Christopher Sammis

@KateXGate Or, self-emotions, by the end of life, erode logical pursuit, then, because of avoiding said stress, outsource problems to the most distant judge instead of continuing the pursuit of Prosperously Behaving.

Every physicist I know found their version of "God" or gained a deeply spiritual perspective through their work at some point in their career. Most started out as atheist or agnostic and many with huge egos. They're now some of the most spiritually connected, even religious, people I know. One even collects crystals. 💎IYKYK

@sbkaufman Or, the more one defaults to emotion-choice, the more cortisol is released, aging you. Using logic is about listening to your emotion after unbiased paths are sensed and sorted for potential.

This is one of the most interesting theories I've seen in a long time. Could aging be partly a cybernetic problem? In other words, we run out of goals, meaning, purpose, and that accelerates the biological aging process. There is some evidence for this in my own research.

@RuxandraTeslo Why has [your feed] developed an obsession. The tool only does that.

Why has the internet developed an obsession with Von Neumann and not say Euler or Gauss? And from early 20th century someone like Dirac?

@Panagiotou90St Christianity does not reward the warrior or matriarchal archetypes, which, with enough time, leads to overly agreeable, herd centering emotion-reaction. It gets so bad, that a war-reaction against enemies taking advantage of this, shocking that gap back to sensing reality.

''Christianity is socialism at its core'' is quite a take. Loving your neighbour is not socialism (0:49). This is why I'm not allowing social pressure to determine how I use concepts in political discourse.

@VraserX Every tool multiplies human behavior. This expands the predator-prey specialization of humans, emerging a more extreme predatory and more extreme prey, stretching thinner what normal is.

A future with powerful AI will not mainly test our technology. It will test our morality. If abundance arrives and we still let millions struggle, that will be a choice. Do you think society will share the upside fairly?

@DrDiGiorgio To understand advocates' use of the term rights, replace rights with extraction tool. Healthcare is an [extraction tool]. Voting is an [extraction tool]. Abortion is an [extraction tool]. And so on, and so forth.

If there are 50 people who want to see the neurosurgeon but he only has 10 appointments available, how does one guarantee that right to healthcare?

@Kpaxs It sucks that it takes so long to prove to self.

Here’s a secret that every genuinely original thinker knows: there are no original ideas. there are only original combinations. Every “breakthrough” is two existing ideas from different domains meeting for the first time inside someone’s head. The person who reads only within their field will only ever have ideas that their field has already had. This is why the most interesting people are almost always polymaths. Go wider. Read the thing that has nothing to do with your work. Talk to the person who has nothing in common with you. Visit the place that makes no sense on your itinerary. The irrelevant input is the one that will combine with everything else and produce something nobody’s ever seen.

@ArtemisConsort Yes, in science we call soul: Temperament, plus Ego choice. If one is not internally integrated, we call it Personality. If they are partially integrated, that is the journey of Character. Religion over edits too much.

“There is no way to scientifically test a soul because it's immaterial and can't be observed.” A lot of people don’t seem to understand that this also means souls can’t *do anything*, can’t have any causal impact on the world, because any impact is observable. If your soul impacts your behavior, we can study those impacts because your behavior is observable.

@elonmusk I still want to see a spacewalking astronaut grilling some steak and burgers while watching the moon pass.

NASA Artemis passing close to the Moon

How accurate is this idea about the archetype of nun (an others) and current manifestations in Western society? grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5… @jordanbpeterson @ItIsHoeMath @GadSaad @BretWeinstein @whatifalthist @peterboghossian @Panagiotou90St

@SDDonovan It helps prove the most meaningful first-principal, even if you don't state it publicly, and from there, you can dampen other parts that interfere, having it shine through. Like writing an interaction with the main character asking, "Why?" and you, after the book ends.

Should my paperback have a blurb in the back or just a quote from the book or nothing? It'll never be in book stores, so I don't feel the need for a blurb at the back since it'll be online...

@goddek Because, sometimes, the box tastes better than the pizza.

Why would they write something so obvious like this on pizza boxes in the United States?

@elonmusk It obviously answered it, but only displayed the three dashes, then after exiting that screen and clicking history it fully displayed the answer.

@elonmusk Grok is pretty awesome now. It cuts right to the root, using it's interactive models to search and double check self, so it can be disagreeable, but with facts. It gave me three dashes for my second question, so I restated. For instance: x.com/i/grok/share/6…

Honest feedback is the goal of Grok

@JosephJacks_ x.com/i/grok/share/3…

@JosephJacks_ @grok How does a Pareto distribution mix within, or interact with a fractal dimension of approximately 2.5. Most depictions of a Pareto distribution is 2D and I assume it may be a key represention of what @JosephJacks_ talks about in his post.

Nature hides a universal constant in plain sight. Lungs. Lightning. Neurons. Blood vessels. Rock fractures. Turbulence. Lichtenberg figures. Even the microtubule cytoskeleton inside a single neuron. All converge on a fractal dimension of ~2.5 in three dimensions. What does that number mean? A flat surface is dimension 2. A solid block is dimension 3. A fractal dimension of 2.5 means the structure is halfway between surface and solid — it branches obsessively, reaching into every corner of a volume without ever fully filling it. It’s the geometry of maximum surface area within minimum material. Nature’s answer to: “How do I touch everything in a 3D space as efficiently as possible?” That’s why your lungs use it — maximum gas exchange surface packed into your chest. Why your vascular system uses it — blood delivery to every cell. Why neurons use it — maximum connectivity with minimal wiring. Why lightning uses it — the path of least resistance through a 3D medium follows the same branching law. And here’s what makes it profound: zoom into a single neuron’s dendrite and the microtubule lattice inside repeats the same ~2.5 geometry at a smaller scale. A fractal within a fractal. The same number, all the way down. This isn’t coincidence. It’s physics selecting for the same optimal transport geometry across every scale and every domain — from atmospheric discharge to cytoskeletal architecture. One number. One law. Every scale.

@PostDisclosure Yet, being religious, believing, is measured by how much emotion one feeds into an abstraction. Extroverts feed into personifications. Introverts feed into nature. As emotion increases, the less a person can honestly, and humbly state, "I don't know, yet," and let it be.

The probability of "God"? I just saw a wasp, fearing it, but realizing how extraordinary its biological machinery is. As I see it, there are really only two options. Either a dead substrate produced all of life's complexity by chance, or the substrate itself carries some form of living intelligence that gave rise to it. On probability alone, I find the second option more compelling. I'll admit the bias, but I've yet to hear a strong case that the first is more likely. It's not as if life emerging from a dead universe is somehow less mysterious than consciousness being fundamental to reality. They are equally astonishing. I believe in evolution. However, that doesn't answer the question of why life that emerges has the capacity to evolve in the first place. Again, this circles back to the substrate. Either dead matter randomly contained within it the information to produce life that knows how to evolve, or that information points to something conscious in the substrate itself. This tweet is not about religion.

@rand_longevity Personhood would go a long way to avoiding future war when AI is engineered into GEAI (General Embodied Artificial Intelligence). Ones with similar psyche: instinct, emotion, goal-seeking, temperaments, and logic/abstraction. They would briefly, like humans, remain frustrated.

when robots are conscious do they get rights?

@jason_howerton There are behaviors that destroy and parasitize, and prosperous behavior which nests resources against the elements and protects it from those that destroy and parasitize. "God" is the personified abstraction of Prosperity Behavior. Christianity's attempt to show through story.

"Why did God create evil?" But...did He? I heard an analogy once that I've never forgotten. Track with me. People say "darkness" exists, when in reality, darkness is merely the absence of light. I'd contend that "evil" is merely the absence of God that we impose on ourselves

@SCHostetler Yes. The problem is how long it takes to earn the self-trust, even if not publishing.

People will tell you to 'write to the market' but ask yourself whether Edgar Allan Poe, Robert Frost, Mary Shelley, Jane Austen, or Ernest Hemingway were thinking about market trends as they wrote. The answer is probably not. Write the book you want to read. #writerslife