A Bridge is needed because The Inter Mind Model addresses the Problem of the relationship of Neural Activity to Conscious Experience.
No bridge is required. It is sufficient to say "I don't know how A leads to C" without needing to introduce an interim stage B and then say "I don't know how A leads to B, or how B leads to C".
Nobody knows what is going on when a Conscious Experience like Redness happens. All we can say for sure is that Neural Activity for Red happens in the Brain, and then Correlated with that, a Conscious Experience of Redness happens. There is Zero understanding as to how the Neural Activity leads to an Experience of Redness, or in the general case of all the Colors, to an Experience of Conscious Light.
Correct. We do not know how A leads to C.
So the Inter Mind is a Speculation based on the realization that there is something missing in the chain of processing from Neural Activity to the actual Experience in the Mind. The Inter Mind is a necessary new unknown stage in between the Physical Mind (Brain) and the Conscious Mind.
There is no "realization that there is something missing...". We simply don't know how A leads to C. Until you come up against an impossibility, there is logically no reason to conclude as you have done. Basically you are just guessing, with zero evidence or rationale (at least not on show here) and just your confidence to support you.
From a logical point of view, "we don't know how A leads to C" is no logical reason to intersperse interim stage B into the chain as being necessary, especially as you are then left with two unknowns (how A leads to B, how B leads to C) rather than just one (how A leads to C). Can you answer either of these two unknowns any better than the one unknown? No.
So the "Inter Mind" is not necessary unless you can show that A leading to C is not possible without it. And no, not knowing how A leads to C, irrespective of time taken looking at the problem, is not the same as saying that it is impossible.
The Inter Mind Model is more of a Framework for Consciousness than a theory of Consciousness. The Inter Mind website favors a Connected Perspective of Consciousness where there is a separate Physical Mind (Brain) and a separate Conscious Mind. In this case the Inter Mind will connect from the Physical Mind, in Physical Space to the Conscious Mind in Conscious Space.
Yet you are unable to offer any knowledge as to how it connects to either, so at best are in no better position than current scientific thinking, and at worse just confusing the situation.
So further Speculation would indicate that the Inter Mind must exist partly in Physical Space and partly in Conscious Space.
This "Conscious Space" being something for which you have provided no explanation for, no evidence for, no support? No, all you're still doing is just relabelling our current lack of knowledge and inserting more unknowns.
Since the Inter Mind Model is a Framework it should also apply to Speculations that Consciousness Emerges from the Neurons. In this case the Inter Mind will be all in Physical Space and the Conscious Mind will be shown to be some how an already know Physical Phenomenon. But the mechanism for how the Neural Activity produces the Conscious Experience in the Conscious Mind will have to be called the Inter Mind aspect of Neural Activity because it will be the Bridge between the Neural Activity and what is happening in the as yet unexplained Physical Conscious Mind.
Here you're just saying "No one has any idea, but it could be monistic, or it could be dualistic". Geez. If you don't know the answer to a question would you normally say "Well, it could be X, or it could be not-X, or somewhere in between" and think you're saying something worth hearing?
So come on, set out these experiments your linked pages try to explain. Let's see what you're actually offering. Let's see if there's anything at all in what you've spent years trying to fathom, beyond simple confidence in a brain/mind dualism.