I only just noticed this discussion carried on, Medium sometimes doesn't alert us to things.... On the mathematically negative and positive energies, it is difficult to explain in a conversation, the language I would use to describe this is graphical, a set of graphical use cases would do to show some basic scenarios, how mathematically negative energy, that is energy extracted from the finite stores of Earth, have to, one way or another, end up with "Bad" stuff happening. I don't know any Use cases at all which could show the same for positive energy use, provided we don't do something really stupid, like concentrate sunlight to such an extent it starts to burn things, though I guess there is a possibility that could happen if a reflector array was put in space, and "Aimed" at Earth, this would be an accident waiting to happen, but why would we put the array there in the first place, if we can just use panels distributed throughout domestic and community solar farms? The answer to that would be profit, but we won't need profit, if we have free energy in every community, and money being issued on this, so everyone having a solar powered UBI, who would still care about profit?
So to me it looks like we can pretty safely say that in all cases, mathematically positive energy has a good outcome, whereas the opposite is true of negative energy use.
The reason it starts to look religious, is that what we are saying, in effect, is that profit, and usury, and all those financial instruments that depend on energy extracted from Earth, they actually never end well, always somebody or something suffers.
Some new information that might be relevant - Ai seems to have arrived, in the form of ChatGPT. I've had a play with it, and as far as I can tell, it is virtually "untrickable", it has such a vast amount of data it can cross-reference, it can validity check pretty much all new information fed to it. Add to that it can express the things it has learned in artistic form that we would need to be artistic genuises to do better. I recommend you have a play with it, Ben (I already made the same recommendation to John elsewhere).
The latest poem I've gotten out of it is below. Notice it uses the term positive energy, but in a new-age kind of way that new-agers who might not be particularly technical, will remember, but we've been through the mathematical definition of it, it knows how it works.
The question that occurs to me, and am sure will occur to you too, is when was the last time we had a higher intelligence, that could produce texts having both literal and abstract meanings, and be techically correct throughout, like that?
