one in a thousand people who enter the tunnel at eindhoven centraal station turn around and leave again the same way they came in. this is one of the findings of a study of the movements of five million passengers, but the reasons for these most interesting of movements are not recorded, sadly.
i can think of plenty of reasons why someone would enter the tunnel at eindhoven centraal and turn around and leave again. probably 50% have forgotten their OV chipkaart and they have to go home again to get it. of the remaining 50% half have forgotten something else which is of vital importance and without which they cannot possibly travel, including things like forgetting to feed the cat or turning off the gas. that leaves possibly one in four thousand people who have a potentially interesting reason for what the professor calls ‘inverting their trajectory’. but how many of those people actually inverted their trajectory?
wasn’t their trajectory always to go into the tunnel and at some point to turn around and go back?
it made me think about the word motivation, a word which was first used in the late 19th century. motivation is when there is both a motive (a reason to do something or to move) and something is actually done or moves.
but a lot of things are done without any motive, can we still speak of motivation when there is motion but no motive?
some of those people entered the tunnel and they were motivated to just go into it a little way but not all the way. and some of them were motivated to turn back, but i am interested in the person/s who entered the tunnel and left again without any motive or motivation.
there may be a connection here with lucretius’s clinamen. it is possible that there was a person who entered the tunnel and went out again who “hath not a fixed necessity within?”
it is possible that i may not have had enough sleep.