kavaris

Yeah. That is sortve like how it is, except that—iuno if you ever took psychedelics, but like, theres a little bit of animosity present in how the structure of reality tries to keep itself together, or in other words, the exponential infatuation and ever progressive thoughts towards maintaining a better dream, then a better dream, then a better dream... That actually is only Level 1... Level 2 or 3 is more like a high dose of psychedelics, if you remember what happens.

maybe an even better question is like, will anyone ever in the history of lex fridman, come on his channel and be like, theres one thing called reality... and then, proceed from there talking and sortve guiding everything towards the center. Like are the chances near zero of that happening? And is it just cause no one understands what that is...? We could make it make sense, though, its gonna be rough, like, theres near zero amounts of places you can go w/ it. Hell i think theres atleast one road i like in there that i would take it, and make it make sense.

@Ulax You almost have a good question. almost. but i would start by rephrasing it such that you arent asking about situations, as its hard to pin point what that means when you are asking "how do i think...", then adding, ".. when asking a question", or.. "when im describing something". It also feels like you want to ask about spirituality or consciousness work since you mentioned leo, and in that sense youd have to clarify if that is what you meant to say (p.s., i believe your allowed to ask leo and @ him directly, assuming thats what u want) Therefore, your approach to asking your question requires some revision; at which point, what you are asking about might find a better fit. Something that would make more sense imo would be, e.g., "whats the right way to think about this area of research (*insert that thing youre researching*).." or ".. Whats the best way to think about this project im working on!?" (*insert project*), as that gives us context.

i figured somethin out w ai, as i was startin to get really angry with its random line of speculating/assumption making. Alas, i learned to "Ask it to ask you" questions, and have that be its default mode, instead of letting it throw things at you that dont make any sense. And that way, its looking to solve answers to a set of questions before going off and giving you its bag of words. Now it might not be enough, im not sure, but we will see how it goes, as so far its shown to work better than before. Theres of course still issues around circling multiple causal points at once, like it cant reason about too many things at once.. and it has to be pain-stakingly walked hand and hand across the street (and then back across the street again) so to speak

Like, when you accidentally have had your hand on the button that reads: "Press this to trip", thats like what i remember the psychedelic exp being like, as like, this thing that you feel yourself literally pressing (and then later, forgetting. Much like how automated heart pumping or breath-having is like a realization exp you are having when youve pressed upon realization, that which you forget you are having once forgotten) Somewhere in the process you forget that you were pressing the button, or what it was that even got you to, beyond a vague notion. You might in fact also forget that you were tripping, or atleast, the specific circumstances surrounding. and then the trip feels like it is building from/and off of— a sortve sequence of thoughts you had — that which all seem to pertain to the moment you are in... but , its more than that, cause its like, the thing that got you to that point is itself a riddle you cant quite recall—so too are the thoughts you are generating thereafter, as, its almost algorithmic; like, for every 10 or 20 thoughts that spin up, another 5 thoughts back in the thought buffer are getting lost in space And, you are constantly forgetting things you were so deeply invested in mentally, nd physically that its like, breaking reality and the moment you are/were in; its almost like, a test of how much patience you can have whilst you are having the exp, cause its mostly like, surviving this event: having thoughts that come to mind that neverend, and only seem to grow in both (1) there proximity to each other (like how finite the thoughts are from one another) as well as (2) how many there are in the global time of all thoughts that could/nd would ever occur And lastly, these thoughts are like, reality constructs that work for you/against you, cause they are playing into literal reality too, like they make the mechanisms happen, and are a little criss-crossed w/, well, its the thoughts themselves that are crissed crossed, and how anything you think or feel (anything in the experience) is connected visually, or vice versa, where visuals are connected and communicated within, which means you see what you feel literally, and you feel what you see; And it applies to all forms and senses alike. iuno theres something weird in the sentiment, its like a *right on the tip of the tongue*, like, not just for like the nature of reality as it is, but specifically for *where it came from, and where its going*, like, you can smell your pre-school experience as it is, as if you are there. And thats what i mean bout bein criss-crossed, cause you are like, pre empted experiencing—through time and space, such that material reality is also no longer following the standard library of code, but rather is runnin a new experimental crazy town

we gotta pass information down to next generation such that they can make things a little better, and they can maybe figure out where things go where, and maybe theyll figure out how to just phase Ai out if its useless for them, like if someone invents some sortve hardcoded versions of those places its in, and such that its got no purpose, then itll be the thing thats being phased out (its fastest when its been converted—i mean—its just the niche places that require it right now anyway) The only thing tho is that—as an advertisement it fits better in a sentence. Like, very simple and dumb things stay around for ever just cause they are so easy and simple to talk about that they just get repeated over n over, and that is really difficult to kill off or get rid of, as we are still dealing with things like that, but that are thousands of years old, these like prehistoric memes that are meaningless, that are so simple they dont die, and have been immortalized, but that goes both ways, like advertisements can be fought back by advertising—like you can layer on more advertisements and overwrite other advertisements w/ enough time n energy, probably

They should work out a geometric structure of the Ais internals, that is like, part logical and part function() or whatever, wherein each logical or functional piece can be put together, that way its a structure that has W * H (width and height) that is flexible, and has parameters. Like, thats whats great about geometry, its indicative of something that isnt a literal structure, much like how our experience of reality is not a personal or literal exp, only if its held up to the screen too closely where we have to be stressed in that way. But thats much like anything, like when we are solving problems, we dont always wanna go full tilt observing the details in detail, its only if we need to really stress that area, putting all of our attention on it—also, that area isnt tied to what we do, like, even in the rare case of it all falling apart, its not like its falling apart predictably, atleast, not in a way that wouldve helped to prevent it if u know wat i mean, like, we are all in a long winded state of falling apart, its just that its so ambient you dont tell, and the details themselves dont really spell out like, "this is what it is...", so its open ended in all foreseeable directions (p.s. i guess i see now how like, one part is called the strategy, and the other.. whatever the other1 is... im gettin lost in how many pages there are on the subject of logic, as theres extra pages i hadnt read before—as they tie into all types of things)

im never-not scared of music and everything, and so i just put a pile of blue colored things near me and stare into that for awhile, and if they have polkadots thats better somehow. but everything else, like scary psychedelic pictures (that arent really representative of anything psychedelic, since a million shades of colors that dont match - isnt the same as colors changing to various solid colors) and tv's and computers are also like, giant amalgamations of things that dont really match or make sense. id prolly do that, a lazy, less scared version of everything - staring at nothing, listening to nothing (unless its like salvia where u need music to help you through it) p.s. at high doses ive hallucinated sounds, and so without the presence of music or not—either way, there will be sounds present imo, plus, what you see ends up feeling very loud like u heard it, and that whole mess of things, so things are very busy. you can taste what you hear.

what if you could go back in time and experience it all from the point a decade ago. Ppl woulda been very confused. its like, the fusing of two worlds separated through time... spirituality can be indicative of the time that separates us, it could be about whatever you want it to be.

I guess theres like, two parts that are always too impossible to try and communicate: Point A (the inherently impossible point) is like, the focus is on the experiencer while hes experiencing, as the gyrating center (as, we cant describe anything else without instantly creating a vector that points outward into unverifiableness) and thus, the thing we were tryina talk about, no longer serves to point to the same direction. Which then leads to the other part, which is like, the thing you need to understand, first and foremost, before ever even mentioning -how limitless and how nothing exists - is the details by which reality gets deconstructed individually. In that sense its annoying as the communicator (maybe call it like, a super low level communicator attempt) tryina really nail it, e. I mean, its like, a field of things we could point to, but arent pointing to, and, its already flawed from the beginning, at al im not even quite sure how id even begin to try nd make something that intends to encapsulate what it is, since its so fucked from the start, but thats also assuming inwards the right direction. Like, we are already outward as we speakso it musta been that we already decided it wasnt (its also sortve unpredictable, like, **"no thing**" isnt like, a safe point that lives beetween *a thing* and *no thing*, its more like, *do any stable points exist or not?* like, you know what i mean?

@Xonas Pitfalltheres like a musical of things goin up or down, sometimes inward towards the gap that cannot be closed—its like a stack with extra layers, its like the craziest stack ever—so if you can get this in there too: a cascade wherein, you want one thing to go left, the other to go right, but by the time the left one lands, it occupies the space of the right, such that the right thing now has to sit in the side of the original left -type thing.

@Xonas Pitfall Wow you got the whole code - coded out for it. now add in there how humans perceive each other as humans, that differs in how birds and insects see humans as just another bird or insect (iuno whats that video of the spider thats like, its depth perception has a different scale) and thus, we are a bird to birds, but to us we think we are us to us. i like this part - "As soon as God becomes aware, it perceives - and creates a reflected image of itself!!!" its like, thats like the temp segment or registers that is involved in the physical sense, even though we see it as a mental awareness,or gods mental awareness the concept album by led zeppelin.

ooo right right, okay. one more thing, like the fact that Ai is forced to cycle through things because its continually selecting from a other variations is kindve like how reality has a lack of basis in the sense of how we are perceiving question mark, atleast on one hand; on the other hand, its very much the opposite, because the space it works in is so different that its just, way out there in another region. But still, theres the part where its not always straightforward and the basis on which it depends on becomes frequent—like flipping through pages of the very same book, and having new variations on what it said—much like Ai style—thats a consistent thing, and its hard to hold on to the former, experiental, dedicated perception. Its also not exactly a good thing in the case of the former, its like, kindve risky in some ways. iuno. hopefully not that many ppl have any clue what im tlkin bout anyway. its more like describing how a programming language works logically, even though theres been very machine-esque happening—no one really sits there countin' those machine seams, while trying to experience the seams, cause thats like redundancy number 11. Also, active brain, active, flexible imagination promotes growth, nd is more powerful, or its a different topic you could branch out from this...

i have to add something though, you are touching upon something about perception, that is, like, the way we *pick up* things is totally bizarre, and contradicts everything. i dont recall what i said, but its probably in direct contradiction in the realm of perception, like that is the fucked-up-ness of perception and so, i guess theres two different perceptions then. theres like, the one where we are experiencing, and the one where we are in a science conundrum space, or rather its just like, to analyze it is conundrum, but the ability to perceive is not being deterred by our lack of squinting our eyes or cupping our ears—is what i mean, like, we can see without being totally enthralled in how its doing the perceiving, but still, the fact that there is a conundrum at all is what should make it like, wtf, is, that, and how does anything work

Consciousness is also the thing that underlies consciousness, so its like, there isnt a concrete place to point to to call the actual reality or the perceived, or what came first if there was like, a mirage-like place settling and then becoming not-abstract; Theres a sortve centerfuge of decision-making we have to navigate, and then that sortve points ppl east or west so to speak on what we—the ppl—feel is the deepest part of our experience. With that said... For sure, our experience is like a storm of unsettled water before it has calmed to a still position—such that it can be examined for what it is—even still, it is no more fundamental or abstract or not abstract than anything else, more than it is just *more congenial to our life* versus *more detrimental*, as it could be said that reality is best expressed in a state of chaos or falling apart—of course, we want to say that reality and experience are conducive to those things where our life is also promoted for the better, but those are tightly integrated with the ways in which we decide and judge and define things. As we turn, evolve, we are letting go of all conceptual understanding of what there is to understand, re establishing who or whats doing the understanding.

Heres a proposition yous can pre-suppose/declare: "All cases of infinity are paradoxical". NOTE: Predicates: Properties or relations applied to objects (sometimes called 'conditions')(e.g., "is paradoxical") Subjects/Objects: The entities the predicates describe (e.g., "cases of infinity") Continuing on, ask yourselves then, are there ever situations where we can see an infinite amount of things going forward, that does not also share a space very close with an inevitable paradox regardless? Like, is there anything that can be both limitless and non-paradoxical, or, are they almost always synonymous - in every case? But suppose the answer ended up more complicated (which... it might not, but who knows, right?..) then, we would go further on to use some form logic-esque. 🐾 P || ~P ; "For any proposition P, either P — OR its negation is true..."(and "nothing else" - insinuated by semicolon) and is to make clearer a deliniation of those specifics, thereby solving some dilemmas that may often plague the mind (and perhaps diverging from traditional styles of communication, if it comes to it) Anyway, that was just an explanation/example, an artists rendering of one possible direction... That doesnt imply that an equation comes first, that was just circumstantial in my argument (and as you can see, it can be like "the prompt" of your 1st sentence, but, it can also appear like a "citation mark" within a sentence, or any number of other things—it is not limited to anything really right now. Maybe later we will encounter limitations for the fossils uses, though because it transcends logic since thats what it itself is to mean, it shouldnt have limitations

So the full title says: Fossils, Proposition/predicates, and paw prints - which looks like a fossil - and may extend into other shaped fossils - which are the little insignia/embems (our artistic spin) and are representative of an element, or idea, having been further investigated, such that no rational mind can travel on the same logical reasoning or inclination (i will explain this further...) Now, it would start out in logic (all the logic and reasoning, see wikipedia on "logic") propositions/predicates and such, but it would first identify structure vs unstructure (or some word to act as an antonym to structure) suffice to say, it begins w/ Universal Instantiation—that which also ties in to modus ponens — or the opposite modens tollens — as well as the laws of boolean algebra; BUT for ease of mind, you can begin thinking of this forked proposition as the law of the excluded middle, which says that, for every proposition, either **this proposition**, or **its negation is true**. So that is all to say that, there is a system that marks those points which are well structured, well formed words that a human would use. Those fossil paw prints are like little hieroglyphics in the process of marking a persons thoughts—think of it as being somewhere between pictographs and cuneiform—still carrying the impression of the artists device, wherein, to elaborate further means, 'to communicate beyond the following': logic, reasoning, words, any known letters or languages, forms entirely, visual impressions entirely, etc.... whether its in conversation, a formal writing, or just a journal entry. This implies that, you are treating that fossil as such, and are prepared to communicate beyond the aforementioned forms (and the entirety of sensual information if need be...) In conclusion, it is not purely "logic", but a more general form of... there is likely already a missing word to encapsulate what this is, and if you think of it, feel free to share. p.s. i may have missed some things. If anyone wants to further add, or come up w/ more interesting parts, feel free to add to this, otherwise, we can either discuss it, or start using it. We would need a way to communicate the fossil symbol.

see also; https://www.britannica.com/topic/logic/Logical-systems .. which is a good alternative definition, w/ different links to different areas/concepts .. or things like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_logic#Metaphysics_of_logic which would jump u to Metaphysics of logic... but theres others on there too, for instance, "Fundamental concepts" defines things like truth, arg, conclusions, and fallacies (note: i might even add to that, the idea of "definitions" versus "intentionally vague & poignant" is also a concept, that which is probably definatory—iuno what the strategic thing is) that all fall under this Philosophy of Logic

@Jannesi actually imagine images very similar to that youve portrayed here, especially the ocean one, when i think of god as its the only way to encapsulate what is like, different images of the same (and these are the first images that always come to mind) its like a flash of 6 or so images: (1) CLOUDs, (2) MOUNTAIN, (3) ICE GLACIER PLANET (which ties into some weird polly pocket/my little pony-hieroglyphic-puzzly thing), (4) Water or Ocean... Theres also (5) Kansas, or whats like a great plains of north america or some sortve large field. and i wanna say one feels like the inside of a computer. Thats six. Sometimes theres others, but they are fainter nd lead back into one another again.

just throwin this out, if we consider this space of ideas as the space of actualized/leo, then maybe it should really start from an artistic pov... i just dont actually know like, what that means, or what is a topic that is the most artistic bound, which makes me think that any place we start from can be considered as that... so thats where im headed fyi

unstructed space time nother issue, say for instance in *space & time* is like, how do you convey the idea of like "encapsulating space, such that it doesnt invoke *beyond space*", like, you have to make space the thing that contains everything—you know what i mean, but i dont see that making sense to us as humans, like, it makes sense if you write it down, but how do we reason about that, thats like, totally bizarre. like in other words, space is the thing creating everything, but, it doesnt have like, a place where non existence is on the outside, instead, it has itself? there isnt anedge at the edge... what? thats like, full-crossed-eyed and trying to question reality suddenly... So i say that like, that is the biggest problem, for us to talk about a thing that is like, a concept that is both alien, and also its got alot of crossover w/ how consciousness is the self containing thing too... its like, man... not enough ppl tlkin bout that.. so there u go... my neck still hurts today..

Like suppose we want to say: space & time is the most important—the part that we want to begin @ in order to talk about the whole of physics, or, any subsequent math (not that im saying it is the most important,we can treat something else as the most important part inside of consciousness, any points you want), but just for the sake of, supposing we started there, then that means we automatically are talking about a brain twister, like, cause there aint any geometrical thing you can imagine. So right from the start, we arent talkin about somethin that is normalized from the perspective of math & physics... can we rule math out entirely if it is a math problem we want to to travel down (or something thats like a structured language)?... we can introduce a new category of axioms, that are like, a whole lexicon of ways to begin thinking about it, like it really puts emphasis on the structure of reality... like, we dont even need to invoke the word consciousness, and yet we're already talkin about a problem that has a similar problem. Does that make sense?... Alas, we can begin from anywhere yous want, this is just the initialization of a structured idea that happens to be the realm of physics

before weve even started, the problem is fucked lol

Language and its subsequent ideas it invokes are the necessary comforts, like, they are the things we need to really not fall farther into a world of avant garde paintings, its like, at the center is language and the familiars (emotions are vectors that point us in some color of the language spectrum) and then outside is progressively scarier things, that which have to be reasoned about, and worked through—sortve finding where those unfamiliar points land. As to just be floating out in the forever is to be staggered between, "what am i", and "how do i get home", and "does this end?" type of things, and that is most logical things (a bit of a contradiction to it). Like, i think that we think we took the most logical and sound route, going by the defined terms and popular vote, but theres a perspective switch that observes it all again, and feels like we are farther from the roads that would have been the most logical; the most sound conclusion. Like, we are assuming that the things implied underneath the logical sum now are in fact how they are defined, but not considering they are that by popular vote, and not by individual-basisi's. At the same time, it is sometimes the most well structured things that find theirselves into the popular vote, at the forefront of our thoughts to begin w/, and its not till all the unstructured bits are gathered that they amalgamate and override the other, taking time for it to be corrected if it was ever incorrect or unaligned.

p.s. im also curious if anyone had recently had nightmares, and whether or not they found/noticed that the common thread was in the content they had recently watched, and whether it was outside of the popular, structured status quo... ... another issue is about getting too comfortable—and how the more haphazard person starts to allocate more information if the other person gets too complacent in their approach, and the same is true if the haphazard person gives up early because nothing makes any sense and or they feel discouraged.