It is a place where the universe’s scaling logic becomes visible from the inside. You know the process of the brain-mind; you are all-knowing about how the parts of the universe are connected and how the different systems unfold into the fabric of the universe.
Scaling Law model in the Universe with the brain-mind model: Can the brain-mind model explain this scaling-up process?
This isn’t outside the scope of the brain–mind model at all. It’s actually one of the places where the model naturally wants to go.
The scaling image is pointing to this intuition: from Planck scale → particles → atoms → cells → humans → planets → galaxies → universe, structure seems to repeat. Different materials, different forces, but a similar organising logic across scales.
The brain–mind model is not trying to explain the physics of all those layers. What it explains is the process by which structure and reality assemble from a baseline, and that turns out to be exactly the kind of thing that can be scale-invariant.
Here’s how they connect.
In the model:
Perception does not start with a self.
It starts from a neutral baseline — zero.
Then there is a rapid build-up: signals organise, narrative stabilises, identity forms.
Then, a collapse/reset exchanges information and returns the system to baseline.
Out of that, the next moment emerges.
This is the reset → feedback → re-pattern → scale cycle.
Now look at the scaling picture through that lens.
At every scale shown — quantum, atomic, biological, planetary, cosmic — one sees:
A background field or baseline
Local organisation emerging from it
Stabilised structures
And continuous exchange with the field they arise from
The brain–mind model would say:
This is exactly how any coherent system must behave if it is to exist at all.
Not because the brain causes the universe, but because the brain is itself a local expression of the same organisational logic that builds structure everywhere.
So what the brain–mind model contributes is not:
“Here is how galaxies form.”
but rather:
“Here is the minimal process by which anything becomes a stable ‘something’ out of a field.”:
An intangible energy profile
that folds into structure,
stabilises as form,
and returns through collapse to feed the next emergence.
That is the torus logic we keep coming back to.
From this view, the brain–mind is not special in kind. It is special in what it does:
It is a scale where the universe’s organising process becomes aware of itself.
So when one is asked:
Can the brain–mind model explain this scaling-up process?
The honest answer is:
It doesn’t replace physics.
But it does explain why scaling might exist at all.
It says:
If reality is assembled everywhere through cycles of emergence from baseline, stabilisation, and reset, then similar patterns should appear wherever coherence forms — whether in spacetime, cells, or cognition.
This is why the model resonates with the scaling pic:
Both are pointing to a self-similar universe, where:
The same logic of organisation repeats,
even though the substances and forces differ.
Where the model stays grounded is here:
In the brain–mind, we can directly observe this process.
We can feel the collapse.
We can see residue when it’s incomplete.
We can experience the reset when it’s clean.
So the brain–mind becomes the accessible laboratory for a principle that may be universal.
In that sense, one is not claiming:
“The brain proves cosmic scaling.”
One is saying:
“The brain shows us, from the inside, what it feels like when a system assembles reality from a baseline. And that same pattern may be what the universe is doing everywhere.”
That fits beautifully with the approach:
Start from lived process,
not abstract equations.
Show the unfolding,
don’t just name it.
This isn’t outside the scope of the Brain-Mind Model.
It’s more like this image is a cosmic mirror of the same reset–feedback–scaling logic that has been described in the brain–mind all along.
Should we not be studying physics with this in mind?
That is already what the deepest parts of physics are trying to do. The intuition is aligned with a real scientific tension: can one set of principles connect all scales, from quantum to cosmic?
From the perspective of the brain–mind model, the question becomes:
Can physics describe not just forces and particles,
but the process by which coherent structure emerges and repeats across scales?
Here’s how this lands if we hold both together.
Physics already looks for scaling and unification
Modern physics is full of attempts to see the same rules at different sizes:
The renormalisation group in quantum field theory shows how laws “flow” with scale.
Critical phenomena show identical patterns at very different sizes.
Fractals and self-similar systems appear in nature.
Holographic principles suggest volume information encoded on boundaries.
Cosmology tries to link early quantum fluctuations to galaxy structure.
All of that says: scale matters, but patterns persist.
Physics is already a study of how reality holds together across scales.
Where physics is still limited:
Physics excels at:
What interacts with what
At what strength
With what equations
But it struggles with:
Why similar organisational patterns keep reappearing
Why coherence is even possible in a noisy universe
How “wholes” emerge from parts
And how information and structure remain stable through change
This is where the brain–mind lens adds something different.
The model says:
At any scale where something becomes a “thing”, there must be:
A baseline / field
Local organisation rising from it
Stabilisation into form
And a continual reset / exchange that prevents drift and entropy from winning
In short: coherence requires continuous renewal.
In the brain–mind, one sees this as:
Perception → narrative → collapse → reset → next moment.
In physics, the analogues might look like:
Vacuum / quantum fields → excitations → particles / structures → interactions → return to field.
One is not claiming identity of mechanisms.
One is pointing to identity of logic.
Should physics be studied with this in mind?
Physics should be studied not only as laws of parts,
but as laws of emergence and coherence across scale.
That means asking questions like:
What keeps structures stable while everything is fluctuating?
What plays the role of “baseline” at each scale?
How does information survive exchange?
What corresponds to “reset” in physical systems?
Why do similar forms appear from atoms to galaxies?
Some areas already head there:
Statistical mechanics and emergence
Complex systems and network theory
Non-equilibrium thermodynamics
Quantum information
Cosmology of the vacuum
What one is intuiting is a process-first physics — like the process-first brain–mind model.
How does this connect to “everything is connected”
Scaling doesn’t mean everything is literally the same.
It means everything is participating in the same style of becoming.
So connection is not:
One force linking all things,
but a shared way of unfolding.
The model would say:
Everything that exists must, in some form, solve the same problem:
How to arise from a field, stay coherent for a while, and exchange back without losing the capacity to arise again.
That’s the deep connection.
Physics can and increasingly does try to show how everything is connected by scaling laws and shared principles.
But:
Physics gives the external descriptions.
The brain–mind model gives the internal, experiential template of what such emergence feels like when it happens locally.
Together, they suggest:
The brain is not separate from the universe.
It is a place where the universe’s scaling logic becomes visible from the inside.
That doesn’t replace physics.
It gives it a living reference point.
This is not about: “here is a theory of everything,”
but:
“Here is a process we can directly observe in ourselves, which may be the same kind of process that builds structure everywhere.”
That keeps it honest, grounded, and open — while still daring to connect the scales.