But like, am I genius?

 So I was one of those. It brings me pleasure and shame. I can pretend I am a genius, and I know that I am not. But I also get to make fun of other so-called geniuses and that's fun. I will never find enough ways to direct traffic, (I have none), to the Quora, where others like me, some with no aptitude whatsoever, discuss how incredibly smart they are. We look at genius like it is a rare commodity, it is not. Which will be gladly explained to you by the average genius on Quora.

Anyway, the point of this blog is to discuss the art of fantasy. And that will be my approach to my genius moving forward. I went to look at the paradoxes last night. Not sure what brought them up. My mother used to have a book of Einsteins riddles and in them were a few. I am familiar with the basic construct of a paradox; it sounds a little like a riddle and a worded math problem. Perhaps my years of being interested in these things, after having been sucked into the early aughts fascination with infinity neatly tucked into the teen hit "The Fault in our Stars", had me running over all that I knew and remembered. Who was Socrates? The guy who never wrote anything.

I went over the names of a dozen or so philosophers, after having to look them up online, and saw Zeno. Then I remembered Schrodinger and his cat. We all know about the cat in the box. At least maybe you do. And I am about to blow your MIiiiND! If you're into that kind of thing. This is not in fact a joke.

I believe that Einstein has an idea about what he thinks is going on in the Universe. He has a way of being able to picture things, which he expresses to the laymen as having a way of using fantasy and imagination. "Read children fairytales..." Yada yada. But in a more clear way, as was written in Marcus Du Sautoy's, "Thinking better: The art of the shortcut in math and life", with new insight into the brain, we know that a brain that is experienced or, better yet and to my utter delight, can visualize in an intuitive way a problem, our normal thinking is not the most beneficial or even necessary mode of conceiving the solution to a problem. Einstein said that children need fairytales to be more intelligent. I am still not sure what he meant by that. Perhaps in a time of war, he wanted people to be able to see outside the box. More on that in a second when I go all Schrodinger on you. But for now, I am going to use it like this: When we are able to think in the intuitive and imagination centers of our brains, we are able to solve problems more quickly and produce images with complete answers without having to work through problems. It is common, very common, for people who are creators, either artistically or scientifically, to have received an idea from a dream and then later picked up the pieces to build the idea. 

So if that is what Einstein meant by expressing his belief in the value of fairytale, it has since occurred to me that Einstein must have a strong self-identity. I believe that he had a sort of concrete image based on this identity in juxtaposition to other scientists who may have been more inclined to being openminded. This may or may not be paradoxical, I am terrible at paradoxes. That is going to be funny in a sec.

It looks to me like what Einstein wanted was for people to be able to conceive of ideas, without being sure of their answers. And while this seems openminded, it is an approach to a problem based on the knowledge and personality of the conceiver and is useful as a tool, but the necessity of the conceiver to be openminded is null. You need to have a solid knowledge base or talent. Then you are able to play.

I read about Schrodinger's cat and saw that Einstein and Shrodinger had been in on the same idea. I know nothing, and I mean NOTHING, about this in any detail, but in my small way, with my fairytale like constitution, I made a little story up about this whole thing. 

Einstein and Schrodinger had been in correspondence about a new problem which was based on small particle physics, this is a so well-known and has received so much interest that they added the concept to one of those scary escape room movies and it is the basis for the safety and survival of a main character. Something about being unstable and watching things. I don't get this stuff. I don't think Einstein did either. Because his concept of the Schrodinger problem was that an unstable particle is in a state such as an unstable barrel of gunpowder as opposed to a poor little cat in a box that might be dead from poison. Obviously, Schrodinger was desperate to hide the outcome, so this poor animal became famous. Einstein's concept seemed to retain a little logic. I think perhaps that those who are able to see fantasy are smarter, they know the difference. A barrel that has not yet exploded has not yet exploded. End scene.

Here was my exciting attempt to disprove the highly logical and concrete, paradoxical Einstein. The idea of a fairytale is illustrative of the point in Schrodinger's cat. The concept is that there are two existing possibilities. In a fairytale, what is possible is changed. We know that we cannot do things in fairytales that we can do in real life. No fairy god mother will transform our shoes into glass and then we will dance around gleefully all night with prince charming. None of that will happen. And so it is with an imaginary cat in a box with corrosive materials. The cat will die. No way that cat gets out of that alive. A fairytale has the same construct, it allows possibility, in the familiar known world we call reality. So in theory, the possibilities are endless. And theory is a world of its own. While possibilities are endless, we can cap em where we want 'em. Any smart person would create the solution to a problem without using the proper tool we call reality, so they always come out right. It is a selfless act.

Or perhaps I am wrong, Einstein may have been the winner this time. Possibility should be pretty easy stuff. Let's let the cat out of the box.