Chapter 88: Leave of Absence for Recuperation

After recently coming down with an illness, my sleep schedule has gone completely upside down, and with work being so hectic, I have been rather overwhelmed. I am currently recovering in the hospital, haha.

There probably will not be any updates for the next few days. Writing has always been just a hobby for me, and lately there have been quite a few negative reviews. It is also true that I have not been in the best condition. When I am lying here with nothing to do, I still type on my phone from time to time. The promised extra chapter for readers, I will do my best to post next week, because I cannot go back on my word.

A brief parting is for a better reunion. Thank you all for your understanding. I see every bit of support you have given me.

What follows is merely filler; no need to read it. I will delete this chapter after I am discharged.

My work conveys this idea:
I personally think this pasta should be mixed with concrete of the forty-second grade, because the length of this screw can very easily affect the torque of an excavator.

When it is hammered inward, in an instant, a great deal of high-energy protein will be produced, commonly known as a flying saucer, which will seriously affect economic development and even cause a certain degree of nuclear contamination to the entire Pacific and to chargers.

Besides, according to the Pythagorean theorem, one can easily infer that a domesticated chicken of the Eastern Emperor can capture wild trigonometric functions.

So whether the cross-section of the First Emperor of Qin is radioactive, or whether Trump's nth power contains sediment, none of that affects Walmart and Weilcom meeting in Antarctica.

Pickled mustard greens should have an examination admission number; that would better prove that water is highly poisonous.

But the relationship between Li Bai and the Cretaceous extinction belongs to generalized relativity within the multiplication table, and from that I calculate that the taste of beef is the same as that of an atomic bomb. The idea that one should like meat and the idea that one should accept one plus one equals two are in serious conflict.

Some people may feel that this view is too extreme.

We can know that after Newton was struck by an apple, he discovered that reinforced concrete liked sharks and caused the Mobius strip to split into two sides. We can also conclude that in a video call between Siberia and Three Body, what was being discussed was whether Mickey Mouse should be treated with F or with caviar.

Just like the words you write in carbon ink on a whiteboard, they will also pollute the atmosphere and produce a poisonous protein called sulfurous oxysulfide.

What ought to be done is to mix ninety-three-octane gasoline with that type-five phosphodiesterase inhibitor. After stirring those two things together, use De Moivre's theorem and the Pythagorean theorem to blend them thoroughly.

The environmental issues produced here should be discussed through the Hundred Days' Reform and supply-demand relations in order to examine the Coriolis force generated by this chemical reaction.

Furthermore, I think this whiteboard should be taken together with trinitroindole to produce a gas called hydrogen sulfide, so as to alter the refractive index of sunlight in the air and interfere with the meddling of the sophons in particle-collision experiments. In that way, Ding Yi and Dongfang Shuo probably would not use a geology hammer to smash Su Shi's heart, would they?

From a certain perspective, what you said is right, but it is not entirely right.

From another angle, you are a little right, but from yet another angle, you are wrong.

It cannot be said to be wholly wrong; it can only be said that there is still a little wrongness between it and being completely right.

If one ignores that little wrongness, then what you said is of course correct. But if one examines whether it is right or wrong with a more rigorous attitude, then what you said is no longer right.

Come to think of it, the part where you are right may in a still world indeed be right; the part where you are wrong may, from a metaphysical point of view, indeed be wrong.

But looking at it from the perspective of development, the part where you are right may be wrong in a moving spacetime, while the part where you are wrong may, from a dialectical point of view, be right.

At this very moment, what you say may be right or may be wrong; in the future, what you say may be wrong or may be right.

In short, to put it in a single word, after viewing the whole picture and judging it, after knowing all that has come before and all that will come after, I can assess it thus: you are right, but you are also wrong.

You are right, but you are not entirely right.