When people think your writing is so cool that they should periodically check in (aka send you reminders aka be desperate enough to ask more than once aka attempt to force/beg?) on how your contributions to their magazines are going along. Ones they requested for in the first place.
*me does the I am not worthy bow.* Of course, I did have legit reasons, which I elaborated.
A while ago, I did think about what I wanted to say, and wrote out a few pages of a rough draft. I soon realized I hadn’t read the magazine before, and had no way of knowing what kinds of articles are acceptable for publication. I had originally planned on an article embracing our inherent curiosity and drawing on it to get a better understanding of the world around us. But before I knew it, it stepped out of that framework and quickly plunged into how deterministic we implicitly assume the world is (through schooling, and to a large extent as scientists). It quickly got more philosophical as it questioned the reasons for existence of higher powers, as everything was purely determined from its previous state by strict classical physics laws. I then gradually introduced the notion of quantum physics, as a saviour from this grim outlook painted by previously non-probabilistic frameworks, by introducing the notion of “chance”.
As you can see, it wasn’t very coherent and just an idea that was beginning to form. I was, I think, shelving it till I got access to a few issues, so I could see what was the norm. However, I would be lying if I didn’t admit the words “… electronic format, preferably in MS Word.” acted as a deterrent to some extent.
I will read a few issues, and get back to it as soon as possible.
Thank you for the reminder.