Introducing the F Model

I'll say right now that I hate invisible shit. Viruses, gamma rays, gods and emotions all give me a case of the screaming bullshits. I doubt their nature, even given incontrovertible evidence of their existance. I have a hard enough time beliving things I can see with my own eyes (like cheering crowds greeting Clinton in Arkansas), let alone things nobody can see but I get told about (like cheering crowds greeting Clinton in Thailand). I would have kicked Pasteur's ass right into the street where he would have stumbled backwards over the Pope whom I had previously thumped if I were prone to violence and a lot older than I am now. But that's me. I accept the invisible now, even if I find it distasteful, or even aggravating.

Probably the worst offender is emotions.

People have emotional motivations for what they do. We "feel" it was the right thing to do, or we "felt" out of control. Sometimes the emotions are in turn driven by physical reality (like fear of a predator), sometimes they are responses to other emotions (like guilt being a side effect of a combination of love betrayal). It can be a very recursive relationship, and it easily defies objective measure. Most of my problems can be tied to lack of a consistent reference continuum where I could lay out at least a semi-complete map of other's emotions and derive some sort of equivalent to my own. It's hard to tell what a buffalo is thinking if you are a bee. Buffalo's don't fly, and bees weren't hunted and skinned to act as habitats for indiginous humanity. At least, not as far as the current interpretation of the archaeological record indicates.

So, let's start by trying to identify the universe of emotions in Freely-space, since that is where I exist. Maybe I can understand you if I first take the step to make it possible, if not easy, to understand me. Tightly curled up around myself, I present a simple particle of loathsome, boring humanity to you. One dimentional, two if I'm lucky. But maybe I'm composed of 3, 6, even 11 emotional dimentions. I'll try to construct a consistent and complete (enough) model representing me to explain everything I observe about myself. I will then try to communicate it to you. I'll call the result the F Model, because Freely starts with "F".

Unfortunately, to have any chance of success at all, I have to make all sorts of assumptions about your rational faculties, because that is what I have to rely upon to reconstruct the metaphors and similies that I will use. I will paint mental pictures about my thoughts with the intention that those pictures will successfully be teleported to you mind and reconstructed into something closely resembling my original thoughts. Please, no ion storms, this part is dangerous.

I have to assume your faculties operate in a simlar way to mine, and that given similar inputs, will output similar results. I have some experimental and anecdotal evidence to support this conclusion, but it is by no means convincing, at least to me. But I'll assume it, and try to solve for this "X" where your rational mental faculties are a finite constant. If you are a omnipotent, or a Democrat, my solution will be incorrect due to extreme divergence on opposite ends of the value spectrum. But if you are omnipotent, you'd know that already. If you are a Democrat, you'll have no idea what I'm talking about and never will, so go play nicely in the corner with a razor blade a triple dose of Ketamine.

Next, I'll start identifying the fundamental particles that seem to manifest in Freely-space and how they are explained in the F Model (unless something more interesting happens and I get distracted).