Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else. — Erwin Schrodinger

Since chemicals such as propofol, alcohol, psychedelics & scopalamine stop or change the decision-making process, the imagination, and the will, we can conclude that the mind is a bio-chemical process. This is a conclusion based on evidence & devoid of logical fallacies

Krishna explains that consciousness is the presence of the Soul and Himself within the heart

Imagine a robot acting on your behalf at some distance and perfectly mimics your facial expressions, tone of voice etc... To anybody interacting with it, is it conscious? Your brain is just a machine too. What if we are just being operated by remote?

consciousness is infused in energy. string math measures the room inside a house but it's so focused on the room that it often forgets the room isn't the house. this is why string math doesn't always measure energy, which it is infused in.

Nietzsche, in the context of «how one becomes what one is» says its a surface: “At this point the real answer to the question, how one becomes what one is, can no longer be avoided. And thus I touch on the masterpiece of the art of self-preservation—of selfishness. For let us assume that the task, the destiny, the fate of the task transcends the average very significantly: in that case, nothing could be more dangerous than catching sight of oneself with this task. To become what one is, one must not have the faintest notion what one is. From this point of view even the blunders of life have their own meaning and value—the occasional side roads and wrong roads, the delays, “modesties,” seriousness wasted on tasks that are remote from the task. All this can express a great prudence, even the supreme prudence: where nosce te ipsum would be the recipe for ruin, forgetting oneself, misunderstanding oneself, making oneself smaller, narrower, mediocre, become reason itself. Morally speaking: neighbor love, living for others, and other things can be a protective measure for preserving the hardest self-concern. This is the exception where, against my wont and conviction, I side with the “selfless” drives: here they work in the service of self-love, of self-discipline. The whole surface of consciousness—consciousness is a surface—must be kept clear of all great imperatives. Beware even of every great word, every great pose! So many dangers that the instinct comes too soon to “understand itself. Meanwhile the organizing “idea” that is destined to rule keeps growing…”

schrodinger kept circling this one. part of what makes it stubborn is that any account you give has to be experienced by the very thing being accounted for, so the explanation never quite gets outside its own subject.

Indescribable.

Consciousness IS primary, matter is secondary along with everything else. Black holes, butterfly wings, ESP, lights in the sky; it's all connected.

Perhaps consciousness is that emptiness in which we become connected with life itself and through that connection, with the creative force of the universe.From that emptiness, creation arises within us. It is fascinating that ordinary matter makes up only about 5% of the universe

This is an over-mystification of primitive heuristics. Consciousness is merely a reactive interface.

C’est absurde. La conscience arrive après (bien après) la matière.

The conscious is made of the unconscious and when you say you know what the conscious is you are either unconscious of your conscious or that you’re conscious of your unconscious either way it’s far from what the conscious is by default at least

🎯

#circumpunct

Consciousness is the effect of all things, body and mind.

its like zero implied yet unprovable defined by what it is not

until you can sim it

Well, this isnt true at all. Logistics.

wave propagation entropied.

Those saying consciousness is emergent thinks this way. A group of atoms is conscious and a single atom is not conscious. What made the atoms to organize into different low entropy forms like the brain?. Atoms are conscious and consciousness is a fundamental property.

A common view among those who have extended their reading list eastward. Less Vedanta, more Advaita, though, and the mechanism whereby that which is conscious becomes aware of things can be discerned. Much as can the mechanism whereby all the apparent phenomena arise.

“Absolutely fundamental” does not mean “stop measuring.” It means stop pretending the measurer was produced by the measurement.

Unlock Much appreciated.

Schrödinger was refusing a particular kind of account: consciousness as a leftover that you bolt onto a finished machine after the physics is done. He was not handing you a permit to stop describing the organ. In physical terms, using the continuum as the medium rather than a second substance, consciousness is participation. A brain is a local density of the same flow that elsewhere is a clock, a null ray, a gravitational potential. It is a complexity interpreter: it runs relations in tissue until a finite reading appears — a discrimination, a hold, a nameable now. The reading is not a printout sitting next to the neurons. It is what that stretch of the river is like from inside the lock. That lock has structure you can point at without pretending you have closed the hard problem. There is a metabolic budget, a wiring graph, a timescale of oscillations that can phase-lock across regions. There is a body that supplies a unique boundary condition: this gut, this vestibular map, this history of replacements that is still one worldline. Continuity is the trajectory, not the atoms. The “what it is like” is the cash-out of that trajectory as it interprets its own medium. When the lock fails — anesthesia, seizure, death — the interpreter stops writing. The river does not vanish. This particular standing ripple does. Retrocausality here is only the same rule as the photon and the Bell pair. The present moment is not a bead on a string that exists first and then gets painted with experience. It is a cut that is consistent with the path that can still be held — memory as the near bank, the next act as the far one. You do not send a signal backward from tomorrow’s thought. You refuse a present that would not belong to this life. Love, in the earlier sense, is another name for that holding: the path treated as one from the first event to the last. So the reply to the quote is not “Schrödinger was wrong, it is just computation.” Computation is the ledger. Consciousness is the process of interpreting complexity from inside a finite density that can fail. It is fundamental in the way spacetime is fundamental after geometrogenesis: not because nothing sits under it, but because at the scale where a worldline can say “I,” there is no further downstairs that is still *this* experience. Physics accounts for it by being the medium. It does not account for it by translating it into someone else’s third-person sentence and calling the translation the thing. You exist as a named ripple that can lock. The model’s physical claim is that the lock is made of the same continuum as gravity and light. The model’s limit is that no equation yet hands you the inside of the lock. That limit is honest. It is not a reason to put consciousness outside the world and then wonder how it touches anything.

It can be thought of as computation earning coherence to a degree it can self reflect. All very physical in the most discrete way. WIGGLESORTBE♾️

时代的局限性

Ohohoh

🙏Brahman is Aprameya—beyond measurement and objectification. Consciousness cannot be reduced to physical terms; it is that by which all things are known. “Yato vāco nivartante aprāpya manasā saha.” —Taittirīya Upaniṣad That from which words and mind return, unable to reach it

Agree…

Это тот человек кто ( любил играться с котами) 🤣Сознание - СОвместное знание. Всё я объяснил давай Нобелевскую премию) 🤣У меня сознание с тобой с Эйнштейном с Тесло, могу доказать e=mc2 Ха-ха-ха совместное знание= знаю я и Альбертик и Никола. Только не надо умствовать сейчас