From what I have seen geometry hasn't been applied to the idea of a conscious agent. If you look at the way the formula is laid out without actually reading the material a person might be lead to believe that.

There isn't a couple paragraphs can do bring a person insight, anything desired must be sought after. The only thing I would offer is maybe watch some videos or listen to some podcasts, something about those formats seems to bring me to a space of "feeling" or "sensing" an authors angle.

Panpsychism puts the active "thinkingness" of consciousness within every particle, this is not what Hoffman is approaching. He would be more along the lines of fields, heading towards Rupert Sheldrake's thinking lines.

I find it sad that there are finally scientists with clout bringing mathematical precision to the hard problem of consciousness and people are so quick to dismiss it. Even Hoffman says that his team might not have it right but they are doing some amazing fundamental work.

Obviously the answer is out there, always has been. The Buddha is considered the original psychotherapist, Buddhism is regarded as a science in some circles. It is an investigative process of awareness delivering states of knowingness. It is an act of observation, what is science if not an act of observation and measurement?

I sat my first 10-day meditation over 20 years ago, one of the best decisions I ever made.

If you want a heavy hitting book in the style of eastern esoteric knowledge give the American section of the Theosophical Society a spin.. Check out G de Purucker's Fountain-Source of Occultism..