How shall I strive to exemplify my conjecture?
1. A camera (or hologram) image is the RESULT OF AN INSTRUSION UPON THE LANDSCAPE OF IMAGES that the light provides generously to the collector of that DEVICE. That collection could be ANYTHING ANYWHERE.
I gave a Hubble imagery earlier in this thread. It is not, in my opinion, complete. Whoever scanned the heavens did not take it to the utmost extent (at least on the link I gave).
2. A fair capacity of a camera (hologram) is that it collects EXACTLY WHAT IT IS AIMED AT. It IS a kind of Quantum register of "spooky" things at ANY IMAGE that is visible to the plate, or pixels, that inherit those "sights" collected on the register.
3. This is the crux of my intuition. HOW CAN A MERE MACHINE INDUCE A LIGHT COLLECTION of any image, that also is now contained upon a film or pixel format (or hologram) and not induce a mental reaction by it's process, as well as by the viewer, and no ULTIMATE CHANGE occur in the image viewed? What I'm saying, I think for the first time, is that the user of that machine, has a Quantum effect also upon the collected image? Is it possible that, because a human uses the Hubble telescope, is there NOT an affectation toward the image(s) viewed?
I guess that this attempt of mine to express a thought of INFLUENTIAL ACTIVITY at every level of observation, as well as through our machines that amplify our FIELD OF OBSERVATION, would be interactive at the macro level, and attractive at the micro level. Is this not the emphasis I am trying to convey? All possible avenues are intertwined with consciousness, whether we understand it or not. How else would our species have learned about our presence upon our environment without the subjective intuition to explore and to manipulate our environment? We have an unmistakable influence whether we realize the effects or not. It is NOT JUST ABOUT INTELLECT, but about REFLEX; our unique ability to realize that we matter as much as our environment matters. It is the greatest symbiosis that has ever come upon our intellect. Now, it is a fair request to ingrain our intuition into the very fabric of existence.
For example, I retrieve auto parts from the shelves in our warehouse. Why is it, both to your mind and my mind, that 90% of the time I stop and look around, and the part is right in front of my eyes. It is spooky, yet my intellect tells me that "I intimately know where all of the parts are from being here for fifteen years". Is it intellect, or intuition? You decide which is real.