The arrow paradox
It begins with contemplating about a paradoxon which is called “arrow paradox“.
In the arrow paradox, Zeno (old ancient Greek man who got a lot of time to think about this and that) states that for motion to occur, an object must change the position which it occupies. He gives an example of an arrow in flight. He states that in any one (duration-less) instant of time, the arrow is neither moving to where it is, nor to where it is not. It cannot move to where it is not, because no time elapses for it to move there; it cannot move to where it is, because it is already there. In other words, at every instant of time there is no motion occurring. If everything is motionless at every instant, and time is entirely composed of instants, then motion is impossible.
Quantum jumps and moments in time
We know that the smallest particles are behaving like a cloud of probability. At the moment of observation this cloud of probability collapses for a short time to a particle. Well, it does not really collapse to a particle, but we receive the information of it’s location, which we perceive as a location. This is the trick our mind plays with us. Matter is not really solid, but the information of it’s velocity (time), direction (vector) or it’s location (space) is stable, especially for macroscopic objects. Motion is not really fluid, but a series of considerations, moments of observation.
Probability densities for the electron of a hydrogen atom in different quantum states.
It’s like the information of the state of a particle unfolds during the observation and we become aware of it. Observing a particle for a extended period of time in a focused manner, will freeze it’s state and it’s evolution through time. This phenomenon has real life applications in quantum freezer, but in ancient times the vicinity of angels prevented the “wearing out of garments and sandals for 40 years in the desert“.
Consciousness is the pre-physical field
The general assumption is that our brain generates by random electro-chemical processes a state which is regarded as consciousness. This materialistic axiom leads to affirmations of the believe that no free will exist, that it is only a illusion, and therefore responsibility is refused for their actions. This paradigma makes part of the deterministic world views. Particles has a own existence, independent of an intelligent creator, isolated from consciousness.
The firing of neurons seems to be a random process, but our consciousness imprints it’s order into the chaotic state.
A new paradigm emerge which understands consciousness as a pre-physical field, which generates space and time for communication purposes, uses mathematics as universal language, reflecting it’s own self-similar character on everything which later forms a physical representation. This physical representations are part of our own nature. The chemical elements seems to reflect psychological states, as known in homeopathy (see Jan Scholten’s theory on Elements). Their order, mass, properties and so on, has not only a justifications and benefits in the physical world, but their invisible part known as morphic fields interacts with our mind. It’s like the entire universe is inside us … but this is a metaphor. Sure we are part of a greater immaterial organism and each one of us is interconnected on a immaterial and nonlocal basis.
Paradoxes and phenomenas reveals the real nature of the universe
I cannot stress enough how important it is to harmonize your scientific world view with your spiritual one. It’s requires not only a rethinking of how our universe works, but also a unlearning of tenacious ideas of materialistic origin. When one then is confronted with apparently paradoxes, the understanding reaches a big impediment, and usually most people runs towards the so called “experts” and ask them for help. The only answer they get is one based on materialistic assumptions.
But the nonlocality phenomenon in quantum physics, the entanglement phenomenon (one and the same as the nonlocality phenomenon), the quantum zeno paradox, and so on, they should lead one towards a consciousness based world view, where unity is the real healthy state and not isolation, and where a thought or a intent has a impact on the physical level of our reality. Instead so many paradoxes and phenomenas are considered taboos in mainstream science.
Good news, the “underground” science community has already adopted the new paradigm and it makes great progress, notwithstanding the lack of funds for research. The paradigm shift will not occur by any change through the company sustained researches, which have a good financial reasons to protect the old world view.
DNA as a interface and structure analogy
Our DNA is a key towards the invisible realm of memory. It reflects self-similarity, a property of consciousness. Russians scientists observed that DNA is able to imprint it’s signature in space and that this signature shifts in frequency with time, going towards higher frequencies. They discovered this by placing a DNA sample in a small chamber for measurements with a laser. The laser stimulates the DNA and it vibrates in a certain frequency with overtones, which is the signature of the DNA, the “private key“, also known by other scientists like Benveniste or Montagnier in the west. After removing the DNA from the chamber, the space continued to vibrate in the same frequency as the DNA. The frequency shift with time to higher frequencies, and eventually it could not be measured anymore because of the technological limits.
Montagnier, based on the works of Benveniste, proved that the EM signature of the DNA is able to imprint itself in water. The anomalous water properties enables it to carry the signal with it, as known in homeopathy as the carrier substance per excellence. By putting a drop of the water in a DNA polymerase solution and starting a polymerase chain reaction, a copy of the original DNA is reconstructed. It’s like the EM signatures is able to get a link towards the morphic field of the DNA and then it is recrystallized to a physical representation. Indeed this is a good scientific proof for the ability of the “field” to remember everything and it’s the base of understanding how a resurrection could be possible (in scientific terms).
Polymerase chain reaction
If you have ever played with the idea to buy a quantum computer, don’t do it! First, it costs 15 million dollar and you need some extra money for the installation, maintenance and operation costs. Second, you get only one quantum computing unit for 15 million dollar. Third, the interface towards the QCU is too slow in order to reach a real advance for playing games … what else would you do with a quantum computer?
But inside yourself you have already QCUs on mass. In each cell your DNA is a fully operational quantum computer, able to perform additions, subtractions, divisions, multiplications and more. Just calculate the costs of yourself … no money of the world could be enough to pay for this super quantum computer. We are perfect. No comparisons to man made machines.
On the quantum state, even with the higher body temperature, our DNA is the interface between our consciousness. We memorize thoughts not inside the limited hardware of our brain, but thanks to this “alien technology” our brain transforms our thoughts into morphic fields and imprint them into the space fabric. We have a limitless memory capacity. You can make the maths for yourself. How much memory does it require to save one day of visual data reaching our eyes? This is a homework. Just a hint, we perceive a higher resolution than only 12k!
This question was in my mind 15 years ago and it is still something which I regard as one of the most interesting questions, because it involves a better understanding of what life force actually is.
My scientific world view changed over the time and the changes was always a kind of a quantum jump. I ask myself:
When mind is fundamental, why do we need space and time and matter and all that stuff?
(Ah, I quoted myself and I am still alive!)
The answer is rather simple: Because space and time and matter and all that stuff provides us with a framework for better communication. We have more things in common, we are more united, we breath all the same air and we live on the same planet. This is more fun than just being a spiritual being. So humans are the most modern creation and more advanced in certain ways than spiritual being. Regarding the Bible, Genesis chapter 6, some of the angels was envious of human beings and they decided to take human form. They materialized as humans, which is a lower form of being regarding personal power, because a angel in his immaterial form is able to destroy entire cities, but a human in flesh and blood is very weak in comparison.
Playing football as immaterial beings is no fun!
But to eat and taste and smell the creation of Jehovah is great. It makes us feel so good. It’s a more advanced state of being than the immaterial one. Yes, a angel is immaterial and can jump here and there with his consciousness all over the universe, watching humans day and night, knowing things for which some scientists would love to die in order to know, … imagine what this means, to know other planets, other galaxies, to have lived for billions of years … but the angels mentioned in chapter 6 of Genesis was envious of us and the was ready to give up all their power just to have the pleasure of being humans made of flesh.
Naturally we live now under the cruel consequences of the original sin and we grow old, get ill and die. Therefore we ask ourselves what it would be like if we would be perfect and have abundance of life force?
So the big question is: WHAT IS LIFE FORCE?
When mind is the ground of all being, then life force is a integral aspect of consciousness.
I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.
It seems that consciousness is a kind of stream. It flows and it behaves in a certain way which reveals patterns. We can observe this patterns. One of them is the vortex.
Life force is not really a physical force. Let us not forget that consciousness is not physical, but the physical universe has it’s origin from a mind, from our creator. So don’t expect to find somewhere a physical force which can be labeled as “life force“. It’s not a radiation of some kind, like alpha or beta or gamma rays. It cannot be labeled with a Greek alphabetic letter.
I cannot stress it enough, that YOUR world view forms your scientific understanding. If you have a materialistic world view, then you will reduce everything on particles. Light is made of particles, matter is made of particles, yes even for gravity you will search a explanation which involves some kind of particle. Even if you regard yourself as super-open-minded, a new-age-junkie, a quantumnaut-hippie, but your world view is still based on a very thin materialistic layer (a residuum of an old world view), then you will always tend to find your answers in a particle like the so called “tachyons“. It’s time to update your world view. Else you can forget it to find a answer.
Also dualism and pantheism are other forms of materialism. There is no “subtle energy” (in German it is called “Feinstofflichkeit“) between energy and matter, between atoms, or a ether. And pantheism is nothing else than materialism too. It assumes that every rock and stone has a spirit, but it does not regard the mind as fundamental. In fiction like the Star Wars movies the universe is based on pantheism and you guess what, this movies molds the world views of young scientists, because there is a motivation behind every world view.
Materialists desires isolation. They claim that our universe is a closed system. They feel themselves enclosed in a self-sustaining system, which has a beginning and a end and no hope and no responsibility. All other variations like pantheism are just little patches of the world view. But it always ends in nihilism.
Enough of paradigm theory for now and back to the life force issue.
If life force is not a kind of radiation and not a kind of energy, then how can we measure it?
Let me ask first this question: How does life force manifest in our physical realm?
I’ve mentioned it before, a pattern, the vortex. It’s the most common pattern in our universe. From galaxies to the atom, vortex patterns are everywhere. A vortex is based on the Fibonacci number sequence and on the golden ratio, phi. It has a relation with eternity. A vortex is nothing else than a fractal, self-similar. And now in order to give you another evidence for the claims made, that mind is fundamental and life force is a integral aspect of consciousness, the self-similarity and the fractal behavior and the relation with eternity is something which is also part of consciousness itself. Do you now get a feeling of a AHA-effect?
I’m sure it’s a difficult switch from materialistic world view towards a idealistic one. It’s a quantum jump! Nothing less. It requires a lot of energy and it does not happen by pure chance. You need to meditate about it, about it implications. If you already have a idealistic world view then maybe you need just a little adjustments here and there. (We all need this kind of adjustments!)
Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.
He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end.
The last quote of Max Planck remembers me of what Robert Lanza has written about his Biocentrism theory. It is very similar what the Bible says about our inner desire to acquire knowledge for all eternity. We live inside a framework which allows us to have great pleasure in discovering all the surprises embedded in the creation of God, but we will never reach the destination of knowing everything. This sounds to me like eternal bliss. A real gift from our father.
Consciousness is order and the source of energy
One of my first posts in this blog was about the source of energy itself. Energy is a potential, a kind of order. Life force is the most high order that exist. If you would be a astronaut exploring other planets, let’s say you would fly to Mars and land there, and then find a array of stones in the desert of Mars which are ordered in a special way, you would never think that this could happen by pure chance. We always relate order with a intelligence. But materialists denies this fact, because they desires a isolation from the creator (Roman 1:20).
We always relate order with a intelligence.
Now life force is like a field, a potential, which exhibits not kinetic or thermal or any other kind of physical force, but it has a influence on random processes and it is very similar to Rupert Sheldrake’s morphic fields. Indeed Sheldrake wrote that morphic fields do not break the law of energy conservation.
One extreme form of random process is the movement of water molecules. Imagine that you see how the Red Sea divides and a dry ground appears where you could walk to the other side and the waters would stay still on both sides like walls. On a molecular level a higher source of life force would change the random process dramatically in order that the H2O molecules would move towards one extreme and remain there, and all this without breaking the laws of energy conservation. Only a materialist would not believe in divine intervention and for this reason the Egyptian army lost their life (Exodus 14).
Therefore in order to measure life force, we need to search for evidence of order, something which alters random processes.
Life force alters random processes
Radioactive decay is very random, indeed radioactivity is the absence of order and consciousness. All radioactive elements are at the end of the chemical table, where order becomes less and the elements more heavier. Nuclear weapons are one of the most terrific things scientists has done to humanity. A criminal act for which they should be ashamed.
Interesting fact is, consciousness alters the process of the natural radioactive decay and forms order in the output. Consciousness does not stop radioactivity, at least not human ones, but the random numbers sequences produced by radioactive decay is altered by consciousness in such a odd way that a order is produced against any pure chance. Dean Radin and his friends has made a groundbreaking work in this field. They have discovered that all humans together triggers ordered outputs of this RNG-devices distributed world wide, when a dramatic event happens and all people are involved emotionally. It seems that our collective consciousness reacts towards threats by creating coherence, which on the other hand influences random outputs making them less random.
Less random means more order, which means more consciousness, which means more life force. So our collective consciousness responses to life threatening events with a huge release of life force and this can be measured with RNG-devices. Does this happen for individual persons too?
My own personal experiments provided a lot of evidence and Dean Radin has written a whole book about this matter, providing so much evidence that should convince every hardcore skeptic … but we know, that a materialist is a materialist is a materialist. You can never convince a materialist with facts. They are professional ignorants of the truth.
Truth never triumphs, its opponents just die out.
Science advances one funeral at a time.
In my “laboratory” (my home) I don’t use RNGs based on radioactive decay. They work purely on electronic noises. The output is transformed in digital one and zeros (bits), which are read as bytes (collections of 8 bits). They can be interpreted as numbers. For the purpose of creating a good balanced random output, I developed a program which analyze the sequence of numbers by evaluating if the preceding number was bigger or smaller than the next number. By doing this it is assured that a unbalanced random output of bits delivers a true random output of “bigger and smaller” ones. This trick is used by the Global Consciousness Project too. Other true RNGs devices uses quantum mechanics, photon splitters, and are very expensive. But they are used for encryption and not for psi-experiments and maybe this expensive devices cannot be used for psi, because they have a software which makes corrections from deviations.
Other random processes are crystallization. The precursor of a crystal nucleus is formed by a cluster of molecules during a random process. Thermal energy contributes to the randomness. Protein crystallization is even more random. But at some point in time the process of crystallization seems to require less time. It is like the structure learns how to perform the crystallization more effectively and requires less time (beware of pantheism! This process has nothing to do with subtle forms of materialism). Rupert Sheldrake investigated historical literature about crystallization of Aspirin and he discovered that this new structure, which is man made and does not exist in a natural form in nature, was in the past rather difficult to crystallize, but then it became easier and easier.
Rupert Sheldrake also wrote that physical laws behaves like are more like habits, which points against in favor to a idealistic world view. He doesn’t stand alone with this opinion. Max Planck said something very similar:
We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.
Now I know that many people who believes in God have a world view of static physical laws, but this kind of world viewed was shaped by the Catholic Church and their motivation was to assure their power over the simple folks. But if your world view is idealistic and you regard mind as fundamental, then you will recognize that only immaterial principles are eternal.
Only immaterial principles are eternal!
Physical laws have the only purpose to ensure the communication inside this framework. The true nature of everything is mind and not matter. So if God would decide to ensure that his will is done, he could even alter physical laws and no man could hinder to do that!
Indeed, great scientists like Rupert Sheldrake already discovered that physical laws changed, even during his lifetime. Robert Lanza, another scientist who have done groundbreaking works, wrote that it is consciousness which forms this laws in order to ensure life in this universe. So this is not in contrast to our faith in a eternal father in heaven who has created everything (Genesis 1:1).
For example the speed of light c changed, it dropped. And because the meter is defined by the speed of light nobody knows the difference.
Gravitation also changes. And this is in harmony with the Electric Universe Theory, which is another threat to the dogmatic cosmology lobby of our time.
Could therefore life force alter even physical laws?
Remember that life force is just another aspect of consciousness and mind is the ground of being.
If a random process outputs a ordered sequence, then we cannot assume a alteration of physical laws. Nobody has tuned here reality. This makes part of the “current” laws of physics which enables our mind to order random processes inside our brain. Stuart Hamerhoff has made extensive research of how consciousness influences random processes inside nerve cells, especially how microtubules enables the mind to collapse wavefunction at will. Free will has it’s source on a immaterial level. So we perform PSI all the time inside our brain.
Life force slows down entropy
Entropy is a kind of random process. Order in form of a potential is released and energy is transformed into another form of energy. Life force is able to restore order or at least to slow down the decay of it. And this can be measured.
For example static electricity inside a capacitor discharge over time. If life force influences the discharge, we can assume that it would slow down the process of discharge. The method is rather simple: Measure the voltage and wait 10ms, then measure again and calculate the percentage of loss. Display the percentage value on a graph with Voltage for y and time for x. But be aware that at the end of the discharge process the loss of static electricity is of a lower rate, because the curve levels out with lower charge.
Life greatly depends on order
(What Is Life? by physicist Erwin Schrödinger)
In a future post I will show you how to build a experimental measurement device using the discharge rate of a capacitor.
How life force cannot be measured
There is intellectual cruelty on the internet that will cause you headache. On youtube you can find quacks who sell pendants with a vortex paint on it, claiming that this talisman absorbs energy from the universe. Oh please downvote them!
Or there are people who sells a frequency counter as a life force measurement apparatus for thousands of dollars, despite the fact that you can get one of them for 11 dollar on ebay. Life force is not a form of radiation, remember!? The (only) motivation behind all this quacks is to make money. Perhaps they even believe their own delusion. But I cannot imagine that they are real happy people.
If you make your research on the internet questions the real motivation of who publish a video or a article. Go deeper into their sites, blogs, watch the other videos and see for yourself if they do not claim exceptional things just for the sake of selling their junk. A good scientific documentation is not done by holding a shaky camera with the left foot. Most time they hide their results, expecting that some naive skip the part of verify their claims and just buy the 1100 dollar junk frequency counter. Poor one who falls in such a trap.
And regarding the famous “dowsing technique” or the so called “Bovis scale“, this is not accepted by scientific community, even if they are really open minded. All kinds of radionics apparatus are empty inside. There are few with orgonite inside (Intel inside … yeah I know), but the switches and buttons goes nowhere. They are build as if they are technical machines, in order to mimic a function. Please do yourself a favor and double-check the foundation of their claims.
Life force is one of the most interesting and yet difficult to understand phenomenons. It require to change a world view in order to understand it. And if just a little part of your world view remains attached to the materialistic one, this will lead you to an dead end.
I believe that it can be measured, not directly, but the secondary effect is measurable. And it is easy to fall into a delusion if one use a frequency counter or such similar devices. Double-check your values and your experiments.
Emergence is a popular idea in science. In particular, physicists have recently become excited about the idea that gravity is an emergent phenomenon. So it’s a relatively small step to think that time may emerge in a similar way.
This is an elegant and powerful idea. It suggests that time is an emergent phenomenon that comes about because of the nature of entanglement. And it exists only for observers inside the universe. Any god-like observer outside sees a static, unchanging universe, just as the Wheeler-DeWitt equations predict.
What is Time?
Time is the space of probability that gives certain events the chance to occur.
In probability theory, a probability space or a probability triple is a mathematical construct that models a real-world process (or “experiment“) consisting of states that occur randomly. A probability space is constructed with a specific kind of situation or experiment in mind. One proposes that each time a situation of that kind arises, the set of possible outcomes is the same and the probability levels are also the same.
Time and the Probability of Events
Quantum probability was developed in the 1980s as a noncommutative analog of the Kolmogorovian theory of stochastic processes. One of its aims is to clarify the mathematical foundations of quantum theory and its statistical interpretation. A significant recent application to physics is the dynamical solution of the quantum measurement problem, by giving constructive models of quantum observation processes which resolve many famous paradoxes of quantum mechanics.
Quantum states can freeze like water to ice if they are observed continuously.
For example the quantum Zeno effect is a situation in which an unstable particle, if observed continuously, will never decay. One can “freeze” the evolution of the system by measuring it frequently enough in its (known) initial state. The meaning of the term has since expanded, leading to a more technical definition in which time evolution can be suppressed not only by measurement: the quantum Zeno effect is the suppression of unitary time evolution caused by quantum decoherence in quantum systems provided by a variety of sources: measurement, interactions with the environment, stochastic fields, and so on. As an outgrowth of study of the quantum Zeno effect, it has become clear that applying a series of sufficiently strong and fast pulses with appropriate symmetry can also decouple a system from its decohering environment.
Observation can freeze Time
Consciousness is order and the absence of order in the physical realm is radioactivity. In cryptography, the one-time pad (OTP) is a type of encryption which has been proven to be impossible to crack if used correctly. Each bit or character from the plaintext is encrypted by a modular addition with a bit or character from a secret random key (or pad) of the same length as the plaintext, resulting in a ciphertext. If the key is truly random (like the randomness deriving from radioactive decay), as large as or greater than the plaintext, never reused in whole or part, and kept secret, the ciphertext will be impossible to decrypt or break without knowing the key.
Radioactive decay produce the best natural random numbers which are used for encryption. The absence of consciousness is the reason for radioactivity in our physical realm. But if the consciousness is too high, the system freeze and no event can occur.
For this kind of randomness time is a critical factor. Without the necessary time certain events cannot occur and with a constant observation like in the situation of the Quantum Zeno effect the flowing of time for that system will freeze and no such event will ever occur. The flow of time depends strictly from consciousness. Consciousness is what produces the space-time. Our universe may look on the first superficial observation of an science rookie a little bit random, but it must be an astonishingly improbable coincidence revolving around the indisputable fact that the cosmos could have any properties but happens to have EXACTLY the right ones for life, right? We live in a biocentric world, based on consciousness and mind rules the physical realm.
If it is a proven fact that consciousness freeze the evolution of time in a microscopic system, why do we continue to experience flow of time?
Life force, according to the traditional chinese medicine, flows in specific meridians or paths during the day. Our life force, or consciousness, is not enough to be able to observe our body as a whole. We are not living in the state of a Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, in which a pair of quantum systems may be described by a single wave function, which encodes the probabilities of the outcomes of experiments that may be performed on the two systems, whether jointly or individually. No, we experience decay and time flow. So our ability to observe is limited as our life force is limited. Time is therefore our friend, because without time no event could occur and we are not frozen in a state of continuous observation. Thanks to this paths of life force our consciousness flows through our body during 24 hours, manifesting order in our organism, but without freezing us by concentrating all the awareness on one point. If such a concentrated awareness on one point occurs we experience a so called “blockage” which can be painful and hinder our organism to work properly.
Our awareness is distributed in our organism through the meridian paths. This kind of distribution of life force enables life.
The End of Time
Can time come finally to an end? Well, it is possible in laboratory under certain conditions on the atomic level. But the end of time doesn’t mean only that a physical state freeze. It means simply that certain events cannot occur anymore. Imagine that every thought has a specific frequency, like sounds in a musical piece. Some thoughts seems to be harmonious to other thoughts because of their compatible frequency. If they can be combined in a harmonious way forming a piece of art, then this kind of thoughts will be promoted by the mind. Every thought can be compared to an event which occur in the mind. Thoughts have consequences on the physical realm too. A thought will influence society and life. No kingdom can persist without thoughts, and this is what will certainly happen, that the overall frequency of all minds, of the collective consciousness, will be raised up to such an high level that all thoughts of a lower level will not be possible anymore. What we perceive as reality is a process that involves consciousness and consciousness has a frequency. Raising the frequency of the collective consciousness will force a separation in the entire humankind.
Every thought has a frequency. Bad thoughts has a lower frequencies, but thoughts on truth, love and kindness has very high frequencies.
For example thoughts which derives from pure love and kindness has a high frequency. Hate or immorality has a very low frequency. What kind of thoughts will then finally be possible when the carrier frequency of the collective mind will be raised? All the people who hates the truth and are addicted to bad behavior will walk around like zombies, loosing their mind. In absence of a clear mind they will kill each other. This is a purification process. Only the mild-tempered ones will survive. And time will continue to flow eternally for whoever loves the truth.
In physics, spacetime (or space-time, space time, space-time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions. From a Euclidean space perspective, the universe has three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. By combining space and time into a single manifold, physicists have significantly simplified a large number of physical theories, as well as described in a more uniform way the workings of the universe at both the supergalactic and subatomic levels.
Two-dimensional analogy of spacetime distortion. Matter changes the geometry of spacetime, this (curved) geometry being interpreted as gravity. White lines do not represent the curvature of space but instead represent the coordinate system imposed on the curved spacetime, which would be rectilinear in a flat spacetime.
In non-relativistic classical mechanics, the use of Euclidean space instead of spacetime is appropriate, as time is treated as universal and constant, being independent of the state of motion of an observer. In relativistic contexts, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object’s velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time.
In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Mathematically it is a manifold consisting of “events” which are described by some type of coordinate system. Typically three spatial dimensions (length, width, height), and one temporal dimension (time) are required. Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined “space”. For example, on the globe the latitude and longitude are two independent coordinates which together uniquely determine a location. In spacetime, a coordinate grid that spans the 3+1 dimensions locates events (rather than just points in space), i.e. time is added as another dimension to the coordinate grid. This way the coordinates specify where and when events occur. However, the unified nature of spacetime and the freedom of coordinate choice it allows imply that to express the temporal coordinate in one coordinate system requires both temporal and spatial coordinates in another coordinate system. Unlike in normal spatial coordinates, there are still restrictions for how measurements can be made spatially and temporally (see Spacetime intervals). These restrictions correspond roughly to a particular mathematical model which differs from Euclidean space in its manifest symmetry.
Until the beginning of the 20th century, time was believed to be independent of motion, progressing at a fixed rate in all reference frames; however, later experiments revealed that time slowed down at higher speeds of the reference frame relative to another reference frame (with such slowing called “time dilation” explained in the theory of “special relativity“). Many experiments have confirmed time dilation, such as atomic clocks onboard a Space Shuttle running slower than synchronized Earth-bound inertial clocks and the relativistic decay of muons from cosmic ray showers. The duration of time can therefore vary for various events and various reference frames.
When dimensions are understood as mere components of the grid system, rather than physical attributes of space, it is easier to understand the alternate dimensional views as being simply the result of coordinate transformations.
The term spacetime has taken on a generalized meaning beyond treating spacetime events with the normal 3+1 dimensions. It is really the combination of space and time. Other proposed spacetime theories include additional dimensions—normally spatial but there exist some speculative theories that include additional temporal dimensions and even some that include dimensions that are neither temporal nor spatial. How many dimensions are needed to describe the universe is still an open question. Speculative theories such as string theory predict 10 or 26 dimensions (with M-theory predicting 11 dimensions: 10 spatial and 1 temporal), but the existence of more than four dimensions would only appear to make a difference at the subatomic level.
In physical cosmology, fractal cosmology is a set of minority cosmological theories which state that the distribution of matter in the Universe, or the structure of the universe itself, is a fractal. More generally, it relates to the usage or appearance of fractals in the study of the universe and matter. A central issue in this field is the fractal dimension of the Universe or of matter distribution within it, when measured at very large or very small scales.
A 'galaxy of galaxies' from the Mandelbrot Set
The use of fractals to answer questions in cosmology has been employed by a growing number of serious scholars close to the mainstream, but the metaphor has also been adopted by others outside the mainstream of science, so some varieties of fractal cosmology are solidly in the realm of scientific theories and observations, and others are considered fringe science, or perhaps metaphysical cosmology. Thus, these various formulations enjoy a range of acceptance and/or perceived legitimacy.
Fractals in observational cosmology
The first attempt to model the distribution of galaxies with a fractal pattern was made by Luciano Pietronero and his team in 1987, and a more detailed view of the universe’s large-scale structure emerged over the following decade, as the number of cataloged galaxies grew larger. Pietronero argues that the universe shows a definite fractal aspect, over a fairly wide range of scale, with a fractal dimension of about 2. The ultimate significance of this result is not immediately apparent, but it seems to indicate that both randomness and hierarchal structuring are at work, on the scale of galaxy clusters and larger.
A debate still ensues, over whether the universe will become homogeneous and isotropic (or is smoothly distributed) at a large enough scale, as would be expected in a standard Big Bang or FLRW cosmology, and in most interpretations of the Lambda-CDM (expanding Cold Dark Matter) model. Scientific consensus interpretation is that the Sloan Digital Sky Survey suggests that things do indeed seem to smooth out above 100 Megaparsecs. Recent analysis of WMAP, SDSS, and NVSS data by a team from the University of Minnesota shows evidence of a void around 140 Megaparsecs across, however, coinciding with the CMB cold spot, which, if confirmed, calls the assumption of a smooth universe into question. However there are serious hints that the apparent cold spot is a statistical artifact.
In May 2008, another paper was published by a team including Pietronero, that concludes the large scale structure in the universe is fractal out to at least 100 Mpc/h. The paper asserts that the team has demonstrated that the most recent SDSS data shows “large amplitude density fluctuations at all scales” within that range, and that the data is consistent with fractality beyond this point, but inconsistent with a lower scale of homogeneity, or with predictions of large scale structure based solely on gravity. Their analysis shows the fractal dimension of the arrangement of galaxies in the universe (up to the range of 30 Mpc/h) to be about 2.1 (plus or minus 0.1).
However, an analysis of luminous red galaxies in the Sloane survey calculated the fractal dimension of galaxy distribution (on a scales from 70 to 100 Mpc/h) at 3, consistent with homogeneity; they also confirm that the fractal dimension is 2 “out to roughly 20 Mpc/h”.
Fractals in theoretical cosmology
In the realm of theory, the first appearance of fractals in cosmology was likely with Andrei Linde’s “Eternally Existing Self-Reproducing Chaotic Inflationary Universe” theory, in 1986. In this theory, the evolution of a scalar field creates peaks that become nucleation points which cause inflating patches of space to develop into “bubble universes,” making the universe fractal on the very largest scales. Alan Guth’s 2007 paper on “Eternal Inflation and its implications” shows that this variety of Inflationary universe theory is still being seriously considered today. And inflation, in some form or other, is widely considered to be our best available cosmological model.
Since 1986, however, quite a large number of different cosmological theories exhibiting fractal properties have been proposed. And while Linde’s theory shows fractality at scales likely larger than the observable universe, theories like Causal dynamical triangulation and Quantum Einstein gravity are fractal at the opposite extreme, in the realm of the ultra-small near the Planck scale. These recent theories of quantum gravity describe a fractal structure for spacetime itself, and suggest that the dimensionality of space evolves with time. Specifically; they suggest that reality is 2-d at the Planck scale, and that spacetime gradually becomes 4-d at larger scales. French astronomer Laurent Nottale first suggested the fractal nature of spacetime in a paper on Scale Relativity published in 1992, and published a book on the subject of Fractal Space-Time in 1993.
French mathematician Alain Connes has been working for a number of years to reconcile Relativity with Quantum Mechanics, and thereby to unify the laws of Physics, using Noncommutative geometry. Fractality also arises in this approach to Quantum Gravity. An article by Alexander Hellemans in the August 2006 issue of Scientific American quotes Connes as saying that the next important step toward this goal is to “try to understand how space with fractional dimensions couples with gravitation.” The work of Connes with physicist Carlo Rovelli suggests that time is an emergent property or arises naturally, in this formulation, whereas in Causal dynamical triangulation, choosing those configurations where adjacent building blocks share the same direction in time is an essential part of the ‘recipe.’ Both approaches suggest that the fabric of space itself is fractal, however.
The book Discovery of Cosmic Fractals by Yurij Baryshev and Pekka Teerikorpi gives an overview of fractal cosmology, and recounts other milestones in the development of this subject. It recapitulates the history of cosmology, reviewing the core concepts of ancient, historical, and modern astrophysical cosmology. The book also documents the appearance of fractal-like and hierarchal views of the universe from ancient times to the present. The authors make it apparent that some of the pertinent ideas of these two streams of thought developed together. They show that the view of the universe as a fractal has a long and varied history, though people haven’t always had the vocabulary necessary to express things in precisely that way.
Beginning with the Sumerian and Babylonian mythologies, they trace the evolution of Cosmology through the ideas of Ancient Greeks like Aristotle, Anaximander, and Anaxagoras, and forward through the Scientific Revolution and beyond. They acknowledge the contributions of people like Emanuel Swedenborg, Edmund Fournier D’Albe, Carl Charlier, and Knut Lundmark to the subject of cosmology and a fractal-like interpretation, or explanation thereof. In addition, they document the work of Gérard de Vaucouleurs, Mandelbrot, Pietronero, Nottale and others in modern times, who have theorized, discovered, or demonstrated that the universe has an observable fractal aspect.
On the 10th of March, 2007, the weekly science magazine New Scientist featured an article entitled “Is the Universe a Fractal?” on its cover. The article by Amanda Gefter focused on the contrasting views of Pietronero and his colleagues, who think that the universe appears to be fractal (rough and lumpy) with those of David Hogg of NYU and others who think that the universe will prove to be relatively homogeneous and isotropic (smooth) at a still larger scale, or once we have a large and inclusive enough sample (as is predicted by Lambda-CDM). Gefter gave experts in both camps an opportunity to explain their work and their views on the subject, for her readers.
This was a follow-up of an earlier article in that same publication on August 21 of 1999, by Marcus Chown, entitled “Fractal Universe.”. Back in November 1994, Scientific American featured an article on its cover written by physicist Andrei Linde, entitled “The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe” whose heading stated that “Recent versions of the inflationary scenario describe the universe as a self-generating fractal that sprouts other inflationary universes,” and which described Linde’s theory of chaotic eternal inflation in some detail.
In July 2008, Scientific American featured an article on Causal dynamical triangulation, written by the three scientists who propounded the theory, which again suggests that the universe may have the characteristics of a fractal.
Tonight is the thriller night, a night full of horror. Materialistic scientist from all over the world are going to watch a movie at the local cinema outside the town, near the dark wood. The title of the movie is so mysterious like the invitation which was teleported right on top of their desks:”The Infinite”
You should know something about materialistic scientists, they fear the infinite like a little girl fears the darkness in the attic. They avoid this thematic and when they are confronted with it they start immediately to whistle, changing the topic, crying loud out for mommy, or just running away. Cowards! Indeed they fear to have reached the edge of their worldview and recognize finally that they lived in a illusion. Materialists are loosing territory with every single scientific discovery. Indeed the best they could do is to hide into theoretical classical physics and playing with their Big Bang simulation until mommy is going to get them to home.
People do think that if they avoid the truth, it might change to something better before they have to hear it.
The Big Bang and the Imaginary Time
Imaginary time was introduced by Stephen Hawking (materialist scientist) to avoid singularities, or points at which the spacetime curvature becomes infinite, that occur in ordinary time. Imaginary time too would be curved by matter in the universe and therefore would meet the three spatial dimensions to form a closed surface like that of Earth. This curved surface would not have a beginning or end, or indeed any boundaries or edges. This idea helps to avoid the fundamental question of what happened before the Big Bang.
In physics, action at a distance is the interaction of two objects which are separated in space with no known mediator of the interaction.
This term was used most often in the context of early theories of gravity and electromagnetism to describe how an object responds to the influence of distant massive or charged bodies. More generally “Action at a distance” describes the break between human intuition, where objects have to touch to interact, and physical theory. The exploration and resolution of this problematic phenomenon led to significant developments in physics, from the concept of a field, to descriptions of quantum entanglement and the mediator particles of the standard model.
Efforts to account for action at a distance in the theory of electromagnetism led to the development of the concept of a field which mediated interactions between currents and charges across empty space. According to field theory we account for the Coulomb (electrostatic) interaction between charged particles through the fact that charges produce around themselves an electric field, which can be felt by other charges as a force. The concept of the field was elevated to fundamental importance in Maxwell’s equations, which used the field to elegantly account for all electromagnetic interactions, as well as light (which, until then, had been a completely unrelated phenomenon). In Maxwell’s theory, the field is its own physical entity, carrying momenta and energy across space, and action at a distance is only the apparent effect of local interactions of charges with their surrounding field.
Electrodynamics can be described without fields (in Minkowski space) as the direct interaction of particles with light-like separation vectors. This results in the Fokker-Tetrode-Schwartzchild action integral. This kind of electrodynamic theory is often called “direct interaction” to distinguish it from field theories where action at a distance is mediated by a localized field (localized in the sense that its dynamics are determined by the nearby field parameters). This description of electrodynamics, in contrast with Maxwell’s theory, explains apparent action at a distance not by postulating a mediating entity (the field) but by appealing to the natural geometry of special relativity in which two events in spacetime can be physically distinct and still have “zero” separation. Perceived action at a distance is a result of human bias for spatial separation, charged particles can be separated in space, and yet geometrically connected.
Various proofs, beginning with that of Dirac have shown that direct interaction theories (under reasonable assumptions) do not admit Lagrangian or Hamiltonian formulations (these are the so-called No Interaction Theorems). Consequently, the Fokker-Tetrode action is mostly a historic novelty. Still, attempts to recapture action at a distance without a field, which is often difficult to quantize, lead directly to the development of the quantum electrodynamics of Feynman and Schwinger.
Newton’s theory of gravity offered no prospect of identifying any mediator of gravitational interaction. His theory assumed that gravitation acts instantaneously, regardless of distance. Kepler’s observations gave strong evidence that in planetary motion angular momentum is conserved. (The mathematical proof is only valid in the case of a Euclidean geometry.) Gravity is also known as a force of attraction between two objects because of their mass.
A related question, raised by Ernst Mach, was how rotating bodies know how much to bulge at the equator. This, it seems, requires an action-at-a-distance from distant matter, informing the rotating object about the state of the universe. Einstein coined the term Mach’s principle for this question.
According to Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity, instantaneous action-at-a-distance was seen to violate the relativistic upper limit on speed of propagation of information. If one of the interacting objects were to suddenly be displaced from its position, the other object would feel its influence instantaneously, meaning information had been transmitted faster than the speed of light.
One of the conditions that a relativistic theory of gravitation must meet is to be mediated with a speed that does not exceed c, the speed of light in a vacuum. It could be seen from the previous success of electrodynamics that the relativistic theory of gravitation would have to use the concept of a field or something similar.
This problem has been resolved by Einstein’s theory of general relativity in which gravitational interaction is mediated by deformation of space-time geometry. Matter warps the geometry of space-time and these effects are, as with electric and magnetic fields, propagated at the speed of light. Thus, in the presence of matter, space-time becomes non-Euclidean, resolving the apparent conflict between Newton’s proof of the conservation of angular momentum and Einstein’s theory of special relativity. Mach’s question regarding the bulging of rotating bodies is resolved because local space-time geometry is informing a rotating body about the rest of the universe. In Newton’s theory of motion, space acts on objects, but is not acted upon. In Einstein’s theory of motion, matter acts upon space-time geometry, deforming it, and space-time geometry acts upon matter.
Since the early 20th century, quantum mechanics has posed new challenges for the view that physical processes should obey locality. The collapse of the wave function of an electron being measured, for instance, is presumed to be instantaneous. Whether this counts as action-at-a-distance hinges on the nature of the wave function and its collapse, issues over which there is still considerable debate amongst scientists and philosophers. One important line of debate originated with Einstein, who challenged the idea that the wave function offers a complete description of the physical reality of a particle by showing that such a view leads to a paradox. Einstein, along with Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen, proposed a thought experiment to demonstrate how two physical quantities with non-commuting operators (e.g. position and momentum) can have simultaneous reality. Since the wave function does not ascribe simultaneous reality to both quantities and yet they can be shown to exist simultaneously, Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) argued that the quantum mechanical description of reality must not be complete.
This thought experiment, which came to be known as the EPR paradox, hinges on the principle of locality. A common presentation of the paradox is as such: two particles interact briefly and then are sent off in opposite directions. One could imagine an atomic transition that releases two photons A and B (spin-1 particles) with no overall change in momentum. The photons end up so far away from each other that one can no longer influence the other (this is the principle of locality). As long as the photons act only locally, the perfect anticorrelation of their momenta will hold. That is, if photon A has a momentum of 1 (in appropriate units) then by the conservation of momentum photon B must have a momentum of -1. Therefore, EPR’s argument goes, we could measure the position of photon A, and also simultaneously know photon A’s momentum by measuring photon B (since A’s momentum must be the opposite of B’s).
Because EPR’s proposal involved properties that were not captured in the wave equation and which were local and real, it became known as a local ‘hidden variables’ theory. After the EPR paper, several scientists such as de Broglie took up interest in local hidden variables theories. In the 1960s John Bell derived an inequality that showed a testable difference between the predictions of quantum mechanics and local hidden variables theories. Experiments testing Bell-type inequalities in situations analogous to EPR’s thought experiments have been consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics, suggesting that local hidden variables theories can be ruled out. Whether or not this is interpreted as evidence for nonlocality depends on one’s interpretation of quantum mechanics. In the standard interpretation the wave function is still considered a complete description so the nonlocality is generally accepted, but there is still debate over what this means physically.
One important question raised by this ambiguity is whether Einstein’s theory of relativity is compatible with the experimental results demonstrating nonlocality. Relativistic quantum field theory requires interactions to propagate at speeds less than or equal to the speed of light, so “quantum entanglement” cannot be used for faster-than-light-speed propagation of matter, energy, or information. Measurements of one particle will be correlated with measurements on the other particle, but this is only known after the experiment is performed and notes are compared, therefore there is no way to actually send information faster than the speed of light. On the other hand, relativity predicts causal ambiguities will result from the nonlocal interaction. In terms of the EPR experiment, in some reference frames measurement of photon A will cause the wave function to collapse, but in other reference frames the measurement of photon B will cause the collapse.
Non-standard interpretations of quantum mechanics also vary in their response to the EPR-type experiments. Bohm interpretation gives an explanation based on nonlocal hidden variables for the correlations seen in entanglement. Many advocates of the many-worlds interpretation argue that it can explain these correlations in a way that does not require a violation of locality, by allowing measurements to have non-unique outcomes.
Retrocausality (also called retro-causation, retro-chronal causation, backward causation, and similar terms) is any of several hypothetical phenomena or processes that reverse causality, allowing an effect to occur before its cause.
Retrocausality is primarily a thought experiment in philosophy of science based on elements of physics, addressing the question: Can the future affect the present, and can the present affect the past? Philosophical considerations of time travel often address the same issues as retrocausality, as do treatments of the subject in fiction, although the two terms are not universally synonymous.
A few legitimate physical theories have sometimes been interpreted as leading to retrocausality. This is not considered part of science, since the distinction between cause and effect in physics is not made at the most fundamental level.
Retrocausality and Antimatter
As the modern understanding of particle physics began to develop, retrocausality was at times employed as a tool to model then-unfamiliar or unusual conditions, including electromagnetism and antimatter.
Time runs left to right in this Feynman diagram of electron-positron annihilation. When interpreted to include retrocausality, the electron (marked e-) was not destroyed, instead becoming the positron (e+) and moving backward in time.
The Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory, proposed by John Archibald Wheeler and Richard Feynman, uses retrocausality and a temporal form of destructive interference to explain the absence of a type of converging concentric wave suggested by certain solutions to Maxwell’s equations. These advanced waves don’t have anything to do with cause and effect, they are just a different mathematical way to describe normal waves. The reason they were proposed is so that a charged particle would not have to act on itself, which, in normal classical electromagnetism leads to an infinite self-force.
Feynman, and earlier Stueckelberg, proposed an interpretation of the positron as an electron moving backward in time, reinterpreting the negative-energy solutions of the Dirac equation. Electrons moving backward in time would have a positive electric charge. Wheeler invoked this concept to explain the identical properties shared by all electrons, suggesting that “they are all the same electron” with a complex, self-intersecting worldline. Yoichiro Nambu later applied it to all production and annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs, stating that “the eventual creation and annihilation of pairs that may occur now and then is no creation or annihilation, but only a change of direction of moving particles, from past to future, or from future to past.” The backwards in time point of view is nowadays accepted as completely equivalent to other pictures, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the macroscopic terms “cause” and “effect“, which do not appear in a microscopic physical description.
Open topics in physics, especially involving the reconciliation of gravity with quantum physics, suggest that retrocausality may be possible under certain circumstances.
Closed timelike curves, in which the world line of an object returns to its origin, arise from some exact solutions to the Einstein field equation. Although closed timelike curves do not appear to exist under normal conditions, extreme environments of spacetime, such as a traversable wormhole or the region near certain cosmic strings, may allow their formation, implying a theoretical possibility of retrocausality. The exotic matter or topological defects required for the creation of those environments have not been observed. Furthermore, Stephen Hawking has suggested a mechanism he describes as the chronology protection conjecture, which would destroy any such closed timelike curve before it could be used. These objections to the existence of closed timelike curves are not universally accepted, however.
Retrocausality has also been proposed as a mechanism to explain what Albert Einstein called “spooky action at a distance” occurring as a result of quantum entanglement. Although the prevailing scientific viewpoint is that the effects generated by quantum entanglement do not require any direct communication between the involved particles, Costa de Beauregard proposed an alternative theory.
At an American Association for the Advancement of Science symposium, University of Washington physicist John Cramer presented the design for an experiment to test for backward causation in quantum entanglement, subsequently receiving some attention from the popular media. Work on Cramer’s non-local communication test started in January 2007. Cramer included a status report on the “UW Test of Nonlocal Quantum Communications with Momentum-Entangled Photon Pairs” in his “Five Decades of Physics” talk at a symposium in his honor at the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, September 11, 2009. Work on the experiment will continue during 2010.
Retrocausality has also been proposed as an explanation for the delayed choice quantum eraser.
The hypothetical superluminal particle called the tachyon, proposed in the context of the Bosonic string theory and certain other fields of high-energy physics, moves backward in time. Despite frequent depiction in science fiction as a method to send messages back in time, theories predicting tachyons do not permit them to interact with normal “time-like” matter in a manner that would violate standard causality. Specifically, the Feinberg reinterpretation principle renders impossible construction of a tachyon detector capable of receiving information.
Outside the Mainstream
Outside the mainstream scientific community, retrocausality has also been proposed as a mechanism to explain purported anomalies, paranormal events or personal events, but mainstream scientists generally regarded these explanations as pseudoscientific. Most notably, parapsychologist Helmut Schmidt presented quantum mechanical justifications for retrocausality, eventually claiming that experiments had demonstrated the ability to manipulate radioactive decay through retrocausal psychokinesis. These results and their underlying theory have been rejected by the mainstream scientific community, although they continue to have some support from fringe science sources.
Efforts to associate retrocausality with prayer healing have been similarly discounted by legitimate scientific method.