* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

APPENDIX K:

Cracking the Cosmic Code*

 

Physics attempts to do so.

Secular philosophy attempts to do so.

Religious philosophy attempts to do so.

All hit major “roadblocks.”

Why is that?

*or more precisely, unraveling another crucial layer or two of the cosmic code

DAVID BIRNBAUM COSMOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEORY OF EVERYTHING

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

Because, the code–breaker is Quest for Potential∞/ Extraordinariation, (Q4P), which is at the intersection
of all three, but not classically thoroughly within any
of the three.   

Do the three indeed intersect?

The mainstream classic wisdom would be –

not necessarily.

But the mainstream classic wisdom is wrong.

All three intersect at their fount (see exhibit above – Convergence).

And their fount is the crucial intersection.

Only a dynamic with the transcendent - and “intersecting” – overarching power of Q4P,

could possibly have had the power to ignite a cosmos.

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHER

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSIST

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

PHILOSOPHY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

Q4P would be in the realm of Metaphysics. Not quite physics and not quite philosophy of any classic stripe.

Only a theme from within the general genre of Metaphysics could ultimately be able to provide a potentially satisfying possible simultaneous answer to hitherto inexplicable conundrums in those 3 classic  realms noted above –

           

[classic physics]:

Where did the first quark came from?

Meaning, where did the very smallest sub-atomic particle, whatever that turns out to be, come from?

[classic philosophy]:

Why there is any reality at all?

Meaning, why is there not simply a state
of “nothingness”?

COSMOLOGY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

THEORY OF EVERYTHING OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSICS

[classic religious philosophy]:

What are the eternal origins of the infinite (‘eternal’) Divine? Meaning, by what imperative/actualization is there the Divine which you posit/assert?

However, the introduction of Q4P does, respectfully, simultaneously and elegantly “solve” all three issues, and the constellation of related issues in each field. 
I have covered these matters – at least on the surface – over the course of the two volumes of Summa.

*

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEORY OF EVERYTHING

DAVID BIRNBAUM COSMOLOGY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

APPENDIX L:

Life

 

Life would appear to be both –

– an end in and of itself of Q4P

as well as

– a portal to greater Q4P

These rich and crucial themes need to be developed.

DAVID BIRNBAUM EVOLUTION THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

APPENDIX M:

Is Q4P

 

^∞ Morally Neutral?

That does not appear to be the case.   

“Giving-ness” is crucial for child-rearing, and child-rearing is crucial for cosmic Q4P. And “giving-ness” is clearly identifiable with “good” (at least by me).  Presumably “giving-ness” was crucial to creation itself, but I have not discerned the play there.

As readers and writers, our natural inclination might
be to associate greater good with greater potential.
That would be my position.   

On net balance the cosmos thus would seem to tilt towards the positive.

However, the tilt towards the positive is not necessarily overwhelming – by any means.

Dealing with this question is a very major undertaking. And I’m not so brave.

DAVID BIRNBAUM DIRECTIONAL UNIVERSE THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN UNIVERSE THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

APPENDIX N:

Extraordinariation
juxtaposed
v.
tohu va-vohu

One can hypothesize that Extraordinariation is juxtaposed against tohu va-vohu (the empty chaotic nothingness).^*a

To take matters further, one can hypothesize that

to keep the cosmos from imploding back into nothingness,

Extraordinariation must advance with more dynamism and richness outward, than tohu va-vohu pulls inward.

This theme can be developed elegantly, and dovetails well with the other components of Q4P, but it remains forever within the realm of hypothesis.

  

^*a see Genesis 1:2: “And the earth/land was tohu va-vohu.”

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

APPENDIX O:

“Secular Divine”
v.
“Religious Divine”

 

As noted elliptically in the text,

Q4P (Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation)

works as a  “Secular Divine” metaphysics and works
well as a “Religious Divine”* metaphysics.

But, either way, we are dealing with an infinitely radiating, infinitely-grasping consciousness, and  infinitely–grasping power: The Divine.

One cannot posit transcendent, energizing and infinite on all fronts, and then come back and say that this is not a “Divine” entity/dynamic/force.

*Godhead included

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM SUMMA METAPHYSICA

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM ACADEMIC

APPENDIX P:

Optimization

 

The signature component of Q4P
(Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation) is optimization.

The component will tend to optimize anything and everything.

*

For example, life on earth will emerge both on the oxygen-sustained surface, as well as in toxic hydrothermal vents in the depths of the ocean.

Optimization has “worked-out” the solution-path in
each case.

But, remember, optimization is the signature
component of Q4P, which in turn is at the heart
of Infinite Divine Potential.

*

DAVID BIRNBAUM HARVARD

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

APPENDIX R:

More Powerful v. Perfect

 

The proposed Summa metaphysics is not perfect. Perfection is hard to come by when trying to

get one’s arms around the infinite.     

However, Summa would respectfully appear to be quite significantly more powerful and elegant than the competing known metaphysics formulations offered to date (over the past three to five thousand years).

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHER

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSIST

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

PHILOSOPHY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

APPENDIX S:

Book #1 (God and Evil) 
v.
Book #2  (God and Good)

Many readers of the Summa much prefer Book #1 over Book #2.

Presumably, it is clearer, and its style is more in a classic expository presentation/form. Plus Book #1 actually uses real, normal sentence structures.

Furthermore, Book #1 is almost a stand-alone, fairly comprehensible original and hi-energy, complete Metaphysics.

But only ‘almost.’

COSMOLOGY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

THEORY OF EVERYTHING OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSICS

Whereas Book #1 conceptualized and framed-out the existence of Quest for Potential (enroute to dealing with theodicy, and before I brought Extraordinariation into the equation), Book #2 attempts to get its arms around the entire Q4P.

However, the mission of Book #2 is not so simple.

How does one use regular language to describe an infinitely expanding (as we speak) Infinitude?

I thought about Book #2 for fourteen years before commencing 5-6 years of writing. And I only even conceived of a line of approach 12 years into the fourteen years of mulling-over this little task. So, either I’m slow or the task is challenging, or some combination thereof.

As noted in the introductory section to God and Good, Book #2 is heavily intuitive as the major motif, and heavily intellectual as the minor motif, whereas Book #1 was the mirror-image in these regards.

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEORY OF EVERYTHING

DAVID BIRNBAUM COSMOLOGY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

To achieve my (ambitious?) goals for Book #2, I needed to not only push my own psyche to its limits, which was frankly painful, but I needed to push your psyches to their respective limits, which I presume may have been somewhat grating, aggravating, frustrating or some combination thereof.

I saw no other route.

And time marches on.

Remember that Book #1 initially encountered very significant resistance when it was published in 1988. No one criticized it; it just wasn’t “grasped.” Then, about 2-5 years after publication, it achieved ‘traction,’ for whatever combination of reasons. Note that Book #2 plays at a totally different level (higher) than Book #1, which itself was not shy in its goals.

— Birnbaum

DAVID BIRNBAUM EVOLUTION THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

APPENDIX T:

Following the Analogy

 

Using one of our basic assumptions, that HUMAN parallels COSMIC, one can conjecture that there is a possibility of perpetual rebirth to (at least portions of)
the cosmos.^*A

In physics, there is a (cyclic) school of thinking along these lines, as well.^*B

*

Our Infinite Divinitude ultimately pierces through the possible various cosmic births and deaths. It is this Infinite Divinitude which is necessary for Cosmic birth to begin with. But, as articulated, the primary fount of the Infinitude is its cumulative future potential.

DAVID BIRNBAUM DIRECTIONAL UNIVERSE THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN UNIVERSE THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

*

Thus, not only does the human spirit potentially transcend one’s death; it even ultimately potentially transcends the Death and rebirth ad infinitum (hopefully), of components of the cosmos itself.

***

---

^*A The Midrash/Kabbala talk about cosmic cycles. According to
this (hitherto) esoteric school of thought, we may be in the 4^th or 5^th or 6^th cosmic cycle.

^*B See also encyclopedia entries for Cyclic Model Cosmology:

# Paul Steinhardt; Neil Turok 2002

# Lauris Baum; Paul Frampton 2007

Note that, respectfully, Summa does not take a position on whether or not the cosmos is cyclic.

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

APPENDIX U:

By-definition

 

Telescoping Elasticity

One of the great advantages of Q4P as the proposed core cosmic dynamic is its by–definition inherent telescoping elasticity. As conceptualized, it can telescope from classic nothingness to infinitude. We need that crucial “telescoping” aspect built-in to the core of the unitary proposed dynamic.

Meaning, that not only must the dynamic qualify as the core of the evolving Divine Infinitude, it must be unitary, “simple” and have telescoping elasticity, as well, among other nice (infinite) aspects delineated over the course of the two-book Summa series.

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM SUMMA METAPHYSICA

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM ACADEMIC

APPENDIX V:

Hypothesizing about Cosmic Origins

 

Clearly, this – hypothesizing about cosmic origins –
is the most challenging aspect of metaphysics.

Now, while one can write with conviction about the elegance of a hypothesis, one cannot truly write with conviction about the validity
of a cosmological hypothesis.

But the near-certain validity per se, of a cosmological hypothesis is not truly the conceptualizer’s goal.

For, in dealing with the realms of the infinite and cosmic origins, our levels of consciousness to date (and perhaps for a long time to come) may simply be inadequate

A worthwhile goal, however, would be a more dynamic
and
elegant hypothesis than has hitherto been offered. That is what Summa proposes.

We seek to advance forward – another layer or two – towards cracking the cosmic code.  We do not presume to articulate the penultimate core.

DAVID BIRNBAUM HARVARD

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

APPENDIX X:

Holographic Universe Theory,
Information and SUMMA

 

In God and Evil (1988) I hypothesize “bootstrap creation” to deal with the classic philosophical/metaphysical/cosmology conundrum of creation ex nihilo i.e. –

How is the cosmos seemingly created out of nothing?

God and Evil proposes an analogy to a leveraged buyout in finance. Basically, in a leveraged buyout one can potentially buy a company primarily by (sort of) guaranteeing the seller the company’s anticipated future earnings stream to (allegedly) cover the (periodic multi-year) payments. [Often the Buyer is the CEO or another prime protagonist related to the business entity.]

Summa proposes that future potentials (in parallel to future earnings)
ignited the cosmos (in parallel to the buy of a leveraged buyout). This is a core theme

which courses through this two-volume metaphysics series.

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHER

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSIST

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

PHILOSOPHY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

However, among other potential underlying vulnerability points to this hypothesis is the question –

How does the “present” (at Creation) know the (infinite) future (potentialities)?

Conveniently for me, along emerges Holographic Theory [see Wikipedia entry] into mainstream physics over the past twenty+ years (c. 1990–2010 and now advancing-forward).

Now, Holographic Theory increasingly has no shortage of explicators and variations on its core themes. However a common denominator of the various hypotheses under this (Holographic) umbrella would be that INFORMATION is

(a) (somehow) stored on the space-time boundary,
and that

(b) this information may interact internally in a modality that defies the classic linear arrow of time.

Now, once the internal interaction of information can possibly interact outside the boundaries of the classic linear arrow of time, “a bootstrap universe” cosmological hypothesis has a further (albeit certainly not necessarily sufficient) – and key – physical sciences toehold.

COSMOLOGY OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

THEORY OF EVERYTHING OF DAVID BIRNBAUM

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM METAPHYSICS

APPENDIX Y:

Counterposing

 

Summa Metaphysica (1988, 2005) with
Spinoza (d. 1677)

There are many intersection points, but the two
treatises are radically different, if not diametrically opposite at the core:

Spinoza posits a coldly impersonal core unifying dynamic;

I posit a fiery all–pervading advancing dynamic and consciousness.

Spinoza holds GOOD and EVIL to be relative
concepts;

I hold them to be objective and distinct.

Spinoza discerns no ultimate purpose to the cosmos;

I do – Quest for Infinite Potential/Extraordinariation.

Spinoza does not grant Man any special place whatsoever in the universe; Summa does.

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEORY OF EVERYTHING

DAVID BIRNBAUM COSMOLOGY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

Spinoza posits a thoroughgoing deterministic universe

(i.e. that absolutely everything that happens, occurs through the operation of necessity).

I certainly do not.

Randomness, Emotion, and (total) Free Will are key components in my Metaphysics. Ultimately, Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation layered-over Randomness, Emotion and Free Will – is iterative as its key component, and not overarchingly deterministic.

*

Both works do have in common, however, an emphasis on an interlocking cosmic lattice-work.

DAVID BIRNBAUM EVOLUTION THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

APPENDIX Z1:

Survival

 

How does “survival” fit into the Quest for Potential∞/Extraordinariation paradigm?

Clearly “survival” is necessary. Obviously. But it is far from sufficient. Thus, necessary, but not sufficient.

“Survival,” in my paradigm, does not occupy the overwhelming paramount position ascribed to it by many “survival of the fittest” 19^th and 20^th century Darwinists. If it did, we would see far more species of slugs, and radically fewer species of butterflies.

At the same time, over the eons the relative priority of survival to extraordinariation may have intermittently shifted:

DAVID BIRNBAUM DIRECTIONAL UNIVERSE THEORY

DAVID BIRNBAUM QUANTUM MAN UNIVERSE THEORY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM THEOGONY THEORY

More species with high probability survival in-place

> more emphasis on extraordinariation, etc.

More species in a precarious survival situation

> more emphasis on survival.

Clearly, to stay in the game, survival is necessary.
But we hypothesize that overall, the macro–signature theme of our cosmos is “extraordinariation.” In any event, while this area, like most areas involving the cosmos is nuanced and textured, the key thrust (extraordinariation) is clear.   

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY

APPENDIX Z2:

Primordial Realm Hypothesis

 

 

At the ‘beginning’ there was not “nothing.”

At the “beginning” there was

“layer upon layer of pure Potential/Possibility”

– whatever that precisely means.

Call it “metaphysical possibility.”

Call it “the plentitude of possibility.”

No matter what the precise jargon, it was “Potential/Possibility.”

Only ‘Potential/Possibility’ can bona fide be hypothesized by the metaphysician to have been eternal.

It is the sole term/theme/concept which works. Period.

It is simple – and it rings true. To me.

We then layer-on Extraordinariation to fill-in the paradigm

DAVID BIRNBAUM TELEOLOGY

DAVID BIRNBAUM SUMMA METAPHYSICA

* DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY *

DAVID BIRNBAUM ACADEMIC

- as Potential/Possibility alone is too diffuse.

Quest for Potential∞ ultimately aims for Extraordinariation.

A theologian can now peg-off the above and hypothesize

– that God is the embodiment

of “possibility/potential/extraordinariation.”   

But as a (putative) metaphysician, I would just keep it simple:

At the “beginning”

– there was “Potential/Possibility”

DAVID BIRNBAUM HARVARD

DAVID BIRNBAUM PHILOSOPHY