Paul,

The keyword for my assumption that consciousness is influencing "reality" (whatever it may be) is the Young double slit experiment , wher the act of aware observing is regulating the outcome of wave or partcle behaviour. Then ther is Wheelers Delayed Choice Experiment. Furhermore I propose that the "material" universe is limited by the Planck Length and Time (these limits can be reached at any point and time in our causal universe), beyond that begins a another "dimension" (perhaps not the right expression) that I call TOTAL SIMULTANEITY, this is a non-causal dimension where ALL probable and nonprobable (for us) slices of block universe like alpha moments are "available". It is our non-causal part of consciousness that is also "available" there and through entanglement with its causal part is creating our CREALITY (Illusion) of causal space and time. You may say that it is humbug, but this kind of reasoning is also used in Loop Quantum Gravity. You can also say that it is not realistic and deterministic, you are right, but I am happy to be able to think free.

best regards

Wilhelmus

W

Reality occurs independently of whatever detects it. By definition, because any sentient organism receives a physical input, it does not create it in its head and then somehow telepathically communicate it with every other sentient organism. We all see St Pauls, because something which constitutes what we label as St Pauls is physically existent, and a light representation of it is being caused as a result.

Consciousness, or any other such associated process, has no effect on the physical circumstance.

Paul

Wilhelmus,

A very enjoyable read and original approach, but I found much in agreement with or complimentary to my own findings, always pleasing! Pertinant, well written and organised too. The 'quote' format worked well.

I particularly liked; "the real thing is 3D and in full colour"

Congratulations on a very fine essay, well written, now also well scored.

Best of luck

Peter

    Dear

    Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

    So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

    I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

    I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The main stream community people want magic from science instead of realty especially in the subject of cosmology. We all know well that cosmology is a subject where speculations rule.

    Hope to get your comments even directly to my mail ID also. . . .

    Best

    =snp

    snp.gupta@gmail.com

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/

    Pdf download:

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/essay-download/1607/__details/Gupta_Vak_FQXi_TABLE_REF_Fi.pdf

    Part of abstract:

    - -Material objects are more fundamental- - is being proposed in this paper; It is well known that there is no mental experiment, which produced material. . . Similarly creation of matter from empty space as required in Steady State theory or in Bigbang is another such problem in the Cosmological counterpart. . . . In this paper we will see about CMB, how it is generated from stars and Galaxies around us. And here we show that NO Microwave background radiation was detected till now after excluding radiation from Stars and Galaxies. . . .

    Some complements from FQXi community. . . . .

    A

    Anton Lorenz Vrba wrote on May. 4, 2013 @ 13:43 GMT

    ....... I do love your last two sentences - that is why I am coming back.

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 6, 2013 @ 09:24 GMT

    . . . . We should use our minds to down to earth realistic thinking. There is no point in wasting our brains in total imagination which are never realities. It is something like showing, mixing of cartoon characters with normal people in movies or people entering into Game-space in virtual reality games or Firing antimatter into a black hole!!!. It is sheer a madness of such concepts going on in many fields like science, mathematics, computer IT etc. . . .

    B.

    Francis V wrote on May. 11, 2013 @ 02:05 GMT

    Well-presented argument about the absence of any explosion for a relic frequency to occur and the detail on collection of temperature data......

    C

    Robert Bennett wrote on May. 14, 2013 @ 18:26 GMT

    "Material objects are more fundamental"..... in other words "IT from Bit" is true.

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 14, 2013 @ 22:53 GMT

    1. It is well known that there is no mental experiment, which produced material.

    2. John Wheeler did not produce material from information.

    3. Information describes material properties. But a mere description of material properties does not produce material.

    4. There are Gods, Wizards, and Magicians, allegedly produced material from nowhere. But will that be a scientific experiment?

    D

    Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 16:22 GMT

    It from bit - where are bit come from?

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 06:10 GMT

    ....And your question is like asking, -- which is first? Egg or Hen?-- in other words Matter is first or Information is first? Is that so? In reality there is no way that Matter comes from information.

    Matter is another form of Energy. Matter cannot be created from nothing. Any type of vacuum cannot produce matter. Matter is another form of energy. Energy is having many forms: Mechanical, Electrical, Heat, Magnetic and so on..

    E

    Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 22:08 GMT

    .....Either way your abstract argument based empirical evidence is strong given that "a mere description of material properties does not produce material". While of course materials do give information.

    I think you deserve a place in the final based on this alone. Concise - simple - but undeniable.

      Thank you Peter, we both know that it is not easy to sail against the wind, you have to tack and tack and tack, but we will arrive at our goal I hope..

      Wilhelmus

      Dear Satyavarapu,

      Thank you for your kind reaction , I responded on your thread.

      Wilhelmus

      5 days later

      Wilhelmus,

      If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

      Jim

        Thank you Jim, I am awaiting your valuation.In the meantime I will read and rate yours, we need to support each other.

        Wilhelmus

        Wilhelmus,

        Quite an interesting read, utilizing unique phraseology along the way. You cover a lot of territory and "conscious creality" as you go. I have always been intrigued with the biblical concept,especially after reading Joyce's Ulysses, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God." The poetic phrasing and the deep meaning perhaps represent the concepts we are struggling with, more in support of your thinking -- I might say.

        Jim

          Thank you Jim,

          It seems that the essence of most religions is compatible with my "thinking", which gives me a good feeling.

          You can eventually read extensive articles that I wrote on the subject in "THE SCIENTIFIC GOD JOURNAL" http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/115 and

          http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/232

          Wilhelmus

          4 days later

          Dear Wilhelmus,

          thank you for commenting on my entry and for invitation to read your beautiful, thoughtful, philosophical essay. It reminded me of the old time alchemists forever searching the perfection at its finest in all aspects of life (and beyond :).

          "The infinity of the now moment is not only the past or the future, our consciousness is creating out of all the shades of grey in the Primal Sequence a Creality , so the appearance of a materialistic universe." -- beautiful:)

            Dear Wilhelmus, I read your essay with great interest. Your concept of the the "Primal Sequence" as "the origin of origins" is very similar with my concept of our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit as Planck's matrix of all matter and also as Maxwell's infinite being, but not his finite being. i also shares your concept of the NOW within the absolute digital time T ≤ 10^-1000sevonds. Please comment and rank my essay. Best wishes, Leo KoGuan

            Dear Wilhelmus,

            I have read your nice work and I find there many for my valuable points that I will take in attention in my future works. I think we going to the same direction despite some difrence of our approaches. I hope my work may be interstig for you.

            I will thankfull for your opinion on it. http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1804

            Best wishes,

            George

              Thanks Marina,

              The thoughts of all participants in this contest give a good rainbow that announces good weather...

              Dear Leo KoGuan,

              "All things are one qubit" touches the "eternal Now" I describe.

              "Each T-moment a new qbit emerges" Your T moment is relative shorter as the Planck time that i used, but I also mentioned that this moment wher there is no longer causality may be shorter (as in the latest results from ESA's INTEGRAL gamma ray observatory which have shown that this "graininess" of space is much lesser as the Planck length : 10^-48cm), but in my perception I have to take a certain length which of course is also realtive to our awareness. I lose you with the formula's Leo, this is just abracadraba for me, but I believe that your perceptions are touching your OWN reality.

              In my perception the Total Simultaneity, where ALL T-moments are available for our non causal consciousness touches very much your perception of the "creation" of a reality what I call CREALITY.

              I just think my dear Leo that we are both on the same path of discovering the Origin of Origins and the Reference of Reference.

              I have great admiration for your causal consciousness that has established a deeper contact with Total Simultaneity.

              I will rate your essay with respect and honor, as I hope you will do with mineand hope that we can in the future assembling of T-moments deepen our thoughts.

              Wilhelmus

              Hi Wilhelmus,

              I like your essay and rate it highly. You are to be praised for aiming high with clarity.

              Of course I can nitpick a little, I find that the use of the concept of infinity objectionable when applied to physical systems. Just because an equation seems to indicate an infinity is possible does not mean that it is true physically. This is why we both like Planck Units of space and time and consider them fundamental.

              Wishing you the best of everything.

              Don Limuti

                Dear Wilhelmus, Again your essay is so wonderful, I am really touched by it. We share somehow some waht similar thought. We are the seekers of the truth no matter what this truth will lead us. Here my reply to your post on my column but I just want you to know here: "Dear Wilhelmus, I read at least 5 times to make sure i understand your terms and rated highly of your fascinating essay. FQXI receipt: "You rated this essay on Jul 10, 2013i." You wrote A "bit" (digital) can be any physical entity or a mathematical concept (zero or one) that serves to make calculations. Quantification of the bit or trying to find the Primal BIT of the Primal Sequence of all sequences cannot be realized easily because every emerging state, every layer of reality, has its own specific form of information quanta that are constituting combined with others to form "new" information/knowledge sequence." Wonderful! Your Primal BIt is our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit and the Primal Sequence is the KQID Ouroboros Equation of Existence: Ξ00☷ = ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm) = KbΘln2 = hf = pc mc^2 = p^2/2m U(iLx,y,z) = 4πGρ- Kqid(ΑΘ-ΘS)gμν = (8πG/c^4)Tμν - Kqid(ΑΘ-ΘS)gμν = Τμν = E = A S ⊆ T that contains QM, KQID relativity, Landauer's bound, Planck, Einstein, Newton, Maxwell, Poisson, Einstein GR with KQID dark energy equation and KQID Third Law of Multiverse as the equation of everything from physics to chemistry, law, employment, monetary and full employment. In physics as shown in my essay, this equation explains the Bit Bang, not Big Bang, plus its partner the Bit Crush and we can estimate the temperature about 7.8 x10^126K in the first burst at 1.43478x10^-147 seconds with the wavelength λ = 4.3x10^-139 meter, moreover when A = S our universe will inevitably start its contraction and acceleration to a Big Crush sometime hundreds of trillions years later thatI also calculated in two different ways. As you can see I made specific predictions with specific numbers that can easily be falsified later by experiments. We are the seekers of the truth and paraphrasing the great Carl Sagan, we are the Qbit's way to know itself and to evolve as the Primal Sequense as you brilliantly put it. We are brothers and sisters literally in our human senses but actually we are one in our Ancestor Qbit reality or in your terms Primal Bit realm. Blood and tears of Wang Yangming's red pearls, I sing and praise Xuan Yuan's Da Tong, Leo KoGuan "

                  Leo KoGuan thank you very much for your warm reaction.

                  I am thinking of organising with people like you a little group to share ideas and perhaps together form a new perception of our reality, representants like you from China and Georg from Russia, i also know an emiritus professor in India etc, together we can DO something, waiting for your ideas

                  Wilhelmus

                  Dear Wilhelmus,

                  I am intrigued by how you essentially describe our physics' parameters as flexible borders, centered in the Human Mind. It is refreshing to see this view expressed, not only in terms of physics (your treatment of Qubits was most intriguing), but with references to metaphysical concepts.

                  This shows confidence in the fact that what is at one time metaphysical becomes in time 'physical'.

                  I myself describe a cosmic paradigm of correlated energy vortices that includes the evolving observer - a participant in the field of reality who makes decisions at every moment, and over a very long period of time, during which his relation to the physical world - his own biological configuration, if you will - is continuously altered.

                  You might be interested to see how I treat this evolutionary argument as a realist interpretation of the field of reality, thus expanding the definitions of It and Bit far beyond those signified by Wheeler, and concluding that their interaction is one of continuous and simultaneous shifts - or more precisely, correlation.

                  I believe my perspective provides a structure you might find useful.

                  I have rated your essay, of course, and hope you will soon visit my page.

                  All the Best!

                  John.