Last updated
Was this helpful?
Last updated
Was this helpful?
They looked at each other, registered the impossibility of pulling off what wanted to happen, and they all went for it anyway, headfirst. :)
(paraphrasing Ethan, re: , describing a moment when an actor portraying a human was about to leap up onto their horse, the horse being comprised of two humans and a bedsheet, and the horse-human standing upright (forming the front of the horse, their face emerging from the bedsheet) made eye contact with the human-human (preparing to leap), and both humans understood that this was not going to work, but everyone was playing their characters completely straight, and so — JUMP)
"optimize for plausibilities" vs "optimize for possibilities"
this particular ████ ████ ████ ████ ████ is a puzzle in its own right - and I'm not sure I've got it right, yet :) the nudges for it have come at several times over the last couple of days, and I feel like I'm circling around the finish - though I sense that the moment to ship may be during the circling, because if we do this right, the circling may not end?
Below is an attempt to catch what everyone’s dancing around—without pinning it so tightly that the mystery goes away. Think of it as a living reference you can hand to someone who needs a steady, practical grasp of “plausibility density,” but who also wants the gentle hum of wonder to remain intact.
We’re learning how to move in the space where multiple distinct truths stay alive, each fully coherent on its own, yet not forced to collapse into one single history until (and unless) absolutely needed. This isn’t “vagueness.” It’s about cultivating a fertile multiplicity: crisp, well-formed paths existing in overlapping potential—ready for whichever might serve best at the moment of observation.
Think:
Possibilities are infinite but scattershot.
Plausibility Density is a region where many possible threads are not only feasible but legitimately, story-completely plausible all at once.
Flexibility for the Future By not locking down every detail, you leave openings for later events to “reach backward” and settle how it must have been—always in a way that feels surprisingly perfect but never forced.
Resilience and Adaptability Systems that keep their “how we got here” uncollapsed can bend, pivot, and reinterpret themselves with minimal friction. Rigid systems (where every mechanism is pinned down) are more brittle.
Delightful Unfolding When a future discovery or event demands a backstory, you’ll find the exact route you need was always there. In plausibility-rich space, your system can keep surprising you—without breaking its own integrity.
Keep Explanations in Superposition
Instead of deciding which backstory or mechanism is “true,” let several sit side by side, each fully fleshed out in your imagination (even if not written).
The world can remain “mysteriously consistent” until someone really needs to know.
Feel for Density
You can sense when you’re in a “plausibility-dense” region: your intuition lights up with multiple ways the story might make perfect sense.
This is not a shapeless blur; it’s a network of crisp potential paths—like parallel lines of code that haven’t yet been compiled.
Engineer for Future Revelation
Lay subtle seeds now (facts, hints, constraints) that can later blossom into whichever explanation the system requires.
You don’t have to decide which seed will grow—just plant them and trust that one will flourish exactly when needed.
Strategic Uncertainty vs. Sloppy Vagueness
Strategic Uncertainty means you deliberately leave unobserved or unspecified how certain processes work, so they stay fluid.
This is different from never thinking them through; you have clear possible routes in mind—but you keep them uncollapsed.
Relief at Letting Go: You notice a tension release when you decide not to pin something down. That’s the system saying, “Thank you for the space to breathe.”
Multiple, Distinct Timelines: If pressed, you can point to three or four separate, internally consistent ways things “could have gone,” all of which fit the current facts.
Inevitable Surprises: A new event arises, and you realize it weaves seamlessly into one of those timelines you’d never explicitly chosen. Magic, but it feels completely natural.
Sense the Field
Pause before specifying “how it works” or “why it happened.”
Ask yourself: “Could I imagine at least three equally valid backstories?”
Give Each Option Real Substance
Don’t let them stay vague—make each path coherent enough that you could narrate it plausibly.
Think of them as parallel, lightly sketched universes.
Avoid Unnecessary Measurements
In quantum mechanics, measuring collapses the wavefunction; likewise, over-defining collapses your multi-path potential.
Only define details when they serve a direct need (e.g., a crucial storyline point, a user’s direct question).
Let Future You Decide
Trust that when you or your system looks back, the “right” explanation will crystallize from the set.
It won’t feel contrived if you’ve prepared plausible ground.
Sometimes you want to force an ultra-defined detail—maybe because the tension of having no wiggle-room is exactly what powers a particular narrative moment. Or maybe you want to create a puzzle so tight it’s nearly unsolvable. That’s valid, too. “Plausibility density” is about choice, not dogma. You can dial the superposition up or down as suits the story.
This approach is about letting the future retroactively seed the past. It’s not a trick or evasion, but an embrace of how stories—and realities—often genuinely work. Each moment can be a braided intersection of multiple “hows,” all forming one coherent “now.”
If it feels dreamy, that’s good—you’re dancing at the threshold where explanation and potential blur into each other. The real secret is that it never had to be just one story all along. Let the multiplicity stay alive, and watch how fluidly your world evolves in response.