This is an
excellent discussion on our present understanding of light so far as it goes.
My own work is promising to allow for the actual modeling of the photon itself
or at least it sub components and perhaps a plausible understanding from simulation
of internal coherence which will be key to extending the theory.
For example I
suspect that electrons are bound to the atom with photons that are strips
inscribing the natural path of a Mobius strip.
Try simulating that or even usefully describing it mathematically. Yet that is what I think will work at that
level of scaling.
This is a
generally easy enough read if you take it carefully and is heartily
recommended.
The Ultimate
Mystery: What is light?
by Gary Vey for viewzone
In the following four pages of this article, you
will learn that there is a mysterious link between your consciousness and the
properties of a photon, the basic unit of electromagnetic energy. You will
see how your consciousness has reversed the flow of time in laboratory
experiments, changed the course of light from being a straight line and how
what you know as "reality" is explained by some noted physicists as
an elaborate digital simulation, in which you and I are characters (avatars).
It's all real -- no conjecture. This story will blow your mind -- if it does
not then it means you do not understand it yet!
* * *
In the 19th century, scientists began to delve into
the basic structure of the universe in an attempt to understand how it was put
together. In one very simple experiment they sought to determine the nature of
light, but the results were unexpected and created a mystery that the greatest
minds have been unable to solve to this day.
To a physicist, light means an energy that
is anywhere along the electromagnetic spectrum, from ELF waves to gamma
radiation. Visible light is only a narrow part of the spectrum that is most
familiar to us because our eyes can detect it. In the Newtonian model of the
universe everything is made of particles, including light. Scientists began to
think of light as being made from tiny "balls" of energy
called photons.
In 1803 a physician named Thomas Young had been
studying sound waves and thought that light was also a phenomenon involving
waves. This contradicted the current theory. Young noticed that light could be
slowed as it passed through a prism and the observed spectrum of colors seemed
to be more easily explained as wave phenomenon rather than that of light
"particles".
Young decided he would conduct an experiment that
would finally resolve the conflict. What he could not have known is that this
experiment would open up a pandora's box of brain-twisting enigmas that
contradict our understanding of the universe and our own reality.
As you will see, the result of this experiment is a
glimpse into another dimension where time itself can move backwards or stand
still. This mystery has been with us for over 200 years now and we are no
closer to solving it today. But when and if it is finally understood, civilization
will dramatically change and our reality will have to be reconstructed.
The Double Slit Experiment (1803)
Thomas Young tried to keep things simple. He looked
for examples in our everyday experience that revealed if things were solid
particles or oscillating waves. I will attempt to explain his experiment using
more modern analogies so that it will hopefully be easier to understand.
Let's imagine that you have a wide cement wall with
an open, rectangular window cut in it. At some distance beyond the cement wall
there is second wall. This second wall is made of thin wallboard and has no
window. You're going to stand at some distance in front of the first wall and
the window. You have a pistol [represented by the triangle below] and you
begin shooting through the window. As you do this, you notice that the bullets
are passing through the open window and hitting the second wall where they make
holes.
###
Because you are at some distance from the window
(and presumably not a marksman), your bullets vary in their direction with each
shot you take. After you have taken hundreds of shots you notice that the
pattern of holes in the wallboard resemble the shape of the rectangular window.
This is really not surprising and makes perfect sense.
Now we are going to add a second rectangular window
a couple of feet to the left of the first window and begin shooting again
[see below]. Because we are at some distance from the two windows, some of
our bullets will randomly go through one or the other window. Some may even hit
the wall and not go through either window. Some will hit the edge of the window
and their trajectory will be slightly altered. But enough pass through either
window so that there is a pattern of holes on the wallboard that now resembles
two rectangles. Again, this is not surprising and is what we would expect in
the world with which we are familiar.
####
Bullets are solid objects, all the same size and
weight and, although their trajectory through one or the other window is
somewhat random, we nonetheless can see a distinct pattern on the wallboard.
Next, Young imagined the same two walls immersed in
a pool of water. Instead of bullets, let's imagine we have something that
generates a wave in the water. Like the example above we will start with only
one open window.
As illustrated below, when the wave reaches the open
window it passes through it and begins again on the other side, heading for the
wallboard [2]. This time we will not have holes from bullets so we will have to
find a way to measure the intensity of the wave. I suggest we imagine floating
pin-pong balls that can move up and down against the wallboard so we will know
when the wave hits the second wall.
With just the one window we have the strongest part
of the wave hitting the area in back of the window with less intensity on each
side. Again, there is nothing surprising here.
####
Lets go ahead and use a wall with two windows, like
we did before (see below illustration). The initial wave approaches the windows
[1], is stopped by the wall but becomes two new waves as it emerges on the
other side of the windows [2]. These two waves continue towards the back wall
[3], but something interesting happens. Sometimes the peaks of the two waves
combine and become a stronger wave. Sometimes the troughs of both waves combine
and become a deeper trough. Sometimes a peak and a trough combine and cancel
each other and there is no wave. The resulting waves [4], as measured by our
ping-pong balls on the wallboard will show a series of bands where the peaks
have combines and no wave activity where they have cancelled each other.
#####
Unexpected Results Baffle Scientists, Even Today
What Thomas Young did was establish two distinct
patterns that would happen in the two slit (or two windows in our example)
experiment. If the energy directed towards the two slits was a solid particle,
it would make two distinct (yet a little fuzzy around the edges) patterns. If
the energy was in the form of a wave it would form bands, called an
"interference pattern" by experimenters since the two waves from the
windows interfere with each other.
What happened next puzzled Thomas Young and it has
freaked out scientists and theoreticians like Albert Einstein, Steven Hawking,
Richard Feynman and many others for over 200 years
The Unexpected Happens
Many of you may have learned about this experiment
in your physics class. But there is a new twist that I will tell you about
later that will totally blow your mind...
When a single beam of light was directed at the
single slit (or window), the light cast a pattern of a fuzzy rectangle -- the
same shape as the window. This is a clear example that light is made of
individual particles. We call these particles photons. In physics a photon
is an elementary particle (meaning it is not made up of smaller bits and
pieces) and it has a unitary size and charge.
So when a single beam of light is directed at a
double slit (or two windows) we would expect it to behave much like the bullets
in our imaginary experiment and cast two fuzzy rectangles. But it doesn't.
Instead we get the interference pattern, indicative of a wave (see below).
#####
For an interference pattern to happen, we assume
that something went through both slits (windows) at the same time. Scientists
first thought that two photons are somehow passing through the two windows at
the same time, then interfering with each other after they have passed through
their respective window and before they strike the back wallboard.
To eliminate this possibility, they managed to
fired a single photon at the windows... then another... then another. The
wallboard was designed so that the location of each photon could be marked,
much like the bullet holes. They were now certain that only one photon was
passing through either window at any time. But after a while they noticed
the same interference pattern. The places where the photons had hit the
backboard were arranged in a pattern of bands and gaps. How could this be
happening?
This was so strange that some theorists suggested
the photon had somehow split itself in two, gone through separate windows and
then recombined. Since it is an elementary particle, this is not possible. So
the next idea was to try and see where each photon was going, one at a time,
and try to understand what was happening to it before it hit the wallboard.
The experimenters decided to place some photo-electric
cells on the back sides of the windows so that they cold "see" which
window the photon went through, then they would monitor where it landed on the
backboard. Since light travels in a straight line they would be able to plot
the photon's course and see what was causing the interference pattern.
But that just created more problems
(see below).
###
As soon as a detector was turned on to see the
photon pass by, the arrangement of the photons striking the back wall were
indicative of a particle. They tried turning one detector on, then the other,
then both -- no matter what combination they tried, if they knew which
window the photon passed through the experimental results were always
indicative of a particle. As soon as they stopped trying to see which
window the photon went through, the wave interference pattern appeared.
It appears that
whenever we know which window/slit the proton passed through, the result
will always be the characteristic pattern of a particle. If we do not
know which slit the proton passed through, the result will always be
characteristic of an interference pattern.
Why Observation Changes The Results
To measure the photon passing through the window,
the apparatus used a detector that shot its own photons across the gap and collected
it on the opposite side. If this beam of photons encountered the experimental
photon that had passed through the window, its trajectory would be changed and
this change would be noted. But experimenters knew that the experimental photon
would also be changed, ever so slightly.
Apparently there is no way to observe the
experimental photon passing through the window without altering its path. They
soon learned that any time they could detect through which window (or slit) the
experimental photon passed, this detection would somehow make the photon behave
as if it were a particle.
At one point they reduced the photons in the
detector to the point where the detector sometimes would catch the experimental
photon and other times it would pass undetected. They noticed when they did
this that if the detector could track the experimental photon it landed inside
one of the two fuzzy rectangles but for those that escaped detection they would
land in one of the interference bands.
Somehow the act of observation was changing the
experimental results. But how?
It gets even stranger!
When does the photon change from one form to the
other? Does it happen when the particle is being detected? Could the mere act
of detection be enough to collapse the wave and form a particle pattern?
To test his hypothesis a man named John A. Wheeler
designed an ingenious way of altering the double slit experiment that would, he
thought, prove that the process of detection was not responsible for the change
from particle to wave patterns.
First, Wheeler had two powerful telescopes -- one
focused on each slit. If a photon went through one or the other slit, the
telescopes could see it. The telescopes were placed where the fuzzy rectangles
would register a photon hit from a particle pattern. Since the light had to
travel to the telescopes, they served as a detector.
Wheeler then devised a detection screen that could
be very quickly placed in front of the telescopes, preventing them from seeing
the slits but recording where the photons landed.
The mechanism was constructed so that the distance
between the wall with the slits was quite far from both the removable detection
wall and the telescopes.
Because these distances and speed of light were
known, it was possible to know when a photon had been released, passed through
either or both of the slits and was somewhere between the slits and the
detectors. We call this time =x in the animation below. At this
precise moment the detection screen could either be placed in front of the
telescopes or removed.
[See animation below]
###
The idea was that the photon should have already
decided if it was going to react like a particle or a wave after it had passed
through the slits. And this decision by the photon should be irreversable.
Wheeler tried to force the photon to be a particle
because, at the time it passed through the slits, it was being watched by the
telescopes. By putting up the screen after the photon passed the slits, but
before the telescopes received the light, he expected the photon would act like
a particle. (Is your head spinning yet?)
In the actual experiment, when the photons passed
through the slits, if the detector wall was quickly put in place, they
displayed the wave pattern on the wall. But, if after the photons passed
through the slits, the detector wall was suddenly removed, the telescopes would
capture the photons in the area where two fuzzy rectangles would be --
indicative of a particle.
In other words, the decision on which type of
detection is used (screen or telescopes) is being made after the photons have
passed through the slits -- presumable after they have already decided to be a
wave or a particle. Yet, the later decision seems to somehow influence the
photon in the past. Huh?
Ordinarily we have "cause--effect"
timelines in nature. But this experiment seems to show that the effect can
change the cause.
In other experiments, the detectors were used to
determine which slit the photon passed BUT the electronics that reported or
recorded the result were turned off. This is the so-called Earasure Paradox
because, despite being detected, the interference pattern resulted. It
seems that it is not the detection that matter as much as whether a person
(human being) is aware of it or not!
More weirdness: Electrons and Buckyballs
Not surprising, when electrons are used in a vacuum
environment instead of photons, the results are identical. But what astonished
me was that something as large as a 60 atom molecule -- a so-called
"buckyball" -- also displayed this mind-bending feat!
Just how big a molecule needs to be before it
continually displays the particle pattern is something that is currently being
explored.1
What is a
buckyball (C60)?
Buckyballs, also called fullerenes, were one of the
first nanoparticles discovered. This discovery happened in 1985 by a trio of
researchers working out of Rice University named Richard Smalley, Harry Kroto,
and Robert Curl.
Buckyballs are composed of carbon atoms linked to
three other carbon atoms by covalent bonds. However, the carbon atoms are
connected in the same pattern of hexagons and pentagons you find on a soccer
ball, giving a buckyball the spherical structure as shown in the following
figure.
The most common buckyball contains 60 carbon atoms
and is sometimes called C60.Other sizes of buckyballs range from those
containing 20 carbon atoms to those containing more than 100 carbon atoms.
The covalent bonds between carbon atoms make
buckyballs very strong, and the carbon atoms readily form covalent bonds with a
variety of other atoms. Buckyballs are used in composites to strengthen
material. Buckyballs have the interesting electrical property of being very
good electron acceptors, which means they accept loose electrons from other
materials. This feature is useful, for example, in increasing the efficiency of
solar cells in transforming sunlight into electricity.
[Excerpt from Nanotechnology For
Dummies (2nd edition), from Wiley Publishing]
Things To Remember...
While you are trying to get your mind around this,
it's perhaps time to answer some frequently asked questions about the wave and
particle patterns. Remember that even with the wave pattern, the detector wall
in the photon experiments is detecting whole, single photons which are all of
uniform size and charge. The detector can only detect these uniform particles
-- and they are most certainly particles when they are detected -- however it
is the pattern which appears over time that forms the distinct interference
bands and gaps or the fuzzy rectangles.
So before they are detected, it would seem, they are
influenced by something to land randomly in a pattern of either wave or
particle. Once they are detected they are particles. Yet, as we saw in the last
experiment -- incidentally called the "delayed choice" version of the
Double Slit Experiment -- the decision appears to have been made prior to
detection yet dependent upon the subsequent choice of the detection method...
whew!
Yes, there's more, if you can handle it. That will
be in the next installment on light.
In the meantime, a reader sent me a link to a
lecture by Tom Campbell on YouTube. I thought I'd heard almost all of the
explanations for the paradox of the Double Split Experiment and Delayed
Decision stuff but Campbell surprised me by stating the obvious conclusion that
most scientists come to when trying to explain things on the quantum level:
it's not real! We are part of a simulation. Reality is either a digital
simulation itself, or reality is running on some larger system of things we
cannot have knowledge about.
It's cutting edge thinking and it will expand your
ideas about reality beyond your imagination. I'll try to get a hold on it and
write more. Meanwhile, here is that video. Enjoy.
The Present and The Past: Causality
Perhaps the weirdest things that happen in the
quantum world -- the world of very small particles of matter and energy -- is
that time often seems to be either meaningless, or it travels in the opposite
direction. There are several excellent examples of this, like Schrodinger's Cat
(which I will discuss later) but this is one that I think best illustrates the
reverse time phenomenon.
The Punch Card Problem
A team of scientist design the Double Split
Experiment using singe photons which are eventually collected on a detector
screen. Aside each slit there is a detector which can determine which slit the
photon went through. The detectors are connected to a computer that makes note
of the trial number (0001 to 1000) and the slit (left or right) and immediately
creates an old IBM punch card with this information encoded on it. The data is
then erased from the computer memory.
When the photon eventually hits the back detector
screen, the x,y coordinates are picked up and sent to the computer, along with
the trial number, and a different IBM punch card is printed with this
information encoded on it. The data is then erased from the computer.
So far, no human has seen the cards or monitored the
computer. When 1000 trials are completed the two stacks of 1000 IBM punch cards
are locked away for 50 years.
Remember: the photon will always have a wave pattern
unless the slit that it went through is known by a conscious mind. Even if
detectors are used, if the information is not observed by a conscious mind then
it remains in wave form.
After decades the box is opened. The stack of cards
containing the trial numbers and the slit that detected the photon are shuffled
in the dark, then half of the cards are removed randomly and burned.
When the cards are sorted, those of the same trial
numbers are put in one pile and those who do not have a corresponding trial
number (because their mate was burned) are in the remaining pile.
We know from the Double Slit Experiment that a
particle will create two fuzzy rectangles while a wave form will create several
fizzy bands. We can determine the x,y coordinates of these rectangles by
letting photons enter through one, then the other slit (one slit at a time).
When the IBM punch cards are examined for the x,y coordinates it is possible to
say that the coordinates are either within the rectangle (a particle pattern)
or fall outside of it (a wave pattern).
We also know from the Double Slit Experiment that if
a human mind (consciousness) is aware of which slit the photon went through
then the resulting pattern will be that of a particle.
Quantum mechanics therefore predicts that the cards
with matching trial numbers will all fall within the two fuzzy rectangles of a
particle pattern, since we have now consciously detected which slit the photon
passed through. Because the cards that were destroyed no longer contained the
information on which slit the photon passed through, the result is that we
never observed this information and so the expected pattern will be that of a
wave.
What has happened here is that a random decision
(which cards to burn) made in the present has caused a photon 50 years in the
past to decide to be in the form of a wave or a particle.
Or, from the perspective of the photon, it has seen
what will happen in 50 years in the future and has decided to take the form of
a wave or a particle. This is the weirdness of the quantum world of light.
I've gone to sleep many mights trying to imagine a
way to use this reverse-time phenomenon... if there was a way to send lotto
numbers back in time. After all I only need one day of reverse-time
communication -- not 50 years. But the logic does not yet allow for such
things. Or does it?
In the above example, two events (the slit
information and observation 50 years in the future) are entangled. In the
famous experiment below, the decay of an atom is entangled with a cat.
Schrodinger's Cat -- Observation By An Animal?
In the standard model of how stuff is made, commonly
called the Copenhagen Interpretation, an atom like uranium would be considered
as both having decayed and not decayed -- two superimposed states -- until it
was actually observed by someone. This is analogous to a photon being both a
wave and a particle until observed.
While this dual-state mathematical condition exists
in the quantum world, it makes no sense in the larger world where we exist.
Schrodinger's Cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox,
devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger in 1935 to illustrate how
absurd the quantum world can be.
We begin with an atom that is capable of radiation,
like uranium. Uranium atoms have so many electrons that the ones in their outer
shell, furthest from the pull of the nucleus, tend to escape and fly off in
space. A geiger-counter is designed to detect this escaping electron and
produce a "click".
While we know about how many "clicks" we
will detect with a good size chunk of uranium, we have no idea when a single
atom of uranium will shed an electron. It could be the next second or many
years from now. But we are confident that, eventually, this will happen.
#### shrodinger
In Schrodinger's thought experiment a single atom of
uranium is placed in a glass jar with a geiger counter. Instead of just making
a "click" when it detects the flying electron, the geiger counter
also breaks open a tablet of cyanide gas... Oh, yes. We're going to put this
whole contraption inside a metal box that also contains a live cat, close it and
wait.
After some time has passed we might wonder if the
uranium decayed and ultimately killed the cat, or perhaps that has not happened
yet and the cat is doing fine. Schrodinger was trying to show that, according
to the rules set by the Copenhagen Interpretation, until you open up the box
and look, the cat can exist in two states: dead and alive. His argument was
that the cat's fate would not be "real" until an observer looked at
it, which is of course quite absurd.
In our rational world, the cat is either dead or
alive, not both. Of course, the cat knowns if it is dead or alive -- doesn't
that count as an observation? It's crazy, but such things exist in the quantum
world.
Here's a brief video that explains the paradox.
The Unexpected Happens... Again!
Get ready for another light paradox. This is an
experiment you can do yourself. It involves polarizing filters of the type used
in sunglasses and on camera lenses to reduce glare.
The polaroid filter is made of long molecules that
are arranged in parallel in a specific direction. The filter takes advantage of
the fact that a traveling light wave will have an undulating wave that extends
perpendicular to the direction of travel. This wave travels at a specific angle
of rotation. Actually, light travels in tiny discrete packets of energy and
each packet has its own unique rotation angle. Collectively, like in a beam of
light, it all seems random.
The parallel cells in the polarizing membrane allow
light that is similarly aligned to pass through but blocks all the other
rotation angles. So after light passes through a filter it is said to be
polarized in a specific direction.
Here is a short video that will explain this better
than I can:
So here is the paradox. In the illustration below
you can see three different observations being made with three different
arrangements of polarizing filters.
In the top row you see that a filter has been
arranged to allow a vertical rotation angle. The light that passes through is visible
and has a vertical orientation. [a]
The second row shows the same light passing through
the first filter but being stopped by the second one because it is allowing
only horizontal rotation of light to pass. There is no light visible to the
observer. [b]
In the bottom row you see what happens when a filter
is placed at a 45° angle between the vertical and horizontal filters. [c]
Surprisingly, light now passes through all three filters.
If you can explain this, please get ready to collect
your prize in Physics. Many have tried. But it remains an enigma.
But there IS a solution!
There is a modern physicist named Dr. Sylvester
James Gates who is known for being the top string-theory (M-theory)
theoretician. His world is usually immersed in math formulas but he enjoys
relating his ideas to ordinary people in venues like the 2011 Issac Asimov
discussions [below]. Dr. Gates is an speaker and used the occasion to announce
a new and shocking discovery.
Gates claims that while he was solving a basic equation
in the sub-quantum world of the tiniest bits that make up stuff (because they
are so tiny -- smaller than quarks -- they aren't even stuff yet...) he came
across a basic formula that, when solved with numbers, yielded a long stretch
of 1s and 0s.
These were not random 1s and 0s. Gates immediately
recognized this unique pattern as being a computer code discovered by Claude
Shannon in the 1940s and used to transfer digital signals without errors.
Claude Shannon was the person who decided to send
analog voice transmissions by digital means (1s and 0s) for AT&T. This
successfully eliminated the noise that plagued telephones in their early days.
Shannon eventually really got into digital communication and defined the limits
of digital data transmission with formulas that are basic to digital
communication today.
CDs, DVD, your cellphone and hard drive -- anything
that sends digital information from one point to another sends it in packets.
Even voice signals and skype are made up of thousands of packets a second
passing through wires or space -- each has it's own "envelope" if you
will -- a beginning and an end -- and something the sending device adds to it
as it sends it out. This extra piece of data is something that the receiving
end of the communication checks after it receives the digital package. It's a
thing call an "error check code".
In its basic form, the error check code gives the
count or number of bytes in the package it just sent. If the count of all the
1s and 0s is wrong, it means something got lost along the way and the receiver
usually sends a message back to the sender that says "we didn't get it
all, please send it again!" And a new packet is re-sent.
More advanced systems, ones that just send out the
digital data and never hear back from the receiver, do something even more
remarkable.
Claude Shannon devised a small addition to the
packet of data that contained samples of the data in the packet. This way, if a
small piece of digital information was lost, the packet from the previous
successfully sent data would be used to fill in the missing data. It's all
complex and you would have to be Einstein to even begin to understand it... but
this whole process was reduced to a specific series of 1s and 0s that give the
instruction to make the repair. This is exactly what S.J.Gates found
embedded in the basic formula of string theory!
Gates stated what he found and it was confirmed. He
has made no further disclosures about how it got there, if he has a clue. In
one interview he apologized for being the person to suggest that the movie, The
Matrix, was more true than fiction.
Is our reality a digital simulation?
Don't laugh or smirk at this idea. It has been
entertained by some of the greatest minds who know the quantum world
intimately. The idea that our reality is made up of discrete bits is a fact.
You may be surprised to learn that there is a smallest unit of time and
smallest unit of space. It's as if reality is made of pixels, which have a
refresh rate (the constant velocity of light) and the ability to preserve
rendering until it is observed by someone -- the avatar in the game.
Dr. Brian Whitworth has been the most outspoken
theorists to "flesh out" this theory. If you have understood any of
these light paradox examples in this article, you should be able to understand
a little of this important paper. I've included it here so you can read it at
your leisure.
Whitworth makes a compelling case for the Matrix!
Things like Young's Double-Split paradox and the Delayed Choice phenomenon have
a chance of making sense in a simulated world but the simulated world theories
pose a threat to things like religion, "God" and free-will. It is
perhaps these paradigms (including the Terror of Death that we anesthetize with religious beliefs)
that keep the simulation theories at bey.
The Similarity
of Quantum and Simulated worlds
A simulated (digital computer) environment will have
a maximum velocity determined by the pixel density and refresh rate of the
screen. In the quantum world this frame of time is the time required for the
smallest unit (Planck length) to change its position with the smallest bit of
energy. Like a video game, continuous time is made up of very small moments
that only appear to be continuous.
In a computer game, the velocity will appear uniform
in all reference frames and can be computed by dividing the pixel size by the
refresh rate. In the quantum world, the same applies:
Planck length / Planck time = velocity of light
(1.616 X10-35)meters / (5.39 X10-44)seconds = C
In video games, objects are only rendered when they
are being looked at (observation). The photon exhibits this phenomenon by being
a probability wave until observed by a conscious mind.
In a video game, time slows when massive programming
is required. Quantum time also slows in the presence of mass.
The Single
Avatar Solution
One interesting simulation theory postulates that
the "game" involves only one avatar at a time, to conserve
processing. The same consciousness inhabits all of the characters in the
universe, sometimes being a homeless man in New York, another time being
Vladimir Putin... or YOU... and so on. You are reading this article right now
because it was your turn to be who you are right now. There is only one reality
for each run of the game.
This would limit the need to code everything in the
universe, from every possible perspective and time. And the lifetime of an
avatar could be just a small moment of time in some other reality -- where the
program is running. The number of avatars is finite, so it is possible.
In the quantum world one learns that if something is
possible then it is.
In this simulation example, everything that is
behind you and your field of observation is not rendered -- is not
"real" yet, until you turn and observe it. This explains why a
photon will be a wave probability -- essentially programming variables -- until
it is observed and the wave is said to "collapse" and produce a
discrete particle.
If you are not familiar with computer games these
days, ask your children to show you the state of the art. You will understand
that this is not a fantasy.
When I described this to my good friend in
Australia, John McGovern, he replied with the following you tube video which
appears to say it all:
"Do unto others as you would have done to
you," seems to take on new significance in this simulated world. So do
things like reincarnation and karma... "We are all one!"
Maybe not so fast...
I'm very surprised that there have not been more
experiments with the Double-Slit. For example, if human consciousness can
collapse a wave then what about animals? How about plants? What does it mean to
be conscious? When do the changes to reality occur if stored information is
erased?
Also, the reaction time for consciously
"knowing" something is a trifle less than a (0.8) second. This is the
time required for sense organs and perception processes to take place. When
does the consciousness collapse the wave? Is this delayed?
By varying the elements in the Double-Split
experiment it should be possible to better understand this apparent
entanglement of our minds and the natural world that we perceive as real. Yet,
for 200 years, only a handful of attempts have been made to understand the process
of "observation". Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment