This is a fascinating challenge, pushing the boundaries of scientific inquiry into philosophical territory. The "20 Questions" format implies trying to narrow down the nature of the phenomenon by asking probing questions that, if answered a certain way, might suggest a non-materialistic explanation. It's crucial to state upfront that physics, by its nature, deals with the physical. Any "proof" of non-materialistic patterns would require an expansion of what we consider "science" or would necessarily push the boundaries of current scientific paradigms. These questions aim to identify *signatures* that would be difficult to reconcile with a purely physical-materialist explanation. Here are 20 questions, categorized for clarity, that could be asked of any scientific physics phenomenon to explore the possibility of non-material patterns of information or influence: --- **Category 1: Information and Organization** 1. **Does the observed pattern of information exhibit irreducible complexity that cannot be fully accounted for by the known physical interactions of its constituent parts, even in principle?** (i.e., not just complex, but fundamentally structured in a way that doesn't seem to emerge from simple physical rules). 2. **Is there any evidence that the information content of the phenomenon is *pre-existent* or "Platonic" (i.e., existing independently of its physical substrate) rather than solely generated by or emergent from its physical manifestation?** 3. **Does the system exhibit patterns of organization or self-assembly that consistently defy the most energetically favorable or statistically probable outcomes for a purely material system under similar conditions?** (Suggesting a guiding principle beyond just entropy maximization). 4. **Could the "information" embedded within the phenomenon be more fundamentally descriptive of a *process* or *meaning* rather than merely a static arrangement of particles or forces?** **Category 2: Consciousness and Observation** 5. **Does the phenomenon's behavior or properties demonstrably change solely due to the *conscious act of observation*, beyond what can be explained by the physical interaction of measurement devices with the system?** (Beyond standard quantum interpretations that assign a role to measurement, but not necessarily consciousness itself). 6. **Is there any indication that the phenomenon itself possesses, or interacts with, a form of rudimentary proto-consciousness, awareness, or "experiential quality" at its fundamental level?** (Exploring panpsychism or similar ideas). 7. **Could the patterns of information observed be interpreted as a form of "subjective experience" (even if alien or rudimentary) rather than purely objective, quantifiable data?** **Category 3: Purpose and Teleology** 8. **Does the phenomenon exhibit a *directedness* or apparent "goal-orientation" in its evolution or behavior that is not adequately explained by random interactions and known physical forces, nor by a simple reduction to initial conditions?** (Avoiding "God of the Gaps," but looking for persistent, inexplicable direction). 9. **Are there aspects of the phenomenon's development or "learning" that appear to anticipate future states or outcomes in a way that defies purely local, time-forward causality?** (Exploring retrocausality or genuine teleology). **Category 4: Non-Locality and Interconnectedness** 10. **Does the phenomenon exhibit correlations or influences over vast distances or across seemingly disconnected systems that cannot be accounted for by the known propagation of physical forces or particles, *even considering quantum entanglement*?** (Looking for a more pervasive, non-physical interconnectedness). 11. **Is there evidence of instantaneous information transfer or influence that unequivocally defies the speed limit of light, outside the specific, pre-prepared conditions of quantum entanglement?** **Category 5: Fundamental Laws and Constants** 12. **Does the stability or fine-tuning of the phenomenon's fundamental constants or parameters appear so precisely balanced that its occurrence by pure chance, given all known physical variables, becomes astronomically improbable to an extent that suggests non-random influence?** (e.g., the cosmological constant, physical constants in a way that enables structure). 13. **Could the *source* of the fundamental physical laws governing this phenomenon be identified as purely physical, or does it point to an extra-physical substrate or principle that dictates these laws?** (Why *these* laws and not others?). 14. **Do the laws governing the phenomenon appear to be prescriptive in a way that suggests an underlying "code" or "program" rather than merely descriptive of observed regularities?** **Category 6: Causality and Anomalies** 15. **Are there instances where the phenomenon consistently exhibits effects without any discernible physical cause, or where the cause-effect relationship is inverted or non-linear in a way that defies known physical principles?** 16. **Does the phenomenon consistently present anomalies or exceptions to known physical laws that resist resolution through deeper physical understanding alone, persistently pointing to "something else"?** 17. **Does the phenomenon require the invocation of dimensions, realms, or influences that are inherently undetectable or untestable by our current physical instruments or known physical forces?** **Category 7: Alternative Ontologies** 18. **Would a complete and consistent explanation of this phenomenon be more parsimonious or conceptually coherent if reality were considered fundamentally *informational* or *experiential* rather than fundamentally material?** 19. **Does the phenomenon suggest that fundamental reality is more akin to a "simulation" or "dream" in which physical laws are merely generated rules, rather than ultimate principles?** 20. **If the phenomenon were fully understood, would its explanation *necessitate* the inclusion of concepts like consciousness, purpose, or fundamental information as primary, rather than emergent, properties of reality?** --- **Important Caveats:** * **Falsifiability:** Many of these questions verge on the non-falsifiable within the current scientific paradigm. True scientific inquiry requires testable hypotheses. These questions are more for probing philosophical implications. * **"God of the Gaps":** It's critical not to use "we don't know yet" as evidence for non-materialism. Science consistently fills gaps in understanding with new physical explanations. The aim here is to look for persistent *signatures* that *actively point away* from physical materialism, not just an absence of a physical explanation. * **Defining "Materialism":** These questions assume a relatively standard definition of physical materialism (reality fundamentally composed of matter, energy, and forces interacting locally in spacetime, governed by immutable laws, with consciousness and information being emergent phenomena). * **Philosophical Implications:** Even if one or more questions lean towards a "yes" that challenges materialism, it wouldn't necessarily "prove" a specific alternative like "spirit" or "God," but rather open the door to alternative ontological frameworks like idealism, panpsychism, or information as primary.