LastThursday

I was thinking about localisation. Here are my half-chewed thoughts about it. Whilst we go about our everyday activities the one thing that seems undeniable is that we have a limited effect on the on the world; both limited in scope and locality. By locality I mean that we affect things in our vicinity or a proxy for vicinity. For example, if I put down a mug of coffee on my table, then the only thing I have affected is the position of my mug in space and more importantly that mug is in my vicinity, it is not a mug on a table in a different country say. It may seem obvious if we're talking about things you can affect physically: our bodies are localised in a small amount of space, so the things within our reach is small. We can move our bodies to a different location, but it's a slow process and we can cover miles at best without aid. The subtlety is that even if we move our bodies that is still an insignificant amount of space and material we can affect compared to the whole. But what we affect is still localised in small pockets of space. We can augment greatly what we can affect by using machines of one type or another. With a machine we could dig a huge hole in a few hours for example, or we can send a message to a person in another part of the world and affect them that way. We could ask that person a thousand miles away to put a coffee mug on a table and we have effectively become more delocalised. Although, still, relative to the whole we can only affect very tiny amounts of stuff and in localised pockets of space, even if those pockets are spread far apart (that is what I mean by proxy for vicinity). But does reality really work this way? If everything is affected by everything else (think butterfly effect), then surely our effects are greatly non-local and non-linear? The coffee mug heats the air around it and the table it's sitting on. One of those hot molecules of air may go to warm up an insect which helps keep it alive just long enough to infect a person miles away and on and on in an infinite chain of cause and effect. However, most of those side effects will not be meaningful and are so miniscule as not to matter to us directly. Indeed, the mug can warp the fabric of space itself via gravity and this has unbounded reach. The closer you look at the world the more interconnected it appears. If it is the case that reality itself is a unity, then everything must affect everything else... eventually. Science has discovered however, that the speed of cause and effect cannot be faster than the speed of light. So even if localisation is untrue (we affect everything), then localisation is true over finite time periods (we affect everything only eventually). Like the ripples in a pond our actions spread out forever. Quantum mechanics says that there is ''spooky action at a distance'', i.e. non-localised correlations, but no information can be exchanged instantaneously - there is no instantaneous cause and effect. Is there something possibly outside of time and space that is not bound by its limitations and laws? Is it possible for us to affect stuff non-locally? Scientists don't think so, but I'm not so sure. Anecdotally, I have experienced coincidences, synchronocities, guiding events through thought or thought-transference that just seem too uncanny to dismiss. Perhaps the unity of reality is a lot deeper than mere cause and effect, and much happens non-locally. It's as if reality had a mind of its own co-ordinating the entire universe in all its mind-boggling detail. Scientists will never find a particle transferring thoughts from one person to another, because the mind of reality doesn't work that way.

We are in 2024.

@integral I know this situation all too well, in my case it was a family member. You're right to be concerned for the welfare of another human being. You're also right to be concerned for your own welfare. The answer then really comes down to this: balance. Looking after someone else can take away from your own freedoms and welfare, so how much are you willing to give up? Is it 100% them and 0% you, or 100% you and 0% them? Realistically, things will happen organically and you settle down into a pattern, even if it can be detrimental to your own well being. In the end with my family member things were set up so that effectively they were self sufficient, but regularly I would have to help out with anything that was too complex for them to handle. A lot can be done so that things are easier on yourself. Involving other people (and professionals) can help a great deal. But also, getting the person themselves to take responsibility helps a lot. After all, if that person had no-one then they would have to fend for themselves in any case. So counterintuitively helping less can be more productive, but it really depends on the situation. You always have the option to walk away even if it would play on your conscience. It can be done.

I see emotions as being like a messaging system. Your being is trying to maintain homeostasis, the further away from that you go the louder the emotional messages are (either positive or negative). From this paradigm chasing emotions or ignoring them doesn't make much sense. Rather you should be looking to maintain good homeostatis: basically you're not in imminent danger and all your needs are being met. A plant doesn't chase emotions it searches for nutrients and daylight.

Is there a right way to live to have a fulfilling life? What is time, what is space, what is stuff? Is reality governed by strict laws or is it more flexible? How does reality maintain itself, what is persistence? What is thought exactly? Voices, hallucinations etc. Do my thoughts leak and/or do they come from "somewhere else"? Does my body do its own thing, or do "I" control it? What should living be about if anything? Fun, finding God, grinding, socialising, mastery etc.? What is and what is the function of dreaming? Are dreams "other worlds"? Will anything be left of "me" or my conscious experience after death?

The past existed, the confusion is over what you mean by exist. For example, the past doesn't exist in the same way the present does. If you think about your episodic memories they are nebulous and low quality (and many probably wrong), and very much like a dream - it's another type of existence. Materially, the past is always concertinaed into the present, with clues everywhere, but even that is a different sort of existence than "the present moment". For example around the corner from here are streets lined with Edwardian houses: evidence of existence of a past, but it's actually the present - I have to reconstruct a past from what I see now, a reconstructed type of existence.

I spoke to someone today, they definitely existed. As with any of this type of thing it all comes down to definitions. Even a solipsist can admit others exist, they just don't believe that others are not themselves. Existence is flexible and depends on what paradigm your using.

18 minutes till a work meeting. How much can I get down? How would a polymath (say me) follow their muse and actually live off their polymathy? First things first, is polymathy a hobby or a way of being? For me it's both. People do hobbies that for one reason or another they find interesting. I would say though in general there are probably one or two hobbies that people might have. I have many: computers, art appreciation, spirituality, stem subjects, languages, music, transport, design, you get the picture. I'd say that my central hobby is computing, it's the one which I find myself engaged in most outside of work - the fact that my work is also computing is more by accident than design. 13 minutes. That broad range of interests makes it difficult for me to focus in any one in particular, I do have a favourite child, but I still love all the others. Maybe synergy is the way to go, but I don't see how music and transport can go together. But there is a linking hobby and that is precisely computing. Computers can do anything and could be involved in all my interests in one way or another: creating music, sharing ideas about spirituality and so on. But that use case is only using computers as a tool for synergy, not as the end in itself which is the thing I'm actually more interested in. One of the reasons I'm so disappointed with my career is that computers feature as tools not as the end itself; I'm less interested in creating a fancy spreadsheet that will solve my company's problems, than I am creating a new type of programming language say. It's like being a blacksmith but being asked to hammer nails all day - albeit in a variety of ways. Ultimately very unsatisfactory. 7 Minutes. The other question is that if I'm creating value for others (that's the only way to make money), then I will be at the beck and call of others' whims. That immediately butts up against my need for autonomy and to "follow my nose". The main joy I get from my polymathy is the organic path I can take from one area of interest to another and learn new information on the way. If however, I am beholden to constantly provide value for others then I am forever restricted in that way - and some (or all) of the joy is zapped from the process. In reality up until now I've kept my polymathy very separate from everything else in my life for exactly that reason: protectionism and freedom. Ultimately, I have the right make up to be entrepreneurial. I'm very self motivated when it comes to my own interests. But I am far far less interested in providing value, except where they may overlap with my interests, and I'm definitely not interested in the administrative side of running a business. The ideal being that someone else would do the admin and planning. 0 minutes.

An interesting talk about what life actually is and the latest findings in biology

Woah I didn't think you'd actually ask me. Erm... I have a long laundry list of hinderances, most of it probably bullshit. My own mind in short. I have to reprogram the beast. Cheers anyway. Seems like you know your own priorities though: freedom, jeopardy, impatience, movement. Lean into those things not against them, there's my advice.

I'm with you there, except I'm not running a business. From the way you're speaking I think you're approaching a point of inflection. If the business takes off in a sensible time frame, then you'll be on your way. However if it doesn't, your internal state will eventually force you to take drastic action or a big course correction - that will be the actual crisis. Depending on how you handle that it may or may not be painful. Go get that motorbike, but just know it's fluff and distraction, and that's ok. Just keep working towards that freedom whatever form it takes. As for actual concrete advice, if I had any I would apply it to myself first! Good luck.

The story you're telling yourself is wrong in a number of ways. Being 35 is not old. In fact I'd say for men 35 is a great age for dating. Women will go for emotional maturity, (financial) stability and (social) confidence and healthiness. If you want to attract women, then you can go a long way by learning to project those attributes. 35 is a sweet spot, because you're not too young and immature and not too old and unhealthy - and by 35 women expect you to have your life sorted out and will project that on to you. People are not very good judges of their own attractiveness. Let that sink in. You should always be looking to maximise and improve on what you do have though. Some women will care about what you look like, but many won't, like I said above other things like confidence and maturity are more important, maximise those. Women will like a man who knows what they want and is comfortable in their own skin and looks after themselves physically - work on those things. As long you as you don't dress like a tramp, and go around feeling sorry for yourself, you'll attract someone, eventually. Stop feeling regret, it's a waste of your emotional energy. You need to get past the feeling like a being a pervert leering at young women, you're not. Young women are the most attractive to all age groups, because, biology. But I would caveat that by saying that a lot of young women are immature and inexperienced - you should question whether you really want to deal with that. There are plenty of very attractive women at all ages, broaden your tastes, see what older women have to offer. Any woman worth going after will require work on your part, it's part of the game. In short, stop telling yourself lies and put the work in and improve those things that women find attractive in a man.

Sometimes a good trick to understand what something is, is to understand what it isn't first. What is not meaningful? Another is to look at intensity: if something is more meaningful than something else, why is that?

@Sincerity I guess there's crazy with intent and crazy without intent, while both outwardly the same inwardly are different. Does it matter what's going on inwardly if the effect is the same outwardly? Dunno. The law says yes in general, even though it's impossible to know what's going on inside someone else 🤷 My insight. If you're walking on a pavement and someone is walking directly towards you, start to move to the left, and more often than not the person will mirror you, then move quickly to the right to avoid.

Yep, look around you. It's understood insomuch as it exists, but there is no possible reason for it. And then you realise that understanding is as much part of it as anything else. It understands itself, but nothing more or nothing less.

Those BAM documentaries are great. For a different angle:

I sometimes wonder what it would be like to be on another world. Especially to see the Earth itself rising above the horizon, and how mind blowing that would be. Only a very few people have had that privilege. The last of which splashed down in an ocean somewhere the day I was born. It was a full moon the day after. At least I got to watch it on TV in 2024: And way before the internet James Burke was on TV explaining everything for you. Even at that age I beginning to get hooked on this stuff!

I have an itch I need to scratch. This very normal, every day, relentless, humdrum, experience of mine is actually really bizzare and extraordinary, and there "I" am in the middle of it. WTAF? And then I have some bald guy on YouTube telling me "yes yes your experience is extraordinary yes". How can I not be hooked on working it all out. I've already had the dissolving bit that was the normal part. Bliss would just be the cherry on top.

Music to, whatever, to.

This. Most people I've known have nearly an irrational need to be coupled up at any cost - so much so that they will impose their irrationality on the single people out there (me). I find women on balance need this more than men, but only marginally so. Literally every woman I've ever lusted after has been attached. Hang on a minute... I've just had a huge epiphany...! let me write this down before I forget.

Yes I can do it on command. But it's taken me actual years of practice, probably about 15 so far. What has it taught me? That my internal monologue is an ingrained habit nothing more and it's possible to function perfectly well without it. I'd say I'm more present more of the time as a result and I find it easier to sleep. But reading without subvocalising still eludes me - gosh darn it. I started by exercising my peripheral vision whilst walking. So, you walk and look dead ahead but pay attention to what's going on to the sides of your vision or above and below. If you practise enough you'll realise you can actually see a lot more than you realise and you can get into "the zone" and start to see everything at once. The point is that it is actually hard to have internal monologue whilst doing this, try it. The meta-point is that focusing intensely on any task will reduce your internal monogue. Practising being focused intensely on what is actually happening around you will help. Lots of practice. Notice also that there will be a slight amount of tension in your tongue when you talk to yourself. Sticking your tongue out and biting down gently on it (I advise doing it in private) will have some affect on your internal monologue. Even hypnosis can work (although I'm quite suggestible): For earworms don't take tablets. I just go to my favourite music outlet and play the song that's going around and around in my head, it soon gets rid of it - but make sure you listen to more songs afterwards. The danger is you get another earworm though, hey ho.

I'm very in to this sort of thing. Here's a few videos to get you thinking: Incredibly precisely manufactured Egyptian vases: Evidence of machining in ancient sites: The mysterious stone nubs and knobs: Finely crafted stone blocks: I can't get enough of it!

It should be borne in mind that the horse has already bolted. It doesn't matter what anyone says, does or wants. It's like trying to stop an express train with your hand. Only two things may stop the train: an artificially engineered deadly pathogen or all out nuclear war. The pathogen would have to be extremely transmissible and extremely deadly. All out nuclear war will mainly affect cities, those in rural and remote areas will be less affected. It should be clear, I don't advocate either.

I get exactly what you feel. Being 22 should be a time for experimenting and exploring different avenues and having many different experiences. In fact your twenties should be for this. Don't get too bogged down in any one thing. When you're older you can settle more. Counterintuitively you should use your dissatisfaction to motivate you instead of letting it slow you down. Instead of spending energy trying to get rid of it, just accept that for a while you will be dissatisfied, probably with everything, even if the feeling is uncomfortable. The message of dissatisfaction is telling you directly that you should be trying something new: go do it!

@integral you raise a good point. Although, I don't think there will be millions or probably even thousands going "off planet". It'll be tens at a time. That would make the pioneer populations extremely vulnerable to going extinct for a long time as the populations slowly grow. They'll then have to contend with population expansion on a planet with no ecosystems at all - they'll be totally reliant on their technologies to cater for all their needs, which is a tall order. Not impossible, but very difficult to pull off.