Deducing the IQ level of the Original and Prime Universal Observer! Just how smart are/were they?

Explanation: The universe must of had an Observer [to collapse the uncertain wave function into a reality].

Now, who that observer is ... IS NOT THE ISSUE of this thread.

This thread is purely about what we can deduce about that specific Observers level of Intelligence ok!

Where do we start looking for this data and what standards should be applied?

Personal Disclosure: I think that the 1st Observers IQ level was low ... very low and I am hoping to be proven wrong on that issue.

reply to post by OmegaLogos
Please don't limit this thread to proof.
What kind of silly requirement is that to impose on your original idea?

reply to post by OmegaLogos

What do we have with which we might compare it's IQ.
Ours?
Just where would you guess it to be on a human scale?

reply to post by OmegaLogos


"The universe must of had an Observer ..."

I see you've been exploring Schrodinger.

reply to post by TerryMcGuire


Explanation: I think I stated in my personal disclosure that the prime observers IQ level was low in my opinion.

I could be very wrong [it was just a pure GUESS ok] and I hope to be shown to be wrong on that for my own personal reasons [which i wont go into].

If we have an independant standard we can apply that we can agree on as a standard worth applying then we have a tool to use.

Do you have any recommendations on which standards we should use, to try and deduce the IQ of a the Prime Universal Observer?

Personal Disclosure: Thanks for under taking this thread!

Originally posted by OmegaLogos



Now, who that observer is ... IS NOT THE ISSUE of this thread.

This thread is purely about what we can deduce about that specific Observers level of Intelligence ok!

With out knowing WHO the observer is; how can we deduce his level of intelligence?

Do you have some kind of mystical IQ test? Can we access his/her ACT scores?

Hmm.. interesting notion..

My personal philosophy is that the universe is sentient.. I don't bother myself too much with how that sentience came about. The universe's purpose is to learn the nature of its existance. So in a sense, I would imagine that the IQ (as we know it) of the universe was very high at the start, but its knowledge base was basically empty.

reply to post by whaaa


Explanation:

With out knowing WHO the observer is; how can we deduce his level of intelligence?

Their ACTIONS! Like a nameless stunt actor [until the credits] doing a stunt in the movie, we can assess their actions.

Do you have some kind of mystical IQ test?

No! Can your recommend one please?

Can we access his/her ACT scores?

I don't know! Please investigate and let us know ok!

Personal Disclosure: Thanks for asking!

reply to post by rogerstigers


Explanation: Starred!

I thank you very much for staying on target and on topic and I noticed you took the title of the topic to heart and so I am taking that as a subtle hint that is where 'we' collectively should look i.e....

My personal philosophy is that the universe is sentient.. I don't bother myself too much with how that sentience came about.

... and you bring up a great point because this thread isn't about how they came into existence but instead "Just how smart are/were they?"

But this ...

The universe's purpose is to learn the nature of its existance.

Can you point to any universal action that might substantiate that claim?

So in a sense, I would imagine that the IQ (as we know it) of the universe was very high at the start, but its knowledge base was basically empty.

That too is a possiblity and I hope that investigation of this prime universal observers actions determines that issue one way or the other!

Personal Disclosure: Do you know of any standard that could be applied to assess the actions with?

If I had to guess, that of a child at first ( with fanciful things like dinosaurs) then HE/She IT went into puberty and wild imagination became less fanciful and there were things of greater intelligence created by the observer so there were cavemen and such wonderful animals that were majecstic and beautiful, then it grew to adult hood where study and analysis comes into being (mainly everything after the evolution of man and the start of science math etc).
We are growing or have grown because it was growing and now is grown.
But this is just my opinion, when it was an infant? Who knows maybe a fart was the big bang?
Just kidding.

reply to post by OmegaLogos


Well we all know about the Creative Observer, it is an intuitive understanding.Yet we lie and deny.
Many of us choose to only disclose upon our death bed.
Lets face it, it is not only easier that way, but it creates a special validity.
A moment of true intimacy.
Before we are gone from here forever.

All you had to do was ask.

My IQ is 117.

Infinitely smart.

reply to post by OmegaLogos


Well, it would be very very hard to asses the nature of a system that we are part of.. that would be like trying to look at our own eyes without the use of a reflective surface..

I deduce and assume (key word there) that the universe is on a quest for self exploration because everything we recognize as sentient seems to also be curious... Curiosity has always amazed me, since aside from survival, there is no real use for it.

Still, all of this is just just my own personal observations and suppositions.. I might be wrong.

The Universes are Dimensionally as Vast as the sheer number of orbs residing in just one, its pretty simple when you think about it...The Multiverse is an Infinity Machine" designed to project every possible scenario that could ever exist.

Then the Observers ( note plural ) can experience what ever theme of emotion and experience required to evolve into a Creator themself.

reply to post by OmegaLogos

The universe must of had an Observer [to collapse the uncertain wave function into a reality].

Now that is an interesting thought; one I haven't experienced ... till now.

I think you should start by defining your ters. Intelligence has inferred by many posters here, and all different. What I've learned in my time is that intelligence isn't "how smart" One is. Intelligence isn't even related to "how much One knows", but rather, to how well One can learn and adapt. (You shuld take a look at some cmoputer learning, and intelligence models). Consider this; "you are more intelligent when very young, than you are at older age." As we all grow from infantcy to adulthood, we loose our "edge" on adaption and learning. We literlly learn more in the first 3 years, than the rest of our life combined.

It should also be pointed out that "observers" typically do not interact with what they are observing. If this bserving entity begins to participate ievents, then "he" stops being an observer, and becomes an active participant in events, perhaps spawning his own events.

Explanation: Bumped to help generate ad revenue!

Personal Disclosure: Enjoy!