How does the Universe works? The short answer is: according to the laws of sophiology.
But this is a personal conclusion (that sounds rather tautological), that I reached after many years of research, after having build a science along with its laws. I presume that no one could feel comfortable with such a sudden conclusion - that’s why I must give you more information about my intellectual achievements. Let’s then get to the extra-length answer: the Universe does not work, it simply exists, and sophiology only puts into evidence the structural and functional patterns of this existence.
We must not forget that SOPHIOLOGY IS THE SCIENCE OF THE MOST GENERAL LAWS OF THE EXISTENCE. These laws are not “invented” by me: the prize goes to Mother Nature, because the laws presented above are intellectual reflections of the repeatable bonds between universal phenomena.
According to the law of specialization each individual science studies a certain category of complex associative phenomena (it’s a pity that not every scientist is aware of this basic fact). Every specialization means also a limitation of the horizon - because almost every specialization within the scientific panel has entered into contact only with specific forms of the action of the laws of sophiology. Two particular categories of scientists were very close to make anticipations of these laws:
- the ecologists, who study the natural environment, and this way they enter in contact with the wilderness, that is the only terrestrial sample of the forces that animate the Universe.
- the economists, who study the relationship between the most complex individual CAPs (the human beings) while they work and share the outcomes of their work, on occasion during their relationship with the most complex global CAP (the terrestrial ecosphere).
That’s exactly how my research begun: with an attempt to “marry” the two sciences, in order to insure in the economic life a wider respect of the laws that animate the terrestrial ecosphere. But very soon I realized that such a marriage were against the nature, because ecological and economical ways of thinking are not compatible (ecologists put natural environment first, as for economists man’s interests are primordial).

That’s why I was “forced” to settle a new science: BIOECONOMICS, whose object of study is the INDUSTRIOSPHERE, the most complex artificial CAP of our planet, which I defined as a COMPLEX ASSOCIATIVE PHENOMENA WHOSE SPECIALISATION IS TO INSURE THE INTEGRATION OF THE HUMANKIND TO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
This should be in fact the aim of every science: to make a deep study of a certain kind of CAP, and put into light the way the laws discovered by sophiology act in that particular field.
Unfortunately, the development of the big family of sciences did not respond yet to the commandments of the specialization law - the apparition of new sciences was anarchic, situation that pushed Aristotle to look, 2500 years ago, for “ a science above all sciences”. By lack of scientific information, he imagined that this science could be philosophy. Nowadays, I dare claim that the “science of the primeval reasons and principles” is sophiology.
As every individual science studies a certain category of CAP, it is obvious that every scientist gets in contact only with the action of the laws of sophiology in his own field of research. In most of these cases, this is also his field of concern, and the said scientist is not at all aware of the fact that he operates only with particular forms of the laws of the sophiology. We can only now begin to understand the major importance of sophiology. There is an undoubted coherence of the universal matter, put into evidence by the sciences that study the physical facts of the existence (I have in view here mainly physics and chemistry). Sciences as biochemistry, physiology or anatomy teach us about the resemblance between elements of the living matter from different levels of evolution.
In order to understand what this means, take a good look to the following table, drawn according to the chart of the identity of genes.


KIND OF ORGANISM GENETIC IDENTITY WITH MAN

Escherichia Coli 15 %
Common bacteria 30 %
Nematodes 40 %
Mice 75 %
Cow 90 %
Chimpanzee 98, 40%
Another human 99, 90%
Brother/sister 99, 95%

But this is only a physical conclusion, strictly inspired by studies carried on the structure of various genomes. And everyone seems to be always interested by the structural view. Scientist have always been prolific when need was to describe and to sort new facts or new phenomena - in a word, the behavior of an entomologist. Unfortunately, most scientists remained entomologists in their field of concern (they don’t deserve to be granted with the title of researchers). Meantime, we must not neglect the fact that even classification of facts or phenomena has become a scientific endeavor less than three centuries ago, that finally makes a very short lapse of time.
In the same time, it is obvious that, without exception, every scientist was, at any time, submitted to a number of historical and social limitations, that I usually (and poetically) call province. Every scientist was more or less influenced by the confessional, moral, economical and social realities of his time, what makes that he lived in a kind of intellectual province. That’s the reason why the liberal society of the ancient Greek culture was so productive and gave so much perennial intellectual values, and this explains why the European Middle Age gave only values for history books.
In modern times provinces become much more sophisticated, and the main limitation turns out to be the inner limits of the scientist’s mind, combined with the background of their scientific training.
As a result of the limitation to the concern to classify or “to put in order”, scientists often “made” their own laws. That is why scientists that discover the true laws (laws that afterwards are unanimously accepted) are so widely celebrated all around the Earth and all along the ages. After thirty centuries of random scientific development, after three centuries of systematic gathering of scientific facts, we have nowadays the following picture of the scientific dome:
- a wide array of scientific fields (currently known as sciences), developed to achieve a complete study of what sophiology calls a class of complex associative phenomena;
- a real profusion of laws in every scientific field (due to the complex and controversial nature of the economic life, we can count more than 600 laws that are formulated by economics scholars).

As physicists make now efforts to achieve the unification of fields, SOPHIOLOGY ACHIEVES THE UNIFICATION OF THE LAWS SETTLED BY SCIENTISTS IN ALL THE FIELDS OF RESEARCH, IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF SCIENCE.

In fact, THE FIVE LAWS OF SOPHIOLOGY ARE THE GENERAL LAWS OF EXISTENCE, THAT ARE TO BE FOUND, IN SPECIFIC FORMS, AND IN EVERY FIELD OF RESEARCH. THIS BECOMES TRUE EVERYTIME THAT A CERTAIN CATEGORY OF COMPLEX ASSOCIATIVE PHENOMENA IS SUBJECT OF THE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.

As I mentioned from the very beginning, grounding SOPHIOLOGY and his five laws is the result of more than twenty years of work, benefiting from a sturdy and wide encyclopedic education. With a start like this, it makes sense to notice, one day, that

ALL PHENOMENA CAN BE DESCRIBED IN A SINGLE MANNER.
ALL THE LAWS THAT ACT IN VARIOUS FIELDS OF RESEARCH ARE IN FACT VARIATIONS OF THE SAME FIVE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS.

All the rest is an entomologist’s work. You do it yourself for your own field of concern (ecologists are very well placed to achieve such a work). But if you think that you are not interested, you are not concerned or you are not able to do this, please do no be disturbed: I’ll do it for you the forthcoming years. Your help would be, of course, highly appreciated.