Connecting Consciousness Knowledge

A small shared catalogue, with clear boundaries

Discussion question: could researchers, reference editors, wisdom communities and citizen curators help readers move between their resources through a small, traceable catalogue of public scholarly records?

AkashicNET proposes starting with selected publications connected to a few clearly defined questions. Each record would retain its original publication link, verified identifier, discovery trail, source type, review status and independently written limitations. Reports of experience, philosophical interpretations and experimental findings would remain distinguishable.

The first deliverable would be an inspectable pilot rather than a combined copy of other platforms’ databases. Reusable metadata could come from appropriately licensed indexes, with provider-specific exceptions checked. Text, images, participant accounts and substantial collections would require their own permission basis. Possible collaboration would be agreed with the relevant people, rather than inferred from shared interests.

Five questions to take into a conversation

1. Which original publications and stable identifiers are the best starting points for a bounded pilot?
2. Which metadata fields may be reused, through which interface, with what attribution and limits?
3. How should corrections, contrary findings, duplicates and uncertain interpretations be recorded?
4. What could a citizen curator contribute usefully, and which judgments need specialist review?
5. What small demonstration would help researchers assess whether this approach saves time and improves traceability?

Suggested first conversation: IONS, based on the historical connections documented below. SAND speakers and Psi Encyclopedia contributors offer further possible introductions, without implying they represent their organisations in any proposed collaboration.

Status: an independent AkashicNET proposal for discussion around TSC2026. It has not been presented here as a submitted or accepted conference contribution. No TSC, IONS, SPR, SAND or other platform endorsement is implied.

A promising combination in an existing field

AkashicNET has substantial relatives on the web. Science and Nonduality (SAND) brings together science, wisdom traditions, direct experience, art and community. The Consciousness Library organises scholarly research. IONS conducts research and offers experiential programmes. Psi Encyclopedia provides specialist reference articles. Noeticmap connects experience reports, literature and visual exploration. Spiritual Evidence Map explores claims and interpretations through a provisional scoring framework.[4–13]

The distinction worth developing is AkashicNET’s proposed combination: interdisciplinary curation, discoverable source relationships, uncertainty, evidence categories, cultural context and compassionate purpose. Its public pages explicitly describe these commitments. Their effectiveness must be demonstrated through reliable records and consistent review, rather than inferred from the presence of labels.[1–3]

What this comparison can establish

This report uses public homepages, About pages, methods, policies and terms consulted on 1 Oct 2026. It separates each organisation’s published descriptions from this report’s comparative judgments. It covers six neighbouring projects and two scholarly metadata providers, with a limited historical check of their TSC connections.

The comparison concerns purpose, discoverability, source handling, publishing activity, reuse and maturity. It does not test every search feature, audit every study assessment, inspect internal databases or independently verify organisational registration claims. Update schedules are reported where stated; a stated schedule is not proof that every item is current.

Collection sizes are deliberately not ranked. A scholarly article, Reddit URL, first-person account, topic page and extracted finding are different units. Larger counts alone do not demonstrate greater coverage, better evidence or fewer duplicates. The same source appearing through several platforms remains one underlying source.

Operator identities are distinguished from technical hosting providers. This report verifies some named operators from their own disclosures; it does not identify origin servers or cloud-hosting arrangements.

Current public capabilities and developing ambitions

AkashicNET describes itself as a citizen data-science project connecting consciousness research, community knowledge, contemplative wisdom, creativity and planetary understanding. Its About page makes clear that lived meaning and scientific evidence receive different treatment, and that resemblance creates a candidate for review rather than an automatic accepted relationship.[1]

AkashicLIBRARY is explicitly presented as an exploratory prototype. Its current public pathways include consciousness, noetic inquiry, reincarnation, historical archives, sacred spaces and testimony. It defines linked, metadata-only, open-licence import and excluded/on-hold states, and proposes source maps, competing views and version histories.[2]

The technology landscape page states that AkashicNET has no native AI engine. It presents AkashicOMNI as a human-led assessment framework and modular AI assistance as a possible direction. A published beta or pre-release designation does not make every proposed feature production-ready.[3]

Different strengths, compatible roles

The table describes complementary functions. It is not a league table and does not imply partnership, endorsement or equal evidential quality.

Six projects worth learning from

Shared researchers, distinct organisations

The Science of Consciousness (TSC) archives reveal connections to this ecosystem through earlier conference editions. The strongest direct organisational trail is IONS. SAND and Psi Encyclopedia also connect through named people. A shared speaker, an indexed paper, a conference interview and an official organisational role are different relationships.

Where to browse past talks

Start with the University of Arizona conference archive and the 2024 recordings and interview collection. The latter links conference interviews with Donald Hoffman, Thomas Brophy, Jonathan Schooler and Tam Hunt, alongside session recordings. An interview should be catalogued as an interview, not substituted for a research paper. [24]

What this means for AkashicNET

Recommended first conversation: IONS, given the documented participation across several editions. Possible discussion topics include finding original publications, obtaining verified metadata, how contested findings are reviewed, and whether any selected resources carry explicit reuse permission. This is a proposed contact route, not an existing partnership.

For future records, distinguish institutional participation, speaker overlap, reference contributor and indexed author, with an edition, source URL and verification date. Conference participation does not establish scientific validity, independent replication, institutional endorsement or reuse rights. Several appearances by the same researcher remain connected to the same person and underlying studies.

Scope: primary TSC archive, IONS event notices, SAND’s video collection and Psi Encyclopedia’s contributor roster checked on 1 Oct 2026. These are confirmed examples from 2020, 2022 and 2024, not a complete survey of every edition. Later affiliations do not automatically establish what role a person held at an earlier conference.

Discover through one site; verify through another

Crossref and OpenAlex offer a practical foundation for scholarly source records. Crossref explains that almost all its metadata is reusable without restriction, while abstracts retain the copyright and licence of the publisher or author. Its public REST API provides structured bibliographic records. OpenAlex releases its research metadata under CC0; access products and service limits are separate questions from the data licence.[14–16]

A record can preserve several distinct origins: the platform that helped discover it, the metadata provider, and the original publication. For instance, a paper encountered through Psi Encyclopedia can retain that discovery trail while its DOI, authors and journal details are verified through Crossref and its findings are assessed from the paper itself.

Suggested record fields

• Identity: source_id, DOI or other stable identifier, canonical URL, title, creators, venue and publication date.
• Provenance: discovery URL, metadata provider, verification date and a revision trail.
• Classification: source type, topics, relevant questions, evidence category and review status.
• Assessment: an independently written description, study limitations, alternatives and links to counterevidence.
• Rights: metadata permission basis, separate content licence, attribution requirements and permitted publication scope.
• Relationships: candidate links with recorded reasons; acceptance requires the applicable human review.

These are proposed logical fields, not a claim about the current repository schema. Existing contracts should be inspected before implementation. Unknown dates, licences and findings should remain unknown.

Public access and reuse are separate questions

Individual factual citations and independently created topic tags differ from copying expressive text or extracting a protected collection. Copyright generally protects expression rather than facts and ideas. German database law can also restrict substantial extraction and repeated systematic extraction of smaller portions when the statutory conditions are met.[17, 18]

For selected records, use source URLs and verified bibliographic information, then write a genuinely independent description. For copied abstracts, images, testimony or substantial datasets, verify the relevant licence, permission or applicable legal exception. Attribution is essential provenance but is not itself a reuse licence. Automated access also requires its own terms and interface checks.

This is a practical rights assessment, not item-specific legal clearance. No permission requests were sent, and no source databases were imported for this report. The bibliographic licence of an index does not automatically license the full text, figures or other material it links to.

Make the distinctive approach demonstrably useful

The most valuable next phase is a searchable, inspectable catalogue that helps a reader move from a question to its sources and understand why a connection was made. The recommendations below are proposals, not completed work or a promised release schedule.

1. Audit existing registrations. Check which providers and publications are already present before creating duplicate entries. Distinguish a platform record from the publications discovered through it.
2. Define the record contract. Specify required identifiers, provenance, rights states and review statuses. Preserve missing data rather than filling it by inference.
3. Build a bounded pilot. Select relevant publications from a few questions, obtain reusable metadata and compare the result against the original sources. Keep the selection criteria visible.
4. Strengthen discovery. Add useful filters for topic, source type, year, review status and evidence category. Show the underlying record and source links beside any summary.
5. Make review visible. Record what was checked, by whom or by which method, when it was checked and what remains unresolved. Labels should lead to explanations.
6. Expand after inspection. Measure metadata completeness, duplicate detection, correction handling and review workload. Increase coverage once the method proves dependable.

Useful checks before scaling

A small inspected sample should answer: Can every record be traced to a publication? Do identifiers and author details agree? Are independent studies distinguished from repeats and commentary? Are contested interpretations presented as interpretations? Can a correction be made without erasing the earlier rationale? Are rights states tied to the specific material?

These checks evaluate the project’s process. They do not give a scientific conclusion extra weight simply because the catalogue is technically well organised.

A connection project with accountable judgment

This wording describes an intended contribution without requiring a claim of global uniqueness. AkashicNET’s broad scope can make unusual connections discoverable. Those connections become useful when readers can examine their basis, their competing explanations and their limits.

The main risks to address are an overwhelming front page, uneven review depth across topics, duplication of sources, and visual or spiritual framing being read as an evidential conclusion. A clearer starting route, reliable metadata and explicit assessment histories would strengthen trust.

Contribution and evidence transparency

The user supplied the project context, comparison questions and request for this report. AI assistance located public sources, organised the comparison and drafted the synthesis. External pages supply the attributed descriptions, policies and licence information. The judgments about closeness, strengths, gaps, contact priorities and development priorities are analytical interpretations. Historical TSC links are grounded in the separately cited archive and organisational records; unconfirmed participation is not treated as established absence.

No contribution percentages or platform grades are supplied because no reproducible attribution or scoring method was applied. The hero is AI-generated conceptual artwork. The five diagrams are editorial visuals created from the report’s distinctions and proposals; they are not measurements or validated scientific models. Diagram labels were checked and the images visually inspected. This publication does not establish source-ingestion permission, institutional affiliation or a change to a Big Question’s evidence status.

For public use, recheck policies and any newly added factual claims at publication time. Publish unresolved operator identities and inconsistent scoring descriptions as uncertainties rather than guessing.

Primary pages and policy references

Consulted on 1 Oct 2026. Descriptions and policies can change. AkashicNET’s self-description informs the capability account; it is not independent proof of uniqueness or performance.

1. [1] AkashicNET: About — mission, evidence boundaries and possible outcomes.
2. [2] AkashicLIBRARY: Metadata Commons — prototype status, source pathways and rights states.
3. [3] AkashicNET: From Knowledge Networks to Metta-Intelligence — current framework and native-AI capability boundary.
4. [4] The Consciousness Library: About — operator, team and services.
5. [5] The Consciousness Library: Methods — collection, synthesis, limitations and update intervals.
6. [6] The Consciousness Library: Terms — intellectual property and service terms.
7. [7] Science and Nonduality — mission and public activities.
8. [8] SAND: FAQ — monthly activities, member access and copyright notice.
9. [9] IONS: About — organisational mission and research orientation.
10. [9a] IONS: Blog — monthly digest and copyright notice.
11. [10] Psi Encyclopedia — specialist categories and signed reference articles.
12. [11] Psi Encyclopedia: About — SPR ownership, editorial structure and copyright.
13. [11a] Nemo C Mörck: The Psi Encyclopedia vs Wikipedia, 28 Sep 2026 — staffing and update limitations.
14. [12] Noeticmap: Research Dashboard — advertised functions and subjective-report disclaimer.
15. [12a] Noeticmap: Terms — source ownership, copying and automated-use restrictions.
16. [13] Spiritual Evidence Map: Editorial Policy — assessment principles and monthly editorial loop.
17. [13a] Spiritual Evidence Map: About and homepage — placeholder/provisional score descriptions.
18. [14] Crossref: Metadata Retrieval — reuse terms and abstract exception.
19. [15] Crossref: REST API — structured bibliographic retrieval.
20. [16] OpenAlex: Access and Pricing — CC0 metadata and distinctions between data licence and access services.
21. [17] WIPO: Copyright Protection and US Copyright Office: Copyright in General — expression, ideas and facts.
22. [18] German Copyright Act, § 87b — rights of database makers.
23. [19] University of Arizona: TSC Conference Archive — 2020 workshop/plenary listings and 2022 non-locality workshop participants.
24. [20] IONS: TSC Conference 2022 — announced participation by Wahbeh, Radin and Mossbridge.
25. [21] IONS: Science of Consciousness Conference 2024 — science-team participation and Delorme/Brophy workshop announcement.
26. [22] SAND: Donald Hoffman on Spacetime and Conscious Agents — confirms Hoffman’s presence in SAND’s content collection.
27. [23] Psi Encyclopedia: Contributors — Radin and Schwartz contributor listings.
28. [24] University of Arizona: TSC 2024 Conference Resources — recordings and conference interview links.