The Brain, A Decoded Enigma (2024)

Copyright (C) 2004 by Dorin T. Moisa

Dorin T. MOISA

Warning

This book contains a symbolic model associated to the basic hardwarefunction of the brain.

A symbolic model is a model based on logic only. So, this book is notrecommended to individuals who has the tendency to understand theexternal reality based on imagination.

The book can be understand by persons between 12 and 20 years old whohave special abilities in the field of positive sciences.

Also, the book is recommended to persons who already work in the fieldof positive sciences (mathematicians, phisicists, engineers and so on).

CONTENT

Introduction
Abstract
Fundamental Terms (keywords)
Definitions associated with the basic terms
The basic hardware elements
Some principial problems
How M-ZM models are build
The human brain (introduction)
The human brain versus animal brain
Human brain: evolution or external intervention
Basic design deficiencies of the human brain
The structure of the brain, the PSM-model
The structure of the brain: functional facilities and types of models
Paranormal phenomena
The normal human brain
The abstract of the functional facilities of the brain
The personality (human only)
The conciousness
Abstract: model dictionary

Example, Tests, Aplications (ETAs)
ETA 1: The model
ETA 2: Truth, reality, communication
ETA 3: Fundamental problems associated to scientific knowledge
ETA 4: General communication language (GCL), dictionary of terms
ETA 5: NULL model
ETA 6: Time
ETA 7: Music
ETA 8: Cinematography
ETA 9: The fundamentalisms of the world we live in
ETA 10: Terrorism
ETA 11: Problems of the human brain evolution
ETA 12: Rattlesnake
ETA 13: The main psychiatric illnesses: paranoia and schizophrenia
ETA 14: Suicide
ETA 15: Normality tests
ETA 16: Dreams
ETA 17: The history of the evolution of the human species, based on MDT
ETA 18: The organization of the human society
ETA 19: The schizophrenic-paranoiac complex (XSPC)
ETA 20: Induced paranoia (XIP) and paranoiac-schizophrenic complex
(XPSC)
ETA 21: Disharmonies of the functions of the brain
ETA 22: Direct demonstration of the function to build image models
ETA 23: Some basic parameters of the brain for measuring the
performances
ETA 24: Animals
ETA 25: Very complicated operations on image models (walk, jumps,
climbing trees) of humans
ETA 26: The brain evolves under our eyes
ETA 27: Principial negative effects associated with the functioning of
the brain
ETA 28: Free-masonry
ETA 29: Problems associated with movie-making
ETA 30: Optical perspective and the quality of construction of image
models
ETA 31: Something agressivity may fight XS1-type schizophrenia
ETA 32: Sex
ETA 33: The internal body
ETA 34: The european spirit
End notes
Bibliography

Introduction

This book contains my original theory, called MDT (Modeling Devices
Theory) on the basic hardware function of the brain (human or animal).

As any scientific theory, it is a symbolic model. Any symbolic model isbased on a limited number of basic terms and a limited number of basicrelations between the basic terms.

For the basic terms and only for them, there are accepted descriptivedefinitions. All the others terms are generated by the model, togetherwith their normal definitions. These definitions are generated by themodel by logical and mathematical procedures.

These are the basic characteristics of any scientific theory and so, Ifollow the procedures described above, to make a theory on the basichardware functions of the brain.

This theory is in a total opposition with all the actual sciencesassociated with the functions of the brain. The present sciences,associated with the functions of the brain, are not based on a singlefundamental model. In this way, as my theory will be accepted, all whatit was already written in the actual sciences associated with thefunctions of the brain, have to be re-written or forgotten.

This attempt of total revolution is necessary because the actualsciences on the brain don't use normal definitions of the terms; thereare only descriptions associated with them. Because the definitions ofthe terms are not generated by a single fundamental model, the logicalcorelation between them is not possible. So, the actual sciencesassociated with the brain cannot evolve to become positive scienceanymore.

In psychology, for instance, about any scientist has his/her own listof descriptive definition associated with the terms used by him/her. Inthis way, it is not possible to make a logical structure to integrateall the terms used in that field. So, the psychology, for instance, isnot a positive science.

Another example:Let's consider a classical positive science, as Newton's Mechanics is.In this symbolic model, all terms have exactly the same definition forall the scientists. These definition are not changed since 340 yearsago when they were generated by the symbolic model of Mechanics. Forinstance, the term "speed" is defined as v=s/t. That is, "speed" meansthat the "space" is divided by "time". This definition is a normaldefinition generated by the symbolic model of Mechanics not adescriptive definition.

Let's suppose now that a symbolic model associated with the basichardware function of the brain is already created or it will becreated. The first consequence is that all the terms used inassociation with the functions of the brain will be generated by themodel by logical and mathematical procedures, together with theirnormal definitions. There is no reason to suppose that any descriptivedefinition which is already used in the present sciences of the brainwill be compatible with the definitions generated by that symbolicmodel.

So, all what is already created in the present sciences associated withthe brain has to be re-written or forgotten.

Regardless of the fact that MDT theory will be accepted or not, asymbolic model which covers the basic hardware function of the brainwill produce this total revolution in all the sciences associated withthe brain, including psychology, psychiatry, gnoseology, epistemology,many parts of social sciences and so on.

Let's consider that a symbolic model to cover the basic functions ofthe brain is created and is already accepted. The persons who alreadywork in these fields have to re-start everything about from zero. Theiropposition will be enormous and I have no illusion in this direction.

This theory was created about 10 years ago. Based on my personalexperience, the theory is easily understood by persons with specialorientation on positive sciences, including children's over 12 yearsold. Also, the persons who already work with symbolic models(mathematicians, physicists, engineers and so on) have a high capacityto understand it.

Let's see what MDT offers.

First of all, MDT treats the brain as a device which processes theinformation. In this way, MDT has no direct connection with themedicine.

MDT is concerning only with the basic functions associated withinformation processing and it is not interested by problems as "whatpart of the brain is doing something" or "how a function isimplemented". MDT is a theory associated with the processing of theinformation and so it has no direct interference with the hardwareimplementation of the physical brain.

As a symbolic model associated with the basic function of the brain,it generates precise definition, based on logic, of all the terms usedin association with the basic hardware functions of the brain. In thisway, all the terms are logical correlated between them.

Examples: MDT generates normal definitions for: knowledge,consciousness, to imagine, to think, intelligence, emotion, to beirritate, love, happiness and many others. E.g. the "consciousness" isthe facility of a brain to make and operate a model which contains thebeing itself as an element. MDT defines, than, 6 different types ofconsciousness which are, of course, defined in the same precise way.Even more, based on MDT, it is possible to design a logical structureto implement the function called "consciousness".

MDT explains the basic functions of the brain up to the level to make alogical design to synthesize all the brain's functions (human oranimal). Of course, a technological implementation of that functions isnot possible now because the computers, for example, have yet a verylow power to process the information and this situation will last, Ithink, at least in the next 25 years.

In fact, the brain is treated by MDT as a technological product. So,there are defined the main design goals and also, the main deficiencies(by design or given by technological implementation).

There is analyzed the problem if, by evolution, it is possible or notto evolve from animal brain to human brain.

There are analyzed the design and technological problems, including thefunctional illnesses of the brains.

The theory treats also the paranormal phenomenon and suggest somemethods to develop such activities.

The Application section (ETAs) contains also many items as a history ofthe evolution of the brain, the evaluation of the problems ofpsychological tests and performance tests for a brain, some problemsassociated with the present and future levels of evolution of thebrain, some long range problems associated with the development of thehuman society (including the terrorism) and many others.

The basic elements of MDT occurs in 1993 and the first written form (on
WEB) in 1997. In 2003 a printed edition of the theory was published (in
Romanian language) by the Romanian Publishing House "Editura Albastra"
and in 2004, in the frame of Gutenberg Project, a new edition also in
Romanian. The process of developing is continuing.

Dorin T. MOISAmoisa@zappmobile.ro

THE BASIC FUNCTIONS OF THE BRAIN

ABSTRACT

This theory, called by me as MDT (Modeling Devices Theory) considers that thebasic hardware function of any brain (human or animal) is to make and operateimage models (or analogic models) which are associated with the externalreality. In this frame, for the human brain only, there is an additionalhardware facility: to make and operate symbolic models.

FUNDAMENTAL TERMS (KEYWORDS)

Image model (or analogic model), symbolic model, simulation on model,information, truth, reality, input reality (IR), external reality, image,harmony, logic, general communications language (GCL), logical andmathematical language.

DEFINITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BASIC TERMS

This theory is a symbolic model. Any symbolic model has a limited number offundamental terms. For these terms and only for them, there are accepteddescriptive definitions. A descriptive definition is, usually, not preciseenough for a scientific approach. This lack of precision is due to the factthat it uses terms which must be defined before. The terms used in thedefinition must also be defined using already defined words. This processseems to be endless.

In any positive science, the descriptive definitions are accepted only for avery limited number of terms. These are called "fundamental terms".

For instance, in the symbolic model of Newton's Mechanics, the fundamentalterms are mass, space and time. None of these terms have a normal definition(i.e. generated by the model). They have only descriptive definitions.

Once the fundamental terms are introduced by description, all the other termshave normal definitions, which are generated by the symbolic model, by logicaland mathematical operations.

Let's see the definitions of the terms used by the MDT theory.

Model: this is a term used on large scale in science and technology. The MDTtheory accepts the definition used there.

A model means some fundamental elements and some fundamental relations betweenthe elements.

The elements could be of any type (physical objects, the representation of anyobject in any form, including pictures of any type or images of any type ormathematical symbols of any type and so on). In fact, an element could beassociated with anything which can be considered as an entity. The elementshave some properties, which must be specified somehow. There are a number ofrelations between the elements, which must also be specified.

An image model (or analogic model) contains an unspecified number of elementsand an unspecified number of relations between the elements. An image model isjust given as it is. It is not possible to specify in explicit and preciseways which are the elements and which are the relations.

Examples of image models: maps, models of an object of any type, an assemblyof such models including any material elements (water, air and so on), anyrepresentation in any form of such elements.

A symbolic model uses as elements letters, numbers or words. The relations areof logical or mathematical type.

The most important symbolic model is the General Communications Language
(GCL). The elements are usually nouns and the relations are usually verbs.

Warning: GCL is not really a symbolic model. The GCL just contains all theelements and all the relations. When a symbolic model is made (a sentence, forinstance), elements and relations from GCL are used. Thus, because there is noavailable word, I decided to consider, by extension, the GCL as a symbolicmodel. In this frame, GCL has to be considered as "symbolic model".

Once a model given, it is possible to simulate some situations on it. Forsimulation, a change must be made to the model. After that, the entire modelwill be changed because all the elements have some relations between them.

Any implicit or explicit information which is generated by simulation by amodel, is called "truth". Any truth must be associated with the model, whichgenerated it. This is the definition of the term "truth" in the MDT theory.

All the information, which is or could be generated by a model by simulation,is called "reality" associated to that model. This is the definition of theterm "reality" in the MDT theory. We also see here that before declaring thereality, one needs to declare the model which generated it.

We already used the term "information". This term is a fundamental term. Ithas no normal definition. MDT accepts the descriptive definition from commonlife and from science. The same situation is for the term "entity".

Warning: in connection with the term "information", something is considered asinformation after that "something" is processed somehow by a device whichtakes and processes that "something".

This somehow confuse situation is normal for any fundamental term. Just think,for instance, how one can explain what is "time". The only possibility toexplain what is "time" is to use examples that already use the term "time". Infact it is impossible to define terms as "mass", "time", "space","information" or "entity".

Let's introduce two new terms: "harmony" and "logic".

Once a model is given, it is possible to make simulations on the model, as ithas already been explained. By simulation, it is necessary to change anelement or a relation. The model goes into a temporary unstable situationbecause all the elements are connected between them. The model will evolve toa new stable situation. For an image model, the evolution to stability isbased on harmony laws. For a symbolic model, the evolution to stability isbased on logic. Thus, a stable model is a harmonic or logic model and, after aperturbation, the model will regain the stability based on the laws of harmony(image models) or logic (symbolic models). The evolution of any model towardstability (to become harmonic or logic) is also a basic hardware facility ofthe brain.

Because some situations from external reality can be associated, sometimes,with both types of models, there can be a corespondence between harmony andlogic.

Thus, the implicit definitions of the terms "harmony" and "logic" areassociated with the methods to regain the stability of an image model(harmony) or symbolic model (logic). An "implicit definition" means that weare able to recognize the effect of harmony or logic in an informationalstructure.

We are now in the situation to present the basic hardware function of anybrain, based on the terms, which have already been defined.

The basic hardware function of any brain (human or animal) is to make modelsassociated to external reality and to predict, by simulation, the possibleevolutions of the model. Because the model is associated with externalreality, it is possible to predict by simulation some probable evolutions ofthe external reality.

We already used the term "external reality" which is not defined yet. Thisfundamental term is considered as a source of information, which is notlocalized in the structure of models of the brain. I want to emphasize thatthe external reality is not a source of information, but is just considered soby any brain.

Thus, one of the main hardware functions of the brain is to make models of theexternal reality and to predict, by simulation on the model, the possibleevolution of the associated external reality.

We already defined the reality as all the information which is or could begenerated by a model. This means that we understand the external reality bythe reality, which is generated by a model, which is associated with theexternal reality.

Example: For a given external reality, any person makes an associated model.Any person has his/her own model associated to the same external reality. Wethink and act based on our own reality and not based directly on the externalreality.

In fact, external reality is rather an invention of the brain to explain itsstructure of models.

THE BASIC HARDWARE ELEMENT

Let's see what is the basic hardware element of a brain (human or animal).There are some image-type models called M-models, which are associated withthe sense organs (eyes, ears and so on). M-models work in association withsome YM-models, which already exist in the brain. YM-models are conceptmodels. A concept-model is a simplified model which, in this way, fits a largeclass of similar models.

Example of YM models: "dog", "table" and so on.

M-models have to discover as many as possible entities in the external realityand to associate a YM model to any entity. Once an entity was firstlyassociated with a YM, M-models will predict its evolution based also on thatYM.

Example: if an entity was associated with a YM-dog, the M-model is able topredict how this YM performs in connection with all the other YMs of it.

Any prediction of M with that YM included is compared with the informationobtained by M from external reality. The information obtained by a M-modelfrom outside during the comparison process, is called "input reality" (IR).

We just introduced a new term as "input reality" or IR. IR is the informationobtained by an M-model from outside (from external reality or from othermodels) to improve its predictions.

If the prediction meets IR, then M will try another prediction to improve itsquality. If one or more predictions do not meet IR, then M will replace thatYR with another, and the process will continue. This process will continue sothat all the entities which are discovered by M-models will be associated withsome YMs and all the predictions of M must confirm the M-model, unchanged.Such a model is, thus, a stable model. When M is stable, all YMs areintegrated in M in a harmonic way.

The main function of M-models is to make a preliminary harmonic model (stablemodel) associated with an external reality.

Conclusion: a M-model interacts with a section of the external reality. M willbe a model made in an informational way by analogy with that section of theexternal reality. Because M is a model, all the elements are connected betweenthem in a harmonic way, so that the model is stable. This stability isverified on and on in an automatic way, as long as a specific external realityis in interaction with the specific M-model.

M-models interact with some other type models, called ZM-models. ZM-modelstake some information from one or more M-models and continue the constructionof models associated with the corresponding external reality. To do this, ZM-models interact with the other ZM-models of the brain to improve M-models.

M-models are just preliminary models based on YM-models. A ZM model will takeany information from any other M and ZM models of the brain, to improve it.

Example: an M-model is associated with a bus that transports people. A ZM-model takes this information and tries to see if this bus transports touristsor is a public transport vehicle. To do this, it will use information takenfrom any other ZM-models and M-models. The aim is to make a ZM-model, whichreflects as well as possible a section of the external reality. Because ZM isa model, it is stable and because this model is integrated in a structure ofother ZM-models, the structure of ZM-models is stable too. This problem willbe treated later in details.

ZM-models are long-range models. This term will be explained later. Here, the"long-range model" is understood as a model, which already developed itselements as self standing models.

ZM models are the main models, which reflect the external reality.

We define now two very important terms: knowledge and consciousness.

Knowledge is associated with the facility to predict the evolution of theexternal reality based on a structure of harmonic/logic models. This structurewas made by a large number of interactions with many sections of the externalreality and so it already generated a large number of good predictions. Thismeans that the only guarantee of the correctness of the knowledge is theconfidence in that structure of models. This issue will be developed indetails later in the book.

The consciousness is the facility to make and operate a model, associated withthe external reality, where the person itself is an element of that model.When such a model is activated, it will also find the position of the personin the model and so it will predict the position of the person in the externalreality. This issue will also be developed in detail in another part of thebook.

We will now develop some issues associated with the term "knowledge". Wealready defined knowledge as the capacity to predict in a correct way theevolution of the external reality.

Here we use the term "correct". Let's see what it means. This term has twodefinitions. One situation is when a model makes a prediction and theprediction is compared with IR. If the prediction meets IR, then theprediction is "correct". Unfortunately, there are very few situations when thecomparison between prediction and IR is possible.

For instance, building a bridge. A problem is, for instance, if the bridgewill be stable or not in case of an earthquake. Here we need a guarantee thatthe bridge is properly built and there is no possibility to verify this basedon IR.

The second definition of the term "correct" is: the brain will consider as"correct" any prediction based on a harmonic/logic structure of models. To beharmonic, the structure was already verified, based on IR in many othersituations. So, the only guarantee of a "correct" prediction is the confidencein that structure of models.

MDT is associated with the basic hardware functions of the brain. Once wedescribed the hardware structure, everything what the MDT predicts is based onwhat the hardware is able to do. What MDT says about knowledge is not anothertheory on knowledge but what the hardware is able to do.

Any experiment is based on a model. That model tells us what we are doing andthe same model tells us what we get and what we see. Any model that makes theexperiment just improves itself. An improved model will make betterpredictions and that is all. There is no guarantee associated with theknowledge except the confidence in our own structure of models.

Let's see another aspect. We saw that any experiment is based on a model. Themodel tells us what we did and what we get and see. If there are many personswho participate in an experiment, everyone will make his/her own model basedon his/her own structure of models. What everyone gets and sees depends onone's own structure of models.

Example: up to around year 1500 everybody knew that the Earth was the centerof the Universe. This idea was supported by direct observation of the sky butalso by a powerful structure of models. So, in that period, the astronomerswere able to calculate Sun and Moon eclipses, understand and calculate manyparameters associated with the movement of the Moon, Sun and stars. Even theHoly Book supported this idea, at least in an implicit way. In that period,the idea that Earth is the center of the Universe was correct.

I want to emphasize again that the situation is generated by the workprinciple of the brain. It does not matter if we like or not this situation!The situation will be the same forever. For instance, Newton's Mechanicsconsiders that there is a fundamental field of forces called "gravity".Everybody considers that the gravity exists. But Einstein says that there isno such a field of forces; what we see is just an effect of the distortion ofthe space due to mass. If Einstein is right, the idea that there is gravity isnot correct anymore. See also the applications.

So, in every moment, the brain will consider as correct everything which isgenerated by its structure of stable models.

Some scientists could consider these assertions as unacceptable, butregardless of the fact that we like or not such a situation, the brain is ableto do only what the hardware structure is able to do.

There is another term that has some associated problems. This term is "wrong".If a model makes wrong predictions, this usually does not mean that the modelis wrong. It means just that the model is not suitable to the given externalreality.

Faced with a new external reality, the brain will activate the model whichmakes the best predictions associated with that external reality. If a modelmakes wrong predictions, we have to change the model with another one or tomodify the model.

Example: Newton's symbolic model of Mechanics makes wrong predictionsassociated with the objects moving at a speed comparable to the speed oflight, but its predictions are good (correct) at lower speed.

In any situation, the terms "correct" and "wrong" must be associated with amodel or with a structure of models.

We already described the first basic hardware facility associated with thebrain (human or animal). It generates truth, reality, knowledge andconsciousness. Now we will describe the second basic hardware facility of thebrain. This is the action on the external reality.

We already saw that faced with a section of the external reality, the brainmakes at least one ZM model. A ZM model works in association with anyavailable (or several) M-model and with any other ZMs of that brain. The mainZM is able to predict in a correct way the evolution of a section of theexternal reality. Such a ZM is able to make a new class of long-range modelscalled ZAMs.

ZAMs are artificial and invariant. An artificial model is made without anydirect interaction with the external reality. An invariant model is a model,which cannot be changed by direct interaction with the external reality.

A ZM model will make a ZAM model in order to modify the external reality. Oncea ZAM is made, it becomes a reference model in changing the external reality.To do this, the ZAM-model works in connection with a number of AZM models. AnAZM is a model which is already connected to the execution organs of a being(for human beings these are legs, hands and so on).

Once a ZAM is activated, it will simulate the requested action using anyinformation from all models of the brain. Based on simulations, ZAM willdetermine if it is able or not to meet the goal. If the simulation shows thatthe action is possible, then the ZAM will activate AZM models for action onthe external reality. The ZAM will control the AZMs to act on the externalreality exactly as in the successful simulation, with good chances of success.If by any simulation the objective is impossible to reach, the brain will beblocked to do that activity.

Example: if a person has to jump over an obstacle, that person will know veryfast if the jump is possible or not. The person knows this, because a ZM makesa ZAM-model, which is associated to the external reality (the person itself,the supporting surface and the obstacle, as main elements). The ZAM thensimulates the jump on the model. If the simulated jump fails, the brain isblocked to do the action. If the jump is done with success in the simulation,the ZAM will control the body during the jump exactly as it was in thesimulation, with good chance of success.

No action on the external reality is possible without a successful simulationof that action. The action will be as in the successful simulation. Both in animmediate action and in an activity that has to be done in the future, anybrain follows this procedure.

We shall add some considerations about the speed of action on externalreality. So, when we walk on a plane surface, for each step there is at leastone simulation before the step is done. Due to a large number of internal andexternal factors, any step is unique. Thus, if we walk on a raw surface (astony trail in the mountains, for instance) not only every step in based on asimulation but even during the execution of a step, it is possible to make anew simulation based on new data and so a step in execution can be modified atall time to meet the goal as ZAM requires. Thus, a very complicated activityas walking on a mountain trail, can be done very easily and even elegantly,based on continuous predictions and simulations associated with every step.

As it was already emphasized before, this procedure to simulate in advance anyactivity on external reality is followed in all situations, regardless if theactivity is immediate or it has to be done in the future.

We have already described the two main hardware facilities of the brain (humanor animal). Here is a preliminary abstract of the main hardware models of thebrain:

M-models: these models are associated to sense organs. The brain tries to makea preliminary model of the external reality. To do this, it uses a number ofYM concept models. The main activity is to find the entities of the externalreality and to associate to any entity a YM model. Then, by simulation on themodel, M-models try to integrate any YM model in the structure in a harmonicway. That is, any simulation of interaction between a YM and any other YM-model must confirm the M-model, unaltered.

If, for instance, some predictions of an YM1 model in relation with an YM2model are not compatible with the prediction of the YM2 model in relation withthe YM1 model, then M has to change YM1 or YM2, or some relations, or someother YMs, so that the M-model is stable. M-models work in an automatic way,trying to be stable in interaction with the associated section of the externalreality.

YM-models: they are concept models associated with all the entities, whichhave already been discovered by the brain by M-model activity. When a newbeing is born, there are practically no YMs. They are made by directinteraction with the external reality.

ZM-models: they are the main long-range models of the brain. They generateknowledge and consciousness. Also they make YMs, ZAMs and AZMs. They are ableto take any information from any other model of the brain. ZMs can replace aYM-model with another if something is not OK after an advance prediction andsimulation based on any available data. They also control ZAM-models duringtheir activity.

ZAM-models: they are artificial and invariant models. An artificial model isnot generated by direct interaction with the external reality. An invariantmodel is a model, which cannot be changed by direct interaction with theexternal reality. ZAMs are models, which act on the external reality. Once aZAM was made and activated by a ZM, it will simulate the activity, using anyinformation from any model of the brain. By one or more simulations, the ZAMwill find the right solution. If it fails to find a solution, then the ZM willmake another ZAM and the process continues.

AZM-models: they are associated in a direct way to the organs which can act onexternal reality. They are ready-made when a being is born, but, to be used,they have to be dynamically calibrated by the activity of the ZAMs. That is, aZAM has to know everything is association with the external organs of a body(e.g. hands, legs for a human). When a ZAM has to make a simulation, it has toknow all the parameters of the muscles, for instance. An AZM has to know andtransmit such parameters. To do this, AZMs keep a model of any external organof that being.

All these models are associated with the hardware implementation of the brain.We will see later some others types of models which are associated with thesoftware implementation of the brain.

SOME PRINCIPIAL PROBLEMS

When an M-model is activated it does not know how many entities are in theexternal reality. Even more, it does not know which are these entities. Thedevice will try to find them based on the facilities of the sense organs, butthere is no guarantee that M-models have found all the entities and noguarantee that the right YMs are associated to such entities. This is a basicdeficiency.

The camouflage and dissimulation are methods which use this deficiency. Bycamouflage an entity is not discovered and by dissimulation M-models associatea wrong YM to an entity.

Let's see another basic problem. Any model evolves to be harmonic with itselfand so, to be stable. This means that, after any change in the model, it hasto regain its stability. If a model has a disharmony, it has to correct itselfbased on IR or based on an internal change (IR is not available in anysituation). Thus the model regains its stability, but in some cases the modelcould be not suitable anymore to reflect the external reality. There are manycases when a model is stable but its predictions associated with the externalreality are wrong.

We already defined reality as all the information that is or could begenerated by a model by simulation. The guarantee of a correct reality is thestability of the model but the stability of the model is not a guarantee thatthe model is capable to accurately reflect the associated external reality.

That is, there is no guarantee that all the entities of a given externalreality are discovered, there is no guarantee that the right YMs areassociated with these entities and so on. The stability of a model is just aguarantee that all the available information is correlated in the right way.

There is another class of basic problems associated with the changes in amodel. If a model has to be changed, sometimes there are small chances to dothat. In fact, the only possibility is to make a new model from scratch, usingor not elements and relations from the old model. This activity could besometimes so complex that it can exceed the technical capacity of the brain.

Indeed, a new model must be accepted by the whole structure of models. Thatis, any other model of the structure must accept any prediction of the newmodel, so that the new structure is stable.

If the new model is good in interaction with the external reality but thestructure of the models is not good enough, then some other models of thestructure have to be changed too. As I said, this process can exceed thebrain's technical capacity of processing. This can be considered as a designdeficiency too.

This explains a lot of situations in common life, when logical arguments orfacts taken from external reality cannot change wrong models some people have.

As we know, a stable model is a model which correlates in a right way all theavailable information. But, there is no guarantee that we gain enoughinformation to make the right model. This basic deficiency is attenuated bythe fact that there is a structure of models. The structure of models helps alot when we interact with a new external reality because it can makepredictions based on the previous interaction with other external realities.On the other hand, the structure of models is like a brake for evolution ifthe structure has problems.

Example: The astronomer Copernicus made a model of the Universe based on theidea that the Sun is the center of the Universe, not Earth, as everybody knewat the time. Around the year 1543, very few persons were able to change thewhole structure of models, based on this new model.

We continue with other basic problems and features.

In the normal activity of the brain, any ZM-model has full access to any modelof the brain. That is, a ZM model can correlate information from many M-typemodels and from any other ZM of the brain. This is true for any ZM of thebrain.

In the complex interaction between a brain and the external reality, there isa single ZM at a time, controlling that being. This ZM is called a local-ZM oran active-ZM. A ZM can be changed to another in a dynamical way, so that thebeing does many activities in time-sharing.

This activity is not simple. So, when a local-ZM is deactivated, it has tostore the conditions, to be able to resume when it takes control again. Thereare problems associated with this activity. Some of the information can belost or the external reality may evolve in the mean time so that the storedinformation will be of no use. In this way, any model, which takes control ofthe being, has to initialize before being able to regain full control. Thisactivity of initialization is very complex and in some situations it mightcontain errors. Thus, it is rather difficult to do many activities in time-sharing.

There is also a basic problem associated with the term "knowledge". As weknow, the knowledge is associated with the predictions of a structure ofmodels.

So, the knowledge is associated with the structure of models and not with theexternal reality, as we'd like it to be. We should never ever forget thisthing. Even more, knowledge is a non-sense if we do not declare the structureof models.

Example: in any positive science, it is usual to say that something is truebased on a specified theory (model).

HOW M-ZM MODELS ARE MADE

For a given external reality, the brain makes a structure of models, usinginformation taken from the external reality or from other models.

We will see how this function works in a specified situation: how a new M-ZMis made in interaction with a new external reality. This function is describedfor a normal and mature brain. The term "normal brain" will be treated later.Here, a "normal brain" is a brain, which is able to work as it was alreadydescribed in the section of hardware facilities. A mature brain is a brain,which has enough YM and ZM models made during a long time of interaction withthe external reality.

An image is an information which is received as it is, in the same way as itwould be generated by a TV-camera for instance. This kind of information,without any meaning in fact, has to be integrated by the brain as an image-model.

As we already know, M-models have to find some entities in that image. Theystart by making a 3D-image. This is possible in a rather easy way becausealmost all beings have two eyes. So there are two plane images and M-modelswill make a 3D-image. Now, the basic problem is that from a 3D-image it is notan easy task to identify the entities. M-models will use any supplementaryinformation associated with this 3D-model, as color, contrast, brightness, themovement of some entities and so on. Anyways, M-models have to associateentities to YM-models. This process could be affected by mistakes, but,because M is a model, there will be a lot of crosschecks that will allow todiscover and correct some of the mistakes.

For instance, if something round is discovered, it could be an apple (YM-apple) or a ball (YM-ball) or anything else.

Once a possible entity is associated with a YM, the M-model will predict howthis YM interacts with the other YMs of the model.

For instance, there is a YM-apple. It has a relation (it is very close to)with a YM-table. So, from the predicted properties of the table, based onsimulation, it results that it can support an apple, and from the predictedproperties of the apple, it results that it can stay on that table. So, thisrelation seems to be good and thus, maybe the YMs are OK.

Now another example: an apple is on a thin branch of a tree. From thepredicted properties of the branch, it results that it cannot support thatapple. So, the choosen YM-apple or YM-branch is not good. M-models have tochange something or to add something (maybe there is no gravity there…) tobe stable.

The exact procedures and methods can be different. Anyway, MDT is a basictheory and it is not concerned with the technological implementation of thefunctions of the brain. It is enough to say that there are basic methods tosolve the problems and also that the methods are not 100% safe, as everybodyknows from his/her direct interaction with the external reality.

What is obtained by this interaction is a preliminary M-model associated withthe external reality. This M-model is in interaction with, at least, one ZM-model, which develops the M-model based on any other information available inthe brain.

These two processes happen almost simultaneously. As an M-model is made, a ZM-model takes some information from the M-model and improves itself. Also, ZMcan change or add some information into the M-model, based on informationobtained from other M-models or ZM-models. These two processes are performed,in fact, almost simultaneously due to this very close communication. They arecalled M-(YM)-ZM processes. The aim is to make a better and better ZM-modelassociated with a given external reality. As we know, such processes generatethe knowledge and the consciousness.

Faced with the same external reality, every brain makes and operates its ownstructure of M-ZM models and so its own reality. For everyone, the reality isgenerated by his/her own structure of harmonic/logic models. From this mode ofinteraction, it does not result that faced with the same external reality,everyone makes the same structure of models.

Example 1: If a painter and a forest ranger look at a tree, each will makeanother M-ZM-model, and each will think and act based on one's own reality.

Example 2: When we drive a car in the city, M-models transmit the fullinformation on what is around, but ZM-models, which control the car, will useonly part of it. As the speed increases, ZM will process a smaller and smallerpart of the M-model, to drive the car. This phenomenon can be called thenarrowing of the consciousness field. It occurs every time when the brain isoverloaded.

Basically speaking, everything what was already presented up to now is aboutthe same for human and animal brains.

The exceptions are associated with symbolic models (which are based on logic).
The animals cannot make any symbolic models.

As we know, the basic function of any brain (human or animal) is to make andoperate image-models. Let's continue with the basic differences between thehuman and animal brain.

THE HUMAN BRAIN (Introduction)

The basic difference between the animal brain and human brain is the capacityof the human brain to make and operate symbolic models. The animals are notable in any way or form to make and operate symbolic models.

We already analyzed how a human or animal brain interacts with an image tomake an image-model. For the symbolic models the interaction is different.

A symbolic model, as we know, uses as elements letters, words or numbers. Whena human brain interacts with such elements, the M-models will contain suchelements as specialized YM-models. Such YM-models contain all the shapes ofthe letters, for instance. It is not necessary to discover the elements,because they are there in an explicit way.

All the symbolic elements are contained in a symbolic model called GeneralCommunication Language (GCL). There is a spoken language and a writtenlanguage, as directly interacting symbolic models. This is true only forcultural zones which use alphabets. There is a specific application whichtreats this problem.

For a given written text, we have all the elements and all the relationsbetween the elements, in an explicit way, as words. Usually, the elements arethe nouns and the relations between them are the verbs. Any sentence is asymbolic model, for instance.

Example: the sentence: "I go home" has two elements "I" and "home" and arelation between the elements as "go".

The stability of the symbolic models is based on logic. When a symbolic modelis stable we call it a logical model. A logical (stable) model can beunderstood by anybody who can make and operate symbolic models.

Sometimes there is a correspondence between image-models and symbolic-modelsas in the following example.

Example: Let's analyze the sentence "An apple falls from an apple-tree". Wehave two elements and a relation between them. On the other hand, we can makean image-model that describes the same situation: an apple falls from anapple-tree.

So, the logic could have been born in the process of translation from an imagemodel to a symbolic model (when the translation is possible). As an image-model is stable based on laws of harmony, a symbolic model is stable based onthe laws of logic.

Here we have in an implicit way the definitions of harmony and logic, as therules and methods to ensure the stability of an image-model (harmony) or asymbolic-model (logic). An implicit definition means that we are able torecognize the effect of harmony or logic in a structure of data.

THE HUMAN BRAIN VERSUS ANIMAL BRAIN

MDT is a theory that treats the human and animal brain in the same framework.

I present here a possible evolution of the brain, from animal brain to humanbrain. It is very important to specify that the theory is like a tool: it doesnot support and also does not reject the evolutionist theory. MDT justdescribes the situation.

For any external reality, the brain (human or animal) will make an image-model. This function is basically the same for human and animal brain.

In a given external reality many similar elements could exist. For anyelement, the brain has to make a YM-model.

For instance, a dog has to make a YM for any dog which it meets. Such a bignumber of models use a lot of the brain resources.

When there are many similar elements, a solution is to make a concept-YM. Sucha YM will fit a big number of similar elements. This reduces the quantity ofdata to be processed by an animal brain, and so, the brain becomes faster andmore efficient.

Thus, the first level of evolution of the brain (level 1) is the extensive useof the concept models. This level is, probably, reached by all animals.

Observation: the human and animal beings continue to use, for some specialsituations, pure image models. A pure image model is a YM-model associatedwith a single entity of the external reality. For instance, a cub has a pureimage model of its mother.

The first step of the evolution of the brain is based on concept models. Aconcept model fits an entire class of entities of the external reality. Duringthe interaction, the brain will use a concept model and then, in M-ZM, newproperties will be added, or even new elements, if necessary, to understandbetter and better the external reality.

The evolution of the brain continues with level 2. This new facility is basedon label-models. As we know, faced with a given external reality, the brainmakes an M-ZM model that is able to predict the evolution of the presentexternal reality. Such models are called local-M-ZM. On level 2, it ispossible to make a new type of models, which are called label-models. A label-model is able to activate a ZM-model, from the available models of the brain,regardless of the local-M-ZM.

Example: an animal senses a specific smell. This can be associated with foodor with danger, for instance. In such a situation, the animal can activate aspecific ZM-model, which has no direct connection with the local-M-ZM model.This is level 2 of the evolution of the brain.

At this level, a special kind of communication between animals occurs. Thiskind of communication based on label-models is used by human beings as well.It is not precise enough and is also very limited, but useful in manysituations, and very fast too.

The level 2 is the highest level achieved by the animal brain. The evolutionof the brain continues with level 3.

We already saw that, at level 2, a label-type model activates a ZM model. Thenext step is to activate not the whole model, but only some associated truthof the ZM-model. In this way, the brain has to manage a reduced quantity ofinformation and so becomes more efficient.

This is a critical point, because it is the barrier to separate the animalworld of human world.

Thus, there is a ZM-model and an associated label-model. The problem is toassociate to the label-model only some truths generated by the associated ZM-model. A ZM-model is an image model, and so its truths are also of image-type.The problem is to record such truths in a different way, based on a totallynew function.

MDT cannot indicate how exactly this facility works. The theory is notconcerned with the technological implementation of the functions. The theoryjust says that some truths generated by a ZM-model have to be recorded in adifferent way. In this way, the label-models become words, and the associatedtruths become symbolic definitions of the words.

On level 3 a label-type model can activate an associated ZM model, but it canactivate only a collection of truths as well, which are different from the'ordinary' image-truths of the ZM.

It is possible that the General Communication Language (GCL) appeared based onthis facility. The presence of a GCL in a brain will characterize that brainas a human brain.

Example: when the word "dog" is heard, it is very probable that we activate atleast one suitable ZM. But when we use the sentence "I go to the forest with agun and a dog", it is very probable that we do not activate any ZM-model. Thesentence is understood based on symbolic models and based on logic and so wedo not need any image-model. In this way, the quantity of information that hasto be processed by the brain is reduced very much. The image models will beused only when we have to make a precise model of the action.

The human brain continues to evolve with level 4. On this level we have wordsand associated symbolic definitions, but no ZM-image-model.

Example: Let's take the following words: "this apple", "apple", "fruit","food". "This apple" is associated with a pure image model. "Apple" is aconcept type image model. "Fruit" and "food" cannot be associated with anyimage model (we cannot imagine what is fruit or what is food).

So, on level 4, the human brain can make and operate symbolic models withoutany connection with image-models.

On this level it is possible to develop logical and mathematical languagesand, in this way, to make positive sciences associated to the externalreality.

Example: Newton's Mechanics is a symbolic model associated with the physicalbodies. The basic terms of this symbolic model are mass, space and time. Noneof these terms can be associated with image models.

The evolution of the brain continues with level 4+, but I prefer to call itlevel 5 (up to now it is the highest). This level was attained only 100 yearsago. On this level the symbolic models break totally with image models.

Example: Newton's Mechanics describes the movements of physical bodies. But wecan imagine such movements. Here Newton's symbolic model can be translatedalso in image models.

The pure symbolic models cannot be translated in any image models. The onlysymbolic model of this type is Quantum Mechanics.

Example: in association with Quantum Mechanics there is a "classical" problemcalled "the dual nature of light". There are some experiments, which provethat light is a wave. But there are also some other experiments, which provethat light is made of particles. It seems that we have big logical problemshere. The aberration with "the dual nature of light" is supported also by somegreat physicists (R. Feynman, for instance).

Physicists in Quantum Mechanics already solved the problem of the nature ofthe light. The "dual nature of light" is not a problem of Physics, but aproblem of thinking.

The problem occurs when the physicists try to explain to us what happens. Atthat moment, they use terms as "wave" or "particle" which are associated withimage models. The same terms, in Quantum Mechanics, are associated withmathematical formulae. There is no connection between the world of QuantumMechanics and the world of image models. If someone forces such a connection,then some big logical problems can occur.

As MDT says, any information is non-sense without declaring the model thatgenerated that information. In the above example, the nature of light is wellunderstood by physicists in the symbolic model called Quantum Mechanics. If wedon't know Quantum Mechanics, then it is not possible to understand theanswer. So, if we do not know Quantum Mechanics, then it is forbidden to askany question associated with that field.

Let's evaluate the world based on these levels. There is a fraction of thepopulation who is staying on level 2, and just occasionally goes on level 3.The majority of the population is on level 3, and occasionally goes on level4. There is a small fraction, which is on level 4, and occasionally on level5. This fraction produces scientific and technological advance.

To understand the MDT theory, at least level 4 is necessary.

HUMAN BRAIN: EVOLUTION OR EXTERNAL INTERVENTION

Some activities of the human and animal beings are similar. So, there is anidea that evolution from animal brain to human brain could be possible.

As we already emphasized, MDT is just a tool, which is used here to see ifthere is any possibility to evolve from an animal brain to a human brain. Thetheory does neither support, nor reject such a possibility.

Based on MDT, the main difference between a human brain and an animal brain isthe facility of the human brain only, to make and operate symbolic models. Thecommon part of the two types of brains is the facility to make and operateimage models.

The evolution problem is to see if there is any possibility to change someparameters in the structure of image-model devices to reach the capability ofmaking and operating symbolic models. On the other hand, a new hardware thatshould be added to the animal brain is considered as not compatible with anevolutive process.

As we saw in the previous section, the highest level reached by the animalbrain is level 2. With a peak on level 5, the superiority of the human brainis huge.

Let's see some arguments that support the evolutive process. For instance,let's analyze whether by increasing the level of conceptualization of themodels, it will be possible to get closer to the ability to make and operatesymbolic models. Thus, if a class of models is more and more conceptualized,such models should be so simplified that they could be very close to asymbolic definition. Therefore, a change from level 2 to level 3 could bereached by evolution.

But, let's analyze an example. So, we have "this apple", "an apple", "afruit", "food". This is an example of increasing level of conceptualizationwith the last two items as symbolic elements. The animals have a shortcut bymaking a model to tell them if what they meet is or not food. In this way, theanimals have a fast solution for problems based on image models. There is noadvantage to increase the level of conceptualization. Thus the evolution couldbe blocked by a fast solution, based on image-models.

The advanced conceptualization should be supported in a group of vulnerableanimals. To survive, the communication could be decisive. By increasing thelevel of conceptualization, the communication could be more and more precise.This seems to be the only serious argument for increasing the level ofconceptualization. On the other hand, there is already a system ofcommunication on level 2. Thus, a sound or a combination of sounds isassociated with a label-type model. It can activate any ZM-model. This type ofcommunication is faster than that based on symbolic models and usually preciseenough for the normal necessities of a group of animals. Unfortunately, herewe did not see again any advantage from increasing the level ofconceptualization.

But, if, for a group of animals, there is a lot of information which comes infast succession, then the animals will be forced to make more and moresimplified models and this should force them to increase the level ofconceptualization.

Let's see another example. A person goes somewhere in the desert. Withoutspecial equipment, his chance to survive should be very low. But, around him,could be some animals which survive without special efforts. For animals, itis more important "to invest" in "equipment" then to increase the level ofconceptualization of the models.

Anyways, at least in theory, it is possible to evolve from an animal brain toa human brain based on an increase in the level of conceptualization. If theanimals have or not the tendency to do this, is another issue.

Let's analyze again the evolution of the brain. A concept model is a modelwhich fits a large number of entities. It has to be recorded, maybe, by thesame hardware as the hardware that records a normal image-model. Also, theremust be a connection between a concept model and every particular modelcovered by it.

By increasing the level of conceptualization (e.g. from "apple" to "fruit")the structure becomes very complex. The structure becomes even more complexwhen it evolves from "fruit" to "food". In theory, an evolutive process couldproduce this process but the increase of the complexity is so huge that it isdifficult to believe that this could be produced without specialized hardware.

Level 2 is very close to level 3, but, as we see, no animal was able to reachlevel 3. Even the most advanced animals, like dolphins, have no tendencytowards level 3.

The first drawings on cave walls were dated back to about 150000 years ago.Such drawings must be produced by some long-range image-models. But, suchdrawings are of no use without some explanations (symbolic messages). Thereason is that the same drawing can be associated with a lot of situations. Itis fair to consider that, at that moment, the primitive human beings were ableto use a symbolic model for communication (a primitive language).

One idea is that the increasing capacity of the brain to make long rangeimage-models was a support to make also symbolic models. This idea cannot besupported, based on MDT.

Indeed, the drawings made by 5 to 12 year old children are rather primitivedrawings. At such age, children have very few long-range models. But they areable to make and operate symbolic models, including languages to communicatewith computers.

Thus, it seems that the long-range image models are not necessary to makesymbolic models. Also, this supports the idea that the symbolic models aremade by a special hardware.

The existence of a specialized hardware is based on the following:

There is an image model and the associated label-model (a word). The word hasa definition (based on other words). It is clear that there must be a hardwareto record the image-model and another (associated) hardware to record thedefinition. On level 4, the image model does not exist anymore.

If this new hardware should be build based on evolution, it is difficult tounderstand why we have no intermediate stages. The dolphins, which areconsidered as the most advanced animals, have no tendency to build symbolicmodels.

There are some experiments with monkeys, which can be understood as supportthat some monkeys are able to make symbolic models. Such cases can begenerated by a software implementation of the function to build and operatesymbolic models.

As we already know, a model in PSM is very efficient but it blocks theevolution (the model is transmitted unchanged or with small changes, from ageneration to another). If an animal builds, e.g. by accident, an advancedmodel of interaction with the external reality, such a model cannot betransmitted to the next generation. Only if a hardware implementation exists,a new model will be transmitted to the next generation. This seems to be a bigproblem for the evolution of the beings.

Without a hardware implementation, the solution is to transmit such modelsbased on education. If there were groups of monkeys which lived together for avery long time, then a good model could be transmitted from a generation toanother by education. In this way, a hardware implementation is built up alsoif the time available is long enough.

After many generations of monkeys who are forced to build symbolic models, itis possible, theoretically, that some hardware occurs to support the symbolicmodel building. This could be the process that generated the human brain by anevolution process.

The main argument against evolution from animals to humans is the fact thatthe 2 years old children are able to build and operate symbolic models. Atthat age they haven't either enough long-range models to understand theexternal reality and they are not capable to build such models. The maturityof a human being is reached around the age of 18, and thus the facility tobuild symbolic models is clearly a hardware facility.

Conclusions:1. Long-range image-models are not an explanation for the occurrence ofsymbolic models.2. The symbolic-models could occur from image-models by a huge increase in thelevel of conceptualization in very special conditions (e.g. large groups ofmonkeys which live together for a very long time).3. The symbolic-models are built and operated by a specialized hardware.

There are two possibilities: either evolution if statement 2 is valid orexternal intervention if not.

BASIC DESIGN DEFFICIENCIES OF THE HUMAN BRAIN

The theory treats the brain as a technological product. So, the theoryconsiders that a designer existed. He had to fulfil some design requirements.Any technological design has some deficiencies. We shall guess them in thissection.

This theoretical and abstract designer is outside of the theory and we are notinterested by it. It could be "Mother Nature" or God or an extraterrestrialcivilization or anything else.

These deficiencies are described here mainly for the human brain, but some canbe met also in the animal brain. The design deficiencies as MDT can detectthem, are:

XD1: The tendency to associate an image-model to any situation met by aperson. This deficiency is explained due to the "image nature" of the brain.This deficiency explains why so many persons "stay" on level 3, when level 5is accessible since 100 years ago. This deficiency can be corrected byeducation.

XD2: There is no hardware protection to prevent the uncontrolled jump from amodel to another, in interaction with a complex external reality. Thestability in a model is a quality parameter of a brain.

Long-range models can stabilize a person. The XD2 deficiency is not related tothem. XD2 is related to the capacity to stay in a model, when faced with acomplex external reality. This deficiency can be corrected by software(education, for instance).

The lack of stability in a model can induce the illness called schizophreniabecause this lack of stability has the tendency to favor short-range models.Indeed, when there is no stability in a model, the brain will make aspecialized model for any particular situation met in the external reality.Such models are not able to see that some different facts can be correlated.Only a long-range model can detect such correlation. So, the stability in amodel is a parameter of quality for a brain and the lack of stabilityindicates a low quality brain.

This deficiency can be met in the animal world too. For example, a dog has towatch a perimeter. That dog can jump from watch-model to food-model, if itgets food from strangers. Such a dog is a low quality dog, due to the lack ofstability in the model.

The dolphins have a good stability in a model, and so, we consider them asadvanced animals.

For human beings, the lack of stability in a model is a major drawback. Suchpersons are not good for any complex activity.

XD3: This is a basic deficiency. Let's start with its description, based onexamples.

So, the brain interacts with an external reality and makes a harmonic modelwith 3 elements. If, that external reality has, in fact, 4 elements, themissing element cannot be discovered based on the 3-element model. As a 3-element model has a number of wrong predictions, it is not easy to see what isthe problem from the analysis of the mistakes. The reason is that, once the 3-element model is activated, the reality is just that one which is generated bythis model. There is no other reality! We cannot be outside of our activemodel. In such a case, the brain tries to correct the model. Usually, it willtry to correct the model by changing the importance of some elements orrelations. Sometimes this procedure works, and the brain will continue to usethe 3-element model.

Such a situation occurs when we have not enough long-range models. In theabove example, the situation can be corrected if there is a long-range model,which contains a 3-element model as an element of it. But even so, byanalyzing the mistakes, it is not easy to understand what is the problem.

A brain affected by XD3A is not able to predict that a model might be missingsome elements. A person, who can fight XD3A, can predict such a situation andwill treat any model as preliminary.

The brain makes models based on the available data. Such models are made in aharmonic/logic way, but the stability of a model is not a guarantee that themodel is good in interaction with a complex external reality.

We define XD3A as a design deficiency, which means that a brain is not able topredict the possibility of a missing element or relation in a stable (harmonicor logic) model.

Another case: a brain has a stabilized model with 100 elements. This modelalready generated a big number of correct predictions. At one moment, theexternal reality is changed, and now there are 101 elements. As we know, tocorrect a model means to reconstruct everything from scratch, using or notcomponents from the old model. This task could be so difficult that it exceedsthe technical capacity of the brain. In such a situation the old model isfragmented, and the brain uses it in this way. Of course, this can produce alot of negative effects, including induced psychiatric disorders.

We define XD3B as a design deficiency, which means that a brain is not able toreconstruct a model, once the model is detected as a wrong model inassociation with a new external reality. We can express this also as theimpossibility of a brain to correct a XD3A deficiency, once it was discovered.

XD3-deficiencies are widespread in the current activity of human beings. Thereis no reference to know that all the entities of the external reality areassociated with the right YMs in the associated model. For us, the externalreality exists only if it is associated with a model. Once we activated such amodel, the reality is what the model says. We cannot be outside of our activemodel.

Once we have a model associated with a specific external reality, the model isconsidered as a good model based on the predictions which are already done.There is no guarantee that the model will continue to be good in any situationand any time. A good quality brain has to know this and to predict somenegative effects associated with such a situation. So, this deficiency can becontrolled by software (education, for instance).

XD4: This is a deficiency associated only with image-models. It does not existin a symbolic-model environment.

For an image-model there is no possibility to know the importance of anelement or relation. The brain will choose in a more or less arbitrary way theimportance. A model can be harmonic (stable) for any importance which isassociated with its elements and relations.

A "lightly" negative consequence of this deficiency is the fact that, facedwith a given external reality, almost any person makes a personal image-modelassociated with that external reality. We will see later that, for extremesituations, such deficiency is associated with the psychiatric disorder called"paranoia".

The symbolic models do not have such problems. Once a symbolic model is madein a mathematical environment, the "law of the propagation of the errors" isable to predict the importance of any element or relation.

For instance, if we have a complex mathematical formula, the law of thepropagation of the errors will tell us how much the result is changed if anelement is changed with, let's say, 1%.

We already used the term "correct" associated with the importance of anelement or relation in an image model. If there is an external reality and twoassociated models, one image-model and one symbolic-model, and if the twomodels have the same predictions, then the importance associated with theelements and relations of the image model is correct. If not, the rightimportance is that of the symbolic model.

The above method is not good in any practical situation. In fact, there is nomethod to know if we associated the right importance to any element orrelation of an image-model. This is XD4.

XD5: this deficiency is a technological one. It means that there is nohardware or software method to erase a model of the brain. A model is madeforever. It can be destroyed only in an uncontrolled way due to thebiological deficiencies or the brain.

The consequence of this deficiency is huge in many practical situations. Theproblem is developed more in another section of this book.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE BRAIN, THE PSM MODEL

The Protection and Surviving Model (PSM) is the basic image-model of anybrain. When a new being is born, it has only this model in its brain. Thismodel is very complex and it will be described in this chapter.

There is a section of the PSM, which contains a collection of short-rangemodels. They have to act very fast to provide minimal protection for thatbeing (including newborn beings) in some specific dangerous situation. Theseactivities are called "reflex actions".

The PSM contains also some basic models, like the model to keep in theeyesight a moving entity from external reality, or the model to touch by handan entity in the range of the hand. There is also a collection of modelsassociated with equilibrium and the general stability of the external body,together with a model of it, of course.

There are also a number of long range models which contain the instincts tosurvive unconditionally, forever (basic design requirement).

During the period of growing, others models can be included in the PSM, modelswhich are associated with the educational process. Such models have to preparethe being to live in a specific external reality.

By accident, any other models can enter the PSM, but some of them can producebig problems for the future mature being, mainly paranoia type illnesses (seeETAs).

The basic characteristic of any model from the PSM is that such a model isinvariant. It cannot be changed regardless of the information obtained fromthe external reality.

The main goal of the PSM is to ensure that the being will surviveunconditionally, forever. To do this, the PSM is able to build elements, whichare activated to self-develop as models.

So, when a new situation from the external reality is met, and there is nomodel to understand it, the PSM is automatically activated and tries to solvethe problem, based on some reflex actions, or based on some instincts. It alsomakes a specialized element, which is activated as a model. The new modeltries to understand the new situation by independent activity, in interactionwith the external reality. When that situation is met again, the PSM is notactivated, and the specialized model solves the case. So, as a being gainsmore and more experience, the PSM is not activated, but one of the specializedmodels is activated instead.

Regardless of how many models are in a brain, if a new external reality occursand there is no model to understand it, the PSM will take the control in theway already described.

When PSM controls a being, this can be recognized by the fact that theconsciousness disappears, as the normal structure of models is deactivated bythe PSM. This situation is called as shock-status.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE BRAIN: FUNCTIONAL FACILITIES AND TYPES OF MODELS

A basic functional facility of the brain is that any model can develop any ofits elements as a model. Once a model activates an element, that element isable to develop itself as a model, by direct interaction with the externalreality and with any other model of the brain.

Another functional facility is described here. We see that a model canactivate any of its elements to develop itself as a model. But, even if anelement is already developed as a model, the main model continues to treat itas an element. This important feature will be developed below.

So, a main model has an element. This element has some properties. Tointegrate that element, the main model uses these properties. Now, theproblems could be like: "why that element has such properties?" or "how suchproperties can be changed?" To answer such questions, the main model has todevelop the element as a model. Once an element is developed as a model, itsproperties appear to be truths generated by the model. So, depending of thepoint of view, referring to the same entity, we discuss about an element withsome properties, or about a model with some associated truths.

Once an element is developed as a model, the model can be changed. A changedmodel will have other associated truths, so that, when treated as an elementof the main model, it has another set of properties. Thus the propertiescannot be changed in a direct way, but through the changes in the model.In any case, a main model can operate only with elements, regardless of thefact that the element is or not already developed as a model.

We already use terms as "long range models" or "short range models". Let'sdefine them.

A long-range model has already been defined as a model with its own elementsdeveloped as models. But here we will prefer another alternative definition. Along-range model is a model which reaches its aims by activation anddeactivation of some of its elements. Such elements are already developed asmodels.

A short-range model reaches its aims by direct activation.

Example: to switch on the light in a room, a ZM model will make a ZAM. ThatZAM will simulate the action. Based on this simulation it will activate an AZMwhich, in turn, will switch on the light. The ZM-model will confirm thesuccess of the activity of the short-range ZAM model.

Example: To travel from a place to another, a ZM will make a ZAM. The ZAM willmake some ZAMs. These ZAMs will make some others ZAMs. For any specificactivity there will be a ZAM. Once a ZAM has reached its aim, it will bedeactivated by the ZAM-model which activated it, and a new ZAM is activated.The general control belongs to the main-ZAM. The main-ZAM can be modified bythe main ZM. Long-range models do such activity.

Example: we enter a room and switch on the light. The light really switcheson. A local-ZM gets this information based on IR. But, a long-range ZM, whichcontains the local-ZM as an element, understands that the light had beenbroken, and now it is on. The local-ZM acts here as a shorter-range model. Itdoes not understand the general environment. The main-ZM (which contains thelocal-ZM as element) is a long-range model.

We already saw that any model can activate any of its elements to self-developas a model. Once an element is activated, it develops itself as a model. Inturn, this new model can also activate as a model any of its elements. This"depth" has only technological limits. In fact, almost any model of the brainis a long-range model. The definitions, which are already given, respect thisfeature.

Now we shall present a list with the main models of a brain:

ZAM: these models are usually long-range models. A ZM model makes them. Theirmain function is to change the external reality. They are made for immediateactivation (to drink water from a glass, for instance) or they could be modelsthat give the orientation of the whole life of a person or anything betweenthese very large limits.

Such models are not changed by direct interaction with the external reality.If a ZAM fails to do something, the upper ZAM or the local-ZM will build andactivate another ZAM.

During their activity, they have full access to any resource of the brain(internal or external, by a ZM model).

AZM: these short-range models are direct-action models. They are connecteddirectly to different organs which can act on the external reality (hands,legs..) They keep precise information about such organs. When a ZAM model hasto make a simulation of a specific action, the AZM models have to give preciseinformation about every feature of the associated organs.

Referring to ZAM and AZM models, any action on the external reality is basedon a simulation. Without a successful simulation, the brain is not able to doany activity.

Once a simulation is a success, the main ZAM will activate the action (inconnection with local-ZM). The action will be the same as the simulatedaction. This procedure is followed by any ZAM in any activity.

There are some exceptions. When the PSM takes control, some reflex-models areactivated without initialization and without simulation. The reason is thehighest speed of action, even if the action is not the right one.

ACTIVE-TYPE MODELS (normal ZM-models)

ZM models are made mainly by direct interaction with the external reality.They generate the knowledge and consciousness. They are self-activated in anysituation when they are able to predict in a good way the possible evolutionof a given external reality.

A ZM, which interacts directly with the external reality, is also a model,which controls the whole body. They build, activate and deactivate any ZAM,based on a set of goals.

A long-range ZM model also controls a local-ZM. This is able to modify alocal-ZM model, based on long-range predictions.

The whole activity is supervised by PSM. Usually the PSM is activated onlywhen all the available ZMs fail to control the interaction with the externalreality.

A ZM model has full access to all the resources of the brain. It can take anyinformation from any part of the brain and can make any model based on anyavailable information.

By analyzing the normal activity of the brain, one understands that someactivities use only a limited number of models. The access to some models iseasier than to others. We can find very fast some information and find moreslowly other. This suggests that some models, which are usually employedtogether, are grouped. We define a quasi-structure of models called MZM. A MZMis a group of models, which are used often together. They can be associatedwith some specific complex activities (job, hobby, family life, car drivingand so on).

STORY-TYPE MODELS

These are transition-ZMs. When there are some information from the externalreality, the normal activity of the brain is to build a normal ZM-model or tofind the best available ZM to integrate that information.

When the quantity of information is high, the brain has no technicalpossibility to follow this normal mode of interaction. It is forced just torecord the information in a string-type mode. Such a record of data is calleda story-type model (S-M).

Note: some persons who already read this book were disturbed by the fact thatthere are many sequences which are repeated in different parts of the book.Unfortunately for such persons, this happened because they make story-typemodels instead of a normal model. If they make story-type models and if thereis a repeated sequence, the local-ZM will jump back to the place where theinformation was previously met. At that moment, the story-type models arefragmenting. The person has lost the connection with the story-type model andis forced to make a new one. Also, the person could try to reconnect the oldmodel with the new one, but this is difficult. For a person who makes a normalmodel, when a sequence is repeated, this sequence will only confirm thenormal model and this is very good for the model.

Story-type models can be used as a source of information to make or develop,off-line, normal models. Any element of such models can be developed as anormal model later.

Although many people use this type of interaction with the external reality,this mode of interaction is not efficient and uses a lot of the limitedresources of the brain.

Indeed, a story-type-model records the information in an explicit way, aboutthe same way as it is recorded on a tape-recorder. This mode is a veryprimitive way of recording data. A normal model can generate a huge quantityof information by simulation. Such information is not recorded there in anexplicit way.

Even more, a story-type model introduces non-normal relations between someelements. As we know, a story-type model is made by elements connected betweenthem in the order of occurrence. So, two elements, which could have noconnection between them, could be recorded with a relation between them ifthey occurred together. Anyway, there is no control and no long-range model tocontrol the recording of a story-type model.

Unfortunately, such models are very spread out all over the world, due to thefact that there is too much information, and due to some big deficiencies ofthe education policy.

So, an education based on normal models will reduce very much the quantity ofinformation, which has to be processed by a brain. The present educationpolicy is based on assimilation of external models. That is, the capacity tobuild models is not used. So, faced with a huge quantity of information, thepopulation is forced to make story-type models. This will reduce even more thecapacity of the population to make normal models.

Example: a taxi driver must know any route in a city. There is a huge numberof such routes and he has to learn each, both directions. If the normal modelof the city is learned, then that taxi driver is able to find a route in anyconditions. Except for the normal model of the city, it is not necessary tolearn anything else. By story-type models (to learn routes) he has to increasethe quantity of information with every new route. This is an example, but thesituation is met in almost any field of activity. In practice, both methodsare used.

Story-type models developed as long-range models are very dangerous, becausethey can stimulate induced-paranoia (XIP) or a schizophrenic-paranoiac complex(XSPC). This is so because a story-type model has special relations betweenits elements. Such relations are generated by the arbitrary occurrence of theelements and thus, to transform the story-type model into a family of normalmodels becomes difficult (the brain has to build from scratch several newnormal models, based on the information generated by a story-type model, andthis is not easy).

The story-type models are integrated in the normal structure of models andthey are controlled by that structure.

SHIELDING MODELS

We already saw that any model evolves independently, by itself, based on theinformation taken from external reality or from others models. The aim of anymodel is to gain its stability. Once a model has a problem, it will continueto be active up to the moment when it regains stability.

There are some problems without solution. The model will continue to look fora solution forever. This activity can produce negative effects on the overallstability of the structure of models of the brain (it consumes a lot ofenergy).

The main problem without solution is death (human beings only).

This is a basic problem. So, there is a model which predicts the death of aperson and that model has no solution to the problem. When there is no modelto solve a problem, the PSM is activated. The PSM has no solution too and soit will make a specific model to solve the problem. But the new model has nosolution either, and so, a dangerous loop is activated. This activity could bevery dangerous for the stability of the structure of models of any maturehuman being.

Since the oldest times, the human beings found a solution: shielding models.

A shielding model is a model, which is made to prevent a normal model fromactivating the PSM and also to transmit to the model with problems someinformation to stabilize it.

The best-known shielding model is religion.

Observation: as a person becomes older and older, the prediction of death ismore and more precise. The person has the tendency to become more and morereligious. Also, when a population is under stress, it has also the tendencyto become more and more religious.

A shielding model is associated to a normal model which has problems. Ashielding model is not based on external reality. It cannot be included in anormal model, as the normal model cannot include a model which is not based onexternal reality.

The reality generated by a shielding model can be called "illusion".

The shielding model can be made for any problem without solution. Such modelsreduce the nonsense activity of a brain and so, there is more energy to solvethe normal problems. But, such models could be also very dangerous. Theactivation of a shielding model also deactivates the protection structure of aperson or at least some section of it.

The shielding models are the main models, which can pass from 'normal-to-PSM'zone to PSM. Such changes could be very dangerous for that being, because someprotection models are deactivated forever.

The shielding models are partially integrated in the normal structure ofmodels and so, the structure can, partially, control them.

ACTIVABLE MODELS (WBAM)

A ZM could predict a future situation of the external reality, which has noassociated model. Such a situation can activate the PSM. To prevent this, theZM can make a would-be active-type model (WBAM). Such a model is not createdby direct interaction with the external reality. Such a WBAM acts as ashielding model up to the last moment before the activation. After activation,it becomes a normal ZM model.

A normal ZM is built in direct interaction with external reality. WBAMs can beassociated with the external reality without previous interaction with it.

Note: the emotion is defined in MDT as a transient situation between theactivation of the PSM and the moment when a normal suitable model isactivated. The activation of the PSM can be prevented by a good WBAM (ofcourse, if that situation was predicted by a main ZM).

WBAMs are included in the normal structure of the models and they arecontrolled by it.

ILLEGAL MODELS (XZM)

All types of models described up to now are normal models. They are includedin a harmonic/logic way in the structure.

There are some models, which are not included in the normal structure ofmodels, or they have lost their normal connection to the structure. Suchmodels are called "illegal models" or XZM.

There are many situations which can produce illegal models. A case is when anew model is not finished because the specific external reality, whichproduced it, is no met anymore.

For instance, somebody has been involved in a car accident. A new model isstarted, but because such situation will not be met again in the near future,the model is not finished, because there is no external reality to finish it.Such model could evolve as an illegal model.

Observation: there is an empirical method of the "classical" psychiatry tostimulate or even to force a person (mainly children) to tell everything whichis associated with a traumatic situation. MDT says that such a method is verygood because, in this way, a possible illegal model will be forced to connectto the normal structure of models and so, the long-range negative effects areprevented. As we see, MDT can explain exactly why this psychiatric empiricalprocedure is good, as MDT was not even created specifically for thepsychiatric field!

Another situation when an XZM could be created is when a model is too large.Such a model could be fragmented and some components can lose the normalconnection with the structure. The fragments can evolve as illegal models.

The story-type models are also candidates to become XZM (at least some partsof them).

A major cause of the occurrence of illegal models is technological problems.As we know, a normal structure of models is made of many models, which areconnected together in a harmonic/logic way. The models communicate betweenthem but, if the communication is not good due to technological problems,some models can become illegal.

Such process can also generate half-XZM models. Such models have littlecommunications with the other models, or the communication can be only inassociation with some other models, or only in association with some specificsituations of the external reality.

Because such models are no controlled anymore by the normal structure ofmodels, they can contain anything. They can obtain information from theexternal reality or from other models, or they can create and activate modelswhich can act on the external reality (ZAM and AZM).

XZM models could be dangerous, or even very dangerous, because a person can dosome things outside his/her consciousness. A person that has such models doesnot know that such models exist in his/her brain. Some of these models can bedetected during hypnosis practice.

XZMs can explain somnambulist-effect, double-personality, and many illogicalor bizarre activities. They can also explain some crimes, including theserial-killer phenomenon or terrorism-related crimes. Such a person is just"remote-controlled" by the XZMs.

The illegal models can explain also some paranormal phenomena.

PARANORMAL PHENOMENA

Telepathy is considered as a direct communication between two brains. Evenmore, this kind of communication is performed at great distance between thetwo brains and through any kind of media.

Unfortunately, this kind of transmission of information is not possible, basedon the laws of the nature. In order to transmit information, it is necessaryto transmit energy at the distance. The known fields of forces (electric,magnetic, electro-magnetic and gravitational) do not meet the requirements forsuch a transmission. Even more, even if there is a field of forces which canpropagate at large distance through any kind of material, in order to transmitinformation, modulation of the energy, depending on the information, is alsonecessary. At the receiver it is necessary to demodulate the energy changes,in order to get the message.

Some could say that the information could be transmitted by a 'shortcut',without transmitting the energy at the distance. This interferes with thebasics of the sciences of nature.

Anyways, I believe in natural sciences, and the only conclusion is that, fornow and forever, telepathy, as a direct transmission of information from abrain to another, does not exist.

MDT explains "telepathy" in the frame of the laws of nature, without any kindof transmission of information at the distance. The phenomenon is based on thehuge capacity of the brain to process information and on XZM models.

As we know, the basic function of any brain is to make models and to simulatethe possible evolution of them. A model, which is associated with an externalreality, is able to predict the evolution of that external reality. So, at anymoment, we make predictions associated with the external reality, and themajority of them are good.

Now, let's suppose that a person has a special relation with another person,as a mother and her child, for instance. The model associated with her childcould have been active for many years. Such a model could become a XZM model.This XZM is active outside the control of the mother. Such an XZM couldsimulate the interaction between the child and different kinds ofenvironments. When a negative prediction occurs, such a model can transmit amessage to the local-ZM. The mother "receives" a message. The "receiver"cannot find the source and the reason for that message, because an XZM-model,not belonging to the normal structure of models, transmits the message. It isvery easy to consider that such a message is transmitted by "telepathy".

So, MDT considers that such messages are generated by simulation on an XZM-model and so, they are just predictions. In some cases, such predictions couldbe correct (the predictions which are not correct are forgotten !!!). Suchmessages are not related with the external reality.

Some of such predictions could also be obtained during a hypnosis session,because hypnosis is associated only with XZMs.

The same basic explanation is valid for the clairvoyance phenomenon. In such acase, the XZM is associated with a specific external reality, or with anillness.

Such predictions could be correct for many situations, but, because they arejust predictions, there is a limited guarantee on their correctness.

Example: a person was "seen" by a clairvoyance medium. This medium was askedon the status of the heart of that person. The answer was that the heart is ina good shape. The answer was correct. But there was a "little" problem: thatperson was wearing a pacemaker, which was not "seen" by the medium, inaccordance with MDT.

MDT can be used to see how to develop such paranormal qualities. First of all,for it, let's remember that XZM are image models and so, developing theinteraction with external reality based on image models is stronglyrecommended. Also, a natural tendency towards image models is mandatory.

Such persons must be well balanced, or able to obtain a stability status bydifferent methods, so that the normal structure of models has a reducedactivity. Such persons must have a reduced tendency to control the activityassociated with the problem (to reduce even more the activity of the normalstructure of models).

It is also very important to obtain as much as possible information by directinteraction (based on image models) with the problem. The information based onsymbolic models could be useful too, after translation on image models.

MDT considers that XZM models are image models. But, there is a suppositionthat some symbolic-models could be illegal too. If so, an XZM-symbolic modelcould explain, e.g., how some persons can perform extremely complicatedarithmetical operations.

THE NORMAL HUMAN BRAIN

This section was intended to treat the subject declared, but instead, it isjust an evaluation of the problem. The reason is the inexistence of sufficientdata on XZM models.

To make a local model on the normal human brain, we take some conditions from
MDT, as follows:

C1: The PSM must act to protect the being and to ensure the unconditionalsurvival, forever, of that being. The PSM must also contain some modelsassociated with the society in which the being lives. The PSM must not containordinary models.

C2: Any model of the brain must be stable (harmonic or logic).

C3: The whole structure of models must be stable. That is, any truth of anymodel must be accepted (or at least not rejected) by any other model of thebrain.

Let's develop a little this local model.

The main condition of normality is that the person has to be accepted by thesociety. That is, the person has to integrate in that society. For a cannibal-type society, the person has to integrate in that society. Otherwise he willbe rejected by the society. The limits or normality are, as we see, verybroad.

For a democratic society of our time, some of the conditions of normality are"not to kill", "not to steal" and so on. Such models must be in the PSM andthis goal is achieved by education since many generations.

Let's consider that a person makes a model to kill someone. If this model isblocked by PSM, that person can be considered as a normal one.

However, if a person makes a model to kill someone and, in some conditions,the PSM does not work properly, that model can be activated. Based on MDT,such a situation is a hardware problem and so, that person is not a normalone.

In "classical" psychiatry, they make a test to understand if the person was ornot responsible for his/her acts. Based on MDT, as I said, here we have ahardware problem and so, the fact that the person was or not conscious of whathe was doing is not relevant. Even more, based on MDT, a model cannot bedestroyed by any hardware or software facility of the brain. So, a punishmenthas no effect.

If a brain has a hardware problem, there is no solution to correct it. Themain reason is the fact that any model is connected with almost all the modelsof the brain. Even XZMs must have some connections. In order to remove a modelby external action, it is necessary to know the exact hardware structure ofthat brain and this, as I think, will be not possible at least in the next 50years.

C1 asserts also the condition that the brain must not contain ordinary models(O.M.). This condition is necessary because if an O.M. is included in PSM,that model becomes invariant (it cannot be changed by any information from theexternal reality). So, if an O.M. is included in PSM, any information obtainedby IR from external reality must be compatible with that OMPSM. If not, thatinformation must be distorted to meet, somehow, the condition requested by theOMPSM. When there is an OMPSM in the brain, this is an illness called"paranoia".

A person with an OMPSM must distort the information obtained from externalreality to meet the conditions requested by the OMPSM.

Example: The authentic communists have included in PSM the OMPSM called "theworking class is the leader of the society". Regardless of the externalreality, they have a harmonic/logic structure of models based on this model.Fortunately, the absolute majority of the communists have no such modelincluded in PSM and so, they are normal persons.

Example: Usually, drugs create an OMPSM called "use them". Such persons willcontinue to use drugs regardless of any information associated with theirnegative effects. This is a special kind of paranoia.

Example: smoking is also a form of paranoia, due to the same reason, as above.After many years of smoking, some persons can give up smoking. This couldhappen if, for instance, the person gets ill. The illness could make a non-smoking model, which enters the PSM too.

The C3-condition states that the whole structure of models must beharmonic/logic. This condition is not easy to meet. First of all, there is alimited capacity to refresh the whole structure of models. The refreshcapacity for some persons could be under the requirements. Such persons couldevolve to a form of schizophrenia.

Let's consider now a person-A, who meets the C3 criterium. At one moment, animportant model becomes useless (for instance, an important person Bdisappears from the life of A). In such case, person-A has to refresh thewhole structure of models. This task could exceed the technical capacity ofrefresh (mainly for older persons).

It the refresh capacity is exceeded, one possibility is to make shieldingmodels. If a person has too many shielding models, such a person cannot beconsidered as a normal person. Such persons can be detected, e.g. due to thefact that they don't want, or they cannot discuss about some subjects.

XZM models are not taken into account because of the lack of enough data aboutthem. XZMs can explain the somnambulistic-effect, multiple personalities oreven some nonsense crimes.

There are killers who don't know why they kill other people. Many of them seemto be normal persons, as their friends can confirm and also they can beintegrated in society. XZMs can be an explanation for their crimes. Indeed, anXZM is a model which is out of the control of the normal structure of models.Such models can become active-models in some situations (due to the hardwareproblems of that brain). The killer is so "remotely-controlled" by the XZM.

Such killers cannot be detected by a lie detector. The explanation is the factthat there is no normal model that makes the crime and so, there is no reasonto pretend or hide something.

As I said, this section is just for evaluation. As new data will be obtainedin association with XZMs, the section will be developed.

THE ABSTRACT OF THE FUNCTIONAL FACILITIES OF A BRAIN

Let's make an abstract about all the functional facilities of a human brain.Almost all the facilities, which are not related with symbolic-models, are thesame for animals.

BF1: To make models associated or not with a section of the external reality

BF2: To refresh, on and on, the M-models by prediction and comparison with IR,so that M-models reflect better and better the dynamic external reality.

BF3: The continuous self-refreshing of some ZM coupled with M-models. The goalis that these ZM-models reflect better and better the external reality. Forthis, ZM must take into account any other ZM-model of the brain as well.

BF4: To simulate, continuously, the possible evolution of the associatedexternal reality, even when a ZM is not connected to M-models.

BF5: One of the main conditions, which must be fulfilled by any model, is tobecome stable (harmonic or logic). That is, any simulation on a model mustreconfirm the model in the same shape. If a disharmony or logicalcontradiction is detected, the model must regain its stability by IR (fromexternal reality or from other models). Moreover, as any model is alreadyintegrated in a structure of models, any other model must accept any result ofany simulation on any model. This condition ensures the general stability of astructure of models. A real brain does not easily meet this condition.

BF6: Any ZMs are able to activate, in time sharing, many ZAM models to do manyactivities. However, there is a single ZAM which can act on the externalreality at a given moment of time. The reason for it is that, beforeactivation, any model needs to initialize using data taken from externalreality. When a ZAM is deactivated, it needs to store data for futurereactivation. This method is fast, but if external reality is changed toomuch, such data is no more valid. In this case, the activated ZAM has to findthe new conditions of initialization, based on ZMs. The brain uses bothmethods. By description of the process, we see that it is not easy to do manyactivities at the same time (in time-sharing), and it is easy to makemistakes.

BF7: The facility of any model to gain information from any other model of thebrain. However, due to the technological implementation, it is possible thatsome models have a better communications with some models, and not as easycommunication with other models.

BF8: Any model has the facility to develop any of its elements as models.Thus, it is possible to have a nested structure of models. The "depth" of thisstructure has only technological limitations.

These facilities generate the knowledge and the consciousness, based on astructure of stable (harmonic or logic) models. Such structure is able toself-develop in an unknown external reality.

For a given brain, in interaction with an external reality, there are a numberof features which will be described now. That is, as a brain has many modes ofinteraction with external reality, a particular brain could use mostly onlysome of them, as follows:

SF1: If there is a difference between reality (prediction) and the externalreality (IR), a brain has some possibilities:

SF1.1: to correct the model based on IR (knowledge)
SF1.2: to modify the external reality (creativity)
SF1.3: to store IR in a story-type model
SF1.4: to ignore or to forget that IR

SF2: When a model is "correct", but it cannot be integrated in the structureof models, there are some possibilities:

SF2.1: to make a shielding model (the external reality is considered as wrong)SF2.2: to modify the whole structure of models (knowledge at any price, butsometimes this can exceed the technical possibilities of a given brain).SF2.3: to modify the model (i.e. to distort the importance of some elements orrelations so that, the modified model can be accepted by the structure). Whenthis procedure is followed, we have a paranoiac behavior.SF2.4: the model with problems is ignored, or it is recorded as a story-typemodel.

SF3: when there is an external reality and no suitable model, there are some
possibilities:
SF3.1: to create a suitable model, initiated by PSM
SF3.2: to ignore that external reality
SF3.3: to record that external reality based on a set of more or less
fragmented story-type models.

THE PERSONALITY (HUMAN ONLY)

The personality is treated here for human beings only. However, somecharacteristics (which are not related in a direct or indirect way with thesymbolic models), are about the same for animals.

The personality is given by the whole structure of models of a given humanbeing. We shall develop this very complex concept. To do this, at thebeginning, we shall see a number of features in a rather random way and then,based on these descriptions, we shall list some important parameters whichcharacterize the personality.

We know from the general theory that any brain makes models and simulates thepossible evolution of these models. There are no restrictions in connectionwith the aims or goals of such simulations. Even for a simple model, thenumber of different simulations could be high. Of course, a model will notmake all the possible simulations.

A characteristic of the personality is associated with this diversity of aimsand goals of any model.

A structure of models could evolve in a chaotic way, out of control. Anotherparameter of the personality is associated with the capability to control sucha diversity of evolution of a structure of models.

As we know from the general theory, the stability in a model is a brainquality parameter. Thus, the aims and goals of any model have to be controlledby a limited number of long-range models. Without such long-range models, thestructure can evolve in a chaotic way (this is a form of schizophrenia).

Faced with a new external reality, the model which gives the best predictionsof the evolution of that external reality will be activated. However, when theexternal reality is complex, the main model has to activate some other models,to be able to predict better and better the evolution of that externalreality. A parameter of the personality is the capacity to keep control of themain activity even when the main model activates some others model. Thus, thestability in the main model is a parameter associated with the personality.

Example: there are some persons who start from a subject and evolve in arather chaotic way to other subjects so that the main subject is sometimesforgotten.

Another parameter of a personality is associated with the fact that, althoughthe structure of models has to be stable, the structure must be compatiblewith some models imposed from outside, by education. Without some main modelsimposed from outside (by education), a human being will be not compatible withthe external reality.

By education, some models must be present in any brain (some of them must bein the PSM). Any human being is able to integrate into society, based on them.

There are now very big problems associated with education, in the presenthuman society. The main problem is the fact that the society (including inmost advanced countries) is evolving very fast based on symbolic models andthe education is not able to keep the pace with this fast evolution. E.g. theusual method of education is to impose some story-type model (i.e. some modelsof "how to do"-type). This method has increased too much the number of modelsthat must be stored by the brain and the brain is not capable anymore to storeand use all of them. Based on MDT, the normal solution should be to store somenormal models that can be tailored by each person to any specific situation.

Another parameter is associated with the tendency to think and act based onlong-range models or short-range models. Some persons behave based on a numberof long-range concept models (principles) which are used in any situation.Other persons have specific short-range models for any specific externalreality. The personality parameter is typically situated between the twolimits mentioned above.

From the general theory, we know that some models generate knowledge andothers are used to modify the external reality. Thus, there are personalitiesoriented mostly to knowledge and others are oriented mostly to change theexternal reality.

There are persons who assimilate easily external models and others who preferto make their own models.

Also, there are image models and symbolic models.

We can make a partial matrix associated with a personality based on thecapacity to make/assimilate image/symbolic models, for instance.

Another very important parameter is associated with the content of the PSM. Aswe know, a number of external models must be included in the PSM, by theeducation process, so that the person is integrated in society. Unfortunately,a lot of models could enter in PSM, in an uncontrolled way. Some of thesemodels could be bad models. They can be built, e.g. if a person is born andlives (at least in childhood) in a bad environment. For a person who has suchbad models, there is still a chance to integrate in a normal society, bymaking some shielding models. However, a shielding model is, usually, not safeenough. Thus, in some situations, a person can act based on the bad models andnot based on the shielding models which had helped him/her to be accepted bythe society. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to know in advance thecontent of the PSM, because the PSM acts only in very special and criticalsituations. To be understood, this subject needs a lot of further work.

Here we present a general theory. It cannot go beyond some limits because thetechnological implementation is, usually, not taken into account. However,based on the theory, it is possible to develop the subject for specificapplications.

Now we shall list some parameters associated with the personality, based onthe above discussion. Some of the parameters associated with the personalitycould be:

The orientation to image models
The orientation to symbolic models
The orientation to knowledge
The orientation to action on external reality
The orientation to make new models
The orientation to assimilate new models
The orientation on short-range models
The orientation on long-range models
The parameter associated with the diversity of action
The parameter associated with the stability in a model
The parameter associated with the conformity to society requirements
The parameter associated with non-standard models from PSM

A table could be made, for any person, with numerical values associated to theabove parameters. To do this, a local model must be developed. That model hasto contain a set of standard procedures to obtain such parameters.

This chapter, which is associated with the personality, refers only to normal,mature persons (as these terms are already defined). The pathological casesare not taken into account here. In fact, to study the pathological cases is anonsense before defining the normal situation.

This general theory, as it will be developed for specific situations, isuseful to understand also pathological cases. For instance, MDT defines XZM-models (illegal models) as models which are not integrated in the normalstructure of models. Such models could be very important to issues related tothe personality, but there are still few data about XZM models.

There is another very important parameter associated with the personality,which was not described above; it is a parameter associated to theconsciousness. Because it is so important, it will be described in a separatedsection.

THE CONSCIOUSNESS

It is considered that there are some long-range ZM models (image or symbolic),which contain the being as an element. When such a model is activated, it hasto initialize. That is, it has to find the positions of all the elements(including the being itself) and to find all the relations between theelements by interaction with the external reality.

The consciousness is the capacity of a brain to make and operate a model,which contains the being as an element.

It is very important to emphasize that such models are normal models, whichare made by that brain in interaction with the external reality. Such modelscannot be assimilated by education, for instance.

The level of consciousness is associated with the capacity of that brain tofind and refresh, in a continuos way, the position of the being in a model.

Such models are long-range models. Their elements are already developed asmodels. Some models can also contain some elements associated with the person.The number of planes of consciousness could be high.

Example: I am a Romanian citizen. I live in Europe, so I am also European. Ihave a job; I have a position there. I live in a block of flats; I have also aposition in relation with the others who also live in my block of flats, andso on.

There are some models, which does not contain the person in an explicit way.This is level-1 of conciousness. Only some parts of that person are taken intoaccount. The consciousness is of level 2 when the person appears in anexplicit way in relation with other persons. On level 2, the person isintegrated in a group; the person knows the aims and the rules of the groupand acts accordingly.

Examples: when a person drinks water from a glass, the person does not appearin an explicit way; only some components of that person are taken intoaccount. If the person knows what he is doing, and is able to predict hisevolution, then he is on level 1 of consciousness. If a person plays a game ina team, and he knows the aims and the rules of the group and communicates withthe members of the group, then that person is on level 2 of consciousness. Onlevel 2, the person is integrated in the model, as an explicit element, as anyother person of that group.

Problem: On level 2, a possible problem is to consider one's own activity as agood one, and to consider that some other members of the group are low qualitypersons. This could happen with a non-hom*ogenous group, but also it ispossible that the model is a low quality one (the person has made a lowquality model associated with the aims and the rules of the group). As weknow, any model is made to be stable (logical or harmonic). We also know thatthe stability of a model is not a guarantee that the model reflects in a goodway the external reality. Thus, for a good level 2 of consciousness, it isnecessary that all the members of the group have about the same basic model.

Observation: it is possible that faced with a new external reality, for whichthere is no available model, the PSM activates itself. As the PSM isactivated, all the normal models are disabled and so the consciousnessdisappears. Such a situation is called "shock status". The consciousnessreturns only after the normal structure of models regains control.

The highest level of consciousness is level 3. There are few persons who areable to reach level 3 of consciousness. It is not easy to understand theexplanations associated with this level.

On level 3, a person is able, e.g. to think with "the others' head". Also, onthis level, a person is able to see how the others see him. This implies tomake a model which contains the model of the group as an element in a longer-range model.

On level 3, the brain has to work very hard. There are few person who are ableto do such an effort. It is harder to do such an effort on image models thanon symbolic models. Usually, level 3 of consciousness is met on symbolicmodels. However, the word "empathy" can be associated on image models, with alow level 3 of consciousness.

Note: Level 3 requests a hard effort for a brain and at the same time, thepersonal advantage from such effort is not too high. Thus, the absolutemajority of the population is on level 1 and 2.

The persons able to stay on level 3 are the elite of a group.

Example: let's see an example involving car driving. On level 1, a driver isreacting only when a situation occurs, or is about to occur. On level 2, adriver is able to predict what the other drivers will do beforehand. On level3, a driver is able to understand every driver around him, and he is also ableto take in account some possible problems, which can occur in association withthe overall traffic problems. Of course, the best drivers are those on level3, but the effort to stay on level 3 is so big, that, at some moments, thebrain will not be able to do such an effort, and the driver "drops" on level1, when he can cause accidents. This could be the explanation of some"inexplicable" accidents, with persons who are considered as very good from aprofessional point of view. Of course, this is a very general problem; it isnot related only with car drivers.

We already defined the elite of a group as those persons who are able to stayon level 3. Let's consider that a person has to work in a position where onehas to take care of the community. Such persons must anticipate what problemscould occur in future, to be able to protect the community. Level 3 isabsolutely necessary. But, there is a problem. When a person is to be selectedfor such a job, he has to gain some abilities. The problem here is that suchabilities are, usually, obtained after some specific training.

The training courses have, as main goal, to ensure that the students haveassimilated a number of models. When a problem associated with such modelsoccurs, they will activate the suitable model, and so they will solve theproblem. But, to be able to do the job in a good way, the main quality is notto have the right model, when the problem occurs, but to anticipate fastenough, what kind of problem will occur. That is, to be on level 3. I neverheard that the selection of personnel is done based also on the level ofconsciousness criterion. Even worse, the persons who are able to assimilateeasily new models, have a reduced capacity to make their own models (as level3 requires) and so, the present system of education stimulates the students tohave a low level of consciousness.

The present level of development of the human brain is too low to have, on alarge scale, a level 3 of symbolic consciousness.

The consciousness based on symbolic models is requested in any situation whenan elite group is necessary. In such a situation, every individual of thegroup is associated with a symbolic element. Such a symbolic element containsnothing which could be associated with the "human" part of an individual (noemotions, no feelings, no love and so on).

Let's see now the consciousness in the animal world. Some superior animals,which live in packs, know their position in the pack. So, there is a form oflevel 2 image consciouness for such animals. Of course, such a level isassociated with a single model, which is made by every individual of the pack.Even more, the position of every individual could be changed in time.

But what about ants. There is very little probability that an ant is able tomake models in interaction with the external reality. The ants are based onthe models of their PSM, (which are ready made when they are born). Forinstance, level-2 of consciousness could be recognized when there is acompetition between the members of the group, as it happens in a pack ofmammals, or when an individual has to be trained. Such things cannot be met inthe world of the ants. Thus, ants have no consciousness (except level 0) as aresult of their incapacity to make models on their own.

Some superior animals, which live in association with human beings (e.g.dogs), are able to create on their own some models of interaction with thehuman beings. So, they could have level 2 consciousness.

ABSTRACT: MODEL DICTIONARY

M: these are models associated in a direct way with sense organs (M-eyes, M-ears and so on).

YM: concept models directly or indirectly associated with different entitiesof the external reality.

ZM: General long-range models. For any external reality, the brain makes oneor more ZM-models. They generate the truths, the reality, the knowledge andthe consciousness.

ZM-models are activated by the associated external reality. There are also ZM-models that are not associated to an external reality (e.g. when we solve aproblem of mathematics).

Any ZM-model associated to an external reality works in association with some
M-models, and also in assocition with any other ZM-model.

MZM: this term is not associated with a model, but with a structure ofdifferent ZM, YM, ZAM, and AZM models. These models are very often usedtogether. Such a structure is generated by the technological implementation ofthe brain, and it optimizes the activity of the brain in a section of theexternal reality.

ZAM: these models are long-range models used to modify the external reality.They are artificial models (they are not generated by direct interaction withthe external reality) and they are also invariant (they cannot be changed bydirect interaction with the external reality).

AZM: these models are associated with the organs that can interact with theexternal reality (hands, legs and so on) in a direct way.

XZM: these models are called also "illegal models", because they are notincluded in the normal structure of models. A normal model is a model forwhich any prediction is accepted in a harmonic/logic way by any other model ofthe structure. XZMs are, thus, individual models which have no normalcommunication with other models. Thus, a brain is not able to detect suchmodels. In some situations, such models can become active and gain control ofthe being. They can also transmit some information to the normal structure ofmodels.

WBAM (would be-active models): such models are artificial models that aregenerated by a ZM-model. Thus, a ZM-model predicts a situation for which thereis no normal model. If a new external reality occurs, and there is no normalmodel to understand it, the PSM is activated. A ZM-model can make a WBAM-model, based on its predictions, so that, when the new external realityoccurs, the ZM will activate that WBAM and so PSM is not activated.

SHIELDING MODELS: Any model has the tendency to become stable. There are somemodels which cannot become stable. Such models can destabilize the wholestructure of models due to some infinite loops performed in order to gainstability (the model with problems will activate some other models, includingthe PSM, in a continuous way). A shielding model is created by the main ZM. Itintercepts some truths which can activate some other models (incuding the PSM)and transmits to the model with problems some information which stabilizes it.The reality generated by a shielding model is called "illusion". The bestknown shielding-model is religion. This shielding model stabilizes any modelwhich predicts the death of the person so it blocks the activation of the PSM.

STORY-TYPE MODELS: Faced with a new external reality, the normal tendency ofthe brain is to make a normal model, or to activate a suitable model from itscollection of models. But, when the external reality is changing very fast,this procedure cannot be followed. In this case, the brain records theinformation based on short-range models. These short-range models areconnected between them based on the order of occurence. Such a model (string-type) is called "story-type model". Story-type models are used later ("offline") to make or improve the normal models.

PROTECTION AND SURVIVAL MODEL (PSM)

This is the fundamental image model of any brain. When a new being is born,the brain contains only the PSM. The PSM contains a collection of basic shortrange models (e.g. reflex actions) and long-range models (e.g. the instincts)for a minimal protection of that being and to ensure the unconditionalsurvival of that being, forever (these are the basic design features).

The PSM contains also a model of the external body (bones, muscles, and so on)and also some basic models of interaction with the external reality (e.g. themodel to follow with the eyes the movement of an entity from external reality,or the model to touch an entity from external reality, which is in the rangeof the hand). There are also some models to ensure the equilibrium of thephysical body.

Faced with a new external reality, the PSM is activated and it tries to solvethe problem, based on its short-range models (e.g. reflex actions), but itwill also create a new element, which is associated to the new externalreality. Once the new element is created by PSM, this element is self-developing as a model, in order to understand the new external reality. Whensuch an external reality occurs again, the specialized model created duringthe first occurence of the new external reality will be activated instead ofthe PSM. Such models are normal models (they do not belong to PSM).

Thus, as a new born being gains experience, the PSM will not be activated, butthe models previously created in the interaction of that being with theexternal reality.

A model, which belongs to PSM, cannot be changed regardless of the informationreceived from external reality (the PSM contains only invariant models). Inspecial conditions, e.g. when a big danger exists for the being (as detectedby PSM), it is possible that a new model enters the PSM. Basically speaking,any model can enter the PSM. For a normal brain, the PSM must contain only"standard models" (see the general theory and ETAs) because, once a model isin PSM, it cannot be changed regardless of the information received fromexternal reality. Even more, any information from external reality can beaccepted only if it can be accepted by PSM.

Example: Let's suppose that in the PSM of a person there is a non-standardmodel which considers that the frogs are very dangerous. Regardless of theinformation received from external reality, that person will be horrified whenfrogs are around.

The content of the PSM is very hard to be known because the PSM is activatedonly when there is no normal model to understand the external reality.

The PSM is an image model and it will remain so forever.

EXAMPLES, TESTS AND APPLICATIONS (ETA) ASSOCIATED TO THE MDT THEORY

These ETAs are intergrant parts of MDT and show how it works in some specificcases. The order of occurence of the subjects is random. MDT tries to keep itsgenerality as much as possible, independent of the technologicalimplementation of different brains.

ETA 1: The Model

The model is a collection of elements and relations between the elements.There are two types of models: image models (or analogic models) and symbolicmodels. The elements and relationships are given explicitly for the symbolicmodels, and implicitly for the image models.

Image models (analogic) can't be given in an explicit manner. They are givenas they are, as a whole. This is an intrinsic property of the image models.

To give a model in an explcit manner means to describe the elements and therelationship between the elements, but this takes us outside the analogicmodel. That means to translate the image model into a symbolic model (we needto use words to describe the image model). Even if the translated model isassociated to the image model, it is a different model.

Example: given an image model of an airplane, its elements are the main body,the wings etc. One of the wings could break in two, so it is made of twopieces. Actually, it contains an infinity of elements, as it could break inany way. In any real situation, it is by far easier to build an image model,than explain what had been built. This is why we say that an image model isjust given as it is, and not defined explicitly. Anytime we refer to an imagemodel, we need to take into account this fundamental issue.

Application 1:
Image models in poetry and painting

A poet imagines something- there is an image model in his mind. The poet willtranslate somehow this image model into several symbolic models (e.g.statements), trying in fact to associate the image model from his mind to acollection of symbolic models, materialised in the text of the poem. It isassumed that the text of the poem, together with other image-type elements(Rythm, rhyme, intonation etc) will be able to make the reader/listener toreassemble somehow the initial image model from the poet's mind.

In the case of painting, the painter has in front of him a subject (e.g. aperson). This subject is perceived through all the senses the painter has.What results is an image model of the subject based on this complexinteraction. This image model from the painter's mind will be translated intoanother image model that will show on the canvas. The translation means onlyto associate a model to another. The translated model can be built anyhowwithin very large limits, based on the complex image model from the painter'smind. It is supposed here as well, that the viewer will remake somehow as animage model the initial model from the mind of the painter.

Application 2:
Image models from the external reality

Long time ago, when people needed to build some complex structures (e.g. afortress), in the first phase they had to make a sketch of what they intendedto build. This is valid only for less complex constructions. For morecomplicated structures, the most used method was to build a 3D model. Themodel can be easily analyzed and modified. With the model in sight, the brainis able to simulate its behaviour for situations associated with the externalreality and to correct the discovered deficiencies, on the model. This modelcan be used at the effective building of the external reality.

Nowadays, the image models are very highly developed. E.g. a model built basedon complex specs can be used to simulate its behaviour during an earthquake.The data obtained can be used to predict the behaviour of the actual building.

The highly developed image models are used on large scale in technology(skyscrapers, suspension bridges, airplanes, and actually in any complextechnological product). These image models can then be used to simulatepossible situations from external reality, including extreme situations,before the actual construction of the technological product.

The symbolic models are built using GCL (General Communication Language). Theyhave explicit elements and relationships. They can be built only by humans.The most important symbolic model is GCL itself. Its elements are in the firstplace the nouns, as the relationship between elements are mainly the verbs.Contrasting to image models, which evolve based on laws of harmony, symbolicmodels evolve based on logic (see general theory). The presence of GCL in abrain will define that brain as a human brain.

Important note:GCL is not really a symbolic model. It contains only components (elements andrelationships). Whenever a symbolic model for communication is built (e.g. asentence), one needs to choose components from GCL. As any use of GCL ismaterialised in a symbolic model and because there is no proper word for it,GCL is considered by extension a symbolic model.

Technology uses models on a very large scale. Image models have initially beenused, but nowadays, due to the high costs of the image models and for otherreasons, symbolic models and the use of computers are favoured (e.g. symbolicmodels are built currently for buildings, suspension bridges, airplanes andspacecrafts, with the help of computers).

For training purposes, symbolic models are built and used for simulation ofnuclear plants, or flight behaviour, or anything, where it is necessary thatfuture crew/staff to gain experience beforehand. Present technology is basedin fact almost exclusively on symbolic models.

Application 3: From the iron to the space shuttle

Apparently an iron is too simple to require a design based on a symbolicmodel. False.

Let's take a simple technological detail: the holes used for steam exhaustsfor moisturising the tissue. Some questions are, e.g. how many holes it needs,where, what shape and dimensions are needed for uniform moisturising of thetissue with minimum water consumption and at lowest costs. Clearly, it ispossible to build analogic models, which can be tested experimentally. Basedon the analogic (image) models one can obtain certain results, but there is noguarantee that the optimal solution was found. The existing image model cannotbe modified, as such. If we want to make any change in the image model we haveto rebuild it from scratch, as we already know, which implies time and money.

The vaporisation and dispersion process of the steam through a complexstructure as the surface of the iron, tissue and the support, is very complex.Physicists, based on symbolic models, with help of computers, solve this typeof problem. The rebuilding of the model in order to find a better solution isfar simpler on a symbolic model, than on an image model.

If in the case of an iron, the highest risk is that the customers won't buythe non-performing iron, in other cases the risks involved are unacceptable.

For instance, the space shuttle was 'verified' for reentering the atmosphereon a symbolic model. This phase of the flight, by far the most dangerous,would have been impossible to test before the actual flight. The crew wastrained on symbolic models in all the phases of the flight, and in all normaland exceptional situations. The astronauts have learned to fly for reenteringthe atmosphere, based mainly on training on symbolic models.

Given a model (image or symbolic), it can be used to predict its furtherevolution. This is achieved by changing/ adding/ removing a parameter/element/ relationship and following what happens. This process is calledsimulation on the model. As we know, the results of the simulation on themodel are called truths associated to the model.

When a model is associated to external reality, by simulating on the model, wecan predict the evolution of the external reality. These operations are doneeither by the human (image and symbolic) or the animal brains (image modelsonly).

We need to note here- it is as important, as it looks trivial: We extend tothe external reality the structure of symbolic and image models from ourbrain. This extension is done not only in the domain of science andtechnology, but also in all domains of life. For each of us, the world itselfis given as a sum of all the projections to external reality of all the activemodels of the brain. This statement is true for animals as well.

Example: The laws voted in the parliament are long-range symbolic models; theyare an extension of the structure of models from the brains of the authors ofthe laws.

The prediction of the evolution of external reality (see general theory) isthe main requirement of design for the human or animal brain. Thus, thisrequirement is fulfilled by the facility of the brain to build and operatemodels.

ETA 2: Truth, reality, and communication

Any result of the simulation on a model is a truth associated to that model.As pointed out in the general theory, a truth is associated by us to asymbolic message (generated by a symbolic model); however in order to keep theterminology simple, in the case of image models, a result obtained bysimulation on the model is also called 'truth', in spite of the fact that itis used 'as is', without the necessity to explain it.

Example: If an animal builds an image model of the external reality,predicting a dangerous situation, it is possible to find the solution to theproblem by simulation on the model. This solution (the truth) might be, e.g.to flee. The truth will activate directly the preexistent action model, whichis in this case to flee.

We'll refer from now on only to symbolic models. If no model is specified, anytruth is nonsense.

Example: The truth is ãa car crashed into a wall". This truth might begenerated by any of the following models:-accident-test-movie/cartoon-computer game

In any of the above models, the specified truth is interpreted differently (ithas a different meaning).

The theory underlines thus, that the model which generated a truth needs to bespecified and accepted before the presentation of the truth. This basicrequirement is always met in positive sciences.

In common life, the declaration of the model is not always done, and often themodel does not even exist in an elaborate and coherent form. Emerging fromhere a long line of conflicts between individuals, groups or cultural zones,which all have their own reality associated to the same external reality. Thiscan be interpreted as a design deficiency of the brain. Some can compensatethis hardware deficiency by software, e.g. the individuals situated on level 3of consciousness (see the general theory).

There is a fairly common situation in external reality when a person states atruth, and then builds the model to support it. This happens usually forpersons based on image models only, and when they interact with externalreality, they only translate the image truth to a symbolic truth. Such personsare recognisable by their rudimentary logic and their tendency to fragment anydiscussion to particular sections of the external reality. Such persons can'tdiscuss a single general subject.

Exercise: Verify yourself and others on the existence and status of the model,which generated any stated truth.

It is known from the general theory that a basic problem in the constructionof a model associated to the external reality is that we do not knowbeforehand the elements of the specific external reality. These elements needto be discovered, and the discovered elements are the only ones we can operatewith.

Warning: The external reality, as defined in MDT, can't have elements andrelationships. The elements and relations appear only in the model associatedto the external reality. However, in many statements we will use notions likeelements and relationships of the external reality, but these need to beunderstood as elements and relations of the model associated to the externalreality. For the external reality, one can use the term 'entity', whichidentified by the model will become an element of it. However, we have no wordavailable to associate to external reality in the case of relations. Byperfectioning the language, such deficiencies will be solved.

A basic requirement for the existence of communication is the existence of asingle common model accepted by both parts who want to communicate. Without acommon symbolic model, there is no communication, as both sides will havetheir own list of definition of the terms associated to the words.

Usually, communication is done only on symbolic models. However, there aremore primitive forms of communication using image models (between people,between humans and animals, between animals).

The reality is defined in the general theory as the sum of all truthsgenerated, or possibly generated, by a model. As each person has his/her owncollection of models, the reality as understood by each person is differentfrom one person to another.

It is important to specify that in the domain of positive sciences,fundamental models generally accepted do exist. One of these models is e.g.Newton's Mechanics. As this model generates a reality, all physicists considerthat the 'reality' is the one generated by Newton's Mechanics, within itslimits of applicability.

Due to reasons associated to confusions of the science of knowledge, thereality generated by Newton's model is considered as 'objective'. Thus,"objective reality" is a term generated by a generally accepted model inspecified conditions. From this point of view, the fact that the Sun revolvesaround the Earth is an "objective truth", at least at the level of the year1500.

It needs to be stated by all means that without a model, the external realitycannot be perceived. After building a model associated to the externalreality, what we perceive is what the model states as perception. If, e.g. wesay that 'snow is white', this is the result generated by a model associatedwith external reality, external reality which contains the element 'snow'. Oneof the properties of the element 'snow' is that it is white. Under themicroscope (another model) the same snow looks transparent.

As we already mentioned, reality is the one generated by the model associatedto a given external reality. Each time we state a truth, we have to specifyfirst the model.

Example: There are an A and a B person. A is taller than B, as it results frommeasurement. The term 'length' is generated of the model 'space', as Euclid'sGeometry and Newton's Mechanics understand it. These fundamental modelscharacterize this truth as objective. If we say that "A is more attractivethan B", this is a subjective truth. However a model has also generated thistruth, more or less elaborate/ specified and more or less accepted bydifferent persons.

The conclusion is that the term 'subjective truth' is resulting from a model,which is not unanimously accepted or insufficiently elaborated. In this case,it is clear that people should avoid such truths or should declare the model.

With the evolution of thinking, the term 'subjective truth' will be removedfrom the thinking system.

ETA 3: Fundamental problems associated to scientific knowledge

Computers are known as devices used to play complex games based onintelligence, to write texts of different types, to make calculations, tostore and manage data, to send or receive information, to build and operatesymbolic models, etc.

A question occurs however: which is the principle of work of a computer?

If we do not interact with the computer via a primary programming language(Assembler or machine language), I believe that it is impossible to find theprinciple of work of the computer either from in- or outside of it.

The fundamental function of a computer is to do logical and arithmeticaloperations with binary numbers with the help of an electronic device(register) called 'accumulator'.

If we are in a text editor, for instance, and we press a key corresponding toa letter, that letter will show on the screen. For the unaware, it isdifficult to imagine that by pressing a key associated with a letter, aregister-accumulator will make hundreds or thousands of logical andarithmetical operations on binary numbers, only to have that letter shown onthe screen.

This example wants to illustrate that, based on the external analysis of whatis happening, it is impossible to figure out the principle of work of aridiculously simple device as a computer (ridiculously simple compared to thebrain of a dog, e.g.)

The method used in positive sciences is not the analysis of primary data. Themethod of analysis works on extremely simple systems, which can be perceivedon image models as well. The method used in positive sciences is to guess asymbolic model, based more or less on the interaction with external reality,and to verify the model.

It results that the method of understanding the brain based on the analysis ofprimary data is at least inefficient.

A fundamental problem of knowledge is that primary facts can be understoodonly if a model to integrate them already exists. Without a model, we areforced to build one on the spot. Thus, each fact of the external reality couldbe understood based on a local model. The correlation between facts, eachunderstood in its local model is impossible. This is why a method of guessinga fundamental model was imposed. Based on the single fundamental model thefacts are interpreted and reinterpreted. Such a method allows the correlationof the primary facts.

If the model does not make good predictions, it will be modified and theprocess restarted from scratch, until we find the model in which all theprimary facts can be understood. The process stops when the predictions aretrue with an acceptable rate. In that phase we can talk about knowledge.

As a comment, we need to say that the analytical method is based on short-range models (can be affected by schizophrenia and XSPC), while the syntheticmethod is based on long-range models which allow not only correlation betweenfacts, but also a cross-check between the local models.

The need for a single fundamental model comes from the fact that any used wordneeds to have a unique definition. This is true only in case of the existenceof a single fundamental model.

Example: what would happen if in common language everybody used differentdefinitions for the words used? The communication would not exist, everyonetalking his/her own language.

The conclusion is that any positive science is based on a single fundamentalmodel, stated from the very start. This symbolic model can be based on primaryfacts, results of the interaction with external reality or on theoreticalprinciples (e.g. the principle of inertia in Newton's Mechanics cannot bevisibly connected by facts seen in the external reality).

However, as in the external reality there are a huge number of facts difficultto correlate, the method to find the fundamental symbolic model is guessing.Once the model built, this will order in a univoque manner all the primaryfacts. Moreover, it will make predictions that will lead to new discoveries orconfirmations of itself.

As we have shown in the general theory, we reflect sections of the externalreality in models. The models make predictions. If the predictions are good,we will use the model a next time too, as it proved to be useful.

Now we have the normal answer to a fundamental question asked for long time:'why do the laws of nature exist?' or 'Why the world has an order?'

As it results from MDT, we reflect the external reality based on symbolicmodels. These symbolic models need to be logical in order to be stable. If asymbolic model associated to external reality will not reflect it correctly,we will build a new model.

Example: The external reality can change due to the movement of some objects.Then we will build a symbolic model containing the term 'velocity'. Thissymbolic model will make good predictions provided the objects move at aconstant velocity. If the velocity is not constant, the model will not reflectcorrectly the external reality. Then we will build a new symbolic model,introducing a new element called 'acceleration'. This model will make correctprediction for the objects that move at variable velocities as well. Thus, bybuilding of adequate models, the external reality is reflected by stablemodels.

It is very easy to confuse the external reality with its 'image' generated bya stable symbolic model.

As we know, we have no direct acces to external reality. We perceive it basedon some associated models. Thus, as a conclusion, the impresion that nature isa structure based on stable laws and order comes from the fact that we reflectthe external reality based on logical and stable symbolic models.

ETA 4: General Communication Language (GCL), dictionary

GCL is the first symbolic model generated by the human brain. At thebeginning, only its spoken form existed, later it appeared as a writtenlanguage too.

As the purpose of the construction of models is to predict the evolution ofexternal reality, GCL was always associated directly or indirectly withexternal reality.

GCL is a very special symbolic model. It is used both for generalcommunication and for building other more precise symbolic models.

Examples of developed languages included in GCL: diplomatic language, juridiclanguage, logical and mathematical language, languages based on gestures andsigns, computer languages.

GCL can be used to build symbolic models that are associated to externalreality, e.g. the positive sciences.

It is supposed that GCL occurs by spontaneous interaction between people butthis is an abnormal mode of occurence. It is not clear to me that a languagecan start from scratch, but let's suppose so. The abnormal mode of occurenceis associated with another aspect. The language for any device used to processinformation (as the brain is) is made of a collection of terms and relations.Any element/relation of the symbolic model (language) must be associated witha component/function of the hardware. That is, the hardware must be knownbefore the language is built. This is the normal situation, e.g. when acomputer, which has no associated programs, has to be used.

But, as it is believed, the language used by the brain appeared withoutknowing the hardware. The main consequence is that all the words, which haveto be associated with the basic feature of the hardware, have no precisedefinition.

Thus, we find in dictionaries what I call "external definition" of the words.
That is, such definitions are not based on the hardware. MDT as a theory
associated with the hardware, generates "internal definitions" of the words.
Some such definitions will be given below.

Dictionary of internal definitions for some words:

1. To believe: there is an incomplete (unstable) model. Such a model couldbecome stable (harmonic/logic) if some artificial elements/relations areincluded (artificial means that something is not generated by the interactionwith the external reality). After such changes, the model becomes stable. Anytruth generated by such a model must be associated with the word "to believe".Also, the artificial changes must be specified before.

2. To know: there is a stable model (harmonic/logic) which is integrated in astable structure of models. Any truth generated by such a model can beassociated with "to know". I want to emphasize that from this does not resultin any way that the truth is correct, when compared to the external reality."To know" means just that the whole structure of models of the brain supportsthat truth, and nothing more! As one can see, "to know" is associated only tothe structure of models, and not to the external reality.

3. As I know: there are some models which support a truth but some otherrelated models are not good enough to support that truth.

4. Correct, to be correct: this term has at least two meanings.4a. There is a model generating a prediction in association with the externalreality. This prediction is compared with IR. If the result is positive, thenthe truth is correct.4b. There is a stable structure of models. Such a structure has alreadypredicted a large number of correct (4a) truths. In such a situation, anytruth generated by the structure is considered to be correct (see also thedefinition of the term "to know").

To be correct based on definition 4a means to make an experiment (anycomparison between a prediction and IR is called "experiment"). There are avery limited situation when an experiment can or may be done (e.g. if theproblem is to verify if a bridge will survive or not in case of an earthquake,then such a problem cannot be solved based on an experiment).

Let's analize now a little the word "wrong". If a model generates wrongpredictions based on IR, this does not mean usually that the model is wrong.This word is usually associated to a model, which is not suitable to aspecific external reality.

For instance Newton's Mechanics is wrong for objects, which travel at a speedcomparable with the speed of light, but is correct at low speed.

5. To understand: there is an incomplete model and there is an IR (fromexternal reality or from other models). The model is selfimproving based onthat IR. The term "understand" is used when a model is improved in such a way.

6. To imagine: is the main term associated to any operation on image models.

7. To think: it is the main term associated to any operation on symbolicmodels.

For human beings, usually, the symbolic models are mixed with image models butwhen "to think" is used, the general frame continues to be a symbolic one.

8. Intelligence: is the facility to make and operate a long-range model. Thereis a kind of intelligence based on image models (human and animal) and onebased on symbolic models (human only).

9. To represent: there is a complex model, which is too big to be used as awhole. Such a model can be associated to a simplified model, which on its turnis associated only to a section of the main model. Such a model represents themain model on the restricted domain. We should never forget that arepresentation model is based on the main model, and the main model only isfully associated to the external reality.

10. Emotion: this is a temporary state which occurs when a new externalreality appears, and no suitable short-range model is available. Emotion isassociated ONLY to a lack of a suitable SHORT-RANGE model. In such a situationthe PSM is activate. But the activated PSM does not consider this externalreality as a dangerous situation. Even so, it builds a suitable element. Suchan element is self-developing to understand the new external reality. Theemotion starts when PSM is activated, and disappears when a new suitableshort-range model is activated. Because emotion is associated with theactivation of PSM, in an emotional status, the conciousness disappears or isat least attenuated.

The brain can predict the possiblity that an emotional status occurs.Sometimes such status can be prevented by a suitable WBAM, built in advance.That is, a ZM will build a WBAM based on the available information about afuture new external reality. ZM will activate that WBAM when the new externalreality occurs (see also the general theory).

We already emphasized that emotions are associated to the lack of a short-range model, when a new external reality occurs. The word "angry" can beassociated with the lack of a long-range model associated with a full sectionof the external reality (for instance when a person lives in an environment,which he/she doesn't fit in). In such a situation, the PSM is activated aswell, but it has no solution. In fact, PSM can't build a long-range model. Along-range model is difficult to build, because it starts from a general modelwhich is not directly associated to a specified external reality. The lack ofa suitable long-range model means that many short-range models can becomeunstable, due to a lack of correlation between them. Such a person has afeeling that there is a problem, but he/she cannot identify it. Such a personis in an angry-status. About the same considerations can be associated to theword "anxiety". Here we can see a class of problems associated to the factthat the words in common life are not associated to the hardware and so, theexternal definitions are not precise enough. As the language will evolve basedon internal definitions, the quality of the language will improve.

MDT is able to generate a definition, and then a word has to be associated tothat definition. Unfortunately, the words have already an external definition.Thus, there are two possibilities: to invent a new word, or to use an alreadyexisting word. In the latter situation, two definitions associated to the sameword could exist: an internal one generated by MDT, and an external one, as wecan find in dictionaries. My decision was to use as much as possible thealready existing words, with the risk to have two different definitionsassociated to the same word. As MDT will be accepted, all the words associatedto functions of the brain will be associated only to their internaldefinitions.

11: To be irritated, to be under stressSuch a phrase is used when there is a temporary situation of instability ofthe structure of models. Such a status can affect the short-range models (tobe irritated) or the long-range models (to be under stress).

In the following, we will describe some situations when such a temporaryinstability can occur.

11a. There is a normal model associated to the actual external reality. Theproblem occurs when such external reality evolves in a cyclical way, for verylong time. In such a situation, the prediction of the evolution of theexternal reality is identical with IR, forever.

If the external reality is a sound, and if the sound contains a sequence whichis repeated on and on, this uses a lot of energy of the brain for a nonsenseactivity (due to the hardware design, it is impossible not to hear a sound).Because the activation of other models becomes difficult, there will be aninstability of the structure of models, and so there is an irritation-status.

Examples: the use as weapon of the rattlesnake's rattle and of the "Chinesedrop"

It is important to observe two parameters: the length of the sequence and therepetition interval. The musical piece called "Bolero" by Maurice Ravelcontains a sequence, which is long enough to produce no irritation. In fact,every time when the sequence is repeated, there are other musical instruments.In this way, this musical piece is not too close to the irritation limit. Evenso, at the end of the piece, the repeated sequence ends, producing an instantrelaxation.

Let's see this problem in the case of visual arts. Let's suppose a large whitesurface. Such a surface can produce irritation, because in any point of thissurface, the IR is identical with the prediction. There is a natural tendencyto put some elements on that surface, to reduce the irritation. But, if thedetails are randomly spread, the prediction will be different of the IR inmost of the points. This also can produce some irritation. The solution foundin about all cultural zones and times was to have some sequence made ofidentical elements, but every element has to be complicated enough so thatsometimes the IR is identical with the prediction, and sometimes not. Whensuch a surface is explored, the brain seems to have a pleasure. The pleasurecan be defined as a situation when the prediction is close to IR, but aboutnever the same. This can be seen mainly on cultural products of ancientcultures, but also nowadays.

We can see this also on the shape of the Christian cross: a Christian-Orthodoxcross has more detail than a Christian-Catholic cross because the Orthodoxreligion is mostly oriented to image models while the Catholic religion ismore oriented to symbolic models.

The modern cultural zones are based mainly on symbolic models. There is areduced tendency to see all the details in a symbolic environment. Thus aperfectly plane surface, without details, will produce no irritation. This isso because, in a symbolic environment, the interaction based on image modelsis not important anymore.

11b. The lack of stability of the structure of models could occur when theexternal reality is unchanging for a very long time. Here, the prediction isalso identical with IR, but there is an additional technological feature,which will be described below.

As we know from the main theory, any active model will predict in a continuousautomatic way the possible evolution of the external reality (this is a basichardware feature). Now, the problem is how often this prediction is made. Mysupposition is that the speed of this activity is variable, and depends on thespeed of changing of the external reality. That is, when the external realityis changing very fast, the new predictions are made also very often.

Now, if the external reality is not changing anymore, there could be aproblem: the model has to make a new prediction, but there is no reason to dothis. Such a situation can also produce a temporary perturbation of thestability of the structure of models, i.e. irritation.

In such a situation, the brain could activate other ZMs, (e.g. ZMs which arenot connected to the unchanging external reality) up to the moment when therewill be a change in the main external reality. This activity could be a sourceof mistakes or even accidents, as the local-ZM becomes, temporarily, one,which is not connected to the main external reality. The accidents can occur,for instance, when the external reality is changing and the suitable local-ZMhas not enough time to reinitialize.

Example: a driver is in a hurry and stops at a stoplight. The external realityis not changing for a while and so there could be an irritation. Under stressconditions, the driver could activate another model (associated or not to theexternal reality) and so, he/she is not properly prepared for the moment whenthe traffic light changes to green. Because this is an important source ofirritation, in some cities there is an additional display, which counts thetime for red or green status, and so the irritation is diminished.

Thus, time flows with a variable speed, depending on the speed of change ofthe external reality (see ETA about "time").

11c. The word "irritation" is used also when an external factor interfereswith the activity of a main model. This external factor could also activatethe PSM. Such a situation can also affect the stability of the structure ofmodels and so, produce irritation.

As we know, faced with a new external reality (for instance a strong noise),the brain will switch from the actual-ZM to another model, which understandsthe new situation. When such external perturbation occurs on and on, the brainis forced to switch the ZMs very often. Such activity can be affected bymistakes, because switching from a model to another is a very complexactivity. When a model is deactivated, some information has to be stored to beused when the model will be reactivated. Sometimes, the external reality canchange so much that the stored information becomes of no use. But the braindoes not know easily if the stored information is good or not at the newactivation. So, there could be mistakes, and the stability of the structure ofmodels can also be affected (irritation occurs).

Because the activation and deactivation of a symbolic model is much morecomplicated than for an image model, the switching between a symbolic modeland an image model, or even worse, between two symbolic models, is verydangerous (don't use the mobile phone when you drive, e.g.)

12. Love, to love

The main model of any brain (human or animal) is the Protection and SurvivalModel (PSM). If something (a person, an animal, an object, an idea…) isincluded by a person in his/her PSM (as a model, of course), the relationbetween that "something" and that person is a love relation. That is, e.g. aperson A includes a person B (as model) in his/her PSM. The person A willtreat person B in the same way as he/she treats his/her legs, hands, eyes etc.

Here we use the convention that A indicates the person who is in love and B isthe person included in the PSM as a model.

The most important love-relation seems to be between a mother and herchildren.

As we defined the term "love" the fact that A loves B is totally independenton the fact that B loves A.

We already described love based on PSM. There is another type of love, whichis not based on PSM. Thus, the person A makes a structure of models whichcontains B in about all of them. If B disappears, the models would becomeobsolete, which produces a large instability of the structure. The problemcould be solved by another "B" or by a shielding model or by suicide.

Because love is based mainly on image models, about all of the written aboveis true for animals too.

13. Happiness, to be happyMDT considers that there are two basic modes of interaction of the brain withthe external reality: to generate the reality based on the external realityand to modify the external reality.

Continuous happiness is associated to the status of the brain which buildsaction models (ZAMs) based on ZMs-only. That is, to do and want only what ispossible (as ZMs predict). So any activation of a ZAM is a success (ZAM isable to reach its aims). The happy persons have a big contribution to thestability of the society, but small contribution to its advance.

We already defined the disharmonic person as the person who builds andactivates ZAMs without taking in account too much the predictions of the ZMs.Usually such persons are unhappy, but sometimes they are able to reach theiraims and so, at least for a short time, they are in a status of high levelhappiness.

14. Intuition

Based on MDT, intuition is associated to the capacity to obtain imageinformation in a symbolic frame.

That is, when we are in the frame of a symbolic model and there is a problemwithout a solution, an image model can be activated automatically on its own(as we already know). Such image model is able to make a prediction but thereis no proof or reason for it (because an image model generates image-truths!).There is just a feeling that such information is true. The symbolic model canuse this information to solve its problems. In this case, we speak aboutintuition.

The intuition is similar to the extra-sensorial perceptions: we gain someinformation without any explanation about the source of it and there is noproof to support it. The difference is that an illegal model generates theextra-sensorial information, and a normal image model, which is activated in anormal symbolic frame, generates the intuition.

Note: everything which is associated to the consciousness is generated by thelocal-ZM. In the case of intuition, the ZM is a symbolic one. When an imagemodel generates information, it is just transmitted to a symbolic local-ZM.Because the consciousness is generated by the local-ZM, that ZM is not able tofind the source of the information, and the proof for it because it was notgenerated by the ZM or by any normal model.

15. Consciousness

The consciousness is associated to the facility of a brain to make and operatea model, which contains the being itself as an element.

Two types of consciousness exist: image consciousness and symbolicconsciousness. The absolute majority of the population has only imageconsciousness. Also, on animal level, at least the mammals have some level ofimage consciousness.

Level-1 of consciousness: on this level, the being is able to predict theevolution of the external reality, based also on its activity in that externalreality. This facility ensures the success of the defense or attack activitiesin interaction with the external reality.

Level-1 consciousness is generated by short-range models.

Level-2 of consciousness: this level occurs only in a group (some packs ofmammals, any human group…). To be accepted by that group, any being mustassimilate and operate a long-range model associated to that group. Suchbeings must communicate with one another to meet the above requirements. Forhumans only, long-range models generate the rules, the laws, the methods andthe aims of the group.

Level-3 of conciousness: on this level, a human being is able to predict theevolution of the group, based on a model which contains the group as anelement, while he is a member of that group. The appartenence to the group isa basic condition here.

There are few persons, which are able to reach this level. The effort of thebrain to stay on level-3 is huge. The persons who are able to stay on level 3are the elite of the group. There are few direct personal advantages frombeing on level-3, but without an elite, the group is a low quality group.

The advance of a society is given by the power given to the actual elite. Itis important to note that there are some positions in a society, which mustbelong to the elite. Many times such positions are occupied by level-2persons. This happens usually in a low quality group or society.

ETA 5: NULL model

Let's consider that an M-model transmits no information (e.g. our eyes areclosed). A local-ZM takes the information from that M-model. Because the M-model transmits no information, the ZM must receive no information. What isreally received is called NULL-model. For a normal brain, in the abovecondition, the local-ZM must receive a completely dark surface. What is reallyreceived is an indication about the overall status of the brain.

For instance, in the above conditions, we can receive a dark surface with somerandomly moving points. That is, the local-ZM detects a bright point in aplace, but at the second scan the point is not there anymore. This means thatthere is a noise, but no important hardware problems. A stable image isgenerated by a hardware problem of M or ZM models.

Application: In the first seconds after wake up, with closed eyes, looktowards a moderately bright surface. Usually, one should perceive a darksurface full of grey points moving randomly. After a few seconds, the surfacebecomes a uniform dark-grey one. This is a typical situation for a brain in anormal status.

It is also possible, in the first moments, to see big bright points or shapes,moving randomly. They evolve to dark and small grey points, and then to auniform grey surface. In such a situation, the brain is not in a good shape(maybe the person did not sleep enough…)

Anyways, if the final status of the NULL model is a uniform grey surface, thebrain is OK.

This case has been illustrated for the eyes, but NULL models exist for allsenses.

ETA 6: Time

Excepting when specified otherwise, the subject is the same for human andanimal beings.

Based on MDT, time is not a parameter for the functions of the brain. This isa basic deficiency.

But there is a problem: as the brain predicts on and on the evolution of theexternal reality, how often is this activity done?

Of course, this problem is associated to the technological implementation ofevery type of brain, so it is outside the field covered by MDT. Even so, basedon MDT, we can make some assumptions.

Because the brain is an optimized device as to its energy consumption, weassume that the predictions about the evolution of the external reality aredone at a speed which depends on the changing speed of the external reality.

That is, the brain time flows with variable speed. This is also our feelingbased on our own experience. For instance, when we are involved in a complexactivity, time seems to flow too fast and when we have nothing to do, timeseems to flow very slowly.

This is a big design drawback. Without time, the long-range models could beinefficient or unusable. So, the brain is forced to compensate, somehow, thisdrawback.

One method is to use story-type models. They are not able to keep the controlof time, but they are able to record the order of occurence of someinformation. Even so, this method is not very efficient. A story-type modelcould fragment. Once it is fragmented, the correlation between the primaryinformation is lost.

Note: when a story-type model is fragmented, there is the tendency toreconnect the fragments, based on logic. Many times this reconstruction iswrong, but the impression could be good.

The fragmentation of the story-type models can be seen when a person describesa complex situation. During this activity, one could change the order of somefacts.

Another method, used by the brain to keep track of time, is to use somerhythm-models. Such models are specialized models, which try to guess whensomething will happen, based on what has already happened before.

For instance, if the brain receives a sequence of two sounds, a rhythm modeltries to guess when a third sound will occur. The supposition is that suchmodels try to find an algorithm, which will generate the sequence. Suchalgorithm must be changed on and on, in a fast dynamical way, to predictbetter and better when the next sound will occur.

Such rhythm-models can be used, e.g. to recognize the speech or to understandmusic.

The rhythm-models are not able either to solve the time problem, but they areable to solve some time-related problems associated to fast changing externalreality in the field of sounds.

Let's analyze a bit this problem. First of all, the rhythm-models are verywell developed for human beings, and they are of very low quality for animals.One assumption would be that, compared to animals, the human brain has a veryhigh capacity to make and operate image models, and, due to this, the rhythm-models are so good.

But, there are some other facts: the European civilization invented thepolyphonic music (the most advanced music). But the European civilization isdeveloping based on symbolic models. It is fair to suppose that symbolicmodels support the rhythm image-models.

We can take into account another idea as well: as MDT considers that thecapacity to make and operate symbolic models is generated by a specializedhardware (thus it cannot be produced by a normal evolution process), it ispossible that the capacity to make and operate rhythm models was added in thesame way. This supposition is supported by the fact that, while some animalsare able to make and operate some image models above the level of humanbeings, their capacity to make rhythm models is unusually low.

The problem of the origin of the rhythm models is left open for the moment.

Another method to compensate for the time keeping deficiency is to record somepattern-models of the external reality. That is, to record some informationbased on many M-type models, to build a pattern-model at a specific moment oftime, and to recognize the pattern later.

Such a pattern could be associated with the function of different organs ofthe being, or with some other information from outside the being.

The time problem is a big one for the brain. The brain will use any externalreference to keep the time as the day/night cycle, the movement of the sun andmoon and for humans only, clocks.

ETA 7: Music

Music is a long-range image model, which exists only for human beings. As anewborn baby grows, firstly, speech appears (a symbolic model) and only later,the qualities associated to understanding music. As music understandingcapabilities appear after the brain aquires the ability to build and operatesymbolic models, it is reasonable to suppose that the symbolic models supportthe development of music. This idea is supported also by the fact thatEuropean music (the most advanced in the construction of symbolic models) issuperior compared to any other music from the point of view of its complexity(polyphonic music was invented in Europe).

Given a sequence of a few sounds, the brain will try to predict the occurenceof the next sounds. Sometimes the prediction is correct sometimes not. If theprediction is good too often, the impression is described in words like:boring, monotonous or upsetting. When the prediction is not correct(there is alarge discrepancy between the prediction and IR), the sounds are uncorellated.If we have an acceptable difference (the sounds are considered corellatedafter modifying slightly the algorithm of generation of the sequence), then wecan associate this to music.

The corellation is associated with the capacity of generation of a sequencebased on an algorithm.

This automatic activity of continuous modifying the generation algorithm canproduce a positive state of mind, which can be called pleasure. This meansthat the predictions are correct constantly, with high probability, and thatthe ones, which are not correct, are accepted, after an acceptable change ofthe algorithm. This activity is called currently music.

The corellation can be supported implicitly, as it happens in classical musicor can be supported explicitly (e. g. by rhythm of drums).

If we accept the hypothesis of the existence of a facility associated withimage models (a hardware facility) to build an algorithm of generation ofcorellated information, then we could try to see if this facilty evolved intime or not.

Thus, in spite of the fact that the capacity of the brain to operate withimage models diminishes relatively in time, the development of the capacity tooperate with symbolic models generated new abilities of operation with imagemodels. In consequence, music evolves based on two somewhat contrarytendencies. The capacity to build and operate image models decreases due tothe increase of the capacity to operate symbolic model, and, on the otherhand, the symbolic models support the image models in the domain of music.

The symbolic models, which were developed especially in Europe, determined thehigh level of complexity of the music. The European polyphonic music is one ofthe results of the "marriage" between image and symbolic models in music.Other civilisations, which did not have an extensive development based onsymbolic models, have created in milleniums of evolution only a simple music.

Let's see in the following some elements of the evolution of music in Europe.The symbolic 'recipes' appeared in music composition in the time of J.S. Bach.The maximum complexity of the music was attained during the times of W.A.Mozart. In that period, the music had several simultaneous musical lines,which, according to possibilities, were followed by those who were able to doit. E.g. in the "Great Messa", KV 427 by Mozart, several musical planes exist,which have to be followed simultaneously. Even nowadays, just the recording ofthis work poses technical problems. This musical work is one of the peakcomplexity constructions in music.

Approximately after year 1800, due to the increased capacity to operate withsymbolic models, the capacity to operate image models decreased. Musiccontinued to be polyphonic, but became simpler, with a single melodic line (L.van Beethoven, contemporary with Mozart).

This simplified music was called romantic music, and was a form offundamentalism. The majority of the population lost their capacity to operatevery complex image models, and so, such a simplified music was generated.

This tendency continued with the increase of the limits of predictionsacceptability, due the increase of the capability of construction andoperation with symbolic models. E.g. the music composed by Igor Stravinsky.When his music appeared, it was rejected due to surpassing the limits ofacceptability. But, in a short time, other musicians and people accepted hismusic, as a consequence of the increase of the acceptability limits.

It is reminded that the increase of the acceptability limits is due to theincrease of the capacity to build generation algorithms. An assumption is thatthese algorithms are supported by symbolic models.

Nowadays, music is so "advanced" that it contains just a rudimentary rhythm,and an endless text (hip-hop or rap music e.g.).

The children of our times have a reduced capacity to understand music. Aroundthe year 1800, some 4 years old children were able to play the piano orviolin, or even to compose music. In our days, this is not met anymore. But,some children are able to build and operate computer-based symbolic models.

As it is shown also, in some other parts of the book, there is a new form offundamentalism nowadays: the rejection of the symbolic models by a fraction ofthe population. That is, some people return to harmony (there are many whoprefer Mozart e.g.). The present music is balancing between symbolic-typemusic (hip-hop or rap e.g.) and harmonic music. This tendency will continuefor a long time, because it is hard to believe that music will disappear (thebrain is based on image models forever), but returning to the year 1800 typeharmony is not possible anymore.

Music is defined as a special story-type model associated with sounds. Thisstory-type model has elements generated by an algorithm generator.

The generating algorithm is able to build in a dynamically way the elementswhich will be recorded by this special type story-type model. Based on thealgorithm, the model is able to predict the future sounds based on the soundsalready received.

Sometimes the algorithm generator is able to make a correct prediction of thesound which comes (a hit), sometimes not (a miss). If the prediction fails,then the generator will modify the algorithm and continue to predict whatfollows. When the number of misses is low, this could produce pleasure to thebrain. When the number of misses is zero, there is no pleasure (e.g. a boringmusic). When the number of hits is zero, there is no music (no correlationbetween the sounds).

As this special story-type model is an image-model, its power is decreasing asthe brain is evolving to symbolic models. On the other hand, it seems that thesymbolic models support the algorithm generator. That is, there are twotendencies that act in contrary directions. One tendency is to make asimplified music, based mainly on symbolic models (texts) in the frame of arudimentary rhythm (e.g. drums), as hip-hop and rap music and on the otherhand, to make music based on complex algorithms (to enlarge the limits ofacceptability). The present music is evolving between these two large limits.

The main tendencies of the present music are:

- The evolution based on symbolic models. This tendency increases the limitsof acceptability of what are and what are not correlated sounds.

- The rejection of the symbolic models by a fraction of the population, i.e.people want harmonic music.

- The return to harmony is possible only partially because many abilitiesassociated with the main story-type model are lost, due to the generaltendency of conceptualization of the image models. That is, the algorithmgenerator is better and better, but it acts on recorded data, which are asimplified copy of the external reality.

Let's see what is the situation with other arts. Almost all classical arts arein decline. Painting and sculpture are based on pure image models. The generaltendency is to make concept models, and so people are not able anymore toperceive fine details. This tendency is very easily seen in contemporary arts.The tendency in visual arts is to make works based on symbolic models, and toincrease the complexity. Some arts as poetry, painting and sculpture are onthe way to disappearance as stand-alone arts. Theatre, because it is based onsymbolic models, is surviving, as it tries to keep the contact with thetendencies of the society. Music is still in a good shape, as we already saw.The main ascending art is cinematography.

ETA 8: Cinematography

Let's make a symbolic model to understand the subject as follows:

- The importance of the symbolic models (thinking e.g.) increases

- A big fraction of the population has difficulties to evolve based onsymbolic models (fundamentalism)

- Fundamentalism means to return to image models

- This return is possible only partially.

Because returning to image models affects an important fraction of thepopulation, why is it not seen in painting and sculpture? The explanation isthat the brain has lost a lot of its capacity to make and operate pure imagemodels. The brain returns to image models, but it stops at the level ofconcept models.

Cinematography is one of the responses suitable to this situation. Thus, thereare cartoons, based on concept image models. They are strongly attached tosymbolic models. There are cartoons, in which symbolic models are moreimportant than the concept image models.

Today's successful movies are image models, which try to develop and extendsome of the incipient image models preexisting in the mind of the viewer.

We remind here that people have the tendency to expand their structure ofmodels outside their mind. When the models can't be expanded to the externalreality, there is the tendency to expand these models into a virtual reality.This is speculated by cinematography, depending on the profile of image modelsin different cultural zones.

From this point of view, movies can be very dangerous. They make thesedevelopments based on what people would like to happen and on the other hand,they favorize the fundamental tendencies of various social groups.

However, as they are attached to symbolic models, some movies are used todevelop symbolic models and fight fundamentalist tendencies and as such, havea positive impact on society.

A huge danger associated to art movies is blocking the capacity of people tothink independently (tendency towards induced schizophrenia XS1B). Each scriptis a long-range symbolic model; thus, the movie as a whole is logical. Thislong-range symbolic model is translated or associated to a long-range imagemodel. If the translation is correct, the image model will be harmonic aswell. Thus, an art movie is a logical and harmonical long-range image model.The fundamental problem is that it is not enough for a model to be logical andharmonical in order for it to have a good connection with the externalreality.

There are movies that try to reconstruct an external reality that no longerexists, an 'external reality' which will never exist, or anything else inbetween these very broad limits. The only condition is that the model isharmonic and logical. We cannot see the degree of connection with externalreality from within the model. This is where the danger originates.Independent thinking will be blocked by the large quantity of informationstructured harmonically and logically.

Many art films contribute largely to the aggravation of the level of inducedschizophrenia (XS1B). At the same time, there are many movies which contributeto the construction of long-range models that stabilize society.

ETA 9: The fundamentalisms of the world we live in

The main fundamentalism is the return to image models, and thus, the refusalof symbolic models. Symbolic models are based on extremely complex functions,which are not easily maintained operational. For a 'regular' brain, the energyconsumption is higher for symbolic models than for image models. However,there is a fraction of the population of developed countries working moreeasily with symbolic models than with image models.

Example: There was a time in the evolution of the brain, when extremelycomplex image models were built and translated to a symbolic form. It was thetime of the great novels (Balzac, Dostoievski etc.). Reading such works was asign of cultural superiority. These books are not read nowadays. The mainreason is the evolution towards symbolic models. The effort of the brain tounderstand and integrate the use of remote controls, cellphones or texteditors is perfectly comparable as intellectual effort with the understandingof the great works of universal literature.

There are too many who have difficulties to operate symbolic models. There isa fraction of the population who refuses symbolic models; this fraction seemsto be increasing.

Example: Microprocessors (the central part of a computer) have been inventedin USA. At that time there was a tendency all over the world to produce orreproduce such microprocessors. The first microprocessor was called 8080. Itwas upgraded to 80286. These microprocessors were reproduced in Europe, formerUSSR and Japan. 80386 followed, which was reproduced with great difficulties,but starting with 80486 the tendency to reproduce such devices was extremelylow. Presently there are two families of microprocessors, both designed andproduced in USA. This is interpreted by MDT as a danger of a break between themost advanced in the domain of symbolic models, and the slighly less advancedones (make your own comparison with the automobile industry). Even theadvanced cultural zones (Europe, Russia, Japan) make big efforts to keep thecontact with the most advanced (USA), but the danger of a break exists here aswell.

The fundamentalist reactions of the individuals, nations or even culturalzones are a great danger for human civilisation. If the fraction offundamentalists will increase too much, then, at the limit, two things mighthappen:

1. The world will fragment into nations/ cultural regions which can maintainthe rhythm of assimilation and development of symbolic models, andnations/cultural regions which will return to image models (fundamentalistreaction)

2. The same type of break will appear inside a nation/ cultural region.

The evolution shown at no.1, pushed to extreme, could generate terrorism, andthe one at 2 already generates 'escape' movements towards religions,antiglobalisation, ecology etc.

ETA 10: Terrorism

The evolution of society leads, for some nations, to an incapacity of furtherdevelopment based on symbolic models. These nations feel that the world isgoing towards something they can't follow and understand. The solution forthem is to adhere to an invariant or universally accepted model, like areligion or a nature/tradition conservation movement, to orient theiractivity, and to offer them an easily understandable and attainable goal inpredictible time (fundamentalist reaction).

Some individuals, who have strong fundamentalist reactions, could try tomodify the society by direct action. A class of such reactions is terrorism.

The definition for terrorism considered here is: terrorism is an antisocialphenomenon, which implies attacking some persons without an explicit reason.It also means destruction of material goods without explicit reasons, whenthese goods do not belong to a state.

If the persons attacked are the representatives of a government and the goodsattacked belong to the government, then we have acts of war. A state candefend itself from acts of war, but in front of a terror attack, theprotection offered by the state is limited. The main reason is that thegovernment officials accept the limitation of their rights, and they accept acertain discipline. These persons are well enough informed to understand thatthey could be the targets of an attack. The same is valid fo defending thegoods belonging to a state.

Many terrorist movements have tried to commit war acts and not terror acts.Thus, they try to obtain a legitimity as liberation movements, who fight forliberty or independence against a state.

Example: ETA in Spain tries to attack only the representatives of the state orlocal administration, and the goods belonging to them. It is difficult howeverfor ETA to comply with these rules, all of the time. IRA acts the same way,trying to delimit itself from terrorism. Both movements make notable effortsto be considered liberation movements at war with an opressive state, and notterrorist movements.

Al Quaida tried at some time to attack only American military targets (thusdelimiting itself from terrorism), but the attack on WTC in New York isclearly a terror act. The people killed were not representatives of the state,the planes used were not military, and the buildings did not belong to thestate). However the attack on the Pentagon was not a terror act, but a waract.

A practical aspect should be noted connected to the tendencies of terrorism:who has vocation to build, has no 'vocation' for terrorism. To build planes,buildings and so many other material goods supposes an immense effort onscientific and technological levels, in labour organisation, on the social andcultural level. Those who know how difficult these things are done, and howmany causes can block easily this process, will not have the tendency todestroy material goods.

We change now the discussion and will refer to the individual terroristsexisting in any society. Serial killers exist, and others, who kill randomlyinnocent people. By definition, they are also terrorists, even if they actalone, without any connection to a group.

It is clear that a society can't protect itself against terrorism throughstricter laws. The tougher laws will determine the disappearance of exactlythose facilities, which permitted the progress of the society. Multiple levelsof security will produce the fragmentation of the society. Thus, due to thereduction of the capability to communicate, the level of generalisedschizophrenia increases. This could lead to a disaster on long-term.

Not any person who refuses symbolic models will have terrorist tendencies.There are adaptation forms to a world that evolves in another direction thanthe one desired by some. In the attempt to find the individuals withtendencies towards terrorism, one can consider a few aspects:

1. Children who have been normal at birth, but have been abused duringchildhood, are on the highest level of risk. Individuals aggressedexplicitly or implicitly by the environment, can build illegal models,which enter their PSM; the ones with difficulties of communication have thetendency to build too short-range models for understanding the world theylive in (schizophrenia XS 1 and 2).2. The stresses generating shielding models and illegal models can affect anyperson, as society is very complex. For persons from 'imagistic' countries,an important source of stress is the assimilation and operation of advancedsymbolic models. Forcing them to evolve from an image platform to highlevel symbolic models can destabilize the structure of models. For the'symbolic' countries, the same can happen on a more reduced scale.3. The isolation or elimination from society of the individuals with cleartendencies towards the destruction of the democratic system.4. Relaxation in the protection of privacy. The so-called right to privacyhides important sources of stress both for the people protected by thisright, and the ones around him/her. If everybody would accept the openingof their privacy, the society as a whole would have less real problems.

The working principle of democracy should be somewhat modified, i.e. ademocratic system protects only those who respect democracy. Thus, theindividuals who fight against democracy should not be protected by thedemocratic system.

Conclusion: The evolution of society is based on symbolic models. Those whohave not the capacity to follow this trend will 'run for shelter' into imagemodels. Slowly a break will occur between 'symbolic' and 'image' people. The'image' people, who are not those who push the society forward, will see that,from their point of view, society goes into a wrong direction. One of theextreme answers to this situation is terrorism.

Warning: The individuals based on image models do not accept logicalargumentation, because logic is an exclusive characteristic of symbolicmodels.

ETA 11: Problems of human brain evolution

This problem is already developed in the general theory. A few additions willbe given here. As we know from the general theory, we have an ability to buildand operate image models [I], and one to build and operate symbolic models[S]. Generally speaking, [I] increased up to about the year 1800. [S] had afirst increase with the spoken language. It increased further with theemergence of the written language. An important step was the development ofgeometry as a symbolic model by Euclid, about 2300 years ago. Then [S] stayedunchanged about up to the year 1666, when Newton's Mechanics marked theevolution of the brain, as the second important fundamental symbolic modelappeared. From that moment, [S] started an accelerated increase whichcontinues.

In spite of the fact that [I] decreased in percentage compared to [S], in anabsolute mode, it continued to increase due to the support of [S].

Unfortunately, this evolution, which is true e.g. for Europe, is not true forsome other cultural regions. Some nations refuse basically symbolic models,but are forced to use them.

There is a risk of splitting the world, due to the more and more reducedcapacity of communication between the two parts of it. The same situation mayhappen inside one country with groups of people.

The two parts are not symmetrical. The ones based on [S] are the vectors ofprogress and power, in any sense. The others are unable to maintain a rhythmof evolution, but are, however, helped by the [S] nations, for stabilityreasons, and due to the lack of other solutions. The [I] nations accept thishelp, especially for practical reasons and opportunism. On long range, thisproblem has no solution within the frame of the generally accepted democraticsystem.

Within the [S] countries, a structure exists as well. Thus, some persons havea higher [S] than others.

In general, the [I]-type people in a structure of [S]-type detain the power.The time when the [S] people would have control is not within view. ([S]-typepeople are called technocrats).

Due to the large dispersion between [I] and [S] levels, there is no hope atthe moment that a unique symbolic model will ever exist to describe correctlythe whole social structure. As a consequence, the technocrats (the [S] peoplein an [S] type society) are not efficient yet, except in relatively narrowdomains. The politicians of today are those who have qualities in both imageand symbolic areas. They can cover approximately the whole society. However,the development of the society will force them to redirect more and more tosymbolic models.

The basic problem associated with any society is the too wide dispersionbetween the [I] and [S] levels, and its increase as the society evolves.

Some explanations for this dispersion, based on MDT, are given below:

1. The models are built chaotically. The structure of models, including PSM,contains important and less important models. This is also a problem ofeducation in early childhood.

2. Education and assimilation of new knowledge continues to be based on a toolarge scale on [I] models.

3. The structure of models, including PSM, is almost invariant and, as aconsequence, the brain has not the flexibility required by a fast evolution ofthe society.

4. Education is chaotic. Too many image models are built in the period ofdevelopment, and the symbolic models are not adequate to reality. Forinstance, mathematical calculations are prefered to the construction andoperation of general symbolic models. Even worse, the students are not taughtto think based on symbolic models. Terms like image model (analog) andsymbolic model are not known at the level of general formal education. Imagemodels should be taught starting in first class, and symbolic models witheight class. Even worse, those who work with symbolic models are not alwaysaware of it. Many physicists are not aware that Newton's Mechanics is asymbolic model.

5. The design deficiencies of the brain are not shown or recognised, and assuch, can't be compensated for (see general theory).

Conclusion: The brain evolves from image to symbolic models. The dispersionbetween the [S]-levels of people, countries and cultural zones is increasing.This increasing dispersion, together with the design and technologicalproblems, creates fundamentalism (some can't continue their evolution).Fundamentalism is a threat for the world as a whole. The possible solutionsare unacceptable within the frame of the democratic principles.

ETA 12: The rattlesnake

The rattlesnake produces a continuous strong sound when it is attacked or isattacking. It is also known that it has no hearing. MDT explains this attackand defense facility. The basic function of any brain (including animal) is tobuild automatically models based on the information from external reality. Arepeated sound will activate continuously an image model, which will try topredict the occurence of any new sound. It is reminded that this hardwarefunction is active, and maintained active automatically, by any brain. Thereis no possibility to ignore, or not hear these sounds.

The sound produced by the rattlesnake will activate repeatedly (hundreds oftimes in a second) a sound receiving model at the animals around. Theseanimals will use a lot of energy to update the model. Thus, the animals willhave difficulties to build and activate a model, either for attack or defense.

The phenomenon is the same for humans. The sounds Ðrepeated or not- diminishour capacity to do any intense intellectual activity.

ETA 13: The main psychiatric illnesses: paranoia and schizophrenia

The terms paranoia and schizophrenia have no definition in psychiatry. Theyhave only descriptions. MDT is able to generate normal definition for thesedeficiences.

In a scientific theory, the definitions are generated by the model and, assuch, can't be compared to the descriptive definitions from presentpsychiatry. However, as in the common language we meet these two terms, as wedo not want to invent new terms, they have been kept, but with the definitionsas generated by MDT.

The general theory does not define, in fact, the diseases. It defines onlystatus and parameters. A status is considered pathological, if some parametershave values beyond certain limits, more or less conventionally imposed.

Example: In MDT, the schizophrenia parameter of a normal brain occurs at anytime having a different value. The value can be lower (better) or higher(worse), at different moments. Sometimes this parameter can reach the limitconsidered pathological, even if the person is not sick. The illness isdeclared if this parameter is permanently and significantly in thepathological zone.

We'll describe and then, define the two fundamental illnesses, as they appearin MDT.

SchizophreniaThe characteristics from lighter to severe cases are:XS1: not enough long-range models exist in order to understand the externalreality. The individuals interact normally with external reality, but thecontext to understand the primary facts is missing sometimes (missing long-range predictions). These individuals succesfully integrate in society, not byall means in unfavoured positions (on the contrary, as we will see later).

XS2: Bad understanding of what is going on in front of their eyes, due to thefact that the necessary models are poor quality or inadequate. The capacity tobuild and operate short-range models is maintained. These individuals aremostly able to be integrated in society, if they have a model of interest forthe society.

XS3: The person has no adequate long-range model for the external reality,short-range models are scarce.

Example: The person does not know where he/she is, even if in his/her ownroom.

Such a person uses only very low quality models, most of them being componentsof PSM. The chances of integration in society are very limited.

On static analysis, XS1 is situated in the non-pathological zone, XS2 is onthe border, and XS3 is pathological.

The schizophrenia parameter is variable in time. A normal person can betemporarily in XS2 status, and if drunk, sedated or tired, even in XS3,without being declared pathologically schizophrenic.

We'll analyze XS1 in detail; two situations can occur:

XS1A: The person has several models, including long-range, associated withsome domains of activity. These allow him to be integrated in society in agood positions. For such a person, some models associated to laws/rules ofintegration in an advanced society, based on long-range symbolic models, aremissing, or of low quality. The absence of these models can lead to anti-social acts, of which the person can't be aware. Social problems occur whenthis type of individuals is in a large number in a society.

XS1B: The person can build long- and short-range models associated to anyexternal reality, but in current life, he needs only very few of them. Thusthe capacity to build long-range models is diminished. The long-range modelsexist, as imposed from the outside, by education. This is a society-inducedschizophrenia. As long as the requirements of the society do not change, theindividual is integrated perfectly in the society. If the requirements of thesociety change, the person has to acquire new long-range models, as they aregenerated by the society, to reintegrate into it. The capability to build ownmodels is diminished to zero.

For both XS1A and XS1B cases it is characteristic that the capacity to buildlong-range models on their own is extremely reduced. The persons can in bothcases assimilate external long-range models. While XS1A has a reduced capacityto both build and assimilate models, XS1B had initially these facilities, butthey were lost in time due to lack of use.

Induced schizophrenia (XS1B) is a great advantage for a person integrated in astable society, as it ensures adequate models to that society. At any changein the society, the individuals are forced to acquire new models, as they havea reduced capacity to build their own.

Example: Driving style in an advanced countryAuthorities enforce the traffic laws for generations. Any personalised styleof driving is punished. Thus, the capacity to build own models is reduced todisappearance. If the environment is non-aggressive, the drivers will haveless and less self-protection capacity at mistakes made by others. Chainaccidents are a direct consequence of induced schizophrenia (XS1B).

There are 2 possibilities:1. We accept induced schizophrenia, and we build safer and safer cars andinfrastructures.2. We accept personalized driving (aggressive style is not punished anymore).

An aggressive environment stimulates the development of intelligence and, assuch, the capacity of building and operation of long-range models. Theaggressivity of the environment makes most drivers better or more capable toreact correctly to impredictable situations, including others mistakes. If theinexperienced drivers will feel aggressed, they become either experienced orthey will give up driving. Society will come at some point to analyze bothvariants, with their advantages and disadvantages.

Now the method used is schizophrenic: we solve the problem which alreadyoccured, with the hope that it won't reoccur in the future. This method isunable to predict what other long-range problems might occur after the changeoperated. Its only advantage is that is gives a personal assurance (includinglegally) to the peson who initiated the solution.

The theory shows the existence of a basic dilemma connected to the problemdescribed above: optimisation or capacity to face an aggressive environment.

The tendency of induced schizophrenia occurs in an optimised structure withslow changes. The individuals have optimal reactions as long as theenvironment is stable. At a change of the environment, they have a reducedcapacity to become compatible with the changed environment. In a newenvironment, the favorised are the aggressive ones, as they have the capacityto build and operate their own long-range models.

We continue with the induced schizophrenia (XS1B). When one of these lifestyles is followed for a long time, the person is going to be affected byschizophrenia induced by the environment, which in time can becomepathological. This negative phenomenon can be attenuated to a certain extent,because of the permanent changes in society. These changes are forcing thepopulation in advanced countries to come up with new models every day. Eventhough society forces people to build and operate new models every day, somedo not have the capability to do this. Because evolution is based on symbolicmodels, some people may not be able to build symbolic models of good quality.Thus, there might be a group of people that cannot fit anymore in the society,might isolate themselves or even oppose to the society.

This way, induced schizophrenia (XS1B) might build shielding models, whichcould act against society. If this group gains enough power, it could try todestabilize the society.

Schizophrenia can appear in an unlimited number of types, depending on theperturbations, which are associated with the fundamental process of the brainoperation. The affected functions are:- The construction of new models and the continuous improvement in accordancewith the changing external reality.- The integration of a new model in the structure of models of the brain. Thelong-range models must contain enough short-range models to handle theexternal reality, which is complex and changing.

Based on the above considerations, the normal definition of schizophrenia willbe given:

Schizophrenia is a technological problem of the brain. The brain cannot buildcomplex models that fit the external reality, and integrate them in aharmonic/logic way in its general structure of models. The function ofbuilding and operating short-range models is maintained.

Many times, schizophrenics on the first level (XS1) can be brilliant in theconstruction of short-range models.

In short, for humans, schizophrenia is short-range thinking.

We will continue to describe the schizophrenia of type XS1 A and B. Thisnonpathological form of schizophrenia can bring some big advantages to thatperson. Long-range models use a great amount of energy in order to be suitableto the changing external reality, and are also developed to find the bestsolution to problems. In a stable society, many such models are of little use,because the society imposes certain models, that need only be assimilated.This way, a person who has XS1 A or B will use the energy only to make betterand better short-range models.

Thus, a stable and efficient society favorises the XS1 schizophrenia.

Let's see an important factor associated to the education system. The wholeeducational system is based on assimilation of external models andverfications of the assimilation of these models. The construction of newmodels is totally unfavored. Thus, the general education system favorizes thedevelopment of induced schizophrenia (XS1B). The effect is devastating for thesociety, if we take into account the consciousness issue. The theory definesconsciousness as the capacity to build long-range models containing the personas an element. Thus, the educational system favorizes implicitly those whohave a low-level consciousness.

The second main psychiatric illness is paranoia XP. Paranoia is defined as theinclusion of an ordinary model (OM) into PSM (OMPSM).

The basic characteristic of a model in PSM is its invariance. These models arepractically impossible to be changed, whatever the information coming fromexternal reality would be. When there is an OMPSM, all the models contained inthe brain have to be in harmony with this invariant model as well.

When a new model is built, some information coming from external reality couldbe in contradiction with OMPSM. In this case, the only way to integrate thenew information with the condition imposed by OMPSM is to distort the ZM whichwill intergrate that information. This is possible only on image models. Onimage models, there is no criteria to attribute to primary facts the correctimportance. Thus the whole structure of models will be distorted in order tobe harmonic with OMPSM (e.g. some facts will be minimalized and otherexaggerated as importance).

This is why paranoia is to be understood as an illness, which affectspersonality. The personality in its whole is of paranoid type. The structureof models is or can be built partially harmonically; the associated symbolicmodels are built to be in accordance with the image models, and sometimes, theparanoid can have a brilliant harmonical and logical structure.

The detection of paranoia is very difficult, as the patients can have nological contradiction in their thinking structure, and they can have a goodcoupling to the changing external reality.

Many paranoids are brilliant in thinking, with an infallible logic. Theexample of Hitler is eloquent. His OMPSM was 'the Arian race is a superiorone'. What followed was based on logic. Communist personalities can bementioned here as well. They had an OMPSM of the type 'the working class isthe driving force of progress'.

When an OMPSM exists, then we have a case of paranoia. There is no treatmentfor it. Even if OMPSM could be destroyed, the whole structure of models inharmony with the OMPSM should be rebuilt, and this is impossible.

We will talk now of light forms of paranoia, undeclared as illness. As weknow, when a model becomes invariant, all associated models will be distortedto be in harmony with it.

Let's suppose that a brain has a normally built model in accordance withexternal reality. This model could at some point become totally inadequate inthe understanding of external reality due to a change in the latter. Thenormal solution is the reconstruction of the whole structure of models, butthis activity would be beyond the technical capacity of reconstruction of thebrain. Due to this, one of the possibilities is to leave the model untouched.In this case, we have a light form of paranoia, which manifests itself asconfusion or avoiding discussions connected to the model with problems.Another possibility is to build a shielding model. Shielding models do notmodify the inadequate model, but can deactivate it.

As this is not pathological, i.e. no OMPSM exists, the illness could be cured,especially at young individuals. This type of problem (important normal modelswhich do not fit the external reality anymore) can occur at any time inlighter or more serious forms. Prevention of this light form of paranoia canbe done with an adequate education.

ETA 14: Suicide

From the general theory we know that a basic requirement of design of thebrain is unconditional indefinite survival. However some individuals commitsuicide.

From the general theory we also know that models are so strong that they canpredict that sooner or later we will die. As this prediction will activate PSMand PSM has no solution, this could destabilize the structure of models. Thegeneral theory also shows that the solution is to build a shielding model,e.g. religion. This model sends to PSM a less catastrophic message, whichstabilizes the situation. Some religions are so strong that they can determinein their followers no fear of death. These believers can commit suicide veryeasily, if they have a 'serious' reason, without the possibility ofintervention of PSM to block it. Fortunately, the Christian religion is notstrong enough to eliminate the fear of death.

This risk of suicide was noticed very early, and this is why religions usuallycondemn suicide.

Whatever the shielding model would be (religion or another shielding model),PSM will be blocked in case of the activation of a suicide model. The presenceof an adequate shielding model can therefore block the PSM, which wants tostop the activation of the suicide model.

A class of suicidal individuals consists of those people that after thedisappearance of an entity included in their PSM (a very close person vanishesfrom their life), they are unable to correct the whole structure of models.The brain gets unstable, all-important models might become unusable and thiscan lead to suicide.

Another class of suicidal individuals is that of those who have all theirmodels blocked (associated with general depression). The person can see thathe/she can't evolve anymore, the predictions are permanently the same, andi.e. there is no hope to get out of a certain situation. This can lead tosuicide, but the brain needs to build on the spot a shielding model, in orderto have a 'successful' suicide. If not, PSM will intervene at the last momentto avoid it.

A classical example is when somebody who has a lot of money looses it all atonce (the great depression in 1929 in USA, for instance). With all modelsblocked, the individual has no capacity to build new models adequate to thenew external reality and suicide becomes an option.

There is a special class of suicidal individuals, under 18. This can beassociated to the fact that teenagers have a limited amount of long rangemodels with lots of imperfections. These models are insufficiently developedto show the whole host of directions of evolution open. These models caneasily predict a situation of generalised blocking, and from here, thetendency for suicide. It is clear that only a simultaneous generalisedblocking could be a cause for suicide. We repeat that without an adequateshielding model, PSM will determine the insuccess of the suicidal attempt inthe last moment.

Obviously, there are persons who have psychiatric illnesses, as defined bythis theory. In their case, additional factors will add up, associated totheir illness.

ETA 15: Normality tests

Having defined schizophrenia and paranoia, we will describe two tests todetect these illnesses. T1 and T2 detect schizophrenia, and T2 alone detectsparanoia.

T1. In front of a complex external reality, an individual has to be able torealize if he/she has enough information to build a suitable model. From thegeneral theory, we know that the brain will build harmonic/ logic models basedon the available information. This is the problem: we don't know beforehandhow many elements are there in the external reality. The models are built withwhat is available. We could not realize that we have not enough information tobuild a good model (see general theory: Defieciencies in the design of thebrain). The test wants to verify is we can compensate this design deficiency.

Example: The primary information is: 'a car crashed into a wall'.The person has to build several models. These models could be, in thisexample:- accident- test- movie- computer game- cartoon

This is just an example. In an actual situation, the person should not onlybuild several models, but also develop them progressively, in parallel, alongwith new data adding to the initial information.

After a certain accumulation of information, the person might stabilize to asingle model, but if he/she has not enough information, and does not realizeit, this can be a sign that there could be a problem. The test is usuallypassed well, if the person maintains his/her flexibility, even after there isapparently enough information to get stable in a model. The existence offlexibility is understood as a guarantee that the person has the capability tobuild long-range models. And also that he/she has no OMPSM, i.e. is notparanoid.

There is a game based on this idea: one builds a model, and the other has toguess what the model is. To do this, he/she has to ask questions to beanswered only by yes and no.

T2. Test for detection of paranoia.

An individual accepts a change in a stable model, if the external realityimposes it. In a practical situation, the person interacts with externalreality and builds a model, which gives good predictions on the externalreality. At some point, an element of the external reality is changed. If theperson detects the change and corrects the model, as well as the otherinterconnected models, this is a good indication of normality. For a personsuspected of paranoia, the model used would be the one supposed to be theOMPSM.

Paranoid subjects can distort the external reality unlimitedly to make itcompatible with their OMPSM. As a consequence, the test tries to see if theperson suspected of paranoia will modify the supposed OMPSM.

To be applicable, the test as described above, needs to take into account adesign deficiency of the brain, as given in the general theory. Any imagemodel has a basic problem: on an image model one can't see the importance ofan element or a relationship. The image model remains harmonic for an infinityof values of importance, given to the elements or relations. Due to thisissue, the paranoid subjects do not realize the presence of their illness.

Except these classical psychiatric illnesses, there are illnesses produced bydynamical and transitory instabilities of the brain. The illnesses given bydynamical or transitory problems refer to the loss of models stability inspecial conditions or at certain moments of time.

The XZM (illegal models) could also explain a series of problems. The generaltheory addresses this issue.

We'll make another note here. The theory is applied here in particular tonormal individuals. The pathological cases are not generally considered atthis level. It is actually absurd to study pathological cases in the absenceof a good model associated to normal persons.

ETA 16: Dreams

The dreams are associated to image model development. Such models are built,based on the available data in the brain and not by direct interaction withthe external reality. We call the source of data for the dreams as Quasi-External-Reality. QER could take information from any available model of thebrain to build and develop the dream-model. QER is invariant during a dream.

A dream is a model, which is developed, based on an invariant QER.

We shall describe several classes of dreams.

1. QER is mainly based on the external reality, but contains also someartificial elements or relations. A dream based on artificial components,tries, by development, to modify the external reality to meet the dream.

Example: we dream a situation. Such a situation doesn't meet the externalreality, because some artificial elements or relations are added. The dreamcan activate some models to change the external reality, to meet thespecifications of the dream.

2. Technological dreams (wake-up dreams)The brain generates such dreams. They solve by software, some of the designdeficiencies of the brain. The most important technological dreams are wake-updreams.

There are normal wake-up dreams, emergency wake-up dreams and nightmaredreams. They are generated to wake-up a brain, because, due to a lack of asuitable hardware, the brain must generate the wake-up function based onsoftware.

The main design feature of the brain, which is used by these technologicaldreams, is to activate the PSM. As the PSM is activated, the brain wake-up,i.e. a normal ZM, is activated. Usually, the PSM is activated by some unusualchanges of the external reality (powerful noises, mechanical shocks…). Thewake-up dreams try to activate the PSM by software. To do this, a wake-updream sends to PSM the information that there is a situation and no suitablemodel to understand it. As we already know, when there is no model tounderstand a specific external reality, the PSM is activated. For a wake-upmodel, external reality is replaced by Quasi-External-Reality (QER).

MDT does not specify which component of the brain starts the dream (this is atechnological feature). The components could be associated with the internalbody or to the sense organs.

The content of the dream is not important. Any dream that activates the PSM isgood. So an important problem associated with the health of the being or anunimportant problem could build the same dream. Only the character of thedream is important.

In case of a wake-up dream the character has to be taken into account:

- iminent danger to the person means that there is a big problem associated tohealth or the environment where the person is sleeping. Also, it could be aproblem associated with something which is included, as a model, into the PSM(close relatives, some objects or situations, some problems etc).

- there is a danger, but it is not associated to the person or closerelatives.

- It is a neutral dream, no danger. This is a normal wake-up dream. Forinstance: the dream is associated with a flower. The person wants to pick thatflower, but fails. This situation activates the PSM, which activates the wake-up procedure.

One problem could occur: how does the brain know that a certain dream willactivate the PSM? A possible answer is that a dream will develop bysimulation, on and on, up to the moment when the PSM is activated. When thewake-up occurs, the first active-ZM will be that one which activated the PSMand so, it will be remembered.

There is an important feature of QER to be presented here. QER is built on thespot, because it is associated to a problem, which has to be solved very fast.Thus, QER cannot be too complex. It is easy to simulate the development on asimple model, which cannot be solved by the dream model.

Example: The QER is associated with a room. If, during a dream, the personwants go outside the room, this is impossible, because the QER doesn't containthe exterior of the room. Thus, it is impossible to go outside and so the PSMis activated.

3. The nightmare dreams are associated with a general instability of thestructure of models. A nightmare cannot occur in a brain which is in a normalstatus. A nightmare dream might try to activate the PSM, but the PSM does notactivate. Even more, if the PSM activates (the nightmare becomes the active-ZM) the nightmare continues. This problem is too closely associated to thetechnological implementation of the brain and so it cannot be treated by thetheory only.

4. We shall introduce another class of dreams: premonition dreams.

There are many ZAM-type models, which work very well for a long time. But, asthe person ages, some of them cannot meet the requirements due to the changesin the internal parameters of the execution organs (legs, hands etc).Such models self-activate during sleep (this is a premonitive-type dream) andfind that they don't meet the requirements anymore. This result can activatethe PSM too and produces the wake-up. The contents of such dreams is importantbut, unfortunately, it is difficult to make the difference between a wake-updream and a premonition dream. Anyways, a premonition dream has to be taken asa serious warning.

The dreams are associated with the technological implementation of the brain.MDT, as a fundamental theory, cannot go beyond a limit. What was presentedhere has to be considered just an evaluation of the dream problem.

ETA 17: The history of evolution of the human species, based on MDT

The primary data are taken from different dictionaries, as this data isuniversally accepted. Only data associated with the development of thesymbolic models have been selected.

Note: The dictionaries present the data mainly based on feeling, or based onlocal models, to select what is important or not. I selected only the dataassociated with the evolution of the symbolic models, as MDT understands thisprocess. The evolution of the human species means the increase of power of thesymbolic model. This history follows just this idea.

70 milions years ago: The first superior monkeys4 milions years ago: Some monkeys walk.2 milions years ago: Stone tools. This is associated with the appearance onlarge scale of the long-range image models.

200 thousands years ago: hom*o Sapiens. hom*o Sapiens was able to build easilylong-range image models. Usually, when a model is good, there is the tendencyto integrate it into the PSM. A PSM model is very efficient, but, because itis invariant, it slows down the evolution. hom*o Sapiens seems to have evolvedin a direction contrary to long-range efficiency. That is, instead ofincluding them in the PSM, such models were changed on and on, and they werenot transmitted to the next generation by heredity, but by social life of thegroups. That is, the groups were stable for a very long time. It is not clearif hom*o Sapiens was able to communicate based on symbolic models, but, forsure, the communication was based on symbolic elements, at least in part.

130 thousands years ago: Art-type, religion-type activities.On such a level, it is clear that the construction of long-range image modelswas very easy and thus, the prediction of death and death itself wereunderstood. Art and religion cannot be directly associated with the symbolicmodels, so we don't know if the language itself, as a symbolic model, appearedat that time.

Based on MDT, the human being is the being which is able to make and operatesymbolic models (a language, as a minimal requirement).

Thus, I don't know, based on the data, when the language appeared, but thesupposition is that it was under development, once the activities were socomplex by comparison to the animal level.

Several thousands years ago: the cities.
A full language was already created and some elements of the writing too.

3700 years ago: the first phonetical elements for writing appeared, and later(about 2900 years ago), the first phonetic alphabet.

This is a crucial point of the evolution of the human species. The brainbuilds an image model. This image model is translated to a symbolic model bythe spoken language. For writing, there are two basic possibilities: toassociate a symbolic writing to the image model, or to translate the symbolicmodel of the spoken language to another symbolic model of the writing.

The Asiatic people chose the first possibility. They built an iconographicwriting. The second possibility generated the phonetic alphabet.

The impact of the appearance of the phonetic alphabet was huge. The writing isnot connected anymore to an image model, but to another symbolic model- thespoken language. Thus, writing becomes independent from the image model towhich it is indirectly associated. Later, writing was able to influence thespoken language, and this tandem led to the 'symbolic' Man in Europe.

The Asiatic populations, who have used the method of description of imagemodels in writing, remained stuck in icons associated to image models fromtheir minds. This had a huge drawback in the development of symbolic models.This is why in this history, reference is restricted only to the world basedon phonetic writing.

The phonetic writing has been a decisive step in the evolution of symbolicmodels, due to its non-association with image models. On the other hand, theChinese spoken language can be translated into a phonetic writing, but thismode could not be used as such, as it would produce a break from the imagemodels, which constitute the basis of the thinking/writing of this people.

1300 BC: Monotheist religion appears in Egypt. This type of religion marks themoment, when the logical analysis applied to religion generates problems andcontradictions, associated with the existence of several gods. The desire forlogical order determines an evolution towards a monotheist religion. Howeverthe appearance of the monotheist religion in Egypt was not a result of theincrease of the level of evolution of human society in those times, but wascreated by the leaders of the society (one of the first monotheist religionscreated by the people is the Christian religion).

600 BC: Poetry. A poem is a symbolic model, which uses image and symbolicelements and relations. The poet has an inner image model, translates it to asymbolic model with symbolic and image elements, which build up the poem. Thereader/listener will translate the poem to an image model in his mind. Thisimage model is supposed to be similar to the initial image model in the mindof the poet. Thus, a poem is a way of approximate transmission of an imagemodel from one creator to a listener/reader, using symbolic models withsymbolic and images elements as a 'vehicle'.

300 BC: Euclid's GeometryThis is the first fundamental symbolic model ever created (a positivescience). It marks a very important moment in the evolution of the brain.This symbolic model continues to be used up to date and it is not changed for2300 years.

The second fundamental model will be created only after 2000 years and it willbe Newton's Mechanics. The evolution of the brain was very chaotic.

There is another symbolic model created in this period: chess. This symbolicmodel is a game (it is not associated to external reality) and it is notchanged (just unimportant small changes) up to now as well. This game can beused as a test of the intrinsic capacity of the brain to make and operatelong-range symbolic models.

30 BC: Christian Religion starts to be created

The Christian religion appears and develops in the Roman Empire as a result ofthe increasing capacity to make and operate symbolic models, and due to theincrease of the consciousness level of the population. The logical orderrequests a monotheist religion. The increase of the level of consciousnessstrengthens the prediction of death. A powerful religion is requested for thishigher level of the evolution of the brain. Christian religion was created inaccordance with this situation.

975 BC: The decimal positional writing of the numerals, taken from Arabs,appears in Europe. The Roman representation of the numerals is associated toimage models. This new way of writing has no connection with the image models.To use such a representation of the numerals, one needs only the ability inthe symbolic field (there is a total break from image models).

1250 BC: The decimal positional writing of the numerals is universally adoptedin Europe.

1482 BC: The Inquisition is established.It lasted for centuries as an institution for punishment and basicallyspeaking, it persists up-to-date in another form, as a list of forbidden booksor ideas.

The brain development reached a higher level. The freethinking based onsymbolic models opened the minds of a big fraction of the population. Thisentered into a violent clash with the invariant model of the religion. In thatperiod, the first violent clash between the Christian spirit and Europeanspirit occured. The Inquisition eventually disappeared, but not becausereligion evolved, but because the European spirit was more and more powerful.

1543 BC: Nikolaus Copernicus published the theory that the Sun (not the Earth)is the center of the Universe. It is very interesting to know that forthousands of years, the official theory was that the Earth is the center ofthe Universe. This theory predicts the Sun and Moon eclipses, and also theecuatorial and tropical lines were established with a fair precision. So, whatwas the problem? The main problem was the imposibility to understand why theplanets have a rather chaotic movement on the sky.

Copernicus' theory was able to explain why the planets have that apparentlychaotic movement (based on logic), but, when the astronomer J. Kepler hasverified the theory, it failed. Kepler eventually discovered that the planetsare not moving around the Sun on circular orbits (as Copernicus said), but onelliptical ones. With this change, Copernicus' theory was correct.

1585 BC: decimal fractionsThe decimal positional writing of the numerals was universally accepted butthe fractions continued to be written based on image models (e.g. the fraction1/2 is easily understood based on image models). Only after about 600 yearsthe decimal fractions were accepted. Even so, the opposition to decimalfractions continues up to date.

1607 BC: The composer Monteverdi composed the musical work called Orpheus.
This marks a moment when the symbolic models supported image models in music.
In the same period, the "recipe" to compose a fugue was also established.
Europeans invented the polyphonic music.

1614 BC: the logarithms are introduced in mathematics.

1640 BC: Rene Descartes, scientistHe considers that the world can be understood based on mathematics. This is ahigher level in the developing of the symbolic models.

Mathematics is based on symbolic models only. In fact, any specific field ofmathematics is a symbolic model. But, a symbolic model from mathematics cannotbe used in a direct way to understand the external reality. Newton's mechanicsappeared at first as a logical model, and then it was translated to amathematical form.

Mathematics generates only numbers. They have no meaning without thecalibration of the model. To calibrate a model means to interact with externalreality and so, to go beyond the limits of mathematics.

The normal interaction with external reality of a symbolic model frommathematics is: prediction > comparison with external reality > change of themodel > a new prediction. This loop has to continue as many times as needed,so that the difference between the prediction and the external reality becomesacceptably low.

It seems that Descartes did not understand this. This problem seems to bedifficult to be understood even in our days, taking into account that themathematician Godel "proved" the existence of God, without any interactionwith external reality.

1642 BC: Rembrandt van Rijn, the painterRembrandt marks a moment when the human brain reaches a peak in building andoperating image models.

1687 BC: Newton's MechanicsAfter Euclid's Geometry (about 2000 years ago) this is the second fundamentalsymbolic model created by the human mind. It is a big step in the evolution ofthe brain. Starting with Newton, the development of the capacity to build andoperate symbolic models accelerates, and this process continues today.

Newton is not well understood even in our days. Some dictionaries say thatNewton discovered the law of gravity. This law was introduced by Newton tosave his theory. The inertia principle states that any material body, which isleft free, is moving in a straight line, with constant velocity to infinity.But in the external reality such a phenomenon is not met. The planets aremoving on closed trajectories in space. The only solution to save the theorywas to invent a new force, which was called "gravity".

Einstein, for instance, says that gravity does not exist. The apparentattraction between the material bodies is generated by the change of the shapeof the space. He is able to explain some phenomena which cannot be understoodbased on the Newton's gravity (the precession of the planet Mercury, e.g.).

Newton's mechanics continues to make good predictions on Earth and near space.
It is not changed since over 300 years.

1749 BC: Sign languageThis is one of the first artificial languages (a symbolic model). Ittranslates the GCL into another language, based on signs and gestures.

1781 BC: Immanuel KantKant was able to understand some basic things in association with knowledge,but although he knew Euclid's and Newton's theories (symbolic models), he wasnot able to understand the means and methods of a positive science. He did notbuild any symbolic model. In his books, one can find lots of definitionsalmost on any page, but Kant does not understand that such definitions cannotbe correlated in a logical way, without the frame of a fundamental symbolicmodel.

1791 BC: Napoleon
MDT considers that there are two basic modes of interaction between a brain
and the external reality: to predict the evolution of the external reality
(ZM-models) and to act on the external reality (ZAM-models).

A war can start only if a big fraction of the population has almost the sameZAM, and if that ZAM is associated to war. War can be associated with anincrease in the level 2 of consciousness of the population. I mean, whenlevel-2 is high enough to believe that it will be better after a war, but noso high to understand that there could be some other alternative solution,then the tendency to war could really start the war. This idea seems to beinteresting in explaining why so many people are so happy to go to war, andwhy this tendency is so powerful even today (e.g. WW1 and 2).

1834 BC: Braille writing1837 BC: Morse code

1854 BC: The symbolic logic of George BooleThe facility to build and operate symbolic models increased to such a levelthat the brain was not able anymore to keep the models in mind. George Booleinvented a language to write symbolic models.

1859 BC: Charles Darwin

Darwin's evolution theory is not based on a symbolic model. It is rather basedon the systematic of some primary data. Thus, it is not a positive science andso, its prediction could be good only on short range.

1867 BC: Das Kapital by Karl MarxThis aberation sounds good on image models. The basic idea is that the"capitalist" takes about all the money and the "working class" is forced towork for peanuts.

The theory was based on some image models, which were understood easily by thepopulation of those times. As we know, it is not possible to find the rightimportance of an element or relationship on an image model. Thus, an imagemodel can be tailored to prove anything, based on external reality. Such amethod doesn't build a theory, but an ideology. Ordinary people easilyunderstand an ideology, because it sounds good, and is able to answer anyquestion.

When Marx's theory appeared, the control of the economy was based on shortrange symbolic models. So, long-range problems were not predicted. The lack ofstability of the society in that period was an effect of this problem.Later, society advanced to take into account the long-range problems too andso, social-democratic movements appeared.

1878 BC: Jehovah's WitnessesIn time, as the capacity to make and operate symbolic models increased, the"classical" Christian religion was under pressure to change to meet the newrequirements. It resulted in reform movements in the frame of the Christianreligion. Instead, Jehovah's Witnesses make a new model starting from scratch.

1900 BC: Max Planck introduces Quantum Mechanics

Quantum Mechanics is the first purely symbolic model associated to externalreality. Such a model is "pure", because it cannot be translated or associatedwith any image model. This is a very high step in the evolution of the brain(level 5 of evolution).

Based on data, it seems that Max Planck understood from the beginning that histheory was good, but he was blocked by the fact that imagination does not workin understanding it. It seems that Albert Einstein pushed him to publish thetheory.

Quantum Mechanics cannot be translated to image models. If someone forces sucha translation, aberations or logical contradictions occur. The best knownproblem is the nature of light. Quantum Mechanics predicts that light is bothwave and particle. This situation cannot be understood based on image models.

Quantum Mechanics pushed forward the evolution of society on a very hightechnological level (e.g. the transistors and the lasers are the basiccomponents to build computers).

1905 BC: Albert Einstein, the theory of the relativity

Einstein starts from Euclid's Geometry and Newton's Mechanics to make a newtheory, to extend the knowledge to atomic and sub-atomic levels, and to thefar Universe. The "marriage" between Quantum Mechanics and the theory ofRelativity builds the main tool to understand sub-atomic "Universe".

This new symbolic model was created based on a new Geometry and some newprinciples. Together with Quantum Mechanics, the Theory of the Relativityspeeds up the evolution of society.

1914 BC: The First World War (The Great War)

1917 BC: Communism in RussiaCommunism is an ideology. It is based on an image model translated to someshort-range symbolic models.

The main problem of the Russian society of that time was a huge dispersionbetween the level of understanding of the external reality from one person toanother. Even worse, the level was low compared to Western Europe. Communismwas only a fast solution to the problem, at least on short-range. Of course,an invariant ideology could be useful only on short-range.As we know, the communist system crashed due to the lack of economicefficiency, but the basic cause is associated to its invariance.

The problem of the dispersion between individuals, countries or cultural zonescontinues to be a big problem of human society. The problem has a tendency toget worse and worse.

1928 BC: Walt DisneyAs the evolution to symbolic models speeded up, the brain also increased theconceptualization level of the image models. The cartoons are based on suchconcept image models. Everybody (including childrens) easily understands them.

1938: World War 2

Both world wars starting in Europe occured in a very complex set of known andunknown factors. MDT can be used to evaluate the problem.

Since Napoleon, there was a general tendency to war in Europe. MDT says thatthere must be a war-associated ZAM, which must be assimilated and accepted bythe majority of the population. Also, the consciousness level has to be highenough to think that the war will solve all the problems, but not high enoughto understand that this is not true.

One example of such a ZAM could be "we have better weapons" or "we arepowerful enough to win". Of course, the attacked people have a ZAM as "we mustdefend our country". It is possible that such action models create conditionsfor a war. But, such models, even if they are assimilated and accepted by thepopulation, are not enough to start a war. There must be also a big enoughnumber of high-ranking persons to plan such a war, and a series of technicalconditions.

Another factor, which is associated with the war start will be describedbelow. The people who are in command are usually image-type persons, butsymbolic-type persons make the weapons. Only symbolic-type persons are able tounderstand the power of such weapons, but such persons are not in command.Once a war starts, the image-type leaders lose the control of the short andlong-range consequences. For instance, the leaders of the Second World Warunderstood the weapons, based on the experience of the weapons of the FirstWorld War. In the WW1 the tanks were "exotic" weapons and planes, too. Verysoon the tanks and planes changed totally the manner of evolution of a war. Itwas not possible to predict the destructions on such a large scale by the WW1-type persons who started WW2.

This problem continues to exist even now. In some less developed parts of theworld, the leaders and soldiers could be image-type persons, who are not ableto understand the power of the weapons used by them. They are also not able tomake such weapons. For instance, the war in Rwanda produced a huge number ofvictims. The different groups of population fought each other since thebeginning of history and it was not a big problem. The problem occured whenthey obtained advanced weapons without being themselves advanced enough tounderstand their power.

1948: The Cold War

Communist paranoia has slowed down some nations to understand basic conceptsas "economic efficiency". Communist leaders have understood this problem, butCommunist ideology, as any ideology, cannot be modified. Any change of anyideology will distroy it. The apparent reason why the Communist system crashedwas a very low economic efficiency. The basic reason was the increase of thelevel of understanding of the external reality based on symbolic models by thepopulation.

1979…1994: The fundamentalist Iran, Idi Amin in Uganda, famine in Etiopia,Iran-Irak war, famine in Somalia, war in Rwanda.

There are some nations, which cannot evolve due to internal or externalfactors. A slowing down of the evolution seems to be a general tendency in animportant fraction of the world.

A typical situation was in Somalia. The facts are:1. In Somalia was famine. Many died.2. Western countries (USA included) brought them food.3. When they obtained enough food, they attacked the US troops.4. USA left Somalia very fast.5. Western countries changed their basic principle "life is the supreme value"to a new concept as "we do not help those who do not help themselves too".

The first consequence of this change was ignoring the situation from Rwanda.

1993: Terrorist attack on WTC in New York City2001: Another devastating terrorist attack on WTC (passenger airplanes crashedinto WTC).

Individuals, groups or cultural zones where the evolution based on symbolicmodels is blocked, generate terrorism. In such a situation, fundamentalistaction is expected. That is, people turn back to image models. As we know, itis not possible to know the importance of an element or a relation, on animage model. Thus, a person based on image models only, has a tendency forparanoia. The logical arguments are not taken into account, because the logicis associated with symbolic models only.

On the other hand, some important cultural zones are speeding up their advancebased on symbolic models. They gain more and more power due to this.

This is the overall situation now.

Abstract: the evolution of the brain means the increased power of the symbolicmodels. The main steps are:

1. Spoken language (about 140 thousands of years ago)2. Phonetic writing (3700 to 2900 years ago)3. Euclid's Geometry (2300 years ago)4. Newton Mechanics (340 years ago)5. Quantum Mechanics (100 years ago)6. Some cultural zone speed up their evolution based on symbolic models, butin other zones there is a tendency to turn back to image models(fundamentalist tendency). Some fundamentalist tendencies occur in symboliccountries too.

ETA 18: The organization of the human society

Faced with external reality, any individual builds and operates some models topredict the evolution of the external reality. The majority of the populationis based on image models. One of the organization principles of the humansociety is:

The majority is seldom right.

This principle is a direct consequence of reflecting the external realitybased on image models.

The evolution of society means that there is a dynamic (a continuous change intime). But, as we already know, it is very hard to change a structure ofmodels.

A second principle states that:

The persons who are able to lead the society must be changed from time totime, even if they seem to be able to lead the evolution process.

The first principle says that a team of "symbolic" qualified persons shouldelect the leading persons, and the second principle says that such personsmust be changed from time to time.

The present democratic society is based on these principles, as MDT justexplained why.

When in a situation associated with the evolution of the society, a decisionhas to be taken; on image models, the decision is based on feelings, orimpressions, or some local models. On a symbolic model, such a decision isbased on parameters and their associated values. So, the importance of everyelement or relationship is controllable.

Example: there is a law of the propagation of errors in mathematics. It sayshow much the result of a formula is changed when a term is changed, let's say,e.g. by 1%. The importance of every element or relationship is given in a veryprecise way.

In future (not in the next 50 years, I guess), there will be a single symbolicmodel associated to the society. Such a model will be able to characterize thesociety in the same way as the mechanical world is characterized by Newton'smodel.

Based on simulation, it will be possible to predict the evolution of thesociety, based on some basic decision. The population will have to know thesepredictions and choose one or another based on its short-range and long-rangeinterest.

It is supposed that in some very advanced countries such models already exist.The main problem is that the political parties and the population are on ageneral evolution level that is too low for a "symbolic" understanding of thesociety.

ETA 19: The schizophrenic-paranoiac complex (XSPC).

XSPC is described only associated to non-pathological schizophrenic persons
(XS1-type).

Based on MDT, schizophrenia means a reduced ability to build and operate long-range models.

XS1 schizophrenia is a non-pathological form, which is associated with theactivity of a large fraction of the population in a normal society.

Paranoia XP means that there is an ordinary model in the protection structureof models. Such an OMPSM forces a person to distort the importance of theprimary facts to be accepted by OMPSM.

Thus, an XS1-type person is not able to build long-range models, but he/she isable to build short-range models. The result is that such a person has a largenumber of short-range models, which are associated with almost all thefeatures of the external reality. A XS1 person is able to integrate into asociety, often in very good positions.

Schizophrenics can't build efficient long-range models, but can build verygood short-range models. The incapacity of building long-range model meansthat they have many uncorrelated short-range models. When they are forced tocouple/correlate several models, as they haven't got the capacity to do it,they will distort the correlation between them. It happens in the same way asfor paranoiac persons, but for schizophrenics, paranoia is induceddynamically. (At different moments, there are different distortions). This isXSPC.

The present educational system has the tendency to create schizophrenicpersons with XSPC symptoms. XSPC is generated by the classical educationalsystem, where lessons are based on elements, without insisting on therelationship between elements. The capacity to make on one's own suchcorrelation is not favoured by the educational system. As in school theconstruction on long-range models is not taught, the persons will lose moreand more this ability. Thus, school, at all levels, favours the occurence ofXS1B, and also XSPC, in perfectly sane children. This characterizes school allover the world.

Application: Let's build the full history of Europe, for secondary schoollevel, in a normal lesson of 50 minutes.

The main problem is to select what is important and what is not. The normalsolution is to make a long-range model and to declare it in an explicit form.Such a model will be able to select, in a coherent mode, what is important andwhat not.

There is a development history of the human species in this book. This historyis based on a long-range model, which says that all the evolution of the humanspecies is based on the continuous increase of the power of the symbolicmodels. Thus, this model is able to select what is important and what not.

Some people could have other ideas. There is no problem. They must declaretheir long-range model and make another history. In every situation, therewill be a correlation between the short-range models, which are the elementsof the long-range model. This is the normal situation, according to MDT.

Conclusion: XS1 persons are based on a large collection of short-range models,which are built by direct interaction with the external reality. When suchpersons are forced to connect some models in between them (to cover a largersection of the external reality), they are forced to connect such independentmodels. This can be done only by the distorsion of some models to fit with oneanother. But, this is similar with the behavior of a paranoiac person. This isXSPC (paranoiac behaviour due to a schizophrenic structure of models).

ETA 20: Induced paranoia (XIP) and paranoiac-schizophrenic complex (XPSC).

XIP affects normal persons who are forced to use a basic model in everysituation.

E.g. the members of the Communist parties are forced to accept that the"working class" is the leader of the society. This model is not in PSM (theperson has no illness) but, they are forced to use this model.

This externally-imposed model determines that any data from external realityshould be compatible with the externally-imposed model. Their structure ofmodels evolves in a paranoiac-type structure (it is not possible to discussfreely with such persons).

A "soft" form of XIP occurs in people that are representatives of a stateinstitution.

For the XP paranoiac persons (there is an OMPSM), the external data couldcollide with the OMPSM. The solution for them is to distort any externalinformation to be compatible with their OMPSM. But, in a complex structure ofexternal realities, this method cannot work (it is not possible anymore tobuild a harmonic/logic structure of models by distorsion). The only solutionis to fragment the data. This means that the same facts from external realityhave a different interpretation depending on the environment. This is XPSC.

Conclusion: a paranoiac structure of models evolves to schizophrenia too, asthe external reality is more and more complex.

ETA 21: Disharmonies of the functions of the brain

We know from the general theory that two basic modes of interactions betweenhumans and external reality exist. The first consists in obtaining better andbetter models of the external reality (ZM). The second is modifying externalreality based on action models (ZAM).

Disharmonies are associated with the importance given to each facility. Thus,there are two categories of humans: more knowledge or more action oriented.

Without action on the external reality, knowledge is limited. On the otherhand, people with a reduced knowledge of the external reality can't build goodquality models, and so the capacity of action on the external reality islimited or inefficient.

Disharmonies are thus determined by the following factors:- the capacity to build models of the external reality- the capacity to build action models- the capacity to activate action models.

All these three factors are in a very close interdependency, whatever theinteraction between the brain and external reality might be.

A disharmony cannot be associated with a psychical or a pathological status.
The disharmonies contribute to what we call personality.

In this chapter, we will talk about people who have no disharmonies. Theperfect situation is the case of those who build action models compatible withthe models of the external reality. These people are those who do not intendto do more than they are able to. Such people will succeed in all they want todo. They are happy people.

However the happy people have little contribution to the progress of society,even if they contribute significantly to its stability.

Example: A man wants to buy a very expensive car. Lacking money, the actionmodel can't be activated. This man is unhappy. Another one wants to buy apencil. He succeeds to do it, and as such, he is happy.

Disharmonic people move society forward. They are essentially unhappy people.If they succeed in the end to do what they wished for, soon their disharmonicstructure will make them build other action models which are not suitable toexternal reality and the cycle restarts.

ETA22: Subliminal messages

When external reality changes, the local ZM won't make good predictions andthe brain will in consequence look for/build a new model suitable to the newexternal reality. However some time to react is needed.

In the case of subliminal messages we have an image which will produce a newM-model. This will have to activate a ZM-SL (SL= subliminal), but before theactivation of the new ZM-SL, the dominant external reality will reappear,which will immediately reactivate the initial ZM. Thus ZM-SL has time to bebuilt, but will not be activated. This will have the effect on a person as anidea or tendency to something, without an explicit reason. Of course thesethoughts influence methods can create big disorders in the structure of modelsof a given brain, as some half-elaborated models have to be integrated in thenormal structure of models. ZM-SL can become illegal models. This is whysubliminal messages are forbidden, at least in advertising, all over theworld.

ETA23: How a positive science works

A positive science is a symbolic model (SM) integrated in GCL, which isassociated to an external reality. Let's explain this statement.

1. The existence of a fundamental symbolic model called General CommunicationLanguage (GCL) is supposed. This symbolic model contains absolutely allwords, together with their definitions. The definitions can be more or lessprecise, logically consistent or not, can be or not accepted by some orothers. GCL is the common language formed spontaneously between people intheir inter-relations along the milleniums.2. We choose a word (term) T from GCL.3. Let's suppose that there is a positive science SM, that could include theterm T.4. The term T, that should be studied by SM, has to be included in SM. Forthis purpose, T has to be redefined within the frame of SM. SM canintegrate a new term only if this term is defined within SM. Thus T willhave one definition in GCL and another generated by SM.

Example: The term 'force' has one definition in GCL and another in Newton'sMechanics. The predictions of Newton's Mechanics refer only to the term'force' as it had been defined within Newton's Mechanics.

5. As soon as T has been included in SM, SM generates the relationshipsbetween T and other elements, and makes predictions that include T. Thesepredictions can then be compared with external reality.6. If the predictions of SM related to T prove to be acceptable, then SM isconsidered useful in understanding T. If the predictions are unacceptable,then SM is inadequate in understanding T. In neither case, SM can beconsidered correct or incorrect.7. Any prediction connected to T has to be associated with the SM whichproduced it.

Example: Gravity is a supposition of Newton's theory. In his theory gravity isa property of the mass of a physical body. In Einstein's theory (anothersymbolic model), gravity is a property of space and mass. Both theories givegood predictions in known specific situations.

8. As the predictions of SM related to T are proved acceptable, SM isconsidered suitable in understanding T and thus, the predictions of SMincluding T can be associated with the term knowledge.

Knowledge based on an acceptable SM is the purpose of any positive science.

We'll see now an extremely complex example. We have intentionally chosen aterm which practically has no definition in GCL (the definitions is unclear)and has no associated direct data and facts from the external reality. Theterm chosen is 'alien' (ET).

To study within a positive science a term like ET seems impossible; we willsee that this is not so. According to the logical schematic presented, we needa symbolic model (a positive science), which in our example is MDT itself.

Generation of a definition of the term ET in MDT means that we accept that ETshave a brain and more, their brain works based on the same principle as thehuman brain. This can be difficult to accept, but independent of the used SM(MDT or another), the situation is the same: SM generates the definition ofET, whatever SM is, and whatever the definition of ET in GCL might be. We'lltry to explain ET in MDT.

Let's activate MDT with ET included. MDT considers that the basic functions ofthe brain are the construction of image models [I] and symbolic models [S].

Let's define a human brain [H] with the parameters I=1, S=1. It is very likelythat ET will not have the same parameters. Let's suppose a model of ET withthe parameters ET(1,10)(the same capacity to build image models as humans, butten times capacity to build symbolic models). This is just a possible example.In a complete analysis we need to use a collection of values (I,S).

After having choosen a pair (I,S), we start operating MDT with ET included. Wecan ask a first question, e.g. how can the interaction between a human H(1,1)and an ET(1,10) look like? Which are the tendencies of the ET? Do they want tocommunicate, do they want to be friends or enemies, etc.

MDT can't answer these questions yet. We need to calibrate the model.
Calibration is done asking questions with known answers.

For instance, a dog might be associated to D(0.1,0) (10% of the capacity tooperate image models compared to a human and zero capacity to operate symbolicmodels). We have the tendency to communicate with dogs and do not have anexagerated tendency to exterminate them. On the other hand, we have thetendency to exterminate mosquitoes which have an extremely low I value andS=0.

We can go on with calibration studying the interaction among humans. Forinstance, the Asiatic have clearly a higher I value than the Europeans, andthe Europeans have higher S.

Once the system is somehow calibrated, extrapolation to given situations ispossible. Based on prediction, we can evaluate which are the limits for I andS for a friendly or unfriendly interaction.

Let's not forget that no prediction of the model can be verified yet ininteraction with external reality. However, the fact that we have a collectionof predictions, brings us a huge advantage. If some facts from externalreality could be in the range of predictions of the model, we will be alreadyprepared to interpret them in specific conditions. Thus, some facts can beexplained if ET had a certain formula. Anyways, we already have a collectionof probable behaviours, which represents a big advantage, when some facts fromexternal reality could be explained by the existence of ET.

We can go even further. Depending on the formula chosen for ET, models ofcivilisation could be built for each type of ET. Again, the model can becalibration based on known types of human society, including those existing inthe past, and extrapolating to various formulas for ET.

Please remember that even if ET existed in external reality, and even if MDTgave exact predictions, it does not result from here in any way, that ET havebrains which function as MDT considers.

A positive science only declares the model and gives predictions. If, based onverifying the predictions, we get confidence in the model, then the model willbe used in other similar situations, as useful. Never and with no positivescience do we expect that it will show us "the truth" or it will offerguarantees or certainties. A positive science, as we have shown above, makespredictions. If the model makes good predictions, we will use it again, andthat's all.

Let's see another possible direct practical application associated to theabove example. We could build models to tell us what could happen with humansociety if S=2. Or, what would happen if the dispersion in S increases toomuch. This means to find out, for instance, if a danger exists forcivilization if 50% of humans have S=0.5 and 50% have S=1.5. Perspectives lookfascinating!

ETA 22: Direct demonstration of the function to create image models

The basic assumption of MDT is that the brain builds and operates modelsautomatically (this is a hardware function). An exercise is described belowwhich demonstrates directly this basic assumption.

The absolute majority of beings (human or animal) have two eyes. They generatetwo plane images but what we see is a single tri-dimensional image(photographic-type image model) in accordance with MDT. Moreover, if we have asingle plane image (we look with one eye) the brain will continue to build thetri-dimensional model.

But we have got a problem: with a single plane image we have not enoughinformation to build a tri-dimensional image. However we have a"compensation": the brain is an extremely powerful system. It will use anykind of supplementary information to build first a tri-dimensional image andthen, the tri-dimensional model. In the following, we will describe anexercise for beginners to demonstrate this.

We need to watch TV with a single eye in a room with no additional lightsource. The glass surface of the screen has to be absolutely invisible (thereshould be absolutely no reflection of light on it). We have to sit in front ofa normal screen at least at 3 meters distance (we should not be able to seethe pixels which build up the image). The screen should show a familiarpicture, from common external reality, in normal perspective, and the imagehas to change slowly.

If, under these circ*mstances, we watch the screen with one eye, after sometraining, we will see a tri-dimensional image. This experiment proves directlythat the basic function of the brain is to make image models.

The generation of tri-dimensional models by the brain starting from a planeimage is known for a long time. This appeared at the same time with theexpansion of art painting trade, many hundreds of years ago. Thus, a painterused to paint first the foreground, and later the background. A good painterhad the whole tri-dimensional model in his head, and the background connectedperfectly with the foreground, even if the background was painted a lot later.In some paintings, the background or some components of the painting do notmatch perfectly (a poor painter) and this could be noticed by art expertslooking at the painting with one eye.

Rembrandt painted scenes with groups of people. However, some people in thegroup could be "closer" or "farther" from the viewer. When such a compactgroup is watched with a single eye, one can notice that the painter hadpainted them correctly (the persons farther out are slightly smaller). Ourbrain can notice tiny differences, because it reconstructs the 3-D model.

By the way: to build a 3D model based on a single plane image is an operationwhich requires an immense capacity of processing of information. In spite ofits huge power, the brain has problems with the capacity of processing such ahuge amount of information. As in principle there is not enough informationfor such an operation, the brain has to guess one or several probable models,which have to be verified. From my direct experience, in order to guess a 3Dmodel from a plane image ones has to be in a very good physical and psychicalshape.

ETA 23: Some basic parameters of the brain for measuring performance

Based on the fundamental theory, I have listed several basic functionalfacilities of the brain, exclusively as an introduction to the problemevaluation.

1. The capacity to build and operate image models (arts, many games,paranormal qualities…)2. The capacity to build and operate symbolic models (positive science,technologies…)3. The capacity to build and operate purely symbolic models (QuantumMechanics…)4. The capacity to integrate an image into a pre-existing image model5. The capacity to translate an image model to GCL (description of an imagemodel)6. The capacity to translate a symbolic model to GCL (the symbolic model isassociated to a certain case, translated to an image model and described inwords)7. The capacity to translate an image model to a symbolic model (generalabilities in science)8. The capacity to translate a symbolic model to an image model9. The capacity to integrate symbolic information into an image model10. The capacity to build concept-type image models from a family of imagemodels11. The capacity to build a concept-type symbolic model from a family ofsymbolic models.12. The capacity to integrate symbolic information into a symbolic model13. The speed to build/operate image models14. The speed to build/operate symbolic models15. The speed to build long range image models16. The speed to build long range symbolic models17. The speed/capacity to update preexisting models18. The capacity/speed to build shielding models19. The capacity to build a new model in front of a new external reality20. The speed of finding a pre-existing model suitable to a new externalreality21. The speed of activation and deactivation by MZM of a preexisting modelin front of a changing external reality. This implies both finding thesuitable model and initializing it to the given external reality22. The capacity to operate in time-sharing several models in front of acomplex external reality

This list can continue, as the brain is extremely complex.

For instance:Endurance parameters (e.g. the quality of the technological implementation),dynamical parameters (e.g. the speed and stability of the operations, how fastone can switch from one operation to another in transient and stationarymode).

In the general theory, the brain appears as having two basic facilities: tobuild and operate ZM models associated to external reality, and to act on theexternal reality, based on a ZAM model. The facility of action on the externalreality has a number of parameters, starting from building ZAM suitable to theexternal reality and ending with the capacity of activation of the actionmodels.

This possible list of parameters is far from characterizing completely thebrain.

From this we can see the naivete and ridicule of the present so-calledintelligence tests. These tests are ridiculous, because there is nofundamental theory, which could at least define and correlate the used terms.

My theory says that there are facilities associated to image and to symbolicmodels (there are arts and sciences, watches are analog or digital, oncomputer screens we have icons and text etc.) We also have facilitiesassociated with obtaining information from the external reality and facilitiesassociated with modifying the external reality. A minimum observation of theexternal reality suggests four independent groups of IQ tests:action/knowledge on image/symbolic models. As this is not the case, thepresent IQ tests are naive and ridiculous, not only from the point of view ofMDT.

In the following we will give a structure of fundamental IQ tests based onMDT:1. The capacity to build M image models2. The capacity to build YM image models (concept models)3. The capacity to assimilate image YM4. The capacity to build symbolic YM5. The capacity to assimilate symbolic YM6. The capacity to assimilate image ZM7. The capacity to build image ZM8. The capacity to assimilate symbolic ZM9. The capacity to build symbolic ZM10. The capacity to assimilate symbolic ZAM11. The capacity to build symbolic ZAM12. The capacity to assimilate image ZAM13. The capacity to build image ZAM14. The capacity to activate symbolic ZAM15. The capacity to activate image ZAM16. The capacity to build image AZM17. The capacity to activate image AZM

Example: For a person who has to be a public relations representative for abusiness, the qualities which will count, on first place, are the capacity toassimilate symbolic and/or image models and to act based on them. He has tohave a reduced tendency to build own models, in order to be fit to therequirements of the position. A person who will work in scientific researchhas to have capabilities to create new symbolic models.

Among these capabilities, interdependence should exist. We can suppose thatpersons who have the tendency to build models will have difficulties toassimilate external models. Their tendency will be to modify any externalmodel in a personal manner. At the same time a person with capabilities ofassimilation of external models, will have diffculties in building own newmodels, and will not try to modify the assimilated models, even if they arenot suitable to the external reality anymore.

Other parameters associated to the brain are connected with the stability ofthese capabilities, on long/ short term, and in normal or extreme conditions.These parameters will charactrize the reliability of these capabilities inspecial conditions.

Based on this theory and further work, a collection of human types will bepossibly established as a list of numerical paramters. As soon as a person isconsidered to belong to a specific type, he/she will know that his/her chancesto socially integrate are big, if he/she will pursue the domain where he/shehas adequate qualities.

The above examples are only as an illustration of the capabilities of MDT inthis field. A fundamental theory as MDT cannot be used directly to solvespecific problems. It creates a basis and a referential system, where specificproblems associated with some sections of the extrenal reality can be solved.

ETA 24: Animals

Bees

A basic characteristic of a bee is its flight beyond its visual limit. It canfly some hundreds of meters from the beehive, while it can identify objectsonly withing a few meters distance. In consequence, the bee must navigate.Navigation means, in principle, the existence of a map, compass and of adynamical system of finding the actual position on the map. If we can makeonly suppositions about the compass and the dynamical positioning system, asto the map, we find ourselves in the action zone of the theory. A map is animage model. The brain builds simplified models (maps) of the externalreality, marking the position of the beehive and the position of the bee inflight and updating that all the time.

When a young bee comes out of the beehive, it will start flying around it, inwider and wider circles, but only on clear days. The explanation based on thetheory is that, in this flight, the bee is calibrating its navigation system.This means that it calculates its position relative to the beehive andcompares the prediction with external reality, as given by direct view. Whenthe instruments of navigation are calibrated, it can fly beyond the limit ofdirect visibility, and return successfully based on the predictions of its mapmodel.

Migratory birds

In the case of migratory birds, we have again a navigation problem. This timethe flight is done at thousands of kilometers distance. It is clear that themigratory birds should have a map added to the navigation instruments. Thebirds should have in memory a successful story-type model (map) of the wantedroute. The bird will compare the wanted position (given by the story-typemodel) with the real position. The real position could be found e.g. byfollowing the magnetic field of the Earth, by observing the position of cosmicbodies (Sun, Moon, and stars). It is clear that any supplementary informationis welcome and added to the story-type model, to sustain a successfuloperation. The navigation story-type model has been built based on a previoussuccessful flight. A bird, which has not this model, could record it, if it isa member of a flock in which at least one bird has this model.

However, if a bird, which has not yet the navigation map, has technicalproblems in flight, it could be lost. Examples are known of migratory birds,which having technical flight-problems, were eventually taken into care bypeople. After healing, they did not want to leave anymore. The theoryexplains this by the fact that without a map and their position on the map,they don't know where to go. However, if they see a flock in flight, theymight follow that flock.

There is a situation reported by the media, when a whole flock lost itsnavigation map and remained stranded. In this situation, a plane resembling abird was used to guide the flock.

Cats

Cats can communicate to some extent with humans. Another characteristic isthat a cat hardly adapts to an environment after getting used to another. Ahouse cat is jumpy at sounds to which it should be familiar. When a cat isdisturbed, it is very likely that PSM was activated.

At first sight, cats have a brain with a reduced capacity to build new models.At the same time, due to a weak instinct of defending its territory (some catsaccept mice around them), one can suppose that the cat's model of theterritory is very primitive. The most probable situation is that a cat canbuild new models only when very young. After some time it looses the capacityto build long-range models and uses mainly short-range models, guided byprimitive long-range models and many solutions based on the action of PSM.

In fact, all predators having few enemies have the tendency to use more short-range efficient models, than long-range models. Thus, intelligence, which isan indicator of the capacity to build and operate long-range models, is notstimulated in predators. Animal intelligence is stimulated by the presence andinteraction with humans, and also by an aggresive environment.

It is important to note that in spite of the fact that the lack of externaldanger is not a stimulus to develop the functions of the brain, the potentialof the predators brain is relatively high. This is why, even if predators donot look too intelligent, they can surprise us in critical situations.

Dogs

Dogs seem to build very precise models of the external reality, includingsensing the mood of the master. Their relatively high capacity to buildmodels, gives them a possibility to communicate based on these models,including with humans.

Let's analize now a situation, as it was reportd in the newpapers. A shepherdwas walking with his dog in the forest. A mother bear with cubs attacked him.The bear attacked the shepherd, but the dog attacked the cubs. The bear leftthe shepherd, to save its cubs.

The theory can explain this behaviour in several ways. A first possibility isthat the master is integrated in the dog's PSM. The dog builds a defence modelof the master, which, at the simulation of the bear attack, fails to find asuccessful solution. Simulating the attack of the cubs, the prediction appearsthat the bear will save the cubs and forget about the shepherd. Thisexplanation is clearly a sign of intelligence (long-range model). It is a bittoo complex for a dog (it is even surprising even for humans).

Another variant is that after the model to attack the bear failed, the dogattacked the cubs because it was less dangerous. This means that the masterwas not in the PSM.

Another variant exists in which the dog has participated previously in anattack of several dogs against a mother-bear, and in that attack, it saw thatthe bear runs with the cubs when the cubs are attacked. This variant againdoes not consider the shepherd. This seems to be the most probableexplanation.

Another variant exists in which the shepherd is not considered, and the dogattacks anything weaker than itself.

Let's continue the analysis of dogs. It is known that dogs are very faithfulto their master. This suggests that they can introduce the master into theirPSM. However, the fact that some dogs can be faithful to several masters(successively) suggests that they can rewrite the PSM. This is really unusual.

The fact that dogs introduce the master in the PSM is clearly demonstrated bythe observation that some dogs die to save their master (they are not afraidof death). According to the theory, this can happen only if the masters are onthe same priority level with their own being.

There are fights with dogs, when dogs fight to death. It is interesting to seeif the motivation can or can't be given by a protection model of the master,or by an instinct, which does not take the master into account.

The elephant

The brain of the elephant could be bigger than the human brain. From thisfollows that its organization is primitive. A way to explain this is thereduced capacity of the elephant brain to build concept models. If this istrue, he uses a huge capacity of the brain to build pure image models. Theterm "elephant memory" can be associated with this feature. Thus, if it builtconcept model, the elephant should be able to identify only limited landmarksof the places it passes by. Using pure image models, it memorizes each treeand each branch. This is a totally inefficient mode of brain functioning.

Monkeys

Experiments show that, in a controlled environment, some monkeys build andoperate some primitive symbolic models. They might implement this function bysoftware, based on image models. However, these very singular examples provetheir incapacity to evolve towards a symbolic model, in fact.

One of the most striking characteristics of these animals is their lack ofstability in a model. The most intelligent monkeys are those which have thecapacity to stay in a model, when the external reality gives them manyopportunities to change the active model. If the monkeys had stability in amodel, then they could have better performance at building symbolic models,under the human control.

In spite of the fact that MDT does not sustain the evolution of man frommonkey, the behaviour resemblance of monkeys and humans, on image models ofcourse, is striking.

The dolphin

The dolphin is considered a very intelligent animal, next after humans. Thedolphin can not only immitate the signs made by humans but they can integratethem into a larger context.

For instance, when the gestures of the trainer suggest a jump followed by asalute, the dolphin understands that it has to jump, and then, to greet thepublic.

However, even if dolphins seem to understand easily gestures, they do not seemto have abilities to associate an action to a symbolic message.

The dolphin builds easily normal long-range models, not only story-type modelsas some other animals.

At the same time, they could reach even level 2 of conciousness, if it couldbe proven that they build their own correlation models with the group to whichthey belong (as it seems to be the case for captive dolphins).

Note: many species of animals hunt in packs. Usually, the model of correlationis situated in PSM. The superiority of an animal is given by the capacity tobuild its own correlation model with the pack or with other beings, human oranimals, (level 2 of consciousness). It is not easy to see this essentialdifference, as the apparent behaviour can be the same.

The theory does not exclude the possibility of level 2 consciousness, on imagemodels (of course) for the dolphins.

This would mean e.g. that a dolphin anticipates the action of another and willact in advance, based on prediction, in the frame of a normal model, imposedby the trainer (not a model of the PSM, as the ones associated to instincts).There could be some difficulties to understand what happens, due to the reasonshown in the note above.

Some other things result from the theory. Thus, the basic characteristic ofthe environment where the dolphin lives, is the lack of landmarks. Whateverthe capacity of interaction with external reality is, the dolphin in the oceancannot build models of the environment in which it lives, due to the lack oflandmarks. It can't mark the territory to use marks in building models of theterritory. Even if it might make maps of the magnetic field of the Earth,these maps are not precise enough to have good landmarks. Even if it hadprecise landmarks (near the coastline), they could be used only for localnavigation.

Using the terminology of my theory, one could say that the dolphin hasschizophrenia induced by the environment.

Captivity should increase the level of intelligence of the dolphins, due to anenvironment with landmarks. These can stimulate it to use its brain to ahigher capacity closer to its theoretical possibilities. However, experimentsup to date do not show abilities to build symbolic models, as in the case ofsome monkeys, even if on image models, dolphin brain seems to be very advancedfor an animal.

Observations about the limited survival of dolphins in captivity can berelated to the fact, that, in captivity, they build very fast the exact modelof the space available. After a while (see "stress") the space is known verywell and this could be a cause of stress. A strong brain needs always newinformation. The solution could be a larger environment, in which,additionally, the configuration should be changed every now and then. Contraryto general belief, animals, including dolphins, should feel better ininteraction with man in a controlled environment, in the above conditions,than in liberty.

The shark

The shark has the same environmental problems as the dolphin. It behaviour isso primitive that, based on the theory, it should have only PSM, withextremely few models, given by the interaction with the external reality.Water seems to be a relatively hostile environment for the development of theintelligence.

The whale

The whale can navigate at thousands of kilometers of open see and return toits start point. It is also known that they seem to communicate by soundssimilar to a song.

It is believed about whales that they can use the magnetic field of the bottomof the ocean to build a map (image model). If so, they could find theirposition on this primitive map. However, if this map becomes incorrect, due tochanges of the magnetic field, they could navigate in a wrong direction,including landing on ocean shores. Moreover, if taken back to the open see,they will repeat the path that lead them to trouble, because their navigationsystem indicates the same direction as before. Simply, the whales get lost,and have no means to find again their position in the ocean.

We can take a risk and say that, if the information of navigation associatedwith the magnetic field were recorded in a story-type model (equivalent to amap), then the whale would know how to return to the starting point by"rewinding the tape". Thus, it has to compare the story-type model with IRgenerated by the direct interaction with external reality.

If this is the method, a transfer of this itinerary model from a whale couldbe possible to another, which did not make this trip yet, through that "song".Seems fascinating, but also it is possible to check by experiment.

ETA 25: Very complicated operations on image models (walk, jumps, climbingtrees) of humans

We will apply the theory to see the exact way of walking, jumping and treeclimbing at humans. In accordance to MDT, an action on the external reality(e.g. walking) implies the existence of a long-range action model (ZAM). Thismodel generates the approximate plan of the action. ZAM will build andactivate a number of local models (ZAM and AZM) to reach its goals.

A local ZAM will simulate the movement of the leg for the first step. If thesimulated step is successful, then ZAM will activate the action on theexternal reality. The leg will move in the same way as the leg 'moved' duringthe simulation. It is not possible to do any movement, if it had not beensuccessfully simulated before.

Let's see the case of jumping. In front of an obstacle, which has to be jumpedover, the brain will 'execute' a simulated jump. If the simulated jumpsucceeds, it can be done in the external reality as well, activating themodel, which did the simulated successful jump. If the simulation does notsucceed, there will be no model to activate the muscles of the body, and thebeing will be blocked to act. Any attempt to go against the internal decisisonwill fail.

The conclusion from the previous analysis is that a more or less elaboratesimulation precedes any action on the external reality. The result is that anextremely complicated activity, like e.g. walking, is executed with remarkableprecision and elegance.

At first sight, walking seems to be a relatively simple activity. At a closeranalysis, one can see extreme complexity. The first problem is keeping theequilibrium during walking. The stability of humans and animals during walkingis a dynamical stability. This means that, if we "froze" the body in anintermediate position, the body would not be stable and would fall. Duringwalking, the models anticipate the movements of the body through simulationand send suitable commands in advance. If there was no anticipation of theevolution and we counted only on the stability and position sensors, theinformation would get delayed to the device taking the decision and such, thesystem would have a reduced stability. This is how all the electronicstabilizer systems work: they wait for something to happen to make acorrection.

In the case of the brain, the information from the stability and positionsensors is used to anticipate the possible future problems and act before theproblem arised. This is the dynamical stability and, I think, this problemcannot be solved in real time by any existing computer due to the low power ofthe present computers.

From here we can see the huge capacity of information processing of any brain,starting with mammals. The most primitive mammals, with brains of a few gramsor tens of grams, are able of higher performance than humans, in running andjumping.

We should think of the fact that, for walking, a correlation of hundreds orthousands of musculars fibers is needed. Dynamically, i.e. depending on thespecifics of any individual movement, on the previous behaviour, on theanticipated behaviour, on the goal to be attained and on the various externalperturbations, all these fibres will be activated/deactivated in a preciseorder, each with the suitable intensity to solve the given problem. At anymoment the problems which could appear are anticipated and the corrections aremade, before the problems occur. The number of models (which are built oractivated), associated with this type of activity, can be tens or hundreds ina second.

Example: The working speed of a model

Related to anticipation by simulation on a model, I have seen a photo of abaseball player that was trying to catch a fast ball in flight. The high-speedphoto showed the ball flying directly into the glove of the player. Thesensational in this picture is that the eyes were looking at the place wherethe ball had been some time before. The model for catching the ball hasanticipated the position of the ball based on the previous information comingfrom the eyes. The action was a success, even if the eyes were unable to givethe real time information, and in spite of the fact that the hand can not movevery fast. This example illustrates the huge advantage of the construction andoperation of models. The effective speed of action can be considerably higherthan the intrinsic speed of action of the components.

Hikers who go on difficult treks with heavy backpaks, which change slightlytheir position, know that hiking can be done with exceptional stability.Personally, the immense capacities of the brain to process information, andthe speed of execution of these incredibly complicated operations, have alwaysamazed me.

Associated with the above issue, I had a situation on a trek, carrying a heavybackpack, when a stone slipped from under my foot and I fell. The activemodels were not able to anticipate this possibility. In this case, thecapacity to build a new model suitable to the external reality is reduced. Aswe know, PSM is activated instead. However, I am still amazed that I was nothurt during that fall (it was practically a controlled fall, but outside myconsciousness). Usually, PSM tries to save what can be still saved, and it iseven possible, that it will accept sacrificing an arm, to save what is moreimportant.

Connected with this specific problem, there is also another variant that aparallel model to the main model of walking was created. This parallel modelpredicted that the stone will slip and built a saving model outside the lineof the PSM. However the theory predicts only two lines: one of the PSM and oneof the ZAM which controls the global activity. Possibly, the ZM could let themain ZAM act, and build in parallel other ZAMs models for new situations,which would be activated in special cases. This type of behaviour is notspecifically excluded by the theory, but in reality it is not met sufficientlyclearly, so that it can be sustained. Building a parallel model is an easyoperation, but the question is, how does the main ZM know what other ZAM toactivate, when the active ZAM does not correspond anymore. The implementationof this facility could be done if there were a 'pipeline' built by the mainZM, so that a specific order of activation of parallel ZAMs existed in specialcases. But this would imply the existence of a new hardware. As I alreadysaid, the existence of this facility (pipeline of ZAMs) cannot be sustainedyet, due to insufficient data, but could be a line of further hardwaredevelopment of the brain.

The issue of walking, jumping and running is inimaginably complicated and I donot believe that in predictible future, robots will come close to theperformance of a chicken a few days old, running on a difficult terrain.

Climbing trees is an even more complicated activity, than walking and jumping.The basic information is related to the lack of precise information about theresistance of the branches. The models are able to make an evaluation of theresistance of each branch, but the model will have enough simulations in whichthe branch will break. ZM will need to take this into account, based onvarious local models, in order to build a good strategy (the best ZAMreactualised very often). In this case, the stability in the tree will begiven by the capacity of building alternative models, which could beactivated, if a branch broke. The brain effort needed to ensure the stabilityof the person in a tree is huge. Not all brains have this capacity. Moreoverthe ZM should also build a 'saving' model, in which there should be at leastthree points of support at any moment, in the ideea that if at least two willbehave as in the simulation, the system will have an acceptable level ofstability.

Walking on a difficult terrain, jumping and the stability in tree climbing aretests, which can show global performance of humans in the domain of imagemodels. In animals these functions can be even more efficient.

ETA 26: The brain evolves under our eyes.

Generally all ETAs refer to the behaviour and evolution of the brain of anormal average human.

In 1900 Quantum Mechanics appeared. It marks the highest level attained up tonow, in the brain evolution. However, people, who reached this extreme advanceof knowledge, are ordinary people in everyday life. Independent of the levelin the professional field, in everyday life, the brain continues to act to alarge extends based on image models.

I have an example, in which one can see clearly, and above any doubt, theevolution of the brain towards more and more advanced symbolic models, at thelevel of the common person, in an issue always associated with image models:nutrition.

In all times, people have eaten based on analysis on image models. Associatedterms to nutrition are taste, smell, colour, aspect etc. The decision to eator not a certain food, is based on image models. It can be said that the wholebeing, with its whole structure, participates at solving the nutritionproblem.

We have an explicit situation, when the process of evolution towards symbolicmodels in nutrition is clear. I have seen a person in a shop, who wanted tobuy a certain product. The person had at hand a list of dangerous foodadditives (the so-called "E"s). A product was rejected because it containedsuch an "E".

Taste, smell, aspect and natural drive were overrun and a logical decisiontaken, totally independent of any image model. "E"s cannot be sensed based onimage models. When a decision is taken exclusively on symbolic models, we haveclearly a progress. This phenomenon, according to MDT, will increase on alllevels.

Important note: the elite has imposed that any food should be labeled with theexact contents and other data, so that evolved people can take their owndecision. This type of information is useless for the image-type public. Thereal problem is not the information, but the technical capacity of the brainto collect information and decide based on symbolic models.

As I mentioned, the attitude of the majority of consumers continues to bestrongly anchored in a complex structure of image models. There is an infinitenumber of cases, in which the image models from one's mind, make the productsmore expensive, and also more dangerous.

Example: "good quality" butter might contain a substance, which confers it aYellow commercial colour. Between butter with colorant and the same withoutit, many consumers choose the one with colour. There are several soft drinks(some very famous) which, without colorants, would have less success.

The brain follows its ascending course towards the increase importance ofsymbolic models, so that, as we have seen it already happening, the decisionin nutrition will be taken with more and more contribution from symbolicmodels.

The guarantee exists on symbolic model, that, within the laws and the levelattained by science and technology and the laws of economy, food is possiblythe safest. Nutritional regulations can only impose what a certain product maynot contain.

The evolution of the brain is, however, slow on the scale of human activelife, even if the evolution accelerates. We are on a level development of thebrain on which, in domains where image models were leading (e.g. nutrition),symbolic models are gaining ground.

ETA 27: Principial negative effects associated with the functioning of a brain

1. There is a principial problem, when we ask a question. In order to have anunderstandable answer, we need to be within the model which generates theanswer. Without this condition, the answer will be nonsense. To put itdifferently: not any question is permitted.

Example: The nature of light can be understood only within the framework ofQuantum Mechanics. If we are not familiar with Quantum Mechanics, the answerto the question about the nature of light is nonsense. From outside QuantumMechanics, light seems to be both wave and particle, and this statement cannotbe understood based on logic.

In case of children, the questions in the class "why..?" cannot generally haveany answer, as the children haven't got the suitable models. However parentshave an answer to any of the children's questions. The answer with the storkbringing the babies is famous. The educational system should take into accountthese issues. For instance the 'why' questions should not be encouraged, andfavour the "what is this?" type questions. This means that, for children,parents should show them the elements associated with external reality andtheir relation/interconnections. Children will build alone models and theywill find themselves the answers to the questions of 'why' type.

2. When you can't do what you want, you do what you can… Here we openPandora's box. In the majority of cases in everyday life, we cannot do what wewant or we can't turn back time after a failure.

These problems can generate building and activation of illogical action modelsstarting with revenge and resignation as individual acts, and ending withwars. The reason is associated with the tendency of any model to evolvetowards stability, in the conditions when the model cannot stabilize in anysituation. For instance, by revenge, in a way or another, one can find astability of the model, by attaching to it another model (this model is ashielding model).

Resignation means building a suitable shielding-type model associated to themodel with problems. The most important and well-known shielding model,associated to resignation, is religion.

All shielding models are associated with the term 'illusion'. The illusion isdefined as the reality generated by a shielding model.

The education system should take into account these classes of problems andfind solutions to avoid them.

3. If an action model has been built, it could be activated, independent ofrespecting or not the social or moral laws. From MDT, we know that PSMcontains a series of models imposed by education, which block certain modelsto activate. If the suitable models in PSM are missing, or if there aresuitable shielding models, there are no limits in activating the mostincredible models.

4. Translation of an image model into a collection of symbolic models tosustain an undeclared image model. This syndrome is recognised from the simpleand imperative logic, but also from the incapacity of the person to have adialogue, based on logical data and statements. On symbolic model, thisproblem does not occur, due to multiple cross-checks between elements andrelations.

ETA 28: Free-Masonry

We start this theoretical discussion by building a local model. The mainstatements of the local model are:

1. The intellectual superiority of a person is given by his/her capacity tobuild and operate long-range models.

2. The activity of the long-range models cannot exceed the lifetime of theperson.

3. There are strong tendencies to prolong the action of long range modelsbeyond the limit of his/her physical life.

If a person wants that certain long-range models be active beyond the limit ofone's lifetime, one possibility is to activate such models within anorganisation. However if we want a model to reach its goals in, let's say 100years, the organisation should be a very special one. This condition isfulfilled e.g. by free-masonry.

Before going on, I want to point out that I have no direct information/knowledge on any masonic organisation. The discussion is based exclusively ontheoretical considerations, as they result from MDT, and the local modelpresented above. Moreover, for the discussion, the inner knowledge of amasonic organisation would not bring any useful information. According withthe theory, the organisation should reach its goals beyond the limit oflifetimes of its members, and as such, the ordinary masons are generallyunaware for what they are fighting.

A very general statement is needed here. Thus, a theory (any theory!) makes aprediction. In this specific case, MDT predicts the existence of a specialorganisation. Then we try to find in the external reality something thatcorresponds to the definition. Thus the fact that I attribute to masonry thedefinition generated by the theory, does not mean that this is complete, andin accordance with the external reality. The masonry in the external realitycould have some characteristics in accordance with the theory, but it mighthave other characteristics, which have not been accounted for by the theory.This means that the theory can predict only the existence of a generalstructure, and so, it is possible that, in the external reality, one can findseveral types of organisations, which in spite of respecting the definition,can have structures and components not predicted by the theory. This situationis an extremely general one in all positive sciences and occurs every timewhen a theory is confronted with the external reality.

Let's go on with the description of a masonic organisation based on MDT.

Usually, ordinary members have no idea on the exact situation, and what theyare fighting for. This happens due to the fact that masonry acts extremelyslowly, modelling people from a spiritual point of view. Thus, when somethinghappens, this will happen because the intellectuality has already the'natural' tendency to act in a certain direction, and because the 'natural'tendency of the majority of people will be in the same direction or will notoppose it, at least. Thus, the masonic methods are very different from theclassical methods of education, or from the political ones.

The states also want to persuade people to act in a certain direction, bypropaganda or education. However, the political goals are short-terminitiatives (at most a few legislative terms), while the masonry wants basicchanges in the thinking structure of people, independent of the politicalorientation of each member.

As I have already stated, the goals of masonry are to be attained in severalgenerations. This is why an ordinary member of masonry cannot detect thegoals, which have to be attained. In this situation, masonry should be in verygood relationship with any political and economical forces, independent oftheir orientation. It also results from here that the masonry will nevercampaign in any way (political or other) for any person (inside or outside itsranks) and generally for any political orientation.

Most masonic organisations will not accept political or religious discussioninside them, in accordance with their goals. Political discussions areassociated with short-range models compared to the masonic goals, and thereligious discussion are nonsense, as religion is based on invariant shieldingmodels.

Masonic organisations are based only on individual personalities, independentof their orientation. This is why these organisations have the tendency topersecute the weak members, or those who wish the support of the organisationin their individual interest. The reason is clear: the masons have to bestrong personalities, to be able to influence efficiently the others.

Masonry should be more complex than it was shown here, as somebody has tobuild and activate such very long-range complex models. At the same time, theexistence of several corellated or uncorrelated masonic organisations is notforbidden.

Let's see the predictions of the theory connected with the future of masonry.For this, we will remind the basic problems of the world, in general, as MDTpredicts them.

X1: The world is pushed forward by "symbolic" nations, while more and morenations cannot maintain the pace and have fundamentalist tendencies.

X2: Inside a "symbolic" society, larger and larger groups of people who cannotkeep the pace with the symbolic orientation appear. These take refuge infundamentalisms (antiglobalisation, ecological, religious movements, etc).

X3: It looks like there is a degradation of the technical quality ofindividuals, already at birth, especially in the "symbolic" countries.

X4: Many persons from "image" countries have very good symbolic orientationand are accepted and desired in the "symbolic" worlds. However, these personsdo not have a structure of basic models compatible with the symbolic world, asthey are coming from an image world, and thus, they cannot contribute to thestrengthening of the structures of the symbolic-type societies.

Let's see now some possible problems to which masonry is obliged to react.Let's take e.g. X1. On long term, it could cause a break up of the world. Partof the world should become a ghetto. If this happened, then masonry would havethe tendency to control this process, which is considered as inevitable. Ifghetto-isation of the world were considered inacceptable, masonry should findand implement a solution excluding it.

Discussion associated with X1…X4 should finalize in long-range models, basedon which masonry should act. We can see from here that masonry is the onlyorganisation, which could work with this class of problems. States have tooshort-range models and above all, the representatives of the states are notpreoccupied by such basic problems.

As the classes of problems of types X1…X4 are extremely complicated whenassociated to specific external realities, the prediction is that masonry hasserious difficulties connected to its own structure of personnel, as well aswith the ways of action in future.

It can also be supposed that presently some members of the masonry could notaccept anymore that some goals are attained beyond their lifetime limit. If alarge enough fraction of the masons think this, then the character of masonrywill change.

Let's see a class of problems we could group under the name "Irak syndrome".This is about the fact that image countries do not adopt and respect thedemocratic-type structure, as it is understood in the symbolic countries. Thiswould not be big deal, if these countries were poor. If they have naturalresources for sale, those countries might be tempted to act dangerously forother countries, as there is no public control on what is happening. Thesecountries may become, at the limit, a danger for human civilization.

This class of problems is far beyond the capacities and goals of classicalmasonry. However, as this syndrome will exist, for long time from now, masonrywill have to act somehow to keep the connection with the external reality.

ETA 29: Problems associated with movie making

I have seen on TV a scene presenting a vehicle entering a street. The scenestarts with a general view of the street. The vehicle enters the scene fromleft to right. During the sequence, two persons appear in the foreground whowatch the movement of the vehicle. The problem is that the eyes of thosepersons follow (we suppose) the vehicle, moving from right to left. If theoperator had not changed position, the eyes of the persons should have movedfrom left to right, as predicted by the general model, created during theprevious scene.

Let's see what happened. The vehicle was recorded entering the scene from leftto right, then the operator crossed the street and took some images of twopersons watching the vehicle, and moving their eyes from right to left. Thiscan produce confusion in the construction of the model. In a more complicatedsituation, the presented data would have been confusing and would beunderstood in fragments, stimulating the schizophrenic tendencies. It isreminded that, when the information cannot be correlated, the brain will"switch" from the construction of a normal model to a story-type one.

This is not an insignificant problem. If the scope of the presentation weretransmission of information to help build a model associated to the recordedexternal reality, other rules to shoot a movie would exist, which should bedifferent from the ones used nowadays.

People do not seem to be disturbed by this class of problems. They might bedisturbed only if they want to reconstruct the normal model based on spreaddata. In this case I consider it as a form of induced schizophrenia (XS1B),as clearly correlated events are presented as unconnected.

Thus, in a movie, as local models appear in a succession, they are relatedinbetween each other, in the frame of a story-type model, instead of been usedto create a single normal model, associated to a unique external reality.

The perception based on story-type models is a primitive way of understandingthe external reality, and it is unfortunately a typical way of the "normal"man in the civilized world. Understanding this problem contains implicitelythe solution. Of course, education in school will have an important role.

This problem (reflection of external reality in story-type models) appeared asan effect of overwhelming the brain. What happened is an avalanche effect: thepresentation of a situation is confusing and, as such, the brain builds astory-type model. The structure of story-type models is consuming a lot ofresources of the brain and determines more and more limited allocation ofresources to building other normal models. The reduced capacity to buildnormal models causes that normal presentations are not detected andappreciated anymore. Even if the presentations were normal, it would beperceived through story-type models and so the circle is closed.

Reflecting the external reality in the form of story-type models is a specialkind of fundamentalism. This conclusion should worry everybody.

The solution should be a strict control on the form of spreading theinformation, so that information could only be presented within the generalframe declared at the begining. Thus, any specific information will beintegrated in the general model. This is what is already happening in positivesciences, while, e.g. in newpapers, information is presented without anyconnection to the past, without any prediction of the future evolutions andeven without presenting the context in which the information should beintegrated.

ETA 30: Optical perspective and the quality of construction of image models.

The succes in constructing image models in the case of photography and moviesdepends on the optical perspective of the objects. The perspective is given bythe angle under which one can see the subjects. This angle is given by theratio of the maximum dimension of the image to the focal distance of the lens.

Example: for 35mm cameras (used typically) the 50 mm focal distance was foundto give the same perspective as the eye.

It is important to know that in order to reconstruct correctly a 3D model, theperspective has to be the normal once as the eye is calibrated for its normalperspective. This means that YM models have been already built and recordedbased on the normal perspective. If the perspective is changed, the M-modelswill not find the correct position of the YMs. Thus, the YMs have to bemodified and this is an extremely complicated operation. In this case thebrain prefers to build fragmented ZM models (several ZMs associated to piecesof the primary M-model). This also could favorize a form of inducedschizophrenia (XS1B).

This problem appears e.g. when we watch a scene recorded in a place where wehave been before and which we know. If the perspective is not normal, it ispossible that we do not recognize, or recognize only with great difficulties,some elements and sequences which we should recognize easily.

ETA 31: Some times aggressivity may fight XS1-type schizophrenia.

The aggressivity is defined as a stronger than average tendency to activateZAM models. An aggressive person has the tendency to easily activate modelsthat act on the external reality.

Let's see some typical situation in common external reality.

Example 1: People who go to supermarkets have easily noticeable schizophrenictendencies during shopping. This is understandable. Each product seen willactivate at least one model, so, in a short time, the brain is overwhelmed bythe multitude of models activated at the simple identification of the entitiesof the external reality. They need to correlate, in addition, the offer(price, quality..) with their (usually) limited financial resources. Theeffort of the brain is very big, so that little energy is left to take intoaccount the surrounding people. Those who are in a hurry (have precise modelsto execute) will perceive the ones overwhelmed by the problem as "sleeping",blocking the flow.

However, as we have seen, schizophrenic tendencies are, up to a point,understandable. The local-schizophrenia given by a main problem whichpreocupies too much the brain could be fought by the aggressivity of theothers (if it existed). When, for instance, the others disturb too much or toooften the "sleepy" (as in the supermarket example) the latter will be forcedto redirect part of their resources to respond to the many externalperturbations. To do this, they need e.g. to build several concept(simplified) models for the products, and this is evolution (everything non-essential is discarded).

Thus, the aggressivity of the others can fight local-schizophrenia as it hasbeen described above. If enough people will be aggressive with those attainedby local schizophrenia, the result will be that the shoppers will have moreprecise ideas and will decide faster. Anyways, an aggressive environment willattenuate to disappearance local-schizophrenia with beneficial effects oneverybody.

Example 2: the same type of local (temporary) schizophrenia appears whendriving in busy city traffic. Many will be overwhelmed and will react slowlywith excessive caution and this will upset the other aggressive drivers. Ifthere are enough aggressive drivers, or if the law favours those drivers, thenthe "sleepy" will be either self-removed from traffic, or they will join thetendency to aggressive driving. The effect would be an increase in fluency andhopefully fewer accidents.

Connected to this paradox (aggressivity diminishing the number of accidents)the pros could be: the "sleepy" upset the aggressive. The aggressive couldthus produce accidents. If the "sleepy" will dissapear, the risk of accidentwill be decreasing significantly because of less sources of irritation. If the"sleepy" will vanish from traffic the occasions of the aggressive to showaggressivity will decrease. This can be explained by the fact that, if the onein front of me knows that I am aggressive, he will not risk to drive "lazy".Also, if I have an aggressive driver behind me, I will not risk to beaggressed, so I will drive more dynamically, without hesitation. The result isnot only more fluency but also the diminishing of the effect of aggressivity.

We have shown how XS1-type schizophrenia could be fought by aggressivity, ifthe law favoured aggressivity e.g.

Let's see the reverse. A schizophrenic population reacts slowly and based ontoo short-range models to the permanent perturbation associated with everydaylife. The dynamic individuals will be discouraged by an inert society and sothey will "contribute" to the general bad status of the society.

ETA 32: Sex

MDT considers that there is no principial difference between male and femalebrains. The differences appear only related to the technologicalimplementation of the beings, in general.

From the general theory we know that one of the basic design requirements ofthe beings is to survive unconditionally forever. This requirement is the goalof several image models of the PSM. In the technological implementation known,the living beings have a limited lifetime and the above condition is completedby reproduction.

Fulfilling in optimal conditions the reproduction in the animal world meansthe selection of the best individuals for reproduction and blocking thereproduction of the less performant, based on the available image models inPSM.

The models associated to sexual activities are in PSM and, of course, they areimage models.

In case of humans, we remember that image models have dominated life untilabout year 1800, after which symbolic models have begun a strong ascension. Asa consequence, sexuality, up to 1800, was based exclusively on image models(for the average person only), while after 1800, sexuality was influenced,more and more, by symbolic models (based on logical analysis).

For humans, as based initially on image models, sexuality modelled the manvery differently from woman.

It should be noted here that the term "Man" means for the majority of us "aman" (male), which is not correct. The explanation for this confusion residesin the dominant position of the man in a society based on image models.

Reluctantly leaving behind the cultural environment based on image models,present sexual life is strongly influenced by symbolic models. In a symbolicmodel environment, there is no sexual difference. This could be expressed bysaying that, in a symbolic society, there are no discriminations based on sex.All humans, independent of being male or female are equal, because thisresults from the analysis on symbolic model.

As already said, sexuality is associated with image models, and changing thestructure of basic models, from image to symbolic, has produced strongperturbations in the approach to sex.

In the present technological implementation of humans, the dominant positionof the man is evident. This is the source of the present crisis of sexuality.A woman, knowing that she is equal or, many times, even superior to the malepartner, will have difficulties in implementing her sexual life. Due to thisproblem, the number of non-usual sexual behaviour is high.

In this approach of evaluation of the problem, we will talk only about the"normal" situation, i.e. the situation which should be dominant in sexualissues in a society dominated by symbolic models.

Both men and women have to build a structure of symbolic models, in which themodels explicitly related to sex (image models) should be controlled based onlogic.

The basic statements of this symbolic model should be the following:

1. There is a perfect equality between men and women, including the explicitsexual interaction.

2. Faithfulness to a single partner is not an important feature in a structuredominated by symbolic models. On image models, faithfulness to a singlepartner, only for humans, is necessary and results implicitly from the way ofchoosing the partner ("pure love"… i.e. the partener is included in the PSMas an image model).

3. Sexual attraction can be strongly discouraged by the existence of aprediction that describes exactly what is going to happen during an explicitsexual interaction. From here results that a 'symbolic couple' needs toinvent, if possible, everyday new ways of sexual interaction. Also, whenroutine appears (the prediction is confirmed too precisely), the couplebreaks-up to avoid unsolvable stresses.

These things can be already met in the world we live in, especially in themost 'symbolic' countries (the most advanced from the economic, technical andscientific point of view).

The theory predicts the continuing changes of our sexual 'ways' based on thegeneral shift from image to symbolic models. However, due to fundamentalistreactions (rejection of symbolic models of a large fraction of thepopulation), the sexual life of those attained by fundamentalism is affected.

For 'symbolic' people, sexual activity can contribute to everyday happinessonly if the partners are on the same level of 'symbolic' development.

There is a problem associated with the actual phase of brain developmentassociated with sexual activity. Thus, several instincts are included in PSM,which are associated with sexual behaviour, too. These instincts will blockfor instance the tendencies towards hom*osexuality, incest and pedophily. Theevolution of the brain to symbolic models results also in the reduction inimportance of the instincts with negative consequences, at least in atransient phase.

Thus, the speed of diminishing the importance of instincts is different fromthe speed of evolution towards symbolic models.

The protection structure based on symbolic models would predict the long-termeffects of a sexual decision. When a prediction shows a negative effect, thedecision is to avoid such activities. This method should replace the methodbased on instincts situated in the PSM.

At this point, we are in a relatively dangerous transient phase. Theprotection structure based on symbolic models is not implemented yet, whilethe protection system based on the instincts is less and less efficient.

On very long range (i.e. over hundred years from now) the whole protectionstructure will be implemented based on symbolic models. This means that anysexual activity will be conditioned by the predictions on symbolic models. Thenormal sexual behaviour, in 100 years from now, will be very different fromtoday.

It is very likely that this prediction will be confirmed for the symboliccountries. For the 'image' countries, due to fundamentalism, one can assumethat a fraction of the population, at least, will turn back to the protectionsystem based on instincts. It is very difficult to evaluate the global effectof the mentioned behaviour on these countries.

ETA 33: The internal body

MDT is associated with the main brain which, among other functions, controlsalso the external body (hands, legs, etc). For the internal body (internalorgans…), there is an extra brain, which is a technological process brain.This process brain contains basically an image model of the whole internalbody (its external reality contains the whole internal body). Its scope is tomaintain the stability of the whole internal body. When a perturbation occurs,a model will simulate one or several solutions, in order to regain theequilibrium.

There is a connection between the main brain and the process brain, as it canbe seen experimentally. Thus, a bad psychological state (many unfavourablepredictions) can produce perturbations in the functions of the internalorgans. The inverse influence also exists: a healthy psychological structurecan improve the general health.

Situations exist when several perturbations appear among the systems of theinternal body. In a complex situation, the model cannot understand anymorewhat happened, due to the too complex structure. Some nonconventional medicaltreaments exist, which can be used to control such situations.

MDT is not very much preoccupied with this problem, as extremely many factorsexist, associated to the technological implementation of the whole being. Thissection wanted only to show that the functioning of the internal body iscontrolled by a technological process brain, which works in the same way asthe main brain. The process brain is dedicated to the construction of areality associated to our internal body, which represents its externalreality.

ETA 34: The European spirit

The theory and the applications are associated mainly to the European culturalspace. Europe is a cultural environment where the extensive development ofcivilization was achieved based on symbolic models, associated or not to imagemodels.

Except geometry (created in a space in close communication with the Europeancultural space), Europeans have created the great fundamental models. We aretalking here about Christianity, open sea navigation, the heliocentric modelof the Universe, polyphonic music, Newton's Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics andRelativity theory.

Let's evaluate the European spirit based on some of these models.

The Roman Empire has been created through conquest, but wherever the Romansgot, they created efficient organisation structures, which have been in favourof the conquered people too. Thus, Romans have been both conquerors andcivilisators. This characteristic in the way of thinking is a permanentfeature of Europeans up to our time. Thus, the large colonial empires did notbring colonisation of Europe with slaves. Independent of the injustice to thecolonies, when leaving them, they were left in a good or very good generalshape, e.g. Hong Kong. Nowadays, the European Union spends a lot of moneyearned by European work, to civilise Eastern Europe.

Europeans created Christianity for Europeans. This is why the Christianreligion is tolerant and has reduced tendencies towards fanatism.

A significant number of facts show that Europeans have an adventurous spirit(Marco Polo, Columbus, Magellan etc.) The spirit of adventure is associatedclosely with the desire of knowledge, the search for new ways of evolution,and the need to analyze everything, and never accept an invariant situation.

An example exists connected with the heliocentric model of the Universe. FromAntiquity, everybody knew that Earth is the center of the Universe.This was proved by direct everyday experience and, at least, implicitly, bythe Holy Bible. The scholars of Antiquity have left us precise methods ofcalculation for eclipses of the Sun and the Moon, and data on the ecliptic,and as a consequence on the position of the Equator and the Tropics. Then, whyafter year 1500, some Europeans did consider that something was fishy aboutthe geocentric model of the Universe?

There was a small problem; from the billions of stars, seven had an apparentlychaotic movement. The Ancient Greeks have called them rambling stars orplanets. The European spirit could not accept this. Nikolaus Copernicuspublished in the last year of his life the heliocentric theory of theUniverse. It was for the first time when the European spirit and Christianreligion clashed. Giordano Bruno, a great European, has payed with his deaththe sustaining of the idea of the Earth not being the center of the Universe,and Galileo Galilei had to be humiliated to survive.

But, surprise! Kepler verified Copernicus' theory and discovered that it iswrong (the positions calculated for the planets did not correspond to theexperimental data). Kepler was not discouraged and he discovered that, if theorbits were to be ellyptical, and not circular as said by Copernicus, then,the calculations could be compatible with the experimental data. Later, Newtonwas able to find the explanation of this situation.

The problem was solved beyond any doubt in the favour of the European spirit.After many centuries, the Christian Church admitted officially the situationand rehabilitated Galileo Galilei, but not Giordano Bruno.

The above considerations suggest the essence of the European spirit:liberalism and tolerance, the desire for knowledge and the tendency toadventure.

We will say a few words about a new issue. It appears now, that a EuropeanConstitution is to be written. The problem is associated with the protests ofthe Christian Church generated by the non-inclusion in the Constitution draftof a phrase on the Christian origin of the European civilisation. As we haveseen above, Europeans have created Christianity for Europeans. In spite ofthis, in many cases the European spirit clashed violently with the Christianspirit. The main reason is connected to the dynamism associated with theEuropean spirit, which cannot accept an invariant model (religion).

The European spirit always was victorious, but the Christian Church did notsucceed to evolve fast enough to sustain always the European spirit. TheChurch doesn't seem to have learned anything along the centuries, if, evennowadays, it opposes the European spirit in problems like the same-sexmarriages, abortion or accepting women as priests. Thus, there is, up to apoint, a justification to the decision not to include in the EuropeanConstitution the reference to Christianity.

We need to note that accepting same-sex marriages is not, in principle, a goodthing, and I believe that many Europeans have this point of view. However, theEuropean liberal and tolerant spirit states that, passing over any pros andcons, there should not exist, in principle, any authority to oppose to thewish of the people to search and experiment new ways of life together.European hom*osexuals are Europeans, and have the right to live their life asthey consider it right.

Note: The fact that the Christian Church, created by Europeans for Europeans,has come at times into violent conflict with the European spirit, does notmean at all that it is a non-European Church. During the 2000 years ofChristianity, the Christian Church had a very positive role in keeping thestability of the world, and gave hope to a lot of people. Leaving faithbehind, created monsters (e.g. Communism). This section wants only to show tothe Church, that it should be more flexible and, independent of its greatmerits, avoid to get into conflict with the European spirit. The Europeanspirit has always been victorious and will always win any battle with theChristian spirit.

Let's follow however some facts. The first fundamental symbolic model isEuclid's geometry. It was created about the year 300 BC and is unmodified upto our days. The scolars of the period left us a huge amount of scientificdata kept in large libraries of the Antiquity. At 415 AD, the Christianleaders destroyed the great library of Alexandria, because the books have beenconsidered contrary to the Christian religion.

The result was that scientific knowledge has been completely destroyed for avery long time (the European civilization entered in the Dark Ages), so thatthe next fundamental symbolic model (Newton) appeared over 2000 years afterEuclid! It is clear that the Christian Church had an active role in thisunacceptable big delay, by the destruction of the books and blockingfreethinking. However, it is not clear that this delay was caused by theemergence of the monotheist Christian religion or it is associated with acharacteristic of the development of the brain. I mean, any monotheistreligion wants the control of the thinking system of the people. The mainproblem is if the people accept this, or not. The Christian Church used tokeep up to fifty years ago a list of forbidden books and ideas, but very fewpeople take it in consideration. The general problem is still open.

The evolution towards symbolic models reduces more and more the influence ofreligion on society, and this can be seen in the increase in the number ofthose who ignore religion.

Many people, who deny the existence of God, are consideres 'atheist'. However,this term has another meaning, closer to its initial meaning, given by theancient Greek, i.e. a person who can live without the help of God. We denotethis term by "atheist-2" and we associate this definition to it: a person whocan live without the help of God, without any other specifications. Anatheist-2 could e.g. not deny the existence of God, but he doesn't need Him tolive normally in a European-type society. This also means that an atheist-2can enter any religious site (Christian or not) and respect the site, faithand the believers. This has been mostly the European spirit of all times.

One of the tendencies of Europeans, in accordance with the European spirit,has been to be atheist-2 (an effect of the liberalism and tolerance), but onlylately, as an effect of the increase of the power of symbolic models, thisshows, including in the statistical data. This tendency will grow and it willdepend only on the Christian Church to change, and accept the atheist-2 asthey are.

Europe has another problem: it started the most destructive wars of the 20thcentury and created horrible ideologies: Nazism and Communism. The wars,Nazism and Communism can be associated to the adventurous spirit specific toEuropeans, but contradict liberalism and tolerance. The Europeans warsappeared when the relative importance of the 4 factors has been distorted.Thus, those who started the wars, those who applied the Nazi and Communistprinciples have departed from the European spirit. There will always be a highrisk for Europe, when this spirit is distorted.

Let's see, for evaluation purpose, Europe's relationship with its main'competitor', USA. The Europeans, who have formed mainly the population ofUSA, have been the Europeans with a strong tendency to action (they have beenbuilding easily ZAMs and AZM and they have been eager to activate them).

This explains the power and efficiency of the American society, but also theweaknesses of the USA (does not 'produce' top personalities and needs to'import' them). This also explains the very high level of XS1-typeschizophrenia in the American society.

As we know, in a stable and efficient society, the tendency exists to buildsuitable models to each problem. The Americans consider generally that thereis only one optimal way to solve a problem. The specialists will find thisoptimal solution and will impose it to everybody. Thus the population reactssuitably to any problem.

However the price for efficiency is XS1-type schizophrenia; if the situationis changed, the people have no suitable solutions anymore, and they areblocked as they are not prepared to build on their own new models in front ofa new changing reality (this problem has been presented in several otherETAs). From here emerge the differences between the two cultural environments,the European and the American ones.

Example: In any country, included USA, there is a white line in front of anytraffic light. If the traffic light changes to red and somebody stops afterpassing the line by 10-cm e.g., this is illegal in the USA and the driver iscalled in court. In Europe this 'illegality' produces at most smiles.Europeans will never accept 'perfection'.

The American success is given by perfection, and perfection is incontradiction with creativity and the European spirit. The European spirit isknowledge oriented, while the American perfectionist spirit is goal-oriented.

Let's see some examples of the competition between Europe and USA.

In Civil Aviation, the Europeans came to sell more planes than the Americansdo. This shows that the European spirit is efficient in the more and moresymbolic world we live in.

In Nuclear Physics, Europeans have discovered two subnuclear particles, "W"and "Z" (Nobel Prize), when the Americans had the needed equipment (high-energy particle accelerators), but did not do the necessary experiment. TheEuropeans continue to be creative and efficient.

Let's see the reverse as well. The Europeans wanted to build a fighter-plane,to compete the US ones. Then they discovered that they haven't got thetechnology to make it 'invisible', haven't got enough money to build it andhaven't got the background infrastructure to support this weapon system. Eventhe navigation system (GPS) is American. This is an example of the Europeanadventurous spirit. This spirit can be seen in the building of the A380 (thebiggest airliner in the world). We will see in a few years the result of thecompetition between the American perfectionism and the European spirit.

We have situations when perfectionism is in conflict with the Europeantolerance (the Americans are less tolerant than Europeans). The result is thatin a few crucial problems of the long-range evolution of the society, theEuropeans have a slightly reduced capacity of understanding what is going on.

E.g. in the Irakian problem, the European tolerant spirit produced a differentreaction than the USA. I think that many Europeans are convinced thatterrorism cannot be fought by dialogue, but their tolerant spirit made themsustain that. Here the Europeans have problems, which will grow along with theevolution of the society. The Europeans have no principial solution, as,actually, the Americans haven't either.

Let's summarize the European spirit.

The tolerant spirit, characteristic to Europeans too, has to be preserved asabsolutely necessary in a symbolic society, but it can turn against thesociety in fundamental problems.

The liberalism, spirit of adventure and desire of knowledge are basiccomponents of the European spirituality, and they cannot be given-up, as longas Europe will exist.

Europe will be in great danger anytime when it will distort the Europeanspirit, as it had been defined above.

This evaluation discussion should be ended here, but unfortunately all I havestated up to now is not really correct in a scientific approach. As we know, ascientific approach is based on the existence of a declared local model. Thislocal model has to generate the definitions of the terms used. Let's startbuilding a local model, and then we can return to read the above statements.

Let's begin with the 4 terms: liberalism, tolerance, spirit of adventure anddesire of knowledge.

Liberalism is associated with the technical capacity of a brain to buildseveral long-range models, associated to the same external reality. Moreover,that brain has to compensate for the design deficiency XD3 (with A and Bvariants, see MDT).

As several models exist, associated to the same external reality, thepossibility exists to activate any of them or several at one time; thesemodels can change dynamically. The liberalism and the spirit of tolerance areclosely connected. Liberalism admits several ways of action, and tolerancemakes possible the choice of several ways, alternatively or simultaneously.Liberalism and tolerance are characteristic to an evolved and high qualitybrain. It is very important to note that tolerance implies the knowledge ofseveral models associated to the same external reality.

When the brain cannot build anymore several models associated with the sameexternal reality, it will restrain itself to a single model, and intoleranceappears.

The perfectionists (e.g. the Americans) can have a serious problem here.Perfectionism means rejecting basically all the models, except one created byspecialists. Thus, the tendency to induced schizophrenia (XS1B) increases forthe perfectionists.

Example: The prompter is used in some TV broadcasts. The persons reading thenews are totally de-personalised and practically recite, sometimes withoutunderstanding what they are saying, even when they are the authors of thetexts. When news is presented, both speakers and listeners have two problems:to read/listen to the message and to understand its meaning. When theperfectionism of transmission of the message is exagerated, people willallocate less energy to understanding its meaning. Using the prompter isagainst the tolerance and the spirit of adventure characteristic to Europeans.

Let's analyze now the spirit of adventure and the desire of knowledge.

In front of a complex external reality, we need to build more and more complexZM models. Without them, ZAMs can be built only approximately. This situationis practically very frequent, and the reaction to imperfect ZMs willcharacterize the spirit of adventure and the desire of knowledge.

It is clear that if we have no good quality ZMs, we cannot build good quality
ZAMs, and this will block even more our possibility to build good quality ZMs.

A solution is to develop the ZMs and ZAMs (by simulation on suitable testmodels) up to the moment when we have enough guarantees that an action on theexternal reality will evolve as predicted. This is how perfectionists act. Asecond solution is to act based on the imperfect available models, evaluatingthe risk in a more or less precise way. The action in these circ*mstancescharacterizes the spirit of adventure.

The spirit of adventure is strongly related to the desire of knowledge. Infact, we can say that the desire of knowledge (to have better and better ZMs)is driven by the spirit of adventure (to activate ZAMs that we know to beimperfect).

Perfectionists are more goal-oriented, and not knowledge-oriented.

Example (effects of perfectionism): The Americans have imposed the operatingsystems for computers and many programs associated with them. Perfectionistshave created them. Their scope is to attain a goal and not directly knowledge.This spirit is incompatible with the European spirit and many Europeans feelit. Forced to evolve in a perfectionist type environment, the computer userbecomes slowly but surely an accessory to the computer.

Another example can be given associated with the negative effects ofperfectionism. After the 9/11 events, the perfectionist American solution wasthe introduction of draconic customs and border rules and other homelandsecurity rules, which are not efficient in any real situation. Theperfectionists have no other available method. In Europe, the spirit ofadventure and desire for knowledge is manifest, which means that the Europeansdo not act according to 'rules' as perfectionists do, but use theirindependent capacity of learning and acting in a new unknown environment.

We will see on long-term the efficiency of the European methods in a world inwhich, according to MDT, the dispersion of the human brain development levelis increasing dangerously.

ENDNOTES

This book can create problems to the majority of readers. The main problem isconnected to the assimilation mode of new knowledge. The usual way, promotedby the educational system at all levels is assimilation of story-type models(logically structured or not)in an image type environment.

This book offers no chance to those who expect a story-type model associatedwith image models. It cannot be in any way associated to any image model. Thebook presents a single symbolic model; it has to be understood as it is, as awhole, based on logic.

The basic requirement is to have the capacity to build and operate symbolicmodels. People who work in positive sciences (physicists, mathematicians,engineers…) are favoured, while others have little chance to understandanything.

Some 'test' readers of the book were displeased by the repetition of severalissues in different contexts. This method is mandatory when a new symbolicmodel has to be assimilated.

The persons who have the tendency to build story-type models will be very muchdisturbed by the repetitions, as the repetition sends them back to the pointwhere the statement appeared for the first time. This will fragment the story-type model. Once fragmented, it cannot be continued and a new story-type modelhas to be built. This produces irritation in this category of readers.

On the contrary, those who build normal models will consider repetion aspositive, as it reconfirms the correctness of the assimilated normal model.The model is logical and thus can be developed by anybody who has abilities inbuilding and operating symbolic models.

A short summary has been given at the beginning of the book. Based only onthis summary and a few observations based on external reality, anybody couldrewrite, maybe even better than I, this whole book. The reason is that anysymbolic model is developed univocally based on logic.

Another aspect I want to underline is that this is a fundamental model. Basedon it, one can build an unlimited number of local models associated withspecific problems. Anybody who has assimilated the model can develop it withhis/her own resources for specific problems. E.g. this fundamental model cangenerate a new positive science called "psychology".

Children starting with age 12 can understand the book. At this age, childrencan build and operate relatively complex symbolic models, including computerprogramming.

Humans have a basic problem related to the perception of the external reality.I have discussed with several people who have not been disturbed by the factthat, e.g. in psychology, the terms used have no normal definitions (onlydescriptive ones). There are people who believe that a positive science is ascience that uses apparata and gives precise results of some measurements.Even among physicists problems exist, most don't even realize that what theyare doing is integrated into symbolic models. They know very well the modelsthey build and operate, but some do not know the term 'symbolic model'. Manydo not realize that any symbolic model is integrated into another symbolicone, until a fundamental symbolic model can be reached.

Example: Many will be surprised to find out that any computer program is asymbolic model. A program written e.g. in Java, is a symbolic model. The Javalanguage itself is a symbolic model. Java is probably included in the symbolicmodel called C++. C++ itself is included in Assembler, which on its turn isincluded, together with all the programs, which have ever been written, andany program which will ever be created, in the fundamental symbolic modelcalled machine language.

Whatever the level we are on, a computer program starts with the constructionof the symbolic model. This means that we need to declare the elements, theirproperties and the fundamental relations in between them. This is valid forlanguages based or not on algorithms. Anything which follow is calledsimulation on models. Properties of elements or of relations can be changed,and we can see what happens. Once this symbolic model is stable (has nological contradictions), it has to be calibrated, i.e. needs to be verified oncases where the result is known. In most cases, the calibration implies alarger effort than building the model.

What we obtain from any computer program is a prediction of the model. If theprogram is stable (logical) and if it passed the calibration tests, then itspredictions will be compared with the external reality. We remind here thatthe assembly of all predictions of a symbolic model is called realityassociated to the model.

It is not at all surprising that, in the same way as with the brain, terms astruth or reality can be associated to a computer program, with the definitionsfrom MDT theory of the brain. The reason is easily understandable: we extendto the exterior our own structure of models of the brain. Seems to beimpossible to do anything except this!

The above statement is interesting also under another aspect. Thus, noconnection exists between the basic functions of the brain and a computer.However, we use computers to extend to the exterior the functions of ourbrain.

MDT makes a few predictions that are very difficult to accept. The educationalsystem is based on assimilation of image and symbolic models, and verifying ofthe assimilation in specific tests.

This method has a problem. Based on the theory, those who have abilities toassimilate models have reduced qualities in building new models. The problemis related to the fact that the level of consciousness depends on the capacityto build new models. Thus, school has the tendency to promote individuals withreduced level of consciousness.

MDT shows that there are people knowledge-oriented and action-oriented. Theaction-oriented are not favourised by the educational system, and the onesoriented to knowledge are overappreciated. The action-oriented people move thesociety forward, and the educational system does not understand this manytimes.

The theory defines schizophrenia as the incapacity to build and operate long-range models. Long-range models are required not only for the formation ofconsciousness but also for the prediction of problems that might occur in thefuture. The schizophrenic method is to solve the problems as they appear, onestep at a time. An 'elaborate' form of schizophrenia is called pragmatism.

The normal way of interaction with external reality is to have long-rangemodels associated with the external reality. These models can predict theoccurence of future problems which can be prevented before their appearance.

Here is the English version of my book "Creierul o Enigma Descifrata" (inRomanian) which is also available in the frame of Gutenberg Project. I want tothank to Dr. Angela Vasilescu and Adrian Moisa for their help in thetranslation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

There is no specific bibliography. MDT is a fundamental theory.

That is, all the terms and all the definitions of them are generated by themodel. No book can be used because in any book there are used terms withdefinitions which are not compatible with MDT's terms and definitions.

Example: there is a book of a researcher named Titu I. Bajenescu with thetitle "The performance of the artificial intelligence" (Albastra PublishingHouse, Sibiu, Romania, in Romanian language). In the Bibliography of thisbook, the author has many hundreds titles, including 241 of his own. There is,in the book, a dictionary of the main terms used by author.

One of these terms is "intelligence". The author defines it by 16 differentstatements which contains at least 12 undefined words (to know, to understand,rational, conceptual knowledge, sensation, intuition, to discover, spirit, toaddapt, character, to learn, problem, experience…).

Thus, to understand what is "intelligence" we need to know in advance thedefinitions associated with all of these terms. These defintitions mustcontain only words which are already defined…. An endless proces starts inthis way.

Of course, the author has no definition of the term "intelligence"; he hasonly a description of it. Even worse, based of the impressive bibliography, itis clear that this very important term has no definition. The authot himselfrecognize this by saying: "the intelligence is a hard to define conceptbecause it is impossible to find a single definition to be accepted by all".

In association with the above example, MDT-model generates the normaldefinition of the term "intelligence" as the facility to make and opperate along range model.

The book cited above cannot be used and the situation is the same with all thebooks associated with the function of the brain, available now.

I used only brute data associated with the history of the human species (e.g.dictionaries or press reports) which cannot be cited in a specific way.

Dorin Teodor MOISAmoisa@zappmobile.roOctober 2004