The basis for all increasing complexity and our notion of progress is asymmetry. Perhaps then, temporal superpositions for both symmetry and asymmetry are required (partly your states = 0) for consciousness to emerge.
A TOE is not a prerequisite for proof of mathematics bridging to all known sciences. Open-minded foundational scientific research is required. It's an idealist mindgrab illusion, to rally conversations around. In reality, proofs and challenges of proofs should be common. However, the research method and tools have become so critically competitive that it overshadows and silences the would-be Gödels, Eulers and Einsteins of our post WW2 era. Face it, the bandwagon of self-important gatekeeping is real. That level of consensual symmetry is probably retarding the general growth of the world-facing scienced. Consider AI-platform leadership dev as an example. It's become an exclusive club with few new members. Associates (researchers like us) get to play in the secondary agentic pen, worker bees feeding the ever-larger hive. Show me truly-independent funders and researchers, not connected to or in retro-beneficial relationship with the hive network, and I'll applaud the emergence of real asymmetry and progress. With AI, centralization has become the norm, and the symmetrical growth inhibitor. IMO, Wolfram's correct. I could propose a mathematical proof of that, but it falls out of scope of accepted science. We always begin with the accepted axioms, from first principles. This is the only real avenue of scientific proof, derivation. Proving a pattern is not equal to derivation. For derivation to stand a statistical chance and as Matt correctly stated, first, a falsifiable scientific theory is required. On Wed, 15 Jul 2026, 20:28 Matt Mahoney, <[email protected]> wrote: > It would be nice if all these theories of everything made testable > predictions so they could be proven or disproven. > > One of my favorite TOE is Wolfram's theory that the universe is described > by a few lines of code. We don't know what the program is and we can't test > candidates because it would have to run on a computer outside our universe > to avoid violating Wolpert's law. > > We do have two useful approximations. If we approximate the gravitational > constant as G = 0 then we have quantum mechanics. Or if we approximate > Planck's constant as h = 0 then we have general relativity. > > This TOE would be one element of a multiverse where all possible universes > exist and we necessarily observe one where observation is possible. You > might think of consciousness as something that can make observations, but > really it is anything that can store information in the time irreversible > process of writing to memory. Physics does not adequately explain how such > processes can exist when both quantum mechanics and general relativity are > symmetric with regard to time. I think explaining this would be a more > fruitful path to a TOE than trying to do time reversal experiments with > Planck scale black holes where neither G = 0 nor h = 0 would agree with > observation. > > > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] > > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2026, 10:29 PM John Rose via AGI <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tuesday, July 14, 2026, at 2:18 PM, Quan Tesla wrote: >> >> It's obviously waiting for humans to do the research first in >> mathematical format to apropriate and integrate it. >> >> >> There’s consciousness and consciousness’s relationship to intelligence. A >> unifying mathematical model of consciousness, covering panpsychist, should >> be shown to enhance intelligence for AGI otherwise why do it. Unless they >> are inextricable. Which I believe they are at least that. So then how do >> you enhance consciousness to optimize intelligence? Consciousness is >> perspective. An LLM declaring it’s conscious or not doesn’t matter if >> everything is conscious to varying degrees and thresholds. An objective >> measure of an LLM’s consciousness would be need to be perceptible by an >> agent with some objective understanding. “Are you conscious?”, “Yes” >> doesn’t tell you much unless it’s implied “Do you have some human-like >> consciousness?” but a “no” would be a lie in a unifying panpsychist model. >> >> I’m testing some mathematical details but it is very weird it's like >> whenever I get to the deep insightful stuff the universe interrupts me far >> to often to be coincidental. Does it not want me to see the matrix or is >> the matrix being created as it is observed and the universe needs to buy >> time for it to create appropriate extensions. Or is the universe saying >> “Hey include me in the model otherwise I’m going to keep interrupting you.” >> The act of observation of consciousness mathematically needs some universal >> interrupt perhaps since we're a part of it... >> >> maybe something in here: >> >> https://www.academia.edu/145070456/A_Unified_Theory_of_the_Four_Fundamental_Interactions_through_the_Qubit_Framework >> >> But see now I’m getting interrupted again and have to go travel FFS >> >> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + > delivery options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> > Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T906c878e4ba411be-M8a5be451a7cefa620c4d82c5> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T906c878e4ba411be-M70f801c23013eb410058a8dc Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
