Every idea in science remains open to questioning, even the well-established ones. Repeatability and consistent results make a model reliable and useful. But reliability is not the same as completeness. Many theories that are now treated as foundational began as practical

The history of science is full of moments where someone questioned the “obvious”: • Gravity was once “objects fall because they seek the ground.” • Heat was once “caloric fluid.” • Space and time were once absolute frames. These ideas were not wrong, they were simply

Conscious bias is not prejudice or preference. It’s the unspoken assumptions baked into a field, the things we believe so deeply that we forget they were ever theories in the first place. For example: • “Consciousness must look like human experience.” • “Fundamental forces

Most major breakthroughs in science happen the same way: Not by discovering new things… …but by realizing we've been taking something for granted. When a concept becomes too familiar, it becomes invisible. It stops being questioned. It becomes a blind spot. And progress

The Two Meanings of Consciousness Many discussions about consciousness start from an unexamined assumption, that “consciousness” refers only to our personal subjective awareness. But there are actually two very different meanings: • awareness • the underlying condition that

I’m going to spend the next few months sharing a theory I’ve been developing that I call the 'Unified Axiomatic Field Theory (UAFT).' A proposed ontological framework It starts with one simple idea: that consciousness is the foundation, not the byproduct, of reality. UAFT

Excited to share that my paper on UAFT was accepted for poster presentation at The Science of Consciousness Conference 2026. consciousness.arizona.edu Time to bring this theory into the public domain.

Breakthrough moment: I realized something important today. Awareness doesn’t become localized because consciousness splits, emerges, or fragments. It appears localized when differentiation becomes emotionally stabilized into a perspective. Separation isn’t fundamental.

A note on naming: I've been referring to my framework as Unified Axiomatic Field Theory. Going forward, the correct name is Unified Axioconscious Field Theory (UAFT). The change makes explicit what was always the core claim — that consciousness itself is the axiom.

Just published my preprint: Unified Axioconscious Field Theory. Consciousness as axiomatic ground. Time as differentiation. Gravity as coherence. Emotion as the origin of the self. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo…

Been a busy weekend.. UAFT Updated to Ver. 2 doi.org/10.5281/zenodo…

New paper... doi.org/10.5281/zenodo…

On the account of bias: One should not only attempt to think outside the box, but to understand that boxes serve to contain and conceal the contents. Instead seek to recognize and eliminate the boundaries that form when we turn away from difficult questions, evade simple

San Diego - Call for Abstracts Consciousness Science 2026 cs2026.org October 11-16 Details to follow

New paper: Colinear Conservation A structural account of why Noether's theorem holds. Conservation reframed as the trace of continuous active correction, not passive preservation. The framework predicts a small but measurable phase differential between time and gravity

Why does a consciousness researcher write a paper on Noether's theorem? Because UAFT proposes that consciousness and physics share the same structural ground. If that's right, the framework's predictions about conservation laws and the cosmological constant should be testable.