because of the race.

 Because he’d spent the entire weekend reading Dr. Felicity Piastri’s entire body of work. Every published paper. Every obscenely niche journal article.

And her doctoral thesis.

He hadn’t meant to do it all in one sitting. He just couldn’t stop.

By 2 a.m. he was muttering things like “Of course she used Euler-Bernoulli assumptions, she’s too smart for non-parametric bullshit.”

 By 4 a.m., he’d highlighted her proposed solution to dampen micro-vibration load in corner exits.

 By 6 a.m., he had a headache, an existential crisis, and a desperate need to know: Why had Oscar Piastri never mentioned this?!

So at the end of the meeting—just as Sophie was wrapping up and Lando was aimlessly spinning a pen like a propeller—Andrea set down a file on the table.

Calmly. Casually. Like he hadn’t just had his entire mechanical worldview rattled by a woman who wasn’t even on the payroll.

“Oscar,” Andrea said, voice deceptively neutral. “Why didn’t you ever mention that your wife holds a doctorate in mechanical engineering?”

Oscar, halfway through eating his protein bar, blinked. “What?”

Andrea gestured vaguely, as if the thesis were still radiating brilliance from his desk. “Felicity. Doctorate. Thesis. Dozens of published papers. Half of them useful to our current car design issues. Why didn’t you say anything?”

Oscar blinked once. “Oh. Yeah. She gets bored sometimes.”

Andrea blinked back.

Lando stared like he’d been smacked with a front wing. “Wait—she got a doctorate?!”

Oscar nodded, chewing. “Yeah. Finished it in 2022. She was stuck in that horrible flat in Enstone while I was back and forth with Alpine, and she got bored. Wrote most of it at the kitchen table while Bee napped.”

Andrea just… stared. 

He had read the thesis. Studied it. The mathematical modeling alone had kept him awake at night—and she had apparently written it during toddler nap times, while stuck in a damp shoebox flat in Oxfordshire.

Zak looked up slowly from his tablet. “Your wife was bored. So she got a PhD in mechanical engineering.”

Oscar shrugged. “She already had the research mostly done before Bee was even born in 2020. She just had to write it up. Bee was napping a lot anyway.”

Sophie blinked. “She wrote a 200-page dissertation with a toddler in the house?”

Oscar just shrugged. “It helped that Bee liked the sound of the keyboard.”

Andrea turned to Zak, still stunned. “She predicted the kind of high-frequency oscillation we’re seeing this season. Two years ago. In a footnote.”

Lando leaned forward like he was watching a live feed of someone discovering aliens. “She’s just, like, a genius?” he asked, voice too loud, too incredulous. “And you never brought it up?”

Oscar just sighed. “She hates that word.”

Andrea just stared at him. “Oscar, she’s not just good. She’s formidable. Has she ever applied anywhere formally?”

Oscar looked genuinely confused. “Why would she apply anywhere?”

Andrea stared. “To work. In engineering. In motorsport. Academia.”

Oscar blinked. “She does work. She manages our lives, Bee, the house, and the chickens.”

Lando leaned toward Andrea, wide-eyed: “I’ve never felt dumber in my entire life.”

Andrea sighed. “Join the club.”

***

The kitchen smelled like vanilla and wood polish and faintly like chicken coop — which meant Felicity had mopped and baked and wrangled Mansell, the escape artist hen, all while probably rebalancing one of their stock portfolios.

Oscar dropped his bag by the door and leaned against the kitchen entryway.

Felicity was sitting at the table in her old university hoodie, feet bare, Bee curled up under her arm asleep with Button the frog as a pillow. There were spreadsheets open on one side of her laptop screen, a half-watched nature documentary on the other, and one of Bee’s plastic toy bulls standing solemnly in the middle of the table for reasons unknown.

He smiled.

God, he loved her.

“Hey,” he said softly.

Felicity glanced up. “Hey. Dinner’s in the oven. Bee passed out mid-pie crust.”

“Excellent,” Oscar said, dropping into the chair beside her. “Because I need carbs.”

She raised an eyebrow, equal parts amusement and curiosity. “Bad day?”

“No. Just... intellectually humbling.”

Felicity made a low amused noise and went back to her laptop. “Did Lando try to explain crypto again?”

Oscar snorted and reached over to carefully lift Bee into his lap, her curls warm against his hoodie. She barely stirred.

He could have let it sit. Saved it for later. But it was buzzing under his skin.

“Stella read your papers.”

That got her attention.

Felicity paused, her fingers stilled mid-scroll. “Which one?”

“All of them,” Oscar said. “Apparently it started with one of the engineers, who brought an article in from Race Systems & Applied Motion. Then he spiraled.”

“Ah,” Felicity murmured, unsurprised. “That one had a good diagram.”

“He found your thesis,” Oscar added.

This time she didn’t answer right away.

He reached for one of Bee’s crayons and twirled it idly in his fingers, watching her.

“He read the dedication,” he said, voice quieter now.

Felicity’s eyes softened in that way that always undid him a little. Always had.

“Did he say anything?” she asked.

Oscar smiled faintly. “He said you’re formidable.”

There was a beat of silence.

Then Felicity laughed—not loud, not startled, just warm and wry and a little disbelieving.

“God help the man,” she said. “He must have hit the rebuttal piece from the Vehicle Design Journal. That one made a few engineers cry.”

Oscar grinned. “Yeah, well. He was halfway to building you a shrine by the end of the meeting. I also told him you got bored in Enstone and wrote your PhD while Bee was napping.”

Felicity gave him a look. “You make it sound like I was scrapbooking.”

“Weren’t you also doing that at the time?”

Felicity blinked. “...Okay, fair.”

Bee stirred slightly in his lap, a tiny sigh escaping her lips as she nuzzled deeper into his hoodie sleeve.

Oscar looked down at her—this tiny human they somehow made and raised—and then back at the woman across the table. 

Her hair was messier than usual, strands escaping her braid, and there was a faint flour smudge near her temple. She hadn’t bought herself a new pair of jeans in two years. She sometimes forgot to eat when she was buried in simulations. She once fixed the bathroom plumbing at midnight because she didn’t like how the guy from the hardware store spoke to her.

She was the smartest person he knew.

Oscar knew most people wouldn’t think it when they first met her. She smiled too easily. She didn’t correct anyone. She let others assume things—that she was just the girlfriend, just the wife, just the mother.

But she had a doctorate from Oxford, and more published academic papers than most career professors. She could hold court with race engineers and theoretical physicists in the same breath, then go home and teach Bee how to build a pulley system out of Lego and twine. She spoke in quiet, exact terms, and when she challenged people, she did it so gently they sometimes didn’t notice until it was too late.

He’d long since stopped being surprised by her. He’d just—normalized it. Integrated it. Felicity being a genius was like oxygen to him: invisible, essential, and easy to take for granted until someone else nearly passed out from the realization.

She was just Fliss to him. 

The woman who sold her designer bags to pay rent when her family cut her off. The mother of his child. His fiercest critic and his most devoted supporter. The one person he trusted without hesitation.

She didn’t want headlines or praise. She wanted quiet mornings and clever puzzles. She wanted Bee to grow up confident. She wanted Oscar to remember to eat something green.

She was the smartest person he knew — and she hated being called smart. So he didn’t. He just came home.

“He called you formidable,” he repeated. “And I agree. For what it’s worth.”

Felicity smiled then—slow and quiet, the kind that reached all the way to her eyes.

She leaned across the table and kissed his temple. “Thanks,” she said. “But if he asks me to consult, I’m charging him triple.”

Oscar laughed softly and ran a hand through Bee’s curls. “Deal.”

And he meant it. Because maybe it was easy for him to forget sometimes, tucked into the quiet rhythm of their life, that the world hadn’t caught up to how brilliant she was.

But he never stopped being proud of her.

Not for a second.

[reasonsforhope]

"Morningside Park, a beloved neighborhood park in Miami with sweeping views of Biscayne Bay, will soon pilot an innovative approach to coastal resilience.

BIOCAP tiles, a 3D-printed modular system designed to support marine life and reduce wave impact along urban seawalls, will be installed on the existing seawall there in spring 2025. BIOCAP stands for Biodiversity Improvement by Optimizing Coastal Adaptation and Performance.

Developed by our team of architects and marine biologists at Florida International University, the uniquely textured prototype tiles are designed to test a new approach for helping cities such as Miami adapt to rising sea levels while simultaneously restoring ecological balance along their shorelines...

Ecological costs of traditional seawalls

Seawalls have long served as a primary defense against coastal erosion and storm surges. Typically constructed of concrete and ranging from 6 to 10 feet in height, they are built along shorelines to block waves from eroding the land and flooding nearby urban areas.

However, they often come at an ecological cost. Seawalls disrupt natural shoreline dynamics and can wipe out the complex habitat zones that marine life relies on.

Marine organisms are crucial in maintaining coastal water quality by filtering excess nutrients, pollutants and suspended particles. A single adult oyster can filter 20-50 gallons of water daily, removing nitrogen, phosphorus and solids that would otherwise fuel harmful algal blooms. These blooms deplete oxygen levels and damage marine ecosystems.

Filter-feeding organisms also reduce turbidity, which is the cloudiness of water caused by suspended sediment and particles. Less water turbidity means more light can penetrate, which benefits seagrasses that require sunlight for photosynthesis. These seagrasses convert carbon dioxide into oxygen and energy-rich sugars while providing essential food and habitat for diverse marine species.

Swirling shapes, shaded grooves

Unlike the flat, lifeless surfaces of typical concrete seawalls, each BIOCAP tile is designed with shaded grooves, crevices and small, water-holding pockets. These textured features mimic natural shoreline conditions and create tiny homes for barnacles, oysters, sponges and other marine organisms that filter and improve water quality.

The tile’s swirling surface patterns increase the overall surface area, offering more space for colonization. The shaded recesses are intended to help regulate temperature by providing cooler, more stable microenvironments. This thermal buffering can support marine life in the face of rising water temperatures and more frequent heat events driven by climate change.

Another potential benefit of the tiles is reducing the impact of waves.

When waves hit a natural shoreline, their energy is gradually absorbed by irregular surfaces, tide pools and vegetation. In contrast, when waves strike vertical concrete seawalls, the energy is reflected back into the water rather than absorbed. This wave reflection – the bouncing back of wave energy – can amplify wave action, increase erosion at the base of the wall and create more hazardous conditions during storms.

The textured surfaces of the BIOCAP tiles are designed to help diffuse wave energy by mimicking the natural dissipation found on undisturbed shorelines.

The design of BIOCAP takes cues from nature. The tile shapes are based on how water interacts with different surfaces at high tide and low tide. Concave tiles, which curve inward, and convex tiles, which curve outward, are installed at different levels along the seawall. The goal is to deflect waves away from the seawall, reduce direct impact and help minimize erosion and turbulence around the wall’s foundation.A

How we will measure success

After the BIOCAP tiles are installed, we plan to assess how the seawall redesign enhances biodiversity, improves water quality and reduces wave energy. This two-year pilot phase will help assess the long-term value of ecologically designed infrastructure.

To evaluate biodiversity, we will use underwater cameras to capture time-lapse imagery of the marine life that colonizes the tile surfaces. These observations will aid in documenting species diversity and habitat use over time...

In the coming year, we’ll be watching with hope as the new BIOCAP tiles begin to welcome marine life, offering a glimpse into how nature might reclaim and thrive along our urban shorelines.