Are you familiar with the Pair of Ducks Paradox?
One duck says, "I know everything. All there that exists is only you and me. I know me, and there you are. So I know everything."
The other duck says, "But I know everything, for the same reasons, and we can't BOTH be OMNIscient."
The two ducks then try to figure this out for a while, but determine that that only thing that could possibly be "all-knowing" was "everything" itself.
So one of the ducks kills the other duck.
The one duck, now the only duck in existence, says to himself...
"Now I am omniscient. Or am I? I don't know." ...and ceases to exist.
As some people noted, nothing can be omniscient if other things exist. One cannot know the other implicitly, only through experience.
As one person noted, this is analogous to "only the ALL could be omniscient".
But as far as perception and sentience goes, with a smaller scope comes more detail, and to get the largest scope ALL detail must be lost, EXCEPT for one bit. One bit of info, whether it be a logical bit, or a q-bit.
The only thing that could be omniscient is everything itself, and all it could recognize as "everything" from its conscious state is "1" (existence, I exist, existence exists)... or "0". In which case existence does not exist... and that is obviously not the case. (3rd unspoken option: 0 and 1 are equal states co-existing simultaneously.)
- The two ducks then try to figure this out for a while, but determine that that only thing that could possibly be "all-knowing" was "everything" itself.