Interesting thoughts . . .
I accept operating within a single reality in life currently lived, but have wondered for some time if intellects have some limited power to create their own reality--a sort of "stored" modification of reality not accessible (or only partly accessible) in this life.
This is an example of material that requires deeper thought to analyse, that is, you can not briefly read it without thought and expect to understand where you are coming from. It is like a feeling in that it can be hard to express but we know it is there somehow. It also shows how external reality is stronger than internal reality - with a bit of luck you can see where I am coming from here. I am saying that there is some limited power to create a stored modification of reality but in the face of external reality it becomes decayed to a limited extent.
Your comment that the one's are still remembered after the equation is completed made me think this might be analogous to the way an author, for example, creates in her fictional characters and landscapes a quasi-reality which is somewhere reduced to mathematical precision whose meaning--which was taken and designed from materials at her disposal in this lived reality--is then stored and can later [after physical life] be accessed and participated in.
Interesting thought . . . accessing the ones would require us to playback reality in reverse to get at them from this reality. The author is already playing reality in reverse to get at her quasi-reality or should I say that in a way she reverse engineers physical life to store for future participation. She is not so much storing things in reverse as she is rearranging the new reality as she is going along.
I digress....could prescriptive(-force) and descriptive(-energy) values--whatever they might be when someone's not thinking about them--be meanings, just from another perspective? Assuming that evaluations/measurements of any kind, factual or moral, are fundamental value expressions/meanings---might meaning be values acquired and encoded or structured into information arrangements which are then decoded in cognition and mapped to language [words]? In this scenario meaning and value are identical...is meaning just another word for value? Just rambling.
Again we have more material that requires deeper thought to analyse and is actually relevant to the discussion. This fits my model of how cognition comes about in the first place and I like the way you say mapped to language. Backing up, I like the perspective you have presented here and I feel that meaning must have its mirror value in external reality so that when things do happen without the observer they still contain meaning. When you stumble across the fallen tree, it can be determined that the tree has fallen id est the ones have been remembered and further, meaning the tree was once standing.