Does his Cognitive-Theoretical Model of the Universe make any sense at all?Is he really the smartest person who ever lived?
>>16480335idk man its seems so strange on one end he really could be but man there is a lack of proof. i feel abit strange that no college has accepted him just simply for being Chris langan i would do it if i was a Proff in math/physics i would fucking head hunt the guy just to see what hes made of
>>16480449What proof do you need?
No, it is actually me, with an IQ of 336, but I will work closely with this man to develop his theory into the first physical theorem, where it resolves the problem of induction, and may even start to manipulate reality like a magical equation.Clucks.
>>16480449While I'm not an expert on him, from what I do know, it seems unlikely that he would accept such a position. Academia as it exists in the West is likely offensive to him. He wouldn't be the first or even the hundredth genius to avoid the world of academia.
>>16480335I read what he wrote about math and physics in his CTMU paper. In short, he's a pseud and has no idea what he's talking about.
>>16480335He got debunked by Professor Dave. It's over
Everyone who disagrees with him just lacks the IQ to understand him. Langan is just too smart.
>>16480335If you believe his shit you are low iq
>>16482931I got in contact with his theory after watched Michael Knowles video.The guys sound like a gigantic fraud.
>>16480335>spews massive word salads every single time he's asked to explain his theory in concrete, direct termsHe's a grifter that appeals to disaffected, uneducated religious people with a resentment for establishment academics.
>>16483193hes payed by the government 10k a month
>>16480335He has no theory. He wrote a book about a philosophy that has as much supporting evidence as one from ancient Greece.
>>16480335He's a fraud. Doesn't understand even basic math. His book is a joke.
>>16480335no, he's probably a midwit who was smarter than the other kids in a particularly dumb environment, let it go to his head, and convinced himself that the world has conspired to not recognize his genius. He might have become a decent mid-tier researcher if being around actual smart people had curbed his egomania a bit.The fact that he's quite limited can even be gathered from the way he writes. Reminds me of a 15 yr old pseud who got his hands on a thesaurus and fell in love with the idea that artificially, pointlessly complex syntax makes you sound smart.
>>16480335These threads always turn out the same. Ask anyone for any particular critique of his CTMU and they have nothing. Then ask them which principles they disagree with. Crickets again. Then ask them what logical inconsistencies are within and yet more nothing. Half-wits like not-professor Dave & co are just permafiltered idjits
>>16488034If Langan would, after all these years, deign to present a single non-trivial corollary of this theory that's not a variation of "all is one/as above so below/everything flows" or any other ancient esoteric tidbit, the proper critique would surely come. As it stands, it's just pseudo-technical autofellatio.
>>16480335>Is he really the smartest person who ever lived?Picrel is the smartest man in the world's wife.
>>16488034>Ask anyone for any particular critique of his CTMU and they have nothing.Is there anything at all that I would gain from reading it, versus doing... literally anything else? Will it make me a better /sci/entist?
>>16487665indeed anon i thought he was a pseud even when i wasnt clear headed
>>16488275It won't help you from a /sci/ perspective, except for six figures starting, but you already have that, right anon?>>16488122While resulting descriptions are the same, CTMU first principles are separate from generic hermetics and ground systemic behaviors, such as telic recursion. The metalogical principles are well founded except for the initial conspansion duality which is more of a theoretical conclusion seemingly based on wave-particle considerations. >... the Principle of Conspansive Duality then says that what appears as cosmic expansion from an interior (local) viewpoint appears as material and temporal contraction from a global viewpoint ...
>>16480697>>16480335If someone knows Chris personally:>>>/x/39270304please ask him to join our project if he isn't interested then we'd love to hear criticism.
>>16480335It does not and he's full of shit.
>>16488667chris is a fraud if you really want to join his moveement or get attention join his patreon and bother him there kek
>>16488034i'm not familiar with him or his theory but it sounds like you are. what's an example of an experimental result predicted by it and not by others? you can go into the details of how the prediction arises if you want but really i'm interested in the example so i can understand what the theory is actually saying.
>>16488829CTMU doesn't have empirical claims, per se. At least, I am not aware of Langan making any testable predictions from it. Certainly phenomenon like Morphic Resonance are substantiated by the SCSPL theory. But what makes it tough, as the other anon said, the behavioral unit is functionally idealism at the end of the day. A unique empirical claim coming from CTMU, that would stand out from those could be tricky to find as everything from remote viewing to GCPdot, outside of materialist understanding, are all trivial results of basic idealism. Alright, so there is a fundamental unit called the Telor which recognizes actions and ascribes real meaning to them. For example, we see a basketball go into a hoop. Without the higher Telor, the event that could never be said to have happened. Perhaps some lower Telor would see some energy transitions of up and down in the ball, and a lower one still would be oblivious to that as it only knows atomic jittering in its local cosmos of many jitterings and the major event it would witness is transient deformations when the ball hits the ground. This is not to say that atoms are telors, but that some telor is necessary for some event to transpire.If one could condition telors, they could locally shape reality. The issue here is that Langan invoked GOD, Global Operator-Descriptor, or the highest telor. Such a thing could be responsible for rules that we can't comprehend including the present isolated condition between telors, such as the qualia gap. And trying to coerce these lower agents could be an impossible task, like trying to sell weaker drugs to an addict at higher prices. No reason for lower forms to bend if they are snorting GOD.Anyways, from this, a prediction can be made. One would expect chemical properties to vary significantly depending on how many atoms there are in a clump as their telor density is lower and/or GOD may have not processed a given combination before and has to figure out how it works.
>>16480335>jew defame him because he said the jew control the world itt
>>16488934pretty much, he's officially been deemed a CHUD now
>>16488885this sounds like leibniz. i'm not sure you could literally just find-and-replace all instances of "monad" with "telor" in the monadology to get CTMU but the way you describe it sounds very similar.>One would expect chemical properties to vary significantly depending on how many atoms there are in a clump as their telor density is lower and/or GOD may have not processed a given combination before and has to figure out how it works.this is a retrodiction, not a prediction, we already know chemical properties vary based on chemical structure and our current theories have explanations of why. does CTMU give any predictions about the properties of new synthetic elements? what does it have to say about the island of stability predicted by our current theories?
If he isn't the smartest person, than who is it? Wouldn't he be so over the top smart that you'd instantaneously know that you're outmatched? I have never heard of or seen such a person, even though he has to exist, right? Or do over the top smart geniuses somehow blend in with us comparatively low IQ plebs?
>>16489571Fyi langan has much more in depth interviews, brainlets just get filtered out by the dailywire interview even though half of it is casual laymans conversation to match the interviewers vibeThose interviews are clearly 200iq and his haters would never have the brain power to critique them
>>16489571Terrence tao
>>16489571>Wouldn't he be so over the top smart that you'd instantaneously know that you're outmatched?lots of john von neumann's colleagues described him like this. not sure there's anyone like that today. terence tao might be the closest to it.
>>16490183I listened to the 4 hour Curt Jaimungal interview and, in addition to being cringe-inducing, it showed no sign of particularly high IQ. If that's your example you're just easily impressed.
>>16489571me
>>16489357There is scientific evidence that changing the number of atoms in a substance changes its properties? 50 gold atoms behave differently from 500?
>>16490624a critical mass of fissile atoms has properties a non-critical mass doesn't have.
>>16490631This doesn't demonstrate a change in the fissile material properties. Likelihood of reaction varies across mass and shape and other such things. Taking the critical mass and flattening it out into a long foil would prevent it from being the critical mass. So critical mass is a function of the geometry. Also, decay is supposed to be a property across every individual atom. Critical mass doesn't not change this.
>>16490624oh, i thought you were talking about in the molecular structure of a compound, not just stacking up more of a pure metal on top of itself.now i'm back to not knowing what you're saying CTMU predicts here. how would a block of 500 gold atoms behave differently from a block of 50?
>>16490714>>16490624also there's stuff like o2 behaving very differently from o3 but i don't think that's what you're talking about either.
>>16490263>Von Neumann was born in Budapest, Kingdom of Hungary (then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire),[13][14][15] on December 28, 1903, to a wealthy, non-observant Jewish family.>is father Neumann Miksa (Max von Neumann) was a banker and held a doctorate in law.>On February 20, 1913, Emperor Franz Joseph elevated John's father to the Hungarian nobility for his service to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.The most intelligent person does not need a mile-long head start. He'd just show up from some background and you'd instantly know, he's the one. >>16490619Most intelligent person doesn't need a name to be recognized.
>>16490260>Tao's father, Billy Tao,[a] was a Chinese paediatrician who was born in Shanghai and earned his medical degree (MBBS) from the University of Hong Kong in 1969.>Tao's mother, Grace Leong,[b] was born in Hong Kong; she received a first-class honours degree in mathematics and physics at the University of Hong Kong.>Tao also has two brothers, Trevor and Nigel, who are currently living in Australia. Both formerly represented Australia at the International Mathematical Olympiad.
>>16490714This is a prediction on telor's. As reality is Self-configuring and processing, the various interactions between materials represent telons manifest, they substantiate some telor's perspective, even if it is GOD. In the case of a base reality where lesser telor's are manipulating events, they are processing in one form or another. Gross matter will be sum-total distribution of telor activity. Low counts of elements could have behaviors that are wildly different.In the case where GOD is micromanaging all of reality, the same also holds because it is only processing through reality. In this sense, the relationship between most permutations of atoms are unknown, because they have never came to pass. Once again, it is possible that behaviors of elements can be different. A further hypothesis would be that upon discovery of a particular interaction between elements, it may come to pass that such events change.From CTMU, there isn't too much reason to assert atomism as the most primitive unit, instead they are another conspansive term. They only appear to be one way or another because of the scale they are witnessed from.
>>16481005Langan is a fraud but Professor Dave is legitimately 80 IQ.
>>16489571That Russian mathematician that lives with his mother deep in the woods and only leaves to scavenge mushrooms from the forest.
>>16490792>The most intelligent person does not need a mile-long head start.but he'll have one, because intelligence has a large genetic component and so his recent ancestors will be smart too
>>16488885>The issue here is that Langan invoked GOD, Global Operator-Descriptor, or the highest telor. Such a thing could be responsible for rules that we can't comprehend including the present isolated condition between telors, such as the qualia gap.Isn't this just a new version of Kant's phenomenon versus noumenon? Instead of empirical realism which is IIRC the set of categorized knowledge resulting from the manifold of intuition, we have the set of effable linguistic relations or descriptions. Instead of the noumenon we have the set of in principle ineffable to humans symbolic relations, so-called highest telors. The effable aspects of information are somehow undergirded by ineffable aspects.Kant didn't think there could be a science of the noumenon, he admits that even 'plural' or 'singular' form of the word noumenon is misleading. It's also misleading to say it has any causal properties. The noumenon is just so beyond the very structure of knowledge available to us. Kant seems to be providing the most minimalist, conservative theory, paraphrasing:>We will reach the bounds of what is conceivable. There is something we can't conceive, but we can't say anything more than that. You could see the above as Kant's response to Leibniz>>16489357and also anticipating contemporary people like Langan who fall into the same trap of theorizing beyond the noumenon. This Lagan guy sounds like an amatuer philosopher more than a proper scientist to me.
>>16488253Very much so I would plap this woman forcefully sir.
>>16491935Listen Schopenhauer disproved kant's metaphysical dead end. There is a window into the noumena - our self experience. Consciousness is the noumena.
>>16488829CTMU is not a scientific theory, it's a metaphysic. As such it does not make empirical predictions. Falsifiability is used to assess the validity of scientific theories. A different set of criteria is used to assess the validity of metaphysical systems. For starters it must not contradict existing empirical observations, and it should offer at least as much explanatory power when compared to the reigning metaphysic: metaphysical materialism. If it is to displace the reigning metaphysic it must offer more explanatory power. CTMU checks all of these boxes.Just take consciousness for example. Consciousness is categorically incompatible with metaphysical materialism. Because consciousness is the only thing we can be certain to exist, metaphysical materialism doesn't even get off the ground. The CTMU on the other hand holds consciousness to be fundamental, and the physical world to be an emergent property of consciousness. So the CTMU explains both consciousness and the physical world while materialism does not.
>>16490853>>16492570lots of wordsno testable predictions
>>16492611It is obviously testable, you are just sub-negroid iq.
>>16493487What's one testable prediction of CTMU, then?
>>16492570you dont know jack shit all 20$ words to flip my mind CTMU is a fraud of "academic" heresay langan is 154 FSIQ not 210 hes a nigger and couldnt take the mega test without identity ill take rick ross' side for this
>>16493533It is clearly stated above. Telors modulate reality. A clump of 10 atoms of one element will have different properties than a clump of 100.
>obvious grifter acts like he's the second coming of christ, yet brings nothing of value>self-proclaimed most intelligent man in the universe, yet can't prove he's even above average>has done exactly 0 experiments, 0 science, 0 research, 0 inventions, all he does is talk>the only distinguishable feature from junkie hobo preaching to you the meaning of the universe on the street is his hygiene, value of his words is the same>lengthy discussions whether he's legitwhy are americans like this?
>>16494116If he so stupid why can't you find logical inconsistencies are refute his principles?
>>16481005>I'm snarky so I winIf Langan is smart he wasted it doing nothing, but Bachelor's Degree Dave is cringe
>>16493868What specific, measurable properties does it predict, that aren't explained by well-established and evidence-based theories like quantum mechanics?
>>16494749Chemical properties are observable. Changes in those can be measured. One major difference will be spectral line emission. A change should also be in the sun as well because of the huge count differences from say in a lab, but it may be above the noise floor due to differential behavior sampling being inverse to telon density.
>>16494759So CTMU predicts that different quantities of an element will have different emission spectrums? What equations does CTMU use to predict an emission spectrum?
>>16494785There aren't equations, unless you include the principle notions Langan put out there, such as Mind = Reality.
>>16494805So if a 10 atoms of hydrogen and 100 atoms of hydrogen are isolated, and emission spectrums measured (I think this is actually possible, even with those quantities), what is the actual difference between them supposed to be according to CTMU? How is that determined?
>>16489357As >>16492570 said, the CTMU is a metaphysical theory. It says that for any X, and for any Y, there exists a state-transition function from X-->Y. The CTMU doesn't say what X is, what Y is, or what the state-transition function is. The same principle applies whether we're talking about a "particle", atom, molecule, planet, etc. If you decide what X and Y are, then the state-transition function is an engineering problem, not a question as to whether it can be done. There's no question that lead can be turned into gold -- the question is, "would there be any point?".
I'm tempted to read through his paper and try to poke holes at it. I know nothing about philosophy and I'm just a lowly graduate with a B.S. but I think it would be fun to tackle his ideas
>>16494732That's PROFESSOR Dave to you chud
>>16494814Reality is a self-configuring, self-processing language, SCSPL. The differing results between high and low telon counts is like looking at the difference between a house with a raging party going on within and another with a few people eating inside. The science approach has accidentally adopted gross matter intuition.
>>16494996That's an analogy, not a specific, testable prediction.>>16494876>for any X, and for any Y, there exists a state-transition function from X-->YSo CTMU states that energy is not, in fact conserved in some circumstances, despite extensive experimental verification to incredible precision that it is, but doesn't actually state under what circumstances it is predicted to not be conserved, so we can test that?
>>16495379The testable prediction has already been stated several times. The question was not related to those. The analogy was to describe how counts can impact observation. As for how it looks in reality, one can just measure spectrums and find out in principle. The materialist paradigm holds some view on electrons and that should never change - of course, this is actually just a result of a lack of precision in their statements. In a situation where low count of atoms cause deviation in spectrums, the materialist paradigm is shattered on its face - their empirical deductions will just be tailored to include it as a gross matter phenomenon and they can still save face. The telor anticipation would be multiple degrees of change as counts reduce to one.
>>16495379you actually believe all that shit? ctmu is a fraud
>>16480335I tried to read his theories. But as far as I can tell they were entirely tautological. They were defined by themselves, and essentially require believing in them already in order to prove them. If you accept that premise then it does all follow.But that's also the reason why it would never be accepted by science. He cannot make any predictions or have a falsifiable theory. It's just some very nice mind porn - it does all make sense, just can't be proved.
>>16489571>even though he has to exist, right?>heMaybe start listening to women, champ. You just might find that smartest person! ;)
>>16497661>they are only tautologicalYou mean he has proven his system?
>>16494680>see this hobo who's giving you a speech on meaning of life in Walmart parking lot? why don't you refute his principles, what if he's right about everything?!lolno
>>16494116Then why are you an incel?
>>16490722>more fizzy Lol, I wonder why
