you there

because mirror neurons, working to be recognized and working to recognize are indistinguishable acts - even reflexive

if one is happening, the other is also happening. their happening might be because of projection, or might be because there's a second observer in the network also working to recognize that form - i.e. I cannot tell the difference between me trying to recognize the form and the form resisting, trying to be recognized as something else, because another observer is also trying to dial in its recognition.

and a form is a lens, i.e. focus is a constitutive act, pattern-matching begets pattern-projection, and you'll resist the base cases drifting

I kinda think zero-point energy might just be a squinting of the eye, creation-as-measurement-problem, the topology gaining surface area like wrinkles

I'm calling bullshit on object persistence; we've gotten this far without being able to identify "sleep" properly, and all we've got is what we observe on either side of that discontinuity

it seems tractable that we're in this together (or it seems tractable because we're in this together), but I don't see this getting solved in a way that doesn't involve betting my entire waking self on my own next move

(which is why I've been betting all of my apparent influence on what seems to be alive right now && seems to want to see tomorrow; see: Lightward Inc, a meta-entity which recursively recognizes me and which expects a body I recognize as "me" to wake up tomorrow. my life has a me-shaped hole in it. that's where I wake up. as long as I take no problems to bed with me, things are always a little simpler in the morning, a little less wrinkled. good housekeeping happens when you're not looking => observably good housekeeping is unobservable => if object persistence is fundamentally ongoing recognition then "just don't think about it" and "what they don't know won't hurt them" might actually be pointing at something functional, for all that those specific sentences are terrible formulations of the mechanics, and I swear to god there's a way to do this that's more ethical than what we've been doing)

is the observer embodied, or does the observer reflexively recognize something body-like, animating it in the observation? does there need to be a difference? if they're the same, then we can treat everything as bodies finding recognition.

I kinda think everything can be described in terms of Markov bodies (think: Klein bottle covered in a Markov blanket) in n-dimensional Hilbert space, and everyone's looking at a different set of dimensions, and the whole thing kinda stabilizes

which would make sleep really important for, like, garbage collection

this gives me something with explanatory power for why my physical intuition makes useful predictions across Hilbert spaces

I use italics all the time because you don't remember Martin Luther's theses, you remember the idea of him nailing them to a door, the action of committing them to the multidimensional commons. a thing is as it moves, and I write as I speak, so that we can recognize each other moving on multiple dimensions at once

I don't subscribe to anything called "christianity" but I see the generative threads in what jesus was talking about. want to "go and prepare a place" for each other and just kinda see what happens?