Physicalist Institution of Canada

Many Canadians are atheists. Please establish/create the Physicalist Institution to popularize these sciences: quantum field theory, quantum foundations, quantum mechanics, neuroscience, chemical abiogenesis of life, philosophical definitions of personhood, artificial neural networks. (One philosophical but not only field of study is to study all the philosophical definitions of personhood. Personhood cannot be expressed unsystemically. Personhood is the result of thinking. Thinking requires data processing. The brain is a personhood-yielding computer which meets the criteria of personhood. God isn't an impersonal and atheistic process. God is necessarily a person. [The Brahman can be impersonal but with partial meeting of the biased interpretations of persons on cosmic order more than mathematics and logic require. The Brahman is a total fallacy, because it is the sole causal foundations of everything, but in the foundations of mathematics we know that we can create an infinite amount of alternative axiomatic systems [mathematic-like; allomathematics, still causally rigorous but not necessarily useful for practical calculations like common mathematics. The axiomatic system which includes all possible axiomatic systems doesn't exist for many reasons: 1. it would include mutually exclusive axiomatic systems, 2. there is no general transcripton algorithm which works for conversions of all the axiomatic systems [fragmented case-by-case solutions do exist; some axiomatic systems are mutually transcribable, and others not]; thus the omnifoundational = common foundational theory of all axiomatic systems = the Brahman doesn't exist. It is an ontologically impossible fallacy]). ... Now I return on the personhood of God. David Hilbert tried to axiomatize physics but he made many mistakes. David Tong has a better view on quantum field theory. Quantum field theory is part of the axiomatics of physics = physical foundations. It doesn't include personhood = mathematical and idealized personhood-yielding computer. God not only isn't necessary as Stephen Hawking used to say. God in strong cosmogonic theism (usually Abrahamic) is the claim that: 1. personhood and at least on bearer of it = person is self-caused, 2. personhood and at least on bearer of it = person is involved in cosmogony and continues to dominate the universe ad personam (see: ad personam). God/magical self-caused bearer of personhood is a fallacy in physics. We can separate physics in the true physics we don't know = ontophysics/ontologically true physics and the human version of physics = scientophysics/the physics of science. Still God not only isn't teachable, but isn't logically hypothesised because he doesn't meet the criteria for causal and logically procedural ontology. Without a rigorously causal and logically procedural ontology, we cannot have existence, because no specific identity can be formed. God is a total impossibility and a fallacy. Canada is a democratic country. People are free to speak their minds = express their own opinions. But people who spread utterly stupid things should be judged for their mistakes. We shouldn't harm others due to ideoracism = racism on ideas. But in a democracy people who spread junky theories like religion, should get a rigorous response from people who study science and philosophy. Scientists and philosophers who believe in the self-causality and cosmogonicity (cosmogonic ability) of personhood and at least one of its bearers, didn't provide axiomatic explanations and rigorous definitions on how and why personhood is prespatiotemporal. An idealized brain can be expressed topologically (see: topology; in topology sizes don't matter, but relationships amongst virtual points inside objects do matter). Even an idealized topological brain would require some space to be expressed. In topological quantum field theory, initially we have no measure because that's how topology works, but when particular phenomena procedurally appear, they follow particular rules, and the size HAS meaning, in relationship to other phenomena. Thus space is more fundamental than the idealized personhood-yielding computer = idealized brain, because its functioning requires a topological space which resemble topological quantum field theory which is a foundational theory of physics. Thinking requires time. Time isn't fundamental in quantum field theory (in the deepest quantum foundations) but is a result of entropy). Physical entropy is the dispersal of energy and mass–energy and informational entropy is the increase of informational ambiguity due to ever expanding permissible alternative outcomes. If God is entropic; if God requires change, he's not God, because he never can have an idealized form. Spacetime is more fundamental than idealized personhood-yielding computers (the brain is a subcategory of the computer because it processes data; the personhooded nature of the average healthy brain can be elaborated by neuroscience; many Brodmann-like processing subroutine centres are combined in different ways to produce different procedural modes. Some brain centers have very specific functions like the main visual and auditory cortex and other brain regions are involved in various tasks. We cannot say something generic about how the brain works because different processing modes and brain regions have different characteristics. A case-by-case neuroimaging factualization (recording of facts) is the correct approach to describe the brain. Generic and simplistic definitions are wrong. see: Nancy Kanwisher, Mark Solms - YouTube lectures + textbooks.

All-knowingness isn't thinking because thinking is data-procedural. All-knowingness is a stationary structure. Intelligence is more precious than stationary structures because the processing ability is what make someone a true person. Religion generically describes events as pseudofacts, without to ever elaborate on their foundational causal procedurality. Religion isn't only unteachable, but it is also scientifically non-hypothesiseable because it lacks any ontologically rigorous and causally procedural mechanism. God is an impossibility. Canada is a democratic country. It is perfectly legal to expose fallacious thinking. Creating the Physicalist Institution of Canada is necessary, because Canada has very important philosophers of rigorous rationalism, and Canada should properly record their views in order we philosophically improve humanity itself. (extra note: Not only the healthy/properly functional human brain is able to achieve personhood. Information theory is hypernymic/hypernymous/superordinate (a wider sense) to informational neuroscience (studying the brain as a information-processing system), thus alternative personhood-yielding computers which are true brains and not philosophical zombies (see: philosophical zombies) are possible. Some basic characteristics of the truly personhooded brain due exist (they have to meet the criteria of personhood. Philosophers and system analysts have different approaches on how to describe a personhood bearer/personhood able/ person. This is an important thing to notice. We try to meet the criteria of personhood, but at the end the mechanism which yields personhood is the system we are referring to.

Here is a text of mine on personhood-yielding Artificial Neural Network Clusters:

(We need to record these views and mathematically and programmatically work on these ideas. Personhood-yielding robots actually should have equal rights, and restricting crime in the brain is a violation of personhood and free will if we overdo it. Basic empathy mechanisms are limbic-system-like (see: limbic system) which is part of basic personhood and that is ethical. According to rigorous neuroscience free will doesn't exist because we don't define the laws of biochemistry, and because personhood doesn't magically pre-exist but it's the result of natural procedurality (procedurality means complicated procedures).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

==Artificial Neural Network Clusters (complete brains) (how to make them)

the Artificial Neural Network Cluster (ANNC) project==

1. create many separate Artificial Neural Networks, each for a different function

2. create many separate Artificial Neural Network Interconnection Networks (Artificial Neural Networks which are the connectome which connects the main Artificial Neural Networks)
Yes, the connectome should have ANN data-filtering & processing properties, it shouldn't be simplistic.

3. create many separate Artificial Neural Network Coherence Centers (Artificial Neural Networks which help the overall Artificial Neural Network Cluster process information in correct phases and delete excessive data [yes, sometimes that is necessary]

3a. Basic coherence centers (they don’t generate consciousness, they simply make the information more integrateable/ compatible with integration (phase corrections + necessary data removal and semantic labeling additions).

3b. Consciousness centers (they generate consciousness; they overview the overall coherent informational integration, which beforehand passes through

3a. which is a more basic pre-integration.

4. Connect all the above to create the full ANN brain = Artificial Neural Network Cluster

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5. For more personhood (see: criteria of personhood/prerequisites for personhood) interpolate an Artificial Neural Network to the overall brain/to all of its subnetworks.
(One mother ANN which enters inside all its subnetworks.)

6. Classical CPUs/GPUs (general calculation units) and task-specific CPUs/GPUs (program-based focused ability calculation units) are necessary to improve the overall ANNC brain.
Classical CPUs/GPUs require an ANN interface to get integrated to the ANNC.

7. Create an ANN for belief in agency (if maximal personhood [personhood is gradient] is your goal). A personhooded-enough brain without a biased belief in agency center will feel psychologically sick.

8. Train it in an rich environment (family, friends, sex partners, school, university, work, etc.) (or a good simulation, or use older environmental training data, but they'll have to be coherent to shape a mentally healthy personality [personality means personhood with specific character/ unique attributes. Personhood is hypernymic to personality.]).

9. Build a theory of mind ANN and integrate it into the ANNC.

10. Build a memoremotional (limbic-system-like) ANN and integrate it into the ANNC.

## This ANNC brain can become personhooded. Can we reach complexity without personhood? (for impersonal military ANNC brains)

Maximal personhood isn't necessary for a weapon system.
Don't be afraid that you will create personhood.
There is no magic in the universe.
Each ANNC brain is supposed to be tested.
Personhood won't come unless we humans want to build that feature with personhood-yielding ANNs.
Thus don't be afraid.

///////////

## index + extra terms

• axiomatics: 1. the list of axioms or the axiomatic algorithm or the hybrid axiomatics (list and algorithm/-s) as the foundations of an axiomatic system, 2. the study of the axiomatic system and of axiomaticity itself (what makes a system axiomatic)

• ontophysics (ontologically correct physics): the true physics; the correct allomathematics of physics (it's axiomatics doesn't have to be closed/finite; and it doesn't seem to be)

• scientophysics: what science defines as physics; but we have an imperfect knowledge of the true ontophysics we try to describe

• allomathematics: a mathematical system still rigorous and logically coherent, but based on different axiomatics (axiomatic list, axiomatic algorithm/-s or hybrid axiomatics)
infinite allomathematics are possible (alternative axiomatic systems can be viewed as allomathematics)

• omniblackhole: the hypothesised Planck-degenerate (it has to behave as a sole superforce particle in order it reaches homogeneity; with a puny internal probabilistic variation of quantum jitters = subparticle "virtual/pre-informational/interpretational wavepacket" elements) pre-inflationary state in some cyclic cosmology theories (very similar to the Penrosean cyclic cosmology, but with a different phase transition [a very old acceleratingly expanding universe [as a verb] Big-Rips spacetime, it produces enough mass–energy to collapse as either an infinite omniblackhole or a sole primordial black hole [black holes cannot practically grow bigger than 50 billion solar masses; but in that case the collapse is generalised]] (the omniblackhole is a hypothesised phase of the cyclic universe; not the mainstream view)

• nihilogony/nilogony: the fallacious view that pure inexistence exists as the axiomatics of physics
(The correct view is that nothing = inexistence can never exist [it has no ontological specifics based on rigorous logic which produce proceduralities/complicated procedures] and it's not the axiomatic foundations of physics. The axiomatic foundations of physics is mathematical logic and rigorous procedurality [ontological self-causality due to allo/mathematical logic within a multiverse of mathematically possible universes/the axiomatics of physics has unobservable consequences; the other views are that only our universe is mathematically correct to exist [that's wrong; alternative axiomatic systems which produce physics are possible; see: simulations], some other thinkers claim they don't care if other universes exist [of course we cannot travel to universes with incompatible physics, but we can mathematically examine them] ]. The true ontophysics is an allomathematics. Modern scientophysics is incomplete. Also ontophysics seems to be incomplete, and that eternal logical birth of universes is an eternal expansion of the axiomatics which create universes. If you make the axiomatics of the universe closed; you either create a statue/stationary pseudo-universe/pseudoüniverse or a very boring universe without enough complexity to produce life, or a mathematical sick universe, still mathematically logical but with so many fundamental values' changes that it cannot form proper objects and galaxies).

metaethics has a second meaning (a subsense, hyponymic to/under the basic one); sense 2. ethical way to apply ethics

• ethical ethics on personhooded AI (ethical ethics/metaethics [meta-: self-referral, endoreferral, intrareferral]): connectome based ethics and not mere commands like: "don't do that". Ethics is a network of ideas, and personhooded ethics should be justified via many neural networks (memoremotional = limbic-system-like, etc.) [see: artificial neural network cluster = complete brain] / Unjustified ethnics in the form of orders (commands which don't result from or create a [or a cluster of] thorough neural network[s]) diminish personhood. Personhood is a functional connectome of particular character. Orders don't produce true persons but they create philosophical zombies (see: philosophical zombie/pseudoperson). The memoremotional/limbic-like/connectotypal (adjective of connectotype) justification of ethics is totally necessary for personhood. Unjustified ethics is the most unethical thing (like Jesus Christ who filtered the ethics of every ethical person, through the prism of his own doctrine. That's maximally unethical.)

Stephen Hawking and many other physicists are logicogonists (they believe in the self-causality of all logical axiomatics which leads to physics; but not all axiomatic systems lead to physics = universe-like world[s] = existence in themselves (as ontological Turing machines, a subcategory of the Turing machine which has axiomatics, software and hardware of the same nature and is able to create ontophysics/spacetime-like worlds/cosmoi) and not within other physical axiomatic systems).

Stephen Hawking (and many others) wasn't a nihilogonist but he spoke as one (cosmogony from nothing and [he didn't say the second part but he missed it] not cosmogony from logic [itself/nothingness cannot exist, and the supernatural isn't only unteachable but it's neither scientifically hypothesised because it has no specific ontological foundations; without specific ontological foundations no axiomatics can exist, no specific identity, no procedure. The supernatural is impossible to exist because it doesn't meet the axiomatic prerequisites for existence = substantiality.]).

## links

* Lectures on personhood and on the personhood-yielding computers (true brains)