The Virtual Universe: How Consciousness Creates Reality

The Virtual Universe

What if reality isn’t objectively “out there”, but is actually rendered or manifested by our consciousness, much like a video game world is rendered onto a computer screen or a virtual reality headset? In this model, consciousness is primary, and space, time and matter are all secondary. The universe doesn’t exist independently of the observer, but is rendered within each individual’s consciousness from a shared underlying informational field.

We all experience the same reality because we are all rendering or manifesting the same shared underlying code. It’s similar to an online multiplayer video game, where each player’s screen renders/manifests the same game-world from that player’s unique perspective. But why would reality be designed this way? Because it’s far more efficient to just render/manifest the parts of reality that are being experienced, instead of rendering it all – in full detail from the subatomic scale to the universal scale, all of the time.

The Virtual Universe Theory proposes that consciousness is primary, and the universe is rendered/manifested locally by each individual observer/experiencer. It draws on scientific, spiritual and philosophical “evidence” to support the idea that reality is rendered/manifested locally within each observer’s consciousness.

Supporting Evidence For The Virtual Universe

There is no conclusive scientific evidence that proves a self-existent, objective reality exists independently of consciousness. Conversely, science, spirituality and philosophy provide strong arguments against the existence of an objective reality, and suggest that reality is observer-dependent and rendered by the observer’s consciousness.

A. Scientific Support

1. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity

Einstein’s theory of relativity, both special and general, describes space and time as intertwined and relative to the observer. This means that time and space are not absolute, but depend on the observer’s frame of reference.

• Implication: Space-time is a rendered construct within consciousness, not an objective reality. Each observer’s consciousness creates a unique space-time geometry, akin to a video game rendering different perspectives for different players. Non-locality suggests that these geometries are interconnected, as consciousness accesses the unified information field instantly.
• Evidence: Relativistic effects are well-verified (e.g. GPS corrections for time dilation), but their observer-dependence supports the idea that space-time is a subjective projection. Theories like Verlinde’s emergent gravity, which ties gravity to information, further align with the holographic model, where consciousness organizes the information field.

2. Carlo Rovelli’s Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM)

RQM proposes that quantum states are relational, existing only relative to an observer. There is no universal state; a system’s properties depend on the observer’s interaction.

• Implication: Reality is observer-dependent, with no objective existence independent of consciousness. Each observer renders a specific reality, akin to a simulation or dream tailored to their perspective. Quantum non-locality and entanglement ensure these realities are interconnected.
• Evidence: RQM is consistent with quantum experiments, such as Bell tests, which demonstrate non-local correlations. It resolves paradoxes like Schrödinger’s cat by framing states as observer-specific.

3. Chris Fuchs’ QBism (Quantum Bayesianism)

QBism interprets quantum mechanics as a framework for an observer’s subjective beliefs, with probabilities reflecting personal expectations. So, reality unfolds uniquely for each of us, and quantum events are shaped by the choices, expectations and perceptions of the individual.

• Implication: The universe exists only as experienced by consciousness, not as an independent reality. Each observer renders their reality, supporting the idea of a locally constructed universe.
• Evidence: QBism aligns with quantum experiments (e.g. double-slit, quantum eraser), where observation determines outcomes. It offers a consistent interpretation without assuming an objective reality.

4. The Copenhagen Interpretation

The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics, by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg, suggests that quantum systems exist as a cloud of possibilities (known as a “wave function”) until observed, then one possibility becomes an actuality as it crystallises into reality. The act of observation is not just passive, but an essential part of bringing the world into form.

• Implication: Consciousness plays a central role in collapsing the wave function, bringing a specific reality into being from the quantum information field. Through entanglement, we see that this influence can even reach across vast distances instantly, suggesting that consciousness interacts with a unified underlying field.
• Evidence: Experiments like the double-slit and quantum eraser show that observation changes quantum outcomes, pointing to the active role of consciousness. Newer interpretations like QBism and RQM build on this, seeing quantum mechanics as dependent on the observer, rather than describing an objective external reality.

5. Non-locality and Quantum Entanglement

Non-locality shows that entangled particles exhibit instantaneous correlations across distances, defying classical locality.

• Implication: Reality is not composed of independent objects but a unified information field. Consciousness renders this field holistically, creating the appearance of separate objects. This supports simulation theory, where the “code” is non-local; and the virtual universe model, where reality is a projection of consciousness.
• Evidence: Experiments consistently violate Bell’s inequalities, confirming non-locality. The delayed-choice quantum eraser suggests that observation can retroactively shape reality, which challenge the objectivity of time.

6. The Holgraphic Principle

The holographic principle, proposed by Gerard ’t Hooft and Leonard Susskind, suggests that all the information in the universe is stored on a 2D surface and projected into 3D space-time, like a cosmic hologram. This idea is supported by black hole entropy calculations and developments in string theory, such as the AdS/CFT correspondence.

• Implication: If reality is a holographic projection, consciousness could act as the projector, rendering the universe from a deeper, non-physical information field — much like a simulation or dream. Non-locality supports this by showing that the underlying field is unified and accessible everywhere.
• Evidence: Theoretical research in quantum gravity and observations related to black hole entropy (like Hawking radiation) lend strong support to the holographic principle.

7. The Sapient Cosmos

In his book The Sapient Cosmos, theoretical physicist James Glattfelder places consciousness at the foundation of reality. Drawing on modern science, ancient philosophies and mystical experiences, he concludes that the universe isn’t a physical construct but a manifestation of consciousness seeking to understand itself through increasing complexity. ​

• Implication: If consciousness is fundamental, then reality may be viewed as a dynamic interplay of information and awareness, where the physical universe emerges from deeper layers of consciousness. He see the universe as a meaningful, self-aware system.​
  
• Evidence: Glattfelder draws upon developments in quantum physics, complexity theory, and philosophical inquiries into consciousness to support his thesis. He also references experiential insights from psychedelics and shamanic traditions, suggesting that these altered states can offer glimpses into the underlying conscious fabric of reality. ​

B. Spiritual Support

1. The Universe is God’s Dream

In many spiritual traditions, the universe is likened to a dream within the mind of God (universal consciousness), and individual beings are dream characters – smaller consciousnesses experiencing the dream from within. This metaphor appears in mystical Christianity, Sufism and Advaita Vedanta, where the divine mind creates and sustains reality as an expression of its infinite nature:

• • Christianity: “In him we live, and move, and have our being.” (Acts 17:28)
  • Sufism: “He is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Hidden.” (Qur’an 57:3)
  • Advaita Vedanta: “The world is unreal; only Brahman is real.” (Vivekachudamani)
• Implication: The physical world is a projection within universal consciousness, and individual consciousnesses render their realities as participants within the universal dream. This aligns with simulation theory, where the “programmer” is universal intelligence; and the holographic model, where reality is a projection of consciousness.
• Evidence: Mystical experiences, such as those reported by saints or yogis, describe unity with a divine consciousness, where the physical world dissolves into a dream-like state. While anecdotal, these accounts are consistent across cultures.

2. Maya (Illusion) in Advaita Vedanta

Maya refers to the illusion of the physical world, which veils the ultimate reality of Brahman (universal consciousness). The world appears real but is a projection of consciousness, like a dream mistaken for reality.

• Implication: Reality is a local rendering within individual consciousness, shaped by our ignorance of our unity with Brahman. This parallels the idea that observers create subjective realities, as in simulation theory or Hoffman’s interface model.
• Evidence: Meditative states and non-dual awareness, reported by practitioners, reveal consciousness as the sole reality, with the physical world as an illusion. These subjective experiences, though not empirically verifiable, are widely documented.

3. Nonduality

Nonduality refers to the unity that underlies all the seemingly separate things that we perceive. Enlightened people can sense the oneness or unity that underlies reality.

• Implication: For nondual awareness to be possible, there must be an underlying unifying factor – a unifying field, or a single source from which everything arises. Consciousness is that unifying field and source from which everything arises, because consciousness is primary. Space, time, energy and matter are experienced within our consciousness.
• Evidence: Like all experiences, nonduality is a subjective experience, so it cannot be empirically proven, but it is supported by the timeless experiences of every mystic, sage and enlightened individual who has ever lived. People who have no incentive to lie, and have known about the oneness of reality long before the materialist view was conceived.

4. Near-Death Experiences (NDEs)

Near-Death Experiences involve vivid reports of consciousness continuing beyond physical death, encounters with non-local realms, profound feelings of unity, and direct experiences of a universal intelligence. These accounts suggest that consciousness is not produced by the brain, but exists independently and fundamentally.

• Implication: If consciousness continues beyond the body, then physical reality may be a local, temporary experience within a larger field of consciousness. This supports models where reality is more like a dream, simulation or projection within universal consciousness, rather than an independently existing universe.
• Evidence: Thousands of NDE reports describe expanded awareness, life reviews and encounters with beings of light, often when brain activity is minimal. While subjective, the consistency of these experiences across individuals and cultures offers compelling support for the idea that consciousness is primary.

C. Philosophical Support

1. Bernard Kastrup’s Analytical Idealism

Analytical Idealism, proposed by ex-CERN scientist and philosopher Bernardo Kastrup, suggests that consciousness is the fundamental reality, and the physical world is a manifestation within a universal consciousness (“mind-at-large”). Individual consciousnesses are dissociated fragments of this universal mind, rendering the universe as a shared perceptual construct, akin to a dream or virtual reality.

• Implication: Analytical Idealism rejects materialism, suggesting reality is a projection of consciousness, aligning with spiritual metaphors like God’s dream and scientific ideas like simulation theory. It implies the universe is a unified, consciousness-driven phenomenon, unifying quantum mechanics and mystical insights.
• Evidence: Quantum mechanics’ observer effect (e.g., wave function collapse) and non-locality (e.g., entanglement) suggest reality depends on consciousness. Near-death experiences and synchronicities indicate consciousness transcends physical limits, supporting a universal mind as reality’s source.

2. Nick Bostrum’s Simulation Theory

Proposed by philosopher Nick Bostrom, simulation theory suggests that we live in a computer simulation created by a highly advanced intelligence. Reality isn’t self-existent but a computational construct like a video game, which is created by a higher intelligence and is experienced by individual entities.

• Implication: In a consciousness-primary model, the simulation is not run on external hardware but within a universal consciousness (God), with individual consciousnesses rendering their perspectives, much like dream characters within the mind of God.
• Evidence: While direct evidence is speculative, the increasing sophistication of virtual reality, the quantum nature of space at the Planck scale, and the information-based structure of the universe (as seen in the holographic principle) suggest reality may well be simulated. Additionally, the fine-tuning of physical constants, such as the cosmological constant, hints at the possibility of an intelligently designed or programmed universe.

3. Donald Hoffman’s Interface Theory of Perception

Hoffman argues that perception is an evolutionary “interface” rather than a direct reflection of objective reality. His simulations show that organisms perceiving reality as it is are less fit than those perceiving a simplified, fitness-driven version.

• Implication: Space-time and objects are like computer icons, constructed by consciousness for survival, not objective entities. Reality is a local rendering, supporting the virtual reality model where consciousness projects the 3D world from an information field.
• Evidence: Mathematical models and evolutionary game theory support Hoffman’s claims, showing that the ability to perceive things as they actually are is evolutionarily disadvantageous. Neuroscientific studies on perception (e.g. visual illusions) confirm that the brain constructs reality rather than mirroring it.

4. Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design suggests that some features of the universe and living organisms are best explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by random natural processes like evolution. It points to the complexity and apparent purposefulness of biological and cosmological systems, suggesting a guiding intelligence, often interpreted as a divine or higher consciousness.

• Implication: Intelligent design challenges the materialist view of reality, proposing that a purposeful intelligence, similar to spiritual models like God’s dream, shapes the universe. While distinct from models like the holographic universe, ID aligns with the idea that consciousness or intelligence plays a role in the design of reality.
• Evidence: Proponents cite irreducible complexity (e.g. bacterial flagellum), specified complexity (e.g. DNA), and fine-tuning (e.g. physical constants) as evidence of an intelligent cause.

5. The Primacy of Consciousness

Nobody has ever experienced anything outside their own consciousness. Every thought, feeling, sensation or perception occurs within our consciousness. This suggests that consciousness is not just a passive observer of reality, but is actually the very medium through which reality appears.

• Implication: Since nothing can be experienced outside of consciousness, it’s impossible to prove that anything exists independent of it. This calls into question the assumption of an objectively existing universe. Instead, it points to a consciousness-based reality, where “reality” is a structured appearance within consciousness – similar to a dream, a simulation, or a virtual reality world.
• Evidence: No one has ever experienced anything outside their own consciousness, and there is no scientific evidence that the world “out there” objectively exists. Neuroscience has not been able to explain how unconscious matter gives rise to conscious experience – this is known as the “hard problem of consciousness”.

6. Other Philosophical Support

• The Placebo Effect: The placebo effect shows that belief can alter physical outcomes (e.g. healing), indicating that consciousness shapes reality. This supports the idea of a rendered, observer-dependent universe.
• Synchronicities: Carl Jung’s synchronicities, where events align meaningfully without causal links, suggest that consciousness interacts with a non-local information field, rendering reality in a purposeful way, like a divine dream or simulation.

In Closing

The Virtual Universe Theory bridges science and spirituality by suggesting that consciousness is the source of all existence, and that reality manifests within each individual’s consciousness, rendered from a underlying shared informational field. The theory offers a profound vision of existence, where each individual is a co-creator of a dynamic, interconnected reality.

If you enjoyed this article, a selection of similar metaphysical articles can be found here: https://leebladon.com/blog/category/metaphysics/