For Our Particular Universe Fundamental Universe-Generating Processes, Intelligent Design and Biblical Theology
[Note: Although, this article uses a small amount of material presented in the article on a Fundamental Universe-Generating Processes and Intelligent Design., the basic General Grand Unification Model (GGU-model) processes article, it should not be difficult to decipher. The symbols used are abbreviations for other meaningful objects or processes. There meanings are fully described. All aspects of the GGU-model are based upon properties of the finite world, properties that we can easily comprehend. These properties are mathematically modeled and embedded into a special "mathematical structure." These complex technical aspects are not presented in this article].
Please consider the following fact. Modern secular science is based upon "reductionism." Under this stance, the development of the universe depends upon accepted fundamental entities that simply "exist." How these entities behave simply exists. That is, physical laws simply exist. No further investigations are allowed "below" this level of existence. If you do make such investigations, then you are ignored and often called "crazy" for rejecting "what everyone knows is true." Of course, such a notion is actually a unverifiable philosophic stance and is not related to "truth."
I would like to emphasize the following facts. The GGU-model and General Intelligent Design model (GID-model) are NOT based upon accepting hypotheses such as assuming the existence of higher-intelligence, the existence of higher-processes that generate a universe or the existence of specific Biblical entities. The theological or higher-intelligence conclusions are ALL predicted. For the theological interpretation, these predictions are Biblically interpreted and shown to verify the rationality of Biblical statements. The concrete behavioral or other illustrations that appear in this article were not used to obtain the basic aspects of the models. They were all discovered after the basic mathematical model was constructed from 1979 - 83.The complete GGU-model answers questions that were not answered using scientific logic until the date of its first appearance. It is, at present. the only known mathematical model for a cosmogony, a theory that produced universes of many different types. It should be very obvious that the methods used are not those as previously applied, methods that are not able to fully answer the questions. The answers are interpretations of entities and their behavior within a mathematical structure that did not generally exist within the mathematical literature until after 1966. For these reasons, one should not assume that a previously obtained technical background is sufficient for full comprehension.
Recently, 2013, an important refinement was made, where the models are now associated with "instruction-sets" and "alteration-sets." When appropriate, I'll mention the appropriate references. You'll also notice that I'm making changes to my mode of presentation from the usual stilted style used in scientific discourse to that of the informal. Using "contractions" shouldn't distract from the results I present. If English is not your native language, then the meanings of the contractions I, from time-to-time, use are easily learned.
The single-complexity approach is based upon this scheme. The notation has been simplified. If compared with the detailed "Complete Processes" paper [0], each simplified symbol is equivalent to the notation used for the actual "refined approach" that yields not only each universe-wide frozen-frame but the contents of each of these in a rationally presented order. (The notation used here doesn't include a slight addition used to discuss the necessary "participator" aspect, where this concept is fully discussed in [0] and [1].) The "standard" scheme is
Each symbol used in (Is) has a very specific interpretation (meaningful meaning). Λ(n) is called a "logic-system." From the viewpoint of human languages, it models (i.e. behaves) like what humans beings do hundreds and hundreds of times a day. Let the symbols P and Q represent how we describe, either in a symbolic language or images, specific physical actions or events. Within the physical world, we have learned that if we apply P, then event Q occurs. What we have learned is modeled by the famous "If P, then Q" statement. Then, given the "P", the "deduced result" is Q. The modern name for this two step process is "the Rule of Detachment." (It has another more formal name.) The rule is a rule for "deduction."
Let "n" be any counting number {1,2,3,4, . . .}. The symbol Λ(n) denotes a special list of such statements, beginning with but one P type statement and then followed by (n-1) "If P, then Q." statements. The actual construction of Λ(n) can be fully described. It is of a special nature so that, when we begin with P and "deduce," all of the "Q" statements occur in a specific order. The starting "P" statement is denoted by I(a,b). The actual "mental processes" used to "detach" the P from each of the "If P, then Q." statements is denoted by A. This is called the "algorithm."
The P, Q statements in Λ(n) are "instruction-sets." They give actual instructions as to how to gather, how to bring together, into collections the "fundamental" universe building blocks called "propertons." These building blocks are what lead to such stuff as electrons, protons, neutrons, then to atoms, molecules, then to . . . . The I(a,b) represents the first, P, instruction-set. The G, the "gathering operator," represents the result of the instruction-set gathering. This result is called an "info-field," NF. The first info-field is denoted by NF((a,b). Thus G is an info-field generator. The info-fields are the next to last step in constructing a physical universe. So far, no actual physical universe is obtained. Of significant is that the Λ(n) construction produces a physical universe in the same step-by-step mode of development as the steps produce by the deduction algorithm.
What is not understood by most is that the basic GGU and GID-models are based upon easily described and illustrated finite procedures. It's when these are properly characterized and viewed mathematically that the non-finite features are predicted. These non-finite features are displayed by various "hyper" denoted entities. The final symbol St is a very special process discovered in 1966. For the GGU-model, it's the application of St that takes an info-field, NF(i,j), and turns it into a real physical universe, an actual step in universe's development. The pair (i,j) is a numerical representation for a step in the development. The (i,j) is a type of "name" for the step. Thus, St is applied to NF(a,b) and the first step in the generation of a physical universe is physically realized (i.e. achieved, attained). (Although a little difficult to describe in this simplified article, "any" universe has a first step in its development.)
The "deductive" process symbolized above has a simply real illustration. The general method is illustrated by the construction of a book B as it corresponds to the Λ(n) in this scheme. The first front page of book B is blank. The back of first page has a single "starting" instruction-set I(a,b). The front of the next page has this instruction-set I(a,b) repeated. The back of that page has the next ordered instruction-set stated on it. You build the remaining pages of the books this way. The algorithm A coupled with instruction-set I(a,b) states that to mentally deduce each sequential step of the instruction paradigm (an ordered collection of instruction-sets), page 2 is the first considered. This is to become the "first" universe-wide frozen-frame. The same instruction-set appears on page 3. This indicates that the page is to be turned over to the instruction-set for the next section, which then appears on the back. (If you don't see such a repeated image, assuming no error has been made, then you know that you are at the end and should stop.) As the "mental" process continues, all the ordered physical results occur. They are "trivially" obtained via deduction in the same order as the even page numbers.
Let's repeat what has thus far been done. In all cases for applications, such "standard" scheme is not written in the customary mathematics "composition" form. Intuitively and in general (i.e. not using the book illustration), the mathematics is applied to a collection of (Λ(i), I(a,b)). If (Λ(n), I(a,b)) is one of these, then a process, modeled by the algorithm A, is applied and, in order, instruction-sets, with the names (i,j), are obtained. The "properton gathering" operator G is applied to each of these instruction-sets and an info-field NF(i,j) is obtained. Finally, to get a slice of an actual universe, a universe-wide frozen-frame, the realization operator St is applied to each info-field. But, this is only the intuitively standard approach and it will not generate an actual universe. What is needed is predicted from this standard scheme. Each of this processes is further mathematically modeled and the following scheme is predicted. The fact that it is predicted is very important. Notice how there are slight changes in the following symbolism.
Mathematically, the starred (i.e. *) symbols behave in the same manner as those that are don't carry the star. But, when more generally described and compared with the original, other highly interesting features emerge. The "star" is usually translated by the prefix "hyper." The G behaves like the original gathering operator and St behaves in a manner similar to the original St in the first display. This is the "hyper" language when the concepts, usually, have the same general properties but are much "stronger" or "greater than" the concepts described by the non-hyper terms. The same holds for any term with the prefix "ultra." So, what is the difference?
The difference is that there is an λ in place of the n. In the standard, "n" is an ordinary counting number. But, in the form (*Is), *lambda; is not a standard counting number. It is a very special type that saves basic problem put forth by Newton and Leibniz 300 years ago. It is called an "infinite number." The word following "infinite," the word number, is necessary in other to differentiate the word "infinite" from its other uses. Intuitively, one can think of λ is representing a number that acts like a counting number but is "greater than" any counting number we can select. Now the exact same "book" illustration used for the standard scheme can be applied to the symbols. Just go through the standard one, change the indicated symbol fonts to bold and put * to the top-left of Λ, A and I. The words that name the symbols also carry the * or the prefix "hyper." The following is a description of the scheme (*Is) in terms of the hyper-language.
(1) All events take place in the substratum, a collection of ultra-propertons [0, 1], and all of the other needed entities exist as members of this substratum. The ultra-logic-system, *Lambda;(λ), represents a specifically definable and illustratable process that yields a universe that develops in a specific order.(2) For our cosmology, which can include multi-universes, *I(a,b) is the first hyper-instruction-set. This acts like a set of instructions that state how "many" objects are to be place in coherent collections.
(3) The mental-like algorithm process *A selects *I(a,b). The *instruction-set guides the properton gathering process G. This yields an "info-field" NF, a coherent collection, to which the realization operator St is applied. Notice that this info-field is in italics and is a special one that not only produces physical systems but physical-like systems and even other types. A physical system is a defined collection of named physical objects, the constituents, which are so related as to form an identifiable whole. Specific relations between the constituents are the bases for establishing the behavior of the entire structure. It can range from a single photon to an entire universe.
(4) The hyper-algorithm *A has the same properties as the illustrated book's "page-turning" procedure. The "next" and, hence, the next ordered info-field is obtained and the next primitive time universe-wide frozen-frame (a fixed universe-wide slice) is produced. Primitive time is a name that somewhat hides its intuitive meaning. It refers to the notion of the sequence of entities in various types. Its properties are those of the ordering of the "numbers" being used.
The representations *Λ, the *A, and St separately display higher-intelligent design signatures. Further, the behavior of each info-field displays an higher-intelligent design signature. The "coherence" follows a pattern that corresponds to higher-intelligence deduction. Obviously, for a secular interpretation, the indirectly verified intelligent design patterns are ignored.
In [1], I use H to denote an ultimate cause. This comes from an extension of H, who is the creator of the GGU-model, the restricted GID-model and the full GID-model interpretations. The basic goal of the GID-model is to guarantee that statements that describe the higher-intelligence are rationally obtained. Although certain behavior of H can now be predicted from observed human behavior, does such an H actually exist and if it does to what does it correspond?
A developmental paradigm is a sequence of broadly defined descriptions or images for the moment-to-moment behavior of a natural-system. It corresponds in a one-to-one manner with a collection of instruction-sets and eventually with the members of an event sequence. Of great importance for the Complete GGU-model are the three subcategories of specific-information, hyper-developmental paradigm information, hyper instruction-information and hyper-alteration-information. The Physical Grand Unification Model (PGU-model), yields a universe that complies with each of these notions, but only presents the view of universe generation relative to how we perceive physical laws. These features of the complete GGU-model are discussed in references [0] and [5].
The following statements are obtained rationally via an interpretation of a mathematical model. No mathematics abbreviations appear.
1. Our universe as a whole is designed and produced by actions taken by an higher-intelligence. Each object used for universe generation is the product of the actions of an higher-intelligence. Each universe-wide frozen-frame is designed by an higher-intelligence. Hence, each physical entity and each configuration of physical entities is designed by an higher-intelligence. Each such physical entity and configuration displays an higher-intelligence signature.2. A higher-intelligence specific mode of thought yields the development of our physical universe. When restricted to our physical universe, this mode is the most basic required by humankind to perform everyday tasks and is used to predict physical-system behavior from physical laws or theories.
3. As physical-science examples, every defined elementary object, if such exists (a neutrino and the like), is designed and produced by the same higher-intelligence. The probabilistic behavior of any such entity is designed by an higher-intelligence and yields an higher-intelligence signature.
4. Every combination of elementary objects, if any exist, used to form any other physical object is designed and produced by the same higher-intelligence. Examples: an hydrogen atom, water, an ocean, the world, the solar system, our galaxy, etc.
5. Event sequence (i.e. step-by-step physical events sequences) are constructed in a very special way. They satisfy comprehensible physical laws and theories and are purposely designed, in this manner, by an higher-intelligence. The design allows intelligent beings to construct additional physical-systems.
6. Every physical change in the behavior of every physical-system is sustained by the same higher-intelligence and displays an ID-signature. Each step in the development of a physical-system satisfies higher-intelligence deductive processes and, if necessary, the selection of appropriate altered universes and application of the gathering and realization processes reveal the existence of an higher-intelligence.
(Over a small primitive time interval the higher-intelligence can perform infinitely many deductions that yield as the final deductive conclusion a specific and complete physical-system. Physical agents can only perform finitely many deductions and, in various cases, cannot deduce the exact and complete composition of a specific and complete physical system. If certain conditions are maintained, then physical agents can approximate the composition. This is a model for behavior and only yields indirect evidence for the existence of the predicted higher-intelligence.)
Examples are: objects move from one position to another, water temperature changes, indeed, anything that changes its known physical characteristics, appearance, etc.
7. The production of an event, whether physical or a physical-like, and alterations in the behavior of each such event, displays yet another higher-intelligence signature in that the production of or alteration in a physical-system or physical-like system is equivalent to generating an event sequence by repeated application of the unification operator, *U, of all physical and physical-like laws and theories. This application represents processes that are equivalent to application of hyper-logic-systems. This shows, in a more specific manner, how each member of an event sequence is rationally designed so as to correspond, at least, to the physical laws and theories deduced by some biological entities. The expressible physical laws give yet more indirect evidence for the existence of an higher-intelligence. (In contrast to the secular scenario, there is a specific Biblical "reason" that such laws and theories exist.) .
I would like again to emphasize the following facts. The GGU and GID models are NOT based upon accepting any hypothesis that an higher-intelligence exists, that the higher-processes that generate a universe exist and that, with one minor exception, the models relate in any manner to the Bible. The theological or higher-intelligence conclusions are ALL predicted. For the theological interpretation, these predictions are Biblically interpreted and shown to verify the rationality of Biblical statements. The many concrete behavioral or other illustrations that appear in this article were not used to obtain the basic aspects of the models. They were all discovered after the basic mathematical model was constructed.
It's obvious that substituting the word God for the appropriate phrase "an higher-intelligence" or "higher-intelligence" that appears in the above universe creating statements, yields mathematically verified rational statements. That is, each of the GID-model statements becomes theological in character. The model predicts the existence of numerous *universe-wide frozen-frames. The set of all *universe-wide frozen-frames contains the standard ones that represent a physical universe at any moment in primitive time. These can be compose only of physical events, only physical-like events or, in the more usual case, both physical-like events and physical events. Assuming that only "material" physical events are observable via human sensors, then physical-like events are immaterial.
As discussed in [5], instruction-sets represent instruction-information which corresponds to meaningful thoughts. The pure intermediate schemes such as
can be theologically translated into a very brief form by using hyper-mental activity terminology. This, of course, corresponds to the higher-intelligence aspects. However, if one wants to correspond this to the strictest interpretation of Genesis 1, then until after the Flood, the following is necessary. Each *instruction-set that yields *universe-wide frozen-frame, contains a portion that corresponds to the pre-Flood Earth and local environment and a portion that is for a corresponding development of an ancient earth and its local environment. The G gathering operator is restricted to the original Earth and its local environment portion until after the Flood, when no restriction is needed for the *universe-wide frozen-frame that have been designed for the further development of our universe. As an example of a theological interpretation, for (Is), one has the following:
(1) God mentally supplies the hyper-instructions for each hyper-universe-wide frozen-frame (the members of *Λ(λ).) This corresponds to the hyper-meaningful hyper-thoughts portion of hyper-instruction-information.(2) He (mentally) selects the first member of the sequence (the *I(a,b)).
(3) He hyper-rationally sustains the primitive-time ordering of the sequence of hyper-instruction-sets as modeled by *Λ(λ) and, at each step, He changes His thoughts via a medium and mentally constructed info-fields, NF, into physical reality as modeled by St and into physical-like reality using the extended form of the both the gathering G and St processes.
Then we have a translation for the minimal case
In this case, the hyper-instruction-sets in *Λ(λ) are replaced by an info-field NF(i,j) for each of the hyper-universe-wide frozen-frames as denoted by (i,j). Then the exact same form of deduction A is applied. As each is "deduced" in the proper order, then realization operator St is applied. However, if one wants to correspond this to the strictest interpretation of Genesis 1, then until after the Flood, the following is necessary. Each info-field that yields an exterior cosmology, contains a portion that corresponds to the pre-Flood Earth and local environment and a portion that is a corresponding development of an ancient earth and its local environment. The St is restricted to the original Earth and its local environment until after the Flood, when no restriction is needed for the info-fields that have been designed for the further development of our universe. I point out that the physical universe-wide frozen-frames are member of the entire set of all hyper-universe-wide frozen-frames.
(1) God has in his mind all of the details for each hyper-universe-wide frozen-frame and the info-fields in Γ(λ) He intends to use. (Technically, this collection forms an ultra-logic-system from which the hyper-universe-wide frozen-frames are obtained via ordered hyper-deduction.)(2) He mentally selects the first info-field NF(a,b) to employ.
(3) He hyper-rationally sustains the primitive-time ordering of the sequence of mentally conceived info-fields as modeled by the operator A applied to Γ(λ). At each step, He changes His thoughts into physical reality, as modeled by St, and into physical-like reality using portions of various info-fields.
In both of these cases, since what constitutes propertons is describable, then even ultra-propertons, intermediate propertons and all of the collections of such entities can be considered as mental constructs for a theological interpretation.
Of great significance is that there is a vast amount of direct and indirect physical evidence that verifies these translated theological statements. I accept this as a preponderance of evidence under my definition of what constitutes fact. But to what "God" do they apply? As shown in reference [9], the translated higher-intelligence statements model numerous Biblical statements relative to human behavior.
The model verifies, via predictions, many other Biblical statements. How do I interpret the words used in Biblical statements? In general, I attempt to find their meanings as understood by the majority of individuals when first transcribed. Under no condition do I accept that certain words have hidden meanings that were only known when first presented or anytime there after by just a chosen few. If this were the case, the Bible would be worthless as a guide for all of humanity from the time the Scriptural statements were first presented to this very moment. The Bible "plainly" states that God's concepts do not change. Once stated there are fixed in meaning.
One of the modes for GGU-model universe creation, models a strict interpretation for the Genesis 1 scenario. The GGU-model also rationally models other theological concepts.
Among other concepts, relative to the "time" notion, the GGU-model relates the "temporal," "non-temporal" and the "atemporal." "Temporal" is but another term for "observer-time." (Intuitively, Observer-time corresponds to our notion of the physical "passage of time" as we might sense it by counting our heartbeats. Generally one can considered it as how we "measure" this intuitive notion.) The "non-temporal" means that portion of primitive-time (merely a sequence notion) that is not observer-time. "Atemporal" means neither temporal nor non-temporal. God is not completely outside, so to speak, of the temporal and the non-temporal. He has created all aspects of these time notions. But, He is also atemporal. Such statements like "God exists" are atemporal. Statements such as God is "eternal," "for ever and ever," and the like are merely used in a comparative sense. No matter how we comprehend time, God is, in general, outside of the temporal and non-temporal in that He creates them in all of their manifestations.
Unless medically prohibited from doing so, human beings can comprehend the temporal and the sequential non-temporal. An higher-intelligence can use an higher-language to describe the atemporal as being "rational," but we most likely cannot. Many, many arguments used by atheists assign the temporal or non-temporal to God in a general way. This leads to logical contradictions such as a logical regress. The regress has been known for thousands of years. It is obvious that God's view includes, at the least, these three "time" motions.
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."( Colossians 2:8. KJV.)
One of the basic methods of the world of philosophy is a form of logical argument called the "dialectic." I have not used any dialectic arguments during my investigations. I have used the common logic of everyday thought, the logical methods employed by physical science. It has been shown, in the paper Modeling the Dialectic, that relative to a human time-frame many dialectic arguments contradict scientific logic.
Relative to God, what does the term "knowledge" mean? In all cases, knowledge refers to God's meaningful thoughts, thoughts that have meaning to God.The GGU-model aids in our comprehension of the will of God. It removes confusion that some individuals apparently intend to foster. The false idea is that one needs to accept "specially selected" individuals as having superior knowledge and accept their pronouncements as emanating from "secret" understandings to which they are only accorded. But, the usual and common meaning of this term is that it indicates that something is a "decision" or a "choice." However, the GGU-model states that all of the material and immaterial has been pre-designed, in a mental sense. The material is not realized until God specifically "commands" (thinks) it into physical existence. For our comprehension, He is, at present, "continually choosing" to do so. This is a way to comprehend His sustaining power.
For the necessary participator universe, God has pre-designed a vast number of "other" universes. Not only does human behavior lead to His realizing a specific universe, but He can choose any one for His own desires. All of these are the "choices" of God - the will of God. The phrase "will of God" either refers to His created choices, in general, or choices for other specific purposes.
The Biblical concept of God's purposes is also a trivial GGU-model implication. A purpose, in this sense, is a "goal kept before the mind." Since all of creation can be comprehend, in general, as God changing His thoughts into various realities, it is a trivial implication that these thoughts are not random but God has goals in mind. Further, His purposes for creating all of reality are partially described in the Bible. Note that this is but a partial human understanding. Trivially, what He "chooses" serves His goals - His purposes, whether His choice is simply the continual sustaining of human choice or to yield His church or for other reasons we can not comprehend.
The original GGU-model processes had only one aspect guided by a Biblical statement. This is Hebrews 1:3, quoted below. In the Fall of 1979, I wondered whether some type of "word" could be used to construct a cosmogony and solve the General Grand Unification Problem. Nonstandard "words" were predicted and analyzed in the original six sections of my Theory of Ultralogic. Thus, I began constructing the remaining portions of this book with but a strong "feeling" that the necessary results will present themselves.
The model verifies, via predictions, other Biblical statements. As mentioned, I attempt to find their meanings as understood by the majority of individuals when first transcribed. Under no circumstances do I accept that certain words have hidden meanings that were known when first presented or anytime there after by just a chosen few. If this were the case, the Bible would be worthless as a guide for all of humanity from the time the Scriptural statements were first presented to the very moment. The Bible "plainly" states that God's concepts do not change. Once stated there are fixed in meaning.
First, when did God create all of the entities and processes that lead to a developing universe? In this paper it is shown that, at least, all of the GGU-model processes are created over a "zero" time interval. This is indicated by the Genesis 1:2 preparation statement.
[The mathematics that yields a strict Genesis 1 creationary development appears in Arxiv:math/0605120 or this duplicate paper . Further, consider any of the four developmental paradigms used to generate any of the proposed cosmologies and the paper on ultra-logic-systems. or this one for the developmental paradigm. These papers also formally model the "participator universe." All of these papers are contained in this one file on this website.]
Prior, in primitive-time, to the primitive-time start of the rapid formation of a physical cosmology, there is a collection of universe-wide frozen-frames containing the development of the entities described in Genesis 1 and for each creation-day through the formation of the Sun and Moon. Then rapid-formation completes the day-four activities. The next creation-days, as literally described, follow from applications of the (GSt) to pre-designed covirtual universes via specific instructions. As mentioned, the creation of all processes, these covirtual universes and all other aspects of God's creation occur over a zero observer-time period. The model predicts that there are creation events not associated with observer-time.
Note that it is not necessary that the original Earth and its local environment verify the same physical laws as those of the universe external to this environment. Indeed, the Bible indicates that prior to the Fall and even before the Flood that local physical regularities are not the same as those we observe today.
What is the connection between physical behavior, the human mind and written rules and diagrams? Indeed, there is even a Templeton Prize winner who is trying to answer the question "Why are they physical laws that we understand?" It is hard to believe that he doesn't know what Genesis 1:28 states
". . . fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." (NIV, 1978)
In order to follow the "subdue" and "rule over" directives, God has set up the correspondence between comprehensible physical law, the human mind, and general descriptions. He has not done this for any other known biological entity.
The Bible describes God's creationary processes linguistically. There is a predicted object that behaves just like a higher-form of a "word" that is employed to generate a universe. It is a complex collection of members of *L. It yields our universe's sustaining *deductively ordered *instructions-sets *Λ(λ). It is the *Λ(λ) viewed, as shown below, as a single "ultraword." It models exactly the Greek rhê'ma as used in Hebrews 1:3. This Biblical rhê'ma, a linguistic word, is consider as a thought.
". . . sustaining all things by His powerful word (rhê'ma), (Hebrews 1:3. NIV).
As illustrated, the *Λ(λ) can be considered as a type of higher-intelligence "book." Indeed, there is an ultraword in *L that is equivalent to such a book. Is this Biblical? Plato used the Greek rhê'ma as signifying a single "spoken" or "written" word-form. However, he also used it for a sentence. The Greek employed for a particular "book" in the Bible is actually written as one long collection of symbols. There are no punctuation or paragraphs indicated. The entire Bible can be consider as written as one very long string of symbols, even in terms of modern forms by use of the spacing and paragraph symbols. We are told that rhê'ma, as a collection of symbols referring to God's prophecy, includes the characteristic aspect of fulfillment [10]. Thus, *Λ(λ) is just such a rhê'ma (word) since all of His creation is pre-designed.
The "page-turning" for the *deduction can be replaced with the ordered repetition notion. Such a "single" word containing the *instruction-sets would symbolically look like
At the time when specific Biblical creationary statements were originally presented, how could this linguistic model for creation be understood? Depending upon the circumstances, the Biblical word used for "to speak" can be interpreted as "to think." Thus, under this interpretation, God's thoughts are transformed into a physical and other realities. The St operator models the notion that God "thinks" specific entities into existence. That is, it is at this stage that He completes the transformation of His thoughts into physical or other realities.
"And God said, Let there be . . . ." (Genesis 1.) The Bible also translates the word here written as "said" by the term "thought" and this is how it should be understood in these verses. (See reference [7] for complete details as to a viable and complete GGU-model verified Genesis 1 creationary scenario.) It's unfortunate that the Bible translators did not use the correct notion of "thinking." This might have prevented the thousands and thousands of "magicians," claimed "witches," and the like from attempting to find the specific spoken words that might lead to physical creation or alterations in physical-behavior.
Relative to the universe in general and the "command" term, there is
". . . for he commanded (via thoughts), and they were created." (Psalm 148:5 NIV.)
Rather than use a words Biblical meaning when first presented, many individuals attempt to justify their faulty models via inappropriate interpretations. One such attempt is when the Hebrew word spoken as tôb, and having the very contextual and broad meaning of "good," is interpreted as having a moral meaning in the Genesis 1 scenario. When an individual has completed a drawing, design or many other physical acts you often hear the phrase mentally or otherwise,"That's really good." The individual is pleased with the results obtained. They have met the exact purpose for which the actions were preformed. This is what the phrase "It was good" means in Genesis 1. Or, as the Living Bible states it in each case, "God was pleased." It has no direct moral connotation to what has been created. It does in Genesis 2, where the tree of "knowledge of good and evil" is mentioned - knowledge that there are behavioral pathways God morally classifies as either good or evil, but not both.
The Hebrew that is interpreted as "good" has many different connotations. In all cases, the correct one must be related to the context.
Accept for the one verse Heb. 1:3, the pre-design aspects of the GGU-model were not originally constructed so as to verify any Biblical statement. Indeed, this author only had a very superficial knowledge of Scripture. The concept verifies the Foreknowledge concept. It strongly verifies Acts 15:18 and Isaiah 44:7
"Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." (KJV) ("known from eternity." (DBY) "All His works are know from eternity." (HNV) "Known from the eon to the Lord is His work." (Concordant Literal). Then there is
". . . let him lay out [set them in order] before me what has happened since I established my ancient people and what is yet to come, yes, let him foretell what will come." (Isaiah 44:7 (NIV)). "And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them. "(KJV) Trivially, this and Acts 15:18 imply that God knows all of His works from the beginning of the world and has set these events in order throughout all of physical time, at least.
Then so that there is no contradiction with Revelations 21, there is
"He set them in place for ever and ever; he gave a decree that they never pass away." (Psalm 148:6 NIV.)
Below, I take from the article [9] a physical illustration of a foreknowledge model. Notice the mathematical models for physical behavior often go back-and-forth from the mathematics and a purely rationally described language model for physical-behavior. Each universe-wide frozen-frame, including those that produce the creation-days, requires that mental-like higher-intelligence deduction be performed. This model for higher-intelligence modes of step-by-step deductive thought not only satisfies Hebrews 1:3 but also
". . . in him all things hold together." (Colossians 1:17. NIV.)
Further, the Old Testament notion that God maintains both physical and human behavior, which is modeled by this theological interpretation, is described in various verses of Psalm 147. Indeed, the fact that the properton approach allows each elementary particle and each combination there of, as well as each physical-system, to have a unique identifier specifically models
"He determines the number of stars and calls them each by name." (Psalm 147:4 NIV.)
Then Paul writes,
". . . For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly see, understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." (Romans 1:20 NIV.)
Is not a description for how God's "thoughts" produce a universe part of His invisible qualities? This appears to be a reason that the ultra-logic-systems are employed. An increase in knowledge is predicted (Dan 12:4). The higher-intelligence model for God's activities is such an "increase" and God's creationary activities are now more "obvious." The reason for this is that, of all of the modes of thought that are possible, God has created a special mode that is displayed through His creation activities. He has created humanity so that, in general, this mode of thought corresponds to the most basic one that we employ.
The complete GID model as theologically interpreted and the processes and entities necessary for this interpretation would be a significant way to display indirectly His invisible creationary attributes. This does not simply follow the fact that they correspond, in a higher-form, to a specific sequence of human actives employed by many to construct man made entities. The significance lies in the phrase "so that men are without excuse." His infinite power and divine nature is partially exhibited by (Is).
In what follows, previous results are brought together to give a step-by-step Biblically related description of how mental processes, "thinking," and observable physical behavior lead to a model for the creation of our universe. All the statements are rationally obtained.
The Bible specifically states that humankind is made in God's image (Genesis 1:26-27). In what follows, I replace the higher-intelligence notion with the term "God." The following displayed statements can now be related to specific human mental and physical activities that are represented by defined members of a mathematical model. These statements are predictions made by a mathematical model. These standard representations are all listed in my technical writings such as in [1a] and other technical writings found in this large compressed file on this website. All of processes that God employs to create are considered as mental in character. The following is a summary of God's GID-model creationary activities, which, as previously discussed, are predicted and satisfy a strict Biblical interpretation.
God pre-designs hyperfinitely many covirtual universes. This means finitely and, if necessary, infinitely many. For the necessary participator universe, each participator alteration corresponds to an altered universe about which God has complete knowledge. (Mathematically the altered universes are denoted by simply adding three symbols to symbol-string such as *Λ(λ). The addition yields *Λ(λ)[k].) This, in general, "models" the idea that He has knowledge of the past, present and future. Each pre-designed universe corresponds to hyper-developmental paradigm that is in a one-to-one relation with a hyper-instructional paradigm. Each hyper-developmental paradigm contains a standard description for each cosmology - the standard developmental paradigm.The Bible only states that God does not create from what is "visible." By implication, this seems to mean the He doesn't create physical entities from anything that appears or that is assumed as physical. The GGU-model does not contradict actual Biblical implications. God also creates, at least, the second and third heavens. Nothing that actually exists in the second heaven is physical. This is the realm of the GGU-model processes, which is termed as a preternatural world in the theological interpretation. Unless one states that God's thoughts are composed of "nothing," then He has not actually created from nothing as this term is generalized. When all of God's activities are considered as mental-like processes, then, as mentioned, a general description for all of God's endeavors is that He changes His thoughts into physical reality. This general characterization holds for both the *developmental paradigm and *instruction-sets cases.The hyper-developmental paradigm scheme is similar to the *instruction paradigm scheme. It is
(((*Λ'(λ)[k], *d(a,b)))*A) = d[k]. Each universe develops relative to primitive-time. Portions of this sequence are (temporal) observer-time. God keeps these ordered hyper-instruction paradigms and corresponding hyper-development paradigms in mental-like files that have special properties. These properties are especially designed so as to display His higher-intelligence. This is evidence that God designs each entity within our universe as well as its behavior over both primitive and observer-time.
God associates each of His created hyper-developmental paradigms with hyper-instruction-sets that correspond to properton formations that yields specific members of a hyper-event sequence, where each hyper-event corresponds to a member of the corresponding hyper-developmental paradigm. Specific hyper-events correspond to physical events while other hyper-events correspond to physical-like events. The created ultra-propertons are especially designed to represent the entire collection of all necessary physical and physical-like parameters.
In order to employ His designs, God creates, in an exceptionally consistent manner, a special hyperfinite mode of thought as modeled by an ultra-logic-system. The designed hyper-developmental paradigm is presented in this form. He repeats this creationary activity for the *instruction-sets. This is the *Λ(λ) single-complexity ultraword.
God applies the step-by-step algorithm *A. This is higher-form of deduction that can be described using a "meta-world" language. That is a general language that's used to describe other languages. When restricted to the physical world, a this higher-form of deduction corresponds to a basic form of human deduction that God includes in the structure of the human brain. This is repeated evidence that God, as Biblically described, is the creator of all aspects of our physical universe.
In order to have any comprehension of substratum behavior, an *instruction-set represents substratum processes that are activated. As noted this activation is denoted by (GSt). Since this is an analogue model, I assume that there is "something," the PLL (physical-like laws), that "force," as directed by the *instruction-set, the propertons to form into the appropriate combinations and also to produce as well as the physical-like events. This, of course, is a concept taken from the world of the physical scientist.
To form each step in the development of a universe, God gathers specific numbers of the created ultra-propertons into collections and these collections into collections and continues this gathering process until the final gathering corresponds to an entire physical universe at a moment in its development. These are the info-fields, NF. Propertons and these gatherings can either be thought of as actual physical-like entities or as "thought-like." These gatherings follow from a designed *instruction-set. This concept of constructing and using *instruction-sets He incorporates within the human brain so that humankind can recognize certain physical regularities termed physical laws.
The application of the coupled process (GSt), at the least, yields the physical universe at a specific moment. The (GSt) models the requirement that God is directly responsible for every physical aspect of a universe's development since the physical world only exists if St is applied. If a universe's development is pre-designed by an explicity defined *developmental paradigm rather then just pre-designed, as with physical laws, God associates each of His created hyper-developmental paradigms with hyper-instruction-sets that correspond to properton formations that yield specific members of a hyper-event sequence, where each hyper-event corresponds to a member of the corresponding hyper-developmental paradigm. Specific hyper-events correspond to physical events while other hyper-events correspond to physical-like events. The GGU-model only models behavior and, hence, exact details of how God obtains the results produced by St can be considerably different from those presented here.
I repeat that these higher-intelligence characteristics are predicted and when restricted to the physical world yield observable human activity, numerous gifts from God, and they match the Biblical statement "let us make man in our image." Hence, the existence of an higher-intelligence is not mere unfounded speculation but can be more deeply analyzed and can be considered as predicted from human mental processes and human behavior, which is related to mental processes and activity that is comprehensible. Moreover, as shown in this article on evidence there is a vast amount of evidence that satisfies the higher-intelligence predictions.
How do I mentally image the infinite? This is something that many claim cannot be done. Sorry, all that claim this are wrong. But, I cannot successfully draw this mental image. Close your eyes or go into a darken room. In some way, remove the visible light from your view. Now imagine a white road moving from the lower left hand position towards the upper-right hand location but the road narrows so as to end in a single vanishing point. That is, the road continues to appear within a totally black background and gets smaller and smaller as it vanishes at a vanishing point. I tried to represent this in a drawing on page 171 in [1]. But, the black background never seems to print correctly.
Unfortunately, there is one aspect of the image I cannot draw. This is the actual aspect that, for me, is a model for the basic generic non-finite. In my mental image, there is no edge to this black background, where as there is such an edge controlled by an individual's field of vision when not physically "seeing" just a black background. Further, any finite drawing must have an edge. So, what part of this mental image is my non-finite? It is the black background. This, of course, is a model for the non-finite and, in modern abstract mathematics, it is unnecessary.
The GID-modeled higher-intelligence can design and produce our universe in a manner that follows a strict (literal) interpretation of the creation statements made in Genesis 1. Example: things appear in mature and functional form, water, light, dry land, or objects formed during but one 24-hour day even without sunlight. This higher-intelligence can also design our universe so as to correspond to any of the proposed cosmologies. Biblical events that occur sequentially prior to a rapidly forming cosmology do so via the primitive-time sequence. This even holds if an "eternal" (no beginning and/or no ending in primitive-time) cosmology is selected. The GID-model specifically predicts that there are many ultranatural events and ultranatural laws about which we can have no knowledge. This is a strong verification of 1 Corinthians 13:12 and Daniel 29:24.
The word "upholding" in Hebrews 1:3 as used in the KJV is better understood as "sustaining." As noted, the term rhê'ma (word) is usually interpreted as a "spoken or mental word." It is the same term used in John 3:34 for speaking a word given by God, which for comprehension should follow a logical pattern. Can we get any additional comprehension as to how He might sustain our physical universe?
Consider that prior to application of (GSt) that there are covirtual universes described previously and illustrated in Herrmann (2002). Each DVD represents an *instruction paradigm that is composed of "ordered" *instruction-sets. Rather than as illustrated in Herrmann (2002), one DVD is all that is necessary, where the "chapter" notion is utilized. Notice that without participator alterations only one covirtual universe is necessary. All of the primitive-time "slices" exist. For the DVD model, this means that the variations in the surface of the DVD that lead to the images, for a chapter as viewed on a monitor, exist in the proper order. The combined operator (GSt) is the last step and it preservers the step-by-step *-logic-system *-algorithm, which, in restricted form, is the simplest form of propositional deduction. That is, one slice follows another in a logical way as displayed by an ID-signature.
The combined operator (GSt) behaves this way. An *instruction-set yields a info-field and this info-field to which the St process is "immediately" applied. Or the DVDs can represent a complete collection of info-fields. In this case, it is the St that is applied a DVD and this yields various realities.
The coupled (GSt) process (or just the St) models the "sustain" notion in that this is a general activity that God applies to each "slice" so that it become a physical reality. If He does not continue this activity, the physical universe would cease to develop physically. Indeed, if this occurred, removal of the "last" application of the coupled GSt) returns the universe to covirtual form and it ceases to exist physically. It has not been erased from the DVD. Another process directly applied by God also yields every miracle event. This higher-intelligence choice process can be applied at any moment in primitive-time to replace completely any portion of an entire universe with another portion God deems as necessary. This uses the participator universe approach since all allowed alterations in behavior are pre-designed.
The fact that there is more than one process used strengthens the intelligent design conclusions. Further, they indicate how God has constructed humans so that if they have the requisite knowledge or experiences, they can mentally deduce the most likely physical events to occur during the development of the physical world about them. On the other hand, one can simply state that "God created all there was, all there is, and all there ever will be" and nothing more needs to be stated about His creationary activities. However, I accept that any effort to enhance Romans 1:20 and establish the rationality of the Biblical creationary statements in Genesis is a worthwhile endeavor.
There are various criteria that need to be satisfied before a collection of statements can be considered as scientific in character. Depending upon who states them, they can differ. I have previously shown how the GGU-model, being a cosmogony, satisfies the basic requirements. The following statements are taken from a website "Encyclopedia of American Loons," where the contributers criticize individuals, organizations, ideas and the like. They mostly reveal their true intent for doing so. Relative to creationary science the remarks are based upon the contributors lack of knowledge. Relative to GID, they might think that they have eliminated their foes, when this is far from the truth.
Thus, to be a contender the ID movement has to have a falsifiable theory that yields testable hypotheses - and the theory has to explain the data (all the data, not just some of it) better than its alternatives. "It's designed" is not an explanation unless followed by an explanation of the exact mechanism of design (which would require identifying the intentions of the designer, as well as the purpose and methods of the designer, as well as why certain features were chosen rather than other ones). Provide a well-developed alternative, then you can play.
As detailed elsewhere, the GID-model satisfies all the necessary scientific criteria for a properly constructed scientific theory. The GID-model is falsifiable and testable. The notion of "better than" can be defined technically. But, it is most often science-community dependent. However, the GGU-model and interpretations satisfy all of these requirements since there is no other scientific cosmogony. And, the "certain features where chosen rather than other ones" is satisfied. The "certain features" comprise the entire physical universe (this, of course, includes the notion of multiple-universes that are but subsections of a cosmology) and there are no physical "other ones."
These requirements might be altered by this contributor to "Loons" in a rather obvious but arbitrary way in an attempt to eliminate the GID-interpretation. He could simply require the designer to be a physical entity, which requires it to be "self-generating." Such an after-the-fact alteration would surely indicate the author's intent in writing the requirements in the first place. However, the self-generation of an entity that creates all there was, all there is and all there ever will be leads to an incomplete infinite logical regress. (See the end of this article.)
In the original approach to the GGU-model as it appears in [1,1a] and elsewhere, the theory of finite consequence operators is employed. In particular, one operator, which I denote here by S'', is employed. A developmental paradigm, d, (or now an instruction paradigm) is used. Mathematically, an "ultraword" W is predicted as is the one that represents ordered reading and speaking. Such ultraword mathematical objects that behave, in general, like a written or spoken word (a finite list of symbols, drawings or images). When S'' is applied to {W}, many objects are *deduced. From this ultraword, choices must be made.
Consider the finite set of rational numbers {1.23, 6.78, 5.345, 1.22}. We have learned how to apply some unknown mental process and place these numbers in the order, 1.22 < 1.23 < 5.345 < 6.78. In the original approach, the same type of process must be done for an hyperfinite infinite set of numbers in order to select the appropriate members of the developmental paradigm. Of course, this is but a model for behavior, a model for some process that selects the appropriate members of the developmental paradigm. This new approach does not employ such a technically vague ordering process, but rather each member of a developmental paradigm is *deduced in the correct order. The ultraword approach requires a different ultraword for each type of universe. In the new approach, only one choice is made and this yields a specific type of universe via application of *A.
Both approaches require the same rationally describable collection of propertons and the rational application of (GSt) to yield physical reality. In the new approach, this coupled operator is only applied in the *instruction paradigm case. Although not mentioned in [1, 1a], the exact same original processes can be applied to an *instruction paradigm and it is these results to which (GSt) can be applied.
One advantage for the original approach is that for participator alterations in physical behavior distinct universes are designed. These can all be incorporate within one ultimate ultraword and the operator S'' rationally yields each ultraword from which specific altered universes are obtained by another application of S''. This ultimate ultraword method can easily be applied to this new method.
In the next section, I repeat a new model for the participator altered universe in which we dwell. This appears in [9], where a great deal more is discussed. This "Humanity Structure, at the least, models the following Biblical statements.
"Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." (KJV) ("known from eternity." (DBY) "All His works are known from eternity." (HNV) "Known from the eon to the Lord is His work." (Concordant Literal) . (Acts 15:18.)
Then there is
". . . let him lay out [set them in order] before me what has happened since I established my ancient people and what is yet to come, yes, let him foretell what will come." (Isaiah 44:7. NIV.)
Trivially, this and Acts 15:18 imply that God knows all of His works from the beginning of the world and has set these events in order throughout all of physical time, at least.
Then so that there is no contradiction with Revelations 21, there is
"He set them in place for ever and ever; he gave a decree that they never pass away." (Psalm 148:6. NIV.)
Isaiah continues, "See the former things have taken place, and new things I declare, before they spring into being I announce them to you." (Isaiah 42:9. NIV.)
"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are yet done . . . . (Isaiah 46:10. KJV.)
"Before I formed the in the belly, I knew (yâda' "reflective thought") thee . . . ." (Jeremiah 1:5. KJV.)<[> ". . . and the revealer of mysteries showed you what is going to happen." (Daniel 2:29. NIV)
"For many are called, but few are chosen." (Matthew 22:14. KJV.)
" . . . 'The secrete of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables . . . .' " (Mark 4:11. NIV).
"In love, he predestined us to be adopted as his sons . . . ." (Ephesians 1:4. NIV.)
"For those that God foreknew, he predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, . . . And those he predestined he also called; . . . ." (Romans 8:30. NIV.)
"They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen. (Acts 4:28. NIV.)
"All the days ordained for me were writhen in your books before one of them came to be." (Psalm 139:16. NIV.)
'For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." (Ephesians 2:10. NIV.)
[Note: As with the DVD approach to the participator universe, what I detail here applies to the *developmental paradigm that correspond to an *instruction paradigm.] Recall that, for the theological interpretation, the complete GGU-model has now been correlated to three distinct views. Rules for combining symbol-strings correspond to how the thoughts, which correspond to these symbol-strings, behave and this behavior predicts how the thoughts of a higher-intelligence behave.
When I was about seven years old I had a thought. "What if all that physically exists is but in a giant's dream and if he awakes, we will all disappear?" Even at that tender age, I was not sure something like that might not be true. During my dreams I also made choices although they are usually poor ones. How it is mentally possible that I am allowed to make such choices seems to me to be rather remarkable. The model I now try to describe follows just such unusual thought patterns.
From 1949 - 1961, I appeared in numerous theatrical productions. I have knowledge as to how the dramatists, the authors for some of the productions in which I appeared, produced their final product. First, they make an outline. It gives a general sketch of the story line, the cast of characters, and the locals the scenery depicts. Then the author fills in the details. Of course, this is how one often writes a novel as well. I have handled many scripts or "playbooks."
Distinct from the usual play, the author is a member of the cast. He can influence the other characters. He obviously can change each "act" as he sees fit. He can change the scenery. He not only gives the actors the exact spoken lines they must say, but he also gives them the exact ideas, the exact mental words and images they will have. Every aspect of each cast member's life is exactly designed by the author.
Thus, each script the author writes (the pre-designs) includes every expressible thought and every expressible influence by the author as well as the influences that author allows the Adversary to make for each cast member. These are altered relative for the specific choices each is allowed. Our thoughts require that choices be made. A specific playbook includes every individual's response for each allowable choice. As should be obvious, the choices necessarily are limited by the physical and mental circumstances and can even be limited, as in the case of Adam and Eve prior to the Fall, to specific knowledge or behavior.
A script includes every allowable physical alteration within the physical universe. This includes our "concrete thoughts." (These are contrasted with "meaningful thoughts below.) Each play ends at the same conclusion, but each play arrives at the conclusion over different time spans or by different "paths," so to speak [9]. Then each script is separated into scenes, one for each universe-wide frozen frame. The author writes trillions and trillions and trillions of playbooks, where each also details physical events that can occur after a cast member makes a specific choice.
Of great significance is that all of the pre-designed playbooks that describe the behavior of each created entity exist as thoughts. We exist, our choices exist, and all the behavior is described that can be physically realized. But, as yet, there are NO physical facts. Hence, no playbook statement carries the additional notion of "true" or "false" for physical reality. Such concepts are invalid for the contents of the playbooks. The behavior of collections of life-paths allows for prophecies to be based upon the outline and they also don't carry any "true" or "false" meaning when playbook statements are written. The book "Revelations" fits this category, where it is merely interpreted as a bare outline with vast symbolic embellishments.
Let's now use a recently manufactured device to model how the author uses these playbooks. (There have been honored scientists who have used aspects of computer design to model "how" they claim our universe behaves. I have used such illustrations since 1985.) The recently constructed device, a "Solid State Hard Drive" (SSHD), is to be employed. To do so, separate each playbook into scenes. These scenes are digitized and, via computer hardware, they will energize the pixels of a 3-D High-Definition monitor. Each scene takes up a miniscule portion of one sement of the SSHD. It, of course, has a SSHD location identifier. When processed by a computer, each scene represents one universe-wide frozen-frame. If it weren't for modern research, then to describe how the scenes are combined via human choices would be difficult.
There is one aspect of the human condition I haven't detailed since it can't be completely described using a comprehensible language. It corresponds to a selection process that originates exterior to the SSHD. It is a major aspect of the created human spirit. It's describe for physical actions, in a general way, by Eccles and Robinson [11]. It's the notion of "mental intentions." This is a process that precedes the actual actions that correspond to the physical realization of a specific choice. It is the actual "choosing to act" step. For Eccles and Robinson, there is an immaterial medium that relates to the "mental intension to act in a physical manner," where this medium connects the mind to the physical brain. This connection is via a back-and-forth process involving different types of thoughts, the immaterial ones I've described [in the paper from I've taken this] and a specific physical brain activity type that forms our concrete thoughts.
"How does the proposed interaction of mind and brain relate to the "free will" problem? The answer is that, despite the so-called insuperable difficulty of having a non-material mind act on a material brain, it has been demonstrated to occur by a mental intention in just the manner predicted by dualist-interactalism - no doubt to the great discomfiture of all materialist and physicalists" [11, p. 163].
The dualist-interactalism hypothesis is described by Eccles and Robinson and it predicts certain behavior [11, p. 35 and on]. The Eccles and Robinson research entails physical actions. I have generalized this "mental intention act" to include the "mental intention to gain knowledge." That is to have "concrete thoughts - thoughts of which we are completely aware." For the SSHD, this interaction flows from a source external to the SSHD. It is a product of the external "spirit" aspect of the human being, an aspect that cannot be described in detailed by any of our languages, but is predicted to have a description using a higher-language.
Each concrete human thought is pre-designed. Via intentions and our Spirit, we "choose" a concrete thought. Mechanisms for this are apparently not describable via meaningful statements taken from the standard general language L. Apparently, this is not the same type of "choice" that is of Scriptural significance. There are three types of "choices" that are of significance. (1) One chooses to act physically. This does not mean such actions can be accomplished. (2) One chooses to accept a thought as fact or not. (3) One chooses to ignore a thought to which (1) or (2) apply.
When such a mental intention is formed, it's this intention via the medium, that informs the SSHD which segment corresponds to the fulfillment of this intention and the exact location of the "next" fulfilling universe-wide frozen-frame contained in a segment. This includes our concrete thoughts. This, of course, is but another illustration of how one can conceive of the participator universe model. Each segment of the SSHD corresponds to the DVDs pervious used to illustrate this approach, the covirtual universes [1]. In this case, hyper-fast propertons are not necessary since the SSHD corresponds to just a portion, so to speak, of the "mind of the author" and the selection process takes place within that mind. That is, our mental intentions, via our spirit, triggers, via the author's mind, the selection process. Then the realization operator is applied to a specifically created info-field. These Info-fields can also be considered as composed of "thoughts."
In all details, the above playbook and corresponding SSHD descriptions behave like a model for these aspects of God's behavior. Hence, it IS a model. It is one of the ways that gives us a rational description for notions we cannot other otherwise comprehend. Formally, the different life-paths that tranverse the numerously many pre-designed universes can be viewed via an "ultra-logic-systems." This leads to these life-paths themselves being intelligently designed and rationally produced by a higher-intelligence. Further, additional aspects of the interlacing aspects can be modeled mathematically via "graph theory" as embedded into the nonstandard structure. I leave any such modeling to others.
When realization occurs then the statements that correspond to observable "fact" are now classified as"true." In the Greek language, there is another term that our Bibles often translate as "true." This type of "truth" has the same properties as the type that corresponds to "fact" but often refers to ideas, concepts and beliefs that may not be observable fact. They can be observable in part. Thus, the existence of this Humanity Structure satisfies the "model theoretic view" of what constitutes truth. Relative to foreknowledge statements, it is a fact that the symbol strings that begin with the "The" in the title of this section and end with the last period mark exist and satisfy the model theoretic requirements for each foreknowledge statement to be "true." This idea of "truth" is that each such statement corresponds to members of a set of entities and the rationally described processes correspond to relations between these entities.
Except how the Humanity Structure corresponds to the Bible, one might ask, "Is there physical proof that this model corresponds to a reality of some sort?" People have tried to explain it materialistically, of course. But, none of these models seem to correspond exactly to what is reported. There are various paranormal explanations as well. From the very few times it has happened to me, I didn't have a feeling that I had "seen something" before. I had a feeling that I had mental "knowledge" that the event is "somehow-or-other pre-designed" in some form prior to when it occurred to me. That is how I've experienced "déjà vu." This could be a purposeful slight delay that gave me and others "playbook" knowledge prior to the thoughts being realized. Just a minor idea that might be useful.
I repeat, a major aspect of this type of creationary process needs to be understood. A main character can make statements and perform actions that have no actual moral value. They need not be fact when first presented. Those statements that are not fact and, hence, not true don't become fact until formally realized. Notice that the author is a member of the cast of characters. The other cast members are considered as but special mental constructs of the author, where the author gives them a limited amount of freedom to choice from pre-designed life-paths.
The "intentions" notion is extended to concrete intentions via the back-and-forth medium process that connects our Spirit with God's Spirit. Obviously this is related to such concepts as "prayer."
I have recently (2/22/2013) discovered the notion of "open theism" or, as some call it, "open futurism." As I understand this concept, this Humanity-Structure differers from it. For the Humanity-Structure, the "probabilities" that human behavior leads to certain outcomes is replaced with the fact that God has knowledge of all of these outcomes. They are mentally pre-designed by Him. In this sense, the future of which God has such knowledge is "immutable." Separating God's pre-designed thoughts from the realities they produce does not seem to be a component of open theism. I point out again that with the exception that God is Omnipresent which satisfies a strict GGU-model description, Omniscience and Omnipotent have no possible truth value unless the quantifier "all" is restricted to a specific list of entities.
Relative to foreknowledge, Humanity-Structure is similar to the notion of "Non-Bivalent Omniscience" in that certain future contingents are neither true nor false. But, all do converge to a conclusion that will, upon realization, be fact. Prior to realization, all basic aspects of the *instruction-information model are relative to *meaningful *thoughts and mediums. For the Humanity Structure this has not changed with the exception that the "general" medium is more prominent. This general medium upholds, so to speak, *meaningful *thoughts. You might think of this as *mind "stuff."
The Humanity Structure leads directly to the *instruction-information model relative to human behavior. All of the steps in the generation through and including the realization point are sequentially contained in one of the collections of pre-designed info-fields. The author has complete knowledge as to the contents of each member of the infinite collection of the collections of info-fields. Any foreknowledge statements or predictions of future events will hold, when realized, for one or more of the collections of info-fields that depict physical events and that follow the specific one realized. Also notice that an individual can be identified by the characteristic behavior that is being represented by a life-path.
Of great significance to understanding this model and its relation to a highly significant feature of the New Testament is the actual meaning of a major Greek term. Recall the original meaning for the Greek word "logos." It began as denoting a "logical expression of a thought." The notion that it comprises "thoughts" and that the consequences of these thoughts yield material entities goes back to Heraclitus at about 500 B. C.
During the time of John, the term is enlarged to signify a complete logical thought, a complete account. It is not to be considered as simply a grammatical collection of symbols. For its Biblical usage, in order to correspond to this well-know meaning during the first century A. D., the term needs to signify the complete creationary scenario that God intends to present - a complete and fully detailed personal expression of Himself. This complete mental-like concept - the logos - exists and does not cease to exist, from our comprehension, before, during and after the thoughts are manifested. As was common prior to and during John's time, it can even carry the name of its main character - Jesus.
Thus, such a logos leads to a step-by-step production of the "material universe" and has exceptional significance for human kind. In general, God's thoughts exist, in a sequence sense, prior to being manifested as physical entities. Entities are comprehended by listing their attributes whether they are displayed or not. This holds for Jesus' various manifestations.
Now consider John's "In the beginning was the logos . . . ." Following this, John begins discussing certain major aspects of this logically presented complete mental expression. Then John tells us, in 1:14, that the major aspect becomes physically real.
I have purposely saved one more speculation that, depending upon ones interpretation, has some Biblical support. Of course, descriptions for such processes can come from the higher-language and only a higher-intelligence could "comprehend" them. There is a modern-day model for it. I do not advocate it as yet since I don't consider it significant. It aids those individuals who insist that foreknowledge is not merely pre-designing all of the possibilities but it refers to actually having knowledge as to the one the occurs in physical reality.
There exists within the GGU-model mathematics "ultra-logic-systems" the rationally yield each of the possible participator universes. There is one that yields the exact one that occurs in physical reality. The fact that this special one exists does not mean that it is in some manner "known" sequentially prior to realization. There is a electronic model for this although it requires a "pre-physical reality" to exist. For the above SSHD model, the mental intentions choice from a pre-designed segment of the SSHD does not yield physical reality but a "pre-physical reality" model. The illustration is that this choice produces a DVD. This DVD can be considered as composed of the exact *instruction-sets or even the exact info-fields that, when activated yields, actual physical reality.
This DVD represents the exact ultra-logic-system that yields the one pre-physical reality. This DVD is fully known sequentially prior to activation. Then pre-physical reality is activated, via the usual GGU-model mechanisms, and our present physical universe is the step-by-step result. As usual all of these GGU-model mechanisms that yield physical reality are created during that "zero-length" time period the corresponds to the preparatory Genesis 1:2 statement.
One can ask, what type of reality are we now exhibiting, the pre-physical reality or the physical-reality? If this "great speculation" is fact, then déjà vu would take on considerably more significance.
[Self-generation. Let A be the class of all symbolized objects created by an intelligence. Let P(|,||) be a predicate interpreted as "| creates ||," where "||" is a member A. Relation symbolized by P is created by H and P is in A. Suppose that H is self-created. Hence, H is in A and P(H,H). One also has the relations P(|,P(||,|||)), P(|,P(||,P(|||,||||))), etc., using Kleeny tick notation as variables, are in A. Again P(H,P(H,P(H,H))) . . . . etc. What this means is that using a trivial step in formalizable scientific (i.e. classical) logic, then a conclusion of this "human deduction" cannot be formally expressed if we assume the usual induction notion. Since the class A exists, and inductive thought is a basis of mathematics and physics, one has no resolution. This is a type of infinite (logical) regress. But, this does not make the concept "irrational." This is resolved by stating that God is not self-created. If this is not satisfactory to some, then, for them, this indicates that human comprehension via language is limited.
[0] The Complete GGU-model Processes.
[1] Herrmann, R. A. 2002. Science Declares Our Universe IS Intelligently Designed, Xulon Press, Fairfax Va and other addresses.
[1.5] (Added referemce) Herrmann, R. A. 1999. Information theory, consequence operators and the origin of life, Creation Research Society Quarterly, 36(3):123-132.
[1a] Herrmann, R. A, 1993. The Theory of Ultralogics, http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9903082
[1b] Herrmann, R. A. 1989. Fractal and ultrasmooth microeffects, J. Math. Physics 30(4):805-808. (See 4c in this publication list for important typographical corrections for Theorem 4.1.)
[1c] Herrmann, R. A. Modeling Divine Attributes
[2] Shoenfield, J. R., 1977. The Axioms of Set Theory, In: Handbook of Mathematical Logic, (ed. Barwise), North Holland, New York, pp. 321-344.
[3] Bohm, D. 1957. Causality and Chance in Modern Physics, Harper Torchbooks/The Science Library, Harper and Brothers, New York.
[4] March, A. and I. M. Freeman. 1963. The new world of physics, Vintage Books, New York
[5] Specific Information .
[9] Human Behavior
[10] Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 3, Ed. Colin Brown, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1971, p. 1121.
[11] Eccles, J. and D. N. Robinson, 1984. The Wonders of Bring Human; Our Brain and Our Mind, The Free Press, NY.
(1) For the actual mathematical statements that lead to the above two displayed sequences, (1) and (2) see this PDF file.