Suppose that in order to explain the really "wierd" stuff in quantum physics like quantum entanglement, we give elementry particles another attribute; that of "awareness", surrounding each particle in a steadily decreasing energy density as a function of radial distance from it's center (a field of awareness). If we define awareness as having two components: 1. the ability to "know" and 2. the ability to interpret immediate surroundings/circumstances, then we could say that the particles don't react according to laws, but rather, they know what they are supposed to do depending on the knowledge of what they 'see' (or 'feel') around them, and what type of particle they are (as if they are perfect obeyers of "ordained" laws, but have the freedom of choice when they choose between two things when neither choice violates the "ordained" laws). They may be thought of as having a choice in certain circumstances, thus the uncertainty principle arises for those who wish to study the behavior of these particles. Of course this is merely a suggestion in interpreting experimental data, and should be derived in a way to better understand and predict natural processes; after all, if this way of thinking helps, then why not use it (much like the idea that E=hf)? Is life the only thing that possesses awareness? Is a lifeform a stable structure of organized complex dynamical processes that all seemingly cooperate to emerge as a single entity with seemingly one mind? At what point does awareness emerge in living things? Can awareness be quantized down to each single particle of said living thing? If so, then the ammount of awareness of each stable dynamical structure can be quantified according to the resolution of measured complexity and/or number of sub-systems of the lifeform in question. A human for example would seemingly have much more complexity (or simply a much broader range of awareness) than a cat, because we can do a wider variety of things (like write, play the piano, paint, play football, etc.). A cat may seem to be less aware in these respects, but it can be aware of much more than us humans in terms of thier immediate surroundings (including thier ammount of focus during short time intervals). For example, a cat's reflexes are known to be very quick, and probably faster than ours, and it is more in tune with a "spidy sense" or "intuition" about it's environment because cats (and all other animals) can sense earthquakes before they occur with much greater accuracy than humans with all thier seismographs and computer equipment. The point is, awareness is a very tricky thing to quantify, and most likely impossible because no single awareness can be aware of everything that needs to be taken into account in any particular event. It's also distasteful because it tempts one to quantify the highest awareness possible, wich is philosophically very contraversial. I would venture to guess that there is an agreeable conclusion to these problems in the uncertainty principle, that it's defined to be impossible to quantify god, even taking into account everything in the universe, because you'd still be dealing with an awareness that has the freedom to decide things one way or the other. Nevertheless, these thought explorations won't stop me from acting under a lack of awareness of how reality truely works. With all of that out of the way, lets define one quantum of awareness. First of all, what should it be dependant on? The two things stated above? 1. Knowledge, 2. Interpretation: A=IK. Knowdelge needs to be a vector, defining the present energy state of the partcle, it's spin, and location among other particles. Interpretation must be an operator that operates on the Knowledge vector in a way particular to the type of structure (particle in question), since each particle behaves in it's own particular way, each particle should have a corresponding operator that, when operated on it's corresponding knowledge, equals a frequency. K is not going to be constant, but is influenced by a recursion relation with it's previous state-space and the operator. The operator is constant, but there is a need for as many of them as there are known particles. Awareness doesn't exist in small time intervals, because it takes time to think, so the relation A=IK doesn't really mean anything because it only exists for a moment in time (dt), it is a single frequency though, and therefore, it has a corresponding energy E=hA, during this moment in time dt. The true awareness wave is a seemingly chaotic pattern of different frequencies, all with no known rhyme or reason, in essence 100% random, but during any particular "snapshot" the awareness is a single-valued frequency corresponding to a specific energy of the system at that time. The awareness function is both dependant on the ammount of it's own energy and it's own complexity of operation. The only argument I can supply as to why awareness in an ammount of energy is because of something I read about experiments that a scientist did which observed an average change in weight of humans as they passed away (which basically was just an experiment where a highly sensitive scale is built into the bed of terminally ill patients, and data is continually plotted). Studies concluded that an average loss of 2/3 of an ounce occured upon death. Since E=mc^2, then the awareness of the average human would be something like (((2/3)/16)(lb)/32.2(ft/s^2))*(14.59(kg))(3*10^8)(m/s^s)^2= 1.699*10^15 Joules. Keep in mind, this is something I can't verify because I can't remember the guy's name, or find a link to his study... why does the awareness correspond to an ammount of overall mass? Perhaps the awareness function is trapped within the many twists and turns of all the neural systems in the brain, as if the brain itself is like a finite universe that curves around in circles leaving the awareness with no escape until the whole system breaks down and the awareness exits it's loop. This implies that the awareness surrounding each particle can be transferred to other particles, and some particles may possess more than others, much like the property of mass or charge. The more I think about this, the less it seems possible... If it's transferrable, then it's inducable, and if it's inducable, then awareness doesn't need to be localized around particles. This moves all the way over to cosmology... Perhaps the dark matter, or dark energy is cosmic awareness? Can awareness be created or destroyed? if an awareness can be created but not destroyed, then thermodynamics is violated, but the accelerating expansion can be better explained since there will be an increasing ammount of awareness in the universe over time (increasing energy). Maybe thermodynamics doesn't have to be violated since we don't know with certainty, the way awareness behaves. What if awareness doesn't even need to exist within the universe at all? I don't see why not. I guess I should change the "theory of awarenss" into "hypothesis of awareness" or maybe even "extemporateous writing adventure"... I hope I've entertained you.