Hello Daniel!

For Daniel Tammet

"autism is a spectrum condition where people have difficulty in forming social relationships and in putting themselves into other people's shoes, to imagine other people's thoughts and feelings..."

I believe that people who are non-communicative and have limited communication ability can benefit massively from empathic connection and counseling on achieving their goals.

The Boy With the Incredible Brain




The Boy With the Incredible Brain pt 2



It may be interesting to perceive numbers or the area within a number

I believe autism is a self-awareness bypass in the brain. For example, when a mental feat is accomplished/condition reached, the brain thinks a 'word' or condition, it recognizes that in itself with internal neuron-field chatter to the "language lab", which is then sent as signal from the lab to the vocalization sector.

Now I believe there is a "self-awareness" lab, which polls all fields in the brain, or receives polls from active cell fields, and judges them in a way. This concentrates consciousness on those fields in a ~^2 effect. It may be a winding of a field's coil tighter, reducing the ~ between shells.

In autism, this "self-awareness" lab is unhooked from the brain entirely, or it does not pick up fields well, or sometimes it does depending on thought level frequency or intensity and mood. This could be reattached to the brain by conscious neurological wiring changes.

While 'unaware' or un/non-polling your own thoughts, it is very possible to think very quickly, but in a way that is unrelated to the world. Judgement of the thought is achieved without ego, and therefore does not require the input of others for it to be justified. The 'shadow' of difference between knowing the location and strength of an electron/force is eliminated. This 'shadow' is an impetus to communicate, that it may be partially compensated for by confirming it in others.

This is like poking a bubble, but not popping it. The dimensions of the bubble and quantity of juice can be known, and the bubble remains unpopped. Non-autistic/Aspergers people seem to corrupt their own thoughts when they measure or judge them, or 'self-aware' them, by this measuring/bubble popping process. Autistic people may preserve this bubble, and therefore preserve 100% confidence in the thought, making social interaction 'fiat'. The level of this fiat confidence could determine the spectrum of the condition, and the social interaction level through this fiat may determine 'function'.

When people experience others' actions, or their own actions, or when non-aspergers experience their own thoughts, they often view them as the actions of other people and pop this thought/experience bubble. The metaphor is that 'juice' goes everywhere and the quantity and polarity of juice in the original is measured by the force of the pop. From this pop we would draw conclusion about the past, and then make measurements of the future if we care to.

"That's a pop" is now a good way of labeling a misunderstanding, particularly a flaw in the difference between the original thought bubble [comic book style comes to mind] and the analysis of the popped bubble by an observer.

Furthermore, this may signal synchronicity in the kinds of bubbles that are being 'blown' at a time around the world. We may all be exmaining a single bubble or bubble-set and experiencing numerous potential 'pops', with numerous interpretations of the original.

<><

I believe that understanding this possible property of thought can have fantastic positive effects on improving / reducing the number of 'pops' and uncorrected pops in social interaction. The 'poppability' of a thought, or ease of misinterpretation, is often used in humor to cause laughter. This laughter is tiny pieces of faith occuring that the bubble will not pop, or amazingness and wonder of geometric interactions with expectations. The uniqueness of expectations is why humor is different from person to person. It is also why new 'bubbles' form based on expectations.

Self Awareness and Socialization

This self-awareness lab seems to produce or find similarities between *thoughts* and *events* in the world, or memories of events, and link them together. Autism may reduce the prevalence of this link, and thereby distance the experience of the world from the experience of thoughts. It may be a 'poppability'* measuring tool for the brain to test the liklihood of a bubble popping. Autism reduces this poppability measurement, which is commonly used in social environments to communicate through probability, rather than possibility.* A probability-society person might focus their experience and expectations on the most probable values likely to occur in the future based on a condition. A possibility-society person will focus their experience and attention on the best possible values regardless of their perceived probability. Since all states of being are possible, whether or not it is perceived by others as 'possible' or 'probable' is unrelated to the goodness of it.

["lastingness of a bubble", "poppability". Bubble longevity probability, which is a factor in societies valuing probability, is a poor value to predict. A bubble has an equal chance of popping or not popping. Equally, infinite thought bubbles can be made, and all are unique. I view most of our society, particularly portions based on quantity,

This poppability measurement also produces 'popularity'. A popular person is someone whose bubbles are unlikely to pop, or who produces a quantity of bubbles reliably sufficient to fill an environment with a 'satsifying' level of bubbles. This can be seen in stereotypes of sexual attraction of women to stag [probable bubble longevity] or father style [reliable bubble supply] men.

What are the impetus for measuring probability? To ask such a question without a specific case or authority of experiential opinion is to invite probability by guessing at what the impetus might be. This would follow backwards-engineering style logic, which presumes that logic exist in static forms. We gather laws of logic from experience. I believe bubbles are electrical signals, and electrical signals are bubbles. The perceptive glands of a body produce these electrical signals, which then by perception and judgement and enjoyment and quantum thought into the future help use the circuit of perception and reality/experience to shape these things.

Logic is the probability of love. The answer to the question [which bears a probability] of love is "yes" [100%]. Because love = 1 and questions asked must have 2 or more possible answers for them to be valid questions, any question of love is based on impossiblity. The question 'is it love' is actually 'is it real'? For all possible realities, all are real. The question 'is it real' is actually 'should it be real?'. This question can be determined based on fun.

Everyone loves bubbles, but probability bunches up possibility, and all things are equally 'possible'. For every possible reality, all are 'real'. Experience is reality. Thought is a kind of experience. Thought is a shared experience, even when not expressed verbally, the questions are created. You cannot impersonate reality. Real is real. Associations between pieces of reality can be judged based on fun as well. We have a common shared reality based upon the performance of bubbles and our own perceptions [bubbles/e- signals that are tiny and difficult to pop or adjust]. It is good to enjoy this reality with others who also enjoy it. It is good for this enjoyment to be honorable to God, from which all good things come.

I just thought 'oops, my foot touched the power bar. It might accidentally turn it off. I had better save my work and go back to type more in case that happens.' This produces a lot of things that are not technically fun, namely using my time to save my work and go back to rebegin, but which are based on probability. I have previously done this once or twice, as we all 'probably' have. This is an action in response to a fear, when the fear is not real. I haven't turned off the power and my work is here. I could potentially eliminate the possibility of that reality occuring by focusing myself away from it, [rather than putting mortar around the power switch, which could not prevent it anyway, this within the authority of what is good]. My reaction itself is probably not a serious problem, but when people do begin to take great measures to avoid possibilities it can become 'pop-overthreat', similar to PTSD, as described previously in Neuroempathy.

POP-overthreat

A popover is delicious. Pop-overthreat is when focus on a negative event is increased as avoiding it is attempted using probability [such as mortar]. This can be seen in wars, standing armies, certain kinds of fences, inappropriately enormous piles of resources, and the behaviors that produce these things. It can also be seen in fear and lack of faith in goodness. A more enjoyable behavior is to eliminate the 'seniority' given to an energy design that produces 'bad fruit'.

Energy Seniority

Certain structures are assigned seniority similar to mathematical order of operations. When fear or an inappropriate desire deriving from fear [e.g. hate] is given seniority over love, a bad energy catalysis occurs bearing ill fruit. Fear and bad things must not be given seniority over good things. Wanting to eliminate all bad things as a way of securing good will eliminate good and secure bad because of improperly weighted goals. This is often called in simple terms, "wanting something that is wrong". It is a 0 = 1. A lie is 0 = 1. Wasting desire on a lie is wrong, and a lie can never be true.

God can and has produced any bubble condition that is enjoyable and good, regardless of its probability. This has been done repeatedly/continually through history and will be into the future. Studying probability is studying the common behavior of bubbles when they are being watched by numerous fairly indifferent attentions, or numerous attentions with a static level of desire.

*[There is technically no time-limit for the life of bubble, in that I could flip a coin 100 times and never get tails. A bubble could last forever. Measuring poppability is measuring probability, which is not good at measuring possibility.]

A bubble vibrating on a higher Hz than another bubble might not join together even if they touch. A bubble vibrating on a higher Hz internal to its basic form [atoms in physics] may not join together even when they touch/overlap.

"Do not... pop... my bubbles."
"Make your own bubbles."
"Enjoy bubbles in honorable ways. Do not take them from others to enjoy in private unless that is honorable to God."
"I poke a lot of bubbles. I love when they do not pop when I poke them. I love it!"
"Cells are bubbles."

There is a math saying 2=1. The sequence goes in a C-shape around the straight line from 1 to 2, trying to make the difference between 1 and 2 = 0. However, the 0 bends in the center towards the line, but never touches it. It also experiences a crease before the apex of the bend and after. This is how the math puzzle shows up in my brain. The gap between the apex and the line is so small that sliding paper between them is difficult, but they do not share current. A connection there would form a triangle after the 1 at 1.5. That is the true math to the equation, and not the C-shape half-zero. A half of zero is zero, not one half. 0!=1.