Causal Budget Framework One budget, one ledger, all of physics.

I'm Jamie, a software engineer of 25+ years and a physics enthusiast. My strengths are building engines and frameworks, and turning ideas into code. After years of watching talks on competing TOEs, I decided to write a simple double slit cellular automaton so I could step through it frame by frame and look for patterns. I did not expect much, but within three months of evenings I kept finding angles that pushed me further and nudged me toward a computational view of the universe.

Reality check: this is not the story of one polished simulator. I built about a dozen evolving, half working double slit prototypes. Nothing was polished because I kept trying new ideas quickly. This is the story of how a CA approach began to reproduce known laws of physics from simple rules. I have a full time day job, so I am publishing the core ideas now, especially C = T + M and GBSL, and I am open to handing them off or collaborating with anyone who wants to push them further.

Not peer reviewed. This site is a working notebook for the Causal Budget Framework (CBF). Nothing here has been formally reviewed or published. Treat the content as exploratory research.

Background. I have no formal education in physics or mathematics. My background is in computer science and software engineering. Many of the links between CBF and established physics, including equations and terminology, are provisional and may contain errors. They are placeholders that show where collaboration and formal verification are needed.

Method. All ideas are developed through coding experiments, custom cellular-automata simulations, and observation. I use AI tools, including ChatGPT and Claude, for rapid prototyping, critique, and algebraic consistency checks. These tools help with expression and organization of ideas, they do not originate or own any discoveries. If asked live to defend some of the heavier math and detailed connections to standard physics, I may not be able to do so. Those areas will be refined with input from qualified physicists and mathematicians during formalization.

Sources and citations. I am not providing formal citations at this stage because this is an evolving theory site, not a peer-reviewed paper. Proper attribution requires knowing which parts are novel and which parts restate known results. That separation will be established during expert review. As sections are formalized, I will add appropriate citations and credit to prior work.

Status and next steps. Replication, mathematical validation, and peer review are required before any of this should be treated as established science. Qualified collaborators are welcome to participate in reviewing and refining the framework.

Use and citation. You may reference or discuss this content with attribution to this site. Please do not present any material here as confirmed physics. If you build on these ideas, clearly label your work as exploratory until peer review is complete.

While I lack formal training in physics, please do not underestimate the Causal Budget Framework because of that. Every apparent gap I have found has resolved not by changing the theory, but by deepening my understanding. The only major rewrite came from a breakthrough on observational time symmetry, which ended up completing the framework rather than contradicting it. I describe this approach as Indie Physics. It means starting from first principles with fresh simulations and minimal assumptions, so I can rebuild concepts from the ground up without inherited bias, while still welcoming expert review and correction.