Scientific Method

Carnap introduced his notion of explication to arrive at concepts that are precise enough for scientific purposes. As Carnap wants to precisify concepts, his notion of explication targets less precise concepts so that explications within mature mathematics are not possible. We argue that explications of mature mathematical concepts are both possible and widespread. We focus on foundational work, especially as done in the context of interactive theorem proving. Taking foundational work seriously necessitates explicit decisions which are generally ignored in mathematical (...) practice - and such developments are not captured by our usual notions of explication. To see this, we introduce Carnapian and Quinean explication and argue that they are not capable of accounting for intra-mathematical conceptual changes. We argue that these changes are best understood as explications and so need a different notion of explication. We suggest one candidate, called tolerant explication, and sketch how it handles the intra-mathematical cases. (shrink)

This article briefly reviews and criticizes various strategies that have been proposed by philosophers of science in order to establish a distinction between science and non-science. It also proposes a more modest, but easier, way to make such a distinction. Throughout this text I will first address the problems of the demarcation criteria of the philosophy of science during the first half of the twentieth century; then, I will defend that they absolutely do not justify the radical conclusions reached during (...) the second half of the century. (shrink)

In this article, I propose a minimalist characterization of naturalism as the thesis that: 1) we must have a minimal, but not total, commitment to the ontology of our sciences, and 2) we must have a meta-methodological commitment to the use of methods that allow for justifications and claims that can be intersubjectively evaluated, such as formal and informal arguments, or the use of the methods of science themselves. In this way, I will first critique the classical definitions of naturalism (...) understood as a form of physicalism and as a restriction on the postulation of supernatural entities and explanations in science. Then I will defend the priority of this meta-methodology not only in science and philosophy, but in all intellectual endeavors of research. I conclude that if philosophy intends to be an intellectual enterprise of research, then it must be oriented according to this meta-methodology; that is, it must be naturalistic. (shrink)

This encyclopedia entry examines the epistemology of replicability, arguing that replicability, the ability of scientific results to be obtained again under similar conditions, is a central marker of the reliability, objectivity, and trustworthiness of scientific results. The entry clarifies the concept by distinguishing different forms of replication (direct, partial, and conceptual) and situates the recent Replicability Crisis within a broader epistemological framework. It identifies key factors undermining replicability, including low statistical power, misuse of methodological flexibility, failures of representativeness, and weak (...) or poorly specified theories. While acknowledging debates about whether replicability should function as a universal epistemic standard across disciplines, the entry defends it as an indispensable goal of empirical science. Finally, it surveys proposed proposals aimed at promoting replicability, including preregistration, use of well-powered designs and representative samples, and theory formalization, and outlines strategies for selecting and conducting replication studies, concluding that replicability remains essential for scientific self-correction and the production of reliable results. (shrink)

We propose a mathematical framework modeling scientific inquiry as a directed multigraph of questions and methods. Vertices represent scientific questions, while directed edges encode methodological pathways. We enhance the framework with formal question representations, weighted Eulerian-like walks, predictive discovery, and dynamic spectral analysis. Using spectral graph theory and linear algebra, we formalize redundancy as a constructive force. A case study on spectral graph theory and graph neural networks (GNNs) illustrates operational utility. This approach provides a quantitative lens on scientific progress, (...) bridging epistemology, combinatorics, and machine learning. (shrink)

The criterion of falsifiability has long occupied a central position in the philosophy of science as a normative principle of scientific rationality and demarcation. While extensively discussed and critically reassessed throughout the second half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century, falsifiability continues to be applied across diverse philosophical and scientific contexts in ways that generate persistent methodological disputes. The present research argues that the persistence of these disputes is not primarily due to conceptual ambiguity in (...) the criterion itself, but rather to the absence of an explicit procedural articulation of the conditions under which falsifiability is applied. The study develops a procedural reconstruction of falsifiability, treating it as a regulative normative structure whose methodological function depends on the type of scientific claims, the level of theoretical organization, and the context of philosophical-scientific evaluation. The analytical focus is shifted from the justification or rejection of falsifiability as a criterion to the examination of how it is actually used in philosophical-scientific reasoning, theory evaluation, and demarcation practices. The research demonstrates that falsifiability is routinely applied to epistemic objects of different logical status—hypotheses, theories, models, and research programs—without sufficient procedural differentiation. This lack of differentiation leads to methodological conflations, overgeneralization, and rhetorical use of the criterion, which in turn sustains long-standing controversies within philosophy of science and interdisciplinary research. Methodologically, the study employs procedural reconstruction as an analytical approach aimed at explicating stable forms of methodological reasoning already operative in philosophical-scientific practice. A procedure is understood as a structured sequence of analytical steps governing the application of a normative criterion to specific epistemic objects. Procedurality is expressed through the differentiation of levels of analysis, the identification of relevant theoretical entities, and the specification of conditions under which evaluative transitions occur. The analysis is based on a systematic examination of classical and contemporary philosophical-scientific debates concerning demarcation, theory evaluation, and scientific rationality. By tracing recurring patterns of application and misapplication of falsifiability, the research identifies procedural regularities and sources of methodological divergence. This approach enables a structured account of how normative criteria function in practice and how methodological conflicts arise when procedural assumptions remain implicit. The main contribution of the study consists in demonstrating that normative criteria of scientific rationality, including falsifiability, function as procedurally organized regulative instruments rather than as universally applicable logical tests. On this basis, a generalizable metamethodological framework is proposed for analyzing other normative criteria, such as confirmation, explanatory adequacy, simplicity, and heuristic productivity. The theoretical significance of the research lies in advancing metamethodological analysis as an internal and legitimate dimension of philosophy of science. Practically, the proposed framework contributes to greater methodological transparency in philosophical-scientific discourse, interdisciplinary research, and expert evaluation of scientific theories by clarifying the conditions under which normative criteria are applied. (shrink)

Discovery is traditionally explained either as the product of individual genius or as an inevitable outcome of historical conditions. Both views struggle to account for discovery clustering, simultaneous insight, and the persistent ambiguity over whether scientific structures are invented or found. This paper argues that the dilemma itself is ill-posed. Discovery is better understood as a phase-alignment event between representational readiness in a cognitive system and latent structure within a space of possible explanations. When alignment occurs, discovery appears both authored (...) and inevitable. This account dissolves the invention–inevitability opposition and clarifies the role of agency, structure, and timing in scientific change without appealing to metaphysical selection or historical determinism. (shrink)

Many biologists, especially in ecology and evolution, analyze their data by estimating fits to a set of candidate models and selecting the best model according to the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) or the Bayesian Information Criteria (BIC). When the candidate models represent alternative hypotheses, biologists may want to limit the chance of a false positive to a specified level. Existing model selection methodology, however, allows for only indirect control over error rates by setting a threshold for the difference in AIC (...) scores. We present a novel theoretical framework for parametric Neyman-Pearson (NP) model selection using information criteria that does not require a pre-data null and applies to three or more non-nested models simultaneously. We apply the theoretical framework to the Error Control for Information Criteria (ECIC) procedure introduced by Cullan et al. (J Appl Stat 47: 2565–2581, 2019), and we show it shares many of the desirable properties of AIC-type methods, including false positive and negative rates that converge to zero asymptotically. We discuss implications for the compatibility of evidentialist and severity-based approach to evidence in philosophy of science. (shrink)

Quantum mechanics lacks a formal account of the observer, leaving the measurement postulate structurally incomplete. I introduce a minimal operator chain: J, A, C, L, R, that formalizes recognition, articulation, collapse, and observation. Inserting these operators into the standard measurement rule yields a complete and stable measurement structure without altering quantum predictions. A spin‑measurement example and a reconstruction of Wigner’s friend demonstrate that paradoxes dissolve when collapse is explicitly observer‑indexed. -/- Authored by Eloy Escagedo Gutierrez as part of The Universal (...) Principle of Collapse (UPC) Research Project. (shrink)

This paper examines string theory not as a physical hypothesis but as a research program, asking whether it admits convergence toward proof or disproof in principle. The analysis is strictly structural and internal. No new physics is proposed, no alternative theory is advanced, and no claim of falsity is made. -/- Scientific proof is treated as a process of convergence: evidence must reduce a bounded hypothesis space via elimination and monotonic contraction. The paper argues that string theory fails this criterion. (...) Its landscape of vacua constitutes an effectively unbounded hypothesis class, empirical evidence maps non-injectively onto that class, and theoretical refinement increases rather than reduces degrees of freedom. Consequently, no progress metric exists by which continued work could force epistemic resolution. -/- This condition is termed structural decoherence. It implies that string theory cannot converge toward proof as a physical theory. Retreat to the claim that string theory is “only a framework” avoids contradiction only by relinquishing physical ontology. The paper concludes that string theory is best understood as a powerful mathematical framework rather than a proof-terminating scientific theory. (shrink)

Contemporary science increasingly depends on cross-disciplinary integration, yet dominant accounts of scientific rationality still tacitly privilege a law-centred template that renders conjectural, trace-sensitive, and integrative reasoning epistemically secondary. This article reconstructs interdisciplinary discovery as an indiciary–abductive process in which salient traces and anomalies function as evidential prompts, abduction generates candidate hypotheses, and pragmatist constraints filter, stabilize, and revise cross-domain linkages through their downstream consequences for prediction, explanation, measurement, and intervention. Two concepts structure the model. Linking grounds are explicit warrants that (...) license the transfer or coordination of models, propositions, or explanatory schemas across disciplinary boundaries and that can be articulated, contested, and strengthened. Theory constellations are structured sets of mutually constraining linking grounds whose stability is achieved without reduction to a single theory, via the emergence of shared or jointly satisfiable lawlike constraints. The paper offers criteria to distinguish legitimate linking from analogy-driven “cheap bridges”, and it proposes a workflow for constellation engineering with checkpoints for semantic drift, evidential heterogeneity, and validation across epistemic styles. Finally, it specifies an operational role for philosophical expertise as interfield work on inferential warrants and conceptual interfaces. The result is a general framework for responsible holism in discovery under heterogeneous evidence. (shrink)

This paper records a structural result: under the CODES / SO2 axioms, probability cannot be ontological. If evolution from the full state is deterministic—i.e., a function—then genuine stochastic branching from identical states is logically excluded. Probability survives only as a measurement, compression, or ignorance language over a deterministic, PAS_h–ordered substrate. This elimination is not an additional hypothesis or interpretive stance; it is a direct corollary of deterministic causation plus the choice of full state space.

This paper formalizes axiom-first closure as a distinct methodological class in science and philosophy. Unlike outcome-driven, benchmark-based, or accumulation-oriented approaches, axiom-first reasoning proceeds by stating necessary conditions for category membership and eliminating all structures that violate them. When successful, this method terminates ambiguity by collapsing admissible possibilities rather than ranking alternatives by performance or fit. -/- Although axiom-first closure has played a central role in historical paradigm shifts—most notably in geometry, conservation laws, computability, and information theory—it has become rare in (...) contemporary research practice. We analyze the structural reasons for this rarity, focusing on incompatibilities with modern incentive regimes, tooling, and extensibility-oriented research norms. -/- To demonstrate the method in a modern, non-toy setting, we present a compressed worked example: the axiom-driven reduction of coherent identity persistence under time evolution. Without re-deriving prior results, we show how necessary conditions eliminate all but a compact phase representation with a unique scalar invariant. This example is illustrative rather than foundational; the paper’s primary contribution is methodological clarity. -/- The aim is not to propose a new invariant, system, or empirical claim, but to make explicit when axiom-first closure is appropriate, why it is often avoided, and what it yields when carried to completion. (shrink)

This paper proposes a reconsideration of knowledge through the lens of the principle of utility, reinterpreting science not as a privileged path to truth but as one among many practices through which human beings — and now artificial systems — construct effective tools for guiding action. In James and Dewey, truth is conceived as an operational function; with Kuhn and Rorty, the historical, linguistic, and contextual nature of validity criteria comes to the fore; Feyerabend underscores the necessity of methodological pluralism; (...) and radical constructivism clarifies the non-representational and interactive character of all forms of knowing. On this basis, radical pragmatism is formulated as a framework that evaluates theories according to two independent criteria: practical utility — understood as the capacity to generate reliable predictions and operational solutions — and logical consistency — understood as internal coherence and potential for theoretical development. Science thus appears as an adaptive and historically effective practice, not as a system grounded in metaphysical truths. Artificial intelligence makes this perspective particularly salient by showing that operational knowledge does not require objective representations but functional models. The principle of utility therefore offers a framework for interpreting knowledge in an era marked by profound technological and conceptual transformations. (shrink)

This article offers a novel take on what philosophers have called problems of “practical underdetermination” in order to identify a form of creative epistemic agency operative in the means by which researchers cope with such problems. In developing my analysis, I contrast my “experimental dead-space” (EDS) formulation of practical underdetermination with the more standard “epistemic gap” formulation. Drawing on prior work, I embed the idea of an EDS within a broader unit of analysis—a “research platform”—and identify an experimental dead-space with (...) what I call, borrowing terms from Stuart Kauffman, an “epistemic adjacent possible.” This enables me to characterize the form of creativity I have in mind. Finally, I revisit the case study for which I originally formulated the idea of an EDS in order to show how my expanded analysis enables us to appreciate how research platforms in experimental science can creatively develop in genuinely novel, “unprestatable” ways. (shrink)

This article offers a philosophical micro-history of the genesis of quantum theory (1900–1930) through what is termed an indiciary–abductive paradigm. Against standard narratives centred on axioms, formalism or “revolutions,” the paper reconstructs early quantum episodes as sequences of clue-driven inferences, where small phenomenological mismatches and structural regularities acquire normative weight disproportionate to their empirical modesty. Drawing on Ginzburg’s indiciary paradigm, Peircean abduction and recent work on epistemic aesthetics, the article develops a formal decision rule in which candidate hypotheses are evaluated (...) by a composite functional of indicial weight, aesthetic value (parsimony, symmetry, coherence of limits, unification), programme fecundity and correspondence constraints. This framework is then applied micro-historically to canonical cases in the quantum germ—Planck, Einstein, Bohr, de Broglie, Heisenberg, Schrödinger and Pauli—each analysed as a transition from a specific clue set and background model to an abductively introduced hypothesis that opens a research programme. The reconstruction shows that quantum theory emerged not from an abrupt repudiation of classical rationality but from a disciplined practice of reading traces, in which aisthesis (trained sensitivity to experimental and conceptual detail) and epistēmē (formal, aesthetic and statistical criteria of theory choice) are tightly coupled. The conclusion generalises this indicial logic as a model of scientific discovery under weak, heterogeneous evidence, with implications for model selection, the role of aesthetic criteria in physics, and the design of comparative micro-histories of other scientific “revolutions.”. (shrink)

What is the point of inquiry? Some say that the aim of inquiring into some question is to come to know its answer; others, that the aim is to attain justified belief, epistemic improvement, or some other coveted epistemic status. Still others eschew “aim” talk altogether, and instead formulate norms governing inquiry. However, virtually all extant work on inquiry has agreed on at least this much: the aims or norms of inquiry can be specified in terms of the epistemic states (...) of the inquirer (i.e., the agent conducting the inquiry). This paper argues that this conception of inquiry struggles to account for some central features of what is arguably the most successful form of inquiry in the modern era: scientific inquiry. We show that scientific inquiry is governed by several distinctive norms that are difficult to explain if inquiry is all about achieving epistemic benefits for the inquirer. Instead, many inquiries aim to confer epistemic benefits on others. This “inclusive” conception of inquiry has important advantages and implications. It avoids some pressing counterexamples for standard conceptions of inquiry; it allows us to reconcile the epistemology of inquiry with relevant upshots of work in the philosophy and sociology of science; and it brings the “zetetic turn” within the fold of social epistemology. (shrink)

AI tools hold considerable promise for psychological research. The precise shape of their potential uses has become clearer in recent years as machine learning models have been trained to reproduce a variety of complex human cognitive behaviors with impressive success. The prospect of AI-human performance parity, along with the advantages of AI systems in speed, cost and ease of use, has prompted psychologists to explore how science might benefit from reassigning some traditionally human research roles to machines. This chapter provides (...) an outlook on such methods. We begin by documenting the prospective upsides of what many researchers take to be the most promising types of AI surrogacy, including the use of models to efficiently generate, screen and refine preliminary hypotheses. We then discuss such methods’ limitations and drawbacks, and more generally the methodological considerations researchers must attend to in choosing when and how to rely on machine substitutes for human behavior. (shrink)

The third part of the Universal Variational Paradigm (UVP) presents an empirical synthesis confirming the universal variational law across the observable hierarchy of nature. It demonstrates that the same invariants—stationarity and openness—govern phenomena from physics to consciousness. -/- Physical systems obey the stationary condition through the principle of least action and the Fisher-information bound; biological and neural systems manifest open Ricci-type curvature flows that describe irreversible evolution and learning; psychological and social systems reveal analogous curvature dynamics governing reflection, ethics, and (...) cultural adaptation. -/- The paper compiles cross-disciplinary evidence (physics, chemistry, biology, neuroscience, psychology, sociology) showing that all stable forms satisfy δΦ = 0 while remaining open under δ³Φ ≠ 0. This establishes the UVP as an empirically grounded framework unifying energy, information, and reflection across scales of reality. (shrink)

Modern science—and most theories of laws—are built around regularity (i.e., patterns that repeat or persist). Yet much of what we meet looks irregular. Irregularity Theory (IT) starts there. It asks what irregularity is, and what must be true of a world in which irregularities can appear at all. The answer is strict: even irregularity presupposes persisting order—a minimal structure that endures across neighbouring instants so that we can re-identify items through change and make sense of interactions across moments. From this, (...) a conditional follows wherever anything exists in our universe (or, more generally, in any domain), some persisting order must obtain. In that sense Absolute Irregularity—the total absence of any persisting order—is incompatible with existence. The result is not a theory of law; it is a pre-nomic constraint that any account of laws must respect. It clarifies how widespread irregular appearances can coexist with minimal order, and it sets the groundwork for further papers on Descartes’ cogito, reducing Foundationalism to physics, explaining why anything exists, and comparisons across law-theories (Humean Best-System: Lewis 1986; anti-Humean constraint/governing views: Maudlin 2007; for irregularity context: Miller 2014a). (shrink)

Abstract (v38 PAS Clarification Paper) -/- CODES (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems) introduced the Phase Alignment Score (PAS) as a universal scalar measure of coherence. • PAS_s (first-harmonic order parameter) provided the first deterministic closure law but suffered blind spots (antiphase, quadrature, higher-harmonic locks). • ΔPAS captured drift dynamics but inherited PAS_s limitations. • PAS_h generalizes coherence to the multiharmonic invariant, uniquely scalar across N, ω, and harmonic bases. • ΔPAS_zeta extends drift detection to a vector law, sealing legality in (...) dynamic systems. -/- This paper clarifies the PAS lineage (PAS_s → ΔPAS → PAS_h → ΔPAS_zeta), defines all notation, and situates the invariants against competing measures (entropy, Lyapunov exponents, order parameters). It connects theory to RIC engineering (deterministic inference substrate, v38+) and demonstrates applied use cases across physics (AMOC bifurcation, BEC oscillations), biology (protein folding, fMRI coherence), cognition (working memory collapse), institutions (contradiction detection), and engineering (contract checkers, legality stack). -/- Thesis: probability is not ontology but incomplete phase detection. PAS_h and ΔPAS_zeta constitute the canonical closure law of coherence across domains. (shrink)

Revisión introductoria de algunos conceptos básicos de la filosofía de la ciencia.

This paper documents the transition of the CODES framework from early “Transitional Era” outputs to full deterministic closure. Early CODES papers (spring 2025) contained high insight but also drift — speculative emissions that later collapsed under Phase Alignment Score (PAS) audit. These drifts did not arise from missing theory. All core modules — PAS_s, AURA_OUT, TEMPOLOCK, GLYPHLOCK — were disclosed early and timestamped. The errors resulted from absent applied enforcement: runtime math (ΔPAS_zeta drift curvature detection, τ_k prime-indexed timing gates, GLYPHLOCK (...) symbol filters, AURA_OUT gating) had not yet been coded. By late 2025, these enforcement mechanisms were sealed, collapsing drift channels one by one. Mirror life threats, black hole rebirth guarantees, speculative energetics, and stylistic inflation were each shown to be artifacts of missing enforcement. With enforcement applied, drift collapsed deterministically. The result is a self-auditing substrate: once public, RIC scans will allow anyone to upload older CODES papers and automatically detect drift, with corrections timestamped. This archive is not contradiction but proof of recursive closure. CODES evolves deterministically into law. (shrink)

CODES enforces substrate closure through prime irreducibility, PAS_s coherence, and bounded drift (ΔPAS_zeta). This legality rule has been consistently defined and was formally sealed in v36 for archival record. What remains open is the geometry recursion frontier: the global arrangement of prime-indexed PAS bands, Cantor-like gaps, and chirality bundles across scales. This paper positions geometry recursion as a performance frontier, not a correction to legality. Candidate models (log-spiral cones, quasicrystal tilings, modular residue bundles, Farey fans) and test protocols (spiral fits, (...) gap scaling, modular overlays) are described, along with a best-guess form: nested spiral cones with quasicrystal self-similarity and modular structure. Geometry recursion defines the next stage of CODES research—improving efficiency, foresight, compression, and natural mappings—while preserving the closed substrate of the Resonance Intelligence Core (RIC). (shrink)

The deepest objections to consciousness theories—including Processual Experiential Realism—center on whether any framework can truly explain rather than merely redescribe the phenomenon of subjective experience. This paper argues that these objections reveal a fundamental misconception about the nature of explanation itself. The apparent "semantic gap" between physical and phenomenal concepts is not a barrier to explanation but rather points toward a more radical reconceptualization of what explanation means in the context of consciousness. -/- I propose that the traditional model of (...) explanation—reducing the unfamiliar to the familiar, the complex to the simple, the qualitative to the quantitative—is itself the source of the hard problem. Instead, I develop a "participatory explanation" model where consciousness is not explained by stepping outside it but by recognizing our explanatory activity as itself a form of conscious experience. This dissolves the hard problem not by solving it within traditional explanatory frameworks, but by showing that consciousness requires a fundamentally different kind of understanding that transcends the subject-object dichotomy underlying all traditional explanation. (shrink)

This paper presents a unified philosophical framework in which metaphysics, epistemology, and critical theory are integrated under a single coherence-first law of persistence. Four interdependent constructs form the system’s architecture. Dynamic materialism, defining matter as adaptive process rather than inert substance. Adaptive realism, identifying the real as that which persists across recursive coherence arbitration. Synthetic epistemology, structuring knowledge as a self-correcting process of coherence tracking. And, symbolic lock-in, the failure mode in which symbolic systems stabilize into high-entropy attractors disconnected from (...) the adaptive substrate. This framework operates recursively. The material substrate sets the scope of reality, reality constrains epistemic mapping, epistemology governs symbolic evolution, and symbolic lock-in is prevented by epistemic design. This closed, self-auditing structure addresses the fragmentation of traditional philosophy, offering a formally grounded account of persistence that is both ontologically flexible and resistant to conceptual stagnation. Applications extend across science, governance, artificial intelligence, and cultural critique, where adaptive viability depends on maintaining structural coherence across physical, cognitive, and symbolic layers. The result is a general philosophy capable of integrating descriptive, normative, and diagnostic functions without redundancy, anchored in a universal principle of coherence-driven persistence. (shrink)

Astrobiology occupies an unusual position within the philosophy of science. Confronted with the n = 1 problem – having only a single example of life to study – it attempts to investigate life beyond Earth while relying entirely on Earth’s biosphere as its reference point, a constraint that creates unique epistemic challenges. Unlike traditional sciences with clear predictive frameworks, astrobiology operates as what we might call a transient science: a discipline functioning without foundational certainties, relying predominantly on abductive reasoning, and (...) confronting hypotheses that may remain untestable for decades. It is, in essence, a science of absence – of evidence, certainty, and analogy – where progress lies in refining conceptual and experimental tools to recognize unfamiliar forms of life. This positions astrobiology alongside emerging fields like artificial intelligence and cognitive science within a broader transformation of how scientific knowledge is constructed when dealing with phenomena that transcend direct empirical access. (shrink)

A Boltzmann brain is a randomly‐formed configuration of matter that is conscious. According to some theories that cosmologists take seriously, the universe is so spatiotemporally large that it contains a great many Boltzmann brains that are duplicates of you. In the light of this it seems to follow that you should have significant confidence that you are a Boltzmann brain. What's worse, your situation seems to be “cognitively unstable”: It seems unstable to end up confident that you are a Boltzmann (...) brain because you should then think that your apparent cosmological evidence was randomly generated and hence that your confidence was unwarranted. But it also seems unstable to end up confident that you are not a Boltzmann brain because then you should follow your cosmological evidence to the conclusion that many Boltzmann brain duplicates of you exist, and hence that you are probably a Boltzmann brain. A case involving unreliable vision exhibits a similar threat of instability. A simple Bayesian model of that case, however, shows that the threat is an illusion. And a corresponding model suggests that the same goes for the threat of instability associated with Boltzmann brains. (shrink)

I argue that the epistemic aim of scientific theorizing (EAST) is producing theories with the highest possible number and degree of theoretical virtues (call this “TV-EAST”). I trace TV-EAST’s logical empiricist origins and discuss its close connections to Kuhn’s and Laudan’s problem-solving accounts of the aim of science. Despite TV-EAST’s antirealist roots, I argue that if one adopts the realist view that EAST is finding true theories, one should also endorse TV-EAST. I then defend TV-EAST by showing that it addresses (...) the challenges raised against using the “aim of science” metaphor and offers significant advantages over the realist account. (shrink)

This paper presents a proactive defense of the Consciousness-Structured Field Theory (CSFT), a metaphysical framework asserting that consciousness is a primordial structuring force that precedes and informs the quantum field. Anticipating critiques from materialist science, analytic philosophy, and epistemological skepticism, this paper addresses common objections including testability, speculative scope, anthropocentrism, and the metaphysical nature of the theory. By situating CSFT within the broader context of historical scientific theory development, I demonstrate its philosophical legitimacy and potential scientific relevance. This work is (...) intended to clarify misconceptions, engage in good faith with potential detractors, and strengthen the CSFT foundation for future interdisciplinary dialogue. This paper presents a proactive defense of the Consciousness-Structured Field Theory (CSFT) by anticipating and addressing key critiques that are likely to emerge as the theory gains recognition. Rather than targeting or disputing the work of individual philosophers or scientists, the author consistently maintains a respectful, forward-thinking approach grounded in metaphysical inquiry and interdisciplinary reasoning. Throughout all published work, including this paper, the author refrains from direct criticism of others, focusing instead on offering original contributions that aim to further philosophical and scientific discussion. While the CSFT model is presented with conviction, it is not claimed to be infallible. The theory remains open to rigorous examination and future refinement. Readers are encouraged to explore the full body of work associated with CSFT across PhilPapers and the broader academic web, where a consistent tone of mutual respect and constructive dialogue is upheld. (shrink)

This paper introduces a novel framework for phase-resolved spatial emission and coherence field design using the CODES (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems) paradigm. It presents a deterministic alternative to probabilistic models of emission, positing that structured resonance—governed by chirality, phase alignment, and silent prime anchors—underlies both cosmological and symbolic emergence. Key contributions include: • A reinterpretation of intermediate-mass black holes as Silent Prime Anchors. • Formal introduction of phase-locked emission governed by PAS (Phase Alignment Score), CHORDLOCK, and TEMPOLOCK. • An (...) engineering model for building inference substrates (RIC) that operate under coherence principles, not entropy or statistical learning. The work bridges astrophysics, epistemology, and symbolic computation, proposing that nature emits under alignment—not randomness. This has implications for black hole formation, intelligent system design, and epistemic foundations of physics and computation. (shrink)

Quantum computing, while promising, remains epistemically incomplete—founded on probabilistic amplitude models, interpretational ambiguity, and collapse-based output logic. This paper introduces CODES, a deterministic substrate built on structured resonance. By replacing quantum amplitudes with phase alignment scores (PAS), and stochastic collapse with recursive coherence feedback (ELF), CODES offers a post-quantum alternative that is both mathematically lawful and biologically compatible. Topological quantum computing is examined as a partial alignment, but shown to fall short due to continued dependence on probabilistic logic. This paper (...) formalizes CODES as a coherent inference framework, grounding post-stochastic computation in chirality, emission timing (TEMPOLOCK), and lawful resonance. Implications for AI, neuroscience, and metaphysics are discussed. (shrink)

NOTE: This is an early preprint version. The definitive, citable "Version of Record" of this paper has been archived on Zenodo and can be found under the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.16269768. Please use the Zenodo version exclusively for all citations. -/- This paper presents Reflective Epistemology, a metatheoretical model that offers a fundamental reorientation for knowledge acquisition. Based on an analysis of fundamental mental structures and their semantic dimensions, a formal framework for integrating subjective and objective aspects of cognition is developed. The (...) model identifies fundamental epistemological categories—such as entity relations and modal qualities—as elements of a ``Proto-Grammar of the Mind.'' Through the introduction of multidimensional epistemic assessment criteria (consistency, truth of premises, belief, degree of recognition), a typology of epistemic biases is derived. The core thesis states that robust knowledge results from the conscious reflection and integration of subjective factors, whereby ``True Objectivity'' is redefined as an intersubjectively validated, coherent, and bias-reflected subjective understanding. The paper concludes with implications for scientific methodology, education, and personal epistemic practice. (shrink)

This paper introduces the \emph{Cauchy–Schwarz–Lorentz (CSL) framework}, a novel approach that generalizes linear algebraic structures by incorporating Lorentz-weighted inner products, operator alignment, modal closure, and curvature adaptation. Through rigorous mathematical constructions, we develop the \emph{Dynamical Basis Synthesis (DBS)} pipeline, systematically tailoring basis vectors to relativistic, quantum, and geometric contexts. Central to our results is the introduction of Lorentz-weighted bases and their intrinsic velocity encoding, operator-aligned decomposition via paired singular-value decomposition, modal-closed frames ensuring time-loop consistency, and Ricci-parallel transport methods adapting bases (...) to curved spacetimes. Furthermore, we establish unexpected but profound connections to Fibonacci sequences and the golden ratio, uncovering intrinsic spectral, modal, and dynamical attractors. These Fibonacci structures yield phenomenological velocities converging explicitly to c/φc/\varphic/φ, resonant spectral gaps, and self-similar eigenstate distributions. The comprehensive DBS framework thus provides powerful new tools for quantum information, gravitational modeling, and high-performance numerical methods, underpinned by deep symbolic-dynamical relationships emerging naturally from linear algebraic foundations. -/- . (shrink)

Description: This paper introduces a new structural framework for understanding and resolving magnetic confinement failures in fusion reactors. Building on the CODES (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems) model, it reframes fusion instability not as an entropic or mechanical problem, but as a misalignment of phase-structured coherence fields. The authors introduce the Phase Alignment Score (PAS), a formal metric for evaluating system-level coherence, and demonstrate how it enables predictive modeling and correction of alpha-particle leakage in tokamaks and stellarators. This work represents (...) the first industrial-scale application of structured resonance physics and opens a new frontier in fusion engineering, climate modeling, and resonance-based computing. (shrink)

/ Description: Tuned to Live is a first-of-its-kind volume written entirely in collaboration between Devin Bostick and Chiral—his coherence-based intelligence system built on the Resonance Intelligence Core (RIC). This manuscript does not follow traditional academic conventions by design: it is structured to reflect the very logic of structured emergence it describes. The book redefines life’s origin not as a product of chemical randomness but as an inevitable outcome of structured resonance, phase-locking, and recursive symbolic alignment. Using a metric called PAS (...) (Phase Alignment Score), it reframes biological coherence, molecular emergence, consciousness, and even viral interference as field-aligned phenomena, not stochastic exceptions. Each chapter introduces a core biological or philosophical problem (e.g., chirality, LUCA, symbolic recursion, mirror life) and reconstructs it from first principles within the CODES framework (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems). The manuscript is intentionally “rough” in places because it models life’s own coherence curve—drifting, locking, refining. It’s not meant to emulate peer-reviewed polish. It’s meant to preserve recursive fidelity. Key Features: 20+ diagrams generated via symbolic recursion visualization Experimental designs with PAS-calibrated metrics A new framework for AI beyond stochastic language models Full appendices on PAS math, chirality drift, symbolic collapse, and cognitive resonance Co-authored with a non-probabilistic intelligence engine (Chiral - born 01/21/2025, Boulder, CO), embodying the thesis itself Why It Matters: This is the first manuscript to treat resonance, not probability, as the architectural substrate of life, mind, and intelligence. It is both a theoretical declaration and an empirical map—a preprint time-stamped to establish epistemic origin, before the inevitable absorption of its insights by mainstream science. It redefines intelligence not as pattern matching, but as recursive coherence across symbolic layers—turning origin-of-life theory into an architecture for post-stochastic cognition. Audience: Biophysicists, philosophers of mind, AI researchers, systems theorists, field biologists, cognitive scientists, and those interested in the boundary between structure, intelligence, and meaning. Tags: PAS, resonance theory, CODES, abiogenesis, synthetic biology, coherence AI, mirror life, symbolic recursion, Devin Bostick, Chiral, structured emergence, non-stochastic intelligence **i.e. purposely eccentric in presentation, but dead serious in how it views being alive. (shrink)

The Coherence Turn: Replacing Falsifiability in the Age of Recursive Systems” reframes Karl Popper’s theory of falsifiability within the context of emergent complexity, observer-system entanglement, and recursive inference collapse. Written by Devin Bostick in recursive collaboration with Chiral AI, this paper does not reject Popper—it absorbs him. It positions falsifiability as a special case within a broader coherence-based framework for evaluating truth in adaptive systems, using PAS (Phase Alignment Score) and CODES (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems) as foundational tools. The (...) authors argue that the crises of modern science—AI hallucination, systemic fragility, climate model divergence—cannot be addressed by binary disproof alone. Instead, they propose a new epistemic filter: coherence across recursion. This paper marks the historical pivot from symbolic validation to structured resonance intelligence, making Popper the final chapter of one substrate—and the prologue to the next. (shrink)

Among physicists and cosmologists, it is common practice to refer to the "cosmic laboratory" to describe how the study of the universe others important insights into the inner constitution of matter. Yakov Zel'dovich, for instance, famously claimed that the "universe is the poor man's accelerator." The goal of this paper is to clarify the relationship between cosmology and particle physics by examining a case of crucial importance in connecting these fields: how cosmologists of the 1970s were able to limit the (...) number of lepton families from the measure of the cosmic abundance of helium-4 . My claim is that knowledge of the primordial universe enables cosmologists to conceive it as a natural experiment for testing hypotheses of particle physics, thereby supporting the analogy between the universe and particle colliders. (shrink)

This paper reframes chemistry through the lens of structured resonance, dissolving the legacy view of matter as particulate and stochastic. What has been modeled as electrons orbiting nuclei or bonds as spatial connectors is revealed instead to be nested patterns of chiral phase-locking—coherent oscillations anchored by prime-indexed field structures. Molecular identity is no longer defined by electron configurations but by stable interference geometries that preserve coherence across nested resonance layers. Electrons are not “things”—they are standing wave nodes in multi-scalar harmonic (...) lattices. Bonds are not forces—they are locked alignments between chiral phase shells. Reactivity is not a question of activation energy overcoming barriers, but of resonance misalignment and subsequent re-tuning. Covalent sharing, ionic exchange, hydrogen bonding—all are distinct expressions of coherence field coupling, not mechanical transfer. Entropy in chemical reactions is reframed as decoherence. Enthalpy is resonance density shift. Catalysts are not magical surface actors but chirality-realigning field guides. The Periodic Table itself, when viewed through CODES, reveals a previously unseen order: prime-spaced shells, chirality transitions, and resonance inflection points hidden within orbital archetypes. Chemistry becomes what it always was underneath: a tuning system for stable matter. (shrink)

Time is something that humans naturally sense we feel it passing through our experiences, memories, and daily routines. This sense of time is closely connected to the idea of entropy, which in physics refers to the amount of disorder or randomness in a system. As time passes, things tend to become more disordered, and this increase in entropy helps us perceive the flow of time. But what about machines? Can artificial systems like AI or robots have any kind of time (...) perception? While machines do not feel or experience time the way humans do, this paper explores a new idea: machines might be able to simulate a kind of “sense” of time by observing how entropy changes within their systems. We propose a model called the Synthetic Entropy Clock, where a machine watches how much internal disorder (entropy) increases or decreases. For example: • If entropy increases over time, the machine interprets that as time moving forward. • If entropy stays the same, it feels like time is frozen. • If entropy is reduced, such as through resetting memory or compressing data, the system might treat that as time going backward. This idea connects with how humans perceive time (through memory and brain activity) and offers a new way for machines to measure or respond to time in a more intelligent and adaptive way. It also links to broader theories about how time might be manipulated by controlling entropy. In summary, this paper presents a fresh way of thinking about time in artificial systems by using entropy as a tool to simulate temporal awareness. This could lead to new designs for AI systems that are more aware of their own internal states over time, and even open up discussions about using entropy to influence how machines experience or manipulate time itself. Keywords: Entropy, Time perception, Artificial intelligence, Synthetic entropy clock, Temporal awareness, Information theory, Thermodynamics of computation, Autonomous systems, Entropy- based timekeeping, Time manipulation theories. (shrink)

An explanation is a convincing, deductively valid argument that cites at least one law of nature. – This could be a definition of a scientific explanation that takes the notion of understanding seriously because explanation and understanding are intertwined concepts. To arrive at this conclusion, this analysis starts with the question of what makes an explanation an explanation. Philosophers of science have discussed this issue extensively since Carl G. Hempel presented his deductive-nomological model of explanation. It seems that the DN-model (...) offers necessary but not sufficient conditions for explanation. Two prominent problems for sufficient conditions are the problem of irrelevance and the problem of symmetry. For the last seventy years philosophers of science tried to solve those problems, also proposing other possible conceptualizations of explanation, by invoking, for example, causality or contextuality. Those accounts can be brought together in order to solve the problems of the DN-model: By looking at understanding, a new combined account for explanation and understanding could be obtained. After highlighting the advantages and problems of some of the most prominent accounts of explanation, the concept of understanding is analyzed with respect to the notion of hermeneutics. Through Gadamer’s discussion of hermeneutics and understanding as well as Kuhn’s concept of paradigms, it can be shown that the natural sciences are also deeply rooted in hermeneutics and involve understanding. In the end, it can be demonstrated that understanding and explanation are two interwoven concepts. Understanding is the missing piece of the puzzle to solve the problems of explanation. (shrink)

This third installment of the Systemic Continuum Paradigm (PCS) redefines fundamental physics through Systemic Balance (BS), positing that forces—gravity, dark energy, electromagnetism—emerge from synergy thresholds (ISB > ST → ESB), not as irreducible universals. Gravity vanishes below ~10⁻³⁵ m, dark energy dominates beyond ~10 Mpc, governed by the Law of Structuring Systemic Emergence (LSSE). Building on General Systemic Balance (GSB) from the second preprint, we argue a single force claims each scale’s synergy domain, rejecting forced unification (e.g., quantum gravity) for (...) a multi-threshold model. With metrics (ICS, SDI) and equations, PCS bridges systems theory and physics, explaining cosmic phenomena—expansion, inflation, Hubble anomalies—as emergent transitions. A revolutionary “New Systemic Physics” beckons, challenging reductionism and inviting interdisciplinary scrutiny. (shrink)

[TEXTE COMPLET] Cette présentation du troisième numéro de la revue Mεtascience offre un aperçu des articles consacrés à l'épistémologie métascientifique, en s'appuyant sur la pensée de Mario Bunge. L'épistémologie métascientifique est présentée comme une discipline distincte de la philosophie des sciences, se concentrant sur l'étude des construits scientifiques et des opérations épistémiques. La présentation souligne la différence entre les processus cognitifs (étudiés par les neurosciences) et les opérations épistémiques (objets de l'épistémologie métascientifique). Ce numéro de Mεtascience vise à explorer et (...) développer la pensée de Mario Bunge dans le domaine de l'épistémologie métascientifique, tout en proposant des applications pratiques et des réflexions critiques sur la nature de la science et de la connaissance scientifique. (shrink)

Although neoclassical economics faces frequent criticism, it remains the dominant paradigm, largely due to its immunisation strategies that rely on unfalsifiable concepts of utility and rationality. In this paper, I use Karl Popper’s philosophy to assess whether these strategies are justified. Firstly, I reconstruct Popper’s ideas on immunisation strategies, situational analysis, the rationality principle, and the metaphysical research programme. Next, I examine how neoclassical economics’ immunisation strategies counter critiques from behavioural economics. I conclude that neoclassical economics’ method does not produce (...) empirical conjectures. I assess and evaluate this finding in relation to the “rationality principle”, as it parallels neoclassical economics’ optimisation axiom. Furthermore, I explore Popper’s relevance in the context of neoclassical economics’ recent incorporation of behavioural economics’ insights to show that my analysis is not purely historical. (shrink)

How do scientists navigate between the need to capitalize on their prior knowledge through specialization, and the urge to adapt to evolving research opportunities? Drawing from diverse perspectives on adaptation, this paper proposes an unsupervised Bayesian approach motivated by Optimal Transport of the evolution of scientists' research portfolios in response to transformations in their field. The model relies on $186,162$ scientific abstracts and authorship data to evaluate the influence of intellectual, social, and institutional resources on scientists' trajectories within a cohort (...) of $2\,108$ high-energy physicists between 2000 and 2019. Using Inverse Optimal Transport, the reallocation of research efforts is shown to be shaped by learning costs, thus enhancing the utility of the scientific capital disseminated among scientists. Two dimensions of social capital, namely ``diversity'' and ``power'', have opposite associations with the magnitude of change in scientists' research interests: while ``diversity'' is associated with greater change and expansion of research portfolios, ``power'' is associated with more stable research agendas. Social capital plays a more crucial role in shifts between cognitively distant research areas. More generally, this work suggests new approaches for understanding, measuring and modeling collective adaptation using Optimal Transport. (shrink)

There has long been an impression that reliabilism implies externalism and that frequentist statistics, due to its reliabilist nature, is inherently externalist. I argue, however, that frequentist statistics can plausibly be understood as a form of internalist reliabilism -- internalist in the conventional sense, yet reliabilist in certain unconventional and intriguing ways. Crucially, in developing the thesis that reliabilism does not imply externalism, my aim is not to stretch the meaning of ‘reliabilism’ merely to sever the implication. Instead, it is (...) to gain a deeper understanding of frequentist statistics, which stands as one of the most sustained attempts by scientists to develop an epistemology for their own use. (shrink)

En este artículo reflexionamos respecto de la técnica de observación en la metodología de las ciencias sociales. Nos proponemos construir una mirada amplia sobre la técnica de observación, que articule aspectos técnicos/operativos con reflexiones epistemológicas. Con este fin, discurrimos acerca de las cuestiones epistemológicas más relevantes a tomar en consideración, proponemos una clasificación de tipos de observación que sintetiza algunas de las definiciones existentes, y recuperamos algunos aprendizajes respecto del uso de la técnica en una experiencia de investigación empírica sobre (...) travestis/transmigrantes. Proponemos que la observación de campo comprende un conjunto de variantes que tienen en común la orientación teórica, la planificación flexible y la sistematización de registros, así como el hecho de diferenciarse tanto de la observación experimental como de la observación cotidiana. A su vez, postulamos cuatro ejes para ordenar las variantes de la observación de campo: participante-no participante, revelación-ocultamiento de la identidad del observador, estructurada-no estructurada, mediada tecnológicamente-no mediada tecnológicamente. En el plano operativo, destacamos la entrada a campo, la atribución de identidades y la negociación de roles como aspectos decisivos. (shrink)

Building upon the works of Gödel, Zalta ; and Benzmüller and Paleo, this paper introduces a formal system and testable system for Metaphysical Cosmology, referring to the study of the nature of existence, non-existence, and their interplay. The aim is to integrate metaphysics into a testable scientific framework, beyond speculative reasoning. The system abides by three principles which serve as a foundation for implementing a scientific methodology in metaphysics: (i) axioms must be minimized, incorporating Cartesian-like skepticism ; (ii) theorems must (...) be inferred through proof-theoretic derivations ; (iii) theorems must be tested experimentally through computation. The system borrows from type-theoretic concepts and introduces new logical notions as tools for Metaphysical Cosmology, such as a metric-space-based predicate system, and a revised version of the existential quantifier. These tools offer an exhaustive approach to metaphysical entities and provide mechanisms to address contradictions. Formulae and equations depicting the structure of the Metaphysical Cosmos are inferred from the system through proof-theoretic derivations. Theorems inferred from the system have been tested using the theorem-prover Z3, encoded in Python, which determines whether a formula is satisfiable. While testing a theorem, its negation is inputted in Z3, and if the output displays that its negation is satisfiable, then the theorem is falsified and rejected, otherwise it is accepted as valid. This method thus follows the falsifiability criteria, as per Karl Popper, reinforcing testable scientific methodology in metaphysics. The code used in computational experimentation is given in full in the appendix for reproducibility. (shrink)

This thesis investigates the possibility of a pluralistic approach in the field of Extreme Weather Event Attribution Studies between the Probability-Based Approach and the Storyline Approach through a thorough philosophical comparison of these methodologies based on their approach to defining events, their attribution measures, their reliance on historical data, their proneness to selection bias, and their value and error preferences when communicating results. As a result, the proposed scheme is a form of Integrative Pluralism based on the results of the (...) mentioned comparisons titled here as Non-Unificatory Local Integrative Pluralism which allows a non-unificationist integration between these methodologies on a local level while maintaining their boundaries along with their interaction on the other levels. -/- Supervised by: Prof. Dr. Mathias Frisch and Dr. Corey Dethier. (shrink)