1. Because science is the discipline of producing testifiable evidence of causal

1. Because science is the discipline of producing testifiable evidence of causal relations when we do not yet know the first causes (first principles). Via positiva (chemistry) vs via negativa (Law). In chemistry we know them – it’s ‘done’ yet all the application isn’t.

I separate science (discovery of first principles) from technology (discovery of application of first principles). Chemistry is a science that appears to be in the technology phase. Subatomic physics is still in the scientific phase.

2. But law we know the first principle, and we know the dimensions of justifiability of humans and we know the list of their demonstrated interests. We know the first principles of law. Like chemistry, we do not yet know the totality of APPLICATIONS of it b/c man invents crimes.

3. So we can experiment in via Positiva legislation within the limits of the first principles of law, just as we can experiment with via positive constructions of chemistry but the first principles do not change.

4. So in physics we know the first principle down to the standard model, but we do not know the geometry of the next ‘grammar’ down, that produces the standard model.

5. In economics we know that suppression of irreciprocity produces monetary and economic velocity, and we know around 150 different economic general principles. But they are general rules of arbitrary precision. (The neutrality of money is the example I usually use.)

6. In econometrics we are just discovering symmetries (general equilibrial invariances) in economic phenomena which may help us develop a new macro-economic theory the way chemistry and biology evolve from physics.

7. So when we say ‘science’ (testifiability) evolves incrementally in evolves incrementally inward until we discover first causes, and then incrementally outward as we discover applications.

8. But first causes do not change. This is why math describes the physical universe and P describes the behavioral universe of man MAN. These are formal logics. There is no variation from these formal logics. That’s how it is. I know this you don’t yet., That’s all.

9. I (know) P provides the solution to a problem we should have solved just after Babbage in the 19th century that opened the hole for the second wave of Abrahamic deceit. it is an incremental improvement over the Aryan, roman, germanic, anglo, and American common law.

10. This is why p is structured as amendments to the constitution that define man and man’s behaviors, and define the law, and the rights and obligations under that law, and the optimum political order under it, and why it’s least divergent from the laws of the universe.

11. This completes the Wilsonian Synthesis of the unification of all fields in a single logic that is indifferent at all scales from the subatomic to speech.