I was going to understand the nature of the Trinity.

I remember it. It’s a doubly odd memory. Back in 1994, I needed to create an AOL screenname to replace my old one, as I had let my 1989 AOL (PC-Link) account go bad or maybe they made me start a new Acct because they were shutting down PC-Link entirely to encompass their expanded Internet capabilities.

Regardless, I needed a new name.

At the time, what’s like now, I was fascinated by the relationship between complexity and simplicity in a number of different fields.

One field of interest at the time was theology. Despite all the strange warnings not to try in old manuscripts, I decided I would simplify 3 in a nonmathematical fashion.

I was going to understand the nature of the Trinity.

This was somewhat similar to an earlier attempt to understand the behaviors of electrons and photons and quarks and their Möbius strip like ways both with each other and how they influence and are influenced by environment and our part in it.

And so, simplify3 became that screenname, and to this day I still use it in various places, 23 years later.

Did I Simplify 3? I did. It’s not a mathematical simplification with the elimination of variables though. It’s not scientific (bacon) reductionism. Rather it’s the simplification that comes from gaining comprehension of a certain kind.

It’s akin to having an awareness of subjective and objective space simultaneously, similar to the process that happens when you watch a movie and get involved in the story while losing yourself, while also remaining in the seat, forgetting your popcorn and the stickiness of the movie floor at the time, except you become the movie that you’re watching.


Oh! I’d forgotten about the gankyil!

You’ll appreciate this: The Halo effect of the Efimov state.
I was *so* fascinated with the Efimov state a few years ago, that I made a crude animated gif showing how I envisioned the Halo effect. I tried to make it as mathematically precise as I could with how I envision it working. Wikipedia kept my addition which I’m kind of proud of :)



I wonder : considering that we were both fascinated by the same subject matter at the same time, was there something happening around that time… a kind of “sign of the times” that drew us both to a similar interest?

Plato’s Logos and the Tao, for example, are two concepts that are functionally identical and arose in the same generation in two different parts of the world.

Of course it’s possible via trade routes and cultural interchange that the concept was shared from one to the other.

But I really do believe that there are sometimes “good ideas” whose “time has come” and that if one person doesnt think of it, another person will. Or rather, 1000 or 10,0000 people may have the same notion because it’s the ‘right time’ for it and they’re in the right mental state to reach a point where they’re each considering the same thing at the same time : independently and yet sharing some amount of cultural or knowledge development.




Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 − five =

Leave a Reply