Fund ResearchCity: Mathematical Clarity to Prevent Nuclear War#


Tagline#

14 axioms. 7 traditions. 1 convergent structure. Fund the peer review that could defuse millennia of theological conflict — before nuclear escalation makes it irrelevant.

The Ask: about ~$8 per person per year#

The goal is to scale up a ResearchCity that can bring this work to serious, large-scale expert review and help implement a gentle kind reasonable proper Jubilee System. The way there is simple, voluntary, and capped:

  • Recommended: about ~$8 per person per year (a bit more than ~$2 cent/day) — enough that everyone can afford a seat at ResearchCity’s design tables for the world’s future.

  • Capped against influence-shopping: direct financial support is strictly limited; the absolute ceiling for any single contributor is about ~$716,800, and only under all start-up flexibilities at once (see Larger backing below).

  • Half is given away: 50% of every buy-in is passed on to other worthy causes in urgent need.

The full framework lives on the Buy-In page.


The Problem#

Theological misunderstandings have fueled wars for millennia. Today those misunderstandings are wired to nuclear arsenals on hair-trigger alert.

A new probabilistic forecast shows that the probability of dying in accidental nuclear winter — given observed Cold War error rates and current launch-on-warning policies — exceeds the probability of dying in a car crash. This is not hypothetical. It is a calculation based on publicly available data about near-miss incidents during the Cold War and their extrapolation under current conditions.

The root cause is not technology. It is that humanity has never resolved the theological disagreements that drive the deepest geopolitical fault lines. Jews, Christians, Muslims, and others have been fighting for millennia over questions that none of them could state precisely enough to resolve — or even to determine where they actually agree.

The Breakthrough#

After 6+ years of research, Dr. Laurence Loewe (who renamed himself “Laurence Loewe of Laodicea” or LLoL as part of this journey) discovered something unexpected:

When theological claims from seven independent traditions are translated into formal mathematical axioms, they converge.

The 14-axiom system — called PET (Pan-En-Theistic mathematical theology) — uses mereology (part-whole logic) and modal logic to formalize what each tradition claims about God, the world, and their relationship. The result:

  • Torah, Prophets, Gospel, wider Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and secular reasoning all support the same 14 axioms when their claims are stated precisely.

  • The convergence is an experimental finding, not a design choice. The axioms were built from philosophical first principles and then checked against each tradition independently.

  • Axiom ax14 — the Revelation Claims Test — provides a formal method for testing whether any claimed divine revelation is internally consistent and consistent with the other axioms. This is the scientific method applied to theology.

The implications are profound: many of the disagreements that have fueled centuries of bloodshed may be verbal, not logical. When the claims are stated with mathematical precision, the conflict often disappears.

What’s Already Done#

This is not a starting-from-scratch project. 6+ years of work have produced:

  • The 14-axiom PET system — fully formalized with proofs, scriptural references across all seven traditions, and a bug database of identified theological errors

  • A 3x4 ft poster summarizing the axiom system for academic presentation

  • A multilingual website (balospe.com) in 10 languages explaining the crisis, the axioms, and the path forward

  • A probabilistic nuclear winter forecast — the first known application of Michaelis-Menten kinetics to accidental nuclear war risk

  • The Jubilee System framework — showing how Revelation encodes a cyclical renewal process, not a prophecy of inevitable destruction

All of this was produced by one person (LLoL) working without funding. The work is at the stage where it needs peer review, interfaith scholarly engagement, and institutional support to move from discovery to impact.

What Your Buy-In Sustains#

Because the ask is ~$8 per person per year, what becomes possible scales with how many people take part. Each row shows ~$8/2 because of the 50% give-away — only half stays with ResearchCity’s own work:

Contributor pool

Annual available

What this approximately sustains

~10,000 × ~$8/2

~$40,000

early operating costs (hosting, domains, archival, storage), keeping LLoL in the race by meeting basic bills

~100,000 × ~$8/2

~$400,000

~4 full-time researcher-years (~$100,000 all-inclusive each) — a bare minimum to help #AuditTheMath

~1,000,000 × ~$8/2

~$4,000,000

~40 full-time researchers for a year — enough to start preparing Stage 0 of the envisioned ResearchCity

~10,000,000 × ~$8/2

~$40,000,000

~400 full-time researchers for a year — enough to complete Stage 0 and Stage 1

~100 million × ~$8/2

~$400 million

~4000 full-time researchers for a year

~1000 million × ~$8/2

~$4000 million

enough to call for the international processes to find and buy the ~133,333–150,000 acres for the full 1,600-stadion ResearchCity

The ~$100,000/researcher-year figures are mid-range, all-inclusive estimates (salary, benefits, overhead), expected to come down as ResearchCity scales and efficiencies allow more precise, transparent, stadion-level costing.

Larger backing: the capped All-Stadia route#

ResearchCity will eventually support 1,600 Research Talent Stadia. Those who can give more may back more than one stadion — up to all 1,600 — as an All-Stadia Backer, within a hard cap that exists precisely so that no one, however wealthy, can buy influence (no more than buying an iPhone lets you decide what Apple builds next):

max ~$8/person/year/stadion × 1,600 stadia = max ~$12,800/year (usual personal limit)
× up to 7 years of start-up catch-up = max ~$89,600
× (yourself + up to 7 people you sponsor who are otherwise locked out) = max ~$716,800 absolute ceiling

That final × 8 is not a household loophole: it is one contributor plus seven unrelated people they sponsor under a temporary equalizer (today only about 1 in 8 people worldwide has a credit card). The cap applies equally to individuals, institutions, foundations, and corporations.

➜ Become an All-Stadia Backer — pick your level

Frequently Asked Questions#

Is this a religious project?

It uses the methods of mathematics and science. The axioms are checked against religious traditions as data sources — the same way a linguist studies languages without speaking only one. The goal is mathematical clarity, not religious advocacy.

Why should I trust one person’s claim that all traditions converge?

You shouldn’t — that’s exactly why this needs peer review. The buy-in funds the process of having independent scholars check the work. LLoL is a scientist (see Google Scholar) who insists on the same standards he applies to his other research: publish, let others check it, correct what’s wrong.

How much do you need?

There is no single fixed target — the model is ~$8 per person per year, so what becomes possible scales with how many people take part (see the table above). The first, concrete step is modest: enough early backers to cover basic operating costs and keep the work alive. Everything beyond that is what a growing community of backers unlocks together.

What if the axioms are wrong?

Then we find out through rigorous testing — exactly what this campaign funds. The scientific method works by trying to break hypotheses. If the convergence doesn’t hold under scrutiny, that’s a valuable result too. ax14 (the Revelation Claims Test) is specifically designed to identify where and how claims fail.

How is this different from interfaith dialogue?

Interfaith dialogue asks “can we get along despite our differences?” This project asks “do the differences actually exist once we state the claims precisely?” It’s the difference between diplomacy and mathematics. Both are needed, but the mathematical foundation is missing — and without it, diplomacy has no firm ground to stand on.

A Personal Note#

I didn’t plan to spend 6+ years on mathematical theology. I’m a scientist who studies evolution and develops simulation software. But when I stumbled into this — through what I can only describe as a cosmic joke — I found something I couldn’t walk away from.

The convergence across traditions is real. I’ve checked it line by line, axiom by axiom, against the primary sources. But I’m one person. This work needs the scrutiny of scholars from every tradition, the rigor of automated theorem provers, and the institutional support to reach the people who make decisions about war and peace.

The stakes are not abstract. The nuclear winter probability forecast shows we may not have decades to figure this out. If mathematical clarity can defuse even one theological flashpoint, this work will have been worth every hour.

Thank you for reading this far. If this resonates, please contribute what you can and share this campaign. The world doesn’t lack for problems — but it does lack for solutions that all sides can check for themselves.

– Laurence Loewe of Laodicea (LLoL)


Next steps