We don't update reality into a new reality. Our amazing scientists update their models of reality, our understanding of the reality that is.
But occassionally theres a complete paradigm shift such as from classical physics to quantum physics or even greater revolutions like the Copernican and the Darwinian Revolutions.
I think the idea that scientists update their models can turn into poor science as sometimes an idea is updated so much to maintain an assumed theory that is becomes too complicated.
It is not reasonable to think it is possible to have a mind without a brain, a mind made of either nothing or supernatural material, that is seperate from the body, that continues to exist even when the body dies. It is not reasonable to think it possible to have a mind that existed before SpaceTime, before energy, before matter.
I don't know about that. Think of what could possibly be before time, space and matter. What brought about time, space and matter. Whatever that is it has to be able to always exist somehow yet be beyond our conceptions of time, space and matter.
It would be unreasonable to say that something within the time, space and matter schema could cause time, space and matter. something cannot cause itself. So its more reasonable to think that something like information, knowledge, a Mind or some sort of Consciousness was always around. A thought has not dimension of time, space and matter.
Yet it is a thought that brings about ideas into reality. Its a concept that creates reality and like some interpretations in QM 'it is the observers mind' that creates reality.
If this is fundemental then it makes sense that some sort of mind that observers can tap into exsisted before any concepts of time, space and matter. We cannot get outside our mind to verify anything, so that in itself points to mind being the creator of reality.
There is no evidence of any supernatural substance or realm,
There is in the sense that phenomenal realism exists which cannot be broken down to time, space and matter.
there is no evidence that a mind is anything other than the workings of the physical brain.
The workings of the brain cannot excplain phenomenal experiences that are of a qualitative nature where as the physical brain is explained in quantitative measures. So physical explanations cannot even explain this in the first place.
As we know, a mind can only be inside a specific brain and can only affect the body that has that brain.
But the concepts, knowledge and information of mind can be beyond mind in that it is the basis for how we see things. The information and knowledge is already there in nature, in the universe beyond mind. We are just tapping into that with our minds.
As I also mentioned there is evdience for mind beyond brain such as with blind sight, NDE, conscious experience when the brain is compromised and many other unexplained situations where people can gain knowledge of events beyond their own minds.
When a brain is injured, the mind can go, it can go into cognitive decline when the parietal lobe deteriorates, it can have long term memory issues, etc, etc.
THis may be like a radio reciever. If the transistors or wiring are broken or loose then we lose signal. But the radio waves are in the universe and the reciever detects the waves. So when its damaged its going to lose connection.
But at the same time we ahve seen unconscious or minimal brain tisse and there still being some consciousness.
To put this as a possibility on the table, you need to find some evidence suggesting this could be the case.
Discover the supernatural realm, find a testable, falsifiable, recreatable test that proves this realm exists. Find a test where the mind can affect something without having to just affect a brain which that mind is the mind of.
I think that evidence is already there except we put it down to coincident or imagination. Like dejavu, premonition, intuition. When people have the same state of mind at the same time for no explained reason.
The simple idea of Mind over matter may be more than just positive thinking. There may be some interaction with the world around us that influences positive opr negative outcomes due the the state of ones mind. But certainly there is a lot of power the mind can have over situations and outcomes as it is the mind and experiences that determine our outlook at reality.
If you constantly seperate the mind from all that your measuring then of course it will seem like whatever we are measuring is devoid of any influence of the mind. But as the mind is central and we cannot get away from it then who says that its the mind that is not creatingf the outcomes and that the interactions do not involves some influence of mind.
E.G get a person to think really hard and will a lightbulb to glow, or will a tap to turn or will a spoon into existence <poof> there it is, or use their mind to read someone else's memories or control someone else's body.
But is not the fact that it was the Mind that created the light buld in the first place the influence of the Mind in the equation. There would be no light bulb but for mind.
I am not sure that even testing the mind by influence at a distance on a current or particle at the macro level is possible as yet. I don't think at this stage thats even the right test. The minds influence may be way more subtle at a more fundemental level. Or it may be that there needs to be a certain combination of factors for it to transfer into the macro level as it seems consciousness is more related to the quantum world in its effect.
But I remember reading there are some experiments that are bringing the quantum effect like 'Entanglement' into the macro. I meran as far as I understand the ul;timate aim of using quantum physics is to bring its effects into the macro world succ as with quantum computing. I think they have also been able to travel backwards in time by a fraction of time. So why knows what we will discover.
Any of these things would be proof that there is something to what you are claiming and would need further investigation.
At the moment your claim is just imaginative fantasy.
It is a very poorly thought out claim.
You are not telling us what the mind is, what it is made of, and what plane of existence it lives in.
You are not telling us how a specific mind becomes bonded to a specific brain
You are not telling us why minds get bonded to brains
You are not telling us why minds are completely constrained to only be able to affect a brain.
You are not telling us how minds come to exist
You are not telling us what happens to a mind after the body dies.
You are not telling us how a mind can alter reality, other than control the person's brain.
The only evidence you present is the double slit experiment or the schrodenger's cat thought experiment.
In the realm of quantum physics when things are so small, you cannot observe them without altering them. You don't alter them with your mind, you alter them with the apparatus used to observe.
That is only one interpretation of QM. There are many based on mind being fundemental. Like I said there are experients that are bringing the quantum effects into the macro world.
There are now entire fields of study into consciousness and mind being fundemental and many are based on scientific theories and can be tested. Like Information theories or the various ideas based on Panphychism. There are many good arguements as I mentioned that support MInd and consciousness as fundemental.
Like I said your demanding a certain kind of evidence according to the material scientific paradigm. It may be that we need a completely different paradigm shift in thinking to even understand how to measure Mind beyond brain. All your doing is claiming an epistemic truth which is not fact but only one way to knowledge about reality and not scientific fact itself.
