The first words of this article are (EDIT: The article in the parent comment, not the HN link)

> A unification of Buddhist phenomenology,

The citations include Buddhist writings and an entry that just says "Collected Twitter threads"

This is not serious science. This is Twitter-era new age mysticism with a dash of scientific words.

This person is part of a group that seemingly posts to twitter and cites twitter as statement against academic institution and traditional scholarship. Some members of the group are academics themselves. Maybe some things can only be posted there, and so your intuition is correct. But I think you misunderstand why specifically you are seeing twitter links so prominently used. My sense is it's attacking the politics of citation.

The politics of citation, to be clear, are actually quite fucked up and elitist. E.g., Feminist Approaches to Citation https://cmagazine.com/articles/feminist-approaches-to-citati...

edit: my mistake

> You must be confused. The words Buddhist or Twitter do not appear anywhere in this paper.

I'm referring to the link in the parent comment: https://opentheory.net/2023/07/principles-of-vasocomputation...

It has "Buddhist" in the URL, the title, and the first sentence.

If that's true, that might also be part of why dreams exist. If the glymphatic cleanout during sleep is a rhythmic constriction wave across the brain, then whatever the brain is doing at the time the wave crosses it becomes a sustained thought as a side effect.

Maybe that's why sleep, in the sense of becoming immobile, is a thing. The brain disconnects a lot of the motor control so that the hallucination caused by sustained randomness from cleanout waves don't make us flail all over the place and hurt ourselves.

Although, not without fail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnic_jerk

What. This is personally mind-blowing if true.

Holy shit, what a load of new age crackpottery.