This idea didn't come out of nowhere, and it didn't begin as an attempt to build a philosophical framework.

My interest in science, physics, philosophy, theology, and consciousness goes back decades.

It first started taking hold in 7th and 8th grade when I became fascinated with Albert Einstein.

That curiosity kept growing through books like A Brief History of Time and later Black Holes and Baby Universes by Stephen Hawking.

Then in 1994, after reading Michio Kaku’s Hyperspace, I got pulled into the rabbit hole of string theory, higher dimensions, and the deeper structure of reality.

I’ve loved following these kinds of questions ever since.

So while I don't have a PhD in physics or philosophy, this line of thinking is not new for me.

It has been a long-standing personal fascination that I’ve continued to revisit over the years.

The specific thesis on this page, however, began in a much simpler and more personal way.

It started while I was trying to explain magnetism to my daughter in a way that a seven-year-old could understand.

That forced me to simplify something complicated down to its most basic moving parts.

And in doing that, it triggered a deeper question:

what is actually happening at the most fundamental level of reality?

From there, the conversation expanded into physics.

We moved from magnetism into atoms, electrons, quarks, and the question of whether electrons are truly fundamental or whether something deeper may still underlie them.

That naturally led into string theory and the broader idea that mathematics has often described aspects of reality long before we had the experimental tools to verify them.

That part has always intrigued me.

Throughout history, there have been multiple cases where the math pointed the way first, and confirmation came much later.

At the same time, I was bringing in beliefs I have held for a long time about God, creation, and the nature of reality.

I have long believed that reality operates according to consistent rules, and that those rules are not random.

The biblical idea that God spoke creation into existence has also always stood out to me.

Not in a simplistic sound-wave sense, but in the sense of ordered expression, patterned causation, and reality emerging from something more fundamental than matter alone.

That led me toward an early working assumption:

that reality could be understood in terms of information as the pre-existing rules, and energy as the dynamic activity that expresses those rules.

From there, the model started taking shape.

Information represented structure.

Energy represented oscillation, motion, waves, and dynamics.

I also assumed that if the source of reality is beyond time, then the rules governing reality must in some sense pre-exist time as well.

And if reality is expressed dynamically, then that expression would have to occur in a framework deeper than our directly observable world.

At that point, the question became more precise.

Are information and energy two separate and distinct components of reality?

Or are they two sides of the same coin?

That question turned out to be the turning point.

Because the more we pressed on it, the clearer it became that both concepts depend on something deeper.

Information describes relationships between states.

Energy describes changes between states.

Neither can stand alone in isolation.

Both require relationship.

That was the shift that pulled the whole thesis together.

Instead of treating information and energy as the deepest layer, it became more coherent to view them as expressions of something more fundamental:

relationship itself.

From there, the framework aligned much more cleanly.

Information could be understood as structured relationships.

Energy could be understood as changing relationships.

And physical reality could be understood as stable patterns emerging within those relationships.

So this thesis didn't come from me trying to step outside my lane.

It came from following a lifelong fascination with fundamental questions, then tracing one line of reasoning all the way through.

It started with Einstein, Hawking, Kaku, theology, and years of curiosity.

It sharpened through a simple attempt to explain magnetism to my daughter.

And it eventually developed into a relational view of reality by repeatedly asking:

what has to be true underneath all of this?

I don't present it as the final answer.

I present it as a coherent working model that emerged from curiosity, pattern recognition, theology, physics, philosophy, and sustained reflection over time.