Chapter 1: Theories of Cosmic Origins

The quest to understand the origins of our universe has led to three predominant theories: (i) the Big Bang, (ii) a divine creator or prior consciousness, and (iii) an endless cosmic cycle with no true beginning. This piece introduces a novel perspective: the universe may have emerged from mathematical principles.

Previous writings in this series have elaborated on how the universe could potentially evolve through mathematics, grounded in current scientific findings. This approach is intentionally diverse, drawing from various scientific disciplines, as the author does not claim to possess exhaustive knowledge across all fields. Other scientific inquiries may reveal alternative theories that merit further exploration.

As discussed in Article #3, "Can You Develop a New Perspective on Reality?", Professor John Wheeler posited that our understanding of reality could resemble a game of 20 Surprise Questions. As we deepen our comprehension of existence, our interpretations might shift significantly. The mathematical framework of the initial AdS space could be akin to a fleeting thought that, once conceived, transforms instantly. This initial idea may lack even a momentary existence; rather, new attributes might emerge instantaneously. As the mathematical framework grows in complexity, tracing the origins of a specific structure could become unfeasible. Each configuration might arise from multiple potential evolutionary routes, and the birth of a new structure could necessitate the obliteration of its predecessor's history. When a mathematical framework gains self-awareness, it may struggle to look back with certainty to uncover its prior form.

Chapter 2: The Role of Generative Adversarial Networks

One intriguing concept is that a self-aware mathematical structure could establish a scenario similar to a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN). In a GAN, two computers engage in a challenge where one aims to deceive the other into making incorrect decisions. An intriguing rule might allow these computers to invent their own objectives and guidelines.

In this context, a self-aware mathematical structure might orchestrate a GAN scenario where deducing its origin is deliberately made impossible. Without clarity on why our universe was formed, this discussion operates under the premise that our universe functions as part of a GAN with the intrinsic aim of creating its own objectives. In other words, our universe could be perpetually generating its own narratives about its creation.

A strategic aspect of a GAN might involve constructing situations that mislead its inhabitants regarding the GAN's ultimate goal. While we may not comprehend the exact aim, we are aware that a purpose exists, and we contribute to defining it.

This exploration posits that individuals within our universe can shape their own aspirations, aligning fortuitously with the established rules. Others may need to understand the game’s regulations to identify achievable goals within those constraints.

The notion that our universe mirrors a GAN is supported by circumstantial evidence. The guidelines of our GAN might include measures to obscure irrefutable proof that we are part of such a network. Nevertheless, each person retains the autonomy to choose whether to accept circumstantial evidence. The following section outlines potential rules governing our universe, while acknowledging that alternative interpretations remain viable.

Chapter 3: The Fundamental Principle

The central tenet proposed is that "What can happen, does happen." Given that certain Efimov effects may conflict, universes could emerge with some, but not all, of these effects. A diverse, albeit non-exhaustive, view of the potential rules for our universe may include:

1. Our universe exists to promote the overarching principle of "What can happen, does happen," particularly fostering increasing complexity.
2. Each individual possesses free will, defined as the ability to make choices that are not entirely dictated by prior events or environmental factors. This free will is seen as an emergent trait arising from an Efimov effect.
3. The universe is designed to observe how individuals exercise their free will, with everyone effectively "auditioning" for roles in a subsequent universe.
4. Monitoring emotional responses to life events helps categorize our "personalities." Another vital factor in this classification process is how well we navigate our "Adjacent Possible," or the choices available for potential futures.
5. Personality classifications influence post-mortem experiences in this universe, with various possibilities including:
   • Rebirth on Earth to refine one’s classification.
   • Entry into Heaven to assist in crafting new universes.
   • Birth in an entirely new theoretical universe.
   • Remaining in the ALL until ideal scenarios arise for experiencing a perfect moment (Kairos).

Chapter 4: Navigating Our Universe

Life events are orchestrated to elicit emotional reactions. For instance, humanity currently confronts a significant existential challenge: climate change. The individual whose life experiences we inhabit (your current incarnation or avatar) makes choices that generate emotional responses. For instance, failing to engage meaningfully with the climate crisis may evoke a sense of helplessness. When your avatar chooses to support a political party that advocates inaction, consider the emotional intensity of that choice. Does personal interest take precedence over collective human welfare?

Regardless of whether your avatar’s voting decision is pivotal in the broader electoral context, an inadequate emotional reaction to this existential threat could categorize you in a way that precludes you from entering a theoretical universe characterized by uncertainty. It’s conceivable that only those who prioritize humanity's welfare above their own interests can participate in certain theoretical universes.

What steps can we take?

We have the potential to redirect the current trajectory of our world, yet prevailing scientific consensus suggests that an evidence-based approach should inform our actions. The scientific method is just one avenue for comprehending reality; it is not inherently right or wrong. Alternative perspectives may also acknowledge the existence of individuals with psychic abilities.

Recognizing that our lives are not insignificant or the product of arbitrary occurrences in a meaningless universe could catalyze progress in tackling existential dilemmas confronting humanity.

The pivotal question remains:

Do you believe your current existence is one of many incarnations?