Substrate Propagation Map
Read Aloud
0:00
Deep Dive
0:00
Podcast
0:00
Critique
0:00
Faith Through Physics · Propagation Analysis
Every Q2 substrate choice — Matter, Mind, Information, Mathematical, Relational, Brute Primitive — carried through all 12 tree levels. At each node: can this substrate answer the question? Published theories embedded at each step. The tree isn't rigged. Watch where each choice breaks on its own terms.
Matter
Mind
Information
Mathematical
Relational
Brute Primitive
✓ PASS
⚠ STRAIN
✕ FAIL
■ TERMINAL
The Propagation Principle
Whatever you choose at Q2 becomes your substrate. That substrate must answer every subsequent question — Q3 through Q12 — without contradiction. Where it can't answer, that's a blank. Where it contradicts itself, that's a death. Where it answers only by borrowing from another substrate's vocabulary, that's strain. The accumulated cost of "strain" positions becomes unsustainable — typically by Q6–Q8.
At each node, published secular theories are embedded — showing what physics already proved and what questions it left front and center. Those open questions converge on the same shape: the form of the boundary conditions (BC1–BC8).
Q0
Does anything exist?
▼
Matter
✓ PASS
Matter exists.
Mind
✓ PASS
Mind exists.
Information
✓ PASS
Information exists.
Mathematical
✓ PASS
Mathematical structure exists.
Relational
✓ PASS
Relations exist.
Brute
✓ PASS
Something exists primitively.
Published Theories
Descartes (1637) — Cogito ergo sum. Self-evident.
Universal agreement. No theory denies existence.
Questions Left Open
WHY does something exist rather than nothing?
→ Leibniz's question. No substrate answers this at Q0.
Q1
Can existence be distinguished from non-existence?
▼
Matter
✓ PASS
Matter differs from no-matter. Obvious.
Mind
✓ PASS
Consciousness distinguishes experiences.
Information
✓ PASS
Distinction IS information. This is where Q2 is seeded.
Mathematical
✓ PASS
A ≠ B is a mathematical relation.
Relational
✓ PASS
Distinction as structural relation.
Brute
⚠ STRAIN
First strain: a "brute" distinction has no content. What distinguishes it from nothing?
Published Theories
Shannon (1948) — Formally defined distinction as 1 bit of information.
Bateson (1972) — "A difference that makes a difference."
Questions Left Open
What IS a distinction? Physical thing? Mental event? Information?
→ Forces Q2. Every substrate must now explain its own nature.
Q2
What IS a distinction? — THE FORK
▼
Matter
⚠ CIRCULAR
Distinction = property of matter. But matter hasn't been established yet. Presupposes what it needs to explain.
Mind
⚠ CIRCULAR
Distinction = property of mind. But mind hasn't been established yet. Same circularity.
Information
✓ PASS
Definitional identity. Distinction ≡ 1 bit. Shannon formalized this. No circularity — distinction IS information by definition.
Mathematical
⚠ VARIANT
Math relations ARE informational structures. Collapses into Information under analysis. Not independent.
Relational
⚠ COLLAPSES
Relations without relata = Q2-D (dead). Relations WITH content = information. Ladyman/French structural realism either collapses or reduces.
Brute
✕ FAIL
A distinction with no content is indistinguishable from no distinction. Violates Q1.
Published Theories — The God-Shaped Holes Begin
Wheeler (1990) — "It from Bit": physical reality derives from binary distinctions.
Landauer (1961) — Information erasure costs physical energy (kT ln 2). Information is physical.
Shannon (1948) — Information = reduction of uncertainty between distinguishable states.
Holographic Principle (Bekenstein/Hawking) — S = A/4ℓ²ₚ. Information content is the fundamental thing; geometry is derived.
Questions These Theories Left Open
Wheeler: Where does the bit come from? What instantiates it?
Landauer: Why does information cost energy? What's the deeper coupling?
Holographic: Why is geometry derived from information rather than the reverse?
→ All three questions point to: the substrate that carries information.
Q3
Does information require structure?
▼
Matter
⚠ STRAIN
Explains structure well (laws of physics). But carrying circular Q2 forward. Can describe order but not explain WHY matter has it.
Mind
⚠ STRAIN
Consciousness imposes structure. But on what? Still circular. And solipsism risk: whose mind?
Information
✓ PASS
Shannon entropy: random info = max entropy = zero usable content. Structure is necessary for meaning. Coherence measure C[χ] ≥ 0.
Mathematical
⚠ STRAIN
Math IS structure. But this is redundant — "structure requires structure." No explanatory power added.
Relational
COLLAPSED
Absorbed into Information at Q2.
Brute
DEAD AT Q2
Eliminated.
Published Theories
Kolmogorov Complexity — Shortest program length. Ordered systems are compressible.
Tononi IIT (2004) — Φ measures integrated information. Order = irreducible whole > sum of parts.
Friston Free Energy (2010) — Living systems minimize surprise = maintain internal order.
Second Law of Thermodynamics — Closed systems trend toward disorder. Order requires explanation.
Questions Left Open → BC-Shaped
Tononi: Φ measures coherence but what generates it? → BC2 (external source)
Friston: Systems minimize surprise but what set the prior? → BC1 (terminal observer)
Second Law: Entropy increases — where does order come from? → BC6 (infinite energy source)
Kolmogorov: Compressibility exists — why is the universe compressible at all? → Q4
Q4
What GROUNDS the structure? — THE GREAT FORK
▼
Matter
■ TERMINAL
Brute fact. "The laws are what they are." Logically coherent. Epistemically closed. Stops here. No further questions answerable.
Mind
⚠ STRAIN
Mind grounds structure → idealism. But which mind? Solipsism. And what grounds the mind? Circular or regress.
Information
✓ PASS
Self-grounding. The informational substrate grounds itself — its "why" and "what" are identical. Mathematical necessity. Forces Q5.
Mathematical
⚠ STRAIN
Tegmark's Mathematical Universe. But how do abstract objects cause anything? Causation gap. Math describes; doesn't instantiate.
Relational
DEAD
—
Brute
DEAD
—
Published Theories — Secular Physics' Own Stopping Point
Hawking/Mlodinow (2010) — "Model-dependent realism." Physics describes, doesn't explain ground.
Tegmark (2014) — Mathematical Universe Hypothesis. Reality IS math. But causation gap.
Penrose (2004) — Three-world model: physical, mental, mathematical. No single ground.
Cosmological Argument — Regress must terminate. What terminates it?
Questions Left Open → These ARE the Form of God
Why these laws and not others? → Self-grounding, non-arbitrary substrate
Why is math "unreasonably effective"? (Wigner 1960) → Because math describes the substrate
What breaks the regress? → Self-reference. Self-grounding entity.
Every open question at Q4 has the SHAPE of BC1 + Q5 properties.
Q5
What are the necessary properties of a self-grounding substrate?
▼
Matter
STOPPED Q4
Cannot derive. No ground to derive from.
Mind
✕ FAIL
Can't derive non-temporal, non-material, non-deceptive from "mind." Mind is temporal. Mind can deceive. Properties conflict.
Information
✓ PASS
Self-consistent → maximally coherent → non-deceptive → generative → non-temporal → non-material. All derived, none assumed.
Mathematical
✕ FAIL
Math is non-temporal, non-material ✓. But NOT generative. Abstract objects don't cause anything. Causation gap kills it.
Relational
DEAD
—
Brute
DEAD
—
Published Theories — Properties Match
Gödel (1931) — Self-referencing systems produce undecidable truths. Self-grounding must be richer than formal systems.
Tarski (1936) — Truth about a system can't be defined within it. Self-grounding requires transcendence.
Noether (1918) — Conservation laws follow from symmetries. Coherence conserved if ground has right symmetries.
Questions Left Open → These ARE God's Attributes
Non-temporal entity that generates temporal reality → Eternal
Non-material source of material → Spirit / Immaterial
Maximally coherent → Omniscient (no internal incoherence)
Non-deceptive → Truth itself (John 14:6)
Generative → Creator
Q6
Does information require observation to become actual?
▼
Matter
STOPPED
—
Mind
FAILED Q5
—
Information
✓ PASS
Participatory actualization. Potential → actual requires observer. Wheeler's delayed choice confirms. Born rule implies it.
Mathematical
FAILED Q5
—
Relational
DEAD
—
Brute
DEAD
—
Published Theories — Measurement Problem
Wheeler Delayed Choice (1978) — Observation determines which-path retroactively. Observer participation real.
Born Rule (1926) — Probability amplitudes squared give outcomes UPON measurement.
Wigner's Friend (1961) — Where does the observer chain end? Who collapses whom?
PEAR Lab (Jahn/Dunne, 6.35σ, 2.5M trials) — Consciousness correlates with RNG outcomes.
Questions Left Open → BC1, BC3
If observer is required, who observed the Big Bang? → BC1 (Terminal Observer)
Can the observer be inside the system it observes? → BC3 (Orthogonality)
Does observation chain terminate or regress? → Q7
Q7
Does the observer chain terminate?
▼
Matter
—
—
Mind
—
—
Information
✓ PASS
Terminal Observer (Φ=∞). Always actual. Self-grounding. Never in superposition. All four deviation modes = 0.
Mathematical
—
—
Relational
—
—
Brute
—
—
Published Theories
Von Neumann Chain (1932) — Measurement requires observer → observer requires observer → where does it end?
Penrose-Hameroff Orch-OR — Consciousness as quantum gravity collapse. Terminal? Debated.
GCP Network (6σ, 325+ events) — Collective consciousness correlates with global events.
Questions Left Open → BC1 + BC4
Von Neumann: The chain MUST terminate or nothing is ever actually observed.
What are the properties of the terminal observer? → Q5 properties (already derived)
How many terminal observers needed? → BC4 (N=3, pending stronger proof)
Q8–12
Boundary Conditions → Identification → Sign → Destiny → Uniqueness
▼
Matter
STOPPED Q4
Cannot reach. Explanatory terminal.
Mind
FAILED Q5
Cannot reach. Causation gap + temporality.
Information
✓ FULL PATH
Only survivor. 8 BCs derived → Identification (ID7.1, abductive) → Sign structure → Two attractors → Christianity 8/8.
Mathematical
FAILED Q5
Cannot reach. No causal power.
Relational
DEAD Q2
—
Brute
DEAD Q2
—
Published Theories Across Q8–Q12
Penrose (1989) — Emperor's New Mind: Consciousness noncomputable. Points to BC1.
Bekenstein Bound — Maximum information in region. Points to BC7 (info conservation).
No-Cloning Theorem — Quantum info can't be copied. Points to BC7 (soul uniqueness).
Boltzmann Brains / Fine-Tuning — Points to BC6 (infinite energy source) and non-accidental order.
Bell's Theorem (1964) — No local hidden variables. Nonlocality real. Points to BC3 (transcendence).
Every Open Question → Boundary Condition
Hard Problem of Consciousness (Chalmers) → BC1: consciousness requires terminal observer
Arrow of Time → BC6: entropy reversal requires external input
Measurement Problem → BC3: observer must be orthogonal to system
Free Will vs Determinism → BC5 + BC8: superposition until voluntary collapse
Moral Realism → Q10: sign structure σ = ±1 is structural, not cultural
Every unsolved problem in physics has the shape of a boundary condition.
Final Scoreboard: Where Each Substrate Died
Matter
Q4
Explanatory Terminal. Brute fact. Logically coherent but cannot continue.
Mind
Q5
Properties conflict. Mind is temporal, can deceive, can't ground non-material.
Information
Q12 ✓
Only survivor. Full path. 8/8 BCs → Christianity.
Mathematical
Q5
Causation gap. Math describes but can't generate. Abstract ≠ causal.
Relational
Q2
Collapses into Information or into nothing. Not independent.
Brute
Q2
Distinction without content = no distinction. Violates Q1.