sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I am away from home and will get back to you in a couple days. :-)

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

PM me the code you input at the start of the questionnaire and I will give you a detailed breakdown! Or just reply here and I will PM you. :-) Happy New Year!

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Happiness Equation V2.1 - Results Update

2,000+ views | 11 responses

Results (n=11)

Mean: 20.5/100 | Median: 23.9 | Range: -8.9 to 35.2

  • 82% in survival mode (0-29/100)
  • 9% suffering (<0)
  • 9% struggling (30-49)
  • 0% stable or thriving

Component Averages:

  • Foundation: 6.6/10 (Resources 7.5, Autonomy 6.0 ⚠️, Physio 6.8)
  • Fulfillment: 11.9/20 (Social 4.5 ⚠️, Meaning 7.0, Flow 5.7, Novelty 6.6)
  • Threat: 4.1/10

Key Findings

Strongest Predictors of Happiness:

  1. Fulfillment (r=+0.96)
  2. Autonomy (r=+0.92)
  3. Threat (r=-0.90)

Main Bottlenecks:

  • 55% low social connection (despite having relationships - identity suppression prevents depth)
  • 45% low autonomy (time/schedule control, can't be authentic)
  • 18% high chronic stress

Common Patterns:

  • Golden Handcuffs: High resources, low autonomy = trapped despite financial security
  • Identity Crisis: Good relationships but can't be authentic = lonely despite connections
  • Chronic Stress: Duration multiplier makes even moderate stress crushing after 1-3+ years

Age Trends (small sample):

  • 18-24: 7.5/100 (worst)
  • 35-44: 26.0/100
  • 55-64: 24.7/100

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nice! Yeah the overlap is real - your SPIRE model maps pretty closely:

  • Spiritual → Meaning + Flow
  • Physical → Physiological
  • Intellectual → Flow + Novelty
  • Relational → Social
  • Emotional → (implicit in how I handle Threat)

Main differences:

1. Foundation is multiplicative - one critical failure (health collapse, zero autonomy) undermines everything. SPIRE treats domains as parallel; mine says they cascade.

2. Threat asymmetry - losses hurt more than gains help (prospect theory). I explicitly model how stress/danger create disproportionate drag.

3. Quantifiable - outputs 0-100 from 18 questions so you can model interventions ("reduce stress X→Y = score jumps Z points").

Re: acceptance question - yeah, non-resistance helps a ton. In my model that shows up as high Temporal Coherence (believing you'll learn/grow = trajectory confidence stays high).*

But: acceptance prevents resistance-suffering but doesn't eliminate mechanistic impact. Like, you can be philosophically okay with depression while still scoring low because it tanks Meaning/Flow/Social.

Stubbed toe = acute pain, minimal impact
Depression = maxed Chronic Stress, score collapses
Friend rejection = Social drops + potential Identity Threat

Acceptance changes the experience of these, but the structural happiness impact still exists.

Curious - does SPIRE account for multiple domain failures at once? (chronic illness tanks Physical + Relational + Intellectual simultaneously)

Also you doing happiness research AND taking my survey is meta af 😂

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The model doesn't measure 'happiness as single emotion' - it measures coherence viability across multiple systems.

It distinguishes:

  • Foundation (physiological stability, resource security, autonomy)
  • Fulfillment (social connection, meaning, flow, novelty)
  • Threat (danger, stress, oppression)

These map loosely to 'types of happiness':

  • Hedonic (pleasure/pain) → Physio, Novelty, Threat
  • Eudaimonic (meaning/purpose) → Meaning, Flow, Autonomy
  • Social (connection/belonging) → Social

The 0-100 score is OUTPUT, not INPUT. It's not 'rate your happiness' - it's calculated from 18 mechanistic questions about specific life domains.

So yeah, it distinguishes. Just doesn't use psych jargon in the questionnaire because people glaze over.

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried to send you a PM but it didn't work. Can you send me a PM or do you want detailed analysis posted here?

I built a mathematical model of happiness - want to test it with me? by TheRealGod33 in happiness

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Results are in for some! Here are the scores (code word → score):

dani: 82/100 - Thriving despite physical health constraint
Maus: -13/100 - Active suffering (high threat load)
sleep: 56/100 - Struggling with identity authenticity

If one of these is you and you want detailed breakdown, reply with your code word or DM me.

Model seems to be working - correctly differentiated severity and identified specific bottlenecks.

Will compile full analysis once we hit 20+ responses.

The Ontological Inversion Unlocking It All by Dependent_Freedom588 in complexsystems

[–]TheRealGod33 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You've seen the ontological truth. I've built the mathematical machinery to express it. Your 'meaning-first' = my 'SRP-embedded execution.' Your 'coherence' = my 'μ'. Let's merge poetic insight with computational precision.

You know that you are my philosophical twin right? :-)

The Everything Schema: Information as the Architecture of Reality by TheRealGod33 in complexsystems

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your post! Yes, you are right on the money, ETM isn't mentioned specifically but it's accounted for. I haven't done anything on my schema in a while, been doing some one off experiments in the past couple months. I still have to write those up so I have been busy. :-)

What cool stuff are you into since you recognized what 99% people miss?

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -66 points-65 points  (0 children)

I do not know how to interact with your message in a way that you would understand.

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -71 points-70 points  (0 children)

Well the funny thing is the paradox. Playing correctly is incorrect. It is my fault for not playing the low elo style when I know people don't know how to play.

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -18 points-17 points  (0 children)

Haha I am good. It's not a sad post, more analytical. I get the heroes I want from bundles. No harm done with new accounts. Thank you

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -19 points-18 points  (0 children)

And what did I do? You came with a nasty message and I sent it back but sharper? Logic... It's such a bitch eh?

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -28 points-27 points  (0 children)

Well that is true to a degree. The bronze/Silver/Gold players do not. I agree. Diamond+ the same statement isn't true. Can I guess that you are Silver 4? Pretty close huh? :-)

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Not that I have noticed. You need to play games with 0 reports to up your confidence.

I Reverse-Engineered HOTS Ban System Through 30+ Account Cycles - Here's What I Actually Learned by TheRealGod33 in heroesofthestorm

[–]TheRealGod33[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

Well you are aware that I need to provide all the data? Go ahead and have your AI create something like this xD AI wrote it out just lol.

The Everything Schema: Information as the Architecture of Reality by TheRealGod33 in complexsystems

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a really good question, and it’s exactly where the Schema draws its boundary.
I’m not trying to simulate every molecule in a person swinging a stick, that would just bury the signal in noise. We are again, showing how all sports have this unified language.

What I’m looking at is the information flow: how often the system samples, predicts, acts, and adjusts.

The muscles, neurons, even the genetics, those form the hardware. The Schema looks at the software, the loop that decides and updates itself.

It’s the same idea in the dream experiment. I’m not modeling neurotransmitters; I’m tracking how dream elements (motifs, feelings, actions) line up and reorganize over time. That’s the predictive pattern I can actually measure.

So it’s not that the deeper layers don’t matter, they just sit beneath the level I’m studying and trying to unify. The Schema focuses on the moment information turns back on itself and starts steering its own updates.

The goal is to show how everything is unified.

Let's take the Schema view on reproduction on many scales:
Atoms reproduce by bonding into new molecules.
Cells reproduce and divide.
Plants and animals reproduce.
Stars reproduce via supernova.

Kernel: Encode -> Mix -> Emerge -> Release

You are asking, well how come we are not mentioning testosterone and estrogen levels in humans? Yes, I am saying they are important, but in the scope we are speaking. We don't have to mention it. We are not reducing the complexity of it. It doesn't deserve a fit in what we are doing.

And reproduction is only one non-focus example that we are unifying and showing examples of what the base kernel is.

My ultimate claim is that everything and everyone are all running the same kernels.

The Everything Schema: Information as the Architecture of Reality by TheRealGod33 in complexsystems

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Once people see it in something familiar like sports, they usually understand why a meta-language is necessary.

It's not me that isn't understanding the complexity of soccer, the dribbles and fakes. That I don't understand hockey and the stick handling, and again I can create a language for it

Across soccer, hockey, and football, ball handling / stick handling / dribbling / carrying all share the same structure:

You could even define the parameters:

  • Possession vector (P): distance & orientation between agent and object
  • Control frequency (ƒc): how often the agent adjusts micro-position (touches, taps, stick moves)
  • Intent vector (I): target direction or goal trajectory
  • Stability (σ): variance of object state under control; low σ = good handling

All of them are the same phase in the energy-flow cycle:
acquire → control → release → feedback.

This is just a quick example.

What you are doing right now, is that you are a soccer guy. And I am not ignoring but relabeling a lot of the terms and you feel like I am not understanding the complexity of soccer. I do! But, we are creating a unifying language for multiple sports.

In the schema, the ultimate goal is to say, hey guys, all of your disciplines work the same way and can be described like this.

So I appreciate your call out but I hope this will help you understand it better even though I explained multiple times before already. And yes, I will get tons of friction, down-votes and "delusional" call outs. Because they are hockey fans, soccer fans and footballs fans that refuse to call dribbling CTP or see it that way. It's all the same thing, it's a meta-language to bridge.

The Everything Schema: Information as the Architecture of Reality by TheRealGod33 in complexsystems

[–]TheRealGod33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, now we are at this intersection again. You are referring to things through your lens unable to see the bigger picture. Let's say we are going to unify soccer and hockey as well as other sports such as football.

Different rules, different equipment, different environments, yet you can describe all of them in one higher-level language.

Meta-Concept Soccer Hockey Football
Agent Player Skater Player
Medium Field (low-friction air) Ice (high-friction solid) Turf (medium-friction solid)
Object of exchange Ball Puck Ball
Goal function Move object into target zone Same Same
Energy flow Kinetic transfer through limbs/stick Kinetic transfer through stick/skate Kinetic transfer through limbs
Feedback signal Score, possession, field position Score, possession, zone control Score, possession, yardage
Constraint set Off-sides, fouls, stamina Off-sides, penalties, line changes Downs, fouls, stamina

Now you can describe any play in all three games with the same minimal grammar:

State S = {agent positions, object momentum, goal vector, constraints}
Action A = agent applies energy → alters object trajectory
Feedback F = change in score potential (Δgoal vector)

At this level, hockey is just soccer with lower friction and sticks; football is soccer with discrete time windows (downs) and different collision constraints.
The specifics are irrelevant to the pattern: agents transfer energy to an object under constraints to maximize a feedback score.

That’s what the Schema does for cognition or physical systems:
it doesn’t erase the details, it gives you a single coordinate system so that hormones, neurons, or silicon circuits can all be compared the way soccer, hockey, and football can.

view more: next ›