Counterfactual cosmi

Counterfactual cosmi refers to hypothetical alternate cosmi (plural universes) posited under a polycosmic view of quantum theorics (quantum physics). In a dialog between Fraa Orolo and Fraa Erasmas, the phrase names the “what-if” universes that a mind can assess when weighing actions and outcomes.

Context and meaning

• Polycosmic framing: In the Polycosm (many-universe model), multiple cosmi coexist with slight differences and can interfere with one another until an observation has effects on the rest of the cosmos, after which the cosmi evolve separately. Within this framing, counterfactual cosmi are the nearby alternatives against which the current cosmos is compared.
• Older vocabulary: Instruction traditionally given to fids (novice avout) often uses “superposition” and “collapse” language from Theors; Orolo prefers to translate those ideas into polycosmic terms.

Proposed role in consciousness (attributed)

Orolo proposes that a brain’s ability to reach sudden, correct insights can be modeled using counterfactual cosmi: - In the “fid” formulation, the brain carries a generalized model of its local cosmos that can exist in many possible states at once; an observation yields one definite answer (the “collapse”). - In the polycosmic formulation, the variants do not live inside a complex internal model. Instead, many versions of the observer exist across cosmi, and subtle “crosstalk” among similar states knits those versions together. On this view, consciousness can make use of counterfactual cosmi by perceiving possibilities that already exist across the polycosm.

Analogies and related ideas

• Saunt Grod’s Machines: Orolo invokes problem-solving devices able to sift many possibilities “at once” as an analogy for how evaluating counterfactual cosmi might work in practice. The “Lazy Peregrin” (Peregrin—sanctioned travel rite—route-finding problem) illustrates an all-routes-at-once search.
• Ita jargon: In discussing measurement and results, Orolo quips about the Ita (practical order) calling the outcome the “output.”
• Community and discourse: These questions are handled within Theorics (formal theory practice) by theors (practitioners of Theorics) and debated among avout (cloistered scholars) and extramuros thinkers alike.

Status and discussion (as presented)

• Acceptance varies. Orolo expects many to dismiss this as metatheorical speculation, while suggesting that some senior practitioners may accept polycosmic terminology and even devise tests. No specific experimental results are provided here.

Notes

• Terminology: “cosmi” is the plural of “cosmos”; “counterfactual” means contrary-to-fact relative to the present cosmos. This page uses polycosmic language where Orolo explicitly prefers it and preserves alternative terminology where it appears in discussion.
• Scope: No neural mechanism is specified; the account focuses on how counterfactual cosmi serve as the comparative space of possibilities in thought.