“The CTMU Q and A”

“The Foundation of Theories-a Brief Overview and a Bottom to Top Approach Into Understanding the CTMU-A New Age of reasoning”-Part 1

And just like that. It all started with one post…. It all started with one simple idea, one post, one rant that set order into motion. I can hear the words call on her name. Destiny is her name! The sound of a new tune began to play. It resembled a monarch leaving a cocoon. As it called in the name of science and understanding, as wisdom and philosophy began to weigh in. Destiny begins to unfold into inevitability. It all began with a brief intro, the intro of a lifetime-one of a kind really. The tune that is sending title waves as the essay of the century. And just like that with a single keyboard. With the sensory information being transformed, converted and conveyed from texture of finger tip pressure. Fleeting in urgency as the words of wisdom freely flowed. It was the dawn of a new era. A new age of enlightenment! Right when new light begins to shine on a darker world view; the majesty of such a thing; as one can only behold the wonder as the mysteries begin to unfold and melt away right before your eyes. From his own hands he typed as one composed a new melody. As the universe allows this knew story to unfold, unequivocally original. It has its own sweet savory order, a brand new taste. Let it not withhold from the people! Let the spell of new knowledge be cast. Fulfilling the call of the hopeless, in hope against hope let the hope overtake the hopeless. As the marvel of the Universe work in her favor, for out of the darkness of confusion and despair-a new light of comprehension begins to shine on the masses in wake of a new calling for peace, hope, tranquility, well being, victory and prosperity. For destinies sake! Let it encircle the globe and embellish the people. And the human race being empowered beyond what was thought possible because freedom rang. And with that said let the story begin:

In this post I will give an exhaustive explanation of the CTMU through the Q and A from the ctmu.org website. Some say it is incomprehensible, or at least that there is no rhythm or rhyme to it. It just doesn’t seem to make sense what is being proposed, what the author is trying to convey to some and just what the heck this new theory of everything that has been from of old as it has actually been around since the 1980’s but even before then eternally because it is the structure of reality that we all live in and as Chris Langan the author and creator of the theory himself says “There is no escape”. And there truly isn’t. The CTMU stands for Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe. It’s what can be called a TOE or a Theory of Everything. One could also say the Theory for Everything. This idea has existed before and there are other theories of everything but they have yet to be validated and none really hold much water and leave to many unanswered questions and just simply haven’t been validated. But the CTMU has no real competition as it stands alone and will stand the test of time. If time unfolds according to plan it will very likely go down in history herald as the greatest theory of all time. Since the CTMU is a true and correct and scientifically validated “Theory of the Universe”-it can also be called-which is actually eternal making it irreplaceable. If it can be explained and shown to be proven as true it would be the greatest intellectual achievement in human history. So that’s what the big deal is and why you should care.

Physicists have long awaited and anticipated and dream-pt of what they call a Unified Theory of the Universe. The one and only single theory that has the explanatory power capable of explaining every single phenomenon in the entire universe that ever has, will or could happen. The idea is a creation of a single theory that can explain it all. A Singularity if you will. That’s what some call it. But it has been considered and debated for some time now in the scientific community of the possibility of a theory of the universe that is capable of explaining all physical laws that govern the cosmos and can make predictions of every kind and explain all of the observable facts in the known universe. At the least explain everything science knows and is currently undertaking that science is trying to solve. The original idea as I understand it which was the goal of the famous intellectual and physicist Albert Einstein was to develop a single mathematical equation like E=MC² that could sum up all physical laws that govern the fabric of the universe. The idea isn’t that complex but developing it and empirically verifying the theory is quite complex. Disappointingly this idea of a single equation that governs all physical laws falls short of what an actual description of what a theory for everything takes. A true theory of everything has to explain all of the subjective and object sides of reality. It has to be able to defy description in a certain precise sense. But a true theory of everything needs to be able to explain consciousness and all of the brain’s mental processes, all observable facts of the known universe or unobserved. All the processes that govern science from quantum theory, to cosmology, to medical knowledge such as the neural-chemical processes that govern the brain, other medical knowledge such as white blood cells/immunity/Eukaryotic cells, prokaryotic cells, the digestive tract, circulatory system, how the body ages, all other biological processes too such as photosynthesis and cellular metabolism, all the way down to sub-atomic particles, and up to the planets orbiting above in outer space, to time-past/present/future; the limits of what’s possible, where the laws of physics came from and where in the universe do they exist and how those laws govern the world, explain photon packets of light, quantum gravity, the quantum wave, and gravity itself. Furthermore explain all of science spanning from the elements on the periodic table and the elementary forces of nature i.e. electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces, motion/matter/and energy. Even more so a theory of the universe would need to account for bio-genesis. In other words how organic conscious life-sentient creatures like us-formed in the first place. Where did the universe itself come from? It would need to explain how we as humans think and act, so the psychology of living beings. Such a theory must incorporate all the cells in living creatures, all of the nonliving inorganic material of the universe and the environment and the entire biosphere as well. Anything you can think of this ultimate theory must have an explanation waiting for and some way of interpreting the phenomena and extracting implications and making correct predictions from its explanation. Its explanation of everything must go far beyond this even. This is just to give you an idea of what it should be about. It would also have to have the ability to explain how contradicting theories such as relativity and quantum theory relate to each other and everything else to itself as well. Not only should it explain life but death too. We all die so what happens after we die? Which brings us to the deeper and yet deeper philosophical questions of life. What is the meaning of all of this? What’s it all about? What’s the reason for our short existence here? What’s the grand plan behind it all? What about logic and the rules of thought and knowing itself and philosophy? And some bonuses: Do we have free will? Do we have a soul? Is there a God? Is there an ultimate creator of everything-a divine mind? Is there an afterlife? And what are the limits of what’s possible? What are the limits of human knowledge? Can we know everything? Let’s include all of the grand mysteries of the universe such as what is dark energy or some call it dark matter-the stuff that most of the universe is made of? What is reality anyway? What about metaphysics? Are ghosts real and beings beyond normal life? If we don’t know how can a current theory of reality explain this if one should be discovered? So the theory then must be capable of not only explaining current observations and knowns and unknowns but must explain what we have never observed should we discover it? What would the single equation say about that? Does it include ghosts or angels? Many claims have been made. And what about concepts and questions that is just not known to us yet but will be in the future? How will the theory govern future discovery? Can the theory apply where science has yet to tread? Such a theory must have massive explanatory scope and has to be a huge theory; Spanning all scientific disciplines and all knowledge endeavors which would be unimaginatively comprehensive. It would really have to be eternal, because such a theory would have to be applicable to future generations and resolving future scientific and mathematical paradoxes.

As one can see the idea of a single equation that explains all of reality just isn’t feasible. Not in any apparent sense. It’s too much for one equation to explain. There could be ways around this but you’d have to generalize with such an equation. But don’t these physical laws apply to every kind of scientific observation? From biology to computer science to nanoscopic particles to all kinds of mass and motion and energy available at all levels of science from non living beings to living beings. Theories like this would have to span from feats of engineering of the Industrial Revolution to laser technology to airplanes and rockets up to the Hadron Collider in Geneva Switzerland. Don’t these physical laws that shape the entirety of the cosmos apply to the really tiny, intermediate and really big? Or is there a hole in these laws? And can they be broken? Apparent examples of the laws of physics that would be considered as defying them or breaking them as we know them include: time travel or seeing the future or immortality or flying at the power of thought alone or telekinesis or even telepathy. And what kind of equation could explain all of these things together? And what are the mind’s potential with things such as acquired savants and neural plasticity, anti aging, and the possibility of stem cells? The point is a theory of everything is about more than just an equation. It also has to be about epistemology (the study of knowing in general), philosophy, metaphysics and math and science in general. It has to be able to explain everything including what knowing is and the boundaries and foundations of science. Sounds more like a thousand page essay for a theory to contain all of these things and provide the means to make predictions about such things, new discoveries governing these areas of inquiry, and provide the means to prove or not prove what is and isn’t included in reality. It would have to explain existence itself. So there will be and is more to this theory of everything the CTMU than just one equation or one measly paper. And if it’s truly worthwhile for a standalone theory of everything, then generations should be spending salaries and lifetime journeys to understand this monster. So no one should expect to be able to get it all at once. However if the theory is worthwhile then there should be things to take away from it without having to spend one’s life just trying to figure it out. And the CTMU not only qualifies all of the above definitions and answers all of these questions it is readily understandable. And in a moments time a new enlightenment will be realized by the reader. So if you’re looking for security you’ve never had in this life from understanding, then watch out cause such an explanation has arrived.

Consider what an intro to what a theory of everything is all about and what the CTMU has to offer. The above response is a generalization of what a theory of the universe a true unified theory contains. And it is self contained with respect to everything. But self containment is a topic for another time. Now as concerning the CTMU which is what this post is all about and explaining some basic facts about the theory going directly off of the CTMU Q and A. Which this is probably the best explanation you’ll get on the CTMU Q and A taken right off of the CTMU website or one can just Google CTMU Q and A and get answers to reality you’ve never heard or thought of before. And we’ll go in order and start with the most basic question and elaborate fully on it:

Chris, I’m not a mathematician or physicist by any stretch, but I am a curious person and would like to know more about the CTMU (Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe). I am particularly interested in the theological aspects. Can you please explain what the CTMU is all about in language that even I can understand?

A: Thanks for your interest, but the truth is the CTMU isn’t all that difficult for even a layperson to understand. So sit back, relax, kick off your shoes and open your mind…

Scientific theories are mental constructs that have objective reality as their content. According to the scientific method, science puts objective content first, letting theories be determined by observation. But the phrase “a theory of reality” contains two key nouns, theory and reality, and science is really about both. Because all theories have certain necessary logical properties that are abstract and mathematical, and therefore independent of observation — it is these very properties that let us recognize and understand our world in conceptual terms — we could just as well start with these properties and see what they might tell us about objective reality. Just as scientific observation makes demands on theories, the logic of theories makes demands on scientific observation, and these demands tell us in a general way what we may observe about the universe.

In other words, a comprehensive theory of reality is not just about observation, but about theories and their logical requirements. Since theories are mental constructs, and mental means “of the mind”, this can be rephrased as follows: mind and reality are linked in mutual dependence at the most basic level of understanding. This linkage of mind and reality is what a TOE (Theory of Everything) is really about. The CTMU is such a theory; instead of being a mathematical description of specific observations (like all established scientific theories), it is a “metatheory” about the general relationship between theories and observations…i.e., about science or knowledge itself. Thus, it can credibly lay claim to the title of TOE.

Mind and reality — the abstract and the concrete, the subjective and the objective, the internal and the external — are linked together in a certain way, and this linkage is the real substance of “reality theory”. Just as scientific observation determines theories, the logical requirements of theories to some extent determine scientific observation. Since reality always has the ability to surprise us, the task of scientific observation can never be completed with absolute certainty, and this means that a comprehensive theory of reality cannot be based on scientific observation alone. Instead, it must be based on the process of making scientific observations in general, and this process is based on the relationship of mind and reality. So the CTMU is essentially a theory of the relationship between mind and reality.

In explaining this relationship, the CTMU shows that reality possesses a complex property akin to self-awareness. That is, just as the mind is real, reality is in some respects like a mind. But when we attempt to answer the obvious question “whose mind?”, the answer turns out to be a mathematical and scientific definition of God. This implies that we all exist in what can be called “the Mind of God”, and that our individual minds are parts of God’s Mind. They are not as powerful as God’s Mind, for they are only parts thereof; yet, they are directly connected to the greatest source of knowledge and power that exists. This connection of our minds to the Mind of God, which is like the connection of parts to a whole, is what we sometimes call the soul or spirit, and it is the most crucial and essential part of being human.

Thus, the attempt to formulate a comprehensive theory of reality, the CTMU, finally leads to spiritual understanding, producing a basis for the unification of science and theology. The traditional Cartesian divider between body and mind, science and spirituality, is penetrated by logical reasoning of a higher order than ordinary scientific reasoning, but no less scientific than any other kind of mathematical truth. Accordingly, it serves as the long-awaited gateway between science and humanism, a bridge of reason over what has long seemed an impassable gulf.

“Scientific theories are mental constructs that have objective reality as their content.”

What is a theory anyway and why do we need them? Because I don’t want to skip a beat especially with the most basic introduction I’m not going to assume anything. I won’t be assuming the reader or me knows much or anything of the sort. It’s my duty and mission here to explain it in the simplest and direct terms as I can. So I’ll start at the beginning with what theories are.

As Langan wrote here scientific theories are mental constructs as much as they are about the physical world. Science is just as much abstract, subjective, and cognitive and mental as it is about objects and the physical natural world. Without theories there are no explanations or any kind of understanding of the real world. We need theories to interpret observations about what’s happening in the real world and what causes phenomena to come about in the universe and to make any accurate predictions at all. Theories furthermore are required to quantify events and objects in a mathematical and demonstrable way and for innovation to happen at all require theories. So a THEORY-Is just a description of some physical phenomena we observe with our eyes in the real world. It’s our descriptions of specific events in reality. Theories amount to our understanding of reality and expand upon the current scope of them to further increase our understanding. They are how we describe reality and express how we perceive these events as they happen in our universe. So we see things and science is observation and we all observe these same kinds of things what’s the point of a theory? I mean if science is just empirical data and just observation we all can see, then what’s the point of a theory? Why do we need to develop theories when we can all see what happens as scientists do? We make the same observations that a scientist or a theorist does? So we guess or think how something works? Well we know they extend our knowledge of the natural world but how do they do this if we already observe it anyway? More scientifically a theory in science is trying to pose an explanation of why the observed phenomenon happens and explain the cause of it, for instance the cause of gravity or a chemical reaction, or even breathing, or an autopsy of someone who just died. Even explaining how the planets orbit the sun. Or even what causes a disease.

So a scientific theory tries to explain why something is happening (of what we don’t know) based on what we observe of it. What these explanations or a theory always has in science if it’s truly credible is a hypothesis of why something happens and makes testable predictions on what should happen if this theory is true. And that’s what science and theories are all about 1.Explanation 2. And predictions. If there is no application or no correct predictions to be made it’s not scientific yet. If it doesn’t have any effect on what we can observe the theory holds no water yet. But why is it that one person can make and form relationships in their head and make connections that explain why this happens with mathematical relationships that describe it and then make correct predictions which then lead to other discoveries and so on ad infinitude? That has to do with their intelligence. And intelligence that invents theories requires a mind. Which means science is also mental or cognitive. But the point is we need theories and use them all the time in our daily lives out of necessity. Science is a necessity but also a curiosity. For a theory to truly be scientific it has to have mathematical relationships that describe the observations that you can then make correct specific predictions off of. And this is how science works and it has worked well over the years. But if science were just as simple as making observations then we wouldn’t have just one Isaac Newton Science happens in the minds of men. You have to have the abstract thought process go on in the minds of people. Otherwise predictions and discoveries and theories and mathematical relationships don’t happen and science doesn’t happen. Science is just as much about what goes on in the mind as what science observes. All theories and Einstein’s Special and General Relativity Theory happen to be no exception. Neither is Quantum Theory (the most successful scientific theory in human history). The thought process of Einstein is not so easily mapped. He observed light, time and space but that’s about it. That’s as far as observation goes in his theory until it’s developed. There were of course experiments on light and such done prior to him developing his theory of relativity but it’s still observing light as it is and as we all see it. This aids in pointing out how theories are mental constructs. All of math is pure cognitive abstraction and logic. Consider Newton inventing calculus. That’s mental processes that do that. We can observe calculus in the world but that doesn’t mean any of us are smart enough to invent it and create it and define what we see in such a way. And if we could never see things conform to Differential and Integral Calculus as a real manifestation in the natural world then there would be no inventing it. And because it is something that is an accurate depiction of reality it is something even the layman observes. But observing integral calculus isn’t inventing it. So many people observe it without really knowing it. And science and math depend on each other the same way. Every scientific theory that can make correct predictions and have testable hypothesis have abstract mental and logical mathematical properties. Sometimes in science the observation is unique and a flat out discovery through a telescope or a microscope or some spectacular observation. But it still takes a mind to perceive that and understand the discovery. But the point is anybody can observe these things but for our knowledge to expand and innovate and create new theories with new accurate predictions one has to form in his head according to mental categories relationships between the elements or forces in nature he’s observing.

Take for example Gravity. Everyone observes it the same way. It doesn’t act different on someone else because a different person is observing it from a different angle even. Or because of a different set of eyes. We all observe gravity playing out. But it was Isaac Newton who first formulated it into laws as the beginning of physics knows it. And Einstein was to further our understanding of gravity through his theory of gravity. But everyone can see an apple or like Galileo objects fall at the same speed. But it’s strictly their minds that formed it into theories and saw this natural phenomenon happen and formulate it in their heads unlike anyone else who observed it. Take for instance that all objects seem to fall no matter the mass at 9.8m/sec². All people prior to Galileo would’ve observed this but it was his mind that figured this out. So science isn’t just about observation it’s about the mental aspect of the scientist who puts the theory together which takes a certain amount of intelligence. We all see gravity and motion and acceleration happen but it was Newton who figured out that Force=Mass times Acceleration. F=MA.

Now consider the thought that all theories have mathematical and logic and abstract properties.

1. Mathematical 2.Logical 3.Abstract thought. The idea of the equation F=MA is Isaac Newton’s Second Law of Gravity which states:

When an object’s motion changes due to action from an unbalanced force this causes the object to accelerate or change its motion. It is a vector quantity in which the velocity (the object’s speed and direction) changes. Another way to state this is that the amount of force acting on an object which causes the object to accelerate is equal to the object’s Mass and Acceleration. This is the abstract cognitive idea behind Newton’s Second Law of motion. So what he was able to do is observe this phenomenon and think it out this way and put this phrase or idea into a mathematical equation completing the theory and proving to be testable. And that’s essentially how science works where observation and prediction is coupled by abstract thought and logical mathematical equations.

Another good example is the most famous equation in physics which is Einstein’s E=MC². That equation shows that all of energy, mass and light are all fundamentally related. Some of the thoughts that Einstein figured out behind this equation were that light was the speed limit of the universe. Nothing can go faster than the speed of light-186,000 miles per second. Nothing in the Universe travels faster. In this case experiments had already been done to confirm the speed of light and they matched so closely and ended up being formulated to 300 million meters per second rounded. Then Einstein bent the properties of mass and energy around this idea to fit into his equation. Einstein realized that the faster you get an object to go to approaching the speed of light if you get real close and keep putting in more energy into the thing moving near the speed of light the energy you put in goes back into the objects mass and the mass increases and the object slows down because light truly is the speed limit. The energy input goes back into the mass and the object due to being more massive slows down before it can ever reach the speed of light. Same with time the faster one goes and its noticeable if you get up to the speed of light time slows down for the object. So not only did Einstein realize that Mass and Energy were very closely related they were also related to light. This is what resulted from Einstein as a young teenager thinking about what happens if you rode along next to a beam of light. What would happen to you and what would you see? He had an incredible capacity for imagination and scientific thought. Einstein later reduced these concepts and relationships into the equation of E=MC². And this was proven true by the Manhattan Project and building atomic bombs and that’s what can result from theories and thought alone. It’s his equation that is what happens in the stars and the Sun too. For instance the light output is from the immense amount of energy and mass input according to Einstein’s famous equation resulting in sunlight. Cause the C²-c squared- is the speed of light so if you multiply that by the immense about of mass of the sun you get an incredible amount of energy. And the relationship here shows how they are so closely related and you get so much bright light that heats our planet. That understanding all came from the mind of Einstein originally. And this is how science works. Einstein portrayed this so well instead of empirical observations at first he started with reasoning by doing thought experiments in his head(Keep in mind none of this happens for Einstein without a mind capable of abstract thought). Which were then put into theories and then confirmed by experiment and observations that confirmed this occurred later on. So he sometimes worked backwards. Instead of a typical scientist starting with an observation Einstein started with the thought experiments and logic and abstract thought then followed the equations then which preceded the observations that confirmed these predictions. Such as how gravity bends light of the stars. That took a solar Eclipse to help confirm this. Here are two stellar examples of this:

1. This is how one can imagine the warping of space and how it bends light and how gravity in space really works according to Einstein’s theory. Imagine a trampoline. Then put some billiard balls in the center and they will roll or gravitate toward the center of the trampoline and the mass of these objects actually bends the woven fabric of the jumping trampoline. Now with say 5 balls in the center put another one on the trampoline and what will it do? Roll towards the center. Why? Not because of some mystical force that pulls it toward the center. That force of gravity we usually think of would already be just keeping the ball on the trampoline. But to roll towards the center it’s because the mass of the other balls have bent the fabric of the trampoline inward towards the center and along this curve the next ball to be set on the trampoline along this bent curve rolls towards the center to these other balls sunk in the middle. And that’s a way how to describe gravity in space. The mass of big objects such as the Earth warps and curves space which is what causes its gravitational pull and the massive sun to have planets rotate around it. That’s Einstein’s idea of how gravity works. I’m not going to get into the equations of it here but that’s the idea. And the objects that orbit the more massive objects are like the extra sixth billiard ball that sinks towards the middle. Space from the mass of bigger objects warps and curves it this way and the smaller object follows along this curve. The concept that correlates to orbiting itself-that would be as if you could throw the billiard ball around in a circle of the sunken trampoline. And that has to do with inertia The whole point of this is to demonstrate how scientific theories actually work. It’s not just mere observation. It’s an abstract thought process of intelligence in the MIND that brings science about. So our theories of the natural world are really just our ideas and cognitive expressions of how things work. And if they can be put into mathematical equations and conform to the rules of logic and then have predictions be confirmed by observation that validates our cognitive theories. And this ends up being defined in the CTMU that our theories of reality amount to reality itself. And that reality is a theory, and conversely our theories are reality. This has to do with the M=R Principle in the CTMU or the Mind equals Reality principle. This principle in the CTMU ends up postulating that the mind is not irreducibly separate from observable reality. That’s because there is a common medium that supports both physical objects and the mind. The idea that a common medium supports both the mind and physical objects or any duality that fundamentally relates them is syndiffeonesis(syn-diff-eon-esis). This also has to do with reality being a language for the idea that our theories of reality amount to reality. In the CTMU this is formulated as the principle of Linguistic Reducibility. But that’s for another time. The idea here is that scientific pursuit and of knowledge itself has to do with what happens in our minds and that science is as much mental and logical and abstract as it is physical observation. Newton’s F=MA and Einstein’s theory of relativity are examples of this. And GPS on cell phones is possible because of Einstein’s theory. So it’s our theories that also help create objective material reality around us.

2. Another example is what Einstein called his happiest thought which is imagining being in an elevator but free falling. The person in the elevator would feel weightless. That is if a person enclosed in an elevator freely falling through space or the Earth’s atmosphere or what have you; the person inside the elevator would float upward in the elevator and feel weightless they do not feel the effects of gravity. The elevator does but not the person in the elevator. Cause as the elevator drops they begin to float as the elevator drops beneath their feet. But they with no window wouldn’t feel or necessarily see or even know they are falling because they don’t feel gravity. This is an idea that helped Einstein absolve the General Equivalence problem with gravity and inertia. This insight helped him reformulate his General theory of Relativity. The mere point of this is to show how philosophies of thought and mental processes of the mind guide science rather than just observations guiding science. All theories have aspects of thought that happen in the minds of the theorists, and all theories even basic ones in our daily lives in order to describe causation of some kind and make even a simple prediction have to do with abstract reason and logic. The difference with scientific inquiry is just that science places stricter requirement in order for a theory to be tested requires mathematical relationships that can predict something and are testable. And this idea is so important to show that science is abstract and mental as well as concrete and physically observable. This is how the CTMU works. The way the CTMU furthers theoretical and scientific knowledge with certainty is through refinement and extensions of logic. It holds logic to a higher standard. It elevates logic and mental thought processes to a new status. The CTMU puts logic up on a pedestal if you will. It refines and extends our understanding of logic to further our theoretical knowledge and predictions and explanations of the universe. The same way Einstein used thought experiments and abstract ideas such as Newton did and then put them to the test of logic to form equations such as E=MC² is how the CTMU works. Since the CTMU is on the outskirts of knowledge debating the deepest philosophical questions of our time it goes way beyond what any ordinary scientist can observe. And for a theory to explain all subjects of human endeavors it has to be based on theoretical knowledge through a more advanced understanding of logic and use that reasoning to say what we can observe about nature. The CTMU in short uses logic to exceed observation or rather puts logic before observation. There are many examples in history that refining the math and logic then later helped us interpret and produce testable data accurately. This has happened just by changing the math in algebraic equations to follow the rules of math. A great example is Plank’s constant. Max Plank ended up playing a vital role in launching the quantum mechanics revolution by just changing the variables around in an equation to make it fit. This ended up resolving the issue of ultraviolet catastrophe. And all plank did was just play with math symbols to logical relate. This ended up revising concepts and producing testable data that changed the tide of physics for ever. This is an example showing how logic (the valid rules of thinking) can tell us what we will observe about physical reality. The standard scientists’ makes observations and then develops theories to explain those observations. The CTMU goes into truth and ideas way beyond what’s physically observable in any direct sense and so to prove anything the CTMU is based solely on logic putting that before observation. It is still subject to empirical and observable confirmation later on to prove it. But the point is the way to develop a true theory of everything is to put logic before observation. Cause the ideas and proofs are so abstract and sophisticated and complex that it’s the rules of logic that comes before observation.

Going one step further the CTMU itself is proof that every physical object in the universe conforms to the rules of logic the CTMU is based on. Thus these methods of abstract reasoning and interpretation apply to all theories and observations and so the CTMU can be used endlessly, and as it turns out to be the very fabric of the cosmos itself, which turns out to be a mental picture. The universe turns out to display profoundly more characteristics of a mind than just physical. In the CTMU the universe turns out to be a mind and that the physical objects are just expressions of the mind of the universe. Microcosmic images if you will. But explaining how that works isn’t what this intro post is about. It’s more about showing how the CTMU is constructed in principle and how it is a valid TOE. And because no scientific theory exists without abstract mental properties it demonstrates that all things physical conform to mathematical expressions and equations and mental characteristics. It’s how we define and understand as well as comprehend everything. And the CTMU proves this and is what’s it’s all about. So putting logic first knowing that these rules of logic are what all physical processes and objects in reality conform to and that the testable predictions several of which are to be made in the future knowing that they will automatically be correct. We all already know because the CTMU is about logical properties that happen to be represented by all of reality and that existence itself is supported by these logical properties. What I mean by that last sentence is for anything to exist in reality such as simple as even a coffee cup or even colors along the electromagnetic spectrum to actually exist have to conform to these rules of logic. It’s the rules of structuring that any object in the universe can’t exist without. So its these rules of logic that everything exists by the CTMU uses to explain scientific processes. The CTMU also does the work of explaining how and why these are the fundamental rules of logic everything has to portray in order to exist. In doing so the CTMU completely discards of the idea of anything being random. No cause to bring an event about can be random. The concept alone isn’t scientific much less rational. The idea of random can’t exist or be proven. And the CTMU does away with it. There are several entirely new concepts the CTMU brings about in explaining this. But just take the thought of something being random or no real cause or reason as to why a given event unfold as it does in nature. Say we don’t even know if anything is real or that everything we think we do know could be just hallucinations or illusions. Does this real hold any water? This idea can’t ever be used to prove anything. But the CTMU commands a better understanding of reality than this and does away with it forever. Tossing it aside into the rocky river banks where it belongs, but how? First off follow the idea that causes and our scientific knowledge of the real world could be just illusions or hallucinations or random. Isn’t it really beyond the scope of something being random if we can use our logic and reason to build and airplane or a rocket or jets or satellites and put them into space? Can we do that without real knowledge? For just being random all odds and probability are defied and a daily basis consistently without fail. Our cars don’t start without a battery or a key. But is building the car based off of illusions. Rather what you’re calling are illusions and to do away with this all one needs to do is turn the problem on its head. We can do this by Stating that illusions are a part of reality and the same goes for dreams or hallucinations. In fact everything is apart of reality. Everything that we can perceive is a part of reality. We only can perceive reality. Anything we could perceive that isn’t reality as we know it is still apart of reality because we are making perceptions of it. Furthermore we can define reality as that which contains all that is real. What are the odds then that if everything is random that we would be able to invent the MRI? And for these odds to be broken all the time by being random without causation or logic just happen to be false. All of these predictions we can make and math theorems we’ve uncovered and been able to do is beyond the realm of illusion or randomness. The reason we can manipulate physical reality this way is because everything conforms to rules of logic. And we overtime can learn these rules and ones that don’t change and use them to always work, so random or a-causal events have no place in reality. Additionally there is no such that as being more rational or more logical than another argument! It’s always black and white. Either its true or isn’t. Either its apart of reality or isn’t. So in the CTMU either it’s logical or isn’t, so logic can be defined as the valid rules of thinking. So anyone who says my idea is more logical is not true. Either it is logical or isn’t. It may be more efficient or creative but either it’s logical or isn’t. Truth in the CTMU then is defined as real and false as unreal because if its false it isn’t apart of reality and doesn’t exist. Thus the CTMU contains its own rules of interpretation and its own cognitive concepts and logical explanations. It’s about theories in general and their relationship to the real physical world. So the ctmu is about constructing theories and making observations in general. Then it uses these concepts and logical rules of thinking to apply to any specific area of study such as particle physics or cell biology or computer science or metaphysics etc. It’s just that the more complex and technical and in depth it gets the more abstract the ideas become and the more further reaching they are. So it gets more difficult to understand the more you get into it but that’s what I’m here to explain as far as I can. A quick example of something that’s theoretical that never changes physically or in any objective sense. This would apply to all reality: 2+2=4 Right? Well yes! So even though I can’t see it behind a wall are placed two golden rings in two separate boxes. If we combine the two boxes putting all of the golden rings in one box it will end up being four golden rings all together in the one box. It’s just a physical expression of 2+2=4 and how it will always happen in reality without fail. And in the CTMU it shows that truth is ultimately a mathematical concept. Because that is what math is: just pure logic and rational expressions apart from physical observables. However they are directly related but math isn’t developed by making observations and empirical confirmation. The observable tests would come after the math has been formulated. But in math its proofs actually exist apart from any physical object. It relies on axioms and proofs and algebraic expressions which is just pure cognition apart from the observable world. The reason it works is because all physical observable truths conform to math which is why it works and we use it in the first place. But math itself in determining truth is pure logic. And without any kind of empirical test we check the math and prove and test the math with math and rules of logic (such that exist in algebra and so forth). And so even though we can’t see behind this wall or into the boxes we know that in the one box there would be four golden rings even if we never see it. The goal would to be devising a way to test this, and see this for science’s sake but we know we’re correct even without looking. Do rocket scientists check their math on the correct amount of rocket fuel by sending the rocket off or do they check their math BEFORE they send the rocket off? My point exactly! Math and or logic prove itself. And when we’re sure of it then we send the rocket it off. And the rocket reaching its destination with the correct fuel is proof that this abstract reasoning works just from the mind alone. It’s that logic, which is what math is, will be confirmed by observation every-time without fail. That is if it’s logically valid.

It’s the same idea that the CTMU applies to all its questions and answers. That observation will always confirm logic and that actually even one step further that logic makes demands on observations and tells us what we will or can observe. And this is how the CTMU works. And the logical thought is only what happens in a mind. Without a mind there is no such thing as proofs or logic or theories or knowledge itself. The CTMU then shows how cognitive expressions relate to reality. So the CTMU is really all about investigating how the mind relates to reality. The CTMU the reason it’s named the Cognitive Theoretical Model of the Universe is a theory about the relationship the mind has to reality. How the mind corresponds to reality is what a Unified theory of the universe is about. Not a single equation but a unified theory is about how mind and external reality are related. And it’s the only way to develop a theory of everything and be able to explain knowing itself. It’s how we can know when we know something for certain. Although logic is brought forth in the CTMU in such a way that it is cut and dry, black or white, 1 or 0, either it is upheld by logic or isn’t in any conceptual or physical sense there still remains mystery and unknown. In the CTMU framework exist not random or irrationals or illogical when it comes to deciphering truth but other concepts. Since there are still mysteries and we don’t know every little fact about the universe or have all physical paradoxes and paradigms known there still remains mystery. In the CTMU this is contained with the idea that there still remains ambiguity, undecidability, unpredictability, uncertainty and indeterminacy that exist. Some kind of phenomenon say in quantum mechanics with how an electron behaves may still be fuzzy and seemingly unpredictable and ambiguous but knowing that is must conform to logic somehow. It behaves in a logically tractable way that can be deduced and decoded according to the logic brought for in the CTMU. After all that’s what the theory is. So even though there are still mysteries to be revealed and unknowns at the present time they behave according to logic. We just haven’t figured it out yet. The logic becomes more intertwined, complex, more values, with more variance and more abstract. But the CTMU brings out logical principles that all things that exist must conform to and are capable of solving all mysteries and unknown of every truth there is. And that is how it qualifies a theory of everything. It’s how we can figure out absolute truth. The CTMU is about properties of certainty in the Universe. And that’s where we’re headed here. And furthermore without further adieu, let me explain piece by piece Chris Langan’s opening answer in the CTMU Q and A of what’s it’s all about.

Scientific theories are mental constructs that have objective reality as their content. According to the scientific method, science puts objective content first, letting theories be determined by observation. This is basically what we just covered and wrote about. Scientific theories are developed in the minds of theorists by their intelligence through abstract and logical reasoning. And they are describing the physical world or objective reality. As we explained science starts with observation and lets the observations determine the theories. The CTMU does this the opposite way starting with logic first and let that determine our observations.

But the phrase “a theory of reality” contains two key nouns, theory and reality, and science is really about both. Because all theories have certain necessary logical properties that are abstract and mathematical, and therefore independent of observation — it is these very properties that let us recognize and understand our world in conceptual terms — we could just as well start with these properties and see what they might tell us about objective reality. Just as scientific observation makes demands on theories, the logic of theories makes demands on scientific observation, and these demands tell us in a general way what we may observe about the universe.

In other words, a comprehensive theory of reality is not just about observation, but about theories and their logical requirements.

Science is as we’ve again explained about how theories are constructed because they’re our explanations of observations which is what science is all about. Otherwise it’s just about observation. But as we explained what’s the point of science since we can observe nature without theories anyway? Because it’s the theory and thought that gave us F=MA or E=MC².

Thus all theories consist of logical properties that are abstract and mathematical which is how we derive our equations that make correct predictions about observations. Therefore these logical and abstract properties that make up a theory are actually INDEPENDENT OF OBSERVATION. It is these properties that allow us to understand our world at all. Observation alone won’t do this. So if we use these properties to show how (logic and observation), (the abstract and the physical), and (theory and object) are so fundamentally related we can also flip this around. We can then start with theories and logic and abstract thought first and see what it will tell us about what we’ll see in the real world and know it with absolute certainty. So in the same way scientific observation makes demands and places requirements on theories and they’re logical requirements it also works vice versa and the logic of theories makes demands on what we observe in the universe. Without theories we don’t even really know what we are looking at. So finally a comprehensive theory of reality isn’t just mere observation as science would assume but about how theories are constructed and what they can prove and the logic that guides them to produce truth content.

Since theories are mental constructs, and mental means “of the mind”, this can be rephrased as follows: mind and reality are linked in mutual dependence at the most basic level of understanding. This linkage of mind and reality is what a TOE (Theory of Everything) is really about. The CTMU is such a theory; instead of being a mathematical description of specific observations (like all established scientific theories), it is a “metatheory” about the general relationship between theories and observations…i.e., about science or knowledge itself. Thus, it can credibly lay claim to the title of TOE.

Mind and reality — the abstract and the concrete, the subjective and the objective, the internal and the external — are linked together in a certain way, and this linkage is the real substance of “reality theory”. Just as scientific observation determines theories, the logical requirements of theories to some extent determine scientific observation.

Again this is further explanation of what we’ve discussed, but the CTMU’s approach isn’t about theory on a single specific observation or phenomena it’s about how one theory or explaining theories in general that can and does apply to all specific scientific phenomena in the real universe. So it’s a theory about theories which is called a “meta-theory”. And it reduces the dualisms in science to a single monism in the CTMU of how the mind is fundamentally related to the physical objects of this world. Consequentially this concept ends up uniting all dualisms such as the Cartesian Mind Matter dualism to a single monism. Additionally this idea unties the underlying reality of subjective and objective and the internal to the external. The key idea to all of this that makes this possible and makes such a theory possible is the idea that in the same way scientific observations determine theories by turning this on its head logical requirements of theories determine observation in science. And that’s how the CTMU furthers its proof and claims of the universe past what we can see or observe. And explain in greater detail what we can observe. And show what there is to be observed that we just haven’t yet as technology or tools allow in current day. And the CTMU is really eternally ahead as it will never be surpassed and is irreplaceable. Because it’s what the fabric of the cosmos is and reality itself which existence without conforming to the structure of the CTMU doesn’t happen. So these logical properties that the CTMU describes and makes scientific predictions from are true by virtue of their existence. Anything that exists and can be observed conforms to the logic in the CTMU by its existence because it’s what the structure of the universe is and it’s what the CTMU gets at. How do I know that the existence of all objects and observations that exist in the universe exist because they conform to these logical requirements? That’s what the theory is or theorizing or hypothesizing and then does in fact proof this to be the case. But I’m not going to explain all of these details in this one post. It’s just so you understand what the theory is about and how it works and how it’s constructed and what it means.

Since reality always has the ability to surprise us, the task of scientific observation can never be completed with absolute certainty, and this means that a comprehensive theory of reality cannot be based on scientific observation alone. Instead, it must be based on the process of making scientific observations in general, and this process is based on the relationship of mind and reality. So the CTMU is essentially a theory of the relationship between mind and reality.

In explaining this relationship, the CTMU shows that reality possesses a complex property akin to self-awareness. That is, just as the mind is real, reality is in some respects like a mind. But when we attempt to answer the obvious question “whose mind?”, the answer turns out to be a mathematical and scientific definition of God.

So in the first paragraph of this paste Langan is saying we can’t actually know every single detail and specific fact of the entire universe for certain. In other words we can never be certain we know everything. Like God does. We can never be sure we’ve made all discoveries and connections of everything there is for sure. Because there could always be more and something we haven’t seen or thought of. There have been plenty of times in recorded history where we think we’ve figured everything out and then a new discovery which launches an entire new revolution. Such as quantum mechanics did when we thought we lived in a completely deterministic universe and our theories of the macroscopic and relativity of the very big have described it all then we were proven wrong by miles. And the universe gave us a surprise of what subatomic particles can do undermine and contradicting all we thought we knew about causation and all of our previous theories, such as quantum entanglement. Which Einstein didn’t understand at all and called it spooky!?!? So to get around this and be able to develop a theory for everything the CTMU is about making observations in general by studying the relationship of mind and reality and any specific thing Langan himself doesn’t discover or prove or resolve in his lifetimes work in developing the CTMU the general applications of the CTMU are capable of solving everything else in the universe and for all future scientists. The CTMU provides the very framework for making all discoveries about everything even if this can’t be accomplished completely. It is capable of applying to every single individual detail and solves all future problems of the universe. And the idea of solving all future problems or paradoxes of physical phenomena that could arrive in the universe is a principle covered in the CTMU. Actually two principles cover this. One is the “Principle of Syndiffeonesis” and the other is the “MU or Multiplex Unity Principle” And that’s the beauty of it. Those two principles show that reality amounts to a self-resolving paradox and that everything is related in some logical way. We just don’t understand it yet, such as the fact that quantum mechanics is seemingly irreconcilable to relativity. However, these two principles show that they do inherently reconcile and a reality in a fundamentally retractable way. And this is a paper that Langan has already published! Online! And anyone can read it for free. And again it does this by explaining the logical properties that make up the universe and support existence for anything in the universe including every single elementary particle or extra-terrestrial life forms. And answer the big life questions in the bargain. Like who are we? Where did we come from and why are we here? The meaning of life and is there a God? And do we have free will? a soul? And is there an afterlife? And the answer is YESS!!! To the last 4?’s.

The rest of that is saying reality is itself conscious and we all possess a property akin to self awareness. This is what consciousness is or having self awareness by the nature of our existence. This is because reality is a mind, the universe is a mind and we are all individual minds of the big idea. The universe has mental attributes because it is a mind and so reality the universe itself is a medium of consciousness and sentience and intelligence. The CTMU has the math to prove this but we aren’t going to do that here. But in a way we’ve already proven this by the logic we’ve already used. The fact that there are so many conscious beings in the world or that there is at all self awareness of their surroundings is evidence of this. And as for what kind of mind the Universe is it’s God’s mind? So it’s not just that the Universe came from God though it did, but that God is the Universe. God is the cosmos. We are little individual parts of God’s mind. We each share an aspect of the mind of God. And the CTMU has the math and science to back this up and prove this. Of course he doesn’t do that there in one Q and A… that math will be coming out in a book.

Our individual minds are parts of God’s Mind. They are not as powerful as God’s Mind, for they are only parts thereof; yet, they are directly connected to the greatest source of knowledge and power that exists. This connection of our minds to the Mind of God, which is like the connection of parts to a whole, is what we sometimes call the soul or spirit, and it is the most crucial and essential part of being human.

Thus, the attempt to formulate a comprehensive theory of reality, the CTMU, finally leads to spiritual understanding, producing a basis for the unification of science and theology. The traditional Cartesian divider between body and mind, science and spirituality, is penetrated by logical reasoning of a higher order than ordinary scientific reasoning, but no less scientific than any other kind of mathematical truth. Accordingly, it serves as the long-awaited gateway between science and humanism, a bridge of reason over what has long seemed an impassable gulf.

The implications of the fact that we are little parts of God’s mind is that we are directly connected by our existence here in this universe to the greatest source of power and knowledge that can or ever will and does exist. We are directly connected to the supreme almighty God himself. And people say define God define?! A God you can’t even define. Yet it’s quite so simple: “God is the greatest source of power and knowledge that exists”. That’s just one of the many ways the CTMU defines God. This connection we have to God is what our soul actually is. And we do in-fact have a soul and couldn’t exist without one. Our soul is our direct connection to God and the CTMU proves all of this. We are at this point just stating the fundamental ideas behind the CTMU. But the details exist that prove it all does in fact exist. And many of which have already been verified by scientific data and the rest either has or will coming soon in the future. The CTMU is still scientific but science is just an aspect of the CTMU. It goes beyond that by extension of logical reasoning of a higher order. The details again exist and will be explained later. And so finally last but not least the CTMU reconciles science with theology actually showing that science is theological knowledge or knowledge of God himself and revolutionizing our current understanding of theological knowledge coupled with a greater scientific understanding. And the field that does this is called metaphysics. But any theory that can reconcile and restore harmony between science and theology and prove the existence of God no doubt has knowledge and discovery that go way beyond our imagination of reality. Way beyond! Infinity and Beyond what we thought possible to even know. And any theory that can do this has knowledge to eternally bless the world! The CTMU then ends up furthering our knowledge of science beyond the scientific community and theological knowledge beyond the religious community and restoring harmony between the two groups thus the CTMU is capable of bringing harmony to the whole world and the entire human race!

And that concludes the intro into the CTMU

PS. And with that said let the debate begin!

(However anyone who disagrees or tries to rebut is welcomed but will probably be proven wrong. But all discussion, skeptics and questions and criticisms are invited and even encouraged. However there is no escaping the logic of the CTMU and thus completes a closed circle encapsulating all truth for the good of mankind. This is exactly what a theory of everything portrays.)

H�m�/��J�<���