There are three sections to Dyer's research findings, with each section divided into two parts. The biorobotic TDE, and its knowledge-level version, the TDE-R, form the middle section, and are naturally labelled as 'mind'. All three sections are depicted in the figure above.

Dyer is surprisingly sanguine about the future of his discovery, in spite of being substantially[2] unpublished. "All that anyone who is curious (or skeptical) about my work needs to do is jump on the internet and check out my website(s). In a way, using free web hosting services to present research results represents a pragmatic realisation of the open-access, zero-barrier-to-entry knowledge publishing ideal". He harbours significant reservations about the entire 'journal system'. He is not alone, and likes to remind people of recent comments by Randy Schekman, a US biologist who won the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine this year. Schekman said pressure to publish in "luxury" journals like Nature, Cell and Science encouraged researchers to cut corners and pursue trendy fields of science instead of doing more important work. Therefore, his lab would no longer send research papers to these top-tier journals whose editors who were not active scientists but professionals who favoured studies that were likely to make a splash.

Dyer has had an ongoing email relationship with linguist Noam Chomsky for about 12 months. "Its weird, I remember saying to my partner after my Honours year that the only mentor I could imagine working with was Chomsky. Fast forward a few months, and, as if by magic, it happened". A significant part of Dyer's research is a reworking of Skinner's view of language, summarised by the title of his 1959 book 'Verbal Behaviour'. This (obviously) presents a potential problem when communicating with Chomsky, since it is Chomsky's debunking of Behaviorism in general, and Skinner's psychological weltanschung, in particular, which announced his (Chomsky's) spectacular entry into the world of high-profile scientific discussion.

It is the sheer range of Dyer's discoveries, in both depth and breadth, which at first blush seems so impressive. Dyer believes this perception is, unfortunately, one of the factors that sometimes works against him. "It is all just so <expletive> unbelievable- I'm the first to admit it. I'm my own worst critic and biggest skeptic- if you think about it, I have to be. Hardly anyone else has a clue what I'm talking about, and the few that do aren't talking. Modern cognitive psychology is, frankly, a disaster area, a broken science, because it has persistently failed to address the major issue, which is consciousness. Plus, there is the vexed issue of the bruised scientific ego. As Bernard Baars said recently, in an email reply- we just have to agree to disagree".

Dyer is proudest of his treatment of subjective experience, easily the most intractable of psychology's chronic problems. By squarely facing the interconnected problems of consciousness and volition (ie conation[3], desire, 'free will'), Dyer was able to arrive quickly at the design of the abstract machine which eventually became the TDE. "The key idea behind the TDE is that consciousness and volition are orthogonal measures, two independent but connected facets of the same mental process". This level of operationalisation[4] of perceptual concepts has never before been achieved. Without it, it is hard to imagine any viable physicalist interpretation of mentation. With it, the mapping of consciousness to control of sensory input, and volition to control of motor output, emerges almost instantly, naturally. After understanding how this operationalisation works, it is hard to imagine thinking otherwise.