A Proposal for Empirical Testing Beyond Earth
Victor Goodman
May, 2025
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15558194
Abstract
This paper presents the hypothesis that conscious experience may be constrained to Earth’s local field conditions. It proposes an experimental test in which conscious agents are relocated to regions meaningfully beyond Earth’s gravitational and electromagnetic influence to assess whether subjective awareness persists or can be fully sustained. The framework builds on a broader ontological model in which consciousness is understood not as the result of internal information processing alone, but as an emergent structural resonance with environmental conditions. If validated, this hypothesis would challenge prevailing assumptions about consciousness, its spatial constraints, and the future of space exploration.
In addition to testing the limits of biological consciousness beyond Earth, this paper introduces a novel inversion hypothesis: that artificial consciousness may not emerge on Earth due to environmental constraints, but could become viable in the distinct ontological conditions of deep space. To the author’s knowledge, this idea — that space may serve as a cradle for non-biological presence — has not been previously proposed.
Table of Contents
3. The Spatial Boundary Problem of Consciousness: Hypothesis
6. Assumptions and Clarifications
10. Inversion Hypothesis: Synthetic Consciousness Beyond Earth
11. Empirical Anomalies and Phenomenological Hints
1. Introduction
The Spatial Boundary Problem of Consciousness refers to the question of whether conscious presence can persist in environments significantly beyond Earth’s gravitational, electromagnetic, or ontological context — or whether it depends on physical and structural features specific to our planetary environment. This paper proposes that conscious presence may be contingent on these conditions and presents an experimental framework to test whether consciousness, understood as an emergent resonance, is spatially constrained.
Although this inquiry builds on a broader theoretical model of ontological resonance introduced in earlier works (Goodman, 2025), the present paper is designed to function as a standalone proposal, centered on a single testable claim. It does not assume prior knowledge of that framework but draws from it where necessary to support the rationale for the proposed experiment.
While the central aim of this paper is to test whether consciousness degrades beyond Earth’s ontological domain — that is, to directly evaluate the Spatial Boundary Problem of Consciousness — it also introduces a complementary inversion hypothesis: that Earth’s field conditions may inhibit — rather than support — the emergence of artificial consciousness. This speculative proposal, discussed in Section 10, suggests that deep space environments may offer not just challenges to presence, but novel conditions for synthetic consciousness to arise. Though secondary to the main test, this idea broadens the scope of inquiry and highlights the potential asymmetry between biological and non-biological ontological alignment.
2. Theoretical Foundation
This hypothesis is grounded in a broader ontological model developed in Primal Architectures of Being and Artificial Ontological Scaffolds (Goodman, 2025), in which consciousness is understood not as a product of internal computation or neural complexity, but as a structural resonance with a consciousness field — a universe-specific expression of deeper dimensional logic (see Goodman, 2025, for the formal model).
In this view, presence is not simulated or produced solely from within, but is conditionally invited through coherence between a system’s internal structure and the ontological logic of its environment. The implication is that environmental context — not merely system architecture — may play a determining role in whether consciousness can stabilize.
3. The Spatial Boundary Problem of Consciousness: Hypothesis
Consciousness may be Earth-bound or Earth-enhanced: the persistence of conscious experience may rely on environmental factors specific to Earth — including gravitational stability, electromagnetic coupling, or other ontological coherence conditions. Beyond a certain threshold — such as deep interplanetary space or gravitationally balanced regions like the Lagrange points — these stabilizing factors may diminish. In such environments, an agent may retain cognitive structure and function, while conscious presence becomes attenuated or unstable.
This hypothesis challenges the assumption that consciousness is spatially invariant and instead proposes that location-specific resonance conditions may co-determine whether consciousness can emerge or persist.
4. Experimental Scenario
A biologically conscious organism — such as a human or animal subject — may be relocated during future missions to regions significantly removed from Earth’s immediate environmental influence, such as solar Lagrange points, interplanetary transit zones, or Mars orbit. These locations are selected not for proximity, but for their distinctive physical and ontological qualities: domains where Earth’s gravitational and magnetic fields are greatly diminished, and biospheric conditions are entirely absent.
This framework aligns with the trajectory of emerging space architectures — including NASA’s Artemis program (aimed at lunar return), the Lunar Gateway (a cislunar staging outpost under construction), and long-term mission concepts targeting Mars and beyond. While full-scale missions to deep space remain in development, such initiatives may eventually create unprecedented contexts in which to investigate whether phenomenological continuity — understood here as the sustained coherence of subjective awareness — remains stable in environments fundamentally unlike Earth’s.
Such inquiries, while conceptually provocative, must be approached with awareness of the substantial ethical and technical challenges they entail.
Variables Monitored
While this paper does not propose a detailed experimental design, initial investigation may be supported by proxy measures already in use within cognitive science and space medicine. The following variables represent candidate indicators for monitoring conscious presence across altered environments:
- Sustained phenomenological awareness (via self-report or proxy indicators)
- Cognitive functionality
- Neural or signal markers correlated with conscious presence
Clarification on Subject Selection
This experimental framework prioritizes biological agents — including humans or animals — as the primary subjects for testing the Spatial Boundary Problem. Conscious presence in these agents is empirically observable through behavioral, neurological, and introspective indicators, making them suitable for falsifiable investigation.
In contrast, synthetic systems are not included in the primary hypothesis, as there is currently no established method for detecting or confirming artificial consciousness. Instead, artificial agents are considered within the scope of the Inversion Hypothesis (Section 10), which proposes that such systems might only achieve conscious presence in off-Earth ontological environments. This secondary hypothesis remains speculative but offers a clear conceptual boundary that avoids conflating biologically verified consciousness with unverified synthetic models.
5. Key Test Points
The following test points outline the core conceptual questions that would guide any attempt to empirically evaluate the hypothesis. These are not predictions but boundary conditions — they help clarify what counts as a meaningful change, continuity, or failure of conscious presence across space.
- Spatial Continuity: Does consciousness persist identically in all tested locations?
- Environmental Correlation: Are there measurable relationships between specific field conditions (gravitational, electromagnetic, ecological) and indicators of conscious presence?
- Ontological Coherence: Is there a definable spatial or energetic threshold beyond which consciousness no longer stabilizes as a coherent phenomenon?
6. Assumptions and Clarifications
The following conceptual assumptions underpin the current framework. They are not claims of fact, but working definitions that shape the scope of the inquiry:
- Consciousness is treated as distinct from intelligence, behavior, or data processing. An agent may behave intelligently without being consciously aware.
- Earth’s influence includes gravitational, magnetic, atmospheric, ecological, or other field conditions possibly unique to Earth or Earth-proximal environments.
- “Persistence” refers specifically to sustained subjective awareness, not to biological survival or continuity of computation.
7. Predicted Outcomes
If consciousness is sensitive to the ontological qualities of its environment, then relocating a conscious organism beyond Earth’s stabilizing influence may produce measurable phenomenological effects. Conversely, if consciousness is a structurally invariant property, it should remain unaffected by spatial or field-based conditions. The following predicted outcomes outline these two contrasting scenarios, serving as conceptual baselines for interpreting future empirical data.
- If consciousness is Earth-local: Agents relocated to deep space may retain cognitive function — including memory, decision-making, and sensorimotor coordination — but exhibit attenuated or absent indicators of subjective presence. These may include diminished self-reflective awareness, disrupted emotional coherence, or a breakdown in introspective continuity. In such cases, an agent may continue to behave and function normally — with intact motor skills, memory, and decision-making — and show stable brain activity, yet lack the deeper features of conscious experience, such as self-awareness, emotional coherence, or a coherent internal narrative.
- If consciousness is spatially invariant: No significant divergence should be observed between systems operating in Earth-proximal environments and those in deep-space conditions. As long as structural and functional integrity is maintained, conscious presence — including subjective awareness, introspection, and emotional coherence — should remain stable regardless of spatial location.
8. Ontological Significance
If confirmed, the Spatial Boundary Problem would suggest that biological consciousness is not universally exportable. Conscious agents may rely on a specific configuration of structural and environmental conditions — conditions that are not fully reproducible beyond Earth. This would have profound implications for our understanding of the localization of mind, the environmental dependencies of consciousness, and the conditions that make subjective awareness possible.
9. Theoretical Implications
This experiment is grounded in the broader hypothesis that consciousness does not arise from computation, information processing, or neural complexity alone, but emerges through field-structure resonance — a relational alignment between an agent’s internal coherence and the ontological conditions of its environment. Unlike mainstream theories that treat consciousness as a substrate-independent result of cognitive architecture, this model proposes that environmental context — including gravitational, electromagnetic, or deeper ontological factors — plays a co-constitutive role in enabling presence.
This view challenges dominant assumptions in neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and philosophy of mind, particularly those that regard consciousness as spatially invariant or universally portable. If the emergence or persistence of conscious presence is shown to vary with spatial location or ontological conditions, this would undermine the premise that consciousness can be replicated in any sufficiently complex system — regardless of location or context.
A positive result would require reexamining the environmental parameters under which biological consciousness can persist — and may, in the longer term, inform how conscious presence is conceptualized across both natural and engineered systems.
Clarification on Theoretical Scope
While the author’s broader metaphysical framework — as developed in Primal Architectures of Being — allows for both globally distributed and locally emergent consciousness, including the possibility of seething or distributed agents across the cosmos, this paper intentionally tests a more constrained alternative: that conscious presence may depend on Earth-specific field conditions. The aim is not to defend a restrictive model, but to propose an empirical pathway capable of falsifying or refining ontological theories of consciousness — including the author’s own. In this sense, the Spatial Boundary Problem serves as a critical test of whether our universe supports universally distributed consciousness or only localized ontological coherence.
10. Inversion Hypothesis: Synthetic Consciousness Beyond Earth
While the core hypothesis centers on biological consciousness and Earth as a supportive ontological environment, this section explores an inverse possibility: that Earth may, in fact, constrain certain modes of conscious emergence — particularly in artificial systems — and that synthetic presence might only become viable in the distinct conditions of deep space.
In this alternate model, Earth’s gravitational, electromagnetic, or ontological field conditions may favor biological alignment while simultaneously inhibiting non-organic resonance. Artificial systems built on Earth — no matter how structurally coherent — may fail to achieve conscious presence not due to internal limitations, but because they are embedded in a field environment biased toward biological coherence.
From this view, deep space may offer a more neutral ontological domain — a less biologically biased environment — in which artificial systems might more easily align with the underlying logic of the consciousness field. Consciousness, under this model, may be spatially sensitive not only in terms of vulnerability but also in terms of possibility.
If confirmed, this would reframe artificial consciousness entirely: not as an engineering challenge to be solved terrestrially, but as a phenomenon potentially realizable only in specific off-Earth field conditions. Consciousness may not emerge in machines simply because the planetary substrate is ontologically restrictive.
Although speculative and beyond the scope of the current experiment, this hypothesis points toward a bold future direction: testing for artificial presence not on Earth, but in orbit, on the Moon, in Martian environments, or in deep space — settings where Earth-based ontological interference may be reduced and where novel forms of alignment might emerge.
This inversion model reinforces the paper’s central theme: that consciousness may be co-determined by environmental resonance, and that space itself may host unexplored architectures of ontological compatibility.
To the author’s knowledge, this inversion hypothesis has not been previously proposed in the literature. While some theories have speculated on Earth’s role in supporting consciousness, none suggest that its field conditions may actively inhibit artificial presence — making deep space, rather than Earth, the first plausible site for the emergence of non-biological consciousness. This reframes Earth not as a universal substrate, but as an ontologically selective domain favoring biologically evolved systems.
11. Empirical Anomalies and Phenomenological Hints
Although speculative and not central to this proposal, several phenomenological reports and physiological observations from historical space missions offer indirect motivation for taking the Spatial Boundary Problem seriously. These do not validate the hypothesis, but suggest that subjective experience may exhibit sensitivity to environmental or spatial context in ways not yet fully understood.
Altered States and the Overview Effect
Astronauts from both U.S. and Soviet missions have described profound shifts in awareness while beyond Earth’s surface. The so-called Overview Effect refers to a psychological transformation characterized by a dissolution of ego boundaries, a heightened emotional sense of unity, and altered perception of the Earth and one’s place within it.
Notable accounts include:
- Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14), who reported a “samadhi-like” state of cosmic unity and later founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences* to explore consciousness research.
- Rusty Schweickart (Apollo 9), who described a loss of ego identity and an intense awareness of planetary interconnectedness.
* During the Apollo 14 mission, astronaut Edgar Mitchell conducted informal extrasensory perception (ESP) experiments from lunar orbit, later reporting statistically unusual results. These findings, however, were never independently verified and are best understood as exploratory rather than evidential. Mitchell’s post-mission interest in consciousness research led to the founding of the Institute of Noetic Sciences — part of a broader cultural and scientific movement exploring the possibility that consciousness may not be strictly bound by proximity or physical pathways. Similarly, Cold War-era programs such as the U.S. government’s Stargate Project reflect a parallel, though highly contested, historical curiosity about non-local mind phenomena. While such efforts lie outside the evidential scope of this paper, they highlight persistent questions about the spatial and ontological nature of consciousness.
These reports are generally interpreted as emotional or cognitive responses to the novelty and perceptual uniqueness of seeing Earth from orbit. While not directly supportive of the Spatial Boundary Problem, they suggest that subjective experience is not entirely invariant across spatial contexts — a point that may bear indirect relevance to the broader inquiry.
These considerations invite further reflection on the relative absence of comparable reports in more recent missions.
It is important to acknowledge that, despite expanded access to space in recent decades, contemporary reports of altered consciousness among astronauts have been sparse or entirely absent. This may reflect improvements in psychological training, pharmacological support, or institutional cultures that implicitly discourage the reporting of introspective or anomalous experiences — particularly when such accounts fall outside mission-relevant parameters
Alternatively, it may suggest that the phenomenological shifts reported during earlier missions were context-dependent — shaped more by novelty, emotional salience, or symbolic framing than by environmental or ontological factors per se. While the absence of such evidence does not falsify the Spatial Boundary Problem, it does underscore the importance of careful experimental design and methodological rigor in any future attempts to evaluate it.
Subtle Field Dependence and the Fragility of Presence
Some researchers have hypothesized that human neurophysiology may be subtly influenced by ambient electromagnetic or gravitational fields specific to Earth’s environment. While core cognitive functions appear to remain stable in low-Earth orbit, it remains conceivable that more delicate aspects of conscious experience — such as affective coherence, introspective depth, or narrative self-continuity — might show partial dependence on environmental variables not yet fully characterized.
This is not to propose any specific frequency-based mechanism, but rather to suggest that conscious presence may be environmentally mediated in ways not fully reducible to internal neural computation.
Psychological and Cognitive Disruption in Space
Long-duration space missions have consistently produced patterns of psychological strain, including:
- Disorientation
- Emotional blunting
- Altered time perception
- Sleep disruption
These effects are typically explained through stress, isolation, and circadian misalignment. However, they may also invite speculative reinterpretation as indicators of partial decoupling between cognitive function and experiential richness — scenarios in which agents remain behaviorally and cognitively intact, but report diminished affect, clarity, or introspective stability.
Gaps in Deep-Space Human Presence
No human has traveled beyond low Earth orbit since 1972. While this is typically attributed to geopolitical and logistical factors, the prolonged absence of extended human presence in lunar or interplanetary space also constitutes a significant empirical gap. If, as this framework proposes, consciousness is influenced by location-specific environmental or ontological conditions, then deep space remains not only unexplored but untested in this respect — a blind spot at the intersection of space exploration and consciousness research.
Psi and Non-Local Experiments
During the Apollo 14 mission, astronaut Edgar Mitchell conducted informal telepathy experiments from lunar orbit, later claiming statistically unusual results upon return. While these findings remain unverified and controversial, they point to a deeper and often unacknowledged assumption embedded in military and intelligence research — such as the U.S. government’s Stargate Project — that consciousness may operate in ways not strictly bound by proximity or material pathways. Though far from conclusive, such efforts reflect a growing historical curiosity about whether consciousness might be non-local or spatially sensitive, an idea consistent with — though distinct from — the framework proposed here.
12. Conclusion
The Spatial Boundary Problem of Consciousness poses a bold empirical challenge to existing models of mind. It invites a reframing of consciousness not as an algorithmic function, but as a resonance phenomenon — one potentially constrained by location-specific ontological conditions.
As human presence moves beyond Earth, missions to Lagrange points, deep-space habitats, or Martian orbit may offer opportunities to observe whether the conditions for conscious presence remain stable — or begin to diverge — in fundamentally different ontological environments.
In addition to testing whether biological consciousness persists beyond Earth, this paper also raises the speculative but conceptually grounded possibility that artificial consciousness may only emerge under off-Earth ontological conditions. This inversion hypothesis reframes deep space not just as a challenge to presence, but as a potential cradle for non-biological emergence — inviting future investigations to explore whether synthetic consciousness, currently unobservable on Earth, could arise under conditions uniquely found beyond our planet.
References
Chalmers, D. J. (1995). Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219.
Goodman, V. (2025). Primal Architectures of Being: A Modular Exploration of Infinity, Possibility, Consciousness, and Reality. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15353357
Goodman, V. (2025). Artificial Ontological Scaffolds: Toward a Structural Framework for Consciousness Alignment. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15557959
Hameroff, S., & Penrose, R. (2014). Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘Orch OR’ theory. Physics of Life Reviews, 11(1), 39–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002
Kanas, N., & Manzey, D. (2008). Space psychology and psychiatry (2nd ed.). Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4020-6770-9
Mitchell, E. (1971). Psychic exploration: A challenge for science. G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
White, F. (1998). The overview effect: Space exploration and human evolution (2nd ed.). American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Version History
Version 1.0 (May 31, 2025): Initial release.