Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe

quote:

Christopher Michael Langan (born c. 1952) is an American whose IQ was reported to be between 195 and 210,[1]

quote:

Op woensdag 25 november 2015 19:46 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

[..]

Waarom, omdat hij het zelf geschreven heeft in jouw optiek, of omdat er de implicatie vanuit gaat dat hij boven jou zou staan?

quote:

Op donderdag 26 november 2015 09:16 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Maar zou het in principe mogelijk zijn? Zelf organisatie is toch juist wat de gehele natuur doet.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 november 2015 09:51 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Hij probeert dan ook God te bewijzen.. Of juist te verklaren wat God zou zijn. Wat mensen in principe doen is menselijke eigenschappen toedichten aan God, terwijl niemand eigenlijk weet wat God is.

Of eigenlijk 'the nature of reality'

quote:

Op donderdag 26 november 2015 10:27 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

De bijbel is dan ook een boek voor de mens zelf, en door de mens zelf, dus in principe een poging om de mensheid te leiden naar een leefbare wereld.

Dat is wat elke religie of levensbeschouwelijke stroming als doel heeft. In de Koran staat ook beschreven dat samenleven tussen alle volkeren het doel is.. En dat in het begin dat ook zo was.

Die omschrijving is realistisch en zeer waarschijnlijk ook gewoon kloppend. En al zou het te beschrijven zijn in woorden of nummers, dan is dat knap, maar veel meer ook niet Dan moeten wij nog steeds omgaan met de realiteit en elkaar.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 november 2015 10:35 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Het is ook zeer zware kost en lastig om er de voordelen van in te zien. Ik had bijvoorbeeld meer gezien in een compleet nieuwe manier om met de wereld en alles erop constructiever om te gaan. En volgens mij is hij daar ook mee bezig.

Dat is trouwens ook de visie die deze man heeft, toewerken naar een betere wereld. Als je IQ hoger of gelijk is aan 164 SD 4.25 dan mag je ook meedenken en meedoen

Maar ja, dan zul je net zien dat je 2 punten tekort komt..

Al die clubjes is niet tussen te komen helaas, had graag al die ideeën van die mensen willen volgen.

quote:

Op donderdag 26 november 2015 10:52 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Of een ballotage gesprek maybe

Ik vind dat ook jammer aan de ene kant, aan de andere kant kan ik het ook weer begrijpen, omdat niet ieder mens vrij en los kan denken zonder aanstoot te nemen.. En niet ieder mens heeft goeie bedoelingen, en al is het in principe een arbitraire grens, het wereldlijk begrip gaat wel enorm omhoog natuurlijk als je dergelijke niveau's bereikt, puur en alleen al door de eigenschappen van intelligentie om zeer veel informatie en kennis te kunnen verwerken tot een meer holistisch en samenhangend verhaal.

Dus bijvoorbeeld oorzaak en gevolg op allerlei manieren. En ik denk dat niet ieder mens daar constructief mee zou kunnen omgaan. Sommigen slaan al op hol als iemand voordringt bij de kassa In die zin een beetje..

En daarbij, werken en theorieën worden niet zomaar geaccepteerd, al zouden die onweerlegbaar de werkelijkheid en waarheid omvatten.. Dat is denk ik ook deel van het probleem.

Je hebt te maken met emoties en allerlei vormen van menselijke verlangens en doelen. Allemaal redelijk complex, en ook weer heel voorspelbaar trouwens, maar dat maakt bijvoorbeeld een praktisch 'ideaal' al bijna onuitvoerbaar, juist omdat je met zoveel verschillen in perspectief en doelen te maken hebt.

quote:

En daarbij, werken en theorieën worden niet zomaar geaccepteerd, al zouden die onweerlegbaar de werkelijkheid en waarheid omvatten.. Dat is denk ik ook deel van het probleem.

quote:

Op dinsdag 24 november 2015 11:52 schreef I-care het volgende:
Kortweg CTMU. De oorsprong van deze theorie komt van Christopher Langan. Een behoorlijk intelligente man die op IQ testen ergens tussen de 195 en 210 scoort.

Net iets hoger dan ikzelf

[ afbeelding ]

Wie kent deze theorie dusdanig genoeg om in simpele bewoordingen de theorie verder te verhelderen?

Zelf durf ik mij er niet aan te wagen anders dan het teveel te versimpelen naar 'relatie tussen bewustzijn/geest en materie'

CTMU en vragen en antwoorden op een lager niveau!

En hier de gesproken versie van de theorie. Helaas gesproken door een computer en daardoor wat lastig te volgen..

CTMU audiobook

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 november 2015 16:32 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Het lijkt er wel op..

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 november 2015 17:23 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Wacht nog even met gooien, want ik ben alles behalve een kenner van beide theorieën..

quote:

Op dinsdag 24 november 2015 11:52 schreef I-care het volgende:
Kortweg CTMU. De oorsprong van deze theorie komt van Christopher Langan. Een behoorlijk intelligente man die op IQ testen ergens tussen de 195 en 210 scoort.

Net iets hoger dan ikzelf

[ afbeelding ]

Wie kent deze theorie dusdanig genoeg om in simpele bewoordingen de theorie verder te verhelderen?

Zelf durf ik mij er niet aan te wagen anders dan het teveel te versimpelen naar 'relatie tussen bewustzijn/geest en materie'

CTMU en vragen en antwoorden op een lager niveau!

En hier de gesproken versie van de theorie. Helaas gesproken door een computer en daardoor wat lastig te volgen..

CTMU audiobook

Nothing Is Wasted - The Man with 200 IQ Chris Langan

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 oktober 2005 09:38 schreef 0d1n het volgende:
little reflection suffices to inform us of some of its properties: it must be rationally derivable from a priori principles and essentially tautological in nature, it must on some level identify matter and information, and it must eliminate the explanatory gap between the mental and physical aspects of reality.

quote:

Furthermore, in keeping with the name of that to be modeled, it must meaningfully incorporate the intelligence and design concepts, describing the universe as an intelligently self-designed, self-organizing system.

quote:

How is this to be done? In a word, with language.

quote:

It means using language as a mathematical paradigm unto itself. Of all mathematical structures, language is the most general, powerful and necessary. Not only is every formal or working theory of science and mathematics by definition a language, but science and mathematics in whole and in sum are languages.

Everything that can be described or conceived, including every structure or process or law, is isomorphic to a description or definition and therefore qualifies as a language, and every sentient creature constantly affirms the linguistic structure of nature by exploiting syntactic isomorphism to perceive, conceptualize and refer to it. Even cognition and perception are languages based on what Kant might have called “phenomenal syntax”. With logic and mathematics counted among its most fundamental syntactic ingredients, language defines the very structure of information. This is more than an empirical truth; it is a rational and scientific necessity.

quote:

Op zaterdag 28 november 2015 19:58 schreef magnetronkoffie het volgende:

[..]

Dat filmpje duurt meer dan 3 uur, is me te lang maar ik heb het geprobeerd (heeeeel eventjes ).

Maar als je dit filmpje kijkt

Nothing Is Wasted - The Man with 200 IQ Chris Langan

dan snap ik wel dat ie slim is.
Hij wil bewijzen dat er een god bestaat. Blijkbaar vindt hij dat belangrijk, maar hij heeft er blijkbaar ook lol in dus misschien vindt ie het niet eens belangrijk of anderen hem wel of niet geloven. Maar hij probeert het wel uit te leggen.

quote:

Of particular interest to natural scientists is the fact that the laws of nature are a language. To some extent, nature is regular; the basic patterns or general aspects of structure in terms of which it is apprehended, whether or not they have been categorically identified, are its “laws”.

quote:

The existence of these laws is given by the stability of perception.

quote:

Because these repetitive patterns or universal laws simultaneously describe multiple instances or states of nature, they can be regarded as distributed “instructions” from which self-instantiations of nature cannot deviate; thus, they form a “control language” through which nature regulates its self-instantiations.

quote:

This control language is not of the usual kind, for it is somehow built into the very fabric of reality and seems to override the known limitations of formal systems. Moreover, it is profoundly reflexive and self-contained with respect to configuration, execution and read-write operations.

quote:

Only the few and the daring have been willing to consider how this might work…to ask where in reality the laws might reside, how they might be expressed and implemented, why and how they came to be, and how their consistency and universality are maintained. Although these questions are clearly of great scientific interest, science alone is logically inadequate to answer them; a new explanatory framework is required. This paper describes what the author considers to be the most promising framework in the simplest and most direct terms possible.

quote:

On a note of forbearance, there has always been comfort in the belief that the standard hybrid
empirical-mathematical methods of physics and cosmology will ultimately suffice to reveal the
true heart of nature. However, there have been numerous signals that it may be time to try a new
approach.

quote:

With true believers undaunted by the (mathematically factual) explanatory limitations
of the old methods, we must of course empathize; it is hard to question one’s prior investments
when one has already invested all the faith that one has. But science and philosophy do not
progress by regarding their past investments as ends in themselves; the object is always to
preserve that which is valuable in the old methods while adjoining new methods that refine their
meaning and extend their horizons.

quote:

The new approach that we will be exploring in this paper,
which might be colorfully rendered as “reality theory is wedded to language theory and they beget
a synthesis”, has the advantage that it leaves the current picture of reality virtually intact. It
merely creates a logical mirror image of the current picture (its conspansive dual), merges the
symmetric halves of the resulting picture, and attempts to extract meaningful implications.
Science as we now know it is thereby changed but little in return for what may, if fate smiles upon
us, turn out to be vast gains in depth, significance and explanatory power.
And on that note, I thank you for your kind attention and wish you a fruitful journey.

quote:

On Theories, Models and False Dichotomies

It has almost become embarrassing to point out that science is in a state of crisis…not because it
is untrue, but because it has become a cliché too often accompanied by little or no remedial
insight. For all of the magnificent achievements of science, its grander ambitions long ago
succeeded in taxing its traditional models and organizational principles beyond their explanatory
limits.

quote:

In the search for ever deeper and broader explanations, science has reached the point at
which it can no longer deny the existence of intractable conceptual difficulties devolving to the
explanatory inadequacies of its fundamental conceptual models of reality. This has spawned a
new discipline known as reality theory, the study of the nature of reality in its broadest sense.
The overall goal of reality theory is to provide new models and new paradigms in terms of which
reality can be understood, and the consistency of science restored as it deepens and expands in
scope.

quote:

Mainstream reality theory counts among its hotter foci the interpretation of quantum theory and its
reconciliation with classical physics, the study of subjective consciousness and its relationship to
objective material reality, the reconciliation of science and mathematics, complexity theory,
cosmology, and related branches of science, mathematics, philosophy and theology. But in an
integrated sense, it is currently in an exploratory mode, being occupied with the search for a
general conceptual framework in which to develop a more specific theory and model of reality
capable of resolving the paradoxes and conceptual inconsistencies plaguing its various fields of
interest (where a model is technically defined as a valid interpretation of a theory in its universe of
reference). Because of the universal scope of reality theory, it is subject to unique if seldomrecognized
demands;

quote:

for example, since it is by definition a universal theory of everything that is
real, it must by definition contain its rules of real-world interpretation. That is, reality theory must
contain its own model and effect its own self-interpretative mapping thereto, and it must conform
to the implications of this requirement. This “self-modeling” capacity is a primary criterion of the
required framework.

quote:

The ranks of reality theorists include researchers from almost every scientific discipline. As the
physical sciences have become more invested in a quantum mechanical view of reality, and as
science in general has become more enamored of and dependent on computer simulation as an
experimental tool, the traditional continuum model of classical physics has gradually lost ground
to a new class of models to which the concepts of information and computation are essential.
Called “discrete models”, they depict reality in terms of bits, quanta, quantum events,
computational operations and other discrete, recursively-related units. Whereas continuum
models are based on the notion of a continuum, a unified extensible whole with one or more
distance parameters that can be infinitely subdivided in such a way that any two distinct points
are separated by an infinite number of intermediate points, discrete models are distinguished by
realistic acknowledgement of the fact that it is impossible to describe or define a change or
separation in any way that does not involve a sudden finite jump in some parameter.

quote:

Op zaterdag 28 november 2015 20:41 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Bedankt voor je moeite magnetronkoffie En the same goes for you.

Ik laat je eerst maar effe knallen nog

quote:

Op zaterdag 28 november 2015 20:45 schreef I-care het volgende:

[..]

Niets moet dan ook

Wat Alan Watts ook zegt, het verschil tussen detaillisten en holisten zeg maar.

Als je altijd naar steentjes zoekt terwijl je een berg oploopt zul je nooit de berg zien..

quote:

Unfortunately, the advantages of discrete models, which are receiving increasingly serious
consideration from the scientific and philosophical communities, are outweighed by certain basic
deficiencies. Not only do they exhibit scaling and nonlocality problems associated with their
“display hardware”, but they are inadequate by themselves to generate the conceptual
infrastructure required to explain the medium, device or array in which they evolve, or their initial
states and state-transition programming.

quote:

Moreover, they remain anchored in materialism,
objectivism and Cartesian dualism, each of which has proven obstructive to the development of a
comprehensive explanation of reality. Materialism arbitrarily excludes the possibility that reality
has a meaningful nonmaterial aspect, objectivism arbitrarily excludes the possibility that reality
has a meaningful subjective aspect, and although Cartesian dualism technically excludes neither,
it arbitrarily denies that the mental and material, or subjective and objective, sides of reality share
common substance.5

quote:

One might almost get the impression that the only two available choices are the classical model,
to which quantum theory has been fastened with approximately the same degree of cogency as
antlers on a jackrabbit, and the newer discrete models, which purport to be more in line with
quantum theory but fall by the wayside en route to the new kind of quantum cosmology they
portentously seem to promise. For such claims exhibit an unmistakable irony: classical reality is
precisely that on which information and computation are defined! Like classical reality itself, a
well-defined entity unable to account for its own genesis, information and computation are welldefined
and non-self-generative aspects of reality as it is observationally presented to us at an
advanced stage of its existence. So they invite the same questions as does classical reality: how,
and by what, were they originally defined and generated? Without an answer to this question,
little can be gained by replacing one kind of reality with the other.

quote:

Some may have felt, as they watched the history of Big Theories and New Paradigms unfold over
the last few years, as though they were being forced to watch the same show, or read the same
novel, a thousand times in tedious succession with no more than an occasional minor revision of
4
plot or character. However, there is a third alternative which has thus far remained in the
background. It provides exactly what is required in light of any thesis and antithesis: synthesis.
This synthesis yields a new class of model(s)6
preserving the best features of both thesis and
antithesis, continuum and quantum, uniting them through general and preferably self-evident
principles. This paper presents this new class through a single example, the Cognitive-Theoretic
Model of the Universe (CTMU).