At this point, it seems these intermittent check-in posts have become something of a routine, which strikes the foundation as a bit odd given the rather urgent nature of this whole situation. Regardless, here is a brief note on what has unfolded in recent weeks, as well as some clarification surrounding our vision of the theory moving forward.
Clearly, the academic silence has still not been broken. Now, despite the dismay of the foundation, we have decided to turn this period of silence into a phase of immense preparation and refinement surrounding the theory.
This decision has proven to be incredibly helpful for a few reasons. Most importantly, this has given us the time to translate the recursive logic directly into a robust system of mathematical notation. This has offered us a more “explicit” way to observe specific phenomena within the recursive framework, as well as a way to extend the implications efficaciously. The structural foundation of this notation makes the Breeze the ONLY framework capable of describing reality, specifically through its accounting for the concept of axiomatic erosion, aka universal incompleteness.
Also within this time, the theory’s grassroots efforts and engagements have grown significantly. Not only are we corresponding with multiple individuals on implementative level; but also, the natural curiosity seen on traditional social media platforms has been very promising. While our primary platform — Instagram — currently only has ~650 followers, we are seeing a level of early engagement with this theory that is not only inspiring but personally staggering.
This includes psychologists, engineers, scholars, entrepreneurs, and an impressive array of unique and deeply talented artists. It’s also worth noting, however coincidental, that the types of individuals these ideas seem to be attracting, are those of profoundly curious, incredibly talented, creative and intellectually innovative disposition.
Between standard engagement, direct messages received, and relationships developed thus far, we can confidently say that the Breeze has found a core audience of deeply curious individuals who are engaging with these ideas on a transformative and visceral level.
In light of these observations, we have considered adopting a different strategy regarding the pursuit of this theory’s implementation altogether. Specifically, and due to the rather blatant reality of institutional discourse as demonstrated through the unwavering academic silence, the foundation can safely assume that all institutional recipients have — after being granted a more than sufficient amount of time — positively rejected this theory and it’s claims, without exception, and by necessity of failing to acknowledge the urgency its implications demand.
These facts ultimately serve to highlight the profound failure and sheer insufficiency of our current academic institutions, by nature of their inability to properly engage with reality’s most fundamental truths when presented in kind.
Therefore, the foundation recognizes the futility of pursuing this engagement to no end, and so, we will unfortunately be transitioning our offer of collaboration away from the academic front, and toward a more public, institutionally-decentralized “network” of intellectually honest, independently curious, and professionally rigorous individuals. This transition is aimed at protecting the integrity of this theory’s continued development, in addition to allowing for maximum transparency especially as external incentives inevitably begin to play a role in the pressures that form around the reception and development of the Breeze.
Leave a Reply