Blueprint of a Conscious Robot

 How to build a mechanical analog conscious synthetic robot:

Consciousness, as defined by Wikipedia, a consistently unreliable source of formal information much like this one, is the state or quality of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. The definition is absolutely wrong primarily due to the fact that awareness and consciousness are two different things. "Someone could be aware of something but could be not conscious, and someone could be conscious of something but could be not aware of itself" is a good example that counters its misguiding definition. But for the sake of understanding consciousness better let us use the definition for awhile for comparison purposes.

Before the conceptualization of biotronics, no one can build a conscious robot for a simple reason that most people have the wrong idea about what consciousness is, what it's made up of, and how it evolved in humans. It is believed that Consciousness must have to do with the mind. Some argue it is a transcendental or mystical experience. Others suggest that Consciousness is the soul or spirit that powers the body. But of course, all these claims are wrong.

Joey Lawsin, author of the book Biotronics: The Silver Species,  formulated the 5 basic stages or levels necessary in determining consciousness based on the data and facts derived from his experiments, observations, and prototypes. The stages, in line with his principal discovery on associative consciousness, are linked to each other and arranged in accordance with their orders of materialization. Each stage is part of a bigger chain that is essentially vital in the creation of consciousness.

To understand consciousness or consciousness better, Lawsin claims that the first principal requirement that determines consciousness is Codexation. It is a behavior, a one-to-one correspondence action where the subject responds to its surrounding by tagging, labeling, or associating what it senses with another object like a ball for play or eat for tray. It is not the same with awareness, as Wikipedia erroneously defined it. Codexation and awareness are two different things that are not related in any way. Awareness doesn't involve consciousness at all as you will see in these videos and write-ups below:

To design a conscious robot, 3 basic requirements must be addressed namely:

1.  A simplified, scientific, and general definition of consciousness  What is consciousness?
2.  The 5 levels of consciousness. What is it made up of?
3.  The Working Principles. How consciousness evolved?

• Definition of Consciousness: 

The simplified definition can be found here, the scientific definition here, and the general definition states that " Consciousness is a two steps action. First, the recipient has the ability to form an idea (abstracts), and second, it has the capacity to associate the idea with a real object (physicals)." In a nutshell, consciousness is the capability to match abstracts with physicals or vice versa. A process known as codification or codexation.

• The 5 levels of Associative Consciousness:
  
  1. Reaction - you don't know what it is.
  2. Recognition - you know what it is.
  3. Retention - you know.
  4. Recall - you know it.
  5. Recalculation - you know more about it.

• The Working IO's Principles:
  
  1. Sensation - input
  2. Acquisition-
  3. Codexation-
  4. Retrieval -
  5. Transmission - output

These requirements are the keys that need to be in place and integrated to be fully functional.

Points to ponder:

• if a robot can recognize a dog from a cat, is the machine conscious?
• If it can examine its one's own thoughts and feelings, is the robot conscious?
• If previous knowledge ( dB) is in place, will it become conscious?
• In a basic string phone system, how do we store and retrieve the message?
• Why in the backward hello paradigm, information is inverted?

Again, to build a conscious robot we need:(1),  (2), and (3)  

"Every single moment of life is a variant of multiple events occurring all at the same time.

~ Joey Lawsin

Intuitive Machines™ Biotronics™ Zoikrons™ Autognorics™  ELFS™ IM™ 

are original trademarks and logos

solely distributed by 

L.A.W.S.I.N. 

--------------------------------

========================= START Chapter 3 ================================

 Chapter 3: Originemology—The Origin of Origins

==================================================================

Chapter 3 - I will discuss here Introduction to Orignemology,  then Caveman in the Box, Acquisition of Information: By Choice, by Chance, iParticle, Nature- Mother of Information, Scriptional Jump, Instinct Fallacy, Bowlingual Experiment, Guesswork Predicament, Shifting Paradigms, Origin of Names, Human, Religion, and The Dog in a Human Suit,

===================================================================

When exploring the origins of anything—be it ideas, inventions, or even existence itself—it’s natural to begin with a question: Where did it all start? Tracing the roots of concepts and creations not only uncovers their beginnings but also highlights the interconnectedness of their evolution. Chapter 3 embarks on this journey, introducing the concept of Orignemology, the study of origins, to examine how systems, behaviors, and even abstract ideas come into being. This chapter delves into these questions through a variety of thought-provoking subtopics, each shining light on the beginnings of what we often take for granted.

When I discuss the origins of machines, for instance, I often begin with a pencil—a seemingly ordinary object that holds within it the principles of levers and the foundation of six simple machines. In geometry, a single dot or period transforms into lines, shapes, and eventually multidimensional structures, showing how the abstract evolves into complexity. A simple switch, flipping on and off, becomes the starting point for understanding the binary systems that gave rise to modern computers, software, and programming languages. Similarly, fire—an ancient discovery—unleashed human creativity, leading to drawing, writing, and the development of symbols, numbers, letters, and language. Each origin story is a window into how human ingenuity interacts with natural laws, providing a foundation for the systems and technologies we use today.

This journey of origins takes many forms. We begin with Caveman in the Box, a thought experiment that imagines a primitive human isolated from the world. This exploration challenges us to consider how knowledge is acquired and how the interaction between an individual and their environment influences understanding. From here, we dive into the Acquisition of Information, examining whether knowledge comes By Choice—through deliberate inquiry—or By Chance, as an outcome of randomness and coincidence.

The narrative then turns to the smallest building blocks of knowledge with iParticle, a perspective that frames particles as carriers of information, making Nature the Mother of Information. From the physical to the abstract, we explore how natural systems encode and transmit the principles that shape reality. This leads us to the Scriptional Jump, a phenomenon where leaps in understanding defy traditional instinctual logic, and the Instinct Fallacy, a concept that questions whether our intuitive tendencies can fully explain how we process and learn.

Real-world insights come to life through the Bowlingual Experiment, which investigates communication across species, and the Guesswork Predicament, which highlights the challenges and limitations of human perception. These studies pave the way for broader reflections on Shifting Paradigms, moments when humanity’s understanding of the world is upended by groundbreaking discoveries or changes in perspective.

Next, we investigate the Origin of Names, particularly those tied to humanity, gods, religion, and systems of belief. Names carry profound meaning, influencing not only how we perceive ourselves but also how we interact with the world and each other. Finally, we end with a reflective and thought-provoking discussion in The Dog in a Human Suit, which humorously yet profoundly asks what truly separates humans from animals. Are we as unique as we believe, or are we just animals wearing the guise of higher intellect and identity?

This chapter weaves together the origins of objects, ideas, and systems into a comprehensive exploration of beginnings. By drawing connections between seemingly disparate topics, it invites readers to consider not just how things start, but why they evolve, and what this tells us about the nature of life and existence itself. Every subtopic contributes to a deeper understanding of the forces that shape our reality, creating a rich tapestry of insight and discovery.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Originemology

Originemology, at its heart, is the science of beginnings—a pioneering exploration into the “study of the origin of origins.” It delves deep into uncovering the roots of everything, from the physical world to the abstract constructs of human thought. Think of it as a way of asking, "Where does it all come from?"—whether it’s the genesis of ideas, the emergence of natural objects, or the underlying laws that bind everything together. This innovative field identifies how things arise through a natural phenomenon Lawsin calls Inscription by Design (ID)—the embedded instructions or intuitive materials that guide creation itself.

At its core, Originemology was born to tackle big questions about the Genesis of Information. How did information first find its way into the minds of the earliest humans? Who or what supplied it? Was it the work of gods, spacefaring aliens, or something else entirely? Where do ideas originate, and how does raw information evolve into structured inscriptions and instructions? These aren’t just whimsical curiosities—they’re the kinds of questions that help us dig into the fundamental nature of our existence.

The field of Originemology breaks its ambitious mission into three primary areas. First, it examines the origins of human-created ideas—things like languages, numbers, emotions, religions, and tools. Second, it explores natural origins, such as the birth of the universe, the creation of elements, and the emergence of life itself. Finally, it synthesizes these insights to propose universal principles—what some might call a “Single Theory of Everything”—that ties it all together. By pulling from disciplines like anthropology, etymology, history, cosmology, and metaphysics, Originemology offers a cross-disciplinary lens to investigate how everything, from the smallest concept to the vastness of the cosmos, comes into being.

A big part of the study centers on five guiding questions: How did the original idea emerge? Who first conceptualized it? Where and when did this happen? And most importantly, why? These foundational questions guide every inquiry in Originemology, from tracing the roots of religious belief systems to mapping the origin of life itself. To tackle these questions, Originemology is built on several unique theories—like The Caveman in the Box Trilogy, Codexation Dilemma, and Generated Interim Emergence—which offer practical and philosophical tools to examine the mysterious "how" and "why" of origins.

And, of course, Originemology doesn’t shy away from grappling with the age-old questions humanity has been asking for millennia: Who or what created the universe? Where did we come from? Why are we here? At its most profound, the study even questions how intelligence and consciousness arise, pushing us to rethink traditional ideas with a fascinating paradigm called “A Brain without the Brain”. This idea suggests that intelligence may not be confined to the nervous system but could be found in any system that carries intrinsic instructions—plants, particles, and perhaps even machines.

In Originemology, everything begins with a particle of information, an iParticle. These are the smallest units of knowledge, referred to as namons or names in the human experience. An iParticle could represent a concept, an idea, or a snippet of information, and like DNA, it’s passed on—copied, shared, and transformed—across atoms, cultures, species, and generations. This hereditary thread of information, called the lawsinic instructional konstant, connects all things in a cosmic web of shared origins, tying together the natural world and human experience.

The ideas behind Originemology don’t just stop with abstract theories—they’re supported by tangible experiments and models, such as the creation of IDMF (isodimensional morphical figures). By applying just one rule to a single type of object, Originemology researchers recreated the evolution of complex structures, ultimately forming a Helixical Torus Dimetrix—which, in layman’s terms, looks like a donut. This model serves as a metaphor for how complexity emerges from simplicity, illustrating the profound elegance of natural creation.

The name Originemology itself reflects the spirit of the field, combining the Greek words for origin (genesis), name (onoma), and study (logos). Originally coined as “Genonology,” the addition of “onoma” was inspired by the idea that everything in existence has some kind of name—a label, a description, or even a mere association. Whether it’s a word, a thought, or a particle, every “name” carries the thread of its origin.

Ultimately, Originemology invites us to see the world through a new lens, encouraging us to ask: Where does this come from? Why does it exist? What does it mean for me, you, and everything else? By weaving together fields as diverse as cosmology and etymology, it attempts to unravel the threads of existence, showing us that behind everything lies an origin—a single, timeless spark that both begins and ends our understanding of reality.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Caveman in the Box

Lawsin’s thought experiment, Caveman in the Box, is a fascinating exploration into the Genesis of Information, designed to unravel how knowledge is acquired and what it means to be self-aware. Imagine this: a newborn son of a caveman is placed inside an enclosed, six-walled box immediately after birth. This "room" provides for all his survival needs—food, water, and sustenance—but isolates him entirely from the outside world. He is never allowed to see, hear, or interact with anyone or anything beyond his contained environment. Now, the question arises: Will this child develop awareness, acquire information, or even come to understand himself and his surroundings—or will his mind remain blank, a clean slate, for the entirety of his life?

This thought experiment is part of the broader Caveman in the Box Trilogy, which examines the origins of information through three scenarios: the caveman's son in complete isolation, the first human living naturally in the world, and a dog—his four-legged companion—existing in the same natural environment as his master. By contrasting these scenarios, Lawsin raises profound questions: What sparks self-awareness? How do individuals come to understand the objects and concepts around them? Is instinct enough, or does the acquisition of knowledge require external stimuli?

In the experiment, the first subject is the caveman’s son, confined entirely to the artificial box. His only interaction is with the walls around him, his own body, and the sustenance provided. The second subject is the first human, living freely in the natural world, surrounded by plants, animals, and non-living objects. The third subject is a dog, experiencing the same natural world as the caveman but with a key difference: the dog’s cognitive abilities are not on par with the human’s.

Through these three scenarios, Lawsin asks fundamental questions:  

- Will they acquire enough information to become self-aware?  

- Will they understand their surroundings or themselves?  

- How much of what they know will depend on their environment?  

- If instinct exists, is it sufficient for survival and comprehension?  

For the caveman’s son in the box, the findings are stark. Lawsin inferred that the boy's mind, without external input, would remain empty. While he might eventually discover his own body—his nose, hands, or feet—he wouldn’t understand what these things are. The six walls, his sustenance, and his body would be the extent of his "world," but without interaction or explanation, they would hold no meaning. Just as a dog might have ears but cannot comprehend their purpose, the boy would lack the context to make sense of what he experiences. This challenges the notion that a baby is born with pre-installed information or instincts. Instead, Lawsin proposes that the brain at birth is a "clean blank slate," empty of information until it is acquired, processed, and internalized through external interaction.

Unlike the boy, the caveman and the dog are exposed to the natural world. Here, the environment plays the role of teacher. Every tree, stone, river, and animal is a piece of information waiting to be observed and processed. Nature, as Lawsin emphasizes, is the Mother of Information—the ultimate provider of knowledge. Through its inherent objects, colors, textures, shapes, and sounds, it feeds both humans and animals with the raw data necessary to become aware, conscious, and self-conscious beings. 

Mother Nature, in this context, is not just a backdrop but a living database—a keeper of the catalog of all things. She provides the "names" of objects—what Lawsin calls inherent information. These physical labels from the outside world are processed by the mind, transitioning from physical reality to abstract thought in a one-directional flow called the Scriptional Jump. Information moves from external objects to internal ideas, from the inherent world to the interim mind. Without this external input, the mind remains functionally alive but informationally empty, much like a clock’s gears that turn mechanically but serve no greater purpose without a face to tell the time.

Lawsin’s framework identifies two primary ways in which information is acquired. By Choice, where knowledge is deliberately obtained—through teaching, observation, or intentional study—and By Chance, where information arises from unexpected experiences, discoveries, or accidents. In both cases, Nature serves as the ultimate source of inherent information, offering everything from the basics of survival to the subtleties of abstract thought.

Lawsin’s findings aren’t confined to thought experiments. Through his Bowlingual Investigation, he explored these same ideas in a physical experiment involving two dogs: an Alaskan malamute and a Mexican chihuahua. By observing their interactions and responses to different environments, he discovered key principles of information and consciousness:

1. Nature provides all the information.  

2. Information is acquired by choice or by chance.  

3. The environment shapes who and what we are.  

4. Objects are information, though not all information is tied to objects.  

5. Information flows only from the external world to the internal mind.  

6. The brain begins as an empty "hard drive" at birth, requiring input from the outside world.  

The Caveman in the Box Trilogy is more than an academic exercise—it’s a lens through which to view the human condition. It challenges us to reconsider the relationship between instinct, environment, and consciousness, proposing that without the external world to provide sustenance for the mind, we would remain unaware, unthinking, and incapable of growth. Consciousness, according to Lawsin, doesn’t need to originate in the brain—it arises from the interplay between the external and internal worlds, shaped by Mother Nature’s boundless database of information.

This experiment underscores the profound role of Nature as a nurturer of both life and thought, suggesting that while we may be born alive, it is our interaction with the world that makes us aware, conscious, and ultimately human.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bowlingual Experiment

Empiricism, the idea that all knowledge comes from sensory experience, has long been championed by philosophers such as John Locke, David Hume, and George Berkeley. While their work laid the groundwork for understanding human cognition, it stopped short of addressing a crucial question: Where does information come from in the first place? How is it created, shaped, and evolved? It failed to recognize that Nature itself—the world around us—is the ultimate provider of information. Every smell, every sound, every visual impression we perceive flows from the environment into our minds. Yet no two beings experience sensory input in precisely the same way. These gaps in traditional empiricism gave birth to a new school of thought, Originemology, conceptualized by Joey Lawsin. As part of his research, he conducted what he called the Bowlingual Experiment, an ambitious study investigating how dogs—our loyal companions—acquire, process, and transfer information.

 

At the heart of this experiment was Zero, a majestic, intelligent Alaskan Malamute with a knack for learning. With his thick, gray-and-white woolly coat, raccoon-like mask, and boundless energy, curiosity, quick learning, and personality made him an ideal subject. Whether chasing squirrels, playing tug-of-war, or pillow wrestling, Zero has always shown an uncanny ability to engage and adapt.  But beneath these playful interactions lay a more profound question: How does Zero think, and how can those thoughts be translated into something humans can understand? This question planted the seed for the experiment.

To bridge the communication gap, Lawsin embarked on a journey to decipher Zero’s thoughts. The study, nicknamed the Malamute-Chihuahua Codexation, aimed to understand how Zero could translate his abstract ideas into physical actions that humans could comprehend. The project even employed a custom Arduino-based microcomputer program called B2W (Barks to Words) to analyze and interpret Zero’s behavior.

 

The Bowlingual Experiment was driven by questions like these:

- How do organisms acquire information?  

- Where does this information originate?  

- How is knowledge stored, bit by bit?  

- Can a dog like Zero express what’s on his mind without understanding letters or numbers?  

- Is it possible for Zero to transfer his knowledge to another breed, like a Chihuahua?  

- And, more broadly, is instinct an innate behavior, or is it acquired over time?

The aim was not just to understand Zero but to explore how all beings—whether dogs or humans—convert abstract thoughts into actions and meaningful exchanges.

Lawsin’s experiment sought to bridge the gap between human and canine communication. Using a carefully crafted environment called "the Cube" or "the Box," Lawsin controlled Zero’s exposure to information. From puppyhood onward, Zero was introduced to bits of knowledge one piece at a time. The goal was to observe how Zero processed and acted on the information he received. Later, the experiment expanded to include a second dog—a Chihuahua—to examine whether information could be transferred between breeds. Could Zero’s knowledge be shared, and if so, how? This study wasn’t merely about understanding one dog—it was about uncovering the fundamental mechanics of communication and cognition across species.

Humans often underestimate dogs, viewing them as "just animals." But Lawsin challenged this perception, asserting that dogs possess a unique intelligence and emotional depth. They may not speak our language, but that doesn’t mean they lack their own. Dogs communicate through gestures, body language, and their acute senses. For example, Zero frequently used what Lawsin called communication by association. By linking objects to specific needs, Zero developed his own kind of language. If he picked up a bell, it meant he wanted to go outside. If he grabbed his plate, he was hungry. And if he brought over a soccer ball, it was time to play. These associations were a form of labeling—a system of understanding objects as symbols for desires or actions.

But Lawsin took this communication experiment a step further with a method called Visual Talk (VT). Instead of teaching commands or tricks, he focused on interpreting Zero’s natural actions as expressions of thought. For instance, during games of fetch, Zero didn’t just bring the ball back mindlessly. There were moments when he’d stop, sit in front of Lawsin, and stare at him, then glance at the ball and back again. The message was clear: It’s your turn to fetch. Such moments showed that Zero wasn’t just responding to commands—he was actively shaping interactions, revealing a deeper level of intention and awareness.

Through countless interactions, Lawsin discovered that communication is not limited to words. Humans, with their vast vocabularies, have complicated their lives with layers of language. But as Lawsin observed, communication can be simpler—and just as effective. Dogs, for example, rely on their senses to convey meaning. A wagging tail signals friendliness, while a bark or a subtle gesture can speak volumes. Zero, like many dogs, excelled at using his body language to convey his needs and emotions, whether it was a playful invitation or a request for attention.

The Bowlingual Experiment wasn’t just about Zero. It was about the broader principles of how information flows and is processed. Lawsin found that information comes from Nature, which he described as the ultimate database of sensory input. Knowledge is acquired either by choice—through deliberate interaction—or by chance, as an unexpected discovery. He also concluded that communication is not exclusively verbal; objects, gestures, and shared experiences all play a role in understanding one another. 

Zero’s contributions to the study went beyond communication. They challenged the boundaries of human-animal interaction, offering a glimpse into a world where understanding transcends species. Lawsin’s work reminds us that empathy, patience, and an open mind are essential in bridging gaps between different beings. Zero was more than a test subject—he was a mentor, showing that even without words, there’s a richness in the way living creatures connect.

The Bowlingual Experiment is as much a testament to communication and intelligence as it is to the bond between humans and their canine companions. Zero, a remarkable Alaskan Malamute, has come a long way in developing his vocabulary, demonstrating that language need not be confined to humans alone. Through a series of structured commands and interactions, he’s learned words and their associated actions, adding layers of depth to the study of interspecies communication. Each word is a bridge between abstract concepts in the human mind and the physical responses of a dog, forming a language of mutual understanding.

Zero’s vocabulary has grown significantly. He knows how to SIT, DOWN, and WAIT when told. He recognizes the word PLATE as a cue to fetch his food tray and BALL as an invitation to play fetch. Commands like SCRATCH prompt him to roll over for a belly rub, while FIVE gets him to offer a high-five. Even more advanced concepts, like SPEAK and SAY, allow him to vocalize in response to human prompts. This ever-growing list of commands highlights not just his intelligence but his ability to map human intentions to his physical world.

But communication is a two-way street, and just as Zero has learned to understand human language, Lawsin has also been learning to interpret Zero’s actions. Through careful observation, Lawsin has decoded Zero’s unique signals and behaviors. For example, when Zero fetches his plate, it means he’s hungry. When he sits by the door, he’s asking to go outside. When he touches Lawsin’s leg with his paw, he’s asking for food, and when he bows his head and tucks his tail, he’s apologizing. Each of these gestures is a form of communication, proving that dogs can express abstract needs and emotions through nonverbal cues.

A particularly fascinating moment occurred when Zero demonstrated a learned behavior that seemed to mimic human actions. After pooping in the backyard, Zero began covering his droppings using his nose and feet—a behavior more commonly associated with human efforts to clean up after pets than with instinctual canine habits. This raised an intriguing question: Could Zero have acquired this behavior by observing humans? If so, this behavior exemplifies how dogs can adapt and mirror human actions, a concept central to the study of Codexation.

Building on these discoveries, Lawsin took the experiment a step further with the Malamute-Chihuahua Dualpair Study. The goal was to see if the knowledge Zero had acquired could be transferred to another dog—both of the same breed (another Malamute) and of a different breed (a Chihuahua). The process relied on communication by association, where objects were used as labels to convey specific meanings. For instance, a ball represented play, a plate symbolized food, and a toy bone signaled a walk. By observing whether Zero could teach these associations to another dog, the study aimed to uncover how information spreads between individuals and species. This experiment provided deeper insights into the mechanisms of learning and communication.

A key component of these studies was the invention of the iBowWow, a device designed to decode and analyze the waveforms of a dog’s vocalizations. By studying the voice signatures of barking and wooing, the device translated these sounds into identifiable patterns that could be associated with specific words or meanings. Early results showed promising findings, with waveforms corresponding to distinct "words" like Peanut or Zero, offering a glimpse into how canine communication might be interpreted scientifically.

Through these experiments, Lawsin demonstrated that the transfer and processing of information extend beyond humans, revealing the complexity of canine cognition and communication. The Bowlingual Experiment not only uncovered new ways to interact with dogs but also challenged conventional notions of instinct and behavior. Zero’s journey, from learning commands to teaching another dog, underscores the incredible intelligence and adaptability of our four-legged friends. By recognizing their capacity to think, feel, and communicate, we deepen our understanding of both animals and ourselves, bridging the gap between species in a profoundly meaningful way.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Baby in a Puppy Suit

People often don’t realize that when we humanize a pet—be it a dog, a cat, a bird, or even a bear—we’re essentially raising a human being in an animal suit. While this may sound like a bold claim, it holds profound truth. According to the Caveman in the Box Trilogy Theory, humans and animals might appear to be distinct species on the surface, but when raised in identical environments, they start to mirror one another in emotions, intelligence, behaviors, and even health. When both are nurtured within the same controlled space—like a home—they become emotionally, mentally, physically, and socially alike. But how does this happen?

Picture a scenario where two newborn beings—a human baby and a puppy—are brought up in the same house. Inside this house, the baby receives care and attention from her family: her mother, father, siblings, and everyone else. Each day, she begins to sense and absorb her surroundings. She hears the soft tones of her mother’s voice, sees the warmth in her smile, feels the gentle caress of her touch, tastes the nourishing milk she provides, and smells her unique scent. Beyond these personal connections, the baby also responds to the environment around her—the hum of the television, the scents wafting in from the kitchen, the chatter of her family, and even the changing temperatures of the room. Piece by piece, these sensory experiences are stored in her mind as information, molding her understanding of the world. The home becomes the baby’s first teacher, shaping her identity, emotions, and ultimately, her humanity.

Now imagine the same house, but this time through the eyes of the puppy. Like the baby, the puppy is surrounded by the same people, the same sounds, and the same environment. He hears the laughter of the family, smells the food being cooked, feels the warmth of the house, and experiences the same ambient noises and textures. Just like the baby, he processes these interactions as information, storing them in his mind. Despite his outward appearance, the puppy is shaped by the exact same environment and care as the baby. In this sense, he too becomes a "human being," albeit in an animal suit.

The parallels become even clearer when we consider their shared experiences. If both the baby and the puppy are showered with love and care, they’ll both feel the same comfort and protection. When they lie side by side in bed, they’ll experience the same warmth, safety, and affection. Conversely, if they’re both placed in the cold loneliness of a garage overnight, they’ll endure the same anxieties and discomfort. What they feel isn’t dictated by whether they’re human or animal—it’s shaped by the environment they share. The environment becomes the great equalizer, a container of knowledge and experiences that molds both beings into remarkably similar individuals.

Some might argue that the baby is fundamentally different from the puppy because her brain is more complex. However, this idea overlooks an essential truth: at birth, both brains are essentially blank slates. Neither the baby nor the puppy comes into the world pre-loaded with information. Instead, everything they know must be acquired from their environment. Information doesn’t just exist—it must be absorbed, processed, and stored through interactions with the outside world. Both the baby and the puppy undergo this same process, accumulating knowledge through experience and observation.

The environment, then, is the true architect of who and what we are. It provides the raw materials—the sights, sounds, smells, and experiences—that shape our behaviors, emotions, and identities. According to experiments like the Bowlingual Experiment and the Caveman in the Box Trilogy, the following principles emerge:  

1. The brain is a clean slate at birth, devoid of pre-stored information.  

2. All information is acquired from the environment.  

3. The environment determines who and what we become.  

4. Nature is the ultimate source of all information.  

5. Information is gained in two ways: by choice (deliberate learning) or by chance (unexpected discovery).  

6. Instinct is not inborn but learned through experience.  

7. Information flows from the outside world into the mind—it does not originate internally.  

8. It is inhumanecccccbctiniirlgecndlrhcrbcfvkvuhlvhhgnjeufdc

 to humanize animals, as it places undue expectations on them—comparable to raising a child in a cage.

When we humanize a puppy, we are effectively raising a human child in an animal suit. This realization challenges us to reconsider how we treat our pets. While we place babies in cribs, we often confine puppies to cages. This disparity forces us to ask: Are we treating our pets as equal beings shaped by shared environments, or are we imposing artificial boundaries based solely on their outward forms? The answer has profound implications for how we understand and interact with the animals in our lives.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Origin of Names

Humanity has long pondered one of life’s greatest mysteries: Where did we come from? Across centuries, countless explanations have emerged to answer this question. Some say humans evolved through a biological process that began with microscopic organisms, gradually transforming over millions of years into the species we are today. Others propose more imaginative theories, such as the idea that our ancestors were spacefaring humans from distant galaxies. Many have been taught that a divine being fashioned us into existence. Most recently, the perspective of Originemology offers a fresh explanation—that humanity was born from Nature itself, through the dualpairing of systemic instructions and vitalic materials.

Regardless of these diverse explanations, archaeologists and molecular biologists agree that modern humans originated in Africa roughly 160,000 years ago. From this shared origin, our ancestors began migrating, spreading out across continents and adapting to new environments. Their remarkable journey can be visualized through a tool called the 16-Days Calendar, which compresses 160,000 years of human history into an accessible timeline of just 16 days. In this framework, each “day” represents 10,000 years, offering a fresh perspective on humanity’s expansive migration and evolution.

In the 16-Days Calendar, 160,000 years are condensed into just 16 days, where each "day" represents 10,000 years. This simplified framework helps us grasp the magnitude of humanity’s migrations and the spread of human civilizations across the globe.

Day 1 (160,000 years ago): Early humans ventured out from Africa, their birthplace, exploring the vast terrain in all directions—north, south, east, and west.

Day 6: A group crossed the Red Sea from Ethiopia into Yemen and the Arabian Peninsula, eventually making their way toward India. This pivotal migration introduced incredible diversity to human skin colors, ranging from black to brown, yellow, red, and white.

Day 9: From India, a group moved onward, traveling to Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and South China, even crossing the seas to reach Australia. Others left their mark in Europe, spreading far and wide.

Day 11: From Egypt, humans pushed north into Israel, Syria, Turkey, Hungary, and Austria, forging paths across the ancient landscapes.

Day 12: By now, human settlements dotted Europe, the Middle East, China, and Japan. This period marked humanity’s growing resilience and adaptability.

Day 14: Humanity reached North America. Crossing the icy Bering Strait from Russia into Alaska, our ancestors ventured south into Canada and eventually dispersed across the continent.

Day 16: By this point, humans had conquered the globe, populating South America, North America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and beyond. The story of modern humanity had officially begun.

According to this calendar, Day 1 marks the beginning of our story, when early humans ventured out from Africa to explore its vast landscapes. By Day 6, some had crossed the Red Sea, moving into Yemen and the Arabian Peninsula before journeying east toward India. This migration profoundly influenced human diversity, with skin tones ranging from black to brown, yellow, red, and white. By Day 9, groups from Sri Lanka continued across seas to South China, Indonesia, and even Australia, while others traveled west, leaving their mark in Europe. On Day 11, Egyptian travelers pushed through Israel, Syria, and Turkey, gradually expanding into Hungary and Austria. By Day 12, human settlements stretched across Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia.

The most dramatic migrations occurred on Day 14, as humans ventured into North America by crossing the icy Bering Strait from Russia into Alaska. Over time, they spread southward through Canada and into the Americas. By Day 16, the globe was fully populated. Humanity had settled nearly every corner of the world, from the Americas to Europe, Asia, and Africa. Although this timeline is presented in ascending order, moving from Day 1 to Day 16, the events flow backward in time, from 160,000 years ago to the present. 

But there’s more to the story than migration. Between Days 15 and 16 lies a pivotal era—the Rise of Civilization. Around 3,700 years ago, ancient Egypt experienced its Golden Age, ushering in a period of art, architecture, and innovation. Classical Greece and Rome followed, from roughly 460 BC to 500 AD, leaving behind legacies that would shape modern thought. The Middle Ages bridged the ancient and modern worlds from 500 to 1450 AD, culminating in the Renaissance, a cultural rebirth that spanned from 1450 to 1900. During this time, humanity moved from isolated tribes to interconnected societies, giving rise to the civilizations that define our history: the Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and more.

Religion, like humanity itself, has its origins deeply rooted in the environment and cultural exchange. The oldest known religion, Hinduism, emerged in India before spreading westward into Babylon (modern Iraq), where Judaism was born. From Judaism, Christianity arose, expanding across Europe and eventually reaching the Middle East and Africa. Islam followed, emerging from the teachings of Muhammad and extending its influence into northern Africa and parts of Asia. Meanwhile, Buddhism spread eastward from India into China, shaping the spiritual practices of the region.

Through trade, conquest, and missionary work, these religions wove themselves into the fabric of human culture, influencing societies and reshaping civilizations.

Even names have a history rooted in nature and context. According to Originemology, early humans borrowed names from the environment around them—animals, plants, and natural phenomena. These names were descriptive rather than formal, capturing the essence of an individual or place. For example, Native American names like Honiahaka (Little Wolf) or Huyana (Falling Rain) reflect a connection to the natural world. Similarly, biblical figures like Abraham and Isaac had names that described their roles or characteristics: Abraham means “Father of the Multitude,” while Isaac means “He Laughs". Names were not just identifiers but carried with them stories, heritage, and symbolic meaning.

Man’s quest for his origins is far from over. From biological evolution to divine creation and even extraterrestrial theories, the answers remain elusive. But one thing is certain: the story of humanity is a story of movement, adaptation, and growth. It is written in the migrations across continents, the rise of civilizations, the spread of ideas, and the names we give ourselves and each other. Whether we came from the hands of Nature, distant galaxies, or a divine creator, our shared journey reveals the resilience and curiosity that define us as a species. And as we continue to seek answers, perhaps the greatest discovery of all is this: every step we take brings us closer to understanding not just where we came from, but who we truly are.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Guesswork Predicamnet

Joey Lawsin’s theory of Circumstantial Standards, also known as the Belief System Paradox, challenges the foundations of human ideas and systems by asserting that all concepts are circumstantial—built on assumptions, guesswork, and subjective agreements. According to this theory, every system humans have created—whether linguistic, mathematical, social, economic, or religious—is governed by a Standard, a set of rules collectively accepted by the majority. These Standards define our reality, but they are not fixed or eternal; they change over time as new discoveries emerge. Old standards fade away, replaced by new ones that reflect the shifting landscape of human understanding. This cycle of creation and revision underscores the circumstantial nature of ideas. They exist only because we agree they do, making them fluid and ultimately a product of our collective imagination.

Take the Guesswork Predicament, for example. Why are there 26 letters in the alphabet instead of 10, 50, or even 100? Why does our number system rely on 10 digits, and not 2, 4, or 16? If we were to remove vowels from the alphabet, reduce it to 13 letters, or expand it into a new format, would humanity’s ability to communicate change drastically? If the markings on a ruler were altered, would measurement itself change? These questions highlight the arbitrary nature of human constructs. The Inca, Mayan, Greek, and Egyptian civilizations all developed different number systems, proving that the way we organize and label the world is not universal or absolute but instead relative and circumstantial. Even something as fundamental as naming a fruit depends on culture and context—an apple in one language could just as easily be called an orange or a banana in another. This variability shows that ideas are based on human-made conventions, making them inherently uncertain and born of guesswork.

The circumstantial nature of ideas extends to time and identity, as illustrated by the Birthday Riddle. Imagine being born in California and celebrating your birthday today. If you were in Australia, your birthday might have technically occurred yesterday, while in Alaska, it might not happen until tomorrow. The same logic applies to calendars, which differ across cultures and time periods. Lunar calendars, solar calendars, and even Martian calendars would all mark your age differently. These variations reveal that even something as seemingly concrete as a birthday is circumstantial, determined by the systems humans have devised to measure time. In essence, the way we perceive time and age is based on arbitrary frameworks—another testament to the fluidity of human constructs.

The Identity Crisis further examines how labels shape our reality. Why is a round, red fruit called an apple? If the dictionary had swapped the definition of “apple” with “orange” or “banana,” would the nature of the fruit itself change? Of course not—but our perception of it would. Words are merely agreed-upon symbols that represent objects or ideas, and these symbols can be altered, replaced, or redefined at any time. Similarly, why does the alphabet start with the letter A and not K? Why do some countries use the Yen and others the Peso? Why is your name your name, and not someone else’s? These questions reveal the subjective nature of our systems. Our labels, definitions, and classifications are simply convenient tools for understanding the world, yet their meaning exists only because society collectively agrees upon them. Once again, this highlights the guesswork and assumptions embedded in human constructs.

The paradox extends even into science, as seen in the Science Quandary. Scientific measurements and results, often regarded as absolute truths, are also circumstantial. For instance, the height of a building might be calculated differently on Earth, the Moon, Jupiter, or within a black hole, depending on the variables and parameters used. While science provides frameworks for understanding the world, its conclusions are subject to change based on context, environment, and advancing knowledge. This variability suggests that even scientific truths are influenced by the same circumstantial nature that governs other human systems. Among multiple valid measurements, which one is the “true” answer? The answer lies in the standard we choose to accept at that moment.

Ultimately, Circumstantial Standards reveals that reality, as we know it, is shaped by assumptions and collective agreements. Ideas become real when they are given physical associations or widely accepted by society. However, this does not make them absolute truths. Whether it’s an apple called by another name, the measurement of time, or the value of a scientific constant, everything we believe is subject to redefinition. Reality itself depends on how we define, associate, and agree upon it—and in this way, it remains a construct of guesswork and assumption. The fluidity of these standards is a reminder of the ever-evolving nature of human understanding, where no idea is permanent and all truths are ultimately relative.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

========================= END Chapter 3 ==================================

==================================================================

Chapter 1: Creation by Laws

I will introduce what existence is based on mainstream definitions. Then how viegenesis works based on creation by twoness, from something to nothing, to shape and space, to physicals and abstracts, to materials and inscriptions. Then how everything shaped from the Lawsinium Marble. Then introduce the biological criteria of life, differentiate bioforms and abioforms, then differentiate alive, living, and with life. Then introduce reality as an illusion by using examples like codexation dilemma, black train expt, lawsin pencil, and the alter pair of life which is death, the final code of life.

=======================================================================

Chapter 2: Evolution of Creation

I will discuss here Introduction to Evolution, how numbers, language. machines, Materials, shapes, Inscriptions, Computers, Formulas and Equations. Dimensions, Units of Measurement, Dimetrix - IDMF, Inverse Square Law -GUT, Darwin Evolution Mistakes

=======================================================================

 Chapter 3: Originemology—The Origins of Inscriptions

I will discuss here Introduction to Orignemology,  then Caveman in the Box, Acquisition of Information: By Choice, by Chance, iParticle, Nature- Mother of Information, Scriptional Jump, Instinct Fallacy, Bowlingual Experiment, Guesswork Predicament, Shifting Paradigms, Origin of Names, Human, Religion, and The Dog in a Human Suit,

=======================================================================

Chapter 4: Inscription by Design

 I will discuss here Introduction to Inscription by Design, then its components of Intuitive materials and Embedded Instructions. Then discuss the Lawsinium Cat that will lead to inscriptions and Algorithms. Then provide some examples of how inherent internal inscription works like in Circles and other examples in biological, artificial, natural,  and cosmic systems. Then I will show how information is stored using the Brein Theory. Then classify Neural and Aneural Brain. Show some examples of Intutive Aneural System (IAN) and the birth of Inscriptionism.

=======================================================================

Chapter 5: The Single Theory of Everything

I will discuss here  Introduction to Generated Interim Emergence or the single theory of everything, then its formula the IAN Equation, then some examples or models like biological, artificial, natural, non-biological and other systems, then Lawsin Conjecture and finally the Big Bang Blunders.

=======================================================================

 Chapter 6: Autognorics—The Emergence of Self-Awareness

I will discuss here the introduction to Biotronics Project, the birth of the biotronics, then the Abiozoics, 7 Non-biological Criteria of Life, the differences between Awareness, Consciousness, Self-realization, then the 7 Definitions of Consciousness, its generalization via Lawsin Dictum, the difference between Human Sapience and Artificial Sentience based on by chance, Lawsin AI Paradox, and finally autognorics.

=======================================================================