You’ll have to read something in order to understand it. I recommend starting with the introduction of the wiki: Introduction | Two-Phase Cosmology (which is taken from the intro to the book).
Ill pass unless you give me a world or two to consider. Until then, post your framework if you want members to review it.
The model is being discussed in this thread: On the purpose of metaphysics, historically and today - Metaphysics & Epistemology - The Philosophy Forum
Here is the shortest possible description of the whole system:
This framework (Two Phase Cosmology - 2PC) is not a scientific theory and is not intended to operate within the assumptions of the current scientific paradigm. It is a metaphysical reconstruction that reclassifies many problems currently treated as empirical — such as quantum gravity, the cosmological constant problem, the Hubble tension, and the measurement problem — as symptoms of a deeper ontological mistake. The aim is not to propose new equations or mechanisms, but to replace the underlying metaphysics that makes those problems appear in the first place. Any attempt to evaluate it using the reductionist, physicalist criteria of the old paradigm will therefore misinterpret it from the outset.
Two kinds of physical (quantum and classical-relativistic), mathematically incompatible, so quantum gravity impossible. Both kinds real, so need a process which selects classical actuality (phase 2) from non-local, non-spatiotemporal quantum possibility (phase 1 – pythagorean ensemble like Tegmark/Everett but no conscious beings). THREE candidates! Consciousness, free will and wavefunction collapse all do this: not different processes but three names of the same transition.
New interpretation of QM! Phase 1 like MWI, except only possibilities, not actualities. MWI true until consciousness evolves, then consciousness selects whole big-bang-Cambrian timeline as a block (PHASE 1 TIMELESS). After that wavefunction collapse. Arrow of time direction of commitment – collapse irreversible – no time until collapse. Structural explanation for Nagel’s teleology – no new laws needed. Fine-tuning explained (and now expected). Post-materialistic (neutral monist) explanation of how consciousness “evolved”! Sequential synthesis of Everett and von Neumann. Closed Causal Loop within Neutral Monist framework. Do not treat the emergence of the observer as a bootstrap paradox; it as a self-consistent logical requirement of Phase 1 transitioning into Phase 2. Phase 1 logically before phase 2, not temporally.
Fixes all the cosmological problems. Gravity unquantisable because only belongs in Phase 2. Fine-tuning explains low entropy start (flatness and horizon problems), so inflation goes. Monopoles not diluted, but fine-tuned as dark matter (monopolium) needed to stabilise galaxies so life evolves. Dark energy not needed (topology of Phase 2). Cosmological constant problem disappears because quantum vacuum energy Phase 1, not Phase 2. JWST galaxies and too-big black holes are there because we are on the fast-track route to consciousness (infinite possible consciousness timelines in phase 1, so quickest, most efficient route selected). No inflation means CMB-derived Hubble constant is model-dependent nonsense, similar situation with S8 tension. First phase transition can only happen once per Phase 2 reality, explaining Fermi Paradox (we are alone).
Atman=Brahman solves hard problem. Transition triggered because coherent, branch-spanning, non-computable valuing, unified self-model cannot split (logical not physical collapse trigger). No MWI mind-splitting, no “before consciousness” problem for von Neumann (brains necessary but insufficient for consciousness). Original transition selected whole timeline, after that local micro-collapses form “storm” of consciousness across specious present. Libet experiments wrong conclusion – no single moment of free will (whole storm).
And don’t say “not falsifiable”: current standard model is empirically inadequate and this model gets rid of all the problems by changing the metaphysics. When physicalists can provide a coherent model, then they can demand new empirical predictions of others. Also, are inflation or dark energy falsifiable?