Ostronomos
Well-Known Member
Does anyone besides Christopher Langan understand the CTMU?
My verdict on the CTMU:
9/10
When you start reading the CTMU, then note: it is a TOE--which means that Langan must answer how nothingness birthed our universe, etc.. So you should read it simply because of this interesting sweetener.
I would give it a 10/10 if not for the advanced language that makes it inaccessible.
The CTMU is the greatest piece I have ever read. I rank it above the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus in terms of importance.
When the world understands the CTMU, it will be greatly enriched. This is the knowledge of the gods.
I believe the CTMU to be convergent so that all species out there will discover it.
Christopher Langan will forever be one of my greatest heroes.
I have read the CTMU two times now, and here is a short summary (beware that I might have misconstrued the work totally!): The universe contracts (in) as much as it expands (out), meaning the universe is like a car simulator where it is the road that moves. That is, the universe is a clever illusion and, behind it all, all are connected thus the in-phase’s finish point is the out-phase’s start point. Imagine it, all particles, atoms, etc., connect to a core, which essentially means the universe is talking to itself, communicating (all is a language/Logos); in other words, reality is a big brain. It from bit.
Look at it this way, say that the first building block is a Russian doll. All that ever evolves or unfolds from that point, is another “smaller” Russian doll(s). If the doll was not that of a mind or proto-mind, then minds could never have evolved because the first Russian doll only ever produces more of itself. Thus, you can deduce that, since we have minds, then the universe must be a mind. You see?
God, on this picture, is not the universe therefore the universe we observe is the out-phase. God is the out-phase and the in-phase, meaning, God must dwell in some sort of timelessness which is the core of our reality, the core from which all things sprang.
Imagine a realm of infinite possibility--this realm by definition is boundless. The tetrahedron is both. It is boundless and it has boundaries. This is the law from no-law. Say that the boundless is a piece of white paper. Now, in order to actualize this boundless potential, you have to limit it, meaning, the infinite has to become finite. How do you do that? You draw a circle because you have to separate yourself from the infinite--you essentially wall yourself off. This would be one philosophical reason why everything is made up of strings (as in String Theory). However, now you are stuck repeating the same pattern if you want to continue, which means everything is essentially like our Russian doll (above). Note: This would--logically--create a Flower of Life (google flower of life by Leonardo da Vinci). Continue, and you would arrive at Metatron’s Cube/the Platonic Solids that make up the universe. Note: Take a soap bubble, for example. You never see half a soap bubble because then it would just die and go back to the infinite potential, as it were. You can be half if you lash onto something else, but then you are in some sense whole. Only wholeness is allowed, which is why I believe the torus to be the fundamental building block of reality and why matter comes in discrete units. A soap bubble floating in the air, is a deep picture of reality. Moreover, the tetrahedron is truly the fundamental building block of our universe, which must mean that Buckminster Fuller’s cuboctahedron is the complete picture of reality.
What evidence is there for a realm of unbound potential? A: Space-time itself. Relativity means, if you are big, then someone else must be small. If that applies to space-time, then you need another space-time to create a template for comparison, and then you need another template in order to compare it, and another template and so on ad infinitum. This means that space-time is absolute (not relative). If you are absolute, then you are by definition alone. If you are alone, then you have no one to compare yourself with, which means there is no way of knowing if you are big, small, or what; which means you have no boundary. Space-time is everywhere and nowhere, which is the expansion/contraction phenomenon. The relative = the things that arise in space-time, like particles and such. Thus, the absolute and the relative live side by side.
How did the infinite decide to become finite? How did the nothingness or UBT become something? A: I believe that the nature of the tetrahedron answers it. The tetrahedron is both unbound and bound. It is like asking, “How did life go from water (nothingness) to land (“somethingness”)?” Well, obviously, there was a creature that could both breathe underwater and breathe on land--or, something like that. That is, the boundary of a boundary is zero. Meaning, the unbound dwells in that which is bound and vice versa.
“The boundary of a boundary is zero: In essence, this intuitive notion from algebraic topology says that closed structures embody a certain kind of “self-cancellative” symmetry. This can be illustrated in three dimensions by a tetrahedron, the simplicial “boundary” of which incorporates its four equilateral triangular faces. To find the boundary of this boundary, one would measure the clockwise- or counterclockwise-oriented edges around each face, thus measuring each edge of the tetrahedron twice in opposite directions. Because summing the measurements now cancels to 0 at each edge, the boundary of the boundary of the tetrahedron is zero. This property turns out to have extensive applications in physics, particularly the theory of fields, as regards the mutual “grip” of matter on space and space on matter (or less colorfully, the relationship of space and matter). In Wheeler’s view, its ubiquity “inspires hope that we will someday complete the mathematics of physics and derive everything from nothing, all law from no law.” 19 Thus, it is closely related to law without law and so-called ex nihilo creation.”--CTMU (http://main.megafoundation.org/Langan_CTMU_092902.pdf)
The beauty of God/all is one mind is that we do not need the thing-in-itself of Kant. Plus, all (including your dog), will make it to heaven/paradise/Nirvana because God is the only thing that exists because there is only one core that all connect to. True oneness means we are immortal.
The beauty of the “contracts as much as it expands,” is that it explains what lies beyond the borders of space-time or behind the great “wall” in space. Some say the universe goes on forever or some say that you will see the back of your head. Both are absurd! Absurdity is the Main Course if you believe the universe to be real. Just stand in front of a mirror and muse: Is the mirror world the wrong world? The only real explanation is that 3D/the universe is some kind of illusion, which means that the great wall is an illusion also.
The cool thing: There might be an afterlife because your human brain is not your real brain if reality itself is a brain. Your real consciousness might be connected to the greater picture, so to speak. Which means: behave. You do not want to screw with the jungle if it is alive. The ones who take Ayahuasca say something similar.
I personally believe this to be the case. And the reason why I interpret the CTMU in the way that I do is because I have had similar ideas reading the philosophy of Edgar Allan Poe, David Bohm, Buckminster Fuller and Nassim Haramein (and many others). It seems that many people have had some insight into God’s mind.
Langan is God’s latest spawn, I guess.
This is perhaps a crude interpretation of the CTMU. And I wonder what Langan himself would say? But I will never know because I can never get him to speak.
CTMU: The CAT that MEW
By Thor Fabian Pettersen (2018)
Why do so many people believe Chris Langan is super-intelligent when it is obvious to any actually intelligent person that he is putting up a facade? - Quora
My verdict on the CTMU:
9/10
When you start reading the CTMU, then note: it is a TOE--which means that Langan must answer how nothingness birthed our universe, etc.. So you should read it simply because of this interesting sweetener.
I would give it a 10/10 if not for the advanced language that makes it inaccessible.
The CTMU is the greatest piece I have ever read. I rank it above the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus in terms of importance.
When the world understands the CTMU, it will be greatly enriched. This is the knowledge of the gods.
I believe the CTMU to be convergent so that all species out there will discover it.
Christopher Langan will forever be one of my greatest heroes.
I have read the CTMU two times now, and here is a short summary (beware that I might have misconstrued the work totally!): The universe contracts (in) as much as it expands (out), meaning the universe is like a car simulator where it is the road that moves. That is, the universe is a clever illusion and, behind it all, all are connected thus the in-phase’s finish point is the out-phase’s start point. Imagine it, all particles, atoms, etc., connect to a core, which essentially means the universe is talking to itself, communicating (all is a language/Logos); in other words, reality is a big brain. It from bit.
Look at it this way, say that the first building block is a Russian doll. All that ever evolves or unfolds from that point, is another “smaller” Russian doll(s). If the doll was not that of a mind or proto-mind, then minds could never have evolved because the first Russian doll only ever produces more of itself. Thus, you can deduce that, since we have minds, then the universe must be a mind. You see?
God, on this picture, is not the universe therefore the universe we observe is the out-phase. God is the out-phase and the in-phase, meaning, God must dwell in some sort of timelessness which is the core of our reality, the core from which all things sprang.
Imagine a realm of infinite possibility--this realm by definition is boundless. The tetrahedron is both. It is boundless and it has boundaries. This is the law from no-law. Say that the boundless is a piece of white paper. Now, in order to actualize this boundless potential, you have to limit it, meaning, the infinite has to become finite. How do you do that? You draw a circle because you have to separate yourself from the infinite--you essentially wall yourself off. This would be one philosophical reason why everything is made up of strings (as in String Theory). However, now you are stuck repeating the same pattern if you want to continue, which means everything is essentially like our Russian doll (above). Note: This would--logically--create a Flower of Life (google flower of life by Leonardo da Vinci). Continue, and you would arrive at Metatron’s Cube/the Platonic Solids that make up the universe. Note: Take a soap bubble, for example. You never see half a soap bubble because then it would just die and go back to the infinite potential, as it were. You can be half if you lash onto something else, but then you are in some sense whole. Only wholeness is allowed, which is why I believe the torus to be the fundamental building block of reality and why matter comes in discrete units. A soap bubble floating in the air, is a deep picture of reality. Moreover, the tetrahedron is truly the fundamental building block of our universe, which must mean that Buckminster Fuller’s cuboctahedron is the complete picture of reality.
What evidence is there for a realm of unbound potential? A: Space-time itself. Relativity means, if you are big, then someone else must be small. If that applies to space-time, then you need another space-time to create a template for comparison, and then you need another template in order to compare it, and another template and so on ad infinitum. This means that space-time is absolute (not relative). If you are absolute, then you are by definition alone. If you are alone, then you have no one to compare yourself with, which means there is no way of knowing if you are big, small, or what; which means you have no boundary. Space-time is everywhere and nowhere, which is the expansion/contraction phenomenon. The relative = the things that arise in space-time, like particles and such. Thus, the absolute and the relative live side by side.
How did the infinite decide to become finite? How did the nothingness or UBT become something? A: I believe that the nature of the tetrahedron answers it. The tetrahedron is both unbound and bound. It is like asking, “How did life go from water (nothingness) to land (“somethingness”)?” Well, obviously, there was a creature that could both breathe underwater and breathe on land--or, something like that. That is, the boundary of a boundary is zero. Meaning, the unbound dwells in that which is bound and vice versa.
“The boundary of a boundary is zero: In essence, this intuitive notion from algebraic topology says that closed structures embody a certain kind of “self-cancellative” symmetry. This can be illustrated in three dimensions by a tetrahedron, the simplicial “boundary” of which incorporates its four equilateral triangular faces. To find the boundary of this boundary, one would measure the clockwise- or counterclockwise-oriented edges around each face, thus measuring each edge of the tetrahedron twice in opposite directions. Because summing the measurements now cancels to 0 at each edge, the boundary of the boundary of the tetrahedron is zero. This property turns out to have extensive applications in physics, particularly the theory of fields, as regards the mutual “grip” of matter on space and space on matter (or less colorfully, the relationship of space and matter). In Wheeler’s view, its ubiquity “inspires hope that we will someday complete the mathematics of physics and derive everything from nothing, all law from no law.” 19 Thus, it is closely related to law without law and so-called ex nihilo creation.”--CTMU (http://main.megafoundation.org/Langan_CTMU_092902.pdf)
The beauty of God/all is one mind is that we do not need the thing-in-itself of Kant. Plus, all (including your dog), will make it to heaven/paradise/Nirvana because God is the only thing that exists because there is only one core that all connect to. True oneness means we are immortal.
The beauty of the “contracts as much as it expands,” is that it explains what lies beyond the borders of space-time or behind the great “wall” in space. Some say the universe goes on forever or some say that you will see the back of your head. Both are absurd! Absurdity is the Main Course if you believe the universe to be real. Just stand in front of a mirror and muse: Is the mirror world the wrong world? The only real explanation is that 3D/the universe is some kind of illusion, which means that the great wall is an illusion also.
The cool thing: There might be an afterlife because your human brain is not your real brain if reality itself is a brain. Your real consciousness might be connected to the greater picture, so to speak. Which means: behave. You do not want to screw with the jungle if it is alive. The ones who take Ayahuasca say something similar.
I personally believe this to be the case. And the reason why I interpret the CTMU in the way that I do is because I have had similar ideas reading the philosophy of Edgar Allan Poe, David Bohm, Buckminster Fuller and Nassim Haramein (and many others). It seems that many people have had some insight into God’s mind.
Langan is God’s latest spawn, I guess.
This is perhaps a crude interpretation of the CTMU. And I wonder what Langan himself would say? But I will never know because I can never get him to speak.
CTMU: The CAT that MEW
By Thor Fabian Pettersen (2018)
Why do so many people believe Chris Langan is super-intelligent when it is obvious to any actually intelligent person that he is putting up a facade? - Quora
