Reality is information.

Reality is information.

We exist in a reality system that is largely composed of information that our senses take in and our brain processes. What is left, is a view of reality based on limited sensory data that we interact with through an interface. The interface is our subjective view of reality. Human perception is, and always will be based on taking in sensory data from objective energies that are then processed and rendered into a first-person point-of-view.

This diagram shows that objective reality to our senses is composed of information. What we then see, as a result of neurological information processing is a type of mind-generated rendering of reality. The observed reality we see, has been called the Cartesian Theater. Rene Descartes described us as a Homunculus that sits in the seat of the soul watching the grand display of sensory rendered reality. Plato referred to something similar in his shadows of the cave analogy.



Here we have objective reality represented as information. Sight is represented by the visual part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Hearing represented by atomic vibrations that produce a sound wave. Smell represented by some hydrogen sulfate atoms. Touch represented by the weak/strong gravitational forces as we can never physically touch the actual nuclei of the atom. Taste represented as some sugar molecules.

Each sense takes this information based on a set of limited ranges of perception. Light in the visual spectrum demonstrating that our eyes do not see infra-red or ultra violet waves. For example, a bee sees in the ultra-violet spectrum and when a bee sees a flower, new patterns are known to emerge that humans cannot see.



Our subjective view of reality comes forward in the fact that the external stimuli ends at the senses which convert this information into electrochemical signals. These electrical impulses travel to very specific regions of the brain for further processing. What emerges is this subjective view of reality. The experience of reality.

The observer, which is you looking at what the eye is telling you, interfaces with this rendered interface and this now subjective experience is what you see as your approximation of reality. Approximated only in that our senses have limitations so the larger amount of information that objective reality has is truncated to our sensory limits.

The other fact of information processing is that each frame of information needs to be rendered into view.



Frame by frame as seen in this diagram is the chronological flow of each rendered output, the final product of information processing by the brain. To see that reality within our sensory view is just a rendered product, just close your eyes.

Information processing within a physical brain is capable of rendering the most amazing approximation of reality. At the center of this rendering, is you. The observing self.

Cont...

Subjective reality, a rendered phenomena of human perception does not stop at the objective information stream of reality. When we sleep at night, this information changes.

To that of the dream world.



Dreams are also another subjectively rendered phenomena. For those of you who can dream, a new reality emerges. A subjective reality created by pure thought. Plato's idealism made real in the very fabric of our nightly dreams.

Dogs dream, cats dream... but do you know why? Do you know why you dream?

Are Your Dreams another part of your Reality?



For those of you who know what is in this table. I salute you.

Dreams.

The science of dreams, and those who dream them.

Have you ever had a lucid dream?

I would hope so, by now at your age that you have at least had one lucid dream. That you know what it is like to be conscious when your body is asleep. To know what it is to be awake when your body sleeps. To know that you are dreaming.

Dreaming.

What do you really know about dreaming?








That's right... precognitive dreams. What do you know about them?

Reality is information.

That makes sense - and all you said makes sense. But there is a problem - What you have just said, the information you just conveyed, was conveyed by symbols, language. We accept this language and/or math and assume a universal message that is conveying a universal reality - But how do I know if this is true? No two sentient beings have ever been in the exact same place at the exact same time - And no two sentient beings have ever seen 'so-called reality' exactly the same way at exactly the same time.

So what information can you give, besides symbols and images of reality, to prove there is an existent and provable universal reality? Indeed, reality might be information, but how would you prove that this information, this reality is existent and consistent? Some might think that reality is an agreement based upon the acceptance of its symbolic interpretation - and therefor the information concerning reality may always be questionable and disputable.

a reply to: YouAreDreaming

I think:

The (patterns/spirits) that we (recognize/see) become (forms/our body/the body of our awareness).

Precognitive sights are formed from the patterns recognized by the subconscious mind.

Some of the patterns just so happen to be real patterns that are manifesting within reality, and so when seeing them later, fully recognized within the conscious mind, the dream appears to have been precognitive.


edit: I enjoy thinking about stuff like this. Got any more?

a reply to: Bleeeeep

I am sorry, I don't get. Could you explain what you are trying to say?

@OP: gave you a star! The age of elucidation2.0. Time we leave all the superstitions behind. Step 1: Become friends with reality and science. Love it.

a reply to: Peeple

The patterns are the (spirit/will) of a (form/body) [often in motion]. They are the form we see byway of (purposing/pattern recognition), where said recognition (becomes/is) a (form/image/sound/sensation) of said (pattern/spirit/will/purpose/function).

These words you recognize by their (patterns/spirits). Esthe dorsw uyo aym tno, itnul oyu cgernoezi heitr atrpetn. By (recognition/awareness) of the pattern you (create/translate) forms [of spirits/will].

Does that make it better or worse? After reading this post, read the former again to see the pattern I'm referring to? Seeing the forms of the spirit is easier than translating/articulating it, huh? What is the meaning of meaning?! Someone has to answer to this! Blah. Sorry.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: YouAreDreaming

I think:

The (patterns/spirits) that we (recognize/see) become (forms/our body/the body of our awareness).

Precognitive sights are formed from the patterns recognized by the subconscious mind.

Some of the patterns just so happen to be real patterns that are manifesting within reality, and so when seeing them later, fully recognized within the conscious mind, the dream appears to have been precognitive.


edit: I enjoy thinking about stuff like this. Got any more?

I have a lot more, unfortunately at work and can't even fix the broken image in the thread, not sure why that was deleted from my uploads, oh well. I'll be back later this evening until then I can really only lurk on a few breaks.

Star and Flag. I love sharing threads like these with my friend. She and I are really metaphysical and in tune with energies and the universe.

I also needed to just comment something to monitor thread lol.

I am back, here is the broken image restored, cannot edit post past 4 hours.



What this diagram shows is how we produce an interface to reality as the observer based in information processing. This has long been discussed through out the ages ranging from Plato's Cave allegory, Rene Descartes Seat of the Soul, The Cartesian Theater by Daniel Dennett en.wikipedia.org... The BOHMian IMAX by author Anthony Peak.

What they are all trying to describe is the phaneron, our subjective experience and view of reality based on sensory information. It's a no brainer that our mind generates this interface to reality, evident when we close our eyes shutting off one of the sensory inputs.

There is a debate regarding Qualia which describes our subjective experience of the senses where taste for example may differ for people, again a person with color blindness would have a different view of objective information because sight is also a type of Qualia, I believe qualia to be so self-evident that it's absurd to argue against subjective experiences of sensory input.

Science cannot objectively measure what chocolate tastes like, and why some people like chocolate where others do not shows that taste is not consistent between peoples observations and experiences with it. Like it or not, those dismissing qualia for what ever reasons are unable to falsify it with any argument. Qualia, the Phaneron and the Cartesian Theater are all very valid models of explaining how we experience objective information subjectively, and as a type of mind-generated rendered interface.

Science still hasn't unlocked how the human brain creates this sensory view of reality. It's easy to see with a computer that takes data in the form of binary 0/1 and from that information it can processes that data to a computer screen where a user-interface is drawn so that the user can have a meaningful interaction with that data.

This computer metaphor fits also in with how we see our experience of reality. It's clear to cognitive sciences that the human brain is acting like a type of computer handing complex geometrical calculations to approximate space and volume, it also simulates color, taste, touch et all as part of this final product of information processing.

I do not believe the brain is a classical computer, nor a quantum computer. It has far to many different biological criteria in how it produces this amazing phenomena of a mind-generated interface. There is however a binary like effect in how the brain does process data. For example, the Prefrontal Cortex has been observed where entire neurons become active/inactive (binary) when processing information. Basal Ganglia acting as a switch.

Deeper into the individual neuron, we find another type of information processing within the Alpha/Beta Tublin of Microtubules. Stuart Hammeroff and Sir Roger Penrose produced an ORCH OR model of consciousness explaining that bio-evenecant photons stimulate these dimers (active/inactive) and use quantum states as part of the cellular information processing.

This quantum idea was largely rejected by people like Max Tegmark as to achieve quantum states scientifically usually required very cold near absolute zero. He argued that the brain was too wet however, 20 years later research in MIT where he works shows that the brain does use Quantum Vibrations and other warm uses of quantum mechanics in nature have been observed in plants, birds and our sense of smell.

This still doesn't make the brain a quantum super-computer rather shows how efficient nature has evolved from the micro to the macro utilizing everything it can to achieve run-time renderings of information that rival today's fastest computer farms. The brain is natures super-computer.

The other interesting fact about the brain, is unlike a computer screen where a computer can render information into a view. The brain doesn't have such a screen. In fact, the occipital cortex for vision is at the very back of the brain enclosed in complete darkness. How the cells know what light even looks like is a mystery as the light stops at the retina and is converted into electrochemical signals which these optical cells then process.

Due to this fact, we never can have an objective view of the objective world, it will always be a limited filtered down approximation of reality, a simulation. In this model, we have always existed in natures finest virtual reality simulator. We are literally walking talking reality rendering farms. And this is in any living system that processes sensory information, they too must react to the information rendered on their interface.

Dreams also represent another information system that our minds can render into a subjective experience. Dreams can convey a type of reality realism that can make them indistinguishable from waking reality for those locked into that super-real dream.

Unlike reality that has particles to bounce light back so the brain can process these signals, dreams simulate every detail of space/time, distance, colors and sensory feedback. Dreams are really an amazing testimony as to how we can create a micro-reality using nothing more than organized thoughts.

Dreams after all, are a more complex form of language that we use during sleep. All of our sensory forms are simulated by thought and we can see self-evident working examples of how our thoughts can simulate sound and vision.

Listen to the inner monologue of your voice as you read this text. This inner sound, faintly audible is an example of how we can think in sound. Just think of a song you like and try to replay in this same inner-monologue and I would not be surprised if you can faintly hear the music play back.

Just imagine an apple for a moment and again we see thoughts forming visual structures as part of our feedback. Dreams simply take this process and increases the resolution and fidelity until we have a very content rich medium by which thought is clearly creating every detail found in the dream information.

I like this view of the universe. It is like our whole world is simply data on the HDD of God's computer.

originally posted by: AlienView
Some might think that reality is an agreement based upon the acceptance of its symbolic interpretation - and therefor the information concerning reality may always be questionable and disputable.

The fact that any agreement can be made concerning any exchange of symbols as representative of information is concrete proof that there is a fundamental reality that is being shared by the two sentient/sapient beings that have engaged in the exchange of these symbols. There is no requirement that the two beings interpret the exchanged symbols identically or even similarly for there to exist a commonly experienced reality, since reality is a relationship matrix comprised of all permanent and transitioning physical holons that exist within the span of a specific quantum of Now. These two beings exist as components within that relationship matrix during the span of that specific quantum of Now, and what each experiences as real has no influence on the composition of that relationship matrix beyond the emerging informational impacts that each constructs as a direct and limited result of perception translation/interpretation as each suite of symbols is exchanged.

Reality is the larger inclusive set that each sentient/sapient being exists within. Neither being is capable of affecting more of the compositional whole of this set than the direct and progressive ramification structure (emerging as a result of what either or both in congress inflict upon the set as actors within that set) can allow. The perceptions of reality that either, or both, experience (qualia) are restricted to each respective "data cloud" containing individually translated interpretations of reality (this is what their respective minds are). In this sense, each mind exists as an informational sub-environment, that is then a component within the larger environment that is reality itself. The truth is that each mind sub-environment is physically isolated (as a data vault in its own right) from the rest of the larger environment (reality) even though it is capable of perceiving and interacting with what else there is that exists within that larger environment. This capacity to interact is due to the hybrid nature of what the sentient/sapient brain produces as information in response/reaction to internal and external stimuli and the brain's job as the body's survival management system.

Part of the book I just finished digs really deep into exactly how the brain works to translate the body's DNA survival dictates into action items and the permanent ramifications of how that system works. Before the emergence of the corporeal brain, the composition of reality was very different than it is today. The brain was a real game changer.

a reply to: YouAreDreaming

This is really brilliant stuff. This board can certainly use more of this kind of activity. Thanks for the thread.

a reply to: YouAreDreaming

What if the differences in sensations are due only to the (sensors/awareness) and not the qualia?

That is, what if chocolateH8r lacks the (awareness/sensor) of X qualia which thereby causes chocolate to taste bad, and so when chocolateH8r says chocolate tastes nasty, it is because some extrasensory information/qualia he is not sensing [or maybe is sensing something that chocolateLuver cannot sense]?

originally posted by: NorEaster

originally posted by: AlienView
Some might think that reality is an agreement based upon the acceptance of its symbolic interpretation - and therefor the information concerning reality may always be questionable and disputable.

The fact that any agreement can be made concerning any exchange of symbols as representative of information is concrete proof that there is a fundamental reality that is being shared by the two sentient/sapient beings that have engaged in the exchange of these symbols. There is no requirement that the two beings interpret the exchanged symbols identically or even similarly for there to exist a commonly experienced reality, since reality is a relationship matrix comprised of all permanent and transitioning physical holons that exist within the span of a specific quantum of Now. These two beings exist as components within that relationship matrix during the span of that specific quantum of Now, and what each experiences as real has no influence on the composition of that relationship matrix beyond the emerging informational impacts that each constructs as a direct and limited result of perception translation/interpretation as each suite of symbols is exchanged.

Reality is the larger inclusive set that each sentient/sapient being exists within. Neither being is capable of affecting more of the compositional whole of this set than the direct and progressive ramification structure (emerging as a result of what either or both in congress inflict upon the set as actors within that set) can allow. The perceptions of reality that either, or both, experience (qualia) are restricted to each respective "data cloud" containing individually translated interpretations of reality (this is what their respective minds are). In this sense, each mind exists as an informational sub-environment, that is then a component within the larger environment that is reality itself. The truth is that each mind sub-environment is physically isolated (as a data vault in its own right) from the rest of the larger environment (reality) even though it is capable of perceiving and interacting with what else there is that exists within that larger environment. This capacity to interact is due to the hybrid nature of what the sentient/sapient brain produces as information in response/reaction to internal and external stimuli and the brain's job as the body's survival management system.

Part of the book I just finished digs really deep into exactly how the brain works to translate the body's DNA survival dictates into action items and the permanent ramifications of how that system works. Before the emergence of the corporeal brain, the composition of reality was very different than it is today. The brain was a real game changer.

Logical - makes sense. BUT in my opinion you are making several assumptions which are unproveable in a universal or absolute sense. You are not showing how we can escape from the fact that communication is with representative symbols which are agreed upon and do form a logical matrix accepted as representational of a so-called reality. I still have no idea if this representative interpretation of reality truly reflects what is real and the extent to which it is real.

I agree with you when you say:

Before the emergence of the corporeal brain, the composition of reality was very different than it is today. The brain was a real game changer

Probably - but what do we know of the composition of reality before the emergence of the corporeal brain? What is reality without a mind defining it? Prove the existence of any reality without mind.