just wanted to add a connection that could be found between information and and Dissipation-driven Adaptive Organization (DDAO) physical law.
Henceforth considering that information organizes dissipation and converts it again in an action (dissipation), humans are the most efficient beings on earth dissipating energy.


(DDAO) https://www.quora.com/Could-you-help-me-understand-Jeremy-Englands-theory-of-Dissipation-driven-Adaptive-Organization-Can-you-explain-it-so-a-layman-can-understand-it

I mean is perdurable because I think time is a product of the mind, therefore our brain is what gives life to time. Is the notion of time what persist.

It's true that I can not exactly tell why a brain can not produce non-physical thoughts, or why would it do that. But my point is that they do exist. And that is a difference from for example exaplaing wetness of water because wetness follow some physical basic notions.

However I agree that my arguments are not a strict proof. But claiming the opposite is also not clear as a cristal.

I have interest in knowing reality.
Answering the after death stuff, at any case the concept self is pretty much attached to the concept of the actual body, therefore I do not think memories or anything related with my actual life would survive. What I think is perdurable is the mind as the 'tool'
Coming back I exposed how we can have actually non-physical thoughts and asked you why they are formed in a physical determinant brain

I agree that is attached with physical processes but that does not fully define the properties of it, It just mean both are connected.
I could use your logic and say that because there are non physical occurrences in the mind and mind is attached to physical world then all the world is non-physical.
Being connected does not give the power to reduce everything to the elements.

maybe even the brain could have something non-physical?
Otherwise how do you explain dreaming about flying?
Why does a physical determinant brain produce non-physical products.
The only explanation could be that the mind is independent of the world.

I mean that energy transforms constantly and does not disappear. Energy disappearing would be the non physical.
Then if I dream I am flying? How can I dream of something that is not physical if the dreams are a physical product

What is behind physical and non-physical are the principles, as for example a well known principle in physics is the law of conservation of energy.

Therefore non-physical principles should be different principles from those who are physical, for example I could came up with a law that is claiming that the energy is limited or being generated randomly etc.

One argument for the presence of non-physical principle is why people can end up believing in those principles and transcending them to earth.

I think I am getting lost in the meaning of what is physical, for example if I start flying it would be physical? Even if it does not follow rules of nature?

non-physical for me, is defined by a property that is not found in the tangible universe, for example symmetry. What is symmetric in our minds? The time, with time comes notions like our own death and with it beliefs of what happens after we die.

Note that with this I am not saying that our mind is capable to produce perfect symmetric thinking ( as for that I am not sure ) but at least is close to it.

In this sense claiming that time is deduced from tangible universe is against the sense that the universe is entropic witch is an antonym of symmetry.

. Non-physicality is a way of describing not a object. I could do a reverse argument and say that what is physical is a construction of our mind and therefore is grounded on our mind. So the foundation of what exists occured in our mind and therefore all theories have the same validation in matters of how they are constructed (not talking on probability or proofs)

and a physical process can only produce physical theories?

a mental construction, are not physics a theory and theories come from our minds

is not physical a claim of imagination too?

I think that thoughts are singular. That quality of being one, is what seems unphysical to me as in nature it seems that everything is permanently connected.

and what is the point of the puzzle if even a LLM system is on there?

but why ideas can not have physical properties. Are not physical properties just laws, I think mental creativity can follow those laws.

I also consider qualia as the let's say plastic material.
With these material physical laws can be created but also non physical.

You mentioned that logic inference was non-physical and I am unsure about that claim. I think that a pure inference is not achieved to know.

I will like to know why logic distinctions are non-physical. If you don't want to go off-topic, you can direct message me.

when you say *6 is the cause of metaphysical mind, why distinction is metaphysical ?

if it is casual, what exactly causes?

For what I can elucidate subjective experience does not break the chain of physical causality ( neither adds information)

interesting, but I struggle to reason how does a coalescence of a discernable duality overlap. As they are uncommon

so it could be said that the mind is so powerful that can recreate realities so believable that confuse our human experience in the world?

when you agree with " a system experiences itself when it can no longer objectify its internal differences. The internal differences, differ between ? Physical-mental domain?

what is there when all past experiences are pointed?

I wonder how would an elemental form could be. For it being elementary, it should be everywhere right? In flavours, in sounds, in sight. I think there should be some starting from, from where our mind builds representations, otherwise our mind must be as complex as universe

addition is quite another controversy, I think when you got two and you add another two the addition is occurring in the world.

how do you know is the same distance

Yea I like to walk, another symmetrical motion, but I don't do it perfectly. And thinking about myself walking symmetric, brings my unsymmetric body to the equation, breaking the symmetry.

nature has semi-symmetry like birds singing, maybe batch was copying birds

yea why you mentioning that?

yea approximate symmetry rules the world, but pure symmetry is not, as everything is affected by particles symmetry is impossible

I think I am unsure to know exactly what you mean, could you rephrase what you said please

yea I am confused, I am starting to rethink nothingness as the "other stuff" that is not a symmetric relationship, and giving the non physical property to the symmetric relationship.

about birth and death, exactly they are different; one occuring after nothing (birth)and other occurring theoretically before nothing ( death), so they share same relationship with total nothing.

About your second claim, you are right, sometimes I say nothingness when I really want to mean total nothing

the mental representation of an absence presented by two different planes or spaces one with the thing(phenomen) and parallel space with some part missing, pure nothingness is perceived only in the sum of all possibilities of absence. The controversy could be that absence could not bring awareness or not be treated alone, I not see a clear argument against that, is an actual fact that the mind can act upon an individual absence, therefore why not upon a sum of them

basically is about nothingness being an non physical entity, therefore anything worldy that resembles nothingness is not physical even if it is in the world.

Then the question of how something not physical can came up in the world if everything involving worldy experience seems physically could be answered by a gate between mind theory of nothingness and world, that gate is what I and some people describe as consciousness.

One way I thought of how can nothingness be a part of a world is by thinking of reencarnation.
I argue reencarnation as the probability of existence after death based on the actual existence after being. I put death and being born with similar connotations because both resemble me of nothingness. This resemblance with nothing is the argument of a non physical prove on world that is created in the mind and tied with consciousness.

Let me know if I can clarify anything.

Hi, Frist the concept of nothingness needs to be accepted. My definition of nothingness could be explained as a theory that is form with the sum of all absences, an absence being a comparation between different symetric planes where one part is missing.