is death the cause of evolution

Is it the awareness of the observation that causes the collapse. Would say an animals observation operate the collapse in the same way. I know theres a system that uses wavefunction collapse on bank security.

Assuming you meant to put a question mark there (?): What's the difference between the observation and the awareness of the observation?



Assuming you meant to say "Would you say" and end it with a question mark: No, I would not say that.



Not sure what relevance that has to the question at hand, even if it were true (which I seriously doubt).

Well an animal could be the observer but not be aware of the implications of its observation.

There has to be an observer to collapse the wave function into the on going event in qm. What im saying is there is only one real observer for the whole event even the writing of these posts is preordained by nothing. And nothing as death is the shaper of forms in the event. That is nothing as niarvana that is the true underlying observer collapsing the wave function of probabilities into the universe ongoing.

QM neither suggests nor requires a cosmic, "underlying observer." Nor is nibbana described as nothing in Buddhism. Buddhism flatly denies any such "underlying observer." If you knew more about either, you wouldn't be so confused. Please take some time to educate yourself about the things you use to support your claim. They don't support your claim. Find something that does, please.

Well its my belief nibbana as nonlocality is the underlying observer in qm. But nibbana also exists as the non happening self which presents the event evolution of species included.

Well, you're just making stuff up. Neither Buddhism nor QM support your idea. If you can show me something in the Pali Canon or a peer-reviewed science journal, you'd establish a lot more credibility. As it stands, you could believe in tadpoles on Neptune and I could believe in pink unicorns on Pluto, and as long as neither of us is burdened by the need to provide evidence, neither of us would have produced anything worth considering.

Well budhism and qm must if Budhism is correct be one in the samething. One cannot exist indenpendent of the other. To my knowledge the niarvana part of buddhism is correct and therefor must fit qm. And nonlocality is the common.

Nibbana isn't a place or a thing. QM says nothing about it, and Buddhism says nothing about QM. They don't contradict because they don't overlap.

Yes nibbana is not a place because it nibbana is nonlocality. And as with all else distinction in the local field is illusion. All locality is illusion relative to nonlocality its creator and former.

If you think it's rational to take such jibberish on faith, then either you're or you think I am.

Ha. If qm s right and budhism s right there has to be a nonlocal connection. And they are right especially budhism regards niarvana. But budhism as a whole I dont think its all correct.

Pardon me for a moment while I put you on Ignore.

Ha. Work it out fbm niarvana has got to be nomoving and nonlocal. I know though it nibbana is beond any description but it is the cause and it nibbana is certain.

I think the collapse of the wavefunction is cause by the effects of applied consciousness overriding base state nonlocal consciousness.

Good luck with the niarvana fbm. Its certainly the right path.