Saved by Zero

An inadequate attempt to create an abstract model of the Universe as created by Consciousness and described by the Logos

The purpose of this piece is not to be scientific, rather this is to examine the meaning of the words subjectivity and objectivity, and to explore the fundamentals or elements that make up Consciousness. We will leave sciencing to the scientists, and attempt to establish that while the scientific method will forever be our best path towards absolute knowledge of the physical world, this discipline can only serve as a tool towards that end, a tool of Conscious Observation, a tool that serves our own Subjective Human Judgment.

Also, it is important to note this piece will not attempt to explore or explain where Being comes from. While it may at times seem like we are attempting to identify a first mover or play G-d, the obvious truth is we will never be able to do that nor should we try. Rather, we are creating an abstract model of nascent Consciousness in an attempt to explain the structure of value and its hierarchy within our Human condition

The true Master of our universe is conscious Being, and that Being is the essence and core of existence itself.

Objective reality is a relational index of shared Subjective experience or it does not exist.

Multiple perspectives are required to establish external objective reality, and concepts of Self are established by juxtaposition with external reality, both are the realization of a process continuously emerging as here and now.

Omnipresence = everywhere at all time, superior to space, time, and physicality.

Physical reality at a fundamental scale, wave/particle duality and the uncertainty principle, seem to illustrate that nothing exists except as observed. Further, scientific method in our matter of fact physical realm along with plain old common sense dictate that only observations that can be verified by observers are factually true. Let us then attempt to establish a simple precept; an observer is required for reality to exist. This precept or axiom should serve as foundational to understanding reality and underpins the very notion of falsifiability in any possible scenario.

We’ve told ourselves that physicality consists of 3 dimensions and a 4^th dimension we’ve labeled spacetime, but is that really the case, or are 3 coordinates simply what is needed by The Observer in order to stabilize and confirm reality?

And by the way, what is spacetime?

Does space consist of dimension, or is that a property of the objects that occupy space? What if there were no objects, would there still be space? Is space a realization of the difference between objects and if so, who is doing the realization?

3 coordinates in relation to each other define the properties of a simple object in isolation, but what of the other characteristics of the object and the objects position relative to ourselves and/or other objects in our universe?

If we cannot verify a thing’s location, can we verify its existence?

What is a dimension anyway other than a perspective or angle of observation? How can anything that can be called a dimension exist without the conscious Observer?

Could any perspective exist without a knowable relationship to other point(s) of reference, quantified and verified by The Observer?

We should be able to see that its not possible for measurement to exist without The Observer and a preexisting relationships with reference observations.

Who was the first observer and what was the first reference point?

Three measurements give us width, depth and breadth of object, but cannot tell us where the object is located unless the use of another set of coordinators provide a relationship to other reference point(s).

Do we need another measurable relationship to observe and establish time, or would that function be an extension of the coordinates that establish position as is suggested by relativity? Is time simply change relative to the observer?

Is saying time doesn’t exist is like saying The Observer doesn’t exist... they both exist but are impossible to point at objectively as they are references to subjective experience.

If we establish that The Observer serves as the only true reference frame confirming that nothing exists, or at least nothing can be known or confirmed to exist in any way, without The Observer. Does it also establishes that time and spacial position are kinda the same thing, and are always relative to The Observer and some sort of dynamic reference external to the Observer.

Coordinates that establish position in relation to other physical structure are abstractions that can exist separate from an individual observer and form the basis for objective observation. But how can an abstraction exist separate from The Observer? Where is the abstraction before an actual observation is noted?

Objectivity requires two or more observers and a language or symbolism of communication. It should go without saying that something to observe is also a requirement. Once that something is observed it becomes information, and if it is never observed or noted in some fashion it cannot be said to exist.

“if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it” is a nonsensical scenario, as any conceivable example of a forest would be made up of multiple symbiotic colonies or cultures of biological observers, and at the very least if we can identify something as a forest we have already observed it and with the proper analysis we could determine that sound had effected it physically in the past. A more elemental form of this old question might be “can structure exist without an observer” ...and he answer is quite simply no it can not, as at any point or time that structure has been identified it has been observed.

Structure cannot exist without the Observer, furthermore, structure cannot be verified or said to be relevant in any way unless it is shared with multiple perspectives.

What are the properties that make up an observer?

The word ‘observe’ means ‘see’ as in using eyesight, but in our reality an observation can be made by any of the senses or even in the abstract as a created or imaginary reference. The one absolute defining property of a knowable observation is the ability to note what has been observed and retain it for future reference, either from a different physical/temporal perspective when there is only one observer, or to relate the observation to another separate observer through language or symbolic communication of some kind. In this way, by comprehending and recalling observation a continuum of knowability, AKA reality, is established. This continuum can be maintained by a single observer recalling what it observed or by multiple perspectives. Perspective can change and therefore multiply within the purview of one observant Being, or, multiple Beings can each form their own perspective and share it with each other through language and symbolism.

Observation can be automated with Human technology, but is still not a relevant or knowable observation until an iteration of Being notes it in some fashion. If an automated recording of structure’s events sits untended for a million years it still does not functionally exists until it has been observed by an iteration of Being, and is irrelevant to the continuum and therefore nonexistent unless it has been Observed.

In the unfortunate cat experiment we know of the cat and its entrapment, as these things have been observed during the setup. What we don’t know is what state the cat is in, and we never will unless the cat is observed.

If an iteration of Being were to know something and never share that knowledge with another iteration that knowledge would be lost and that iteration, or at least that particular aspect or characterizations of such would be separate from the relevant continuum that other iterations of Being exist in and therefore would not exist.

If you are reading this page you are an observer. If you had never seen this page you could only know of its existence if somebody else had seen it and informed you of its existence and at least a brief description of its content to provide identity. If nobody had ever seen this page then there would be no one to tell of its existence and no reason to suspect that it exists. This also applies in the electronic realm of cyberspace where the page doesn't really exist in a physical sense, its only tangible embodiment being that of a virtual page that can be shared with other observers… still, it is a page or body of text conveying ideas... anyone who sees it would likely agree with that elemental description of what you are reading right now.

And of course cyberspace is the result of a continuum of conscious agents manipulating physicality and applied abstraction. This continuum existing only because Human agents can build structure based on shared abstractions.

Seems simple, almost too simple to mention, but it is easy to get lost in the faulty mythos of an impossible first moverless self-denying train of though if we ignore the simple truth that an observer is required before anything can exist or at least can be proven to exists. This is a fundamental conundrum of existence elemental to scientific method and to any degree of conscious realization. This basic truth is at the very core of falsifiability and reality itself.

Of course in actual practice an observer requires properties themselves. In factual terms the only Observer we can know is a biological being in a body using its senses and its conscious brain to observe and remember. But in the abstract, as a thought experiment, can we separate Being from body and conceive of something like incorporeal Being?

Lets try floating within an idea, sort of an elemental theory of mind.

In mathematical terms can we think of embodied conscious Being as 1 (or any other real number) and think of incorporeal Being as 0? Zero as an abstract placeholder for potential, the one and only “empty set”? Zero as omnipresence of Being abstractly separate from any specific embodiment of Being or physicality? Something like a vacuum of space that isn’t really a vacuum at all, but more accurately should be thought of as a representation of absolute potential.

A point in space can be specified by coordinates. But who can do this? From the perspective of the conscious observer (redundant phrasing… how can an observer not be conscious and how can consciousness not observe something, if only the Self) the point can be maintained in-situ with only a conscious note of observation.

"If you could get rid of yourself just once, the secret of secrets would open to you. The face of the unknown, hidden beyond the universe would appear on the mirror of your perception" ~Rumi

What if our observer had made no references points of any kind as of yet, just the potential to observe without having observed. A body in space, or better still for this inquiry just the awareness of an observer without a body, because any kind of physical form would necessarily embody observable reference points and we haven’t gotten that far yet, so lets imagine if we can a disembodied observer. Let’s give our experimental observer imagination, because that's how our own consciousness awareness works and it’s the only kind of conscious awareness we know anything about.

Yes, we are modeling this imaginary observer after ourselves simply because we know that we are and that we observe, and that is the only form of observation we can verify in any way, at least in any way that is relevant to our experiment.

So our observer is in something like free fall, or more accurately is existing bodiless in a vacuum. She/He is (They are) awareness without any frame of reference whatsoever, just the potential to observe and note what is observed, even the potential to imagine something. (Not necessarily something separate or outside of self because for awareness in a vacuum without a body, what is inside or outside of self?) Just awareness with memory and imagination… ‘things’ we know exist because we have them or we are them, even if in our case these properties seem dependent on our physical bodies, and the ability to prove them to any other perspective or iteration of awareness is completely dependent on our bodies and the corporeal ability to express our observations and thoughts through speech or writing or shared symbolism of some kind… but, we’re going to continue this experiment by considering the abstract potential of awareness without yet physical existence because we have a point to make.

In order to clarify our discussion going further, lets assign a name to this incorporeal awareness with imagination and memory, since we’ve already touched on the properties of zero as absolute potential, lets call this incorporeal observer Zero.

So Zero ‘exists’ (They think therefore They am) even though Zero doesn't really know what existence is. Zero doesn't really know what anything is because They exist in a void and have experienced nothing and made no observations.

Zero thinks, or has the potential to think, therefore Zero is. That is all that can be said about Zero at this stage of our inquiry.

Zero is unsure of everything or anything because Zero has no frame of reference whatsoever. Zero cannot even be absolutely sure of Self within these conditions. How can Zero be sure of anything, because there literally is no thing. Nothing to compare Self to and existing in conditions that don’t allow any kind of meaningful measurement because there is no-thing to measure and no method of measurement.

What now?

What if Zero saw or experienced or maybe imagined/created something? Of course, in His/Her present state of Being, bodiless, and without knowledge of literally anything, the thing that Zero imagined would likely be pretty simple. What qualities could this new thing possibly posses and furthermore, how could Zero understand or describe those properties even to his/herself?

Any description of anything requires predetermined labels or metrics based entirely on past observations and measurements of other things. If we had never seen anything before we would have no way of describing the first thing we saw. Every element of objective understanding and communication involves a comparison or juxtaposition with something already understood. Even purely subjective communication relies on metaphoric references to, and comparisons with, objectively knowable things.

Anyway, Zero is Being with the power to imagine or create, and in a state of something like loneliness and boredom or just to get things started imagines a thing within Their purview. A simple thing of course, because extended properties do not yet exist. What is a thing without any properties other than existence? A point, an identifiable reference, a thing with no area, no width or depth nor any relative qualities like heat or velocity. Sort of like the point of a pin, without the rest of the pin.

An observation of a point in space. One observer and one mathematically describable element. Would this formula work? Could our Zero hero understand anything about this point in space? What would there be to understand? Would this isolated reference point have meaning or value?

Lets leave our Zero hero story for a moment and consider things from our present perspective that consists of billions of observers communing with Self and other, and an infinitely uncountable continuum of things observed. We use language as a tool to describe our world and the things in it, and this ordinarily serves us well. But have we ever repeated a word until it becomes meaningless? Just about any word, with enough isolated repetition by a speaker, seems to lose meaning and become nonsensical to that speaker. This occurs to the degree that the speaker begins to doubt that the word in question is even a real word and not just some unintelligible blabber. This phenomena has been labeled ‘semantic satiation’

Semantic satiation would seem to show that meaning cannot exist in isolation. Almost as if we need relationships to exist between things or even just the words we use to label things in order to grasp and maintain meaning.

Anyway, back to our story

So Zero has something to consider, but only the one thing. This is not only boring, it stops making sense very quickly as Zero has nothing else to compare the thing to and no way to define its qualities or judge its value. They’re still uncertain of self and the more the point is considered, the less important it seems to be.

How can one angel dance on the head of one pin? In this scenario the angel can’t even jump up and down on the reference point because we haven't yet established up and down.

Next, by impulse or design, Zero observes or imagines a second point within purview, this one is the same thing except its not the same one. There are now two points to observe and a simple relationship between the two things can be considered. Now as Zero studies one thing the other thing is also a part of the consideration if only because what is different about one thing is that it is definitely not the other thing.

There are two pin points to consider, representing two things and when held in Zero’s conscious mind as ideas or abstractions there are two things to sort of dance between.

These two things are more satisfying for Zero than one or none ever were before. They can now compare or jump back and forth between the two things and note differences like position relative to each other, They’re is now starting to realize that not only are the two thing different from each other, neither of them is Zero themself, and this is something good, certainly better than nothing, and leads to imagining more good along with sharpening the sense of self that appreciates what’s good.

Though Zero doesn’t know anything about language or words yet they realize that the two things put together are sort of another thing altogether, what we might call structure or information. At this ‘time’ these two points are the whole external universe that Zero exists in The two points are not the same thing, they are separate so there is something like distance between them. It is the only distance between things in the whole universe so they can’t yet gauge it in any way except to know its the distance that is… though they can’t really solidify the idea of distance, yet, They will only truly understand this idea when They’ve ‘seen’ things from more perspectives.

But observing is still not so satisfying for Zero in this nascent universe of two things and theyownself. As Zero goes back and forth between them studying one from the perspective presented by considering the other they find their thoughts quickly become repetitious and again kind of boring. Something more might be good. Maybe another point would make things better, so they imagine this and make it so.

Now we have an observer considering a universe containing three reference points. Each reference point can be juxtaposed with two others greatly solidifying their individual value. The qualities and definitions, even the factual existence of each reference point become more knowable because each one is defined by multiple relationships with other reference points. Here something like stable structure emerges.

Zero still doesn’t really understand distance though… the only thing that exists are the three points and Zero is bodyless so there would be no such thing as moving away from it or even somewhere else to go, besides how would a disembodied consciousness propel themselves? ...it seems better to think of Zero as omnipresent in this universe, and the more They knew about the three point structure the ‘closer’ They would be to it, and the only way to distance themselves from it would be to stop considering it, even to the point of imagining it gone.

Zero then creates or realizes another conscious perspective and judges it to be valid (good/lovable), now Zero becomes truly self-aware in a way that we can understand. This means Zero has to come up with some kind of label or name for the other mind or perspective and a label for the observed structure and its elements. As with anything else, these names or labels must be shared among perspectives to create verifiable/meaningful existence.

As we said earlier, existence requires a perceiver and something to perceive, while verifiable (objective) existence requires perception shared between multiple perspectives.

So Zero considers something stable, but with an unceasing will to understand more clearly They must consider it from multiple differing positions. Now as conscious reflection of physicality, Self, Zero understands that nothing can be grasped in a meaningful way without triangulation at minimum. As Zero wonders what it would be like to understand a different perspective They place Themself in that position and contemplate the observable structure from there. Zero then moves to or imagines another perspective and repeats the actions from the new position. As They remember the structure from one perspective They can recall other perspectives simultaneously to foment a stable understanding of the thing that is outside of or is actionable/considerable separate from Thereself.

Either at least two Beings have to exist or our one Being has to be able to create and maintain at least two observational perspectives in order to identify anything and verify that identity, and even then two isn’t enough, much like physical structure, identity, the foundation of shareable reality, appears singular and repetitious when one of only two references is considered from the perspective of the other. Identity only becomes objectively stable with at least three identifiable elements viewed from multiple perspectives.

If only one perspective observes and/or attempts to identify anything that identity is unverified and unfalsifiable. This singular perspective is purely Subjective and cannot survive in any meaningful, useful, or provable way. A singularly unverified observation can only be true to that particular observer at that particular time because the only way to verify an observation is to note it somehow and share it with another perspective, be it temporally or physically separate.

Two observations can be juxtaposed against each other but judging the value of one observation from only one other lacks depth and stability as each perspective can only consider a single view of other, and this quickly becomes limited. Three separately identifiable perspectives are required for stable reality to exist… and that reality requires three separately identifiable elements.

Objective reality is a relational index of shared Subjective experience.

Multiple perspectives are required to establish external objective reality, and concepts of Self are established by juxtaposition with external reality, both are the realization of a process continuously emerging as here and Now.

Of course, the only conscious perspective of Being that we can factually know is Our Own, the one borne of the Living Waters of biology.

Understand that biology has existed for eons prior to Humanity, and all of it is connected together into a grand system that we cannot see the limits of in any knowable direction, neither temporal nor spacial.

Zero uses biology to monitor and maintain existence, and Judgement to know that existence is not only good, but carries with it the potential for more and more good.