T-0-0- T-0-T theory.

[leskey]

God is...the greatest...

Composite systems need parts, so then God would be dependent on these more fundamental and even basic parts, so E could not Ermself be absolute and fundamental. Hiser's unlimited power makes Erm the ultimate complexity.

Introducing Erm at the point of simplicity that we see in our own universe that has gone from complex composites down to the simple seems out of place, for a huge complexity, like say an advanced alien, would not be underlying all there is but would rule from above all there is. from above.

Saying that God still qualifies because E is simple is perhaps just words. Simple doesn't have parts, it being fundamental and not made of anything else; it couldn't even be broken into pieces, for then they would really have been what was fundamental.

Even human brains and minds are quite complex forms of the fundamental(s) that formed atoms, molecules, cells, and on up, but God's mind would be infinitely even more so.

God had to have always been, for what better smarter being could have made Erm.

note: I am trying out my new genderless pronouns.

Sorry, Austin, I missed your reply previously...

What is the ultimate origin of a complex "system?"

I agree with you, Michael.

[austintorn@aol.com]

The ultimate origin would be the TOE.

Some pieces of the puzzle:

1) 'Nothing' is not there and so nothing could become of it, so, that's out.

2) Some thing, like energy, could have been always there and happened to not be inert and also happened to have the great combinative properties leading to protons to stars to the elements to molecules to cells to as the rest.

Now, if (2) is not possible, for reasons yet unknown, like say it is too rare of a chain of events, although one could counter with having all eternity for one of a large number of universes to succeed, then there is a (3).

What is your guess?

[leskey]

The ultimate origin would be the TOE.

Some pieces of the puzzle:

1) 'Nothing' is not there and so nothing could become of it, so, that's out.

2) Some thing, like energy, could have been always there and happened to not be inert and also happened to have the great combinative properties leading to protons to stars to the elements to molecules to cells to as the rest.

Now, if (2) is not possible, for reasons yet unknown, like say it is too rare of a chain of events, although one could counter with having all eternity for one of a large number of universes to succeed, then there is a (3).

What is your guess?

Consiousness.

[austintorn@aol.com]

What is consciousness as a separate entity, if other than our individual consciousness that is seen to be an 'end' of a brain state (from the subconscious brain analysis) since it is greatly affected by what ills or drugs are of the brain?

In other words, how does it become a beginning state instead of an end state? Or, if not, what is the Consciousness conscious of and through what means?

If this is of a Larger energy, then, since we've already gone past (2) as unlikely, what is the (3) for the source of this Being's nature being the Right Stuff that has the Consciousness?

Was it from 'nothing'; no that is out.

Could it have existed forever; no, since that is infinitely more unlikely than (2), which we are rejecting.

As (3), I am proposing the creation of the fundamental stuff of which our universe is made, whether we call it quarks, energy, and whatever; however, in a way that guarantees the right stuff, but does not need any prior real stuff or a God Being Person to make it. So, the method is neither a thing forever nor not a thing (a 'nothing') and it also has a parallel in our universe, so what could it be that could make workable real stuff without the regress of prior stuff from smaller stuff or stuff made by prior Beings made by more prior BEINGS made by…?

[leskey]

What is consciousness as a separate entity, if other than our individual consciousness that is seen to be an 'end' of a brain state (from the subconscious brain analysis) since it is greatly affected by what ills or drugs are of the brain?

In other words, how does it become a beginning state instead of an end state? Or, if not, what is the Consciousness conscious of and through what means?

If this is of a Larger energy, then, since we've already gone past (2) as unlikely, what is the (3) for the source of this Being's nature being the Right Stuff that has the Consciousness?

Was it from 'nothing'; no that is out.

Could it have existed forever; no, since that is infinitely more unlikely than (2), which we are rejecting.

As (3), I am proposing the creation of the fundamental stuff of which our universe is made, whether we call it quarks, energy, and whatever; however, in a way that guarantees the right stuff, but does not need any prior real stuff or a God Being Person to make it. So, the method is neither a thing forever nor not a thing (a 'nothing') and it also has a parallel in our universe, so what could it be that could make workable real stuff without the regress of prior stuff from smaller stuff or stuff made by prior Beings made by more prior BEINGS made by…?

Consciousness > inspiration > the rest is history...really!

Isn't conscousness the determining factor for inspiration - the vehicle for imagination (what could be) - the motivation to ascertain a method/innovation/action/movement ("Make it so, number one."), to arrive at a tangible result?

"We" follow the same pattern as the "ORIGINal." (I'm learning from Mel...)

As usual, I'm only expecting to be ignored, treated with contempt, whatever...

[austintorn@aol.com]

I never treat with contempt, but others may do as they have done.

Consciousness depends on a brain that depends on more below.

To summarize, we have that 'nothing' cannot exist, for it means 'not here in any way'. Now it could be the case, in principle, that there could have been the case that things and there origin are not here, but, there is 'something' here so that is why 'not here' (nothing) cannot be. It was impossible to be or it would still be 'not here' and the universe would not be here.

Thus, something HAS TO BE. This is an important concept.

Now, if we can't find a (3) of creation or our basis for it is faulty, we will have to go back to (2) as a basis for the universe, that is, that either we were straight out lucky to have a workable fundamental substance/energy around forever or that any old kind of stuff would recombine and build into the complex forms of our universe, including us and all of what is surrounding, such as planets, suns, plants and all.

For science, a retreat is not so bad, for there is no real preference to a given solution.

So, in current quantum theory, as some interpret it, right or wrong, that things like an electron can be everyplace possible (superposition) until summoned into an actual being by observation by a person's consciousness.

It is not that quantum mechanics is wrong, for it predicts all of electronics and more and never fails, just that the interpretation of superposition could really be wrong in that lower hidden variables could be such that whatever makes quantum events happen are just as discrete and objective as a chair.

But there is a strangeness about the quantum realm that still hints of no objective reality being there at the sub-atomic level.

Why do we really try for the (3) of creation, even though we may not need it. It's, I guess, just a wonder, again, of what could have decided the specific amount of forever stuff, why it worked (its nature), and, simply, how could anything just be around forever with never a start, for that is just hard to conceive of, especially also because their would have been no reason. Now, too, it could still be so for some reasons stated earlier, but if we can go further, why not try.

Hint: Huck and Nobody employ this method that is neither of nothing nor a real thing as we know it.

[Hucknallite]

Even in the state of nothingness there are plenty of things which exist. At least in the sense that we could consider them to be still existing now... though they don't.

The best example would be mathematical objects. 2+2=4 is a mathematical statement and many would consider that is a true existing statement even though it does not exist anywhere that we could find with our senses. We can however access the realm of mathematics with our mind. So even before the bigus bangus we can assume that 2+2=4 still retains the same truth. We can also extrapolate to a belief that all the objects of mathematics have existed for all eternity even whilst disallowing the eternal existence of hardcore physical stuff. Nothing after all is an object of maths!

The 'what existed before big bang?' question can then be further explored. For example are the geometric objects of maths eternal. There seems no reason to disallow.

Newton and Leibniz argued over this 300 years ago. Newton thought that prior to existence there were vessels of empty space and empty time which into which God placed the universe. Leibniz claimed that when God created material stuff, space and time were a side effect. i.e. space became the gaps between matter and time was the measurement of change between matter.

Newton therefore allowed for a geometric existence prior to the beginning, Leibniz did not. Yet Newton is insisting on a real physical geometry. Space and Time do exist for Newton, though each is empty.

A third perspective is one which lies somewhere between the two. Imagine Leibniz is correct. Nothing means nothing and time and space arrive only at the point in which matter is created and space is the gaps between matter and time is the measurement of time as matter moves. We can ask... Is this how things must be?

What I mean is, if a universe is to come into existence, does it have to have spatial and temporal components, or could a universe exist which contains neither space or time or both? If universes must contain space and time then there is some respect that Newton is right also. There may be no physical space or physical time prior to existence, but space and time are restraints on whatever may come into existence from nothing.

Any creation is limited by what is possible to come into existence. If space and time are crucial components of universes then even prior to the beginning there are conditions imposed on what can come into existence.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Thanks, Huck.

(Huck suggested elsewhere that it’s OK to discuss his book, but I double checked with him and asked him to keep an eye toward where this discussion was headed, for it gets into some of his ideas in the book. Hopefully, rather that getting anything wrong here, I can add to or help refine the ideas from what I got from Nobody’s ideas of some things similar, although his universe was not real, and from some of my own musings in which it was. However, Huck’s ideas is more comprehensive and fleshed out than any I have seen in a similar vein.)

‘2+2=4’ cannot be otherwise, so it is true whether any stuff ever came to be or not, and whether any mind came to have enough development to know. Whether a cat or a dolphin can know, who knows, but a proto-human, it seems, would know the counting of math to some extent.

It seems that our universe has space, which is stuff of varying densities, and time, which is the movement/change of the stuff.

Let’s continue our long build up to the ultimate TOE. I love this stuff, for it is of the heart of ToeQuest’s aims, even going beyond the unification of what already is, for it say why and how the universe can be.

So, the first cause cannot be a ‘nothing’ or a thing (including any kind of being), for ‘nothing’ cannot be and a Larger Energy/Being/Person creating the smaller energy/stuff of our universe would still need explaining to an even greater (near infinite degree), for how could an ultimate SYSTEM be around?

So, before our universe was real in the actual, there was no stuff and so there was no time, being the movement and change of stuff, and no form, the stuff defining form, and, to cut it short no physical laws at all, since there was nothing physical yet.

So, what is more than ‘nothing’ but less than something?

It is the possibility or potential granted by a timeless-formless-lawless state. What? Well, remember that there HAS TO BE ‘something’ or else ‘nothing’ would have been still ‘here’, meaning nothing would be here, not even the potential.

Since ‘nothing’ could not be, ‘something’ had to an so it was this ‘potential of all things possible’ that was around forever, thus obviating the need for luck to have applied to the right stuff always having been here all along.

So, outside of time and form and physical laws that would have come from such, all possibilities of things like fundamental substances would be there in a superposition like that of what we think underlies the quantum realm. But this is not enough, for which would lead to a workable universe?

Well, while still in the potential state, these possible fundamentals went on to evolve, a lot of them going nowhere, generating useless possible ‘universes’, but one, maybe more, went on to generate the rare universe that is ours, which is why we look back to see the great and many ‘lucky’ happenings of the universal constants being so fine-tuned that any tiny divergence from their values would have doomed further growth of, say, producing the needed and various atomic elements from the stars, among other events .

Now, I should have mentioned earlier that another good reason to consider superposition as likely, other than its parallel to the quantum realm, is that it seems to be a natural extension of the dimension we are familiar with, as explained more extensively by Huck in his book.

As an infinity of points makes a line, and so forth, with infinite lines making a plane and planes making 3-D, the 4th dimension being 3D objects existing through time, the 5th extending to be all possible universes, and the 6th being mind since it is key in real-izing the Potential, as we are/will see.

So, what happened after our universe did many billions of years of generating higher and higher combinations of the right fundamental stuff, remembering that this was still only in the ‘potential’ way?

Note that the Potential is not ‘smart’ in the ultimate way that it could not foresee everything right off the bat, but that it makes up for this by ‘trying’ every possible scenario, potentially, and the growth of that to wherever it goes to. Maybe this took ‘long’ or maybe it could try everything at once, but still took ‘a while’ since their was so much to try. Who knows, but all of this is a must—because a ‘nothing’ of no potential that could lead to stuff CANNOT BE.

In a way, the Potential is ‘intelligent’, the same way that our minds collapse a scenario of consequences into an action or a means to think deeper.

(A few more posts coming to complete this.)

[austintorn@aol.com]

Before getting on, let us stop to note that many have claimed to have found the TOE for sure, but so many of these were non rational, and even wrong for sure, since the ‘for sure’ TOEs even conflicted with each other. That, of course, is what becomes of just saying things.

We are attempting to be rational, so it may also help to define ‘rational’ by noting what it is not, for the non rational readily leads to contradictions.

Needless to not say, if we could just say things about a Nature of a Supernatural, if even if there was one, we, by this non rational procedure, could just use it more and go on making things up as we went along, which, amazingly, is exactly what is done sometimes, like these ‘sure things’ of the TOE listed:

The sure TOE is that there are many Gods and if we are good in life then we will reincarnate and come back at higher and higher human levels and eventually go to live on an invisible planet with some lessor Gods and then move up some more if we are good until we get to an ultimate place of Krishna.

The sure TOE is that there is one God who never had a Divine son named Jesus because and that He made a special covenant with the Jewish, His chosen tribe.

The sure TOE is that there no God as a Person but that It is an It called the Tao, of which no words can be further said.

The sure TOE is that there is an all loving God who just wants us to enjoy life as a gift of His love, for He would do none other.

The sure TOE is that there is a vengeful type God who put us here as a test and will burn us forever if we fail the judgment.

The sure ‘TOE’ is that we can never find the TOE. (This one has actually proved ‘true’ so far.)

The sure TOE is that we come from ‘nothing’, for matter can’t really exist.

The sure TOE is that only the Islamics got it right.

The sure TOE is that the Originator just left and let things go as they would go by themselves.

The sure TOE is that God directs every event, even every bit of fundamental substance.

The sure TOE is that we are God’s entertainment channel of his dreaming.

The sure TOE is that an invisible soul is placed into us and that it replicates or is our own unique identity, during life, forever after death and before birth.

The sure TOE is not about a God, but of a way of life taught as Buddhism.

The sure TOE is to remove all ego since this is what God wants.

(I have left many even crazier ‘sure TOEs’ out.)

Well, obviously, billions, or most likely, all, are ‘way off’ about the sure TOE, so we need to get back to the rational; otherwise, we’d be lost in the imaginary real of “must be’s” claimed by a mere say so.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Now, onto the answer of how the universe became actualized through the (3) of creation from Potential, but not by ‘nothing’ or by via real substance having always been around.

The growth, in potential, of our universe continued on through its possible states until consciousness arrived as the end product of the evolution of our possible Universe. Then, consciousness, by virtue of its ability to make the potential (non objective) actualize into the real (and objective), brought forth our Universe into this reality we see now as our own.

Now, whether it then began from fundamental(s) or picked up at the point of first consciousness in mammals is not known by me, but perhaps Huck or others have an insight to this question.

So, Leskey, consciousness was key after all, being an end product of the potential, it became that which could real-ize the potential into the actual.

So, then, we have explained the ‘good luck’ of the asteroids wiping out 90% of all species to give us an opening, plants excreting oxygen, and so many other fortunate events.

(Again, though, it still could have been real luck, such as in (2), so maybe some will help us to see that luck would not have been likely.)

So, everyone, is the TOE of the direction of Potential creating the right workable stuff that formed our universe? Could it have done so for other universes? And since our conscious ancestors brought our Universe into being, would that imply that we are the only ones as such in the whole universe, there being no ETs possible? Also, if mammals lower than us have consciousness, would it have been insufficient to bring about the collapse of the potential state of superposition?