Is the Universe the sentient repository of all intelligence and the creator of a physical illusion that each of sense as a body?

The universe is a repository of “stuff”, but if we ask about what sort of repository, all we can do is point to the collection of “stuff” to define it. In this ultimate sense, containment and definition are equivalent.

In quantum experiments, we can see directly that defining a quantum state changes its physical appearance. In the Quantum Zeno experiment, measuring an unstable element transforms it into a stable element, while the same sort of reflexive transformation takes place between wave and particle patterns in the Double Slit experiment. In both experiments, obvious changes of physical state are related to the physical existence of information regarding the states.

But the trick is that it doesn’t matter where the measurement information is stored or erased (from) to then cause the different observed states, which means the causal attribution determining which states are observed is a non-local function. In other words, the overall system (ie, including any stored information as potential or any unused or erased potential), as a global state embodying a descriptive container (G.O.D.), is implicated in the reflexive attribution of value for each quantum state therein, and vice versa. Adding or erasing just a single photon of information (eg, re. trajectory) anywhere in the universe reflexively determines the observable results of the a double slit experiment.

The “physical illusion” is that causality is only related to physical objects bumping around or tugging on each other across space, while primordial causality is reflexive attribution at the quantum level. The same universal process which reflexively describes a single collapsed quantum state can substitute for any other sort of state. “Origin” of all reality is also a reflexive identification process effectively identical to perception. “Origin” isn’t at the beginning until an “end” exists, and any old perception is equivalent to an “end” for the purposes of a self-processing, self-contained universe to define itself.

Unlike with quantum particles, we can’t see that solid physical objects are reflexively alternating binary states all the time (in absorbing and emitting radiation), as we observe this as stability instead. Solid objects effectively generate a world line by “self processing” among constituent particles to assure a “collapsed state” of mass with a coherent worldline. The quantum particle in a double-slit experiment is effectively isolated, and can’t have a coherent world line without some other particle to “point this out”, and a 3rd particle to store the info, and in lieu of any trajectory-related information a wave pattern appears. Coherency requires enough relevant information to affect a resolution of state, and this apples to quantum particles as it does to grasping complex scientific theories.

So back to sentience. Where a symmetrical identity relation exists between any operator (quantum or macro scale) and the overall universe, the same relation holds between sentient beings and the overall universe, ie “sentience” itself. The symmetry between sentience and the universe can be called the “soul” or “enlightened nature” of a living being, but it’s just as well a raw fact of inorganic material too. With any and all identity relations, the attributive functionality is reflexive and binary, regardless if this is with binary quantum operators in an experiment or the reflexively attributive states of sentient awareness (particularly yes or no with regards to existence).

I think we can give a very positive NO to this and similar notions that pop up all the time.

The universe is a collection of matter and energies. The vast majority of the universe we can perceive is composed of but one element, hydrogen. That’s the simplest element and composes about 90% of what we see, the stars, the nebulae, etc.

Hydrogen is not intelligent. Put enough of it in one place so that gravity causes it to ignite in fusion and create a star… Still not intelligent. Just hot.

A great deal of what we can’t perceive (yet…) is apparently the “dark matter”. We don’t yet know what the dark matter is but there’s enough of it to have a profound gravitational effect on everything else. It’s generally considered to be some sort of “WIMP” or “Weakly Interactive Massive Particle”.

Particles are not intelligent.

Intelligence is the product of biological organisms and may be vastly rare in the universe. Indeed, we don’t know of any intelligent species besides… Us. There is no evidence whatever of any other intelligent species. There may be more…But that’s all we can say.

Sure, or no, depending on how grandiose one wants one’s conceptualization to be.

Sentience exists, it is a real part of the universe. A container, if you like, even a repository. Of all intelligence? Yes, I’m ignoring the “multi-universe” concept and saying, if it’s intelligent, it’s in the universe.

The universe, including its general universal conditions, were the origin for sentience, but it was created by itself using itself, so it is a self-creator of sentience.

It makes no sense to me to call it a “physical illusion”. Physical is what it is, and does. What we call “physical” is the large-scale behavior of a quantum substrate.

And it’s not any less real than … well what do you have in mind? An illusion compared to what, exactly?

The universe itself is made of empty space and particles. Everything is inside it. The term universe is Christian so the word restricts your thought.

Uni+verse - at first it was the word. If you’re a Christian, you can accept that because you would not accept anything else.

If you’re not a Christian or religious, then you can consider different philosophy and thought. If you’re a free thinker, it would be better.

If you consider infinity, you can’t see the word uni+verse. The infinite vastness is enough. Then you will see the space differently. You would not see it graspable or tangible. That’s how infinity works.

Infinity is the space and time that are what made the vastness. So the vastness of space and time is infinite. As being infinite, it is not a living thing.

I don’t know. But I think the perceptible world, including my body, is not perceived fully as it is, so in that sense, it is something of an illusion. At the same time, the perceptible world is the world. So, for example, a rock is a rock, and it is simultaneously a local condensation of energy. A rock is and is not a rock. We are and we are not what we think we are.

You could build an argument for this but it strikes me as having pretty limited utility. It also relies too much on projecting ourselves onto the universe. The idea that the universe behaves like we do is pretty much refuted by even the most basic review of quantum theory.

Maybe.

Then again maybe not.

It’s possible to create many kind of irrefutable* ideas like that. I think it’s more productive to live as if the world we perceive is real until proven otherwise.

*Irrefutable doesn’t mean true it means that an idea cannot be refuted, i.e. proven false. Sometime that’s because the idea is true but it can also be because the idea is so formulated as to defy refutation.

For instance Russell gave the example of claiming that there is a teapot in orbit around the Sun. You cannot refute the idea unless you are able to scan the entire Solar System at the scale of teapot.