@Gunito Dogan Great idea to quote and comment, much easier to follow, but I haven’t figured out how to do it easily on my cellphone. Somewhat random approach for now. Several thoughts lumped together here: 1) re the TOE and your comment on psychoanalysis and consciousness, we should perhaps introduce the idea of hierarchy as well to mirror the hierarchical structure in nature: there’s a hierarchical structure of theories within the TOE, my TOE being about particle physics and cosmology, ie the fundamental reality. Only once this fundamental reality has been confirmed can we hope to figure out other levels of theories concerning chemistry, biology, etc, including consciousness. 2) your stubborn lack of understanding of the concept of energy is truly astounding to me, what a betrayal to all the delicious Turkish food that exists in this world! Without correcting your disrespectful attitude towards energy, we can hardly pursue a meaningful conversation: my entire theory or life is based on three words — all is energy. The rest is just to draw out the logical consequences of this absolute truth. 3) The title of King: you are familiar with Plato, so you should be the last person on the planet to call me King as you know too well the meaning of a philosopher king. 4) which part of Canada are you in, Toronto? If in Ottawa, let me know and I’ll be honoured to take you to one of the Turkish restaurants here and solve the energy issue once and for all. 5) all the philosophers in human history had served their roles in the pursuit of knowledge and truth; I would certainly acknowledge their contributions when the time comes; but now isn’t that time yet. Now is the time to destroy, to undo, so that the tiny seed of truth can sprout and grow to protect the future. The majority of philosophers have failed miserably, at least at the level of fundamental reality. I only admire very few of them, such as Spinoza and Zhang Zai, and several others at various levels, even though I don’t completely agree with them all. What I’m doing here — as a self proclaimed philosopher king — is to DO philosophy by conducting conceptual examination of all fundamental scientific concepts. At this level, you no longer study philosophy, you do it. All past philosophers are no longer relevant unless I need their services here and there. For example, Kant is a dead person now with his noumena bullshit, but I will gladly revive him for a second when introducing the idea of a rotating universe — it was Kant who had the brilliant mind to imagine an infinite universe that’s rotating; he got the infinite part wrong, as rotation by definition is quantized and therefore finite, but still he got the rotation part right, which is no small achievement.

@Gunito Dogan A pity indeed! I have been doing weekly trips to Montreal for three years since my son attended McGill. Re the TOE and layered approach, the key point is to land on electromagnetism associated with pure rotational energy: once you have explained any and all matter with just the two fundamental charges, you will start to appreciate how everything else, from the atoms and molecules to human bodies and galaxies, are just scaled-up electromagnetic functions. The study of consciousness is just the study of the brain structure and related functions, that’s all — it doesn’t mean some entity called “consciousness” exists somewhere. So we can’t say “all is consciousness” — the only option is all is energy, energy being the power to be, to exist (paying tribute to the historical “Being” here). Earlier you asked about why rotational energy as if one could create or generate angular momentum from nothing — one can’t. Rotational energy being rotational energy, it rotates eternally — it is what it is. A logician doesn’t invent or fabricate reasons to explain the reality; a logician uses the facts of the physical reality to explain the physical reality. The abundance of angular momentum in nature is a fact despite it being ignored by the majority of people; to use the observed/known rotations to account for all the rotations that are either too small, too big or too far away to be seen is logic proper — this is the principle of self explanation as mentioned in my ebook. Hence the significance of the conservation of angular momentum: it explains itself.

Thanks, Huey! Will ponder this and see how to respond! My approach to date has been to boil everything down to the single issue of rotation vs non-rotation, and then use the simplest possible model of the electron-positron pair to deconstruct the standard model which was entirely based on the wrong assumption of a non-rotating universe. The laundry list will be as long as the list of physics puzzles…there’s indeed the question of why wrong theories can still produce certain predicted results, will address it in time. Thanks again!

@Aaron Conrad nothing to do with “dimensions” — that’s one of the most physically abused mathematical concepts. It just implies that people don’t realize there are larger rotating systems in the rotating universe — let alone seeing the associated rotations. Without such conceptual knowledge, people won’t understand that, at present, the expansion of the universe is driven by the top two largest internal rotating systems (supercomplexes, about 1000 of them; and complexes, about a million of them) whose rotating periods are longer than the time since the Big Bang. Once you understand the hierarchical structure, all observed “mysteries” become observed evidence of the rotating universe, be it dark energy, dark matter, the “cold spot” in the CMB, or the so-called “axis of evil”.

@Aaron Conrad no telescope needed — would be useless anyway if one didn’t have the conceptual tools to properly understand what’s being observed. The best and only resource is Sternglass’ work, including his book Before the Big Bang (of which my ebook is merely a footnote). See the attached for a glimpse of the hierarchical structure.