March 11, 2014 at 3:55 am #41978
note: This article is interesting because it shows scientists are starting to examine more closely the issue of NON-HUMAN free will. What the scientists are NOT looking at is the deeper question of what kind of non-human free might be involved in the creation of the quasars being used to test Bell’s Theorem. In short, sin’t the creation of the cosmos itself a likely source of Free Will? That is the position that I find is assumed in Taoist cosmology. Humans have free will (micro-cosmicially) because the Macro-Cosmos has free will. – Michael
An experiment of cosmic proportions, looking at some of the most distant visible corners in the universe, could help close what may be the last major loophole in quantum physics, or shake it to its very foundations.
In the bizarre realm of quantum physics, two or more particles can get linked so they stay in sync instantaneously no matter how far apart they are. Albert Einstein derisively called this seemingly impossible connection “spooky action at a distance.” Nowadays, scientists give it the name quantum entanglement. Einstein believed that quantum entanglement could be explained on a deeper level by the more intuitive laws of classical physics.
In the classical picture, two objects in different regions of space could not influence each other faster than the speed of light. Also, every particle would have well-defined properties at every moment in time classical mechanics-based, “hidden variables” that would dictate the strangely synchronized entangled behavior between the particles.
Fifty years ago, physicist John Bell devised a mathematical formula that predicted what scenarios would occur if the counterintuitive predictions of quantum physics were governed by these classical hidden variables. Experiments on Bell’s theorem have supported a purely quantum physics picture, rejecting the existence of hidden variables and showing that particles are linked more strongly than one would expect under the laws of classical physics.
However, researchers have also identified major potential loopholes in Bell’s theorem.
The ‘free will’ loophole
Two have been closed, but a third remains, “one known as ‘setting independence’ or sometimes colorfully called the ‘free will’ loophole,” said David Kaiser, a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s a really crazy-sounding loophole, but it turns out it’s the easiest way to fake an outcome in tests of Bell’s theorem.”
In this scenario, the two detectors measuring the entangled particles have a shared history, via an event, information or third party they have in common. This could link them and lead to biased results. Therefore, a scientist testing Bell’s theorem would not have complete control in choosing what each detector measures.
To solve this loophole, Kaiser and his colleagues have proposed looking for answers from the most remote corners of the known cosmos.
The experiment they propose relies on the fact that the universe has been expanding ever since the Big Bang happened nearly 14 billion years ago. As such, objects can be far enough away from each other to have been out of contact since the beginning of the cosmos, with no way for any signal to have ever reached from one to the other. This makes it possible to test the last loophole in Bell’s theorem for a so-called “Cosmic Bell” experiment.
Quantum query by quasar
The experiment would involve a pair of telescopes, aimed at opposite sides of the sky at different quasars supermassive black holes up to billions of times the mass of the sun, which release extraordinarily large amounts of light as they devour matter.
The experiment would create two entangled particles here on Earth and send one of the two to both telescopes. The particles would be measured by detectors at the telescope, machines that would rely on information from the two unconnected quasars to determine which properties they would measure of the two entangled particles.
“There could be weird activity in the very earliest moments of the Big Bang.”
The scientists reason that because each detector’s settings are controlled by quasars that have shared no history since the universe was born, it should be impossible for these detectors to be part of a conspiracy to skew their results. If the experiment discovered the measurements of the entangled particles matched each other more than predicted by the laws of classical physics, that should close the “free will” loophole.
The researchers expect this experiment to verify quantum theory’s predictions, but if the test finds otherwise, “that would be a win also,” Kaiser said. “It could mean that we have to change quantum theory, the fundamental theory governing matter. Or it could mean that there could be weird activity in the very earliest moments of the Big Bang.”
Targeting the Canary Islands
Kaiser said the experiment is possible using modern technology.
The distance between each telescope and the source of the entangled particles needs to be on the order of 30 miles (50 kilometers). Scientists have already carried out experiments with entangled particles 90 miles (144 kilometers apart), between the two Canary Islands of La Palma and Tenerife off the northwest coast of Africa.
“It turns out the Canary Islands have some of the largest optical telescopes in the world, so maybe we could do it there,” Kaiser said.
Image: Tenerife observatory IQOQI Vienna / Austrian Acad. of Sci.
ESA’s Optical Ground Station sits 2,400 meters (7,900 feet) above sea level on the volcanic island of Tenerife. Visible green laser beams are used for stabilizing the sending and receiving telescopes on the two islands. Invisible infrared single photons used for quantum teleportation are sent from La Palma, the neighboring island, and received by the 1-meter (40-inch) telescope located under the dome of the Optical Ground Station. This picture is a multiple exposure also including Tenerife’s Teide volcano and the Milky Way in the background.
High energy physicist Warren Huelsnitz with the MiniBooNE experiment at Fermilab in Batavia, Ill., who did not take part in this research, noted that the experiment would be very challenging. Scientists would have to make sure the light measured by the telescopes really came from the quasars, as opposed to light pollution on Earth or scattered starlight.
“If Bell’s inequality is not violated in the ‘Cosmic Bell’ experiment, then that would be truly amazing, and it would set quantum mechanics, and perhaps all of physics, on its head,” Huelsnitz said. However, Huelsnitz predicts that the results will likely be consistent with previous tests of Bell’s theorem.
Even closing this loophole “will not entirely rule out hidden-variables theories,” cautioned theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder at the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics in Stockholm, Sweden, who did not participate in this study. For instance, there are so-called superdeterministic hidden variables that Bell’s theorem cannot be used to test. She is now investigating whether experiments could show whether those hidden variables exist or not as well.
Kaiser and his colleagues Jason Gallicchio and Andrew Friedman will detail their findings in the journal Physical Review Letters.
This report, “Cosmic Experiment Aims to Close Loophole in Quantum Theory,” was first published by Inside Science News Service. Copyright 2014 American Institute of Physics.
First published March 5th 2014, 9:47 pm
Charles Q. Choi, Inside Science
Charles Q. Choi is a freelance science writer based in New York City who has written for The New York Times, Scientific American, Wired, Science, Nature and many other news outlets. He tweets at @cqchoi.March 13, 2014 at 3:00 pm #41979
“relativity” has apparently lost on 96% of the universe’s mass and the brightest objects in the known heavens…
not to mention the super-luminal barrier…
while the mass can be argued as true unprecedented dark mass,
AGN quasars are blinking in apparent freedom from “time dilation”…
free will should have no involvement…
simultaneity by previous quantum connection may simply be a form of trigonometric interaction from relative angles within higher dimensions..
“What’s 96 Percent of the Universe Made Of? Astronomers Don’t Know”
Einstein, Kaluza and Klein never agreed publicly on a true 5D 5 metric…
all of spacetime and its supposed “boosts” and “transforms”
(which claim light speed acceleration smacks into a brick wall of time and infinite mass)
may be proven incorrect by correct 5D+ energy-momentum tensors born out of QCD/QED integration with true astrophysics…
all clocks tick at the same rate at sea level regardless of GPS “time slow down in orbit” and their varying rate of rotation around Earth’s core…
“finicky” math apparently….March 14, 2014 at 12:11 am #41981
Dark energy appears to account for over three-quarters of the stuff in the Universe, and its pushing all the rest ordinary matter and dark matter farther apart at an ever-increasing rate. But what is dark energy? Although theories abound, the short answer is that nobody knows.
The High-Z SN Search Team is an international group of astronomers interested in using type Ia supernovae to trace the expansion of the Universe from the present day to 9 billion years in the Past. In 1998, along with another team, the Supernova Cosmology Project, we uncovered evidence that the Universe is accelerating as it expands.
This is not any proper book review.
Because there seem to be published increasing amount of those science books which scope stays at the popular level Richard Panek’s ‘The 4%ent Universe’ is somehow very different.
It’s not written by scientist but professional writer, who has taken task to tell about the supernovae surveys of two different teams, High-Z team and Supernova Cosmology Project, for probing the acceleration of the universe.
I normally don’t read novels, but this book in it’s novel like structure makes it different from those other popular cosmology books which become very dissatisfying after one has read several of them.
It goes through again all the background from Fritz Zwicky and Bell Telephone Laboratories collecting some curious data etc., but in interesting way.
It would be good to have some other reference with Panek’s book and I used ‘Oxford Companion to Cosmology’ by Andrew Liddle & Jon Loveday, which is seemingly meant to be somewhere between popular account and more technical literature.
HOWDYMarch 14, 2014 at 11:27 pm #41983
Penrose is right on in idea whether the insanely difficult to hit nails are exact hits or not…
Kaku has perfectly described multiverse membrane resonance..
in that stream…
1) twistors and spinors are real….
“Atlantian”/Enochian IS a built in twistor set… a microcosm is spin encrypting within the macrocosm… the homonid brain, through this built in language, interfaces with 4D/8D matrices, otherwise known as “multiple/parallel universes”
2) “consiousness” is a measurable field process… every organism’s anatomy is a subset field spindle of structures which house some degree of what is essentially 5D recursion… allowing each organism its own degree of the same consciousness as any other… an orangatang has the same exact consciousness as a “human” to the capacity of its structure… the field is only functional to the level of that local structural implementation.. look to the electrical… the same for a galaxy, per its context and build, all are subsets of the local “Big Bang”
3) the twistor set of homonid language is inherited from the kinetochore of the homonid chromosome bundle itself.. which is itself a grand child of hyperspace processes which found their way into star dust.. the mind is running on kinetichore inheritance
4) histones are the great grand children of orthogonal matrices revolving and transforming between eternal “universes”, which themselves evolve and die
5) Big Bangs occur through smooth transitions between higher-dimensional manifolds, “Universes” are womb spaces which develop a primordial/proto-typical neural hive/tunnel/axon structure within the thickening/thinning of membrane density
6) Relativity and Quantum theory fall apart at the intersection of black holes because the astrophysical form collapses to quantum scale… if “Creation” followed a self-embedding compression as part of self-regenesis, the intersection between macro and micro would be found in the focus of string theories…
“The single most important equation in (first quantized bosonic) string theory is the N-point scattering amplitude. This treats the incoming and outgoing strings as points, which in string theory are tachyons, with momentum ki which connect to a string world surface at the surface points zi. It is given by the following functional integral which integrates (sums) over all possible embeddings of this 2D surface in 26 dimensions:”
but the thing they are really looking for is vast astrophysical membrane resonance that is in operation within nucleic and quantum fields…
“General relativity typically deals with situations involving large mass objects in fairly large regions of spacetime whereas quantum mechanics is generally reserved for scenarios at the atomic scale (small spacetime regions). The two are very rarely used together, and the most common case in which they are combined is in the study of black holes. Having “peak density”, or the maximum amount of matter possible in a space, and very small area, the two must be used in synchrony in order to predict conditions in such places; yet, when used together, the equations fall apart, spitting out impossible answers, such as imaginary distances and less than one dimension.”
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES
A. Einstein June 30, 1905
“The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity”
A. Einstein, 1916
RELATIVITY: THE SPECIAL AND GENERAL THEORY
ALBERT EINSTEIN, 1917
7) PHI hetero-dyne cascades follow golden ratio based spirals into white hole subspaces…
Einstein, Kaluza, Klein modeled multiple conflicting 5-metrics
Special (Case) Relativity
General (Case) Relativity
Penrose claims to have glimpsed universe before Big Bang
“Michio Kaku: Andre, we believe, though we cannot yet prove, that our multiverse of universes is 11-dimensional. So think of this 11-dimensional arena and in this arena there are bubbles, bubbles that float and the skin of the bubble represents an entire universe, so were like flies trapped on fly paper. Were on the skin of a bubble. Its a three dimensional bubble. The three dimensional bubble is expanding and that is called the Big Bang theory and sometimes these bubbles can bump into each other, sometimes they can split apart and that we think is the Big Bang. So we even have a theory of the Big Bang itself. Now you ask a question what about the dimensions of each bubble. Well in string theorywhich is what I do for a living; that’s my day jobIn string theory we can have bubbles of different dimensions. The highest dimension is 11. You cannot go beyond 11 because universes become unstable beyond 11. If I write down the theory of a 13-, 15-dimensional universe its unstable and it collapses down to an 11-dimensional universe. But within 11 dimensions you can have bubbles that are 3 dimensional, 4-dimensional, 5-dimensional. These are membranes, so for short we call them brains. So these brains can exist in different dimensions and lets say P represents the dimension of each bubble, so we call them p-brains. So a p-brain is a universe in different dimensions floating in a much larger arena, and this larger arena is the hyperspace that I talked about originally.
Also remember that each bubble vibrates, and each bubble vibrating creates music. The music of these membranes is the subatomic particles. Each subatomic particle represents a note on a vibrating string or vibrating membranes. So, believe it or not, we now have a candidate for the “Mind of God” that Albert Einstein wrote about for the last 30 years of his life. The “Mind of God” in this picture would be cosmic music resonating throughout 11-dimensional hyperspace.”
8) the Tzol’jik is 26D local/non-local Ultraverse core-collapse re-genesis wheel.. 4 24 cell compounds are animated as 5 self-reflexing 24 cell compounds within a 5-orthoplex transform…. otherwise known as an AGN (Quasar) prototype..
“‘Superstring theory’ is a shorthand for supersymmetric string theory because unlike bosonic string theory, it is the version of string theory that incorporates fermions and supersymmetry.”
Bosons and Fermions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particleMarch 15, 2014 at 10:23 am #41985
there you go…
approx. 5 pages, 60 pages, and then an overview of an easy 160 in a large print digital, really about 50…
it is all based on the completely and totally false premise that the speed of light is a constant…
in clarification of common misconception,
THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT LIGHT MOVES AT A CONSTANT SPEED IN A VACUUM.
rather, the entirety of relativity was built on the premise that the speed of light is constant to ANY observer regardless of their motion relative to the light source..
THIS IS WHOLLY FALSE.
the only person with a clue was apparently Fitzgerald….
in other words, if you are accelerating against the direction of the light source, according to Relativity, there is no change in the apparent velocity of waves
in total contrast to any other known physical phenomenon
the explanation? measuring rods are contracting, clocks ticking more slowly due to acceleration
The bottom line:
this was all in the direction of NO MEDIUM, NO AETHER..
if the Universe came from “NOTHING”, maybe space is just a vacuum effect, itself nothing pressurized on nothing
the logical thought of Fitzgerald:
the medium is producing resistance messing up the infinitesimally precise measurements…
Now, 110 years later, what is “dark energy”, “dark matter”, a dark field other than part of the same thing that was being removed to begin with…
outer “space” is not a vacuum as thought, 96% of the Universe is missing…
the model was that time “curved” along the 4D manifold of warping spacetime, so that the distance between 2 points is no longer a straight line and therefore the distance is greater..
the arc length of time has therefore increased across the manifold, so time “slowed”
the problem is that gravity is electric which is NOT just curvature…
the common acceleration of objects under the same source of gravity regardless of mass is because it is a form of electro-static attraction, nucleus to nucleus…
it is a different form of the same force which attracts the hair to the comb…
this is a picture of a REAL ELECTRON ORBITAL.
people need to get out of their heads and their “worlds” and into the REAL world…
(IMHO)March 17, 2014 at 1:42 pm #41987
Special relativity says that the speed of light is constant with respect to all inertial reference frames (i.e. frames that are not accelerating or in a gravity field, but are free to move at constant velocities with respect to each other).
General relativity extends these basic rules beyond the inertial reference frame model and concerns the nature of acceleration and/or gravity . . . how gravity and non-inertial reference frames warp space-time.
Most physicists have NO doubts about the authenticity of special relativity. Every conceived experiment verifies its claims. Moreover, the aether was shown to not exist via the famous Michelson-Morley experiment.
In fact, special relativity is so well established that it is already incorporated into current quantum theory. The quantum mechanics of Schrödinger has already been replaced by the relativistic quantum mechanics of Dirac. Modern quantum field theory is based on relativistic quantum mechanics.
General relativity (to date) has not been successfully integrated into quantum mechanics. This is where the paradoxes arise.
I think special relativity is probably true, but it is also highly specialized in the sense that “an inertial reference frame” that is free from the effects of gravity and/or acceleration is an idealized situation that doesn’t “really” exist, except as an approximation in frames that are relatively free from the effects of gravity/acceleration.
Gravity, on the other hand, is something modern physicists don’t have an adequate explanation for.
SMarch 17, 2014 at 8:06 pm #41989
do you really accept that a “wave” moving
299,792,458 meters per second
will stay that speed by measurement regardless of acceleration against that wave?
Einstein predicted, roughly 1905, that clocks at sea level would tick at different rates due the rotational acceleration described by his special case relativity..
when this did not occur,
Einstein corrected everything for the release of “General Case Relativity”
where the contradicting return was corrected by gravitational time dilation…
why would a measurement of 299,792,458 meters per second seem to appear to be so constant?March 17, 2014 at 9:37 pm #41991
>>>will stay that speed by measurement regardless of acceleration against that wave?
If you are accelerating, you are NOT in an inertial reference frame.
SMarch 17, 2014 at 9:46 pm #41993
the frame is based more on the proposed 4D curvature…
nevertheless, in controvertible fact, by all possible dances around the issue..
the definitive prediction, and original cause, of relativity, general and special
is the declaration that if you are travelling against the motion of that light source,
whether in constant motion or acceleration,
you will never observe a change in its incoming velocity
because your measuring rods are shrinking and your clocks slowing…
Einstein based this on the lack of any observed velocity shift..
the constant is not a constant of velocity, it is a constant of velocity even against the frame
IT IS 1000% FALSE.March 23, 2014 at 3:00 pm #41995March 25, 2014 at 1:41 pm #41997March 26, 2014 at 1:07 am #41999
There isn’t any theory or version of physics that is “true” in an absolute sense.
They are only true under certain reducing assumptions.
For the benefit of other folks on here, I’ll give a short history and explain.
The classical mechanics of Newton only works for objects of visible size, don’t move too fast, aren’t electrically charged, are not undergoing radioactive decay, are not subject to intense gravitational fields, and are not thermally radiating heat. Yet, under those assumptions, works quite well. It is still used today in many “real-world” mechanical engineering analyses.
However, classical mechanics is horribly incompatible with electromagnetism.
Electromagnetism, governed by the 4 equations of Maxwell, perfectly dictates the behavior of electricity, magnetism, and electromagnetic wave propagation (gave us the radio!), yet unlike classical mechanics dictates that velocities DON’T add and that the speed of light in vacuum is constant.
Two working theories, both incompatible.
It was actually this problem that gave rise to special relativity, getting mechanics to agree with electromagnetism by saying that the speed of light is constant in vacuum. By making this simple assumption, suddenly inconsistencies in mechanics were solved by proper mathematical equations (using the Lorentz transformation) that describe near-light motion phenomena. The Michelson-Morley experiment disproved the ether and corroborated the “velocities don’t add” story. They only look like they add at low speeds, so intuition breaks down.
Similarly, thermodynamics worked quite well describing the behavior of heat, temperature, and thermal objects. Thanks to it, we got the refrigerator. However, once again, this was horribly inconsistent with electromagnetism. The thermal electromagnetic radiation that came off of heated objects was not consistent with prediction. Hence the birth of quantum physics and the idea of quantized radiation. The radiation came off of objects in “packets” or quanta of energy. Here light behaved like a particle, not a wave, as predicted by electromagnetism. Then the double-slit experiment drove people crazy, as light behaved either like a particle or a wave depending on whether or not you were “watching” the experiment. In any case, quantum physics was the resolution. This led to quantum mechanics through the Schrödinger equation. However, all of this created non-intuitive principles, , such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, etc. However, it allowed us to solve the incompatibility between thermodynamics and electromagnetism, allowed a better explanation of the nature of light, and allowed us to accurately model the world of the very tiny.
Quantum physics then lead to the development of atomic energy, through its associated nuclear physics and later particle physics.
That’s not to say that either thermodynamics or electromagnetism are wrong; they are still used in engineering applications today . . . provided you only use them under the operating assumptions.
Special relativity and quantum mechanics combined nicely to form relativistic quantum physics, so that the Schrödinger equation of quantum mechanics was replaced by the Dirac equation of relativistic quantum mechanics.
Relativistic quantum mechanics handled both the very tiny and the very fast moving, and it accurately predicted the existence of anti-matter. This created the birth of quantum field theory.
Special relativity still did not handle gravity correctly, nor did it properly handle the situation if the observer is accelerating. General relativity and its associated prediction of warped space-time solved this problem.
*IT WAS DUE TO GENERAL RELATIVITY AND ITS EQUATIONS* that allowed us to develop GPS. Orbiting satellites would have internal measurements and clocks affected by gravity, and would continuously get out of sync. Getting them back in sync was a success of general relativity. General relativity also solved telescope problems with gravitational lensing.
Now of course, we have an incompatibility with quantum field theory. Bell’s paradox, of “spooky action-at-a-distance” with spin-linked particles seems to violate relativity, even in its “special” form. This and other incompatibilities between relativity and quantum mechanics abound. What’s the resolution?
String theory? Super-string theory? Some other theory?
But regardless of what replaces both quantum field theory and relativity (as a “super-model” incorporating them both) each of them will still be valid under the limited range of their assumptions.
They are both useful and completely valid in the local sense of the hypotheses that you take, similar to the usefulness of old classical mechanics and electromagnetism.
Are they true in the global sense? Of course not.
Every physics theory is completely 100% false in the absolute sense.
Not one of them is true, not relativity, not quantum physics, not anything.
Is there some GRAND theory that will accurately explain everything?
In fact, such a thing is impossible.
While it is true that more and more sophisticated theories can be created that explain a wider group of phenomena (treating the earlier theories as special cases under limiting assumptions), there will never come a point when there exists one that explains them all.
In fact, such a thing is impossible.
Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem from mathematics shows (proved using only mathematical logic) that any system (or universe) that is complicated enough to have arithmetic can never be fully explained.
It says, put simply, while you can always explain more and more and more, there will never come a time when one theory is complete. You will always run across “bizarre situations” in the universe that can not be explained via any theory that you currently have. You will need to develop your theory more to include these new things. But then, after you do this, you will run across ever more of the same type.
On and on, ad infinitum.
In one sense, this whole scheme is fruitless. It has no end.
However, at each step, the “false theory” that we have, still allows us to accurately describe some things that we couldn’t do before.
LONG STORY SHORT: Every physics theory is false. This includes all the ones we currently have, and all the ones not yet thought of. What about that clever one that you think you have come up with?
Nope, that one’s not right either.
Yes, That one too.
However, every one of the adopted “false theories” is still accurate to the level of the assumptions being made, and has plenty of engineering applications.
HOWEVER, to get all wound up about “which theory is right” is a waste of time.
This universe is completely unexplainable in the total sense.
This is where I think the idea of free will comes into play.
How else could one explain infinite complexity, unless new rules were/are continuously being written, unless the universe were itself in the process of continuous creation, both with regard to new things, and with regard to its own properties.
The Wuji, the Supreme Mystery.
All pointless to try to resolve from any thought processes.
The codons of existence are hopelessly and infinitely ramified.
Moreover, ultimately us and the universe is doomed. P.S. This means you.
See the following pic taken from a website linked at the bottom.
March 26, 2014 at 7:21 pm #42001March 27, 2014 at 10:52 am #42003
when none of it is correct to begin with…
the real entanglement is in the video linked above
Relativity and all the foof is completely wrong…
fodder for pointless metaphysical insanity
94% of the predicted mass of the Universe is not there…
the brightest light sources in known creation are not time dilating
the entirety of the Universe is inflating with unknown result for an unknown and unpredicted reason
planets and stars are clearly NOT following the rules of relativity across the cosmos
and you age going to base free will on light measurements?
the mumbo is incomprehensible
the velocity is NOT constant and superluminal has been clearly documented..
then, no joke, falsified away
through a chord which “came unplugged”
surely Einstein tried and the curvature helps, but it is just NOT true…
the Lorentz transforms all essentially junk..
accept aspects of the gravitational time dilation..
which were not even printed until the sea level clocks did not perform according to special case
GET THE TIME DILATION RIGHT BEFORE YOU PIDDLE WITH FREE WILLMarch 28, 2014 at 3:56 pm #42005
this was part of the “karma” free “ceremony” during a lesser Kan and Li section…
since “karma” is not the “Taoist” perspective…
isn’t this exactly how quantum entanglement is defined? an unexplained connection linking the present across all known barriers of space and time into the present?
I do not mean to really insult anyone here…
but this is a serious issue…
I would personally say the EXACT opposite..
there is a COMPLETE DIMENSION of the past, actually helping crystallize the future, as both dissolve into and out of resolution..
there is a momentum and force from the past
nevertheless, what could any of that possibly mean?
well, for one, in an extreme sci-fi sense, what if the future needed to communicate back into the past? well there went that one…
but since that is so “out there”
this context was implying that somehow organ fusion, healing love etc will show people that here is only the present, free for them to change
but this is just not true…
anyone knows that reputation, past actions, are, can be, and should be held against someone…
furthermore, I would argue that unresolved issue from the past must be resolved on an emotional level because of that very same continuum…
so what does the statement really mean? well basically nothing
sorry : /
it was an attempt at being positive and “karma free”
here’s more action from the dimension in the past acting on the present
the above is even wrong on a classic Newtonian level, momentum itself is action from the past creating the future…
not to mention psychic force fields form the past influencing events in the future…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.