Why I Built My Website Around Math and Systems

Most personal sites follow a pattern:

some “about” copy,
a list of roles and logos,
a blog,
maybe a portfolio.

Mine doesn’t.

If you land on my site and see:

math,
system diagrams,
architecture stacks,
essays about memory and intent,

you might think:

“This is overkill.”
“Why not just say what you do?”

The answer is simple:

My life broke in ways that made it impossible to keep presenting myself as a flat résumé.
Math and systems are the only honest way I know to represent who I actually am now.

I built the site around math and systems because that’s how I see the world — and because anything less felt like lying.

The Old Way of Presenting Myself Stopped Working

For almost 20 years, my identity on paper was straightforward:

enterprise seller,
GTM leader,
big accounts,
predictable numbers.

I knew how to talk about that:

logos,
wins,
responsibilities,
outcomes.

It matched the rooms I was in and the expectations people had.

Then everything shifted:

leaving NTT after nearly two decades,
AWS cultural friction,
t‑emgee’s grind and eventual exit,
estate responsibilities,
falling down the AI/quantum/memory rabbit hole,
building RFS, NME, MAIA, AIDF, LQL, LEF, CAIO, AIOS, AIVA, TAI.

The version of me that fit neatly into “enterprise sales” didn’t exist anymore.
But the “pure engineer” label didn’t fit either.

When I sat down to write a conventional personal site, it all felt wrong:

simplified,
flattened,
like a sanitized recap of a life that had turned into something more structural.

I realized I didn’t want a page about “my career.”
I wanted a page about my architecture.

Systems Are How I Actually Think Now

At some point — quietly, then all at once — my brain rewired.

I stopped thinking primarily in:

“what do I do?”
“what have I done?”

and started thinking in:

“what systems do I see?”
“what structures am I building?”
“what are the invariants?”

That lens shows up everywhere:

in how I see enterprises (incentives, org charts, load paths),
in how I design AI stacks (biology/chemistry/physics, memory, intent, governance),
in how I run my life (routines, capacity, boundaries, repair).

Math and systems aren’t decorations.
They’re how I process reality now.

Trying to describe myself without them felt like:

explaining a function without its type signature,
showing a system without its architecture diagram,
telling a story without its structure.

So instead of hiding that lens, I leaned into it:

the site is an architecture map,
the essays are derivations,
the math is the skeleton.

If that narrows the audience, so be it.
At least whoever stays is seeing the real me.

Math as a Filter, Not a Flex

Putting math on a personal site reads, to some people, like a flex.

That’s not the point.

“Math‑first” for me isn’t about:

showing off,
performing rigor,
trying to look smart.

It’s about:

being explicit about what I believe belongs upstream of code and narrative,
refusing to build on vibes alone,

and signaling:

“If you like the story but don’t care about the structure, we’re probably not a fit.”

The equations, diagrams, and formalism are there so:

technical people can see the depth,
non‑technical people can see the seriousness,
I can hold myself accountable to the standards I say I care about.

It’s less “look what I can do” and more:

“this is the substrate my work rests on.”

If someone bounces off because of that, I’m okay with it.
The site is doing its job as a filter.

Making the Architecture Visible for Myself

The surprising side effect of building the site this way was internal.

Putting everything into:

stacks,
layers,
relationships,

forced me to answer uncomfortable questions:

“What is this work actually for?”
“How do these projects relate?”
“What’s the through‑line from NTT sales to RFS to TAI?”
“Where does fatherhood fit in all this?”

I ended up drawing the same structure over and over:

Biology (AIOS) — the life‑like layer.
Chemistry (LQL) — intent and contracts becoming reactions.
Physics (LEF) — execution as particles.
Memory (RFS/NME) — continuity and identity.
Intent (MAIA/VEE) — the spine of “what is this trying to do?”
Governance (AIDF/MA) — what’s allowed and forbidden.
Assistant (TAI) — the interface between all of this and a human life.

That’s not just my stack.
It’s the map of how my mind is organized now.

Making it public locked something in for me:

I’m not dabbling.
This is the architecture I’m committing to.

The site is as much a commitment device for myself as it is a broadcast to anyone else.

Giving People a Real On-Ramp Into the Work

Another reason I built the site around math and systems is practical:

my work is deep and multi‑layered,
context matters,
shortcuts create confusion.

If someone wants to:

collaborate,
invest,
critique,
use what I’m building,

they need more than:

“Phil does AI stuff.”

They need:

how the pieces fit,
what problems they solve,
what tradeoffs I’ve already made.

By exposing:

AIDF’s role in governance,
RFS’s field model for memory,
MAIA’s role in intent,
LQL/LEF/CAIO’s integration,
AIOS/AIVA/TAI’s organism/OS framing,

I’m giving anyone who cares enough a real on‑ramp:

they can see where to plug in,
they can see what not to propose (because it violates the architecture),
they can see what I’m not willing to compromise on.

That’s better for everyone:

fewer misaligned conversations,
fewer “maybe we could just…” suggestions that break the base,
more time spent on the edges where there’s room to explore.

Where This Leaves Us

Building my site around math and systems was less a branding choice and more an honesty choice.

It says:

this is how I see the world now,
this is the architecture I’m building,
this is the level of rigor I expect — from myself and from what I touch.

If that comes off as intense, that’s okay.
I am intense about this.

But if you’re:

tired of AI stories that don’t match the structure,
more interested in invariants than slogans,
trying to build systems and lives that don’t depend on pretending things are fine,

then the math and systems aren’t a barrier.
They’re a signal.

They’re my way of saying:

“If we’re going to build anything together — products, companies, or even just a shared understanding — let’s start from structure, not spin.”

Everything on that site exists to make that invitation obvious.

Key Takeaways

Traditional “about” pages couldn’t capture the structural way I now think and work.
Math and systems are not decoration; they’re how I process reality after years of chaos and architecture work.
Putting the stack (AIDF, RFS, NME, MAIA, LQL, LEF, CAIO, AIOS, AIVA, TAI) front and center is a filter and a commitment, not a flex.
Making the architecture public forces me to stay honest about what I’m building and how the pieces relate.
The site is designed as an on‑ramp for serious collaborators who care about structure as much as story.
Framing my work this way is my way of refusing to return to flattened, résumé‑style narratives that don’t match the actual complexity of my life and systems.

What “Math-First” Actually Means As a Personal Identity
Rebuilding AI From First Principles: A Blueprint for the Next Decade
Why Software Is Failing — And How Math Can Save It
The Unfair Advantage of Speaking Both GTM and Engineering Fluently
The Real Reason I Refuse to Build Fragile Systems