Considering reality and perception and thinking

Witness my madness!

Definition 1: Agent is an intelligent being that has the capacity to influence subatomic particles in a limited fashion, in order to achieve some desired goal. This influence occurs through actions.

Definition 2: A state of reality (SoR) is some configuration of all subatomic particles with causal link to the agent. Current state of reality (CSoR) is the current configuration. The collection of all SoRs forms the reality space (RS), ie. the power set of all SoRs.

Definition 3: An action is a function from RS to RS. In other words it is a description of the movement of certain subset of all elementary particles from their current configuration to some other goal configuration. The set of all possible actions forms the action space (AS). There is a unique zero element in the AS, called inaction, where the agent chooses to make no conscious action, other than the choice to make no conscious action.

Axiom 1 (Axiom of future): Every CSoR, with one exceptions, is followed by SoR. The SoR must be withing a ball of radius epsilon centered at CSoR. Ie. The SoR that follows the CSoR must be similar enough to CSoR.

Axiom 2 (Axiom of action): Every transition from CSoR to any other SoR (with one exception) is occupied by an action by the agent. In other words, always (with one exception) is CSoR ---> action ---> SoR.

Axiom 3 (Axiom of birth): To a given agent, there is a unique first CSoR, called birth. It is preceded by no SoT and no action.

Axiom 4 (Axiom of death): To a given agent, there is a unique last CSoR, called death. It is followed by no SoR and no action.

Definition 4: Life of an agent is the ordered collection of 3-tuples (SoR1, action, SoR2), ordered by the relation that SoR2 of the previous tuple is the SoR1 of the next, ie. (SoR1, action, SoR2) -> (SoR1', action', SoR2') iff SoR2 = SoR1'. It contains all previous SoRs the agent has been in and all actions the agent has taken. The last element is the tuple with SoR2 = CSoR.

Theorem 1: The action the agent chooses must be from a small neighborhood of inaction.

Proof: Assume the agent is capable of choosing the action from all of AS. Choose SoR from arbitrarily far from CSoR. There exists an action in AS that changes CSoR to the chosen SoR. Let the agent choose that action. But this is against the Axiom 1. Thus the agent cannot choose that action. Thus the action must be so that CSoR doesn't change too much. This limits the action to a small neighborhood of inaction. QED

I shall continue tomorrow. I will go watch Doctor Who now.

If you have comments, they are welcomed.

Holy shite, I'm going to feel bad if everyone else here knows what he's talking about.

Still trying to get past the axioms....

I think I understand what you are describing.
But I don't think dead is followed by inaction and birth is the beginning of action. I consider me and everyone around to be as old as the universe. We just can't remember a lot.
You can use much simpler words to describe what you have in mind, but the way you did it is good. It's brain weight lifting to get past the words.

Oh look, this can only be the AS board.

No, my darling. It is math. This is how I think.

I shall now concentrate on the topology of the spaces defined above.

Definition 5: A path from SoR (A) to given SoR (B) in AS is the ordered collection of 3-tuples (SoR1, action, SoR2), ordered by the relation that SoR2 of the previous tuple is the SoR1 of the next, such that the first element is of the form (A,action,SoR2) and the last is of the form (SoR1, action,B).

Definition 6: The length of a path is the amount of distinct SoR in it. The length of a path from A to B depends on the path chosen.

Definition 7: The duration of an action is the total amount of time it takes to fulfill the transition from SoR1 to SoR2 with that action. Marked |(SoR1, action, SoR2)|.

Definition 8: The duration of a path is the total sum of the durations of its constituent actions. IE. Consider a path from A to B: {(A, action, SoR2),(SoR2, action, SoR3)...,(SoRn, action, B)}. Now the duration of that path is |{(A, action, SoR2),(SoR2, action, SoR3)...,(SoRn, action, B)}| = |(A, action, SoR2)| + |(SoR2, action, SoR3)|+...+|(SoRn, action, B)|.

Definition 9: A SoR (B) is said to be attainable from a given SoR (A), if there exists a limited (ie. with finite duration and length) path from A to B.

Definition 10: A SoR is said to be real, if it is attainable from CSoR and doesn't break the laws of physics. If a SoR is not real, it is said to be impossible.

Example 1: Consider the following CSoR: on a table are two empty containers, one of two liters and one of a deciliter. On the table is also a container of one liter, filled completely with water.

The SoR where the liter of water has been placed completely inside the container of two liters is real.

The SoR where the liter of water has been placed completely inside the container of one deciliter is impossible.

Definition 11: A goal of a given agent is such a SoR that the agent tries to attain it. IE. the agent chooses actions that belong to a path from CSoR to that SoR. At every CSoR, the agent has at least one goal.

Theorem 2: There exists SoRs that are attainable but cannot be reached by a given agent.

Proof: Consider an attainable SoR and an agent whose goal SoR that is. The SoR is attainable, therefore there exists a limited path from CSoR to that SoR. That duration of the agents's life, ie. the duration of the path from the birth of the agent to the death of the agent, is limited. If the shortest possible duration of all paths from CSoR to the SoR (marked min |{{CSoR ,action,SoR}}|) exceeds the duration of the life of the agent, the agent cannot attain it. QED

Phew. Second theorem. This is going well.

If I made mistakes, please inform me. Criticism is welcome.

The nature of the agent.

As previously discussed, an agent is an intelligent devise that also has an internal state, called desire or goal. The agent tries to attain this goal by manipulating the CSoR.

Due to theorem 1 the agent has to choose the next action from a small neighborhood of inaction. In other words, if the goal is too far from CSoR, the agent cannot attain it by a single action.

I shall now explore the properties of a single action a bit more closely.

An action is both the description and the fulfillment of the manipulation of elementary particles in some way by the agent. As proven previously, this manipulation cannot change the SoR too much.

Example 2: Consider the CSoR of the example 1. The lifting of the container with water is an action. Pushing it down is another. Smashing it is one also.

Consider the container is made of glass. Thus melting it is not an action, for the lenght of the shortest path from CSoR to SoR where the container has melted is greater than one, ie.

min |{{CSoR , action, SoR}}| > 1.

Theorem 3: An alteration to the CSoR is an viable action to the agent if and only if min |{{CSoR , action, SoR}}| = 1.

Proof: From -> it follows from the definition of an action, for the agent is then capable of performing the necessary motions directly. From <- it follows from theorem 1 so that the necessary action is in the small neighborhood of inaction. QED

This is equivalent to me sitting in the corner, rocking myself. This is my escape from the impossibility of the world and life.

You are not helping. This is me trying to understand the world.

I hate myself so much.

I couldnt understand a word of that, but it looked good while my brain fried trying to comprehend it.