Interesting development — a field-theoretic model of consciousness is a useful metaphor and aligns directionally with what My Big TOE describes: Consciousness (the Larger Consciousness System) is the fundamental 'stuff,' while the 'physical' universe is a rule-based virtual data stream rendered for individuated units of consciousness.
For me real question isn't whether the math is correct yet — it's whether this model helps you lower your entropy more effectively than materialism does. Test it subjectively: Does treating consciousness as primary change your intent, attention, and love in daily experience? If it measurably reduces fear/ego and increases compassion/connectedness, you're moving toward truth — regardless of what the journals eventually decide.
I guess the proof is in the pudding of ones own consciousness evolution, not in consensus physics
I love that thought. It is right in line with the crux of my work now…. What story are you telling and is that story useful or not for you and others. At the very least it should be useful for you and not harmful to others …. But ideally it is useful to both. And utility to me is does the way you perceive and operate in the world bring more connection, creativity and community? Does it bring more fulfillment. Does it bring more love or less. All the rest… is just exploration
Nice one. This paper's basically the physics crowd inching toward what MBT nailed years ago: consciousness (the Larger Consciousness System) is fundamental; matter's just a virtual render inside it.
No emergence magic needed—brains are like localized avatars processing data-streams from the field. Flip the script from "matter makes mind" to "mind makes matter," and suddenly a lot clicks.
But theory's only the map. The real game is your intent: choose low-entropy (love, openness, cooperation) daily, and you evolve your own IUOC. No waiting for more papers—experiment on yourself. Materialism's cracking; keep lowering entropy. That's the evolution that counts.
Over the years I have found that the western mindset has an extreme aversion to this idea. It is simply not digestible to those that will accept nothing less than the dominate materialist paradigm.
And just read this… some goes over my head but right or wrong this is the philosophy I have come to intuit as must accurate. I have come to be most interested in the ideas of Faggin, Kastrup and other “philosopher physicists” … your stuff seems to echo a lot of that… but again psychology & philosophy are the areas I have far more command over not physics
Of course. For me I am a student first and a teacher second. Physics is out of my league… but I learn by just jumping in the waters. I am always appreciative of those who want to help me and correct me. You pointed out a pretty egregious mistake so of course there is gratitude for that. I try to operate under the assumption that everything we think we know could be wrong. But I sincerely thank you for the correction… it’s important. I enjoy your content very much… and yes I am aware many would take issue with your material as well. But in this case it was blatantly wrong. How could I not feel appreciation for that? I also updated the note and article based on your feedback. 🙏🏽
I am a Naturopathic Physician licensed as a primary care doc in California and Washington state. My degrees prior to that were biochemistry and psychology. My main background is in endocrinology. Although 10 years ago I shifted focus into education becoming a CEU provider in functional medicine and last few years began work on a PHD in transpersonal psychology.
Interesting development — a field-theoretic model of consciousness is a useful metaphor and aligns directionally with what My Big TOE describes: Consciousness (the Larger Consciousness System) is the fundamental 'stuff,' while the 'physical' universe is a rule-based virtual data stream rendered for individuated units of consciousness.
For me real question isn't whether the math is correct yet — it's whether this model helps you lower your entropy more effectively than materialism does. Test it subjectively: Does treating consciousness as primary change your intent, attention, and love in daily experience? If it measurably reduces fear/ego and increases compassion/connectedness, you're moving toward truth — regardless of what the journals eventually decide.
I guess the proof is in the pudding of ones own consciousness evolution, not in consensus physics
I love that thought. It is right in line with the crux of my work now…. What story are you telling and is that story useful or not for you and others. At the very least it should be useful for you and not harmful to others …. But ideally it is useful to both. And utility to me is does the way you perceive and operate in the world bring more connection, creativity and community? Does it bring more fulfillment. Does it bring more love or less. All the rest… is just exploration
Nice one. This paper's basically the physics crowd inching toward what MBT nailed years ago: consciousness (the Larger Consciousness System) is fundamental; matter's just a virtual render inside it.
No emergence magic needed—brains are like localized avatars processing data-streams from the field. Flip the script from "matter makes mind" to "mind makes matter," and suddenly a lot clicks.
But theory's only the map. The real game is your intent: choose low-entropy (love, openness, cooperation) daily, and you evolve your own IUOC. No waiting for more papers—experiment on yourself. Materialism's cracking; keep lowering entropy. That's the evolution that counts.
Over the years I have found that the western mindset has an extreme aversion to this idea. It is simply not digestible to those that will accept nothing less than the dominate materialist paradigm.
Did you read this paper? You disagree?
And just read this… some goes over my head but right or wrong this is the philosophy I have come to intuit as must accurate. I have come to be most interested in the ideas of Faggin, Kastrup and other “philosopher physicists” … your stuff seems to echo a lot of that… but again psychology & philosophy are the areas I have far more command over not physics
Of course. For me I am a student first and a teacher second. Physics is out of my league… but I learn by just jumping in the waters. I am always appreciative of those who want to help me and correct me. You pointed out a pretty egregious mistake so of course there is gratitude for that. I try to operate under the assumption that everything we think we know could be wrong. But I sincerely thank you for the correction… it’s important. I enjoy your content very much… and yes I am aware many would take issue with your material as well. But in this case it was blatantly wrong. How could I not feel appreciation for that? I also updated the note and article based on your feedback. 🙏🏽
I am a Naturopathic Physician licensed as a primary care doc in California and Washington state. My degrees prior to that were biochemistry and psychology. My main background is in endocrinology. Although 10 years ago I shifted focus into education becoming a CEU provider in functional medicine and last few years began work on a PHD in transpersonal psychology.
More on me here: https://www.jadeteta.com/jade-teta-about?
And you?