Drive Toward Infinity

What if singularities aren’t failures of physics, but clues about what comes next?

So apparently I wasn’t finished.

I published a piece about the recent Navier–Stokes singularity result and ended up going down a particular rabbit hole.

The basic thought was this:

If an extraordinarily successful physical theory predicts infinity, perhaps the interesting question isn’t:

How do we get rid of the infinity?

Maybe it’s:

What assumption broke immediately before we got there?

Navier–Stokes Broke. Good. Now What?

A million-dollar maths problem, a small army of AI mathematicians, some very angry vortices… and why I think the singularity might actually be the beginning of the interesting part.

So.

Apparently Navier–Stokes has been solved.

Or possibly solved.

Or very convincingly claimed to be solved and currently being stared at suspiciously by mathematicians, which is probably the more responsible way of saying it given that this all happened, what… four days ago?

You Should Be Ten People in One

I think a fully formed person should be ten people in one.

The Citizen. The Logician. The Philosopher. The Adventurer. The Lover. The Protector. The Scientist. The Artist. The Warrior. And somewhere among them, the one who decides who should speak.

The mistake we make is thinking that maturity means becoming one consistent person with one coherent philosophy applied across every part of life.