Veysel Batmaz Hi,
We cannot assert,affirm without concrete mathematical and physical proofs. You are like a super reductionist asserting your philosophy. You misinterpret I think the quantum mechanics and its limitations. You must understand that we have an ontological problem. It is like you confound epistemology and ontology. The measurements are limited and we don t know what is the nature of the reality. You dismiss in fact the consciousness as an ideological hallucination or a quantum delirium, it is very odd. If the consciousness is a fundamental aspect of the reality , or even a primary essence and that universe knows what to do, so treating it as you do leaves the origin of the meaning of consciousness totaly unexplained. The moving reality is essential to be understood and your analysis is purely static , you forget the engine in its pure essence. You seem to reduce and assert forgetting or feraing the philosophical important doors .
You confuse if I can say the map and the territory , you treat the wavefiunction or the equations as just tools, yes but we need ontologival questions, we can calculate the statistics for example but we must also search why we have precise matheamtical structures. You dismiss the hard problem of consciousness, but you don t solve it , you cannot assert that the consciousness and quantum mechanincs links are delirium or mysticiam without concrete proofs, physical, mathematical, ontological.
Your reasonings is respectable but is a circular reasoning ,calling measurement an ordinary physical interaction assume things lacking of ontologival , physical and mathematical deeper parameters hidden.
Have you also thought to understand deeper the observer rules in quantum mechanics , because while the human minds do not magically create the physical matte , the QM is also about informat
ion relative to this observer and measurement, we cannot be naive about the realism if I can say. It becomes dogmatic about the possible ontological hidden parameters, they can exist , you can ask fundamental questions and it is there that the researchs are important and permit to go farer and deeper about the unknowns. You must understand that this universe generates complex mathematical and physical laws , the same about the coherences of conscious observers, they require active priciple of coherences, the miracle of random luck about these things seems impossible . The reductionists and their static equations lacking of deeper ontological causes forget the realm processes , the movements, the origin of this consciousness. It is like refusing the gaps for real understandings of our unknowns.
The problem also of reductionists is to confound the religions, wich are human inventions with possible concrete interpretations of a god of spinoza like einstein said.
Regards
