Posted by Admin On May 30th, 2014 11:29 PM | Philosophy
Was the universe created by the equations of Physics and Math so they would, by extension – have the ability to give and receive love?
Metaphysicist David Birnbaum (see David1000.com), of Manhattan, believes that this scenario – as outlandish as it sounds – may have more than a grain of truth to it.
Birnbaum is an independent scholar operating from his base in Manhattan. His iconic work Summa Metaphysica has been the focus of over 30 feature articles in the last 12 months alone. Yeshiva-educated and Harvard-educated David Birnbaum published his iconic treatise over a 26-year period 1988-2014: Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man (Ktav Publishing, 1988), Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014). The theory is an elegant and powerful paradigm challenge (see PotentialismTheory.com/ParadigmChallenge/)
The core theme of Birnbaum’s works is that one elegant dynamic and one elegant dynamic alone both instigates and drives the entire cosmic order. Birnbaum delineates that dynamic to be: Quest for Potential. According to Birnbaum “Potentialism proposes that there is, indeed, a protagonist to the cosmic order, but that the protagonist is a ‘quest,’ and not a ‘classic entity.’ The universe quests for its maximal potential. The core dynamic Quest for Potential∞ strives with purpose and direction towards ever-greater and higher potential. At the ‘beginning of time,’ eternal Quest for Potential harnessed the eternal equations of Physics-Mathematics to ignite our universe via the Big Bang. This same symbiotic dynamic – Quest for Potential in league with Physics-Math – then acted as a catalyst for life, evolution, language, emotion, consciousness, and, indeed, for all the key dynamics which have evolved in the universe.”
Over a dozen institutions of higher learning have assigned Summa Metaphysica as a Course Text ranging from UCLA to Brandeis to Hebrew University (Israel). Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential was the focus of a 4-day international academic conference at Bard College (Upstate, NY) April 2012 (see summacoverage.com)
Parts of Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential dovetail back to the work of physicist John Wheeler (1911-2008) of Princeton fame. Birnbaum collaborated with Wheeler and, indeed a Wheeler testimonial graces the back of Summa Metaphysica II.
Wheeler dovetails with Birnbaum on at least two key points:
(a) It from Bit
(b) Observation impacts reality
It from Bit:
Per Wheeler, the entire cosmos at its early stages was binary bits: 1s or 0s. Birnbaum seizes on that possibility. He asks a simple question: Hypothetically what might a super-extraordinary super-neo-computer want which it could not easily get? One answer, of course, might be the ability to give and receive love. Birnbaum hypothesizes that precisely that goal may have been one of a cluster of motivations for the eternal force of Quest for Potential to harness the equations of Physics-Math to ignite the cosmic order.
Observation impacts reality
It was respected physicist John Wheeler, colleague of Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr, who first championed the idea that the universe itself is dependent on observation. That is, the universe proceeds according to how it is perceived by humanity and, by extension, Wheeler has concluded that observation actually affects not only the present and future of the universe, but its past.
Coming from anyone else, this could sound like far-flung, fringe science mysticism. But let us remember who John Wheeler is. In fact, his observations on quantum reality and its effect on the present were done in collaboration with no less than Richard Feynman, the first name in quantum physics.
It was Wheeler, in collaboration with others, who noted the phenomenon of light passing through slits in a blind. When detectors were set up, the light would travel through the slits as particles, as expected, either passing through one of the other slits. But when the detectors were removed, light fundamentally changed. It began to behave as a wave instead of a particle – passing through both slits. Wheeler was left with the rather uncomfortable fact that the act of observing the light fundamentally changed how it behaved. In short, watching something changed how it behaved in reality.
But the science gets odder from that point. Wheeler decided to test, by extension, galactic phenomena. He chose to test a quasar. Now, gravity from massive objects, such as galaxies, cause light to bend. Therefore, he tested photons emitted from a distance quasar that would pass through the gravitational effects of nearby galaxies in its path.
This is where the science gets really weird. Wheeler found that the same phenomenon was true for the quasar. Depending on how they measured the photon’s path, it would either take one direction around the galactic interference, behaving as a particle; or it would take both paths around the galactic interference, as a wave, if not witnessed directly. What does this mean? Well, as before, depending on how one observed the photons emitted from the quasar, changed how it arrived – whether it took both paths as a wave (following both potential paths), or one path as a particle.
This all sounds familiar so far – no different than the previous slit experiment. Here's the problem though. The photon being observed left its quasar several billion years ago. If the method of observation changes the path and reality of the photon it emitted, that means that the act of observing the photon, changed the photon's actual trajectory retroactively billions of years into the past. This might sound like mind-boggling hypothetical quantum math. But here's the fun part. This was actually proved to occur in 1984 at the University of Maryland. As odd as it sounds, this in now scientific fact.
Okay, so we have to concede that observation has a tangible effect on reality and it can actually change not only the present and future, but the past as well. So what about this love thing Birnbaum mentioned? You're still a long way from that. Don't worry, we're getting there.
Well, hopefully the bit on Wheeler's discovery will have braced you to deal with the inexplicable. This is where Birnbaum's own metaphysics (see summametaphysica.com) contribution comes into play. Birnbaum's core discovery is Potentialism. Potentialism is a cosmic drive. Potentialism states that the universe cannot exist in a state of rest. Rather, it continually evolves towards greater and greater degrees of Complexity. The end-goal of the universe is Extraordinariation (see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation/). This is a, yet to be defined, state of Super-Complexity. Don't overburden yourself with Super-Complexity. It is a hypothetical state. An infinite. It might never even be achieved. Think of it more like a calculus equation, those ones from college that are infinitely striving toward the infinite yet never quite actually attaining it. That is Super-Complexity. What is important is the intermediate products of this drive towards Extraordinariation.
To Potentialists, these are called Quantum Jumps (see Glossary1000.com). They are defining moments when the universe reaches some critical mass of Potential and expresses itself in a fundamentally new level of Complexity. Think of it like this: The universe existed in an age of the atom. It kept increasing in complexity, filling up the periodic table until it had nowhere to go. But as the universe strives towards Complexity and Extraordinariation, it couldn't rest contentedly forever. With nowhere left to go atomically, the universe created molecules. This provided a whole new level on which to explore Complexity.
This is where it becomes important to understand that Potentialism is not just physics, it is metaphysics. It necessarily encompasses human thoughts and ideas. If you think we exited the road of rational science with the introduction of thought, you need to go back and reread what Wheeler said on the subject. Cognition, while separate from physical reality, plays a role in the physical, tangible universe, shaping it across both space and time.
Potentialism (see sequence1000.com) actually picks up where Wheeler left off. Human logical cognition is indeed a force of the cosmos to Potentialists, but it is not the end of cognitive evolution. Rather, cognition has experienced its own Quantum Jumps, increasing in its Complexity. One of the most significant jumps has been from pure logic (the binary Epoch, as Potentialists would refer to it) to the more esoteric and nuanced realm of morality – encompassing right and wrong, compassion, feelings... The things which demarcated humanity from the reflexive survival mentality of other species. Just as Wheeler posits that the universe must necessarily witness itself to complete its form, Potentialists take this cognition one logical step further – that the universe must express through itself (i.e. humanity) the identity and declaration of love.
This does trip into the realm of spirituality to some extent. But it follows the logical progression Wheeler has already laid out. Reasonably speaking – if altruism, love, compassion and morality are higher forms of cognition, the universe must bear witness to itself in these terms as well. As such, Potentialism is unshrinking in the importance of these concepts and the necessity of them in the cosmic order. One might point out that the universe seemed fine to get along without them before the birth of humankind and such concepts. Potentialism would simply point out what Wheeler has already proven – once such concepts are birthed into existence, they will extend retroactively throughout the cosmic cloth and will have always existed. Love, in the cosmic order, is not subject to temporal restraints any more than a photon. Upon examination within the conceptual umbrellas which Wheeler and then Birnbaum lay out, this concept is then hardly surprising.
Does the Universe Self-Iterate?
focus: Summa Metaphysica's Potentialism Theory
Published by guestposting
February 18, 2014, Category: Physics
MIT Quantum Physicist Seth Lloyd proposes in his book Programming the Universe (First Vintage Books, 2006) that the entire universe is like one all-encompassing quantum computer. According to Lloyd this evolving and computing quantum enterprise continuously self-iterates (builds upon itself) as it advances forever forward unto greater and greater complexity:
“All interactions between particles in the universe….convey not only energy but also information; in other words, particles not only collide, they compute. What is the entire universe computing ultimately? Its own dynamic evolution…As the computation proceeds [and iterates], reality unfolds.”
According to Lloyd the history of the universe is the history of one ongoing quantum computation and iteration: “At first, the patterns it [the universe as quantum computer] produced were simple, comprising elementary particles and establishing the fundamental laws of physics. In time, as it processed more and more information, the universe spun out ever more intricate and complex patterns, including galaxies, stars, and planets. Life, language, human beings, society, culture—all owe their existence to the intrinsic ability of matter and energy to process information… (p. 3)… “Each revolution has laid the ground-work for the next….” (p. 5)
But what dynamic is driving this quantum computation enterprise forward? And is complexification, as per Lloyd and several other contemporary scientists, truly its key goal? Or is Lloyd perhaps correct vis à vis his daring proposal concerning the mechanism (quantum programming), but not quite on-the-mark with his hypothesis (complexification) as to the key cosmic goal?
Interestingly enough, Lloyd’s (2006) concept of a self-iterating universe dovetails with the original metaphysics proposed by conceptual theorist David Birnbaum in his 1988 (Summa Metaphysica I). According to Birnbaum’s theory, an eternal cosmic dynamic exists – Infinite Quest for Potential – and this dynamic marshals the equations of Physics-Math (parallel to subsequent Lloyd) to ignite and then drive the universe forward. This (Infinite Quest for Potential) dynamic is the catalyst for the Big Bang, life, evolution, language and consciousness. According to Birnbaum, his Infinite Quest for Potential is continuously self-iterating. It continuously builds-upon its ever more extraordinary ‘platform’ as it seeks to leap-onto a still more exceptional ‘platform’ and onward and onward.
If we wrap Birnbaum’s conceptual Infinite Quest for Potential theory around Lloyd’s ‘mechanism’, the universal quantum computer, we end up with a seamless and fully-integrated schema. (Birnbaum’s) Quest for Potential drives (Lloyd’s) the universal quantum enterprise, and the direction/purpose of the self-iterating quantum computations is (Birnbaum’s) penultimate potential.
Birnbaum identifies/defines this penultimate potential as extraordinariation - the cosmic teleology (the cosmic purpose): Quest for Potential∞ is probing and searching for (elusive) ultimate - grandeur…elegance…beauty…symmetry…fulfillment....harmony…artistry…symphony…
spirituality...perfection…humanitarianism…altruism…mercy…romancing… love….parenting...meaning.....and ever-higher and higher consciousness…the elusive extraordinariation.
Andrei Alyokhin, Professor of Biology and Ecology at University of Maine wrote November 2012, “…Summa represents a bold attempt to formulate a unifying concept of the Universe…it is reasonable to propose the Quest for Potential∞ as a working hypothesis for explaining the impetus behind the cosmic dynamic….” Echoing the iconic Claude Levi-Strauss (2006), British journalist Oliver Burkeman called Summa “remarkable and profound.”
Wrapping Birnbaum’s (self-iterating) Infinite Quest for Potential around and through Seth Lloyd’s (self-iterating) quantum programming enterprise strengthens both theories and provides both the conceptual and the mechanical for understanding the cosmic order. The integrated (self-iterating) Birnbaum-Lloyd metaphysics emerges as a uniquely elegant and powerful schema. Indeed, on the global intellectual chessboard, there is no paradigm to seriously challenge it.
The American Revolution was a political upheaval over an 18-year period 1765-1783.
By admin on 12 March, 2014 10:28 am
Midway through this period the iconic Declaration of Independence was proclaimed in 1776 heralding the founding of the United States of America. The 13 U.S. colonies had revolted against British imperialism. Their motto: ‘No taxation without representation.’
Abuse of power 21st Century style
Fast-forward to the 26-year period, 1988-2014: A small but organized clique of hard-line atheistic British academics have gained hegemony over the leading academic journals – a primary lever of power in academe – as publication of articles in academic journals is a route to tenure, and prestigious academic appointments.
Through their stranglehold over key journals, the Randomness/atheistic hierarchy exerts asymmetric influence over Western academe. Atheism dovetails with a pseudo-scientific view of the universe called Randomness Theory – and this same atheist clique aggressively foists this Randomness/atheistic ideology over Western academe. [Note for context that hardline atheism is embraced by just ~1% of the global population.]
It would seem the British have not so much given up on imperialism as they have changed their battlefront. What used to be fought on a political field is now taking place in the halls of academia. British academics, like their forerunner British imperialist before them, have incredibly sought to control debate and permissible ideas in the world of science. Much as they unilaterally redefined geographical borders during imperialist expansion, an entrenched British atheistic academic crew now seeks to unilaterally freeze the borders of acceptable scientific discussion.
The British atheistic academic hierarchy champions Randomness theory – and zealously imposes it globally wherever its tentacles reach. Randomness theory presses the (counterintuitive) proposition that the entire universe is a random-chance happening: Thus, the Big Bang, the billions of galaxies, the trillions of stars, the myriad solar systems, bio-forms, evolution, language, emotion, sexuality, consciousness et al. are all, according to Randomness theory, just pure chance happenstance. And all these happenstances just happened to intersect and coalesce and thrive in our little universe.
Also like their imperial British forefathers, the British atheist academics seek to impose this aimless schema across academe globally without the inclusion of external give-and-take. The British atheistic academic orthodoxy, it seems, would have us stay within the vacuous intellectual box they have delineated, while denying anyone a voice. Taxation without representation, indeed.
The Second Colonial Revolt
It may be that the British academic community has forgotten the lessons of its forerunner’s imperialistic past. The latter half of the last century and the beginning of the current one have seen the rise of a new wave of vibrant independent minds revolted by the force-feeding of Randomness theory across academe. Far from being cowed by the political machinations of the ‘entrenched orthodoxy’ (atheism camp), these dynamic thought leaders are intellectually independent and self-assured. If anything, they grown in resolve and voice as a consequence of the Orwelian political games played by the academic hierarchy.
NEW YORK / midtown area: Between 1988 and 2005, David Birnbaum, an independent philosopher and metaphysicist, set out to challenge the monolith of British orthodoxy. His critically acclaimed multi-part treatise Summa Metaphysica would directly challenge them. The atheistic group has tried to suppress his ideas globally – but has failed.
The very basic assumptions of the British atheist academic world's theory of universal origin, Randomness, would come under withering intellectual assault from Birnbaum. Challenging Randomness theory head-on, Birnbaum's Theory of Infinite Potential would, for the first time, provide a powerful, bulletproof scientific, mathematical and philosophical model for the cosmic order. Included in the theory would be a powerful teleology (plan and purpose to the universe), as well.
Teleology is, by simple definition, the study of evidence of design and purpose across the natural order. Design and purpose is in sharp contrast to the suppositions held by Randomness/atheism, which has decided axiomatically that nothing in the universe has design or purpose. For the zealot Randomness-atheist crew, any intellectual argument for ‘design or purpose’ to the universe is the proverbial anti-Christ to be fought-to-the-death. Thus, David Birnbaum, author of the iconic 3-volume treatise Summa Metaphysica emerges as Public Enemy #1 of the global hardline atheist community.
Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica treatise proposes that “there is a protagonist to the cosmic order, but that the protagonist is a ‘quest’ and not an entity. The universe quests for its maximal potential. The core dynamic Quest for Potential∞ strives with purpose and direction towards ever-greater and higher potential. At the beginning of time,’ eternal Quest for Potential harnessed the eternal equations of Physics-Mathematics to ignite our universe via the Big Bang. This same symbiotic dynamic – Quest for Potential in league with Physics-Math – then acted as a catalyst for life, evolution, language, emotion, consciousness, and, indeed, for all the key dynamics which have evolved in the universe.”
Birnbaum has blown a hole in Randomness theory which its zealous proponents cannot close. Birnbaum – via his Quest for Potential∞ has shown that not only is there both design and purpose to the universe but that that both are Physics-Math based. The gaping hole that Potentialism has blown in the palace gates of Randomness/atheism is a large one. Birnbaum’s powerful theory has provided the hoped-for opening for other minds to speak out against the (fatal) intellectual flaws of Randomness as well, let alone, their 20+ year highly-politicized gambit of trying to bully the academic world and suppress debate.
Over a dozen journals have featured Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica and its Theory of Potential in the 2013-2014 period alone.
MASSACHUSETTS: One such man is Seth Lloyd, MIT professor of Mechanical Engineering in Boston, MA., and the author of Programming the Universe (2006). Lloyd, a highly respected name in quantum mechanics and quantum theory, has worked extensively to help scientists understand the universe in terms of a quantum computational model. His work expresses in mathematical terms how the universe can be examined as a teleologically (purpose) driven model following a pre-destined program or set of rules. His theory parallels Birnbaum’s prior Potentialism theory.
NEW YORK / Greenwich Village area: At the more philosophical end of the spectrum is Thomas Nagel of NY. Nagel has done in-depth philosophical analysis of the limitations and mistakes of the Randomness model. Nagel sets forth an elegant argument for a natural teleological drive for the universe. For this work Mind & Cosmos (2012) Nagel was attacked savagely by the atheist orthodox community. His book wasn't even a direct attack against atheism. In fact, Nagel himself is an atheist but his cardinal sin from the British perspective was in not being zealous enough in defending atheism’s pet theory of Randomness. The problem, however, resides solely with the inherent weakness of Randomness which Nagel delineated, not in Nagel. Randomness Theory fatally lacks the flexibility to incorporate any purposefulness to the universe.
MAINE: The Randomness model of cosmology has likewise been challenged by biologists in recent years. Dr. Andrei Alyokhin, Professor of Biology and Ecology at the University of Maine likewise supports a teleological model as a cosmic order which would explain many phenomena Randomness fails to. In fact, he strongly supports Birnbaum's Potentialism Theory, observing that as a metaphysics it uniquely explains the observable basic laws of ecology in which governs the growth and regulation of populations of living organisms.
The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn
Randomness proponents have thus far showed a monolithic unified front intended to maintain the imperialism of the British atheistic academic orthodoxy in a position of absolute power. Through distribution of academic rewards and a tight control of academic journals and media, the atheistic sect of academia has sought – directly and through atheist surrogates in the media- to control and/or suppress the release of information or any competing theories through any means necessary: coercion, academic censorship, libel and ad hominem attacks.
What the academic establishment hasn't been able to do is silence dissenters or answer the challenges which teleology supporters have leveled against Randomness Theory; this challenge is starting to become noticed and make significant headway; indeed, breaks in the ranks of the academic front are starting to show.
CONNECTICUT: Academic champions, such as Yale professor of Computer Science David Gelernter, have begun to speak up in the media and call out the libelous attacks on those who disagree with the atheist academics for what they are – ‘bullying tactics’ and a ‘lynch mob’ modus operandi meant to intimidate their peers into conformity – and to stifle innovation in cosmology.
History repeats itself
What should be scientific evolution – the progression of science and philosophy towards a greater understanding of the natural world – has instead been bottled-up for decades; however, the strangulation of debate has now instigated a Second American Revolution It may be that British academia is about to receive another history lesson.
High-handed tactics and intimidation only work against the meek. To apply these tactics against the highly-focused quite formidable intellects of those who study the very nature of the universe is a fool's errand. The British academic atheist net may snare the less involved academics protective of their tenure, who would not wish to face the wrath of the British academic institute; however, intimidation and defamation is ultimately a futile tactic to employ against the formidable players they actually need to silence to achieve their nefarious objectives.
Much as British high-handedness to suppress human potential ended disastrously in the past, it seems they are destined to repeat their same disastrous imperialistic gambits. Every attack they've leveled, has only served to highlight their insecurity, cast further doubt on their intellectual integrity, and highlight the ultimately fatal weakness of their randomness schema. The Second Colonist Revolution is unfolding and the British academic orthodoxy stands on the wrong side of the battle lines. Its intellectually and morally bankrupt ivory tower of power is now under quite-formidable assault.
DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY / METAPHYSICS
Cosmology, Metaphysics & Philosophy: See sample testimonial on Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum's philosophy treatise:
“…a major contribution to the Jewish conversations through the ages, on theodicy, and the problem of evil generally.”
- Dr. Norman Lamm, President, Yeshiva University, New York, NY
Cosmology, Metaphysics & Philosophy: See sample testimonial on Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum’s philosophy treatise:
“…a framework for a renewed exploration into the most agonizing aspects of the meaning of religious belief… It is an impressive attempt to focus intellectually on the Holocaust without diminishing the primal outcry of pain.”
– Rabbi Nachum Rabinovitch, Rosh Yeshiva Birkat Moshe, Israel, Former Dean, Jews College, London
How did we (the cosmic order) get to the point of Beethoven’s symphonies?
Did we get there simply by survival of the fittest?
Darwin presented his now mainstream theory of survival of the fittest as the root of human evolution. And Darwinism has demonstrated vitality as a theory. But did we get to Beethoven by survival of the fittest alone?
The 21st century has seen a rise in new theories of cosmology. At the forefront has been Potentialism. The theory was developed by independent scholar David Birnbaum of Manhattan. It is explicated via his 3-volume treatise: Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man (Ktav Publishing, 1988), Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014). The theory is an iconic paradigm challenge.
Note these key terms:
Q4P∞ = Quest for Potential (infinitely iterated) (see www.sequence1000.com )
E+ = Extraordinariation ( see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation )
Potentialism’s primary edict is a simple formula: Q4P∞ → E+.
This is a simple and straightforward proposition. In layman’s terms, it states that the universe inexorably strives towards greater Potential or Complexity/Sophistication, and thus heads towards a state Potentialists call Extraordinariation (E+ for short).
Once delineated, this simple theme/concept can be seen as pervasive across the cosmic order – from the macro to the micro level. Everything strives after its optimal potentials and the cosmos itself moves towards Complexity/Sophistication. For example, people learn, atoms conjoin into molecules. Advance – in multiple permutations. This is the primal dynamic of existence, which upon reflection, can indeed be seen all around us.
Potentialism takes issue with Darwinism. It does not do so because Darwinism is incorrect, but rather because Darwinism is radically incomplete. The Theory of Potential maintains that there are actual three interlocking components of Evolution:
1) survival-potential (classic Darwinism)
2) deploying an optimal array of potential
3) discerning the optimal route towards Extraordinariation
The line-of-genetics which optimizes all three of these components, will, according to Potentialism, be the ‘genetic mix’ which prevails. Looked at differently, Quest for Potential impacts genetic coding to get to this ‘optimal mix’.
The root of the deficit with classic Darwinism lies with two factors: group selection and higher evolution.
Group selection is a soft chink in the armor of Darwinism. Darwinism explains that everything evolves based on personal/individual survival traits. An individual is more likely to survive and pass on his or her traits for their individual advantage. However, the real natural world does not show this to be the only influence at work. There is group selection. Group selection represents those decisions made by individuals that actual harm oneself but benefit the group. In short, Darwinism does not account for altruism. Be it your family, tribe, species, or perhaps nature as a whole – the issue is that we have plenty of examples of group selection and Darwinism is dead silent on the cause of this.
While Potentialism recognizes evolution, it understands full well that survival is not the only force at work. Potentialism recognizes the teleological nature of the universe. That is to say, Potentialism understands that not only do individual creatures work towards their evolution, or higher level of Complexity, but the species as a whole does as well. Following the precepts of Potentialism, life forms, in their totality, struggle as a group as well as on an individual level to maximize their Potential.
And this is where Beethoven comes in. Darwinism simply seeks a higher order of survivability. Potentialism, on the other hand, strives towards Complexity/Sophistication/Extraodinariness in its infinite, myriad forms enroute towards Extraordinaration. While Darwinism is only concerned with the individual survival of a species or sub-species, Potentialism takes a holistic approach to judge what is survival and progress. It is not enough for an individual to survive. Potentialism rules that a creature must strive for their species as a whole. But further, and this is where the huge difference occurs, Potentialism requires species not only to survive, but to increase in Complexity/Sophistication as they advance ever-onwards towards the extraordinary.
To Darwin, winning is simply about surviving, killing and procreating. To Potentialism, this is not enough. To Potentialists, one must also rise in Complexity/Sophistication to be winning the evolutionary game. And that is where humans excel. The necessary reflexes and basic instincts to survive are a basic principle of intelligent life. But for Potentialists, the true litmus test is development of the skills beyond survival: art, morality, intellectuality, the panoply of emotion, and abstract consciousness.
Darwin leaves no place for a creature to create art. It leaves no room for higher evolution – the learning beyond simple tools – of the more nuanced parts of cognition itself. Cognition is not directly associated with the skills to survive, so it should simply die out as some weird anomaly, per Darwinism – useless, in and of itself. Potentialism, by contrast, expects the rise of art and emotion. Art and emotion are considered a higher mode of cognition and are expected in the most advanced species – humans. Thus we see, Darwin leaves no room for Beethoven, art being simply an aberration of no useful (survival) value in humanity’s evolution. Potentialism, by contrast, foresees the birth of art and embraces it for what it properly is – the higher level of Complexity/Sophistication achieved by humankind, representing a tangible step forward in our evolutionary journey towards ultimate Extraordinariation.
DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY / METAPHYSICS
Cosmology, Metaphysics & Philosophy: See sample testimonial on Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum's philosophy treatise:
“David Birnbaum brings the rich resources of the Jewish tradition to bear on
the universal problem of theodicy. The result is a new synthesis… I can certainly recommend it as a fascinating contribution to the philosophy of religion which merits the attention of Christians and Jews alike.”
- John J. Collins, Professor of Theology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, Editor, Journal of Biblical Literature
The Pattern to Cosmic Advance - Quest for Potential∞
Summa Metaphysica's Potentialism Theory
David Birnbaum, metaphysicist and private scholar, set out on an audacious odyssey in 1988 to redefine modern cosmology as we know it. What he gave the world was Potentialism. The Infinite Quest for Potential is the unifying cosmic drive – the reason for how things are – and the path for what they will become – as the universe grows. In 1988, Birnbaum released Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man (Ktav, 1988), followed by Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014).
Potentialism Theory: The Superlaw Overarching Formula
Birnbaum laid out a simple formula underlying the cosmic order and regulating its ongoing evolution:
Quest for Potential∞
This formula describes the basic mechanics of Potentialist cosmology. It states that there is an inherent drive in the universe, the Quest for Infinite Potential (Q4P). This is the drive that causes everything in the universe to achieve increasingly higher levels of potential. The dynamic is infinite in every conceivable frame of reference.
Potentialism Theory: More detailed formula
The first formula above is a simplification of the Potentialist model.
For a more detailed analysis of Potentialism, it is necessary to look at a fuller mathematical model governing the Potentialism process.
Q4P∞ → C+ → QJ → E+
This follows the Potentialism model on a finer detail of scale. Q4P gives direct rise to what Birnbaum refers to as Complexification (C+), which in turn gives rise to Quantum Jumps (QJ), which are all enroute to Extraordinariation (E+).
Thus, ‘the plot thickens’, but the core thrust remains the same: Infinite Potential drives the Cosmic Order.
Complexification (C+) is defined as the ongoing process of advancing the complexity/sophistication/variety/wondrousness of everything existing in the universe. When C+ reaches a critical mass point, a Quantum Jump (QJ) is the result. Some QJs are more dramatic than others.
For instance, the Big Bang is probably the most distinct QJ known to us. But QJs permeate the stream of cosmic history. And more are to come, for sure.
C+ can be witnessed in terms of simple, mechanistic/physical terms – such as two hydrogen and an oxygen atom combining to form water (an intrinsic complexity event), or when a cell divides (a multiplicative or extrinsic complexity event). However, Complexification covers far more than mechanistic complexity. C+ is used to denote the myriad ways outside of the mechanistic in which complexity can increase.
As an example, consider two pieces of music. Our first piece is written entirely in one key, so it is harmonically sound. The notes are all standard lengths, but random. There is nothing integrally incorrect with this piece, but it, arguably, doesn't sound much like music. Our second piece may be, perhaps, a moving sonata – emotion evoking and transcendent beyond what is printed on the sheet music because of this. Both pieces, on paper, look the same – but one is unarguably more sophisticated; however on a mechanistic level they are identical. This is the meaning of Complexification. C+ not only accounts for the mechanistic complexity of the sheet music, but also for the complexity of the emotion it evokes, the beauty of the piece itself. It eludes physical science to explain what makes the sonata more complex than the random piece – but it is humanly self-evident that it is more complex. Thus, C+ necessarily encompasses more than the mechanistic alone. Like Extraordinariation, it is the sum of its mechanistic, intellectual, emotive, spiritual and beautific qualities – both the qualitative as well as the quantitative.
Focus: Quantum Jumps
Quantum Jumps (shorthand: QJ) can appear, on the surface, as very similar to Complexification+. They display the same overarching properties as C+, showing complexity in its myriad quantitative and qualitative forms. But, C+ displays complexity in known forms. QJs express complexity in fundamentally new, never before seen expressions. QJs also introduce a fundamentally higher, “game changing” if you will, level of complexity. Finally, QJs are episodic. Whereas, C+ occurs continuously, a QJ happens only rarely and does so dramatically.
To explain QJs, it is easiest to illustrate them. Imagine a universe where only atoms exist. Without molecules, there is no life. Even water itself cannot exist – that is a combination of oxygen and hydrogen atoms. In such a universe, the complexity we take for granted cannot exist at all. At one point, in our distant past, that was the universe. Beyond that, there was an era where even atoms did not exist yet. As you can imagine, the universe itself was fundamentally different – less complex. But QJ events, in the form of first atom creation, then molecular creation, gave rise to a universe where more complex forms could coalesce.
QJ: Rungs on the ladder to Extraordinariation
This the nature of QJ events. They are game changers, opening up the universe to unfold in new directions and levels of complexity impossible to even imagine until they occurred. QJs both form and follow the scientific rules governing the universe. They are an expression of the increasing maturity, driven by Potential, of cosmic evolution as it steers ever onwards towards Extraordinariation.
As mentioned though, QJs, like C+, are driven by more than mechanistic design – they are an expression of all levels of complexity. As such, they encompass such universal phenomena as the creation of language, music, reason, emotion, altruism. While some of these phenomena are not quantitative, they are all self-evident in their existence and perfectly qualitative. It is the metaphysical nature of Potentialism itself which allows Potentialism to smoothly and easily explain these aspects of reality where pure, analytic science fails.
Complexification+ > Quantum Jump
It is this ongoing interplay of Complexification and Quantum Jumps that govern existence and define how it evolves. Both are created/driven by Q4P, the drive of everything within the universe to seek its own higher levels of complexity. C+ and QJs are the visible evidence of that eternal Quest for Potential. All are items in the universe's tool box which lets it seek out and strive towards its quest for ultimate Extraordinariation.
Cosmology, Metaphysics & Philosophy: See sample testimonial on Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum's philosophy treatise:
“God and Evil represents a bold attempt to formulate an ingenious theory, which, drawing upon creative reinterpretations of classical Jewish doctrine, places the Free Will Defense within a broader metaphysical framework…”
- Rabbi Walter S. Wurzburger, Professor of Philosophy, Yeshiva University, Editor, Tradition, New York, NY
Birnbaum’s paradigm-shattering cosmology de facto ‘clears-the-chessboard’ of the iconic Greek philosophers – and, indeed, of every other pre-existing metaphysicist.
In 1988, independent scholar David Birnbaum (see major1000.com) began laying out his breakthrough concept and related principles for his cutting-edge Theory of Potentialism. The original paradigm endeavors to totally change the way we think about the universe, our planet, and our lives. Simply put, yeshiva-educated and Harvard-educated Birnbaum hypothesizes the core dynamic of the Cosmic Order: Quest for Potential (infinitely iterated). Per Birnbaum, Infinite Potential drives the cosmic order – from eternal origins through the present day. And per Birnbaum, if there is a Divine, Potential is at the Divine core (see sequence1000.com).
Birnbaum’s paradigm-shattering cosmology de facto ‘clears-the-chessboard’ of the iconic Greek philosophers – and, indeed, of every other pre-existing metaphysicist. Birnbaum has effectively and compellingly theorized what was hitherto deemed indiscernible: a natural drive – with purpose and direction – to the cosmic order.
Birnbaum crafted a three-part treatise, Summa Metaphysica to make-the-case. Over the course of the set – released over the 1988–2014 period – Birnbaum lays-out his Potentialism theory. According to the Conceptual Theorist, the universe seeks out – on an instinctual- driven level – and ongoing iteratively – its own Potential. More succinctly, the universe is driven to become what it potentially can be. Ongoing and infinitely. From eternal past to eternal future (see SummaMetaphysica.com).
Birnbaum’s postulation seems, perhaps, too concise, too accessible, and indeed, too good – to be true. But upon reflection – and after 25+ years of international scrutiny and global academic vetting – the theory does appear bulletproof. Repeat: Bulletproof (see PotentialismTheory.com/ParadigmChallenge/).
Summa Metaphysica was projected globally via a major 4-day international academic conference at Bard College in April 2012. Indeed the conference would in retrospect be the tipping-point in the beginning-of-the-end of ossified 20th century Randomness/Atheistic Theory, and the beginning of the rise of a new paradigm – 21st century Theory of Potential). The old order changeth.
Now, empirically the Theory of Potential meets the criteria of a compelling metaphysics. Wherever we look, the facts of nature fit well with the theory. The question is – Can we provide more direct scientific proof that there is, indeed, ‘design’ to the cosmic order? Enter Davies.
Paul Davies is an Anglo-American physicist, biologist and cosmologist based in the USA. He is the author of noted books on cosmology, including The Goldilocks Enigma (Mariner Books, 2006) – a ground-breaking work researching and extrapolating on the so-to-speak “Fine-tuned Cosmic Order enigma’.
This enigma, elucidated in a forerunner 2001 book by cosmologist (Sir) Martin Rees runs roughly as follows: There are at least 6 cosmological constants (and actually possibly well over a dozen per Birnbaum) which if adjusted by even 1 decimal point would preclude the cosmos having life, among other things, as we know it.
Davies’ sophisticated and in-depth Goldilocks book explores the nature of the cosmic order from different perspectives. The book explores the enigma of the ‘fine-tuned Cosmic Order’ – and how it seems precisely attuned to form the physical universe as we know it – and then to fortuitously provide a hospitable universe for the birth of life……….and ultimately of that allegedly super-sophisticated species of human beings.
Two extracts from Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma, First Mariner books edition 2008:
“…Somehow the universe has engineered, not just its own awareness, but also its own comprehension. Mindless, blundering atoms have conspired to make not just life, not just mind, but understanding…Could it just be a fluke?….Or is there an ever deeper subplot at work? (p. 5)
“In some manner ….life, mind, and physical law are part of a common scheme, mutually supporting. Somehow, the universe has engineered its own self-awareness.” (p. 231)
The Davies work elucidates the logical and empirical-evidence imperative of design of some sort to our universe. Hence, the work – which dovetails with Birnbaum’s 1988 Summa I work (and subsequent Summa volumes) – is anathema to the British-based Randomness/Atheist academic junta – which invalidates any/all intimations of design/purpose to the cosmic order. [Note that the Davies ‘Goldilocks’ work was also released under the title The Cosmic Jackpot (Orion Publications, 2007).]
Notwithstanding Davies et al., prior to the 2012 Bard College (Upstate, NY) international academic conference on Birnbaum’s 21st century Theory of Potential, the 20th Century British Randomness/Atheistic construct held an iron grip (however manipulated) on global academe; the formidable challenge posed to Randomness/Atheism by the ‘Fine-tuned Cosmic Order’/Goldilocks enigma, had been ‘conveniently’ ignored by the atheist academic junta controlling key academic journals. In 2013 a global storm would erupt over the Summa Conference of thirteen months earlier – and Birnbaum’s theory – which provides an explicit, articulate and pro-scientific alternative to aimless Randomness Theory, would be projected across the world stage.
A Near Perfect Match
Birnbaum (cosmology works 1988 and onward) and Davies (cosmology works 2006 and onward) align wonderfully. Birnbaum’s 3-volume Summa work (1988, 2005 and 20014) on Potentialism nicely brackets Davies’ important 2006 work. Davies’ 2006 Goldilocks makes a powerful case for design/direction as being integral to the universe. Eighteen years earlier in 1988 via Summa I, Birnbam had already actually identified the design/direction as ‘the cosmic drive for its own potential – Birnbaum’s trademark “Quest for Potential” theme.
But can we prove that there is ‘design;’ to the cosmic order? In 2006 Davies articulately lays-out ‘the elephant in the room’ which the entrenched orthodoxy Randomness/Atheist academic group had disingenuously ignored: The universe seems, at each turn, designed specifically to support both the world as we know it and to be hospitable – against all odds – for the rise of intelligent life.
In 1988 Birnbaum had discerned this drive as infinite Quest for Potential (shorthand: Q4P) – a cosmic drive for the universe to grow in complexity/sophistication ongoing (see www.summametaphysica.com/logical-science/). The direction of this drive is towards what Birnbaum labels as Extraordinariation, (see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation/) an end-goal horizon of super complexity/sophistication.
Davies himself provides evidence of the Birnbaum-proposed phenomena in his (Davies’) analysis of the physical laws and nature of existence. He notes, as examples, the perfect balance needed for the Big Bang to have been ignited; for the formation of atoms to have been formed (from energy); for multi-cellular life to have evolve from single-cell life – without which, for example, the universe could not have evolved as we know it today.
The Ideal Cosmology
Davies’ 2006 Goldilocks work articulates in its last two chapters that the ideal cosmological theory would, as a crucial component, be a ‘closed causal loop’; meaning, the cosmology would show how our universe both (a) ignited itself and (b) loops-around itself internally – and almost eternally – toboth emerge in the first place and then to maintain its ‘cosmic energy’. The first two volumes (1988 and 2005) of the 3-volume Birnbaum treatise, had, indeed, already presented a ‘closed causal loop’ universe via Summa Metaphysica’s Potenialism contruct: Quest for Potential < > Extraordinariation. The two inter-related dynamics (a) ignite each other, (b) feed-upon-each other and (c) loop-around each other (see sequence1000.com).
Davies questions the eternal nature of the complete current set of physical laws themselves.
Birnbaum, indeed, has held that the laws of physics – as we know them today in all their permutations– were not necessarily all in existence near the time of the Big Bang (see ExaminerPurpose.com). Rather, permutations on laws came into existence as an expression of Complexification (Complexification is the Birnbaum-proposed ‘handmaiden’ to over-arching Quest for Potential; it is a sub-dynamic maneuvering for ever-increased complexity/sophistication/variety/wondrousness (see glossary1000.com). Like amendments to the U.S. Constitution, new sub-laws were organically layered-on by Complexification to govern new forms of matter and energy as they became more complex.
In defense of this concept, Davies (2006) notes the “impossible luck” of laws coming into existence that just happen to be perfect to create and govern what was necessary when new forms of matter coalesced. Birnbaum had already answered this riddle (1988, 2005) by the driven nature of Potential itself (see TheoryCore.com). As Potential marches-on inward in its infinite cosmic quest, it is natural and unavoidable that the increased complexity would be governed by law-permutations that allow further future Complexification.
Most interestingly though, Davies holds-to-task both purely religious cosmology and purely 20thcentury scientific cosmology with equal measure – for not providing fuller structure to their constructs. What was at the very ‘beginning? What is the core drive?
Davies contends that such scientific theories as multiversing to explain the perfect nature of our universe are no less intellectually ‘soft’ than other constructs – academic or supernatural. The multiverse proposition merely subtly shifts the fundamental cosmological/metaphysical questions from our one discern-able universe, to a package of myriad universes.
Of course, Birnbaum’s very key point is that, indeed, a metaphysics/cosmology cannot have any key gaps. The parallel would be to a tablecloth. The ‘tablecloth of metaphysics’ must cover all four corners of the metaphysics table, including the corner of ‘eternal origins’. Covering, say, 3 of the 4 corners would simply not be enough.
But, what ignited that which you posit as eternal?
The Superlaw of Physics
Potentialism proposes that the governing force of the Cosmic Order is inherent in the universe itself – a universe superlaw at the core of the cosmic order: Quest for Potential < > Extraordinariation. Infinite Quest for Potential infinitely seeks-out its maximal potential , ultimately Extraordinariation (shorthand notation: E+). In turn, E+ draws-forth Quest for Potential to fulfill its eternal yearning. . Potential permeates everything in the cosmos and, as such, is an intrinsic force of the universe.
Any why does the cosmos drive-forward so perfectly, navigating past pitfalls that would make the universe unlivable, in effect guiding it along Davies’ (2006) Goldilocks path? Because, per Birnbaum (1988, 2005) that path would be the most direct route towards the ultimate realization of Potential of the cosmic order – the optimal path towards Birnbaum’s hypothesized cosmic horizon of Extraordinariation.
As Davies puts it rather poetically, “the laws explain the universe even as the universe explains the laws.” As Birnbaum encapsulates the issue rather directly, “Potential is both the cause and effect of the universe.”
Context: Two 21st Century Iconoclasts
DAVID BIRNBAUM (see David1000.com) elucidates his theory via his iconic 3-part treatise Summa Metaphysica: Volume I: Religious Man (Ktav, 1988), Volume II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Volume III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014). See also NewParadigmMatrix.com.
Over a dozen institutions of higher learning – from UCLA on the West Coast, to Brandeis on the East Coast, thru Hebrew University (Jerusalem) – have assigned the landmark work as a Course Text (see SummaCourseText). Over 33 feature articles in over two dozen journals globally have focused on Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica and its Theory of Potential in the 2013-2014 period alone (see SummaCoverage.com). PAUL DAVIES is the recipient of numerous awards and prizes, including the Templeton Prize (1995) and the Farady Prize (2002) . With an academic base at Arizona State University, in 2005 Davies took up the directorship of the SETI Institute [SETI is the formidable multi-organizational and inter-university (national) search/scan for (particularly) sentient life beyond our planet.]
Birnbaum & Davies: Two men, two theories – but fundamentally aligned with one another to explain the mysteries of the cosmos. The cosmos indeed has both an ‘unseen hand’ and an explain-able ‘direction’.
Attempting to invalidate this quite-formidable twin core theme – as 20th century Randomness/Atheism vainly, egregiously and unsuccessfully attempted – was simply to deny what is now incontrovertible. As per Aristotle’s general proposition c. 375 BCE, there is indeed a teleology – purpose – to the universe. It is up to us to prove the same (see Davies 2006) and discern the same (see Birnbaum 1988, 2005, 2014) Both formidable revolutionary 21st century thought leaders, Birnbaum and Davies, are intellectual heirs – and indeed, modern-day torch-bearers- of this ancient general tradition of cosmic purpose.
Indeed, like a phoenix, twenty-three centuries after Aristotle, teleology (the proposition of cosmic design) has arisen with a vengeance in the 21st century; this time, finally, it has been quite concretely laid-out and elucidated (by Birnbaum) – and empirically demonstrated (by Davies et al.).
DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY / METAPHYSICS
Cosmology, Metaphysics & Philosophy: See sample testimonial on Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum's philosophy treatise:
“All who read this book will find much instruction, insight, and material for reflection…I find the overall thesis of the book touching and inspiring…”
- Rabbi Irving Greenberg, President, The National Jewish Center for Learning and Scholarship (CLAL), New York, NY