Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American


How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help


Thomas Ray: "(reposted in correct thread) Lorraine, Nah. That's nothing like my view...." in 2015 in Review: New...

Lorraine Ford: "Clearly “law-of-nature” relationships and associated numbers represent..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Information Channel. An example from Jon Barwise. At the workshop..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Please clarify. I just tried to put a simple model of an observer in the..." in Alternative Models of...

Lee Bloomquist: "Footnote...for the above post, the one with the equation existence =..." in Alternative Models of...

Thomas Ray: "In fact, symmetry is the most pervasive physical principle that exists. ..." in “Spookiness”...

Thomas Ray: "It's easy to get wound around the axle with black hole thermodynamics,..." in “Spookiness”...

Joe Fisher: "It seems to have escaped Wolpert’s somewhat limited attention that no two..." in Inferring the Limits on...

click titles to read articles

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

January 23, 2018

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: THE PURPOSE OF LIFE by Wilhelmus de de WILDE [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 21:18 GMT
Essay Abstract

All the information of the past is perceived and identified as past facts that can help us to predict the future. Both past and future are emergent phenomena. We argue that the life-line from an observer is only one of an infinity of availabilities in a time and space-less Hilbert Space that we call Total Simultaneity (TS). The specific emergent life-line we are experiencing is the result of a by time and space constrained form of consciousness, entangled with Total Consciousness (TC) in TS. Both Time and space are models that emerge from consciousness. TS is a set of an infinity of probabilities/availabilities called Eternal NOW Moments (ENM), comparable to singularities. Our experience of time (and so of our life-line) is essentially “happening”as an emerging singularity of time out of TS. We argue that the “thinking” of consciousness about ideas happening in the emergent NOW , reveals in TS the probability of these ideas. Emergent life discloses the choices of free will at any ENM in TS. Better understanding the real nature of TS will bring us closer to the awareness that the specific emergent life line we experience NOW is only a minuscule part of the endless set representing the Total YOU in TS.

Author Bio

Independent researcher. Alumnus Technical University of DELFT.

Download Essay PDF File

William Walker wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 22:54 GMT
I kind of skimmed it... but the stuff I was getting was brilliant!

Well done!

Good luck in the contest ;)

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 14:34 GMT
Thank you very much William for your encouraging words.

Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 13:10 GMT

Brilliant stuff, full of wise and pertinent analysis excellently argued and written. I particularly thank you for the Heraclites quote, which I hadn't seen before but his description pre-empts my recycling mechanism for galaxies and unverses! RECYCLING MODEL ALSO PRODUCING THE 'AXIS OF EVIL' AND GALAXY BARS

I found most excellent but it did...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 14:42 GMT
Dear Peter,

As I explained in my essay the solution you are proposing is "available" in TS, like every idea that emerges from human thinking, yours as mine is just another path of probabilities. Indeed bothe "particles" (emerging phenomenae) hold both sets of information in TS. There is nothing muddy metaphysical in this perception, and when it is it is one of the infinity of answers we are looking for...

I am gonne read your interpretation now..

best regards


Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 20:40 GMT

Yes, I see. That's great. So really it's all in a holistic 'higher strata' of possibilities, which also links vertically to and includes the most simple physical mechanisms there are, in this case a spinning ball.

I think you'll see, possibly almost uniquely given your training, a version of that holistic view in the 3D 'interleaved' structure of thought I refer to, as a way of managing and assessing the vast number of possibilities which may emerge in designing buildings of the slightest complexity.

But a test of my hypothesis on the brain; After each chapter think back and see if you can remember more than 3 of the points, and let me know.

A top score is coming, but my first one was 10 taking it to the top, which attracted two immediate anonymous 1's from trolls! so I'd delay yours for the moment.

Very Best


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:49 GMT
Dear Peter,

"managing the vast number of possibilities" is just another way of explaining "free will". It can also be called "creativity". Creating an emergent phenomenon in the NOW that is also radiating on the SSS (Subjective Simultaneity Sphere's) of other observers. However this "creation" is just a another life-line available in TS.

Sorry for the two scores of "1" , I am aware that it will maybe arrive to me as well, but it is inherent to the system of valuation of this contest.I am not in favor of contestants giving scores toother contestents.

best regards


Steve Dufourny wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 14:58 GMT
Hello Mr De Wilde,

Happy to see yopu again on fqxi.I liked your essay ,it is general and full of relevances.Thanks for sharing your thoughts.Good luck in this contest.

All the best from belgium

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 15:03 GMT
Dear Steve,

I am happy that you are doing well in your Subjective Simultaneity Sphere.

Good to hear from you. Thanks for the time you took to read my interpretation of reality.

best regards


Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 19:12 GMT
Thanks ,I am a little better psychologically speaking.I have had many personal problems,but that goes,I have faith in this sphere.

You are welcome Wihelmus,I have always liked your interprétations of our physics.The philosophy and sciences dance together ...

I liked indeed this subjectivity and how you have interpreted the reality.We have all our own subjective sphere after all :)


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:53 GMT
Thanks Steve,

The last time I was informed of your situation, your mother had problems, is it going better now ?

best reards


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 19:31 GMT
Dear Mr. Wilhelmus de Wilde

If I can help about your “thoughts”.

* Is Space-Time a Quantum System ? (meaning that our 3-D universe is an emergent


My answer is; Yes. Why, you can see in formula (17) of my essay.



report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 16:02 GMT
Dear Brenco,

I argue that an emergent reality is not gradual in its essense. It is just like an idea not divisible in quanta. The problem with quanta is that inbetween these "units" there is a "space". Our emerging phenomenon that is called space-time is an idea not a structured entity.

We can "think" about this idea like being structured in quanta but this is only "thinking" about reality, and as so creating another probability in TS. Each probbility that is thought of by observers is a reality so....

best regards


George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 05:10 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am happy to welcome you in FQXi contest again with your nice essay. It is right that we have talking about of some different subjects in our works, however I did not seen the contradictions in ours approaches - I hope my work can be interesting to you.

Best wishes!

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 16:05 GMT
Dear George

My perception cannot agree with any contadiction of thinking. Any thinking will reveal a "reality".

I am gonna read your essy and will come bck to it on your thread.

best regards


George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 05:52 GMT
I must to recognise also that you write as a maestro!

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 16:17 GMT
Thank you George, but I don't reserve it, i am just a beginner.

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 07:52 GMT
Dear de WILDE,

Good essay on new concepts TS, TC, ENM etc. And very nice development of these ideas were done in the essay, my congratulations.

Your words…. “It is widely accepted that 13,8 billion years ago somehow /somewhere the universe as we are (partly) aware of underwent a change that led to a conclusion that there is a “beginning”. To arrive at a for the present scientific ideas an acceptable beginning of of nowhere, ideas like singularity and inflation were introduced.”

…………….. You are introducing these concepts “Beginning and Singularity” based on Expanding Universe Models. These concepts are inevitable there. These concepts are based observation of redshifted Galaxies, which are 40 percent in the universe. They ignored rest 60 percent.

Have a look at my essay also where these singularity and Bigbang were avoided by showing relevant reference papers …

Best wishes…………….

=snp. gupta

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 16:16 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

The results of scientific research seem (until yesterday) to indicate that our universe has abeginning. Indeed our universe has (regarding human consciesness) 7,5 billion beginnings, every one believing in a Big Bang is creating a BIg Bang as beginning for his reality. I do not "believe " in a BB, nor in an expanding universe. The reality I live in is just an excitation that appears for my parception as a flowing time/life -line untill NOW. The "nowhere" is the totality of probabilities in TS that we cannot reach from where every conscious thinking emerges, each one creating its own beginning.

I will go and read your essay.

best regards


Yehuda Atai wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 11:45 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus

It was interesting to read your essay and indid I agree that the Emerging Reality is in the continuous present. Also that we are all subjective with our actions and perception. Yet we are a Union of Subjective life forms and as such its existence is Unique in Union and Multiplicity.

I develop through my observation an approach that explain the occurrence of the self organization while it is continuously changing. (here in the FQXi contest - we are together,therefore I am)

THank again

yehuda atai

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 16:23 GMT
Dear Yehuda,

Indeed as you mention we are "ONE" in this contest of FQXi.

We all are interpreting our awareness of reality and if we are searching for a goal. As I mentioned in my essay we are like a group of soap bubbles , each one with unique subjective information but also with objective information that is the result of being here together. But is remains an emergeing phenomenon...

best regards


Jose P. Koshy wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 17:50 GMT
Wilhelmus de Wilde,

You seem to say that the singularity that each individual feel is just an 'integral' within the given limits of a continuous reality. A very nice idea connecting mathematics and philosophy. Mathematics and philosophy always go hand in hand. 'Infinity', 'continuous' and 'simultaneity' all go together, and each can create a mystic feeling. The lack-luster 'finite', 'grainy' and 'localized' reality is disappointing.

Considering the metaphysics content, this is the best essay I have read in the present contest. In terms of physics content also, it is the best, provided QM is correct. However, I differ regarding QM: light is streams of rotating particle-pairs, which create three-dimensional wave-patterns; so it shows the properties of waves also; there is no wave-particle duality and consequent uncertainty.

In my proposed model, matter is grainy, and so everything connected with matter is finite. The finite universe remains in an infinite loop of pulsations - the only possible way a finite thing can exist in an infinite frame. So the 'infinite possibilities' (that you visualize) get reduced to finite possibilities, and ultimately to just one possibility that is, a pulsating universe, which cannot exist in any other form.

As matter is perfectly grainy, each individual is real, a real singularity, and his consciousness is just one of the allowed possibilities in a finite set, not part of or entangled with the infinite Total Consciousness. The difference comes from finite vs infinity, and grainy vs continuous. Poles apart, and that creates an affinity.

Jose P Koshy

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 18:18 GMT
Dear Jose

Thank you for your enlightning post.

Of course QM is grainy, it is the essence of the this way of thinking.

A way of thinking is expressed as "idea". Ideas are also constituted of parts because no idea can exist without time, it is the "order" of the parts of the idea that are constituting a new idea through consciousness.

The infinite loop of "pulsations" as you name it, is also a way of thinking, so in my perception an availability, thee reducing is again the result of time, we just cannot perceive a timeless and spaceless infinity of thoughts. But any thought is a part of the TOTAL, without the smallest there is no Total.

best regards


Jose P. Koshy replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 15:50 GMT
Wilhelmus de Wilde,

QM is based on simultaneity of grainy and continuous. A photon is a particle and wave at the same time. Einstein, though he had a crucial role in developing the quantum concept, never agreed with this uncertainty. The metaphysical beauty of QM lies in this uncertainty, 'God playing dice'. Physical reality may not be that much beautiful.

Jose P Koshy

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 16:17 GMT
Dear Jose,

I agree with you that our emerging physical reality is not that much beautiful. God playing dice means for me Total Consciousness leading to the blinking of a time and space restricted consiousness with all its uncertainties, defaults and incomprehensions. We are just smelling at TS through our thinking of QM.

best regards


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 21:40 GMT
So we agree that our 3-D universe is an emergent phenomenon.

Quanta does not mean: inbetween these "units" there is a "space".



report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 14:20 GMT
Yes, but space is also an emergent phenomenon

George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 04:26 GMT
My dear Wilhelmus,

I can be with you completely agree, when I see how growing my grandchildren in the other world than it has been in our time.

I can also think that maybe the crocodile can be born from the chiken eggs with the time! However, I never can think that energy preservation law, or the value of pi (3,14 ...), can be changeable, in the past, or in the future.

I have initially put high score on your essay because it is informative and written just beautiful! Excuse me if something is not that!

Best wishes

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 14:28 GMT
Dear George,

In your emergent reality (the one you are experiencing right now) and in our collective NOW memory, energy preservation and pi are stable,. Changing of life-line may reveal that they may be changing, when you change life lines you are not aware of the specific changes.

I thank you for your rating, but it is best not to talk about in the threads I think.

best regards


sridattadev kancharla wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 22:19 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

You very well know that we are one and the same singularity, i, and that we concur fully in our thoughts and expressions of that singularity (TS) through our essays. I wish you all the very best and request you to kindly enjoy the essay There are no goals as such it's all play.



report post as inappropriate

sridattadev kancharla replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 22:27 GMT
i = TC

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 14:59 GMT
Thank you very much dear Sridattadev.

I am going to inhale your essay right now


Joe Fisher replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 16:46 GMT
Dear Mr. Wilhelmus de Wilde,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.”

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:41 GMT
Your paper definitely gives food for thought. In particular, trying to explain entanglement in a different way is nice because it is something that has always bewildered me how entanglement can truly be possible.

I agree that there are so many different paths and choices that we all take, and collectively, this could result in an infinite number of possibilities. But I sure hope that this doesn't mean that there are parallel universes where our decisions spawn a parallel path. It's hard to prove or disprove a parallel universe, but I personally believe that they don't exist. I believe that nature is simple and I sure hope that we can prove this one day.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 18:22 GMT
Dear Jeff,

I also think that paralel universes don't EXIST is our own reality, and as we cannot (yet) jump from one reality to another by trespassing the Planck Wall, the paralel and other realities are only probabilities outside our own. It is like I mentioned in the essay : the dimension behind the Planck Wall doesn't exist in our emergent phenomenon. Other emergent phenomenae are only thoughts.

best regards


Member George F. R. Ellis wrote on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 20:13 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus

I am struggling with some of your concepts such as ENM, but agree very much with the e Subjective Simultaneity Sphere. This was in effect pointed out by Helmholz a long while ago.

For me "now" is not eternal but is continually changing.


George Ellis

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 26, 2017 @ 15:25 GMT
Dear George,

Thank you for your answer on my essay and the reference to von Helmholz.

NOW is never eternal in our emerging reality, we experience a FLOW of time.

This 'flow" is the result of the capacity of our memory. The continuation of this flow is created by the addition of a new NOW moment. This new NOW moment is originating from Total Simultaneity where it is a timeless entity (so eternal) and I called it the ENM. The ENM is NOT existing in our emergent phenomenon called REALITY.

Our experience (like you are saying is continually changing) of NOW is entangled with its "ENM" in TS but NOT existing in our experience of reality. The timeless ENM becomes an addition to a timeless experience in our memory.

I hope to have explained my interpretation.

best regards


Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 26, 2017 @ 15:54 GMT

First, a minor criticism. You use a lot of acronyms that are of your creation. Until something is widely accepted as an acronym, it is better not to do this. It makes it difficult for the reader.

The real meat of your essay starts when you discuss the two slit experiment. That is a nice touch and fits well with the flow of things. I was not aware of the delayed choice experiment by Wheeler ... many thanks. The interpretation of the Wheeler experiment and the discussion of Bob and Alice then follows cleanly. The diagrams you provide here are helpful.

It seems to me that what you describe as TS Consciousness is similar to the complex plane in my essay.

All in all this is a respectable effort.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 26, 2017 @ 16:54 GMT
Thank you Gary for your instructive comments on my essay.

Next time I will try to avoid acronyms (perhaps I like to mimic formula's...)...

Indeed there is more to explain but I could not realise it in nine pages. I have solutions for time-travel, black hole information loss and more that you can find in my article published in The Journal of Consciousness Exploration and Research Total Consciousness in Total Simultaneity

Your "Complex Plane" is indeed almost the same idea as Total Simultaneity, maybe I need your advise to mathematically explain my idea of Total Simulaneity which is both a not in our reality existing singularity without time and space as well as it contains ALL Eternal NOW Moments and contents also a "field" named Total Consciousness.

best regards


Gary D. Simpson replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 13:34 GMT

I might be able to provide assistance but there is no guarantee. Take a look at two papers I have posted to They are "Quaternion Dynamics Part 1 and Part 2". They can be found here:

My email address is shown on the cover sheet of my essays.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Peter Leifer wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 11:08 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus, I see that you have essentially different world's picture.

``Totality of human thinking"? Probably some analogue of the direct sum. I see that even in the physical community such ``totality" is very and very problematic. But at least one point is common: Hilbert space looks now more fundamental than space-time.

PS I cannot understand the general principle of the calculation of scores. How this value may be reduced in time? Who play with this?

Best regards,


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 14:57 GMT
Dear Peter,

Different colours make a beautifull rainbow....

I mentioned the ratings because I began wit a 6 and a 9 nd then from nothing three 1's appeared , so I had to struggle from downwards on...

It seems to happen more, as I was warned by another author.

I just don't know who is playing this game of ones...

best regards


Alexander M. Ilyanok wrote on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 16:27 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

I read your essay several times before I received your letter. Very interesting work, it makes us think a lot. At the time, I explored some of the problems that you have set.

How do you say “Mankind is full of ideas” and “universe cannot yet be realised with our scientific method of thinking”. The Subjective Simultaneity Sphere (SSS). The origin of...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Don Limuti wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 06:27 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus,

Good to be in another contest with you. I like your TS concept. Would I be correct to say that is close in meaning to the concept of now?

And thanks for your insights on my essay!

Don Limuti

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 16:45 GMT
Dear Don,

Thank you for taking the time to read/comment and rate my essay.

In my perception the concept of NOW has two sides, one side is the eternal NOW moment in TS and the other is the NOW experience in our time restricted emergent phenomenon that we call reality. Time is also an emergent phenomenon that only exists in our "minds". The illusion of living...

When we are creating Lexi's as AI this is also an emerging phenomenon, so when we are "thinking" that AI's (the children of our intelligence) are going to take over , this reality is an available probability in TS, it can become a reality in someones mind in a specific life-line (constituted of Eternal NOW Moments) in TS.

best regards


Philip Gibbs wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 11:10 GMT
Wilhelmus, this is a very well thought through essay. You give a clear picture of how information is stored in memory and is processes from signals from the spheres. This leads to goals. It is consistent with my view and you add a lot of detail and further insights.

Our sensation of time is central to these ideas. The delayed choice experiment shows that causality is a complex matter. What are your thoughts on how our world is asymmetric with respect to the direction of time, so that past and future are so different?

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 17:04 GMT
Thanks a lot dear Philip.

The cause of the asymetric appearance of our reality lies in the difference between an emergent phenomenon and its "origin" Total Simultaneity.

TS is time and space-less (eternal and infinite an both singularity), the emergent phenomenon that we experience as reality is time an space restricted.

But as it originates (is entangled with) from a time and space-less entity it is only the NOW including MEMORY that we are aware of and not the eternity of this NOW in TS.

Every ENM is unique for ach agent, so different from each NOW, Past and Future.

best regards


essay:The Purpose of Life

Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 20:55 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

It's been obvious for years that you are extremely focused on consciousness, so I'm not surprised that you partook of 'expanded' consciousness, 'back in the day'.

I very much liked your "searching for the announcer in the radio".

When I first read your essay I started to give you 10, but everyone that I pushed to the top so they would receive...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 10:04 GMT
Thank you Edwin for the open mind you are showing.

As different as we both are we are searching for the same solutions, without different colours there is no beautifull rainbow.

You say "I tend to view our universe as existing in one ENM, and all local consciousness partakes of this Now." This is exactly what I mean to argue, My Derived Local (in space and time) Consciousness in a flowing time-restricted reality is a expression of Total Consciousness in Total Simultaneity. The NOW that that consciousness (field ?) is experiencing includes the whole historical flow towards this NOW Moment.

"The observer isn't the cause" of a wave collapse" In my perception the fact that the observer (agent) is "measuring" an event that is from the past (he cannot measure the NOW because that is immediatly past...), one part (position or velocity) is fixed, the observer is NOT the cause of this so called collapse, it isn't even a collapse it is a search for position/velocity in the flow that exists only in the observers consciousness. So it seems as if the observer is the cause but he is not, the result is just as lost as is the future.

So you see that we agree more as you thought...

best regards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Edwin Eugene Klingman replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 22:43 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thanks for clarifying your 'collapse' argument. You are correct, we agree more now than I thought. Yes we do attack the same problem. It is so vast that there is room for two approaches. We focus on Now.

Also, I said believe you misunderstood a comment on scoring in my response on my essay page. You might wish to reread it.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Cristinel Stoica wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 08:19 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

This was a very interesting reading, which turns upside-down some of the usual ideas. Causality as we thought we know it is challenged whenever we try to make sense of quantum mechanics by using elements of reality, and you used this well in trying to elucidate if there is a purpose of the universe.

Best regards,


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 09:37 GMT
Thank you Christie,

It is not easy to open a new box in the perception of physics...

best regards


James Lee Hoover wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 17:23 GMT

This is language that helps us to touch the unfathomable, the inscrutable -- which are elements of our topic. For example, The choice is representing different available time-lines in TS. Total Simultaneity is acting like a wormhole connecting choices and time-lines. Or Total Simultaneity where all elemental interaction are done, happening or existing at the same time. Whatever is eternal must be out of time.

The meaning of life and the universe needs ways to bridge time and infinity. Your piece helps to bring a little more clarity to these ruminations.

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 09:53 GMT
Thank you very much James.

Each essay is helping to enlighten a little bit, the totality gives perhaps a good view of our goals.

I am now gonne read yours.

best regards


Alexey/Lev Burov wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 23:50 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I have to admit that I do not understand your text well. Do you mean that TC is the ultimate source of everything? If not, what could be this source? Is there any meaning of everything or it is rather a meaningless dream of the TC? How important are our ethical, aesthetic, scientific and philosophical efforts and why? What gives you any confidence in the worldview you share with your readers? Sorry for that many questions; you may consider them as nothing but reflection of my confusion with your essay.


Alexey Burov.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 09:41 GMT
Dear Alexey;

Sorry that you did not quite understand my perception of the emergent phenomenon that is called reality. So I hope that I can explain it more clearly and answer your questions.

Indeed I accept that TC is the "source" of everything, everywhere from any time restricted reality. TC is time nad spaceless.

I argue that time and space are both restrictions from Total...

view entire post

Alexey/Lev Burov replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 22:21 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for your attention to my questions; your answers are really helpful. Following your invitation, I will ask you a bit more in order of better understanding.

You write: "These "availabilities" (available life/time lines) are forming you could say the "ALL". This ALL cannot be a complete set when any of the life-line availabilities are missing. So the specific life-line reality that you are experiencing NOW is essential for the completeness of ALL." I think an important point is the meaning of these "ALL", its completeness. Does it mean that all thinkable worlds/availabilities are realized, even really bad? Or, may be, following Leibniz, your ALL include only the best of all possible worlds?

Your essay is very different from others, and I highly appreciate this difference.



report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 10:17 GMT
Dear Alexey,

I will try to explain what I meant with ALL and the completeness of the Total YOU.

I introduced the TOTAL Consciousness, including the Total Consciousness of ALL agents.

An emergent agent in an emergent reality is just ONE life-line of that specific agent. The agent there is an individual because he is not the complete Unity. The emergent agent is furthermore restricted through time an space while the Totality is time and spaceless.

The Total YOU could be described (in our restricted way) as the totality of ALL possible (and the impossible : the ones you did not yet think about) and available time/life-lines.

So YES, all the bad ones are available too. But also the "best of all worlds" is an availability.

During the FLOW of a specific time/life-line each NOW moment decisions are made and your specific time/life-line switches, the time/life-line you left still is available in TS.

This process of continually switching and the coexistance of availabilities of the time/life-lines that are not chosen, I described as the origin of FREE WILL.

In this specific emergent reality the time/life-line you are experiencing as a FLOW may exist as a singularity in TS, this doesn't mean that also your future would be concrete for this specific FLOW. Each Eternal Now Moment represents its own time/life-line. The emergent FLOW that we seem to live in can be compared to a time and spaceless singularity in TS.

The complete YOU could be described as a complete set of singularities in TS.

best regards and I like the exchange of thoughts with you.


Stefan Weckbach wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 20:44 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

i am starting now to read your essay, it may take some time but i will comment on it when i am finished!

report post as inappropriate

Stefan Weckbach wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 22:12 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

your lines of reasoning remind me of the many near-death experiencers which had been interviewed and can be watched on youtube. They report some similar things. Especially there are cases where the experiencer could take a view into his future (and the things indeed developed due to what he/she saw – but not in the sense of a self-fullfilling...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 09:44 GMT
Dear Stephan,

Thank you for your honest comment on my essay.

I would like to add some explanations for you :


When our emergent body and mind complexity is reaching the finish of a certain life-line, it is still our restricted form of consciousness that stays "entangled" with Total Consciousness in TS. At that very point of the time-line, the restricted part (in...

view entire post

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 10:55 GMT
Dear Stefan,

On your question : when are the changes taking place ?

In my perception (theory) the reality you are aware of (formed by the memories you have from your birth untill NOW) is an "emerging phenomenon". When YOU are changing to another time/life-line maybe your new emergent memory contains a whole other "past". At hat very NOW moment you won't be aware of the changed...

view entire post

Stefan Weckbach replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 15:38 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

thank you so much for your comments.

I fully aggree: the lower the level, the more we approach GOD.

As i wrote above, i already voted your essay.

You wrote: "The concepts "knowing" and "understanding" are imbedded in the restrictions of time and space."

This is interesting. i have to ponder about it.

Best wishes

Stefan Weckbach

report post as inappropriate

Patrick Tonin wrote on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 07:40 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for your post on my page.

I have read your essay with great interest and we seem to agree on a lot of points.

Your multiple emergent realities approach is similar to mine but in your case they don't seem to be connected in any meaningful way and once lived, each moment is back into oblivion. In my approach, past/present/future exist simultaneously and we are just going through each moment at the speed of light. This means that there is a limited number of "you" living your life at any one time (equal to the number of moments in your life). Each moment in your life forms your "lifeline" and is linked with the adjacent moments but each moment can change (in a limited way) at every new moment. So effectively, your past and your future can change but as far as you are concerned you can't see it because you can only "see" your present "now". I hope you get the idea.

As requested, I will rate your essay.

All the best,


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 16:22 GMT
Dear Patrick

What you are describing in your essay is just in other words what i am thinking.

Every NOW moment the FLOW can change, which means also the past, so the memory.

Once lived means for me, the emergent phenomenon of that specific life line still is an availability in TS, exploring thsi idea further and trying to remember that also the ME is an emergent phenomenon it can mean that The life you are seeming to live now is an eternal sequence in the time and space restricted emergent reality.

I very much agree with your thoughts.

best regards

thank you for the rating


Patrick Tonin replied on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 05:14 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus,

It is always nice to hear that your ideas are shared by others.

Please rate my essay when you can, I just got a "1", not cool !



report post as inappropriate

Christian Corda wrote on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 09:19 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am happy to re-meet you here in FQXi Essay Contest.

I have just read your interesting Essay. Despite it is a bit speculative, I consider it being a remarkable work which gave me fun. Thus, you deserves the highest score that I am going to give you. Good luck in the Contest!

Here is our Essay

Cheers, Ch.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 16:35 GMT
Dear Christian,

Thanks a lot for your comment on my essay.

I have read with great interest the work of yourself and the co-authors.

The gravitational waves trembled through the text.

The goal of any wave is insecure, it goes on and on.

You also deserve a high rating.

best regards


Klee Irwin wrote on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 23:52 GMT
I enjoyed reading your essay has been a bit busy around Quantum Gravity Research with our new movie 'What Is Reality' that just came out explaining a bit about our work, so forgive the limited input here. Your essay was VERY interesting!

I gave you the highest score and I wish you luck in this essay contest and continued success in your research work.



report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 08:18 GMT
Thanks a lot Klee

Pls keep me informed about your movie "What is Reality"

Maybe my articles may be of assistance with your search.

This afternoon I am gonne read your participation.

best regards


Georgina Woodward wrote on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 05:18 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus, I just wanted to let you know that I have enjoyed reading read your well written essay. You have clearly explained your model and I have a better understanding now of the ways in which your and my own model of reality diverge. Good to read all of the positive reviews and replies. It is clearly attracting attention and interest. Kind regards Georgina

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 08:45 GMT
Dear Georgina,

Thank you for your attention for my participation.

I am gonna dive into your emergent reality this afternoon.

best regards


Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 09:54 GMT
Dear Georgina,

Thanks for reading my contribution to the contest.

I have read your essay with great interest.

Your "emerging" comes from complexity, my thinking is also complexity is an emerging phenomenon, our whole experience of reality is an emerging phenomenon.

Causality is (in my latest perception) the effect that EVERYTHING we are consciousness experiencing ihas happened in the PAST (because we are "living" in a time and space-restricted reality). We only are aware of events that were "caused" by earlier events in our memories. This PAST has its origin in what I call Total Simultaneity. There the several moments (ENM's) forming our life-lines are timeless so eternal. The NOW moment we seem to experience is immediately becoming past and no longer "available" in our emergent memory experience. However it is still an eternal ENM in TS. You could then imagine that the NOW moment we seem to experience "contains" ALL the Information of a specific life-line in TS, so it seems a FLOW experience. When going further it could mean that the life we are living is only an emergent NOW moment with all its specific life-line info in our emergent memory. In this way causality and flow of time could be understood. I amaware that this is not yet a complete perception but in this contest all the other opinions are contributing to the basic idea.

I rated your essay and hope that you will rate mine also.

best regards and good luck in the next Eternal Now Moment


Member Tejinder Pal Singh wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 06:42 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am quite amazed at your intuitive grasp of notions such as Eternal Now Moment and Total Simultaneity. This is awesome I think. It tallies very well with what I have mathematically defined as Trace Time in my essay.

I do not know how to deal with consciousness - so I tried to steer clear of it. That is not to say that I disagree with the importance you attach to it with regard to understanding the physical world.

In the later part of your essay, are you suggesting that you believe in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics?

Best wishes,


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 15:30 GMT
Dear Tejinder,

Thank you for your positive comment on my essay.

In my "emergent phenomenon" called reality "time" is a restriction (like space).

We are experiencing a "flow" of time through the limited consciousness that is creating (emerging) memory at each Eternal Now Moment.

Looking at a Wave collapse we see that it is "happening" always in the past. The emerging particle after the "collapse" is also a past emergent phenomenon. The moment we are aware of the "particle like distribution" in the Young experiment, we are experiencing an image from the past, representing a past ENM (that is timeless (eternal) in Total Simultaneity).

So you could say that the Flow that we experience as TIME is an emergent effect of the memory data we are aware of. Actually I am 71 yeras old,(and remeber the I have the memories of that age, I cannot reach out to the past (nor to the future). The NOW moment includes the whole FLOW of my past life, so the emergent effect of "living". The whole emergent life as also reality is compressed in an ENM.

I do believe that any way of thinking can be the base of an emergent reality.The MWI is a splitting up of realities. In my perception this split up is not a "material" one only the "move" to another "availability" that can become reality in another emergent phenomenon.

I am untill now unable to substantiate this view mathematically, but I am searching.

best regards


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 19:25 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I read with great interest your depth analytical essay, ideas and conclusions, that will help us overcome the crisis of understanding in fundamental science through the creation of a new comprehensive picture of the world, uniform for physicists and lyrics filled with meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl). I believe that the modern "crisis of understanding" (K.V.Kopeykin "Souls "of atoms and "atoms"of the soul: Wolfgang Ernst Pauli, Carl Gustav Jung and the "three great problems of physics"), "trouble with physics" (Lee Smolin,"The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next")is a deep crisis of ontology and dialectics. Your essay gives hope that we will still be able to unravel the "thought of the Creator before the Creation Act" and build a model of the "self-aware Universe" (Vasily Nalimov) .

That is especially important of your ideas and actualization of concepts: "structure", "process", "memory", "The Subjective Simultaneity Sphere", "life-line", "timeless memory". I am particularly grateful to you for actualization of the "dialectical line" in knowledge since Heraclitus. I give my highest rating.

I believe, that only extremely constructive metaphysics, and the global "brain storm" will help us to overcome the crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation: "An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies." (G.W.F.Hegel)

Best regards,


report post as inappropriate

Robert Groess wrote on Mar. 25, 2017 @ 09:24 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

Thank you for your fascinating essay, with strong emphasis on the nature of time on intent and consciousness. I would like to ask if you consider widening what you call the "collective NOW memory" to include all information that has ever been directed at our physical point in space-time over the age of the universe? (I say point because anything that happens within a few thousand years around the "collective NOW" as well as a few thousand light-years in all directions is essentially a single point from our vantage on a light-cone diagram). It just struck me when you specified the collective history we have accumulated as an information infrastructure from human efforts, we could also include what astronomers and cosmologists are still accumulating through observations today.

I wanted to let you know I enjoyed reading your essay and have also rated it in the meantime.



report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Mar. 25, 2017 @ 16:11 GMT
Dear Robert,

Indeed what I had to refer as "The collective NOW memory" is wht is available as information on our Subjective Simultaneity Sphere. It also means that it is available for ALL other SSS spheres of any form of consciousness. The center of an SSS is indeed an emerging physical point in our emerging reality with its restrictions of space and time.

If we are expanding the radius of an SSS this new sphere can involve the whole "known" universe with all its known and also unknown (meaning the not yet interpreted and discovered data) information.

This could mean that we are receiving at any NOW moment ALL information (on our SSS) about our specific emerging reality, in the middele ages the "interpretation" of that collective NOW moment was another one as the one we are receiving right NOW, becuse of lack of knowledge.

When looking around in our emerging reality we become aware that only a little part of our consciouss companions are sharing the "knowledge" of the specific NOW we are experiencing.

The accumulated "knowledge" (awareness) of ALL branches of science is available for ALL s data on their SSS. This also counts for the collective "history" of a specific NOW moment that includes the infinity of time before this NOW, only a little part of thsi is available as "knowledge" that we become consciouss of.

You asked me the right question that I am still working on , thank you for that.That is why I like so much the FQXi contest , you are directly confronted with essential questions.

I am going to read comment and rate your essay NOW.

best regards


Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 25, 2017 @ 16:40 GMT
Dear Robert

I like to mention some remarks on your very well written essay:

* "The second LAW of Thermodynamics" is a "collective memory" of a past analysis in this specific NOW moment. In the next NOW moment it may be totally different. It may just be another interpretation of Maxwells Demon...

* Consciousness may be the counterforce of entropy...

* Any "limit" of minimal information (Landauer) is restricted in TIME. Time is an emergent phenomenon, so is information so are the receiving agents... Each NOW moment includes ALL information of its past.

* AI is crated by emergent consciousness, so maybe it is a GOAL that is not only occupied by progeneration...but can be a means to overcome the restrictions of time and space and come closer to Total Simultaneity...

* It sis no use I think to look for the announcer in the radio. Both the announcer and the radio are emergent phenomenae.

I liked your essay very much, the above remarks are only thoughts that came up during reading, I wish you good luck in the contest, be prepared to receive negative ratings without any comment (I got 6 ones!!!)...

best regards


Robert Groess replied on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 02:42 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for your reply, as well as the time you took to read my essay. I have replied to your comments on my forum page. As regards the SSS, I wonder if, in a very real sense, we could "travel" back in time by returning all information on a SSS to the microphysical point that is at the center? In your example of an announcer and a radio being emergent phenomena, so is the SSS generated by the isotropically radiating radio wave. In any event, this is a far more speculative musing that came to mind and I am not sure how deeply it is rooted in fundamental physics. As a counter argument, the subjectivity of the simultaneity sphere is what leads you to your contention that time is an emergent construct. (Something I delve into a little deeper in my comment to you on my forum.) Thank you for your stimulating discussion!



report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 08:51 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for taking the time to read and comment on my essay. I appreciate it. I enjoyed your thoughts and extra perspective that you have provided. You say "Time is an emergent phenomenon, so is information so are the receiving agents". This is a fascinating discussion since I agree with you on the information and receiving agents. What I would love to understand better is the concept of time being a realization of another, deeper process. For example, neutron decay really happens at the scale where quantum effects are substantial, and yet we can treat the elapsed time for such an event classically. I wonder if you have more thoughts on that? In any event, thank you again for your comments and I will reply to your post regarding your essay on your forum.



PS: From the rules of the contest, I understand there is a good probability that excessively low ratings without basis will be cancelled and removed from scores before the final decisions are made.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 09:43 GMT
Dear Robert,

As we ALL are emergent agents in this emergent relity it is also for me sometimes difficult not to fall in the pitfall of accepting reality as REAL. Also it is quite difficult to obtain an "exteriour" viewpoint...

When we stay comparing an emergent reality with its Source (TS) I am inclined now to accept that any emerging reality (ER) that is "lived" by a consciouss...

view entire post

Robert Groess replied on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 19:39 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for taking the time to respond in detail. You say we are all emergent agents in an emergent reality. Indeed our experiences in the world are limited to a few "levels" of hierarchy in emergent structure. Something that Quantum Mechanics can also be thought of at the quantum-classical boundary. Very interesting thought.

I also appreciate you mention time being a restriction. Something like a preferred 4-velocity in spacetime. I must admit I am struggling with what you call a singularity though. To me it seems to mean something very different to what you are using the word for.

In any event I greatly appreciate our discusion. Thank you for making me think about the concepts you have mentioned in very different ways.



report post as inappropriate

Daniel de França Diniz Rocha wrote on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 23:28 GMT
OK! I will read it!

report post as inappropriate

Daniel de França Diniz Rocha replied on Mar. 29, 2017 @ 22:36 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I really loved your essay. In GR is also timeless, in that time is a dimension like the others. Given that what we have in GR are events, measured by a test particle, carrying a clock and a ruler, it really becomes an essential issue. This is a problem in that temporal paradoxes are created because the ordering of events, and so causality, become a confusing issue. Solution for this issues are avoided by imposing conditions which are not contained in the theory.

In QM, time is a parameter for coordinates or fields. This leads to complicated issues, unless you have a low dimensional system, like in 2 dimensions (say, string theory). But this goes awry quite quickly and there is no way to probe this kind of system in any conceivable known experiment.

So, you come up with an intriguing idea, an eternal now, that is, an eternal event. I think the eternal event, associated with the eternal now, is more fundamental than brains, plants, or whatever living beings, or particles, given that any particle (and thus any of those) has a discontinuous existence(the moment it interacts, it trades particles, so, if you check a Feynman diagram, it cannot be said to be the same). Then, you come up with the concept of SSS.

I would guess that this SSS is a sort of "condensate", a kind of 3d slice of the universe. While in GR there are no preferential slice due equivalence of observers, this SSS is living like "floating" on GR, perhaps with a universal time, which you call an emerging reality. This would be an extended object, where the eternal now is happening, emerging all the time. Perhaps a clue to this object is dark matter, since this emerging reality would interact with the gravitational field, making sure things stay in sync with a condensated surface with a unique universal time.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 15:25 GMT
Dear Daniel,

In the perception I devellopped there are no time-paradoxes. Even if one of the probabilities in TS is time-travel (and there is...). So...

You go back to a specific ENM from a specific time-life-line. The as then newly created life-line the evolves as a new one, while the old one still exists as an Eternal Now Moment. Kill your grandfather here and nothing happens to...

view entire post

Daniel de França Diniz Rocha replied on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 19:44 GMT
I was trying to make it into a form that I could treat in terms of mathematics. Can you give me an idea?

report post as inappropriate

Gavin William Rowland wrote on Apr. 1, 2017 @ 08:26 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus

I enjoyed reading your essay. I liked the fact that you identified the non locality evident in quantum experiments and used it as evidence for your Total Simultaneity. It seemed a bit Bohemian to me (the Holomovement), although at some points you seemed to be describing something a bit like many worlds/many minds.

Like Bohm, your work has a lot of acronyms and i wondered if these could be cut down at all. But I guess it can go with the territory when one is proposing a nonlocal realm and discussing the interactions between this realm and the material realm. Are TC and TS ultimately the same thing? Or how are the two separate?

Best regards


report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Apr. 1, 2017 @ 14:52 GMT
Hi Gavin,

Thanks for your attention.

The MWI (again an acronym) is different from my proposition. MWI is splitting up at each choice (in two realities) like mine but my proposition is not splitting up in two coexisting realities, it is splitting up in one ongoing life-line and one that is "becoming" an eternal availability (probability). I will make an illustration for my next article.

The many Minds that you indicate are the many available minds outside your own. YOU are experiencing one of them, the others (an infinity of them) are available as probabilities in Total Consciousness that is essentially the total YOU.

I am now thinking about the so called "availability" of all other "YOU's" in Total Consciousness. Maybe these availabilities are experienced as flows of reality by other YOU's. This could be because each Eternal Now Moment is the "cause" of the memory of a specific YOU. As an Eternal Now Moment is a pointlike entity in Total Consciousness and Total Simultaneity (both Time and Spaceless) this could mean that every YOU is experiencing its own reality (a FLOW because it is outside TC and TS) eternally. I would like to compare this thought with the hologrphic principle, a n dimensional entity can be the cause of an n+1 dimensional emergence. In this case an n+2 dimensional emergence.

It is a very difficult question you are asking me there about the unity of TS and TC. Total Consciousness is like a field in Total Simultaneity. The Total Consciousness I introduce is the totality of ALL forms of Consciousness. If we have Total Simultaneity without Consciousness it is just a complete set of information (data) without any goal a chaos of data. It is only there. The to be or not to be has only a reason with consciousness.

When we accept Consciousness as afield it could be the counterforce of entropy.

Hope I answered your questions if you have more don't hesitate to ask me.

best regards


report post as inappropriate

Janko Kokosar wrote on Apr. 4, 2017 @ 19:38 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde

I like your thought that everything what we observe, is already past. And that future is unpredictable.

Do you have any references for these your mentioned thoughts?

According to Chalmers, the consciousness is the only reality. And, it is now, thus it is future of what is seen. Because future is uncertain, I think that this can be a reason for uncertainty principle. But, future is also predictable on some way, otherwise physics is without sense.

Thus, I have a little different opinion as you, but it is based on your opinion. I need to read you more.

my essay

Best regards, Janko Kokošar

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 14:51 GMT
Dear Janko,

First of all congratulations you are the 100th comment on my thread...

Thanks a lot for your reading and attention.

About references I can only say that I don't have them, this thoughts just came on about five years ago and I am still working on it to improve and make them all round.

In fact we are all searching for "The Reference of Refernce" but still cannot find it. The only reference is the center of our Subjective Simultaneity Sphere, our own consciousness.

The past is a fixed set of data, that we are using to make predictions. These predictions may not at all be right, because we just don't know what the next Eternal Now Moment will bring us, it just can create quite another past in our minds. This new past will not be the awareness of new, but just as a lived flow of inforation in our life-line. This NEW Eternal Now Moment has connected us with another past and so a new future. The "old" flow of past data is still existing as just another ENM (probability) in Total Simultaneity. Maybe another aspect of the Total You is continuing thsi flow, taking his own decisions (free will).

What I am trying to say is that our experience of a past and the so called FLOW that is representing our "lived" (experienced) past is just ONE Eternal NOW Moment in Total Simultaneity. TS is timeless and so without "happenings". Without Consciousness this would just be a pile of information, chaos. Time and Space are emergent from Total Consciousness in order to create ALL possible Time/Life-lines in every probable and improbable (for us) emergent realities.

That is the reason why every opinion counts, it is part of the totality. The colours of a rainbow make the rainbow beautifull.

If you have more questions don't hesitate to ask them.

best regards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 13:06 GMT
Hi, Wilhelmus.

Now I am ready to read your essay. Thanks for your support.

You must Think we can change the past too. That there are no absolute facts in history?

That we may have doppelgänger is known, and Amazing in itself. But what decide which spacetime sheet or what memory is used? What you describe looks like entanglement. How are those different sheets entangled? You suggest something you call TS, as spaceless and timeless, but it cannot be so. I suggest you instead have all space and all time superimposed so you can get the entanglement needed. Don't ask me how it is done :)

I like your fig. 2.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 13:43 GMT
Dear Ulla,

Thank you for your thoughtfull comments on my thinking.

I made the difference between TS (time and spaceless) to indicate that time and space are the restrictions needed to achieve life and death.

In TS there is NO temporal life nor death, each moment you are consciousnes of is an ETRNAL NOW MOMENT. Communication is also an element that needs time it is the result of one agent not having data that another has (so an inequality) in our reality that is emerging from TS.

In TS no communication is needed because there is total equality. So what you are calling ALL space and Time is my TS.

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.