The more i read your esssay, the more i am able to comprehend its understanding. You illustrate it well in terms of degrees of consciousness finally terminating in total consciousness ( equivalent God .)The logic behind creation of our Universe, including how the living beings evolved from shrubs, to plants, animals and eventually the man. Your essay has received the attention due to it and it is going up with the passage of time. I wish you get rated to get a Prize. Our essay is just a poor draft in comparison, as my younger author could not find time due to many pre-occupations he happens to have at this period of time, our ill luck!

Consciuosness is at the heart of everything we become aware of. Thus, degree of awareness contains the secret of success. I post my ranking as top in my jedgement!

    Dear Christian,

    The Reality Loop approach is actually a kind of proof for the Anthropic Principle.

    The Reality Loop "we" are experiencing is one where it seems as if EVERYTHING is made for us...

    However this loop is only ONE from an Infinity, each agent in his own loop will have the same experience, and these agents may differ just a little or a whole lot, each one is at HOME in his own loop. Those other loops are until now unattainable for our specific sort.

    Each time an agent makes a choice "the reality is not splitting up" (like in MWI) but all other Loops representing other choices become "unattainable", they "withdraw" in the behind Planck limits...

    So the fine-tuning of our reality is a logical effect for the specific loop that we are calling REALITY. If our kind of agents were not in our specific loop, the loop is of no use, each reality has to be experienced (conscious of) to be a reality. A loop without consciousness is no loop...

    I hope this explains your question.

    best regards

    Wilhelmus

    Dear Narendra,

    I thank you so very much for rereading my attribution to this contest.

    The Reality Loops are an extension of the Total Simultaneity and Total Consciousness model of reality. In this essay, I tried to explain the idea by using explanations as used in "accepted" science. This does not mean that I am behind the idea of the BB or expanding universe, not at all. The beginning of a reality LOOP is just one of the infinite acts for completeness of Total Consciousness.

    best regards

    Wilhelmus

    • [deleted]

    • Post #45

    Mr. de Wilde,

    I had a first read of your essay and it was a pleasant lecture. Allow me a second read (before rating it) for a more profound understanding. I will appreciate if you could explain in some simple way the word "consciousness". What are you referring at, more precisely? Anyhow, I do appreciate (and subscribe to) the substance, emerging from your "mental images", picturing what you perceive as being real.

    By the way, I tried to explain the in-congruence between your remarks and the essay referring at (in my opinion there are't any), for making it clearer for you in case you would like to rate it.

    Respectfully,

    Silviu

      Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

      You wrote a good essay, but it would be even better if you were familiar with the New Cartesian Physics isbased on the principle of physical identity of space and matter, the French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Rene Descartes. I call upon everyone here to develop his theory everething on the basis of achievements of modern science. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows this principle. Evaluate and leave your comment there. Then I'll give you a rating as the bearer of Descartes' idea. Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness.

      Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

        Dear Corciovei Silviu

        Thank you for reading and commenting on my essay and also for answering on my points regarding yours.

        I will begin with the points you ask on your essay :

        1.I think we both agree here. It is quite clear for me what you mean.

        2.Yes. But here its important to make the difference between intelligence and awareness/consciousness. As you say we are constructing artificial intelligence. Intelligence is just data/information, the algorithms of software can compare data to resolve the mathematics, and give solutions to questions. Awareness is not achieved, sometimes "it looks like" awareness because of the complexity of the software, but it will stay only a "yes or no" phenomenon.

        3.Indeed there are ways of communication that we will perhaps never be aware of, because we have only five senses.

        4.In the middle ages the immutable law was that the sun was turning around the earth, and really there were used such complex calculations that it really "seemed" to be true. The later immutable law was that it was the other way around. So the first one is no longer valuable. Humanity is only existing one second...Our "intelligence is also existing only one second and we think that we know already a lot (not me). We are indeed creating artificial intelligence but not artificial Consciousness, the new quantum devices (working with qubits) that can not only "choose" between yes or no, may be the new evolution towards Artificial Consciousness (AC). AC will have then the "I" and the "will" to stay "alive", without the need to "eat" other AC's. The only "eating" will be the sharing of intelligence (information).

        On your question on my essay : What is consciousness ? I partly gave already the answer above under 4. But I will try to answer this (ultimate difficult) question very short by asking you : "What is the "I" (yourself, ego) inside you ? That is the part of you that is aware of its emergent entity. It TRIES to UNDERSTAND the signals from emerging reality around YOU. It TRIES to UNDERSTAND the foundational HOW and also WHY. This consciousness is not the result of a complexity called brains, but it is the origin of the complexity. (You will not find the announcer inside the radio).

        I hope that this answers your questions. I rated you an 8 today.

        Wilhelmus de Wilde

        Dear Wilhelmus:

        Your essay clearly has some originality. I will read more of your work.

        Thank you for complementary comment on my essay, "The concept of "fundamental" must keep evolving". In addition, I would be delighted if you can develop a mathematical expression for the concept of a self-looped oscillatory entity in the CTF. Please keep me informed. Feel free to go to my web to down load relevant papers: http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/

        I will separately send you Ch.11 of my optics book, "Causal Physics: Photon by Non-Interaction of Waves", Taylor and Francis, 2014. It validates the potential reality of CTF from the viewpoint of experimental optical sciences.

        Now a philosophical comment. You say:-

        "Emergent phenomena are ILLUSIONS originating from a space and timeless Point : a NOTHING."

        I understand what you mean. However, I do not like the word "illusion" while explaining nature; because our brain has evolved with the analytical capability to enjoy many true optical illusions (play of the neural network), while figuring out how to separate illusions from elusiveness. The Moon is always there in its orbit even if all humans shut their eyes at night. The reality of the cosmic universe is not our illusion. However, it has remained elusive (limitation of our knowledge), even though we have been trying hard for centuries to explain all the detailed laws behind its origin and evolutionary behavior.

        In ancient Indian philosophy, the word "Maya" has been used to describe this elusiveness of the universe. Unfortunately, I believe it was the first translator of Indian philosophy, Friedrich Max Müller, who used the word "illusion" as a translation for the word "Maya". I wish he had used the word "elusive".

        Sincerely,

        Chandra.

        Dear Wilhelmus,

        I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay.

        I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.

        Vladimir Fedorov

        https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080

        Thank you very much, Narendra

        but I think that your co-writer has already rated me.

        Good luck in the contest

        Wilhelmus

        Thank you, Peter, for your comments.

        I will reply on your thread later.

        respectfully

        Wilhelmus

        Dear Tejinder,

        Thanks a lot for taking the time to read my contribution.

        I am very glad that you liked it, indeed we have overlaps.

        I will still give a reaction on your thread

        Wilhelmus

        Dear Satyavarapu,

        I have left a complete answer on your thread.

        Thank you for reading my essay.

        Wilhelmus

        Thank you Don,

        It is always pleasant to meet related thinkers.

        I will leave a full answer on your thread

        Wilhelmus