John Crowell
You're asking the right questions. But I believe that there is no original ontologically grounded structure in your model of the Universe.

<<This lowest level consists of large quantities of one substance - that I call C*s - in a state of chaos.>>

The concept of "substance" and "chaos" is not an ontologically based structure.
"The event of grasping the structure means understanding." (G.Gutner "Ontology of Mathematical Discourse")/

Have you ever dealt with the problem of ontological justification / substantiation of mathematics (ontological basification), which means knowledge in general?
See the article by D.Bukin "THE CRISIS OF THE FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS AS THE CRISIS OF ONTOLOGY"
[http://www.unn.ru/pages/e-library/vestnik_soc/99990201_West_soc_2011_4 (24)/15.pdf]

<<The combination of creative mathematics, creative algorithmic computations and creative intelligence would provide the “tools” for comprehending and explaining a complete, comprehensive and comprehensible world.>>

See the article A.Narignani "Mathematics XXI – a radical paradigm shift. A Model, not an Algorithm"
[http://vphil.ru/index.php?id=255&option=com_content&task=view]

<<Science is the search for truth about the natural world.>>

Could you draw your truth - the physical/metaphysical first-beginning of your model of the universe?

A.Zenkin: "the truth should be drawn..." (SCIENTIFIC COUNTER-REVOLUTION IN MATHEMATICS)
[http://www.ccas.ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.htm]

      Neil Bates Hello Catshark. I reread your essay and I have some thoughts about how successful creation may be helpful in your quest to add consciousness as well as qualitative and trans-abstraction aspects into science.
      I am saying:

      1. C*s are the fundamental “substance” the world is made of and their consciousness and creational capabilities are inheritable as successful creation progresses.
      2. Cs deviations and returns to normal produce oscillations which can “travel” in the (Cs in chaos) quantum creating field as waves. C*s are the primordial wave producers.
      3. The original progression from C*s to the original Successful Self-Replicator produced repeating processing. That conversion converted quantum creativity to quantum “mechanics”. Self- replication produce copies that in their self-creating field interact, combine and self-organize to become a new self-replicator. The creation of the new self-replicator is the creative part. The repeating processing and its self-replication is the mechanical part. Both are needed for successful creation to progress. So having “mechanical” capabilities is a needed component in successful creation.
      4. Successful creation transcends science, religion, philosophy, mathematics, etc. It provides the fundamentals of all of these.
      5. Successful creation transcends intelligence. It creates and becomes the logistical, networking, intelligence that solves problems and delivers the successful creating capabilities to the right place, at the right time and in the correct quantities for successful creation to achieve its results - to overcome entropy and satisfy consciousness. Note: Successful creation transcends Panpsychism.
      6. Human minds and minding are results of successful creation. Human minding is based on and uses the fundamentals, methods, etc. of successful creation to achieve its capabilities and results.
      7. I have been able to “pick out” the fundamentals of major religions in the successful creation processing and results. Examples are Animism, Panpsychism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Hinduism, The Eastern religions, and the Abrahamic religions. So, I believe successful creation transcends these religions.

      Note: In my work, I put everything in terms of successful creation. This is similar to your viewing of science through the lenses of consciousness, qualitative aspects and the mechanical measurement problem. Both essays express different ways to “examine” reality and science.

      Hope you find this useful. Regards. -FT

          Vladimir Rogozhin Hello Vladimir. I was hoping you would read my essay and provide comments. I got my wish. After reading your comments, my answers, and looking at your previous publications, I believe an ongoing discussion would be beneficial for both of us. In this reply, I will just address your comments. In the next reply, I will go into relating and correlating my work with yours - especially your paper on the Crisis of Fundamentality ….

          In my essay, if I understand your ground, grounding, and grounded terms correctly, the Cs
          "in chaos creating field would be the ground. The conversion of the chaotic C          s into the ordered, original, self-replicator would be the grounding. The resulting self-replicator would be the grounded. This is analogous to the C*s in chaos being the creator, the creating being the conversion and the self-replicator being the created. This process creates and becomes the original, stable, repeating, self-maintaining, space/time/mass processing which in my theory is the “birth” of ontological “being”. This process can be described verbally, mentally followed (drawn) in my mind and described mathematically. This process was introduced in my previous fqxi essay: Clarification of Physics: A Complete, Computable, Predictive Model of our Multiverse. You can access this essay by going to your search engine and typing in: fqxi Clarification of Physics …

          In my essay, successful creation creates and uses its own mathematics in its progression to become the physical world. In the development of the successful creation model, I discovered the mathematics in the physical world and developed a successful creation mathematical model. This mathematical model “maps to” the scientific, empirically derived, generally accepted, physical descriptions of the range of change from the constants of Plank actions, to atomic structures, stars, solar systems, galaxies, the visible universe, etc. The success of this mapping provides knowledge about the physical universe and its relationships with mathematics. I believe this provides evidence for the correlations of math and physics.
          Note: I introduced the successful creation, mathematical, physical mapping in the same fqxi essay previously mentioned. In the paper I provided some correlations that may be of interest to you.

          1. In my theory, the model is the overall description that includes the creation and functioning of all of the order in existence. Algorithms are useful tools in that description.

          When I read your comments, I looked up some of your previous papers and selected your January 4th 2018 paper on Crisis of fundamentality … What I did when I read your paper was to put everything in terms of successful creation and also substituted some of my terms in your paper. From my point of view, successful creation “fits” into your paper very well. In my next posting, I will describe some of the important correlations. You will hear from me soon. Best Regards -FlaxTern

            John Crowell Hello again Vladimir. Since my last posting I reread your 2018 fqxi paper Crisis of Fundamentality…. and read your 2020 paper on Dialectical- Ontological Modeling of Primordial Generating Process … I thought your review of the philosophical history and selection of the fundamentals needed in the model was brilliant.
            In my work there is only one process that generates “all of the order in existence” -successful creation. Successful creation fulfills the requirements you describe. Successful creation is your “Primordial Generating Process and all that it generates. Understanding and use of successful creation as the primordial generating process will provide a paradigm revolution in what is currently presumed to be the fundamentals of the universe and its contents.

            As described in my Clarification of Physics essay, the conversion of Cs to the original self- replicator produces equivalent and opposite processes that emerge from and return to/as the creative source and repeats. The creation of the equivalent and opposite processing is the origination of dialectics. These dialectics are the basis of the repeating, stable, unchanging processing of physical (ontological) ‘being”. Both of these occurred in the original Cs conversion to the original self-replicator and are inheritable characteristics in the progression of successful creation.
            The progression of successful creation is the progression of your primordial generating process.
            When I translate your papers in terms of successful creation and /or substitute sc terms inti the descriptions in your papers their is an amazing correspondence. From my point of view your description of what is needed to be successful and my papers fulfillment of those needs provides a fundamental model of reality.
            I am interested in your thoughts. Regards —FT

              8 days later

              It would be better FlaxTern...
              If the central point of the essay - successful creation - was more crisply defined, it would be easier to assess how this fixes things for Science. It appears you want to define this core concept by its results, which is a kind of bootstrap. But today's scientists do assume too much of what we see as the natural laws and fundamental constants are universal back to the universe's inception, and this has its problems so a fix is needed.

              If we assume E = mc2 is absolutely true, and we go all the way back to the matter-free regime at the inception of the universe, then is we solve c2 = E/m as m --> 0 we find that the speed of light is unbounded when the mass of the universe is nothing. So you can't have both "the speed of light is constant everywhere/when" and "E = mc2 is always true" at the same time.

              I think perhaps time itself takes on the creative role and the persistence of something in both space and time shows that the creation of that things is successful. Space then is the holder of consciousness, and the fabric of spacetime is thus seen to have a memory. But you want to also replace the standard form of natural selection with probabilistically favorable continuation, and this deserves further study.

              You give us a lot to think about.

                Jonathan Dickau
                Hello LavenderTakin. Thanks for reading and commenting on my essay. I will try to address your comments.

                1. If I understand your “bootstrapping” terminology correctly, successful creation is a bootstrapping process. It creates using what exists in each stage of its progression. It never creates something from nothing and it never uses “outside help” to progress. It becomes a successful self-creating (bootstrapping) process.
                  2.In successful creation, there is no “mass free inception” of the universe. C*s are both quantitative - they have a mass - and qualitative - they have an ability to feel compositional changes, create equivalent and opposite processing and return to their “normal” composition without changing their quantitative mass value. So mass never goes to zero and the speed of light never becomes unbounded. It is a constant that is equivalent to the speed of creation.
                2. Your thoughts about time, creativity, persistence, memory and success can be correlated to successful creation. They all have a role in successful creation. Mapping of these aspects onto the successful creation progression will provide those correlations.

                We are not that far apart in our thinking. If you have more comments/questions/etc. , we should keep up the conversation. Regards - FT

                  Write a Reply...