The Science Explained

A Tool To Train Your Mind

The stars we see, the ground beneath us, even the flow of time may be a 'VR headset'-like user interface of a deeper reality, a model of existence where perception continually renders both the quantum and spacetime - a generative mechanism of consciousness that assembles and edits the very stage on which it seems to perform .. where what we see is a species-specific data structure, computed and created by our consciousness for survival, not for accuracy or to see the entirety of reality ('the truth').

All this is centered around the wave function equation .. it's collapse (CAUSED BY YOUR ATTENTION) is the exact gateway that results in what appears in your everyday life, including infinitesimal quantum space all the way to the observed infinite expanse of cosmic space, because they are 'one'. Furthermore it is the expression of 'conscious agents' (you) interacting > causing wave function collpase > causing 'emergence' (ref: Objects of Consciousness), versus physicist's former view that the universe is 'always there'. Essentially 'emergence' means the material universe is not the fundamental base of reality, and in Donald Hoffman's view the universe is rendered or assembled .. that is .. EMERGES .. both 'on the fly' .. and only as we need it.

Also, scientists not only posit that space, time and matter are not fundamental (or 'spacetime is doomed') but that our 'universe' is literally manifest only in our mind. They state that only consciousness is the fundamental principle and consciousness is all that fundamentally exists. A 'universe' they posit is a fininte, temporary and relatively tiny data structure .. a data structure that exists merely as an experience of consciousness (similar to the experience of a VR headset). One end of this data structure is the Planck scale in the infinitesimal limits of quantum reality, the other end is an infinite expanse of cosmic space .. and when the data structure reaches the end of it's lifecycle the result is complete quantum decay (evaporation) and complete cosmic thermaldynamic inactivity (ref: How Could The Big Bang Arise Out Of Nothing).

Consciousness doesn't originate from the 'universe', instead, the universe emerges from consciousness and is a grand mental experience.

Recent rigorous scientific work includes mathematically describing how quantum wave-particles manifest ('emerge'), which is thought to be the interaction of the fundamental components of existence: consciousness in the form of ‘conscious agents', YOU AND I THAT IS. Furthermore this interaction of conscious agents is perfectly described by the quantum wave function equation (ref: Objects of Consciousness). Specifically, quantum wave-particles (protons, quarks, gluons, etc) are vibrations of interacting conscious agents .. or, vibrations of you and I interacting with existence and with each other. Physical properties such as position, momentum, and energy are properties of interacting conscious agents and are not there preexisting all the time but instead emerge 'on the fly' and only as we need it.

What's more .. this 'conscious agent' interaction does not include us perceiving the entirety of reality but instead we perceive and experience only that which promotes survival (determined mathematically by a 'fitness payoff function' according to Donald Hoffman, ref: (1) non-technical, Why You Don't Need The Truth To Survive | Donald Hoffman, (2) technical, Donald Hoffman's Fitness-Beats-Truth Theorem Part 1). Meaning, most of existence is outside of our perception and experience, like a tiny bubble in an infintely vast ocean of bubbles and fathomless deep and infinite space above. This is what Donald Hoffman means when he says our 'universe' is a 'tiny data structure' because it truly is. He and his team has derived mathematically that the probabllity of us being able to perceive 'the truth' (or the entirely of reality) is "exactly zero" because it is "infitely complicated".

For in-depth details (including technical) watch Andre Duqum - Donald Hoffman series BELOW, where they go deep into the concept that perception is not objective reality and in fact our experience of reality via the universe or 'VR headset' shows us zero percent of the complexity of reality, that 'spacetime' is not the final ground of being, that it's a trivial framework .. yes, the 'universe' is trivial:

Proof That Reality Is An ILLUSION: The Mystery Beyond Space-Time | Donald Hoffman

The Emerging Science: "We Are ONE Consciousness" - Life, Death & The Simulation | Donald Hoffman

The Greatest Discovery About Reality And The Consciousness Behind It | Donald Hoffman

How Physicists Threw Away Spacetime In Favor Of Emergence

Journey towards emergence: The intellectual journey of modern physics reveals a profound and ongoing evolution in our understanding of reality. It began with the Classical Era, which was built upon the principles of locality (the rule that no information or causal influence can travel faster than light) and realism (the concept that objects possess definite, intrinsic properties independent of observation). This worldview, which saw the universe as a deterministic machine on a fixed stage, found its ultimate expression in General Relativity (GR), a theory that describes gravity as the curvature of a smooth, continuous, and fundamentally real spacetime.

This solid foundation was shattered by the Quantum Revolution. Quantum Theory (QT) demonstrated that the subatomic world is inherently probabilistic and operates on radically different principles. Crucially, through phenomena like quantum entanglement, it proved the universe is fundamentally non-local (exhibiting instantaneous correlations between distant particles that cannot be explained by any local, realistic model) and non-real (properties of particles are not defined until the moment of measurement, defying the classical idea of an objective reality). This created a deep schism: our best theory of the cosmos (GR) was local and real, while our best theory of its constituents (QT) was not.

For decades, physicists struggled to force these two conflicting theories into a single framework. We are now entering a third, more radical phase, driven by the failure of this direct reconciliation. This is the Era of Emergence. Leading theoretical physicists now posit a startling conclusion: spacetime itself is "doomed." This means the four-dimensional continuum of GR is not a fundamental ingredient of the universe. Instead, our experience of spacetime, along with the very rules of quantum physics, is likely an emergent phenomenon (a collective property that arises from the interactions of more fundamental, non-spatiotemporal constituents, much like the fluidity of water emerges from the collective behavior of individual molecules).

This suggests that the universe we perceive is a kind of holographic projection (a description where the information about a volume of space is encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary) from a more primitive, abstract reality that exists without concepts of "here," "now," or even "before." The ultimate quest is no longer to quantize the spacetime of GR, but to discover the underlying structure from which spacetime, locality, realism, and perhaps even quantum theory itself, all emerge.

It began with dreamers who unraveled the cosmos thread by thread. Young, like an archaeologist of light, exposed the first cracks in Newton’s rigid universe with his double slits, revealing light’s inherent duality, its capacity to be both particle and wave. Then Einstein, the revolutionary cosmic weaver, unstitched the very fabric of space and time: his relativity bent gravity into geometry, while E=mc² welded matter to energy, and his photons existed in a state of playful potential, always ready to become either particle or wave. Planck, reluctantly fathering the quantum, quantized reality itself, his blackbody calculations birthing discrete packets of energy where continuity once ruled.

Journey towards emergence: Here, the foundational schism was being laid. Newtonian physics was built on locality (influences propagate smoothly and continuously from one point to another) and realism (objects have definite properties like position and momentum independent of observation). The work of Young, Planck, and even Einstein on photons began to challenge this. Planck's quanta introduced discreteness where continuity ruled, and wave-particle duality suggested that the classical, realist view of objects was incomplete. Einstein's own General Relativity (GR), however, would become the ultimate expression of a local and realist theory, describing a definite spacetime fabric.

Heisenberg, with his uncertainty principle, etched the limits of knowledge into the fabric of the universe — measurement now a fundamental trade-off, where to know one thing perfectly, you must surrender knowledge of another. Schrödinger’s wave equation painted subatomic realms not as certainties, but as shifting probability clouds, though he recoiled from his own creation’s implications. Dirac, the unifier, braided quantum mechanics with relativity and conjured antimatter from pure mathematics, his equation a portal to a more fundamental reality. And Bell, the quiet dismantler of Einstein’s last hope, proved with cold logic that entanglement’s "spooky action" was no flaw — but a feature of reality itself.

Journey towards emergence: This period marked the solidification of the quantum challenge. Heisenberg and Schrödinger formalized a theory that was fundamentally non-real (particles lack definite properties until measured). Then, through the phenomenon of quantum entanglement, the theory revealed its non-locality (instantaneous correlations between distant particles), a concept Einstein famously derided as "spooky." John Bell's theorem provided a way to test this, and experiments confirmed that the universe violates local realism. This created the central conflict: General Relativity (a local, realist theory of spacetime) is incompatible with Quantum Theory (a non-local, non-real theory of matter and forces).

These were the architects. Their blueprints: Young’s wave-particle duality, Planck’s discrete energy leaps, Schrödinger’s shifting probability clouds, Heisenberg’s fundamental trade-off, Dirac’s unification of relativity and the quantum, Einstein’s relativistic geometry and Bell’s cosmic dialogue that is not bound by spacetime. Their legacy was forging a new architecture of the real, one founded upon pure mathematics, which opened doors for endless exploration.

It was then that a Cambridge physicist turned his gaze toward the void, who noticed it whisper subtle radiation, the faint thermal glow of black holes dissolving into quantum fog, In that glow, a paradox burned — information, the sacred currency of reality, seemed to vanish forever. The cosmos appeared to be eating its own secrets. The black hole information paradox, first formulated by Stephen Hawking in 1975, exposed a fundamental conflict between quantum mechanics and general relativity, necessitating a quantum theory of gravity. (And he might have had help from a largely unknow child prodigy, David Adair).

Journey towards emergence: Hawking's paradox was not a minor puzzle; it was a crisis that occurred where the two great theories, General Relativity and Quantum Theory, directly collided. The paradox suggested that the fundamental laws of quantum physics broke down in the face of gravity, implying that our understanding of spacetime itself was flawed. This crisis forced physicists to consider that the stage itself might be part of the play, leading to the radical idea of emergence (the concept that complex properties, like spacetime, arise from the collective interactions of simpler, more fundamental constituents).

Yet, a profound paradox does not confound nature; it is a portal to a deeper law. From this crisis bloomed the holographic principle of ’t Hooft and Susskind, physics' most radical act of ontological revolution. Not merely a theory but a koan: what if the three-dimensional theater of our existence — every galaxy, every falling leaf, every beating heart — is but an emergent shadow play cast from a two-dimensional boundary at infinity? The mathematics is precise (AdS/CFT correspondence, the Maldacena duality), yet its implications are mystical. Spacetime, that venerable stage, demoted to mere emergent phenomenon, its curvature and drama unfolding from entangled quantum bits like a Persian carpet weaving itself from threads of pure information.

Journey towards emergence: The holographic principle, developed by 't Hooft and Susskind and given a precise mathematical form by Maldacena, was the first concrete step in formalizing the "doom" of spacetime. It proposed that our apparently three-dimensional universe of spacetime and gravity is emergent from a two-dimensional quantum system that lives on its boundary. This directly addresses Hawking's paradox and provides a mechanism for how spacetime and locality themselves could be emergent phenomena, derived from a more fundamental, non-spatial reality of quantum information and entanglement.

Then arrived the amplituhedron, a discovery by Arkani-Hamed and Trnka so profound it rendered the agonizingly complex mathematics of particle collisions obsolete. This geometric oracle calculates outcomes directly, challenging the foundational principles of locality and unitarity, and suggests that spacetime and particle interactions are emergent phenomena and computational artifacts arising from a more fundamental, primordial geometry. Here, in this transcendental algebra (Grassmannian kinematics, scattering amplitudes without unitarity or locality), the 'surface' laws of physics (or 'play physics' for children, like a VR gaming headset) are actually projected manifestations of a far more elegant, fundamental linguistics or mathematics, a reality where 'before' and 'after' lose their absolute meaning, becoming mere perspectives within a higher-dimensional, crystalline geometry.

Our fundamental frameworks are fractured. The spacetime stage of relativity and the entangled, non-local world of quantum theory remain irreconcilable, and their mathematics, however successful, appears to describe an emergent layer of reality, not its ultimate source. The amplituhedron, however, points beyond this divide. It suggests the universe is computed in a native tongue of timeless, spaceless geometry.

The Classic Era view of the 'block universe' (spacetime) as a static four-dimensional thing has now been re-thought as emergent phenomenon originating from a deeper mathematical structure. 'Block universe' arises from the idea that space and time are unified ('one') into a single four-dimensional entity called spacetime. A 'block universe' is where time is not fundamental so why we perceive time as a flow is the hard problem of consciousness. As a powerful candidate for a new formalism the amplituhedron shows that the sequence of events is not primary but depends on how one 'slices' this higher-dimensional object. This challenges the very fundamentality of time, suggesting our conscious experience of a flowing "now" may be a profound illusion arising from a deeper, simultaneous existence.

Journey towards emergence: The work of Arkani-Hamed on the amplituhedron pushes the concept of emergence to its logical extreme. It suggests that not only is spacetime not fundamental, but even the core principles of Quantum Theory like locality and unitarity are themselves emergent from a deeper, pre-geometric reality. The amplituhedron calculates particle interactions without any reference to spacetime or causes and effects, implying that our entire experience of a physical universe unfolding in time and space is a computational artifact or a "user interface" derived from a more fundamental, timeless mathematical structure.

The message is clear: we have been trying to decode the 'emergent' universe in a language that is not the fundamental syntax. We are now learning our universe emerges from 'linguistics' or mathematics we don't natively speak yet, one where quantum physics and spacetime are emergent verses in a poem composed in a geometry we are only beginning to hear.

Next, all certainties are crumbled to dust, and we find ourselves breathing the air of a more brilliant dimension. If spacetime is not fundamental, then what is "here"? What is "now"? Donald Hoffman’s interface theory takes the next leap: perhaps the "universe" is a rendering - a real-time simulation run on the pre-quantum processors of existence itself. The implications detonate like silent supernovae: the stars we see, the ground beneath us, even the flow of time may be a 'VR headset'-like user interface of a deeper reality, a model of existence where perception continually renders both the quantum and spacetime - a generative mechanism of consciousness that assembles and edits the very stage on which it seems to perform .. where what we see is a species-specific data structure, computed and created by our consciousness for survival, not for accuracy or to see the entirety of reality ('the truth').

Journey towards emergence: Donald Hoffman's interface theory of perception provides a provocative psychological and evolutionary framework for these physical discoveries. If spacetime is emergent and not fundamental, as suggested by the holographic principle and the amplituhedron, then Hoffman argues that our perceptions of a local, realist world cannot be true glimpses of the underlying reality. Instead, he proposes that spacetime itself is a species-specific user interface—a simplified, symbolic dashboard shaped by evolution for fitness, not for truth. This places consciousness as a primary player in the emergence of our experienced reality, suggesting that the non-local, non-real quantum world is closer to the truth, and our classic spacetime experience is a useful illusion.

This is our latest physics and it isn't philosophy. It's the unbearable gradient our equations are climbing - from Hawking's paradox to the hologram's inescapable conclusion, from the amplituhedron's stunning geometric shortcut - bypassing the need for spacetime and causality to calculate reality, to the definitive evidence of participatory realism - proof that to observe is to co-author reality. We are not merely discovering new laws; we are uncovering the source code and operating system of emergent universes. We are glimpsing existence as it is, true 'seeing' .. and beginning to understand the primordial architecture of reality.

This is the actual work of 'hacking the matrix'.

The great work is no longer to explain the universe. It's to survive and thrive in the revelation of what it actually is. The 'universe' is our collective creation but with divine laws that unravel deeper .. and deeper .. and deeper.

Proof That Reality Is An ILLUSION: The Mystery Beyond Space-Time | Donald Hoffman

Video: In this thought-provoking episode, cognitive psychologist and author Donald Hoffman takes us on a journey through the mysteries of consciousness and reality. From questioning the nature of what we perceive to pondering the existence of inanimate consciousness, Hoffman challenges conventional beliefs and explores the profound implications of proving local realism false. He delves into topics such as the illusion of free will, the role of love in metaphysics, and the possibility of reincarnation. Prepare to have your mind expanded as we contemplate the nature of reality itself and how this paradigm-shifting understanding will change everything.

Local realism in physics combines two principles:

Locality – No influence can travel faster than light (no instantaneous action at a distance).
Realism – Particles have definite properties (e.g., spin, position) even when not measured.

Quantum mechanics violates local realism, as shown by Bell's theorem and experiments (e.g., entangled particles). This suggests either:

Non-locality (instantaneous influences), or
Non-realism (no definite properties before measurement).

Most interpretations of QM reject local realism.

The Emergent Universe

The core idea of an "emergent universe" posits that spacetime, gravity, and the laws of physics are not fundamental but are collective phenomena that arise from more basic, often abstract, underlying structures. Just as temperature and pressure emerge from the collective motion of atoms (which themselves are not "hot" or "pressurized"), spacetime and gravity might emerge from something more fundamental, such as quantum bits (qubits) or entangled quantum states The following categories represent the leading frameworks for this concept.

Category 1: Holographic Duality (AdS/CFT correspondence or the Anti-de Sitter/Conformal Field Theory correspondence)

Key Idea:

A gravitational universe in d dimensions is fully encoded in a quantum field theory in d-1 dimensions. Spacetime is a holographic projection of quantum information.

This is the most rigorously defined and developed framework for emergence and is a holographic principle ( 1 , 2 , 3 ), suggesting a holographic relationship between a higher-dimensional spacetime (Anti-de Sitter space, or AdS) and a lower-dimensional quantum field theory (a conformal field theory, or CFT) living on its boundary. It posits a precise mathematical duality (a "dictionary") between a theory of gravity in a volume of space and a quantum field theory without gravity operating on that volume's lower-dimensional boundary. This makes the boundary theory the more fundamental description, from which spacetime and gravity emerge.

Proposed by Juan Maldacena in 1997, it implies that gravity in a d-dimensional AdS spacetime is mathematically equivalent to a quantum field theory without gravity in d-1 dimensions. For example, a 5D AdS space (describing string theory and gravity) can be fully encoded in a 4D CFT, like a supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory ( 1 , 2 ). This duality is a cornerstone of quantum gravity research, offering insights into black holes, emergent spacetime, and the deep connection between quantum mechanics and general relativity.

Leading Scientists:

Juan Maldacena was the first to propose the AdS/CFT correspondence in its precise, modern form in his seminal 1997 paper. But his work is based on the earlier work of Gerard 't Hooft and Leonard Susskind. The timeline and roles are:

Gerard ’t Hooft (1993): Proposed the holographic principle in the context of black hole thermodynamics, suggesting that a theory of quantum gravity could be described by a theory with one fewer dimension. This was the crucial conceptual precursor. (Ref: Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity).

Leonard Susskind (1994-95): Co-developed the ER=EPR conjecture (see below) and has been a leading figure in interpreting the holographic principle's implications. (Ref: The World as a Hologram).

Juan Maldacena (1997): Provided the first concrete, mathematically rigorous realization of the holographic principle by discovering the precise duality between a specific gravitational theory in Anti-de Sitter space (AdS) and a specific Conformal Field Theory (CFT) on its boundary. (Ref: The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field Theories and Supergravity).

Key Papers:

1. ’t Hooft, G. (1993). [Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity]. Salamfestschrift: A collection of talks, World Scientific Series in 20th Century Physics, vol. 4, 1-13.

2. Maldacena, J. (1999). [The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity]. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 38(4), 1113–1133. (The seminal paper).

3. Susskind, L. (1995). [The World as a Hologram]. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 36(11), 6377–6396.

(( Adding additional categories very shortly .. ))

Nima Arkani-Hamed - Why is Quantum Gravity So Significant?

Nima Arkani-Hamed is a prestigious physicist who belives our old understanding of spacetime is 'doomed' (as do most physicists). That is, space, time and matter are no longer considered the fundamental reality, but deeper mathematical objects are (the amplituhedron, etc).

Quantum theory explains how particles and fields work. General relativity, discovered by Einstein, explains how gravity generates the structure of the universe. But the two great theories of physics and cosmology are not compatible. But this is impossible because both describe reality. Only a solution to quantum gravity can solve the huge problem. Nima Arkani-Hamed (born 5 April 1972) is a Canadian/American theoretical physicist with interests in high-energy physics, string theory and cosmology. Formerly a professor at Harvard, Arkani-Hamed is now on the faculty at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton.

Other lectures by Nima Arkani-Hamed

Nima Arkani Hamed: The End of Space Time 1 of 3

CERN Scientist Goes Viral After Exposing the Illusion We Live In

SHORT VIDEO (above) - Dr. Bernardo Kastrup worked at CERN. He spent years deep inside the world of high-level science and technology. But something didn’t add up. Today, he’s one of the few respected voices claiming that reality is not made of matter — it’s made of mind. According to him, everything we experience is a projection of consciousness, and the physical world is just a mental illusion. His ideas are shaking the foundations of science — and revealing truths many still refuse to accept.

FULL VIDEO - Is Consciousness The Final Reality? - Questioning The Material Universe | Dr. Bernardo Kastrup

Ex CERN Scientist .. The interview explores the fundamental premises of Analytic Idealism. Dr. Bernardo Kastrup, known for developing this philosophical system, discusses the nature of consciousness, life, God, and AI with Natalia Vorontsova.

Dr. Bernardo Kastrup posits our senses and what we experience is like a 'dashboard' (like a computer screen or virtual reality headset) that our senses give us a very limited view of existence only for the sake of survival.

He says there is a Mind that is omniscient, omnipresent and omninpotent. Mind is the only thing that exsits. We are it. He argues that panentheism (God transcends the universe) is close to the truth as our evolution (perceptual apparatus we have acquired through evolution) still doesn't allow us to sense all that there is in existence. We haven't evolved to cognize everything to be cognized.

He says that the material universe is only mental and mind is all that exists (under Analytical Idealism). Matter is what mind or mental states look lke (appearances). Physicists deal with the world of these appearances but physicusts don't have the full picture.

Fusions of Consciousness (Dr Donald Hoffman, 2022)

Cognitive neuroscientist Dr Donald Hoffman posits space and time is not fundamental and that all of reality is literally manifest only in our mind .. his work includes mathematically describing consciousness, where he has found that the basic components of his theory (‘conscious agents’, more or less us) are perfectly described by the quantum wave function equation, This means our mind and quantum physics are almost the same thing.

Donald Hoffman's theory that the interaction of conscious agents creates spacetime is discussed in several of his works, but one key paper that explicitly addresses this idea is:

Fusions of Consciousness
Published in Entropy (Basel)
January 9 2023

Donald D Hoffman
Chetan Prakash
Robert Prentner

Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA
Department of Mathematics, California State University, San Bernadino, CA 92407, USA
Association for Mathematical Consciousness Science, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, LMU Munich, D-80539 Munich, Germany

Ref: Fusions of Consciousness (PDF)
Ref: Fusions of Consciousness (PubMed)
Ref: Fusions of Consciousness (MDPI)

Key Points from the Paper:

1. Conscious Agents as Fundamental:
    ∗ Hoffman and colleagues propose that spacetime is not fundamental but emerges from the interactions of "conscious agents" — mathematical entities whose dynamics are described by Markov chains
    ∗ They argue that spacetime is a "data structure" projected from these interactions, analogous to how a computer interface simplifies underlying code

2. Markov Chains and Decorated Permutations:
    ∗ The paper links the dynamics of conscious agents to scattering amplitudes in physics, using decorated permutations (a tool from particle physics) to map agent interactions onto spacetime processes (ref: Fusions of Consciousness {PubMed}), including literally offering a new model for particle interactions as observed at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN in Switzerland .. or in layman's terms the interactions of US (the conscious agents) results in quantum effects and the creation of spacetime ('on the fly' as we need it as he explains)

3. Critique of Spacetime Fundamentalism:
    ∗ The work builds on Hoffman’s earlier claims (e.g., in The Case Against Reality) that evolution hides true reality, which is a network of interacting conscious agents (ref: The Case Against Reality | Prof. Donald Hoffman on Conscious Agent Theory)

Abstract: What are conscious experiences? Can they combine to form new experiences? What are conscious subjects? Can they combine to form new subjects? Most attempts to answer these questions assume that spacetime, and some of its particles, are fundamental. However, physicists tell us that spacetime cannot be fundamental. Spacetime, they say, is doomed. We heed the physicists, and drop the assumption that spacetime is fundamental. We assume instead that subjects and experiences are entities beyond spacetime, not within spacetime. We make this precise in a mathematical theory of conscious agents, whose dynamics are described by Markov chains. We show how (1) agents combine into more complex agents, (2) agents fuse into simpler agents, and (3) qualia fuse to create new qualia. The possible dynamics of n agents form an n(n-1)-dimensional polytope with nn vertices-the Markov polytope ($M_n$). The total fusions of n agents and qualia form an (n-1)-dimensional simplex-the fusion simplexFn. To project the Markovian dynamics of conscious agents onto scattering processes in spacetime, we define a new map from Markov chains to decorated permutations. Such permutations-along with helicities, or masses and spins-invariantly encode all physical information used to compute scattering amplitudes. We propose that spacetime and scattering processes are a data structure that codes for interactions of conscious agents: a particle in spacetime is a projection of the Markovian dynamics of a communicating class of conscious agents.

Objects of Consciousness (Dr Donald Hoffman, 2014)

Donald D. Hoffman
Chetan Prakash

Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, 92697, USA
Department of Mathematics, California State University, San Bernardino, 92407, USA
2014

A mathematical description of consciousness, particularly the bottom right of page 13 (PDF) where he describes consciousness with the wavefunction equation.

Abstract: Current models of visual perception typically assume that human vision estimates true properties of physical objects, properties that exist even if unperceived. However, recent studies of perceptual evolution, using evolutionary games and genetic algorithms, reveal that natural selection often drives true perceptions to extinction when they compete with perceptions tuned to fitness rather than truth: Perception guides adaptive behavior; it does not estimate a preexisting physical truth. Moreover, shifting from evolutionary biology to quantum physics, there is reason to disbelieve in preexisting physical truths: Certain interpretations of quantum theory deny that dynamical properties of physical objects have definite values when unobserved. In some of these interpretations the observer is fundamental, and wave functions are compendia of subjective probabilities, not preexisting elements of physical reality. These two considerations, from evolutionary biology and quantum physics, suggest that current models of object perception require fundamental reformulation. Here we begin such a reformulation, starting with a formal model of consciousness that we call a “conscious agent.” We develop the dynamics of interacting conscious agents, and study how the perception of objects and space-time can emerge from such dynamics. We show that one particular object, the quantum free particle, has a wave function that is identical in form to the harmonic functions that characterize the asymptotic dynamics of conscious agents; particles are vibrations not of strings but of interacting conscious agents. This allows us to reinterpret physical properties such as position, momentum, and energy as properties of interacting conscious agents, rather than as preexisting physical truths. We sketch how this approach might extend to the perception of relativistic quantum objects, and to classical objects of macroscopic scale.

Ref: Objects of Consciousness (PDF)
Ref: Objects of Consciousness (Froniers in Psychology)

Related Works:

    ∗ The preprint "Traces of Consciousness" (2024) also explores how observers (modeled as conscious agents) are integral to physical systems, though it focuses more on quantum observation than spacetime emergence (ref: Traces of Consciousness)

Thomas Young and the Classic Double Slit Experiment of 1801

The double-slit experiment was first performed by Thomas Young in 1801. Young conducted the experiment in England to demonstrate the wave-like nature of light. The experiment involves passing light through two closely spaced slits and observing the resulting pattern on a screen behind the slits. Young's observations showed an interference pattern, which provided evidence that light behaves as a wave rather than a particle, contradicting Isaac Newton's particle theory of light.

In the modern version of the experiment, scientists have used electrons and other particles instead of light, and observed similar wave-like behavior. When a detector is set up to observe which slit a particle passes through, the interference pattern disappears, and the particles behave as if they are classical particles, each passing through one slit or the other.

This phenomenon highlights the principles of wave-particle duality and the role of observation in quantum mechanics, suggesting that the act of measurement can influence the behavior of particles.

Interference pattern --> Observation --> Results in particle pattern

This equation symbolically represents the transformation from an interference pattern to a particle pattern upon observation.

Below is a chronological timeline of key developments in the double-slit experiment, with direct links to scholarly references (READ MORE: Chronology Of Significant Developments).

Werner Heisenberg and Niels Bohr

Werner Heisenberg and Niels Bohr were the first classical physicists to concretely argue (mathematically) that quantum systems exist as probability distributions (wave functions) until measured, at which point they "collapse" into definite states, implying that physical properties don't exist in a defined state until they are observed.

Werner Heisenberg and Niels Bohr's views were initially driven by theoretical and mathematical considerations, but they were also deeply influenced by emerging experimental evidence that classical physics could not explain. Here’s how theory and experiment interacted in the development of their ideas:

Theoretical and Mathematical Foundations

Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics (1925) and Schrödinger’s (11) wave mechanics (1926) provided mathematical frameworks that described quantum systems probabilistically.

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle (1927) mathematically showed that certain pairs of physical properties (e.g., position and momentum) could not be simultaneously defined with arbitrary precision, reinforcing the idea that quantum states were not deterministic before measurement.

Bohr’s Copenhagen Interpretation (late 1920s) synthesized these ideas, proposing that quantum systems exist in superpositions (wave functions) until measurement forces a collapse.

The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics was primarily developed by Niels Bohr, with significant contributions from Werner Heisenberg and others, such as Max Born and Wolfgang Pauli.

Bohr was the central figure in formulating the philosophical and conceptual framework, emphasizing complementarity (the idea that quantum systems can exhibit wave-like or particle-like properties depending on the experimental setup, but never both simultaneously in the same experiment).

Heisenberg contributed key ideas like the uncertainty principle and the mathematical formalism, but the broader interpretive framework was more strongly shaped by Bohr.

Niels Bohr’s view of the Copenhagen interpretation centered on the idea that quantum mechanics does not describe an objective reality independent of measurement but instead provides a framework for predicting the outcomes of experiments. Regarding the collapse of the wave function, Bohr argued that the act of measurement forces a quantum system to transition from a superposition of states (described by the wave function) to a definite classical outcome, but he avoided ontological claims about what really "happens" to the system. Unlike some later interpretations (e.g., von Neumann's explicit collapse postulate), Bohr did not treat the collapse as a physical process but rather as a shift in our knowledge—once a measurement is made, the wave function updates to reflect the new experimental context. He emphasized complementarity, meaning that quantum objects exhibit wave-like or particle-like behavior depending on the measurement apparatus, and the wave function’s collapse simply reflects the necessary choice of experimental conditions. For Bohr, the wave function was primarily a calculational tool rather than a direct representation of reality, and its collapse was part of the unavoidable classical-quantum divide since all measurements must ultimately be expressed in classical terms, the quantum description "collapses" to a classical result upon observation.

Ref: Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
Ref: Collapse Theories

Supporting Experimental Evidence

While Bohr and Heisenberg did not have direct "wavefunction collapse" experiments (such as later quantum measurement tests), their ideas were motivated by key experimental results that classical physics could not explain:

Blackbody Radiation (1900, Planck {4}): Quantized energy levels suggested discrete, probabilistic emission/absorption.

Photoelectric Effect (1905, Einstein {5}): Showed light behaving as quanta (photons), supporting particle-wave duality.

Atomic Spectra (Bohr’s 1913 Model): Discrete emission lines hinted at quantized electron orbits.

Stern-Gerlach Experiment (1922): Demonstrated quantized angular momentum (spin), incompatible with classical trajectories.

Double-Slit Experiments (e.g., Davisson-Germer, 1927 {14}): Showed wave-like interference for particles (electrons), suggesting superposition until detection.

Indirect Validation

The mathematical formalism (e.g., Born’s rule for probabilities, 1926) consistently predicted experimental outcomes, lending credibility to the idea that wavefunctions described reality prior to measurement.

Later experiments retrospectively reinforced their early insights, like:

Quantum entanglement tests (EPR, Bell’s Theorem, 1960s–70s)

Delayed-choice experiments (Wheeler, 1970s)

Modern quantum superposition tests (e.g., large molecules in interferometry)

The Case Against Reality | Prof. Donald Hoffman on Conscious Agent Theory

Video: In this extended interview we dive into: (1) the Interface Theory of Perception (how evolution hides the truth about reality in favor of a dumbed down "user interface" that only shows us "fitness payoffs" that help us survive), (2) the "Hard Problem of Consciousness" and how we simply have no idea how consciousness could emerge from physical matter, (3) the non-dual theory of Conscious Realism (how reality is really a social network of "conscious agents" and our perceptions are simply the interface by which we exchange experience with other agents), (4) the math behind conscious agent theory, (5) implications for artificial intelligence (AI), psychedelics, spirituality, and much, much more.

2022 Nobel Prize in Physics Confirming Quantum Entanglement

The 2022 Nobel Prize lureates' views on spacetime

Nobel Prize in Physics 2022

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 was awarded jointly to Alain Aspect, John F. Clauser and Anton Zeilinger "for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science"

Ref: Nobel Prize in Physics 2022
Ref: Proving that Quantum Entanglement is Real
Ref: “What If Physics IS NOT Describing Reality”

Anton Zeilinger has expressed views suggesting that information might be more fundamental than spacetime, that quantum information precedes spacetime — a view gaining traction in quantum gravity and foundational physics.

1. Quantum Entanglement and Non-Locality
    ∗ Zeilinger’s experiments (e.g., loophole-free Bell tests) demonstrated that entangled particles correlate instantaneously across large distances, violating classical notions of locality
    ∗ He argues that these correlations suggest quantum information (e.g., shared states) transcends spacetime constraints, hinting at a deeper informational structure.

2. Foundational Principle of Quantum Mechanics
    ∗ Influenced by Carlo Rovelli’s relational quantum mechanics, Zeilinger proposed that quantum states are defined by information between observers rather than absolute spacetime properties
    ∗ His 1999 paper "A Foundational Principle for Quantum Mechanics" posits that quantum phenomena emerge from information invariance under complementary measurements.

3. Spacetime as an Emergent Phenomenon
    ∗ In collaborations with quantum gravity researchers, Zeilinger has speculated that spacetime might arise from entanglement networks, akin to holographic or tensor-network models.
    ∗ This aligns with ideas like ER=EPR (entanglement ≈ wormholes), where spacetime geometry is encoded in quantum correlations.

4. Key Quotes
    ∗ "The universe is not locally real": Zeilinger’s Nobel-accepted conclusion rejects spacetime as an absolute stage.
    ∗ "Quantum correlations exist without spacetime mediation", implicit in his teleportation experiments (e.g., 1997).

Quantum Information Panpsychism Explained | Federico Faggin

Video: CPU inventor and physicist Federico Faggin, together with Prof. Giacomo Mauro D'Ariano, proposes that consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain, but a fundamental aspect of reality itself: quantum fields are conscious and have free will. In this theory, our physical body is a quantum-classical ‘machine,’ operated by free will decisions of quantum fields. Faggin calls the theory 'Quantum Information Panpsychism' (QIP) and claims that it can give us testable predictions in the near future. If the theory is correct, it not only will be the most accurate theory of consciousness, it will also solve mysteries around the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

[** Note: by classical Dr Faggin is referring to the 'outer' material world, where A-to-B spacial distance is experiencd, and all the laws of Newton (force and gravity) .. where the quantum world is the spaceless and timeless world of the atom and it's subatomic interactions, which don't obey Netwon's spacetime laws. So this is what he means where below he says (1) "conversion of information from classical to quantum" BY US the 'conscious agent' and (2) "The theory provides that a conscious agent may intentionally convert quantum information into a specific classical information to express its free will".

These are the scientists who are right now contributing to the math that will enable advanced stargates that operate by thought .. ie, thinking of the place then stargating there. Apparently we aleady have stargates of some sort in the DUMBS (deep underground military bases, ref: Emery Smith, circa 2018).]

Hard Problem and Free Will: an information-theoretical Approach (2021)
Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano and Federico Faggin

Summary of paper: We have presented a theory of consciousness, based on principles, assumptions, and key concepts that we consider crucial for the robustness of the theory and the removal of the limitations of most panpsychist theories. We believe that conferring inner reality and agency to quantum systems in pure quantum state, with conversion of information from classical to quantum and vice versa, is unprecedented, with major philosophical and scientific consequences. In the present approach free will and consciousness go hand in hand, allowing a system to act based on its qualia experience by converting quantum to classical information, and thus giving causal power to subjectivity–something that until now has been highly controversial, if not considered impossible.

The theory provides that a conscious agent may intentionally convert quantum information into a specific classical information to express its free will, a classical output that is in principle unpredictable due to its quantum origin. The theory would be incoherent without the identification of the conscious system in terms of purity and inseparability of the quantum state, which is identified with the systems experience. The purity of non-deterministic quantum evolution identifies consciousness with agency through its outcome.

Metaphysically the proposed interpretation that a pure, non-separable quantum state is a state of consciousness, could be turned on its head by assuming the ontology of consciousness and agency as primary, whereas physics is emergent from consciousness and agency. This same interpretation would then consider classical physics the full reification (objectification) of quantum reality as quantum-toclassical agency corresponding to the free will of conscious entities existing entirely in the quantum realm. The ontology deriving by the acceptance of consciousness as fundamental, would be that objectivity and classical physics supervene on quantum physics, quantum physics supervenes on quantum information, and quantum information supervenes on consciousness. If we were to accept this speculative view, physics could then be understood as describing an open-ended future not yet existing because the free will choices of the conscious agents have yet to be made. In this perspective, we, as conscious beings, are the co-creators of our physical world. We do so individually and collectively, instant after instant and without realizing it, by our free-will choices.

Default Section: Another Full Video

Sed consequat, leo eget bibendum sodales, augue velit cursus nunc, quis gravida magna mi a libero. Fusce vulputate eleifend sapien. Vestibulum purus quam, scelerisque ut, mollis sed, nonummy id, metus.