I discovered that one simply needs to be driven to work. And the best drive is a good mix of exercise with holding the breath type of concentration. If there is something else, that might be good classical music. Listening to liszt is sort of amazing. He represents the muscle of mid 19th century victorian romanticism in my opinion. He has a good mix of masculinity and ingenuity, unlike Brahms who excelled at the former. In some sense listening to virtuoso work conveys the challenge the performer faces, hence stimulates good moral incentives to excel at one’s own work.
If one could streamline research, it won’t be called research. And perhaps I should take heed of a colleague’s wantom comment today that I am slow and I work very hard. I took it personally and defended my position, based on hyper-rationality. One could only try to maximize utility by excelling at what he can and forgo the things he has no control over. Within the ivory tower of math department, there is almost a concensus that great genius lies in a state of lethargy. I found that outrageous and irreconcilable. What I believe has always been a strict reward system in which people are given a precise measure of the amoung of sacrifice they are willing to issue. Last year saw a continuation of my Dutch year before that emphasized personal welfare preservation, i.e., I sought a state of being most conducive to the sustenation of life and preservation of its pristine state, much like the solider described in the first chapter of "Catch 22". Now I have come to terms with the two-sidedness of life, embodied in the need for both healthy lifestyle and personal sacrifice, and in my opinion, the former should justify the latter, much as the great Lei Feng of PRC had demonstrated all his life.