SF000066 - Phimath for the Big G (original) (raw)

A SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF DESTINY

Things in our world cannot be comprehended without taking a global view in both space and time. Thus this paper takes a multi disciplinary approach using mathematics, physics, engineering, economics, and philosophy. It has two major related objectives (A) Provide a theory for existence of destiny and (B) Explain away the counter logic. For part A we take the following approaches. (a1) The idea of destiny is well recognized by Newtonian physics. In our universe everything happens because of simultaneous interactions of everything. Thus destiny is not an individual concept. It is not my destiny or your destiny, it is our destiny. (a2) From this global concept of destiny, we show how the destiny plays out locally for an individual, and how we really are part of nature, and work in cooperation with nature, apparently not realizing that we do not have any freewill. (a3) Destiny has another integral part, related to reincarnation theory. We show, giving real life examples, that reincarnation is a law of nature, and we are all reincarnated souls. Thus destiny is not only global in space; it is also global in time, covering all past lives. For part B we cover several important views. (b1) The uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics says nothing can be certain, and therefore destiny cannot be true. We show that the uncertainty principle makes assumptions about nature, and therefore its conclusions for nature cannot be correct. One of its assumptions is infinity. Replacing infinity by any finite number changes the uncertainty to certainty, just like the Newtonian physics. (b2) Destiny is not in the mainstream, therefore it must be wrong. We show that it is the opposite. Mathematics and physics have assumptions that are invalid in nature and therefore they cannot describe nature, they are all wrong. We also show that as a consequence, engineering is full of kludges and patches. (b3) To really understand everything with proper perspective we must understand money, money power, and the way it is controlled by the central bank. If anyone anywhere is allowed to find the truth on any subject, then people will eventually discover the truth of central bank, which cannot be allowed. It is a very secret organization, as is well known in economics.

Process Physics, Time and Consciousness [2016/2017] (Chapter 4. Life and Consciousness)

Process Studies Supplements, 2017

For official full paper, see: https://tinyurl.com/yc9r6kys (date of publication: October 18, 2017). Ch4. Life and Consciousness Process Physics, Time and Consciousness: Nature as an internally meaningful, habit-establishing process Ever since Einstein’s arrival at the forefront of science, mainstream physics likes to think of nature as a giant 4-dimensional spacetime continuum in which all of eternity exists all at once in one timeless block universe. Accordingly, much to the dismay of more process-minded researchers, the experience of an ongoing present moment is typically branded as illusory. Mainstream physics is having a hard time, though, to provide a well-founded defense for this illusoriness of time. This is because physics, as an empirical science, is itself utterly dependent on experience to begin with. Moreover, if nature were indeed purely physical – as contemporary mainstream physics wants us to believe – it’s quite difficult to see how it could ever be able to give rise to something so explicitly non-physical like conscious experience. On top of this, the argument of time’s illusoriness becomes even more doubtful in view of the extra-ordinary level of sophistication that would be required for our conscious experience to achieve such an utterly convincing, but – physically speaking – pointless illusion. It’s because of problems like these that process thought has persistently objected against this ‘eternalism’ of mainstream physics. Just recently, physicist Lee Smolin even brought up some other major arguments against this timeless picture in his controversial 2013 book ‘Time Reborn’. And although he passionately argues that physics should take an entirely different direction, he admits that he has no readily available roadmap to success. Fortunately, however, over the last 15 years or so, a neo-Whiteheadian, biocentric way of doing foundational physics, namely Reg Cahill’s Process Physics, has been making its appearance on the scene. According to Process Physics, nature is a routine-driven or habit-based process, rather than a changeless world whose observable phenomena are governed by eternally fixed and highly deterministic physical laws. Counter to the currently prevailing view of such a law-abiding natural world, Process Physics suggests that the natural universe comes into actuality from an initially undifferentiated, orderless background of dispositional activity patterns which is driven by a habit-establishing, iterative update routine. In the Process Physics model, all such habit-establishing activity patterns are ‘mutually in-formative’ as they are actively making a meaningful difference to (i.e. ‘in-forming’) each other. This mutual in-formativeness among inner-system activity patterns will thus actively give shape to ongoing structure formation within the system as a whole, thereby renewing it through stochastic (hence, ‘novelty-infusing’) update iterations. In this way, the system starts to evolve from its initial featurelessness to then branch out to higher and higher levels of complexity, thus leading to a neural network-like structure formation. Because of this noise-driven branching behavior, the process system can be thought of as habit-bound with a potential for creative novelty and open-ended evolution. Furthermore, threedimensionality, gravitational and relativistic effects, nonlocality, and near-classical behavior are spontaneously emergent within the system. Also, the system’s constantly renewing activity patterns bring along an inherent present moment effect, thereby reintroducing time in terms of the system’s ongoing change as it goes through its cyclic iterations. As a final point, subjectivity – in the form of mutual informativeness – is a naturally evolving, innate feature, not a coincidental, later-arriving side-effect.

Physics and the Real World

Foundations of Physics, 2006

Physics and chemistry underlie the nature of all the world around us, including human brains. Consequently some suggest that in causal terms, physics is all there is. However, we live in an environment dominated by objects embodying the outcomes of intentional design (buildings, computers, teaspoons). The present day subject of physics has nothing to say about the intentionality resulting in existence of such objects, even though this intentionality is clearly causally effective. This paper examines the claim that the underlying physics uniquely causally determines what happens, even though we cannot predict the outcome. It suggests that what occurs is the contextual emergence of complexity: the higher levels in the hierarchy of complexity have autonomous causal powers, functionally independent of lower level processes. This is possible because top-down causation takes place as well as bottom-up action, with higher level contexts determining the outcome of lower level functioning and even modifying the nature of lower level constituents. Stored information plays a key role, resulting in non-linear dynamics that is non-local in space and time. Brain functioning is causally affected by abstractions such as the value of money and the theory of the laser. These are realised as brain states in individuals, but are not equivalent to them. Consequently physics per se cannot causally determine the outcome of human creativity, rather it creates the possibility space allowing human intelligence to function autonomously. The challenge to physics is to develop a realistic description of causality in truly complex hierarchical structures, with top-down causation and memory effects allowing autonomous higher levels of order to emerge with genuine causal powers.

Process Physics, ecological realism and their implications for time and consciousness (first submitted on January 21, 2017; expected in 2021)

“The Metaphysical Foundations of Environmental Ethics” by D. Soelch and A. Berve (Eds.) , 2021

By doing physics, we inevitably have to make sense of the same system in which we are ourselves participating – namely, nature as a whole. Accordingly, when trying to grasp the universe in its entirety, we should not only take into account how nature works, but also how our awareness of nature works. However, contemporary mainstream physics, together with the tacit framework of objectivist basic realism that underlies it, typically likes to treat our subjective awareness as secondary to the more objective, quantifiable, and physical aspects of nature. Fortunately, though, when embracing ecological realism and the related ecological-relational way of doing physics – i.e. Reg Cahill’s Process Physics – we can overcome the inherent limitations of, and simplifying presumptions behind, basic realism and our current way of ‘doing physics in a box’ (cf. Smolin 2013). Since Process Physics is basically a habit-establishing way of ‘doing physics without a box’, its modeling of nature can be characterized as routine-driven, rather than law-governed, and ecology-based, instead of being focused exclusively on some artificially delineated natural system. By being based on mutually informative processuality, it turns out that the Process Physics model can give rise to an initially undifferentiated, but gradually complexifying connectivity network. The way in which this self-organizing connectivity network branches out has many interesting similarities with how biological neural networks evolve. Indeed, next to their shared ‘neuromorphic’ structure formation, the most striking similarity between the brain, the Process Physics model and the universe at large is probably the ‘recursive mutual informativeness’ which, in Edelman’s and Tononi’s extended theory of neuronal group selection, facilitates the emergence of higher-order consciousness. Finally, the Process Physics model can also be seen to bring along an inherent present moment effect which may be referred to as an ‘anticipatory remembered present’ (i.e., a ‘past-renewing, future-aimed Now-on-the-go’); this in line with what Edelman, inspired by William James’s specious present, called the ‘remembered present’ (1989).

Existential Physics a Review

Review of Sabine Hossenfelder's Existential Physics: A Scientist’s Guide to Life’s Biggest Questions (New York: Viking, 2022)

G-D's Physics Personal Providence & Free Moral Choice

Journal of Theoretical & Computational Physics, 2022

Twenty-first century Theoretical Physics is undergoing a profound "Paradigmatic-Shift" from the Old 20th century's "Material-Causal" Paradigm to the New "A-Causal Computation" "G-d's Physics" ("Computational Unified Field Theory"); The acceptance of the New "G-d's Physics" Paradigm follows direct empirical validation of two unique "Critical Predictions" of this New "G-d's Physics" Paradigm, e.g., associated with the "Proton-Radius Puzzle" findings and associated with the "Non-Continuous Accelerated Expansion of the Universe" (NCAEU) which is indicated by the current "Astronomical-Cosmological Gap in the Universe's Accelerated Expansion Rate"! Based on this initial empirical validation of the unique "Critical Predictions" of this New 21st century's "G-d's Physics" Paradigm the New "G-d's Physics" key theoretical postulates are outlined: indicating the existence of a singular higher-ordered "Universal Computational/Consciousness Principle" (UCP) which simultaneously computes all exhaustive spatial pixels in the universe at the incredible rate of "c 2 /h" = 1.36-50 sec' thereby producing an extremely rapid series of "Universal Frames" (UF's) constituting the entire physical universe at every minimal time-point! Indeed, the empirical validation of this New "G-d's Physics" Paradigm brings about a profound change in our basic conception of the origin-sustenance-and development-of the universe: not as "caused" by an initial "Big-Bang" nuclear event, nor does the accelerated expansion of the universe "caused" by purely hypothetical (non-existent) "dark-matter" and "dark-energy"-but rather as "driven" by the sole and singular "Universal Consciousness Reality" (UCR) whose "Ultimate Goal" is to bring the universe towards a "Perfected Geulah State" characterized by Moral, Spiritual and even Physical Perfection, i.e., recognizing the "Oneness", "All-Goodness" and "Morality" of this singular UCR Reality! It also highlights the special and important role of human-beings in taking an active Moral role in the fulfillment of this UCR's Ultimate Perfected Geulah Goal of the universe!

How to connect mathematics and physics to life and consciousness ? Rethinking the Universe

2017

Human ideas of how life and consciousness relate to mathematics and physics are conditioned by the fact that we have lived our lives on a 5.97×10 kg ball of matter. These ideas would arguably be different if we had evolved instead inside a large rotating world far from astronomical bodies. Contemplating the latter perspective provides some insight on how prevailing views may be in error and how to correct them.