What Came Before Physics? The Birth of Everything

Send us a text

What existed before the Big Bang? What came before the laws of physics themselves? These profound questions have challenged humanity's greatest minds for centuries. 

Today we take a fascinating journey into a revolutionary new scientific framework called "The Principle of Least Genesis" (PLG), proposed in a groundbreaking July 2025 paper by Philip Lilien. Unlike traditional physics that begins with space, time, and physical laws already in place, PLG explores how reality itself emerges from what the paper terms "coherent singularity."

We unpack the paper's central premise: that reality arises through the path of minimal ontological cost and maximal coherence emergence. The concept introduces a mind-bending "seed equation" (0^∞^0=1) that symbolizes how unity—the first "something"—can emerge from the paradoxical tension between absolute nothingness and infinite potential.

At the heart of this framework is a unified mathematical structure called the "coherence functional" that combines both the creation of reality and its subsequent evolution into a single principle. We explore how this creates a hierarchical structure where the Principle of Least Genesis sits above familiar concepts like the Principle of Least Action and maximum entropy.

The implications are profound. Spacetime becomes not a fundamental backdrop but a coherence projection. Physical laws aren't externally imposed but emerge naturally as projected constraints. Everything we observe—particles, forces, fields—represents patterns within a primary genesis field of coherence. This perspective offers intriguing answers to those ultimate "why" questions that have haunted philosophers and physicists alike.

Whether you're a science enthusiast, a philosophical thinker, or simply curious about existence itself, this deep dive will challenge your conception of reality and leave you contemplating the fascinating possibility that coherence isn't just a property found in the universe—coherence is the universe.

Central to PLG is the Seed Equation (0∞)zeroth power=1, which represents "generative unity from paradox." This principle integrates "Coherence Physics"—where reality emerges from "gradients and bifurcation

Support the show

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.

...

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Have you ever, you know, just stopped and wondered
not just how the universe works,but really, why is there
anything here at all?

Speaker 2 (00:07):
It's the ultimate question, isn't it?

Speaker 1 (00:09):
Absolutely Like what came before the Big Bang or even
before the laws of physics, thereally basic rules.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
Yeah, where did those come from?

Speaker 1 (00:16):
Exactly so today we're putting on our
investigator hats.
Maybe we're diving into areally radical new paper that
tackles these huge questions.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Sounds fascinating.

Speaker 1 (00:29):
Welcome to the Deep Dive.
We're looking at the Principleof Least Genesis, a pre-dynamic
foundation for physical law byPhilip Lillian.
It just came out, july 2025.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
A very fresh perspective, then.

Speaker 1 (00:41):
Very fresh.
And look, this isn't just abouthow stuff moves around in the
universe, it's about how theuniverse itself emerges from
well, from something incrediblyfundamental.

Speaker 2 (00:50):
From potentially nothingness, or at least
pre-physical potential.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
Right.
The paper proposes this newkind of meta-principle,
something even deeper than theprinciple of least action, which
is already pretty fundamentalin physics.

Speaker 2 (01:02):
That's a big claim.
Least action is a cornerstone.

Speaker 1 (01:10):
It is so our goal today is to give you, our
listeners, a clear path intounderstanding this potentially
groundbreaking idea, hopefullyspark a few aha moments about,
you know, existence itself.

Speaker 2 (01:18):
Let's dive in.

Speaker 1 (01:19):
Okay, so let's start with that familiar ground the
principle of least action, orPLA.
If you've dabbled in physics,you've probably heard of it.
It's super elegant, verypowerful.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
It really is.
It basically says that systemsfollow the path that minimizes
or extremizes something calledthe action.
It tells us how things move,how they evolve over time.

Speaker 1 (01:41):
Like a planet orbiting a star or light bending
around gravity.
It works beautifully fordescribing those paths.

Speaker 2 (01:46):
It does.
But here's the crucial thingthe new paper points out what
does the principle of leastaction already assume?

Speaker 1 (01:53):
Hmm, okay, what does it assume?

Speaker 2 (01:55):
Well, it assumes you already have space, you already
have time, you have a system,particles, fields, whatever with
defined properties, and youhave laws, like the rules
captured in the Lagrangianfunction, that tell the system
how to behave.

Speaker 1 (02:08):
Right, it needs a stage and actors already in
place before it can direct theplay.

Speaker 2 (02:12):
Exactly.
It governs the evolution ofthings that exist, not the
emergence of those things in thefirst place.

Speaker 1 (02:18):
And that is precisely where this new paper jumps in,
asking that deeper question whatprinciple governs the actual
origin of the system?
What determined the stage andthe actors before the play
started?

Speaker 2 (02:29):
It's like asking you know if least action is the
recipe for baking the cake.
What's the principle thatdecided there should be flour,
eggs and sugar at all?

Speaker 1 (02:37):
That's a great analogy.
So how does the paper answerthat?
This is where the principle ofleast genesis comes in.

Speaker 2 (02:42):
Precisely the principle of least genesis, or
PLG.
Lillian proposes this governsthe emergence of being from
non-being, or, as the paper putsit, the birthing of phase space
itself from coherentsingularity.

Speaker 1 (02:56):
Okay, coherent singularity, birthing of phase
space.
Let's unpack that a bit.

Speaker 2 (03:00):
The core idea is that reality arises through the path
of minimal ontological cost andmaximal coherence emergence.

Speaker 1 (03:07):
Minimal ontological cost.
What does that mean in simplerterms?
Is it like the universe beinglazy, taking the easiest path to
just exist?

Speaker 2 (03:15):
Huh, you could sort of think of it that way.
Yeah, like water naturallyflows downhill following the
path of least resistance, thepath of minimum potential energy
.
Downhill following the path ofleast resistance, the path of
minimum potential energy, thePLG suggests, existence itself
flows into being by minimizingsomething called coherence
potential.

Speaker 1 (03:31):
Coherence potential, so maximizing coherence is key.

Speaker 2 (03:34):
Exactly.
Coherence here means roughlyorder, unity, internal
consistency, resonant harmony.
Reality emerges in the mostefficient way possible,
achieving the highest degree ofinternal coherence as it
differentiates itself from thisstate of pure, undifferentiated
potential.

Speaker 1 (03:51):
So it's a shift from just describing motion within
reality to describing thecreation or ontology of reality
itself.

Speaker 2 (03:58):
It's a fundamental shift, yes, from kinematics to
ontology.

Speaker 1 (04:01):
Now the paper introduces something that looks
well, frankly, bizarre at firstglance An equation it calls the
seed equation.
Zero times infinity, raised tothe power of zero equals one.
I mean, mathematically that'sundefined, right?
Well, at least highlyproblematic.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
It certainly looks that way using standard
arithmetic rules.
But the paper argues this isn'tjust playing with symbols.
It represents a fundamentalparadox-resolving act, a
paradox-resol resolving act, aparadox.

Speaker 1 (04:25):
Resolving act, how so ?

Speaker 2 (04:27):
Think of zero as representing absolute
nothingness, the void andinfinity as representing
unbounded potential, maybe eveneverything possible.
These are fundamental opposites.
The zeroth power, zero, actslike a kind of unifying or
binding operation that resolvesthe tension between them,
resulting in unity.
The number one, the firstsomething.

Speaker 1 (04:48):
So it's claiming.
This mathematical paradoxactually describes the birth of
unity from the tension betweennothing and everything.

Speaker 2 (04:54):
That's the core idea presented.
It's positioned as afundamental operator in what the
paper terms ontologicalmathematics.
It's not just a number game.
It's meant to represent agenerative act of being.

Speaker 1 (05:05):
Okay, and this ties into a broader idea called
coherence physics.

Speaker 2 (05:09):
Yes, in coherence.
Physics, reality isn't seen asbeing built from fundamental
forces acting on particles in apre-existing space.
Instead, everything space, time, particles, forces emerges from
gradients and changes orbifurcations in an underlying
field of coherence.

Speaker 1 (05:26):
Like ripples appearing on a perfectly still
pond.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
That's a good way to visualize it.
Before anything emerges,there's a state the paper calls
hypercoherence.
Imagine that perfectly smooth,absolutely still pond, maximum
symmetry, no features, just purepotential.
That's the starting point.

Speaker 1 (05:43):
Okay, I'm trying to follow.
But how do we get from thesesort of philosophical concepts
coherence, a paradoxical seedequation, to actual physics, to
math?
We can calculate.

Speaker 2 (05:53):
Right, that's the crucial step.
The paper introduces a newmathematical structure.
It's called the coherencefunctional, usually written as c
.
Okay, and here's the reallyelegant part.
It's defined as c is wheels aplus ld whoa, okay, so I
recognize the second part.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
Hell, ldt, that's the action from the principle of
least action, right?

Speaker 2 (06:11):
exactly that represents the evolution within
being, the dynamics we alreadystudy.
The new piece is A omega.
This omega term represents theorigin of being.
It's the pre-dynamic generativestructure that actually brings
reality, the phase space, intoexistence.

Speaker 1 (06:27):
So C combines both the creation part A and the
moving around part into onesingle thing.

Speaker 2 (06:32):
That's the unification proposed.
A itself is derived from thatseed equation.
We talked about 0, 0, 1, andother related coherence
constants.

Speaker 1 (06:40):
Coherence constants like fundamental numbers related
to emergence.

Speaker 2 (06:44):
Kind of.
The paper mentions things like0, 0, 1, which here symbolizes
that self-emergence from nothing, and 0, 1, 0 factorial equals 1
, representing the concept offorming something, a first
countable unit, without anyprior action or movement, and
something called C, the infinitecoherence, constant,
representing that boundlessgenerative potential we started
from.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
Okay, so A bundles up all these origin concepts and
the action term handles thedynamics once things exist.

Speaker 2 (07:09):
Correct and the absolute core of the framework
is the unified variationalprinciple, dias.
Minimizing or extremizing thisentire coherence?
Functional C.

Speaker 1 (07:20):
So D-Zero.
That single equation isproposed to govern both the
birth of reality and itssubsequent evolution.

Speaker 2 (07:26):
That's the claim.
It's a principle that governsboth ontology and dynamics
together.

Speaker 1 (07:29):
That's huge.
How does that structure work?
Is there a sequence?

Speaker 2 (07:33):
The paper lays out what it calls an ontological
dependency chain.
Think of it like dominoesfalling each step enabling the
next.

Speaker 1 (07:40):
Okay, walk me through it.

Speaker 2 (07:41):
It starts with the seed equation.
This act of resolving paradoxcreates fundamental unity.
This unity then informs thestructure of the origin
functional dia, which encodeshow coherence generates reality.

Speaker 1 (07:53):
Got it.
Seed leaves to omega.

Speaker 2 (07:55):
Then from LS, phase-space emergence happens.
This is where the dimensions,the fields, the basic variables
of our reality are defined.
The stage is built.

Speaker 1 (08:04):
Okay, so space and dimensions come from omega.

Speaker 2 (08:07):
Yes, and only after the phase-space exists can you
define the Lagrangian L, whichcontains the rules of
interaction and motion withinthat space.

Speaker 1 (08:15):
Ah, so the laws come later too.

Speaker 2 (08:16):
Exactly.
Once you have L, you canformulate the action, functional
S, evil, ldt, which governs howsystems evolve over time along
their paths, and minimizing Sgives you the Euler-Lagrange
equations, the specificequations of motion.

Speaker 1 (08:31):
So the crucial point is that motion dynamics, the
stuff PLA deals with, can onlyeven be defined after this prior
process of coherence.
Emergence, phi omega hashappened.

Speaker 2 (08:41):
That's the essential idea.
It completely flips the usualperspective where we assume
space and laws exist first.
Here they are emergentproperties.

Speaker 1 (08:50):
Now, physics loves its extremal principles, right
Least action we've talked about.
There's also maximum entropyand thermodynamics, minimal
surfaces and geometry.
How does this principle ofleast genesis fit in with those?
Does it replace them?

Speaker 2 (09:02):
That's a really important question.
The paper doesn't aim toreplace them, but rather to
place them within a hierarchy itproposes the principle of least
genesis sits at the very top.

Speaker 1 (09:10):
Okay, so level one.

Speaker 2 (09:20):
Level one, the principle of least genesis D.
Its job is ontologicalemergence.
It's the most fundamentalselector.
It determines which realityemerges, the dimensionality, the
fundamental laws, the structureof phase space.
It's the meta selector of being.

Speaker 1 (09:27):
Wow, okay, what's level two then?

Speaker 2 (09:29):
Level two is our familiar principle of least
action, d zero.
Its domain is physical dynamics.
It governs how things movewithin the phase space that PLG
selected.
It presupposes the existence ofspace, time and laws that came
from level one.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
Makes sense.
It takes the output of levelone and runs with it and level
three.

Speaker 2 (09:48):
Level three is where you'd place something like the
principle of maximum entropy,centropy extremum.
Its domain is thermodynamics.
It governs statisticaldistributions of states within a
system that's already evolvingaccording to level two dynamics
in a space defined by level one.
It's secondary, only becomingrelevant once you have dynamics
and a space to work with.

Speaker 1 (10:05):
So it's a nested structure.
Least genesis picks theuniverse, least action runs the
simulation within it, andmaximum entropy describes the
statistical crans of thatsimulation.

Speaker 2 (10:15):
That's a pretty good summary.
Yes, the key concept ismeta-extremization Least action
finds the optimal path throughspace, but least genesis finds
the optimal structure of spaceitself to emerge.

Speaker 1 (10:26):
That is genuinely mind-bending.
I can imagine some physicistsraising an eyebrow at redefining
things so fundamentally.

Speaker 2 (10:32):
Oh, absolutely.
I can imagine some physicistsraising an eyebrow at redefining
things so fundamentally.
Oh, absolutely.
Any theory proposing such adeep shift would and should face
intense scrutiny, but the paperattempts to ground it in a
mathematical framework, which isessential.

Speaker 1 (10:44):
What are some of the biggest implications if this
framework holds water?
You mentioned emergentspacetime.

Speaker 2 (10:49):
Right.
Spacetime isn't the fundamentalbackdrop anymore.
It's a coherence projectionfrom that deeper reality
described by A the Lagrangian.
The rulebook for dynamics onlygets written after this
projection happens.

Speaker 1 (11:02):
And fields like electromagnetic fields,
gravitational fields.

Speaker 2 (11:05):
Those are described as bifurcations like branches or
splits within a primary genesisfield, which the paper calls
phi.
Everything we see emerges fromthe behavior of this underlying
coherence field.

Speaker 1 (11:16):
So it's like everything, particles, forces,
space are just different kindsof ripples or patterns in this
one deep, generative ocean ofcoherence.

Speaker 2 (11:25):
That's the picture it paints, and it aims for a
massive unification, bridgingdomains we usually keep separate
.

Speaker 1 (11:31):
I hope so.

Speaker 2 (11:32):
Well, physics becomes the study of coherence dynamics
, not just forces.
Metaphysics, the philosophicalstudy of being, potentially gets
a formal mathematical groundingin make, and even pure
mathematics might be seen asreflecting the resonant
structures of coherence itself.

Speaker 1 (11:47):
A unification of physics, metaphysics and maybe
even mathematics.
That's incredibly ambitious, itis.
So does this framework offeranswers to those ultimate why?
Questions Like why is theresomething rather than nothing?

Speaker 2 (12:01):
It attempts to.
For why something rather thannothing?
The answer points back to thatseed equation.
The idea is that the resolutionof this fundamental paradox
necessitates the emergence ofunity of something.
Existence becomes anunavoidable outcome of resolving
the tension between nullity andinfinity.

Speaker 1 (12:17):
Okay, and what about?
Why these laws of physics?
Why the specific rules weobserve?

Speaker 2 (12:23):
The framework suggests they aren't arbitrary
or externally imposed.
They are projected constraintsthat arise naturally from the
structure of the origin,functional A.
They are consequences of howcoherence had to manifest to
become reality, selected by day.

Speaker 1 (12:38):
So the laws are baked in by the process of emergence
itself.
What about time?
What is time in this picture?

Speaker 2 (12:45):
Time is described not as a fundamental dimension we
move through, but as amodulation of coherence
reduction, perhaps like therhythm or rate at which the
universe unfolds ordifferentiates from that initial
hypercoherent state.

Speaker 1 (12:58):
And basic properties like mass or spin or electric
charge.

Speaker 2 (13:01):
Those are interpreted as phase curvatures and
quantized defects withincoherence tensors.

Speaker 1 (13:06):
Okay, let's break that down.
Coherence tensors likemathematical objects describing
the coherence field.

Speaker 2 (13:11):
Right and phase curvatures might be like little
warps or twists in that field'sphase, giving rise to properties
like mass Quantized defectscould be like tiny, stable
imperfections or knots in thecoherence field, manifesting as
fundamental charges or spin.

Speaker 1 (13:25):
So particles and their properties are just
specific stable patterns orglitches in the coherence field.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
That's the interpretation offered.
Yes, it reinforces the ideathat everything, including the
laws and constants of nature, isemergent.

Speaker 1 (13:38):
And the fundamental constants like the speed of
light c, Planck's constant shurl, the gravitational constant g.

Speaker 2 (13:44):
Those are seen as eigenvalues of coherence
quantization.
Basically, they are thespecific allowed values that pop
out when the fundamentalcoherence quantizes, when it
settles into stable forms.
They're inherent parameters ofthe emergent structure.

Speaker 1 (13:59):
So this really redefines the whole quest for a
theory of everything.
It's not just about unifyingforces anymore.

Speaker 2 (14:05):
Not primarily.
No, the goal shifts.
It's less about reducing allknown forces to one superforce
and more about revealing thegenerative origin of force and
interaction itself.

Speaker 1 (14:14):
Finding the source code, not just simplifying the
existing code.

Speaker 2 (14:17):
Exactly All physical properties space, time, mass,
particles, forces are describedin terms of coherence as
projections, directions,curvatures, vortices deviations
within that fundamentalcoherence field, leading to that
bold statement you mentionedearlier.
Yes, coherence is not aproperty of the universe, it is
the universe.
It suggests coherence isn'tjust in things, it is the

(14:40):
fundamental substance or processfrom which things arise.

Speaker 1 (14:44):
Wow, Okay.
So wrapping this up, theprinciple of least genesis is a
truly profound rethink.
It's not just about how thingsmove, but why there's anything
here to move at all.
It starts before existence,defining the rules for reality
itself to emerge, unlikestandard physics, which usually
starts the clock after existenceis assumed.

Speaker 2 (15:04):
That's the core shift .
It's asking the pre-dynamicquestion.

Speaker 1 (15:07):
It is a lot to process.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
It definitely is, and it leaves you thinking.
If laws themselves are emergentproducts of this coherence
process, what does it reallymean for our search for ultimate
unchanging truth?
Really mean for our search forultimate unchanging truth?
Could it be that the deepestanswers lie not just in physics
but at the intersection ofontology, physics and maybe even
consciousness, all unifiedthrough coherence?

Speaker 1 (15:29):
That's a powerful thought to end on.
It certainly gives you, ourlisteners, plenty to chew on.

Speaker 2 (15:33):
A lot to contemplate.

Speaker 1 (15:34):
Indeed, we really encourage you to sit with these
ideas, mull over this principleof becoming, maybe even revisit
parts of our chat today.
Thank you for joining us on theDeep Dive.