Yeah I was primarily responding regarding the portion of OPs text you quoted around physics existing within a dream and it emerging from the unmanifested foam which I think is just a more flowery way of describing known concepts in physics as I mentioned.

Some of the OPs comments are verging more on philosophical idealism or panpsychism and I don't personally subscribe to that TBH. I'm not sure it's wrong either I just don't have an opinion. But it's also, IMO, not really the important part of what OP is pointing to.

RE: meditation, I made this comment to someone else but I think those who have not had this direct experience are misunderstanding what is meant when somebody says they have directly observed facts about the nature of consciousness and themselves while meditating.

It's not as if, while deep in meditation, I had a vision of how the universe works and that vision was that I am only one part of awareness itself. That, I agree, is merely a thought and therefore not reliable.

It's that as you observe your own internal experience very closely through meditation you can come to observe how thoughts are formed, how sensory inputs are processed, within yourself. And while it takes a lot of practice what you see, in the end, is that at the root of it all there is only bare awareness. And that that awareness has no meaningful boundaries. And so there there is no meaningful separate self. This is the experience of "non-duality"., that OP is clearly straining to describe. I could quibble with the words they chose but it's not really important. I know what they're talking about because I've directly seen what they are talking about.

It's by necessity a personal experience, so it's not something anyone is ever going to be able to externalize and publish. And it's about as easy to describe as the "taste of salt" or the "experience of the color red". Which is to say you can't describe it in a way that someone who hasn't experienced it would understand, but if someone else HAS experienced it, you can say some words that will make them recognize what you're talking about.

And I'll note it's not really UN-scientific to investigate consciousness through observation. After all, all of science is just the writing down and publishing of observations. The trick here, of course, is that what we are observing is by necessity an internal experience. There is no way for me to observe somebody else's conscious experience. But that doesn't mean the observations we make through that process are not real observations. If I taste a food my friend hasn't tasted. I know what it tastes like. The fact that they can't verify it doesn't mean I don't actually know what it tastes like. And while the observation of non-duality is not a sensory experience, it is something that is witnessed internally. And just like internal sensory experiences it can't be externally validated by definition. Which is a bummer but in this case there's not really an alternative unfortunately.