Hello there! I find it interesting now and then to entertain the kind of ideas you pose in this article. Although I agree that consciousness is an intriguing and poorly understood phenomenon, I wouldn't go so far as to put it at the center of the universe, which seems to be just a recycled version of an anthropocentric conception of the world.

I don't think ideas are born out of nothingness. We form ideas based on experiences, how we interpret them and how we connect them among each other. To propose that it's the other way around seems to be completely unsubstantiated. There is a subjective dimension to how we represent our experiences within our minds, but there are also many ways in which we can access objective features of reality. Is it an illusion that if I have an apple and you give me another apple, I will have two apples in the end? Is it an illusion that, each time I release a massive object midair, it falls down? Is my mind creating these regularities? If so, where is it creating them from? How is it that every single consciousness perceives these same regularities?

You've written a statement which I'm having trouble understanding, and I quote:

Spirituality has always claimed that there is a larger reality that is more fundamental than the material world, and that it has something to do with consciousness. Quantum physics is coming to the same conclusion that reality is governed by probability waves or information.

On which basis do you say that the conclusions of spiritual traditions and quantum mechanics are the same? There is no larger reality in the case of quantum mechanics, it's the same reality, only at a smaller scale and following a probabilistic causality. It is not metaphysical, it is as much as physical as the moons of Jupiter. Spiritual traditions, on the other hand, usually speak of transcendent realms and hypothetical dimensions separated from the physical world. These do not seem the same thing to me.

I would also like to remark that, while the idea of us having five classical senses remains very popular, the actual number of physical senses is somewhere around 10 and 20, depending on the details of the definition of sense. This is just a curiosity, not a criticism. You might like to check it out.

For me, the greatest indication of the existence of a physical objective reality instead of just a mental construct is the fact that almost all observers tend to agree in their sensory observations, even if each may represent these observations subjectively in their minds. I release a massive object midair and not a single person will tell me that it is going upwards to the sky. Everyone, with their sensory systems, agree on the behavior of that object. Are they incidentally creating the same illusion, or are they manifesting an objective feature of the world? The former seems too arbitrary to be plausible.