Joey Lawsin

From Hmolpedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Joey Lawsin.png

In existographies, Joey Lawsin (c.15- BE) (c.1940- ACM) (LH:2) is an American aeronautical engineer, automation technologist, philosopher, and atheist, noted for his 1988 to present attempt to formulate a neo-Pythagorean like theory, wherein every "thing" emerged from numbers and a blurry quasi-metaphysics, teetering on bit god logic, of his own invention.


In 1988, Lawsin began to attempt to unify his views on the “scientific, engineering, theological, and philosophical” views about life, and therein developed what he calls “originemology” meaning the study of the origins of origins, deals with the birth of a notion or idea or concept.[1] Most of Lawsin's publications seems to be an attempt to explains god and life by some sort of emergent materialized information theory. The writings of interest, in Lawsin's work, seem to teeter on what he calls "abiozoics" meaning the study of the interrelationship between non-life to life, from non-living things to living things, from abstracts to physicals, from nothing to something.


A popular Lawsin quote about how "humans are not alive", from his Originemology (2000).

In 2000, Lawsin, in his Originemology, the title of which meaning the study of "origins of origins", one of Lawsin's many neologisms, stated the following two points:

“If atoms are not alive and humans are made of atoms, then humans are not alive.”
— Joey Lawsin (2000), Originemology (pg. #)[2]
Life is chemistry, not biology.”
— Joey Lawsin (2000), Originemology (pg. #)[2]

These two quotes, since, seem to have gathered a certain amount of popularity, e.g. as Google Images quote posters. Lawsin's "atoms are not alive quote" quote, in the poster form adjacent, made by Thims, e.g., has a 92% upvote ranking at Hmolpedia reddit.[3]

What is life?

In 2001, Lawsin, in his “What is Life?” blog, reflected on how in his biology class

“Once in my biology class, we had an experiment about differentiating living and non-living things. Our teacher instructed us to gather at least 5 specimens of living and non-living things. Afterwards, the class individually classified all these collections either living or non-living things in the lab. Leaves, butterflies, worms, dragonflies, flowers, roots, twigs, birds, bugs, fruits, dogs, squirrels were regarded as living things, while soda cans, plastic bottles, stones, candy sticks, paper bags, dirt, water, air were viewed as non-living things. Once everything was sorted accordingly, my teacher asked the class about what make living things different from nonliving things. From a very interesting lengthy discussion, two kinds of classifications came up on the board. The first one was according to how science defines life; and, the second one was according to how the court of law defines death”
— Joey Lawsin (2001), “What is Life?”, Lawsinium, WordPress, Aug 4[4]

Here, we recall Diderot's 1769 Alembert's Dream, a dialogue on whether stones are sentient and living matter can derive from dead matter or non-alive molecules.

Animation effect | Allusion of aliveness

In 2009, Lawsin, in his “20 Most Common Theories on the Origin of Life”, of his Evolution of Creation, drafted in 1988, argued that what we call being alive is an illusion formed by an animation effect:[5]

“The ‘animation effect’ is a theory that claims that since the beginning of time everything is alive. Objects are intact or bonded cohesively due to the forces pulling and pushing them. These combined centripetal and centrifugal forces are called gravitational attraction. When objects move, they create all forms of parameters like friction, heat, temperature, vacuum, pressure, weight, and density to name a few. Because of these latent motions and parameters, objects are always in an animated state. Even stationary objects are always in motion. Being stationary actually does not exist.
When objects transform from simple to more complex systems, they become highly more animated. The illusion of aliveness is manifested by an extremely complex, cross multi-layered synchronization of sensors-senses that structurally act and react in chorus generating the impression of being alive or with life. Objects that are highly animated are classified as living things and those that are not as non-living things.”
Objects are neither created nor destroyed. They do not live or die. They simply become animated over time because of the power of energy. Internally, they are dynamically alive. This embedded phenomenon of acting alive or with life is called the animation effect.”

This seems very progressive thinking, for his decade.

Self-animation emergence = life form?

In 2018, Lawsin, uploaded a video entitled "Mechanical Self-Animation Emergence", wherein he displaced some type programed Lego-device crawling along the ground, which looks similar to a "Theo Jansen beast", aka wind-walkers that craw along the beech.[6] This might be compared to a "walking molecule"? An inherent difficulty in the title of this video, is that a "self-animation" which emerges, from mechanics, is code for a violation of inertia (Pearson, 1892) and "emergence" is short for "coming out of a dark cave", and ignoring the details in the cave.

“I'm sorry that i defined alive in haste as self-energized. Alive should precisely mean the ability to self-consume energy. A detailed definition of alive or aliveness is partially defined on my site: Life, Living and Alive!”
— Joey Lawsin (66AE), “Email to Libb Thims”[7], Aug 24

From Lawsin's c.2018 blog “Life, Living, and Alive”[8], we see the following "self-terms", shown below left, being employed, as attempted replacement for life form, namely:

life self-

in basic formula. This is compared to Christopher Langan's 2002 “The Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe: a New Kind of Reality”[9], who uses over a dozen different self-terms in his abstract alone:

Lawsin (c.2018) Langan (2002)
  1. Self-energized
  2. Self-animation [emergence]
  3. Self-consume [energy]
  4. Self-knowledge
  5. Self-ability [of organism]
  6. Self-experience
  7. Selfness
  1. Self-configuring
  2. Self-configuration
  3. Self-containing
  4. Self-characterized
  5. Self-definition
  6. Self-execution
  7. Self-generating
  8. Self-modelling
  9. Self-processing
  10. Self-recognizing
  11. Self-reference
  12. Self-selection
  13. Self-transducing

Langan, of note, is a theist, whereas Lawsin, says that he is not only an atheist, but a "progressive atheist", yet they both argue via the similar "bit theory" and "self theory" platform, which combined yield a bit god? Lawsin and Lawsin would be wise to heed the words of Vinci, Pearson, and Minsky:

No ‘thing’ whatever can be moved by its self, but its motion is effected through another. There is no other force.”
Leonardo Vinci (1490), notebook
“The principle of inertia states that no physical corpuscle need be conceived as changing its motion except in the presence of other corpuscles, that there is no need of attributing to it any power of self-determination.”
Karl Pearson (1892), Grammar of Science (pg. 287)[10]
“The idea of self is worthless. It’s like the ‘soul’ in religion.”
Marvin Minsky (2012), “On the Self” (Ѻ), What Meditation Really Is, YouTube, Jan 14

Lawsin, in sum, seems to be arguing for a self-based perpetual motion theory (of the living kind)?[11] A "self-animated thing", as compared to an "animate thing" (e.g. DTA, AQ, retinal, etc., by definition, is perpetual motion. Lawsin, however, denies that he is a perpetual motion theorist.[7]

Religion | Atheism

In 2000s, Lawsin seems to have begun blogging an attack on the Abrahamic religions in general, e.g. he cites Horus and Zeitgeist.

In 2011, Lawsin, in his “Man Created God” blog, attempted to argue, in loose way, that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions were derived from the Egyptian religions, and that the Egyptians invented god, or something to this effect.[1]

In 2018, Lawsin blogged a list of “Top World Notable Atheists”[12], most of which, however, seemingly derived from the Wikipedia "list of atheists".[13] Compare the Hmolpedia list of "famous atheists". In 66AE, Lawsin declared that he was a progressive atheist:

“I am also a progressive atheist. But it sounds better to be called an ‘abioist atheist’ instead. I love the way you coined it.”
— Joey Lawsin (66AE), "Email to Libb Thims", Aug 23

Presently, however, it remains to be determined exactly what sort of "atheist" Lawsin is, as he does not seem to have posted anywhere online that he is an atheist? Thims, e.g., queried Lawsin about to provide his "atheism types by denial and belief"[14] categories, but he did not reply?

Grand unified theory?

In 2011, Lawsin in his “Grand Unified Theory Solved”[15] blog and “The Single Theory of Everything”[16] video, boasted all of formulas and equations of science, from the Newton's second law of motion to Coriolis work equation, can be reduced down to the following formula


where S the "new sets of generated numbers" and N is "number of pairs and the letter". He then ventures down a confused Pythagorean rabbit hole, attempting to argue that every thing, from quarks to atoms and emotions to humans "emerged" from numbers and circles, or something along these lines.

Pen names

Pseudonyms of Lawsin, include: Joey Ledesma Lawsin, J.B. Wylzan; Sir Lawsin, J.Lawsin, and Joey Lawsin.[17]


In 1970s, Lawsin completed a BS in aeronautical engineering, with majors in thermodynamics and aerodynamics,[7] and an MBA.[18] Lawsin claims to have education in or knowledge about electricity, electronics, computers, mechanical systems, automation technology, hydraulics, pneumatics, radio transmission, programmable logic controllers, and computer programming. He co-authored a textbook in physics and taught a number of subjects including physics, biology, chemistry, algebra, geometry, statistics, and computers. He characterizes himself as a retired academic turned independent researcher.[1]


Quotes | By

The following are quotes by Lawsin:

“A natural-born autodidactic problem solver and abacus programmer.”
— Joey Lawsin (65AE), “Who I Aim”,
“I am so glad that an intelligent person like you who has a different perspective about ‘life’, managed to put all together the bright minds in the world in one place which you named Hmolpedia. I was even impressed that you are redefining and rewriting the ‘concept of life’ according to abioism, a concept parallel to my idea of ‘abiozoicism’. In autognorics, I defined alive as self-energized, one of the important factors to become living and with life. And of course, as you said[19] there is no such thing that life exists. I agree with you 100%. I am also a progressive atheist. But it sounds better to be called an ‘abioist atheist’ instead. I love the way you coined it.”
— Joey Lawsin (66AE), "Email to Libb Thims", Aug 23

End matter


  1. 1.0 1.1 Joey Lawsin (About) – Blogspot.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Originemology (quotes) –
  3. If atoms are not alive (Jul 65AE) – r/Hmolpedia.
  4. Lawsin, Joey. (2001). “What is Life?” (Ѻ), Lawsinium, WordPress, Aug 4
  5. Lawsin, Joey. (1988). Evolution of Creation (§:20 Most Common Theories on the Origin of Life, §§:The Animation Effect) (Ѻ) (revised: Oct 2009). Publisher.
  6. Lawsin, Joey. (2018). “Mechanical Self-Animation Emergence” (YT), iHackRobot Channel, Jun 9.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Lawsin, Joey; Thims, Libb. (65AE), “Abioism: email-turned-forum dialogue”, Aug 23 to 27.
  8. Lawsin, Joey. (66AE). “Life, Living, and Alive” (Ѻ), Lawsinium, Blogspot, Aug 24.
  9. Langan, Christopher. (2002). “The Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe: a New Kind of Reality” (WB),, 2015.
  10. Pearson, Karl. (1892). The Grammar of Science (pgs. 124, 287, ). Adam, 1900.
  11. Perpetual motion of the living kind – Hmolpedia 2020.
  12. Lawsin, Joey. (2018). “Top World Notable Atheists” (Ѻ), Lawsinium, WordPress, Mar 26.
  13. List of atheists – Wikipedia.
  14. Atheism types by denial and belief – Hmolpedia 2020.
  15. Lawsin, Joey. (2011). “Grand Unified Theory Solved” (Ѻ), Lawsinium, Blogspot, Jan.
  16. Lawsin, Joey. (2011). “The Single Theory of Everything” (YT), Lawsinium, Nov 13.
  17. Joey Lawsin –
  18. Joey Lawsin (about) –
  19. Thims, Libb. (66AE). Abioism: No Thing is Alive, on the Defunct Theory of Life, the Non-Existence of Life, and Life Terminology Reform (pdf). Publisher.


  • Lawsin, Joey. (1988). “The Simplified Theory of Consciousness Based on the Theory of Generated Emergence” (abs),
  • Lawsin, Joey. (2008). Creation by Law: a Journal of Creative Mind (abs). Wasteland.
  • Lawsin, Joey. (2010). Evolution of Creation (abs) (Amz). Wasteland.

External links