Allow us to begin with the assumption that human imagination is the only earthly thing capable of complex creativity. A cuil is the measure by which a person’s thought deviates from reality. An “insane” person, for example, would naturally percieve his world with a greater measure of nonreality than a “sane” person, and a “sane” person, according to theories regarding the recursive nature of cuil, must perceive things by at least 1 cuil difference from reality.

Now let us include that any organic micro or macroevolution constitutes a positive cuil because natural selection includes a slight chaotic randomness in deciding what lives or dies. This randomness allows for true deviations from reality to merge with reality. The idea becomes that every idea and thought, no matter it’s measure of ‽, approaches 0‽. sThis makes sense with our current understanding of probability: as long as something hasn’t happened yet, as time goes on it is given more opportunities to happen, and given an infinite number of opportunities, the probability of something happening will always increase.

It then follows that any prediction for the present or future (such as to say “the sun will rise tomorrow”) constitutes a measure of cuil which can be calculated using probability. Consider then that the sun has risen every single day, so the probability of the sun rising again is high, but the cuil value of that statement is small. On the other hand, to say that a seagull is gonna come peck you to death for reading this article is more of a stretch from reality. To measure its cuil value we will have to consider how many times it has happened in the past and measure its probability.

But then, since there is no negative probability, what can a negative cuil be? In theory, nothing hyperreal can be measured by living people, because everything is skewed by our perception. However, to make the negaitve cuil useful we might say that the negative cuil is only measurable to the individual, and is a measure of how much he understands what is happening (by implication: how much control the individual has over his perceived surroundings)

Therefore cuil values can not described simply by probability: in fact, I propose that an idea’s cuil value can be expressed in spherical polar: where r is the 1/(probability - u(probability + .5)) of the event, theta is defined by an individual’s propensity to misunderstand the idea, and phi is an idea’s corresponding hyperreality (or a measure by which a person can control the idea or event). By this model, phi has a different measure for each observer including the person or object to which an idea pertains, and measuring phi inherently changes phi. (phi is the vertical angle, and theta is the horizontal angle)
The function r = 1/(probability - u(probability +.5)) uses the step function u, so when probability is greater than .5, it subtracts 1. This function will result in a large negative value for r whenever probability is high, and a large positive number for r whenever probability is low.
A value of 180 degrees (or pi) for theta would be a person completely misunderstanding the event ( there are no negative angles for theta, but one might misunderstand by such a great measure as to understand more than is realizable, in rare situations – 180<theta<360). This allows for hyperreal (negative cuil) events to gain a positive cuil value (a value on the right side of the graph, more nonreal) by being completely misunderstood.
A value of 180 degrees (pi) for phi denotes that something is completely uncontrolled (there are no values > 180 or ←180 for phi). A value of 0 degrees phi denotes that something is completely controlled by the subject individual or the one who conceived the idea. A value -180 denotes that something is completely controlled, but not by the subject individual or conceiving individual.
Consider the hamburger example. If I ask you for a hamburger, I am completely in control of the act of asking , so in the moment while I am asking, as long as nothing interrupts me, we can assume a value close to 0 phi. During that moment, as long as you are giving out hamburgers, we can assume a value close to 0 theta as well. However, the probability of me asking you, specifically, a reader of this article, for a hamburger at any given time is slim at best – so the r value of me asking you for a hamburger is high. If anything unexpected happens while I ask you for a hamburger, that moment’s phi would shift control to someone else (-phi) or to nature/chaos (+phi). Also, it is unlikely that in that moment I completely understand the unexpected event, so the theta value for that moment would be high.
A positive Cuil value is to be measured as being anything to the right of the plane (theta = pi/2) . For example: if r = 1 and theta = phi = 0, then you have a positive Cuil.

Consider the clinically insane person. To hear voices in your head or to see things which aren’t there is a reality for them, but we know that the voices and hallucinations do not exist. To tie this back, in cuil theory it is acceptable to assume that the voices or hallucinations do exist on a higher cuil level (in coherence with the GMT, one might say they are further from center). Therefore, the probability that the voices exist in tangible reality would yield a high r from our perspective, but a low r from the perspective of the insane person. Measured by the insane person, phi might be negative – measured by me, phi might be positive. For both me and the insane person, I would guess a high value theta.

This model may bring the cuil into a more measurable light, but it means that a cuil must always be defined by three terms ( r, theta, phi ). However, I think that it is fair to shorten the Cuil to a single value C, which is the perpendicular distance from plane (theta = pi/2) to the point measured. This value is a legitimate measurement since the angles are relative to the observer. As a cuil philosopher, I welcome any additions or changes to this already TLDR post. Thanks for coming up with such an interesting and cool idea.

~BoxcarTenant