Summa III: The Transcendent Dynamic

POTENTIALISM THEORY

BOOK 3

The Guts of Potentialism Theory

# Birnbaum's Prime Mover is a quest-force-algorithm

# The algorithm is: Q4P∞ → C+ → E+ /// see: Super-Formula1000.com

INFINITE QUEST FOR POTENTIA L ∞ → COMPLEXIFICATION → EXTRAORDINARIATION

David Birnbaum is a graduate of CCNY Engineering [ with a major in Computer Science ] and of Harvard University

He has served on the faculty of the New School (for Social Research) in NY

metaphysics: Summa I (1988); Summa II (2005); Summa III (2014); Summa IV (2020)

Summa Metaphysica series

1988, 2005, 2014, 2020

a universal & unified & fully-integrated philosophy / metaphysics / cosmology / cosmogony / teleology

"No flaw has been discerned" - Huffington Post 6/10/15

HuffPost1000.com

SummaMetaphysica.com

POTENTIAL drives the universe - Birnbaum

DAVID BIRNBAUM

SUMMA METAPHYSICA : A PHILOSOPHY/COSMOLOGY SERIES

• a hitherto undiscerned overarching dynamic

David Birnbaum Summa Metaphysica philosophy treatise proposes its signature Potentialism Theory.

“Potentialism proposes that there is, indeed, a protagonist to the cosmic order, but that the protagonist is a ‘quest’, and not a ‘classic entity’. The universe quests for its maximal potential. The core dynamic Quest for Potential (Q4P∞) strives with purpose and direction towards ever-greater and higher potential. At the 'beginning of time’, eternal Quest for Potential (Q4P∞) harnessed the eternal equations of Physics-Mathematics to ignite our universe via the Big Bang. This same symbiotic dynamic - Quest for Potential (Q4P∞) in league with Physics-Math - then acted as a catalyst for life, evolution, language, emotion, consciousness, and, indeed, for all the key dynamics which have evolved in the universe.”

our 'Smart Universe' driven by our hypothesized natural force (Q4P)

"POTENTIAL DRIVES THE UNIVERSE" - BIRNBAUM

This Summa series is offered as a working hypothesis for a unified metaphysics - via four prisms.

( see Alyokhin1000.com )

Bulletproof1000.com

“NO FLAW HAS BEEN DISCERNED”

“What drives our universe? The great Greek philosophers were ultimately stymied, as is contemporary physics. A contemporary 21st century independent scholar and metaphysicist, David Birnbaum of Manhattan, proposes that ‘Potential’ drives the universe.

He hypothesizes the core cosmic dynamic to be what he labels Infinite Quest for Potential. Over 150 articles and reviews in dozens of journals (see SummaCoverage.com) have dissected and analyzed the compelling and fullyintegrated theory over the course of a quarter century; no flaw has been discerned.”

– Huffington Post June 10, 2015

[see CracksCosmicCode.com]

SummaCoverage.com

ENCAPSULATION

Summa Metaphysica I

Religious Man: God and Evil focus: theodicy & eternal origins (1988)

Summa-1.com

Summa Metaphysica II

Spiritual Man: God and Good focus: metaphysics & teleology (2005)

Summa-2.com

Summa Metaphysica III

Secular Man: The Transcendent Dynamic focus: cosmology & evolution (2014)

Summa-3.com

Summa Metaphysica IV

Quantum Man: Morphed Cosmic Order focus: quantum-potential (2020)

Summa-4.com

Supplement

Summa Metaphysica: Articles on Summa (articles from 2013 and onward) [ book is on SummaMetaphysica.com only ]

Summa-supplement.com

Summa Metaphysica / Potentialism Theory

has been featured in 100+ articles in 55+ journals; and has been assigned as a Course Text at 15+ colleges and has secured 40+ distinguished testimonials

from the desk of Hugo van den

On Birnbaum’s Formula

University of Warwick Department of Mathematics Coventry, United Kingdom Mar 28, 2013

Physics, unlike metaphysics perhaps, is concerned only with description. However, not all descriptions are created equal; it is sometimes possible to capture large swathes of phenomena with a minimum of formal apparatus. Such superb descriptions are what scientists like to think of as “good theories” (all is, in the final analysis, still mere description, a point that is sometimes lost). The game naturally becomes this: to capture as much as possible with as little as possible.

In Birnbaum’s unparalleled and magisterial Summa Metaphysica, we find a pithy quote attributed to a Nobel prize winner [physicist Lederman] who expresses this dream as capturing the universe in a formula that one could print on a T-shirt. Birnbaum, in a staggering and audacious move, displays a formula below this quote.

The formula just stands there, glorious in its splendid isolation. It reads: Q4P∞

Are we to infer that this is the answer to the dream of the physicist recently quoted? The recondite renaissance man Birnbaum does not tell us, at least not directly, not on this page.

Perusal of Summa Metaphysica, two imposing tomes of recondite philosophicalmathematical-poetic musings, indicates that Birnbaum wants the reader to think of Q4P as a single symbol......

[ balance of essay upon request ]

Q4P∞

Q4P ( Q4P ( Q4P (

Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential ad infinitum

"unparalleled and magisterial"

by

COPYRIGHT © 2014 DAVID BIRNBAUM

Revised Edition October 2017

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Birnbaum, David.

The Transcendent Dynamic: Secular Man / David Birnbaum.

ISBN 978-0-9801710-2-0

1. Metaphysics. 2. The Transcendent Dynamic. I. Title.

New Paradigm Matrix att: David Birnbaum

Tower 49 Twelve E. 49th St., 11th Floor, New York, NY 10017

www.NewParadigmMatrix.com

Direct contact to Editor-in-Chief

David.Birnbaum.NY@gmail.com

SUMMA METAPHYSICA

ORGANIZATION OF BOOK

Summa III

Introductory Material

Section 1a: Potentialism Theory

Section 1b: Evolution

Section 1c: Primordial Cosmic Realms & Creation Ex Nihilo+

Section 1d: Reprint: Direction

Section 2: Appendices to entire series

Section 3: Glossary

Reprint: Cosmic "Tool Kit"

Selected Articles

Miscellaneous

POTENTIALISM THEORY**

THE SUMMA METAPHYSICA SERIES

a unified & universal (consistent, overarching, fully integrated) conceptual line of attack

metaphysics

cosmology philosophy aligning eternal origins

Life Force direction/teleology/driver purpose/meaning evolutionary theory universe horizon via one Common Denominator dynamic* *

Summa I:

Is Q4P∞ - Infinite Divine Potential

Summa II:

Is Q4P∞ - the overarching cosmic spiritual dynamic

Summa III:

Is Q4P∞ - the transcendent (natural) cosmic dynamic

infinite quest for infinite potential infinitely iterated

per Summa, Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) is a ubiquitous and overarching cosmic dynamic...

Quest for the fulfillment/actualization of this dynamic is the underlying core drive of the cosmic order...

All of the countless components of the universe, including humans, are striving towards the full realization of their particular potentialities....

*see UnifyingConcept.com

Quest for Potential

(infinitely recursive)

Quest for Potential within Quest for Potential within Quest for Potential ad infinitum

The Eternal Dynamic POTENTIAL* AS

ETERNAL

A central proposition of Summa: “Potential” is the sole “concept/dynamic” which can safely be posited as having been eternal.

Meaning, by definition “Potential” – and only “Potential” – can be conjectured to have been “eternal.”

Upon careful reflection, the above is self-evident.

For “Potential” vectored-in onto – and crystallized-into – its own maximal Potential.

“Potential” thus achieved traction – and has never looked back.

* Potential / Possibility

The Eternal Dynamic

- follow through POTENTIAL AS CENTERPIECE

Why does it make sense to craft a metaphysics centered around Potential?

To craft a metaphysics, one must commence at eternal origins; and to commence at eternal origins one needs an eternal dynamic

A primary goal in any metaphysics is an overarching cosmic dynamic; and a logical overarching cosmic dynamic would be some extrapolation of the eternal dynamic

Therefore, once one has delineated a truly eternal dynamic, one can play in the metaphysics sandbox

Potentialism Lexicon

Key Terms

Q4P∞ = Infinite Quest for Potential

C+     =  Complexification

the cosmic drive towards increased  complexity/sophistication/wondrousness

E+      =  Extraordinariation

the idealized end-goal of the cosmic process; an ideal to be approached, but not quite realized more detail/amplification to follow

a suis generis infinitely nested algorithm

[ the inviolate arc of the universe ]

an infinitely iterative dynamic

[ the full-spectrum macro & micro level common denominator trajectory of the Cosmic Order ]

the eternal - teleology / chi / direction / modus operandi - of the universe

Per Birnbaum, there is an overarching natural cosmic dynamic which Birnbaum hypothesizes as being Infinite Quest for Potential. ... “One elegant dynamic and one elegant dynamic alone — Infinite Quest for Potential — both instigates and drives the entire cosmic order. Jun 10, 2015

HuffPost1000.com

An original, - but grasp-able - 21st Century working hypothesis via one all-encompassing (snapshot) equation

Extraploating back to eternal origins (see EternalOrigins.com) and tracking across time with cosmic direction (see Complexification1000.com) to the cosmic goal (see Extraordinariation.com)

Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) as the common denominator & the cosmic engine across time and space - before and after the Big Bang

seemingly simple, but powerful, elegant and all-encompassing

***

~7,000 years of civilization through this point

an original and fully-vetted new paradigm hypothesis

multi-tasker

Summa develops the themes that this proposed formula

Q4P∞ → C+ → E+ is simultaneously:

(a) a dynamic

(b) a description of a process,

(c) the direction of the universe

(d) the teleology / purpose / 'driver' - of the universe

(e) a concise formula encapsuling the entire universe

(f) possibly the formula for 'life force'

Core Tenet of Potentialism Theory

The universe is the triumph of possibility/hope over the inertia of the void. or

In Birnbaumian metaphysical terms, Quest for Potential∞ ignited, sustains, nourishes, charts and builds-out the universe. The universe - and all in it. - are physical build-outs of metaphysical Quest for Potential.

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC

Secular Man

Summa Metaphysica proposes a comprehensive and integrated metaphysical structure – an original and powerful new paradigm. The author proposes that one fundamental concept – and one fundamental concept alone – Quest for Potential∞ (recursive to the infinite power) – ignited – and drives – the cosmos.

Summa I: God and Evil: Religious Man (published 1988 by Ktav Publishing, NJ) develops the theme within a religious context.

Building upon his 1988 treatise, the author moves on to a spiritual context. In Summa II: God and Good: Spiritual Man (17 years later) the author lays out his overarching metaphysical structure in very significantly greater scope, depth, breadth and texture.

The theory lexicon custom-crafted by the author for Potentialism Theory will include - aside from Summa I's Q4P ∞ = Infinite Quest for Potential - two new terms: C+ = Complexification, and E+ = Extraordinariation

In the mix, the author's iconic formula Q4P∞ > C+ > E+ is introduced. Significant attention is given in Summa II to the final component E+ (Extraordinariation).

In a focused section 'Direction', the author sketches out a clear 'direction of the universe' - a subject which has been in major contention in philosophical, scientific and metaphysics circles since the respective fields began.

Summa III: The Transcendent Dynamic: Secular Man (2014) lays-out the Potentialism metaphysics for Secular Man – delinked from any spirituality or religious aspects. The metaphysics is anchored in a creative finesse of science and logic.

Birnbaum’s paradigm is non–linear, as opposed to the linearity of the great bulk of Western philosophy. It is non–circular, as opposed to the circularity of much of Eastern philosophy. Rather, Birnbaum’s paradigm is what the author refers to as a “spiral/reflexive” dynamic (elucidated in the text). The author proposes that this Quest for Potential∞ paradigm more elegantly explains the dynamics of the cosmos – and of life, in particular – than alternate propositions.

According to Birnbaum,

“The cosmic goal is profound Quest for Potential ∞ is probing and searching for

...the elusive Extraordinariation ( E+ ) ultimate –grandeur…elegance…beauty…symmetry…fulfillment.... consciousness…harmony…artistry…symphony…spirituality... perfection…humanitarianism…romancing…love…parenting... meaning...altruism…mercy…

– plus possibilities and potentials as yet not precisely known either to us or even to the cosmic driver, Quest for Potential ∞ itself”

Finally, in a separate section Evolution , the author proposes a new paradigm hypothesis - for Evolution itself. Again, rejecting reliance on randomness, the author parlays his core formulation of Q4P ∞ > C+ > E+. The lucid and powerful evolution hypothesis presented is a fusion of Summa Theory (1988, 2005 and herein) with the Quantum Mechanics/messaging of MIT's Seth Lloyd (elucidated 2006).

David Birnbaum Academic Bio

David Birnbaum is a philosophical writer, conceptual theorist, historical chronicler and editor.

# universal philosophy & Jewish religious philosophy:

Birnbaum is known globally as “the architect of Potentialism Theory” – a unified philosophy/cosmology/metaphysics. The paradigm-challenging theory - presented through four prisms - is delineated in Birnbaum’s 4-volume Summa Metaphysica series (1988, 2005, 2014, 2020). See Summa1000.com. But, see www.Potentialism-Summa.com for 'consolidated' theory (2020).

A riposte to Summa Theologica of (St.) Thomas Aquinas, the (original) Birnbaum treatise challenges both the mainstream Western philosophy of Aristotelianism as well as the well propped-up British/atheistic cosmology of Randomness.

The Summa Metaphysica series was the focus of an international academic conference on Science & Religion April 16-19, 2012 at BARD College (see Conference1000. com).

The focus of over 150 reviews and articles, Summa Metaphysica has been an assigned Course Text at over 15 institutions of higher learning globally. The work has been very widely covered globally. (see SummaCoverage.com for 100+ articles on the series as well as the Course Text institutions.)

The first volume of the Summa series, God and Evil (KTAV, 1988) is considered by many to be a breakthrough modern day classic in the field of religious philosophy and of theodicy, in particular. See also GodOfPotential.com

# Signature metaphysical themes:

Cosmic Womb of Potential

The God of Potential Quest for Potential∞

Q4P∞ → C+ → E+

Complexification (C+)

Extraordinariation (E+)

Super-Formula / Cosmic Algorithm

Suis Generis Code/Coding

Mirror Hypothesis / Cosmic Detective

Chronology1000.com

Three Epochs / Push-Pull / 2 births

cosmic pulse, leveraged buyout & tango

# editor, Jewish thought & spirituality:

David Birnbaum is the conceptualizer and Editor-in-Chief of the Mesorah Matrix series on Jewish thought and spirituality. The series spans 10-volumes with 10 respective themes and includes 200+ original pieces from 150+ global Jewish thought leader essayists. See Mesorah1000.com.

# historical chronicler and author:

In the history realm, David Birnbaum is the author/chronicler of the 2-volume The Crucifixion – of the Jews. The 2-volume set (published in 2009) traces a direct trajectory from the Canon Gospels in the First Century to Auschwitz in the Twentieth. In November 2019, ten years after the publication of The Crucifixion, the Church of England / Anglican Communion issued a major document/report "God's Unfailing Word" - which accepted/confirmed many of the key thrusts of the (highly-controversial) Birnbaum frontal challenge to the Church of a decade prior. See Crucifixion1000.com.

The inter-related Birnbam history series is his 7-volume Jews, Church and Civilization. See Civilization1000.com.

# education:

He is a graduate of Yeshiva of Forest Hills (Dov Revel), Yeshiva University High School (MTA), City College of New York (CCNY), and Harvard (1974).

[David B's BSc degree is in Computer Science from CCNY's Engineering School; the major contained within its fold both System Simulation and Formal Logic focuses - aside from sundry data science and programming courses.]

# faculty:

New School for Social Research (1983)

[aka The New School]

New York, NY

See also NewParadigmCatalyst.com; See Vindication2022.com

re: Birnbaum's micromanaging/directional cosmological Prime Mover

DAVID BIRNBAUM MAJOR WORKS

As Author

4-volume Summa Metaphysica (www.philosophy1000.com)

2-volume The Crucifixion (www.crucifixion1000.com)

7-volume Jews, Church & Civilization (www.civilization1000.com) As Editor-in-Chief

10-volume Mesorah Matrix (www.mesorah1000.com) [ Jewish Thought & Spirituality ... 150+ authors ]

As Conceptualizer

3-volume Summa Spinoffs (www.Spinoffs1000.com)

8-volume Potentialism Theory via Graphic-Narrative (www.TheoryGraphics1000.com)

As Commentator

www.ManhattanObserver.com

Summa Metaphysica

Mesorah Matrix

YouTube channels

DAVID BIRNBAUM MAJOR WORKS

Summa Metaphysica series

presenting new paradigm

Potentialism Theory

a universal, unified, seamless & fully-integrated overarching philosophy

www.SummaMetaphysica.com

Summa I:

Religious Man: God and Evil: focus: theodicy & eternal origins [1988]**

Summa II:

Spiritual Man: God and Good: focus: metaphysics & teleology [2005]

Summa III: Secular Man: The Transcendent Dynamic: focus: cosmology & evolution [2014]

Summa IV: Quantum Man: Morphed Cosmic Order: focus: quantum-potential [2020]

see also secondary site PotentialismTheory.com

see also: RewindSumma.com 222+ panel Scroll-Down tour

YouTube Channel: Summa Metaphysica

see also Supplement: Articles on Summa (only online - on www.SummaMetaphysica.com)

** see also: www.GodOfPotential.com

** see special YouTube channel: www.UnifyingScienceSpirituality.com

www.Summa-3.com

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC Overview of Summa Series

core theme (spanning all 4 works): Potential drives the universe

1988 (Summa I) Religious Man

# theodicy / theology / intellectuality

# Proposed Theodicy/Theogony resolution/finesse closes two key and salient philosophical vulnerabilities in Religion

# the 'Unified Formulation'

# The God of Potential

# 'Tree of No Risk' v. 'Tree' of Potential'

# Proposed theory centerpiece - pinnacle dynamic Infinite Quest for Potentialoverthrows all classic metaphysics, and lays the groundwork for Directional Universe

# Q4P∞ is a natural albeit pinnacle dynamic; not a supernatural pinnacle dynamic

2005 (Summa II) Spiritual Man

# An overarching (powerful and original) metaphysics/cosmology

# Cosmic Tool Kit

# Demonstrates Directional Universe

# Proposed formula cracks the cosmic code

# The cosmos is most certainly directional, and most certainly not random

# Provides an Overarching Metaphysics / Simultaneous Solution

# Provides new metaphysical/ cosmological/philosophical ‘standing’ to Spirituality

# The Birnbaum SuperFormula

Q4P∞ → C+ → E+ provides a formula for the Cosmic Order [ an original Teleology ]

SECTION?

2014 (Summa III) Secular Man

# ‘Potentialism Evolution’ theory – with MIT in the mix. [ displaces Random Mutation / Natural Selection ]

# A universal, unified, seamless & fully-integrated metaphysics/cosmology

# Overthrows Randomness across multiple fronts (including vis à vis Cosmology and Evolution)

# MIT's Quantum Mechanics Professor Seth Lloyd reinforces our theory with his book Programming the Universe (2006)

# Creation Ex [infinite] Potential

# intro to Chronology of the Universe

2020 (Summa IV) Quantum Man

# What reality is our universe?

# The Organic Proactive Supercomputer Super-Organism

# Starship Universe

# Morphed universe at Big Bang point from 100% Metaphysical > Physical-Metaphysical hybrid

# Morphed Q4P at Big Bang point

# ‘Connected-at-the-hip’: Q4P- Quantum Mechanics

# The universe: Not your ordinary Life Form

# Q4P∞: The true universal, pinnacle natural force Driver of Evolution; the Driver of 'Birnbaumian Evolution'

# Q4P∞: the Cosmic Instinct (among other things)

# Suis Generis Code/Coding

# Three Epochs of our universe

# Chronology of the Cosmos: Eternal Origins > today

# 'Second Law'

Potentialism

a unified & fully integrated - theory / hypothesis "quod erat demonstrandum"

- D. Birnbaum / NY

this one page reprinted from Summa II

[ the Birnbaum ]

formula / direction / purpose / path of the universe

Q4P∞ > C+ > E+ *c

[ wrapping-around the Einstein formula ] *d

NO FLAW HAS BEEN DISCERNED *e

*a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology

*b aka the Birnbaum Super-Formula ALGORITHM

*c see Direction1000.com

*d see Einstein1000.com

*e see HuffPost1000.com Potentialism-Summa.com

The Transcendent Dynamic

The Transcendent Dynamic

Potentialism Theory

Potentialism Theory

“Sequenced Summa” [ a quasi-Loop ] via 16 points

Summa’s handling of the key inter-related issues in Philosophy / Metaphysics / Theology / Science

Note to reader: Over the course of its three volumes, Summa Metaphysica handles almost all issues on multiple-levels – ranging from a stripped-down thoroughly “secular level” through a richer, more textured and nuanced “religious/ spiritual level.”

At the request of an array of “interested parties” –ranging from young students through teachers to journalists to scientists –the sequence below presents the stripped-down secular level –with a few references (needed even in this stripped-down version) to a Theistic perspective in 3 of the 16 component parts here.

The Cosmic Spinal Column of Potential

#1 Is there an eternal something?

Classic term for question: “Eternal Origins”

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response as regards this question: Summa proposes that Potential/Possibility is eternal. Indeed, it is the only concept/dynamic that we can conceptualize with certainty as being eternal.

SUMMA ICON: POTENTIAL/POSSIBILITY IS ETERNAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: no position or answer

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

1a) By Definition

By definition, Potential/Possibility is eternal. It is self-evident that Potential/Possibility is eternal.

1b) Infinite nesting

• Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential ad infinitum

• Note our shorthand notation:

Q4P∞ = Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential ( Quest for Potential

1c) Key components of (each) Q4P = ( Traction-Survival ( Deployment of Potential Array ( Extraordinariation

( Note that Extraordinariation is my term, and is explicated in preliminary form in the last two points of the sequence unfolding below... )

1d) The m.o. – modus operandi – of Q4P

Macro-Holistic Optimization (my term)

Q4P∞ surveys the cosmic chessboard, and giving extra-weight to proximity-factors, calibrates/ choreographs/iterates the “next move” for overall cosmic optimization of Potential.

#2a How did things “get started”?

Classic term for question: embryonic CosmologyCosmogony

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Q4P ‘breathesfire’ into the equations of Physics-Mathematics.

SUMMA ICON: EMBRYONIC POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: no answer

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

The precise nature/origin of primordial/abstract PhysicsMathematics is unclear.

[See also Seth Lloyd, Programming The Universe, published by Alfred A. Knopf © 2006: “As soon as the universe began, it began computing. At first, the patterns it produced were simple, comprising elementary particles and establishing the fundamental laws of physics.” (p. 3)]

The eternal equations of Physics-Math are in a symbiotic relationship with Infinite Potential.

#2b How did the universe as we know it come into existence?

Classic term for question: (classic) CosmologyCosmogony

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: The equations of Physics-Math, integral to Quest for Potential, seeking after their fuller potential, sought realization and embodiment. They continuously set-the-stage for the next layer of reality…leading in due course to igniting the Big Bang.

SUMMA ICON: EQUATION-POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: no answer

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

As we are dealing in metaphysical-realms, it is challenging to get much more detailed than we are already.

#2c What else is happening?

(in parallel with #2a above)

Classic term for question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: The Cosmic Womb of Potential, a higher-level engine of potential, is ever-evolving and in-gear…

SUMMA ICON: THE COSMIC WOMB OF POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: not applicable

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

We are dealing with an ultimately infinitely nested situation, i.e.

Cosmic Womb of Potential (Cosmic Womb of Potential (Cosmic Womb of Potential….

Meaning, there are many ’faces’/facets to Potential:

Quest for Potential∞, Infinite Potential, Cosmic Womb of Potential and related.

#3 What are the prime goals of the Cosmic Womb of Potential?

Classic term for question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: A prime goal of the Cosmic Womb of Potential is a reality-universe.

SUMMA ICON: METAPHYSICAL POTENTIAL > REALITY-POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: not dealt with

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

A reality-universe is not the end-goal of the Cosmic Womb of Potential.

Rather, the reality-universe becomes “the platform” for a possibly infinite plethora of potential.

#4 What Ignited the Big Bang?

Classic term for question: Origins of the Big Bang

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: PUSH and PULL dynamics ignited the Big Bang. Note that Push/Pull would parallel the dynamics of childbirth.

PUSH: The equations of Physics-Math will split the “0”-Point and ignite the Big Bang.

A few billion years later, Einstein et al. will split the atom and unleash an atomic bomb explosion.

The equations will treat the “0”-Point as a Cosmic Portal to Reality; they will split the “0”-Point and unleash its Potential (power) to ignite the Big Bang and with it, our universe.

PULL: The extraordinary potentials down-the-road [see the very last two points at very end] – which include the super-expansion of consciousness – both in breadth and depth - layer-on a crucial ‘pull-force’ and ‘guidance’ towards retroactively igniting and guiding creation (the Big Bang aka The Genesis Point). I call this a “Cosmic Leveraged Buyout” - “cosmic bootstrapping”. See Summa II: section Beta: “The Cosmic Tool Kit.

SEE ELABORATION – “Pull” below.

SUMMA ICON: THE “0”-POINT PORTAL; COSMIC LEVERAGED BUYOUT COSMIC BOOTSTRAPPING

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: a variation on “randomness”

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

The equation will split the “0”-Point into Positives and Negatives

Female and Male

Good and Evil

Positive & Negative energy

Regular & Dark matter

amongst other dualities

Note: We have not explicated the “0”-Point, but we are not the first to refer to same vis à vis cosmic origins.

#5 Why is the universe so Finely Tuned?

Classic term for question: Goldilocks Enigma

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: At the splitting of the “0”-Point, the equations, integral to Quest for Potential, quiteprecisely calibrate the universal constants necessary to set-the-stage for eventual life.

SUMMA ICON: THE GOLDILOCKS POTENTIALIZERS

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: Some scientists offer variations on Multiverse theory. They assert that with enough universes, anything is possible. I believe that the reasoning is fatally flawed. Aside from failing rudimentary rules of probability, the multiverse-makes-anythingpossible reasoning violates Occam’s Law of Parsimony.

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

With respect to the Entrenched Dogma, the Goldilocks Enigma vectors all non-Theistic metaphysics to at least consider the equations as “prime suspects” in the cosmic drama.

#6 If there is an eternal dynamic, what is the dynamic’s essence/origin?

see sections 1c and 1d below

#7 Does Man Have Freedom?

Classic term for question: Freedom Question

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: As Freedom is integral to Potential, and Potential is the core cosmic dynamic, Man has Freedom. And privacy.

SUMMA ICON: MAN’S FREEDOM IS INTEGRAL TO POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma:

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Note: Summa I (God and Evil) is heavily focused on this issue.

#8 How/why does Life emerge?

Classic term for question/issue: Origin of Life

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Q4P establishes/generates/facilitates ever-more dynamic ‘platforms of potential’ (my term) to launch the still next stage(s) of Potential. Cosmologist Paul Davies writes (p. 228 of Goldilocks Enigma) that “the history of the universe is one in which fundamentally new phenomena emerge at successive thresholds of temperature, energy, or complexity.” I might add, ‘or of fuller - consciousness/ emotion/information/awareness/versatility and forcemultiplier ability’.

SEE ELABORATION – “Platforms of Potential” below.

SUMMA ICON: ‘PLATFORMS OF POTENTIAL’

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: all random chance

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Thus, life is quite central, and indeed pivotal, to the cosmic drive and cosmic order. It is not trivial and/or accidental as per the contemporary majority (‘entrenched orthodoxy’) academic hierarchy view.

#9 Does Quest for Potential∞ Impact Evolution?

Classic term for question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Conceptually, Evolution is correct. Quest for Potential is embedded in Evolution as its key “driver”.

SUMMA ICON: POTENTIAL-IMPACTED EVOLUTION

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: see Wikipedia article on Evolution plus Wikipedia article on Natural Selection

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Q4P∞ impacts the evolutionary process via its MacroHolistic Optimization tool.

Q4P∞ = ( Survival-Traction ( Panoply of Potential ( Extraordinariation

see my own comlete separate Section 1b: Evolution

#10 What is Man’s purpose?

Classic term for question: Purpose Question

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Man’s purpose is to seek his potential.

SUMMA ICON: PURPOSE-POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: none

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Meaning, a specific individual’s purpose is unique to the inherent and unfolding potentials of that specific individual.

#11 Why does eternal Quest for Potential tolerate gross evil?

Classic term for question: Theodicy (in the context of classic God)

Here we are focused on a secular eternal dynamic, but the parallel question remains. Our secular answer here will parallel our answer to the parallel theological question in Summa I: God and Evil:

Evil and good are both necessary for cosmic existence. Why? Because the universe came into existence, in part by splitting the Zero-Point into Pluses and Minuses; Good and Evil et al.

Thus, Q4P (Quest for Potential) would be effectively committing universe-suicide if it destroyed evil. Q4P can counter evil, but it cannot destroy evil if Q4P wishes the universe to continue on.

SUMMA ICON: FREEDOM POTENTIAL IS INVIOLATE

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: not applicable

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: As the purpose of Man is to reach for his potential, and as Freedom is integral to potential, the potential Divine is (virtually) unable to interfere with Man’s freedom.

#12 Consciousness: How did it evolve; why is it ever-increasing?

Classic term for question: Consciousness Question

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Quest for Potential∞ seeks after its potential, and “consciousness” is on the route towards Extraordinariation (the amorphous end-goal of Quest for Potential∞)

SUMMA ICON: CONSCIOUSNESS–POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: no answer

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

It is possible that Q4P∞ defines the outer contours of its own (non-mechanistic) consciousness by the consciousness-level achieved by Mankind.

#13 Love: How does it fit into the scheme of the Cosmos?

Classic term for question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: It is possible that the potential for love was a primary motivator in the equations’ endeavor to craft a universe – with ultimately sentient beings therein – to thus be-in-a-position to potentially both receive and give love.

SUMMA

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: no answer

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

It is hard to define love, and, as they say, love is elusive. But it is possible that the equations ached for its realization, to the extent that it was a primary motivator for creation of the universe.

#14 What is the purpose of the universe?

Classic term for question:

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: The purpose of the universe is as a designated vehicle and platform for realization and optimization of potential.

SUMMA ICON: POTENTIAL-REALIZATION

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: There is no purpose to the universe, and the universe has no endgoal.

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Q4P ∞

Quest for Potential∞ is the tip-of-the-spear

of Birnbaum's hypothesized directional Prime Mover quest-force-algorithm

#15 What is the ultimate cosmic goal?

Classic term for question: Teleology

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: The ultimate cosmic goal is EXTRAORDINATRIATION.

SUMMA ICON: EXTRAORDINARIATION-POTENTIAL

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: There is no ultimate cosmic goal

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

Quest for Potential∞ is probing and searching for ...the elusive Extraordinariation ( E+ ) ultimate –

grandeur…elegance…beauty…symmetry…fulfillment.... consciousness…harmony…artistry…symphony… spirituality...perfection…humanitarianism…romancing… love….parenting...meaning...altruism…mercy…

– plus possibilities and potentials as yet not precisely known to either us or to Quest for Potential∞ itself

In combination, the possible outermost-limit realization of the myriad potentials above – known and unknown –would define extraordinaration.

In parallel to the concept of Infinity, extraordnariation is a goal to be sought, but conceptually not ever quite-fully realized.

Directed & Designed Evolution

Evolution is not directed by Natural Selection / Random Mutation (the fatally-flawed Darwinian theory)

Rather, Evolution is hyper-intelligently directed/designed by Q4P∞Birnbaum’s hypothesized Prime Mover quest-force-algorithm- essentially a unique directional ~secular dynamic

There is, thus, respectfully, a powerful ~secular resolution path to resolving/understanding the extraordinarily intelligently-crafted hyper-complex and ongoing directional journey of Evolution

The hitherto intractable scientific conundrum of Evolution is quite-elegantly resolved (by Potentialism Theory)

see Vindication2022.com

#16 Is there a self-dynamizing (my term) Cosmic Loop here?

Classic term for question: Reality from Nothingness?

(In jewish philosophy) Yesh m’Ayin?

Quick-formulation of Summa’s response: Extraordinariation down-the-road is retroactively a key ‘guidance’ and ‘impetus’ for Creation/The Big Bang/The Genesis Point.

Deploying eclectic contemporary scientific jargon to the above, it can be proposed that the universe is selfCausal and/or self- Explanatory and/or self-Actualizing and/or self- Dynamizing and/or self- Sustaining and/or self- Enervating - aside from and related-to the universe being ultimately self-Observing and/or self-Participatory and/or self-Comprehending and/or self-Explaining and/ or self-Organizing and/or [ultimately] self-Aware. You are by now aware of my key thrust of the universe as selfIterating. These are all profound topics, but just noting the jargon alone noted here gives one a glimpse into the basic thrusts of discussion. [see the same well-organized and relatively lucid Davies book Goldilocks (cited above) chapters 1, 9, 10, Afterword) for some general amplification and chapters in-between for more in-depth.]

SUMMA ICON: SELF-DYNAMIZING & GUIDING COSMIC LOOP

The position of the Entrenched Dogma: all is random

Components of the Summa hypothesis as regards this question:

see my “Cosmic Leveraged Buyout” plus “Cosmic Bootstrapping” references noted above in Question 4. Note that schematically, our Q4P is eternal, but then in concert with Physics-Mathematics and assorted other dynamics (discerned herein and in Summa proper to the best of our ability)

Q4P embodies itself as our self-iterating, fully-integrated universe, incorporating, as well, you and me.

SEE ALSO ELABORATION – “Pull” below.

– “Pull”

Owing to the particularly radical nature of this proposition, I cite here several buttressing sources from the mainstream contemporary scientific community. See the following:

#A John A. Wheeler, “World as a System Self-Synthesized by Quantum Networking,” IBM Journal of Research and Development vol. 32, no. 1 (1988), p. 4.

#B Cosmologists J. R. Gott III and L.-X. Li, “Can the Universe Create Itself?” Physical Review D, vol. 58 (1998], p. 023501.

#C Astronomer Fred Hoyle who concludes that “the Universe is seen as an inextricably linked loop…Everything exists at the courtesy of everything else”. The Intelligent Universe [London: Michael Joseph, 1983), p. 248.

#D Cosmologist Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma, chapter 10 How Come Existence? sub- section “Loops in Time” (pps. 251254) (© 2006 by Davies, First Mariner Books edition, UK ) for survey overview, plus citation to Davies’ own prior causal loop-theory article “Closed Time..” in Natural Physical Science , vol. 240, (1972), p. 248.

In the Afterword finale’ to his 2006 Goldilocks ‘survey masterwork’, Davies concludes that the optimal eventual cosmology [he was not aware of Summa Metaphysica 1988, 2005 at that point] would contain the following components:

# Davies - “something unexpected has to be accepted as a given”

[ Summa proposes Infinite Potential (Q4P inifinitely iterated & nesting .]

# Davies - “and the rest of the explanatory scheme constructed on that…”

[ Summa does just that.]

# Davies – [potentially] a closed explanatory or causal loop

[ Summa has a quasi-closed explanatory/causal loop (see PULL just-above).]

# Davies – [maybe even] a backward-in-time causation whereby the universe creates itself…self-contained”

[ Summa incorporates a similar integral component – see PULLjust-above.]

# Davies – “something self-activating...self-consistent loops capable of understanding themselves with (at least the potential for) life and mind

[ Summa comports to this checklist, as well. But articulates just one loop.]

Note that only the suis generis proposed concept of Quest for Potential infinitely nested & iterated - and then inserted as centerpiece to a nuanced metaphysicscould pull-off the multi-tasking Davies is looking for. = because only Potential/Possibility can be posited with conviction as being eternal ( see point 1a above).

Davies is clear that the scientific community is looking for a mathematical formula. So here is the deal:

1) Q4P ( Q4P ( Q4P is a conceptual formula.

2) Science has been looking in the wrong zone. It should have been looking in a conceptual zone - as opposed to a mathematical zone –for an ultimate eternal dynamic. Mathematics may be linked-at-thehip to the dynamic, but the dynamic would be the ‘fire breather into the equations’ – and not vice versa.

THE TRANSCENDENT DYNAMIC ELABORATION – “Platforms of Potential”

Thus, some salient ‘platforms’ of the post-Big Bang cosmic order (some more directly relevant to us than others) -

13.7 billion years ago: The Big Bang

At 13.7 billion years ago minus one micro-second: quarks and gluons congealed into protons and neutrons

At 13.3 billion years ago: electrons and nuclear particles combined into atoms

At 13.2 billion years ago: gravity exerts its pull

At 12.95 billion years ago: supernovas…and the consequent 98 (discovered) natural terrestrial elements ultimately necessary for humans. (My conjecture is that the final number might be precisely 100.)

At 12.7 billion years ago; galaxies

4 billion years ago: life on our own planet

3.9 billion years ago: photosynthesis

3.5 billion years ago: first strand of DNA makes-an-appearance

1.5 billion years ago: organisms with cell nucleus containing DNA

1.2 billion years ago: sexual reproduction

1.0 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: Large mammals Take # I

200 million years ago: dinosaurs

150 million years ago: birds

114 million years ago: flowers

65 million years ago (post Dinosaur extinction): Large mammals Take #2

4 million BCE: First hominids

1.8 million BCE: Homo Erectus

130,000 BCE: Neanderthal Man

120,000 BCE: Homo Sapiens

13,000 BCE: agriculture

7,600 BCE: Zhenpiyan, China, culture

3,250 BCE: Hieroglyphics

3,100 BCE: 60 place-value mathematics in Babylonia

2,500 BCE: Stonehenge

2,400 BCE: precise astronomical calendar, Egypt

1,250 BCE: Monotheism codified in Ten Commandments

Mind and consciousness have emerged and advance ongoing. Then, roughly speaking, culture and love (in each case, we’re focusing-on the genre of Mankind’s predilection) manifest.

Ongoing, consciousness - and its ever higher-level platforms –advances. Consciousness - in its manifold aspects - seems to be the arena where the next platform(s) will play out. Presumably this is already underway on some level. Note that there is no reason to assume that we have reached the end of ‘platform building’.

Section 1b: Evolution

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel A

Evolution: the next focus of Potentialism Theory

Darwinism is fatally flawed

# The entire Natural Selection / Random Mutations proposition (aka Darwinism) is fatally flawed.

# Respectfully, notwithstanding its global standing, Natural Selection / Random Mutation simply does not advance the Evolution drama.

# The confluence of factors which launched and sustained the theory at the very center of academe is a bizarre 150+ year saga worthy of examination; but that saga is not the focus.

a1) Except in Marvel (superhero) comic books, mutations are typically weaker than the original; a positive mutation is rare, at best; this reality is not a formula for dynamic evolution.

a2) Intergral to DNA - the foundation of life - is (ultra highly sophisticated and complex) sequenced digital coding; even one random mutation of this sophisticated coding does not end well; mutations undermine 'the foundation of life';

mutations do not enhance life. Compound mutations of this coding are disastrous, not salutary, for the potential of the life form.

a3) At least three dozen universal constants are ultra highly fine-tuned for the existence of life; were these constants truly fine-tuned by random mutation? Seriously?

b) Even if the Darwinian concept were, in principle, viable, one key challenge is that one would still need "a trillion-trillion times" the time (4.0-4.5 billion years) currently allotted for the 5 billion new species.

In the human genome there are 3 billion nucleotides (and corresponding 3 billion characters of digital code)

The odds against having gotten to this sequence randomly are greater than 26 to the power of 3 billion........ Would you take these odds?

Respectfully, classic and well-established Probability Theory would reject random mutation generating five billion species over 4-4.5 billion years as a viable denouement. Probability Theory can be deployed for possibility, not for de facto impossibility*. [To argue to the contrary - per the mainstream consensus - is, respectfully, simply group-think run amok.]

As in cosmology, randomness is clearly amply present on-stage in Evolution, but, once again, is not a component in evolution.

c1) SPECIES: The Cambrian explosion was just half billion year ago. With its uniquely rich and extraordinary multitude of new species - within a supernarrow ~19 million year slice of time**, it belies Darwinism. This issue alone is fatal to Darwinian (Natural Selection / Random Mutation) Theory.

c2) PHYLA: All the major phyla seem to have appeared during the Cambrian Explosion (maximum currently guestimated duration: a very narrow 30 million years).

Thirty million years is a very narrow sliver of the 4.5 billion years of our earth; thus, just by the paragraph above, Darwinian Natural Selection / Random Mutation is clearly simply not a significant factor in advanced Evolution.

d) How could complex bio-chemical transformations possibly result from the proposed randomness Darwinian mechanism?

Per Michael Boehe's presentations, biological systems at the molecular level present hyper-complexity even greater than complexity at other levels.

e) How does one get biological creativity/innovation/super-complexityfrom linear, spaced-out mutations?

f) How does Darwinism explain - "linearly irreducible complexity" (my term / I expanded the classic 'irreducible complexity' term) i.e. complexity instances in organisms which simply could not have occurred via a linear mutation-sequence stretched-out over time (per standard Darwinian prognostication).

See also discussions by Michael Boehe - including on YouTubedebunking the alleged 'science' here.

g) The fossil record in general and pre-Cambrian, in particular, does not jibe with Darwinian theory (see also David Berlinski discussions).

h) Per Randomness / Darwinism - where did - first life - the first cell and - the first species each come from?

>>> No answer, Darwinian crew?

- the perfectly fine-tuned universe constants?

>>> No answer, Darwinistas?

Not one species will ever be birthed via Darwinism, let alone billions of species, even if a trillion years were allotted for even one new species.

Evolution is achieved by Q4P∞ introducing new genes; by re-wiring gene networks; and by deliberate and complex sequenced bio-chemical transformations choreographed by Q4P∞; Evolution is not achieved via mutations; not via a slo-mo and simplistic stretched-out linear sequence of random mutations.

In-the-mix, new proteins and concomitant digital coding must be introduced. And just where is this new digital coding coming from? It is certainly not coming from random mutation; rather, the new (digital) coding is coming to you courtesy of digital-based Q4P∞

*See Lloyd, Programming the Universe, Knopf, 2007, NY, p. 57

"In fact, the chance of an ordered universe like ours arising out of random flips of a coin is so small as to be effectively zero."

** ~19 million years Cambrian period - out of, say, 4.5 billion years = 4/10 of 1% of the total time sequence....yielding well over 50% of the most complex/sophisticated species? [Meaning, insufficient time for Natural Selection / Random Mutation to produce billions of super-complex species.] ***

Why is that theory (Darwinism) still afloat at all? ***** As the expression goes, "What are they smoking?"

*** especially since even a trillion∞ years are insufficient - for even one Darwinian species

***** Can the toxic/machiavellian British-based cohort still manipulate/intimidate/con the entire western world?

Vindication2022.com

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel B

reminder:

Q4P encompasses the fusion ofQuantum-information processing + Quantum-computing + Quantum-engineering to play-out

Q4P → C+ → E+

Q4P re-engineering the genomes

Other Related Theorists

What Charles Darwin (On the Origin of Species 1859) reads as 'natural selection';

what George C. Williams (Adaptation and Natural Selection, 1966) and Richard Dawkins (The Selfish Gene 1976) are reading as 'gene-centered Evolution';

what Murray Gell-Man (The Quark and the Jaguar 1994) is viewing as 'complex adaptive systems'

what Stuart Kauffman (At Home in the Universe 1995) is reading as 'selforganizing systems';

what David Pines (Complex Adaptive Matter 2005) is reading as 'complex adaptive matter',

are all actually one and the same:

the Potentialim Evolution hypothesis -

What they are viewing, is actually Q4P re-engineering the genomes

More technically, they are (typically) viewing Q4P on a local-level/micro-level tweaking & re-engineering an individual genome.

However, the plot thickens....

# Q4P Evolution is operating simultaneously in an integrated fashion across all the genomes of our planet

# Meaning, the educated hypothesis is that plant genomes will be reengineering ensemble with human genomes and ensemble with insect genomes, etc

# Why the integrated choreography? Because, of course, all the 'pieces' need to advance (and fit/interact) together ensemble / efficiently / dynamically - on the C+ march towards E+.

note: the now-established phenomenon (per Carl R. Woese d. 2012) of H.G.T (Horizontal Gene Transfer) - that DNA itself can indeed move sideways, across barriers, from one kind of creature to another - would buttress (Summa's) Evolution Theory above.

Summa (just above) posits simultaneous (varied) re-engineering across 'barriers' (life forms); Woese (in the late 1990s) posited simultaneous identical DNA-cluster replicating across 'barriers'. So, Woese was on a parallel but

different track. [However, I suspect that Woese may have missed important variations in the 'replications' - and, in fact, was observing precisely what I am hypothesizing.]

Some macro Observations

Five billion (ever more sophisticated and wondrous) species over the lifespan course of life on our planet.

Random mutations crucially setting the stage for the inexorable advance/ expansion and Complexification of the species on our planet? No, the random mutations are an insignificant side show, not factoring-into evolution

So, Evolution, YES; but the catalyst and driver is Q4P.

Notwithstanding the politically correct pro-Darwinian view, random genetic mutations in nature are (per Potentialism Theory) respectfully simply not a factor in evolutionary biology. And, yes, correct, Natural Selection, a pillar of modern biology, falls. The 1-2 punch of iconic Darwinism - Natural Selection / Random Mutation , however established in modern science, is fatally-flawed.

[ Per Potentialism Ancestor of Man was one of the complex species progenitors launched/created by 'the designer' (Q4P∞) during the narrow (~30 million-year wide) Cambrian Explosion c. 500 mill BCE. ]

In both cosmology, in general, and evolution, in particular, Q4P is 'cracking the whip' and 'running the show'; not Randomness.

Both cosmology and related evolutionary biology are 'directional', not randomchance.

In both cases, we do not ride a multi-billion year trajectory towards E+ (Extraordinariation) via randomness. It is hard enough for ('directional') metaphysical/quantum hyper-intelligence Q4P to pull this off ; )

Building-out the Cosmic Order - ongoing over the eons - requires a (directional) hyper-intelligent prime prime time catalyst - Q4P∞.

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel C

reminder:

Q4P encompasses the fusion ofQuantum-information processing + Quantum-computing + Quantum-engineering to play-out

Q4P → C+ → E+

TimeLine / Context

A) Summa Metaphysica series 1988, 2005, 2014, 2020

B) John Archibald Wheeler (1989 - see below) sets the digital stage from his Princeton base

C) Seth Lloyd, from his MIT base (2006) sets the quantum mechanics 'wiring' for Potentialism Theory

# More specifically, Wheeler's iconic proposition of It from Bit (Santa Fe Institute Spring 1989) sets the stage for Lloyd's the universe as computer (2006: Programming the Universe).

# As per the three panels Birnbaum:Lloyd above, Lloyd furnishes the quantum mechanics to support the Potentialism metaphysics.

# Lloyd's quantum mechanics (via bits) proposition for: quantum - information processing / computing / engineering, dovetails seamlessly into Potentialism's more conceptual Evolution theory.

# Lloyd himself (as of JAN 2022) still has not extrapolated his quantum mechanics into an evolution theory. (He may be wary of inciting the Darwinist gangster sub-cohort.)

# Lloyd may be under the gun, but he may see a Nobel - if MIT can find a way to give him his Center for Extreme Quantum Information back - on premises [ expeditiously ].

Cosmology Evolution

Randomess aimless/random aimless/random mutation formulation – with Natural Selection

Potentialism Directional Directional theory Q4P Q4P

Thus, Randomness Formulation deploys a non-directional 'play' - aimlessnesssomehow first to ignite our universe. and then to sustain / drive / iterate / optimize / expand our universe - over a 14 billion year span and counting. In the mix, non-directional 'aimlessness' somehow - miraculously - allegedly via random mutations - drives Evolution forward from a single cell entity to 21st Century humans and associated consciousness. Quite a feat for an 'aimless' play.

Potentialism, on the other hand, deploys its quite-directional core dynamicQ4P - across both Cosmology and Evolution. *

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel D

reminder:

Q4P encompasses the fusion ofQuantum-information processing + Quantum-computing + Quantum-engineering to play-out

Q4P → C+ → E+

Evolution

[ per Potentialism Theory ]

Q4P tweaks the genomes

[ theory development: historical trajectory ]

c. 350 BCE (384 BCE-322 BCE)

Aristotle /

The universe has 'direction'; but that 'direction' is not known or delineated by Aristotle

c. 1557 (1534-1572)

Baal Shem Tov / Founder, Hasidism

The entire universe is one interconnected Life Force

c. 1677 (1632-1677)

Spinoza / Ethics

The universe is a lattice-work; meaning, it is thoroughly inter-connected

c. 1745 (1698-1760)

Isaac Luria / founder of Modern Kabbalah

The universe emerges from the 'No End'

1859

Darwin / Origin of Species Evolution / Natural Selection

1988

Birnbaum / Summa I Potentialism Theory

Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) ignited and drives the universe;

new paradigm Potentialism Theodicy gains global traction

Proposed eternal dynamic Infinite Quest for Potential overthrows all classic metaphysics, and lays the groundwork for Directional Universe

1990

John Wheeler / "It from Bit" Information, Physics & Quantum (Sub-atomic) information bits are the foundation of the universe.

2005

Birnbaum / Summa II

Q4P drives the universe;

the Birnbaum SuperFormula: Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) >

Complexification (C+) > Extraordinariation (E+)

presentation/delineation of Direction of the Universe

Provides an Overarching Metaphysics / Simultaneous Solution

2006

Seth Lloyd / Programming the Universe Quantum Mechanics proposition: In each atom there are bits which communicate with bits in other atoms across the universe - and compute the advance/buildout of the universe ongoing

2014

'Birnbaum/Potentialism Evolution' theory - with MIT in the mix.

Overthrows Randomness across multiple fronts (including vis à vis Cosmology and Evolution)

Creation Ex Nihilo+

2020

A fully-integrated secular metaphysics/cosmology

Super-Formula / Cosmic Algorithm Suis Generis Code/Coding

Mirror Hypothesis / Cosmic Detective Chronology1000.com

Three Epochs / Push-Pull / 2 births cosmic pulse, leveraged buyout & tango

2022

Q4P∞-Evolution re-engineers/tweaks the 'human genome'and possibly many thousands of inter/related genomesand maybe ALL the genomes planet-wideand maybe all the genomes universe-wide, if extraterrestrial genomes exist.

Remember, per Birnbaum/Potentialism the universe is one interlocked super-equation; thus the universe-spanning super-genome can potentially be tweaked ‘at-will’.

The entire universe-spanning genome? You just know that this will be the finalfinal conclusion in due course

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel E

reminder:

Q4P encompasses the fusion ofQuantum-information processing + Quantum-computing + Quantum-engineering to play-out

Q4P → C+ → E+

Intelligence

- but each is quite distinct and unique

the Birnbaum Evolution hypothesis

Potentialism Evolution

Summa's Metaphysics fused with Lloyd's Quantum Mechanics

Evolution / panel F

reminder:

Q4P encompasses the fusion ofQuantum-information processing + Quantum-computing + Quantum-engineering to play-out

Q4P → C+ → E+

Q4P intelligence > produced human intelligence > which produced AI

43 EVOLUTION Evolution

Potentialism Darwinism

Species evolve? Y Y

the literal Biblical N N presentation

planet-wide**; local; Evolution inter- not gamut connected interconnected

driven by a transcendent dynamic? Y N

Infinite

Driver Quest for Potential

Natural Selection / (Q4P) Random Mutations

underpinning Quantum Mechanics ostensibly Struggle for existence

Designer? Yes / Q4P∞ No / none

Conceptualizer David Birnbaum Charles Darwin (Manhattan) (Kent/Greater London)

// Per Potentialism Ancestor of Man was one of the complex species progenitors launched/created by "the designer (Q4P∞)' during the narrow (~30 million-year wide) Cambrian Explosion c. 500 mill BCE.

** and maybe universe-wide - if extraterrestrial life exists

Core Text Summa Metaphysica Origin of Species 1859 (see summa-4.com) Vindication2022.com

now, back to the ‘beginning of the beginning’

Section 1c: Primordial Cosmic Realms & Creation Ex Nihilo+

Primordial Cosmic Realms* working hypothesis

1) Potential/Possibility is eternal**

[But what is the catalyst morphing (seemingly passive) Potential into (pro-active) Quest for Potential (Q4P)?]

2) Primordial (potential/possibility-oriented) Quantum Mechanics (QM)*** and (eternal) Potential supercharge each other

a) Potential → Quest for Potential∞ (Q4P)

[This ‘quest’ will have both intentionality and ~instinct intelligence]

b) Primodial QM → Primodial+ QM

3) In due course, Q4P will deploy/harness both (pre-Big Bang primordial)

Quantum Mechanics (QM) and (pre-Big Bang primordial) Classic Physics – to split ‘ZERO’ – and ignite our universe via the Big Bang…. the Genesis Point.

Creation Ex Nihilo+

So, it would seem that Creation Ex Nihilo (Creation from Nothing) falls, as well, to Summa/Potentialism Theory

So we, indeed, would seem to have a viable metaphysical/ scientific (‘fusion’ again) working hypothesis for one of the iconic Holy Grails of metaphysics//philosophy/cosmology

I might prefer to call the finesse –

…..Creation Ex Nihilo+

because

Potential is more than Nothing

Basically, two potential-related ‘somethings’ supercharge each other –

Summa’s metaphysical Eternal Potential was ‘impacted’ by the primordial incarnation (specifically, the potentialpossibility aspect thereof, of) Planck/Einstein’s Quantum Mechanics (QM) – to yield

Summa’s proposed Prime Mover (primum movens) ………… Q4P

And this Prime Mover can be viewed as either secular or spiritual or Divine (or some variation thereof), depending on one’s predilection.

# Be clear that I did not (have the nerve to) mess around with integrating QM whatsoever into Summa/Potentialism Theory until I read Lloyd’s (“Programing”) book in 2006 –and had a mini heart attack from the adrenalin surge because of the 1:1 parallel to Summa I (1988) and Summa II (2005); however, like a stem cell, QM would seem to have many vibrant ‘faces’… and thus, the QM plot thickened... and here we are

# As you are aware, I integrate the Wheeler/Lloyd QM It/ Bit build-out into my Summa/Potentialism theory Evolution build-out several years later – in 2014 in Summa III; however, the above Primordial Cosmic Realms QM build-out is new****.

# Be alert that, contrary to point (2) above, there are those who assert that QM does not exist (in any form) pre-Big Bang; respectfully, they are wrong*****; however, even if they are right, point (2) above will then simply need to be tweaked as follows. The potential/possibility of (potentialpossibility-oriented) QM jump-started Q4P from Eternal Potential. ******

* before our universe was even created

** As noted, BY DEFINITION….Self-Evident

*** In our deployment of QM in primordial realms we are focusing on the classic ‘possibility’ aspect of QM; in our deployment of QM via a’ vis Evolution we are focusing on the Wheeler/Lloyd ‘bit-build-out aspect of QM.

**** I had ‘radar lock’ at a post-Yom Kippur Break-Fast Sept 30, 2017 while harassing the (philosophically sharp) NYU Medical School student next to me – after struggling with the issue for several decades. As we were leaving and going down the NYU Kimmel Building elevator, I asked him what he liked best about the theory. His response: “It would appear to be a viable and quite all-encompassing theory; and in science the more all-encompassing viable theory prevails.”

***** QM needs to be operational pre-Big Bang, because QM is (quite-specifically) needed to arrange the precise settings for the Big Bang; QM has the tool-kit to do same –and 100th generation IBM’s Watson (c. 3000 CE) was not in the picture yet….

****** As is apparent, this (fallback) version would be weaker than my preferred version (above).

The Birnbaum super-formula ALGORITHM

Quest for Potential∞ → Complexification → Extraordinariation

a suis generis infinitely nested algorithm

[ the inviolate arc of the universe ]

an infinitely iterative dynamic

[ the full-spectrum macro & micro level common denominator trajectory of the Cosmic Order ]

the eternal - teleology / chi / direction / modus operandi - of the universe

Potentialism Lexicon

Key Terms

Q4P∞ = Infinite Quest for Potential

C+     =  Complexification

the cosmic drive towards increased  complexity/sophistication/wondrousness

E+      =  Extraordinariation

the idealized end-goal of the cosmic process; an ideal to be approached, but not quite realized more detail/amplification to follow

Birnbaum-Super-Formula

The Birnbaum-posited

Direction/Teleology/Driver of the universe

- from Summa Metaphysica II, 2005

WITH DIRECTIONAL UNIVERSE DEMONSTRATED HERE TO BE SELF-EVIDENT IN COMPLEXIFICATION

***see panel 3 of 3

Direction: panel 1 of 3

ZOOM-IN MICRO

the close-in focus:

the ‘mechanistic driver’ of the universe

First, in the life sciences , we now can see the trajectory from the atom to molecules to single celled organisms to multicelled organisms to photosynthesis and plants; then as we continue to advance forward, we move into the (more complex) Animal Kingdom then onto (even more complex) humans — with ever greater and wider complexity/sophistication/wondrousness, freedom of action, brainpower, emotional array and indeed, consciousness.

Laying out the Q4P → C+ → E+ trajectory on a more macro level vis à vis the history of the cosmos , we now know that the trajectory post-Big Bang is very roughly as-follows: from Big Bang point > expanding universe of energy > gas Clouds > embryonic Galaxies > Stars > super-complex Galaxies and planetary systems and ever-expanding universe > embryonic Life on Earth > evolution of sex, advanced/sophisticated/complex Life forms > development of brains, language, numbers, reading, writing, computing, emailing, artificial intelligence, ever-wider spectrum emotion and ever-higher levels of consciousness - in the persons of homo sapiens. - a trajectory which, of couse, dovetails with the life sciences trajectory just delineated justabove.

Direction: panel 2 of 3

ZOOM-OUT MACRO

the broader view: the overarching ‘metaphysical driver’ of the Cosmic Order

***Meaning, the equation is simultaneously the :

# METAPHYSICAL DIRECTION OF THE UNIVERSE

# METAPHYSICAL DRIVER OF THE UNIVERSE

# LIFE-FORCE/CHI OF THE UNIVERSE

# PURPOSE/GOAL OF THE UNIVERSE

# (entire) UNIVERSE ITSELF

***ALL ARE ONE-AND-THE-SAME***

Potentialism Theory

Summa Metapysica series 1988 and onwards

some equations are more nimble than others - DB ;)

Birnbaum-Super-Formula

Direction: panel 3 of 3

Directional universe is now established.

BCE

~350 / Aristotle / directional universe

CE

1859 / Darwin / Origin of Species / directional universe / evolution

1961 / Dicke / Dirac's Cosmology / fine-tuned-universe / direction: finetuned for life

1988 / Summa I: Infinite Quest for Potential (Q4P) / directional universe

1989 / Gribbin & Rees / Cosmic Coincidences / fine-tuned universe / direction: fine-tuned for life

1999 / Rees / Just Six Numbers / fine-tuned universe / direction: finetuned for life

2005 / Birnbaum / Summa II: Q4P → C+ → E+ / directional universe

2006 / lloyd: complexity / directional universe

2012 / Nagel / Mind & Cosmos / directional universe

Potentialism Theory (starting with Summa I in 1988; Summa II in 2005; and MIT Professor Seth Lloyd (in his quantum-theory Programming the Universe book - 2006) have respectively independently delineated - in an overlapping manner - the (same) empirically-observed pattern/direction. And, for sure, others have done same before and after.

The [zoom-in] direction of the universe simply put is Complexification [C+] per Summa Metaphysica/Potentialism) - and the parallel theme of ever-increasing complexity per LLoyd. This directional trajectory spans the (entire) life of our universe - and once discerned, as it has been, is essentially indisputable.

Note that in the Summa Metaphysica/Potentialism case, the broader metaphysical trajectory/direction is Q4P > C+ > E+ (or, in 'the vernacular', Infinite Quest for Potential > Complexification > Extraordinariation).

lead-in

the quantum physics to backstop Summa Theory

a Birnbaum hypothesis

Birnbaum:Lloyd

see also 2006 Programming the Universe by Seth Lloyd Professor of Mechanical Engineering & Physics at MIT

This (2006) seminal Lloyd work came out after Summa I (November, 1988) and Summa II (March, 2005). - and prior to Summa III (2014).

Professor Seth Lloyd - from stellar MIT - furnishes a (timely ; ) crucialand hitherto missing - breakthrough cutting-edge science nuts & bolts mechanics / quantum physics mechanism to backstop the metaphysics of Summa Theory.

translation: 'Insider' Lloyd of MIT ensures (in 2006) that 'outlier' Birnbaum's proposed (1988, 2005, 2014) global and over-arching (macro-micro) paradigm shift will prevail.

(more on Lloyd:Birnbaum further down)

Paralleling Birnbaum

Lloyd (2006-2007) presents a Quantum Mechanics theory of a Quantum Computer universe paralleling Birnbaum’s (1988 + 2005) orinigal/breakthrough

Conceptual Metaphysical theory of a Q4P∞ (Quest for Potential) universe

the key contemporary scientific hypothesis bridge to Summa

**from a secular / scientific / mechanistic perspective“All interactions between particles in the universe...convey not only energy but also information in other words, particles not only collide, they compute. What is the entire universe computing, ultimately? Its own dynamical evolution... As the computation proceeds, reality unfolds.”

-from the back-cover of Programming the Universe

By Seth Lloyd, Professor, Mechanical Engineering, MIT (c) 2006, First Vintage Books Edition (NY)

Lloyd’s hypothesis provides key 1:1 buttress to Summa.

Indeed, “Q4P∞ is hiding in plain sight,” - both conceptually and literallyas we have hypothesized since 1988 via Summa Metaphysica I (hardcover), and then via Summa Metaphysica II (2005 online, 2008 softcover)

Birnbaum’s Q4P∞ resonates as a fuller multi-dimensional wrap-around conceptualization re: Lloyd’s universe as a programming entity

*MIT scientist Seth Lloyd directs the Center for Extreme Quantum Information Theory at MIT, where he is also a professor of Mechanical Engineering.

**excerpt, not a testimonial

Both Birnbaum's Q4P∞ (Quest for Potential∞) dynamic and Lloyd's Quantum Computer are (eternally) building-out from the eternal 'Genesis Point'; they are each ~infinitely iterating & optimizingdrawing-from an ever-richer pool of resources; each has, as well, essentially 'become' the universeadvancing onwward and outward into the unknown; the disciplines, language, lenses, and imagery may seem to diverge, but the core dynamics - and implications of the two cosmologies - are eerily parallel.

a Birnbaum hypothesis

1:1 Resonance ?

Parallel to Summa, albeit highly mechanistic

excerpts from PROGRAMMING THE UNIVERSE

A QUANTUM COMPUTER SCIENTIST TAKES ON THE COSMOS

“The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is a quantum computer. This begs the question: What does the universe compute? It computes itself. The universe computes its own behavior. As soon as the universe began, it began computing. At first, the patterns it produced were simple, comprising elementary particles and establishing the fundamental laws of physics. In time, as it processed more and more information, the universe spun out ever more intricate and complex patterns, including galaxies, stars, and planets. Life, language, human beings, society, culture—all owe their existence to the intrinsic ability of matter and energy to process information. The computational capability of the universe explains one of the great mysteries of nature: how complex systems such as living creatures can arise from fundamentally simple physical laws…. (p. 3)

The digital revolution under way today is merely the latest in a long line of information-processing revolutions stretching back through the development of language, the evolution of sex, and the creation of life, to the beginning of the universe itself. Each revolution has laid the groundwork for the next….” (p. 5)

Lloyd directs the Center for Extreme Quantum Information Theory (xQIT) at MIT.

so, Metaphysical/Holistic Birnbaum’s Quest for Potential (Q4P∞) has 1:1 resonance with neo-Mechanstic Lloyd's ‘universe computer’

Conceptually, one schema reinforces the otheras both ‘unities’ are all-embracing, all-universe, all-encompassing, ongoingiterating, and inexorably-advancing.

So, put another way... per Birnbaum's Potentialism Theory, via the quantum, (see quantum mechanic maestro Lloyd for the nuts & bolts) our super-organic and fully-integrated universe optimizes, then iterates - in an ongoing loopon every level (macro thru micro) and integrates across the entire universe (ongoing), factoring-in short, medium and long term.

[Meaning, Q4P is a 'busy boy']

-DB

On Cosmology, Evolution per Lloyd*

"In fact, the chance of an ordered universe like ours arising out of random flips of a coin is so small as to be effectively zero." - p. 57

"The amount of information in a gene can be measured; the human genome possesses some 6 billion bits of information." - p. 15

*Lloyd, Programming the Universe, Knopf, 2007, NY.

see also Birnbaum Extrapolates Lloyd Extrapolates

the heirs to alchemy?

Issues with the ('competing') Randomness formulation

It is clearly dead-wrong see Direction panel just-above

Internally contradictory?

The same entrenched British Randomness academic clique which fanatically defends its (non-directional) Theory of No Theory - Randomness, simultaneously fanatically defends (directional) Evolution.

alchemy?

Notorious alchemists swore they could turn lead into gold. However that seems like a simple trick compared to contemporary hard-line Randomnist High Priests who profess that their theory turns the random void into our rocking and rollingfor 14 billion years - universe.

Is the Randomness formulation simply the ‘successor theory’ to alchemy?

Second Law of Thermodynamics:

Why does our allegedly random universe not implode from entropy? [hint: because it is driven forward by (competing Potentialism Theory's) Q4P, and not randomly]

combination - The Emperor's Clothes and The Wizard of Oz?

Is the fantastical Randomness formulation not a 1:1 parallel to these just-noted fables of vacuousness?

We are all still waiting for the actual theory:

The hard-line Randomness clique has perfected the dark art of "toxifying" any theorist who dares disagree with their aimless and hollow construct; but, after 150+ years, for their part they have yet to produce an actual theory. [ translation: the Randomness/Aimlessness clique is an intellectual charlatan ]

From the shadows, the Randomnist clique hyper- aggressively mauls 'directional universe' theorists, but never actually seems to present an actual theory. Are we supposed to conflate frenzied attacks with an actual theory? To paraphrase the diss used by Texas cattlemen to characterize big bluster / no substance

characters: These Randomness hombres are ALL HAT; NO CATTLE.

defining our universe:

There are many and significant random dimensions to our universe; but, randomness does not define it; rather, (competing Potentialism Theory's) Quest for Potential defines our universe.

'Randomness' Invalidated by Fine-Tuned Universe proposition

Is the universe fine-tuned for life? This proposition has gained increasing prominence and traction.

The proposition reached critical mass in 1999 with the publication of Just Six Numbers by Martin Rees, distinguished British Astronomer Royal. The proposition is directly antithetical to the Randomness proposition; the proposition negates Randomness. Rees went on to become head of the Royal Society.

Randomness may have been frontally challenged prior, including by Summa I, 1988, but Randomness 'is slain' by the 1999 Rees work; and a stake is driven in its heart by Summa II (2005).

'Defaming' is not 'Debating'

Some hard-line Randomness proponents seem confused. 'Defaming opposing theorists' - typically through paid surrogates/hit men - does actually not qualify for 'debating opposing theorists'.

Denial of Negative Reality

The first requirement of a theorist is to deal with reality. The 'denial of negative reality' psychosis can be hazardous to one's legacy. The core tenet of Randomness - non-directionality, has been clearly scientifically demonstrated to be false- on two fronts: Fine-Tuned universe (see Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers (1999) and Direction section from David Birnbaum, Summa Metaphysica II (2005).

Contrary to the first - and only - axiom of Randomness, the universe, is unequivocally directional. See Directional

'Game Over'?

For over a decade, and on two key different fronts, Randomness is in checkmate. Both Fine-Tuned universe formulation and the empirically demonstrated Complexification C+ / complexity teleology (universe purpose/direction) respectfully frontally render the Randomness formulation of 'no directionality' fatally undermined and disproven. The emperor, indeed, had no clothes.

the Randomness 'Theory of No Theory'

No theory. No content.

No core work. No formulation. No science. No cosmology.

Basics

The earth is not flat; the sun does not orbit the earth; our universe did not randomly ignite, gain traction, evolve, and steadily iterate towards ever-increasing sophistication and wondrousness ongoing for 14 billion years and counting.

intellectual 'sleight of hand" ?

There is no scientific anchoring whatsoever. Random universe is simply hocus pocus masquerading as science.

product of an "echo chamber" discussion? Group Think?

Go along to get along?

Bandwagon syndrome?

more akin to the mantra of a medieval nihilistic cult - than to a serious academic discussion in 21st Century England

a fanatic - and in-vain - gambit - to align science with hard-line Atheism (de facto a fundamentalist and militant anti-directional universe belief system).

"Big Brother" modus operandi

No debate; No discussion; No competition of ideas.

The Fall of Randomness

subtext: the ramifications of the Randomness

clique's abuse of power

The m.o.:

From the shadows, their 'leadership clique' has rationalized a pattern of ongoing nefarious antics/gambits to destroy competing theorists.

unable to compete 'on the merits' the clique deploys academic thuggerywith slander, defamation, and misinformation as consistently central to its messaging - in targeting opposing theorists for destruction

The net result:

Institutionalizing the strangulation (by the Randomness clique) of global debate as (somehow) acceptable academic practice & norm

extra-legal modus operandi one cannot assert that their m.o. is a legal one Is the closest description - 'racketeering & corrupt' ?

a few medieval ogres calling their shots suppress all debate * crush all dissent * destroy all dissenters

actually a fundamentalist/hard-line/militant/nihilistic cult masquerading as a scientific theory

radicalizing classic Atheism

- from (scientifically tenable) ideological opposition to classic Creationist God, into (scientifically untenable) hard-line Atheismwith strident opposition to any 'direction' whatsoever in the universe as core doctrine.

In the mix, Their stratagem conveniently aims to toxify competing theorists (typically American), and attempts to sideline these American theories (typically 'directional universe').

The 'cover':

slap-on-the-back jocularity and pompous self-righteous (misplaced) arrogance

The internal (delusional) mantra:

are Imperial" - and we alone - and unilaterallywill decide what is acceptable academic discourse

Conflating an anti-religious ideology - with academic teachings

As 90%+ of science academicians in England happen to conveniently be hardline Atheists, they will merge a fundamentalist ideology (stridently anti-theist), with a (false) scientific hunch (an anti-directional universe); they will then advocate

"We

Randomness/Aimlessness - as (alleged) science. The two - a strident fundamentalist ideology and (false) a hunch - will become one and the same: the (convoluted) 'science' of the Atheist British academics.

the putative 'side benefit':

Presumably the Randomness clique would get to divvy-up global academic influencewith 'legacy' and sundry accolades in-the-mix....

the ancillary toxic gambits: the 'gaming' of Google and Wikipedia

teaching the wrong course

The Randomness clique should not be teaching Cosmology; they should be teaching a course which they actually truly understand: "Fascism for Beginners" : An Introductory Course

does not actually qualify as science should not really even be brought up in the Science Department courses; sort of, a wrong turn in the history of science; simply not serious

hijacked and mutated classic Atheism mutated Atheism from: disbelievers in classic God > rabid and militant opponents of any 'direction' to the universe

Zombie DNA

we come, we destroy; darkness trumps light; despair trumps hope

We are the nihilist Randomness cultists

Three racketeering identity-masked ghouls on pinnacle British campuses are allowed to decree verdicts of academic Life or Death on cosmology/philosophy academics across America ???

- while Cambridge - Oxford - Imperial hear no evil; see no evil ?

- while cutting-edge American theorists are conveniently undermined and/or systematically destroyed?

- And while The Chronicle (DC-based) always 'happens' to deliver the core (often virulently) negativity attack? - which can conveniently and readily be parlayed by the ghouls' acolytes into a high-profile destructive Guardian article and/or

Wikipedia piece to aid & abet the steady academic asphyxiation of the target theorist?

a (very) small secretive, psychologically twisted clique - dictates (quack) 'science' to the world?

- by neutralizing/eliminating competing theorists viasecretly commissioned toxic articles; bare-knuckled academic blackmail; and gaming Google/Wikipedia?

The core Randomness hierarchy permanently in hiding?

Three thuggish from-the-shadows misfits...

Self-appointed to play judge-jury-executioner...

Sadistic cowards...

[NOTE. My family exited Berlin in 1938; we have seen these fascist freaks before...]

The collateral damage:

# a 100+ year (at least as far back as 1900) freeze of scientific advance across multiple fields

# a betrayal of the world's trust in British academe

# the unhinging of England's venerable core academic integrity

*

But, as noted in the above Scroll Down, Randomness - as front & center - now falls on both key fronts: Cosmology and Evolution

And, all the king's horses and all the king's men

Couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again

"The world is not flat - and the universe is not random" - Birnbaum

see also SuperFormula1000.com

Section 2: Appendix Section

APPENDIX A: Metaphysics Analysis

One can never PROVE a metaphysics.

By definition.

Because one would have to stand outside the entire cosmos to view it all –

and simulate Creation itself – to test it all.

* However one can certainly ASSESS different metaphysics.

Metaphysics is always hypothesis. But, hopefully very, very intelligent hypothesis.

One can, indeed, analyze different metaphysical constructs with a consistent set of questions.

*

Now, some of the questions involved in assessing various metaphysics might be the following: (These

questions tend to overlap, but have different thrusts and nuance.)

Is the metaphysics overarching? All-embracing?

Does the metaphysics handle the key questions in philosophy? (re-capped in the INTROS and FOREWORDS of the three books of this series)

Does the metaphysics have a fatal flaw(s); a major gap(s),

– or does it essentially legitimately ‘stitch-together’ all the key issues

*

To what extent is the metaphysics TETHERED to classic works or spiritual texts? *

Does the core of the metaphysics RESONATE within us?

*

Is the case made exclusively “in an Ivory Tower” –

– or is the case somewhat brought-down-to-earth, as well?

Is the presentation some sort of miasma (murky, obscuring vapor)

or is it actually fairly articulate and systematic?

Are the themes, however allegedly profound, articulated in a totally obscure manner –– or in a generally intelligible manner?

*

Do we grasp the CREATIVE ESSENCE of the presentation?

*

Does the proposed metaphysics gently ‘tip-toe around the garden’ –

or does it attempt to get to the very core of the cosmic code?

*

Does the proposed metaphysics primarily concern itself with playing with SEMANTICS and DEFINITIONS –

or does it actually provide an overarching INTEGRATED FORMULATION for the cosmic order?

*

A proposed metaphysics must be assessed, as well, by these not inconsiderable – and, frankly, nonnegotiable, demands, as well:

Does the proposed metaphysics truly embrace all known dynamics – in all fields?

Does the proposed metaphysics embrace our experiences and accumulated wisdom over the centuries?

Does the metaphysics embrace all that we scientifically believe to have occurred – and the overwhelming great bulk of what we hypothesize to have occurred – since the dawn of time? *

Does the particular proposed metaphysics – about our most extraordinary universe and profound existence –run flat and dry

– or does it, on some level, actually, touch our soul? * * *

APPENDIX B: Schematically

(as introduction to this particular appendix, first let us take one more quick look at the Baal Shem Tov’s philosophy.....

see lead paragraph on the Baal Shem Tov’s doctrines

(a.k.a. the BESHT’s doctrines)

Elements of Besht’s doctrines

Jewish Encyclopedia Online, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ view.jsp?artid=18&letter=B (accessed October 5, 2009)

“The foundation-stone of Hasidism as laid by Besht is a strongly marked pantheistic conception of God. He declared the whole universe, mind and matter, to be a manifestation of the Divine Being; that this manifestation is not an emanation from God, as is the conception of the Kabbalah, for nothing can be separated from God: all things are rather forms in which He reveals Himself…” * * * * * * * * *

Now, having the BESHT’s doctrine noted above for easy

reference, to schematically outline what is happening as regards our formulation, juxtaposed against other formulations

* * * * * * * * * let

A = God

B = Man

AB = GodMan

Maimonides:

encapsuled one core proposition: God created Man (Aristotelian)

A created B *

Lurianic Kabbalah:

encapsuled in one core proposition: Man is an emanation from God (sort of, from WITHIN God);

GOD WITHDRAWS to create Man

( tzimtzum )

B comes from WITHIN A * Baal Shem Tov:

encapsuled in one core proposition: All is a Manifestation OF God

(panentheistic)

A and B are part of AB *

SUMMA / Birnbaum:

encapsuled in one core proposition: Holy Quest for Potential (to the infinite recursive power) drives GOD, MAN and the COSMOS ever-forward towards EXTRAORDINARIATION.

Now, Summa Metaphysica lays the FORMULATION out in

18 multi-faceted propositions:

9 in the first book, God and Evil

9 in the second book, God and Good

But, let’s give you the “Monarch notes’

‘test-prep version’ here on Summa / Birnbaum *

Thus, to attempt to outline SUMMA in 6 quick propositions:

1.

QUEST FOR POTENTIAL ∞ is on a journey from POSSIBILITY through METAPHYSICAL REALMS through REALITY, then towards PERFECT FULFILLMENT & REALIZATION (‘EXTRAORDINARIATION’)

(the first part of this proposition has components in-common with RASHI ( ‘na-asheh adahm b ‘zalmenu’

Let us make Man in our Image - Genesis), and with Lurianic Kabbalah ( En Sof...Sefirot ) and Plato’s Forms ... aside from being anchored in ‘ Eheyeh Asher Eheye h’ –Exodus)

2. Infinite Potentialities at the end–of–the–rainbow (‘EXTRAORDINARIATION’), retroactively ignite Creation – and the Divine ‘spark’

3.

We are ALL part of HOLY QUEST FOR POTENTIAL (this is ~panentheistic, parallel to the BESHT)

4.

We are all part of a grander, evolving COSMIC Consciousness.

(this has components in common with the BESHT and with Teilhard, the Jesuit philosophical renegade)

5.

Divine consciousness (the Godhead of the cumulative consciousness) withdraws to give greater freedom to MAN

(an anchor of the proposed solution to theodicy in Book #1)

(this has components in common with the Torah’s Hester Panim (Hiding of the Divine Face) and with Lurianic Kabbalah tzimtzum )

6.

ALL (AB) are on an ongoing journey towards EXTRAORDINARIATION.

(components, almost in common with ‘ Messianic era ’ ) * * *

APPENDIX C: Extraordinariation ( E+ )

To our readers:

Summa Metaphysica proposes the concept of Extraordinariation. This concept is proposed and elaborated upon in the chapter Mu: Cosmic Tool Kit- Shelf #2 above (in the first section of this book, Cosmic Womb of Potential)

The following is a finalé commentary piece on the theme.

EXTRAORDINARIATION

To say that the feeling in the listener’s soul at the climax of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony is ‘perfect’ is drastic and degrading understatement. The meta-emotional human response to this piece of art (and it is not alone) is outside of perfection as it is outside of language. It is transcendent, extra, extraordinary.

It has been said that God is the ultimate artist, creating a world-dynamic with all the idiosyncrasies of complex art. To praise His work as being merely ‘perfect’ or ‘efficient’ is to miss its creative essence. It is to embrace the engineer while neglecting the artisan. This is a neglect bolstered by science and mathematics, disciplines whose unique understanding of the universe’s exactitude has been used to turn the focus from its delicate elegance. The cold progression of evolution engenders an appreciation for the lion’s strength, for the cheetah’s speed; the precision of physics provides a window into the flawlessness of our cosmos; but there is more.

Darwinian evolution need not have yielded the frail butterfly, the vulnerable dove; the Earth’s orbit need not have yielded the grace of changing seasons, snow-decorated forests. Indeed laws of nature and principles of physics need not have yielded complexity at all. Nevertheless, complexity permeates our world from subatomic particles to cosmic galaxies. It is this complexity that allows for the sophisticated beauty that stands in wait of our perception daily.

Yet the paradox of this complexity surfaces as we probe it more deeply. Structural biologists have shown that fundamental biology depends on predictable chemistry. Quantum mechanics has shown that chemistry, in turn, can be dissected into the physics that underlies it.

Einstein showed that even within physics separations are an illusion. His special theory of relativity (1905) revealed that the division between space and time is

artificial. His subsequent general theory of relativity (1915) showed the same of the distinction between space-time and matter.

Thus, the broad perspective reveals our world’s complexity while the deep, penetrating perspective reveals its unity. Stepping back, we appreciate worldly complexity, stepping close we are astounded by its unity. Such is the paradox. Complexity and unity challenge one another as they each thrust forward expanding their respective scopes simultaneously. New species are discovered as unified theorems are developed. This duality teases us with its plainness: we can only watch, spellbound, as our cosmos’ singularity and its nuance develop and unfold, hand-in-hand, before us. Herein lays the irony of our world’s progression: a relentless trajectory towards unbounded extraordinariation.

APPENDIX D: Consciousness Connection?

Consciousness remains a vast unknown.

Above, in the main body of the book, I posit a “cumulative consciousness”. And this speculative conjecture is an integral part of my philosophical construct.

Now, we know from Astrophysics that approximately half-a-billion years after the Big Bang (with the Big Bang currently calculated at 13.7 billion years ago), Supernovas (collapsing hi–mass stars) started ‘creating/manufacturing/cooking’ the so–called heavier elements (elements heavier than #26 Iron) in their cores, and then projected them outwards to the far reaches of the universe.

These heavier Elements were, in turn, necessary building–blocks for LIFE. Meaning, without the DEATH of the supernovas, there would be no LIFE.

Meaning, on some level, from DEATH, emerges (fuller and fuller) LIFE. Now, we posit as a consistent theme throughout SUMMA, that: the human parallels the cosmic. The question is just exactly how.

So, we see from Astrophysics, that DEATH can profoundly yield LIFE. The question is: Is there a parallel in human death?

So, perhaps, perhaps, (individual) human death enhances the cumulative cosmic consciousness.

This is fragile and dangerous terrain, and I simply do not have a good intuitive feel here. Hence, placement in an Appendix.

However, intriguingly, Maimonides, Guide to the Perplexed, from Friedlander’s translation, Part I, 74, 7th argument:

“

Amr , and therefore the souls of all the departed form only one being as has been explained by Ibn Bekr Ibn Al-zaig , and others who ventured to speak on these profound subjects. In short, such intricate disciplines, which our mind can scarcely comprehend, cannot furnish any principles for the explanation of other subjects.”

Somewhat cryptic, for sure, but positing that, post-Death – all souls merge into one.

Now, Souls are certainly not necessarily Consciousness.

But, then again, maybe they are (very) closely inter–related...

Thus, perhaps, the Death of an individual, somehow enhances the cumulative consciousness – on some level, however profound.

Perhaps, we should respectfully leave this particular matter (Consciousness) at that (for this treatise)...

APPENDIX E: Potential-Impacted Evolution

Conceptually, Evolution is correct. However, Evolution is heavily impacted by the mandates of Quest for Potential ∞ .

The “entrenched orthodoxy” on the subject is: Randomness, then “natural selection” ~guided evolution . The mechanics of “natural selection” are in-dispute by the academic/scientific community. It was originally thought that “survival of the fittest” was the driver of Evolution – with “survival of the fittest” incorporating the optimal ability to propagate and pass on genetic coding.

From my speculative perspective as a so-to-speak Conceptual Theorist, as opposed to a scientist, “survival of the fittest” is necessary but not sufficient. The grander and more accurate concept is that Q4P ∞ impacts the evolutionary process via its Macro-Holistic Optimization tool.

[ See section MU above: “The cosmos OPTIMIZES and EVOLVES & MORPHS as it seeks OPTIMIZATION, an

iterative macro–holistic–optimization of eco–systems towards the ultimate goal of INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION presumably incorporating vanguard species....” ]

Local imperatives and considerations receive the most “weight” in the Macro-Holistic Optimization calculation.

Q4P ∞ = ( Survival-Traction ( Panoply of Potential ( Extraordinariation

Meaning, Survival-Traction is necessary-but-notsufficient “bedrock consideration,” but far from the only consideration.

Summa maintains that Q4P ∞ is choreographing Evolution.

see Section 1b: Evolution

“Evolution itself, moving upwards coordinately and undeviatingly from the lowest to the highest, demonstrates most clearly a prevision from afar – a preset purpose for all existence. Divine greatness is thereby enhanced and all the goals of faith confirmed, and trust in and service of the Divine is all the more justified – since all strives upwards and man has it in his power to improve and perfect himself and his world, he is manifestly thereby doing the will of his Creator. Spiritual perfection is thus seen to be in the center of all existence.” Rabbi Abraham Kook, Orot Ha-Kodesh (c.1920)

APPENDIX F1:*

Hasidic v. Kabbalistic

BAAL SHEM TOV (founder of Hasidism)

(b. 1698, Sara, Ukraine; d. 1760, Medzhybizh, Ukraine)

(“The Besht”)

“The foundation-stone of Hasidism as laid by Besht is a strongly marked pantheistic conception of God. He declared the whole universe, mind and matter, to be a manifestation of the Divine Being; that this manifestation is not an emanation from God, as is the conception of the Kabbalah, for nothing can be separated from God: all things are rather forms in which He reveals Himself…” a

*a Jewish Encyclopedia Online , http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ view.jsp?artid=18&letter=B (accessed October 5, 2009)

BASIC IDEAS OF HASIDISM

Creator and Universe

“‘The hasidic leader R. Menahem Mendel of Lubavich observes ( Derekh Mitzvotekha (1911), 123) that the disciples of the Ba’al Shem Tov gave the “very profound” turn to the doctrine of the oneness of God so that it means not alone that He is unique, as the medieval thinkers said, but that He is all that is:…there is no other existence whatsoever apart from His existence, blessed be He. This is true unification…just as there was no existence apart from Him before the world was created so it is even now.” …as a corollary of hasidic pantheism (more correctly, panentheism)…’” b

(author’s note: there are no extant writings of the Besht)

*b As noted in Encyclopaedia Judaica on Baal Shem Tov {1997} [CD-ROM]

Author’s editorial comment / perspective on the classic and historic ‘dispute’ between Lurianism and Hasidism on the subject:

As the gemorah might say, “Eylu v-aylu divre’ Elokim Chayim”

i.e. Both (exegesis) positions stand valid side-by-side eternally

and, indeed, in this case, both philosophical propositions:

The Lurianic*** [The universe as EMANATION from God] –

and the Hasidic position [The universe as MANIFESTATION of God]

Both tether different (intertwined) aspects of the proposed Quest for Potential ∞ paradigm.

*

***Lurianic is a thrust of Kabbalistic

Meaning, philosophical thrust #1 does not exclude philosophical thrust #2, as the respective theological / philosophical camps supposed; On the contrary, BOTH philosophical thrusts must be true side-by-side in order to explicate and outline – in even the most general terms – the contours of an all-embracing metaphysics.

APPENDIX F2: The Suffused Divine

Rav Chaim of Volozhin*a (b.1749, Volozhin, Belarus; d. 1821, Volozhin, Belarus) elucidates Hashem (the Divine) as filling – and surrounding – all worlds.

“It says in many places in the Zohar that ‘Hashem fills all worlds’ and ‘surrounds all worlds.’ This means that from Hashem’s perspective, He fills all worlds, and we, from our Torah-oriented vantage point, see Hashem as surrounding all worlds. The meaning of the concept of ‘Hashem filling all worlds’ is concealed from us.

The truth is that from Hashem’s perspective, even after creating the world, He fills all the worlds and all existence; literally, ‘There is nothing else beside Him’ (Devarim 4:35).”

Meaning, as per Summa, the Divine is not “over there” and we are “over here”; Rather, the Divine suffuses all. And, parallel to our metaphysics, wherein Quest for Potential∞ is the core of the Divine, and the Divine drives the cosmos....

APPENDIX G: Push v. Push & Pull

Classic Western and Jewish philosophy* (call them both Model #1) each has –

the “Concrete subject” –God –

“pushing” Creation forward –in the moment.

Whereas my metaphysics (call it Model #2) has –

a) Q4P∞/Extraordinariation

“pushing” Creation forward inexorably as well as

b) the future perfection goal-point –Infinite Divine Potential –

“pulling” and igniting Creation –from the future.

Thus, these are 2 very different “models” – on multiple levels.

* Kabbalistic Jewish philosophy diverges from mainstream Jewish

APPENDIX H: “The Spiraling Collective”

The outwardly-spiraling COLLECTIVE-vortex-unity potentially incorporates the following interlaced layers, among others

Spirituality

ConSCiouSneSS

intelligenCe

Taking-a-stab at a more schematic representation of the current state of our little Quest for Potential∞ dynamic, we respectfully offer the schematic on the left.

“The Spiraling Collective”: an industrious and ultimately spiritually-driven ‘collective,’ which has a habit of creating solar systems and life forms, and is even rumored, via its GODHEAD, to have parted the Red Sea once, a long time ago...

APPENDIX I: Balance and Diversity

To focus first on our own planet, balance of life and diversity of life are embedded in the overarching theme of Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation.

.....which maneuvers on an ongoing basis to protect and advance* these two important “sub-motifs,” among others.

*balance of life is maintained to protect survival

APPENDIX J: Convergence

All roads lead to the infinite fount of Quest for Potential ∞ .

Religion, spirituality, the life sciences, physics, chemistry, astronomy et al. all converge on the road to Infinity.

They do not quite merge, as the quest for ultimate infinity is elusive, but they do converge.

In our quasi–finite milieu they are seemingly separate, – at least without the Quest for Potential ∞ overlay onto them.

However, on that ethereal road to the infinite fount of Quest for Potential ∞ they converge closer and closer.

Why is that?

Because they were originally tributaries of the “fount” of Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation. Thus, an objective observer looking at their trajectories would track back to their original divergence from the fount.

Thus, they are each truly not “complete” without that “Crown” (of Quest for Potential ∞) affixed to them.

And it is at the “Crown–point” that they converge, de facto merge, and de facto unify. ***

Key “gaps” and “loose-ends” across the spectrum of fields of human study and inquiry, will tend to “fill-in” relatively seamlessly employing the above. ***

Note that “Keter” (Crown) is, as well, an important component in Kabbalah. There is a convergence, to utilize that same term once again here, between my usage of the term Crown and the Kabbalistic explication of Keter.

APPENDIX K: Cracking the Cosmic Code*

Physics attempts to do so.

Secular philosophy attempts to do so.

Religious philosophy attempts to do so.

All hit major “roadblocks.”

Why is that?

*or more precisely, unraveling another crucial layer or two of the cosmic code

Because, the code–breaker is Quest for Potential∞/ Extraordinariation, (Q4P), which is at the intersection of all three, but not classically thoroughly within any of the three.

Do the three indeed intersect?

The mainstream classic wisdom would be –not necessarily.

But the mainstream classic wisdom is wrong.

All three intersect at their fount (see exhibit above –Convergence).

And their fount is the crucial intersection.

Only a dynamic with the transcendent - and “intersecting” – overarching power of Q4P, could possibly have had the power to ignite a cosmos.

Q4P would be in the realm of Metaphysics. Not quite physics and not quite philosophy of any classic stripe.

Only a theme from within the general genre of Metaphysics could ultimately be able to provide a potentially satisfying possible simultaneous answer to hitherto inexplicable conundrums in those 3 classic realms noted above –

[classic physics]:

Where did the first quark came from?

Meaning, where did the very smallest sub-atomic particle, whatever that turns out to be, come from?

[classic philosophy]:

Why there is any reality at all?

Meaning, why is there not simply a state of “nothingness”?

[classic religious philosophy]:

What are the eternal origins of the infinite (‘eternal’) Divine? Meaning, by what imperative/actualization is there the Divine which you posit/assert?

However, the introduction of Q4P does, respectfully, simultaneously and elegantly “solve” all three issues, and the constellation of related issues in each field. I have covered these matters – at least on the surface –over the course of the three volumes of Summa.

APPENDIX L: Life

Life would appear to be both –– an end in and of itself of Q4P

as well as – a portal to greater Q4P

These rich and crucial themes need to be developed.

APPENDIX M: Is Q4P∞ Morally Neutral?

That does not appear to be the case.

“Giving-ness” is crucial for child-rearing, and child-rearing is crucial for cosmic Q4P. And “giving-ness” is clearly identifiable with “good” (at least by me). Presumably “giving-ness” was crucial to creation itself, but I have not discerned the play there.

As readers and writers, our natural inclination might be to associate greater good with greater potential. That would be my position.

On net balance the cosmos thus would seem to tilt towards the positive.

However, the tilt towards the positive is not necessarily overwhelming – by any means.

Dealing with this question is a very major undertaking. And I’m not so brave.

APPENDIX N: Extraordinariation juxtaposed v. tohu va-vohu

One can hypothesize that Extraordinariation is juxtaposed against tohu va-vohu (the empty chaotic nothingness).*a

To take matters further, one can hypothesize that to keep the cosmos from imploding back into nothingness, Extraordinariation must advance with more dynamism and richness outward, than tohu va-vohu pulls inward.

This theme can be developed elegantly, and dovetails well with the other components of Q4P, but it remains forever within the realm of hypothesis.

*a see Genesis 1:2: “And the earth/land was tohu va-vohu ”

APPENDIX O: “Secular Divine” v. “Religious Divine”

As noted elliptically in the text, Q4P (Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation) works as a “Secular Divine” metaphysics and works well as a “Religious Divine”* metaphysics.

But, either way, we are dealing with an infinitely radiating, infinitely-grasping consciousness, and infinitely–grasping power: The Divine.

One cannot posit transcendent, energizing and infinite on all fronts, and then come back and say that this is not a “Divine” entity/dynamic/force.

*Godhead included

APPENDIX P: Optimization

The signature component of Q4P (Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation) is optimization.

The component will tend to optimize anything and everything.

*

For example, life on earth will emerge both on the oxygensustained surface, as well as in toxic hydrothermal vents in the depths of the ocean.

Optimization has “worked-out” the solution-path in each case.

But, remember, optimization is the signature component of Q4P, which in turn is at the heart of Infinite Divine Potential.

*

From Big Bangs to the evolution of snails, optimization will be hard at work.

From advancing human consciousness, to advancing peak-experiences, from the spiritual through the sexual, optimization has a 24/7 “consulting contract.” *

Both the optimization components of (Newtonian) calculus and the iterative components of Mandelbrot fractals are the (intertwined) mathematical threads here. They presumably underpin the mathematical component, which I hypothesize to be present.

(All) the other fields and extraordinary dimensions to this optimization component, presumably are intertwined–with, and wrap-around, the math.

This may prove somewhat hard to clinically prove :)

APPENDIX Q: Q4P∞ juxtaposed v. Vicissitude

Some readers, after concluding reading the Summa set, posed the same question with which I started the series in the first place: If Q4P, why evil? Now, that question was dealt with heavily in Book #1 and dealt with again intermittently over the course of Book #2.

But, let’s approach the question from one more angle, a very rough analogy, as we end this series.

The trip from the Old World to the New World involved stormy and quite-lethal voyages across the Atlantic. And even when the New World was reached, there was no shortage of travail. But there was ‘advance.’

And we advance–forward.

APPENDIX R:

More Powerful v. Perfect

The proposed Summa metaphysics is not perfect. Perfection is hard to come by when trying to get one’s arms around the infinite.

However, Summa would respectfully appear to be quite significantly more powerful and elegant than the competing known metaphysics formulations offered to date (over the past three to five thousand years).

APPENDIX S:

Book #1 (God and Evil)

v. Book #2 (God and Good)

Many readers of the Summa much prefer Book #1 over Book #2.

Presumably, it is clearer, and its style is more in a classic expository presentation/form. Plus Book #1 actually uses real, normal sentence structures.

Furthermore, Book #1 is almost a stand-alone, fairly comprehensible original and hi-energy, complete Metaphysics.

But only ‘almost.’

Whereas Book #1 conceptualized and framed-out the existence of Quest for Potential (enroute to dealing with theodicy, and before I brought Extraordinariation into the equation), Book #2 attempts to get its arms around the entire Q4P.

However, the mission of Book #2 is not so simple. How does one use regular language to describe an infinitely expanding (as we speak) Infinitude?

I thought about Book #2 for fourteen years before commencing 5-6 years of writing. And I only even conceived of a line of approach 12 years into the fourteen years of mulling-over this little task. So, either I’m slow or the task is challenging, or some combination thereof.

As noted in the introductory section to God and Good, Book #2 is heavily intuitive as the major motif, and heavily intellectual as the minor motif, whereas Book #1 was the mirror-image in these regards.

To achieve my (ambitious?) goals for Book #2, I needed to not only push my own psyche to its limits, which was frankly painful, but I needed to push your psyches to their respective limits, which I presume may have been somewhat grating, aggravating, frustrating or some combination thereof.

I saw no other route.

And time marches on.

Remember that Book #1 initially encountered very significant resistance when it was published in 1988. No one criticized it; it just wasn’t “grasped.” Then, about 2-5 years after publication, it achieved ‘traction,’ for whatever combination of reasons. Note that Book #2 plays at a totally different level (higher) than Book #1, which itself was not shy in its goals.

APPENDIX T: Following the Analogy

Using one of our basic assumptions, that HUMAN parallels COSMIC, one can conjecture that there is a possibility of perpetual rebirth to (at least portions of) the cosmos.*A

In physics, there is a (cyclic) school of thinking along these lines, as well.*B

*

Our Infinite Divinitude ultimately pierces through the possible various cosmic births and deaths. It is this Infinite Divinitude which is necessary for Cosmic birth to begin with. But, as articulated, the primary fount of the Infinitude is its cumulative future potential.

Thus, not only does the human spirit potentially transcend one’s death; it even ultimately potentially transcends the Death and rebirth ad infinitum (hopefully), of components of the cosmos itself. ***

*A The Midrash/Kabbala talk about cosmic cycles. According to this (hitherto) esoteric school of thought, we may be in the 4th or 5th or 6th cosmic cycle.

*B See also encyclopedia entries for Cyclic Model Cosmology:

# Paul Steinhardt; Neil Turok 2002

# Lauris Baum; Paul Frampton 2007

Note that, respectfully, Summa does not take a position on whether or not the cosmos is cyclic.

APPENDIX U: By-definition Telescoping Elasticity

One of the great advantages of Q4P as the proposed core cosmic dynamic is its by–definition inherent telescoping elasticity. As conceptualized, it can telescope from classic nothingness to infinitude. We need that crucial “telescoping” aspect built-in to the core of the unitary proposed dynamic.

Meaning, that not only must the dynamic qualify as the core of the evolving Divine Infinitude, it must be unitary, “simple” and have telescoping elasticity, as well, among other nice (infinite) aspects delineated over the course of the two-book Summa series.

APPENDIX V: Hypothesizing about Cosmic Origins

Clearly, this – hypothesizing about cosmic origins –is the most challenging aspect of metaphysics.

Now, while one can write with conviction about the elegance of a hypothesis, one cannot truly write with conviction about the validity of a cosmological hypothesis.

But the near-certain validity per se, of a cosmological hypothesis is not truly the conceptualizer’s goal.

For, in dealing with the realms of the infinite and cosmic origins, our levels of consciousness to date (and perhaps for a long time to come) may simply be inadequate

A worthwhile goal, however, would be a more dynamic and elegant hypothesis than has hitherto been offered. That is what Summa proposes.

We seek to advance forward – another layer or two –towards cracking the cosmic code. We do not presume to articulate the penultimate core.

APPENDIX W: Physics, Metaphysics & Poetry

a) PHYSICS will not solve PHYSICS without METAPHYSICS....and

b) METAPHYSICS will not solve METAPHYSICS without POETRY....

now, re: (a)

Why is that?

PHYSICS operates with a quasi-dead-spot on its cumulative brain that PHYSICS is a stand-alone field.... albeit directly interacting with the hard sciences. This is wrong.

All fields are interconnected – meaning the hard and soft sciences – and it will frankly require integrating multiple fields to penetrate truly deeply into the cosmic code.

now, re: (b)

Why is that?

Metaphysics operates with a quasi-dead-spot on its own cumulative brain that METAPHYSICS is a stand-alone field...albeit directly interacting with the hard sciences. This is wrong.

The concepts necessary to get us to the core of cosmic code are too abstract for METAPHYSICS alone (whether from 5,000 years ago or contemporary). [Among other thinkers, the legendary theologian Rav Kook (b. 1865), Chief Rabbi of Palestine from 1921-1935, understood and followed-through on this.]

POETRY, while still hampered by the limitations of the human word and human consciousness, nevertheless affords us the opportunity of potentially thrusting closer to the core of cosmic mystery...

Of course, once one enters the world of POETRY, one enters another netherworld....

Sort of, damned if you do; damned if you don’t

But, nevertheless, poetry ultimately has a place in the arsenal of the metaphysician....

APPENDIX X: Holographic Universe Theory, Information and SUMMA

In God and Evil (1988) I hypothesize “bootstrap creation” to deal with the classic philosophical/metaphysical/ cosmology conundrum of creation ex nihilo i.e. –How is the cosmos seemingly created out of nothing?

God and Evil proposes an analogy to a leveraged buyout in finance. Basically, in a leveraged buyout one can potentially buy a company primarily by (sort of) guaranteeing the seller the company’s anticipated future earnings stream to (allegedly) cover the (periodic multiyear) payments. [Often the Buyer is the CEO or another prime protagonist related to the business entity.]

Summa proposes that future potentials (in parallel to future earnings) ignited the cosmos (in parallel to the buy of a leveraged buyout). This is a core theme which courses through this three-volume metaphysics series.

However, among other potential underlying vulnerability points to this hypothesis is the question –How does the “present” (at Creation) know the (infinite) future (potentialities)?

Conveniently for me, along emerges Holographic Theory [see Wikipedia entry] into mainstream physics over the past twenty+ years (c. 1990–2010 and now advancingforward).

Now, Holographic Theory increasingly has no shortage of explicators and variations on its core themes. However a common denominator of the various hypotheses under this (Holographic) umbrella would be that INFORMATION is

(a) (somehow) stored on the space-time boundary, and that

(b) this information may interact internally in a modality that defies the classic linear arrow of time.

Now, once the internal interaction of information can possibly interact outside the boundaries of the classic linear arrow of time, “a bootstrap universe” cosmological hypothesis has a further (albeit certainly not necessarily sufficient) – and key – physical sciences toehold.

APPENDIX Y: Counterposing Summa Metaphysica (1988, 2005) with Spinoza (d. 1677)

There are many intersection points, but the two treatises are radically different, if not diametrically opposite at the core:

Spinoza posits a coldly impersonal core unifying dynamic; I posit a fiery all–pervading advancing dynamic and consciousness.

Spinoza holds GOOD and EVIL to be relative concepts; I hold them to be objective and distinct.

Spinoza discerns no ultimate purpose to the cosmos; I do – Quest for Infinite Potential/Extraordinariation.

Spinoza does not grant Man any special place whatsoever in the universe; Summa does.

Spinoza posits a thoroughgoing deterministic universe (i.e. that absolutely everything that happens, occurs through the operation of necessity).

I certainly do not.

Randomness, Emotion, and (total) Free Will are key components in my Metaphysics. Ultimately, Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation layered-over Randomness, Emotion and Free Will – is iterative as its key component, and not overarchingly deterministic.

*

Both works do have in common, however, an emphasis on an interlocking cosmic lattice-work.

APPENDIX Z1: Survival

How does “survival” fit into the Quest for Potential∞/ Extraordinariation paradigm?

Clearly “survival” is necessary. Obviously. But it is far from sufficient. Thus, necessary, but not sufficient.

“Survival,” in my paradigm, does not occupy the overwhelming paramount position ascribed to it by many “survival of the fittest” 19th and 20th century Darwinists. If it did, we would see far more species of slugs, and radically fewer species of butterflies.

At the same time, over the eons the relative priority of survival to extraordinariation may have intermittently shifted:

More species with high probability survival in-place

> more emphasis on extraordinariation, etc.

More species in a precarious survival situation

> more emphasis on survival.

Clearly, to stay in the game, survival is necessary. But we hypothesize that overall, the macro–signature theme of our cosmos is “extraordinariation.” In any event, while this area, like most areas involving the cosmos is nuanced and textured, the key thrust (extraordinariation) is clear.

APPENDIX Z2: Primordial Realm Hypothesis

At the ‘beginning’ there was not “nothing.”

At the “beginning” there was “layer upon layer of pure Potential/Possibility” – whatever that precisely means.

Call it “metaphysical possibility.”

Call it “the plentitude of possibility.”

No matter what the precise jargon, it was “Potential/ Possibility.”

Only ‘Potential/Possibility’ can bona fide be hypothesized by the metaphysician to have been eternal.

It is the sole term/theme/concept which works. Period.

It is simple – and it rings true. To me.

We then layer-on Extraordinariation to fill-in the paradigm - as Potential/Possibility alone is too diffuse.

Quest for Potential∞ ultimately aims for Extraordinariation.

A theologian can now peg-off the above and hypothesize

– that God is the embodiment of “possibility/potential/extraordinariation.”

But as a (putative) metaphysician, I would just keep it simple:

At the “beginning”

– there was “Potential/Possibility”

APPENDIX Z3: Launch

Obviously we have no clue as to the sequence leading up to “launch” – or the Big Bang.

However, we are not shy to speculate.

Potential/Possibility calibrates its optimal path out of the strictly metaphysical and into reality and ultimately to Extraordinariation.

APPENDIX Z4:

Where is Option B?

Summa proposes a unified metaphysics.... call it Option A

But, where is the competing Option B?

Obviously, we have questions with regards Option A.

But, with Option A, we do seem to have an elegant, overarching, seemingly seamless, powerful, crisp metaphysics which seems to elegantly finesse an almost endless series of issues – cosmology, cosmogony, theodicy, theology, evolutionary biology, teleology – and on and on....

Option A happens to nicely dovetail as well with components of the Torah and with key components of Lurianic Kabbalah – aside from being universalistic and humanistic and empowering – to all.

So, therefore the next obvious step might be to stack our Option A against Option B.

But, what is Option B? And, where is Option B?

Which is the salient – contender, challenger, old champion?

You might say that there are 100+ contenders? And that they are too numerous to count?

OK, but which is the salient contender? No salient contender?

That is the point.

While Summa makes numerous assertions, they all dovetail nicely into the Potential framework – its unifying ‘spinal column’ – and the overall construct is philosophically elegant.

It is not clear which other metaphysics challenges it.

APPENDIX Z5: Cosmic Nesting (Iterativeness)

Q4P∞

– is hypothesized in Summa Metaphysica to exist and to nest:

Q4P ( Q4P ( Q4P

(In formal mathematical terms: infinite self-similar progression-regression is suggested)

Mandelbrot Fractiles nest:

The geometry of [Mandelbrot set] fractiles [developed by Polish/French/American Jewish émigré mathematician Benoit Bernard Mandelbrot heavily c. 1970-1982 during his thirty-five year (1958-1993) tenure at IBM] deals with the creation of ever-repeating, “self-similar patterns” nested within each other.

Nature nests:

the pattern on twigs on a branch resembles the pattern of limbs branching off the trunk

the pattern of a major river looks like the pattern of its smaller tributaries

the fractile pattern of the bronchus of the human lung, keeps repeating in the smaller and smaller bronchioles

Natural water frost crystal growth shows fractile branching Generations nest:

Son of the son of the son of the son, etc....

Consciousness, Anger, Love and Sexual Arousal

(among other dynamics) all possibly have nesting dimensions

meaning, layer upon nuanced-layer ratchets-up the particular dynamic.

APPENDIX Z6: Modern Evolutionary Synthesis*a

The modern evolutionary synthesis is a union of ideas from several biological specialties which provides a widely accepted account of evolution. It is also referred to as the new synthesis, the modern synthesis, the evolutionary synthesis, millennium synthesis and the neo-darwinian synthesis.

[ Note from author: They are all dead wrong.]

Some key asserted points in the Mordern Evolutionary Synthesis are –

• Evolution is a series of gradual: small genetic changes regulated by natural selection accumulated over long periods - seizing-on Random Mutation.

• Natural selection*b is by far the main mechanism of change; even slight advantages are important when continued.

[ Darwin was a talented botanist - with a fabulously wealthy family - and eventually, the entire British Empire backing-up its favorite son - and backing-him-up ad extremus; but Darwin was wrong. ]

*a Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis (accessed February 6, 2012)

*b No scientific community consensus as of May 2012 as regards the precise modality of selection from the authorsee my own complete separate Section 1b: Evolution

APPENDIX Z7: Anima mundi*

The world soul (Greek: ψυχή κόσμου, Latin: Anima mundi) has been a component of several systems of thought. Its proponents claim that it permeates the cosmos and animates all matter, just as the soul animates the human body. The idea originated with Plato and was an important component of most Neoplatonic systems:

Therefore, we may consequently state that: this world is indeed a living being endowed with a soul and intelligence... a single visible living entity containing all other living entities, which by their nature are all related.[1]

The Stoics believed it to be the only vital force in the universe. It also features in systems of eastern philosophy in the Brahman-Atman of Hinduism, and in the School of Yin-Yang, Taoism, and Neo-Confucianism as qi.

1 Plato, Timaeus, 29/30; 4th century BCE *

APPENDIX Z8: The Soul of the Universe

One can hypothesize that –

the soul of a child has a 1:1 correspondence with the soul of the universe

As a child’s spirit bursts with love and potential and hope, so does the spirit of the universe.

As a child embodies all of our cumulative aspirations and hopes, so does the universe encompass all of our aspirations and hopes.

And as a child is but one (nested) link in the evermorphing and advancing interlinked chain of Quest for Potential, so does a snapshot of the universe at any moment in time, represent but one (nested) link....

APPENDIX Z9: Potential/Possibility

Perhaps, our particular universe came into being because it potentially had the most extraordinary denouement –and the cosmos optimizes.

APPENDIX Z10: “The Free Lunch?”

The estimable physicist/cosmologist Stephen Hawking posits*a that “there is no God.” His (alleged) truism is that “there is, indeed, a free lunch.” What Hawking means and articulates is that the entire universe more-or-less spontaneously popped out of nothingness.

Hawking’s reasoning, as he explicitly articulates it, is that –

(A) since when one factors-in newly-hypothesized dark energy*b (c.1998), positive and negative energy mathematically balances-out the universe, then

(B) one can (allegedly) consequently conclude that there is no God (necessary for Creation).

However, the Hawking logic is fatally flawed, as is more or less obvious.

For (A) can be true, without (B) being true. Meaning, (B) does not necessarily flow from (A).

Summa Metaphysica (first volume 1988) along with many predecessor metaphysics formulations, some pre-dating it by thousands of years, hypothesizes*c a net-

zero-balanced universe.d Some, if not the overwhelming majority, of these “net-zero” metaphysics, along with Summa Metaphysica, embrace a transcendent force and/or a Divine in the creation equation. Even if we are cumulatively hypothesized as being integral to the Divine, as per Summa.

With due respect to Hawking, not even a rock, let alone a universe, spontaneously pops-out of nothingness.

Respectfully, giggling five years old girls frolicking at the seashore on a balmy June day, tip-toeing through the foamy surf where ocean wavelets lap onto the beach, did not simply pop out of nothingness.

Respectfully.

***

*a Summer 2011, see Hawking interview/feature on Wormhole Series on the Science Channel. See his inter-related book The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, Bantam Books, a division of Random House, NY 2010

*b a hypothesis which started emerging in the contemporary scientific community in the past 40 years, but mainly started gaining traction since ~1998, when scientist Michael Turner (University of Chicago) coined the term.

*c see Summa Metaphysica: Volume I: God & Evil 1988: Unified Formulation

*d i.e. positive and negative energy balance-out the universe

APPENDIX Z11: Birnbaumian Panentheism

Quest for Potential∞ is at the core of the Infinite Divine.

The Infinite Divine is synonymous with the unfolding cosmic order.

Panentheism in Judaism*

“While mainstream Rabbinic Judaism is classically monotheistic and follows in the footsteps of the Aristotelian theologian Maimonides, the panentheistic conception of God can be found in certain Jewish mystical currents. A leading scholar of the Kabbalah, Moshe Idel (“Hasidism: Between Ecstacy and Magic,” SUNY, 1995, pp. 17–18), ascribes this doctrine to the kabbalistic system of Rabbi Moses Cordovero (1522–1570) and in the eighteenth century, Rabbi Israel ben Eliezer, the Baal Shem Tov, founder of the Hasidic movement, as well as his contemporary, Rabbi Menahem Mendel, the Maggid of Bar. There is some debate as to whether Lurianic Kabbalah, with its doctrine of tzimtzum, can be regarded as panentheistic. According to Hasidism, the Infinite Ein Sof is incorporeal (has no body) and is both transcendent and immanent….”

*Wikipedia online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism#Panentheism_in_Judaism

(accessed September 20, 2011)

APPENDIX Z12: Cosmic Level: Individual Level

Current scientific guestimates figure 100 billion+ galaxies in the observable universe and then, the same number, a 100 billion stars in the Milky Way Galaxy and then, a third layer –the same 100 billion ( 1011 ) neurons in the human brain

Now, the 100 billion neurons in the brain in turn yield 100 trillion ( 1014 ) synapses which generate thought, creativity, emotion etc.

Thus, the cosmos ( Q4P∞ ) presumably calculates that 100 billion (or thereabouts) is the efficient CRITICAL MASS number to seek/pursue/extend/force-multiply Q4P∞/EXTRAORDINARIATION !

on multiple levels cosmic > individual

as it thunders-on towards Infinitude.... and Extraordinariaton.

APPENDIX Z13: Major Problems in [establishment] Science

Selected Quotes from ON BEING*a

Celebrated atheist Oxford U scientist Peter Atkins [2011] admits that science remains stymied by a series of important questions (see just-below); however, Potentialism [1988, 2005, 2014, 2020] elegantly hypothesizes [integrated] answers to all of them.

See, in particular, www.Chronology1000.com printed in Summa IV [2020].

As well, the [widely-circulated]

Huffington Post piece (June 10, 2015)

"David Birnbaum Cracks the Cosmic Code" (see www.HuffPost1000.com) addresses the core issues of Atkins' angst.

“The first great question of being is one that has probably entertained us all at one time or another: where did it, the universe, all come from? How did it begin?...” (p. 1)

“There are, in fact, three related profound questions to address in the context of creation. One is the mechanism of the coming into being of the universe: what actually happened at the beginning? Another is whether there is any meaning to the question of what preceded the universe and had, in some sense, the potential to become a universe. Here we are confronted by the linguistically and conceptually engaging question of whether absolutely nothing can have potency to become something. The third is whether an agent was needed to trigger the process of cosmogenesis, the process of turning that nothing into what is to all appearances something, or can nothing turn itself into something on its own? All three questions sound as though they might fall within the range of science to answer. A fourth question, why there is a universe, is rather different, but still apparently very interesting….” (p. 2)

“As a result of their intrinsic caution, almost every scientist is wisely unwilling to express a view about the events accompanying the inception of the universe. Quite honestly, they haven’t a clue….” (p. 5)

“The task before science in this connection will be to show how something can come from nothing without intervention. No one has the slightest idea whether that can happen and, if so, how it can come about….” (p. 11)

“The unfolding of absolutely nothing—what out of rev-

erence for the absence of anything, including empty space, we are calling Nothing—into something is a problem of the profoundest difficulty and currently far beyond the reach of science. It is, however, a target at which science must aim even though to some, even to scientists of a pessimistic or perhaps just realistic bent, it would seem to be for ever out of science’s reach….”

(p. 12)

“Presumably before the creation, when there was Nothing, there was no charge; so the coming into being of the universe was accompanied by the separation of ‘no charge’ into opposites. Charge was not created at the creation: electrical Nothing separated into equal and opposite charges….” (pp. 13-14)

“I promised to return to the question of why there is a universe. What is its purpose? Something so big, complex, and all embracing some hold, must be there for a reason….” (p. 18)

“…science is a ceaseless probing with a view to overturning authority….science, though delighted by the glorious complexity of the world, seeks the simplicity that lies beneath it….science is extraordinarily difficult, as it seeks covert mechanism….science is ever thrusting forward, wriggling into new modes of understanding,…science gives an opportunity for humanity to achieve the aspirations it already has and opens its eyes to new ones….” (pp. 26-27)

“A scientist, the arch-descendent of Occam, looks first for the simplest explanation, then builds elaborations only if the explanation’s barren, rocky simplicity proves

inadequate….” (p. 33)

“One problem with evolution is how it began. Competition between primitive organisms is all very well, the triumph of one message over another, but how did matter step across the national bridge from the inorganic to the organic in the first place? ...It would be much more satisfying—satisfying of curiosity, intellectually satisfying, and possibly spiritually satisfying—if we could find a physical process by which that gap was bridged, presumably without the apparent intervention of an agent….” (pp. 38-39)

“…Scientists are still puzzled about how this complexity [of life] emerged under the impact, presumably, of natural selection, and it remains a problem of evolution. That is not to say that there are not many ideas about how it came about. Just as for the origin of life itself, which is still a real puzzle, evolutionary biologists are not without ideas, but have not yet identified which, if any, is valid….” (pp. 60-61)

*a Peter Atkins, On Being (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp.1-2, 5, 11-14, 18, 26-27, 33, 38-39, 60-61.

*b Scientist Peter Atkins is the author of almost 70 books, including Galileo’s Finger: The Ten Great Ideas of Science, Four Laws That Drive the Universe, and the world-renowned textbook Physical Chemistry. A Fellow of Lincoln College, University of Oxford, he has been a visiting professor in France, Israel, New Zealand, and China, and continues to lecture widely throughout the world.

He is, as well, a 'poster boy' for Atheism.

APPENDIX Z14: “Nothing”

It would be incorrect, of course, to imply or infer that Summa maintains that NOTHING preceded all. That position, respectfully, would, by definition, be a metaphysical ‘dead end.’

The ‘starting point’ of the cosmos is not NOTHING.

Rather, Summa proposes that ‘Potential/Possibility’ was/ is eternal. And ‘Potential/Possibility’ is clearly a far more complex and a far richer concept than ‘Nothing.’

While, one can posit that by definition ‘Potential/ Possibility’ is eternal, one can also posit that by definition ‘Nothing’ is just that – nothing. And no entity or agent or force can turn nothing into something. By definition.

Now, ‘Potential/Possibility’ may, indeed have dimensions/ facets of which we are either unaware, or cannot fully grasp. ‘Possibility/Potential’ in turn, may have had the

ability to traverse – or impel the traversing – from the metaphysical to reality as we know it.

‘Possibility/Potential’ may have had the power, ultimately, to divide ‘0’* ( hypothesized core “zero-point/integer” ) into positives and negatives, as discussed in the text. And, herein, in my estimation, is most probably the crux of the genesis of our little universe.

[ See later - 2020 - www.Chronology1000.comin Summa Metaphysica IVwww.Summa-4.com ]

“Cosmologists sometimes claim that the universe can arise ‘from nothing.’ But this is loose language. Even if shrunk to a point or a quantum state, our universe is latent with particles and forces: it has far more content and structure than what a philosopher calls ‘nothing.’” (Martin Rees, Our Cosmic Habitat, p. 142)

*technical note for Hebraists:: maybe we should treat the Hebrew word ayin as “0”

APPENDIX Z15: Gnosticism

(selected WIKI excerpts)*

“Gnosticism (from gnostikos, “learned”, from Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge) is a modern scholarly term for a set of religious beliefs and spiritual practices found among some of the early Christian sects called “gnostic” (“learned”) by Irenaeus and other early Christian heresiologists. The term also has reference to parallels and possible pre-Christian influences of the Christian gnostics.

Gnosticism was primarily defined in Christian context, or as ‘the acute Hellenization of Christianity’ per Adolf von Harnack (1885), until Moritz Friedländer (1898) advocated Hellenistic Jewish origins, and Wilhelm Bousset (1907) advocated Persian origins….”

Common characteristics

“….The Christian sects first called “gnostic” a branch of Christianity, however Joseph Jacobs and Ludwig Blau (Jewish Encyclopedia, 1911) note that much of the terminology employed is Jewish and note that this “proves at least that the principal elements of gnosticism were derived from Jewish speculation,….”

Monad (apophatic theology)

“In many Gnostic systems (and heresiologies), God is known as the Monad, the One, The Absolute, Aion teleos (The Perfect Æon), Bythos (Depth or Profundity, Βυθος), Proarkhe (Before the Beginning, προαρχη), and E Arkhe (The Beginning, η αρχη). God is the high source of the pleroma, the region of light. The various emanations of God are called æons.

Within certain variations of Gnosticism, especially those inspired by Monoimus, the Monad was the highest God which created lesser gods, or elements (similar to æons). According to Hippolytus, this view was inspired by the Pythagoreans, who called the first thing that came into existence the Monad, which begat the dyad, which begat the numbers, which begat the point, begetting lines, etc….”

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism (accessed February 26, 2012)

APPENDIX Z16:

Atheist v. Potentialist

Atkins* v. Birnbaum

consonant with Summa: “simplicity”

“...The only clue we have at the outset is that the final answer will almost certainly be one of extreme simplicity, for only the perfectly simple can come into existence.... what we perceive of as complexity may be the outcome of chains of simplicity.” (p. 7)*a

“...Somehow matter must have been created out of something resembling nothing....” (p. 11)*a

Intersecting with Summa: “Mega-organism”

“…our own nominally civilized, cultivated, intelligent, and reflective level of life emerged when organisms stumbled on a way of passing on intricate, unpredictable information to others around them and following them. It did so by inventing language and effectively binding together all human organisms, past, present, and future into a single mega-organism of potentially boundlesss achievement.”

(p.33)*b

polar opposite to Summa:

“....All change, I shall argue, arises from an underlying collapse into chaos. We shall see that what may appear to us to be motive and purpose, is in fact ultimately motiveless, purposeless decay. Aspirations and their achievement, feed on [purposeless] decay.” (p. 21)*a

*a Peter Atkins, Creation Revisited, The Origin of Space, Time and the Universe (London, England: Penguin Books, 1992)

*b Peter Atkins, Galileo’s Finger, The Ten Great Ideas of Sciences, (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2003)

“collapse into chaos”

“Aspirations... feed on (purposeless) decay”

APPENDIX Z17: Particle Physics and Q4P∞

Interacting with a layer of Q4P∞?

Higgs mechanism*

“In particle physics, the Higgs mechanism is the process that gives mass to elementary particles. The particles gain mass by interacting with the Higgs field that permeates all space….”

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanism (accessed March 5, 2012)

APPENDIX Z18: A Fix-It “Conceptual Plug”?

The Summa series started out with God and Evil (1988). In that work it was demonstrated how Q4P∞ potentially might not just solve the classic philosophicalreligious conundrum of Theodicy, but would seem to simultaneously solve as well several other key philosophical issues in metaphysics.

As pointed-out in this volume, God and Good, many/ most/all major fields – not just Metaphysics – would seem to have gaping holes in them. The appendix relating to noted scientist Atkins, for instance, highlights via excerpts from his works – gaping holes in the physical sciences.

This ‘gaping-hole’ issue ranges through Astrophysics, Biology, Anthropology, Philosophy, Theology, Cosmology, Life Sciences and on-and-on.

The key fields – and probably all related fields – have major gaps.

Now, adroitly plugging Q4P∞/Extraordinariation into the

respective gaps, seems to potentially close-the-gaps. (Is that the world’s most grandiose assertion or what?)

Thus, we have an intriguing potential simultaneous solution on a very grand scale.

Are we catching your attention yet?

Several examples:

Evolutionary Biology: What drives Evolution?

Physiology: What drives Consciousness?

Astrophysics: What ignited/drove the Big Bang, in particular?

Cosmology: What ignited creation and maintains the Cosmos more generally?

Metaphysics: What is the purpose of Man, the cosmos?

Astronomy: Why is the cosmic order so wondrous?

Life Sciences: What drives Life? What is Life? What makes Life so tenacious?

Anthropology: what drives the ‘Ascent of Man’?

Love Science: What drives Love?

and, of course, our initial inquiry into the Theodicy question-

Religious Philosophy: Theodicy question – If there is a God who is all-powerful and merciful, why is there gross evil?

APPENDIX Z19: The Data

Comporting to the data v. Data proving the hypothesis

Metaphysicians doing metaphysics seek an all-embracing hypothesis, at-a-minimum comporting to the data. Metaphysicians seek ‘aesthetic elegance.’

Physicists doing physics want testability. They want data proving the hypothesis. To them, a successful experiment is by definition elegant. To them, Grand Theory metaphysics is not Center Stage – as by definition it cannot be proven.

Now, Summa poses an intriguing issue for physics.

Because, on the one hand, (infinite) Summa cannot necessarily be proven in the classic sense, which physics would prefer. Eve though it is always hard to prove the infinite and/or timeless.

But, on the other hand,

(a) Summa fills-in crucial and key gaps in physics and

(b) No data or knowledge accumulated in the past 5,000+ years at all contradicts Summa.

No other metaphysics can make these claims.

Thus, the fully synchronous data underpins Summa, while Summa underpins physics and astrophysics et al.

APPENDIX Z20: Take #2: Where Is The Competing Metaphysics?* The Bard Symposium ‘take’

The three basic groups of academics represented at the April 2012 international academic conference at Bard College (NY) on Summa Metaphysica were:

A) Religious philosophers

B) Secular Philosophers/Metaphysicians

C) Scientists

Conference co-Chair Gary Hagberg** posed the (abovenoted) question, (see title above) to the assemblage of academics: answers

(A) Group A academics leaned-towards the proposition that each of their respective religions could potentially embrace Summa as an elegant dovetailing add-on to their respective belief systems.

(B)

Group B academics leaned-towards the proposition that Neoplatonism as a whole was the closest (albeit indirectly) competing neo-metaphysics. However, Neoplatonism is more a modality of looking at problems, rather than a particular specific all-embracing intellectual or metaphysical structure. Indeed, we all operate on a Neoplatonism platform. Meaning, that there was, indeed, no salient viable directly competing metaphysics.

[However, respectfully, Aristotelianism and its Jewish offshoot, Maimonidean philosophy are important historical systems, still embraced by many, which do so-to-speak on significant levels compete with Summa. D. N. Khalil directly and articulately deals with – and exposes the fatal metaphysical gap in – Aristotle and Maimonides in his Foreword to Summa II: God and Good.]

(C)

Group C academics went along with Oxford scientist and Conference presenter Peter Atkins’ “interesting” minimetaphysics that “purposeless decay” was the allegedly more powerful and competing metaphysics. Atkins repeatedly articulates this theme in his published works.

When challenged as to whether he preferred to view himself as the product of Birnbaumian Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation or of Atkinsonian purposeless decay, Atkins responded with the latter, to the dismay of the assemblage.

re: the proposed “Purposeless decay” metaphysics: Thus, the prime direct challenge to the Potential/ Extraordinariation metaphysics, is, according to at least one segment of the Conference, only “purposeless decay.” Frankly, hard-to-believe that this pessimistic quick-fix – which has no formal structure and no answers to many key questions – is even qualified to challenge. Aside from the fact that the ‘visceral appeal’ of “purposeless decay” is not, shall we say, stellar. As well, it has neither a “starting point” nor significant “integration” beyond a few specific physics issues.

re: the Aristotelian metaphysics: As noted above, Khalil deals with the fatal gap in Aristotelian or neo-Aristotelian systems.***

Conclusion: Thus, with no readily available seriously challenging metaphysics, we would need to juxtapose Summa against putative competing systems as they are potentially offered-up.

* see also “Appendix Z4: Where is Option B?”

** Chairman, Dept. of Philosophy, Bard College

*** For the record, Orthodox Jewish scientist and academic Khalil does not challenge the religious doctrines of Orthodox Jewish Maimonides. Nor does Khalil truly need to do so in order to challenge the metaphysics of Maimonides. [Please note that Khalil and I are insync on both fronts here.]

APPENDIX Z21: The Assertion/Claim

The assertion/claim herein is that Summa is the optimal working hypothesis for a unified and integrated metaphysics. Of course, like all hypotheses, it should be probed, challenged and debated.

While it is certainly true that Summa frontally challenges the heavily-entrenched academic status quo, perhaps Summa’s hypothesis is actually right.

Perhaps that* is possibly sufficient reason for establishment academia to very seriously debate and consider it, even if the academic establishment is simultaneously threatened by it.

*being right

APPENDIX Z22: The Q4P∞ ‘Package’

A) As argued, “Potential/Possibility” is the sole “dynamic” which can arguably have been eternal. This is “selfevident.” [By Definition, Potential/Possibility is eternal.]

B) Recursive / Looping upon itself / retrocausality / backward causation*a gets us from a Pure Potential Cosmic Order to the genesis of Q4P∞

Hypothesizing that Q4P∞ evolved from “Potential/ Possibility” is, respectfully, not a major conceptual leap.

C) Q4P∞ is now in-motion in a metaphysical arena

D) Finally, Q4P∞ is a rare “conceptualized dynamic” which could be hypothesized to have taken the (budding) cosmic order from the metaphysical to the physical/ metaphysical (at the Big Bang point).

It is this sui generis inter-related bundle of attributes*b and related – which decisively arm Q4P∞ as the prime protagonist in the cosmic drama?

*a Backward causation relates, as well, to the “leveraged buyout” aspect delineated in the text: Potentials down-the-road ignite the present . But note that these same potentials-down-the- road also help sustain and nourish the ongoing drama.

*b It is the architectural/conceptual ‘elegance’ of ‘the package’ which, so-to-speak, 'gives it a chance'.

APPENDIX Z23: Explication

Q4P∞ is perhaps also explicated as –

The cosmic Supra-Instinct & Essence.

The underling cosmic Progenitor & Dynamic.

The cosmic Common-Denominator & Imperative.

The font, essence and drive of the cosmos.

The [Divine] Qi of the Cosmos.

The (elusive) [Chinese] Tao – the “source of everything.”*a

The (elusive) [Jewish] Lurianic Kabballah mystical En Sof.*b

The Infinite and dynamic Divine.

The Biblical Eheyeh asher Eheyeh.*c

Simultaneously, the Macro and Micro essence of the cosmic order.

The Holy Grail of the cosmos….

The mysterium tremendum

while at the same time, encompassing the entire dynamic cosmic order

*a Never explicated by obscure Taoism (Daoism), even though everyone is referred to the collected works of Laozi (and Zhuangzi) which, in turn, never explicate the Tao except very elliptically and very obscurely/ambiguously. [Note that Taoism is a philosophy or religious tradition which emphasizes living in harmony with the aforementioned (obscure) Tao.]

*b The “No End”: Dealt with extensively in Summa I: God and Evil

*c “I WILL BE THAT WHICH I WILL BE” – The self-proclaimed Identity of the God of Israel to Moses at the ‘Burning Bush’ episode –when God reveals Himself to Moses.

APPENDIX Z24: Context

Heretofore, we essentially generally operated without overall context. Most fields of knowledge have floated essentially on their own (or linked to close fields) in an ineffable and greatly inexplicable cosmos. Not explicatedby or tethered-to an all-enveloping metaphysics. Summa, however, offers a powerful all-embracing context and integrated thesis.

While the author and many academic luminaries believe Summa to be on-the-mark, it may or may not be. But, certain aspects regarding Summa are hard to dispute:

It seems to be elegant, powerful, overarching, integrated and holistic.

Its core thesis has remained unchallenged.

It alone among known metaphysical schemas systematically and conceptually seems to truly unify Science, Spirituality, Philosophy and Religion.

And, finally, Summa is essentially “the only game in town.” There is simply no known bona fide directly competing, even somewhat compelling (overarching and well-integrated) metaphysics known to us.*

* Respectfully, classic religious philosophies are not counted here as competing metaphysics. Respectfully, their systems tend to include as integral to their core paradigms, a particular ineffable and inexplicable deity or divine. Ditto for (obscure) Taoism. Rather, religious philosophies can and should consider Summa as a potential add-on or wrap-around schema.

The alleged competitor to Summa – Neoplatonism’s ancient offshoot schema Aristotelianism – is, respectfully, simply too simplistic, too assumption-laden, too incomplete and, respectfully, more accurately in the realm of religious philosophy. As noted [see Khalil “Foreword”]: Aristotelianism has a gaping-hole in it.

As well, Aristotelianism is often dead-wrong. For instance, it postulates that the Sun rotates around the Earth.

APPENDIX Z25:

Where is the Divine?

Metaphysical challenge: Choose from these multiple choice options:

a) Nowhere

b) Up there / Separate from us

c) Here

d) Here, and it encompasses all / We are part of It – and integral to It.

Summa rejects (a) and (b), agrees with (c) but embraces (d).

The author is dubious that any metaphysics, which embraces (a) or (b) can present a viable integrated, holistic and fully-satisfying option. Summa believes that the metaphysical debate needs to take place within the embrace of (c) or (d).

Atheism embraces (a)

Note that Aristotelianism (Aristotle was the student of Plato, who in turn was the student of Socrates) and classic mainstream Western (religious) thought classically both embrace (b).

Taoism and much Eastern philosophical/religious thought embrace (c) or (d).

“We are made of light, and we are all part of God’s mind. Most importantly, we are the universe itself having the experience of knowing that.” (Fred Alan Wolf, Time Loops and Space Twists, p. 232)

APPENDIX Z26: String Theory and ‘Provability’

String Theory is a contender for the “theory of everything in physics.”

After 40 years of intense effort (and failure) by String Theory advocates to make predictions which can definitively be tested by experiment, String Theory is nevertheless essentially accepted by its many and often quite-eminent scientific community proponents because of it’s elegance, its conceptual aesthetic appeal, and its relative power vis à vis other contending theories. As well, there is the hope of its advocates that in the future there may be some measurable consequences. On net balance to date, it is a noble effort by many hundreds of scientists to transcend mortal and current scientific limitations.

Thus, in Physics, which demands as an almost inviolable sine qua non (essential condition) testability, provability and ultimately proof, in this instance an untested and unproven theory is nevertheless held in the highest possible (international) esteem.

Note that Metaphysics, which more often than not probes the infinite, the transcendent, and universal cosmic axioms, does not require scientific proof per se. It inviolably requires, however, the absence of contradiction with physics and science, as a whole.

APPENDIX Z27: Multiverse Theory

Multiverse is a theory in physics. It is not a classic metaphysics overarching the gamut of fields of knowledge.

So, for instance, as regards the classic question as to where our universe came from, if one proposes as an answer that it is part of – or a “daughter of” – a multiverse cosmic order, one still needs to address where the “mother universe(s)” came from.

APPENDIX Z28: Theory of Everything* (in Physics)

“A theory of everything (TOE) or final theory is a putative theory of theoretical physics that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena, and predicts the outcome of any experiment that could be carried out in principle.

Many candidate theories of everything (in physics) have been proposed by theoretical physicists during the twentieth century, but none have been confirmed experimentally. The primary problem in producing a TOE is that general relativity and quantum mechanics are hard to unify. This is one of the unsolved problems in physics....

While loop quantum gravity [theory] attempts to unify quantum field theory and general relativity/gravitation, string theory and its successor M-theory, remain the only prominent candidates as a theory of everything.” *Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

from the author –

Summa, of course, fully embraces physics, and believes that Q4P∞ is by definition fully synchronous with physics.

Metaphysics is about painting a “bold brush stroke” super-macro overarching conceptual Theory of Everything (meaning, a “real deal” Theory of Truly Everything). The correct [overarching] metaphysics theory would embrace within its fold the correct [overarching] physics theory. The author respectfully believes that ultimately physics will be compelled to make its way to Q4P∞ in order to cross the final theoretical bridge in its quest for a Theory of Everything (in Physics), including Big Bang Theory.

Note that as a reference to their work, metaphysicians avoid using that (TOE) terminology or a more precise phrase for metaphysics like “Macro Theory of Everything,” because the terminology projects/resonates as being too presumptuous. But conceptual macro brush strokes is essentially what metaphysics is ultimately all about. Macro Everything. That is what metaphysicians are paid to do.

APPENDIX Z29: Occam’s Razor

“Occam’s razor (also written as Ockham’s razor, Latin lex parsimoniae) is the law of parsimony, economy or succinctness. It is a principle urging one to select among competing hypotheses that which makes the fewest assumptions and thereby offers the simplest explanation of the effect.”*

Summa offers a so-to-speak ‘simple’, but purportedly sophisticated and powerful proposition: Quest for Potential∞ ignited, drives and indeed, is, the cosmos.

Occam

might smile.

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_razor (accessed April 25, 2012)

APPENDIX Z30: Schopenhauer v. Birnbaum from Wikipedia*

“Arthur Schopenhauer (22 February 1788 – 21 September 1860) was a German philosopher known for his pessimism and philosophical clarity. At age 25, he published his doctoral dissertation, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, which examined the four separate manifestations of reason in the phenomenal world.

Schopenhauer’s most influential work, The World as Will and Representation, claimed that the world is fundamentally what humans recognize in themselves as their will. His analysis of will led him to the conclusion that emotional, physical, and sexual desires can never be fully satisfied. The corollary of this is an ultimately painful human condition. Consequently, he considered that a lifestyle of negating desires, similar to the ascetic teachings of Vedanta, Buddhism and the Church Fathers of early Christianity, was the only way to attain liberation.

Schopenhauer’s metaphysical analysis of will, his views on human motivation and desire, and his aphoristic writing style influenced many well-known thinkers, including Friedrich Nietzsche, Richard Wagner, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Erwin Schrödinger, Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Otto Rank, Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Leo Tolstoy, Thomas Mann, and Jorge Luis Borges….” from the author –

So Schopenhauer’s The World as Will and Representation posits that the world is fundamentally ‘will’; and ‘pessimistschool’ Schopenhauer comes to the conclusion that negating ‘will’ is the ‘route to liberation.’

Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica posits that the world is essentially ‘potential’; and, to continue counterposing Schpenhauer, ‘optimist-school’ Birnbaum comes to the (quick) conclusion that proactive ‘Quest for Potential’ is the true ‘route to liberation.’

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer (accessed May 21, 2012)

APPENDIX Z31: Simple v. Simplistic

Metaphysicians and scientists like their theories simple yet sophisticated. Thus, Einstein’s iconic Theory of Relativity, E=MC2 is simple, but highly sophisticated.

Many theories and laws of physics follow this general paradigm: Simple, yet sophisticated.

Now in our little realm of metaphysics, we posit that Q4P∞ is simple, yet sophisticated.

Q4P∞ enthusiasts would argue that (linear) Aristotelianism (i.e. Eternal God deployed primal matter and created the Earth) is simply simplistic*.

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler”

*or in any event, more in the realm of theology

Albert Einstein (c. 1933)

APPENDIX Z32: Aesthetic Elegance

After multi-day discussion/debate at Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, Upstate, NY as to the sine qua non (~the necessary aspect) of a powerful metaphysics, the consensus emerged that since metaphysics (by its infinite nature and ambition) does not lend itself to formal scientific proof, its aesthetic elegance indeed emerges as perhaps its key defining aspect.*

Of course, aesthetic elegance, seemingly subjective, in reality embraces many clinical components. Presumably the metaphysics under examination at-a-minimum passes muster vis à vis the litmus test checklist proposed at the very beginning of the appendix section in Appendix A: Metaphysics Analysis.

Now, the human psyche is awesomely complex. But it ultimately often seeks to boil-down a litmus test checklist to just one concept. Aesthetic elegance presents itself as a viable candidate in metaphysics.

* Incorporated into qualification for aesthetic elegance would necessarily be the requirement that the metaphysics comports with ‘actual knowledge’ i.e. the hard and soft sciences

APPENDIX Z33: The Red Queen Hypothesis

Classic application to evolution: from Wikipedia*a

“The Red Queen’s Hypothesis, also referred to as Red Queen, Red Queen’s race or Red Queen Effect, is an evolutionary hypothesis. The term is taken from the Red Queen’s race in Lewis Carroll’s Through the LookingGlass and involves the Red Queen and Alice constantly running, yet remaining in the same place.

“Well, in our country,” said Alice, still panting a little, “you’d generally get to somewhere else — if you run very fast for a long time, as we’ve been doing.”

“A slow sort of country!” said the Queen. “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!”

The Red Queen Principle can be stated thus:

In reference to an evolutionary system, continuing adaptation [and successive procreation] is needed in order for a species to maintain its relative fitness amongst the systems being co-evolved with.*b….”

BIRNBAUMIAN application to the cosmic order:

Successive evolutionary and cosmic advance – on myriad levels – is necessary for the cosmos not to devolve into entropy.*c

A parallel to this might be the dynamic of skimming a rock along the surface of a pond. The rock must be projected within a given angle tolerance and within a given speed and acceleration tolerance, in order not to fall into the water.

To “defy gravity,” the skimming rock must advance. Likewise, the cosmic order: To defy entropy, it must advance... playing-out cosmic potential and advancingtowards Extraordinariation.

*a Wikipedia online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen’s_Hypothesis#cite_note-1

(accessed June 4, 2012)

*b http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/REDQUEEN.html

*c Birnbaumian corollary to the Second Law of Thermodynamics

APPENDIX Z34: Punctuated equilibrium* from

Wikipedia

“Punctuated equilibrium (also called punctuated equilibria) is a theory in evolutionary biology which proposes that most species will exhibit little net evolutionary change for most of their geological history, remaining in an extended state called stasis. When significant evolutionary change occurs, the theory proposes that it is generally restricted to rare and geologically rapid events....”

Punctuated equilibrium, consists of morphological stability and rare bursts of evolutionary change from the author –

Clearly, Punctuated Equilibrium works far better with Q4P∞ in the equation, i.e. with Q4P∞ driving and igniting the leaps-forward. What other hypothesized dynamic is punctuating the equilibrium?

Indeed, when now lining-up all the areas – even just those alone which have been articulated in Summa – where

Q4P∞ provides a significantly more elegant conceptual framework than any sans-Q4P∞ hypotheses, it would seem that a somewhat compelling case has been made. Especially since there is no known competing, compelling alternative.

Respectfully, Summa de facto stands alone. It may turn out to be wrong, but it would currently seem to be the overwhelmingly and distinctively aesthetically elegant metaphysics.

Perhaps mainstream academic scientific and philosophical thought should endeavor to transcend its inertia. Perhaps academia will now undergo its own Punctuated Equilibrium...and go with a winning new paradigm ;) as its working hypothesis, as opposed to its current (somewhat pathetics) modus operandi: of operating without any real conceptual context.

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium (accessed June 4, 2012)

APPENDIX Z35: The Font/Soul of the Cosmos

Ninety five percent of all religious and spiritual belief systems de facto vector towards this issue.

This question/quest for the Font/Soul of the cosmos is the Holy Grail of –Religious, Spiritual, Philosophical and Metaphysical inquiry *

Summa attempts/proposes a ‘silver bullet’ – Q4P∞ – to pierce through to the core of the cosmic origins/essence/engine/drive/purpose.

The Summa hypothesis would seem to be powerful, elegant, and compelling.

Where is the truly competing compelling metaphysics.

> See 2015 www.HuffPost1000.com

> See 2020 www.Chronology1000.com

APPENDIX Z36: Time

To whatever extent, over the next decades and centuries, physics ascertains potential non-linear dimensions of time, Summa advances.

As readers of Summa know, the thesis hypothesizes that as a key component thereof, the plethora of potentials down-the-road were instrumental in igniting the ‘genesis point.’

So this key component mandates some non-linear dimensions or pathways in time. In other words, some link between the future and the past.

So, for instance,

As holographic theories gain in traction, Summa advances.

If ‘black holes’ turn out to impact time any-which-way, Summa advances.

If the ‘speed of light’ barrier protects the linearity of time in particular, Summa advances.

If it turns out that time can indeed be compressed or expanded, Summa advances.

If it turns out that, on some level, the future co-exists simultaneously with the present or that the present somehow exists within the future (or vice versa), Summa advances.

The manifold mysteries of time are inextricably linked to the mysteries of creation.

“Time travel and causal loops are not merely the stuff of science fiction. The theory of relativity, which permits time to be warped by motion and gravitation, predicts circumstances in which physical objects, including observers, can loop back into the past. An explicit model of a universe that permits time travel was found by Kurt Gödel in 1948 using Einstein’s general theory of relativity”... (Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma, p. 252)

APPENDIX Z37: An Ultra- Dynamic MultiDimensional Organic Entity

The cosmos: Interactive, integrated, expanding, evolving, fluid, processing, information-transferring, energy-distributing, life-generating/affirming/sustaining/ reproducing, pulsating on more than 100 rhythms, in possible perpetual motion, expanding/morphing/ transforming for at least 14 billion years, our cosmos is not as simply “mechanistic” as the common wisdom would have it. One can make a strong case that it is a “living”, “breathing” and “sentient” super-entity/dynamic, as well as a supra-entity/dynamic.

– With a defining name – Q4P∞ (aka the aforementioned biblical Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh) – The Infinite Divine.

It is possible that various frequencies/components/flavors of human emotion/creativity/artistry/literary prowess/ consciousness/spirituality/intellectuality/sensuality add to the extraordinariation of Q4P∞. It is possible that these are

optimal axes for Q4P∞ to project onward for enhanced advancement/expansion/flowering of succeeding generations of these elements.

Of course, if humans radioactivate the planet, that particular thrust might not be helpful to assorted cosmic advance.

from a secular / scientific / mechanistic perspective -

“All interactions between particles in the universe...convey not only energy but also information in other words, particles not only collide, they compute. What is the entire universe computing, ultimately? Its own dynamical evolution... As the computation proceeds, reality unfolds.”

- from the back-cover of Programming the Universe by Seth Lloyd, Professor, Mechanical Engineering, MIT (now, Oct 2012). Seth Lloyd is, as well, Director, MIT Center for Extreme Quantum Information, Cambridge, Massachusetts

APPENDIX Z38: “The Mind of God”

Stephen Hawking –

(1988)

“If we do discover a complete theory…then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason—for then we would know the mind of God….”

– A Brief History of Time*1

Paul Davies –(1992)

“I belong to the group of scientists who do not subscribe to a conventional religion but nevertheless deny that the universe is purposeless accident. Through my scientific work I have come to believe more and more strongly that the physical universe is put together with an ingenuity so astonishing that I cannot accept it merely as a brute fact. There must, it seems to me, be a deeper level of explanation….”

*1 Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time. New York: Random House, 1988. (p. 193)

*2 Paul Davies, The Mind of God, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992. (p.16)

– The Mind of God*2

APPENDIX Z39: Metaphysical Assumptions

incorrect: Time is linear

correct: Time is non-linear

incorrect: “Originally” there was NOTHING

correct: Eternally there was Potential/Possibility

incorrect: We are finite beings

correct: We are finite+ beings

incorrect: God is “there” and we are “here”

correct: There is no divide in the Divine

incorrect: We are no longer able to “connect” with the Divine

correct: As we are integral to the Infinite Divine, by definition we eternally organically connect

incorrect: Physics is a secular science, inherently antithetical to an Infinite Divine

correct: All scientific Investigation is an examination of components of the Infinite Divine. There is no divide between scientific and spiritual investigation.

incorrect: The Infinite Divine can be delineated

correct: As the Infinite Divine is an ever-morphing and evolving supra-Entity, best to focus on attempting to delineate “the core attribute(s) of the Infinite Divine”

[Summa proposes that this core is: Q4P∞]

APPENDIX Z40: The “Double Play”: Push-Pull

Summa has proposed two separate dynamics as having ignited Creation and the cosmic advance as we know it.

(1) The splitting of the Zero-Point

(2) The “leveraged buyout” of future potentials

To clarify, the hypothesis holds them as simultaneous ‘igniters.’

Simultaneous in-tandem ‘agents of creation.’ The ultimate “Double Play.”

*

Taking this to yet another level, in parallel to our Potential v. Fulfillment discussion earlier, one can speculate that –

(1) is symbolically proto-male – PUSH while

(2) is symbolically proto-female – PULL

APPENDIX Z41: Framing Beliefs

“There are many other unprovable framing beliefs, and they have perplexed philosophers since humans first thought systematically about such things. Is there really a world out there, or are there only our sense impressions? Are there other minds? Do we have free will? Has the universe existed for billions of years, or did it come into existence five minutes ago, together with false memories and evidence? These are staple topics of any introductory course of philosophy. Framing beliefs – that there is an external world, and other minds, and free will – lie beyond the scope of proof. Nonetheless, they are what give meaning to the chaos of experience.*” from the author -

I am proposing the Summa hypothesis/theory/paradigm –Q4P∞ / Extraordinariation – as a “Framing Belief”

APPENDIX Z42: The Goldilocks Dilemma***

“As we were leaving, a stranger came up to me, gentle and unassuming, and said, ‘I’ve just written a book that I think you might find interesting. If I may, I’ll send it to you.’ I thanked him and some days later the book arrived. It was called Just Six Numbers [© 2001], and with a shock of recognition I realized who the stranger was: Sir Martin, now Lord, Rees, Astronomer Royal, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge and President of the Royal Society, the world’s oldest and most famous scientific association. Sir Martin was, in other words, Britain’s most distinguished scientist.

The thesis of the book was that there are six mathematical constants that determine the physical shape of the universe. Had any one of them been even slightly different, the universe as we know it would not exist. Nor would life. It was my first glimpse into the new cosmology and the string of recent discoveries of how improbable our existence actually is. James Le Fanu, in his 2009 book Why Us?, adds to this a slew of new findings in neuroscience and genetics to suggest that we are on the brink of a paradigm shift that will overturn the scientific materialism of the past two centuries.

The new paradigm must also lead to a renewed interest in and sympathy for religion in its broadcast sense, as a means of expressing wonder at the ‘mysterium tremendum et fascinans’ of the natural world. It is not the least of the ironies of the New Genetics and the Decade of the Brain that they have vindicated the two main impetuses to religious belief – the non-material reality of the human soul and the beauty and diversity of the living world – while confounding the principle tenets of materialism: that Darwin’s ‘reason for everything’ explains the natural world and our origins, and that life can be ‘reduced’ to the chemical genes, the mind to the physical brain.

(James Le Fanu, Why Us?, p.258)

There may be, in other words, a new synthesis in the making. It will be very unlike the Greek thoughtworld of the medieval scholastics with its emphasis on changelessness and harmony. Instead it will speak about the emergence of order, the distribution of intelligence and information processing, the nature of self-organizing complexity, the way individuals display a collective intelligence that is a property of groups, not just the individuals that comprise them, the dynamic of evolving systems and what leads some to equilibrium, others to chaos. Out of this will emerge new metaphors of nature and humanity, flourishing and completeness.”*

from the author –

As noted in the 2001 Sir Martin Rees book Just Six Numbers, there are at least 6 cosmological constants, (and, actually maybe a dozen+) which, if adjusted by even 1 decimal point would preclude the cosmos having life, among other things, as we know it.

Thus, “life” – and existence – exists at the “knife-edge” of the precision of these constants.

By-and-large the scientific community and the theological community is not-quite-sure exactly how to understand this “synchronicity.”

However, from Summa’s perspective the resolution is clear. Obvious. The cosmic order orients itself – and its crucial/integral cosmological constants – to advance interrelated goals of life, potential and extraordinariation.

APPENDIX Z43: God***

“God is the distant voice we hear and seek to amplify in our systems of meaning, each particular to a culture, a civilization, a faith. God is the One within the many; the unity at the core of our diversity; the call that leads us to journey beyond the self and its strivings, to enter into otherness and be enlarged by it, to seek to be a vehicle through which blessing flows outwards to the world, to give thanks for the miracle of being and the radiance that shines wherever two lives touch in affirmation, forgiveness and love.”*

APPENDIX Z44: Man: Mortal or Divine***

“When I behold Your Heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and stars that You set in place, What is man that You are mindful of him, Mortal man that You take note of him? Yet You have made him little less than the angels And adorned him with glory and majesty.”

Psalm 8:3-5 (c. 1000 BCE)

“Pico della Mirandola (1463-94) was one of the moving spirits of the Italian Renaissance. Born into an aristocratic family, he was a child prodigy, mastering Latin and Greek at an early age and winning the title of papal protonotary when we was only ten. Initially intending a career in the Church, he went to the University of Bologna to study law, but widened his interests to include philosophy, which he pursued at the universities of Ferrara and Padua.

In 1486 he completed his monumental 900 Theses, Conclusiones philosophicae, cabalasticae et theologicae, on the entire range of human knowledge. To accompany them he wrote his Oration on the Dignity of Man, widely regarded as a manifesto of the Renaissance. In it he

argued that the human person was the centerpiece of creation, the one being other than God himself who had no fixed nature. Endowed with freedom, he could rise higher than the angels or fall lower than the animals. This is how he imagines God addressing the first human:

Adam, we give you no fixed place to live, no form that is peculiar to you, nor any function that is yours alone… All other things have a limited and fixed nature prescribed and bounded by our laws. You, with no limit or no bound, may choose for yourself the limits and bounds of your nature. We have placed you at the world’s center so that you may survey everything else in the world. We have made you neither of heavenly nor of Earthly stuff, neither mortal nor immortal, so that with free choice and dignity, you may fashion yourself into whatever form you choose. To you is granted the power of degrading yourself into the lower forms of life, the beasts, and to you is granted the power, contained in your intellect and judgment, to be reborn into the higher forms, the divine.”*

*Oration on the Dignity of Man (1486), the text available at: http:// public.wsu.edu/~brians/world_civ/worldcivreader/world_civ_ reader_1/pico.html#2. See Ernst Cassirer, Paul Oskar Kristeller and John Herman Randall, Jr, The Rennaissane Philosophy of Man, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1948; M.V. Dougherty (ed.), Pico della Mirandola: New Essays, Cambridge University Press, 2008.

APPENDIX Z45: New Interpretations***

“I end with a fascinating comment by the nineteenthcentury Jewish mystic Rabbi Zadok haCohen of Lublin (1823-1900).

‘Every day there are new interpretations of Torah, because every day, continually, God renews the work of creation.’ Since the world was created according to the Torah...presumably, the renewal of the world comes about through new aspects of Torah. That is why after the blessing [in the morning prayers] ‘creator of the heavenly lights’ which speaks about the daily renewal of creation, the sages instituted a second blessing which is a form of blessing over the Torah...in which we ask to know the new interpretations of Torah which come about through the new aspects of creation....’

Rabbi Zadock haCohen, Tzidkat ha-Tzaddik, 92 (c. 1870)

According to Rabbi Zadok, since the God of creation is the God of revelation, and since the Torah is itself a commentary on the natural world, every new scientific discovery generates new religious insight. By daily renewing creation, God is daily renewing, our insight into his creative will.”

*** Jonathan Sacks, The Great Partnership, New York: Random House, Inc. 2011, pp.111-112

APPENDIX Z46: Take #3: Physics & Metaphysics

In secular society, and even in religious society, our natural inclination is to keep a close eye on Physics for its most up-to-date “wisdom” re: Cosmology (the origin and dynamics of the cosmos). After all, Physics best understands the equations and their import, does it not?

The ‘problem’ is, however, that according to Summa, “Creation” / the “Big Bang” / the Emergence of our Universe, was an epic attempt to break-free of the sterile universe of the equations, to “transcend” the equations.

The “Cosmological Breakthrough” was an attempt to move the cosmic order into Reality – a world of texture and emotion, of love and sunsets, of giggles and relationships. It was an attempt at maximizing the Potential/Extraordinariation of the cosmic order.

Thus, classic physics more logically plays the role of “Expert Witness” in verifying the plausibility of a particular Metaphysical construct, but does not by any means hold

the flag of the Must-Go-To place to find an explicator for the “breakthrough.”

We seek “aesthetic elegance” in hypothesizing “the key to the cosmic code.” We seek “the common cosmic denominator. We seek the “key to the kingdom.” The “unity key.” We, respectfully, do not seek yet another complex equation.

APPENDIX Z47: “...beyond science...”

“The preeminent mystery is why anything exists at all. What breathes life into the equations of physics, and actualized them in a real cosmos? Such questions lie beyond science, however: they are the province of philosophers and theologians”***….

from the author –

Martin Rees is Royal Society Research Professor at Cambridge University, Astronomer Royal of Great Britain and conceptual theorist. He was the recipient of the 2001 Peter Gruber Foundation Cosmology Prize.

*** Cosmologist Martin Rees, Our Cosmic Habitat. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 2001. p. xi

APPENDIX Z48: “The Same Recipe”***

on-point: Q4P / Cosmic Traction

“A universe hospitable to life—what we might call a biophilic universe—has to be very special in many ways. The prerequisites for any life—long-live stable stars, a periodic table of atoms with complex chemistry, and so on—are sensitive to physical laws and could not have emerged from a Big Bang with a recipe that was even slightly different. Many recipes would lead to stillborn universes with no atoms, no chemistry, and no planets; or to universes too short lived or too empty to allow anything to evolve beyond sterile uniformity. This distinctive and special-seeming recipe seems to me a fundamental mystery that should not be brushed aside merely as a brute fact.’” (p. xvi)

on-point: Q4P / Extraordinariation

*** Cosmologist Martin Rees, Our Cosmic Habitat. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 2001. pp xvi, 163

“Likewise, we should surely probe deeper, and ask why a unique recipe for the physical world should permit consequences as interesting as those we see around us.”…(p. 163)

APPENDIX Z49: The Consciousness Continuum

Where does it begin? Where is it at?

What is it? Why is it? “Who” is it?

Across how many dimensions of time and space does it span?

To what extent is it shared? partitioned-off?

To what extent is it stored eternally? In-time and out-oftime?

If we are separate from the Divine, to what extent does the Divine read our individual consciousnesses?

If we are, a’ la Summa, extensions of the Divine, where does my consciousness end – and yours start?

If there is a Godhead, was there indeed a contraction of Divine consciousness – a Hester Panim – spanning the Holocaust time frame, among other time frames?

Is ascending consciousness a gateway to Summa’s fuller Extraordinariation?

To what extent, is an emerging consciousness a goal of Creation?

But, did it not require an extraordinary consciousness to effect Creation in the first place?

Did the Cosmic Consciousness indeed anticipate and foresee the plethora of (neo-infinite) potentials down-theroad, as per Summa, and then ‘bootstrap-leverage’ those potentials into the “pull-aspect of Creation.”

Did the Cosmic Consciousness indeed grasp the neoinfinite potential inherent in “splitting 0”, as per Summa, and then have the savvy to do just that in the “pushaspect of Creation”?

Does the Cosmic Consciousness – to this very day –optimize evolution and in-parallel attempt to “balance-out” the forces of Nature?

My “TAKE”

I believe that we (humans+) are the ‘forward wave’ of consciousness.

And, I believe that our cumulative consciousness –integrated with the entire extended Divine consciousness – will plot the next level of Extraordinariation and Consciousness.

APPENDIX Z50: “Backward Causation”

( meaning, the FUTURE impacting the PAST )

[ support for the “bootstrap” component of Summa’s metaphysics ]

“Quantum Mechanics Could Permit a Subtle Form of Teleology”

“Crazy though the idea may seem at first, there is in fact no fundamental impediment to a mechanism that allows later events to influence earlier events. In fact, there are some famous theories of physics that explicitly involve backward causation – future events having causative power over past events. Wheeler proposed one such theory with his then student Richard Feynman in the mid1940s. In the Wheeler-Feynman theory of electrodynamics, electromagnetic interactions can travel both forward and backward in time. There is no experimental evidence in favor of the theory, I hasten to add. Something similar was proposed for gravitation by Hoyle and Narlikat, and for quantum cosmology by Gell-Mann and Hartle and by Hawking. Again, observation and experiment are silent on these ideas, but the theories are certainly not ‘antiscientific,’ and variants of them are still being investigated today.”*…

* Cosmologist Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma. United Kingdom: Little, First Mariner Books edition. 2008. pp. 242-243

APPENDIX Z51: Galapagos

I, as well, traveled to the Galapagos Islands. Not on the HMS Beagle (c. 1835), but via HMS Boeing (December 2006), 171 years later.

My reaction – after surveying the incredible giant Tortoises, the exotic fierce-looking but harmless iguana, and the surreal pastel-blue footed seabirds (the ‘Blue-footed booby’) – was that Mr. Darwin, for all his greatness, had missed “the main event.”

One does not need Galapagos to discern the core axis of Evolution. One might very well, however, employ Galapagos, to discern Quest for Potential∞/ Extraordinariation.

Isolated from the South American mainland, (500 miles west of Ecuador), the sundry Galapagos species had their own survival/extraordinariation evolutionary calculus. The threats were quite different and the resources/environment were quite different. In sum total, it was a unique, standalone environment within-which to evolve. Differently. With a little Extraordinariaton thrown-in.

APPENDIX Z52: Ecology

The very basic laws of ecology describing the growth and regulation of populations of living organisms appear to fit the metaphysical model of the cosmic Quest for Potential∞ proposed by David Birnbaum. Obviously, ecology is only one of many sub disciplines within the rather broad science of biology, and biology is only one of many natural sciences (albeit a very important one). Therefore, this observation alone does not serve as an immediate and decisive proof that the Quest is indeed the major driving force behind each and every natural process.

Nevertheless, it is truly fascinating that an established scientific theory based on experimental evidence and mathematic models is in such a strong agreement with a philosophical theory of Conceptual Theorist Birnbaum, and developed independently of any formal natural history research. This is unlikely to happen by chance alone.

Therefore, it is reasonable to propose the Quest for Potential∞ as a working hypothesis for explaining the impetus behind the cosmic dynamic.

Testing this hypothesis would involve a critical review of other scientific theories explaining particular phenomena in chemistry, physics, sociology, etc. for their agreement with Birnbaum’s proposed Overarching Theory.

Ultimately, this may yield a unified view of the Universe, which would be a major leap in fulfilling our potentiality as conscious beings.

APPENDIX Z53: A Compelling Case

One cannot expect to clinically prove a dynamic Framing Belief* of the Cosmic Order – of the overarching/infinite magnitude of Quest for Potential∞.

But ideally one could provide a rather compelling circumstantial/supporting/empirical case.

Perhaps we have done so.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said that ideally when solid circumstantial evidence is presented in court, it would be like a spider’s web – so strong that nothing could hope to escape. According to my consulting litigators, in an ideal legal cobweb, all the inferences and implications are internally consistent – like the fabric of the web.

Ideally, a powerful case would clearly trump competing scenarios.

Perhaps we have done so here.

There is no (repeat: no) contradictory evidence to Summa’s hypothesis. Not one iota of contradictory information. After 5,000+ years of accumulated data and wisdom – across a myriad of fields.

Over a 40+ year period – I have quite-carefully reviewed fieldafter-field – to reality-check Summa. Does Summa – overlaid over the particular field – enhance the field – or contradict the field?

In each and every case, overlaying Summa either has a neutral effect or, more often, enhances the field. Often, Summa radically enhances the field. There are no exceptions. Meaning, there are no instances where Summa detracts from the field.

Thus, on weighing all the evidence, the probability that Summa is essentially on-the-mark, is quite high. And the possibility that it is totally off-base, is quite remote.

Moreover, there is massive and compelling affirming evidence – from multiple directions, avenues and fields – and from careful, direct and empirical observation – to buttress Summa’s hypothesis. One has only to objectively weigh the hypothesis.

In addition, as explicated, there is de facto no competing metaphysics.

So I have presented.

There are no eyewitnesses coming forward from the Creation-point. With regards the Creation point, Summa has made-a-case for circumstantial and deductive (and spiritually consonant) evidence.

And contemporaneously, we are all, indeed, very direct eyewitnesses. And we can all carefully evaluate the contemporary situation – across the panoply of fields – and in our own lives – through a Summa lens.

Very straightforward: Does it work?

* see Exhibit Z41 several exhibits prior

APPENDIX Z54: neo-Survival-of-the-Fittest or Q4P∞/Extraordinariation?

Approximately 67 million years ago, a sleek, red-crowned flying dinosaur existed, with a wingspan of ~35 feet, and a flying range of possibly ~9 days at-a-clip at 15,000 feet at 80 mph for 10,000+ miles.

Here are Wikipedia excerpts –

Quetzalcoatlus

Quetzalcoatlus (/ketsəlkou’ætləs/) was a pterodactyloid pterosaur known from the Late Cretaceous of North America (Maastrichtian stage, about 68–65.5 million years ago), and one of the largest known flying animals of all time....

223 APPENDIX

Scientific classification

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Order: Pterosauria

Suborder: Pterodactyloidea

Family: Azhdarchidae

Genus: Quetzalcoatlus

Species: Q. northropi

More recent estimates based on greater knowledge of azhdarchid proportions place its wingspan at 10–11 meters (33–36 ft)....

The nature of flight in Quetzalcoatlus and other giant azhdarchids was poorly understood until serious biomechanical studies were conducted in the 21st century....

After factoring wingspan, body weight, and aerodynamics, a sophisticated computer program led the two researchers to conclude that Q. northropi was capable of flight “up to 80 miles an hour for 7 to 10 days at altitudes of 15,000 feet”. Mike Habib further suggested a maximum flight range of 8,000 to 12,000 miles for Q. northropi....

[Note that the entire circumference of the Earth is 25,000 miles.]

* Quetzalcoatlus belongs to the order Pterosauria which were flying reptiles. They existed [144.5 million years] from the late Triassic to the end of the Cretaceous Period (210 to 65.5 million years ago).

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

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.”

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.”

***

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…

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

…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.”…

APPENDIX Z59: 2006: Quantum Computation

The universe is a quantum computer

“The universe computes its own behavior.* As soon as the universe began, it began computing. At first the patterns it produced were simple, comprising elementary particles and establishing the fundamental laws of physics. In time, as it processed more and more information, the universe spun out ever more intricate and complex patterns, including galaxies, stars, and planets. Life, language, human beings, society, culture—all owe their existence to the intrinsic ability of matter and energy to process information.” (p. 3)

Why is the cosmos so complex?

“The computational capability of the universe explains one of the great mysteries of nature: how complex

systems such as living creatures can arise from fundamentally simple physical laws…. The digital revolution under way today is merely the latest in a long line of information-processing revolutions stretching back through the development of language, the evolution of sex, and the creation of life, to the beginning of the universe itself. Each revolution has laid the groundwork for the next, and all informationprocessing revolutions since the Big Bang stem from the intrinsic information-processing ability of the universe. The computational universe necessarily generates complexity. Life, sex, the brain, and human civilization did not come about by mere accident.” (pp. 3, 5)

from the author –

Lloyd and his key scientific compatriots are now holed-up at MIT’s new Center for Extreme Quantum Information Theory (established in 2007) of which Lloyd is the Director [ google MIT xQIT ]. Lloyds hypothesis converges with mine. The universe does ‘compute itself,’ and complexity ‘is no accident.’

Now, to a proficient cutting-edge secular MIT scientist observing a slice of the universe at-work, the universe might appear as a quantum computer. What the scientist is observing, however (according to our hypothesis) is the quantum aspect of Infinite Divine Extraordinariation atwork.

From my perspective, the MIT group is pretty adroitly dealing with a very key conceptual slice of the (multibillion-year) unfolding of the cosmic drama. Thus this

‘Quantum Information’ group would have a potentially significant interest and “stake” in Summa. And, Summa, in turn, has an extremely significant “stake” in this group.

The entire Universe is self-generating and complexifying. The MIT center buttresses a very major swath of Summa – from the pinnacle of contemporary cutting-edge academic hard sciences.

* Lloyd’s ~mechanistic terminology posits “a computer which computes”; I might rather say “Infinite Divine Potential" which creates or iterates. Note that Seth Lloyd is currently (October, 2012) a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT, and has selfdescribed himself as a ‘quantum mechanic.’ Notwithstanding the probability that Lloyd is more multi-dimensional than he professes, his background context is relevant here.

Note as well that Lloyd’s group is a small cadre of iconoclastic top-flight scientists/engineers/mathematicians representing mainly themselves (and not the scientific community at-large), albeit with the imprimatur of MIT for their esoteric and mind-stretching research.

*** Seth Lloyd, Programming the Universe. New York: Vintage Books, 2006. pp. 3 and 5

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 soto-speak “sets the dial” in each case.

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

APPENDIX Z61: 2010: Cosmologists Hawking and Mlodinow***

“We each exist for but a short time, and in that time explore but a small part of the whole universe. But humans are a curious species. We wonder, we seek answers. Living in this vast world that is by turns kind and cruel, and gazing at the immense heavens above, people have always asked a multitude of questions: How can we understand the world in which we find ourselves? How does the universe behave? What is the nature of reality? Where did all this come from? Did the universe need a creator? Most of us do not spend most of our time worrying about these questions, but almost all of us worry about them some of the time.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead. Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics. Scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”*

*** Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The Grand Design. New York: Bantam Books. 2010. p. 5

APPENDIX Z62: ALERT

Cosmologist Haisch (2010)*** Clones (serially plagiarizes)

Summa I (1988)

Here is a sample list of Haisch plagiarizations (of Summa) in his 2010 book***-

“The purpose I propose that life has is a grand one, and even, I think, a logical one. We are the means whereby God experiences his own potential, and this is why the Universe has some of the amazing properties conducive to life that it has….” (p. 20)

“The purpose of life is to let God make his own potential real. And of course this cannot be limited to human experience. God in this view seeks the experience of all living things on this planet and wherever else life might exist and whatever else it might be like….” (pp. 20-21)

“Back to the question of evil. If we are to believe in a God, we would surely like for him or her to be

benevolent and merciful in addition to all-knowing and all-powerful, omniscient and omnipotent. How could he or she tolerate the cruelty that some inflict on others (including on animals) and still merit our respect as a kind and loving God?

What I am proposing—and it is no original idea of mine—is that God chooses to deliberately stay off the playing field in order to let freedom of choice create the new and original experiences that the Universe affords and that God seeks through us….” (p. 23)

“The idea of an infinite conscious intelligence with infinite potential, whose ideas become the laws of physics of our Universe and others, makes sense to me. The consciousness providing purpose can be called God, who transforms potential into experience and gives our universe a purpose….” (p. 85)

“…God desires to experience his potential…. Because we are the incarnations of God in the physical realm, God experiences the richness of his potential through us….”

(p. 86)

“The Godhead has infinite potential, infinite power, infinite ability…but that is all sterile perfection. In The God Theory the Godhead chooses to convert potential into experience….” (p. 122)

“…God’s consciousness wishes to know itself by expressing itself. God wishes to make his potential real….” (p. 126)

“I believe that we live in a purpose-guided Universe governed by the laws of science. There is no conflict

between a Universe of matter and forces and a Universe of purpose, because the purpose is what went into the laws. In order for God to let himself experience a part of his potential, he imagines into existence just the right characteristics that a Universe needed to have in order for life to originate and then to evolve into complex beings, such as you and I. His consciousness caused this and it is his consciousness that we share and that is our essence. But the arena in which all this takes place is fully governed by the laws of nature including Darwinian evolution. Hence there is ample reason to believe in Einstein, Darwin, and God.” (p. 206)

from the author –

This appendix was added-on by myself in September, 2012, seven years after Summa II was originally first copyrighted and posted online (2005), four years after it (Summa II) was available on Amazon, and twenty-four years after Summa I was published by KTAV – and reviewed and distributed globally.

Note that all the extracts from the Haisch book (2010) are almost verbatim reprints of key and highlighted sections of (1988) Summa Metaphysica I’s featured centerpiece Unified Formulation, and reprinted in Summa II (2005). (See my summary link https://www.summametaphysica. com/theory-outline/).

Summa I (1988) introduces onto the world scene, among other concepts, respectfully, my original concept of Quest for Potential∞ as well as the inter-related Potential∞ as the core of the Divine.

Note as well that Summa I (God and Evil) maneuvers with the concept of Divine Contraction of Divine Consciousness in Summa I’s book-spanning Theodicy presentation. (Former seminary student) Haisch’s presentation (2010) of this theme in his above-noted The Purpose Guided Universe is almost a verbatim extract from Summa I.

Finally, Haisch’s centerpiece theme – the actual title of his book – The Purpose-Guided Universe – of Potential fulfillment being the purpose of Creation, is straight out of Summa I.

Thus, note that Haisch’s key and central ideas (2006 and 2010) very directly, to put it mildly, clone/plagiarize focused ideas proffered in Summa I (1988) and Summa II (2005).

Note, however, that in the ‘history of ideas’ it is not unusual for (alleged) ‘conceptual breakthrough’ ideas to ‘bubble up’ simultaneously in two unrelated quarters. However, in this case, of course, there are multiple identical concepts 'bubbling-up' (plagiarized) here simultaneously – and therein lies the issue.

It should be noted, that Summa I enjoyed considerable global traction for over 18 years (both online and hard copy) before Haisch’s works on cosmology (2006 and 2010).

pp. 20, 21, 23, 86, 122, 126, 206.

APPENDIX Z63: Paradigm Challenges

Comments on Wikipedia review of the 1962 classic, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. Kuhn (Univ. Of Chicago Press)

[Note that Birnbaum proposes a new paradigm metaphysics, not a new paradigm scientific theory; however, the Birnbaum metaphysics fully wraps-around and integrates-with science.]

Note to reader:

We are going to present six excerpts from the Wikipedia article, followed by the Birnbaum “take”.

Excerpt (A):

“…Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which periods of such conceptual continuity in normal science were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science. During revolutions in science the discovery of anomalies leads to a whole new paradigm that changes the rules of the

game and the “map” directing new research, asks new questions of old data, and moves beyond the puzzlesolving of normal science….”

(A) The Birnbaum “take”:

A proposed paradigm shift “raises the stakes.”

If the new paradigm is more authentic than the prior, the entire field emerges more dynamic and overarching. If the new paradigm is less authentic, the entire field is set back.

Excerpt (B):

“…Kuhn’s book argues that the evolution of scientific theory does not emerge from the straightforward accumulation of facts, but rather from a set of changing intellectual circumstances and possibilities….”

(B) The Birnbaum “take”:

For my part, I would call this “a conceptual breakthrough”

Excerpt (C):

“Coherence”

One of the aims of science is to find models that will account for as many observations as possible within a coherent framework….”

With an important caveat: With no serious flaws or glaring gaps. Excerpt (D):

“…As a paradigm is stretched to its limits, anomalies — failures of the current paradigm to take into account observed phenomena — accumulate…. But no matter how great or numerous the anomalies that persist, Kuhn observes, the practicing scientists will not lose faith in the established paradigm for as long as no credible alternative is available….”

“…In any community of scientists, Kuhn states, there are some individuals who are bolder than most. These scientists, judging that a crisis exists, embark on what Thomas Kuhn calls revolutionary science, exploring alternatives to long-held, obvious-seeming assumptions. Occasionally this generates a rival to the established framework of thought… The majority of the scientific community will oppose any conceptual change…. Those scientists who possess an exceptional ability to recognize a theory’s potential will be the first whose preference is likely to shift in favor of the challenging paradigm. There typically follows a period in which there are adherents of both paradigms. In time, if the challenging paradigm is solidified and unified, it will replace the old paradigm, and a paradigm shift will have occurred….”

(D) The Birnbaum “take”:

Note that typically the contemporaneous ‘scientific community’ refuses to acknowledge the objectively unacceptable limitations of the old paradigm.

Excerpt (E):

“Incommensurability”

“According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigms preceding and succeeding a paradigm shift are so different that their theories are incommensurable — the new paradigm cannot be proven or disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice versa…. The paradigm shift does not merely involve the revision or transformation of an individual theory, it changes the way terminology is defined…. The new theories were not, as the scientists had previously thought, just extensions of old theories, but were instead completely new world views…. It is simply not possible, according to Kuhn, to construct an impartial language that can be used to perform a neutral comparison between conflicting paradigms, because the very terms used are integral to the respective paradigms… The competition between paradigms is not the sort of battle that can be resolved by proofs.”

Scientists subscribing to different paradigms end up talking past one another….”

(E) The Birnbaum “take”:

I might say slightly differently:

The new can effectively challenge the old. On the merits.

The old is unable to challenge the new on the merits.

The new cannot ‘prove’ the new – yet.

Excerpt (F):

“…Kuhn saw that for a new candidate for paradigm to be accepted by a scientific community...

1) the new candidate must seem to resolve some outstanding and generally recognized problem that can be met in no other way.

2) the new paradigm must promise to preserve a relatively large part of the concrete problem solving activity that has accrued to science through its predecessors.

3) overall Kuhn maintained that the new paradigm must also solve more problems than its predecessor, which therefore entailed that the number of newly solved problems must be greater than those solved in the old paradigm….”

(F) The Birnbaum “take”:

All three are true in Summa’s case.

APPENDIX Z64: Q4P∞ & Evolution

Over 4 billion species have graced our planet.

# Q4P∞ drives Evolution; # Darwinism [ Natural Selection/Random mutation] does not.

# Not one species has ever been generated by Darwinism.

# Not one species has ever not been generated by Q4P∞

> see my own comlete separate Section 1b: Evolution also see www.Chronology1000.com (2020)

However, note clearly that Q4P∞ is assessing on a universe-basis and on planetary-basis as well, and not just at the local level. Even though the local level is the component we can most readily focus on.

And, we posit that on the local level, for instance - the genes of ALL species are tweaked ensemble.

for the scientist reader: I know you want a mechanism; it would require a quasi-supra-organic-super-processing entity/matrix/web of some sort spanning the entire universe – and getting feedback in real-time across its far reaches...

meaning, Q4P∞ itself

[ In Summa IV [2020], Potentialism will posit that suis generis CODE/CODING traverses the Cosmic Order - and ongoing builds-out the Cosmic Order; this CODE/CODING executes the (eternal) mandate of Q4P∞; and this universespanning CODE/CODING is quasi-alive and does not need to touch-base with 'home''; it somehow operates dynamically - across all directionsacross the far reaches of the Cosmic Order.]

See in parallel Seth Lloyd of MIT XQIT, Programming the Universe, Knopf, 2006; Lloyd's model is rudimentary ['plain Jane']; the Lloyd program (only) seeks greater and greater complexity; the Birnbaum program plays-out a more challenging/ complex /adventurous/nested goal/theme; it seeks to ongoing execute the [2005 Summa-2] SuperFormula: Q4P∞ > C+ > E+ : Quest for Potential∞ > Complexification > Extraordinariation

In turn, the 2005 - Birnbaum Super-Formula pegs-off-of the Birnbaum 1988 Summa I - which introduces hypothesized Quest for Potential to the planet.

APPENDIX Z65:

How does Q4P∞ interact with the physical world?

Our proposition: At the Big Bang / the Genesis-Point / Bereshith

Q4P∞ morphs from a Supra-Metaphysical conceptdynamic-entity into a Supra-Metaphysical-physical concept-dynamic-entity.

Meaning, we are all part of Q4P∞. You, me, all of us. But it is far from clear to what extent, among other key issues. From my perspective, it is a subject more appropriate for a next generation of works on Q4P∞ if/when Summa is used as a working hypothesis.

APPENDIX Z66: Consciousness & Cosmos

Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist NeoDarwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False is a 2012 book by Thomas Nagel, Professor of Philosophy at New York University © Oxford University Press Sept. 2012

from Wikipedia Overview

“In the book, Nagel argues that the materialist version of evolutionary biology is unable to account for the existence of mind and consciousness, and is therefore at best incomplete. He writes that mind is a basic aspect of nature, and that any philosophy of nature that cannot account for it is fundamentally misguided. He argues that the standard physico-chemical reductionist account of the emergence of life – that it emerged out of a series of accidents, acted upon by the mechanism of natural selection — flies in the face of common sense.

Nagel’s position is that principles of an entirely different kind may account for the emergence of life, and in

particular conscious life, and that those principles may be teleological, rather than materialist or mechanistic. He stresses that his argument is not a religious one...”

from the author -

As we know, the guiding principle/dynamic/force Quest for Potential∞ is overarching, which would include its teleological dimension. From the get-go and thru its end-goals, Q4P∞ would foster and advance both the emergence of (mind and then) Consciousness, and the ever-increasing nurturing/expansion/elevation thereof.

*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_and_Cosmos (accessed June 23, 2013)

APPENDIX Z67: Contemporary Natural Selection Theory: Mechanism & Criteria

Is there a clear and focused academic scientific conviction/consensus on the mechanism and criteria for Natural Selection? The answer is NO.

See two groups of excerpts from Wikipedia

First group*a

note – this LISTING only deals with the “main figures”

Main figures in selection debate

“Besides Richard Dawkins and George C. Williams, other biologists and philosophers have expanded and refined the selfish-gene theory, such as John Maynard Smith, George R. Price, Robert Trivers, David Haig, Helena Cronin, David Hull, Philip Kitcher, and Daniel C. Dennett.

Individuals opposing this gene-centric view include Ernst Mayr, Stephen Jay Gould, David Sloan Wilson, and philosopher Elliott Sober.”...

Proponents of multilevel selection (MLS) include E. O. Wilson, David Sloan Wilson, Elliott Sober, Richard E. Michod, and Samir Okasha.

Second group*b

21st century

Macroevolution and microevolution

“One of the tenets of the modern evolutionary synthesis was that macroevolution (the evolution of phylogenic clades at the species level and above) was solely the result of the mechanisms of microevolution (changes in gene frequency within populations) operating over an extended period of time. During the last decades of the 20th century some paleontologists raised questions about whether other factors, such as punctuated equilibrium and group selection operating on the level of entire species and even higher level phylogenic clades, needed to be considered to explain patterns in evolution revealed by statistical analysis of the fossil record. Near the end of the 20th century some researchers in evolutionary developmental biology suggested that interactions between the environment and the developmental process might have been the source of some of the structural innovations seen in macroevolution, but other evo-devo researchers maintained that genetic mechanisms visible at the population level are fully sufficient to explain all macroevolution.”

Epigenetic inheritance

“Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene expression or cellular phenotype caused by mechanisms other than changes in the underlying DNA sequence. By the first decade of the 21st century it had become accepted that Epigenetic mechanisms were a necessary part of the evolutionary origin of cell differentiation. Although epigenetics in multicellular organisms is generally thought to be a mechanism involved in differentiation, with epigenetic patterns “reset” when organisms reproduce, there have been some observations of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance. This shows that in some cases non genetic changes to an organism can be inherited and it has been suggested that such inheritance can help with adaptation to local conditions and affect evolution. Some have suggested that in certain cases a form of Lamarckian evolution may occur.”

Unconventional evolutionary theory

Omega Point

“Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s metaphysical Omega Point Theory describes the gradual development of the universe from subatomic particles to human society, which he viewed as its final stage and goal. Cosmologist Frank J. Tipler subscribes to a version of this theory.”

Gaia hypothesis

“Teilhard de Chardin’s ideas have been seen by advocates of the Gaia theory proposed by James Lovelock, which holds that the living and nonliving parts of Earth can be viewed as a complex interacting system with similarities to a single organism, as being connected to Lovelock’s ideas. The Gaia hypothesis has also been viewed by Lynn Margulis and others as an extension of endosymbiosis and exosymbiosis. This modified hypothesis postulates that all living things have a regulatory effect on the Earth’s environment that promotes life overall.”

from the author -

For “my take” on the particular matter see –

Section 1b: Evolution

Wikipedia Online

*a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene-centered_view_of_evolution (accessed June 23, 2013)

*b http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_evolutionary_thought (accessed June 23, 2013)

APPENDIX Z68: Quantum Representation of “Physical” Q4P

pegging-off

of MIT’s Llloyd*

the key contemporary scientific hypothesis bridge to Summa

from a secular / scientific / mechanistic perspective -

“All interactions between particles in the universe...convey not only energy but also information in other words, particles not only collide, they compute. What is the entire universe computing, ultimately? Its own dynamical evolution... As the computation proceeds, reality unfolds.”

-from the back-cover of Programming the Universe

MIT(c) 2006, First Vintage Books Edition (NY)

Lloyd’s hypothesis provides key 1:1 buttress to Summa.

Indeed, “Q4P∞ is hiding in plain sight,” as we have hypothesized since 1988 via Summa Metaphysica I (hardcover), and then via Summa Metaphysica II (2005)

so,

Birnbaum’s Q4P∞ resonates as a fuller multi-dimensional wrap-around conceptualization re: Lloyd’s universe as a programming entity

*MIT scientist Seth Lloyd directs the Center for Extreme Quantum Information Theory at MIT, where he is also a professor of Mechanical Engineering.

APPENDIX Z69: The Cosmic Spinal Column

Q4P∞ Eternal

Q4P∞ yields Physics et al.

Q4P∞ embracing/adhering-to all

Q4P∞ ignites the universe

Q4P∞ as catalyst for Life

Q4P∞ as the spinal column of myriad Life

Q4P∞ driving Evolution forward

Q4P∞ as the central nervous system of Consciousness

Q4P∞ gives Purpose

Q4P∞ driving the universe forward

Q4P∞ as teleology. The goal: Potential/Extraordinariaton

APPENDIX Z70: Reprise

Respectfully, the proposed Summa paradigm appears for all intensive purposes to be so-to-speak bulletproof – vis à vis its key assertions.

The initial exposition of the Quest for Potential∞ concept in 1988 (via Summa I) has withstood 25+ years of global scrutiny.

No vulnerability or weak point has been discerned.

*

Question: Is there another viable game in town?

*

Those insistent – for whatever combination of reasons –on resolutely preserving the pre-Summa status quo, have only limited options, and none of these are good options. History may not treat them overly kindly.

We respectfully believe that Summa will prevail, because its core themes reflect the eternal realities of the cosmic order.

...of first tier of Potentialism Terms

Over the past three decades (since KTAV published Summa I in 1988) Birnbaum's Potentialism Theory has been built-out. As such, it has developed its own lexicon to describe its fundamental principle of Potentialism.

Potentialists define the universal drive of cosmology as the Infinite Quest for Potential. This is the inherent “drive” of the cosmos to seek its own ever-further complexity/sophistication/wondrousness.

Potential journeys towards a non-concretized state of infinite complexity/sophistication/wondrousness. The universe moves inexorably towards this infinite goal.

Potentialism

Potentialism itself represents a new metaphysics/ science for a new century. It provides an overarching 21st century metaphysics that seeks no less than to encompass the scientific, the religious, the spiritual, the secular and the philosophical.

Fully encompassing all modern science, Potentialism is potentially (repeat: potentially) a candidate - in due course - for a (true) Theory of Everything – not only in scientific terms, but in all terms meaningful to humankind.

Potentialism seeks to arm those seeking an understanding of the cosmic order with the tools necessary to have a “seat at the table” for this new metaphysics. All are invited as science comes back to

the metaphysics table after a de facto three century, post-Spinoza hiatus.

Following is an (abridged) short glossary of core, key terms of Potentialism.

Q4P∞ The Infinite Quest for Infinite Potential

- usually shortened to Quest for Potential in conversation, though the formal name best represents the iterative, infinite nature of Potential. This represents the universe’s innate drive towards fulfilling its true potential. Also commonly denoted as Q4P∞ or, supershorthand: Q4P.

Note that there are multiple embedded infinities in Q4P∞: See Infinity-3.com

CWP

Cosmic Womb of Potential

C+ Complexification

The hypothesized cosmic intermediate drive – “Q4P’s handmaiden” – maneuvering the cosmos towards greater complexity/sophistication/richness/integration/ variety/wondrousness.

In turn, note that one of the components of Complexification just-noted above is ‘integration’; meaning, Complexification does not occur divorced

from the cosmic landscape; rather, Complexification integrates into-the-process the harmonization/ optimization of the ongoing Complexification with the existing bio-landscape.

Complexification seeks quantum jumps – QJs (see entry in this same Glossary) – as opposed to incremental advance.

In its ongoing march of Complexification – the universe moves ever-and-ever closer to what Birnbaum calls Extraordinariation (E+) – the universal endgoal – a horizon to be approached, but never quite realized – and a state otherwise defined as hyperComplexification.

E+ Extraordinariation.

The end-target of this journey towards increased complexity/sophistication/wondrousness is referred to as Extraordinariation (see Extraordinariation.com).

Extraordinariation is not so much a precise destination as an ideal goal to be sought-after, albeit never quite fully-realized.

Note that Q4P itself does not quite know precisely what E+ looks like. Q4P is so to speak 'finding its way'. Along these lines, the Cambrian Explosion may have been a re-set.

Q4P∞ → C+ → E+

[ the SuperLaw / Super-Formula ]

The fundamental, core/primal drive of the cosmic

dynamic. This represents the Infinite Quest for Potential which drives the cosmic order towards greater and greater complexity and onward towards Extraordinariation.

Q4P∞ is super-charged with Quantum - information processing / computing / engineering

Universe Horizon

The denouement of the universe as far out as we can project our infinitely expanding universe *

Summa Metaphysica is a paradigm-changing work; it entirely changes the way we look at everything.

Core Map and Core Glossary of Potentialism

C+ = Complexification+ = (increased > complexity/ sophistication/richness/variety/wondrousness/step-up)

and this entire deal is a quasi-loop* or some sort of Ying-Yang

* imagine the number 6 or 9 or a PARTICLE ACCELERATOR

where, once instigated, the LOOPING continues/accelerates

GLOSSARY: =========================================

CWP = Cosmic Womb of Potential

Q4P∞ = Quest for Potential infinitely iterated

Q4P ( Q4P ( Q4P ...

explained in Section 1a following

quick-reference: www.TheoryCore.com

PA = Potential Array

e.g. types of lions types of butterflies children and grandchildren et al. ( plural would be PAs )

QJ = Quantum Jump > a higher-level platform

> a quantum higher state

> complexifying the Laws of Physics/ Chemistry/Biology

> self-organization at higher levels

> mini-Extraordinariation

> a new critical-mass level of Complexification+

> a quasi networking/morphing ( plural would be QJs )

A Quantum Jump (QJ) event: A hypothesized significant/ watershed/critical-mass cosmic complexification/ sophistication event on-the-march towards Extraordinariation (E+)

e.g.

“0-Point” > Big Bang universe

energy > atoms

single-cell life > multi-cellular life

[ Our ‘platforms’ are dealt with in more depth in www.sequence1000.com ]

E+ = Extraordinariation = Infinite Max QJ

explained in Section 1a

quick-reference: www.Extraordinariation.com =========================================

Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential discerns that one fundamental, simple formula/superlaw rules the entirety of the universe and, indeed, is responsible for its very existence: Q4P∞ → E+. This equation expresses that the Quest for Infinite Potential drives the universe ever onwards towards Extraordinariation.

What is the Quest for Infinite Potential? In simplest terms, Q4P represents the universal, inherent and eternal drive for everything in the universe to seek higher levels of Complexification. What is Complexification (C+)? It is the Birnbaum-hypothesized cosmic intermediate drive –“Q4P’s handmaiden” – maneuvering the cosmos towards greater complexity/sophistication/richness/variety/ wondrousness (see Glossary1000.com).

In its ongoing march of Complexification – maneuvering the cosmos towards increased complexity, sophistication, variety and wondrousness – the universe moves ever-andever closer to what Birnbaum calls Extraordinariation (E+) – the universal end-goal – a horizon to be approached, but never quite realized – and a state otherwise defined as hyper-Complexification.

see also www.CosmicToolKit1000.com

note: We are using the following definitions:

Cosmic Order – Everything, everything – both metaphysical and physical – pre-Big Bang and post

Universe – our physical universe (the current post-Big bang physical universe)

Shelf 1 & Shelf 2 (

The Cosmic “Tool Kit”

Shelf #1

tools:

* DIVISION INTO POLARITIES & DUALITIES *

* SIMULTANEOUS PUSH / PULL TENSION *

* INFINITELY-COILED SPIRALITY *

* COSMIC ‘LEVERAGED BUYOUT’ (“BOOTSTRAPPING”) *

* (INFINITE) RECURSIVENESS & (INFINITE)

LOOP-ABILITY *

* 1:1 METAPHYSICAL CORRESPONDENCE *

* MITOSIS OF “0” *

* INEXORABLE LIFE-QUESTING *

* VACUUM-BUSTING *

* INEXORABLE & INFINITE ASCENTS *

* MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MORPHING *

* OPTIMIZATION *

* COSMIC-TAPESTRY-WEAVING *

* QUEST FOR INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION *

* INTERLOCKING DIVINE INFINITUDE QUEST *

* HYPER-COSMIC RESOURCEFULNESS *

note:

Starting with this sub-section, there are NOTES by KHALIL;

There are approximately three dozen NOTES total by KHALIL – all in this Part I of the book – “THE COSMIC WOMB of POTENTIAL”. *

Hypothesis:

We propose and hypothesize the following Cosmic “Tool Kit”

[This “Tool Kit” is key and integral to our proposed metaphysics]

This “Tool Kit” might seem to be a ‘light’ section, but essentially provides the “SET of KEYS” necessary to open the vault containing the elusive ‘Cosmic Code’ …once you examine the Tool Kit, the Holy Grail of metaphysics is laid bare… discern the Tool Kit – and the construction of the Metaphysics of the Cosmos falls readily into place 1,2

(sounds presumptuous enough)

(all “TOOLS” are direct sub-components of the overarch ing Quest for Potential ∞ )

“A carpenter needs good tools”

– Carpenter’s union

Polarities and Dualities as well as assorted complementary Positives / Negatives, are the BUILDING BLOCKS and counter-point balancers of the cosmic order

(Articulation of this concept – whose core is not original – commenced in God and Evil …. The ‘spin’ may be original, but there is, indeed, voluminous literature on the subject in many cultures and many languages stretching back thousands of years)

NOTES by KHALIL

1 “readily into place” A: In his preamble to Derech Hashem Moshe Chaim Luzatto writes that before a subject such as this can be mastered it must be understood in a most general way first. General principles and overarching themes are to be understood before details are probed. Once the framework of the subject is made clear, one will then be able to place each detail into its proper context automatically, and he will ”delight” in understanding new facts that add texture to the framework. This work – God and Good – is written with this concept in mind.

2 “readily into place” B: The Cosmic Womb of Potential, and particularly the Tool Kit, will elucidate the general principles that are central to the paradigm presented here. The “Master Craftsman” of the cosmos employs a cosmic tool kit. Extraordinary tools open–the–way for a potentially extraordinary construct. Examine the Tool Kit, and you will grasp the dimensions of the cosmic construct.

••• TOOL:

* SIMULTANEOUS PUSH / PULL TENSION * (my term)

Masculine / Feminine

Components of the cosmos are in DYNAMIC TENSION and/or ENGAGEMENT

Some components simultaneously PUSH from one dimension, and PULL from another realm For example: a component may PUSH from a metaphysical level, while it PULLS from a REALITY realm – or from a still further-out POTENTIAL realm.

••• TOOL:

* INFINITELY-COILED SPIRALITY * (my term)

INFINITELY-COILED SPIRALITY is the favorite infinity-tool in the Tool Kit.

One can conjecture that the specific ‘spirality’ parallels a double-helix.

Meaning, COILED SPIRALITY is the “cosmic highway”.

Encapsulization: The cosmos is more like an infinitely coiled – and expanding – and regenerating – spiral spring.

SPIRALITY is closely inter-linked with… “BOOTSTRAPPING” (another cosmic tool, next)

REPRINT: COSMIC "TOOL KIT"

••• TOOL:

* COSMIC ‘LEVERAGED BUYOUT’ (“BOOTSTRAPPING”) * (my term)

Leveraging (infinite) POTENTIALS down–the–road3, 4, 5

(forward towards infinity) to energize the ‘present’

A key concept positioned centrally in the predecessor work God and Evil , but using more prosaic terminology here. This above–proposed “TOOL” alone could keep metaphysics – and physics – busy for a thousand years or so.

Encapsulization: Potentials down-the-road energize the PRESENT (and initially ignited CREATION itself).

••• TOOL:

* (INFINITE) RECURSIVENESS & (INFINITE) LOOP–ABILITY * (my term)

An entity or theme repeating within itself.....indefinitely... is a key cosmic theme. For instance POTENTIAL, as we define it, is recursive… i.e.

Potential within Potential within Potential ad infinitum

Recursiveness of Quest for Potential ∞ :

The power of Q4P (Quest for Potential ∞ ) hinges on its (infinite) recursiveness. Like an infinitely coiled spring.

To the extent that it keeps iterating infinitely outward and

onward, it self–charges and perpetuates its power. Another way of looking at this is always assuming Q4P to mean – Q4P to the power–of–infinity.

NOTES by KHALIL

3 Leverage A: “Leveraged Buyout” is a term from finance. It refers to a case in which a financier buys a company using future earnings as the collateral. For instance, a financier might offer to pay $1 million dollars a year for ten years to buy a company. And where, does he plan to get the million dollars per year? From the future projected earnings of the company – of $1.5 million dollars a year. The financier essentially buys the company using the company’s own future earnings (i.e. He buys the company with the company’s own potential). Birnbaum is positing throughout Summa Metaphysica that the original “leveraged buyout” concept was cosmic. The cosmos was created, he hypothesizes, out of the cosmos’ own potential.

4 Leverage B: Plato had infused in Western philosophy that “God” created the universe out of ‘primal matter’ even though Plato never articulates just where this primal matter came from – just as he never explicates where ”God” came from. Platonic thought –and, indeed, most Western philosophical thought – including classic Jewish philosophy – is linear, i.e. A created B created C, etc.

Birnbaum’s paradigm, on the other hand, is ‘bootstrap’, i.e. the potential of A ignites A retroactively. The Torah Itself has a one –phrase all–encompassing treatise on Jewish philosophy: “ Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh ”. This is Potential within Potential within Potential, which Birnbaum seizes upon as the crux of Summa Metaphysica.

5 Leverage C: A classic theme in Jewish thought is “yesh mai–ayen,” the creation of somethingness, from nothingness. This ‘magic trick’ receives an elegant ‘makeover’ in Birnbaum’s “leveraged buyout” theme, namely that potentials down–the–road ignited the cosmos. Now, finance is not cosmology – and cosmology is not finance, but the “leveraged buyout” theme can indeed be applied to both. Indeed, there is a 1:1 parallel between the two.

But what does that mean?

It really means infinite recursiveness, tracking forward to the “end of time”

~Example 1: like those painted doll–within–a–doll Russian or Chinese dolls, where there is always yet ANOTHER (smaller) doll within

~Example 2: an ONION… where there is inevitably yet another (smaller) layer [carrying within itself still other smaller layers]

Note that there is actually a ‘double power’ to this: First, is its infinite ~spring effect.

Second is the nature of the proposed dynamic –whereby infinitely compelling potentialities ‘down-theroad’, “ignite” the present.

••• TOOL:

* 1:1 METAPHYSICAL CORRESPONDENCE * (my term)

1:1:1:1:1:1 Multi–directional infinite CORRESPONDENCE

* * * metaphysical: cosmic: human * * *

1:1:1:1:1 (to the infinite level) correspondence exists between what occurs on

metaphysical cosmic human molecular sub–molecular levels

••• TOOL: * MITOSIS OF “0” * (my term)

We do not know what existed pre– Big Bang. Let us call it “0”

We can make assumptions about “voids” of various flavors, but we certainly do not know

Best to just call it “0”

Now, moving forward…

At CREATION, “0” is presumably divided in multiple ways, many beyond our capability of even beginning to fathom at this point…

counter–balancing Negatives and Positives…

0 divides into +1, -1.........+2, -2 etc.,

Positives and Negatives; Polar and anti-Polar, Male and Female; * * * (see Book #1)

Split the atom and create an atomic bomb; Split “0” and ignite a cosmos (a powerful concept, even by the standards of this volume)

Hypothetically, split “0” into Emerging Potential...and a Cosmic Vacuum

and you will have a rapidly and dynamically expanding Potential

So, we see that both examining “0” and/or

examining the possible >>> splitting of “0” <<< are both very rich mines to plumb.

••• TOOL: * INEXORABLE LIFE-QUESTING * (my term)

UNQUENCHABLE / INSATIABLE / INEXORABLE THIRST / THRUST for (diversity of) LIFE 6

an INEXORABLE craving/drive to bring forth LIFE (and diversity thereof) is a primary cosmic thrust

The nuance just depends on which prism you look through… cont’d

NOTES by KHALIL

6 Thirst for Life: Life – seeking to bring forth life – seeking to bring forth life… is a quintessential example of recursive potentialities.

Quest for Potential ∞ is thus simultaneously –

• a FORCE

• a QUEST

• a POTENTIAL

• the ongoing open–ended COSMOS

• the Infinite Divine Extraordinariation

• the SPARK of LIFE

• the sum total of all eco–systems

• in other words, EVERYTHING as we know it

Not bad for a dynamic.

••• TOOL: * VACUUM–BUSTING * (my term)

Abhorrence of vacuums on all different levels (metaphysical, reality and other levels)

Vacuums – metaphysical or otherwise – are abhorred 7 Nature abhors a vacuum. And it presumably abhors a ‘vacuum of principles,’ as well.

So, ‘initially,’ if ‘ initially ’ can be said to exist, we are faced with a potential ‘vacuum’ situation.

7 The Physical Vacuum: This ‘abhorrence,’ as it were, can be allegorized as ‘negative pressure.’ A vacuum exerts a ‘pull’ on adjacent matter and thereby seeks its own obliteration. The greater the relative vacuum, the greater the negative pressure, the greater the ‘abhorrence,’ and the more likely the vacuum is to obliterate itself.

The vacuum–breaker principle was quest for a possibility of a principle – or embryonic Quest for Potential ∞ .

And perhaps, reacting to a potential VACUUM situation, Q4P then ultimately achieves a ‘life of its own,’ feeding upon itself, looping around itself billions upon billions of times, seeking to achieve critical mass… and eventually apparently doing so, first metaphysically, and then in full–blown reality.

••• TOOL:

* INEXORABLE & INFINITE ASCENTS *

ASCENDING LEVELS of REALITY & ACTUALIZATION & FULLNESS & CONSCIOUSNESS

– are ongoing cosmic imperatives

••• TOOL:

* MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MORPHING * (my term)

Metaphysical Realms are not static; they are dynamically morphing.

The Emotional Richness of the Cosmic Order is not static; it is dynamically morphing.

The Intellectual Richness of the Cosmic Order is not static; it is dynamically morphing.

The Consciousness Level of the Cosmic Order is not static; it is dynamically morphing.

The Reality Richness of the Cosmic Order has not been static; it has morphed to this point.

Combine all-of-the-above dynamics, and you have a symphony of ongoing morphing and ever-increasing richness and advance.

Creation / “Big Bang” [the Potential ∞ Point ] was possibly at the boundary where metaphysics “morphed” into physics, and thus both fields (metaphysics and physics) are fully engaged.

We, in contemporary times, for example, intersect with this extraordinary pulsating, morphing advancing Cosmic Order at-one-specific particular-point-in-time. But understand that between the time you started this sentence and the time you finish it, the entire Cosmic order will have incrementally morphed.

••• TOOL: * OPTIMIZATION *

NOTES by KHALIL

8 Optimize: The individual must have the patience and decisiveness to act at precisely the opportune time. This ability to ‘seize the moment’ was harnessed at the Genesis Point to create the universe.

On every level, the cosmos and its components, have an uncanny instinctive ability to OPTIMIZE 8

[simple and elegant enough]

287

REPRINT: COSMIC "TOOL KIT"

••• TOOL: * COSMIC–TAPESTRY–WEAVING * (my term)

Quest for Potential ∞ weaves an ever-expanding, everricher, ever-more-sophisticated, wondrous, multi–dimensional multi–thread cosmic tapestry encompassing and integrating ***

ALL fields…(cosmic threads) metaphysics, philosophy, theology, physics, astrophysics, chemistry, biology, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, psychology, architecture, art, music et al .

in ONE inter–connected cosmic tapestry

You know the favorite refrain here.....

“Adoshem

“God is ONE and his NAME is ONE”

All part of the ongoing cosmic Infinite Divine Extraordinariation

*** see ••• TOOL: OPTIMIZING COMPLEXIFICATION / CONTOURIZATION * below in section MU [Shelf #2]

[not COMPLEXIFICATION for complexity’s sake (as is often viewed in the Physical Sciences as a universal imperative); rather, ‘complexification’ when it advances the key thrusts of multi-dimensional POTENTIAL and OPTIMIZATION]

Echad, u-Shemo Echad”

[Interesting how a religious service in an extraordinary cathedral, for instance, might bring together so many of these themes, e.g. spiritual as well as the extraordinary aesthetic (art, choir music, organ music, architecture) simultaneously at one time, in one place, all under a majestic roof with spires directed heavenwards]

••• MASTER TOOL:

* QUEST FOR INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION9, 10 * (my term)

* * * Quest for INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION:

Fullness/Richness/Beauty/Diversity/Meaning/Fulfillment/ Potential et al . is the key “tool” and metaphysical theme we will posit (to ‘crack–the–cosmic–code’) This particular hypothesized “tool” will finally unlock the final locked door in METAPHYSICS

key note: this Quest is anti-polar to: “aimless nothingness”

NOTES by KHALIL

9 Infinite Divine Extraordinariation A: With this concept, the author presents a concrete endpoint towards which the path of both human and cosmic potential is directed. It represents the completion of a metaphysical framework introduced in God and Evil and described more fully here.

10 Infinite Divine Extraordinariation B: The quest for one’s potential need not be a spiritual experience, particularly if the endpoint is left undefined. Here the author takes a clear stand as to the endpoint, describing it as necessarily spiritual and indeed Divine. The concept of the Potential ∞ Point still allows for a multiplicity of goals (as will be exemplified in the 120 Angels) but it ties these goals together in the singular aim of reaching the state of Infinite Divine.

289

REPRINT: COSMIC "TOOL KIT"

••• TOOL: * INTERLOCKING DIVINE INFINITUDE QUEST * (my term)

The Quest (the journey) is at least as important as the denouement.

The ongoing QUEST is itself / ITSELF integral to the Infinite Divine Extraordinariation.

One cannot separate the Divine from the ongoing Divine Quest.

••• TOOL:

* HYPER-COSMIC RESOURCEFULNESS * (my term)

Q4P will tap-into the full panoply of cosmic assets (meaning, of its own assets), in its (ongoing) development of new species and organisms.

The Cosmic “Tool Kit”

Shelf #2

tools:

* SUBJECTIVITY OF “INFINITE DIVINE” *

* HYPER-ITERATION *

* SIMULTANEOUS OPERATION LEVELS *

* ONE ORGANIC SUPER-EQUATION *

* INSTINCT-DNA *

* RECURSIVITY IS REGNANT (RECURSIVITY REIGNS) *

* EXTRAORDINARIATION *

* EMOTION-EXPRESSION-DRAMA *

* OPTIMIZING COMPLEXIFICATION/CONTOURIZATION *

* MACRO-HOLISTIC-OPTIMIZATION *

* CHERRY-PICKED EVOLUTION *

* TEMPLATE FIDELITY *

* METAPHYSICAL > PHYSICAL LEVERAGED BUYOUT *

* CUMULATIVE / MASSED-ARRAY DESIGN *

291

REPRINT: COSMIC "TOOL KIT"

••• TOOL:

* SUBJECTIVITY OF “INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION” *

“INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION ” may be used as “religious DIVINE ” or as a spiritual-perfection DIVINE; or

as an INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION with a RELIGIOUS DIVINE “GODHEAD”

(but one can make a strong case for a spectrum of possibilities)

There are, of course, infinite striations of this.

Addition to Cosmic Tool Kit: (although alluded-to in the text multiple times, but less formally)

••• TOOL:

* HYPER – ITERATION * (my term)

On multiple levels, MACRO, and MICRO, the cosmos continuously hyper-iterates, i.e. All organic entities ask and re-assess: Given my current assets, and given the multiple layers

of contexts, what is my best next move (evolvement)

– to advance both my individual Q4P and the overall cosmic Q4P?

[How often? Unclear]

••• TOOL: * SIMULTANEOUS OPERATION LEVELS *

The cosmos may very well be operating on multiple levels simultaneously, all INTERACTIVE with each other.

a ) Potentiality-level

b ) Equation-level

c ) Proto-Metaphysical-level

d ) Metaphysical-level

e ) Reality-level

f ) Infinite Divine Extraordinariation-level

Bro adly speaking, presumably we are in (e) flanked by (d) and (f).

Would need a separate book j ust to more fully elaborate on the above “quick snapshot.”

God and Good deals with these issues in this part, Cosmic Womb.

••• SUPER-TOOL:

* ONE ORGANIC SUPER-EQUATION * (my term)

All subjects and fields and emotions, and, indeed, all

history past and future, are all part of our one supra–equation – Q4P ∞

All fields and subjects ultimately dovetail into the supra–equation.

We see distinct snippets, like, say, Biology, Chemistry. Anthropology.

But at some point Biology connects to the Calculus, etc. The interaction of Quest for Potential ∞ – at the Genesis / Big Bang / Potential ∞ point – with, what I have called the “Mitosis of “0”, adds major, major complexity into an already complex proposition.

Nevertheless, we can only take matters as far as is appropriate to hypothesize at this point.

••• TOOL: * INSTINCT-DNA * (my term)

Complex instinct mechanisms, whether for SURVIVAL, food-HUNTING, SEXUAL–hunting, MATING, PARENTING, INTER–PERSONAL BEHAVIOR and others, are potentially transmittable genetically via (hypothesized here / what I call) INSTINCT–DNA

••• TOOL:

* RECURSIVITY IS REGNANT (RECURSIVITY REIGNS) * (my term)

Potential within potential within potential. Schematically:

potential ( potential ( potential..........

grandfather ( father ( son ( grandson ...........

Potential/Possibility ( metaphysical realms ( primitive reality realms ( modern reality realms ( post-modern reality realms

Torah ( Mishnah ( Gemorah ( Commentary ( Commentary on Commentary.............

cosmic drama ( cosmic drama ( cosmic drama.............

( complex ( extraordinary ( more extraordinary ( even more extraordinary ( ...............

layer ( layer ( layer [see following section .... EXTRAORDINARIATION........]

••• TOOL: * EXTRAORDINARIATION * (my term)

The Cosmic Order endeavors to become ever-more extraordinary and wondrous.

EXTRAORDINARIATION is both the work-in-progress and ultimate goal.

Complexification and Variation have as their end-goals, EXTRAORDINARIATION.

The ‘cosmic trajectory’ is from the bottomless VOID to the limitless EXTRAORDINARY.

This is the “cosmic bootstrapping” I have hypothesized since Book #1. The potential of mega-EXTRAORDINARY enroute towards the end–of–the–rainbow is the “forcemultiplier” – the ultimate sui generis ‘metaphysical magnet’ – which propels the cosmos forward.

Only this potential EXTRAORDINARY could have the power to divide the initial timeless void into ‘positives’ and ‘negatives,’ thereby igniting and creating the cosmos.

As extraordinary as one may think matters get, and they are indeed quite extraordinary already in-front-of-oureyes, one must hypothesize that ultimate matters are quite ‘unbounded.’

(Others may categorize or hypothesize this as Messianic Era, Perfection, Redemption; But, according to our hypothesis, “supraEXTRAORDINARIATION” – on-all-fronts – encompassing all secular and spiritual – is the target.)

Extraordinariation helps explain, among other things, the flourishing of –literature, poetry, art, music

the thousands of species of dainty butterflies, for example

the beauty of thousands of varieties of flowers

Magnificent sunsets

Talmudists

Violin virtuosos

the beauty of the heavens

art in all its variations

the ‘pull’ of spirituality

and, last but not least, HUMANS – individually and collectively

– with all their wondrous complexity and drives

– and their emergence as the dominant players on the planet

Like the trek towards INFINITY in math, EXTRAORDINARIATION is, according to this thesis, more of a PROCESS, an ongoing endeavor, an ongoing work-in-progress. The PROCESS is the deal, not necessarily the ultimate ATTAINMENT of a specific discrete goal, which is by definition unbounded, in-any-event.

The unboundedness of the ‘goal’ ...with the infinite richness inherent, retroactively empowers the ‘leap from the void’ questing with unquenchable thirst for this (unbounded) infinite attainment.

This work proposes that EXTRAORDINARIATION –in concert with the bootstrapping quest thereof –QUEST for POTENTIAL ∞ – is the hitherto elusive couplet “holy grail” of metaphysics.

Like two complementary overarching super-dynamic tornadoes, hypothetically linked at their epicenters, these two intertwined dynamics propel the cosmos forward.

Connect-all-the-dots and you will sense better what I am articulating.

We are in the midst of the cosmic “Potential Storm”; Consequently we see “individual trees”, as opposed to the forest (Quest for Potential ∞ ) as-a-whole.

All the billions of components and themes dovetail into these intertwined super-dynamics (Quest for Potential ∞ /Extraordinariation). We prefer to maintain them as a couplet, as opposed to merging them into one concept – Quest for Extraordinariation, as that would not truly be on-the-mark.

On an individual level, we quest for potential ∞ , and, in rare cases, for potential which is extraordinary. On an ongoing cumulative level, the quest is ultimately for the extraordinary.

EXTRAORDINARIATION – and its inexorable voracious hunger for variety and drama, as well –“casts a wide net” – including Predator / Prey ..... with all the unending brutality entailed, as well. This is philosophically difficult to deal with. Drama in all its permutations, may be cosmically desired. Sof-kol-sof (after all has been reviewed and weighed) , it would seem that DRAMA has its place in the pantheon of cosmic imperatives.

(Maybe Khalil can get me out of this one ;)

All roads lead to EXTRAORDINARIATION

[EXTRAORDINARIATION 1 is inter-related with......]

••• TOOL:

* EMOTION-EXPRESSION-DRAMA * (my term)

EMOTION seeks ACTUALIZATION, plus the fullest possible EXPRESSION.

Emotion, hard to clinically measure or analyze or photograph, seeks the fullest possible realization and drama.

Emotion’s actualization-imperative, may play a far greater role in the cosmic odyssey, than hitherto discerned.

••• TOOL:

* OPTIMIZING COMPLEXIFICATION / CONTOURIZATION * (my term)

an inexorable evolvement to ever–more COMPLEX & SOPHISTICATED & MULTI–FACETED & WONDROUS & OPTIMIZED EFFICIENT life forms,

1 Extraordinariation: At very end of book, see Appendix C by Khalil on this theme.

fitting in as optimally as possible into the evolving contours of the local and cosmic ECOSYSYTEMS, as the cosmos orients towards the richest possible optimally inter–dependent efficient bio–diversification.

The above is an ongoing thrust of the cosmos, on both a physical level, and on a metaphysical level – all geared towards the goal of INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION within the objectives of optimizing diversity / beauty / reproductiveness / survivability / viability / efficiency et al . within the contours of the eco–system and within the evolving realities of the broader environment

Optimizing COMPLEXIFICATION / CONTOURIZATION is closely inter–linked with overarching tool.........

••• TOOL:

* MACRO-HOLISTIC OPTIMIZATION * (my term)

The cosmos OPTIMIZES and EVOLVES & MORPHS –as it seeks OPTIMIZATION, an iterative macro–holistic–optimization of eco–systems towards the ultimate goal of INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION presumably incorporating vanguard species.

The cosmos both PUSHES and PULLS towards the goal of potentially advancing the WHOLE equation and cosmic

thrust, factoring–in ALL of its (Quest for Potential ∞ ) goals in the context of the current base–line.

For instance: the sudden introduction of a billion species of EAGLES might not qualify for macro–holistic–optimization, as it would both throw-off the various natural balances and inter-dependencies, while crowding–out other species and, last, but not least, the dominance of eagles might not be the optimal ROUTE towards INFINITE DIVINE EXTRAORDINARIATION.

The cosmos does this on an ITERATIVE basis –meaning it is constantly re-assessing its optimal route.

It does this on a MACRO (cosmic) basis all the way down through the MICRO (sub-cellular level). It is difficult for me to fine-tune the lexicon on this.

••• TOOL:

* CHERRY-PICKED EVOLUTION * (my term)

Evolutionary paths are not determined by “survival of the fittest” (as per the conventional wisdom ); Rather, evolutionary paths are determined by Quest for Potential ∞ ‘cherry-picking’ among various path-options (“survivability” is just one component thereof).

The CUMULATIVE CONSCIOUSNESS, in concert with Quest for Potential ∞ /Extraordinariation directs evolution.

Please see Appendix E: Evolution from Perspective of Summa Metaphysica

••• TOOL:

* TEMPLATE FIDELITY * (my term)

Once the cosmos commits to a particular template, it will tend to play-out very extensive permutations and extensions of the template 1. What is truly happening in the picture, however, is that the particular template was perceived by the cosmos from the get-go as potentially an optimal/efficient/versatile building-block for “ Q4Pprojection” (my term). The template consequently will often be found in many applications and permutations.

••• TOOL:

* METAPHYSICAL > PHYSICAL LEVERAGED BUYOUT * (my term)

Extraordinary potentials down-the-road are leveraged in metaphysical realms retroactively at the Genesis point into the ignition of REALITY and the Cosmic Order, as we know it.

This is a key motif of this two-book treatise. The theme is developed somewhat in Book #1.

NOTES by KHALIL

1 Template Fidelity: This template is particularly conserved between species at the genetic level. Extensive similarity can be found in the genomic sequence of any two organisms, regardless of how different they seem.

There is a limit to how far I can take it because of its all-enveloping power. On some level, this one ‘tool’ defines the ‘revolution’ proposed by Summa Metaphysica 2 .

••• TOOL: * CUMULATIVE / MASSED-ARRAY DESIGN * (my term)

The cumulative array – physical (organisms) and metaphysical (entities) – interacting and integrated with permeating Quest for Potential ∞ , and factoring-in the current landscape, and most certainly in conjunction with the Mother Lode Life Force (Godhead?) cumulatively design the next level organism.

2 Leveraged Buyout (in the Torah): The Torah calls for that which God and Good describes as Leveraged Buyout on both the personal as well as the national level.

In the fourth chapter of Exodus a frightened Moses is commanded by God to approach the King of Egypt not as the refugeeshepherd that he now is, but as the formidable leader and revolutionary into which God would soon transform him. Later, the national disheartening of the Israelites subsequent to the negative report of their spies (Numbers 14:1) is criticized as a fatal error (ibid., 14:11,12). It seems from this episode that the Israelites’ mistake was to regard themselves as a vulnerable coalition of freed slaves, instead of a nation that would, in the future, conquer a land promised to them.

These two narratives are examples, among others throughout the Tanach, of the requirement to rely now on the success of the future. It is a powerful tool, based in an otherwise irrational faith, which allows one to overcome impossible odds in the here-andnow.

(deep breath after the above paragraph)

This is an ongoing iterative process. Daily.

At some point the Cumulative / Massed-Array achieves radar-lock on the DESIGN for other or higher-level organisms – which will optimize the potential and fullness/diversity of the cosmos. *

With two “shelves” of cosmic tools – all with different levels of originality – we now have-at-our-disposal many of the necessary – and previously lacking –“TOOLS” for a powerful – and viable – Metaphysics.

Essentially, we must ‘think’ in totally different terms than hitherto in contemplating the dynamics of the cosmic order.

We cannot think “linear Western” or “circular Eastern.”

We must think in terms of, for want of a better term, “Spiral/Potential/Birnbaumian” – complete with the two-shelf cosmic tool kit. *

Only then, do the hitherto elusive key building blocks of the cosmic code start falling-into-place.

* end of Summa Metaphysica III

Secular Man: The Transcendent Dynamic

*

Selected Articles

David Birnbaum Cracks the Cosmic Code

06/10/2015 6:09 pm

What Breathes Fire into the Equations?

How 21st century Quest for Potential Theory elegantly cracks the cosmic code

David Birnbaum answers Stephen Hawking

What drives our universe? The great Greek philosophers were ultimately stymied, as is contemporary physics. A contemporary 21st century independent scholar and metaphysicist, David Birnbaum of Manhattan, proposes that 'Potential' drives the universe.

He hypothesizes the core cosmic dynamic to be what he labels Infinite Quest for Potential. Over 150 articles and reviews in dozens of journals (see SummaCoverage.com) have dissected and analyzed the compelling and fully-integrated theory over the course of a quarter century; no flaw has been discerned.

In discussing Infinite Quest for Potential (shorthand: Q4P), we will look at some crucial gaps in 20th century physics and philosophy. Our literary vehicle will be through a hypothetical give-and-take between two important philosophical thought leaders: Physicist Stephen Hawking of Cambridge and Metaphysicist David Birnbaum of Manhattan.

Hawking's work The Grand Design (2010) actually negates any possibility of

a 'grand design'; Birnbaum is the author of the 3-part Summa Metaphysica series (1988, 2005, 2014) and its associated Potentialism Theory which ascribes 'grand design' to our universe via his hypothesized metaphysical dynamic Infinite Quest for Potential.

Renowned contemporary British physicist Stephen Hawking has given us a number of memorable one-liners regarding physics and the universe. And when Hawking speaks, people do listen. He is a 'pinnacle player' and one of the leading minds in physics. Hawking has given a lot of conjecture over the years -- snippets of hope and tidbits of wisdom for universal understanding; however, the great Hawking, like his erstwhile contemporaries in academe, ultimately leaves key questions unanswered.

Many believe that David Birnbaum's unified Potentialism Theory elegantly lances the key (historical and hitherto intractable) issues in metaphysics via his proposed core dynamic Infinite Quest for Potential -- proposed as the cosmic constant (albeit a quite vibrant constant). Let's see if the Birnbaum theory has the capability to adequately address the great Hawking's questions. First, we need to understand a few concepts from Summa Metaphysica.

Summa Metaphysica's Potentialism Theory

Per Birnbaum, there is an overarching natural cosmic dynamic which Birnbaum hypothesizes as being Infinite Quest for Potential. According to Birnbaum, this one dynamic is eternal and infinitely iterating; it ignited our universe; it drives our universe forward to this very day; it instigated and sustains life; its goal is to seek-after maximal/optimal Potential....inexorably. In other words, if it exists it is the ultimate 'silver bullet' for metaphysics.

As per the Summa Metaphysica website:

"Infinite Quest for Potential (infinitely iterating) is the eternal cosmic dynamic. This dynamic works its way forward over the billions of eons towards first igniting our universe and eventually -- down the road -ultimately catalyzing the emergence of higher-level consciousness human beings within it."

"One elegant dynamic and one elegant dynamic alone -- Infinite Quest for Potential -- both instigates and drives the entire cosmic order. There is, indeed, a protagonist to the cosmic order, but that the protagonist is a quest and not a 'classic entity'."

"The universe quests for its maximal/optimal potential. The core dynamic Quest for Potential strives with purpose and direction towards ever-greater and higher potential. At the 'beginning of time,' eternal and infinite Quest for Potential harnessed the eternal (primordial) equations of PhysicsMathematics to ignite our universe via the Big Bang."

"This same symbiotic dynamic -- infinite Quest for Potential∞ in league with Physics-Math - then acted as a catalyst for the route ultimately tracking-forwards to high level humans in the 21st Century."

Note that the contemporary works (see below for detail) of MIT quantum physicists Seth Lloyd (2006) and Max Tegmark (2014) dovetail with Potentialism Theory of the Summa Metaphysica series (1988, 2005, 2014).

So, now on to some of the illustrious Hawking's standout quotes, questions and queries...

Hawking: "What breathes fire into the equations?"

Hawking's now iconic aphorism -- "Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?" -- could have been the lead-in to Birnbaum's Summa Metaphysica treatise. Hawking's question is, of course, astute. What, indeed, brings the myriad equations we have all seen flashed at us alive?

Classic academic science has never come up with a satisfactory response. Of course, embedded within the Hawking equation is a deeper question, actually a compound question -- What ignited the cosmic order and what propels it onward? Another way of looking at the Hawking question is that it is a variant on the classic Eternal Origins question: What is the eternal core cosmic dynamic?

Birnbaum's response to this cluster of questions is that there is, indeed, an

Overarching Cosmic Dynamic: Eternal and Infinite Quest for Potential -- and that is this eternal and overarching dynamic which 'breathes fire' into the equations.

Hawking: "For millions of years, mankind lived just like the animals. Then something happened which unleashed the power of our imagination. Mankind learned to talk and we learned to listen."

What happened here? What caused 'the leap'?

What happened, of course, is Birnbaum's delineated infinite Quest for Potential playing-out and iterating-forward.

To reach its Potential, Mankind was thrust into a greater level of complexity/ sophistication than the animals around him. The form of that advanced complexity included higher-level reason, language, emotion, and consciousness.

Per Potentialism Theory, the notion that 'advancement' would happened was a given; it was only a question of when, where and what form it would take.

Hawking: "The whole history of science has been the gradual realization that events do not happen in an arbitrary manner, but that they reflect a certain underlying order, which may or may not be divinely inspired."

Per Birnbaum: Exactly. "...a certain underlying order..."

The expanded Birnbaum response -- Thank You for articulating Summa's core point, Professor Hawking. The theory is strong -- and potentially resolves the key points of 90 percent+ of the philosophical/scientific issues philosophers have been grappling-with.

At the very heart of Potentialism Theory is the recognition that there is one central, underlying order to all of the universe. A higher force. An overarching dynamic. As noted, this force is posited by Summa Metaphysica as being "Infinite Quest for Potential."

The scientific community's potential recognition of a transcending dynamic has been a long time in coming; but physicists themselves are starting to realize what some metaphysicists and philosophers have long conjectured: There is a pattern, purpose and direction to the Cosmic Order.

As alluded-to, Summa Metaphysica proposes that Quest for Potential ignites and drives the universe by breathing fire into the equations.

And where does infinite and eternal Quest for Potential come from?

Summa posits that Potential/Possibility is eternal. In turn, Potential/Possibility sought actualization.... The result is history. Of course, it gets more textured, and Summa proposes a 16 point outline.

Hawking: "I don't believe that the ultimate theory will come by steady work along existing lines. We need something new. We can't predict what that will be or when we will find it because if we knew that, we would have found it already!"

Per Birnbaum: Right again, Professor Hawking. Exactly.

Stephen - Thank You for your frankness.

Hawking predicted this accurately. The possibly 'ultimate theory' is Brinbaum's Potentialism Theory. It is as stunning and original as it is elegant; it has changed the 21st century landscape of our understanding of cosmology itself. The 21st century ushers in an era of acute insight. No one could have seen it coming.

Summa Metaphysica's Potentialism Theory goes for a "knockout punch." Birnbaum is the first to say that (a) it is hypothesis and (b) that it only advances us several 'layers.' However, that being said, the theory appears to propel our understanding via a quantum jump, and not via an incremental advance. Note that Birnbaum has been at this since age 10 (in 1960). He commenced writing Summa I at age 32 (in 1982).

Potentialism Theory: Context

A Course Text at over a dozen colleges, Summa Metaphysica has been the focus of well over one hundred and fifty articles and reviews. No flaw has been discerned in the theory since introduced via Summa Metaphysica I (Ktav Publishing) in 1988.

Potentialism Theory: Conference

Summa Metaphysica -- and its Potentialism Theory -- was the focus of a 3+ day international academic conference at Bard College (Upstate, NY) April 2012. The conference, which launched Summa Metaphysica globally, created a global academic and media firestorm. See Conference1000.com.

Potentialism Theory: Dovetailing works by leading MIT and NYU academics

Recent hi-level academic works dovetailing with Birnbaum's Theory of Potential include the following: 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.com

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 (see NPM1000.com) has over 180 global thought leaders under its umbrella.

Going Boldly Where No Man Has Gone Before: A Conversation with Metaphysicist David Birnbaum on Leonard Nimoy’s

Legacy

I have recently made the acquaintance of David Birnbaum, the intellectual entrepreneur and freelance philosopher. Birnbaum is the architect and author of the Summa Metaphysica series, a groundbreaking project devoted to the pursuit of an overarching metaphysics. Summa Metaphysica proposes a comprehensive and integrated metaphysical structure; a wholly original and powerful new paradigm. Upon hearing the news that Leonard Nimoy died, Birnbaum emailed me that he felt a spiritual kinship with him.

Intrigued, we started a conversation on this compelling topic, which I’ve edited into a Q & A, below.

Q: Since childhood, I have been a fan of Star Trek (the original series, which began in 1966) and a devotee of Leonard Nimoy’s iconic character, Mr. Spock, the uber-logical Vulcan. I always felt that Star Trek’s cosmology transcended much of pop culture’s offerings and I intuited a strong spiritual element in Mr. Spock...despite his avowed love of logic. I know that you are a big fan as well. I have also had the great privilege of meeting and speaking with Nimoy on two occasions through my work with the now-defunct National Foundation for Jewish Culture and was impressed by his menschlichkeit.

Where does Nimoy’s concept of the universe intersect with your proposed infinite Quest for Potential concept?

A: If I can take the liberty of combining the core mantras of Star Trek and Star Wars, we end up with the following hybrid mantra: May the force be with you/ Boldly go where no man has gone before.

This hybrid mantra would directly parallel the underlying motif of my Potentialism Theory: Advance and advance inexorably. This imperative applies on all levels — cosmos-wise, universe-wise and individual-wise.

Q: Okay, so let me just point out that you very creatively merged two distinct cultural products - Star Trek and Star Wars — and Nimoy is connected only to the former. Then again, it is your prerogative to fashion a hybrid cosmic mantra. So can we talk a bit more about your Potentialism Theory in the context of Star Trek?

A: My Potentialism Theory hypothesizes that there is one eternal metaphysical dynamic underlying and overarching the entire Cosmic Order — Quest for Potential — or Q4P for short.

And what is the cosmic imperative underlying this eternal and all-embracing Force? To inexorably advance towards greater and greater sophistication and wondrousness; this very directly parallels the Star Trek mantra of pressing to the limits of the frontier.

Q: Can you show your theory in action?

A: Start with the Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago and end up with our everexpanding wondrous universe in 2015. Our knowledge of two inter-related fields — the history of the cosmic order and the progression of life — has undergone a quantum jump in the last 150 years; one can now connect the dots in either of these fields and discern the same one clear conceptual trajectory. This is a trajectory — over the span of billions of years — of the ever-iterating Quest for Potential — starting with that which is very obscure and heading inexorably towards the increasingly complex, sophisticated and wondrous.

Q: And where do you believe this trajectory is headed?

A: It is headed inexorably towards what I label as the super-Extraordinary, or E+ for short.

In symbolic form, my concise SuperLaw to crack-the-cosmic code would therefore be Q4P > E+. Quest for Potential drives the universe onward and on-track towards the super-Extraordinary.

At the April 2012 four-day international academic conference at Bard College on Summa Metaphysica, several hundred T-shirts were distributed with the Q4P∞ > E+ SuperLaw.

Q: Can you bring this discussion down to earth, laying out some of the evidence of your theory?

A: Yes, for sure, my Q4P > E+ trajectory is increasingly obvious once you have been alerted to it.

First, in the life sciences, we now can see the trajectory from the atom to molecules to single celled organisms to multi-celled organisms to photosynthesis and plants; then as we continue to advance forward, we move into the (more complex) Animal Kingdom then onto (even more complex) humans — with ever great and wider complexity/sophistication/ wondrousness, freedom of action, brainpower, emotional array and indeed, consciousness.

Of course these humans will one day — perhaps in the 23rd century — possibly build the Starship Enterprise — with Mr. Spock on the Command Deck — and, indeed, go boldly where no man has gone. Thus, one straight trajectory spanning billions of years. Advance, inexorable and hopefully infinite. Ever onward, ever forward.

Laying out the Q4P > E+ trajectory on a more macro level vis à vis the History of the Cosmos, we now know that the trajectory post-Big Bang is very roughly as-follows: from Big Bang point > Stars > Galaxies and Solar Systems > Earth > Life on Earth > ever-increasing consciousness and “smarts” — a trajectory which then dovetails into the life sciences trajectory just delineated above.

My SuperLaw relates to Einstein’s iconic formula E = mc2 in the following

way: It wraps-around Einstein’s physics equation — and clearly dovetails with his iconic aphorism — “God does not play dice with the universe.” The universe is not random; it is directional.

Q: I’m glad we are back to God, something I am more comfortable speaking about. In 1988, in Summa Metaphysica I (Ktav Publishing) you introduced your concept of the Cosmic Womb of Potential; both Leonard Nimoy and you apparently have a neo-feminine God Force as part of your worldview. Can you address where you think you connect with his Shekhina concept?

A: On a personal level both Leonard Nimoy and I anchor our lives in Jewish mesorah — or tradition. One can readily say that this adds a rich and fulfilling spiritual/religious dimension — aside from anchoring each of us in unique Jewish history — and, perhaps, destiny.

As well, Nimoy was passionate about the masoretic concept of the neofeminine Shekhina (God-Presence) permeating out lives. Remember, classic secular Aristotelianism and classic Maimonidean Judaism both place God “there” and us “here”; however there are strains in Judaism — like that of Baal Shem Tov Hasidism which place God all around us. Thus, the Shekhina — God-Presence in our midst theme. On a personal spiritual/religious level, I am in basic accord with the concept.

As a writer of metaphysics however, I like my formulations lean and mean and not hostage to any deity or religious tradition. In other words, within all three volumes of Summa Metaphysica, I like my theory anchored in hard, pure, bulletproof logic. Period.

And just where have we heard this insistent “It is logical” mantra before? Yes, from Nimoy’s alter-ego — Mr. Spock himself. Mr. Logical. Logic is eternal, of course, and not vulnerable to the vicissitudes of time, historical memory, academic fashion, and political correctness.

Q: Logic aside, is there a neo-feminine dimension to all this?

A: In both Eastern tradition — and strains of Kabbalistic tradition — the Creator, which is the fount of fertility and birth — has, almost by definition, a strong feminine dimension. This neo-feminine dimension includes, but is not limited to, quest for ultimate fulfillment, creativity — and, indeed, creation. In

my schema, my hypothesized neo-feminine foundational Cosmic Womb of Potential both “births” the Cosmic Order and guides inter-related Quest for Potential (Q4P) to optimize the Cosmic Order.

Q: But Nimoy took the concept much further and into the salacious.

A: Respectfully, the great Nimoy erred here in extrapolating a metaphysical, neo-feminine Divine into a sexual/sensual Divine. The Divine is metaphysical. The whole sexuality/sensuality cluster is a construct for physical realms and inapplicable to the abstract metaphysical world (of the Divine). One should not extrapolate neo-feminine Creator into a sexual/sensual female Creator. But Nimoy is not alone in his detour. A highly sexual deity is intrinsic to other tradition strains, particularly in the Far East.

Q: From your perspective, if we conflate Leonard Nimoy the man and Mr. Spock the iconic space explorer, what is his legacy?

A: Nimoy leaves an extraordinary legacy of a man grounded in tradition, spirituality and service in his personal life; he connected not only to the world, and not only to America, which he loved, but walked the walk in service to the Jewish people. Onstage and screen, Nimoy leaves an extraordinary legacy of a bold and brilliant cutting-edge explorer of unimpeachable integrity. His inner conviction is manifest. En toto, a man for all seasons, for sure. May his memory be blessed.

Q: So, now that the narrative of his life on earth has ended, do you think that Nimoy/Spock has fulfilled his Vulcan blessing — Live long and prosper?

A: For sure.

Two schemas of the Universe

Current Academe is heavily under the sway of a group of academics aligned with what is often referred to as the ‘entrenched orthodoxy’ schema. This schema’s mantra is that the universe is barren and random; its advocates are often atheistic. These advocates, whose geographic center of gravity is at seven leading colleges in southern England, often informally act in tandem, and are often referred to as advocates of Randomness/atheism. As noted, the group propounds that everything is random happenstance and chance. In turn, they assert that mankind is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, being but a cosmic accident of no significance and importance. To this group, mankind is but an insignificant speck in a cold, random and aimless universe. The group rejects any possibility whatsoever of any transcending force or dynamic or design or spirituality or purpose in the universe. To them the universe is barren. If there is any common denominator to the universe, they would single out ‘decay’. And as far as the billions of extraordinary galaxies, each with billions of extraordinary stars and assorted planetary systems, at least one of which with a quite extraordinary multitude of breathtaking organic bio-forms, well, to them it is just a random event. It all sort of ‘just happened.’

A January 2014 feature article by David Gelernter, professor of computer science at Yale, “The Closing of the Scientific Mind” in Commentary Magazine, puts the scientific and academic community in their place on several inter-related fronts. Gelernter chastises the scientific community for what he terms ‘roboticism, that is, for belittling the role of the aesthetic, the humanistic, and the spiritual. He also criticizes the scientific community at large for being too ‘mechanistic,’ for viewing life entities as if they were pseudo-computers with assorted binary switches.

Wrapping all these inter-related issues together, Gelernter cites the case of NYU Professor of Philosophy Thomas Nagel. In 2012 Oxford

University Press published Nagel’s work Mind and Cosmos. The thesis of the work is relatively simple: Contemporary Evolutionary Biology theory (aka ‘the entrenched orthodoxy’) does not ‘handle’ the emergence of consciousness. Nagel, like Gelernter, wants our theory of the cosmic order and its sub-theory of evolution to be richer and to account for human spirit, consciousness and subjectivity. Thus, Nagel feels that there must be a cosmic dynamic driving the universe and evolution forward in a direction which leads to consciousness. He feels that the prevailing orthodoxy, focused only on genetic survival as the sole dynamic in a universe driven only by randomness, is ‘missing the boat’ on what is truly happening here. In technical terms Nagel is proposing that there is a ‘teleology’ (a purpose ‘driver’ of the universe) embedded in the cosmic order.

However, in questioning the entrenched orthodoxy’s failure to explain the emergence of consciousness, Nagel is but a ‘schoolboy’ compared to conceptual theorist and metaphysics specialist David Birnbaum. Nagel suggested in 2012 that there must be a core cosmic ‘drive,’ a teleology. But a major teleology (adroitly handling consciousness in-the-mix) was already published (1988, 2005) by a fellow New Yorker. Nagel’s midtown Manhattan neighbor, 40 blocks north of Nagel at NYU, is David Birnbaum, author of the iconic 2-part philosophical treatise Summa Metaphysica. Birnbaum’s work proposes an overarching cosmic dynamic: Infinite Potential. In November 2013 British journalist Oliver Burkeman, echoed French anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss (2006) on Birnbaum’s Potentialism, and called Birnbaum’s theory ‘remarkable and profound’; Burkeman felt that both leaders – Birnbaum and Nagel – were nicely in-sync.

Infinite Potential is the centerpiece theme of Birnbaum’s proposed original overarching theory of the cosmic order, the Theory of Potential. Birnbaum’s universe is organic, overflowing with potential. Indeed Potential defines it. If Nagel’s work gives the ‘entrenched orthodoxy’ academics heartburn, then Birnbaum work gives them a massive heart attack. The Birnbaum treatise was published in two parts: Summa Metaphysica I: God & Evil (by Ktav Publishing in1988) and Summa Metaphysica II: God and Good (by New

Paradigm Matrix in 2005).

Birnbaum’s Summa, which has over fifty thousand sets in circulation, is actually in full philosophical alignment with Nagel’s later Mind & Cosmos book (2012) and with Gelernter’s above-noted major Commentary article (2014). All their works, so to speak, ‘talk to each other’.

Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential offers a unified, grand and dynamic cosmic construct. Birnbaum is quite aware, as we all are, that there is no shortage of seemingly ‘open space’ in the cosmos. However he suggests not missing the core thrust and embedded potentiality of the cosmic order.

Birnbaum proposes that his signature theme, Infinite Potential, is the eternal and ongoing dynamic of the quite rich cosmic order. What has unfolded over the ages, according to Birnbaum, is far from randomness acting out in a barren universe. “You and I, according to this theory, are individual cosmic potentials, the end-result of many billions of years of ongoing iteration and optimization. In turn, individually, we each set the stage for more potential” says Birnbaum.

There is thus a direct sequence of contemporary protagonists of a so to speak ‘organic’ universe: Birnbaum (1988, 2005) > Nagel (2012) > Gelernter (2014). Nagel in his 2012 work articulated that we should seek to discern the cosmic drive which brought us to life, consciousness, reason, knowledge, language and altruism. It turns out that all of the items on both the Nagel and Gelernter checklists are fully encompassed by Birnbaum’s Theory of Potential. According to Potentialism, the cosmos is organic, not barren. It inexorably quests after its manifold and quite often extraordinary potentials. It seeks the full flowering of its own possibilities. This unstoppable quest for extreme potential drives our quite extraordinary and quite rich universe.

re: Summa I

“A Major Work in the Philosophy of Religion”*

“…there is no comparable volume offering such a comprehensive, authoritative and intelligible discussion of the problem…a remarkable effort to offer a fresh approach...”

Paul Mendez–Flohr

Professor of Philosophy, Hebrew University, Jerusalem Editor, Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought

“…an original, and, in this reader’s opinion, a very promising point of view…the author gathers a philosophically coherent and, in the end, highly modern insight… a unified metaphysics…”

Louis Dupré

Professor of Religious Studies, Yale University

Professor of Philosophy, Brandeis University

“…a major work in the Philosophy of Religion… a masterful achievement…a novel and satisfying approach… a major intellectual achievement.”

*Canon William Johnson

“…a major contribution to the Jewish conversations through the ages, on theodicy, and the problem of evil generally.”

Dr. Norman Lamm President, Yeshiva University

“…a framework for a renewed exploration into the most agonizing aspects of the meaning of religious belief… It is an impressive attempt to focus intellectually on the Holocaust without diminishing the primal outcry of pain.”

Rabbi Nachum Rabinovitch

Rosh Yeshiva Birkat Moshe, Israel, Former Dean, Jews College, London

“David Birnbaum brings the rich resources of the Jewish tradition to bear on the universal problem of theodicy. The result is a new synthesis… I can certainly recommend it as a fascinating contribution to the philosophy of religion which merits the attention of Christians and Jews alike.”

John J. Collins

Professor of Theology, University of Notre Dame Editor, Journal of Biblical Literature

“God and Evil represents a bold attempt to formulate an ingenious theory, which, drawing upon creative reinterpretations of classical Jewish doctrine, places the Free Will Defense within a broader metaphysical framework…”

Rabbi Walter S. Wurzburger

Professor of Philosophy, Yeshiva University

Editor, Tradition

“All who read this book will find much instruction, insight, and material for reflection…I find the overall thesis of the book touching and inspiring…”

Rabbi Irving Greenberg President, The National Jewish Center for Learning and Scholarship (CLAL)

“A major work…a great intellectual and spiritual effort”

Joseph Dan

Professor of Kabbalah, Hebrew University

“the best book in print on the subject.”

–HERITAGE JOURNAL

“Author and scholar David Birnbaum wrestles with the age–old problem of the existence of evil… a compelling, stimulating and creative contribution…”

–JUDAICA BOOK NEWS

“Birnbaum’s God and Evil is an extremely significant volume which grapples forthrightly and originally with the problem… well–organized… clearly written… persuasive… Birnbaum comes as close as possible to solving the awesome dilemma of evil in a world created by a just God.”

–JEWISH WORLD

“Birnbaum wrestles with the problem of evil from a Jewish perspective, but provides fresh insights for Christians as well. This is a good book, written in faith, and with honesty and passion…”

–THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Georgetown University

“Wiesel and Birnbaum share a deep respect for, and loyalty to, their ancestral faith. Yet the contrast between their approaches is ultimately perhaps as instructive as the approaches themselves. Birnbaum’s approach is essentially that of the intellectual, philosopher, and theologian…”

–CANADIAN

CATHOLIC REVIEW

“a bold and highly original synthesis…audacious yet sensitive, traditional and yet highly innovative…yet within the parameters of an authentically Jewish halakhic point of view…an intellectual odyssey”

–JEWISH REVIEW

International Academic Conference

Science

and Religion:

A Role for Metaphysics?

Reflections flowing from David Birnbaum's Summa Metaphysica

- from Official Program Invitation & Introduction**

BARD College Conference, April 16-19, 2012

- Dr. Bruce Chilton, co-Chairman

- Dr. Gary Hagberg, co-Chairman

* [ Meaning, after 300 year hiatus post-Spinoza ] ** Conference1000.com

"Works by David Birnbaum... suggest that Metaphysics may emerge as a critical field once again." *

BIRNBAUM WORKS

BIRNBAUM ACADEMIC WORKS

4 Summa Metaphysica books (see SummaMetaphysica.com)

1 Summa Supplement book (see Summa-Supplement.com)

2 Crucifixion (see Crucifixion1000.com)

7 JCC (Jews Church & Civilization) (see Civilization1000.com)

10 MMX books (see MesorahMatrix.com)

3 Summa SpinOffs (see SummaSpinOffs.com)

8 Theory graphics (see TheoryGraphics1000.com) 35 ( updated: 10.12.21 )

NEW PARADIGM MATRIX

New Paradigm Matrix is a multi-media “platform” – based out of Manhattan – which typically publishes works simultaneously in three modalities:

Hardcover for Amazon et al. [ see www.AmazonX1000.com ]

eBooks [ see www.eReader1000.com ]

Flip-books online [ see www.NewParadigmMatrix.com ]

Additionally, the “platform” www.NewParadigmMatrix.com features YouTube videos [see YouTubeX1000.com] relating to symposiums et al. focused on the works.

As well, the platform has other contemporary offerings including Birnbaum’s Manhattan Observer column [see www.Observer1000.com]

New Paradigm Matrix endeavors to publish works, which are vibrant and cutting-edge, if not paradigm changers.

David Birnbaum, a graduate of Harvard University, is editor-in-chief of New Paradigm Matrix – as well as the author of several of the works. In addition he is co-editor of the works in the Masorah Matrix division series. *

Birnbaum’s iconic work God and Evil – which intrzoduced his new paradigm Quest for Potential∞ hypothesis, was originally published by KTAV (Jersey City, NJ) in 1988. Four subsequent printings followed in the 19892000 period. KTAV still offers the work in its catalogue.

New Paradigm Matrix offers the work as Volume I of 3-volume Summa Metaphysica.

“ A UNIFYING CONCEPT OF THE UNIVERSE”

“ David Birnbaum’s Summa Metaphysica is a major philosophical contribution to the study of Being. According to Summa, Holy Potential is at the very epicenter of the Divine, and the quest for its fulfillment is the underlying core dynamic of the cosmic order.

Birnbaum considers Quest for Potential∞ to be ubiquitous and overarching holy cosmic dynamic. All of the countless components of the Universe, including humans, are striving towards the full realization of their particular potentialities.

Although centered on the problem of evil existing in the world created by benevolent and omnipotent God, Summa reaches far beyond theodicy. Deeply rooted in Biblical tradition, yet providing a modern and original approach to answering millennia-old questions, Summa represents a bold attempt to formulate a unifying concept of the Universe.” ************

ECOLOGY

The very basic laws of ecology describing the growth and regulation of populations of living organisms appear to fit the metaphysical model of the cosmic Quest for Potential∞ proposed by David Birnbaum. Obviously, ecology is only one of many sub disciplines within the rather broad science of biology, and biology is only one of many natural sciences (albeit a very important one). Therefore, this observation alone does not serve as an immediate and decisive proof that the Quest is indeed the major driving force behind each and every natural process.

Nevertheless, it is truly fascinating that an established scientific theory based on experimental evidence and mathematic models is in such a strong agreement with a philosophical theory of Conceptual Theorist Birnbaum, and developed independently of any formal natural history research. This is unlikely to happen by chance alone.

Therefore, it is reasonable to propose the Quest for Potential∞ as a working hypothesis for explaining the impetus behind the cosmic dynamic.

Testing this hypothesis would involve a critical review of other scientific theories explaining particular phenomena in chemistry, physics, sociology, etc. for their agreement with Birnbaum’s proposed Overarching Theory.

Ultimately, this may yield a unified view of the Universe, which would be a major leap in fulfilling our potentiality as conscious beings.

Andrei_Alyokhin@umit.maine.edu

As of November 2015, well over 40,000 volumes of Summa Metaphysica –Summa I, II or III – are in circulation globally.

Birnbaum key academic platforms

All New Paradigm works are available in multiple modalities, including gratis - pro bono via on-line Flip-Books.

See www.AmazonX1000.com to order

[ The New Paradigm Matrix Publishing global network numbers over 2,000,000]

Editor-in-Chief

New Paradigm Matrix

att: David Birnbaum

Rockefeller Center

45 Rockefeller Plaza / 20th Floor

New York, NY 10111

David.Birnbaum.NY@gmail.com

$15.00

ISBN 978-0-9801710-2-0

5 1 5 0 0 >

Summa Metaphysica series

Summa I - Religious Man: God and Evil (1988)

Summa II - Spiritual Man: God and Good (2005)

Summa III - Secular Man: The Transcendent Dynamic (2014)

Summa IV - Quantum Man: Morphed Cosmic Order (2020)