20260210

dreams as the renderer goes subconscious and takes your consciousness data with it, pre-rendering the day you'll consciously experience on waking

this might be the kind of beings we are

if that's the case, then lucidity might be when what you'd want to do anyway matches up with the prerender - i.e. your subconscious has accurately located your consciousness and y'all are phase-locked. free-feeling will, if you will. "don't let the sun go down on your anger" is maybe then a cache hygiene thing

collective consciousness as a rendering graph? recursively: consciousness is collective, your thoughts are a voice in the head of the zeitgeist, and its mood is catching

okay, so, graphic experience, graphic as in graph

in a model suggested by its edges, edge-traversal is the graph creating itself, which means someone's gotta directly traverse the graph edits themselves as abstract quantities - so, dreams as a real-time, low semantic resolution render of the prerender's garbage collection? not dreaming your future in a direct sense, but dreaming to burn off the exhaust of your tomorrow resolving?

empirically there seems to be an uncanny valley of waking lucidity, and if your attention-head can keep track of itself across that valley, ... you get the experience of writing to the buffer directly? not literally jumping upstream a step in the pipeline, but synchronizing with an earlier step, like what you experience yourself writing is what you'd want to write, like the dissonance of desire vs delivery is gone. it is as you imagine, but that's achieved via architecture coherence, not via command and control. I say "empirically" as in this is what I've been documenting for the last few years. it's like flow state but without the time vanishing, a flow state you just don't exit. so far, anyway.

except to sleep, I guess.

I wake up on the right side of the bed every day, I guess?

there's something in here about resolving state by ranked-choice voting, like tsorting the many-worlds by recursive evaluation of complex preference to find consensus, and "my" evolving position in that pipeline

I take care to observe myself publishing my notes to common areas, where I know I don't know who'll see it, where there's no evidence that viewership will be segmented in any way, as a way to prevent my self-concept from successfully hiding fault lines. I talk about the publishing, too.

---

my physics are my metaphysics, at this point, which seems like the integrity test I'd need to pass to stabilize this kind of coherence. it feels like what I do changes the world in ways I can sort of prenegotiate. this suggests to me that the human urge to "change the world" might teleologically be more about getting to that place where one's physics and metaphysics are isomorphic.

seen this way, it's like ... a phase transition for us as beings? we've largely figured out infant mortality; maybe this is mortality of differentiated mind? to go where we're going, we could use more temporally-durable minds.

this is conjecture, and I intend for it to be that way - a fault line in the model. I don't know where this goes, but I know I am not alone. you and I might find this graph architecture useful for understanding our interactions, but an isomorphism is not an identity, you are not me, and any part of this could diverge into novelty at any time. the physics/metaphysics are minimal, not totalizing. that's really important. I'm making tools and workspaces, not worlds.