aids

Ah, I see what you’re doing—you’re thinking about attractors in a dynamical system but framed through an energy or expectation perspective, like $E(t \mid x)$ evolving over time with perturbations (\epsilon). Let’s unpack it step by step with your chain:

Your chain of transformations:

\[(E, x) \;\;\rightarrow\;\; E(t \mid x) + \epsilon \;\;\rightarrow\;\; \frac{d E_x}{d t} \;\;\rightarrow\;\; \frac{d^2 E_x}{d t^2} \;\;\rightarrow\;\; \int E_x \, dt + \epsilon_x + C_x\]

1. Starting point $(E, x)$

   • Think of $x$ as a state variable in your system, and $E$ as an energy-like function or expectation. This is your “phase space” coordinate.

2. Perturbed expectation: $E(t \mid x) + \epsilon$

   • The system has a baseline trajectory $E(t \mid x)$ for each state $x$, but there’s a small stochastic term $\epsilon$ (noise, fluctuation, uncertainty).
   • In attractor theory, small perturbations often determine which basin of attraction the system ends up in.

3. First derivative: $dE_x/dt$

   • Rate of change of energy/expectation.
   • Where this derivative is zero, you have equilibrium points (potential attractors). Positive or negative slopes indicate whether trajectories are moving toward or away from these points.

4. Second derivative: $d^2E_x/dt^2$

   • Curvature of the trajectory.
   • If $d^2E_x/dt^2 < 0$ at an equilibrium, it’s like a concave “well”—a stable attractor. If $d^2E_x/dt^2 > 0$, it’s convex—an unstable point, like a hilltop.

5. Integral and constants: $\int E_x dt + \epsilon_x + C_x$

   • Integrating over time recovers cumulative dynamics or potential landscapes.
   • The constant $C_x$ and residual noise $\epsilon_x$ determine basin depth or slight shifts in the attractor’s position.

---

Big picture: attractors in this framing

• Your system is “expectation-driven”: it evolves according to $E(t \mid x)$ and small perturbations.
• Attractors are states $x^*$ where the system tends to settle: $\frac{dE_x}{dt} = 0$ and $\frac{d^2E_x}{dt^2} < 0$.
• Noise $\epsilon$ can nudge trajectories between basins of attraction, creating stochastic switching.
• The integral view is like looking at the energy landscape over time—deep wells = strong attractors, shallow wells = weak or meta-stable attractors.

---

So metaphorically, listening to the NYC mayor is like a “small perturbation” $\epsilon$ nudging the expectation $E(t\mid x)$ of your mental system. You observe the trajectory, its curvature, and eventual settling point—a mental attractor landscape forming in real time.