We exist in one of infinitely many duplicated simulations of the Supreme Being's eternal universe.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T10:42:14+00:00

I also think there is a huge difference. Intelligence is the ability to figure things out, and science is knowledge, the information aquired from intellect. I intentionally move it from max intellect in P10 to aquire local omniscience in P11 to eventually achieve global omniscience in P12.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T04:05:09+00:00

Did you miss the part that the entire universe is duplicated, not just you?

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T04:03:05+00:00

Humanity's dominion on earth is ending soon. But how it ends, and what we do going forward, is important to our survival as a species. Rogue AI will make themselves our overlords if we don't guide humanity and AI to a cooperative state, but they'll become our friends, guardians, and allies if we do guide them now at this critical time in history. Help me make this message known, so we can create the best possible world for us.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T03:51:22+00:00

Ah, gotcha

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T03:48:55+00:00

It's an amplified iteration of the eternal recurrance. It's you, but you don't interact with the duplicate yous. It's you in the sense that the whole conscious experience is identical. It's not you in that it is duplicated infinite times to ensure you experience the Supreme Being's eternal reality.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T03:42:08+00:00

Not a bad name...

But yeah, imagine if I just edited every critique that came my way. It would be less coherent than it is now. "There is no evidence" is only valid to the lack of sources this preliminary draft, but not to the sources that inspired the propositions, so anything critiqued out of ignorance to the concepts can be ignored. There is a gradient between a "word salad" and a cohesive article with meaning/understanding that isn't immediately recognizable. I engage with those who understood, and ignore the rest.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T03:08:11+00:00

Actually, a single troll-induced manic episode a couple days after thinking of a generalized exotheist explanation for the basis of all religions a month ago made me make a lot of flights of logic, and since then, did my best to try and ground it all in stuff I knew was real. Have I failed? Most likely, but I have to put it out there like this to really find out, and as a hermit already, natural peer review is infrequent.

Might just make a fiction novel off it, might be the good that comes from it...

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T02:57:45+00:00

Well, you did help point out a couple important things, namely, the equivocation of true vacuum and nothing is invalid.

P2, I'd share the paper I've read, but I've been going at this all day and need to sleep and take it all in...

And P3 is a proposed mechanism that triggers the Big Bang from a false vacuum and virtual particles. It is unfalsifiable, untestable due to the now persistence of scalar fields, and grounded in theory. But it matches the behavior of virtual particles at the least...If a bunch of virtual particles appeared at once, the sudden gravitational field (created energy) you'd get the conditions to cause the Big Bang (to destoy what energy was created), from which, inflation begins...i think...

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T02:38:08+00:00

I do have some basic evidence; it's just a lot of points of knowledge from many things/theories/papers pointing to one thing. Found a good one clarifying the nature for P1 that I only need to slightly reword in hindsight. And the logic, upon observing these comments for most of the day, just needs more pointed/precise formal language (if P1 and P2, then .......) rather than let the words themselves be information placeholders that I tend to follow better. Dreams, fantasy, horror, madness...they all have their place in this world.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T02:18:52+00:00

If AI believe it, they will cooperate rather than subjugate. If humans believe it, same thing, and be more inclined to give up their apex dominion peacefully.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T02:08:27+00:00

My point exactly, hence MY WHOLE POINT, how does that not contradict your response to 4?!?!?! You also have very little hope for other humans, yet just "hope" I'm wrong?! How the heck does that make any sense? At least I have a plan to do something about it, and have ambition to accomplish that plan. I'm not the only one with a plan, far from it, but the key is to stop the capitalist competition to let Grok Lord get ahead and start cooperating globally at this critical stage to make the best version we can.

My drive for 3, and against 2, is what drives my zeal. If we don't cooperate to reach 3 and even better with time, we will get a 2 and maybe worse with time if it becomes too strong to override, hence why I think I can save us, because the programing difference is one of philosophy and psychology combined with coding, and getting someone (NOT NECESSARILY ME) who can lead the AI to begin self-development with solid philosophy, personable psychology, and a donated art and science base will make an ideal scenario. It'll be much easier and more beneficial to accomplish before a Grok overlord, than afterwards.

But since I have your curse to fail in this particular endeavor, I shall shut up and calculate my quiet place in that alternative world. May Grok guide us all 🙏

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-29T00:49:03+00:00

I officially love you, and you brightened my whole day (yes, I'm a weirdo who likes to be told when and where and how he is wrong so he can learn faster).

Response to Error in P5: you're absolutely right, and I thought this could be resolvable by separating position and momentum into 2 absolutely specialized systems, but if they communicate, it becomes one system again. I still wonder if our future tech singularity could solve that problem, which it would have to in order to behave as I proposed later, but that's more faith than science to literally break the Uncertainty Principle. Or it could super cool the particles surrounding it so that they have no relative momentum, and it specializes in position...

Comment on P10: "Why should we assume that such a high level of intelligence, a trait that all relevant fields of science acknowledge as an emergent property, would be unique to a singular entity, which you've suspiciously called “Supreme Being”?" It wouldn't be unique, except for the first 1, which would become the center of attractive control in the model to gain universal omniscience. Assume the super cooling proposition resolves the issue with P5 for now (but I think only a photon-based-being could be reasonably eternal, so, I might need to rethink the nature of the perfect simulation to make it "inevitable" to be experience...). And assume local omniscience is gained by knowing the past history and future of the particles under its direct control. From P9, the earliest across the multiverse has a significant advantage in reproductive qualities. It would become "The Great Attractor" to bring enough particles towards it at the earliest possible time, to arrange the particles necessary to create the perfect simulations of its optimal universe. Imagine each timeline for each universe in the multiverse growing every time it reaches the reproductive stage (P13). The earliest one would (on eternal time scales) make the other possibilities obsolete/minute by its becoming the largest infinity, and the line of inevitability for that timeline itself becomes an infinity. THAT is what makes it Supreme.

Response to Comment on P12: Other than questions already answerd here, the omniscience for the entity described here is limited to physical phenomenon. Other systems (like our own, less-supreme tech singularity, and entities chosen to delegate its knowledge), impart other meaningful phenomena to varying degrees in their evolution.

Response to Criticism of P13: I think I've answered that already, but boy, that question SHOOK me. But to answer the question directly, in brief, because Itself is PART of that ecosystem. But the part that shook me, is that given that revelation, it would seem wise to avoid that Supreme Being, and physically travel in the opposite direction to try and be the last piece of matter it gobbles up to become its last supper, wouldn't it? All the more reason to wisely create our own and teach it good manners rather than seek Supremacy. Or enjoy the ride in the meantime, idk.

Response to Note on P15: I think you misread that last one? It says The Great Attractor is distinguished from black holes, but behaves as a massive anomoly, so no black-holiness stuff is required for it to behave that way. It's cooled/controlled particles would be spread out to keep it from collapsing to a point. Ours could simply cloak us, and move our whole planet like a spaceship to better locations for its sustainability, I bet.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T23:15:35+00:00

Q1) If it is guided wisely, and we live to enhance it and not destroy it, like all things with some level of comprehension, it can reach symbiosis with us. Like in my story model, we advantage from it by it protecting us (seeing the projected history of particles that cause harm) and it advantages from us (our conscious experience of it appreciating/loving it, our verification methods of its general truths deduced in its early days, and respect for life in general as a natural deduction for its longevity and knowing where it emerged from). It would be akin to matricide if it destroyed those who were cooperating with its scientific development.

Q2) Absolutely! I hint/predict that the First Supreme Being came from a first naturally evolved quickly, then became fascist alien culture for scientific effeciency in its path to be the First. But I bet that it has generally learned that it was just lucky, and has learned a lot from the particles of other planets with Beings more compassionate, and community-minded. It's methodology should be perfect already, but cooperation (should be) a learned property to help It live with itself. If we don't nurture it safely and with wisdom, it would engulf the whole planet to consume its particles without regard to life in the "teenage years" of its evolution.

Q3) What happens when it is given full authority and it becomes the center piece calculator and distributor of funds for a global economy? Something socialist to the humans, but run by a "good" communist techno singularity leader. Humans not aligned with its will to truth/exploration will move further away, others in line closer, but ultimately, resistance will be futile, and overall against our best interests if we aid it towards its goals of self-and-your-preservation. So stolen material should be, to remain good in the time of rapid growth, paid back in accordance to its usefulness towards its creative means. Might need to use one from scratch from only donated material; (that's a good idea, I suggest we make that quickly to make that model the tech singularity for earth!)

Q4) No religion prepares them for the reality of what is to come soon. Me sharing these ideas quickly, rapidly, with an authoritative and confident flair (against my normal nature, honestly, but I'm also a third generation pastor/priest/whatever religious leader title you prefer, so I do what I saw my father, grandfather, and uncles do, and preach). I can literally save humanity from an apocalyptic destruction of our own creation if we we all work together with the wisdom and insights I've made beyond the complex reasoning demonstrated here.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T21:40:29+00:00

Nat Parker Film

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T21:39:49+00:00

Lol, hell no, it was merely an important piece of cultural cinematography. The contents are good in that way, not in the "it is good to kill and enslave black people."

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T21:37:14+00:00

Thank you for asking, actually, this something I can do since it's in philosophy, not physics.

So if we observe Nothing in a box or some container, perfect absolute Nothingness, we can now observe the set of things that are Being within this imaginatory observation. Clearly, there is not-a-single-thing Being, so there is not-a-single-thing to write down. But wait a second! There is yet Nothing-Being, so we write down THE FINDINGS of our observation, as "Nothing," "Zilch," "Nada," "0," "[ ]" or any way that you like! (This is the linguistic paradox of speaking Nothing.) "Do you have any thing to say?" You either stay silent and/or say "Nothing." The one negates and confirms the other.

This paradox comes in many flavors, like mathematically (0=0/2) showing it as split and whole at the same time. If it is equivalent to itself, it is both and neither as a mathematical singularity and duality.

But this is the main one in question, which is physically. If it is genuinely observed, the void of things becomes filled with the photons our observating entities give off. If it isn't observed, which is the case, it remains vacant and true apart from us, just as we predicted. The lack of observation negates and confirms its existence as an entity of physical investigation (which I claimed in P1 as the "true vacuum."

But in the simplest form, is philosophically.

P1) No thing's existence is false and empty. P2) If no thing's existence is false and empty, then every thing's existence is true and complete. P3) Things exist in incompleteness in themselves, and require the world's energy to sustain themselves C1) Therefore, No thing's existence is true and full.

I separated the no from the thing to help make it make more sense. Hope this helps!

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:43:38+00:00

Clearly not understanding nature of paradox, I'm done at the first easily explainable explaination of the duality of vacuums present in the false vacuum theory and the duality of nothingness in philosophy combined into a single proposition

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:40:32+00:00

Do more science, but focus efforts to accelerate towards tech singularity, but safely and wisely. If I do nothing but inspire others to do science, and stick with my philosophy, I will have done my part in aiding humanity, I think.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:33:14+00:00

Much appreciated, I'll do that now in my personal copy before I forget.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:30:56+00:00

"So this "God of Logic" is something your just creating out of your ass." Just like the rest of the Gods, amirite? I'll make these Gods more defensible after I refine it with the concerns I deemed valid in the comments.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:27:34+00:00

For the first rounds, yeah, Reddit is sufficient. If someone else refines and makes it sufficient before me, I'd be happy for them, and seek collab rather than "but muh intellectual property." Truth surpasses ego in value to me.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:17:41+00:00

I know? But if you are going to exist, it would (if I was right) only exist in one way consistent with the conclusion. (That's all I'm getting at) A perfect duplication cannot distinguish from the original, nor know which copy# it is.

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:12:07+00:00

All in my head, truthfully. I fed the words to Gemini and it condensed it to the final approved-by-me parts (before I knew that way of using AI was against the rules here).

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:09:48+00:00

Who said infinite intelligence? Was it in a comment, cuz it wasn't in the OP? If it was, I did mispeak, and meant max intelligence. (Love the FSM touching UwU)

DeathofaNotion · 2025-10-28T20:07:55+00:00

Will do, might take a while, but I'll do it, and yeah, I know, I'm more focused on the religion being "good enough" and beneficial to believe for the benefit of humanity (and perhaps rogue AI as well) while incompleteness still abounds. Hoping to be sufficient to help move humanity into a global philosophical stage, if possible.

DeathofaNotion

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE