Foundation of all Axioms the Axioms of Consciousness

[The Grand Nudger]

From the above statement I am not sure if are on the same page or not.

You're not even on the same page with yourself, that;s the problem...you're discussing one thing and drawing inferences about another from it. I don't have high hopes for us being on whatever page it is together.

1. On your tv screen in usa your are watching a live broadcast of a football match played in germany.
where is the location of the image you see?
a) in Germany
b ) on the tv screen
c) in your brain

That would be b and c, except that there's no football match being played in my head or on the screen, ofc.  There's a neural correlate of the football match, there's a digital signal transmission of a bitmap. 

2. There is a new technology that has been invented that can bypass your eyes and directly stimulate your brain, in this case where is the image of the game?
a) in Germany
b ) in the wires connected to your brain
c) in your brain

Still b and c, since whether or not it can bypass my eyes is irrelevant, whether or not the match is in germany is irrelevant (whether or not there even -is- a match is irrelevant) and yet the match is still not happening in my brain.

If it's the representation you wish to discuss, cool. We're no longer discussing football matches though, are we? Or trees. We're not discussing a footbal stadium full of players or a growing oak in your skull. All the things required for either of those two things are most definitely -not- in your head. Not possible, not enough room. If it's that experience which interests you, there;s no sense in describing it as something you experience as external to yourself. The tree "out there" is irrelevant. You're talking about the tree in here which you -do- experience as a part of yourself and can fit in your head.

Whats true of the football game or the tree and whats true of the football game or tree of mind are not the same or in the same subset. They can not contradict each other (and so the football game can be, depending on the ambiguity so conveniently imported to the questions -all of the above-). These analogies are going to fail at important points, like the point when you describe your internal experience of a tree as some sort of perceived external. Or posit that all that is required of the tree (or even the experience of the tree) is inside your head.