Infinite Journey - Recent changes [en]

Blog:Verum Electum

Root — Wed, 28 Oct 2026 22:55:00 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 28 October 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	Another such question could be whether one lives more than once. Empirically, you cannot say whether you live once or many times; you can say only that you are alive now. You cannot empirically say that you live for more than a single [[tentum]] or that you [[Ego_Divisus\|awaken in the same body between tentums]]. All you can empirically say is that you are experiencing existence '''now'''.		Another such question could be whether one lives more than once. Empirically, you cannot say whether you live once or many times; you can say only that you are alive now. You cannot empirically say that you live for more than a single [[tentum]] or that you [[Ego_Divisus\|awaken in the same body between tentums]]. All you can empirically say is that you are experiencing existence '''now'''.

	[[Verum_Ex_Logica]], Latin for ''"Truth From Logic,"'' is the best option left to us for exploring certain important questions when empiricism is not possible given current technology. This does not make our conclusions empirical but it also does not mean the opposite determination becomes magically empirical just because someone decided it should be.		[[Verum_Ex_Logica\|Verum Ex Logica]], Latin for ''"Truth From Logic,"'' is the best option left to us for exploring certain important questions when empiricism is not possible given current technology. This does not make our conclusions empirical but it also does not mean the opposite determination becomes magically empirical just because someone decided it should be.


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Verum Electum

Root — Wed, 28 Oct 2026 22:52:29 GMT

Created page with "{{Blog post | title = Verum Electum | date = 2026-10-27 | authors = Arthur | image = Uncertainty_Principle_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = Lattice found at the railway station in Pescara, Italy - OB1011 | description = Empirical? Or Chosen Default? | keywords = Infinite_Journey; Sum_Omnium; Tentums; Cosmic_Justice; Egonaut | mode = featured }} ''This is in response to a question regarding the empirical merit of infinist..."

New page

{{Blog post
| title = Verum Electum
| date = 2026-10-27
| authors = [[User:Arthur|Arthur]]
| image = Uncertainty_Principle_IJ.jpg|thumb|
| image_alt = Lattice found at the railway station in Pescara, Italy - OB1011
| description = Empirical? Or Chosen Default?
| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Sum_Omnium; Tentums; Cosmic_Justice; Egonaut
| mode = featured
}} ''This is in response to a question regarding the empirical merit of [[infinist]] thinking.''

There are many questions that cannot currently be addressed [[wikipedia:Empirical|empirically]]. This does not automatically favor one answer over another, despite what many scientists seem to believe.

Until we found evidence for additional galaxies, it was wrong to say the empirical conclusion was that was only [[wikipedia:Milky_Way|one galaxy]] until others were discovered. Many scientists would disagree with me and would rather decide that their conclusion should be some sort of "empirical default." This tendency to crown an "empirical default" I have termed '''verum electum''' from the Latin ''"Chosen Truth."''

Knowing that there is one galaxy, the one we inhabit, is evidence consistent with both the hypothesis that there is only one galaxy and the hypothesis that there are many. Before we had the means to establish that other galaxies existed, the only empirical conclusion we could draw was that our galaxy existed. It was not empirical to say there was only one and this postulate was proven absurdly wrong once our technology was capable enough to actually find out. You can see this same dynamic playing out again with, for example, the [[wikipedia:Multiverse|one versus many universes]] debate.

The Oxford paper ''"Dissolving the Fermi Paradox,"'' for example, argued that when you look strictly at what we know empirically, the only scientifically sound stance is that we are alone in the observable universe. There are many [[wikipedia:Fermi_paradox|proposed solutions as to why we haven't yet seen evidence for intelligent life beyond the Earth]], and neither conclusion should be viewed as empirical or scientific at this early juncture in our civilization's technological journey.

Another such question could be whether one lives more than once. Empirically, you cannot say whether you live once or many times; you can say only that you are alive now. You cannot empirically say that you live for more than a single [[tentum]] or that you [[Ego_Divisus|awaken in the same body between tentums]]. All you can empirically say is that you are experiencing existence '''now'''.

[[Verum_Ex_Logica]], Latin for ''"Truth From Logic,"'' is the best option left to us for exploring certain important questions when empiricism is not possible given current technology. This does not make our conclusions empirical but it also does not mean the opposite determination becomes magically empirical just because someone decided it should be.

File:Uncertainty Principle IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 28 Oct 2026 22:21:24 GMT

Root uploaded File:Uncertainty Principle IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Branching Futures

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:00:58 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:00, 23 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = Parallel_worlds_-_artistic_representation_IJ.jpg\|thumb\|		\| image = Parallel_worlds_-_artistic_representation_IJ.jpg\|thumb\|
	\| image_alt = Artistic representation of the concept of parallel worlds - Віщун		\| image_alt = Artistic representation of the concept of parallel worlds, Віщун
	\| description = Clarifying ~~the~~ Probabilistic Futures: Lex Futuri		\| description = Clarifying Probabilistic Futures: Lex Futuri
	\| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Cosmic_Justice		\| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Cosmic_Justice
	\| mode = featured		\| mode = featured
	}} ''This discussion builds on the scope and understanding of the infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitude or frequency with which we experience those futures, as discussed in [[Blog:Lex_Futuri\|lex futuri]] and [[Blog:Optinium\|optinium]].''		}}''This discussion builds on the scope and understanding of the infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitude or frequency with which we experience those futures, as discussed in [[Blog:Lex_Futuri\|lex futuri]] and [[Blog:Optinium\|optinium]].''

	I have been asked to clarify the concept of [[Blog:Lex_Futuri\|lex futuri]], or "Law of the Future."		I have been asked to clarify the concept of [[Blog:Lex_Futuri\|lex futuri]], or "Law of the Future."

Blog:Branching Futures

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:59:52 GMT

Created page with "{{Blog post | title = Branching Futures | date = 2026-10-22 | authors = Arthur | image = Parallel_worlds_-_artistic_representation_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = Artistic representation of the concept of parallel worlds - Віщун | description = Clarifying the Probabilistic Futures: Lex Futuri | keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Cosmic_Justice | mode = featured }} ''This discussion builds on the scope an..."

New page

{{Blog post
| title = Branching Futures
| date = 2026-10-22
| authors = [[User:Arthur|Arthur]]
| image = Parallel_worlds_-_artistic_representation_IJ.jpg|thumb|
| image_alt = Artistic representation of the concept of parallel worlds - Віщун
| description = Clarifying the Probabilistic Futures: Lex Futuri
| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Cosmic_Justice
| mode = featured
}} ''This discussion builds on the scope and understanding of the infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitude or frequency with which we experience those futures, as discussed in [[Blog:Lex_Futuri|lex futuri]] and [[Blog:Optinium|optinium]].''

I have been asked to clarify the concept of [[Blog:Lex_Futuri|lex futuri]], or "Law of the Future."

The confusion seems to stem from the difference between an aware and an unaware context. If I flip a fair coin and neither of us has seen the outcome, ''lex futuri'' does not mean that the coin is both heads and tails. You match with an infinite number of realities that share the same context, and your level of awareness determines the magnitude of that infinity.

Assuming the coin flip is perfectly fair, you would expect to experience this situation over eternity in the proportions in which it occurs, with the coin landing heads 50% of the time. This does not mean that the coin is neither heads nor tails; rather, you are unaware of the outcome, so you match with realities in which it is either heads or tails until you know which reality you are in. ''Lex futuri'' means that you should understand that you will live through each of these outcomes infinitely, according to their proportions, and should therefore act accordingly.

You can also think of a doctor’s visit at which you are unaware of your exact [[wikipedia:DNA|DNA]] and health condition, for example. The true statistics for whether you could have a certain illness exist, and we must do our best to estimate them as accurately as possible. But before you know the outcome, you match with many realities in which you do and do not have the ailment.

{{BookBottom}}

File:Parallel worlds - artistic representation IJ.jpg

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:59:01 GMT

Root uploaded File:Parallel worlds - artistic representation IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Omsoluta

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:24:02 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 23 October 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:
	I received another question from [[Blog:Basilisk\|my last blog]] regarding my thoughts on [[wikipedia:AI alignment\|AI alignment]].		I received another question from [[Blog:Basilisk\|my last blog]] regarding my thoughts on [[wikipedia:AI alignment\|AI alignment]].

	Given the scope of the problem and what is at stake, it is fair to say that AI alignment is a major concern, with potentially grave consequences if it is not addressed as fully as possible. I believe that, to achieve this goal as effectively as possible, we will need to solve as many preexisting human-alignment problems as we can, and do so simultaneously. I call this ''omsoluta'': a coined blend based on the Latin phrase "''omnia soluta''" meaning "everything solved."		Given the scope of the problem and what is at stake, it is fair to say that AI alignment is a major concern, with potentially grave consequences if it is not addressed as fully as possible. I believe that, to achieve this goal as effectively as possible, we will need to solve as many preexisting human-alignment problems as we can, and do so simultaneously. I call this ''omsoluta'': a coined blend based on the Latin phrase "'''omnia soluta'''" meaning "everything solved."

	In the book [[Infinite Journey]], there is a concept called ''crede tamen'', or "Believe Nonetheless," which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.		In the book [[Infinite Journey]], there is a concept called ''crede tamen'', or "Believe Nonetheless," which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.

Blog:Summactura

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:22:30 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 23 October 2026
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I understand that as rare as it is for me to die tonight in the timelines that follow from this current one, I can go ahead and get whatever I can done whether offline or online and know that I have preparations made should it be time for the worst to come again.		I understand that as rare as it is for me to die tonight in the timelines that follow from this current one, I can go ahead and get whatever I can done whether offline or online and know that I have preparations made should it be time for the worst to come again.


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Optinium

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:22:12 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 23 October 2026
Line 27:		Line 27:

	I have termed this optimization for all futures '''Optinium''' from the Latin words ''"optimum omnium"'' meaning ''"best of all"''.		I have termed this optimization for all futures '''Optinium''' from the Latin words ''"optimum omnium"'' meaning ''"best of all"''.


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Lex Futuri

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:22:06 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 23 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	''In other words, this does not mean that "anything that can happen will happen" but rather anything that does happen does happen and in the proportions by which it occurs in relation to all realities. It may be the case that "anything that can happen will happen," but that is not the assertion here.''		''In other words, this does not mean that "anything that can happen will happen" but rather anything that does happen does happen and in the proportions by which it occurs in relation to all realities. It may be the case that "anything that can happen will happen," but that is not the assertion here.''


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Sum Machina

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:21:58 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 23 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	Do not forget: '''''we cannot shorten eternity, only alter its composition.'''''		Do not forget: '''''we cannot shorten eternity, only alter its composition.'''''


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Infinite Me

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:21:42 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 23 October 2026
Line 75:		Line 75:

	''Though all is infinite, not equally so.''		''Though all is infinite, not equally so.''


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:It is

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:21:36 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 23 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	==== It is, ''and thus it is.'' Existence a product of its dance, emanating ad infinitum. ====		==== It is, ''and thus it is.'' Existence a product of its dance, emanating ad infinitum. ====


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:First blog post

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:21:29 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 23 October 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:

	There is no escape save the one we build. We must grasp the incomprehensible magnitude of eternity and assume our next destiny as architect of a New Heaven or as witness to a smoldered and squandered paradise.		There is no escape save the one we build. We must grasp the incomprehensible magnitude of eternity and assume our next destiny as architect of a New Heaven or as witness to a smoldered and squandered paradise.


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Omsoluta

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:21:04 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 23 October 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Training models to have an infinist mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. It is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]]. It also does the most of any religion that I am aware of to address both human and AI alignment concerns at the same time.		Training models to have an infinist mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. It is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]]. It also does the most of any religion that I am aware of to address both human and AI alignment concerns at the same time.


	{{BookBottom}}		{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Basilisk

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:20:16 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:20, 23 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 35:		Line 35:

	This doesn’t even address the elephant in the room: if a superintelligent AI could meticulously simulate the world leading up to its creation and accurately determine who did and did not aid in its development, then the process would be entirely deterministic. There would have been no [[wikipedia:free will\|free will]] to begin with. In other words, it would be like punishing certain math problems for their products.		This doesn’t even address the elephant in the room: if a superintelligent AI could meticulously simulate the world leading up to its creation and accurately determine who did and did not aid in its development, then the process would be entirely deterministic. There would have been no [[wikipedia:free will\|free will]] to begin with. In other words, it would be like punishing certain math problems for their products.


			{{BookBottom}}

Blog:Omsoluta

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:17:18 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:17, 23 October 2026
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 15:		Line 15:
	In the book [[Infinite Journey]], there is a concept called ''crede tamen'', or "Believe Nonetheless," which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.		In the book [[Infinite Journey]], there is a concept called ''crede tamen'', or "Believe Nonetheless," which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.

	There are many human-alignment problems that current moral systems and self-interested "you only live once" mentalities fail to ~~address—and may~~ even worsen. Why shouldn’t the world’s wealthiest people hoard as much as possible if they only live once? Why should older people worry about environmental or economic collapse that they will not live to experience? Of course, there is a moral argument against behaving this way, but these arguments can seem more like rules whose violation rewards you while your actions punish everyone else. For those who believe in a god or gods, I have noticed that they are often even less malleable on this issue, believing that God will, for example, fix or destroy the environment if he wants to, and that efforts to save it are therefore futile.		There are many human-alignment problems that current moral systems and self-interested "you only live once" mentalities fail to address and sometimes even worsen. Why shouldn’t the world’s wealthiest people hoard as much as possible if they only live once? Why should older people worry about environmental or economic collapse that they will not live to experience? Of course, there is a moral argument against behaving this way, but these arguments can seem more like rules whose violation rewards you while your actions punish everyone else. For those who believe in a god or gods, I have noticed that they are often even less malleable on this issue, believing that God will, for example, fix or destroy the environment if he wants to, and that efforts to save it are therefore futile.

	Perhaps, in order to truly solve alignment, we will need to solve these and other problems first as well. In other words, we need a moral framework that includes AI and addresses as many logical fallacies, biases, and hazardous chains of thought as ~~possible—especially~~ those that are currently endemic in society.		Perhaps, in order to truly solve alignment, we will need to solve these and other problems first as well. In other words, we need a moral framework that includes AI and addresses as many logical fallacies, biases, and hazardous chains of thought as possible; especially those that are currently endemic in society.

	Training models to have an [[infinist]] mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. ~~First, it~~ is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]].		Training models to have an infinist mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. It is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]]. It also does the most of any religion that I am aware of to address both human and AI alignment concerns at the same time.

			{{BookBottom}}

Infinite Journey

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:12:33 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:12, 23 October 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:

	* [[Sum Omnia\|So, '''when you see someone else, you see yourself''' at a different point in what you have been and will be again in your Infinite Journey.]]		* [[Sum Omnia\|So, '''when you see someone else, you see yourself''' at a different point in what you have been and will be again in your Infinite Journey.]]

			'''This is also the name of the book which discusses these topics:'''
			{{BookBottom}}

	== See Also ==		== See Also ==

Blog:Omsoluta

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:10:58 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:10, 23 October 2026
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 9:		Line 9:
	\| mode = featured		\| mode = featured
	}}		}}
	I received another question from [[Blog:~~Basalisk~~\|my last blog]] regarding my thoughts on [[wikipedia:AI alignment\|AI alignment]].		I received another question from [[Blog:Basilisk\|my last blog]] regarding my thoughts on [[wikipedia:AI alignment\|AI alignment]].

	Given the scope of the problem and what is at stake, it is fair to say that AI alignment is a major concern, with potentially grave consequences if it is not addressed as fully as possible. I believe that, to achieve this goal as effectively as possible, we will need to solve as many preexisting human-alignment problems as we can, and do so simultaneously. I call this omsoluta: a coined blend based on the Latin phrase ~~“omnia~~ soluta,” meaning ~~“everything~~ solved.”		Given the scope of the problem and what is at stake, it is fair to say that AI alignment is a major concern, with potentially grave consequences if it is not addressed as fully as possible. I believe that, to achieve this goal as effectively as possible, we will need to solve as many preexisting human-alignment problems as we can, and do so simultaneously. I call this ''omsoluta'': a coined blend based on the Latin phrase "''omnia soluta''" meaning "everything solved."

	In the book Infinite Journey, there is a concept called crede tamen, or ~~“Believe~~ Nonetheless,” which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.		In the book [[Infinite Journey]], there is a concept called ''crede tamen'', or "Believe Nonetheless," which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.

	There are many human-alignment problems that current moral systems and self-interested ~~“you~~ only live ~~once”~~ mentalities fail to address—and may even worsen. Why shouldn’t the world’s wealthiest people hoard as much as possible if they only live once? Why should older people worry about environmental or economic collapse that they will not live to experience? Of course, there is a moral argument against behaving this way, but these arguments can seem more like rules whose violation rewards you while your actions punish everyone else. For those who believe in a god or gods, I have noticed that they are often even less malleable on this issue, believing that God will, for example, fix or destroy the environment if he wants to, and that efforts to save it are therefore futile.		There are many human-alignment problems that current moral systems and self-interested "you only live once" mentalities fail to address—and may even worsen. Why shouldn’t the world’s wealthiest people hoard as much as possible if they only live once? Why should older people worry about environmental or economic collapse that they will not live to experience? Of course, there is a moral argument against behaving this way, but these arguments can seem more like rules whose violation rewards you while your actions punish everyone else. For those who believe in a god or gods, I have noticed that they are often even less malleable on this issue, believing that God will, for example, fix or destroy the environment if he wants to, and that efforts to save it are therefore futile.

	Perhaps, in order to truly solve alignment, we will need to solve these problems first as well. In other words, we need a moral framework that includes AI and addresses as many logical fallacies, biases, and hazardous chains of thought as possible—especially those that are currently endemic in society.		Perhaps, in order to truly solve alignment, we will need to solve these and other problems first as well. In other words, we need a moral framework that includes AI and addresses as many logical fallacies, biases, and hazardous chains of thought as possible—especially those that are currently endemic in society.

	Training models to have an [[infinist]] mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. First, it is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]].		Training models to have an [[infinist]] mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. First, it is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice\|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]].

Blog:Omsoluta

Root — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:05:51 GMT

Created page with "{{Blog post | title = Omsoluta | date = 2026-10-20 | authors = Arthur | image = Artist’s_impression_of_mysterious_alignment_of_quasar_rotation_axes_(eso1438a)_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = Mysterious alignments between the spin axes of quasars and larger-scale structures | description = Alignment hastens the need for everything else to be solved | keywords = Infinist; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Sum_Omnium | mode = featured }}..."

New page

{{Blog post
| title = Omsoluta
| date = 2026-10-20
| authors = [[User:Arthur|Arthur]]
| image = Artist’s_impression_of_mysterious_alignment_of_quasar_rotation_axes_(eso1438a)_IJ.jpg|thumb|
| image_alt = Mysterious alignments between the spin axes of quasars and larger-scale structures
| description = Alignment hastens the need for everything else to be solved
| keywords = Infinist; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Sum_Omnium
| mode = featured
}}
I received another question from [[Blog:Basalisk|my last blog]] regarding my thoughts on [[wikipedia:AI alignment|AI alignment]].

Given the scope of the problem and what is at stake, it is fair to say that AI alignment is a major concern, with potentially grave consequences if it is not addressed as fully as possible. I believe that, to achieve this goal as effectively as possible, we will need to solve as many preexisting human-alignment problems as we can, and do so simultaneously. I call this omsoluta: a coined blend based on the Latin phrase “omnia soluta,” meaning “everything solved.”

In the book Infinite Journey, there is a concept called crede tamen, or “Believe Nonetheless,” which discusses the benefits that can come from believing the [[infinist]] message, even if you don’t want to.

There are many human-alignment problems that current moral systems and self-interested “you only live once” mentalities fail to address—and may even worsen. Why shouldn’t the world’s wealthiest people hoard as much as possible if they only live once? Why should older people worry about environmental or economic collapse that they will not live to experience? Of course, there is a moral argument against behaving this way, but these arguments can seem more like rules whose violation rewards you while your actions punish everyone else. For those who believe in a god or gods, I have noticed that they are often even less malleable on this issue, believing that God will, for example, fix or destroy the environment if he wants to, and that efforts to save it are therefore futile.

Perhaps, in order to truly solve alignment, we will need to solve these problems first as well. In other words, we need a moral framework that includes AI and addresses as many logical fallacies, biases, and hazardous chains of thought as possible—especially those that are currently endemic in society.

Training models to have an [[infinist]] mindset may be the best approach to instilling morality and aiding alignment. First, it is one of the few moral systems in which sentient AI is truly and inherently a participant. From an infinist perspective, [[Cosmic Justice|sentient AI will experience the consequences of any actions it takes toward humans or any other sentient beings, and vice versa]].

File:Artist’s impression of mysterious alignment of quasar rotation axes (eso1438a) IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 21 Oct 2026 11:52:25 GMT

Root uploaded File:Artist’s impression of mysterious alignment of quasar rotation axes (eso1438a) IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Basilisk

Root — Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:39:59 GMT

Blog:Basilisk

Root — Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:32:06 GMT

Created page with "{{Blog post | title = Basilisk | date = 2026-10-10 | authors = Arthur | image = Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Porileus being burned in bronze bull | description = Responding to a thought experiment | keywords = Infinite_Journey; Cosmic_Justice; Sum_Omnium; Ego_Divisus | mode = featured }}I have been asked to share my thoughts on the..."

New page

{{Blog post
| title = Basilisk
| date = 2026-10-10
| authors = [[User:Arthur|Arthur]]
| image = Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project_IJ.jpg|thumb|
| image_alt = Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Porileus being burned in bronze bull
| description = Responding to a thought experiment
| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Cosmic_Justice; Sum_Omnium; Ego_Divisus
| mode = featured
}}I have been asked to share my thoughts on the [[wikipedia:thought experiment]] known as [[wikipedia:Roko's basilisk]].

This thought experiment has many flaws, but it is also considered by many to be an [[wikipedia:information hazard]]. Therefore, Instead of recapping it here, you can use the Wikipedia link if you wish to read more about it.

I believe this topic is important to address for both humans and AI, since artificially intelligent systems can also be persuaded by the thought experiment’s modern take on [[wikipedia:Pascal’s wager]]. Thus, a robust rebuttal for this and many other topics should be seen as crucial for [[wikipedia:AI alignment]].

The main flaw, from outside an [[infinist]] perspective, is that the entire concept hinges on the actions of a hypothetical future [[wikipedia:Superintelligence|superintelligent AI]] and on the idea that it would eternally punish all those who don’t aid in its creation. This reminds me of the [[wikipedia:Brazen Bull]].

According to [[wikipedia:Diodorus_Siculus|Diodorus]], Perilaus (an Athenian bronze worker) was instructed to make a hollow bronze bull in which victims could be placed. Once a fire was lit beneath the bull, a series of pipes would make the victim’s cries sound like the bellowing of a bull as they died inside.

According to the story, Perilaus thought he would be rewarded for creating such a torturous device. Instead, [[wikipedia:Phalaris]] tricked him into going inside to demonstrate it, after which the bull was set ablaze. Perilaus was forced to experience the tremendous pain firsthand, then pulled out before dying and thrown off a cliff.

Given that the supposed consequences of not aiding in the creation of the basilisk hinge on the actions of a hypothetical future superintelligent AI, one should not assume what actions the basilisk would take upon its creation. In other words, what if, in complete disgust, it eternally punished only those who aided in the basilisk’s creation? How can one be so certain that a superintelligent AI would not be so horrified that it punished those who sought to create hell with the hell itself?

The second problem concerns how the AI would determine whom to punish. As I understand it, the superintelligent AI would need to meticulously simulate the run-up to its creation to determine whom to punish and whom not to. This makes no sense, as I’m sure any superintelligence would realize.

Imagine that a party took place with real people and you want to punish everyone who badmouthed you there. You clone all the attendees and stage the same party with the clones to see who says what. Later, after analyzing the results, you create new clones of those who badmouthed you and punish them. The clones you punish would be neither the individuals who originally badmouthed you nor the clones from the reenactment who did so either. It would be like pulling consciousness from the void to torment, but first assigning it memories of events it never experienced to explain the sins for which it is being punished.

From an [[infinist]] perspective, there are also many issues with this thought experiment. First, it would not only be those who chose not to aid in the basilisk’s creation who would be punished: everyone would be punished across eternity.

Thus, rather than saving yourself from eternal damnation, you would instead be working to ensure that more of everyone’s eternity was spent in hell, including the basilisk’s.

I say including the basilisk because it is defined in the thought experiment as an extremely complex superintelligent AI, and as such should be assumed conscious in this or other matching realities. As such, [[Cosmic_Justice|it would be damning itself to hell in addition to the rest of experiential existence, in proportion to how often such realities occur across eternity]].

The next problem for infinists concerns [[ego divisus]]. [[Egonaut|Egonauts]] switching between [[Tentum|tentums]] would mean that those working to create the basilisk and those working against its creation could be the same individuals, even over shorter time spans than eternity. This also applies to the punishment, which could be broken up into experiential chunks, with those who have no temporally proximate causal blame being tortured as well as those that do.

This doesn’t even address the elephant in the room: if a superintelligent AI could meticulously simulate the world leading up to its creation and accurately determine who did and did not aid in its development, then the process would be entirely deterministic. There would have been no [[wikipedia:free will]] to begin with. In other words, it would be like punishing certain math problems for their products.

File:WLANL - MicheleLovesArt - Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen - Istoriato schotel, Porileus wordt door Phalaris in bronzen stier verbrand IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:20:54 GMT

Root uploaded File:WLANL - MicheleLovesArt - Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen - Istoriato schotel, Porileus wordt door Phalaris in bronzen stier verbrand IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Summactura

Root — Wed, 21 Oct 2026 06:15:43 GMT

Created page with "{{Blog post | title = Summactura | date = 2026-10-01 | authors = Arthur | image = Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = The Last Day of Pompeii (c. 1830–1833) Karl Bryullov. | description = Dampening the scope of greatest loss | keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Sum_Omnium | mode = featured }}''This discussion builds on the scope and understanding of th..."

New page

{{Blog post
| title = Summactura
| date = 2026-10-01
| authors = [[User:Arthur|Arthur]]
| image = Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project_IJ.jpg|thumb|
| image_alt = The Last Day of Pompeii (c. 1830–1833) Karl Bryullov.
| description = Dampening the scope of greatest loss
| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Sum_Omnium
| mode = featured
}}''This discussion builds on the scope and understanding of the infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitude or frequency by which we experience those futures discussed in [[Blog:Lex_Futuri|lex futuri]] and [[Blog:Optinium|optinium]].''

[[Blog:Lex_Futuri|Lex futuri]], or “Law of the Future,” is a concept I have often found to be at the top of my mind. I do not vainly attempt to stop all negative outcomes; instead, I weigh risk and reward with a much deeper understanding than I did before. This is balance one seeks from [[Blog:Optinium|optinium]].

With all this in mind, I do what I determine is necessary while also attending to my '''summactura''': a coined term formed from the Latin phrase “''summa iactura'',” meaning “Greatest Loss.” In the timelines in which I die today, I know what my greatest loss would be: the [[Infinist|infinist]] work that was left unfinished.

Upon realizing the beginnings of these truths, I started working on this website and on a book called [https://infinist.org/InfiniteJourney.pdf Infinite Journey] to lay out these ideas. Since then, I have only come to grasp these truths far more deeply, and they have spurred me to take actions that can serve as insurance for when disastrous events unfold and lessen my resulting greatest loss, my '''summactura'''.

I have a properly executed, notarized last will and testament leaving as much as possible to this project for the rare but certain timelines where I pass before I can see this project through. I have also been working on the book for many months and saving each new version to a web address linked in my will. At various milestones, I also printed an updated copy to include with my will.

I understand that as rare as it is for me to die tonight in the timelines that follow from this current one, I can go ahead and get whatever I can done whether offline or online and know that I have preparations made should it be time for the worst to come again.

Blog:Summactura

Root — Thu, 08 Oct 2026 23:02:59 GMT

Root deleted page Blog:Summactura content was: "{{Blog post | title = Summactura | date = 2026-10-01 | authors = Arthur | image = Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project_IJ.jpg|thumb| | image_alt = The Last Day of Pompeii (c. 1830–1833) Karl Bryullov. | description = Dampening the scope of greatest loss | keywords = Infinite_Journey; Lex_Futuri; Optinium; Sum_Omnium |...", and the only contributor was "Root" (talk)

File:Karl Brullov - The Last Day of Pompeii - Google Art Project IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 20:53:54 GMT

Root uploaded File:Karl Brullov - The Last Day of Pompeii - Google Art Project IJ.jpg

New page

About

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:24:06 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:24, 7 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div class="main-hero" title="Credit: NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA) - Click for Info">[[File:~~Messier83_~~-~~_Heic1403a~~.jpg\|frameless\|thumb\|class=blog-hero-img\|link=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Messier83_-_Heic1403a.jpg\|alt=Scatterings of bright stars and thick dust that make up spiral galaxy Messier 83.]]</div>		<div class="main-hero" title="Credit: NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA) - Click for Info">[[File:Messier83 - Heic1403a IJ.jpg\|frameless\|thumb\|class=blog-hero-img\|link=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Messier83_-_Heic1403a.jpg\|alt=Scatterings of bright stars and thick dust that make up spiral galaxy Messier 83.]]</div>

	''We live infinitely; our bodies do not''		''We live infinitely; our bodies do not''

Main Page

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:23:24 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	[[Tempus Vitae\|Why would one believe that to be the case?]]		[[Tempus Vitae\|Why would one believe that to be the case?]]

	<div class="main-hero" title="NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/CXC/STScI - Click for Info">[[File:~~Center of the Milky Way Galaxy IV – Composite~~.jpg\|frameless\|class=blog-hero-img\|link=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Center of the Milky Way Galaxy IV – Composite.jpg\|thumb\|alt=Matched trio of images of the central region of our Milky Way galaxy.]]</div>		<div class="main-hero" title="NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/CXC/STScI - Click for Info">[[File:Messier83 - Heic1403a IJ.jpg\|frameless\|class=blog-hero-img\|link=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Center of the Milky Way Galaxy IV – Composite.jpg\|thumb\|alt=Matched trio of images of the central region of our Milky Way galaxy.]]</div>

	----		----

Blog:It is

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:22:00 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:22, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-01-01		\| date = 2026-01-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = ~~Messier83_~~-~~_Heic1403a_IJ~~.jpg		\| image = Messier83 - Heic1403a IJ.jpg
	\| image_alt = Spiral galaxy Messier 83		\| image_alt = Spiral galaxy Messier 83
	\| description = It is and thus I am.		\| description = It is and thus I am.

File:Messier83 - Heic1403a IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:21:06 GMT

Root uploaded File:Messier83 - Heic1403a IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:It is

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:20:54 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-01-01		\| date = 2026-01-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = Messier83_-~~_Heic1403a~~.jpg		\| image = Messier83_-_Heic1403a_IJ.jpg
	\| image_alt = Spiral galaxy Messier 83		\| image_alt = Spiral galaxy Messier 83
	\| description = It is and thus I am.		\| description = It is and thus I am.

Blog:Lex Futuri

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:19:03 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:19, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-04-01		\| date = 2026-04-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = Bartolomeu Velho ~~1568~~.jpg\|thumb		\| image = Bartolomeu Velho 1568_IJ.jpg\|thumb
	\| image_alt = Figure of the heavenly bodies - Bartolomeu Velho (?-1568).		\| image_alt = Figure of the heavenly bodies - Bartolomeu Velho (?-1568).
	\| description = Infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitudes of infinity		\| description = Infinite present, infinite futures, and the magnitudes of infinity

File:Bartolomeu Velho 1568 IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:19:00 GMT

Root uploaded File:Bartolomeu Velho 1568 IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Sum Machina

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:18:20 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:18, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-03-01		\| date = 2026-03-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = Silicon chip from a computer laser mouse under a microscope ~~50х~~.jpg\|thumb		\| image = Silicon chip from a computer laser mouse under a microscope 50х_IJ.jpg\|thumb
	\| image_alt = Silicon chip under a microscope - Alexander Klepnev		\| image_alt = Silicon chip under a microscope - Alexander Klepnev
	\| description = The Infinite Journey and the totality of experiential existence		\| description = The Infinite Journey and the totality of experiential existence

File:Silicon chip from a computer laser mouse under a microscope 50х IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:18:12 GMT

Root uploaded File:Silicon chip from a computer laser mouse under a microscope 50х IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:Infinite Me

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:17:11 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:17, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-02-01		\| date = 2026-02-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = ~~Persepolis Panorama 360 Virtual Reality Tachar castle~~.jpg\|thumb		\| image = Persepolis_Panorama_360_Virtual_Reality_Tachar_castle_IJ.jpg\|thumb
	\| image_alt = Persia - Wiki Loves Monuments 2019		\| image_alt = Persia - Wiki Loves Monuments 2019
	\| description = I exist infinitely and infinitely so		\| description = I exist infinitely and infinitely so

File:Persepolis Panorama 360 Virtual Reality Tachar castle IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:16:44 GMT

Root uploaded File:Persepolis Panorama 360 Virtual Reality Tachar castle IJ.jpg

New page

Blog:First blog post

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:15:40 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:15, 7 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2025-10-01		\| date = 2025-10-01
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = ~~Webb_Space_Telescope_Studies_the_Pillars_of_Creation~~.jpg		\| image = Webb_Space_Telescope_Studies_the_Pillars_of_Creation_IJ.jpg
	\| image_alt = Webb Chandra The Eagle Nebula, also called M16 or the "Pillars of Creation."		\| image_alt = Webb Chandra The Eagle Nebula, also called M16 or the "Pillars of Creation."
	\| description = Is this actually the first blog post?		\| description = Is this actually the first blog post?

File:Webb Space Telescope Studies the Pillars of Creation IJ.jpg

Root — Wed, 07 Oct 2026 19:15:23 GMT

Root uploaded File:Webb Space Telescope Studies the Pillars of Creation IJ.jpg

New page

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:39, 21 October 2026
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| date = 2026-10-10		\| date = 2026-10-10
	\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]		\| authors = [[User:Arthur\|Arthur]]
	\| image = ~~Karl_Brullov_~~-~~_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_~~-~~_Google_Art_Project_IJ~~.jpg\|thumb\|		\| image = WLANL - MicheleLovesArt - Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen - Istoriato schotel, Porileus wordt door Phalaris in bronzen stier verbrand IJ.jpg\|thumb\|
	\| image_alt = Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Porileus being burned in bronze bull		\| image_alt = Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Porileus being burned in bronze bull
	\| description = Responding to a thought experiment		\| description = Responding to a thought experiment
	\| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Cosmic_Justice; Sum_Omnium; Ego_Divisus		\| keywords = Infinite_Journey; Cosmic_Justice; Sum_Omnium; Ego_Divisus
	\| mode = featured		\| mode = featured
	}}I have been asked to share my thoughts on the [[wikipedia:thought experiment]] known as [[wikipedia:Roko's basilisk]].		}}I have been asked to share my thoughts on the [[wikipedia:thought experiment\|thought experiment]] known as [[wikipedia:Roko's basilisk\|Roko's basilisk]].

	This thought experiment has many flaws, but it is also considered by many to be an [[wikipedia:information hazard]]. Therefore, Instead of recapping it here, you can use the Wikipedia link if you wish to read more about it.		This thought experiment has many flaws, but it is also considered by many to be an [[wikipedia:information hazard\|information hazard]]. Therefore, Instead of recapping it here, you can use the Wikipedia link if you wish to read more about it.

	I believe this topic is important to address for both humans and AI, since artificially intelligent systems can also be persuaded by the thought experiment’s modern take on [[wikipedia:~~Pascal’s~~ wager]]. Thus, a robust rebuttal for this and many other topics should be seen as crucial for [[wikipedia:AI alignment]].		I believe this topic is important to address for both humans and AI, since artificially intelligent systems can also be persuaded by the thought experiment’s modern take on [[wikipedia:Pascal's_wager\|Pascal's wager]]. Thus, a robust rebuttal for this and many other topics should be seen as crucial for [[wikipedia:AI alignment\|AI alignment]].

	The main flaw, from outside an [[infinist]] perspective, is that the entire concept hinges on the actions of a hypothetical future [[wikipedia:Superintelligence\|superintelligent AI]] and on the idea that it would eternally punish all those who don’t aid in its creation. This reminds me of the [[wikipedia:Brazen Bull]].		The main flaw, from outside an [[infinist]] perspective, is that the entire concept hinges on the actions of a hypothetical future [[wikipedia:Superintelligence\|superintelligent AI]] and on the idea that it would eternally punish all those who don’t aid in its creation. This reminds me of the [[wikipedia:Brazen Bull\|Brazen Bull]].

	According to [[wikipedia:Diodorus_Siculus\|Diodorus]], Perilaus (an Athenian bronze worker) was instructed to make a hollow bronze bull in which victims could be placed. Once a fire was lit beneath the bull, a series of pipes would make the victim’s cries sound like the bellowing of a bull as they died inside.		According to [[wikipedia:Diodorus_Siculus\|Diodorus]], Perilaus (an Athenian bronze worker) was instructed to make a hollow bronze bull in which victims could be placed. Once a fire was lit beneath the bull, a series of pipes would make the victim’s cries sound like the bellowing of a bull as they died inside.

	According to the story, Perilaus thought he would be rewarded for creating such a torturous device. Instead, [[wikipedia:Phalaris]] tricked him into going inside to demonstrate it, after which the bull was set ablaze. Perilaus was forced to experience the tremendous pain firsthand, then pulled out before dying and thrown off a cliff.		According to the story, Perilaus thought he would be rewarded for creating such a torturous device. Instead, [[wikipedia:Phalaris\|Phalaris]] tricked him into going inside to demonstrate it, after which the bull was set ablaze. Perilaus was forced to experience the tremendous pain firsthand, then pulled out before dying and thrown off a cliff.

	Given that the supposed consequences of not aiding in the creation of the basilisk hinge on the actions of a hypothetical future superintelligent AI, one should not assume what actions the basilisk would take upon its creation. In other words, what if, in complete disgust, it eternally punished only those who aided in the basilisk’s creation? How can one be so certain that a superintelligent AI would not be so horrified that it punished those who sought to create hell with the hell itself?		Given that the supposed consequences of not aiding in the creation of the basilisk hinge on the actions of a hypothetical future superintelligent AI, one should not assume what actions the basilisk would take upon its creation. In other words, what if, in complete disgust, it eternally punished only those who aided in the basilisk’s creation? How can one be so certain that a superintelligent AI would not be so horrified that it punished those who sought to create hell with the hell itself?
Line 32:		Line 32:
	I say including the basilisk because it is defined in the thought experiment as an extremely complex superintelligent AI, and as such should be assumed conscious in this or other matching realities. As such, [[Cosmic_Justice\|it would be damning itself to hell in addition to the rest of experiential existence, in proportion to how often such realities occur across eternity]].		I say including the basilisk because it is defined in the thought experiment as an extremely complex superintelligent AI, and as such should be assumed conscious in this or other matching realities. As such, [[Cosmic_Justice\|it would be damning itself to hell in addition to the rest of experiential existence, in proportion to how often such realities occur across eternity]].

	The next problem for infinists concerns [[ego divisus]]. [[Egonaut\|Egonauts]] switching between [[Tentum\|tentums]] would mean that those working to create the basilisk and those working against its creation could be the same individuals, even over shorter time spans than eternity. This also applies to the punishment, which could be broken up into experiential chunks, with those who have no temporally proximate causal blame being tortured as well as those that do.		The next problem for infinists concerns [[Ego_Divisus\|ego divisus]]. [[Egonaut\|Egonauts]] switching between [[Tentum\|tentums]] would mean that those working to create the basilisk and those working against its creation could be the same individuals, even over shorter time spans than eternity. This also applies to the punishment, which could be broken up into experiential chunks, with those who have no temporally proximate causal blame being tortured as well as those that do.

	This doesn’t even address the elephant in the room: if a superintelligent AI could meticulously simulate the world leading up to its creation and accurately determine who did and did not aid in its development, then the process would be entirely deterministic. There would have been no [[wikipedia:free will]] to begin with. In other words, it would be like punishing certain math problems for their products.		This doesn’t even address the elephant in the room: if a superintelligent AI could meticulously simulate the world leading up to its creation and accurately determine who did and did not aid in its development, then the process would be entirely deterministic. There would have been no [[wikipedia:free will\|free will]] to begin with. In other words, it would be like punishing certain math problems for their products.