Lloyd v. Birnbaum

Is Seth Lloyd’s universal cosmic computer the same as David Birnbaum’s Cosmic Womb?

In 2006, Lloyd, Professor of Quantum Mechanics at MIT, released his groundbreaking work, Programming the Universe. In his seminal book, Lloyd posits that the universe is one giant quantum computer. He states that, “the ordinary laws of physics tell us nothing about why the universe is so complex.” Lloyd believes that physicists are missing the bigger picture of the universe. Per Lloyd’s daring hypothesis, the universe itself is a sublime cosmic quantum computer, which self-iterates infinitely as it increases ‘the complexity’ of the universe.

In parallel – but eighteen years prior – David Birnbaum of Manhattan – private scholar and metaphysicist, unleashed his Summa Metaphysica I (launching what would be a 3-part treatise), in 1988 (see SummaMetaphysica.com). In Summa, Birnbaum presents his original and powerful cosmic theory of Potentialism. In Summa Metaphysica’s Potentialism Theory, the universe itself is inherently driven towards ever-increasing ‘Complexification’ – ever-greater complexity/sophistication/richness/variety/wondrousness – seeking after its own Potential.

Note that Lloyd’s 2006 ‘complexity’ is included in Birnbaum’s wider-spectrum 1988 ‘Complexification’. But note that per Birnbaum the overarching drive is towards infinite Potential, with Complexification being but a subordinate mechanism towards that goal; per Lloyd the goal and the mechanism are the same – ‘plain vanilla’ complexity.

According to Summa Metaphysica’s Potentialism Theory, Infinite Potential will unerringly drive the cosmos forward towards an ultimate end-goal Birnbaum calls Extraordinariation – a utopian state of super-Complexification in a wide-spectrum deployment. To Birnbaum this utopian state of perfect Potentialism is a horizon/goal to be approached – but never quite realized (see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation/).

Per Summa Metaphysica’s Potentialism Theory, this great journey of Complexification occurs within what Birnbaum calls the (metaphysical) Cosmic Womb of Potential. In perhaps over-simplified terms, the Cosmic Womb can be thought of as somewhat synonymous with the universe. But, whereas people usually speak of the physical universe when they talk about it – the Cosmic Womb is a closer representation of the entirety of the universe – from the physical thru the metaphysical thru the abstract – where ideas, ideals and concepts – and possibilities – all reside as well.

On the surface, Lloyd and Birnbaum seem to agree on a lot, and they do. Both play with complexity; both have an infinitely iterating universe; both have a fully integrated holistic universe; both have a self-contained-self-actualizing universe. The Birnbaum universe may be richer, more textured, and more multi-dimensional, but the two theorists have radically more in common than in which they differ.

Birnbaum and Lloyd conceptually part ways on two particular points: (a) the intentionality of the birth of the universe and (b) the role of the metaphysical/abstract, conceptual universe – that part of the Cosmic Womb which Lloyd fails to address. However, there is nothing in either metaphysics which so-to-speak contradicts the other.

Universal intentionality

Regarding intentionality, Lloyd thinks the current drive of the universe is real and with intention, but its beginnings were accidental. Lloyd believes at some point the universe, through its endless sharing of bits of information as expressed by particles and energy, eventually and accidentally gave rise to a cosmic program, which is guiding the universe.

Birnbaum himself would certainly be the first to articulate that the universe acts very much with intention. But where Lloyd believes the universe ‘accidentally stumbled’ into creation, Potentialism hypothesizes that the universe always had purpose – infinite Quest for Potential – and that has guided it from eternal origins’ (see www.Sequence1000.com).

Chicken & Egg paradox

Fundamentally, it is the chicken and egg paradox of what came first. Lloyd believes the universe came first, then intention (complexity); Birnbaum states that both are simultaneous; the universe (Quest for Potential in its myriad manifestations) and the intention (Quest for Potential) – are one-and-the-same and inextricably linked.

Cosmic iteration: How prescient?

Birnbaum (1988) is indeed in-sync with Lloyd’s later assertion (2006) that the universe can be seen as an iterative computational enterprise; but, per Birnbaum, the iterations are for wider-spectrum Complexification, not just for ‘plain vanilla’ complexity; furthermore, per Birnbaum, all Complexification (Evolution included) factors-in ultimate Extraordinariation; the Lloyd schema does not give the entire process much prescience. The Lloyd schema is operating (exclusively) in the present, and not integrating into the process a future-goal of Extraordinariation, as per Birnbaum.

Master v. Slave

Conceptually, to Lloyd the universal computer is the ‘master; whereas, to Birnbaum Lloyd’s universal computer, to the extent which it exists, is the ‘slave’ to the true master – Quest for Potential∞. Birnbaum (who, by the way, has a BSc. in Computer Science) will yield extraordinary discretion to infinite divine potential; not to a computer of any sort.

Teleology

Teleology is the classic physical/metaphysical question of whether the universe has an overarching goal. Aristotle had proposed back c. 350 BCE that the universe had a teleology – but he simply could not discern its parameters. To the pinnacle players in 20th century academe – typically associated with Randomness/Atheism – the universe has no teleology – no purpose, no direction, no design, no ‘arrow.’ Rather, it is aimless and ever decaying.

Potentialists (21st century) are rather horrified by Randomness/Atheists (20th century) – and vice versa. The two groups are sort of like intellectual oil & water, with differing modalities of consciousness thrown into-the-mix.

Both Birnbaum and Lloyd stand together on opposite sides of the divide from the (British) Randomness/Atheists; the two Americans have related teleologies, both including ‘complexity’ as a key factor in-the-mix.

Birnbaum ‘wraps-around’ Lloyd

Both Birnbaum and Lloyd deploy ‘drive to more complexity’ in their teleologies. To Lloyd, ‘drive to more complexity’ is the basic teleology. To Birnbaum, the ‘drive to complexity’ is a component of Complexification, which in turn is subordinate to Infinite Quest for Potential’s march towards Extraordinariation. Thus, the Birnbaum teleology is de facto wrapping-around the Lloyd teleology, just as the Birnbaum conceptual structure (Cosmic Womb of Potential) wraps-around Lloyd’s universal computer (see ParadigmChallenge).

Conceptualization as a universal phenomena

And that brings us to the second issue Birnbaum parts ways with Lloyd on. Lloyd’s cosmological model is essentially mechanistic.

Indeed, Lloyd describes himself as a Quantum Mechanic. Birnbaum describes himself as a Conceptual Theorist. So, their basic self-definitions set-the-stage for the divergence in their cosmologies: Lloyd’s is radically more mechanistic; Birnbaum’s is radically more conceptual.

Lloyd only describes the physical universe. But the physical is not the total sum of the universe’s parts. As mentioned in defining the Cosmic Womb, the universe must include every aspect of reality. Excluding, as Lloyd does, conceptualization, morality, emotion, beauty…. this is artificially viewing the universe that exists – as a world far less complex than it really is. It’s also defining a cosmology based on incomplete information, which is readily and undeniably at hand.

To be clear, Lloyd’s insights into the mechanistic part of the universe are insightful and key – and revolutionary. His theory speaks to his talent as a cutting-edge quantum mechanical engineer and his theory is a daring exposition. But viewing the universe in purely mechanical terms, instead of through the perspective of the Cosmic Womb is somewhat akin to touring a country by viewing black & white photographs; a degree of ‘texture’ is lost.

An overarching metaphysics

That is where Birnbaum’s metaphysical approach and the use of the Cosmic Womb come into play. It allows one to view the texture and panoply of the universe from not only the quantitative, analytical, mechanistic perspective, but also from the qualitative.

In short, the Cosmic Womb is not so much different from Lloyd’s mechanistic interpretation as it is an overarching organic metaphysical edifice within which Lloyd’s quantum mechanical enterprise operates. Lloyd provides perhaps a key piece of the great cosmic puzzle. Lloyd’s construct is key to understanding a key level of the mechanics of the universal workings; however, without the metaphysical big picture understanding – we would fall short of a full understanding of what is truly at work. Potentialism, by contrast, allows for a stepping back and viewing of the Cosmic Womb itself, allowing one to see the grand mosaic that the component puzzle pieces are filling-in.

Birnbaum’s “take” on Lloyd

Birnbaum himself embraces Lloyd; to Birnbaum, Lloyd provides a hard sciences mechanism to effectuate the goals of Birnbaum’s metaphysical Cosmic Womb; per Birnbaum, one might conceptualize the Cosmic Womb as a metaphysical “glove” fitting over Lloyd’s quantum computer “hand”. The two become as one in advancing cosmic goals and driving the universe forward (see SummaCoverage.com).

Logical Science

Q4P^∞: What is it? Why do we care?
Potentialism Theory challenges

Posted by Admin On December 18th, 2013 09:27 PM | Philosophy

Q4P is a shorthand notation for Quest for Potential. Potential is the centerpiece of an audacious contemporary theory in philosophy causing a stir around the globe. It was conceptualized by David Birnbaum at age 32 in 1982.

In 1988 Ktav Publishing House (NJ) published the first of three volumes of a cutting-edge philosophy work. The ultimate name of the 3-volume series was Summa Metaphysica – which modestly translates into ‘the sum of all metaphysics’.

Metaphyics is a corner of philosophy which deals in the bedrock currents of the cosmic order. It is the turf of Aristotle, Maimonides, Aquinas and Spinoza. Few writers dare to tread here. Historically, the field ‘takes no prisoners.’ Many thousands of metaphysics schemas have been proposed over the past five thousand years; not one has truly withstood the ‘test of time’, including those by the aforementioned philosophical giants.

The second volume of Summa Metaphysica was issued in 2005, seventeen years after the first volume. At that point its author was 55 years-old.

In 2012, seven years after the issuance of Summa Metaphysica II, Bard College, Upstate, NY hosted a 3 ½ day international academic conference on Science & Religion focused on the work and its apparent unification of science, religion, philosophy and spirituality. Neither at the conference, nor over the past twenty-five years has any flaw been discerned in Summa. Key conference panelists proposed that Summa achieved ‘aesthetic elegance’, the sine qua non for a great metaphysics. The panelists could not come up with the name of any seriously competing paradigm to Summa ( see Bard: Summa Metaphysica ). The groundbreaking Bard conference closed on a fine and harmonious note, and all the illustrious conference panelists embarked back home to their respective institutions around the globe.

Eleven months after the close of the conference, this past May 2013, as if by ‘spontaneous combustion’, the academic world erupted in intense global battle over the core proposition of the treatise, the author’s signature theme of Q4P (Quest for Potential).

The author of Summa Metaphysica, David Birnbaum, is a Manhattan-based yeshiva-educated and Harvard-educated private scholar. Birnbaum divides his time between what he calls his ’day job’ as an international rare gem dealer, and his so to speak ‘night job’ wherein he has pursued his academic interests since he exited Cambridge, Mass. for Manhattan in 1974.

Birnbaum’s publishing platform, New Paradigm Matrix, which now has over 180 global thought leaders under its aegis, has placed him at the crossroads of discussion. Birnbaum’s academic ‘night job’ has not only gained him a global intellectual platform, but has landed him in the vortex of an international storm over his proposed Theory of Potential, of which Q4P is the centerpiece.

Academic ‘outsider’ Birnbaum’s cutting-edge Theory of Potential challenges the currently entrenched Theory of Randomness of the Establishment. Although Birnbaum’s philosophy works have been used as course texts at well-over a dozen institutions of higher learning globally the concept of an ‘outsider’ frontally challenging the vey core Establishment wisdom has outraged many ‘insiders’. The fact that he might actually be right, has apparently only further incensed matters.

Since 1988 Birnbaum has garnered quite significant support from inside the academic/scientific; however this is cavalierly brushed aside by the on the warpath Establishment group. To the zealots protecting ‘randomness’, Birnbaum is ‘the horseman of doom’ frontally galloping towards them.

Birnbaum is a ‘universalist’, not hostage to either ‘religious fundamentalism’ or ‘secularist atheism’. His suis generis concept of Quest for Potential (Q4P) straddles the divide between religious and secular. His core Potentialism Theory concept is transcendent; it so-to-speak overarches the cosmic order.

The ‘insider’’ Establishment theory of randomness, however, championed heavily by the hard-line atheistic academic community, is not only anti-religion, but rejects any transcending dynamic whatsoever, in any shape, manner or form. Therein lies the seeds of the conflict – and the threat to the ‘entrenched orthodoxy’.

Let us step back a moment at look at the metaphysics chessboard. Roughly a dozen inter-related classic metaphysics questions have been at the fore of discussion from time immemorial. All the iconic figures noted above grappled with these issues in their respective writings, and respectively none of their schemas is accepted by the academic community today

Let us look at a selection of core metaphysics questions and see how Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory – and then the entrenched establishment’s Theory of Randomness – come down on each of these issues.

1) Is there an eternal dynamic ?
Birnbaum: Yes, Quest for Potential (Q4P)
Establishment: No, none

2) What ignited the Big Bang?
Birnbaum: Q4P
Establishment: Random accident
playing-out across infinite universes

3) What drives the cosmic order?
Birnbaum: Q4P
Establishment: Random chance

4) If there is a God what is the essence of God?
Birnbaum: Potential
Establishment: No God or any transcendent force

5) What was the catalyst for life?
Birnbaum: Quest for Potential (Q4P)
Establishment: Random accident

6)What sustains life?
Birnbaum: Q4P
Establishment: no answer

7) What drives Evolution?
Birnbaum: Q4P ( which includes genetic survival)
Establishment: genetic survival alone and random chance

8) What was the catalyst for consciousness?
Birnbaum: Q4P
Establishment: Random chance

9) Does Man have a purpose?
Birnbaum: To quest for his/her optimal potential
Establishment: No / none

10) Does Mankind have a purpose?
Birnbaum: To quest for its optimal potential
Establishment: No / none

11) Is there a purpose to the universe?
Birnbaum: The universe seeks its fullest possible potential
Establishment: no purpose

Thus, the battle lines are clear-cut. Birnbaum layers one single elegant concept across the entire spectrum of issues – and across the timeless cosmic continuum. Aside from the one issue of Evolution, the Establishment does not even purport to provide one single answer.

The Establishment cannot attack Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory as it has attacked the ‘intelligent design’ proponents as being a ‘stalking horse’ for Creationism, as he clearly is not.
Birnbaum methodically and clearly addresses all key issues. The Establishment does not. Birnbaum clearly lays-out his Potentialism Theory proposition in a 20+ panel presentation. The Establishment offers no such blueprint.

Birnbaum’s Q4P construct is a ‘lean and mean’ pure intellectual play. It is so to speak ‘fat free’. It is, as well, unburdened by any ‘baggage’ from any dogma.

Essentially, Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory is proposing a new ‘framing concept’ – Q4P – as the underlying bedrock dynamic of the cosmic order. If Summa is essentially on-the- mark, the consequence would, indeed be, a grand unification at a minimum of spirituality, science and philosophy. Many or most fields of study would be impacted to a greater or lesser extent.

As a consequence of Birnbaum’s offering-up the his cosmic centerpiece ‘Infinite Potential’ in 1988 and steadfastly advancing the theory both via Summa Metaphysica II and via other modalities, many notables view Birnbaum as the progenitor/originator/founder of a new field, Potentialism. The author is clear to point out, however, that he views his role as a ‘supporting’ one, and not as a stand-alone field or belief system. See PotentialismTheory.com.

MACRO > MICRO

Potentialism’s Universal Dynamic: from Macro to Micro levels

However, let us focus more specifically on the Q4P part of the Potentialism equation. According to Potentialism, everything in the universe strives towards greater Complexification.

By TheSouthAfrican.com on August 26, 2014

In 1988, metaphysicist David Birnbaum released the ground-breaking cosmological work Summa Metaphysica (see www.philosophy1000.com). In it, Birnbaum would scientifically lay out the cosmological theory of Potentialism.

Potentialism’s core principle revolves around the infinite Quest for infinite Potential (often called Q4P). Q4P describes a universal mechanism in which the universe naturally strives towards higher and higher levels of potential; this process is, in turn, labeled Complexification (complexity/sophistication/variety/wondrousness). This drive towards Complexification (often called C+) strives infinitely forward to a state Birnbaum describes as Extraordinariation (or E+). E+, by definition is hard to define, because it is an idealized state/goal/horizon of hyper-Complexity not yet realized in the physical universe; however Extraordinariation would sort-of be an idealized state of complexification, reality, beauty, morality, intellectuality and consciousness.

It may seem odd to describe a mechanism with an end goal that is not truly expressible. Think of it in these terms. Say you were alive, somehow, in the very early ages of the universe – where the most complex structure in the universe was the atom. You might articulate a coming era of Complexity, but it would hardly be within your power to predict the molecule….or multi-cellular life. Such is the issue when trying to describe Extraordinariation – Until you’re there, it is very hard to predict what it will be.

However, let us focus more specifically on the Q4P part of the Potentialism equation. According to Potentialism, everything in the universe strives towards greater Complexification. It is an overarching, pervasive mechanism that should be found in all parts-of and on all scales-of the natural and metaphysical world. So, let us analyze the universe on drastically different scales and see if Q4P is indeed uniformly omnipresent (see Sequence1000.com).

The Macro-level

On a macro-level, one can readily see the hand of Potentialism at work. To understand the growing Complexification on a macro-scale, it helps to look back through the eons to the birth of the universe. The epochs themselves are heralds of the effect of Potential and Complexifcation. At one time the universe was nothing but an impossibly hot, plasma mass. As it cooled, it gave rise to the atom – a clear increase in Complexification over what existed before. Moreover though, these are the more dramatic displays of macro-scale Complexification. Solar fusion is a good example, as the most basic of elements, hydrogen, is fused into the more dense helium. Likewise, the age of the molecule swept away the seemingly insurmountable Complexification of the atom.

A short recap of macro Complexification: 13.7 billion years-ago, the Big Bang; 13.2 billion years-ago gravity exerts its pull; 12.95 billion years-ago supernovas; 12.7 billion years-ago, galaxies; 4.6 billion years-ago, the sun; 4.5 billion years-ago, our solar system; <does the paragraph end like this with semi-colon?>

In due course, life, love, consciousness, the emotional gamut, art, music and poetry will make-an-appearance….

4 billion years-ago, life; 3.9 billion years-ago, photosynthesis; 3.5 billion years-ago, DNA; 2 billion years-ago, ‘snowball theory’ ice age; 1.5 billion years-ago, organisms; 1.2 billion years-ago, sexual reproduction; 1 billion years-ago, multi-cellular life appears; 540 million years-ago, Cambrian explosion; 460 million years-ago, life moves ashore; 390 million years-ago, amphibians; 335 million years-ago, the first forests; 300 million years-ago, reptiles; 275 million years-ago, the Permian Extinction; 200 million years-ago, dinosaurs; 150 million years-ago, birds; 14 million years-ago, flowers; 65 million years-ago, dinosaur extinction; <same here, does the paragraph end like this with semi-colon?>

The Human-level

1.8 million years-ago, Homo Erectus emerges; 780,000-400,000 years-ago Peking Man; 130,000 years-ago, Neanderthal Man; 120,000 years-ago, Homo Sapiens; 15,000 years-ago, agriculture; 11,500 years-ago, granaries employed in the Jordan Valley; 10,700 years-ago, metallurgy carried out in Mesopotamia; 9,600 years-ago, domestication of animals in Zhenpiyan, China; 9500 years-ago, domestication of rice; 7500 years-ago, fabric woven in Egypt; 6,000 years-ago, irrigation canals in Mesopotamia; 4200 years-ago, water clocks in China, 5,630 years-ago, silk production in Henan Province, China.

On the “mid-level”, the best example of Potentialism is humanity itself. Certainly, one can point to terrestrial life in general. The mechanics of Evolution naturally give rise to ever more specialized and Complexified organisms.

But of course, the crowning achievement for this planet to-date is humankind. In humanity, Potentialism took a more dramatic turn – no claws, wings, strong jaws for this creature. Via Complexification-driven evolution, Potentialism gave this unique creature advanced ‘reason’. At once apex predator and highest life form, humanity represents a new order of magnitude of Complexification. The first creature to be able to shape and redefine its environment, humanity represents what Potentialism calls a Quantum Jump in Complexity. Much as atoms could only grow so diverse and complex before it was necessary for the molecule, humanity represents the next order of Complexification which rises above the level of animals (see www.PotentialismTheory.com/ParadigmChallenge/).

The Micro-level

On a micro level, Potentialism shines perhaps most clearly. Travel down far enough in the microscopic world and you enter the world of quantum physics – the clearest example of Potentialism. Unlike the analog day to day business of the larger universe, on the quantum scale Potential is the clear, undisputed ruler of reality. A quantum, at its most fundamental is an expression of a given amount of energy. There is no halfway in quantum reality. Something is or it isn’t. Like the orbit of a valence electron around an atom – you add energy (potential) and will see no results until there is a fundamental change – it is binary, all or nothing. Pour in energy and an electron sits, building its Potential, until it reaches critical mass; then, all at once, it redefines its orbit. Such is the state of Potential at its most basic. The electron will strive for a higher order of energy until it is finally realized.

Likewise, quantum physics is a showcase for another concept of Potentialism. To a Potentialist, everything contains not only the energy of what it is, but what it can be. While this might sound outlandish, quantum physics proves this as a physical fact of the universe – in the form of superposition. Superposition holds that a particle exists in all its possible places in a quantum physical position at the same time. Think of that valence electron again. It could be to the left or right of a nucleus at any given time. According to superposition, it is in both places. Sounds like science fiction? It’s not. It’s provable. However, the act of observing the electron will force it to decide where it is at any given time? Observation is a key factor in determining its location. During this act, the electron trades its Potential for Complexity, going from potentially anywhere to a more complex object by weight of its specificity.

Context

The Summa series was released as-follows: Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man (Ktav, 1988); Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014). The series has been the subject of a major international academic conference as well as quite significant media coverage (see www.SummaCoverage.com).

Matrix Club

www.MatrixClub1000.com

January 7, 2014

Matrix Club

In turn, David Birnbaum's delineated teleology of a Potential-driven directional universe validates Aristotle's more general proposition of 2500 years ago.

www.summametaphysica.com/matrix-club/

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY / METAPHYSICS

21st Century Philosophy: Does iconoclast David Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica – a fully integrated philosophy, cosmology, metaphysics – crack the cosmic code? See also CodeBreaker1000 and www.Augustine1000.com.

Mechanics of Potentialism

The Pillars of David Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica:

Q4P and E+

By Mark Davis

Potentialism is a highly-sophisticated overarching metaphysics/cosmology designed by independent scholar David Birnbaum in his ground breaking, three-part Summa Metaphysica treatise (1988, 2005, 2014). The metaphysics endeavors to incorporate all known scientific data into an elegant and seamless thesis. No flaw has been discerned in the theory which was the subject of a focused 4-day international academic conference at Bard College.

Birnbaum is compelled to develop a new lexicon and new ‘tool kit’ to explicate his elegant and dramatically original theory. Potentialism Theory has been featured in over 30 articles in sundry journals in the 2013-2014 period alone to-date.. Over a dozen institutions of higher learning have assigned Summa Metaphysica as a Course Text.

Per Birnbaum, one dynamic is the ‘platform’ for the entire cosmic order – and that dynamic is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional Potential. To say that the dynamic is suis generis is, of course, an understatement.

In Birnbaum’s schema, two mirror-dynamics of Potential (Q4P and E+) resonate against each other. As well, the two dynamics possibly loop around each other in a closed loop. Note that a closed loop cosmology is, according to cosmologist Paul Davies, for one, the holy grail of cosmology.

The first dynamic is Q4P, which is shorthand notation for – Quest for Potential infinitely iterated ( see www.TheoryCore.com, www.Sequence1000.com). The obverse side of the coin is E+, which is shorthand notation for Extraordinariation ( see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation/ ), the cosmic ‘end goal’ of maximum quest for Potential.

Note that along-the-way, as Q4P advances the cosmic order towards E+, there are periodic QJ (Quantum Jump) events, e.g. the Big Bang. A QJ is a mini-Extraordinariation event. Note that QJ events do not unfold in a single linear track, but radiate outwards into multiple QJ events.

The intermediate stages between QJ events are called PA (Potential Array) states, as the panoply of Potential as a consequence of each QJ begin to be played-out. Thus, simplified radically, one single Potential track would show a sequence Q4P > multiple PA > multiple QJ > E+.

Thus our cosmos is a panoply of QJs radiating outwards, each in-turn with its own penumbra of PAs

( Potential Arrays), with the sum-total, work-in-progress penumbra defining the cosmic track towards E+. [On some level it replicates a multi-generational family radiating-outwards from the original ‘family founder’ couple. Each descendant-couple represents a QJ event, and each is surrounded by its own PA (Potential Array) of children, their emotions, their achievements, their relationships and on-and-on.]

In turn, all these dynamics – Q4P, PA, QJ and E+ – operate within CWP which is shorthand notation for Birnbaum’s hypothesized quantum Cosmic Womb of Potential. See also MIT’s Seth Lloyd: www.XquantumUniverse.com.

Summa Metaphysica’s three volumes are subtitled respectively Religious Man; Spiritual Man; and Secular Man. The author looks at the same dynamic through three different lenses, and is fine with each of them. This piece will focus on the secular lens.

Operating within the Cosmic Womb of Potential, Quest for Potential (Q4P) seeks-after (quests-after) Extraordinariation. Symbolically, CWP [ Q4P∞→E+]: Potentialism rests squarely on this proposed metaphysical theorem. In this paper, we will explore the interrelationship of Q4P and E+ more fully.

Q4P∞→E+ is clearly a causal relationship.

The universe realizes moments of QJ (Quantum Jumps) – watershed, critical-mass moments where its complexity/sophistication increases not on incremental level, but rather, on a quantum level.

While simplified, this is a bird’s eye view of Potentialism from a philosophical perspective. As the universe strives towards a more complex state of Potential, we witness, episodically, moments of QJ – or fundamental moments where the complexity/sophistication of the universe increases by a quantum level.

But, like most comprehensive cosmological theories, there are multiple lenses through which it can be viewed. One overarching principle in Potentialism is duality. This is hardly a new concept. It has been expressed in many philosophies, sciences and religions: energy vs. matter, yin vs. yang, positive vs. negative. So, we’ll examine Potentialism though different filters to gain a better understanding of this cosmological opus.

Analog versus Digital

A common question to those new to Potentialism revolves around QJ events. QJ events are of course mini-E+ events (or mini-Extraordinariation events). Of course these ( for example the Big Bang) are objectively not so “mini”.

These episodic ‘events’ tend to be dramatic in scope. An example would be when the universe transitioned between atomic complexity and molecular completely – a moment when the entire physiology of the universe underwent a fundamental change in complexity. However, Q4P is expressed as an omnipresent force of change. So, the question would be what is the relationship between Q4P and E+.

To understand this, one must look at Q4P as analogous to an analog force. By contrast, Extraordinariation is a digital force. By that, we mean Extraordinariation (whether so to speak “mini” like QJ events or max, like E+ ) is governed by quantum principles. There is no half-way point of an Extraordinariation event. It has either happened or it has not happened. By contrast, Q4P is most commonly viewed as an analog force. Q4P is a gradual build-up of the universe’s need for self-expressed complexity.

An easy way to understand this interplay between Q4P and QJ/ E+ is by analogy. Think of complexity as a car. Q4P is the acceleration of the vehicle. If the car accelerates to, let us say, 60 MPH, the car will experience every speed in-between 0 and 60. QJ events represent milestones along the way which can occur at particular minimum speeds. In our analogy, we would say atomic structure formation occurs at 20 MPH, while molecular formation occurs at 40 MPH. If our car is going 19 MPH, nothing will happen. We are building up “potential” towards our 20 MPH milestone, but until we reach it, the effects will not be visible.

This analog-to-digital analogy may seem far fetched, but it is objectively proven as a norm in the real scientific world. This is not conjecture, it is fact. Take atomic structure, for instance. Specifically, electron orbitals. It is fact that when we apply energy to an atom, in an analog fashion, electron orbits do not respond in an analog fashion. Instead, electrons treat the addition of energy in a quantum fashion. Energy builds up the potential of an electron until a threshold is met; then abruptly, with no in-between phases, an electron moves from a tighter orbit to a wider orbit. This happens all at once. There are no in-between phases and the electron does not gradually move out to another orbit. It merely caches its potential until it is time to realize itself at a different state of energy.

Alternately, this interplay between analog Q4P and quantum QJ can be expressed as a series by:

Δ(Q4P)x, Δ(Q4P)y,… Δ(Q4P)z = QJ+_x, QJ+_y,… QJ_z

Where Δ(Q4P)x = x₂– x₁ ;

and x₂ = threshold of QJ_xand x₂ being threshold of QJ_x-1 , or the previous level of Q-J

and x₂ = threshold of QJ_xand x₁ being threshold of QJ_x-1 , or the previous level of Q-J

and QJ_x represents x level of Extraordinariation.

The series logically follows to:

Δ(Q4P)z = QJ_z

Where QJ_z = QJ_∞

Note: QJ_∞ equals a hypothetical state called E+ (or Extraordinariation). This state is predicted by Potentialism, though its exact nature is, by necessity and definition, unknown and unknowable – and by Birnbaum’s theory not quite attainable. While this can seem counter-intuitive, it is a predictive value common in formal calculus where equations infinitely approach an infinite value.

This is the foundation of the QJ march towards Extraordinariation. Q4P builds Potential until it reaches a critical number and is expressed via QJ enroute towards elusive Extraordinariation.

When looking at scales of the universe, we see this pattern naturally occurs on the micro and macro scales as well. One need look no further than the interplay of Newtonian and quantum physics. Quantum physics is ruled by digital mathematics, on/off, a binary model. By comparison, Newtonian physics is ruled by a geometry dominated by waves, curves and analog mathematics.

A Balanced Equation

Potentialism can also be described in purely mathematical terms. We’ve described Potentialism in philosophical and physics terms. Now let’s look at it from a purely mathematical perspective. In its most basic form, we have:

Q∞(4P)∞ > E+

Q∞(4P)∞ = the Infinite Quest for Infinite Potential. If this seems redundant, it is not. This nested infinite drive is crucial to Potentialism.

As illustration, let us look at an individual. A person has infinite decisions they might make. These decisions are represented by the person’s Potential. Yet, that person, can themselves, create life. That life has its own decision points – and the infinite Potentials which might radiate from those decision points. Hence, the individual’s infinite potential is nested within their parents’ infinite potential. This clearly can be followed out ad infinitum.

E+ = Extraordinariation. On the other end of the equation, we have Extraordinariation. Extraordinariation is an infinitely realized state of cumulative QJs ( Quantum Jumps). What that state actually looks like, Potentialism cannot answer.

Extraordinariation lives just over the outer bounds of the future of the cosmos. We can only imperfectly describe this state in words. However, it is expressible mathematically. As Extraordinariation is an infinite expression of QJ, themselves a product of Q4P, by means of substitution, we can say:

Q∞(4P)∞ > QJ** > E+

Likewise, we can see it in word format

The Infinite Quest for Infinite Potential > leads to infinite Quantum Jumps > radiating-outwards > Infinite Extraordinariation.

Extraordinariation Results: Balancing an Equation 3 Ways?

On one level, Extraordinariation and Q4P can be seen as mirror images of one another. While necessarily expressed in analog and quantum formats, Q4P and E+ meet in a tangible and physical expression, at each level of Quantum Jump events. We must remember though, that when E+ takes a quantum step up to balance against increasing Q4P, there is also a resultant product – Complexity/Sophistication.

This would seem antithetical. How can a balanced equation also have a product? The key is the nature of Complexity/Sophistication. Complexity/Sophistication is neither matter nor energy. From a physics perspective, no rules are broken. In fact, from a physics perspective, more rules are created. This is the very nature of Complexity/Sophistication.

Let us take, for example, the formation of molecules – at the very primitive end after the Big Bang would be the simple paired hydrogen molecules occurring during the Dark Ages of our universe’s origin, about 100 million years after the Big Bang. When the Q4P of the universe had built a significant degree of Potential, it achieved a Quantum Jump state, like the coming together of the male and female, Q4P and E+ met at a mini-Extraordinariation Event to give birth to a new level Complexity/Sophistication.

This Complexity/Sophistication certainly had a physical effect on the universe. But the Complexity/Sophistication itself was not a thing or a force, it was a rule for how atoms could come together to create more and more complex forms.

So we can see that when enough Potential has accumulated (Q4P) to reach a Quantum Jump, a particular intermediate level of Extraordinariation (E+), there is a concurrent Complexity/Sophistication event. While not a physical sum itself, a Complexity/Sophistication event provides new, more complex rules under which the universe operates.

A Growing Universe of Infinite Complexity/Sophistication

We can already see how the interrelationship between Q4P and E+ can be expressed in different ways mathematically and as a universal phenomena. To most cosmologists, this would be a cause for concern. But we see even this concept is grounded in the complexity of our perceptible universe. One need look no further than the interplay of Newtonian and Quantum physics. Before addressing how something behaves, we must ask what scale we’re viewing it on. Likewise, when speaking of a photon, is it a wave or a particle? Again, we find that it depends on what manner we are speaking of it in.

What is important to the Potentialist is that this universal theory (of Potential) can be applied in different ways to view a universe which is growing towards an infinite complexity/sophistication, to some perhaps not even fathomable ending where the universe grasps for its ultimate Extraordinariation.

Missing Piece

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z55:

1999: Cosmologist Martin Rees

Noted astrophysicist and cosmologist Martin Rees (b. 1942, England, and President of the Royal Society 2005-2010) noted the following in the finale of his 1999 work “Just Six Numbers”:***

“But it remains a fundamental challenge to understand the very beginning – this must await a ‘final’ theory…. Such a theory would signal the end of an intellectual quest that started with Newton, and continued through Maxwell, Einstein and their successors. It would deepen our understanding of space, time, and the basic forces….

This goal may be unattainable. There could be no ‘final’ theory; or, if there is, it could be beyond our mental powers to grasp it. But even if this goal is reached, that would not be the end of challenging science. As well as being a ‘fundamental’ science, cosmology is also the grandest of the environmental sciences. It aims to understand

how a simple ‘fireball’ evolved into the complex cosmic habitat we find around us – how, here on Earth, and perhaps in many biospheres elsewhere, creatures evolved that are able to reflect on how they emerged.”*

from the author –

Every once-in-a-while, Sir Martin, a sort-of ‘simple concept’ makes-an-appearance on the world stage – a ‘simple concept’ which simultaneously apparently ‘solves’ an array of formidable, inter-related, and hitherto seemingly intractable issues.

*** Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers. Great Britain: Weindenfeld & Nicolson, 1999. pp. 176-177

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z56:

2000: Cosmologist Brian Greene^***

“The search for the fundamental laws of the universe is a distinctly human drama, one that has stretched the mind and enriched the spirit… We are all, each in our own way, seekers of the truth and we each long for an answer to why we are here. As we collectively scale the mountain of explanation, each generation stands firmly on the shoulders of the previous, bravely reaching for the peak. Whether any of our descendants will ever take in the view from the summit and gaze out on the vast and elegant universe with a perspective of infinite clarity, we cannot predict. But as each generation climbs a little higher, we realize Jacob Bronowski’s pronouncement that ‘in every age there is a turning point, a new way of seeing and asserting the coherence of the world [(Jacob Bronowski, The Ascent of Man, p. 20]. And as our generation marvels at our new view of the universe—our new way of asserting the world’s coherence—we are fulfilling our part, contributing our rung to the human ladder reaching for the stars.”

*** Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe. New York: First Vintage Books edition, 2000. p. 387

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z57:

2004: Cosmologists Tyson & Goldsmith^***

“Every once in a while, however, a significantly new take on an important theory emerges…. The greatest moments in scientific history have arisen, and will always arise, when a new explanation, perhaps coupled with new observational results, produces a seismic shift in our conclusions about the workings of nature….

Baruch Spinoza, the philosopher who created the strongest bridge between the natural and supernatural, rejected any distinction between nature and God, insisting instead that the cosmos is simultaneously nature and God… Let us then proceed with our adventurous quest for cosmic origins, acting much like detectives who deduce the facts of the crime from the evidence left behind.”

*** Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Donald Goldsmith. Origins. New York: W. W. Norton & Company,Inc. 2004. pp 19-21

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z58:

2006: Cosmologist Leonard Susskind^***

“For my own tastes, elegance and simplicity can sometimes be found in principles that don’t at all lend themselves to equations. I know of no equations that are more elegant than the two principles that underpin Darwin’s theory: random mutation and competition. This book is about an organizing principle that is also powerful and simple….

And what about the biggest questions of all: who or what made the universe and for what reason? Is there a purpose to it all? I don’t pretend to know the answers…

…The ultimate existential question, ‘Why is there Something rather than Nothing?’ has no more or less of an answer than before anyone had ever heard of String Theory.”…

*** Leonard Susskind, The Cosmic Landscape. New York: Little, Brown and Company. 2006. pp 379-380

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z60:

2008: Cosmologist Paul Davies^***

“…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? Might the fact that the deepest level of reality has connected to a quirky natural phenomenon we call ‘the human mind’ represent nothing but a bizarre and temporary aberration in an absurd and pointless universe? Or is there an even 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)

*** Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma. United Kingdom: Little, First Mariner Books edition. 2008. pp. 5 and 231

from the author –

Paul Davies (b. 1946) is possibly my favorite cosmologist. I have read several of his works since the early 1980s. Australian Davies, currently at the University of Arizona, who has a Templeton Prize under his belt, among other academic trophies, is also a favorite cosmologist of the academic ruling elite in cosmology.

Reading the above quotes, one can sense Davies’s frustration. The holy grail of cosmology – the cosmic common denominator/motivating engine lurks just outside his quite-formidable intellectual grasp. But, as readers of Summa surely grasp, all that Davies needs to do to nail-down ultimate victory after his ~25 books on cosmology and related, is to simply plug-in metaphysical Summa into his sophisticated astrophysicist matrix.

In contemporary times, theologians and physicists both vector towards the Goldilocks Enigma.

To theologians, it is an indicator of a “Guiding Hand”
To physicists, it is a conundrum.

Actually, the Goldilocks Enigma is a key – and almost incontrovertible-support for Q4P^∞. It is Q4P^∞ which so-to-speak “sets the dial” in each case.

And Q4P^∞ of course “sets-the-dial” to optimize potential Extraordinariation – which includes Life.

MIT-Birnbaum v. Cambridge

Cutting-edge science v. Intellectual torpor

The reigning cosmology at the end of the last century was Randomness/Atheism. This construct had been championed by the leading British universities for well over a century.

By Bryce Lowry on 26 August, 2014 3:06 pm

In international university rankings (see online) America’s MIT typically place first, and England’s University of Cambridge (usually just called Cambridge) typically places second. But is this somewhat misleading? Is the gap between MIT and Cambridge really a chasm between a 21^st Century University and a 20^th Century university? A focus on the field of cosmology (the origins of the universe) provides a window into the gaping intellectual chasm – and approach to cutting-edge thinking – between the two institutions.

The reigning cosmology at the end of the last century was Randomness/Atheism. This construct had been championed by the leading British universities for well over a century. Per this construct, the universe has no construct; all is random happenstance; the only common denominator is decay.

A major paradigm challenge to this reigning construct was launched by Harvard graduate and conceptual theorist David Birnbaum of Manhattan in 1988. Via his to-be 3-volume treatise Summa Metaphysica, Birnbaum would endeavor to supplant Randomness/Atheism with his signature Potentialism. Per Birnbaum the universe is a dynamic, integrated and iterating cosmic structure; from eternal origins to this very day – on every level – the universe seeks after its maximum potential.

The 3-volume Summa Metaphysica series by Birnbaum would appear sequentially November 1988, March 2005 and January 2014. The series consists of Summa I: Religious philosophy; Summa II: Spirituality; Summa III: Secular Science; it so to speak covers the bases; Birnbaum would be consistent throughout: Infinite divine potential is eternal; it ignited and drives the cosmic order forward through this very day; the Quest for Potential, in turn, is the cosmic teleology (purpose).

Controlling the major academic journals and well-ensconced in the castles of Academe, the British academic elite at first ignored Birnbaum; but when Bard College (Upstate NY) hosted a 3 1/2 day international academic conference on Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential in April 2012, British academe (in Spring 2013) went into a global rabid attack-frenzy. Birnbaum was attacked quite vitriolically ad hominem, although the Birnbaum theory itself was never challenged – and, indeed, has literally never been challenged – on the merits.)

Who was this interloper Birnbaum? Who was this yeshiva-educated and Harvard-educated independent Conceptual Theorist? How dare Bard College give him a world platform and global exposure? How dare Bard College break ranks with the entrenched establishment and feature a challenging theory? Is not the very possibility of Birnbaum’s purpose-driven dynamic and iterating cosmic structure off the charts? Is not the cosmos an aimless, direction-less, structure-less void?

It turns out that two leading and cutting-edge MIT physicists would follow directly in the path of Birnbaum’s 1988 Summa I; both world class physicists would contemporaneously author major physics works in the early 21^st century – both paralleling the Birnbaum’s Summa series by articulating dynamic and iterating cosmic structures.

MIT Prof. Seth Lloyd of MIT would author Programming the Universe in 2006 (Knopf), and MIT Professor MaxTegmark would author Our Mathematical Universe in 2014 (Knopf). The two works neither fight each other’s nor Birnbaum’s. Indeed, Lloyd wrote a key testimonial for Tegmark’s book, and both are published by Knopf, as noted.

Maverick cosmologist Birnbaum suddenly had two super-elite de facto scientific allies and both from the #1 university in the world. Thus, the global battle over Summa Metaphysica’s Theory of Potential plot had now essentially been joined by MIT- in intellectual alliance with Birnbaum.

To add ‘insult to injury,’ (to Cambridge U.) not only did the two MIT constructs provide dynamic and iterating cosmic structures, as per Birnbaum, but it turns out that Birnbaum’s core theory is elegantly complemented by the Lloyd and Tegmark constructs. Thus, with a little help from the cutting-edge MIT physicists, Harvard grad Birnbaum’s metaphysics is now integrated into cutting-edge hard science; it would seem to quite readily trump the previously-entrenched randomness/aimlessness construct of the Cambridge, England academic hierarchy.

More than ever before, MIT was looking quite-stellar and, shall we say, 21^st century; Cambridge U., on the other hand, was looking, shall we say gently, non-21^st century. The gap between #1 MIT and #2 Cambridge would seem to have widened further. MIT emerges ever more dominating at the pinnacle of global academe.

Nagel & Birnbaum

Philosophy & cosmic purpose

09 Jan, 2014
by Candice Reed in UNCATEGORIZED

Juxtaposing two philosophers: David Birnbaum & Thomas Nagel

Does Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory solve Nagel’s grand quest?

Birnbaum (Mid-town Manhattan-based, born in 1950 in NY)

David Birnbaum’s three-part thesis Summa Metaphysica I, II and III (1988, 2005, and 2014), launched a new movement in cosmology – Potentialism Theory (see SummaMetaphysica.com https://www.summametaphysica.com/). The theory entirely changes the way we think about the universe.

Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory stands in sharp contrast to the 20^th century’s dominant Randomness Atheistic Theory. 21^st century Potentialism is a pro-scientific theory which offers a powerful and elegant cosmology.

Randomness Atheism declared – for well-over a hundred years – that the universe is decaying and degenerating and is thoroughly unsystematic, without plan or purpose.

Potentialism Theory discerns that the universe is alive and thriving in complexity and follows a consistent and inescapable path on the road to the endlessly extraordinary.

Birnbaum quite courageously introduces and coins three totally new fundamental terms to enable him to so to speak ‘crack the cosmic code’.

All three refer to dynamics hypothesized by him:

Infinite Quest for Potential (shorthand notation: Q4P) [see www.summametaphysica.com/the-q4p/]
Complexification (shorthand notation: C+) [see Glossary1000.com]
-Extraordinariation (shorthand notation: E+) [see www.summametaphysica.com/extraordinariation/ ]

In Potentialism, Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) unstoppably pushes the cosmos forward via its mechanism of Complexification (C+) ever-onward towards a cosmic end goal-horizon, Extraordinariation (E+).

Thus, the shorthand notation of Birnbaum’s succinct proposed cosmic SuperLaw is:

Q4P > C+ > E+

The ‘problem’ with Birnbaum’s SuperLaw and its related metaphysics is that it apparently works on every level; from the super-macro to the super-micro – with no exceptions. No matter what piece of data – spanning cosmic history – is tested, the Birnbaum Potentialism SuperLaw smartly covers it.

The Big Bang? Covered.

The core thrust of Evolution? Covered.

The evolution of Consciousness and the aesthetic? Covered.

The path from exploding supernovas to Beethoven? Covered.

You name it? Covered.

No exceptions; no excuses; no asterisks.

Its ‘perfection’ – spanning the billions of years of intergalactic history – provokes Birnbaum’s intellectual opponents (in British academe in particular) to near-hysteria. They cannot challenge the theory’s elegance; they cannot challenge its originality; they cannot challenge its conciseness; and they cannot challenge its large-scale magnificence. They are left to sulk and just as though to ‘throw rocks at it’ – and hope it goes away. But it has not gone away since introduced by Ktav Publishing (NJ) via Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica I in 1988. Examined from many dozens of angles over several decades – globally – the theory has thus far proven bulletproof. See PotentialismTheory.com/ParadigmChallenge/

Summa Metaphysica has been –

The prime focus of a major international academic conference (see Conference1000.com)
A Course Text at over a dozen colleges (see SummaCourseText )
The focus of over seventy feature articles in 2013-2014 alone (see SummaCoverage.com).

Per Summa Metaphysica theory, the universe strives endlessly towards more complex forms of expression in the direction of the perpetually extraordinary (E+).

Birnbaum’s intermediate concept is Complexification, Quest for Potential’s ‘handmaiden’ (or ‘enforcer’), directing the universe onwards towards E+; the universe increases in complexity through what Birnbaum calls Complexification (C+). This Complexification is, of course, fueled by the (infinite) Quest for Potential, the inherent force within everything in the universe

Remember the SuperLaw noted above, Q4P > C+ > E+

This C+ is proposed as Q4P’s ‘handmaiden’ – the intermediate-level cosmic drive towards greater complexity/sophistication/richness/integration/variety/wondrousness. In turn, according to Birnbaum this Complexification is the true driver of Evolution. Unlike such concepts as Darwinian survivalist-evolution though, Potential is not a shotgun – or ‘Random Walk’ – process of chaotic and mindless attempts at genetic or species survival; rather, Potential is guided directly by Complexification (C+) towards the universal pull towards Extraordinariation (E+).

In turn, E+ is a goal of the unfolding cosmos, a state of unimaginable Complexification. And when Potentialists say ‘unimaginable,’ they mean that literally – ‘unimaginable’ is actually a requirement for Extraordinariation. Think of it like trying to teach physics to a Neanderthal. Before you can teach physics itself there are fundamental, underlying concepts which must be known. Extraordinariation is so far past anything that has been experienced thus far, there is simply no frame of reference on which to build from.

To Potentialists, Extraordinariation is a horizon/goal to be approached, but never quite reached; it is beyond simple mechanical complexity. Extraordination represents the infinite goal of Complexification in every conceivable form. Theoretically unattainable, it is nevertheless by definition hyper-complex mechanically, emotively, rationally, spiritually…. The true Extraordinariation is inconceivable because (a) it is a goal/horizon and not an eventual reality, and (b) because we lack the capacity to understand such in any terms at this time – because the universe optimally iterates-forward infinitely.

Thus, per the theory, three separate, albeit inter-related, dynamics, Q4P, C+, E+, each give mutually-supportive ‘direction’ to the universe – across the entire span of cosmic history; meaning, not one dynamic, but three.

Hard-line Atheism

The Birnbaum Potentialism theory puts to lie hard-line Atheism’s immutable core tenet that there is no ‘direction’ whatsoever – in any shape, manner or form – to the Cosmic Order. Potentialism Theory renders their entire global movement instantly obsolete after a run of centuries.

Thus, no effort is spared by selected diehard zealots of hard-line Atheism in particular to engineer crass, juvenile, and ultimately in-vain gambits to delegitimize cosmologist/philosopher Birnbaum; typically the twisted gambits are fed into the media anonymously to preclude libel suits by the Birnbaum team.

Note that hard-line Atheism precludes the possibility of any design, direction, purpose to the universe, while mainstream (soft) Atheism typically ‘just’ precludes the possibility of the supernatural (Creationist God) as the agent of design. Thus, while Birnbaum’s Potentialism would be anathema to hard-line Atheism, it does not butt heads with mainstream (soft) Atheism; likewise it is consonant with Agnosticism or with Spiritualism or with Religion; the attack-dog group is several diehards from within the 1% sliver of the planet which is hard-line Atheist, but that 1 percent sliver controls many key and venerable British academic journals.

Nagel (NY)

(Downtown Manhattan-based, b. 1937 in Serbia)

Thomas Nagel holds degrees from Cornell, Oxford and Harvard. He has a PhD in philosophy and is a professor at New York University. Well-respected in his field and a notable author – Nagel has done a good deal of work on exploring human cognition and the place of intelligence in evolution. Nagel is the author of Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False. The work was issued by Oxford University Press in September 2012. [In due course the major British press in 2013 would deploy Nagel’s work to support Birnbaum’s teleological argument of Potential.]

Nagel’s 2012 work dovetails with Birnbaum’s (1988, 2005 and 2014) Summa Metaphysica. One of Nagel’s most intense and controversial statements (2012) is that modern science alone – in its current incarnation (Randomness/Atheist schema aka the Materialist neo-Darwinian schema aka the Entrenched Orthodoxy ) – is a wholly inadequate tool to understand the entirety of the universe. Nagel lays out a careful argument for this assertion. Far from decrying modern science, he embraces it for all it can explain, and he reassures us that he is a proponent of science.

However, Nagel has a fundamental issue with currently-entrenched (neo-Darwinian) Randomness/Atheist academic dogma in that objective observation shows that Randomness/Atheism cannot fully encompass the complexity and dynamics of all phenomena in the universe; in particular consciousness.

[Birnbaum likes to challenge Randomness/Atheism with his own one-liner: From whence Beethoven?]

September 2012: Nagel argues that a new science will be necessary

Nagel expands upon the gap re: the emergence of consciousness. By extension, Nagel argues for the validity of such concepts as life, consciousness, reason, knowledge, and emotion – to be incorporated into any metaphysics. To Nagel, the “hard” sciences – as they currently stand – are wholly insufficient to explain the mechanics of subjective and ‘soft concepts’. Thus, Nagel argues that a new science will be necessary to articulate the totality of the universe – something that can quantify and explain these concepts as easily as physics and chemistry explain the material world. Moreover, Nagel explains that such a concept must be equally at home describing the physical world as well as the cognitive one – a unifying theory, if you will, for all that exists in the universe.

Take, for instance, scientific observation of a Siberian Tiger. Science can glean much useful information about its properties – its size, its mass and its density, for instance. But this is a very imperfect and incomplete understanding of the object being studied. For a complete picture, subjective impressions are necessary – its boldness, its raw beauty, its apex position in the jungle, and, indeed, its grandeur. Without such subjective study, one cannot fully understand what the object is.

The Randomness/Atheists trash Nagel’s proposition

Nagel had devoted an entire book to basically one proposition:

Randomness/Atheism et al. cannot/ does not explain the emergence of consciousness.

Now,

(a) This proposition is quite self-evident, albeit politically incorrect in many rarefied academic scientific circles.
And

(b) This proposition is a quite-tangential attack on Randomness/Atheism. But it does knock a chink in the armor.

The reigning 20^th century British-based academic hierarchy was/is hard-line atheistic; the global Atheist movement – a de facto apparently self-appointed support group of their fellow-traveler British academics – is politically hyper-aggressive, and often assumes an attack-dog posture vis à vis potential intellectual challengers. It typically uses its vehicle The Chronicle of Higher Education in its ad homenim attacks – and did same in Nagel‘s case in May 2013; It quite virulently trashed every aspect of Nagel’s Mind & Cosmos. The Chronicle’s favorite m.o. (modus operandi) is to ridicule intellectual opponents by selective quotes or misrepresentation.

Counterattack from Commentary Magazine – supporting Nagel

In response, in January 2014 a lead piece in Commentary Magazine ripped-apart the Chronicle attack on Nagel and the (Randomness/Atheist) group behind the attack. See The Closing of the Scientific Mind by Yale professor David Gelernter. (See also SelectedRelated.com).

Nagel and divinity

It should also be noted that Nagel is an atheist, albeit not a hard-line atheist. Nagel firmly believes in the existence of fundamental teleological systems – that is, that the universe moves with some inherent purpose. He is clear that he does not know what that elusive purpose/design is.

Mainstream atheist Nagel believes the classic definition of a divinity requires it to exist “outside” the system – a player external to the universe. To Nagel, whatever driving force is behind the universe must be intrinsic to the system itself. In other words, it must be a ‘natural dynamic’; it cannot be classic God; a ‘supernatural dynamic’ would not be acceptable.

An Answer to Nagel’s Request/Search Already Exists

Directly answering Nagel’s open (September 2012 via Mind & Cosmos) request, is Birmbaum’s already-published and actually widely-disseminated (since 1988) Theory of Potential. Birnbaum’s hypothesized eternal and infinite Quest for Potential dynamic advancing towards Extraordinariation fits all of Nagel’s (secular) criteria.

Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica Volume I, published in 1988, by the year 2012 had well-over 30,000 volumes in distribution (the current June 2014 figure is over 50,000); this Summa distribution is aside from usage as a Course Text at over a dozen institutions of higher learning globally. See SummaCourseText.

Indeed, in March 2012, Bard College (Upstate, NY) hosted a 3 ½ day international academic conference on Science & Religion, with the prime conference focus dedicated to Birnbaum’s paradigm-challenging Theory of Potential (see Conference1000.com). Neither at the Bard Conference, nor in the quarter-century subsequent to Summa I’s initial publication in 1988, has any flaw been discerned in the theory. The Birnbaum theory has been receiving massive coverage subsequent to the international conference, with over 80 articles focused on Summa Metaphysica in the past eighteen months alone (see SummaCoverage.com).

One of the greatest strengths of Potentialism Theory is its overarching (and pro-scientific) nature; it is at home explaining particle physics as it is explaining altruistic behavior in humans. Birnbaum elucidates that one central overarching (natural) dynamic drives the cosmic order – from the macro to the micro level; this drive affects both the physical and cognitive, the reasoning and emotive, the substantive and the ephemeral – the universal and infinite quest for Potential (see www.PotentialismTheory.com).

The Quest for Potential^∞ is a pervasive, universal drive for the cosmos. Driving the cosmos and all under its embrace towards greater and greater levels of Complexity; this “Complexification” acts as an evolutionary force. Just as Darwinian mechanics explains a facet of life’s evolution, Potential is the super-set from which it flows – governing both the direction of evolution as well as providing the force behind such leaps that Darwinism alone cannot explain sufficiently – like reason and ethics.

Potentialism Theory, on the other hand, explains these phenomena quite succinctly. To Potentialists, all the changes observed – the Complexifications in the universe – are just manifestations of the Quest for Infinite Potential as it strives towards Extraordinariation.

Divinity/divinity

As to the concept of a divinity, Birnbaum takes a more middle of the road approach than Nagel – perhaps partially because of Nagel’s more narrow definition of divinity. To Nagel, God must be extrinsic to (outside of) the universe. But Potentialists define the sole creative force in the universe as Infinite Potential itself. Thus, if God does exist, he is a direct manifestation of Potential.

Far from removed from the system, to Potentialists, God, if such exists, is fundamentally entangled within the universe itself, pervasively and universally.

So, for the Potentialist, it is Potential at the core.

Is Infinite Potential indeed God?

Do we know where Infinite Potential ends – and God begins?

Are we ourselves integral to the Divine?

Is classic God the best interpretation our ancestors could discern for Infinite Quest for Potential?

Is Quest for Potential at the core of (possible) God?

Birnbaum might say that posing this cluster of questions frames-out the key parameters; and the individual has significant intellectual leeway to choose a path.

Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory might also point out that one can legitimately be Buddhist inter-personally 24/7; Religious in one’s house of worship; a Naturalist in the meadow; a Spiritualist in the mountains and a Secularist in the chemistry lab. All are legitimate facets of the wondrous psyche of the sum product of Infinite Potential to-date: humans.

Thus, to Potentialists – God is an authentically viable philosophical option (repeat: option), just as Spirituality and Secularism or combinations thereof are all bona fide options.

Vis à vis Nagel, the Potentialism SuperLaw provides the missing teleological (purpose) model which Nagel has been searching for. The SuperLaw model governs the formation of thought, reason and altruism – just as easily as it governs energy and matter; it is the “blueprint”/road map of the universe; it is the holy grail of philosophy which Nagel (correctly and astutely) has been searching for.

In one stunningly (seemingly) simple and concise concept Birnbaum provides the answer to Nagel’s grand quest: Quest for Potential^∞ (via intermediate dynamic Complexification) drives the universe towards Extraordinariation: Symbolically, Q4P > C+ > E+.

And the emergence of Consciousness – like the emergence of Beethoven – is most definitely within the purview of Extraordinariation.

Potentialism Theory: The Summa series

Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man: God and Evil (Ktav, November 1988);
Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man: God and Good (New Paradigm Matrix, March 2005);
Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man: The Transcendent Dynamic (New Paradigm Matrix, January 2014).

Potentialism Theory: Dovetailing: MIT & NYU

Recent hi-level academic works dovetailing with Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential (see www.PotentialismTheory.com) include the following:

( We include the Nagel work noted above.)

Programming the Universe (Knopf, 2006) by Professor of Quantum Mechanics Seth Lloyd of MIT;
Mind & Cosmos (Oxford Press, 2012) by Professor of Philosophy & Law Thomas Nagel of NYU;
Our Mathematical Universe (Knopf, 2014) by Professor of Physics Max Tegmark of MIT.

Potentialism Theory: Paradigm Challenge

Via his revolutionary true theory of everything (see TTOE1000.com), Birnbaum has instigated a global paradigm challenge (see ParadigmChallenge). Literally, all fields of study are impacted.

David Birnbaum himself is known globally, as well, as the author or the editor-in-chief of several important series on history and spirituality. His New Paradigm Matrix platform has over 180 Thought Leaders under its aegis.

Newsvine

New Paradigm Designer

By JastinBailey
Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:52 PM

A paradigm is a model: It can be real or theoretical and it conveys the core architecture proposed. David Birnbaum of NY is a new paradigm designer. He has a 4-decade-long habit of designing and then implementing new paradigms. Yeshiva-educated (13 years) and Harvard-educated (2 years), he is at the helm of transformative new paradigms in disparate fields.

Warm Up

Birnbaum’s first foray into the realm of ‘new paradigm’ was as the designer in 1983 of a unique ‘cutting edge’ course, which he taught in the evening, for the New School for Social Research in Manhattan. The course was The Science of Strategy in which Birnbaum showed, over a 12-session course series, how a set of (universal) strategic principles he compiled could be applied as a starting point to deal with a wide array of problems and challenges.
Unique Business Model

Birnbaum revolutionized the hi-end luxe jewel industry in the Americas with the unique new paradigm construct of his Upstairs Private Jeweler operation. Operating with just a small elite team out of a seventh floor suite in the Rockefeller Center area, Rare 1 purveys ultra-rare jewels globally and directly to VVIP end-users.

Birnbaum’s ‘day job’ is heading Rare 1, his flagship international rare jewel operation. The firm, founded in 1982, employs a unique business model which has weathered the turbulence of global change and remains the template of the firm to this day.

The firm has refined the concept of direct pinpoint database marketing of a hi-end product. The firm markets via ultra deluxe catalogues to the top 1/10 of 1% of the global financial spectrum. Its direct competitors, the established iconic Fifth Avenue retailers, are saddled with massive retail frontage overhead and the concomitant quite necessary, quite high margins.

The unique Rare 1 business blueprint was conceptualized and designed by Birnbaum in the early 1980s. While its ‘Designer Line’ has morphed over the decades, its core strategy and even its core senior team has remained intact. The firm stands alone at the pinnacle of the Private Jeweler market in the Americas.

Birnbaum refers to Rare 1 as his ‘day job’ and to his wide-ranging neo-academic projects as his ‘night job.’ However, some staffers do ‘double-duty’ focusing on one or the other as needed. Birnbaum quips that depending on the economy “some years the academic books do better than the jewels.” (Nobody believes him.)

Metaphysics

Birnbaum presents a new paradigm challenge to the global academic community. He seeks to overthrow the entrenched staus quo.

Birnbaum’s iconic new paradigm design project has been his quest for a unified metaphysics. He set out to find one Unifying Theory – one that united religion, spirituality, philosophy and science and provided a framework for understanding the totality of the cosmos. No small endeavor. Birnbaum’s three-part treatise Summa Metaphysica I: Religious Man (Ktav, 1988) Summa Metaphysica II: Spiritual Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2005) and Summa Metaphysica III: Secular Man (New Paradigm Matrix, 2014) is the answer to that quest. The treatise presents a ‘new paradigm’ philosophical construct.

The centerpiece of an international conference hosted by Bard College in 2012, Summa Metaphysica‘s central concept of Infinite Potential was presented as a breakthrough in philosophy. It is the first theory to quite formidably challenge the ‘entrenched orthodoxy’ – the dominant atheist Randomness Theory – for describing the nature and purpose of the cosmos. Unifying the intellectual, philosophical, and theological, Birnbaum has accomplished what has eluded philosophers and scientists alike for millennia.

Birnbaum focuses on his signature theme of potential. He deploys his Infinite Potential as a“simultaneous solution” which frontally lances more than a dozen previously unsolvable metaphysical issues. In one smooth and logically consistent sweep, Birnbaum lays them open to explanation in a solution poetic in its stunning simplicity, yet powerfully elegant (see Paradigm Wars). No bona fide flaw has been discerned in the theory since it was first introduced in 1988 by Ktav Publishing.

Jewish History

Birnbaum has designed and then implemented two quite-distinctive historical chronicle projects. The inter-related projects both involve chronicling Jewish history via different modalities. The author had twin objectives: (1) Discerning and tackling the core ‘driver’ of historic anti-Semitism, and (2) showing the historical journey of the Jews within rich and textured historical context.

In turn, Birnbaum’s first history project, the 2-volume The Crucifixion takes an additional two tacks: Volume I traces Jewish history from 1 CE – 1300 CE while Volume II focuses on the First Century CE (1 CE – 100 CE) via 80 inter-related exhibits. En toto the set carefully chronicles how first the early Church Fathers and then their successors laid the groundwork for twenty centuries of anti-Semitism via the institutionalized demonization and dehumanization of the Jews.

His second new paradigm Jewish history project is the 7-volume Jews, Church & Civilization, which is an integrated timeline interlacing the historical points of the Jews with that of the Church and key civilizations including Chinese, Japanese, Egyptian, Russian, French, British, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and Indian sub-continent. Both Islamic civilization and noteworthy American and Latin American historical points are incorporated as well.

Jewish Thought

Birnbaum has since turned his attention to designing and launching a potentially landmark spiritual-oriented series, the Mesorah Matrix. The series is an in-the-works, projected 10-volume, 7-year endeavor (culminating by 2020). Birnbaum conceptualized the project, and is heading it as editor-in-chief. The Mesorah Matrix will incorporate essays from over 150 Jewish intellectual leaders from around the world focusing on 10 eclectic themes. The entirety of the work is expected to contain a staggering estimated 200 eclectic essays.

Typically works on Jewish philosophy and spirituality have been limited to under 10-20 authors and usually the book themes have been fairly general. Mesorah Matrix breaks that mold. It attempts to ‘get a handle’ on Jewish Thought by focusing on ten very specific themes, some iconic and some subtle. As one of the senior editors, Saul J. Berman noted, “Before Birnbaum came up with his 10-theme/150 authors concept and jump-started the anticipated seven-year global endeavor, Judaism had never quite been able to ‘get its arms around’ the vast ocean of spirituality at its very core.”

In keeping with Birnbaum’s style, he has challenged traditional denominational barriers; the series will cut across standard demarcations in the Jewish community and shatter the glass barriers between the Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Renewal and Reform denominations. Those who follow him closely will find it no surprise that it was Birnbaum who managed to unify the thought leaders of these fiercely independent groups under his aegis for such a monumental and unique undertaking. According to Senior Editor Martin S. Cohen, “The disparate scholars apparently had confidence in the top leadership and its vision; the consequent unification breakthrough engendered by the series has been striking and profound.”

The cross-fertilization of the mini-cultures of the formerly self-segregated denominations engaged in the common-goal project has only served to turbo-charge the dynamism of the project underway. To be published by Birnbaum’s New Paradigm Matrix publishing platform, the first two books of the 10-volume set are expected to be released in late 2014/early 2015 with the entire series expected to be completed by 2020. Titles included in the work will be Sanctification, Kaddish, and Search for Meaning, among others.

Political Science Alchemy

Unable to resist the challenge of ‘dipping his toe’ into the hitherto intractable Middle East quagmire, Birnbaum tried his conceptual hand at a peace framework formulation. In June 2011, the Jewish World Magazine Group published a new paradigm proposal designed by Birnbaum titled Squaring the Circle. In it, Birnbaum unflinchingly made a point-by-point assessment not only of both Israel and Palestine’s vested interest in finding a solution to the ongoing conflict, but an actual, detailed, integrated, one page peace plan formula as a platform to execute such an accord.

Among the proposals were (1) A de-militarized Palestinian state (2) Key Arab portions of Jerusalem become linked to the nascent Palestinian state (3) Refugees compensated, but no refugees would be mandated by the accord into Israel’s sovereign territory (4) An Israeli military presence along the Jordan River Valley (5) A land swap of about 20% (6) Israel to maintain the key settlement blocks (7) A phased-in Accord over several years to allow “peace to settle-in.” The audacious, nuanced and multi-part peace plan was widely disseminated, including within the hallowed halls of Washington and the State Department, in particular.

Fast forward 2.5 years to the beginning of 2014 and Secretary of State John Kerry’s emerging ‘framework’ Israeli-Palestinian peace proposal. Surrealistically, in a near point-by-point reading of the proposal, there sits an almost carbon-copy of David Birnbaum’s blueprint from 2011. He notes “Part of me must have a ‘death wish’ for wading into those turbulent and volatile waters.” But if peace is eventually achieved under this new paradigm blueprint, some astute readers will know to look back to Squaring the Circle and give a polite nod to Birnbaum’s not insignificant role in the process.

Conceptual Problem Solver

Birnbaum likes to look at problems afresh. He is averse to being held hostage to the established wisdom’s standard architecture or accepted ‘givens’ or conventional ‘platforms.’ Birnbaum likes to work with a clean slate, a tabula rasa so to speak; he likesto be in position to craft his new paradigm formulations from the ground up.

Birnbaum’s contributions in the new paradigm department are not inconsiderable; but as far as Birnbaum is concerned, he is just “a pretty good conceptual problem solver with ‘a hang’ for new architecture.”

NEWSVINE – Revolution

Intellectual Revolution Underway

By GeneralArticles
Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:51 AM

There are certain watershed moments in the history of science and philosophy, revolutions not only in discovery but for the scientific approach as a whole – the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, the age of relativity and quantum physics, and even the Digital Revolution. History may look back to this, our current age, as the Age of Potentialism.

On its surface, Potentialism is a philosophical and scientific model of cosmology (see PotentialismTheory.com). More importantly though, it is a revolution in scientific theory and approach. For hundreds of years atheism has ruled science. In the name of scientific progress, academics have stepped away from the classic philosophical teachings of Plato and Aristotle; declaring that all but the hard, measurable sciences are nothing but myth and fantasy.

Certainly this has gone far to remove the superstitions of a previous era. Like most things though, it can be taken too far. What was once a catalyst for scientific progress now serves the unintended purpose of actually inhibiting progress. Abstract philosophy and metaphysics serve a very real function which contemporary academics have lost sight of – they embrace what is real, but beyond mankind’s ability to, as of yet, fully understand and quantify.

Aristotle understood one of the most important imperatives of scholarship – humility. To truly learn, one must embrace and accept how much one is actually ignorant of. The entrenched modern orthodox academia has lost this precious understanding (see https://www.summametaphysica.com/academic-imperialism/). Clinging desperately to such outdated paradigms as the nihilistic Randomness Theory, it has embarked on the fool’s errand of pronouncing its complete understanding of cosmic order; it has labeled the metaphysical, that which is beyond science currently, as invalid and unworthy of study or regard as true science.

History will show that this is not scientific rigor, but intellectual narcissism gone unchecked; their days are numbered. Potentialists are ushering in a new era of scientific enlightenment. Not content to shy fearfully from the unknown, Potentialists are carving new pathways to cosmic understanding (see SummaCoverage.com).

In 350 BC Aristotle empirically proved the earth was round. Over 1800 years later, Columbus would set off to pull the shroud of ignorance off the eyes of Europe to once again prove Aristotle’s wisdom. Aristotle also laid the foundation of teleology that the cosmos moved with determination to some cause and design. Now some 2300 years later, Potentialists set sail into waters unknown to champion teleology, their captain on the voyage – David Birnbaum (see ExaminerPurpose.com).

Birnbaum, like Columbus before him, takes Aristotle’s ground breaking work and – in a revolutionary fashion – brings it into contemporary context. In his three-part treatise (see SummaMetaphysica.com), Summa Metaphysica I, II and III, Birnbaum lays the foundation of Potentialism – a complete teleological model functioning within the real scientific bounds of mathematics and physics (see PotentialismTheory.com/ParadigmChallenge/).

Some people are born before their time and their importance is undeniable. Aristotle was one of those men. He could envision truths in the world that, at the time, were unprovable. For humanity, these people have always been crucially important – catalysts of human enlightenment. Just as crucial though, are those men, like Birnbaum and Columbus before him, that were born at just the right time – men with the vision to take the seeds of wisdom from those such as Aristotle, plant them and nurture them to maturity.

Columbus had something Aristotle would never have – Spanish ships, superior navigational technology and the vision and strength of will to apply them to realize another man’s dream. Birnbaum, likewise, had tools Aristotle could only wish for – integral calculus and quantum physics. And like Columbus before him, Birnbaum could not contentedly look at a map covered in dragons beyond the known borders of science.

Birnbaum (see David1000.com) has taken up the flag of philosophical pioneering to push the border between science and metascience forward. Like Columbus, he could not be content with the willful ignorance of orthodox science, but instead seeks to shed light on the unknown. As for those lucky enough to exist in this current time, they’ll be able to see the new world being explored. Potentialism has set sail for these ready-to-explore lands and has offered passage to anyone brave enough board.

David Birnbaum Philosophy

focus: Potentialism Theory by David Birnbaum

Lloyd v. Birnbaum

The Universal Computer and the Cosmic Womb of Potential

Summa Metaphysica’s unified Potentialism Theory

Team info

focus: David Birnbaum’s Potentialism Theory

David Birnbaum Metaphysics

David Birnbaum Philosophy

focus: Potentialism Theory by David Birnbaum

Logical Science Journal

Q4P∞: What is it? Why do we care? Potentialism Theory challenges

David Birnbaum Metaphysics

David Birnbaum Philosophy

MACRO > MICRO

Potentialism’s Universal Dynamic: from Macro to Micro levels

By TheSouthAfrican.com on August 26, 2014

David Birnbaum Metaphysics

Matrix Club

Mechanics of Potentialism

The Pillars of David Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica:

Q4P and E+

Appendices from Summa Metaphysica II : God & Good

relating to –

Missing Piece in Current Cosmologies

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z55:

1999: Cosmologist Martin Rees

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z56:

2000: Cosmologist Brian Greene***

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z57:

2004: Cosmologists Tyson & Goldsmith***

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z58:

2006: Cosmologist Leonard Susskind***

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

APPENDIX Z60:

2008: Cosmologist Paul Davies***

David Birnbaum Metaphysics

MIT-Birnbaum v. Cambridge

Cutting-edge science v. Intellectual torpor

By Bryce Lowry on 26 August, 2014 3:06 pm

David Birnbaum Philosophy

LeraBlog: Checkmate

Philosophy & cosmic purpose

09 Jan, 2014 by Candice Reed in UNCATEGORIZED

focus: Potentialism Theory by David Birnbaum

Newsvine Paradigm

JastinBailey

New Paradigm Designer

focus: Potentialism Theory by David Birnbaum

NEWSVINE – Revolution

GeneralArticles

Intellectual Revolution Underway

Logical Science
Journal

Q4P^∞: What is it? Why do we care?
Potentialism Theory challenges

Missing Piece
in Current Cosmologies

2000: Cosmologist Brian Greene^***

2004: Cosmologists Tyson & Goldsmith^***

2006: Cosmologist Leonard Susskind^***

2008: Cosmologist Paul Davies^***

09 Jan, 2014
by Candice Reed in UNCATEGORIZED