German translation see: 

   What Does The Name Of The Almighty God ("YHWH" or "JHWH")
   Mean in Epistemoloy And Propositional Calculus?

Excerpt of P
atent Description:

"Method for the Generation of Self-Organizing Processes for Autonomous Mechanisms and Organisms"

US     US 6172941 (filing date Dec. 16, 1999)
EP     EP 01145406 A1 (filing date Dec. 03,1999)

Author: Erich Bieramperl, 4040 Linz, Austria


For a better overall understanding, see the most important points, principles and findings from the description "Method for the Generation of Self-Organizing Processes for Autonomous Mechanisms and Organisms"

see Pat. US 6172941:

1) The "primary act" of every autonomous organism (including autonomous self-organizing
    robots) is to "explore" their surroundings in order to ascertain whether temporal-spatial 

    variation exists between its own physical state and that of its surroundings. In order to do 

    this, a multiplicity of sensors or receptors 135a, b...,n are necessary.

2) Only when deviation exists, are the current STQ elapse times Tw(1,2...n) or Td(1,2...n)
   137a,b,...,n     derived. The time counting frequency of their measurement  depends on

   currently acquired STQ(v)- quanta Tv(1,2,3....n) 136a,b,c,.....n,  which represent para-

   meters for the temporal-spatial variations vm(1,2 ...n) between sensors 135a,b,....n and

   external signal sources. These deviations are identical to the "relative speeds" vm(1,2,...n).  

   Note:  vm(1,2,...,n) are always acquired by means of an invariant time counting frequency

   f, respectively, at an absolute time base.

3) The current STQ elapse times Tw(1,2..n) or Td(1,2..n) flow into so-called "information pots"

    138 (or time data memories) and form STQ time data patterns Tw'(1,2....n) or Td'(1,2...n),

    which serve as reference patterns. If the organism finds sub-sequences of these Tw' or Td'

    patterns which in some combination are covariant with a currently recorded Tw or Td -

    pattern, then the organism interprets these combinations of sub-sequences as an "iso-

    morphous pattern" significant for defining the "actually perceived event-pattern" (i.e. what

    actually is). In this way, the present event (represented by temporal or spatial deviations

    between sensors and external signal sources) is "recognized".

4) An organism is equipped with "actuators" that influence a self-referential change - that is
    concurrently being recognized - in an organism's temporal-spatial condition (e.g. its own

    motion) in such a manner, that the change is highly    covariant with a prior recorded

    pattern of change of a temporal-spatial condition (it emulates the prior pattern). Because

    the shortest and most efficient time patterns have a tendency to be of high priority while

    new Tw or Td sequences are being recorded in the memory, organisms continuously try to

    optimize changes in temporal-spatial conditions. Both processes result exclusively from

    comparison of quantized STQ elapse times and from recognition of isomorphous time data

    patterns (see also Fig. 5), and are termed "auto-emulation" and  "auto-optimization"; or,

    equivalently, "autocovariance behaviour".

5) An essential consequence of these considerations is that a teleological tendency inheres in
    generates the ability for self-organisation. As seen from Fig. 10, both "time" and "velocity"
    unequivocally depend on the existence of sensors for their perception. Actually, all time
    data and information flow from the "present" (the origin of the recording) into the "past" (the
    verifiable existence). Indeed, time and velocity are not "sensed" as a continuum, but in the

    form of quanta. In order to feel both physical quantities as a continuum, an enormous

    capability for auto-adaptation and auto-emulation is required of an organism. It can be said

    that the above fundamental principles are valid not only for robotics and biological units,

    but also for molecular atomic and subatomic structures. Also, these have to be "time

    sensing organisms" otherwise they can have no basis for existence. Consequently: time,

    space -  every physical quantity – only sensorial together with distinct sensitivity zones;

    and these form the basis for local subjective time sensing together with a general universal

    tendency for auto-adaptation, auto-optimisation, and auto-emulation. This is a fundamental

    teleological principle.



    1) The herein described invented method is universally applicable and describes the ultimate
     achievable mechanisms and organisms.

2) Discrete time quantization methods, according to which the received signal is scanned and
    digitized at predetermined points in time, prove themselves to be inadequate in the generation
   of highly efficient autonomous self-organisation processes.

3) In redundancy-free autonomous self-organizing systems, there are no "points in time" and

    there is no determinism. In these systems, STQ elapse times are quantized which are

    derived from the temporal/spatial changes in physical conditions between sensors and

    external sources.

4) Each such system has its own time counting pulses and produces its own time. The time
    counting frequency for the quantization of elapse times is continuously adapted in an auto-
    adaptive manner according to the relative velocity vm with which changes in condition occur.

    The time recording has in each case a quantum nature; i.e. it has the properties of a

    "discrete counting", no matter whether the recording is analogue or digital. Moreover, the

    time recording is subjective and passive; i.e. the time quanta are "sensed" and not

    "objectively measured" as in the conventional physical understanding.

5) In order to be able to quantize elapse times in autonomous self-organising systems, the
    individual receptors or sensors must have distinctive grades of perception zones (or threshold

6) In order to explain precisely the difference between "synchronism" (in the conventional
    understanding) and "auto-adaptation", we define the following:

   a) parallel synchronism (i.e. "synchronism"): this occurs when temporal changes of physical
      conditions of different systems are covariant at the same time.
   b) autonomous adaptation (i.e. "auto-adaptation"): this occurs when temporal changes of the
       physical state of a particular system are covariant at different times.

7) In all redundancy-free autonomous systems the capability for self-organisation increases with
    the quantity of elapse time parameters available for autonomous adaptation and for optimi-

    zation process, as well as with the number and variety of sensors or receptors.

8) With synchronism (definition 6a above), the number of quantized elapse time parameters
    vanishes; in 3b this number is a maximum (and point 7 above is valid! ). Therefore one can
    conclude that there is an inherent tendency in all autonomous systems of the type discussed
    herein, towards continuous auto-adaptation, auto-optimization and auto-emulation. This is
    similar to the biological term "vitality".

9) In autonomous self-organizing systems,  there is no "timing" (i.e. temporal motion coordina-

    tion) without the comparison of currently acquired elapse time patterns with previously

    recorded elapse time patterns. Briefly stated, there is no "timing" without accompanying

    "time keeping".

10) Auto-adaptation theorem of Erich Bieramperl :

     Every current non-chaotic change (A) in condition of an autonomous system (X)  with the
     variable dynamic trajectory vm(1,2,3....n) underlies a currently acquired sequence of elapse
     times TW(1,2,3 ...n) as well as a covariant sequence of elapse times TW'(1,2,3 ...n) from a
     temporal displaced condition change (A') or from a combination of distinct temporal displaced
     condition changes (A1 ') (A2 ')...( An'), whereupon (A) with (A') or (A) with (A1') (A2') ....(An')

     are approximately isomorphous.

     Hence: TW = vm adaptively acquired current STQ(i) or STQ(d) elapse times Tw or Td
               TW' = vm adaptively acquired covariant STQ(i) or STQ(d) elapse times Tw' or Td'
     Other consequences in the scientific domain are the following:

11) Each preselection of a certain time for an intended action,  a so-called  "act of free will" by an
     autonomous organism, results from continued autonomous adaptation of the described type,
     and is therefore not realizable in a deterministic manner.

12) From the ability of an autonomous system to find previously acquired elapse time patterns
      matching with currently acquired elapse time patterns, and from trying to emulate these, not
      only is auto-adaptation, auto-optimization, self-organisation and recognition of physical
      surroundings and self-motion made possible, but ultimately also motion co-ordination

      (timing), intelligent behaviour and conscious action are produced.

13) Auto-adaptive, auto-optimizing and self-organizing processes of the described type have
      universal validity not only in autonomous mechanistic systems, robots, automatic machines
      biological organisms, but also in molecular and atomic structures. All autonomous self-
      organizing systems contain information in form of time data.

      The following results from the property that in such systems, "time" is "subjectively
      sensed" and not "objectively measured ": 

14) In the universe, all time dependent physical values are "subjectively sensed". If there is no
     adequate sensorium for time and velocity, then "time" cannot exist objectively. Example: in
     "black holes", no "time" exists because there is no sensorium for it.
     In this case, the atomic and subatomic sensorium is quasi "dead". Each change of physical
     condition, which does not underly an auto-adaptive process, continues increasingly

     chaotically; whereupon it follows that the described tendency for auto-adaptation in the

     universe counteracts the tendency towards entropy and chaos.

15) If vm is too high and STQ(v) is too short to be measured (or "sensed"), then neither an auto-
     adaptation nor any self-organization process results (because no elapse times are derivable).
     Therefore, for example, the velocity c of propagation of light is an "ultimate value", because

     it implies the shortest STQ(v) quantum that can be "perceived" by atomic structures.

16) If there is absolute physical invariance between the sensorium of autonomous systems and
     their surroundings, then also no STQ quanta are derivable. This is the reason why, for

     example, absolute zero ( 273,15°C) is an ultimate physical quantity. In this case, the

     atomic and subatomic sensorium is not capable of recognizing a lower temperature

     because of lack of STQ quanta,  and no auto-adaptation process can take place.

17) As mentioned before, atomic and subatomic structures also display sensory and time
     quantization properties. Their description from the view of quantum theory is inadequate. If
     there is no measurement or observation of an event, then exists also neither "time" nor
     velocity" (S.13). Quantum phenomena appearing in the known two slit experiment or in the
     SCULLY experiment (quantum indeterminism) are explicable in this way.

18) The electromagnetic force, gravitation, the strong and weak interaction (nuclear force), so-
     called "autocatalysis" (KAUFFMAN), "synergetic effects" (HAKEN), or other phenomena are
     produced by the existence of time quantization sensorium, auto-adaptation and auto-

     emulation. These features can be regarded as the inherent teleological principle of the

     universe (S. 8).

19) The ability to perceive time and velocity as a continuum, and not as an endless series of
      sensed elapse times, is likewise produced from continued auto-adaptation and self-
      organization processes. The higher the "intelligence" of an autonomous system as a result

      of such processes, the more distinctive its subjective time perception and its ability to


         Consequences for metamathematics and propositional calculus are:


1) Because there are no deterministic point of times, the status of a system can neither be
    ascertained to be at a certain "point in time", nor "points in time" can be determined for a

    future status. There is nowhere any type of determinism. Since the classical physics as

    well as the quantum theory are based on the postulate that a system is in a certain status

    at a certain "point in time" (in the first case as points of phase space, and in the other

    case as probability distributions in phase space), neither theory can be completely

    consistent (see also THOMAS BREUER / 1997) [1].


2) Regarding WIGNER (1961)[2], an absolutely universally valid theory would have to be

    capable of describing the origin of human consciousness. The auto-adaptation theory

    described herein could be capable of this; the quantum theory cannot. (Wigner postulated

    that complex quantum mechanics delivers a usable description of the physical reality

    only when there is no "subjective sensing". The author holds the view that subjective

    sensing also exists in atomic and subatomic structures).


3)  Sequences of elapse times like TW and TW' are definable as strings of an axiomatic formal
     system; albeit this system is a "time domain system" and not an arithmetic systems in the
     usual sense of the classic number theory. Indeed, said formal system shows at least one
     axiom and derives from it continuous strings of numbers through the application of a certain
     algorithm. Regarding TURING, an axiomatic number theoretical system can be produced

     also by a mechanical procedure, which produces "formulas and algorithms".For this

     reason, the known logic theorems of GOEDEL, TARSKI or HENKIN are absolutely

     applicable on such a model. GOEDEL`s incompleteness theorem [3] shows that each

     extensive number theoretical model includes consistent formulations which cannot be

     proven with the rules of the model, and which therefore are undecidable. This is valid also

     to metatheoretical models and to meta-metatheoretical models etc. For example, a self- 

     referential metatheoretical sentence like the type of the Goedel formulation <I am provable>

     is neither provable nor disprovable. A decision procedure for this proposition leads to an

     infinite regress. TARSKI showed that a decision procedure for number theoretical "truth"[4]

     is also impossible, and leads to an infinite regress. Thus, a self-referential sentence of
     the type <I am provable> is admittedly "true", but not "provable". It follows, that "provability"

     is a weaker notion than "truth". HENKIN showed that there are sentences, that assert their

     own provability and  "producibility" in a specific number theoretical model and which are

     invariable "true"[5]. A self-referential sentence based on Henkins theorem would be: <It

     exists a number theoretical model in which I am provable>. Strings of quantized elapse

     times like TW and TW' approach the domain of validity of HENKIN`s theorem. Applying

     Henkins logic, these strings assert: <I will be produced to proved>. TW and TW's are

     therefore strings or sentences that are produced in a specific formal model, which induces

     its own decision procedure on truth, consistence, completeness and provability through

     continued self-generation (see also description to Fig.10).
     In contrast to self-referential strings or sentences of the Gödel or Henkin type, strings of

     elapse times are never asserted to be "true", "consistent", "complete" or "provable" to a

     certain "point in time", because within the "number theoretical model" in which they are

     produced, no "points of time" exist. This model also prohibits superior semantics or

     metatheories or meta-metatheories. It is plainly obvious that each formal system, each

     metatheory, each meta-metatheory and each semantics, in which axioms, strings or

     sentences of any type are formulated, is the result of continued autonomous adaptation

     (which is based on the quantization of elapse times) and therefore a derivation of the model

     described in this work.

4)  The cognition, that a specific formal system exists asserting absolute universal validity, from
     which everything has been produced and to whom all other systems have to be subordinated,

     is not new. Already in early antiquity, many years before PLATO and ARISTOTLE, the

     Hebrew Scriptures (2. Moses 3: 14) let this <source of all logic> say from itself: "JHWH"

     (spoken: Jahwe or Jehovah), that is about: "I shall be proved"[6]. This sentence asserts its

     own decision procedure on provability, truth, completeness  and consistence; through a

     specific formal system, that it "induces to be".

5) There is no "cognition" without "recognition".


[1]  Thomas BREUER (1997) "Quantenmechanik: Ein Fall für Goedel" ISBN 3-8274-0191-7
[2]  Eugene WIGNER (1961) "Remarks on the Mind-Body-Question",
      see also: Roger Penrose:
"The Emperor`s New Mind"/    ISBN 0-19-286198-0 (page 381)
[3]  Kurt Goedel
"On Formally Undecidable Propositions in Principia Mathematica and Related
      Systems I. (1931),

      see also: Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach" (pg. 17) ISBN 0-394-74502-7   
[4]  Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach"
(page 579, 580: "Tarski`s Theorem")
[5]  Douglas HOFSTADTER "Goedel, Escher, Bach"
(page 541: "Henkins Sentences")
[6]  See WIKIPEDIA  (note: the engl. JHWH-web-site became removed by some nerds in 2007.
      So the link to this site has been deleted too.)  


Important notes:


The Tetragrammaton „YHWH” (or “JHWH”) originates from a Hebrew verb that means “to

become”. It is to be understood in a CAUSATIVE manner, and enunciates an imperfect

aspect. This verb unequivocally has a FUTURISTIC connotion.


Therefore, self-referenced assertions like “I shall be proved” or “I induce it to be” or “I

cause it to become” bases on the same logic in propositional calculus. The same applies

to a non-selfreferenced assertion like “He causes it to become”. They all are “HENKIN”-



By the way, an assertion in the form of “I am” or “I am that I am” or “I am who I am” (e.g.

see King James Bible or Luther-Bible) is neither a Goedel- nor a Henkin-sentence. It is a

tautology. It is very unlikely - even from a purely scientific point of view - that Jesus Christ

would have said: "Father, glorify your name" (John 12:28) when this refers only to such a

simple tautology.


Furthermore, the following facts result from this statement:


-    "YHWH" (or “JHWH”) as creator of all beings is NOT bound to the existence of "time".

       He/ she/ it also exists as an exclusive and mere mathematical/ logical condition. So also

       "outside" and beyond a so-called "big bang". (Such a primitive state, in which only the

        laws of mathematics and logic exist, is also referred to by physicists as the "ground

        state of the universe”).

      This answers the well-known philosophical question: "Why is there anything at all?” btw

       “Why is there something rather than nothing?” Because the answer is: "YHWH" (or

       “JHWH”) also exists in "nothing", i. e. as a mere mathematical / logical condition.

       Since this condition does not stand alone, but brings something into existence through

        its very existence, there is no "nothingness" either.


-      The existence of such a creative principle (strictly speaking: "being" and principle in

        unity) necessarily implies two contrary views:


  A = The perspective of "YHWH" (or “JHWH”) itself, which results from the continued activity.

         It is "timeless"; i.e. not tied to any time when it takes place.


  B = The perspective of any being "created" by this activity, which at a time T is considering

         that created. This view requires the existence of "time", is subordinate to view A, and

         depends on "YHWH" (or "YHWH").


Let`s summarize:


         Every type of view, approach or perspective of type B implies undecidable formulations

         according to Gödel and Tarski. It leads to decision procedures, which end in an infinite

         regress. It is therefore subordinate to the type A.


         Finally, it should also be noted that according to the view, approach or perspective of

         the type B nothing could have come into existence. The Henkin logic A ("YHWH" or

        “JHWH”) works continuously to overcome the logical bounds set by B.


            e-mail bitte an: