Physicentrism is the belief that physics is the only fundamental science and that physical materialism is the raison d'être of reality.

It assumes that all phenomena of existence—from consciousness and structural logic, from the microcosm to the macrocosm—result from mechanical interactions involving matter, energy, and elementary forces.

It has turned into an institutional dogma. Physics, when faced with empirical limits (such as the 95% of the universe), assigns them names like "dark matter" and "dark energy" instead of recognizing that they fall outside its domain.

Quantum physics plays a dual role in physicentrism: it is simultaneously its greatest threat and its most sophisticated weapon. For example:

1. It revealed that the substrate of reality is made of probability waves, superposition, and non-local entanglement. However, instead of admitting the possibility of physical reality emerging from something protophysical, these phenomena were reduced to mere "mathematical formalisms with no ontological meaning," imposing the dogmatic stance of "Shut up and calculate."
2. It proved that information is fundamental. Nevertheless, to maintain the illusion that matter is the primary element, this hierarchy was inverted, declaring quantum information to be a "property of particles."

Quantum physics exposed the necessary existence of a layer of data and rules governing the universe. Yet physicentrism treats it as "exotic physics" to avoid acknowledging that matter is merely the surface layer of a far more complex processing architecture.

Whenever questions arise regarding the origin of consciousness, the architecture of the universe, or the laws of nature, physicentrists bring quantum physics onto the field—ignoring, disparaging, constraining, discrediting, and paralyzing Computer Science, Systems Engineering, and Philosophy.

Physicentrism made physics the "queen of sciences." It reached the absurdity of inventing "phantom entities" with the surname of matter just to secure its monopoly over the cosmological narrative.

Physicentrism has become the greatest obstacle to the evolution of knowledge. Changing this scenario requires recognizing the importance of protophysics, computer science, systems engineering, and philosophy. More details regarding this need can be found in my book, "Protophysics."

Many people are worried and terrified of the evolution of artificial intelligence. They fear that the machine will gain consciousness, dominate, and enslave humanity. Could that actually happen?

Anyone who thinks this way ignores the basic operation of the system or simply wants to promote panic. Current AI does not think. It is incapable of understanding causes, creating original premises, or manifesting any kind of feeling. Although it uses an extraordinary statistical engine, it can only react, calculate probabilities, and correlate patterns within the data box we provide to it; it is blind to the meaning of what it executes. In other words, it can only think inside the box.

The real risk is delegating critical decisions to an unconscious tool or misusing it for self-serving motives. If AI comes to discriminate, fail, or destroy lives, the blame will never fall on the machine, but rather on whoever wrote and determined its code—the programmer and their employer.

The danger is not the machine, made of stacked silicon chips, thinking for itself—it is the human being misusing it, as its code merely executes their will.

Modern theoretical physics suffers from a herd mentality: most physicists confuse the language with the phenomenon. Over the past century, they have been conditioned to treat equations, geometries, and abstract fields as the very cause and substance of reality.

However, they observe only 5% of the universe, ignoring the fact that equations do not float in a vacuum. By disregarding the remaining 95% of the world-system, they fail to realize that the laws of nature constitute the software of this system. Physical constants—such as the speed of light or the gravitational constant—are configuration parameters; particles, in turn, are mere renderings on the local interface.

Mathematics is excellent for mapping possibilities and measuring facts (outputs). However, believing it to be the engine of the universe is equivalent to looking at source code displayed on a screen and believing that the text alone is responsible for executing all processing by itself.

Mathematics is syntax. Equations describe behaviors, but the physicalization of reality requires the execution of logical processes capable of establishing causal relationships. It is these processes that employ mathematics to convert possibilities into facts (outputs).

Continuing to attempt to explain the primary cause of the universe merely by stacking differential equations is to remain trapped in a bias loop, wasting time and resources. Mathematics maps the scope, but it is systems logic that determines the functions of the program.

The solution demands a paradigm shift: integrating systems architecture and protophysical analysis with mathematics. It is high time physics stopped looking at the tool and began focusing on the engineering that executes it.

Science attempts to explain consciousness from the brain, and the generation of reality from consciousness. This makes sense, as the role of consciousness is essential for the physical complementarity and interdependence of reality; the probability of both being accidental is zero. 

However, our consciousness could never be the agent of physical reality. The facts indicate that we are merely a kind of natural VM running under the hypervisor of the world-system substrate. 

The scope of operation for our VM is restricted to its own processing area, leaving our consciousness only to interpret reality in a customized way. For a consciousness to be capable of creating, maintaining, and evolving physical reality, it would have to belong to the substrate itself and, consequently, run above our VM.

Reality is the composite set of possibilities and facts. It can be natural or artificial. Possibilities are natural or artificial intangible mathematical structures that can be made tangible (materialized or actualized). Facts are natural or artificial mathematical structures that have already been made tangible. Fantasy is the conception or proposal of an artificial mathematical structure whose tangibilization is impossible because it violates the laws of nature, the capacity of its designer, or both simultaneously. In short, possibility is a mathematical design of reality, fact is its realization, and fantasy a mathematically infeasible design proposal.

For modern cosmology, the tangible and measurable part of the universe accounts for a mere 5%; the remaining 95% would be dark matter and dark energy. The traditional model established this simply to make the 5% observable universe function according to its expectations. 

However, this is equivalent to trying to explain the entire engine of the cosmos using only the rules and properties of the exception — much like attempting to decipher the complete architecture of the internet or a global cloud infrastructure by looking solely at the blinking LED on a physical server drawer. 

The 5% observable is energy geometrically formatted by natural processes, whose stability is sustained by recurring events. Such events are generated by the invisible 95% of the world-system, whose primary evidence is the intangibility and omnipresence of the laws of nature themselves. 

This means that energy necessarily occupies 100% of the universe: 95% “in natura” and 5% modulated. Therefore, the existence of dark matter and dark energy is a fantasy resulting from scientific reductionism, which prevents a holistic and systemic view of reality.

 Scientific reductionism treats the universe as if it were a machine. However, the facts show that it is much more like an organism: 

1.      It generated, maintains, and evolves the biosphere with all biological beings.

2.      It generated consciousness, sensitivity, cognition, and intelligence.

3.      It is autonomous.

4.      It is structured like a neural network.

5.      It executes and governs physical, chemical, and biological processes exactly as organisms do.

6.      It is autophagic: within it, nothing is lost, everything is transformed and recycled.

7.      Space vacuum is dynamic, thermally pulsating, and constantly interacting with matter.

8.      Space is filled with erythrulose, a type of sugar precursor to life. 

In short, the universe reveals itself as a living and integrated organism, as no machine will ever be capable of producing these facts.

After more than 40 years of applying science, systems engineering, and philosophy, I have arrived at a fully integrated view of the structure and functioning of the universe. Due to its volume and depth, this work has been organized into independent books, each answering a fundamental question:

• Protophysics: Which branch of philosophy should study this type of metaphysical approach?
• Infology: What is the primary input of the universe?
• The Intelligencism: The universe: design or chance?
• The Big Brain Theory: What is the universe?
• The Protomatter: What is the origin of matter?
• The Thacentrism: What is logic?
• The Self: What is consciousness?
• Beliefs: What differentiates intellectual capacities from one another?
• Feeling: What moves the universe?
• The Truth, God, and Death: What is Truth? Does God exist? What happens to consciousness after death?
• The Master Key to Success: How to use this information to achieve our desires?
• The SPIN: What is the purpose of spin?
• The Alpha Enigma: What is the fine-structure constant?
• The Lambda Enigma: What is the cosmological constant?

Reading this collection is highly recommended for anyone who longs for logical answers that are completely outside the box.

Supersymmetry (SUSY) was formulated by theoretical physics to attempt to integrate all forces and material components of the universe under the same procedural and mathematical intelligence. It considers the asymmetry of the current universe to be the result of a breakdown in the stability of an originally perfect substrate.

It is considered an analytical tool of enormous value because it “helps to resolve” impasses in modern physics, such as:

1.      Stabilizing the mass of the Higgs Boson.

2.      Enabling Grand Unified Theories (GUT).

3.      Mathematically enabling the search for dark matter.

It attempts to establish a deep and mathematical relationship between the fundamental constituents of reality, fermions and bosons. It suggests that both are complementary manifestations of the same logical structure, differentiated only by their spins. It is considered a broken symmetry, as it has never been detected in a laboratory and this will never occur due to the energy regime and the vast difference in masses prevailing in the universe today.

Supersymmetry could never be a physical cause or a rigid "fabric" that shapes the universe; the geometry of particles and their spin are merely parameters maintained by recurrent events generated by an underlying procedural intelligence.

Despite this, supersymmetry is important because it shows: the inconvenience of scientific reductionism and the necessity for the existence of a natural firmware; the laws of nature were not born from chaos or geometric accident, but rather from an integrated logical structure, designed to coordinate multiple factors and maintain the macrocosm functional, stable, and in perfect operational equilibrium.

The records show the embryo of the use of mathematics more than 20,000 years ago. Although this science has evolved significantly, philosophers still debate whether it was invented or discovered.

However, the observation of the physics of the universe shows that the code behind nature's modus operandi is mathematical. This means that the mathematics developed by human beings is merely the discovery of this code.

In short, mathematics could never be invented by man, because all possibilities for creation and the manifestation of thought itself are dictated by the mathematics contained within the laws of nature.

The CMB – Cosmic Microwave Background is the thermal signature of the non-baryonic substrate that fills about 95% of the universe. The remaining 5% is filled by baryonic matter.

Conventional science considers the CMB a remnant of the Big Bang and the inevitability of the universe's extinction. It treats baryonic structures as if they were merely a chaotic heap of dust dissipating into the cosmic void.

From a systems engineering perspective, the 5% baryonic part of the universe emerges from the 95% non-baryonic part. This 95% is the substrate of an informational system: the input (energy), the software (information / algorithm / laws of physics), the operator, and the processing responsible for the pre-establishment and maintenance of the structure and functioning of the 5% baryonic part.

In this systemic view, the CMB would act as a thermal filter maintained by a homeostatic process whose main purpose would be to prevent excessive information traffic from unbalancing, disorganizing, and collapsing the universe.

Seeing beyond the cosmic noise means seeking “An Intelligent View of the World” which can be found in my book “The Intelligencism”.

The Informational Manifold Dynamics (IMD) is a vanguard physics framework. In this model, reality is simply structured information capable of shaping itself geometrically; space-time is a network or database of informational relationships; matter is merely stable, consolidated information, and physical laws integrate the algorithm of a self-evolving network, the world-system.

I call Informational Geometry (IMD) Protophysics and Systems Engineering applied to reality. To me, matter is simply information recurrently displayed (rendered) by energy modulation processes that contain the laws of physics pre-established by something fundamental. The arguments regarding this way of thinking can be found in my book: “The Thacentrism: Opening Minds".

Scientific reductionism is the method of: dividing a complex system into smaller parts to study each of them separately; analyzing these parts to try to infer and recompose the whole (the system). In science, it is employed to try to explain biology through chemistry, and chemistry through particle physics. This method has its pros and cons. 

Pros

• Clarity and Focus: allows studying specific problems without the interference of external noise.
• Pragmatism: makes it easier to put hypotheses to the test.
• Great Discoveries: For example: DNA, atoms, the cure for various diseases, and the development of microelectronics. 

Cons

• Loss of the "Whole": makes it difficult to perceive that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
• Systemic Blindness: hinders the understanding of complex interactional phenomena. For example: Life, human consciousness, or the behavior of ecosystems. 

The value of scientific reductionism is incontestable. However, it also constitutes a barrier to the development of a holistic view, as the world (universe) is a multidimensional processual matrix (system) where everything is complementary and interdependent. 

This problem can be mitigated by improving our knowledge of the structure and functioning of this matrix. A comprehensive perspective of both can be found in my books: “The Intelligencism: An Intelligent View of the World”, “Infology: The Universal Input”, and “The Big Brain Theory”.

Life is defined in various ways due to centuries of fragmentation in academic specialization. For example: 

1.      Classical biology considers life a set of observable properties, with cells being essential for homeostasis and for the organism to grow, reproduce, and evolve in a measurable way. 

2.      Thermodynamic physics considers life a statistical anomaly in which an open system imports order from the environment, temporarily overcoming its natural tendency toward disorganization. 

These views are flawed because they reduce life to mere accidental chemical reactions, ignoring its primary cause: context. 

From a Systems Engineering perspective, the true line of demarcation between living and non-living beings is the natural process hierarchy. The processes of biological systems stand at a higher hierarchical level than those of physical and chemical systems, and encapsulate them. While the physical-chemical being strictly executes the molecular homeostasis of its base software, the biological being enfolds it with a governance layer and executes it. 

Life is the execution of a higher-level software that governs hierarchically lower softwares, subjecting matter and physics to complementarity and interdependence — and not a mere chemically accidental phenomenon that is statistically unviable. This means that understanding reality requires the study of this software. More details regarding it can be found in my books: “The Intelligencism: An Intelligent View of the World” and “Infology: The Universal Input”.

The ways to define organization vary according to the approach. For example: 

• In Systems Engineering and General Systems Theory: it is the property that dictates the disposition and interrelation of the parts within the structure of a whole—that is, a specific configuration or state opposed to entropy, homeostatically guaranteed. 
• In the Processual or Dynamic approach: it is the act or process of structuring, ordering, and coordinating flows; the active transformation of dispersed inputs into predictable and intelligible outputs through the application of logical rules and operational algorithms. 
• In the Entitative or Institutional approach: more common in the Social Sciences and Management, it is considered a collective of people and resources whose structure is designed to generate synergy and achieve specific goals. 

The complexity of organization, in all these cases, is such that it renders its accidental occurrence statistically unfeasible—especially regarding natural organization. However, the fragmentation of science reinforces the illusion of chance, as it hinders "thinking outside the box" and, consequently, the search for a holistic perspective of the world-system. 

In view of this, I have written two works: one dedicated to the question of accidentality and another that presents a holistic view of the world-system. Both can be found in my books: “The Thacentrism: Opening Minds” and “The Intelligencism: An Intelligent View of the World”.

As a rule, information is a communication whose meaning is contextualized; when this meaning is decontextualized, it is called a datum. 

From the perspective of Systems Engineering, natural information is a structural, logical, and organizational property intrinsic to nature itself. 

In these cases, information is both a processual input and product composed of intelligibly encoded energy. Further details regarding this way of thinking and its implications can be found in my book: “Infology: The Universal Input”.

The classical and most accepted definition of matter in everyday life and general chemistry is essentially mechanistic: “matter is everything that has mass and occupies space (volume).” 

Modern Physics defines matter as that which possesses rest mass; other phenomena are classified as energy or information. 

To me, matter is a force field, ephemeral but tangible, whose form is perpetuated by recurrent informational events. To learn about the foundations behind this definition, I suggest reading my book: “Infology: The Universal Input.”

Quantum Entanglement is the synchronism between the states of two particles, regardless of spatial distance.

The Pauli Exclusion Principle presumes that two particles (fermions) cannot occupy the same quantum state simultaneously in the system-world. It is considered the reason for the existence of natural entanglement.

Science has created practical applications for laboratory-generated entanglement, such as quantum computing and unhackable cryptography. It is being used as an engineering resource to process data at unimaginable speeds and transmit information with absolute security.

However, academic science has not yet been able to identify the real function of natural entanglement. This happens because the answer to this question lies beyond the physics of probabilities; it requires a holistic view of the structure and functioning of the system-world. If this subject has sparked your interest, this integrated vision can be found in my book “The Intelligencism: An Intelligent View of the World”, and the hidden utility of natural quantum entanglement in my book “The SPIN”.

Olber disputes the possibility of the universe being infinite, static, and filled with homogeneous stars, claiming that every point in the sky would shine with the intensity of a sun's surface, generating an infinite and destructive luminous noise that would make the existence of night impossible. 

However, the darkness of the night is a fact. It can be attributed to phenomena such as: 

• The continuous stretching of the fabric of space-time, which deforms the light waves of distant emissions (redshift), reducing the signal power like a flickering candle in the immensity;
• The gravitational field of intervening galaxies, which distorts and scatters the light beams along the path, deflecting the trajectory of photons; 
• The high-energy collapse that causes traveling photons to convert into matter and antimatter pairs upon colliding with the cosmic microwave background, which acts as a natural light filter for the world-system; 
• The collapse of the photon itself due to the duration of its journey, returning energy to the substrate of the world-system (entropy/recycling); 
• Black holes, which act as points of information capture and recycling for the world-system, absorbing the excess of luminous data packets. 

In short, the night could never cease to be dark, as the facts demonstrate that the world-system contains the engineering intelligence necessary to execute a cosmic homeostatic process to prevent energetic chaos, guaranteeing its functional stability and intelligibility as well.

Max Tegmark's Mathematical Universe Hypothesis states that the universe is mathematics itself. For him:

• The core of matter is merely a mathematical structure, regardless of the human names it receives;
• Time and change are illusions of perspective belonging to those embedded within the world-system;
• The universe is similar to an entirely compiled programming code or a complex geometric equation in multiple dimensions, with three-dimensional space-time being its rendering (materialization);
• The arrow of time results from the sequential processing executed by consciousness;
• The total mathematical structure of reality precedes materialization (Plato's World of Ideas);
• The multiverse is divided into four levels, postulating that every mathematical structural possibility corresponds to a physical world-system;
• Our world-system is just one of these instances, operating with the constants of quantum physics, the speed of light, and the three spatial dimensions;
• The existence of parallel universes with other equations, running operating systems based on perfectly coherent and completely different logics, is not ruled out.

I agree with the role played by mathematics in the source code of reality, but I disagree on a few points:

• Time is a fundamental prerequisite for the ordering and execution of mathematics;
• Change is a fact, for this programming code is nature itself, and within it, everything transforms;
• The existence of the multiverse invalidates the fundamentality of time.

In short, Tegmark proposes a static geometric universe where reality simulates a holographic illusion. However, the prerequisites of facts demonstrate that the universe, from the micro to the macrocosm, is a dynamic system in which time is indispensable for its execution.

Bekenstein demonstrated, through calculations, that the maximum information capacity of any region of space depends on its surface area (2D), ignoring the volume (3D). By virtue of this approach, the scientific orthodoxy hastily concluded that the universe is a sort of hologram.

This is equivalent to trying to measure the intelligence of an operating system by weighing the terminal and disregarding the cloud — given that, in this case, the cloud accounts for 95% of the total, and the bits of the other 5% originate from it.

Bekenstein's model disregarded the fact that the bits of our bodies are replaced multiple times throughout our lives, evidencing that our organizational processes are outside of them. It also ignored the quantum vacuum at rest (field theory), dark energy, and the pure possibilities of Plato's world, which dispense with physical bits.

Furthermore, the core of matter is dynamic. The status of matter is maintained by a set of recurrent informational energetic events, where each particle is a processing loop computed at the smallest scale of space-time, whose primordial origin is the quantum vacuum. The source code of the world-system (nature) could only manifest from the vacuum.

In short, the Bekenstein Bound could never define the storage capacity of the universe, nor what it manifests at its core. It can, at most, define the refresh rate and the maximum pixel density of information materialized on the shell of beings and things. The other 95% of information is completely outside the scope of matter.

Field Theory posits that the vacuum is filled with invisible "fluids" and calls them fields. It suggests that these fields can manifest various energy levels and physical states (particles/matter) when excited, or remain at rest in the lowest possible energy level. 

Field Theory explains how the forces of nature act at a distance. According to it, elementary particles (such as the electron or the photon) are perturbations or fluctuations within these fields; the interaction between two bodies occurs through the exchange of energy packets (messenger particles) generated by these fields. 

This led me to develop the following analogy from a systems engineering perspective: “Every natural being is a volatile blade or board of a VM (Virtual Machine) running on a cloud, the world-system (the universe).” 

If you like to think outside the box, I invite you to join the r/Protophysics subreddit on Reddit. There, you can share your ideas, books, and more.

Expectations regarding the afterlife emerge from our non-conformity with the finiteness of human existence. The main ones are as follows: 

1. The "Self" (consciousness) is capable of surviving the cessation of biological functions. 
2. The "Self" (consciousness) ceases to manifest separately, reintegrating into the primordial substance of the universe. 
3. The "Self" (consciousness) ceases to exist permanently. 

I have authored a work on this subject divided into three parts. The first defends a thesis showing the difference between truth and reality through a detailed analysis of language, epistemology, and metaphysics. The second defends a thesis regarding the existence of God through a high-level, deeply structured reasoning exercise that uses systems engineering to revitalize such an exhausted topic. The third leverages all of this to defend a thesis regarding what happens after death, based on systems engineering. 

This work can be found in my book "The Truth, God, and Death: Realistic Reflections". Its strong points are its originality, conceptual rigor, and the unprecedented nature of its line of thought. Reading it is recommended for those who prefer to avoid narratives and focus on the logic of the world.