Chapter 121: Saving the World – The Third Step – The Holy Grail

by Darryl Penney

Abstract: the organisation of our civilisation has created obvious problems that threaten the world and disadvantages certain groups, but now a new bottom-up approach shows how disadvantaged groups can be helped to the betterment of all. This is a theoretical derivation based on truths that allows the disadvantaged to gain more resources, and at the same time is a template for a new direction for our civilisation. Women have been disadvantaged, relative to, and by men, for a long time and a method is given that redresses this, outlines a selection of the best, indicates how to implement it, allows universities to function properly and uses technology to create an opportunity to construct a workable system for the future. This derivation suggests that world government will be limited, that people will form regions with friendly relations coupled with closed immigration borders so that multiculturalism will operate only as distinct regions of similar people that choose their inherently homogeneous phenotype.

Part one showed that there is a fundamental restriction in decision making [specialist/generalist] as intimidating as the wave/particle duality in quantum mechanics but pertinent to the real world, as well as showing the necessity of an expanding universe, the ubiquity of relativity and that democracy is apparent from the creation equation. In part two, the concept of the market was shown to be as basic as democracy and also apparent from the creation equation and that a bottom-up organisation using truths is necessary to forecast. This third part shows that there is another fundamental restriction of Life due to relativity between genes and organisational genes [orgene] that is the key to controlling population. In total, they allow a bottom-up examination of our civilisation by using the mathematics of concept/context to generate a civilisation built on truths to limit population and improve both the genetic and epigenetic base so that we can move to save the world from ourselves and our top-down theorising.

This theory assumes that energy and organisation appeared as a fractal from nothing (see box) and our aim is to understand the organisation of our civilisation so that we, as parasites, can attain a symbiosis and save the world from our own actions. The problem is to consider Life in all its forms and as the basis of Life is the gene, I will consider the gene as an informational tool that is passed on to make new Life and thus, if the universe is a fractal with the creation equation [(1+(-1))=0] as a generator, Life is a fractal based on the gene. Thus, if there is a gene, that is material [made of atoms] and thus composed of energy/matter, there must be an organisational gene [orgene] that explains the gene’s capability [relativity] and if we are to understand the civilisation of Life, we must study this orgene, but what is it?

But, not knowing what it is, is the cause of mankind’s problem, and in particular, of science’s problem because we should also be asking ‘what is it relative to?’ as relativity is inherent in the creation of energy [1] and organisation [-1]. They are not only equal and independent [concept], they are also orthogonal and entangled [context] with the restriction that to exist they must be kept apart and hence the universe must expand. Thus, the gene is the concept and the orgene is the context and, as they are ‘independent but entangled’ they cannot be derived from each other. We have looked at the gene and we must start again to find the orgene, so the logical place is the transmission of that gene to offspring. The first problem that we encounter is relativity, which should not be surprising, and is what I call the logic of the half-truth because relative to the individual, it is not logical to expend energy to create a competitor, but from the species’ point of view it is essential for the species to continue to exist.

The logic of the half-truth is the working of the universe and is the context of the creation equation that determines the form of the universe so the orgene is very important and a means of quantifying the desire to have offspring. This desire is necessary because everyone of us has an unbroken chain of ancestors stretching back 3,000 million years and our problem in population control is to offer inducements not to have offspring that exceeds that desire. Clearly, there is a difference in the value that must be assigned to the male and the female, especially in mammals where the offspring is carried by the female for a considerable time and this difference forms a relativity of value [concept] and difference [context] so that we can use the mathematics of concept/context as the overall form of the investigation.

To be usable, the structure of our civilisation must be a truth and not some hodgepodge of wants of various types as it is [to us] at the moment and the herd structure seems to present a template where a superior male provides protection and access to a food supply to a number of females. We currently use a similar family grouping, but with one male to one female presumably because that causes less friction in the community, but also stops genetic selection. This lack of genetic selection is starting to become worrisome [cancer, heart disease, dementia, allergies, diabetes, asthma etc.], along with a modern diet that lacks the variety that I believe that we evolved to use because in the general population 60% of adults are overweight or obese. It is a truth that established people are reluctant to change their ways because, in nature, their way was successful and change is left to the young, but the marketing of cheap junk food is having an adverse effect on the new generation, so that a strong personality and knowledge is required if we are to remain healthy.

I believe that health has three important components: mental attitude, exercise and nutrition. These can be positive, as they must be to produce positive people, but can be negative and produce negative people that become sick, alcoholics, homeless, drug-takers etc. that cause emotional distress that leads to broken homes, delinquency, prison etc. in later generations. The family life of husband, wife, children, working to buy a house etc. works for many people and tends to lead to positive people in the next generation. Thus the living of a life is the test for selection of the best [in that environment] that results in a reasonably stable family life, a pension on retirement or the inability to access an old age pension due to owning too many assets. Thus we have a selection criterion of the poor, the average and the superior that is sufficient for me to indicate a possible method. It is literally impossible for me to go into any depth of subject [specialist/generalist duality], so I will be content with a simplistic overview that may be naive but that is unavoidable without assistance (The First Step).

Thus living a successful life [context] provides the restriction [numerical in the mathematics of concept/context] to judge the father [concept] that is prime mate material and suggests that young women should select older men and not young men that they might desire. This already happens to a certain extent. Even more important is the stability of the personality that is found in older, successful men because of a truth from our recent evolution because ‘in most respects, humans are one of a relatively small number of species that evolved a very different strategy of investing more energy to reproduce more slowly. Like apes and elephants, we mature at a leisurely pace, grow large bodies, and have few babies but devote much time and energy to raising them well.’ (The Story of the Human Body, Daniel Lieberman, p 95) Thus, we have pushed the orgene to the limits of its illogicality and to do this, we need superior parents.

Surprisingly, this endeavour is probably self-funding because a very expensive social system is in place to cater to the needs of the class of people that will eventually be eliminated by their own choice. Many of these people depend on welfare, waste police resources or are held in jails that are extremely expensive to maintain. It is not the genes that are damaged or inappropriate in many cases, it is the organisational genes [orgenes] that produce the antisocial behaviour that can arise from broken homes, poor parenting etc. Likewise, genes that are damaged or unsuitable to modern living can be eliminated from the gene-pool by financial incentives. As most of these people are receiving social security, it is not a case of the ‘carrot or stick’, but a case of small variations of money that determine whether or not they have children. This is a general feature because those people that access the old-age pension could have it adjusted up or down according to the number of children that they have had over their lifetime. Clearly this reduction of pension could be used to increase the pension of those that do not have children, thus augmenting the effect, and it is morally and logically correct that children should support their aged parents and not leave it to the general taxpayer.

Returning to the organisation of the herd, the male is clearly the best male at the time in fighting off rivals and in our civilisation this corresponds to those males that are not on a pension and further, a modern civilisation requires males from many ‘walks of life’ to be available for selection. A woman, who does not have a suitable partner desires the best choice of father for her children and that should be one that is old [demonstrates longevity plus all of the other attributes], healthy, successful in life, keeps his hair, his figure, nutritional choices, attractiveness etc. This, of course means IVF, which is now so common that it is part of everyday medicare and is free and taking this further, young women could have a family via IVF and receive a substantial pension [using chosen fathers] from the government, much like the single-mother’s pension and the value of the female’s contribution to society [earning power] is also a selection tool.

This changes the stigma of single-motherhood to something resembling ‘super mum’ putting civilisation back on track and still allowing partners and a comfortable living. The state becomes the leader of the herd and must offer protection to the mothers, if the chosen system breaks down. At the moment, there is concern that AVO’s [Apprehended Violence Orders] do not work well and domestic violence is not being contained, so the government could use prisons that become vacant (eventually) to provide safe, controlled environments for women and children with the walls to keep the world out and supervised visitations, as well as support services. In defence of this proposal, I want to point out, firstly, that it contains negative feed back [which is necessary] and secondly, that there are genes that we can change slowly by this manipulation, but the orgenes are derived from the environment and can be changed much faster and can be identified as epigenetics where a methylation switches genes on and off depending on environmental factors.

‘Gene expression can be controlled through the action of repressor proteins that attach to silencer regions of the DNA. These epigenetic changes may last through cell divisions for the duration of the cell’s life, and may also last for multiple generations even though they do not involve changes in the underlying DNA sequence of the organism; instead, non-genetic factors cause the organism’s genes to behave (or “express themselves”) differently. One example of an epigenetic change in eukaryotic biology is the process of cellular differentiation.’ (Wikipedia, Epigenetics) Thus, orgenes are a truth that we recognise in a severely limited way as epigenetics but have relevance to the way we live as an organisation and the alignment of orgenes with epigenetics must go a long way to making this proposal believable and worth supporting.

This theory suggests that survival of the fittest can be better defined as a respect/defence orthogonality and as this orthogonality is fundamental, it shows where the breakdown of families is not currently well handled. The herd system shows that if the male does not respect the female, the female’s defence is to leave the herd and join another where another male will protect her. When families break down, respect is lost between husband and wife and the female and children should be protected by the state, but it is not happening because the state is not protecting them sufficiently with AVOs. This situation calls for prisons to be redecorated, leaving guards and wire intact and using it as a woman’s and children’s resort and refuge, with the protection that another herd would provide. Domestic violence is an example of intermittent loss of respect/defence and the threat of secure facilities being available for a rest or holiday would act as a deterrent and also as a solution in the long-run.

Respect/defence is the orthogonal truth behind survival of the fittest and is fundamental and can be used to understand other organisation such as why it is safer to have more guns in the community in spite of police and politicians’ actions to the contrary. The intent of police and the ‘bad guys’ are orthogonal, that is good/bad in the ‘eyes of the law’ and yet violence is often stated as being ‘bad’ and something to eliminate, whereas violence, when necessary, is a requirement in respect/defence. In other words, respect/defence is a truth and the threat of violence, in any of a number of forms, is a restriction that allows respect/defence to exist, but the threat must be real and contained by personality. Police tend to be just as violent as criminals, but can (usually) suppress extreme behaviour and stay within the law. I believe that the ‘bad guys’ have personality disorders to do what they do and that they came from broken homes, parents that were poor models, immigrants from war zones etc. If the antisocial behaviour is not epigenetic, it must be eliminated and that will eventually be eliminated by death at the hands of other criminals or police, or being incarcerated in prison. Clearly, ‘death by cop’ is a common form of suicide where guns are restricted and is hardly fair on the police at the front line.

Further, the newspapers and TV suggest that most of the reported crimes are committed by ‘new arrivals’ that have been traumatised by unrest in their home-countries, disrupted with a new environment and present an example of why we should promote our growth from within our own country and not allow immigration. Population growth can be adjusted by the amount of money offered, hopefully leading to a well-adjusted, low cost next generation. Similarly, illegal immigrants are becoming a problem in Europe, Australia and the USA etc. where they believe that they can better their economic outcome at our expense. Clearly, if respect/defence is a truth, the illegal immigrant does not respect our borders and we have to have a defence to keep them out such as a coast guard, a wall and more guns in the community. Further, respect/defence works for the individual, family and country, but it does not work for a single entity [due to relativity] and makes a world government unlikely to happen in the near future and I believe that the Australian state and commonwealth system would be the most likely outcome. Most continents are composed of countries that would (presumably) amalgamate to form a homogeneous whole see below.

Conclusion: the pop-song that says that everyone will be ‘coffee-coloured’ in the future is simplistic and according to the above, wrong because regions should close their borders to immigrants in order to control their population [as is happening in the USA at the moment] and women have the choice to move to an ‘ideal’ skin, eye and hair colour etc. via their choice of partner. The herd system introduces the respect for women that has been lacking for thousands of years because alternatives and choices exist at every level [relativity] and the monetary means is available that comes with having ‘chosen’ children and then they can select a partner to live with. Men have dominated women for a long time and it is not necessarily a bad thing [keeping peace in a herd], but men have (to some extent) enslaved women and this proposed reorganisation redresses that situation and allows women to choose the type of children that they want without necessarily the husband that goes with them. The desire to have a superior child and commensurate monetary payments should compensate and, if a couple want their own child, they bear the cost themselves, or is subsidised as at present.

Prediction: the above predicts the future because it is bottom-up and built on truths, so it is difficult to see any other option that might be forced on us, and if it is, it will probably lead to problems. Technology has made this future possible and available to everyone and the government’s role has been redefined as an organisation to better look after women (if necessary) so that they avoid personality damaged and uneducated children and that eventually eliminates crime, makes gun control irrelevant and focuses attention on border control and forces countries to be relative so that evolution can continue. Experiments can begin in problem areas, and expanded as required because this derivation is built on truths, and hence, any country that does not embrace this system will eventually ‘fall by the wayside’ economically and genetically because this is an evolution.

Further, a World government is unlikely (in any meaningful way) because Life is built on orthogonalities like respect/defence that depend on relativity, which demands two economic zones. This proves that multiculturalism within an area can not work (in the long-run) and that the main aim should be ‘one nation’ that competes with other nations or trade blocs. The fact that women follow fashion so eagerly suggests that they are more comfortable in a homogeneous population and it is their selection through their choice [of male phenotype and teaching of the young] as to where it will end. This is a chance to change our civilisation to control ourselves, take pressure off the world, restart evolution, control technology and other addictions by changing ourselves genetically or epigenetically over time to meet the new world. We must do something quickly and this plan gives everyone what they want, including allowing the ‘less fit’ to take their genes out of the gene-pool by giving them money if they do not breed.

Afterword: why should I send this letter to a woman’s magazine? For a lot of very good reasons! Firstly, the universities are part of the problem in not wanting to change and their present methods do not give adequate answers, see below. Secondly, a woman’s place in evolution is to be protected by respect/defence, but so often she has been oppressed at all levels from husbands, parents, churches and state. For example, Christianity (I believe) evolved as an orthogonality to the savagery of the times and acted as a support base for women, as it still does. For several hundred years Christianity was unrecognised by the hierarchy and it grew as an ‘underground grass-roots’ and similar must happen here, within a much shorter time-frame because the establishment will not change, as above. Thirdly, it is up to women to demand a future for themselves and their children on the planet because they expend more energy in growing and looking after children than males do. Fourthly, everyone of us has an unbroken chain of ancestors over 3,000 million years [else we would not be here] but we only need a few more generations to secure the future for ever by moving to selection of the best, with population and environmental controls. An untold number of generations have contributed to Life on Earth and yet we stand to destroy it through global warming [and population] over the next few generations if we do not do something about it, and quickly.

Fifthly, fortuitously, a number of technologies have recently come together to provide organisational answers to our civilisation that I call the Holy Grail. I surmise that contemplating the organisation of civilisation generates emotion [energy] in the enquirer, as through the creation equation, that recognises civilisation as something valuable that we confabulate as a cup from the Last Supper. If the Holy Grail is the concept, then there must be a context to go with it, and yet the obvious method of using our accumulated knowledge of the last 2,500 years is through the universities that have failed us. The answer, I believe, lies in orthogonality and it is again fortuitous that men gave women the vote a hundred years ago and women have dutifully voted as men do, ever since and we see them supporting political parties aligned to the rich and the poor. Our planet is in danger and we are squabbling about which party gains most by ‘stacking’ the parliament.

Women can access this orthogonality [of men and women] simply by banding together to save the world and voting their own candidates or those candidates that support a solution, such as the above. A concerted effort by women would upset the results of a poll, to such an extent that it would send a clear message to every country in the world to get on the ‘bandwagon’ and start working on the most deserving areas with a view to eliminating them, in time. This message is not new, but it cannot be handled quickly and must conform to civilised behaviour and a positive example is the partitioning of India compared to the many attempts at genocide.

Finally, no references are cited because everything can be derived simply from the first principles and the examples given above. However, it is pointless ‘reinventing the wheel’ and most of it will be on my website darrylpenney.com when required.

In the beginning there was nothing (0) and it is a property of orthogonality to make two independent things, but entangled [at the origin], such as (1) and (-1) [first fractal] and that forces the second fractal (1+(-1))=0 [this equation I call the creation equation because it yields the form of the universe] and it’s orthogonal is the logic of the half-truth [true, false, both true and false simultaneously] that yields ‘physical choice’ [shimmer presents opportunities for a reaction through the wave/particle duality] that leads to the working of the universe [‘a single particle could seemingly span a field as would a wave, a paradox still eluding satisfactory explanation’ Wikipedia, Elementary particle]. Life employs a mind/brain to make better choices based on the structure of the probability equation [mathematics of concept/context] in the brain as well as thought [(-1), organisation] from the burning of a simple sugar [(1), glucose]. That is the answer to the above, but with a ‘twist’ because Life uses a probability space [(a+b)=1] that is similar to the measuring space [(1+(-1))=0], but allows all concepts a, b to be considered.

Notice that the creation equation exits only if (1) and (-1) are kept apart and this logic requires an expanding universe, which we have [Big Bang], and this expansion produces the dimensions of space-time, energy and organisation The equation also says that everything is relative to something else, with no exceptions, except that ratios naturally become absolutes and they are the conservation of (total) energy/organisation [energy/time], constant speed of light [distance/time], dark energy [energy/space] and gravity [energy/separation] and this becomes the principle of relativity in a measuring space [and replaces the present one that the laws of physics are the same in constantly moving frames]. The absolutes produce stability – the first leads to Occam’s razor and the principle of least action, the second to the constant [to the measurer, Michelson-Morley] speed of light, the third to the infill energy/organisation [dark energy] to balance the expanding energy/organisation of the universe and the fourth to gravity.

The limitations of Newtonian physics have made gravity an enigma for a long time and I believe, it is not an attraction [Newton], not ‘bent’ space that introduced organisation and shut down modern physics for a hundred years [Einstein, deflection of a photon by a solar mass], but simply an absolute [energy-organisation/distance], where all matter is composed of energy and organisation and the doubling effect that Einstein (eventually) found is due to relativity where:

Attraction equals E(1)/d times E(2)/d plus O(1)/d times O(2)/d where E is energy, O is organisation and d is the separation of two masses (1) and (2).

This leads to twice the Newtonian value where only energy is considered and is in line with Einstein’s finding. Notice that this is the first time that Newton’s law of gravitation has been derived because Newton used an ‘inspired reasoning’ [Robert Hooke maintained that it was stolen from him] and Einstein used an ‘analogy’. Clearly, this explanation shows that the inverse-square law has nothing to do with it!

We now understand gravity completely in that it’s effect has and will always be constant, it cannot exist except between two objects [relativity], its value depends only on the total amount of energy/organisation and the separation and shimmer [from particle to wave] has no effect because two terms are involved as a sum. Also, the equation E=mc2 is misleading because mass and energy are the same thing and the equation is a conversion of the units that we have assigned, but what is not so obvious is that all of energy/mass and all of organisation contribute equally [relativity]. It was accepted in Newton’s time that mass had an attraction and in Einstein’s time that energy [photon] had the same attraction, but the fact that organisation had an attraction [curved space] and gave the correct experimental answer was a ‘step too far’ and fundamental physics closed down.

This enigma is a result of the short-comings of Newtonian physics, and it is not an enigma when it is realised that energy and organisation are ‘two sides of the same coin’ and further, that this complexity is a mathematical physics solution because the first orthogonality [energy/organisation] produces a second where, in part, organisation gives gravity [organisation] and energy [of gravity] through the absolute. To maintain the condition that universe is expanding [(1) and (-1) kept separate] gravity must be a solution and be non-zero because a zero gravity produces random walk, which, in the limit, is not stable. The “e” in Euler’s equation determines a constantly growing universe [“e” is the driver in compounded interest].

From above, the statement that ‘the absolutes produce stability’ needs expansion, firstly, ‘the absolutes produce stability’ is, of course, true because they define the structure of the universe, secondly, ‘Occam’s razor and the principle of least action’ are an organisational requirement that only the simplest and least energetic response is possible if the organisation is to have unique answers. In other words, the universe does measures organisation and the measurement requires that the lowest energy be used [first absolute]. Thirdly, the requirement that all of energy/mass, length and time obey the Lorentz contraction together is an organisational requirement in that it is simpler that all change proportionately than to list an order of change.

Fourthly, compare the treatment of organisation in Newtonian physics where organisation is allowed upon experiment or peer review. The English philosopher, Francis Bacon was correct that physics must be based on experiment because [repeatable] experiment is a truth, but we can also use the long-term effects of evolution as truths [an experiment] and ‘thought’ experiments based on the absolutes and their logic. ‘The general idea of the importance and possibility of a sceptical methodology makes Bacon the father of the scientific method’. (Wikipedia) For example, ‘in loco parentis’ passes from parent to offspring and not visa versa as the major religions demand. Peer review is a half-truth that is true only for specialist subjects and false for general subjects because specialists think differently to generalists [relativity] plus two truths are violated [relativity, and evolution (the established resist change)]. Notice the ‘thread’ that I am using is not the usual [ancient Greeks to Newton to Einstein to the Snow White effect], but a different successful thread [ancient Greeks to Bacon (experimental truth) to this theory (absolutes, experimental truths and evolutionary truths)]

Fifthly, the principle of relativity, stated above could also be called the principle of orthogonality because they are relative to each other and everything contains elements that are either the same or independent to something else and it is the orthogonals that form the basis of the mathematics of concept/context that is immediately apparent from the probability equation.

Coulomb’s law for charges is similar in form to Newton’ law, and many people must have, like I, wondered about this, and both are, [inappropriately as it turns out] associated with the inverse square law [a single mass, charge or magnetic pole cannot exit]. A simple explanation is to use the fractalness that the neutron [mass] is a special case of energy [photon] and orthogonates to a proton, electron and a neutrino and that Newton’s law describes the mass attraction, whilst Coulomb’s law describes the charge attraction. Obviously they must be equivalent, apart from sign and magnitude.