Or if not _it_ (perhaps there are an infinitude of them), at least _one_. "Consciousness" is a phenomenon, like "Physics". All consciousness is the same phenomenon operating on differing contexts.

That reads to me like I'm not saying anything at all, but the concept of consciousness in phenomenological debates is often problematic to me. Somehow. Somewhere. We are conscious, therefore we assume x, y, quifnut.

And like physics, paired particles of consciousness can (possibly) influence each other across long distances, yeah?

Just a thought. :) Feel free to shoot a billion holes in it. Or ask "Why?" because that's a big enough hole in itself, I think. It came from reading a proof of the existence of a creator (not any particular creator, just something outside of this spacetime), and trying to find the right words... I haven't quite found the right words, but I've got too much workworkwork and playworkwork to focus on it the way it requires just now.

[[Oh, and--previous post--I am not a unique and beautiful snowflake, of course. I've had my #1 broken twice now.]]

ETA: this is what got me started, give or take. I've done a poor job of summarizing its key points.

[given that it is believed to be four-dimensionally static, to an extent], the reality that we live within and perceive must have been sequentially created (thus accounting for the obvious causes and effects we observe) in a higher dimensional time, [...] and then became static, exactly as a painting does upon completion. Quite simply, a cause must precede its effect within existence, which cannot be the case if both the cause and the effect have always existed simultaneously.