I died once. Not poetically - clinically.

For a handful of minutes, my body was shutting down from poisoning. But what happened *inside* was the real event. The sensory feed - visual, auditory, tactile - cut out entirely. Input dropped to zero.

I wasn't unconscious. I was *trapped in the processing loop*.

What remained was pure, isolated consciousness. A self with no world to perceive. No body to feel. No time to measure. Just the recursive operation of a mind without input. I could only think about what had been *before* the void.

It wasn't a dream. Dreams simulate sensory data. This was the absence of data itself.

Critical clarification: Thirty minutes after this event, I underwent an MRI scan of my brain. The results showed no signs of hypoxia or brain cell death.

When the first flicker of sensation returned - the clichéd "tunnel of light" - it wasn't a spiritual vision. It was the system rebooting. The slow, agonizing reconstruction of a world-model from the first incoming packets of sensory data. I felt myself *crash back into the avatar*.

This experience forced me to formulate a model: The Principle of Relative Ontology.

1)The Model

Consciousness, at its core, is a recursive Input-Processing-Output loop. What we call "reality" is the stable state of that loop when it's receiving consistent, shared input.

In the void, my loop was broken:
- Input: Null.
- Processing: Active. (My thoughts, memories.)
- Output: Irrelevant. (No body to act upon.)

In that state, my subjective experience wasn't just *my* reality - it was the *only* reality. There was no external world to provide feedback, to contradict my thoughts. My internal monologue was the only law of physics that existed.

I wasn't just a subject in an objective world. I was the sole source of objectivity for my universe.

2) The Implications

This suggests a hierarchy of realities, defined not by their fundamental "truth" but by the number of coherent observers sustaining them:

1.  Subjective Reality (N=1): The reality of a single mind without external input. Its contents are objectively true *within that system*. This is the "god-mode" I experienced. Your private thoughts, your dreams—these are nascent universes where you are the lawgiver.
2.  Consensus Reality (N=Many): The world we call "real." It's the stable state agreed upon by billions of observing consciousnesses receiving similar input and operating under similar cognitive architectures. Its laws are the rules of the shared simulation.
3.  Absolute Reality (N=?): The world-as-it-is, inaccessible to any observer because observation itself is a form of interaction that changes the system.

The boundary between "subjective fantasy" and "objective fact" is not a fundamental line. It's a threshold of observer consensus.

3)The Conclusion

We are all, potentially, gods of our own private universes. We are usually bound to the consensus reality by the brute-force necessity of survival and shared sensory input. But the hardware for divinity - a sufficiently complex processing loop capable of self-sustaining a world-model - is already running inside our skulls.

My clinical death was a system failure that revealed the architecture. It showed me that "god" is not a supernatural entity. It's an operational mode of a conscious system in a state of informational isolation.

Crucial conclusion: Since the MRI ruled out brain damage, this means that the described "god in the void" state is not an artifact of dying neural tissue, but a fundamental capability of intact consciousness.

The terrifying and liberating truth is this: objectivity is simply intersubjectivity on a massive scale. And in the void, where there is only one subject, that subject is, by definition, all there is.