Still True Today

I’ve been reading some books (old and new) on quantum physics and quantum mechanics, and I was fascinated by the discussions regarding probability waves. Back in the late 1700’s a scientist named Thomas Young (1773-1829) conducted an experiment, that was soon repeated by other physicists and is even now repeated in schools as a training tool.

The experiment goes like this:


He created a black box that had a back wall of light-sensitive materials and contained just two small holes at the front to allow light in. He removed the covering over the two small holes and let the light go into the box. Then, when he later opened the box, he saw that instead of the two bars that he was expecting when the light entered the two holes, there were 4. Curious, he increased the holes to 3. Instead of getting six bars, though, he found that he had 5 bars. Even more curious, he made 4 holes, but this time the number of bars actually decreased. His conclusion was that the light traveled in waves and the waves interfered with each other, thus creating the “irregular” patterns of light bars in his results.

This conclusion held for many decades. Scientists would draw wave patterns to demonstrate how they interfered with one another, and used mathematics to “prove” this conclusion. Then, other physicists came along that questioned this wave theory. After all, they had calculations to show that light wasn’t a wave, it was a particle. Therefore, the interference patterns shouldn’t be occurring the way everyone assumed.

To test their theory of particles, they devised a way to allow a single photon through the hole and into the black box. To determine that just one photon got through, they set up monitors on the back side of each pin hole. That way, they would know that only one photon was being released and which hole it was going through. This was because they deduced that if one photon went through at a time, then there was no way it could interfere with itself, and that would mean that there would be no interference patterns, thereby disproving the waves theory and proving that light (and energy) traveled as particles (see Figure 2).


What they discovered was that the photon seemed to travel in a wave-like pattern until it passed the monitor. Once detected, the photon traveled as a particle until colliding with the back wall. This wave-to-particle motion became known as probability waves. That is, photons (and all sub-atomic and atomic particles—all energy) create waves of probabilities until a determination is made.

Once that determination is made, they select one of the probabilities and make it a reality. If the photon is detected, it selects the probability of this reality and the path on which it was detected. If the photon is not detected, then it is free to select this reality or any other. So, until a choice is made, all possibilities exist. However, even though a decision is made, the other possibilities don’t just go away, they also become reality, just not in our world.

Can you understand why I find this so fascinating? Basically, quantum physics is expressing the philosophy of choice (albeit in a manner more acceptable to those who are more logic and mathematically based).

For example, let’s go back to the photon. We release a photon and it’s traveling in a wave-like way. We decide to detect it, so now it exists in our reality, but the other wave (the one not being detected) doesn’t just fade away, after all, energy doesn’t disappear, it merely takes on another form. (Energy is a constant.) Instead, the remaining wave(s) simply enters a reality where the photon wasn’t detected. By following this idea, we see a more balanced reality, a more balanced world. It also fits with the basic principal of an equal, and opposite reaction. If we chose not to detect the photon, then the photon would no longer exist in our reality, but would, instead, be in a reality where it was detected.

So, every time you make a choice, that unselected choice doesn’t simply fade away, it becomes a separate bubble of reality, a separate and opposing energy loop. It may only last for a moment, or it may last for many years, creating its own branches and its own parallel realities, it all depends on the size of the choice. If the choice is something small with little impact on your life and your world, then the bubble will most likely be small and may resolve itself quickly, returning back to the originator of the probability wave (you). On the other hand, if it’s something large, with a lot of impact on your life, then it may last decades (perhaps even the entire life).

Let’s say you decide to watch a televised sitcom instead of reading a book one night. That’s not a big choice, and may have very little impact on your life. Therefore, this little bubble wherein you read your book instead of watching the sitcom, may only last for the night, or for a couple of days, before merging back into your reality. Now let’s say that your fiancé just asked you to marry him. That’s a choice that will make a large impact on your life. In this case, whichever choice you don’t take, will most likely endure throughout the entire life of the alternate you.

If you decide to marry, then your alternate is going to say no. This alternate life then will be far different than the one you will be living, and the two may not merge until one or both of you die.

Because of the impact of this decision, each alternate reality will continue to create other alternates with the various decisions that come up. The reality where you married may bring choices of kids or no kids, career choices, and others, while the reality where you didn’t marry, may bring other marriage proposals, other opportunities perhaps to travel, or for career. Each of these will result in a large impact, which will result in even more alternates.

Whew, confusing isn’t it, trying to imagine all those realities? But as you try to wrap your mind around it, can you see how this fits with the concept of imbalance seeking to restore itself to balance?

The concept of imbalance seeking to become balanced isn’t new, and it isn’t just from the philosophy of choice. Scientists have talked about it for a long time, and this simply adds another rock to the foundation of its truth.

If a choice results in a probability wave containing two options, and only one is selected, then if that second option simply fades away, it would make our world very imbalanced. But, if another reality were created in which that option also became a reality (the rules of duality applying here), then that would create a balance between both of our worlds/realities. And when the two realities merged back together, that would simply consolidate the balance into one source again.

According to both science and philosophy, no energy is lost, no decision is left unexperienced, because all possibilities exist Somewhere.

It’s fascinating reading some of these books on quantum physics and realizing just how much they echo some of the more current philosophies and metaphysical ideas of our times.



Ripples of Effects

waterRings-4x6We’ve all heard of the butterfly which, when it flaps its wings in Tokyo, causes rain in New York, but do any of us realize that each of us also creates ripples and waves in the ocean of reality that surrounds all of us?

Just like that butterfly, every time we make a choice, rings of consequences flow outward through the energies surrounding us. Eventually they impact the energies of the people nearest us, who then make choices that then affect those near them, and outward and onward. It’s very similar to what happens when you drop a pebble in the water. The rings flow outward until they collide with something; then sometimes the rings stop, but other times they simply split and keep going.

So, what if you drop several pebbles into the water? Now you have rings flowing into rings, flowing into rings. Each ring spawning another, just as each choice spawns another. For instance, let’s say that you get up one morning and as you come into the kitchen you decide to have oatmeal instead of toast. The extra few moments it takes for you to microwave and eat your oatmeal makes you a few minutes later in leaving than normal. So, in your haste, you skip kissing your spouse and settle for a quick “Bye. See ya later…” instead.

What’s the big deal? It’s such a small choice what can it possibly affect? Well, a butterfly is a small thing, yet it can cause rain in New York. But let’s follow our scenario and see where it goes.

The spouse has chosen to be miffed at not getting a morning kiss (consequence and chosen response). Because the spouse is miffed, they drive in an angrier manner than usual. This choice affects everyone they encounter on the road between home and office, and each of those people then makes a non-conscious choice to respond to the spouse’s angry driving in some way. They might decide to ignore it; they might decide to compete with it; they might decide to advance the anger into a rage. All are valid choices that are spawned by the ring of consequence from the spouse, and each of these choices kicks off its own rings of consequences. All of this just because you chose to eat oatmeal instead of toast.

It’s simplistic for sure, but it does illustrate how easily something you might not even really think about can affect more than just yourself. It also shows that what affects someone else, then affects another group of people, and so forth.

Each day you make thousands of choices, some large and noticeable by you and by others (such as whether you should buy the new car, take a vacation, or have a baby), while others are small and seemingly negligible and may be made without any real thought (such as sleeping in 5 or 10 minutes later than normal, wearing the green or blue tie to work, or having toast or oatmeal for breakfast).

Some choices are such habits that we give them no thought at all, such as brushing our teeth, kissing our spouse goodbye for the day, or the choices we make while driving to work and back. But each of those choices, from the smallest to the largest, to the ones we really ponder to the ones we do out of habit, is what creates our personal reality. Without all of those choices, our personal reality wouldn’t exist. However, some of our personal choices spill over and affect the people around us. Perhaps you were running late, so you didn’t brush your teeth today, and your bad breath annoyed your seat mate on the train. That annoyance made him snap at his secretary, who then complained to her friend, who missed a phone call because she was listening to her friend complain, and so on.

Each of us makes choices on how we will act, what we will do, and how we will react to someone else. And every time we make a choice, we send out rippling rings of energy, and those ripples flow outward until they connect with one or more someone elses. Then those people act or react to the energies and create their own rippling rings of energies. Soon the whole world is filled with these rippling rings of energy, mixing, interacting and merging, creating a global reality with each new wave.

So, if we choose to be kind and upbeat, full of positivity and happy energies, this creates a very positive energy that ripples outward and touches all those around you. And if those around you take that energy and decide to react in a happy and positive way, then they send out positive waves of energy, and pretty soon the whole world is just filled with nothing but positive energies.

Think about it…no more fear, no more intolerance, no more hate or war, just happy positive energies filling the world. Is it possible? Of course. Is it probable? Maybe not, but why not make a choice to give it a try, anyway?

Talking to God

Can we speak to God? Of course; and most of us do so, all of the time. Some call it prayer; others might call it just their own internal ramblings and dialogues; but each of us in our own way speaks to God.

So the real question is: does God speak back?

According to Buddha, each of us is a god, and so, each of us knows all. Therefore, each of us needs only to open our minds and hear our own (god’s) wisdom.

Science also says that within each of us is that spark of creation; that bit of energy that all creations of matter contain. And it is that bit of god-energy that also connects all things. (Pretty much what George Lucas in his Star Wars movie series elegantly described as The Force.)

The study of entanglement physics has shown that there are, in fact, connections between both animate and inanimate objects and creatures. It also has shown that a type of communication occurs between different species of animate creatures. This communication (according to entanglement physicists) can only be described as a type of invisible linking at the very basic levels (the energy levels) of each creature. These communications can alert a person’s pet to the moment of their master’s demise, even though the person was miles away at the time. It is also thought to be the link that allows humans to know when a loved one is in danger or has died.

This connection can link creatures, plants, and people—giving warnings or encouragement, or offering feelings of love or hostility. For instance, have you ever felt as if a forest was telling you to stay away? Perhaps it was. Just maybe the trees didn’t want you there, and so projected their energy as a barrier to your energy (the basis of what you are), which you then perceived as feelings of hostility or unwelcome. Or perhaps you see a bird flying overhead and it swoops down to land on your shoulder. Maybe that bird “felt” your intentions and knew that you meant it no harm. It trusted you, and so came down to say “hi”.

People receive “warnings” and messages all the time; however, not everyone knows how to interpret the signals that they perceive, and not everyone allows themselves to recognize that they are even receiving these signals. Many times people have received a feeling of impending doom and simply brushed it away. They might put it down to their understandable, yet negligible, fear of flying or traveling, but overall they don’t consider it worth thinking about. But just maybe that feeling is coming from the great connecting force of everyone who plans to be on that plane, and just maybe a decision has already been made to use that plane as a means to exit the physical world. The information, the warning, would go out to everyone as a way to keep those who don’t need or want to participate in this mass exodus from life, from boarding that plane.

But how many will listen? How many will acknowledge that voice of “god” and listen to the message. Will you open your heart and hear the warning, or will you prefer logic to feelings, and get on the plane, anyway?

Science is beginning to see the value of adding emotions and feelings into their equations. Oh, there are still branches that value pure logic, but more and more are we finding that if you want to study God, you need to incorporate feelings into the logic, because let’s face it—God (and religion) are based on emotions, not logic.

So, can we speak to God? Yes, of course. Can God speak to us? It depends on you and how you feel towards “God”.

Let’s shoot first…

If [space] aliens landed what would happen to us, could we survive? That was the question the people at the Discovery/Science channel posed to a group of “experts” consisting of scientists, SciFi writers, journalists, politicos, disaster recovery personnel, military, and police and firemen from the US, Canada, and different countries in Europe. The consensus of this esteemed panel was that the human race would survive but at the cost of society, culture, and nations. They all felt it would result in a global war to defeat the aliens and save the world.

My whole being bristles because not a single person even considered that ET might be benign or [gasp] even friendly. Instead, everyone assumed that anyone coming from another planet (after traveling for how many light years, while probably wondering the same things that we have–is there any other intelligent life out there?) is automatically out to conquer us. Really?!?!

Is that why we’re trying to find life outside of our own planet, so that we can conquer them? For goodness sake, we can’t even run our own planet, how in the world could we even imagine that we could conquer someone else and take over theirs?

So, why would someone come all that way just to wipe us out? When asked, some of the science and military folks offered explanations — the aliens want our resources (the ruined air and polluted water would be a splendid addition to anyone’s planet, I’m sure); they lost their own planet, so want ours (did they put an ad in the lost and found, maybe the folks on Alpha Centauri found a planet wandering by); they’re simply like us and like to fight with whomever they come across while wandering the galaxies (maybe they film the confrontations and televise it as reality TV); they might not consider us intelligent and so they would have no qualms about wiping us out (ahhh, sort of the way we treat all the other beings on our own planet, such as the dolphins, whales, and gorillas — okay, that one I might believe).

But not a single person put forth the idea that maybe, just maybe a group of explorers from another planet would want nothing more than to take a few photos to show their people to say, “Hey, guess what? There are other beings out here.” It just totally shocked me, I must admit, that our societies are so blood thirsty.

Why do we assume that everyone is as blood thirsty and as fond as war as we all seem to be? Why can’t we remember those explorers of long ago, such as Magellan, Thomas and Clark, or even Admiral Byrd, who merely wanted to find out what was out there. They didn’t set out wanting to kill anyone, they just wanted to know what was over the next hill. Well, maybe those [space] aliens that come to visit are simply trying to find out what’s beyond the next moon or the next galaxy.

My biggest solace, is that I believe that whatever form alien life takes, it will most likely be something we either don’t recognize as being alive or we don’t recognize as being sentient and intelligent — such as something plant-based or something that resembles an insect rather than oxygen breathing carbon-based bipeds. Therefore, we have most likely already seen and ignored it, finding it, in our arrogance, of little or no significance. Who knows, maybe that dragon fly that just zipped by is really an alien, and just maybe that flower it’s sitting on is its space ship. You never know…

What a funhouse…

The universe is a funhouse of mirrors. I’m finding it hard to accept, even though I can visualize it fine. If you step through the wall at the back, you reappear stepping through the wall at the front of the funhouse room. Step out of the room to your left, and you reappear on the right. If you look behind yourself, or to your left, or right, you’ll see multiple images of yourself at different points in your life as if in a hall of time-traveling mirrors.

At least that’s one of the latest theories that the scientists have about our universe. Now, instead of our universe being infinite, they’ve suddenly decided that it has boundaries and structure. Yet, despite the boundaries, the rules of this finite universe state that no matter how hard we try, we can never cross from one universe to another. We simply reappear back within our own universe at a corresponding corner or edge. Therefore, if you leave the universe going north, you reappear at the southern edge.

Some of the string theory scientists who also go along with this new finite universe theory, have stated that our universe is shaped like a large bubble. This large bubble is pressed up against a multitude of other large bubbles. According to the scientists, each of these large bubbles is another universe, which is merely another version of our own universe.

They call it the multiverse theory. Strings of pearls each touching, but not influencing the others along the strings. Now, according to these science guys, if you want to “escape” your universe, you would have to change the frequency at which your internal structures vibrate (this is way down beyond the atomic levels).

According to the scientists, every universe is self-contained because of it’s frequency of vibrations. So, if you don’t change the rate at which your physical form vibrates, then you simply reappear back inside your universe. 

Those theoretical cosmologists and physicists who claim that our universe is more like the funhouse full of mirrors have no explanation as to why we can’t leave; they simply say you can’t. (Sort of a “because I said so…” kinda thing.)

Also, whereas the funhouse theorists say that if you look right, left, forward, or backward, you’ll see images of yourself at various points in time, the string theorists say that each bubble or pearl, has smaller bubbles clinging to it. It’s these smaller bubbles that contain the important points in time that are needed because of their influence on our universe. And as each of those points in time is expended and no longer needed, then like a bubble, it simply breaks apart and flows back into the soapy exterior of our universe.

I’m not sure what I believe—finite or infinite; soap bubble, wave (infinite), or funhouse. But I do know it’s entertaining to listen to the scientists come up with their theories, and then try to explain them.

Harvey and I do lunch

We all share the same reality, right? But do we really? Say you and I witness an event—let’s say it’s a parade—and someone else comes along and asks us to describe what we saw. Now if we both share the exact same reality we should be able to describe exactly the same details, right? But both of us are going to describe what we saw, or what we experienced, and although it may only differ slightly, it’s still going to be different.

That’s because each person is different, so none of us is going to experience life—or any aspect of life—in exactly the same way as someone else. Maybe in our mythical parade you saw a dozen clowns with balloons riding motor scooters, while I don’t remember any clowns at all. However, I may remember seeing a wild bunch of cowboys whooping it up and throwing lassoes around ladies as they went by, while you remember one or two guys riding on horses and nothing more.

It’s these differences in perception and remembrances that make up our own selective perception or personal reality. We both share a global reality—which includes the fact that we attended a parade on the same date at the same location. However, the details of what we saw and experienced during the time in which the parade was occurring are different because each of us is different. Even if you and I went together to the parade and stood together and watched the parade together, we still wouldn’t have seen and experienced the same thing, because we are two different people.

So, how then do we ever determine what are true facts? How can we say that the sky is blue, or that the diameter of circle is equal to 2 times the radius, or even that pi = 3.142 and call those facts? How do we know that Lincoln was president after Washington, or that sound travels in waves, and that “hat” is a noun? Easy, we teach ourselves that these are true, unchangeable facts and we believe it. Think about what schools really teach and you’ll see that we are doing is making sure that everyone starts out with the same basic “truths” and facts shaping their reality. Once they have the same foundation as everyone else, then we let them loose to start creating their own version of reality.

Now some of those folks never quite get the hang of staying within the global boundaries; they start creating a reality that outside of the global template—they hear voices even though no one is around, or they see and converse with six-foot tall, invisible, white rabbits named Harvey. When they do that, then we label them insane and we lock them up, give them drugs that supposedly help them cope, or we try to correct them and make them fit back inside the global template.

But as long as we all stay within the template the world is ours to “play” with. We can see clowns in our parades or we can see cowboys, and sometimes we might even see both…it’s completely up to us. It’s our reality to do with as we please. We can enjoy it, or hate it, or even ignore it (catatonia)…it doesn’t matter, because each reaction, each expression of reality that we create is just one more unique experience.

Every once in a while someone comes along and challenges the template with some new “fact”. If the majority of people accept this new “fact” then it does, indeed, become a fact. If, however, most people reject this new concept, idea, or “fact” then it fades away and isn’t woven into the global template of our lives. Science is always “discovering” new theories that they want to prove are facts, and while some of them are accepted, a great many of them are not. So, the template is constantly shifting and changing, and that’s okay, because we (everyone) wouldn’t have as much fun if the world and reality in which we lived were static and unchanging.

Therefore, some day those who see six-foot, invisible, white rabbits named Harvey may no longer be considered unbalanced or out of touch with reality. Instead, it will be all of us who can’t see Harvey who are out of touch.

So, Harvey, where do you want to go for lunch? I hear they have great salads down at Crispers…

Where and when are we, really?

“Time/space exists only because we can measure it…”

I found that quote and realized it pretty much sums up our relationship with time and space. After all, these tangibles don’t exist outside of physical reality, because beyond physical reality time/space isn’t needed.

Just imagine what our world would be like without both of them? Without space, all places would be one. Wouldn’t that be a pain if Chicago, Tokyo, London, and Toronto all shared the same space? Talk about crowded.

And then there’s time. Without time everything would be happening all at once. So, now you don’t know whether you should be going to your 9 a.m. staff meeting, heading to bed, eating lunch, or going out on the town. Is it Halloween, Yom Kippur, or New Year’s, and for what year/century/millennium—who knows. Maybe it’s all of them.

What a mess our world would be, or would it? Maybe it would be a simpler place. Maybe we could learn to adapt to a world where everything is here and all things are now. However, it seems that our choice was to develop methods of seeing and measuring our reality in a way to separate out the places, and we found ways to create increments of time that allow us to sequence events allowing each moment its own place in our minds.

We have even created a way for us to travel backward and forward in time; of course, you have to travel through space, too. Just think, you can get on a plane at 6 a.m. in LA, and arrive in NY at 9a.m. that same day. So, you not only skipped over space (going from one coast to the other), but you moved ahead three hours into the future. Not bad.

You can use this same technique to jump whole days, too. Did you miss your mom’s birthday? No problem. Simply fly past the International Date Line going west and gain a day. How cool is that?

Of course they haven’t yet come up with a way to skip back to Ancient Rome, or forward to the year 3000, but who knows? With the way science is going, they might just find the measurement that will let you do just that. We have international date lines, maybe they’ll come up with intergalactic date lines. Jump in a space ship, zip around the moon, and end up a year into the past.

According to the scientists, if you go fast enough and far enough, you can skip hundreds of years into the future (speed of light and all of that), so all we need is to find a way to reverse that so that we can visit the past. Or maybe we just need a way to measure it to make it possible. Anyone got a tape measure?