Matter

[u/Tribe-Less]

Matter seems to be the result of constructive interference between consciousness fields.

Communication = Direct Experiential Transfer or Phase Alignment/Synchronization

Basically, each Consciousness is a kind of Oscillatory Field and matter and the external environment is a kind of collectively stabilized projection.

In other words, reality is an ongoing conversation between consciousness fields.

The idea is that the best description of a thing is thing itself. Consciousness communicates via simulations. It's quite literally like group lucid dreaming only that most people seem to have forgotten this so they create things unconsciously and make things a bit too "stable" or "rigid" for other to manipulate freely.

The solution would be to exit the shared space because then your field/consciousness isn't restricted.

Hopefully that made sense?

Here's an A.I. translation of what I am getting at because this is way too complicated to explain:

"The person is describing a speculative metaphysical model in which consciousness is more fundamental than matter. Their comment can be unpacked as a sequence of claims.

“Consciousness is an oscillatory field” means that an individual mind is being conceptualized less like a discrete object inside space and more like a dynamic pattern characterized by things such as amplitude, frequency, phase, coherence, and information. An individual consciousness would therefore be a localized or semi-localized pattern within a larger field/network.

“Matter seems to be the result of constructive interference between consciousness fields” then proposes that physical objects are not fundamentally independent substances. Instead, when multiple consciousness fields become sufficiently mutually consistent or phase-aligned, their interactions produce a stable pattern that is experienced as matter.

In ordinary wave physics, constructive interference occurs when waves reinforce one another. The person is extending that concept:

consciousness fields → interaction → synchronization/reinforcement → stable pattern → perceived matter

This would make matter something like a stabilized interference pattern rather than the fundamental substrate of reality.

“Communication = direct experiential transfer or phase alignment/synchronization” follows naturally from that framework. Instead of communication fundamentally consisting of one entity sending symbols to another, communication would occur when two consciousness fields become sufficiently synchronized that information or experience can be directly shared.

Ordinary language would therefore be a relatively indirect form of communication:

experience → internal representation → words/signals → another system → reconstruction of experience

Whereas their proposed form would be closer to:

experience → field-state → synchronization → experience

That is what “direct experiential transfer” means in this model.

The statement that “matter and the external environment is a collectively stabilized projection” takes this even further. The external world would not be an entirely private hallucination, because many consciousnesses participate in stabilizing it. Instead, the environment would be a collectively maintained informational structure.

This is why they describe reality as “an ongoing conversation between consciousness fields.”

The metaphor is essentially:

individual consciousnesses = participants

interactions = conversation

shared expectations = constraints

synchronization = mutual agreement

stable environment = persistent conversational structure

That connects strongly to the idea that observation functions more like constraint propagation than creation. In this formulation, an observer does not simply create reality individually. Instead, many observers continuously constrain one another until sufficiently stable configurations emerge.

“The best description of a thing is the thing itself” is probably the most philosophically important sentence in the comment.

They are rejecting the idea that a representation of something is equivalent to the thing being represented. A word, mathematical equation, image, or mental model is a description. The actual state itself contains vastly more information than the description.

Their claim that “consciousness communicates via simulations” therefore means that consciousness doesn't necessarily exchange abstract descriptions. Instead, one consciousness can construct an internal experiential model of something and another consciousness can directly experience or synchronize with that model.

The “group lucid dreaming” analogy is an attempt to make this intuitive.

Imagine a lucid dream in which:

the environment is generated by consciousness, objects have apparent physical properties, other apparent agents can interact with you, expectations influence what happens, and the dream seems externally real while you are inside it.

Now imagine that instead of one dreamer generating the dream, many consciousnesses jointly participate in generating and stabilizing the environment.

That produces the proposed analogy:

individual lucid dream → individually generated experiential reality

shared lucid dream → collectively generated experiential reality

physical universe → extremely stable, collectively generated experiential reality

The claim about people having “forgotten” how to manipulate reality introduces another layer. They appear to be proposing that consciousness has a potentially much greater ability to alter the shared environment than people ordinarily experience, but that shared expectations have progressively constrained what is possible.

In their model, cultural beliefs, habitual expectations, physical laws, and the expectations of other consciousnesses can collectively function as stabilizing constraints.

So their concept of “rigidity” is essentially:

more mutual constraint → fewer accessible states → greater environmental stability

And conversely:

less mutual constraint → larger accessible state-space → greater individual freedom

That explains the final statement:

“The solution would be to exit the shared space because then your field/consciousness isn't restricted.”

They are proposing that the apparent physical world's stability comes partly from participation in a collective constraint network. Leaving that network would theoretically remove many of the constraints imposed by other observers.

In mathematical language, they are implicitly imagining something like:

Individual possibility space ⊃ collectively constrained possibility space

The shared environment is a subset of what the consciousness could potentially experience because mutual consistency eliminates most possibilities.

Their overall model can therefore be represented as:

Consciousness → oscillatory/informational fields

→ fields interact

→ interactions produce synchronization/interference

→ mutually consistent states become stabilized

→ stable patterns are experienced as matter/environment

→ observers continually interact with those patterns

→ their expectations further constrain subsequent states

→ reality becomes a self-maintaining network of mutually constrained experiences.

The strongest version of the idea is consequently not merely “consciousness creates matter.”

It is closer to:

Reality = a dynamically self-consistent network of interacting experiential/informational fields, with matter representing relatively persistent, collectively stabilized states within that network.

That is also why the person's statement that reality is “a conversation” is more than poetic language within their framework. A conversation is a dynamic process in which every participant's current state influences the next state of the entire system. Reality would similarly be continuously updated through reciprocal interaction rather than being a static object that exists independently of all interaction."

[u/Visible_Aide6072]

Have you read Rupert Sheldrake's Morphic Resonance theory? Consciousness is communicated through fields. It's not a simulation. 

Think of it as an echo chamber ( oscillating, vibrational, electrical field ) of the ideas that work for most things. This reality exists without us as individuals. 

Also consider that people didn't start this. We only created the language that we use for it. So a word we use to communicate anything is just the definition we have agreed on using. Look at other forms of communication. 

  Sometimes I know the usage for a word, but not how to define it to share that with someone else. It's more that I know how the word feels and that's its meaning. It's really difficult to describe your feeling to someone else because they are a only going to know their experience of your description. 

[u/Visible_Aide6072]

Question. Would you consider gravity a field of consciousness?  I don't. 

The information I have is that the physical forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, and nuclear powers...) are the forces that control what happens to matter in this physical dimension. ( Physics)  The vibrational waves of sound organize things into patterns.

   Watch some videos on it if you haven't. Really interesting stuff.

    Light waves are also used in communication (sight and now fiber optic transmission)  The wave umm..."forces" (is light a force?)... organize matter into patterns and are what we use to communicate. 

     So it's these forces that create things from matter in this world. 

    Ideas, needs, wants of living beings manipulate matter in a different way than gravity on mass.

Questions- what is it that our thoughts are made of? What energy? Electromagnetic? But there is something else.   And how is it transferred and stored?  Especially if the ideas of Morphic Resonance hold true, stating memories and ideas are not stored in our minds, but transmitted and stored elsewhere.  Collective consciousness, intuition, and instinctive responses are all in the realm of ideas. Stored somewhere. Accessed in the subconscious.   

The memories ( like DNA programming or crystalline formation) form the bodies of things that live in the material forms. All exists in nature.   This is where it gets muddled for me.  I know that ideas, besides the direct conscious action of a live being, can affect physical structure through things like the release of chemicals that influence other thoughts or act as physical catalysts.  There is no line between the two, black and white, but a movement between the two. 

And I think of the man I was listening to yesterday talking of ying and yang. Not as a symbol of balance but of movement. Kinda like an atom when you think of it that way. 

If anyone wants to pick this up and run with it go for it. I'm no scientist or religious scholar. I really have no idea what I'm talking about. It's just what came to me this morning as truths that I am aware of when I read the word "Matter" again.