Correlations between the Invariant Set Postulate and the Codex 5 Model,

Fritz Hoffecker, 2010

1.0 Abstract ........................................................................................................................ 2

2.0 Correlations between the ISP and the Codex 5 Model ................................................ 2
3.0 Summary of the Codex 5 Model .................................................................................. 3
3.1 Major Phases of the Model ...................................................................................... 3
3.2 Details of the Codex 5 Model .................................................................................. 8
4.0 Description of a Fractal State-Space Geometry ......................................................... 11
5.0 Dynamical Systems .................................................................................................... 14
6.0 Invariance ................................................................................................................... 23
6.1 Comparing the ISP and Codex 5 Model ................................................................ 23
6.2 Codex 5 Model – Evolution of DC5 and the Physical World ................................. 24
7.0 Asymptotic Behavior ................................................................................................. 27
8.0 Gravity ....................................................................................................................... 29
8.1 Gravity: ISP and Codex 5 Model ........................................................................... 29
8.2 Gravity and Dark Matter: Other Observations...................................................... 32
9.0 Quantum Theory ....................................................................................................... 33
10.0 Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 33
References ......................................................................................................................... 34

1
1.0 Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to show correlations between the ideas and hypotheses
described in two different papers:
1) The Invariant Set Postulate: a new geometric framework for the foundations of
quantum theory and the role played by gravity, by T. N. Palmer, first published online on
29 July, 2009, Proceedings of The Royal Society.

2) The Codex 5 Model: Describing the Origin & Nature of Dark Energy & Dark Matter
and Predicting the Distribution of Energy / Matter in the Universe, by Fritz Hoffecker,
2008.

Note that the authors did not collaborate in writing their respective papers, and have
never met, spoken or communicated in any way.

The Invariant Set Postulate [ISP] states:

A new law of physics is proposed, defined on the cosmological scale but
with significant implications for the microscale. Motivated by nonlinear
dynamical systems theory and black-hole thermodynamics, the Invariant
Set Postulate proposes that cosmological states of physical reality belong
to a non-computable fractal state-space geometry I, invariant under the
action of some subordinate deterministic causal dynamics DI .

The Codex 5 Model proposes a new approach that describes the origin and development
of dark energy, dark matter, and baryonic matter. In doing so, the Codex 5 Model‘s
statements about, and descriptions of the physical universe correlate with the ISP‘s in
some interesting areas.

This paper will show correlations between the ISP and the Codex 5 Model – parallels that
may strengthen and add depth to the concepts about and descriptions of physical reality
found in both papers.

2.0 Correlations between the ISP and the Codex 5 Model

This section summarizes correlations between the ISP and the Codex 5 Model. For
readers unfamiliar with Codex 5, a summary is presented.

The papers show correlations in the following key areas:

1) Description of a fractal state-space geometry – see Section 4.0 below.

2) Use of dynamical systems theory, with reference to and description of a
dynamical system‘s deterministic, causal effects on a state-space geometry – see
Section 5.0.
3) Proposal that an invariant set lies at the heart of physical reality - see Section 6.0.
4) Description of asymptotic behavior under certain conditions - see Section 7.0.

2
 5) View that gravity is related to and/or a manifestation of variations (or
heterogeneities) in the geometry of state space (including the state space of the set
Physical Reality, PR, per Table 3-1 below) - see Section 8.0.
6) Both papers lead to a questioning of some basic precepts of Quantum Theory.
This paper will only summarize the relationship between the Codex 5 Model and
Quantum Theory - see Section 9.0. Work has begun on another paper that will
investigate this relationship in more detail.

3.0 Summary of the Codex 5 Model

The Codex 5 Model paper (Hoffecker, 2009) presents the model in detail; this section
summarizes key aspects of the Model.

3.1 Major Phases of the Model

Figures 1a and 1b below present a summary of the phases of the Codex 5 Model. Text
descriptions follow the diagrams.

3
 BP1
BP4b
Phase 1: Initial
BP2 BP3
BP1b
BP3

BP3
State
BP2b

BP4 BP1b BP4

BP4 BP1b BP2

BP2b BP2 BP1 BP3 BP3

BP2
BP2
BP1
BP1 BP2 BP1 BP1 BP1b
BP4

BP1b BP4 BP4 BP3b BP3 BP3b

BP3b

BP2
BP3b BP2b BP2b BP2b BP2b

BP4b BP2b
BP4b BP1b
BP3b BP1b BP3

BP1
BP4b
BP4b BP4
BP4b

BP3b BP3b

BP4b

LgP4
BP1 Phase 2, Initial
BP1
LgP1b
State
BP3b BP4b
BP1b BP4

BP4
BP1 BP2b BP2b

BP1b BP2
BP1 LgP1
BP1b
BP3 BP3b BP4b

BP3b BP3b
BP2 BP2 BP2b
BP2
LgP2b

BP3 BP4 BP4

BP2b BP3b

BP1 BP4b BP2b

BP1b
LgP2

LgP3b
BP2 BP1b
BP3
LgP4b
BP3

BP3
BP4b
LgP3
BP4b BP4

Phase 3, Initial
BP BP
4b

BP4
2b
BP
3b
State
BP2 BP3
b
BP1
LgPx b
BP3
b LgPx
BP
BP2
2b
b BP1
BP2
b
BP2 BP2

BP4 BP4 BP2 BP4 BP3 BP4

b b b b

BP3 BP1
b
BP3 BP4
LgPx b
BP3
BP1 LgPx
b
BP3 BP1

VLQ BP1
b
LgPx BP4
BP2
b
BP2 BP3

BP4 BP1 BP4

BP1

LgPx
BP1 BP3
b b

BP1 BP1

BP1
LgPx

BP3
BP3

BP4 BP1
Phase 4, Initial
BP2
b
BP1
BP2
b LgPx BP1
b
State
BP3
b
BP3 VLQ1b
b
BP2
VLOct2b
LgPx
BP3 BP3
LgPx
VLQ3b
BP2 BP4
BP4 BP4
BP3
b
BP2 VLQ2b BP2
BP1
b BP4 BP4
b
BP4
b BP1 LgPx
BP3 BP2
b
LgPx BP4
b
BP4
BP1 b

BP1
b
VLOct3b
b BP2 BP3
b BP BP b
3b 2b

BP
BP
4b
2b

BP1 BP4
b b

BP1
b
BP2
b
BP4 BP4

BP4
Phase 4: Next
BP1
b LgPx
BP4
BP3
LgPx
b BP
2b State
BP2 BP1 BP
b 4b
BP3

BP3 BP2
b
VLQ2b
BP2 BP1
(0.35)
BP2 BP4
b b
BP4 BP
b LgPx 3b
BP2 BP3 BP1
b b
BP3
LgPx
BP1 BP2 BP3
VLOct3b b

(0.25) BP3 BP3 BP

b 2b
BP4 XL12-2B
(0.05)
BP4 BP2
LgPx BP3 b

BP1 BP1 BP1

LgPx

Figure 1a: Codex 5 Model - Phases 1 through 4

4
 Last Large Pair unwinds =>
VLOcts & XL-12s evolve
Singularity & next Big Bang
into Baryonic Matter
10 – Where the Singularity Came From
VLOs & XL12s acquire mass as they Hypothesis: The Singularity where the
accelerate through the field of Basic Pairs. Big Bang occurs is at the spot where the
1 7
2 6 Exact mechanism is unknown. Last Large Pair ‗unwinds‖ into 2 Basic
Pairs.
Correlation:
Basic Pairs ―...the farther back the fluctuation x/a
Big Bang happened, the lower the entropy it would
have had to attain (entropy starts to rise The Last
after any dip to low entropy…a small Large Pair
fluctuation early on—a modest jump to
the favorable conditions, within a tiny
Very Large nugget of space—inevitably yields the
Quads (VLQ) huge and ordered universe we are y/b
Very Large aware of.‖
Pairs (VLgP) B. Green, The Fabric of the Cosmos.
Force of surrounding ‗ocean‘ of
Basic Pairs starts to pull the Last
Large Pair apart.

Very Large
Octets (VLO)

XL-12's

Forward arrow of Time x b

VLOs & XL-12s accelerate a

through the y
Basic Pairs Field

x b
Basic Pairs b
Field x

y a
y a
As VLOs & XL-12s accelerate
through the Basic Pairs Field,
they combine in some fashion Singularity
(eg, multiple VLOs, and/or
multiple XL-12's) and is here
emerge as Elementary Particles,
e.g., Electron, Quark

Quarks Electrons

Universe consists of
only Basic Pairs when
Universe evolves to current
next Big Bang occurs
state:
~4.5% Baryonic Matter
~24% Dark Matter
~71.5% Dark Energy
BP1
BP4b
Return to
BP2 BP3
BP1b
BP3

BP3
Phase 1:
BP2b

BP4 BP1b

Initial State
BP4

BP4 BP1b BP2

BP2b BP2 BP1 BP3 BP3

BP2
BP2
BP1
BP1 BP2 BP1 BP1 BP1b
BP4

Universe devolves as BP1b BP4

BP3b
BP4 BP3b

BP2
BP3 BP3b

Baryonic & Dark

BP3b BP2b BP2b BP2b BP2b

BP2b
BP4b

Matter ―unwind‖
BP4b BP1b
BP3b BP1b BP3

BP1
BP4b
BP4b BP4
BP4b

BP3b BP3b

BP4b

Figure 1b: Codex 5 Model – Beyond Phase 4, Back to Phase 0

Figure 2 below presents 2-dimensional, generic views of the entities of the Codex 5
Model: Basic Pairs (BP), Large Pairs (LgP), Very Large Quads (VLQ), Very Large
Octets (VLO), and Extra Large-12s (XL-12).

5
 WMAP & other Integrated
CODEX 5 Model Observations &
Hypotheses Hypothesis

~73% of Dark Energy

Basic Pair: Dark
Matter is Dark consists of Basic
71.43% Energy
Energy Pairs

Dark Matter
Large Pair: ―Light‖ Dark consists of Large
21.43% Matter Pairs & Very Large
Quads

Dark
Matter -
~23%
(secondary
V Lg Quad: possibility:
2.50% -About half of V Lg
―Heavy‖ ―Hot‖ DM: Quads become
Dark Matter Neutrinos may Neutrinos. Other half
be ~ <1% of migrates to baryonic
current Matter and/or ―Heavy‖ DM.
-Or 1.5% of neutrinos
not detected yet.)

V Lg Octets & XL-

V Lg Octet: 12s are transformed
3.57% into Baryonic matter.

VLO‘s &
VLOs & XL12's
~4% of all ‗aggregate‘ into leptons,
XL12's are
Matter is quarks as they
transformed
4.64% Baryonic accelerate through the
into
Baryonic plasma of BPs and
Matter eventually LgPs that
surround the singularity.
Similar to Higgs
Mechanism, but there‘s
no Higgs Boson.
XL-12:
1.07%

WMAP – Codex 5
Correlations

Figure 2: Codex 5 Model - Entities

Phase ―0‖ (aka ―Phase Zero‖)

Absolute Nil and Non Nil must exist, and can only exist as entities called Basic Pairs
(BPs).

Phase 1: BPs interact.

Results of these interactions: Some BPs remain whole (i.e., do not change), while others
merge to form Large Pairs (LgPs). While the term ―some‖ is used here, the Codex 5
paper provides exact percentages. Also see Table 5-3 below for a summary.)

Phase 2: BPs and LgPs interact.

6
Results of these interactions: Some BPs and LgPs remain whole (i.e., do not change),
while some LgPs merge to form Very Large Quads (VLQs).

Phase 3: BPs, LgPs and VLQs interact.

Results of these interactions: Some BPs, LgPs and VLQs remain whole (i.e., do not
change or merge), while some VLQs merge to form Very Large Octets (VLOcts).

Phase 4: BPs, LgPs, VLQs and VLOcts interact.

Results of these interactions: Some BPs, LgPs, VLQs and VLOcts remain whole (i.e., do
not change or merge), while VLQs and VLOcts merge to form Extra Large 12‘s (XL-
12‘s).

Subsequent phases involve the merger of VLOcts and XL-12s.

These interactions are described in the Codex 5 paper, Appendix 1, Section 2, which
includes rough diagrams of the interactions. This section of the paper doesn‘t provide
details of these interactions, but proposes that they facilitate subsequent particles‘
acquisition of mass, and thus lead to the creation of baryonic matter.

Evolution of the Universe.

After the creation of baryonic matter, the universe evolves to, for example, its current
state, about 13.7 billion years after the Big Bang.

Devolution of the Universe.

The Codex 5 Model proposes that in subsequent phases, all types of matter except Dark
Energy (which is made of Basic Pairs) will ―unwind.‖ That is, baryonic and Dark Matter
will devolve until only one Large Pair is left among a ―universe-wide sea‖ of Basic Pairs.

The Next Singularity.

The final Large Pair eventually ―unwinds,‖ and this marks the location where the
singularity of the next Big Bang will occur. See Codex 5 Model paper, Section 4.0, Part
2 - Death and Rebirth of the Universe, and details in Appendix 1, Section 10.

At this point, it is important to note that the next iteration of the universe (i.e., after the
next Big Bang) will not evolve to become an exact copy of the current universe. This is
because initial conditions at the next Big Bang will be different in that the distribution of
Basic Pairs will not be precisely the same as the distribution was at the time of the most
recent Big Bang. At these instants of Big Bangs, it is estimated that Basic Pair
distribution will be fairly even throughout the volume of the universe; however, there will
be heterogeneities, which will account differences in the eventual emergence of stars,
galaxies and other baryonic matter. So, it is anticipated that in the next iteration of the
universe (i.e., after the next Big Bang), matter will evolve in much the same way as in the
current universe (e.g., Hydrogen will form in the same way), but distribution will be
different. Finally, the locus of the next singularity will not be exactly the same as last
singularity‘s, and given the different distributions of BPs just before the Big Bangs, then
it can be concluded that stars, galaxies, planets and other matter will not evolve in exactly
the same trajectories and locations for both iterations.

7
In line with these views, Section 5.0 below will describe the Codex 5‘s Dynamical
System, DC5, as causal and deterministic, but non-computable. For example, the DC5 that
has followed the last Big Bang has the same deterministic ―rules‖ as the DC5 that will
follow the next Big Bang, but the next DC5 will not lead to an exact repetition of the
physical reality which has been seen in the past 13.7 billion years.

3.2 Details of the Codex 5 Model

As detailed in the Codex 5 paper, Phase 0 begins with the following statements:
Absolute-Nil is defined as a ―Basic Entity‖ that is ―complete Nothingness.‖ For
example, it is not composed of baryonic matter, does not emit or reflect any
energy in the electro-magnetic spectrum. Figuratively, it can be thought of as the
tiniest possible bit of nothingness in the Universe.
Non-Nil is defined as a ―Basic Entity‖ that consists of matter that cannot be
further decomposed. Figuratively, it can be thought of as the tiniest possible bit
of matter in the Universe.

Figure 3 below shows Phase 0, which illustrates the Model‘s statements:

1) that Absolute Nil and Non-Nil must exist, and
2) furthermore that they can exist only as a Basic Pair:

x (Non-Nil) = shaded area

y (Absolute-Nil) = white area

Figure 3: Codex 5 Model - Phase 0: A Basic Pair

Figures 1a and 1b (above) and Table 3-1 (below) show that the Model‘s set structure is:
1) A set consisting of all physical reality, PR, over the entire life-span of the
Universe, including baryonic matter, Dark Matter and Dark Energy. While the
definition of physical reality is debatable, in this case, certain abstractions are not
included, such as imaginary numbers and hypothetical musings like ―If Planet
Earth were 40 million miles from the sun instead of 93 million, then life as we
know it would never have evolved.‖ One could argue that the brains imagining
such things are made of baryonic matter, and that therefore, such things are part of
physical reality. However, this avenue isn‘t useful in this paper, e.g., a person can
imagine that there are 10 million elements, not the 117 commonly listed in the
Periodic Table, but a similar approach is irrelevant here.

8
2) A set, here called C5, of all instances of the entities described in Phases 0 through
4 of the Codex 5 Model: Basic Pairs, Large Pairs, Very Large Quads, Very Large
Octets, and Extra Large-12s. C5 is a subset of PR.
3) A set, here called AN-NN, which consists of any instance of Absolute Nil (AN)
and Non-Nil (NN). The Codex 5 Model proposes that any pair of one instance of
Absolute Nil and one instance of Non-Nil can exist only as a Basic Pair. AN-NN
is a subset of C5, and therefore also a subset of PR.

9
 Table 3-1: Set Structure of Codex 5 Model

Phases of Codex 5’s Dynamical

Set AN-NN Set C5 Set PR System (DC5)
Ab-Nil / Non-Nil Phase 0, #1
All entities in
instances as Phase 0 thru
Basic Pairs Phase 4 Phase 1, Initial State
(BPs, LgPs, Phase 1, Next State
VLQs, Phase 2, Next State
VLOcts, XL-
Phase 3, Next State
12s)
Phase 4, Next State

Emergence of Baryonic matter

Recombination: 1st stable H & He
atoms form
Stelliferous era starts
Stelliferous era continues, e.g., to
present day:
Set of all
physical
reality: Dark End of stars (burned out)
Energy, Dark
Matter, Ongoing decay, unwinding of all
Baryonic Baryonic matter
matter Codex 5: Black Holes, stars, all
Baryonic matter asymptote to Set
C5, then ―backwards‖ thru the
fractal progression (Items 1 thru 4b
below), until Set AN-NN is
reached.
1) XL-12s first devolve into VLOcts
& VLQs.
2) VLOcts devolve into VLQs

3) Decay of VLQs into Large Pairs

4a) Decay of Large Pairs into Basic
Pairs
4b) Last LgP unwinds into 2 BPs

Invariant Ab-Nil Phase 0, #2 (Set AN-NN)

/ Non-Nil as
BPs Phase 1, Initial State, #2

Reviewing the entire Codex 5 Model paper will enhance understanding of Model‘s
phases and set structure, but this summary shows key points.

10
4.0 Description of a Fractal State-Space Geometry
The ISP:
proposes that cosmological states of physical reality belong to a non-
computable fractal state-space geometry I, invariant under the action of
some subordinate deterministic causal dynamics DI.

This single sentence marks several correlations between the ISP and the Codex 5 Model,
but Section 4.0 will focus on fractal state-space geometry.

The ISP makes many other references to a fractal state-space geometry, such as:
The Invariant Set Postulate posits the existence of a fractionally
dimensioned subset I of the state space of the physical world (i.e., the
universe as a whole).

In summary, the Codex 5 Model describes a state-space geometry that is fractal in that all
the entities that evolve through Phase 4 of the Model (i.e., all the entities in Set C5) have
self-similar structures. Using the Codex 5 Model‘s terminology, the Model describes the
evolution of the physical entities in Set C5: Basic Pairs (BP), Large Pairs (LgP), Very
Large Quads (VLQ), Very Large Octets (VLOct) and Extra-Large 12‘s (XL-12).

Figure 4 (below) shows each of these entities on the left; their self-similar structures are
evident. Note that while the diagram shows flat, 2-dimensional shapes, each entity exists
in three dimensions, e.g., approximately as spheres, not circles. (The sphere is selected
because it gives even distribution about a center point.) The entities are different in that
each different type of entity has a different level of Energy/Mass (E/M). The base unit of
E/M is the BP. Since a LgP is formed by the merging of two BPs, the E/M of a LgP is
twice as large as the E/M of a BP.

Likewise, when two LgPs merge to form a VLQ, the VLQ has E/M equivalent to that of
two LgPs (or four BPs). Two VLQs can merge to form a VLOct (which has an E/M of
eight BPs). A VLQ and a VLOct can merge to form an XL-12 (E/M of 12 BPs), but the
Model stops short of detailing any mergers of entities after Phase 4 ends. Instead, after
Phase 4, the Codex 5 paper proposes that the vector associated with any further merging
among VLOcts and XL-12s leads to the evolution of known subatomic particles and the
creation of baryonic matter. For details, see Section 3.0 and Appendix 1, Section 2 of the
Codex 5 paper.

The Codex 5 Model does not estimate the magnitude of a BP‘s E/M, as work in this area
has begun and is ongoing. However, note that SEVEN-YEAR WILKINSON
MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP1) OBSERVATIONS:
COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION, Table 2, indicates that:

….using WMAP+BAO+H0, [the limit on the total mass of massive

neutrinos is] Σmv < 0.58 eV (95% CL).
Footnote g states that ―For WMAP+LRG+H0, Σmv < 0.44 eV.‖

11
Calculations in the Codex 5 paper indicate that a BP has less mass than a neutrino. Some
correlation is proposed between the Energy/Mass of a neutrino and that of a VLQ. Using
Seven-Year WMAP observations (referenced above), and if a VLQ and the referenced
neutrino have about the same mass, then since a BP has 25% of the mass of a VLQ, then
the mass of a BP would be < 25% of 0.58 eV (i.e., < 0.1475 eV). Per Footnote, g, for
WMAP+LRG+H0, the mass of a BP would be < 25% of 0.44 eV (i.e., < 0.11 eV).
Further work in this area is ongoing.

Note that in addition to showing the fractal aspects of the Codex 5 entities, Figure 4 also
maps the types of entities to types of matter (ref WMAP observations and data, 2003 –
2009).

12
 WMAP & other Integrated
CODEX 5 Model Observations &
Hypotheses Hypothesis

~73% of Dark Energy

Basic Pair: Dark
Matter is Dark consists of Basic
71.43% Energy
Energy Pairs

Dark Matter
Large Pair: ―Light‖ Dark consists of Large
21.43% Matter Pairs & Very Large
Quads

Dark
Matter -
~23%
(secondary
V Lg Quad: possibility:
2.50% -About half of V Lg
―Heavy‖ ―Hot‖ DM: Quads become
Dark Matter Neutrinos may Neutrinos. Other half
be ~ <1% of migrates to baryonic
current Matter and/or ―Heavy‖ DM.
-Or 1.5% of neutrinos
not detected yet.)

V Lg Octets & XL-

V Lg Octet: 12s are transformed
3.57% into Baryonic matter.

VLO‘s &
VLOs & XL12's
~4% of all ‗aggregate‘ into leptons,
XL12's are
Matter is quarks as they
transformed
4.64% Baryonic accelerate through the
into
Baryonic plasma of BPs and
Matter eventually LgPs that
surround the singularity.
Similar to Higgs
Mechanism, but there‘s
no Higgs Boson.
XL-12:
1.07%

WMAP – Codex 5
Correlations

Figure 4: Self-Similar Fractal Structure of Entities in the Codex 5 Model

13
Mandelbrot (1982) has defined fractals as ―a rough or fragmented geometric shape that
can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of
the whole.‖
As can be seen in Figure 4, the entities described in the Codex 5 Model are 3-dimensional
fractals, in that all the structures of the different types of entities are self-similar. For
example, a BP and a LgP have the same structure, with the only difference being that the
Energy/Mass (E/M) of the LgP is twice as large as that of the BP. Likewise, BPs, LgPs,
VLQs, VLOcts and XL-12‘s all have a self-similar 3-D structure, the only difference
being in measurements of E/M. (The evolution from BPs to LgPs, and so on through XL-
12s, is described in detail in the Codex 5 paper, Section 3.0.)

In summary, Section 4.0 has shown the set structure of the Codex 5 Model, including the
fractal aspects of the sets involved. Sections 5.0 and 6.0 below will show relationships
between the Codex 5‘s fractal geometry and, respectively, the Codex 5‘s Dynamical
System, and Invariance.

5.0 Dynamical Systems

As noted above, the ISP states:
…the Invariant Set Postulate proposes that cosmological states of physical
reality belong to a non-computable fractal state-space geometry I,
invariant under the action of some subordinate deterministic causal
dynamics DI.

The Invariant Set Postulate is framed in terms of invariance, a concept that

forms the very bedrock of physics, and conjectures that states of physical
reality are defined by a fractal geometry I, embedded in state space and
invariant under the action of some subordinate causal dynamics DI.

The Codex 5 Model describes a dynamical system, DC5, that operates according to certain
deterministic, causal rules, but as noted above at the end of Section 3.1:

… it is important to note that the next iteration of the universe (i.e., after
the next Big Bang) will not evolve to become an exact copy of the current
universe…
In line with these views, Section 5.0 … describe[s] the Codex 5‘s
Dynamical System, DC5, as causal and deterministic, but non-computable.
For example, the DC5 that has followed the last Big Bang has the same
deterministic ―rules‖ as the DC5 that will follow the next Big Bang, but the
next DC5 will not lead to an exact repetition of the physical reality which
has been seen in the past 13.7 billion years.

The Codex 5 paper describes DC5 in detail, and a summary is presented below. DC5
drives the evolution of entities from BPs to LgPs, and so on, such that a fractal geometry
evolves from the smallest entities (BPs, at Phase 0) to the largest (XL-12s, at the end of
Phase 4). Note that given the initial state described in the Model, and the effects of DC5

14
throughout various phases, certain aspects of the ―next states‖ are predictable, i.e., the
dynamical system described in the Codex 5 Model is deterministic and causal through its
Phase 4. See details in Section 3.0 of the Codex 5 paper. However, the Codex 5 Model
also shows non-computable properties, in that DC5 is non-halting: It can be shown where
it starts (at Phase 0) and many aspects of subsequent phases can be predicted – but many
properties (such as the properties of molecules resulting from combinations of atoms) can
not be calculated before they occur.

The Codex 5‘s dynamical system is symbolic in that the BPs and other entities are not
intended to be completely accurate graphical representations of entities in physical reality,
as no BPs, LgPs, et al. have actually been observed. However,

1) The diagrams intend to show key properties of actual entities, and

2) The interactions shown between BPs, LgPs, et al. are a rough, but integrated
graphical representation of actual interactions and transformations.

In summary, the diagrams provide symbolic representations of BPs, LgPs and the other
entities described in the Codex 5 Model. The Codex 5‘s dynamical system, DC5, aligns
fairly closely with the ISP‘s references to symbolic dynamics:

One key technique to represent the evolution of states on an invariant set

is that of symbolic dynamics... Given the non-computability of fractal
invariant sets, the analysis here suggests that the most likely approach to
finding a robust mathematical representation of the invariant set of the
universe is through the symbolic approach; as discussed in §1a, this
approach can define the invariant set to topological equivalence. Indeed,
as remarked by Bohr himself, the very fact that a quantum theoretic state
has the form | A› + β | B› suggests that quantum theory is itself
profoundly symbolic.

The Codex 5 Model‘s state space – as used here to illustrate the Model‘s Dynamical
System, DC5 - can be described as a tuple [E, T, IS, NS], where:

 E = a set of entities (such as – in the Codex 5 Model – Absolute Nil and Non-Nil,
which can only exist ―paired together‖ in Basic Pairs)
 IS = an Initial State, which describes which entities are available to participate in
a subsequent Interaction
 IA = Interaction between entities in E
 NS = Next State, which describes the situation after the Interaction (e.g., ―Do 2
different Basic Pairs merge – to form a Large Pair – or do they stay separate?‖)

Phase 0 of the Dynamical System DC5:

The Codex 5 paper begins with the following state space:

 E0 = {Absolute Nil0, Non-Nil0} Note that in the totality of physical reality (ref
the set named PR in Table 3-1), E contains more than one such set. In fact, it

15
 contains many billions, though the calculation of an estimated number will be
addressed in a future paper.
 IS0 = In the Codex 5 Model, the Initial State explains that Absolute Nil and Non-
Nil must exist.
 IA0 = according to the Codex 5 Model, the existence of the set {Absolute Nil0,
Non-Nil0} can lead to one and only one Next State:
 NS0 = {Basic Pair0}. This means that neither a real instantiation of Absolute Nil
nor a real instantiation of Non-Nil can exist alone in PR; they can exist in physical
reality only as a Basic Pair.
(Note that NS0 is not a ―next state‖ from the point of view of the forward arrow of
time, because Absolute Nil and Non-Nil can only exist as in a Basic Pair. In other
words, Ab-Nil and Non-Nil don‘t exist first, and then a Basic Pair exists. Instead,
NS0 is a ‗next state‘ in terms of the logical sequence used to describe them: That
is, once the existence and properties of Ab-Nil and Non-Nil are understood, then
the ‗next state‘ in understanding is to see that the can exist only as a Basic Pair.

Phase 1 of the Dynamical System DC5:

Given that many sets exist where E0 = {Absolute Nil0, Non-Nil0}, e.g., {Absolute Nil2,
Non-Nil2}….. {Absolute Niln, Non-Niln}, then many NSA = {Basic Pair1} will also exist
after Phase 1 of the Dynamical State occurs many millions of times. However, given that
there are only four possible arrangements for Basic Pairs, the Codex 5 Model addresses
and focuses on those four alternatives.

For the dynamic system described in the Codex 5 Model, DC5, the ―Next State‖ that
results from Phase 0 becomes the Initial State that Phase 1 begins with. Therefore, in
Phase 1, the initial view of E (―E1‖ for the Initial State of Phase 1) is:

E1 = {Basic Pair1}, {Basic Pair2}, {Basic Pair3}, {Basic Pair4}

This will be extended shortly, but first, here are some notes about E1:

The four types of BPs in E1 are distinguished by variations in the following properties:
1) Direction of ―rotation‖: Clockwise or Counter-clockwise
2) Placement of the ―larger‖ (in the diagram) part (―head‖) of the Non-Nil part of the
BP: top or bottom
3) Placement of the larger part (―head‖) of the Absolute-Nil part of the BP: top or
bottom
[Note that the terms ―large part‖ and ―head‖ are just wording used to align with the
symbolic states shown in the diagrams. For example, work is being done to compare
the current representations and properties of BPs, LgPs, et al. with aspects of quantum
harmonic oscillation. This would lead to somewhat different representations of the
Codex 5 entities.]

Table 5-1 below shows, for any BP, the only possible combinations of these three
variables. Note that some combinations that look mathematically or categorically

16
possible are actually counter-factual; specifically, the following cannot exist in the
physical reality described in the Codex 5 Model:
1) There can‘t be a BP with both the Absolute Nil and Non-Nil ―head‖ (i.e., the
―wider‖ part of Ab-Nil or Non-Nil) at the top, or both at the bottom.
2) There can‘t be a BP that has 2 Absolute Nils (and zero Non-Nils) or 2 Non-Nils
(and zero Absolute Nils).
3) Both the Absolute Nil and the Non-Nil parts of a BP have to ―rotate‖ in the same
direction.

Table 5-1: Codex 5 Model - All Possible BP Properties

Direction of Location of Non- Location of Ab-Nil

Rotation Nil Head Head
Clockwise = 1 Top = 1 Top = 1
CCWise = -1 Bottom = -1 Bottom = -1

BP1 -1 -1 1
BP2 -1 1 -1
BP3 1 -1 1
BP4 1 1 -1

In order to show all the possible Interactions (IAs) of this state space, E needs to be
expanded to include additional BPs – BP1b, BP1b, BP3b and BP4b – which, respectively,
have the same properties as BP1, BP2, BP3 and BP4.

Therefore, for Phase 1:

 E1 = {Basic Pair1}, {Basic Pair2}, {Basic Pair3}, {Basic Pair4}, {Basic Pair1b},
{Basic Pair1b}, {Basic Pair3b}, {Basic Pair4b}
 IS1 = In the Initial State, all 8 BPs are separate, but are poised to interact in every
possible combination.
 IA1 = Interactions in this step of this dynamical system take into consideration the
fact that every possible interaction between any two unique BPs will occur. In
Table 5-2 below, the first 2 columns show the interactions that take place.
 NS1 = See Column 3 of Table 5-2 below (―Results of Interaction‖), which shows
the Next States resulting from the interactions.

Figure 5 below shows typical Initial States that involve different BPs. (Additional details
and graphics are provided in the Codex 5 paper, Section 3.0.)

17
 y b

x
a

Interaction 1 (IA1)

y a

x b

IA2

y b

x a

IA3

y a

x b

IA4

Figure 5: Codex 5 Model – Possible Interactions (IAs) of Initial States

18
The first two columns of Table 5-2 (below) show the 28 possible Initial States that
involve different pairings of BPs, e.g., in the first Initial State, the ―1st Basic Pair‖ is
shown as ―1‖ (i.e., ―BP1‖), and the ―2nd Basic Pair‖ is shown as ―2‖ (i.e., ―BP2‖).

For example, Row 1, Column 3 (―Results of Interaction‖) shows the Next State that
resulted from the interaction of BP1 and BP2 (―BPs merge‖).

Table 5-2: Interactions and Next States

1st Basic 2nd Basic Result of

Pair Pair Interaction
1 2 BPs merge
1 3 BPs stay separate
1 4 BPs stay separate
1 1b BPs stay separate
1 1b BPs merge
1 3b BPs stay separate
1 4b BPs stay separate

2 3 BPs stay separate

2 4 BPs stay separate
2 1b BPs merge
2 1b BPs stay separate
2 3b BPs stay separate
2 4b BPs stay separate

3 4 BPs merge
3 1b BPs stay separate
3 1b BPs stay separate
3 3b BPs stay separate
3 4b BPs merge

4 1b BPs stay separate

4 1b BPs stay separate
4 3b BPs merge
4 4b BPs stay separate

1b 1b BPs merge
1b 3b BPs stay separate
1b 4b BPs stay separate

1b 3b BPs stay separate

1b 4b BPs stay separate

3b 4b BPs merge

In Table 5-2, when the ―Result of Interaction‖ (3rd column) is ―BPs stay separate,‖ this
means that the BPs retain their existence as individual entities and do not merge to form a

19
Large Pair. For example, in Row 2, when BP1 and BP3 interact, the result is ―BPs stay
separate,‖ which means that BP1 and BP3 remain separate entities.

The merging of two different BPs creates a new type of entity, called a Large Pair (e.g.,
Table 5-2, Row 1). See Figure 6 below:

y a
Initial
State 2
x b

y
a
{x/y} and {b/a}
Force
Intersection
x
b

y/b

Next
State 2

x/a

Figure 6: Codex 5 Model - Two Basic Pairs Merge to Form a Large Pair

The structure of the Large Pair is the same as the structure of a BP, so they can be
described as ―3-dimensional fractals.‖ As the dynamic state DC5 continues through
subsequent steps, this self-similar fractal structure is maintained, through Phase 4, as
other entities emerge from the interactions described in DC5.

20
After Phase 2, the Codex 5 Model describes subsequent phases of DC5. Table 5-3 (below)
shows that after Phase 4, the initial total of Energy/Mass in the first E (i.e., the 56 BPs
shown in Table 5-2), has become distributed among BPs, LgPs, VLQs, VLOcts and
XL12s.

After Phase 4, as shown above in Figures 1a and 1b, the geometry of state space evolves
as follows, under the dynamical system DC5:
 BPs, LgPs and VLQs continue to exist, and are not transformed further (until after
the next Big Bang). [Note, however, that other than the interactions described in
DC5, there may be cases in the universe where some interactions among LgPs
and/or VLQs occur. For example, the Codex 5 Model proposes that LgPs and
VLQs make up Dark Matter. Observations of Abell 520 (Mahdavi, et al., 2007)
may be explained by ―weakly self-interacting dark matter.‖ In Codex 5 terms,
this would mean that LgPs and/or VLQs were interacting; note that in the case of
Abell 520, this would have occurred only ―after a complicated collision of galaxy
clusters, some of the most massive objects in the Universe.‖
The Codex 5 Model maintains that after Phase 4, the remaining BPs, LgPs and
VLQs do not normally interact; however, it appears that events such as this
collision allow for some additional interactions – possibly because of the high
levels of energy involved. Further analysis has started and will be addressed in
the future, e.g., explaining the apparent differences between the behavior and
properties of Dark Matter in Abell 520 and the ―Bullet cluster‖ (1E 0657-56).
 VLOcts and XL-12s continue to be transformed through the action of the DC5.
However, one could also say that they become subject to the action of a new
―epoch‖ of DC5. This is a semantic issue that doesn‘t change what actually
happens in PR. In these subsequent transformations, VLOcts and XL-12s interact
and new entities are formed as mass is acquired, until subatomic particles are
created. Physical reality continues to evolve, e.g., to our current universe – until
the final unwinding of the last Large Pair – as shown in Figure 1b.

21
 Table 5-3: Dynamic System after Phase 4

Units of Total Units of End of Phase 1: % End of Phase 2: % of End of Phase 3: % of End of Phase 4: %
Phase 4
Type of Quantity of each Energy / Mass Energy per of Total E/M in each Total E/M in each Total E/M in each of Total E/M in each
Entity Entity per Entity/ Entity Type type of Entity type of Entity type of Entity type of Entity
Throughout Phase 4, 71.4%
Phase 4 Results

of E/M remains in Basic

Pairs BPs 40 1 40 71.4% 71.4% 71.4% 71.4% 71.4%
21.43% - (0.75 * 21.43% - (0.75 *
.286): means after Ph .286): means after Ph
Throughout Phase 4, 21.4% 2, 21.4% of total E/M 3, 21.4% of total E/M
of E/M remains in Lg Pairs LgPs 6 2 12 21.4% is in LgPs is in LgPs 21.43%
A = % of
Phase 4
Calcs

7.14% in
VLQ, VLOct B = E/M not in BPs
or XL12: and LgPs = 7.14%: AxB
VLQ (each has 4 Units of
E/M) VLQs 14 = gross # 4 35.00% 2.50% 2.50%
Phase 4
Results

VLOct (each has 8 Units of

7.14%
E/M) VLOcts 10 = gross # 8 50.00% 3.57% 3.57%
XL12 (each has 12 Units of
E/M) XL12s 2 = gross # 12 15.00% 1.07% 1.07%
TOTAL -> 100.0%

22
6.0 Invariance

6.1 Comparing the ISP and Codex 5 Model

The ISP states:
The Invariant Set Postulate is framed in terms of invariance, a concept that forms
the very bedrock of physics, and conjectures that states of physical reality are
defined by a fractal geometry I, embedded in state space and invariant under the
action of some subordinate causal dynamics DI.
Specifically, the Invariant Set Postulate subordinates the notion of the differential
equation and elevates as primitive, a dynamically invariant fractal geometry in the
state space of the universe. This geometry is used to define the notion of physical
reality—states of physical reality are precisely those on the invariant set.

Codex 5 Model and Invariance

The Codex 5 Model aligns with the concept of invariance in that an invariant set is one that
evolves to itself under the transformations of some Dynamical System. In the Codex 5 Model,
the Dynamical System DC5 starts action on an invariant set, AN-NN (consisting only of Absolute
Nil and Non Nil in the form of a Basic Pair): See details above in Section 3.0 and Table 3-1.
DC5 runs through multiple transformations, which eventually lead back to a state that, again,
consists only of Absolute Nil and Non Nil which exist together as Basic Pairs. See Figures 1a
and 1b, and Table 3-1 above for a summary of the phases of DC5.

If only the first four Phases of DC5 are considered (i.e., Set C5), then at the end of Phase 4:
1) Most instances of Absolute Nil and Non Nil (which exist as Basic Pairs) - remain
unchanged from the beginning of Phase 0; ―Most‖ here means that the unchanged BPs
total 71.43% of the total Energy/Mass [E/M] of the universe.
2) Many instances of Large Pairs (21.43% of the universe‘s E/M) and a few Very Large
Quads (2.5% of the total E/M) also remain unchanged from when they first emerged
during the actions of DC5.
3) Baryonic matter begins to emerge, as VLOcts and XL-12s eventually evolve into entities
that acquire mass. The VLOcts and XL-12s make up 4.64% of the universe‘s total E/M.
After further transformations, VLOcts and XL-12s evolve to form baryonic matter, which
also accounts for 4.64% of the total E/M (as is seen in comparable WMAP observations,
which estimate Baryonic matter at ~4.6%).
4) After tens of billions of years (better estimate to be addressed in the future), DC5
ultimately leads to an end state where the universe once again consists only of instances
of Absolute Nil and Non Nil in the form of Basic Pairs. At this point, the Codex 5 Model
proposes that the event where the last LgP ―unwinds‖ into two BPs becomes the
Singularity where the next Big Bang occurs (also see Codex 5 paper, Section 4.0, Part 2,
and Appendix 1, Section 10).

In summary, the initial set AN-NN in the Codex 5 Model can be considered invariant if viewed
from a long enough time period (i.e., all the time from just before the last Big Bang to just before
the next Big Bang), but during that time period, the Dynamical System DC5:

23
 1) Allows for the emergence of some ―variance‖ (e.g., for the emergence of LgPs, VLQs,
VLOcts, XL-12s and baryonic matter; though the last item does not evolve until after
Phase 4 of DC5), while…
2) Concurrently creating a subset of C5 consisting of: a) Absolute Nil and Non Nil as Basic
Pairs, b) LgPs and c) VLQs. After the noted phases of DC5, these entities make up never-
varying percentages of all the universe‘s E/M (see Table 5-3 above).
3) The overall set, PR, is invariant in that after billions of years, it evolves back to its initial
set, E0, which includes Absolute Nil and Non-Nil in the form of Basic Pairs (see Section
4.0 above, ―Phase 0 of the Dynamical System‖).

Given the preceding description of aspects of the Codex 5 Model, it is useful to loop back to the
Invariant Set Postulate paper, which states:
The Invariant Set Postulate posits the existence of a fractionally-dimensioned
subset I of the state space of the physical world (ie the universe as a whole). I is
an invariant set for some presumed-causal (ie relativistic) deterministic dynamical
system DI ; points on I , hereafter referred to as world states, remain on I under
the action of DI . World states of physical reality are those, and only those, lying
precisely on I.

Rewriting this sentence from the point of view of the Codex 5 Model, and referring to Table 3-1,
would lead to:
The Codex 5 Model indicates that the ― fractionally-dimensioned subset of the state space of the
physical world (i.e., the universe as a whole)‖ can be seen as the set C5, which includes BPs,
LgPs, VLQs, VLOcts and XL-12s. These entities have self-similar structures and represent a
fractal subset of the Codex 5‘s set called ‗Physical Reality‘ (PR) – see Table 3-1. The Model
would also say that ―World states of physical reality are those, and only those‖ that are in the Set
PR. Since C5 is a subset of PR, world states of physical reality also lie on C5. Note that like the
ISP, the Codex 5 Model allows for consideration of counterfactual entities, such as imaginary
numbers, but states that these entities do not lie on PR.

6.2 Codex 5 Model – Evolution of DC5 and the Physical World

The Codex 5 Model defines the Set AN-NN as invariant, in that:
Absolute-Nil is defined as a ―Basic Entity‖ that is ―complete Nothingness.‖ For
example, it is not composed of baryonic matter, does not emit or reflect any
energy in the electro-magnetic spectrum. It can be thought of as the tiniest
possible bit of nothingness in the Universe.
Non-Nil is defined as a ―Basic Entity‖ that consists of matter that cannot be
further decomposed. It can be thought of as the tiniest possible bit of matter in
the Universe.

In the Codex 5 Model, neither Ab-Nil nor Non-Nil vary during all the transformations described
in the Codex 5 Model‘s Dynamical System DC5, except when two BPs merge to form a LgP.
Also, note that each BP that doesn’t merge to form a Large Pair is also invariant. Subsequently,
each Large Pair and VLQ that don‘t merge to form other entities are also invariant throughout all
phases of the Dynamical System DC5.

24
The Codex 5 Model correlates this persistence of invariant Basic Pairs, Large Pairs and VLQs -
in the current universe - by proposing that:

 71.43% of the Energy/Mass in the universe consists of Basic Pairs (aka, Dark Energy)
 21.43% of the Energy/Mass in the universe consists of Large Pairs (aka, ―Light‖ Dark
Matter)
 2.5% of the Energy/Mass in the universe consists of Very Large Quads (aka, ―Heavy‖
Dark Matter).

The remaining Energy/Mass starts as Very Large Octets (3.57 %) and XL-12‘s (1.07 %), two
entities that:
a) Initially evolved during Phases 3 and 4 of the Codex‘s Dynamical System, and
b) Eventually evolved into what today is baryonic matter (i.e., the Codex 5 Model proposes
that baryonic matter makes up 4.64 % of the total Energy/Mass in the universe). See
Tables 6-1 and 6-2 below for details.

Note that if an initial state of Phase n of DC5 is defined as starting to exist well after the last Big
Bang (e.g., in 2009), it could be defined to include all entities existing in the ―world space‖ (the
current instantiation of Set PR), including Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and all baryonic matter
(from Codex 5 entities to subatomic particles to atoms to molecules to stars).
Only ―real‖ physical phenomena that have resulted from the ongoing actions of the Codex 5
Model‘s Dynamical System DC5 would be included in this instantiation of PR. Other entities -
such as imaginary numbers,10th dimensions, etc. – would be considered counter-factual, i.e., not
lying on PR, nor have they ever lain on Sets AN-NN or C5. See Section 5.0 (Phase 1 of the
Dynamical System DC5) above for further discussion of the Model‘s view of counter-factual
entities.

25
 Table 6-1 - Energy / Mass Distribution in the Universe

Type End of Phase

of 4: % of Total E/M ―Current‖
Final Distribution Entity of universe Nomenclature

Throughout Phase 4, 71.43% of E/M

remains in Basic Pairs BPs 71.43% Dark Energy

Throughout Phase 4, 21.43% of E/M "Light" Dark

remains in Large Pairs LgPs 21.43% Matter
"Heavy" Dark
VLQ (each has 4 Units of E/M) VLQs 2.50% Matter

VLOct (each has 8 Units of E/M) VLOcts 3.57%

Baryonic Matter

XL12 (each has 12 Units of E/M) XL12s 1.07%

The Codex 5 Model also notes that these results align well with WMAP observations and
analysis. Table 6-2 below combines the Codex 5 Model‘s predictions aligned with WMAP‘s
observations:

Table 6-2: Distribution of Energy / Matter Types in the Universe

Codex 5
Codex 5 Model: Model: Variation:
>Gross Difference of Codex
% of Total vs. WMAP: "xx%"
E/M in each WMAP WMAP % >% Diff (=Gross % /
Final Distribution type of Entity Category distribution Codex %): "yy%"
Gross Diff: 0.57%
Dark Energy 71.43% Dark Energy 72.0% % Diff: 0.8%
"Light" Dark
Matter 21.43%
"Heavy" Dark
Matter 2.50%
Gross Diff: 0.93%
Total Dark Matter 23.93% Dark Matter 23.0% % Diff: 3.89%
Baryonic Gross Diff: 0.04%
Baryonic matter 4.64% matter 4.6% % Diff: 0.87%
Total 100.00% 100%

To put these percentages in terms of quantities of the different types of entities:

Table 6-3 below shows that for every 1120 BPs that the Dynamical System DC5 begins
operations on, at the end of Phase 4, there will be 120 LgPs, 7 VLQs, 5 VLOcts and 1 XL-12.
After the end of Phase 4, the BPs, LgPs and VLQs no longer change (i.e., remain invariant),
while - under the action of DC5 - the VLOcts and XL-12s go on to form baryonic matter.

26
 Table 6-3: Distribution of Entities after Phase 4

Type of Entity Quantity of Entities at

End of Phase 4
Basic Pair 800
Large Pair 120
VLQ 7
VLOct 5
XL-12 1

7.0 Asymptotic Behavior

The ISP includes references to how a state-space geometry, under the effects of a dynamical
system, will eventually asymptote. For example:

…Lorenz (1963) proposed a very different type of chaotic motion, associated with
forced nonlinear dissipative dynamical systems, Ẋ = f(X). In contrast with
Hamiltonian systems, the states X(t) of such systems evolve asymptotically to
fractionally dimensioned (fractal) attractors. If X is initialized on an attractor, X
stays on it forever; the attractor is a dynamically invariant subset of state space.
Fractal attractors reveal some of the most beguiling of geometries known to
physics, and form the basis of discussion in this paper. However, the dynamical
systems which generate these geometries are usually considered
phenomenological rather than fundamental, since they are explicitly dissipative.
In §1b, an inherently relativistic reason for supposing these geometries to be
fundamental will be proposed.
It can therefore be supposed that volumes V(t) will shrink to zero and asymptote
onto one of the following: a fixed point, a limit cycle or a fractal attractor. Since
fractal attractors are generic, we will assume henceforth that the zero-volume
asymptotic limit is a fractal set. Clearly it will take an infinite time for a generic
volume in the state space of the Hawking Box to evolve precisely onto its
invariant set.

In summary, the Codex 5 Model describes a dynamical system DC5 that – over billions of years
(from one Big Bang to the next, and so on) – evolves to a fractal attractor. Based on the Sections
above, Absolute Nil and Non-Nil (which can exist only as a Basic Pairs) can be considered
fundamental (not phenomenological) fractal attractors, because the Codex 5 Model proposes:
1) That they are the most fundamental entities in the physical world (ref the set PR, Table 3-
1), and
2) That the entire universe will eventually asymptote to a state space geometry where it
consists of only Basic Pairs, which are the smallest fractals (i.e., have the least
Energy/Mass) in the set of all fractals described in the Codex 5 Model.

It appears that these characteristics of the Model are analogous to the type of dynamical systems
the ISP refers to above, i.e.:

27
 In contrast with Hamiltonian systems, the states X(t) of such systems evolve
asymptotically to fractionally dimensioned (fractal) attractors. If X is initialized
on an attractor, X stays on it forever; the attractor is a dynamically invariant
subset of state space.
In the Codex 5 Model, the dynamical system asymptotes to a ―dynamically invariant subset of
state space,‖ namely a state-space geometry consisting only of Absolute Nil and Non-Nil in the
form of Basic Pairs. See Figure 7 below (from Codex 5 paper, Appendix 1, Section 10):

10 – Where the Singularity Came From

Hypothesis: The Singularity where the
Big Bang occurs is at the spot where the
Last Large Pair ‗unwinds‖ into 2 Basic
Pairs.
Correlation:
―...the farther back the fluctuation x/a
happened, the lower the entropy it would
have had to attain (entropy starts to rise The Last
after any dip to low entropy…a small Large Pair
fluctuation early on—a modest jump to
the favorable conditions, within a tiny
nugget of space—inevitably yields the
huge and ordered universe we are y/b
aware of.‖
B. Green, The Fabric of the Cosmos.
Force of surrounding ‗ocean‘ of
Basic Pairs starts to pull the Last
Large Pair apart.

x b

a
y

x b
x b

y a
y a

Singularity
is here

Figure 7: Codex 5 System Asymptotes back to Phase 0: “All Basic Pairs”

28
Though the Codex 5 environment is different from what is mentioned in the reference above, the
result is similar: In both cases, the systems asymptote to a fractal attractor. Also, as in the ISP,
the Codex 5 Model proposes that the asymptotic evolution to a fractal attractor (Ab-Nil and Non-
Nil as BPs, in the case of the Codex 5 Model) is fundamental, not phenomenological.

In summary, in the Model, the entire universe will asymptote to a physical reality consisting only
of Basic Pairs, i.e., to the most basic fractals described in the Codex 5 Model. Note that when
the universe consists only of BPs, it has asymptoted down to its most fundamental entities,
Absolute Nil and Non-Nil, which can exist only as BPs. Thus the Dynamical System DC5 has
returned state-space geometry to the Initial Set, E0. (see Section 5.0 above).

8.0 Gravity
Both the ISP and the Codex 5 Model present views that gravity is related to, or a manifestation
of, variations (or heterogeneities) in the geometry of state space.

8.1 Gravity: ISP and Codex 5 Model

Palmer‘s Invariant Set Postulate paper makes several references to gravity, such as:
It is proposed that heterogeneities in the fractal geometry of I are manifestations
of the phenomenon of gravity.

Indeed this leads to the following rather radical suggestion. If the geometry of I is
to be considered primitive, then the geometric properties of the invariant set
which lead to certain regions being relatively stable and other regions unstable
should be considered a generalization of the notion introduced by Einstein that the
phenomenon we call ‗gravity‘ is merely a manifestation of some more primitive
notion of geometry—here the geometry of a dynamically invariant subset of state
space.
… if gravity should be seen as a manifestation of the heterogeneity in the
geometry of the invariant set, then attempts to quantize gravity with the
framework of standard quantum theory will also fail. As such, it is misguided to
assume (as almost all serious attempts have so far done) that ‗theories of
everything‘ can be formulated within conventional quantum theory.

As indicated in Tables 6-1, 6-2 and 6-3, the Codex 5 Model addresses gravity by proposing that:
 Dark Energy consists of Basic Pairs;
 Dark Matter is made up of Large Pairs and Very Large Quads;
 Baryonic matter evolves from VLOcts and XL-12s.

[To use some terminology from the Invariant Set Postulate, The Codex 5 Model views gravity as
a manifestation of heterogeneities in the geometry of instantiations of:
1) the invariant set AN-NN (which the paper proposes as fundamental to physical reality),
and
2) the invariant subset of C5 that consists of the BPs, LgPs and VLQs that never transform
(see).

29
Note also that the fractal nature of C5 equates to variations in the E/M of the set‘s entities (BPs,
LgPs, VLQs, VLOcts and XL-12s).]

In summary, Basic Pairs are Dark Energy and have the gravitational properties observed in Dark
Energy. Large Pairs and VLQs are Dark Matter and have the gravitational properties observed in
Dark Matter.

As previously noted, BPs, LgPs and VLQs are all part of the fractal invariant set C5 of the Codex
5 Model. The differences between these entities (e.g., BP vs. LgP vs. VLQ) and the variations
in their distribution throughout the universe correlate to heterogeneities in the state space
described in the Codex 5 Model, and likewise, correlate to the uneven distribution of Dark
Matter and Dark Energy gravity in the universe. Thus, the Codex 5 geometry aligns with the
ISP‘s reference to Einstein‘s speculation that the ―phenomenon we call ‘gravity’ is merely a
manifestation of some more primitive notion of geometry—here the geometry of a dynamically
invariant subset of state space.”

Taking the insights of the Invariant Set Postulate, and seeing that the Codex 5 Model describes
invariant fractal subsets and geometry of state space (in the form of BPs, LgPs, etc.), another
view of gravity might emerge:

On a macro level (planets, asteroids, stars, etc.), gravity can be seen as ‗curvature‘ (i.e., has
characteristics that can be described using geometric terms) of the space-time fabric. On the
micro-level of BPs, LgPs and VLQs, gravity can be viewed as a fundamental, geometric aspect
of the state-space, as seen in variations in:
1) the distribution of BPs, LgPs and VLQs, and
2) the differences in Energy/Mass of these different entities.

Figure 8 (below) presents sample visualizations of these heterogeneities.

BP1
BP4b
BP1 BP4
b b
BP2 BP3 BP3
BP1
BP3
b BP1 BP1 BP4 BP4
BP1b
b b
BP1b BP4
BP4 BP4 b
BP3 BP
BP1b
BP4 BP2 LgPx 1b
BP1 BP4
b LgPx
BP2 BP1 BP
BP1b BP2 BP1 BP3 BP3 4b
b
BP3
BP2

BP1
BP2
BP3
b
BP2 VLQ
BP1 BP2 BP1 BP1 BP1b BP2 1b BP1

BP4 BP1 (0.3 BP4

b b
BP4
LgPx 5) BP
3b
b BP1
BP1b BP4 BP4 BP3b BP3 BP3b BP2 BP3
b b
BP3b BP3
LgPx
BP2 BP1 BP2 BP3
BP3b BP1b BP1b BP1b BP1b VL b

Oct BP3 BP3 BP

BP1b b 1b
BP4b
BP4b
3b BP4 XL12-
BP3b BP1b BP1b BP3
(0.2 1b
BP1 BP4
5) LgPx (0.05) BP1
b
BP4b BP3
BP4b BP4
BP4b

BP3b BP3b BP1 BP1 BP1

LgPx
BP4b

Phase 4: Next State

Phase 1: Initial State - unstructured

Figure 8: Phase 1, Initial State – 56 Basic Pairs vs.

30
 Phase 4, Next State – Mix of BPs, LgPs, VLQ, VLOct, XL-12
(Entities are Distributed in 3-D Space, not a 2-D plane)

Figures 1a, 1b and 8 indicate that the geometry of state-space changes from the beginning of the
Codex 5 Model‘s Dynamical System DC5 to the end of Phase 4 of DC5. Subsequent changes have
occurred as the universe has evolved through more and more phases; for example, as stars and
galaxies evolved in the universe over time, the Codex 5 Model postulates that Dark Matter (in
the form of LgPs and VLQs) has tended to cluster around galaxies, while Dark Energy has not
clustered and is spread more or less evenly throughout the universe. This difference could be
due to the fact that BPs (Dark Energy) have less E/M per unit than LgPs and VLQs (Dark
Matter).

Since each entity (BP, LgP, etc.) has Energy/Mass, if some other entity were to pass through the
―sphere‖ (represented by a 2-D circle above), then that entity would take a different path through
the respective geometries shown above. These different paths through different geometries
could be the what is commonly seen as the effects of gravity. In other words, gravity is indeed a
manifestation / result of heterogeneities in the geometry of state-space. See Figure 9 below.

Figure 9: Homogenous vs. Heterogeneous Geometries in State-Space

In Figure 9, some entity (e.g., a Basic Pair, an electron) is shown passing through the following:
1) Phase 1, Initial State, is shown as a fairly homogenous field of 56 BPs. Since the field is
homogenous (BPs distributed more or less evenly within the indicated subset of state
space), the path of the moving entity is fairly straight. Note that the term ―fairly‖ is
admittedly far from ideal. As mentioned above Section 4.0, further work in this area is in
progress.
Note that the BP distribution‘s relative homogeneity may align with the ISP‘s reference
to ―regions of relative stability (small local Lyapunov exponents).‖
2) Phase 4, Next State, is diagrammed as a field that has many heterogeneities, due to the
presence of many different types of entities (BPs, LgPs, etc.), each type with a different
level of Energy/Mass. These heterogeneities cause the path of the moving entity to vary

31
 more than when it passes though the more or less homogenous field that consists only of
BPs.
As a converse corollary to the note in Item 1 immediately above, these regions of higher
heterogeneity may align with the ISP‘s reference to ―regions of… relative instability
(large local Lyapunov exponents).‖

As noted above, the ISP states:

If the geometry of I is to be considered primitive, then the geometric properties of
the invariant set which lead to certain regions being relatively stable and other
regions unstable should be considered a generalization of the notion introduced by
Einstein that the phenomenon we call ‘gravity’ is merely a manifestation of some
more primitive notion of geometry—here the geometry of a dynamically invariant
subset of state space. As such, a challenge for the future will be to try to unify the
notions of pseudo-Riemannian geometry for space–time, and fractal geometry for
state space. This is a very different perspective on ‗quantum gravity‘ than
suggested by any existing approaches to the subject. [italics added]

The Codex 5 Model has some implications regarding ―unify[ing] the notions of pseudo-
Riemannian geometry for space–time, and fractal geometry for state space.‖

As noted elsewhere in this paper, the entities described in the Codex 5 Model exist in space-time
(i.e., are not just abstract or purely mathematical concepts, are not dependent or based on
imaginary numbers, do not require 6 or 8 or 10 dimensions, etc.). For example, the Model
proposes that BPs make up Dark Energy; that LgPs and VLQs make up Dark Matter; and that
VLOcts and XL-12s are key to the ultimate emergence of baryonic matter. Furthermore, they
play a key role in how the last Big Bang came about, and in the ongoing and future evolution of
the universe, including the eventual path to the next Big Bang.

Concurrently, the Model describes a comprehensive fractal geometry for state space, and a
dynamical system that affects the elements of this geometry.

8.2 Gravity and Dark Matter: Other Observations

Note also that observations have indicated that Dark Matter clusters around galaxies. For
example, Canada-France-Hawaii (CFH) Telescope analyses of Dark Matter clustering state:
1) Figure 2, Deflection of light rays crossing the universe, emitted by distant galaxies: ―The
dark matter is concentrated into a web-like distribution of filaments that intersect at dense
nodes where great clusters of galaxies are expected to form and become visible.‖
2) Figure 3, Image of the distant galaxies lensed by the dark matter of the universe: ―By
measuring the systematic distortion in the images of distant galaxies, one can "see" the
dark matter.‖
However, observations of Abell 520 (Mahdavi, et al., 2007) show areas where Dark Matter exists
but is not clustered around galaxies:
We consider possible mechanisms for separating the dark matter from the
galaxies. Two possibilities stand out: (a) the galaxies originally in the dark core
could have been ejected through a multiple-body interaction within the merging

32
 system; or (b) allowing for weakly self-interacting dark matter, the dark peak was
deposited as a result of dark matter collisions during the merger impact;
From the point of view of the Codex 5 Model, further work is ongoing in this area. The initial
working hypotheses are that Dark Matter, in the form of LgPs and VLQs:
1) Does in fact cluster around galaxies.
2) Can also exist apart from galaxies, such that, Dark Matter entities (LgPs and VLQs) can
and do interact amongst themselves, as indicated in the Codex 5 paper. This supports
Item b (above) from the Abell 520 paper, i.e., ―allowing for weakly self-interacting dark
matter.‖

9.0 Quantum Theory

Section 6 of Palmer‘s Invariant Set Postulate (ISP) paper addresses how the precepts of the ISP
impact Quantum Theory. The Codex 5 Model also has implications for Quantum Theory and
physics, but these will be addressed in a future paper.

For example, the ISP states:

In the context of the invariant set postulatey, the superposed quantum state
| A› + β | B› has no fundamental ontological significance; it indeed
describes a probability of ignorance, here ignorance of the intricate structure
of the invariant set based on a sample space of trajectory segments in some
neighbourhood on the invariant set. From this perspective, Schrödinger‘s cat
is alive or dead, and not both.

As in the ISP, the Codex 5 Model postulates invariant fractal sets and, in fact, aspects of physical
reality (ref the sets AN-NN and C5) that Quantum physics is ignorant of. For example, BPs,
LgPs et al. are never mentioned in Quantum physics. Given the properties of the Codex 5
Model‘s invariant set (BPs, LgPs, etc.), superposition has no meaning from the Model‘s point of
view; as with the ISP, the cat is not both alive and dead – it must be one or the other only.

10.0 Conclusions
In summary, this paper has presented a summary of the Codex 5 Model and shown its
correlations with Palmer‘s Invariant Set Postulate, specifically in areas such as:
 Fractal state-space geometry.
 Dynamical systems theory, with reference to and description of a dynamical system‘s
deterministic, causal effects on a state-space geometry.
 Existence of invariant set that describe physical reality.
 Description of certain types of asymptotic behavior.
 View that gravity is related to and/or a manifestation of or heterogeneities in the
geometry of state space.
 Quantum Theory is only briefly mentioned, but is the subject of ongoing work.

Exploration of the Codex 5 Model will continue, as it already provides potentially useful
correlations with WMAP observations and aligns with many aspects of the Invariant Set
Postulate. During the next few years, it is anticipated that:

33
 1) WMAP and other surveys will make further observations and attendant analyses, which
will be considered in any future papers.
2) As the ISP paper states, ―Future papers will attempt to provide the mathematical detail
required to develop this exploratory analysis into a rigorous physical theory.‖
As new data, studies, analyses and observations emerge, their relationships to the Codex 5 Model
will be considered.

References
Hoffecker, F.S. The Codex 5 Model: Describing the Origin & Nature of Dark Energy & Dark
Matter and Predicting the Distribution of Energy / Matter in the Universe. January 2009.

E. Komatsu, J. Dunkley, M. R. Nolta, C. L. Bennett, B. Gold, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, D. Larson,

M. Limon, L. Page, D. N. Spergel, M. Halpern, R. S. Hill, A. Kogut, S. S. Meyer, G. S. Tucker, J.
L. Weiland, E. Wollack, E. L. Wright. FIVE-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE
ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION.
(Submitted on 4 Mar 2008 (v1), last revised 17 Oct 2008 (this version, v2))

E. Komatsu, K. M. Smith, J. Dunkley, C. L. Bennett, B. Gold, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, D. Larson,

M. R. Nolta, L. Page, D. N. Spergel, M. Halpern, R. S. Hill, A. Kogut, M. Limon, S. S. Meyer, N.
Odegard, G. S. Tucker, J. L. Weiland, E. Wollack, and E. L. Wright. SEVEN-YEAR
WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP1) OBSERVATIONS:
COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION. Submitted to the Astrophysical Journal Supplement
Series (ref document version created January 25, 2010, per ―document properties‖).

Andisheh Mahdavi, Henk Hoekstra, Arif Babul, David D. Balam, Peter L. Capak, A DARK
CORE IN ABELL 520. Accepted June 18, 2007 for publication in The Astrophysical Journal.

Mandelbrot, B.B. The Fractal Geometry of Nature. W.H. Freeman and Company, 1982.

Palmer, T.N. The Invariant Set Postulate: A New Geometric Framework for the Foundations of
Quantum Theory and the Role Played by Gravity. 29 June, 2009.

L. Van Waerbeke (CITA), Y. Mellier (IAP, Obs Paris), T. Erben (MPA), J.C. Cuillandre (CFHT),
F. Bernardeau (CEA Saclay), R. Maoli (IAP), E. Bertin (IAP, Obs Paris), H.J. Mc Cracken
(LAS), O. Le Fevre (LAS), B. Fort (IAP), M. Dantel-Fort (Obs Paris), B. Jain (JHU), P.
Schneider (MPA). Detection of correlated galaxy ellipticities on CFHT data: first evidence for
gravitational lensing by large-scale structures. (Submitted on 27 Feb 2000 (v1), last revised 13
Apr 2000 (this version, v2).) [See also Canada-France-Hawaii (CFH) Telescope, ref
http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/News/Lensing/, Figures 2, 3, 4.]

34