4
1 Introduction
Objects in the unobserved universe have no structure, shape, color or
individual appearance, because appearances are created by minds. They do
not have features, because almost every feature you can think of corresponds
to a category of animal sensation. It has been claimed, for example, that the
very notion of solid matter rests on the sensation of hardness. We assign qualities to objects according to the way they affect our senses. In other words, it
is our sense organs, and their extensions in the brain, that create features and
qualities. Thus, in a universe without sentient beings, all features and appearances are absent. Such a universe is not a figment of our imagination, for it’s
exactly the situation prior to the evolution of life. Philosophers refer to it as
the mind-independent universe, or sometimes, the primal universe.
The universe as it is outside the scope of any observer is an austere and
inhospitable place. In a world in which so much of reality is actually constructed by observers, the laws of physics take on a new form. The new aspect
of fundamental physics has been brilliantly captured by a new theory called
quantum Bayesianism. According to this new way of thinking about material
phenomena, what traditional physicists got wrong was the naïve belief that
there is a fixed, true external reality that we perceive correctly, as it really is.
What the scientist actually perceives is the reality depicted in our human model
of the world.
By assumption, the universe outside the purview of any living observer is
not divided into separate objects. Moreover, rigid bodies have no shape or
structure, because those things are created by observers. This universe has no
inherent description: It simply is. Atom-for-atom it is exactly the universe we
know. However, without living observers to give it form and structure, it is
radically diminished compared to the reality we perceive. Its physics is not at
all like the science we know.
What, then, can we say about it? Surprisingly, we can say a great deal. The
remarkable answer comes from the latest research in neuroscience, which aims
to elaborate a theory called predictive processing. The underlying idea is a very
simple one:
In order for animals to survive, they must find optimal ways of using the
resources available in their environment. They learn by trying every path open
to them: Along some paths they make progress, while along other paths they are
turned back because they run into obstacles. Gradually, natural forces oblige
them to distinguish what’s possible from what’s not. It is through the medium of
these hurdles—these natural constraints—that organisms gradually learn the
structure of their environments. The impediments which the natural world
imposes on their efforts progressively shape their understanding of the world.
1 Introduction
Objects in the unobserved universe have no structure, shape, color or
individual appearance, because appearances are created by minds. They do
not have features, because almost every feature you can think of corresponds
to a category of animal sensation. It has been claimed, for example, that the
very notion of solid matter rests on the sensation of hardness. We assign qualities to objects according to the way they affect our senses. In other words, it
is our sense organs, and their extensions in the brain, that create features and
qualities. Thus, in a universe without sentient beings, all features and appearances are absent. Such a universe is not a figment of our imagination, for it’s
exactly the situation prior to the evolution of life. Philosophers refer to it as
the mind-independent universe, or sometimes, the primal universe.
The universe as it is outside the scope of any observer is an austere and
inhospitable place. In a world in which so much of reality is actually constructed by observers, the laws of physics take on a new form. The new aspect
of fundamental physics has been brilliantly captured by a new theory called
quantum Bayesianism. According to this new way of thinking about material
phenomena, what traditional physicists got wrong was the naïve belief that
there is a fixed, true external reality that we perceive correctly, as it really is.
What the scientist actually perceives is the reality depicted in our human model
of the world.
By assumption, the universe outside the purview of any living observer is
not divided into separate objects. Moreover, rigid bodies have no shape or
structure, because those things are created by observers. This universe has no
inherent description: It simply is. Atom-for-atom it is exactly the universe we
know. However, without living observers to give it form and structure, it is
radically diminished compared to the reality we perceive. Its physics is not at
all like the science we know.
What, then, can we say about it? Surprisingly, we can say a great deal. The
remarkable answer comes from the latest research in neuroscience, which aims
to elaborate a theory called predictive processing. The underlying idea is a very
simple one:
In order for animals to survive, they must find optimal ways of using the
resources available in their environment. They learn by trying every path open
to them: Along some paths they make progress, while along other paths they are
turned back because they run into obstacles. Gradually, natural forces oblige
them to distinguish what’s possible from what’s not. It is through the medium of
these hurdles—these natural constraints—that organisms gradually learn the
structure of their environments. The impediments which the natural world
imposes on their efforts progressively shape their understanding of the world.