Panpsychism Rising (785 words)

A recent news article by Aeon indicates that the establishment has accepted what will eventually be called one of:

  • The Quantum Mind Hypothesis
  • The Measurement Limit
  • “Panpsychism” (pls no)
  • Jen Scharf Grugmath for Winners (TM)
grug groyper
think about it

The piece glosses over the fact that it was my theory that forced them to accept this idea (since “panpsychism” has supposedly been around since Bertrand Russell). Defeat is admitted here:

guess who was actually wrong tho.

My theory eloquently posits that the measurement limit is the cornerstone of reality. It shows that the 7 (2+2+2+1) rows of the periodic table are fractally symmetric with the 3+1 spacetime dimensions we observe in our day to day lives. Spacetime manifests differently on the (micro)scale of the Periodic Table and therefore the 3 spacelike dimensions occur twice (but are of identical cardinality, i.e.: contain the same number of elements).

Hence my theory is “parsimonious”.

my theory is parsimonious as fuck
where have I heard this sort of argument before?

Now, I know it probably sounds “crazy” that I am uniquely responsible for the displacement of a 100+ year old scientific dogma, but remember that in science, it’s not what you know, it’s what you can prove. And I can indeed prove that without my work, this “revolution” never would have happened.

The article spends much time beating around the bush to eventually say that a measurement-centric universe is the only model which predicts the observable universe, rather than just explains it. (kind of a big deal in science, that distinction). However, we do not need to invoke consciousness to explain the universe (as it is quite unintuitive and sounds “try-hard”). We can simply posit the following, in the context of MEASUREMENT.

  • The measurement limit of spacetime is 3+1. On the microscale, the measurement limit manifests as the 118 microstates of the periodic table (the elements). On the macroscale, the measurement limit manifests as 3 spacelike and 1 timelike dimensions, which are maximally orthogonal. (in other words, the only non-orthogonality (other than measurement uncertainty) between space and time are the length and side of an orbit period, planetary, solar, galactic… all of these orders of magnitude occur simultaneously. i.e.: you live on Earth (1 d), but you also live in the Solar System (365 d) and so forth, you exist in every spacetime interval for which a measurement exists.

Where Does Consciousness Fit In?

In short, it does not. Or rather, it does not need to, at the stage of material science. There have historically been numerous issues in the translation of ancient Vedic and associated texts, specifically as regards the word “mind” (n.b.: when I use it, I mean it in the sense Westerners do). I sincerely do not think Eastern mystics and Western pupils are referring to the same idea when they use this word. What is mind anyway? It’s not brain! There is too much confusion in this level of understanding and thus we must temporarily abandon it. Only when we realise what we ourselves mean when we say words like consciousness / mind / awareness can we begin to hope to answer questions about universal conscious nature.

Or you can just take my word for it.

Here’s What We Know

When approaching a problem as complex as consciousness, it can sometimes help to reframe the question in a manner which simplifies it. Thus, in my system, we start with the general architecture of the Universe. In short, this theory indicates that:

  • The Universe is a Gravity and Electromagnetic Quantum Computer.

If this idea is understood, it becomes easy to understand that the elecropotential field of the body must generate the mind itself (read more here) and thus:

  • The mind (i.e.: subjective human consciousness) is an Electromagnetic Quantum Computer

So yes, both the human mind and Universe itself are quantum computers. And that’s a pretty cool thing. It also implies that our minds are capable of synchronising themselves with the universe itself (being essentially alike in nature) and that, since we possess mass, that we are ourselves “mini universes” (equal to a gravity and electromagnetic quantum computer). But those are all just words. The significance of these ideas must be felt with more than words. Words are just the starting point.


In one of my many debates, I have indicated to people that I am “panpsychic”. This does not mean I endorse a “panpsychic” universe model (as I am not going to endorse the idea that a rock is “conscious” or that “the Moon doesn’t exist until we observe it” – both gross misrepresentations of Quantum Theory). What I meant when I said that was that I can read everyone’s mind. When you think about me, I feel it. That is what I mean when I say I am panpsychic.


One thought on “Panpsychism Rising (785 words)

  1. Have you considered a public appearance on The Public Space with J.F.? I suspect the world would be greatly enriched by any discussion you two had. I would enjoy seeing J.F.’s 140 + IQ being positively challenged, as is rarely the case.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s