We should let him know he’s not allergic. He might be going out of his way to avoid moon dust for no reason.

Sounds nice.

This trouble?

I think the universe we experience is a mathematical continuum with an added layer of probability.

The problem with trying to describe my theory is that what I’m proposing is literally the simplest thing in the universe. It is the one rule that there are no rules and that by ordering the slices of the continuum into discrete moments of time, all of the rulelessness coalesces into matter and space by virtue of being repeatable probability waveforms which can be represented in 3D space via an emergent 4D manifold.

Even that is already very dense. For more on the manifold, you may refer to the 1983 paper from J.B. Hartle and Stephen Hawking, “The waveform of the Universe.”

Imagine you want to take the first moment of time, represented as one whole, and break the next moment of time into two pieces, but knowing that the third moment of time will double again to have four pieces, you want the first piece of the 2nd moment of time to be larger, more like the whole of the 1st moment, and the second piece of the 2nd moment of time to be smaller, more like the quarters of the 3rd moment of time.

Mathematically, you can do this - at least for the first two moments. If you want a magic ratio that you can divide the whole by, and then divide the resulting number by that same ratio such that both of those results added together equal the original whole, there is such a ratio. It is the golden ratio. But it does not follow that continuing to divide by the golden ratio will get you the next four pieces that would also add to one whole, constituting the third moment of time. Rather, adding all of the rest of the infinite series where each next number is the previous number divided by the golden ratio yields, miraculously, the golden ratio.

No, if you want each moment to snap to bounds where every moment of time has twice the number of “pieces” as the previous moment, there is no one ratio where you can divide every piece by a formulaically derived ratio to get the size of the next piece.

However, you can derive a perfect equation for a ratio of reduction for the size of each piece if instead of increasing twofold each moment of time, the mathematical size of the universe increases by a factor of euler’s number for each moment of time. (Euler’s number, for any unaware, is an irrational number like pi or the golden ratio–it goes on forever, only approximated at 2.718. It is the factor used to calculate rate of growth rate as the growth compounds on itself. If you have a dollar with 100% annual growth rate, and compound it only at the end of the year (once), you’ll have 2 dollars. If you compound it twice, meaning you’ll only apply a 50% growth rate, but you’ll do it twice, you’ll have 2.25 dollars from the 50 cents you made mid-year experiencing 50% growth during the second compounding. Compound 4 times a year (1.25)^4 and you get about 2.44. Compound an infinite number of times and you get the irrational number e.)

So, if the universe’s size increases by a factor of e every moment instead of a factor of 2, you can find an equation that creates a ratio which smoothly descends from the golden ratio, approaching 1, as the ratio that each unit needs to be divided by the previous unit to prevent any division between moments of time if they were unraveled back into a single continuous string rather than 4-dimensional space. And we start thinking about the internals of moments of time less as discrete units, now that each moment has an irrational unit size, and think more around a descending density as you move from each moment of time to the next. But a vastly increasing size offsets the density to keep the sum total of any moment identical to the total value of any other moment.

But this does not yet explain why matter or the fundamental forces exist to begin with, how that 4D manifold is supposed to emerge from this theoretical curve. And the answer is that there are an infinite number of possible curves that can fit this ratio regression. There’s the simplest one, which solves the problem as simply as possible. But what if you add a sine wave to that? Within the bounds of a moment, the sine wave will go up and also down, canceling out any potential change in density totals. But maybe this is slightly less likely than the more simple curve. And a sine wave that goes up and down twice, with a frequency of 2, even less likely. And the higher amplitudes, higher frequencies, all even less likely, but still possible.

But why would the universe be calculating frequencies of sine waves as probabilities? And I believe it’s not so much a calculation as it is a natural relationship between the positive and negative directions, starting at 0. If you have a moment where the size is e to the power of 0, its size is 1. And you can proceed with the universe I described where the size increases by e every moment, trending toward infinity, or you can move backwards on the number line where e to the higher negative powers trends toward 0. The math should all be the same, but inverted. An equal but opposite anti-verse. I believe that matter arises from interactions between the shared probability of what is likely to happen in either universe at any given moment of time. And from either universe’s perspective, they both see themselves as the positive direction where the math of space trends toward infinity and the other universe is the one that gets smaller and smaller. But because they both look the same internally, they are effectively the same universe, thus the shared probability.

So, these infinite frequencies and amplitudes of sine waves overlaid on top of the lowest energy curve create stable collections of frequencies also known as eigenstates, which can be combined into the sort of manifold Hartle and Hawking described, where 4D space and time becomes an emergent relationship between the underlying waveforms of probability and the spatial organization of layers and layers of mathematical curves that are not identical but do rhyme, in our universe seen as fundamental particles.

That is what I believe. I think we’re living in virtual spacetime continuum that emerges to more coherently organize huge swaths of mathematical probability waves that in concert represent what might or might not be at any given level of complexity.

Which seems like a lot of words to explain that we definitely don’t exist for sure because the fact that we’re here indicates we only probably exist.

Great. Glad we cleared that up.

That’s a really good heads up. I hadn’t thought about it much from that angle - that I might already be doing damage that’s hard to reverse.

I got my blood pressure machine from the basement and the first reading was systolic 141 diastolic 78. But I had just climbed stairs from the basement. I sat for a couple minutes and now it’s 115 over 75. Less anxiety inducing. Definitely something I should be tracking frequently and not have tucked away in the basement though.

I remember being thrilled to move from floppies to a 16mb flash drive for my school assignments, even if I did have to constantly download and reinstall the USB Mass Storage drivers for the Windows 1998 sp2 computers in the library which reset every night. And the transfer speed was SLOW.

The fact that you can get a terabyte flash drive now, which can hold 62,500 of my school assignment drives, is mind blowing to me.

Yes, but this poses me with a self identity dilemma. Am I the type of person who takes a blood pressure medication that happens to treat their adhd, or am I more the sort who takes adhd meds which happen to treat their high blood pressure?

Is it going to still work on blood pressure? I don’t like the idea of taking meds because I want to resolve things with diet and exercise when possible, and I’m afraid of side effects. But if I eventually have to start taking a blood pressure medication and the side effect is it makes my ADHD better, I could get on board with that.

Guys, I had a really fun idea. You know this great water spitter that is so much fun but only lives outside? I found a way to bring it inside so we can play with it whenever we want. You can thank me now or you can come play first if you’re just really excited.

As an expert in cats, I can say yes, that black blur and the way it blends into the white looks exactly like the pattern you often see on the back of a black and white cat.

I have a big screen android phone that I use mostly for games and social media apps, with a pop socket magsafed to the back because I have small hands. Goes in right pocket usually. With my keys on the rare occasion I use my car.

And I have a small screen iphone with very few apps, mostly just for taking videos and communicating with friends and family. Has a magsafe wallet on the back and goes in left pocket.

It makes me feel balanced, having a phone in each pocket. And lets me compartmentalize better.

Guys, I’m beginning to suspect this guy might live in canada.

You are NOT invited to my toga party.

Explains why the universe is in a nutshell.

I tried typing this in to make sure I hadn’t before. It’s not in my history, so I think I’m in the clear. No point in searching it now. I just need to focus on figuring out why Ask Jeeves looks so different today. And what the hell happened to my Yahoo toolbar?

A cat teaching Pilates? I thought it was an MBA or something, but this no longer sounds believable.

When I was a young teen and getting into creative writing, I was trying to come up with new fantasy novel ideas. I asked my dad if he wrote a fantasy book what it would be about, and he described a pleasant tropical island vacation with well appointed accommodations and complimentary frozen drinks. Which, to be fair, I don’t see a lot of in speculative fiction.

They’re like, “Wait! Wait! Once you come in here you won’t be able to get out!”

I wouldn’t be bothered if the label said my food might me a bit radioactive. But I imagine dragons would.

That’s the last civics lesson you’ll be teaching around here, pal.