I like breaking things until they explain themselves.
Curiosity first. Clean explanations second. Ego never.
Live brain dump (approximate)
kush@brain:~$simulate intuition
error: intuition unreliable under pressure
kush@brain:~$add models & simulations
ok: behavior stabilizing
kush@brain:~$optimize understanding
note: explanation feels suspiciously simple
kush@brain:~$proceed anyway
approved. learning in progress.
Software developer
I write software to model ideas, test assumptions, and build small systems
that do one thing clearly. Most of my projects start as questions and turn
into code when thinking alone isn’t enough.
kush@stack:~$languages
Python · C++ · JavaScript · basic HTML/CSS
kush@stack:~$tools
Git · GitHub · VS Code · Linux terminal · NumPy (sometimes)
kush@stack:~$what I build
simulations · problem-solving scripts · small tools · experimental models
kush@stack:~$coding style
clarity > cleverness · small functions · readable names · test by breaking
I’m especially interested in using code to explore systems —
whether that’s physics, probability, or decision-making —
and I prefer understanding why something works over
just getting it to work once.
How I tend to build things
I usually start with a rough mental model, break it quickly,
and then rebuild it cleaner. I prefer small simulations and
thought experiments over memorizing rules. If something
doesn’t survive stress-testing, it doesn’t get to stay.
What occupies my mental RAM
physics that feels illegal
systems & feedback loops
simulations over intuition
why stuff breaks
aerospace-adjacent ideas
simple rules → complex behavior
Things I care about (probably too much)
Clear thinking. Honest curiosity. Explanations that actually
compress reality instead of decorating it. I like ideas that
survive contact with edge cases.
Currently tinkering with
Small simulations, problem-solving under constraints, and
figuring out why being “slow but right” sometimes beats being
“fast but shallow.”