Music as Coherence Operator: Frequencies, Tuning and Resonance

MUSIC AS COHERENCE OPERATOR: FREQUENCIES, TUNING AND RESONANCE WITH THE OBSERVER

From Pythagorean tuning through A=432 and A=440 to coherently-optimal tuning Pankratov Anton Sergeevich Independent Researcher, Kazan, Russia E-mail: [email protected] | ORCID: 0009-0002-4870-2995 UDC 530.145 + 781.1 + 167.7

1.1 ABSTRACT Within the observer-dependent theory of everything (ODTOE), music is investigated as a coherence operator Ômus acting on an observer at level d ∼ +3 (organismal) through resonant synchronization of biological loops (Φheart , Φbreath , Φneur ). An analysis is conducted of the historical evolution of musical tuning: Pythagorean tuning (νA ≈ 432 Hz, ratios based on 3/2), Verdi’s “scientific tuning” (νC = 256 Hz, νA = 432 Hz), and the modern ISO 16 standard (νA = 440 Hz, adopted in 1955). A criterion of coherent optimality of tuning is introduced: minimizing the mismatch δ (V.1) [8] between note frequencies and the natural frequencies of biological loops. √ It is shown that the structural invariants of ODTOE—π [2] and ϕ = (1 + 5)/2 [2, section Vbis]—generate two classes of “preferred” frequencies: π-derivatives (via multiples of 2π) and ϕ-derivatives (via Fibonacci ratios). It is established that νC = 256 = 28 Hz (⇒ νA = 432 Hz in Pythagorean tuning) is closer to ϕ-resonance with biological rhythms (νheart ≈ 1.2 Hz, νalpha ≈ 10 Hz) than νA = 440 Hz. A coherent scale is proposed with νA = 432 Hz as the basic recommendation and νA = 429.6 Hz (= 256 × ϕ2 /22 ) as the theoretical optimum. Limitations and experimental protocols for verification are discussed. Keywords: musical tuning, A=432, A=440, Pythagorean tuning, equal temperament, resonance, coherence, golden ratio, frequency, heart rate, ODTOE.

1.2 I. INTRODUCTION: MUSIC AS AN OPERATOR 1.2.1

1.1. Why does a theory of everything need music?

According to axiom (A) [1]: R = Ô(Ψ) — reality is constituted by the observation operator. Music is a sound operator that modifies the state of the observer O = (B, A, H): it retunes the focus of attention F , changes emotional coherence E, and either reduces or increases σ (internal contradiction). According to [1, D1.1]:

B = F w1 · E w2 · (1 − σ)w3 · Λw4

(I.1)

Music that increases E and reduces σ increases B — and, by P4 [1], increases P (E | B). Music is not entertainment. Music is a calibrator of the observation operator. 1.2.2

1.2. The central question

If music is an operator acting through frequencies, then which frequencies are maximally effective? The answer depends on what these frequencies resonate with. And resonance is δ → 0: coincidence between the imposed and natural frequency [8, formula V.1].

1.3 II. HISTORY OF MUSICAL TUNING: FROM PYTHAGORAS TO ISO 1.3.1

2.1. Pythagorean tuning (� VI century BCE)

Pythagoras founded harmony on simple ratios of whole numbers: octave = 2/1, fifth = 3/2, fourth = 4/3. All intervals were derived from powers of 2 and 3. The frequency of the note “A” in the first octave in Pythagorean systems was not fixed by standard, but reconstructions yield νA ≈ 420–436 Hz depending on the initial tone. Philosophical basis: numbers govern the Universe; the simplest ratios generate harmony; music is audible mathematics. 1.3.2

2.2. “Scientific tuning” and Verdi (νC = 256 Hz)

In the XVIII–XIX centuries, several physicists and musicians (Sauveur, 1713; Scheibler, 1834) proposed fixing νC = 256 = 28 Hz. Reason: at C = 256, all octaves of the note “C” are powers of two (1, 2, 4, 8, . . . , 128, 256, 512, . . .). This is a “natural” scale: C0 = 1 Hz, C1 = 2 Hz, . . ., C8 = 256 Hz. At this setting, νA ≈ 430–432 Hz (depending on temperament). Verdi in 1884 sent a letter to the Italian Musical Commission supporting νA = 432 Hz as a standard, arguing for the “naturalness” of this tuning for the voice. 1.3.3

2.3. Pitch inflation: the rise of the tuning fork

From the XVII to the XX century, concert pitch rose steadily: Era νA (Hz) Context Baroque (1700) Mozart (1780) Verdi (1884)

� 415 � 422

Handel’s tuning fork Vienna standard Italian proposal

Era νA (Hz) Context Paris Conference (1858) 435 French diapason London (1939) BSI preliminary standard ISO 16 (1955) International standard Modern orchestras 441–445 Berlin Philharmonic: 443 Reasons for the rise: (a) brighter, more “brilliant” sound at higher pitch; (b) competition between orchestras for “brightness”; (c) improvement in metal strings (withstanding greater tension). None of these reasons are related to the biology of the observer. 1.3.4

2.4. Establishment of A=440: the 1939 conference and ISO 1955

In 1939 in London, the International Standardization Conference adopted νA = 440 Hz. In 1955, ISO formalized this standard (ISO 16). The choice is pragmatic: 440 is a round number, convenient for electronics; a compromise between German (� 443) and French (435) standards. No biological or acoustic arguments were presented.

1.4 III. BIOLOGICAL LOOPS OF THE OBSERVER: NATURAL FREQUENCIES 1.4.1

3.1. Inventory

Each biological loop Φbiol [8, section I.3] iterates at a characteristic frequency: Loop ν (Hz) Octave multiples (×2n ) Circadian rhythm Breathing (at rest) Heartbeat (at rest) Schumann frequency (Earth) Alpha brain rhythm Theta rhythm Beta rhythm Gamma rhythm

1.16 × 10−5 0.2–0.3 1.0–1.2 7.83 8–13 4–8 13–30 30–100

…, 64, 128, 256, 512, … …, 125, 250, 501, … …, 128, 256, 512, … …, 64, 128, 256, … …, 208, 416, 832, … …, 480, 960, …

3.2. Resonance criterion

Two oscillators resonate if the ratio of their frequencies is a small integer (or its fraction): ν1 /ν2 = p/q, where p, q are small. Ideal resonance: ν1 /ν2 = 2n (octave multiple). In ODTOE [8, formula V.1]: δ → 0 at octave multiple

(III.1)

3.3. Key observation

νheart ≈ 1 Hz. Octave multiples: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512. At νC = 256 Hz: C4 /νheart = 256/1 = 28 — exact octave multiple

(III.2)

The note “C” at the tuning C = 256 Hz resonates with the heart across 8 octaves. At νA = 440: C4 = 440 × 2−9/12 ≈ 261.6 Hz. 261.6/1 = 2n — no octave resonance. Schumann frequency: 7.83 Hz. Octave multiples: . . . , 125.3, 250.6, 501.1 . . .. At C4 = 256: 256/7.83 ≈ 32.7 — close to 25 = 32, but not exact

(III.3)

At C4 = 261.6: 261.6/7.83 ≈ 33.4 — farther from 25 . Alpha rhythm: � 10 Hz. Octave multiples: . . . , 160, 320, 640 . . .. None of the standard notes fall exactly; but 256/8 = 32 = 25 — at lower alpha � 8 Hz, octave resonance with C = 256 reappears.

1.5 IV. STRUCTURAL INVARIANTS OF ODTOE IN MUSIC 1.5.1

4.1. π and music

According to [2, section III]: π appears in ODTOE as the period of oscillation of the coupled system R ↔ B. A full cycle of self-observation contains a phase of 2π. All wave processes contain 2π in the argument: sin(2πνt). Musical sound is a pressure oscillation: p(t) = p0 sin(2πνt + φ)

(IV.1)

Each note is one cycle of 2π, repeating ν times per second. π is already embedded in the very nature of sound — through the cyclic nature of the act of observation [2]. 1.5.2

4.2. φ and music: the golden ratio in harmony

√ According to [2, section V-bis]: ϕ = (1 + 5)/2 ≈ 1.618 is a structural invariant of discrete iterative self-referential dynamics. In music, ϕ manifests as: (a) Chromatic scale. 12 semitones in an octave. The ϕ-point of the octave: 2ϕ/(1+ϕ) = 20.618 ≈ 1.535. Nearest interval: minor sixth (28/12 = 1.587). Chords containing a minor sixth are often described as “warm” and “emotionally saturated” — the first inversion power chord. (b) Formal structure. Many composers (Bartók, Debussy, Shostakovich) placed climaxes at the ϕ-point of the work (� 61.8% of total duration).

(c) Fibonacci sequence and overtones. Fibonacci numbers (1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, . . .) appear in the structure of overtones: fundamental tone (1), octave (2), fifth across an octave (3), double octave (4 — not Fibonacci, but 5 = major third across two octaves), 8 = three octaves, 13 ≈ augmented octave. 1.5.3

4.3. φ-derivative frequency

Define the φ-optimal frequency of the note “A”: νA,ϕ = νheart × 2n × ϕm

(IV.2)

At νheart = 1 Hz, n = 8, m = 0: νA = 256 × (3/2)3/4 ≈ 432 (via the Pythagorean ratio C → A). More precisely: with equal temperament, νA = νC × 29/12 . If νC = 256: νA = 256 × 23/4 = 256 × 1.6818 ≈ 430.5 Hz. Alternative path via ϕ: νC × ϕ = 256 × 1.618 = 414.2 Hz (close to Baroque tuning!). Or: νheart × ϕ12 = 1 × 321.997 ≈ 322 Hz (not a standard note, but falls between E4 = 329.6 and E�4 = 311.1 in modern tuning). 1.5.4

4.4. KAM-stability and tuning

According to [2, V-bis.4]: the Kolmogorov–Arnold–Moser (KAM) theorem establishes that orbits with frequency ratios most distant from rational approximations are maximally stable. φ is a number with worst rational approximations. Consequence for music: intervals close to the φ-ratio create maximally stable resonances in nonlinear systems (such as the human organism). The interval ϕ = 1.618 . . . lies between the fifth (3/2 = 1.500) and minor sixth (28/12 = 1.587) / major sixth (29/12 = 1.682). Major sixth (1.682) is the nearest standard interval to ϕ.

1.6 V. 432 VS 440: QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS 1.6.1

5.1. Frequency table Note

ν at A=440 (Hz)

ν at A=432 (Hz)

Δ (Hz)

Δ (cents)

C4 D4 E4 F4 G4 A4 B4

261.63 293.66 329.63 349.23 392.00 440.00 493.88

256.87 288.33 323.63 342.88 384.87 432.00 484.90

−4.76 −5.33 −6.00 −6.35 −7.13 −8.00 −8.98

Note

ν at A=440 (Hz)

ν at A=432 (Hz)

Δ (Hz)

Δ (cents)

−9.51

The difference between A=440 and A=432 is exactly 31.77 cents (= 1200 × log2 (440/432) ≈ 31.8). This is approximately 1/3 of a semitone — audible to a trained ear, but not perceived as “out of tune.” 1.6.2

5.2. Octave resonance with biorhythms

At C = 256.87 Hz (tuning A=432, equal temperament): C4 /νheart = 256.87/1.0 ≈ 257 — close to 28 = 256, but not exact (δ ≈ 0.003). At precise “scientific” tuning C = 256.00 Hz: C4 /νheart = 256 = 28 exactly. δ = 0. Ideal octave resonance. At C = 261.63 Hz (tuning A=440): C4 /νheart = 261.63. 261.63/256 = 1.022 — deviation � 2.2% from 28 . δ ≈ 0.022. 1.6.3

5.3. Resonance with the Schumann frequency

νSchumann = 7.83 Hz. Five octaves higher: 7.83 × 25 = 250.6 Hz. C = 256: discrepancy 256/250.6 = 1.022 → δ ≈ 0.022. C = 261.63: discrepancy 261.63/250.6 = 1.044 → δ ≈ 0.043. Tuning A=432 is twice closer to Schumann resonance than A=440. 1.6.4

5.4. Summary table of mismatches Biorhythm Multiple 2n Heart (1.0 Hz) Heart (1.2 Hz) Schumann (7.83 Hz) Alpha rhythm (8 Hz) Alpha rhythm (10 Hz) Theta (6 Hz)

δ at C=256

256 = 28 307.2 (not C) 250.6 = 7.83 × 25 256 = 8 × 25 320 = 10 × 25 384 = 6 × 26

δ at C=261.6

0.000 0.167 0.000 0.200 G₄ = 384.87: 0.002

0.149 0.043 0.182 G₄ = 392: 0.021

At C=256, three biorhythms (νheart = 1 Hz, νalpha = 8 Hz, νtheta ≈ 6 Hz) yield nearly zero mismatch with the scale notes. At C=261.6, the mismatch is systematically higher.

1.7 VI. COHERENTLY-OPTIMAL TUNING: RECOMMENDATIONS 1.7.1

6.1. Level 1: Minimal correction (A=432)

Recommendation: transition from A=440 to A=432 Hz. Justification: C4 ≈ 256.9 Hz — practically exact octave resonance with νheart = 1 Hz and νalpha = 8 Hz. Minimal deviation from familiar tuning (−32 cents = −1.8%). Historically justified (Verdi, Pythagorean tradition). Technically feasible (electronic retuning). 1.7.2

6.2. Level 2: Precise scientific tuning (C = 256 Hz, A ≈ 430.5)

Recommendation: νC = 256.00 Hz exactly, νA = 256 × 29/12 = 430.54 Hz. Justification: exact octave resonance C/νheart = 28 . All octaves of the note “C” are powers of two: C0 = 1 Hz, C1 = 2, . . ., C8 = 256, C9 = 512. Note C0 = 1 Hz = one heartbeat. Music and biorhythm are identical at the fundamental level. 1.7.3

6.3. Level 3: φ-optimal tuning (theoretical)

From the KAM theorem [2, V-bis.4]: maximum stability occurs at φ-frequency ratio. Proposed tuning:

νn+1 /νn = 21/ϕ ≈ 20.382 ≈ 1.306

(VI.1)

This is an unequal temperament in which the step between notes is determined by φ, not 21/12 . The octave (×2) is divided not into 12 equal semitones, but into 1/ log2 (21/ϕ )−1 ≈ 2.618 “φtones” — a non-integer number, which means a spiral structure of the scale instead of a closed octave. This echoes the transcendence of π in ODTOE [2, section IV]: spiral (not circular) observation dynamics. The φ-tuning is a spiral scale: it does not close into an octave, but unwinds, like the self-observation loop. Practical feasibility: extremely difficult for traditional instruments; possible on electronic synthesizers. Theoretical interest: maximum KAM-stability of resonance. 1.7.4

6.4. Recommendations table Level

Tuning ν_A (Hz)

Current standard ISO 16 Minimal correction Verdi Scientific precise C = 256 φ-optimal Spiral scale

δ_heart

440.0 432.0 430.5

Feasibility 0.003 0.000

Standard Retuning Retuning Synthesizer

1.8 VII. WHY A=440 “WORKS WORSE”: MECHANISM VIA ODTOE 1.8.1

7.1. Mismatch as σ

According to [8, formula V.1]: mismatch δ > 0 between imposed and natural frequency translates into σ > 0 — internal contradiction. An organism listening to music in A=440 tuning receives δheart = 0.022: a small but nonzero discrepancy between the musical rhythm and the biological rhythm. According to [1, D1.1]: B = . . . × (1 − σ)w3

(VII.1)

Any σ > 0 reduces B. At A=432 (more precisely, C = 256): δ → 0, σrhythm → 0, B → Bmax (all else being equal). 1.8.2

7.2. Confirmation bias vs. real effect

A skeptic might object: “432 vs 440 is placebo; the difference is inaudible.” ODTOE’s answer: by P4 [1], placebo works (B > 0 ⇒ P (E | B) > 0). But in addition to placebo, there exists a physical mechanism: octave resonance 256/1 = 28 is a mathematical fact, independent of listener belief. Resonance δ = 0 acts through biophysics (d ∼ +2: cellular, neural), not cognitive belief (d ∼ +3). Experiment [7]: choral singing synchronizes HRV. If a comparison were conducted at A=432 vs A=440 (double-blind), ODTOE predicts: HRV synchronization would occur faster and deeper at A=432 than at A=440, due to smaller δ. 1.8.3

7.3. Cumulative effect

The difference ∆δ = 0.022 in a single listening session is small. But music accompanies the observer continuously: background music, concerts, instruments, recordings. Cumulative effect over years: ∫ T σcumul ∼

δ(t) dt

(VII.2)

If δ = 0.022 is constant (all music in A=440), then σcumul grows linearly — chronic mismatch, analogous to circadian shift [8, section V.4].

1.9 VIII. ANCIENT COHERENCE 1.9.1

TUNING

SYSTEMS

INTUITIVE

8.1. Indian music: Sa = the voice’s fundamental tone

In Indian classical music, there is no fixed νA . The fundamental tone (Sa) is tuned to the natural frequency of the singer’s voice. Each musician plays in their own tuning. In ODTOE: δ = 0 by

definition — the instrument is tuned to the loop of the specific observer. 1.9.2

8.2. Gregorian chant: acoustic resonance with the temple

Gregorian singing was tuned to the resonant frequencies of the space (temple). The tuning was determined by architecture. In ODTOE: temple = an architectural artifact of coherence [5], its resonant frequencies = the natural frequencies of the collective loop of the worshippers. Tuning to the temple = tuning to the collective. 1.9.3

8.3. Tibetan singing bowls: overtone resonance

A singing bowl generates multiple overtones, distributed according to φ-like ratios (not exact equal temperament). The observer is immersed in a nonlinear resonance, closer to the φ-optimal tuning (VI.1) than any standard instrument.

IX. SPECIFIC FREQUENCY RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1. Scale of “coherent frequencies” (C = 256, A = 430.5) Note ν (Hz) C₀ C₁ C₂ C₃ G₃ C₄ D₄ E₄ F₄ G₄ A₄ B₄ C₅

1.000 2.000 4.000 8.000 191.8 256.00 287.35 322.54 341.72 383.57 430.54 483.26 512.00

Nearest bioresonance

Heart (1.0 Hz) — exact match Delta rhythm (0.5–4 Hz) Theta boundary (4 Hz) Alpha rhythm (8 Hz) — exact match 2⁸ — octave resonance with heart Close to φ¹² = 322.0 6 × 2⁶ = 384 — theta × 2⁶ Tuning fork 2⁹ — double octave resonance

Four notes (C₀, C₃, C₄, C₅) give exact match with biorhythms. G₄ is nearly exact (δ ≈ 0.001). Five of twelve notes in the first octave are in resonance. 1.10.2

9.2. Transition from current tuning

Parameter ν_A ν_C Intervals Temperament Instruments

Current (A=440)

440.00 Hz 261.63 Hz Unchanged Equal Unchanged

Recommended (C=256)

430.54 Hz 256.00 Hz Unchanged Equal Retuning

Change

−9.46 Hz (−2.2%) −5.63 Hz (−2.2%) Trivial

The transition is technically elementary: shift all notes by −37.6 cents. Intervals, harmony, melody — unchanged. Only absolute pitch changes, and it changes toward bioresonance.

1.11 X. TESTABLE PREDICTIONS 1.11.1 10.1. HRV coherence: A=432 vs A=440 Protocol: two choirs, identical composition, double-blind (conductor unaware of tuning), HRV monitoring of all participants. ODTOE predicts: HRV synchronization at A=432 will occur faster (by � 15–30 s) and will be deeper (higher coherence in LF/HF spectrum). 1.11.2 10.2. Alpha rhythm: tone C=256 vs C=262 Protocol: EEG monitoring while listening to pure tones 256 Hz vs 262 Hz (30 s each, randomized). ODTOE predicts: at 256 Hz, alpha rhythm power (8 Hz = 256 / 2⁵) will increase significantly more than at 262 Hz. 1.11.3 10.3. Subjective assessment Double-blind listening to the same composition in A=440 and A=432. Assessment: “relaxation,” “emotional engagement,” “sense of harmony.” ODTOE predicts: systematic preference for A=432 on parameters related to E (emotion) and σ (internal contradiction).

XI. DISCUSSION

11.1. What ODTOE adds to the debate

The “432 vs 440” debate has lasted decades, but arguments usually amount to subjective preferences or numerology. ODTOE offers a formal apparatus: (a) resonance criterion δ [8, formula V.1]; (b) mechanism δ → σ → B ↓ [1, D1.1]; (c) collective effect via P5 [1]; (d) testable predictions (section X).

11.2. What ODTOE does not claim

(a) “432 is a magic number.” No: 432 is an approximation to the optimum C = 256 Hz (A ≈ 430.5). The exact value depends on temperament. (b) “440 is harmful.” No: δ = 0.022 is a small quantity. The effect is cumulative and small compared to other factors (σ from stress, F from screen time). (c) “Ancients knew better.” Partially: intuitive tuning to voice/temple/body is indeed closer to δ = 0 than a fixed electronic standard. But ancient tunings were unstable and irreproducible — their Stech → 0. 1.12.3

11.3. Limitations

(a) νheart = 1.0 Hz is an idealization; actual rhythm varies (0.8–1.5 Hz), which blurs octave resonance. (b) The link δ → σ (section VII.1) is postulated, not strictly derived from axiomatics. (c) The φ-optimal tuning (VI.1) is a theoretical construct; its perceived “harmoniousness” is not guaranteed (the auditory system is adapted to 21/12 ).

XII. CONCLUSION

Music is a coherence operator Ômus calibrating the observer’s B through resonance of note frequencies with biological loop frequencies (Φheart , Φalpha , Φbreath ). The A=440 standard (ISO 16, 1955) was chosen on technological, not biological grounds. It produces δ = 0.022 with heart rhythm — a small but chronic mismatch. The tuning C = 256 Hz (A ≈ 430.5 Hz) provides exact octave resonance C/νheart = 28 and C/νalpha = 25 . The A=432 Hz tuning (Verdi) is a practical approximation with δ ≈ 0.003. ODTOE’s recommendation: retuning to C = 256 (A ≈ 430.5) — a minimal correction (−2.2%), preserving all intervals and harmonies, but bringing music into bioresonance with the observer.

C0 = 1 Hz = 1 heartbeat. Music begins with the heart — literally.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author has no conflict of interest.

FUNDING

The research was conducted using the author’s own funds.

REFERENCES

[1] Pankratov A.S. Theory of everything: observer-dependent (ODTOE) // Preprint. — 2025. — 47 p. [2] Pankratov A.S. The number π as a structural invariant of self-consistent observation in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. [3] Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM). The International System of Units (SI). — 9th ed. — Sèvres: BIPM, 2019. — 216 p. [4] Pankratov A.S. Atom as an elementary strange loop in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. [5] Pankratov A.S. Architecture as an operator of collective coherence in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. [6] Pankratov A.S. Honesty in ODTOE: a separate parameter or a consequence of coherence? // Preprint. — 2025. [7] Vickhoff B. et al. Music Structure Determines Heart Rate Variability of Singers // Frontiers in Psychology. — 2013. — Vol. 4. — Art. 334. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00334. [8] Pankratov A.S. The nature of time in ODTOE: from cesium-133 to the heartbeat // Preprint. — 2025. [9] Pankratov A.S. Love as a coherence operator: a recursive formula for eternal being // Preprint. — 2025. [10] Coldea R., Tennant D.A., Wheeler E.M. et al. Quantum Criticality in an Ising Chain: Experimental Evidence for Emergent E8 Symmetry // Science. — 2010. — Vol. 327, No. 5962. — P. 177–180. DOI: 10.1126/science.1180085. [11] Hardy L. Nonlocality for Two Particles without Inequalities for Almost All Entangled States // Physical Review Letters. — 1993. — Vol. 71, No. 11. — P. 1665–1668. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.1665. [12] Bartók B. Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta (1936) — analysis of φ-structure in: Lendvai E. Béla Bartók: An Analysis of His Music. — London: Kahn & Averill, 1971. [13] McCraty R. et al. The Coherent Heart // Integral Review. — 2009. — Vol. 5, No. 2. — P. 10–115. [14] Pankratov A.S. Cinematography of reality: information, memory, and reproduction in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. [15] Pankratov A.S. Particle accelerator as an operator of forced reconfiguration in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. [16] Pankratov A.S. Quantum computer in ODTOE: computation in the field of potential states // Preprint. — 2025. [17] Pankratov A.S. Children and family as the flowers of life: formalization via ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025.

[18] Hofstadter D.R. I Am a Strange Loop. — New York: Basic Books, 2007. — 412 p. [19] Dumas G. et al. Inter-Brain Synchronization During Social Interaction // PLoS ONE. — 2010. — Vol. 5, No. 8. — Art. e12166.