It would be so great to have some kind of a meta (mathematical) language of attempts theories of everything in physics or theories of literally everything in natural science fields, consciousness, philosophy and so on, where each theory would be defined by its properties I'm describing below, then what one could care about in attempts at ToEs would be free (continuous?) parameters and for example quantum field theory, string theory, loop quantum gravity, universal bayesianism or other physics or archdisciplionary models would be a special concrete cases in this general language in this abstract mathematical space with string theory for example having "amount of unobservable properties" parameter set to gazilion, and this way in this language find a model that has the best ToE desired properies by just traversing this abstract space, trying to ground it concretely in the the empirical measurements we have as much as possible to make concrete predictions. I like to distinguish between theories of every "thing" - usually unfalsifiable models/principles/mathematical frameworks/languages that can model anything really (usually its some abstract space of all possible models in some domain defined in some way), such as the free energy principle (but its applications to the brain or other complex systems then becomes) thanks the the infinite free parameter freedom, and attempts at theories of everything in physics (or natural sciences in general) that try to be as concretely grounded with empirical data in some domain as possible. Middle waying seems like such an universal approach! Each model has its own different advantages and disadvantages in different domains! And some have equivalent properties! One can dissolve the hard boundaries between models by making them spectrummy by mapping out their properies in relation to eachother when reasoning about them! Middlewaying tries to minimize the effects of disadvantages and maximizes advantages! Physical theories live in a landscape as local minimas! You can also have mathematical correspondence mappings between scales using scalefree dynamical systems theory. Continuous landscapes are useful for optimizing discrete systems too so even if most of the theories in the landscape have undesirable artifacts or messiness that would be undesirable, it might be possible for theoreticians to use optimization techniques on the landscape and either select the nearest "clean" model to the solution of their optimization problem or optimize for a section of the landscape and sift all the clean models out of that section. Some models are also more suited for our model building visualizing reasoning intuition that others, which doesn't have to correlate with how predictive they actually are. In order to get the most predictive model of everything we can, I think merging the best physics, consciousness and overall ToEs together will be the way! Figuring out the structure of the black box of current empirical measurement mappings and fitting them into one model as accurately as possible. Properties of models to take in account: In physics (can be applied to all natural science fields): - Few free parameters (-quantum field theory (seemingly arbitrary constants), +string theory but -string theory (combinatorial explosion of dimension reduction)) - High number of symmetries that unify in simplifying ways (+amplituhedron<ref>[ [- YouTube]([- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==GL77oOnrPzY)) Amplituhedron: The End of Space-Time, Nima Arkani-Hamed, 2022]</ref>) - Minimum unobservable properties (-string theory<ref>[ [string theory in nLab](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/string+theory) String theory]</ref><ref>[ [Quanta Magazine]([Quanta Magazine](https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-theres-only-the-landscape-20180604/)) There Are No Laws of Physics. There’s Only the Landscape, Robbert Dijkgraaf, 2018]</ref><ref>[ [Compactification (physics) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compactification_(physics)) Compactification in string theory]</ref>, +quantum field theory<ref>[ [quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab]([quantum field theory in nLab](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/quantum+field+theory))))))) Categorical axiomatization QTF: Algebraic/Functorial Quantum Field Theory]</ref>) - Minimum unobserved observable properties (-graviton<ref>[ [Graviton - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton) Graviton]</ref>, -supersymmetry<ref>[ [Supersymmetry - Wikipedia]([Supersymmetry - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersymmetry)) Supersymmetry]</ref>) - Testable predictions - Simple explanations of all so far observed physics, accuracy versus complexity tradeoff (-string theory) - How well it can explain empty space (+loop quantum gravity<ref>[ [Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia]([Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity)))))))))))))) Loop quantum gravity]</ref>), -string theory) or content in it (-loop quantum gravity, +string theory) In general: - If more facts or observations are accounted for - If it changes more "surprising facts" into "a matter of course" (following Peirce) - If more details of causal relations are provided, leading to a high accuracy and precision of the description - If it offers greater predictive power (if it offers more details about what should be expected to be seen and not seen) - If it depends less on authorities and more on observations - If it makes fewer assumptions - If it is more falsifiable (more testable by observation or experiment, according to Popper) - If it can be used to compress encoded observations into fewer bits (Solomonoff's theory of inductive inference)<ref>[ [Explanatory power - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explanatory_power) Explanatory power]</ref> <references/> ===Construction=== What is? Starting from Zero Ontology<ref>[[- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==KdDNfTREQJU) Why Does Anything Exist? Zero Ontology, Physical Information, and Pure Awareness]</ref> , from universal wavefunction, one electron universe, baseline is superposition of all possible states of physical fields, structurelessness.<ref>[[[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]([[1210.8447] Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation](https://arxiv.org/abs/1210.8447)))))))) Nothing happens in the Universe of the Everett Interpretation]</ref> Quantum Field Theory postulates that there are multiple fields of contents in spacetime. Under Free Energy Principle, quantum mechanics scale has high stochastic fluctations, general relativity scale has low fluctations, and we live and reduce uncertainity about our sensory data in the middle. <ref>[[- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==2v7LBABwZKA) Karl Friston: The "Meta" Hard Problem & Free Energy Principle]</ref> Superposition of all possible paths of particles ala Feyman's integral is mathematically equivalent to thinking of quantum mechanics as smooth field evolving ala Schrodinger equation. One electron from one electron universe is a field.<ref>[[- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==NXEpMqpl09M)))))))) Good Vibes: The Harmonics of Psychedelics & Energetic Healing]</ref> This can be further deflated by the Amplituhedron. <ref>[[- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==CmieNQH7Q4w))) Donald Hoffman: The Nature of Consciousness]</ref> Universal Darwinism: what survives is not what is fittest, but what is the most stable in time, what had the best conditions for continued existence, what resisted entropy, second law of thermodynamics. The smallest parts that are regularities across spacetime are fundamental particles, that are quantum excitation of their fields. They can also be seen as solitons, or markov blankets. Particles form higher order structures through darwinian statistical physical game theoretic selforganization with scalefree selfsimilar dynamics with each scale causally codependently affecting eachother: atoms, molecules, cells, organs, organisms, societies, ecosystem,... neurons, raw sensations, complex mental representations in experience such as cognitive mechanisms, narratives, models,... they, or any pattern, can also be seen regularities in spacetime, as hiearchical markov blankets with internal and external states, measure and action on the boundary states, or solitons, as stable excitation in a field-like spectrumy implementational or abstract thingness functional evolving statespace with state of the system surfing between local minimas governed by free energy gradients, a general framework to ground subjectively or objectively empirically measured patterns on our retina to construct a predictive model.<ref>[[- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube]([- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==_JCaic5Cxms))))))))) Universal Bayesianism: A New Kind of Theory of Everything]</ref><<ref>[[- YouTube]([- YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v==Mu_kW11ap8M)) Physical reality and mind with Chris Fields | Reason with Science | Quantum theory | Consciousness]</ref><ref>[[Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023]([Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023](https://coda.io/@active-inference-institute/fields-physics-2023)))))))))))))))))) Physics as Information Processing]</ref> Neurophenomenology studies the dynamics of neurons forming hiearchical specialized or unified populations forming cognitive faculties and mental representations when activated. Deep meditative highly symmetrical states feel like the superposition of all possible configurations of qualia. Consciousness, defined as subjective experience, can be part of physics. Physics can be part of consciousness. Physics can be giant field of universal consciousness, and in it we (observers) can be local substructures, hiearchical markov blankets, solitons, coherence, topological pockets with a field within it, and those senses in phenomenology can be further warped or transcended. Both can be approximating or/and (infinitely small) part of something third, something beyond human comprehension. Dissolve all too certain beliefs by embracing infinite combinatorial explosion of possible synthesises with different models in a higher order of complexity embracing both sides cooperatively and become one with the ineffable unknownness of reality full of timeless absolute meaning. All models are wrong but some are useful by giving more predictivity, agency, or wellbeing. <references/> ==Equation of Individual and Collective Happiness== Happiness equation includes the interplay between nature and nurture, between many environmental and genetic factors. Happiness == Genetics + Environment<ref>[[3 Things to Know: Social Determinants of (Mental) Health | Hogg Foundation for Mental Health]([3 Things to Know: Social Determinants of (Mental) Health | Hogg Foundation for Mental Health]([3 Things to Know: Social Determinants of (Mental) Health | Hogg Foundation for Mental Health](https://hogg.utexas.edu/3-things-to-know-social-determinants-of-mental-health))) Social Determinants of (Mental) Health, Hogg Staff, 2018]</ref> + Action<ref>[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17439760.2019.1689421?journalCode==rpos20 Revisiting the Sustainable Happiness Model and Pie Chart: Can Happiness Be Successfully Pursued?, Kennon M. Sheldon, 2019]</ref><ref>[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237535630_Adaptation_and_the_Set-Point_Model_of_Subjective_Well-BeingDoes_Happiness_Change_After_Major_Life_Events Adaptation and the Set-Point Model of Subjective Well-BeingDoes Happiness Change After Major Life Events?, Richard E. Lucas, 2007]</ref> What genes we got, in what environment we grew up in, what do we do, together form the structure of the brain which is where happiness is stored. How does it look like in the brain? I will explain it more in detail below. Many of those factors overlap and influence eachother across levels.