Closer To Reality: Time And Time Travel

Time is just one of the most mysterious concepts the human mind has ever invented and grappled with. From what is time, to was time created and if so by God, to what is the state of timelessness and was God in such a state, to whether or not time travel (especially to the past) is possible. Much of what follows arose out of a few debates I had with various others on the general nature of time.

Regarding Time 1

“Time actually has a direction”, but that in itself is a mystery because there are no violations in the physical laws, physical relationships and physical principles if you reverse the direction of time. The only way you would identify an anomaly in a film that was reversed and run backwards would be if whatever you were filming ran contrary to probability like an egg unscrambling. However, the unscrambling of an egg isn’t in itself a violation of physical law. Actually you could film many things and run the film backwards and not detect anything weird going on. For example, tree branches swaying in the wind.

Regarding Time 2

The direction of time is fundamental to our existence and understanding of the cosmos. However, the direction of time is determined more by what is probable than what are the laws, principles and relationships of physics. You know time has passed in a unidirectional way when your hot cup of coffee warms up the kitchen while the cooler kitchen cools down the coffee. But there is no law that says that must of necessity be the case. It’s just probability that that will happen instead of the hot cup of coffee staying hot hour after hour.

Regarding Time 3

There is always an “earlier than” and a “later than” relationship when it comes to the flow of time. My sole point is that there is no actual physical law, like say gravity or the cosmic speed limit of light that governs the flow of time. When it comes to time, you can run two identical scenarios and not get the exact same results. In one scenario your hot coffee and cool kitchen might hit uniformity in say 300 seconds; next time it might be 298 or 302 seconds.

Regarding Time 4

Time has a direction. That direction is based on probability, probability that overwhelmingly favours one direction (past to future) over the other. Eggs get scrambled; eggs don’t tend to unscramble. However, there is no physical law that wouldn’t operate in the exact same way going from future to past. Reversing the direction of time wouldn’t change gravity into anti-gravity.

Regarding Time 5

We define time by the order of events. If eggs now started to unscramble; if the galaxies now reversed direction and started getting closer together, if your wrinkles unwrinkled and your grey hair turned back to black (or red or blond) and what you recalled from 2015 you’ve now forgotten because it’s now 2014, then to an outsider outside of time and unaffected by all of this, that outsider would conclude that the direction of time had reversed. To those affected of course the direction of time would still be consistently in one direction. Eggs scrambling is time in one direction. Eggs unscrambling is time in one direction. The direction is arbitrary. If everyone agreed that what is left is now right and what is right is now left, so be it. It’s like Planet Earth. North is up and south is down. Canada is north of the USA and Mexico is south of the USA. But Planet Earth is still Planet Earth if you turn the globe upside down. Now Antarctica is north of Australia and Mexico is north of the USA. A rose by any other name seems to apply here.

Regarding Time 6

There’s no time reversal on the grounds that the “laws” that govern probability are unlikely to reverse. That’s what makes watching most films in reverse so odd. They defy probability as we understand it. Now an interesting question might be, say a Maximally Greatest Being like God waved a magic wand such that eggs unscrambled and warm cups of coffee got hotter while warm kitchens grew cooler and your wrinkles unwrinkled and babies popped into the womb. Would we actually think that anything was actually odd about this temporal state of affairs? Would we still have memories of how things were the other way?

Regarding Time 7

I’ve never claimed that time can reverse in the sum totality of all things cosmic, just that every now and again the improbable will happen and give rise to an event that gives the illusion that time has reversed. For all I care one could put it down to Maxwell’s Demon.

Regarding Time 8

My favourite sparring partner, the Accidental Meta-physician, notes that 1) there is an arrow of time independent of the ordering of events; 2) as a true believer in Biblical events that he will live to the longevity of say Methuselah and that 3) he will be resurrected. My reply is that yes, there’s an arrow of time which points to him kickin’ the bucket well short (about roughly 870 years’ worth) of the record set by Methuselah with no possibility given the logical impossibility called The Resurrection of an actual resurrection.

Meantime, IMHO the past series of temporal events is infinite, you just can’t ever reach that pseudo-‘beginning’ since there was no beginning. It, the journey, can’t be completed. That doesn’t rule out infinity. And the journey can extend infinitely into the future. Infinity crosses the ‘now’ which is often claimed to be an end point ruling out an infinite past. IMHO, the idea of ‘now’ or the present moment is illusionary, unless someone, anyone, can tell me what the actual duration of ‘now’ actually is. If it has no duration there is no present moment and so the logical argument that time cannot be infinite goes down the drain.

The Accidental Meta-physician claims that when someone proposes a possibility, no evidence is required to back that up, but when someone claim that something is an actuality then evidence is required. But he has indeed admitted that the creation of something from nothing, a first cause, a beginning, thus no temporal infinity, is an ACTUALITY not a POSSIBILITY so by his own logic he now needs to provide the actual physical evidence for that beginning, something he has never been able to do. Till then, infinity rules, OK?

Did God Create Time 1?

Time is just a mental concept, the way we come to terms with change, motion and causality. Time, and units of time, are inventions. They have no structure or substance; no physical, chemical, biological, etc. properties. Wednesday is a unit of time. You would not say that Wednesday has any independent reality. Wednesday cannot be created as a something with mass, electric charge, colour, shape, density, and so on. Since time cannot be created since time has no actual physicality, the question “did God create time?” is meaningless. God did not create Wednesday, the hour, the decade or any other mental concept or term we associate with time. If anyone “created” the mental concept of time, that creation lies within the human mind.

Did God Create Time 2?

If you absolutely cannot create an absolute something from an absolute nothing, then the cosmos (of which our Universe is just a part of) must have always existed – the ultimate ‘factory’ that endlessly recycles stuff, well, endlessly. If the cosmos has always existed, then ‘time’ (as change or motion) has always existed. Anything that has always existed cannot have had a creation. But if there was no creation (of time or anything else) then why religion?

As to the origins of religion, I think there are two complementary reasons. Firstly, we mostly all tend to desire some sort of existence after we fall off of the perch or kick the bucket. Since we can’t manage that desire on our own, well we have to appeal to a higher authority and hope that higher authority exists and grants our post-death desires. The second is that when we can’t explain a mystery, and there were lots of unexplainable mysteries to the ancients like comets and supernovae and rainbows and thunder, then we ‘explain’ them by attributing these unexplainable phenomena to, again, a higher authority who works in mysterious ways. It’s the appeal to the God-of-the-gaps – God explains the gaps in our understanding.

Did God Create Time 3?

Regardless of the ultimate cause of the origin of our Universe, even if just a random quantum fluctuation, it was still a case of something that produced a something – quantum foam is a something. There is movement within the realm of the quantum, therefore there is that concept associated with it that we call time. Even if events run backwards*, it’s still motion; still change, therefore the concept of time still applies.

*For example, the late Richard Feynman postulated that a positron, an anti-electron (the antimatter equivalent of an electron), was in fact an actual electron, only travelling from future to past.

Did God Create Time 4?

The quantum foam, otherwise known as the vacuum energy, has been experimentally verified. In fact it apparently accounts for a goodly percentage of your weight since if you add up the mass of all of the electrons, neutrons and protons that comprise you, you come up short. The vacuum energy creates virtual particles which only last for nanoseconds before annihilating back into the pure vacuum energy again – recall Einstein’s famous equation. These particles are virtual only because they exist for such incredibly brief time frames. But all of that vacuum energy/virtual particles count in terms of contributions to your bulk. Of course all of that popping into and out of existence creates a force and it is that force which has been experimentally confirmed. The apparently rather nasty fly in the ointment is that the predicted/theoretical force and the experimentally observed force differ by 120 orders of magnitude, creating one of the biggest discrepancies in modern physics.

Anyway, there has to exist some amount of absolute nothing in addition to lots of absolute something for the following reason. If the cosmos were 100% something, then there could be no motion since no individual something could move since there would always be some other individual something in the way. Think of you trying to move in a typical office elevator crammed with fifty people. So some nothingness must exist to allow some individual something to shift position.

Regarding God’s Timelessness 1

Regardless of God’s existence in a timeless state, or His existence in this state of time, what the heck does He actually do? If He had no beginning while He existed in a timeless state, well that’s a heck of a long time to do – well, what? God either had to have been bored out of His timeless mind and/or been the greatest party-poop of all time. It would seem the sum total of His CV is creating the cosmos in just a tiny interval of His existence. I mean if you live for 100 years and the sum total of your accomplishments in that time is making one breakfast, well that doesn’t strike me as being something to brag about!

Regarding God’s Timelessness 2

OK, if God or any other Maximally Greatest Being was changeless, frozen in a state of suspended animation, doing nothing, thinking about nothing while in that timeless state then He could NOT have come up with an idea to cross the Rubicon and create time and a physical cosmos. The very idea to do such a thing had to have existed while in that timeless state and that’s a contradiction.

OK, never mind about what God did do or didn’t do or could do or couldn’t do while in a timeless state, what’s God done post creation? Now that this theoretical deity, a Maximally Greatest Being, has created the cosmos and crossed the Rubicon into time and is now stuck here in time (not all that omnipotent now is He?), what is He going to do for an encore? Or perhaps He has just packed it up and gone off to Florida to retire and just do a bit of fishing.

Regarding God’s Timelessness 3

IMHO the concept of timelessness or timeless as used in theology it is utter claptrap. There is no truism to be had. Can true believers show me a state of timelessness? Theologians can’t walk-the-walk but they sure can talk-the-talk. It’s all metaphysical waffle like arguing angels and pinheads.

Regarding God’s Timelessness 4

Arguments are often prefaced with the “If” word as if that somehow equates to something of actual fact. Ah, yet another true believer has made use of the word “If” again. “If time had a beginning” and if time “was caused to exist” then only a timeless state could have created that beginning and that cause. Well, here’s my “If” rebuttal. If time did NOT have a beginning, and if it was NOT caused to exist, then there does NOT have to be a timeless state or a timeless entity. You’re not getting that through your head! Actually since time is change and change requires a state of matter/energy, we’re just back to that golden oldie about creating something-from-nothing versus creating something-from-something. Sigh!

Is Time Travel Possible 1?

Question: Do you need to travel outside of the Universe in order to plot the positions and velocities of all of the objects contained therein and extrapolate for both the past and the future before you time travel?

Point Number One: What if you didn’t have any destination in mind; you didn’t care where you ended up but just wanted to see if it could be done?

Point Number Two: To get outside of the Universe, you say that you’d need to outrun gravity which would travel faster than the actual expansion rate. But you’d also need to outrun light, or the velocity of electromagnetic radiation since the speed of light (and all electromagnetic radiation) and the speed of gravity are the same. Therefore, if outside that boundary, the every increasing boundary of the expanding Universe, you couldn’t actually see all of the bits and pieces that make up the Universe and their respective ever-changing positions. In other words, it’s a useless exercise and it also breaks the absolute barrier that thou shall not go faster than the speed of light.

Point Number Three: One can get a pretty good handle on the movements of any objects we were interested in travelling to from inside the Universe. We extrapolate all the time from the present into the future to know where objects will be as our planetary probes and manned voyages to the Moon proved. We can extrapolate into the past just as easily.

Is Time Travel Possible 2?

Here are just a few further thoughts that have crossed my mind on this topic.

1) If somehow your past history or ancient history or prehistory were altered by time travellers from the future, we’d be none the wiser since our memories would have altered right along with the textbooks, fossils, archaeological artefacts or whatever else was relevant in the alteration.

2) Perhaps time travellers from our future might downplay the “Butterfly Effect” but still adhere to a principle of minimal interactions. They might use aerial drones in the shape of real birds; submarine drones in the shape of real fish; or have highly realistic robotic ‘terrestrial’ animals plant cams in trees, etc. assuming they weren’t themselves equipped with an “I spy with my little eye” cam. If you have advanced technologies enough enabling you to time travel, you probably have advanced enough technologies to cloak yourself and do advanced surveillance behind the scenes.

3) Perhaps in the far future Earthlings don’t have the most savoury of reputations with those other inhabitants amongst the stars (Earthlings, go home!), so one advanced ET civilization travels back in time to Earth to hobble our interstellar space-flight capacity before it even gets off the ground.

Evidence From Quantum Physics Supporting A Simulated Universe

Most physicists don’t have much of a philosophical streak and they don’t tend to ask what they study all means. Philosophizing doesn’t pay their mortgage. Physics works, so they just go with the flow; they just shut up and calculate. Most philosophers on the other hand don’t usually have the technical education and background to wax lyrical and come to terms with modern physics. Whether physicists or philosophers, they don’t tend to advertise themselves too far out of their establishment’s standard model box. It’s not usually considered a wise career move, especially if you’re on the academic road upwards and tenure. As for myself, I have no academic career to damage or destroy, so I’m going to combine physics and philosophy and think way, way, way outside of the standard model box. It’s going to be quantum (particle) physics ‘explained’ by appeal to the Simulated (Virtual reality) Universe scenario. If I’m right, the Nobel Prize committee knows where to find me!

There are many anomalies from the macro-world that can be ‘explained’ by resorting to a Simulated [Virtual Reality] Universe scenario, from statues that walk (Easter Island) to the concepts of an afterlife to those feelings of déjà vu to recollections of previous lives to crop ‘circles’ to ghosts, and so on and so forth. However, most of these anomalies can be classified as belonging to the paranormal or as a pseudoscience and dismissed. Not so easily dismissed are anomalies from hardcore particle (quantum) physics, the most experimentally verified science every known and responsible in gismos and gadgets for over one-third of the world’s economy. Despite all the runs on the board, points of view on the subject of Quantum Mechanics tend to be along the lines of…

Albert Einstein: God does not throw dice.

Niels Bohr: Anyone who is not shocked by the [quantum] theory hasn’t understood it.

Richard Feynman: Nobody understands quantum physics.

And that’s comments by noted quantum physicists.

However, the key to reality* in general, including yours in particular, lies in the basics (i.e. – the Standard Model of Particle [Quantum] Physics) and how it builds from the ground up. That reality includes those anomalies and how they can be explained. It’s time to think the unthinkable!

# CAUSALITY

You tend to associate lack of causality, on the macro scale, with free will. What you decide to have for dinner tonight has no prior cause, just your spur-of-the-moment whim. It’s all free will and free will alone, pure and simple.

However, on the micro scale of fields and forces and particles, you often find they also do whatever they damn well please – no causality need apply. A perfect example is radioactivity. There’s no apparent cause why one unstable nucleus goes poof and an identical clone living next door doesn’t. In fact if something like radioactivity happens for no apparent reason at all, yet that happening follows one precise mathematical relationship (one out of numerous theoretical possibilities) then that surely implies some sort of intelligent manipulation behind the scenes. The Virtual Reality writing is on the wall for all to see.

Either you have to accept that the fields, forces and particles that collectively make up the Standard Model of Particle (nee Quantum) Physics have free will and thus are somehow ‘alive’ and ‘animated’ in some sense (although their free will comes with some restrictions just like your free will comes with restrictions – you can’t flap your arms and fly or hold your breath underwater for three straight hours), OR else it is all programming software which implies an intelligence (a Supreme Programmer**) somewhere on up the line.

# MISSING IN ACTION

An electron can have this amount of energy corresponding to this ‘orbit’ (around an atomic nucleus) or that energy level corresponding to a different ‘orbit’ or this other energy level corresponding to a third possible ‘orbit’, etc. but not any energy level (and thus ‘orbit’) in-between (since energy comes in single indivisible quantum packets). Energy thus is a discontinuous phenomenon; just like you can have coins in multiples of five cents (I’m talking Australia here) like five cents, ten cents, fifteen cents, etc. You cannot have a coinage value of seven cents or of nine-point-three cents.

Here’s the rub. When an electron gains or loses energy, it rises or drops it’s ‘orbit’. But where the hell is it when it is rising, or falling between allowable ‘orbits’? Is it in The Twilight Zone or in another dimension or in Wonderland keeping Alice company? Being in-between allowable ‘orbits’ equates to having a forbidden energy level that would correspond to that in-between state. It would be like having a six, then seven, then eight, and then a nine cent coin as you increased the value of your pocket change from five cents to ten cents.

A similar situation could be had for the anomaly known as quantum tunneling. A particle is here on one side of a barrier, then it is there on the other side of the barrier – instantaneously – never to be found in-between.

Of course virtual reality software could easily have our electron disappear and reappear as it quantum jumped from one allowable ‘orbit’ to another allowable ‘orbit’ or as it tunneled over, around or through the barrier.

# ALL THINGS [NOT] TRANSPARENT

The standard macro analogy to an atom (nucleus and electron cloud surrounding it) is trying to picture a gnat (the nucleus) in the middle of Westminster Abbey with a cloud of bacteria (the electrons) around the walls, ceiling and floor and thus surrounding the gnat. In other words, there’s a hell of a lot of empty space inside your everyday atom. That might suggest that electromagnetic radiation, photons, would have no trouble in passing right on through an atom without intersecting anything and thus being hindered on its uninterrupted journey.

So why isn’t everything transparent? Why doesn’t light go right through you? Why are some things transparent (air, glass) and some things (of equal density and thickness) opaque for a specific wavelength/frequency of ‘light’ (light here being not just visible light but infrared light and radio light and microwave light, etc. not that the energy value of the photons of ‘light’ should matter since it is traveling through what’s for all practical purposes ’empty’ space). Further, photons have no electric charge properties that would hinder their passing straight through your average atom.

A quick anomalous point – light passes through air. You can look clear through roughly 100 miles of atmosphere and see the sun and moon and stars, etc. Add a bit of smog or fog and things get a bit on the opaque side, yet the overall thickness and density of the clear air, or air-smog mix, isn’t drastically different. It’s still 99.99% empty space. Something’s screwy somewhere unless of course there’s additional programming that counters the scenario.

# THE PARTICLE THAT WAVES

Traditional wave-particle duality is according to one interpretation a complementary but either/or phenomenon. Sometimes light/particle experiments show results that prove a pure 100% wave phenomena is responsible; sometimes however other light/particle experiments show results that prove a pure 100% particles phenomena is the only possible interpretation. That doesn’t make a great deal of sense unless there is a higher power (a Supreme Programmer) pulling the strings – or programming the program.

# DOUBLE SLIT EXPERIMENTS

The late Nobel Prize winning quantum physicist, Richard Feynman, thought the Double Slit Experiment (and variations on the theme) was the heart and soul behind the anomaly that is Quantum Physics. It was the ultimate anomaly in a sea of anomalies that could not, in any shape, manner or form, be explained by any sort of, or resort to, classical physics available in the observable Universe.

1 – If photons, electrons, Buckminsterfullerene molecules (Bucky-balls), etc. are fired in rapid succession at a single slit, with a detector (like say photographic film or a TV screen) behind the slit, then a quasi-blob of impacts are detected. Particles rule, okay!

2 – If photons, electrons, Bucky-balls, etc. are fired in rapid succession at a double slit, with a detector behind the dual slits, then a classic wave interference (constructive and destructive interference) pattern emerges. Waves rule, okay!

3 – If photons, electrons, Bucky-balls, etc. are fired one at a time, at a single slit, such that one photon, etc. completes the journey before the next one is fired off, again with a detector behind the slit, then a quasi-blob of impacts are ultimately detected. Particles rule, okay!

4 – If photons, electrons, Bucky-balls, etc. are fired one at a time at a double slit, such that one photon, etc. completes the journey before the next one is fired off, again with a detector behind the slits, then ultimately after enough firings, a classic wave interference (constructive and destructive) pattern emerges. Waves! However, that implies one photon, electron, Bucky-ball, etc. somehow manages to go through both slits at the same time and thus interferes with itself. That’s absurd. But you ain’t seen anything yet!

4A – The above assumes nobody (human observer or independent measuring device) is peeking and taking the slightest notice of what’s going on – the non-observing nobodies are just looking at the pattern on the detector screen after the fact; after the experiment has concluded.

4B – However, if someone, human observer or independent measuring device, is peeking and taking absolute and total notice of what’s going on, and determining at the precise time of passage which of the two slits the lone photon, etc. is actually going through (on the grounds that one entity cannot pass through two doors at the same time) then the wave interference pattern doesn’t eventuate and you get a quasi-blob of particle hits on the detector behind each of the two slits. Somehow the photon, etc. is somehow ‘aware’ that it is being observed and changes it’s self-interfering behavior accordingly – keeping in mind that the very act of observing before-the-fact unobserved properties of a photon, etc. alters those properties after-the-fact, since you can’t observe something without mucking around with it.

4C – What if someone, human observer or independent measuring device, peeks, but only after the photon, etc. has already passed through presumably, but absurdly, both slits and self-interfered with itself? That shouldn’t affect the ultimate wave outcome since it’s now too little to late for the photon, etc. to change its mind. Or so you would think. But again, irregardless, the wave interference pattern disappears even after the peeking is done after the photon, etc. has passed through both slits and self-interfered. The one very nasty and anomalous implication is that the photon, etc. has traveled back in time to just before, or when it was, initially emitted so as to now make the ‘correct’ choice and thus will pass through one and only one slit to correlate what it actually does with what is actually detected.

5 – Summary: If you turn your back and don’t peek, and there’s a double slit available, the detector screen, and therefore you, will detect a wave pattern because the photon, etc. will pass through both slits and self-interfere.

If you don’t turn your back away from the action, but do a peeping-Tom act, double slit notwithstanding, the detector screen and therefore you will detect a particle (quasi-blob) pattern behind each slit.

The two very disturbing facets are that a photon, etc. displays awareness, and free will, as well as exhibiting the ability to travel backwards in time. Photons, etc. not only know before-the-fact whether or not both slits are open (two open slits equals wave behavior); or that one or the other slit is open (either/or equals particle behavior), but also whether or not someone is peeking. If both holes (slits) are open and nobody is peeking we end up having wave interference behavior; if someone is peeking even if both holes (slits) are open, we get particle quasi-blob behavior. That means the photons, etc. know (how is that possible?) and adjust and exercise their free will (how is that possible?) accordingly.

6 – Conclusion: Now either you’ve got to believe we exist in The Twilight Zone #One where denizens of the micro world have an awareness of their surroundings and possess some degree of free will to react to and within those surroundings, OR you believe we live in The Twilight Zone #Two where said denizens of the micro world are programmed by higher authority** to behave in the way we see and measure them behave.

# SYMMETRY & PARITY

One of the fundamental bedrocks beloved by physicists is their love of symmetry, especially with respect to time, charge and parity.

Physics should work as we know it whether time is considered positive or negative***. It doesn’t matter if you go 50 miles per negative hour for 10 negative hours, you still travel 500 miles. Or, imagine two electrons (call them A and B) traveling towards in time, each approaching the other. When they get close enough, they will repel each other (both being of the same negative charge) by exchanging a virtual photon. But which electron emitted the virtual photon? It might have been A to B forward in time, but it is just as probable that it might have been B to A backwards in time. It’s symmetrical either way you care to look at it. And of course any negative time that’s squared in any equation reverts to positive time.

Physics and chemistry should work as we know it even if positrons (antimatter electrons) ‘orbited’ around nuclei comprised of antiprotons and antineutrons (collectively anti-nucleons). So charge is symmetric.

Parity is your left-right mirror image. Physics should remain the same when viewed in a mirror. Mirror light still comes out of a mirror image flashlight; gravity still makes mirror image apples fall to the mirror image ground. The distinction between left and right should hold no sway in physics. Unfortunately, while charge and time are totally symmetrical with respect to the operations in physics, there’s an ‘oops’ in parity. The ‘oops’ is not in electromagnetism, nor in gravity, nor in the strong nuclear force (which hold the nucleons (protons and neutrons) in a tight embrace in the nucleus. Parity however is not conserved in weak nuclear force interactions. Physicists might say that Mother Nature has a slight bias towards the left; some theologians might suggest that God is a weak lefthander; I might put it that our Supreme Programmer introduced into some software subroutines a code favoring a slight left-handed slant.

So symmetry holds in 11 out of 12 cases – four forces (electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and the weak nuclear forces) times three symmetry operations (time, charge and parity) with only the parity of the weak force being the odd one out. There’s something screwy somewhere!

# UNIQUENESS

In the macro world no two ‘identical’ products, inanimate or animate, are actually identical down to the Nth detail – not even identical twins. But in the micro world that’s not the case. All photons are identical, even when they have differing energy levels. All heavy hydrogen atoms are identical, ditto so are all those up-quarks or tau neutrinos. Why this should be so is not readily apparent from first principles on up the line. However, it’s easy to code any particle, and whenever that code appears, you have an identical particle appear.

# CHEMISTRY

It’s not at all clear (to me at least), how the rather limited properties we associate with electrons, neutrons and protons, can, just by changing their relative numbers in association with each other, morph into all of the wide variety of properties associated with the chemical elements.

Further, it’s not at all clear (to me at least), how the properties of the chemical elements can ‘combine’ to form molecules with vastly differing properties from those of its parents. For example, a yellowish and to us poisonous gas (chlorine), plus an explosive (in water) silver metal (sodium) can morph into properties we associate with a whitish quasi-translucent solid crystal – table salt (sodium chloride).

Further again, it’s not at all clear (to me at least), how memory and creativity (and not just in humans) can be stored and manipulated in terms of chemistry, organic chemistry, biochemistry or neurochemistry. Of course it’s easy to encode ‘memory’ into software and with the rise and rise of artificial intelligence, can creativity be far behind?

# FRACTAL COSMOLOGY

Though bordering on the fringe, some bona-fide astronomers strongly suggest from both the observational and the theoretical point of view that the extreme large-scale structure of the cosmos exhibits a fractal pattern (and there is some extensive literature on the subject). To me however, fractals are primarily a mathematical construction; the product of a mathematical mind, and as such, if there is a fractal cosmos, that’s very strong evidence for a Supreme Programmer.

# CONCLUSIONS

It’s just about time here to cite Arthur C. Clarke’s Third Law, which notes that “any sufficiently advanced technology (i.e. – a Supreme Programmer, for example) is indistinguishable from [quantum physics] magic”.

To his dying day, Einstein insisted that there were hidden variables that would, when discovered account for those various quantum anomalies – quantum magic. Those hidden variables would ultimately unite quantum physics with classical physics. Unfortunately for Einstein, experiments have since ‘proved’ that there are no hidden variables of the type Einstein had in mind. That’s because IMHO the hidden variable, which Einstein couldn’t have envisioned in even his wildest imagination, is the Supreme Programmer who creates our Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe.

Not only can the Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe scenario account for the above hardcore but seemingly magical anomalies in physics (and chemistry), but perhaps the Supreme Programmer left us these clues, inadvertently or deliberately, such as, in the macro world, those enigmatic crop ‘circles’ for which no other theory makes any absolute sense, common or otherwise.

*It is impossible to know the absolute really real nature of reality since we cannot know the properties of the micro world without measuring/observing them and the act of measuring/observing affects, even distorts, those properties. But, the measuring device is unbiased and independent measurements yield identical results so the disturbances, if any, are at least consistent. Further, theoretical predictions about the properties and reality of potential fundamental particles have all been realized. The predictions that there had to be neutrinos, antimatter, quarks, the particles that convey the weak nuclear force, even the Higgs Boson have all come to pass, so really real reality can’t differ all that much from what we observe and measure.

**Not by any means of necessity a deity! A real deity wouldn’t stuff things up and give us a Universe that has all the hallmarks that enable me to say that something is screwy somewhere!

***Not to be confused with the concept of running a film backwards.

What Are YOU Attracting in Your Life? Connecting New Age, Metaphysics and Quantum Physics

“God does not play dice with the Universe.” ~ Albert Einstein

In an earlier article, I discussed how the philosophy of, ‘we become what we attract’ dates back thousands of years. That what you tell yourself becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy through the power of “I am” statements. And that most people are unaware that they continually attract exactly what they do not want through negative statements like “I think I’m getting sick,” or “I’m too fat, too old, etc.”

New Age thought often connects self-empowerment with Universal energies. Books like The Law of Attraction and The Secret are based on this philosophy of what you put out comes back to you. But to go beyond New Age thought we need to go into Metaphysics that can be explained through quantum physics.

Metaphysics is derived from the Greek word Meta meaning “beyond” or “after,” and physics pertaining to the physical. Initially meaning beyond the physical, today it encompasses theories and explanations for phenomena not often explained by the physical sciences. Metaphysics can involve theories of the origins of the Universe, consciousness, the purpose of life, universal laws, and Karma. It can attempt to answer questions that the physical sciences cannot. Metaphysics attempts to explain phenomenon that traditional science does not attempt to explain. Concepts such as psychic phenomenon, telepathy, ESP, Out-of-Body Experiences, Near Death Experiences, Reincarnation and the spirit dimension science usually dismisses through “lack of evidence.” However, quantum physics does in fact explain such Metaphysical phenomenon.

The field of quantum physics began in the early 1900’s. It is a set of principles that describe the behavior of subatomic particles. Quantum theory provides accurate descriptions for many previously unexplained phenomena such as black body radiation and stable electron orbits. In the development of quantum theory, physicist Max Planck (1858-1947), considered the founder of quantum theory, proposed that energy waves could be described as consisting of small packets or quanta. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) further postulated that an electromagnetic wave such as light was composed of particles called photons. This led to a theory of unity between subatomic particles and electromagnetic waves called wave-particle duality in which particles and waves were neither one nor the other, but had properties of both. Quantum mechanics led to the development of the transistor, electron microscope, magnetic resonance imaging, the laser and semiconductors.

An interesting discovery of quantum physics is that of nonlocality, the phenomenon that when two particles interact, they continue to influence each other and transfer information between them instantly, no matter how distantly separated they become. They can be separated by inches, feet, or millions of miles, and the transfer of information is immediate, indicating instant communication. This transfer of information is not bound by the laws of the physical universe, such as traveling at the speed of light (186,282.4 miles per second). It is believed this nonlocal transfer of information operates in an unseen reality, one that connects all physical events with the universe.

Using theories in quantum physics, we can explain how Metaphysical principles such as energy healing, clairvoyance, and consciousness existing outside the body all function:

Light is composed of electromagnetic energy that has properties of both particles and waves.

These subatomic particles can transfer information as well and are not bound by properties of space or time.

Human thought/consciousness produces energy similar to that of light-energy with the same properties; consciousness is not bound by space and time.

Consciousness/thought is composed of energy that can affect matter near or far.

Science is now explaining how energy can leave the body and affect its surroundings, be it near or far (energy particles are nonlocal). Quantum physics is explaining how energy is composed of matter and can leave the body, affecting various energy layers around it. Science is now explaining what sages, mystics, and religious leaders have professed for thousands of years, that energy travels in

waves and can affect the physical world. Our consciousness is energy that can affect our lives by attracting other energy to it. When we project negative energy outward through self-debilitating thoughts and statements, that energy returns to us. As does positive and uplifting energies that will return better health, happiness and prosperity! It is all based in science!

Quantum physics also supports that our consciousness does not die when the physical body does. Our consciousness is energy that continues on when the body does not. What has been observed during NDE’s and in past life regressions (reincarnation) is being explained by the “science’ of quantum physics.

The science of quantum physics now explains that our consciousness is energy that can affect our lives, as in New Age thought and that our consciousness is universal energy that can transcend space, time and dimensions as in Metaphysical principles of karma, reincarnation, psychic phenomenon and connecting with those Universal energies. What you are attracting is based on science! What do you want to attract?

“Life is a mirror and will reflect back to the thinker what he thinks into it.”~ Dr. Ernest Holmes.