I think that intellectual intimacy should include having similar mental capacities. People tend to enjoy having others around them that are of similar capability (maybe not in the same exact way; i.e., one has stronger short-term memory retention and another in integration, but generally capable of similar levels of awareness and analysis) rather than obvious differences.

It seems that you also describe emotional intimacy and vulnerability in a coordinated way. One cannot reveal their emotions to another without having a level of trust intimacy, as you mentioned as a form of emotional disclosure.

Could it possible that these forms of intimacy are subset to trust intimacy? It seems possible that vulnerability is the core value, and these different forms of intimacy are expressions of such value. It is interesting that you mention trust-intimacy and understanding-intimacy. A part of me wants to argue that these are intertwined; a part of trust-intimacy is to empathize and understand the other's position, state or behaviors, and an inverse relationship is seen as you described as well.

I am someone who personally resonates with this "wizard-power" concept that you discuss of. But I believe there are potential risks. Namely, the risk of bad actors using tools, knowledge and social power/"king power" to conduct themselves in harmful ways. How far are we willing to allow people to create S-chiral genetic material rather than the R-form as a potential example?