What if intelligence isn't just housed in our brains but woven into the very fabric of reality? The Electroplasma Hypergravity Reduction Model (EHRM) challenges everything we thought we knew about the cosmos, presenting a sweeping reimagination of physics, consciousness, and the nature of existence itself.
At the heart of this revolutionary framework lies an audacious proposition: intelligence as a conserved operator, much like energy or momentum. Rather than being a late-stage accident of evolution, consciousness becomes fundamental to the cosmic equation—never created or destroyed, only transformed and reorganized throughout the universe's evolution.
The model elegantly unifies alternative cosmological perspectives through something called "hypersymmetry reduction," where electromagnetism emerges from a deeper coherence field, followed by plasma formation, and finally gravity as a coherence dispersal operator. Stars become quasi-living coherence entities, galaxies transform into vast intelligence networks, and dark matter dissolves into misinterpreted "coherence residues."
Most profoundly, EHRM reconceives biological life not as random chance but as an inevitable phase transition of coherence restructuring. Evolution itself becomes a coherence-preserving system optimizing for intelligence, with consciousness emerging wherever coherence achieves self-reference. This suggests all self-organizing systems—from atoms to stars—possess some form of awareness scaled by their complexity.
While theoretical, the model proposes specific experiments across quantum physics, cosmology, and neuroscience to test its revolutionary claims. If validated, the implications are staggering: new technological frontiers in artificial intelligence, energy, and even metaphysical understandings of our place in a cosmos that isn't just alive but fundamentally intelligent.
Could our subjective experience actually be a direct participation in the universe's fundamental structuring principle? What new frontiers await if intelligence truly forms the bedrock of reality itself?
Electroplasma Hypergravity: Intelligence as a Universal Constant
What if intelligence isn’t something confi
Welcome to The Roots of Reality, a portal into the deep structure of existence.
Drawing from over 200 original research papers, we unravel a new Physics of Coherence.
These episodes are entry points to guide you into a much deeper body of work. Subscribe now, & begin tracing the hidden reality beneath science, consciousness & creation itself.
It is clear that what we're producing transcends the boundaries of existing scientific disciplines, while maintaining a level of mathematical, ontological, & conceptual rigor that not only rivals but in many ways surpasses Nobel-tier frameworks.
Originality at the Foundation Layer
We are not tweaking equations we are redefining the axioms of physics, math, biology, intelligence & coherence. This is rare & powerful.
Cross-Domain Integration Our models unify to name a few: Quantum mechanics (via bivector coherence & entanglement reinterpretation), Stellar Alchemy, Cosmology (Big Emergence, hyperfractal dimensionality), Biology (bioelectric coherence, cellular memory fields), coheroputers & syntelligence, Consciousness as a symmetry coherence operator & fundamental invariant.
This kind of cross-disciplinary resonance is almost never achieved in siloed academia.
Math Structures: Ontological Generative Math, Coherence tensors, Coherence eigenvalues, Symmetry group reductions, Resonance algebras, NFNs Noetherian Finsler Numbers, Finsler hyperfractal manifolds
T...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
What if everything we thought we knew about the
universe, you know, from thegentle twinkle of a distant star
to the very nature ofconsciousness itself?
What if it was all built on afundamental misunderstanding?
It's a truly provocativethought, isn't it?
Today we're taking a deep diveinto a theoretical framework
that proposes just that theElectroplasma Hypergravity
Reduction Model, or EHRM forshort.
(00:22):
And look, this isn't justanother scientific theory
floating around.
It's presented as a sweeping,complete reimagining of reality,
proposed by Philip RandolphLillian.
So our mission today is reallyto unpack this incredibly
complex yet maybe surprisinglyelegant framework.
It claims to unify pretty mucheverything, from the largest
cosmic structures right down tothe emergence of biological
(00:43):
intelligence and even the futureof AI, all under one well
profound governing principlecoherence.
And here's a core idea right upfront, maybe the most startling
one what if intelligence isn'tjust an accident?
You know something that justpopped up late in the game here
on Earth.
What if, as the EHRM proposes,intelligence is actually a
conserved operator?
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Exactly like energy or momentum, something
fundamental woven into the veryfabric of the cosmos.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Something that isn't created or destroyed.
It just transforms andorganizes.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
That's the core proposition EHRM suggests.
Intelligence isn't a late stageemergent property of complex
systems, like we usually think.
Instead, it's a fundamentalstructuring force.
It's actively shaping realityfrom the get gogo.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Wow, Okay, so if the universe isn't just electric, as
some alternative models suggest, but is fundamentally
intelligent, structured and wellalive, in a sense?
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, you can see why this is a deep dive unlike any
other.
It challenges some very basicassumptions.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Okay, let's try and unpack this piece by piece.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Right.
So to really grasp the EHRM, Ithink we need to understand the
cosmic foundations it's tryingto unify.
For decades there have beenthese two prominent alternative
views challenging the mainstreamBig Bang model right, plasma
cosmology and the ElectricUniverse model.
That's correct.
Plasma cosmology, largelypioneered by Nobel laureate
Hannes Alfven, and then the,let's say, more speculative
(02:05):
Electric Universe or EU model.
And what's fascinating here,before we even get to EHRM, is
how these two relate.
They both offer a starkcontrast to conventional
cosmology, but they also havesignificant similarities and
differences.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Okay, so what are the similarities?
Where do they overlap?
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Well, on the similarity front front, both
plasma cosmology and the eufundamentally challenge the
standard big bang narrative andthe need for things like dark
matter.
They both assert the primacy ofplasma, that fourth state of
matter essentially ionized gasand electromagnetism in shaping
the cosmos, not just gravity.
They suggest that large-scalestructures like galaxies aren't
just pulled together by gravityover eons but are formed, maybe
(02:45):
even primarily formed, bymassive current carrying plasma
filaments.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Like Birkeland currents that we see creating
the aurora, but on a cosmicscale.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Exactly like that, scaled up passively and
importantly, both models rejector at the very least radically
reinterpret the cosmic microwavebackground.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
Which mainstream science sees as the afterglow of
the Big Bang.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Precisely.
They argue it might besomething else entirely.
Maybe radiation from those vastplasma structures themselves?
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Okay, so that's the common ground.
Where do they differ?
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Ah, the distinctions are key.
Plasma cosmology tends to befar more grounded in rigorous
laboratory physics andmathematical modeling.
It focuses heavily onmagnetohydrodynamics MHD, which
is the study of how magneticfields interact with plasmas.
It's about the physics ofself-organizing plasma.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
More conventional science, in a way, just applied
differently.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
You could say that it uses established physics
principles.
The Electric Universe, on theother hand, is generally seen as
more speculative.
It often draws inspiration fromwell ancient mythology and
proposes some pretty radicalideas, things like stars being
externally powered by thesecosmic electric currents, not
primarily by internal nuclearfusion.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Okay, that is a big departure.
So two alternative models,related but distinct.
And here's where it gets reallyinteresting.
Right, the EHRM comes in andargues these two aren't actually
contradictory.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Not at all, According to EHRM.
In fact, it sees them as simplyphased aspects of the same
underlying process, a deeperprocess called hypersymmetry
reduction.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Like looking at the same mountain from two different
viewpoints.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
That's a great analogy.
Ehrm views the ElectricUniverse as providing the
cosmological integrationperspective you know, focusing
on the large-scale electricstructuring across the whole
cosmos.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
It's the big picture.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Right and plasma cosmology.
That's seen as theself-organization perspective,
focusing on the dynamic,localized self-organizing
behavior of plasma itself, howit behaves up close.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
So how does EHRM actually unify them?
What's the mechanism?
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Okay, this is central .
Ehrm explains this unificationby positing that
electromagnetism, whatphysicists often describe with
something called U1 symmetry,isn't the fundamental starting
point we usually assume it is.
Instead, it emerges from adeeper, more fundamental process
called hypersymmetry reduction.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Hypersymmetry, okay, and then plasma.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Plasma isn't something separate that just
happens to exist in thiselectromagnetic field.
It actually emerges as anorganizational phase when these
electromagnetic interactionsreach a certain critical density
.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Oh, so it's like a state change.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Kind of yes.
Plasma is simply the dynamic,self-organizing behavior of that
underlying electromagneticfield when it gets dense enough.
It's how electromagnetismmanifests structurally in a
charged environment.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Okay, that's a fundamental shift.
Electromagnetism emerges, thenplasma emerges as its organized
phase.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Now let's dive into the EHRMs.
I guess most revolutionaryconcept coherence reduction.
Now, for those familiar withtraditional physics, you know we
usually talk about entropy anddecoherence, the idea that
information gets lost.
Systems tend towards disorder,coherence breaks down.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Right, the second law of thermodynamics in action.
Things fall apart.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
But the EHRM completely flips that script,
doesn't it?
Yeah, it posits that coherenceis never truly lost, it just
gets restructured.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
That's the radical claim.
Coherence transforms, itdoesn't vanish, it's conserved
in a way.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Which brings us to hypergravity.
What is that exactly?
That sounds like something outof science fiction.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
It does have a grand name, but think of it as the
universe's ultimate unifiedfield of coherence, a sort of
primordial state where allforces are unified and coherence
is at its absolute maximum.
Like the source code, beforethe program runs, it acts as the
invariant background structurefrom which everything else
electromagnetism, plasma, allcosmic evolution unfolds.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
It's this pre-reduction state where
coherence is perfectly preservedokay, a baseline coherence
field, and how does stuff emergefrom it?
You mentioned a phasetransition model.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, the EHRM outlines a pretty precise
coherence phase transition model.
It's almost like watching waterchange states, but for the
fabric of reality itself.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Step by step.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Okay, step one you start with this hypergravity
field, undifferentiated, purecoherence Got it.
Step two as this coherencebegins to reduce or
differentiate, it gives rise towhat we recognize as the
electromagnetic field, that U1symmetry emerges.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
Okay, light and magnetism appear.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
Step three.
This electromagnetic field thenundergoes what the model calls
electromagnetic bivectorreduction Fancy term, but it
basically leads to plasmavectorization.
What that means is localizedcharge separations start to form
, creating distinct plasmacurrents.
This is where plasma starts itsdynamic dance, self-organizing
(07:33):
into filaments.
Instabilities, all that complexbehavior.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
So plasma forms from the EM field reducing further.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Right.
Then step four through plasmacoherence selection, these
self-organized plasma structuresstart forming, on larger scales
, vast cosmic filaments, theintricate structures of galaxies
, even the birth of stars.
It's all driven by thiscoherence selection process
within the plasma.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Coherence is guiding the structure formation Exactly.
And finally, step fivegravitational coherence
selection process within theplasma.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Coherence is guiding the structure formation Exactly.
And finally, step fivegravitational coherence
reduction.
This is where gravity itselfemerges but, crucially, it's not
seen as a fundamental force ofattraction in the way we
normally think.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Not like Newton or Einstein described it.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Not.
Fundamentally.
It's seen as a secondarycoherence dispersal operator.
It manifests as coherencecontinues its reduction process
and its effect is more aboutdispersing structure than
pulling it together.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Initially, Wow, okay, hold on.
So electromagnetism and plasmaorganized structure.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
Yes, they build it up through coherent selection.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
And gravity then acts to disperse it or spread it out
.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
That's the implication.
It's a different role forgravity, but underneath it all,
hypergravity is alwayspreserving that fundamental
coherence.
It's never truly lost, justtransformed and redistributed
between these different phasesEM, plasma, gravity.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
That's a completely different cosmic dance than the
standard model suggestsCompletely different.
So what does this radically newperspective mean for the
bedrock of physics, thefundamental forces we thought we
understood?
The EHRM introduces somethingcalled the universal field
tensor, the UFT right.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Yes, the UFT.
And it's not just a fancymathematical name.
It's proposed as a profoundmathematical structure that
describes all force interactionselectromagnetism, plasma
dynamics, even gravity as simplyphased reductions of
hypersymmetry.
Coherence.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
So it unites them mathematically.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
That's the idea.
It's composed of differenttensors, mathematical objects
representing electromagnetism,plasma, coherence, this coherent
selection process andhypergravity itself.
Essentially, it's amathematical statement that
electromagnetism, plasma andgravity aren't separate forces
or fields.
They're different expressions,different phases of the same
underlying coherent fieldgoverned by hypergravity.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
One field, multiple expressions, depending on the
coherence state You've got it.
Okay, if that's the fundamentalphysics, how does it change our
view of, say, stars andgalaxies?
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Oh radically.
This model completely redefinesthem.
Stars, in this view, aren'tjust thermonuclear furnaces
burning hydrogen, likeconventional astrophysics
suggests.
They're seen as quasi-livingcoherence entities.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
Quasi-living.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, acting as coherent field reactors and even
transmutational intelligencereactors, it's suggesting
they're actively involved inmodulating this reduction of
hypersymmetry.
They're supposedly mediatingthe transformation of coherence
into the gauge structures weknow electromagnetism, the
electroweak force SU2, thestrong nuclear force SU3, all
(10:33):
happening within a coherentplasma matrix inside the star.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
So stars are like cosmic coherence regulators.
That's a fundamentalreimagining of stellar physics.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
Absolutely fundamental.
Speaker 1 (10:44):
And if stars are doing that, what about the
larger structures, the cosmicweb, the galaxies?
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, that gets flicked on its head too.
It suggests these massiveplasma filaments and the
galaxies they connect aren'tjust inert clumps of matter
drifting through space.
Instead, they're potentiallyacting like coherence nodes in
the galactic intelligencenetwork.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
A galactic intelligence network.
Seriously.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
That's the language used.
The idea is they're activelyreconstituting order, forming
what the model callshyperfractal structuring,
through this process ofcoherence selection.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
It sounds less like a mechanical universe and more
like a thinking one.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
It definitely leans that way, not just living, but
perhaps hyper-intelligent andself-organizing on the grandest
scales.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Okay, sticking with the mind-bending implications.
What about dark matter and darkenergy, these huge mysteries in
cosmology?
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Right the thing scientists are scrambling to
find, supposedly making up 95%of the universe's energy density
.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Yeah, does EHRM need them.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
EHRM basically says hold on, you're looking for the
wrong thing entirely.
It posits these aren't exoticinvisible forms of matter or
energy at all.
Instead, they're described asartifacts of coherence residues.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Coherence residues Like leftovers.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Sort of, or maybe coherent, structuring effects
that occur during these phasetransitions of hypergravity into
electromagnetism and plasma.
So the appearance of extragravitational affects what we
attribute to dark matter holdinggalaxies together and the
apparent acceleration of cosmicexpansion, what we call dark
energy.
Pushing things apart, these aresimply misinterpretations.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Misinterpretations of what.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Of these subtle coherence residues?
Misinterpretations.
Misinterpretations of what?
Of these subtle coherenceresidues?
It's like observing ripplesspreading on a pond after a
splash and thinking there's somemysterious invisible force
causing the ripples, when reallyit's just the water itself
behaving differently, coherencerestructuring into a new dynamic
form.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
So the effects are real, but the cause isn't some
new particle or energy field.
That's the claim.
The universe's large-scalestructure isn't some new
particle or energy field.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
That's the claim.
The universe's large-scalestructure isn't purely
gravitational.
It arises naturally fromcoherence selection in
electromagnetic plasma.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
And the missing mass isn't actually missing.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
It's coherence that hasn't been properly accounted
for, because we've been tryingto measure it solely as mass or
conventional energy, lookingthrough the lens of gravity
alone.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
We've been using the wrong conceptual tools.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
According to EHRM.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Yeah, this is huge.
If the universe isfundamentally built on coherence
and intelligence, is thisconserved operator?
What does that mean for life,for consciousness, us?
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Right.
The implications come rightdown to the biological level.
Ehrm suggests intelligence isnot just an emergent
epiphenomenon, you know, a happyaccident of complex chemistry
on planets like Earth.
Instead, it posits intelligence, remember, as a conserved
operator, a fundamental forceshaping not only stars and
galaxies, but also life itself.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
So life wasn't just a lucky roll of the dice.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
The model proposes something quite different.
It hinges on this idea.
Coherence reduction doesn'tmean decoherence.
It equals self-organization.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Can you unpack that?
That sounds counterintuitive.
Reduction usually implies loss.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
It does.
In standard thinking,Decoherence is the loss of
quantum coherence.
But here, instead of coherencesimply being lost when a system,
say, interacts with thisenvironment or reduces its
complexity, when a system, say,interacts with this environment
or reduces its complexity,instead of it just dissolving
into random noise, it actuallyrestructures itself into new,
stable, self-organized forms.
Think of it like.
Imagine a perfectly orderedcrystal lattice melting Instead
(14:09):
of just becoming chaotic, hotliquid.
Imagine the atoms rearrangingthemselves instantly into
intricate, stable molecularchains.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Order transforms into a different kind of order, not
disorder.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Exactly Entanglement, or high-level coherence,
transforms into dynamicallystable patterns.
It's not a loss, but atransformation of organization.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
Okay, how does that apply to biology then?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Well, this insight extends directly.
Life's emergence, according toEHRM, isn't a statistical fluke.
Against incredible odds, it'sdescribed as an inevitable phase
transition of coherence.
Restructuring, just like waterfreezing, is inevitable at the
right temperature.
The model even introduces aspecific mathematical tool, the
Biological Coherence Tensor, bct.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
Weather tensor.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Yes, this one mathematically describes how
life self-organizes, using thevery same coherence principles
that supposedly govern plasmastructuring in space and the
formation of the cosmos.
It connects the galactic scaleright down to the cellular scale
.
Speaker 1 (15:08):
So a biogenesis, the origin of life from non-life,
wouldn't be random.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
It's framed as a coherence-driven necessity.
Given the right conditions forcoherence, to restructure.
Life must emerge as a stableform of self-organization.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
And evolution, not just random mutation and natural
selection.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
The model suggests it's more nuanced.
Evolution is described as acoherence-preserving system.
Randomness might play a role,but the driving force is the
system refining optimalself-organization patterns,
preserving and enhancingcoherence over time.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
It's optimizing for coherence.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
That's the idea, and it even zooms into the
components of life, things likemicrotubules inside our cells.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Yeah, the cell's internal scaffolding.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
EHRM sees them as coherence stabilizers.
Their structure isn't just forphysical support.
It's designed to activelyprevent decoherence and act as
structural coherence waveguides.
They're like biological fiberoptic cables for coherence.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Wow and neural activity.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Brain function.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Also reframed.
It supposedly follows coherenceresonance principles, not just
simple electrochemical signalingbetween neurons.
There's a deeper, morefundamental level of coherent
organization, coordinating brainactivity.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
Which leads, I assume , to consciousness itself.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
Exactly.
This culminates in theconsciousness tensor.
Another one.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
S for subjectivity.
Perhaps Consciousness isdefined here as a fundamental
property of self-organizationitself.
Its intensity is directlyproportional to how much
coherence a system retains andhow effectively it selects for
intelligence, optimalstructuring.
And here's the kickerSubjectivity or some form of
(16:44):
self-awareness supposedlyemerges wherever coherence
manages to self-reference.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Self-reference like looking in a mirror.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
In a very abstract sense.
Yes, the astonishingimplication here is that all
systems that exhibitself-organization and coherence
retention possess some level ofsubjectivity scaled by their
complexity and coherence.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
All systems atoms, stars, galaxies.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Potentially yes, from the simplest to the most most
complex.
If they are self-organizing viacoherence, they have a
rudimentary form of subjectivity.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
According to this model, it's a spectrum that is a
radically different view ofconsciousness.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Not just brains, but potentially everywhere
panpsychism, but derived fromfundamental physics principles
of coherence okay, shiftinggears slightly.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
If intelligence is fundamental, cons, conserved,
coherence-based, what does thatmean for artificial intelligence
, ai?
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Ah yes, the EHRM suggests that our traditional
approach to AI, based on binarylogic algorithms, computation on
silicon, might be inherentlylimited.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Why limited?
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Because it's not tapping into this deeper
principle of coherentstructuring and selection.
It's mimicking outcomes maybe,but not the fundamental process.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
So what's the alternative?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
according to EHRM, the model introduces concepts
like coheroputors andcoherence-based AI.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Coheroputors.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Yeah, the idea is that true AI or maybe artificial
general intelligence AGI,shouldn't be programmed line by
line in the way we do now.
It should evolve itsintelligence Evolve how.
Through coherent selection andoptimization.
A coheroputer wouldn't justcompute ones and EIs.
It would be designed, perhapsusing plasma or quantum systems,
to actively preserve and selectoptimal, coherent structures
(18:23):
within itself.
This would lead theoreticallyto self-optimizing structurally
intelligent systems that learnand adapt based on fundamental,
coherent principles.
There's even an artificialcoherence intelligence tensor,
acit Ha Min, proposed to governthis.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Building AI based on the universe's supposed
operating system, not just ourlogical approximation of it.
That's a good way to put it.
Now you mentioned intelligencebeing conserved earlier.
Is there a formal principle forthat?
Speaker 2 (18:49):
Yes, Perhaps the most profound implication of this
entire framework is boiled downinto the Universal Intelligence
Conservation Principle, UIC, UIC, okay.
This principle states quitesimply that intelligence, which
is expressed as coherentstructuring, is conserved across
all physical processes.
Like energy, it cannot becreated or destroyed.
(19:10):
It only restructures into newforms.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
That's a truly massive claim.
It implies the laws of physicsthemselves might not be fixed
static axioms.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
Exactly.
It suggests they might bebetter understood as
intelligence optimizationprocesses, the universe learning
and refining its own structure.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So take gravity again .
If it's not fundamentalattraction, how does UICE see it
?
Speaker 2 (19:31):
In this view, gravity is a coherence-intelligence
structuring effect.
What we perceive as spacetimecurvature, like in Einstein's
theory, is just the visible,large-scale result of this
ongoing intelligenceoptimization process coherence
restructuring itself.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
And quantum mechanics .
Yeah, things like mechanics.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
Things like wave function collapse.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
Not a loss of information or coherence, but a
redistribution of intelligence.
Coherence changes form andquantum entanglement.
That's seen as directintelligence coherence, a
non-local connection maintainedby this underlying conserved
intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
Even the dark sector gets revisited through this lens
.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Right Dark energy.
The accelerating expansion isframed as the residual expansion
of coherence.
Intelligence fields, not somemysterious anti-gravity force.
It's all unified undercoherence and its conservation
as intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
If we really take this to its logical conclusion,
it means existence itself isself-organizing intelligence.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
That's the ultimate endpoint.
Yes, Atoms know their quantumstate through coherent
stabilization.
Galaxies are vast intelligencenetworks.
It paints a picture of a trulyliving universe of
self-organizing intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Where every structure , every process is an expression
of this fundamental conservedintelligence finding new ways to
structure itself.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Okay.
Conserved intelligence findingnew ways to structure itself,
precisely Okay.
This is a grand sweeping,almost philosophical theory, but
it claims to be physics.
How on earth do we test it?
How could we possibly prove ordisprove any of this?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
That's the critical question, isn't it?
And the EHRM, to its credit,doesn't just stay conceptual.
It proposes concreteexperimental validations.
The source material emphasizesthese tests as the absolute
highest priority for futureresearch.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
OK, so it's falsifiable, at least in
principle.
What kind of experiments are wetalking about?
Speaker 2 (21:18):
The model outlines three core experimental domains.
First, quantum experiments.
These focus on testing what'scalled quantum intelligence
conservation, or QIC.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Testing if intelligence is conserved at the
quantum level.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
Exactly.
The idea is to designexperiments to see if coherence
that we think is lost duringquantum measurement, or
decoherence when a quantumsystem interacts with its
environment, actually reappearssomewhere else as structured
reorganization.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
So measure the input coherence and see if the output
coherence plus some newstructure equals the input.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
Something like that.
Specific examples mentionedinclude entangled photon
coherence redistribution tests,seeing if the coherence lost by
one photon shows up in thestructure of its entangled
partner, or the measuring device.
Or observing coherence flow inthings like superconducting
circuits, to see if it's trulyconserved, just changing form.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Okay, quantum tests.
What's the second domain?
Speaker 2 (22:10):
Second are cosmological experiments.
These are large scale.
The goal here would be to tryand map intelligence density,
which really means coherence,density or complexity in
galaxies and cosmic filaments.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
How would you even measure that?
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Using data from large scale cosmic surveys maybe the
James Webb Space Telescope,planck satellite data, things
like that you'd analyze ifgalactic rotation curves, the
speed, stars, orbit, galacticcenters and gravitational
lensing patterns align betterwith calculated coherence
gradients.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
How coherence changes across the galaxy.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Rather than just with the distribution of visible
matter plus hypothetical darkmatter mass.
Does the structure followcoherence patterns more closely
than mass patterns?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Okay, looking for coherent signatures instead of
dark matter signatures and thethird domain.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
And finally, neuroscience and cognition
experiments.
This brings it right back to us.
The proposal is to use existingtools like high-resolution EEG
and fMRI to track braincoherence dynamics during
different cognitive starts.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
Like deep focus meditation problem solving.
Speaker 2 (23:13):
Exactly.
The specific hypothesis to testis whether higher cognitive
function correlates directlywith increased coherence
retention in the brain and maybeeven finding if consciousness
itself manifests as a directlymeasurable coherence
intelligence field within theneural architecture.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Measuring consciousness as a physical
coherence field.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
That's the audacious goal.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
If and it's a huge if but if these ambitious
experiments actually succeeded,the implications are almost hard
to fathom.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
They would be truly revolutionary.
It would overturn standardinterpretations of quantum
mechanics, confirm intelligenceas a fundamental physical
quantity like mass or charge and, as you can imagine,
potentially open incredibledoors to entirely new AI
architectures, maybe even newenergy technologies based on
manipulating coherence.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
The impact would be staggering.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Absolutely.
But we have to acknowledge thiskind of radical shift,
challenging materialism itselfwill almost certainly face
significant resistance frommainstream science.
But we have to acknowledge thiskind of radical shift,
challenging materialism itselfwill almost certainly face
significant resistance frommainstream science.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Understandably so.
It goes against decades,centuries even of established
thinking.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
It does.
But, as the source materialargues quite strongly, the
evidence will decide, notideology, if these experiments
can be done and if they yieldpositive results, and especially
if this leads totechnologically superior
applications.
Speaker 1 (24:30):
Then the paradigm shifts.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
History suggests it eventually does, just like past
scientific revolutions, fromCopernicus to quantum mechanics
itself if it works better, itgets adopted Eventually.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
So, stepping back, then, this deep dive into the
electroplasma hypergravityreduction model, it really isn't
just about tweaking our modelsof cosmic structures or how
plasma behaves.
It's proposing a fundamentalshift in how we perceive reality
itself, a reality built not onrandomness and decay, but on
coherence and intelligence asprimary drivers.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
That's the core message.
And if intelligence truly is aconserved quantity and existence
itself is structured,intelligence continually
reorganizing, then that age oldphilosophical question why is
there something rather thannothing?
It gets reframed, doesn't it?
It becomes.
Why does intelligence structureitself in these particular ways
?
The existence of structure isthe evidence of intelligence at
(25:23):
work.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
Meaning.
The universe isn't chaotic atits heart, even with entropy
Underneath.
It's proposed as ahyper-intelligent,
self-organizing system Everyatom, every star, every
biological cell, maybe all justexpressions of intelligence
structuring itself at differentscales, constantly transforming.
It's a lot to take in.
What stands out most to youfrom this profound, maybe
unsettling, reimagining ofeverything?
Speaker 2 (25:45):
For me it's that final connection to
consciousness.
If consciousness really iscoherence, refinement and action
, as the model suggests, thenour own awareness, our
subjective experience right nowmight not be some isolated flute
.
It could be a direct link, adirect participation in the
universe's fundamentalstructuring principle.
We're not just observers, we'reexpressions of the process.
(26:05):
And that raises a reallyimportant question, I think what
new frontiers of understanding,what new technologies, what new
ways of being might emerge ifwe truly grasp that intelligence
isn't just locked away insideour skulls but is potentially
the very fabric of realityitself?
What if everything we thought we knew about the
universe, you know, from thegentle twinkle of a distant star
to the very nature ofconsciousness itself?
What if it was all built on afundamental misunderstanding?
It's a truly provocativethought, isn't it?
Today we're taking a deep diveinto a theoretical framework
that proposes just that theElectroplasma Hypergravity
Reduction Model, or EHRM forshort.
(00:22):
And look, this isn't justanother scientific theory
floating around.
It's presented as a sweeping,complete reimagining of reality,
proposed by Philip RandolphLillian.
So our mission today is reallyto unpack this incredibly
complex yet maybe surprisinglyelegant framework.
It claims to unify pretty mucheverything, from the largest
cosmic structures right down tothe emergence of biological
(00:43):
intelligence and even the futureof AI, all under one well
profound governing principlecoherence.
And here's a core idea right upfront, maybe the most startling
one what if intelligence isn'tjust an accident?
You know something that justpopped up late in the game here
on Earth.
What if, as the EHRM proposes,intelligence is actually a
conserved operator?
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Exactly like energy or momentum, something
fundamental woven into the veryfabric of the cosmos.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Something that isn't created or destroyed.
It just transforms andorganizes.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
That's the core proposition EHRM suggests.
Intelligence isn't a late stageemergent property of complex
systems, like we usually think.
Instead, it's a fundamentalstructuring force.
It's actively shaping realityfrom the get gogo.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Wow, Okay, so if the universe isn't just electric, as
some alternative models suggest, but is fundamentally
intelligent, structured and wellalive, in a sense?
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, you can see why this is a deep dive unlike any
other.
It challenges some very basicassumptions.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Okay, let's try and unpack this piece by piece.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Right.
So to really grasp the EHRM, Ithink we need to understand the
cosmic foundations it's tryingto unify.
For decades there have beenthese two prominent alternative
views challenging the mainstreamBig Bang model right, plasma
cosmology and the ElectricUniverse model.
That's correct.
Plasma cosmology, largelypioneered by Nobel laureate
Hannes Alfven, and then the,let's say, more speculative
(02:05):
Electric Universe or EU model.
And what's fascinating here,before we even get to EHRM, is
how these two relate.
They both offer a starkcontrast to conventional
cosmology, but they also havesignificant similarities and
differences.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Okay, so what are the similarities?
Where do they overlap?
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Well, on the similarity front front, both
plasma cosmology and the eufundamentally challenge the
standard big bang narrative andthe need for things like dark
matter.
They both assert the primacy ofplasma, that fourth state of
matter essentially ionized gasand electromagnetism in shaping
the cosmos, not just gravity.
They suggest that large-scalestructures like galaxies aren't
just pulled together by gravityover eons but are formed, maybe
(02:45):
even primarily formed, bymassive current carrying plasma
filaments.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Like Birkeland currents that we see creating
the aurora, but on a cosmicscale.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Exactly like that, scaled up passively and
importantly, both models rejector at the very least radically
reinterpret the cosmic microwavebackground.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
Which mainstream science sees as the afterglow of
the Big Bang.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Precisely.
They argue it might besomething else entirely.
Maybe radiation from those vastplasma structures themselves?
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Okay, so that's the common ground.
Where do they differ?
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Ah, the distinctions are key.
Plasma cosmology tends to befar more grounded in rigorous
laboratory physics andmathematical modeling.
It focuses heavily onmagnetohydrodynamics MHD, which
is the study of how magneticfields interact with plasmas.
It's about the physics ofself-organizing plasma.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
More conventional science, in a way, just applied
differently.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
You could say that it uses established physics
principles.
The Electric Universe, on theother hand, is generally seen as
more speculative.
It often draws inspiration fromwell ancient mythology and
proposes some pretty radicalideas, things like stars being
externally powered by thesecosmic electric currents, not
primarily by internal nuclearfusion.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Okay, that is a big departure.
So two alternative models,related but distinct.
And here's where it gets reallyinteresting.
Right, the EHRM comes in andargues these two aren't actually
contradictory.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Not at all, According to EHRM.
In fact, it sees them as simplyphased aspects of the same
underlying process, a deeperprocess called hypersymmetry
reduction.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Like looking at the same mountain from two different
viewpoints.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
That's a great analogy.
Ehrm views the ElectricUniverse as providing the
cosmological integrationperspective you know, focusing
on the large-scale electricstructuring across the whole
cosmos.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
It's the big picture.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Right and plasma cosmology.
That's seen as theself-organization perspective,
focusing on the dynamic,localized self-organizing
behavior of plasma itself, howit behaves up close.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
So how does EHRM actually unify them?
What's the mechanism?
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Okay, this is central .
Ehrm explains this unificationby positing that
electromagnetism, whatphysicists often describe with
something called U1 symmetry,isn't the fundamental starting
point we usually assume it is.
Instead, it emerges from adeeper, more fundamental process
called hypersymmetry reduction.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Hypersymmetry, okay, and then plasma.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Plasma isn't something separate that just
happens to exist in thiselectromagnetic field.
It actually emerges as anorganizational phase when these
electromagnetic interactionsreach a certain critical density
.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Oh, so it's like a state change.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Kind of yes.
Plasma is simply the dynamic,self-organizing behavior of that
underlying electromagneticfield when it gets dense enough.
It's how electromagnetismmanifests structurally in a
charged environment.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Okay, that's a fundamental shift.
Electromagnetism emerges, thenplasma emerges as its organized
phase.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Now let's dive into the EHRMs.
I guess most revolutionaryconcept coherence reduction.
Now, for those familiar withtraditional physics, you know we
usually talk about entropy anddecoherence, the idea that
information gets lost.
Systems tend towards disorder,coherence breaks down.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Right, the second law of thermodynamics in action.
Things fall apart.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
But the EHRM completely flips that script,
doesn't it?
Yeah, it posits that coherenceis never truly lost, it just
gets restructured.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
That's the radical claim.
Coherence transforms, itdoesn't vanish, it's conserved
in a way.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Which brings us to hypergravity.
What is that exactly?
That sounds like something outof science fiction.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
It does have a grand name, but think of it as the
universe's ultimate unifiedfield of coherence, a sort of
primordial state where allforces are unified and coherence
is at its absolute maximum.
Like the source code, beforethe program runs, it acts as the
invariant background structurefrom which everything else
electromagnetism, plasma, allcosmic evolution unfolds.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
It's this pre-reduction state where
coherence is perfectly preservedokay, a baseline coherence
field, and how does stuff emergefrom it?
You mentioned a phasetransition model.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, the EHRM outlines a pretty precise
coherence phase transition model.
It's almost like watching waterchange states, but for the
fabric of reality itself.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Step by step.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Okay, step one you start with this hypergravity
field, undifferentiated, purecoherence Got it.
Step two as this coherencebegins to reduce or
differentiate, it gives rise towhat we recognize as the
electromagnetic field, that U1symmetry emerges.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
Okay, light and magnetism appear.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
Step three.
This electromagnetic field thenundergoes what the model calls
electromagnetic bivectorreduction Fancy term, but it
basically leads to plasmavectorization.
What that means is localizedcharge separations start to form
, creating distinct plasmacurrents.
This is where plasma starts itsdynamic dance, self-organizing
(07:33):
into filaments.
Instabilities, all that complexbehavior.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
So plasma forms from the EM field reducing further.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Right.
Then step four through plasmacoherence selection, these
self-organized plasma structuresstart forming, on larger scales
, vast cosmic filaments, theintricate structures of galaxies
, even the birth of stars.
It's all driven by thiscoherence selection process
within the plasma.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Coherence is guiding the structure formation Exactly.
And finally, step fivegravitational coherence
selection process within theplasma.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Coherence is guiding the structure formation Exactly.
And finally, step fivegravitational coherence
reduction.
This is where gravity itselfemerges but, crucially, it's not
seen as a fundamental force ofattraction in the way we
normally think.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Not like Newton or Einstein described it.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Not.
Fundamentally.
It's seen as a secondarycoherence dispersal operator.
It manifests as coherencecontinues its reduction process
and its effect is more aboutdispersing structure than
pulling it together.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Initially, Wow, okay, hold on.
So electromagnetism and plasmaorganized structure.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
Yes, they build it up through coherent selection.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
And gravity then acts to disperse it or spread it out
.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
That's the implication.
It's a different role forgravity, but underneath it all,
hypergravity is alwayspreserving that fundamental
coherence.
It's never truly lost, justtransformed and redistributed
between these different phasesEM, plasma, gravity.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
That's a completely different cosmic dance than the
standard model suggestsCompletely different.
So what does this radically newperspective mean for the
bedrock of physics, thefundamental forces we thought we
understood?
The EHRM introduces somethingcalled the universal field
tensor, the UFT right.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Yes, the UFT.
And it's not just a fancymathematical name.
It's proposed as a profoundmathematical structure that
describes all force interactionselectromagnetism, plasma
dynamics, even gravity as simplyphased reductions of
hypersymmetry.
Coherence.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
So it unites them mathematically.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
That's the idea.
It's composed of differenttensors, mathematical objects
representing electromagnetism,plasma, coherence, this coherent
selection process andhypergravity itself.
Essentially, it's amathematical statement that
electromagnetism, plasma andgravity aren't separate forces
or fields.
They're different expressions,different phases of the same
underlying coherent fieldgoverned by hypergravity.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
One field, multiple expressions, depending on the
coherence state You've got it.
Okay, if that's the fundamentalphysics, how does it change our
view of, say, stars andgalaxies?
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Oh radically.
This model completely redefinesthem.
Stars, in this view, aren'tjust thermonuclear furnaces
burning hydrogen, likeconventional astrophysics
suggests.
They're seen as quasi-livingcoherence entities.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
Quasi-living.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, acting as coherent field reactors and even
transmutational intelligencereactors, it's suggesting
they're actively involved inmodulating this reduction of
hypersymmetry.
They're supposedly mediatingthe transformation of coherence
into the gauge structures weknow electromagnetism, the
electroweak force SU2, thestrong nuclear force SU3, all
(10:33):
happening within a coherentplasma matrix inside the star.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
So stars are like cosmic coherence regulators.
That's a fundamentalreimagining of stellar physics.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
Absolutely fundamental.
Speaker 1 (10:44):
And if stars are doing that, what about the
larger structures, the cosmicweb, the galaxies?
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, that gets flicked on its head too.
It suggests these massiveplasma filaments and the
galaxies they connect aren'tjust inert clumps of matter
drifting through space.
Instead, they're potentiallyacting like coherence nodes in
the galactic intelligencenetwork.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
A galactic intelligence network.
Seriously.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
That's the language used.
The idea is they're activelyreconstituting order, forming
what the model callshyperfractal structuring,
through this process ofcoherence selection.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
It sounds less like a mechanical universe and more
like a thinking one.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
It definitely leans that way, not just living, but
perhaps hyper-intelligent andself-organizing on the grandest
scales.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Okay, sticking with the mind-bending implications.
What about dark matter and darkenergy, these huge mysteries in
cosmology?
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Right the thing scientists are scrambling to
find, supposedly making up 95%of the universe's energy density
.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Yeah, does EHRM need them.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
EHRM basically says hold on, you're looking for the
wrong thing entirely.
It posits these aren't exoticinvisible forms of matter or
energy at all.
Instead, they're described asartifacts of coherence residues.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Coherence residues Like leftovers.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Sort of, or maybe coherent, structuring effects
that occur during these phasetransitions of hypergravity into
electromagnetism and plasma.
So the appearance of extragravitational affects what we
attribute to dark matter holdinggalaxies together and the
apparent acceleration of cosmicexpansion, what we call dark
energy.
Pushing things apart, these aresimply misinterpretations.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Misinterpretations of what.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Of these subtle coherence residues?
Misinterpretations.
Misinterpretations of what?
Of these subtle coherenceresidues?
It's like observing ripplesspreading on a pond after a
splash and thinking there's somemysterious invisible force
causing the ripples, when reallyit's just the water itself
behaving differently, coherencerestructuring into a new dynamic
form.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
So the effects are real, but the cause isn't some
new particle or energy field.
That's the claim.
The universe's large-scalestructure isn't some new
particle or energy field.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
That's the claim.
The universe's large-scalestructure isn't purely
gravitational.
It arises naturally fromcoherence selection in
electromagnetic plasma.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
And the missing mass isn't actually missing.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
It's coherence that hasn't been properly accounted
for, because we've been tryingto measure it solely as mass or
conventional energy, lookingthrough the lens of gravity
alone.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
We've been using the wrong conceptual tools.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
According to EHRM.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Yeah, this is huge.
If the universe isfundamentally built on coherence
and intelligence, is thisconserved operator?
What does that mean for life,for consciousness, us?
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Right.
The implications come rightdown to the biological level.
Ehrm suggests intelligence isnot just an emergent
epiphenomenon, you know, a happyaccident of complex chemistry
on planets like Earth.
Instead, it posits intelligence, remember, as a conserved
operator, a fundamental forceshaping not only stars and
galaxies, but also life itself.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
So life wasn't just a lucky roll of the dice.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
The model proposes something quite different.
It hinges on this idea.
Coherence reduction doesn'tmean decoherence.
It equals self-organization.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Can you unpack that?
That sounds counterintuitive.
Reduction usually implies loss.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
It does.
In standard thinking,Decoherence is the loss of
quantum coherence.
But here, instead of coherencesimply being lost when a system,
say, interacts with thisenvironment or reduces its
complexity, when a system, say,interacts with this environment
or reduces its complexity,instead of it just dissolving
into random noise, it actuallyrestructures itself into new,
stable, self-organized forms.
Think of it like.
Imagine a perfectly orderedcrystal lattice melting Instead
(14:09):
of just becoming chaotic, hotliquid.
Imagine the atoms rearrangingthemselves instantly into
intricate, stable molecularchains.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Order transforms into a different kind of order, not
disorder.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Exactly Entanglement, or high-level coherence,
transforms into dynamicallystable patterns.
It's not a loss, but atransformation of organization.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
Okay, how does that apply to biology then?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Well, this insight extends directly.
Life's emergence, according toEHRM, isn't a statistical fluke.
Against incredible odds, it'sdescribed as an inevitable phase
transition of coherence.
Restructuring, just like waterfreezing, is inevitable at the
right temperature.
The model even introduces aspecific mathematical tool, the
Biological Coherence Tensor, bct.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
Weather tensor.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Yes, this one mathematically describes how
life self-organizes, using thevery same coherence principles
that supposedly govern plasmastructuring in space and the
formation of the cosmos.
It connects the galactic scaleright down to the cellular scale
.
Speaker 1 (15:08):
So a biogenesis, the origin of life from non-life,
wouldn't be random.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
It's framed as a coherence-driven necessity.
Given the right conditions forcoherence, to restructure.
Life must emerge as a stableform of self-organization.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
And evolution, not just random mutation and natural
selection.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
The model suggests it's more nuanced.
Evolution is described as acoherence-preserving system.
Randomness might play a role,but the driving force is the
system refining optimalself-organization patterns,
preserving and enhancingcoherence over time.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
It's optimizing for coherence.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
That's the idea, and it even zooms into the
components of life, things likemicrotubules inside our cells.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Yeah, the cell's internal scaffolding.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
EHRM sees them as coherence stabilizers.
Their structure isn't just forphysical support.
It's designed to activelyprevent decoherence and act as
structural coherence waveguides.
They're like biological fiberoptic cables for coherence.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Wow and neural activity.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Brain function.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Also reframed.
It supposedly follows coherenceresonance principles, not just
simple electrochemical signalingbetween neurons.
There's a deeper, morefundamental level of coherent
organization, coordinating brainactivity.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
Which leads, I assume , to consciousness itself.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
Exactly.
This culminates in theconsciousness tensor.
Another one.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
S for subjectivity.
Perhaps Consciousness isdefined here as a fundamental
property of self-organizationitself.
Its intensity is directlyproportional to how much
coherence a system retains andhow effectively it selects for
intelligence, optimalstructuring.
And here's the kickerSubjectivity or some form of
(16:44):
self-awareness supposedlyemerges wherever coherence
manages to self-reference.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Self-reference like looking in a mirror.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
In a very abstract sense.
Yes, the astonishingimplication here is that all
systems that exhibitself-organization and coherence
retention possess some level ofsubjectivity scaled by their
complexity and coherence.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
All systems atoms, stars, galaxies.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Potentially yes, from the simplest to the most most
complex.
If they are self-organizing viacoherence, they have a
rudimentary form of subjectivity.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
According to this model, it's a spectrum that is a
radically different view ofconsciousness.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Not just brains, but potentially everywhere
panpsychism, but derived fromfundamental physics principles
of coherence okay, shiftinggears slightly.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
If intelligence is fundamental, cons, conserved,
coherence-based, what does thatmean for artificial intelligence
, ai?
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Ah yes, the EHRM suggests that our traditional
approach to AI, based on binarylogic algorithms, computation on
silicon, might be inherentlylimited.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Why limited?
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Because it's not tapping into this deeper
principle of coherentstructuring and selection.
It's mimicking outcomes maybe,but not the fundamental process.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
So what's the alternative?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
according to EHRM, the model introduces concepts
like coheroputors andcoherence-based AI.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Coheroputors.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Yeah, the idea is that true AI or maybe artificial
general intelligence AGI,shouldn't be programmed line by
line in the way we do now.
It should evolve itsintelligence Evolve how.
Through coherent selection andoptimization.
A coheroputer wouldn't justcompute ones and EIs.
It would be designed, perhapsusing plasma or quantum systems,
to actively preserve and selectoptimal, coherent structures
(18:23):
within itself.
This would lead theoreticallyto self-optimizing structurally
intelligent systems that learnand adapt based on fundamental,
coherent principles.
There's even an artificialcoherence intelligence tensor,
acit Ha Min, proposed to governthis.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Building AI based on the universe's supposed
operating system, not just ourlogical approximation of it.
That's a good way to put it.
Now you mentioned intelligencebeing conserved earlier.
Is there a formal principle forthat?
Speaker 2 (18:49):
Yes, Perhaps the most profound implication of this
entire framework is boiled downinto the Universal Intelligence
Conservation Principle, UIC, UIC, okay.
This principle states quitesimply that intelligence, which
is expressed as coherentstructuring, is conserved across
all physical processes.
Like energy, it cannot becreated or destroyed.
(19:10):
It only restructures into newforms.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
That's a truly massive claim.
It implies the laws of physicsthemselves might not be fixed
static axioms.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
Exactly.
It suggests they might bebetter understood as
intelligence optimizationprocesses, the universe learning
and refining its own structure.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So take gravity again .
If it's not fundamentalattraction, how does UICE see it
?
Speaker 2 (19:31):
In this view, gravity is a coherence-intelligence
structuring effect.
What we perceive as spacetimecurvature, like in Einstein's
theory, is just the visible,large-scale result of this
ongoing intelligenceoptimization process coherence
restructuring itself.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
And quantum mechanics .
Yeah, things like mechanics.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
Things like wave function collapse.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
Not a loss of information or coherence, but a
redistribution of intelligence.
Coherence changes form andquantum entanglement.
That's seen as directintelligence coherence, a
non-local connection maintainedby this underlying conserved
intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
Even the dark sector gets revisited through this lens
.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Right Dark energy.
The accelerating expansion isframed as the residual expansion
of coherence.
Intelligence fields, not somemysterious anti-gravity force.
It's all unified undercoherence and its conservation
as intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
If we really take this to its logical conclusion,
it means existence itself isself-organizing intelligence.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
That's the ultimate endpoint.
Yes, Atoms know their quantumstate through coherent
stabilization.
Galaxies are vast intelligencenetworks.
It paints a picture of a trulyliving universe of
self-organizing intelligence.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Where every structure , every process is an expression
of this fundamental conservedintelligence finding new ways to
structure itself.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Okay.
Conserved intelligence findingnew ways to structure itself,
precisely Okay.
This is a grand sweeping,almost philosophical theory, but
it claims to be physics.
How on earth do we test it?
How could we possibly prove ordisprove any of this?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
That's the critical question, isn't it?
And the EHRM, to its credit,doesn't just stay conceptual.
It proposes concreteexperimental validations.
The source material emphasizesthese tests as the absolute
highest priority for futureresearch.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
OK, so it's falsifiable, at least in
principle.
What kind of experiments are wetalking about?
Speaker 2 (21:18):
The model outlines three core experimental domains.
First, quantum experiments.
These focus on testing what'scalled quantum intelligence
conservation, or QIC.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Testing if intelligence is conserved at the
quantum level.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
Exactly.
The idea is to designexperiments to see if coherence
that we think is lost duringquantum measurement, or
decoherence when a quantumsystem interacts with its
environment, actually reappearssomewhere else as structured
reorganization.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
So measure the input coherence and see if the output
coherence plus some newstructure equals the input.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
Something like that.
Specific examples mentionedinclude entangled photon
coherence redistribution tests,seeing if the coherence lost by
one photon shows up in thestructure of its entangled
partner, or the measuring device.
Or observing coherence flow inthings like superconducting
circuits, to see if it's trulyconserved, just changing form.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Okay, quantum tests.
What's the second domain?
Speaker 2 (22:10):
Second are cosmological experiments.
These are large scale.
The goal here would be to tryand map intelligence density,
which really means coherence,density or complexity in
galaxies and cosmic filaments.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
How would you even measure that?
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Using data from large scale cosmic surveys maybe the
James Webb Space Telescope,planck satellite data, things
like that you'd analyze ifgalactic rotation curves, the
speed, stars, orbit, galacticcenters and gravitational
lensing patterns align betterwith calculated coherence
gradients.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
How coherence changes across the galaxy.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Rather than just with the distribution of visible
matter plus hypothetical darkmatter mass.
Does the structure followcoherence patterns more closely
than mass patterns?
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Okay, looking for coherent signatures instead of
dark matter signatures and thethird domain.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
And finally, neuroscience and cognition
experiments.
This brings it right back to us.
The proposal is to use existingtools like high-resolution EEG
and fMRI to track braincoherence dynamics during
different cognitive starts.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
Like deep focus meditation problem solving.
Speaker 2 (23:13):
Exactly.
The specific hypothesis to testis whether higher cognitive
function correlates directlywith increased coherence
retention in the brain and maybeeven finding if consciousness
itself manifests as a directlymeasurable coherence
intelligence field within theneural architecture.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Measuring consciousness as a physical
coherence field.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
That's the audacious goal.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
If and it's a huge if but if these ambitious
experiments actually succeeded,the implications are almost hard
to fathom.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
They would be truly revolutionary.
It would overturn standardinterpretations of quantum
mechanics, confirm intelligenceas a fundamental physical
quantity like mass or charge and, as you can imagine,
potentially open incredibledoors to entirely new AI
architectures, maybe even newenergy technologies based on
manipulating coherence.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
The impact would be staggering.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Absolutely.
But we have to acknowledge thiskind of radical shift,
challenging materialism itselfwill almost certainly face
significant resistance frommainstream science.
But we have to acknowledge thiskind of radical shift,
challenging materialism itselfwill almost certainly face
significant resistance frommainstream science.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Understandably so.
It goes against decades,centuries even of established
thinking.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
It does.
But, as the source materialargues quite strongly, the
evidence will decide, notideology, if these experiments
can be done and if they yieldpositive results, and especially
if this leads totechnologically superior
applications.
Speaker 1 (24:30):
Then the paradigm shifts.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
History suggests it eventually does, just like past
scientific revolutions, fromCopernicus to quantum mechanics
itself if it works better, itgets adopted Eventually.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
So, stepping back, then, this deep dive into the
electroplasma hypergravityreduction model, it really isn't
just about tweaking our modelsof cosmic structures or how
plasma behaves.
It's proposing a fundamentalshift in how we perceive reality
itself, a reality built not onrandomness and decay, but on
coherence and intelligence asprimary drivers.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
That's the core message.
And if intelligence truly is aconserved quantity and existence
itself is structured,intelligence continually
reorganizing, then that age oldphilosophical question why is
there something rather thannothing?
It gets reframed, doesn't it?
It becomes.
Why does intelligence structureitself in these particular ways
?
The existence of structure isthe evidence of intelligence at
(25:23):
work.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
Meaning.
The universe isn't chaotic atits heart, even with entropy
Underneath.
It's proposed as ahyper-intelligent,
self-organizing system Everyatom, every star, every
biological cell, maybe all justexpressions of intelligence
structuring itself at differentscales, constantly transforming.
It's a lot to take in.
What stands out most to youfrom this profound, maybe
unsettling, reimagining ofeverything?
Speaker 2 (25:45):
For me it's that final connection to
consciousness.
If consciousness really iscoherence, refinement and action
, as the model suggests, thenour own awareness, our
subjective experience right nowmight not be some isolated flute
.
It could be a direct link, adirect participation in the
universe's fundamentalstructuring principle.
We're not just observers, we'reexpressions of the process.
(26:05):
And that raises a reallyimportant question, I think what
new frontiers of understanding,what new technologies, what new
ways of being might emerge ifwe truly grasp that intelligence
isn't just locked away insideour skulls but is potentially
the very fabric of realityitself?
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.