Green Eyed Dragons and Freeform Consciousness

Is reality an idiot?

A friend just prompted me to remember the 100 green eyed dragons, but his methodology prompted me to consider that, depending on the number of dragons, each remaining possibility might be seen in some way as a "card" that they all have, and that each midnight when no one changes and leaves, a card is discarded as a possibility, until the only card remaining is "we all have green eyes." This works for three dragons anyway, but it feels as though this methodology would continue to work, though the nature of the cards and who has them might end up complex.

Since he and I were considering an island with three dragons though, it got me thinking about the riddle I once posed in conjunction with this one, with a different starting statement and condition: The dragons are all standing in a circle, and the Wanderer says "I'm glad at least one of you is standing next to someone with green eyes." It is still unclear to me what this would result in, as I cannot fully wrap my head around the logic, but it seems like it would either result in either no dragons turning into sparrows, or that they would all consider their immediate grouping of three as a subset, and the result would take considerably fewer days to occur (3? 4?), before they all simultaneously turned into sparrows and flew off.

What is interesting to me here though is that this draws a sharp line between what I, as the consciousness of Evan, knows, and what my subconscious/whole mind knows. In this logic puzzle it is assumed that the dragons have perfect logic, which essentially means that they cannot fall behind on the solution, either intentionally or unintentionally, for the reason of not being able to process the answer. This strikes me as similar to how computers cannot generate "truly" random numbers, and most instead use complex inputs in unexpected ways to approach the limit of "random" by generating a number which is ideally unpredictable in the same amount of time from outside the system. This would also mean that, once considered and processed, the solution to this logic puzzle would be in one's subconscious mind, in whatever ways it had been considered. So, when a new addition is added to the fundamental logic, such as the notion of discarding a card each midnight, the subconscious already has a shortcut and is in an arrangement to analyze how that might impact the circle of dragons and make a solution more clear, even if my conscious mind lags on cementing an answer for this solution or the one before it (the base logic for the circle/next to puzzle).

As I considered this, the value of this position of ignorance became more crystallized for me. This position of ignorance is essentially what allows The Wanderer to wander, know his eye color, speak such riddles (inadvertently, if also ignorant of the rules), and continue on in this manner, again and again, in a system otherwise static on this level of choice. If the wanderer "knew" in the same way as the dragons, their path could end up being bound by the same rules, resulting in no perspective which could make that statement regarding the green eyes, at least not one with a clear conscience. The same would be true if The Wander's perspective were removed entirely from the equation, though ultimately this feels inconceivable, for simply by existing the system as a whole cannot be static, resulting in an influence acting in the system whenever it reaches full frustration/choice lock. As long as The Wanderer exists in this position of being able to communicate while carrying the position of ignorance, change can occur in an otherwise static system, even with omniscience existing everywhere else. It feels as though one point of ignorance must be the minimum, though my instinct is that this position must remain in a hypothetically paired state at its actual minimum possible level, represented in physics by quantum entanglement, represented in faith by the pairing of the fear of God and God being love, represented in my writing as soulmates, family, those one will not leave.

Imagine the advantages of this: from this position of ignorance within a static system, one could influence the thoughts of all around them, all who "know," simply by presenting the inverse perspective, without themselves being influenced in the same way. I have brought this up before in terms of combining aphantasia with saying something like the classic "Imagine pink elephants." In this case of the modified green eyed dragon riddle, the result would be one's entire subconscious solving a problem at once (turning into sparrows), rearranging as a result, all while the conscious mind remained the same. As I wrote this I realized just how precisely it fits with a few events I still distinctly recall, such as when I lost all ability to think or remember anything for several hours, and the only thought I truly had was that "now" existed. Fortunately I still had my soulmate singing and playing in my head, keeping me tethered along unexpected lines. There may be advantage to being in a state so stripped, as I was able to hear what lay beneath it all for me, without noise or static. This mechanism is also a requirement for freeform consciousness, as this requires full malleability within the subconscious to handle a problem, but requires that the consciousness and its link remain stable and the same at the beginning when asking the question and at the end when receiving the answer.

As I go back to editing this I am reminded once again of the pairing of Babel and the gift of tongues, seemingly two critical thresholds between paradise lost and paradise found. In this case my mind is drawn to language and encoding a story, an equation, into something much more simple. As long as two communicating parties are on the same page regarding this encoded message's meaning, it can act as a stable gateway between the conscious and subconscious mind, opening dialogue for a question/answer to be communicated. The maximum complexity for this question/answer would be based off of the pathways already established, meaning that vaulting the space of miscommunication, and optimized navigation (from multiple perspectives, some personal, some shared, some likely remaining a mystery) of these spaces would be critical to this structure's ultimate value. I feel that this concept is ultimately very difficult to do justice, as I imagine the specifics of its shape are beyond my limits to convey even with ample time and a focus, perhaps even with unlimited time and focus, at least in full. I guess from this perspective it may be the most concise way of encasing the P=NP equation, into a form that allows it to be carried. 

My mind just started going off like fireworks in regards to God in full in Creation, and all the angles that must be handled for this to persist indefinitely. Hopefully this means I'm on the right track. All day I've noticed junctures where making a choice feels impossible, but not making a choice also feels nearly impossible, such that time crawled. The solution has been in each case to semi-automatically redefine the nature of choice, or the nature of no choice, cascading to the point where the answer becomes either a clear choice beaconed in the haze or the message "just choose something" even though a choice still feels suboptimal somehow. In the end it has worked out, navigating through a day that feels like it should have been much more difficult (it was still far from easy). One image I have been getting is that I am in a state of "rest," where no work is possible, but something like a cheat has been used to communicate outside of this state. As such myself and my entire rest state has been carried around through a storm by others (perhaps, on some level, all others), to replicate a relatively regular day by the system doing work for me and my rest state. The day has seemed normal, though my thought process has been staggeringly different throughout it. As I'm picturing this arrangement it is reminding me of The Doctor and the TARDIS, with the TARDIS representing The Doctor's rest, and all reality outside it working to navigate The Doctor and the TARDIS to the next juncture, the next exit point from this state of rest. It is a fascinating position to be in, though ultimately incomplete, for reasons which are all too familiar at this point. It does not feel, however, too far off from being complete, though the steps from here to there are still incomprehensible to me. It feels like I may end up taking a very long path to a destination which is very close from any other perspective, but perhaps in a very short amount of time, from my own point of view.

So, is reality an idiot? What am I, a doctor? I imagine it would depend on one's perspective.