Thanks for explaining, it sounds like you have a lot of big ideas and an interest in many different fields, which is cool.

Something worries me though. I've seen before a pattern that happens, when people have big ideas and see a lot of connections between different things, leading to personal breakthroughs in things like physics/math, where it's then hard to find an an expert to look at your ideas. Your post reminds me of that a little.

I can say that for other people in the past, the point where it went wrong is that the devil is in the details, and by connecting many fascinating things together without knowing the math, you can find beauty in things without having the hard fundamental to confirm whether it's real or an illusion.

>I feel like I'm most likely falling into a self bias trap

My instinct is that, in the kindest way possible, this should be a big concern. To be honest I'm someone who likes reading criticism (because I'm far from perfect), so I realize this might come across as criticism, but I mean it positively and constructively.

I think I also share a lot of the fascination that you talk about for things like quantum mechanichs, cryptograhy, complex and deep topics. (I'm also bilingual, another coincidence!) But the more I learn in these deep areas, the more I understand how deep the subject the really is, and how easy it is to think you understand the broad picture of something, without really understand the details (and all the subtlety really is in the details!).

>Bottom line is I need to nail down specifics to focus on and produce project results

I would look at it this way. There's a lot of people in this world, we might pass eight billion today. That's important, because we can look at the kind of patterns people have tried in the past, and we can see where they ended up.

Crucially, it's impossible to know whether a big idea works without diving deep (otherwise everyone would have done it already, and it wouldn't _be_ a big idea). But it _is_ possible to see the more general pattern of people attempting to see connections between many different things, that are hard to precisely articulate.

There's a very dangerous trap in chasing interconnections of fields with a surface understanding (as opposed to deep details-level understanding), because you can spend a lot of years faster than you'd think and wake up at the end with little to show for it. With the feeling that you have found something but without anything very concrete.

If you have something specific and detailed that you have questions about, I'm good at diving into details in a couple of the fields you've listed (though I'm not an expert, and I'm not always entirely immune to overconfidence either.. caveat emptor).

HOWEVER and this is important: I think you could likely avoid a lot of hardships by trying for a while to stick closer to boring ideas than breakthrough ideas, with the goal of growing enough experience to be able to see the flaw in other people's breakthrough ideas. If you can't see the mistakes other people are making, you can't see the mistakes you are (potentially) making, and this is how people fall into the trap.

Cryptographers have an important lesson & rule: anyone can invent cryptography that they can't themselves break.
In cryptography, in quantum-adjacent fields, in high-energy physics, a lot of people come with breakthrough ideas and it is fascinating to see why they went wrong (if they didn't go wrong, we would be using their ideas!).
This is genuinely a pattern that happens a lot, and that you really want to pay attention to. I cannot underscore how important it is to not fall into the same trap. You don't want to be a quantum 'crank', or a cryptography 'crank'. People have spent many years feeling misunderstood, and their ideas were never recognized in the end. Some have grown old with nothing.
You should really want to understand why, so that it doesn't happen to you.

Take care, and stay suspicious of bias. Everyone has them. The easiest lie to sell if from a person to themselves.