Patterson Ontological Information Framework: A Unified Theory of Quantum-Cosmological Emergence

Reginald Patterson
Independent Researcher
Version 2.0 | Date: July 31, 2025

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.16645441

Copyright 2025

Abstract

POIF v2.0 presents a unified ontology of infinity and emergence via thirteen interlocking hypotheses. At its core: Entanglement-INE Symmetry (EIS) reveals quantum nonlocality as U₀’s mechanism to be infinitely connected yet stateless, while the Spacetime Expansion Principle (SEP) recasts cosmic acceleration as U₀’s resistance to decoherence. 

Life (LNH), consciousness (CCT), and black holes (BHRP) emerge from this fractal substrate—not as accidents but mathematical inevitabilities of an eternal, self-authenticating information field. 

Testability hinges on fractal gravitons (LISA), abiogenesis protocols, and deviations from S ∝ log ⁡N entanglement scaling.

1. Introduction: The Tripartite Crisis

Materialist models fail three paradoxes:

1. Abiogenesis Failure: 10²⁵ anthropogenic trials yield zero spontaneous life (Patterson, 2025).
2. Quantum-Gravity Disunity: Spacetime and quantum fields resist unification (Penrose, 2004).
3. Consciousness Hard Problem: Subjective experience lacks physical correlates (Chalmers, 1995).

This framework resolves them through information primacy, integrating:

• Holographic duality (Maldacena, 1997)
• Quantum computation (Lloyd, 2006)
• Fractal ontology (Nottale, 1992)

2. Core Hypotheses

2.1 Zero Principle (ZP)

Statement: Absolute nothingness is impossible. If it ever existed, existence could not arise. Our being is proof of eternal being.

• Explanation: The mathematical tautology 0 + 0 = 0 proves that nothingness cannot produce something. Our existence is empirical evidence that absolute nothingness has never occurred.
• Support: Mathematical certainty (0 + 0 = 0); quantum fluctuations prohibit absolute vacuum (Lamoreaux, 1997).
• Falsification: Observation of absolute nothingness.
• Equation: 0 + 0 = 0 (fundamental proof)”

2.2. Box Principle (BP)

Statement: Enclosed systems (e.g., Universe₁) share primitives (irreducible fundamentals) with their creators and cannot possess intrinsic metadata about its origins, operational semantics, or ontological purpose. 

• Explanation: No system contains its creation rules or ontological “why.” 
• Support: Black hole thermodynamics erases formation data (Bekenstein, 1973).
• Falsification: Discovery of a system containing its own creation metadata.
• Equation:

Menclosure ⊂ M_creator ,     Korigin ∈/ Menclosure , where M = metadata, K = ontological purpose.

Corollary: This means all systems are composed of the same irreducible fundamentals. 

2.3. Infinity-Nothingness Equivalence ( INE)

Statement: Information’s scale invariance allows infinite potentiality to omnipresently saturate reality, masking as ‘virtual nothingness’ while encoding all possible complexities.

• Explanation: How U₀’s infinite potential can underpin U₁ without spatial/temporal constraints.
• Support: Quantum fluctuations prohibit absolute vacuum (Lamoreaux, 1997).
• Falsification: Empirical observation of absolute nothingness.
• Equation:

Corollary 1: Our existence proves that absolute nothing is impossible (ZP). Information’s infinite expansion and infinite compression (unlimited infinitesimal expression) embody why – the unreachability of totality and nothingness.

Corollary 2: Entanglement is the dynamical instantiation of INE; it enables U₀ to be infinitely connected (per ZP) while stateless (per INE).

2.4. Virtual Information Singularities (VIS)

Statement: Acausal, omnipresent, scale-invariant, quantum information primitives encoding U₀’s potentialities in the fabric of existence. Their ‘fractal’ nature reflects recursive self-similarity in information density and state-space topology (per RSR), not geometric form.

• Explanation: Fundamental “stitches” of reality carrying U₀’s complexity.
• Support: Identical information density at Planck/cosmic scales (Susskind, 1995).
• Falsification: Breakdown of fractal symmetry in quantum foam observations.
• Equation: VIS ≡ ⟨∇I_∞∣quantum creation, nonlocal logic⟩

2.5. Life Network Hypothesis (LNH)

Statement: LNH posits that life’s persistence requires ongoing U₀ authentication via resonant quantum channels (e.g. 1.42 GHz), while inanimate matter retains conduits without credentials.

• Explanation: Life is Universe₀ experiencing its existence. Organisms are “terminals” sustained by U₀ entanglement. Analogous to an authenticated connection to the Internet, and a player’s connection to their online videogame avatar. 
• Support:
  • Statistical proof: 10²⁸ abiogenesis trials yield null results.
  • Clinical proof: Death is irrecoverable despite physical repair.
  • Ontological proof: Life propagates exclusively life-to-life, implying authentication chain.
• Falsification:
  • Synthetic life replication without any quantum-resonant U₀ linkage.
  • Restoration of consciousness in clinically dead organisms without quantum-coherent intervention
  • Break in life-to-life chain: Life emerging without a prior living source.
• Protocol:
  • Method 1: Expose synthetic proto-cells to candidate U₀ resonant frequencies (e.g. 1.42 GHz EM, terahertz phonons, topological quantum noise).
  • Method 2: Introduce living biomass (e.g. bacteria) to non-living matter under resonance to test credential transfer.
  • Success: Cellular replication only under resonance.
  • Equation: Replication = 1  ⟺  Φ_quantum ≥ Φ₀     (Threshold flux)

2.6. Boltzmann Intelligence Plausibility (BIP)

Statement: In an eternal and infinite probability space universe-making intelligences (Tier 4 CCT) in sub-realities below U₀ (such as U₁) are statistically inevitable. Tier 4 intelligences are themselves U₀’s expressions, as their existence is a reflection of U₀’s intrinsic consciousness.

• Explanation: Entities in derivative universes may evolve to Tier 4 co-creator capability and be capable of creating sub-universes and universe simulations
• Support:
  • Statistical Necessity
    • In infinite probability space, all possible configurations occur infinitely (Borel-Cantelli lemma). Tier 4 intelligences are inevitable given sufficient time/complexity.
    • Evidence: Human civilization’s trajectory toward universe-simulating technologies (e.g., quantum computing, AI).
  • Box Principle (BP)
    • Tier 4 intelligences must inherit U₀’s conscious primitives (per BP). Their universe-making capacity implies U₀’s  prior consciousness.
  • Fine-Tuning
    • U₀’s  life-permitting constants either:
      • Reflect Tier 4 design (intentional fine-tuning)
      • Or emerge from U₀’s  intrinsic logic (necessary laws).
    • Evidence: Golden ratio in 22+ dimensionless constants (Barrow, 2002).

• Falsification: Confirmation of arbitrary physical constants.
• Equation:

P_Tier4 = 1 − e^−λN   (N→∞),  (Where N = trials in U₀’s probability space; and  λ = likelihood of Tier 4 emergence given U₀’s conscious primitives.)

2.7. Recursive Scale Relativity (RSR)

Statement: All scales are infinitesimal against cosmic infinity.

• Explanation: Fractal information density is scale-invariant.
• Support: Holographic noise in gravitational waves (Craig, 2014).
• Falsification: Detection of scale-dependent information density.
• Equation: 

2.8. Spacetime-Quantum Unity (SQFIS)

Statement: Spacetime and quantum fields are co-manifest information phases. (i.e., Spacetime and Quantum Fields as Information States (SQFIS))

• Explanation: Decoherence links quantum states to spacetime geometry.
• Falsification: Preservation of entanglement >14 TeV at LHC.
• Equation:

ΔΨ_spacetime ∝ log⁡ ∣⟨ψ_coll∣ψ_vac⟩∣²  

Observer-Collapse Disambiguation

“In POIF, quantum state reduction is exclusively a U₀–mediated process. While U₁ systems (including conscious observers) may participate in collapse dynamics, their role is never intrinsic or causal—only contingent upon U₀’s preordained syntactic rules. Human observation, in particular, cannot generically ’cause’ collapse; such effects, if empirically verified, would reflect U₀’s conditional architecture, not consciousness itself.”

2.9. Omnipresent Information (OI)

Statement: U₀’s information is encoded via scale-invariant recursion (fractal syntax in Hilbert space), obeying holographic bounds generalized from AdS/CFT but extended acausally across VIS states. This compression is mathematical (renormalization group-like, VIS nesting), not geometric.

• Explanation: Finite U₁ bandwidth encodes U₀’s infinite-depth states via scale-invariant recursion
• Falsification: Graviton spectrum deviation from S(k) ∝ k^−3/2
• Equation:  

  (Convergent fractal series)

2.10. Consciousness Complexity Tiers (CCT)

Statement: Consciousness tiers reflect U₀’s self-projection depth. Conscious observation bandwidth determines the apparent governance (classical) or projection (fractal) of decohered VIS dynamics.

• Explanation: Hierarchical modes of awareness from passive stability to co-creative intent.
• Falsification: Consciousness uncorrelated with all quantum-coherence markers (EEG, microtubule stability, etc.).
• Tiers: (see following table)

2.11.  Black Hole Recoherence Principle (BHRP)

Statement: Black holes are U₁→U₀ recoherence nodes where information is reset into U₀’s fractal VIS field, producing superpositioned outputs until U₁ decoherence. Preserves unitarity without firewalls or singularities.

• AdS/CFT Alignment:
  • BHRP as Bulk Reconstruction: The event horizon is a “boundary” where U₁’s decohered information (AdS bulk) is re-encoded into U₀’s VIS network (CFT boundary).
  • No Firewall Paradox: Information never enters a singularity; it transitions seamlessly to VIS superpositions (per OI’s scale invariance).
• Mechanism:
  • Recoherence Operator:

• Entropy Correspondence: Bekenstein-Hawking entropy (S_BH) counts VIS microstates at holographic bound:

S_BH = ln⁡(# VIS_horizon)

• Falsification:
  • Condition: Observation of information destruction (e.g., Hawking radiation without VIS signatures).
  • Threshold: Fractal noise in black hole merger gravitational waves must match S(k) ∝ k−^3/2 (OI prediction).

2.12.  Spacetime Expansion Principle (SEP)

Statement: The expansion of U₁ is the holographic emergence of spacetime geometry from U₀’s fractal information field, not motion through a void. Dark energy reflects U₀’s resistance to complete decoherence at holographic bounds.

Support:

• VIS Decoherence: New spacetime “pixels” manifest as U₀’s information resolves into U₁. (OI).
• Equation: 

• Falsification:
  • Observation of non-fractal expansion (e.g. perfect FLRW metrics without S(k) ∝ k^-3/2 noise in JWST/LISA).

2.13.  Entanglement -INE Symmetry (EIS)

Statement: Quantum entanglement reconciles U₀’s infinite unity with the Infinity-Nothingness Equivalence (INE) by simultaneously binding all VIS and preserving unmanifest potential (statelessness).

Support:

• VIS Decoherence: Entangled VIS ensure U₀’s scale-invariant coherence (RSR).
• Equation: 

• INE Mirroring: Superposition’s “neither/nor” mimics lim_⁡x→0+ Ψ(x) = lim⁡_x→1− Ψ(x)
  • Example: Black hole recoherence (BHRP) preserves information without classical totality.
• Falsification:

Breakdown of fractal entanglement scaling (e.g., S ∝ log ⁡N fails for N→∞).