Death is the Ultimate Illusion, at least in this reality...

 

Death Doesn't Exist And May Just Be An Illusion, According To Quantum Physics

"People are taught that we die"... R. Lanza

After the death of his old friend, Albert Einstein said "Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us ... know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."

New evidence continues to suggest that Einstein was right, death is an illusion.

Our classical way of thinking is based on the belief that the world has an objective observer-independent existence. But a long list of experiments shows just the opposite. We think life is just the activity of carbon and an admixture of molecules: we live awhile and then rot into the ground.

We believe in death because we've been taught we die. Also, of course, because we associate ourselves with our body and we know bodies die. End of story. But biocentrism, a new theory of everything, tells us death may not be the terminal event we think. Amazingly, if you add life and consciousness to the equation, you can explain some of the biggest puzzles of science. For instance, it becomes clear why space and time—and even the properties of matter itself—depend on the observer. It also becomes clear why the laws, forces, and constants of the universe appear to be exquisitely fine-tuned for the existence of life.

Until we recognize the universe in our heads, attempts to understand reality will remain a road to nowhere.

Consider the weather ‘outside': You see a blue sky, but the cells in your brain could be changed so the sky looks green or red. In fact, with a little genetic engineering we could probably make everything that is red vibrate or make a noise, or even make you want to have sex, as it does with some birds. You think its bright out, but your brain circuits could be changed so it looks dark out. You think it feels hot and humid, but to a tropical frog it would feel cold and dry. This logic applies to virtually everything. Bottom line: What you see could not be present without your consciousness.

In truth, you can't see anything through the bone that surrounds your brain. Your eyes are not portals to the world. Everything you see and experience right now‚ even your body, is a whirl of information occurring in your mind. According to biocentrism, space and time aren't the hard, cold objects we think. Wave your hand through the air—if you take everything away, what's left? Nothing. The same thing applies for time. Space and time are simply the tools for putting everything together.

article continues after advertisement

Consider the famous two-slit experiment. When scientists watch a particle pass through two slits in a barrier, the particle behaves like a bullet and goes through one slit or the other. But if you don't watch, it acts like a wave and can go through both slits at the same time. So how can a particle change its behavior depending on whether you watch it or not? The answer is simple, reality is a process that involves your consciousness.

Or consider Heisenberg's famous uncertainty principle. If there is really a world out there with particles just bouncing around, then we should be able to measure all their properties. But you can't. For instance, a particle's exact location and momentum can't be known at the same time. So why should it matter to a particle what you decide to measure? And how can pairs of entangled particles be instantaneously connected on opposite sides of the galaxy as if space and time don't exist? Again, the answer is simple: because they're not just ‘out there'—space and time are simply tools of our mind.

Death doesn't exist in a timeless, spaceless world. Immortality doesn't mean a perpetual existence in time, but resides outside of time altogether.

Our linear way of thinking about time is also inconsistent with another series of recent experiments. In 2002, scientists showed that particles of light "photons" knew, in advance,what their distant twins would do in the future. They tested the communication between pairs of photons. They let one photon finish its journey—it had to decide whether to be either a wave or a particle. Researchers stretched the distance the other photon took to reach its own detector. However, they could add a scrambler to prevent it from collapsing into a particle. Somehow, the first particle knew what the researcher was going to do before it happened, and across distances instantaneously as if there were no space or time between them. They decide not to become particles before their twin even encounters the scrambler. It doesn't matter how we set up the experiment. Our mind and its knowledge is the only thing that determines how they behave. Experiments consistently confirm these observer-dependent effects.

izarre? Consider another experiment that was recently published in the prestigious scientific journal Science (Jacques et al, 315, 966, 2007). Scientists in France shot photons into an apparatus, and showed that what they did could retroactively change something that had already happened in the past. As the photons passed a fork in the apparatus, they had to decide whether to behave like particles or waves when they hit a beam splitter. Later on - well after the photons passed the fork - the experimenter could randomly switch a second beam splitter on and off. It turns out that what the observer decided at that point, determined what the particle actually did at the fork in the past. At that moment, the experimenter chose his past.

Of course, we live in the same world. But critics claim this behavior is limited to the microscopic world. But this 'two-world' view (that is, one set of physical laws for small objects, and another for the rest of the universe including us) has no basis in reason and is being challenged in laboratories around the world. A couple years ago, researchers published a paper in Nature (Jost et al, 459, 683, 2009) showing that quantum behavior extends into the everyday realm. Pairs of vibrating ions were coaxed to entangle so their physical properties remained bound together when separated by large distances ("spooky action at a distance," as Einstein put it). Other experiments with huge molecules called ‘Buckyballs' also show that quantum reality extends beyond the microscopic world. And in 2005, KHC0₃ crystals exhibited entanglement ridges one-half inch high, quantum behavior nudging into the ordinary world of human-scale objects.

We generally reject the multiple universes of Star Trek as fiction, but it turns out there is more than a morsel of scientific truth to this popular genre. One well-known aspect of quantum physics is that observations can't be predicted absolutely. Instead, there is a range of possible observations each with a different probability. One mainstream explanation, the "many-worlds" interpretation, states that each of these possible observations corresponds to a different universe (the 'multiverse'). 

There are an infinite number of universes and everything that could possibly happen occurs in some universe. Death does not exist in any real sense in these scenarios. All possible universes exist simultaneously, regardless of what happens in any of them. Life is an adventure that transcends our ordinary linear way of thinking. When we die, we do so not in the random billiard-ball-matrix but in the inescapable-life-matrix. Life has a non-linear dimensionality; it's like a perennial flower that returns to bloom in the multiverse.

"The influences of the senses," said Ralph Waldo Emerson "has in most men overpowered the mind to the degree that the walls of space and time have come to look solid, real and insurmountable; and to speak with levity of these limits in the world is the sign of insanity."

Online Sources:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/biocentrism/201111/is-death-illusion-evidence-suggests-death-isn-t-the-end

https://bigthink.com/articles/biocentrism-posits-that-death-is-merely-transport-into-another-universe/

Is Time Travel in the Social Imagination... ???

    Time travel is usually understood by most as going back to a bygone era or jumping forward to a point in the future. But how much of the idea is based in reality? Is it possible to travel through time? 

    According to NASA, time travel is possible, just not in the way you might expect. Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity says time and motion are relative to each other, and nothing can go faster than the speed of light, which is 186,000 miles per second. Time travel happens through what’s called “time dilation.”

     Time dilation, according to Live Science, is how one’s perception of time is different to another, depending on their motion or where they are. Hence, time being relative ~ https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/science/2022/09/10/time-travel-possible-science/7847346001/

    Again, is time travel possible? Given the popularity of the concept, this is a legitimate question. Theoretical physicist, Peter Watson, Emeritus professor, Physics, Carleton University, thinks that there are several possible answers to this question.

   The simplest answer is that time travel cannot be possible because if it was, we would already be doing it. One can argue that it is forbidden by the laws of physics, like the second law of thermodynamics or relativity. There are also technical challenges: it might be possible but would involve vast amounts of energy.

    There is also the matter of time-travel paradoxes; we can hypothetically resolve these if free will is an illusion, if many worlds exist or if the past can only be witnessed but not experienced. Perhaps time travel is impossible simply because time must flow in a linear manner and we have no control over it, or perhaps time is an illusion and time travel is irrelevant.

 

COMMENTARY: I put in bold and or underlined the key or important words/phrases from the excerpts above.  As a sociologist (PhD), not a social worker, I can only give my expert take on the idea of time travel. Since, I study people, society/culture and their information reality, the social imagination, it is obvious to me that the idea of time travel stems from what it would mean to an individual to do so. 

There is no 'studied/researched' group of people who wish to time travel as a group with one given purpose to do so. Why? Probably because they couldn't really trust one another's motives to time travel. They somehow intuitively know that each person has his/her reason to do so. Sure, there could be a group of people that might be interested in time travel as a kind of tourism and or sightseeing; saying... "I would like to 'have been there", i.e. 

The point being, whether one man or many, meaning has everything to do with the desire to time travel. And, what time to travel to because the choice also means something. And, would they actually find the meaning they are looking for? Probably not. Why? 

Firstly, my assumption is that all time is in the social imagination, its a necessary illusion. And, thus we could say that time travel is irrelevant. And, I would go as far to say that its unobservable for the traveler in the sense of whether or not the traveler would know that they have actually 'time traveled'.

The social imagination, the social reality, is relational. All relationships in the social imagination are subjective in that they are necessary for the one among the many; hence, no man is an island. They, relationships, are created or grow up in the social imagination because that's the only place they can and do exist.  

And, in that context of growing up, our social reality is becomes grounded in agreement and disagreement through relationship building. Both agreement and disagreement compliment and complete the experience of social reality relationships. The more we agree on what it is 'real' and what is not through relationships, the more we become embedded in them and in it.

Regarding time travel, once, the so-called transportation back in time occurs, we would need to or rather have to immediately engage relationships: the surroundings and everything in that 'time'. In order to feel that something happened, we need to be able to confirm something happened by connecting with and interacting with the people and all things appearing before us to be able to discern if the time travel happened. 

Also, I suppose, to have an actual experience, if possible... we would not want to give away our identity knowing that whatever we had in our previous social reality, social imagination would likely not fit to this alternative or past... or jeopardize the experience. So, we would have to look and be 'like them' just to get around and take in 'understand' the information provided to not only discern the event indeed happened, but to enjoy it. 

In this 'process' of fitting in or adjusting to the 'new' relationships, in context of either the 'past or future', necessary in order to experience the event, we could easily be deceived by the social imagination into thinking... nothing happened simply through agreement of what actually is before us. 

I imagine that we could easily forget (instantly or over a short period of time) where we came from. In fact, we may necessarily have to forget the place where we came from. Essentially, erased or interpreted by the previous social imagination as a dream and the new reality is where you landed or end up. 

This is why a I can say time travel would be unobservable in the long run or over time... and perhaps still dreamed of as 'possible'.

CERN ~ The Large Hadron Collider is Looking for Dark Matter...

 

On Tuesday, July 5, 2022, scientists at CERN will begin collecting data for their experiments, and the Large Hadron Collider will run around the clock for almost four years. It’s the third run for the massive machine, with greater precision and discovery potential than ever before thanks to the upgraded data readout and selection systems, as well as new detector systems and computing infrastructure.

 “When we do research we hope that we will find something unexpected, a surprise. That would be the best result. But of course the answer is in the hands of nature, and it depends on how nature answers open questions in fundamental physics,” said Fabiola Gianotti, CERN Director-General, in a video posted on CERN’s website.

“We are looking for answers to questions related to dark matter, to why the Higgs boson is so light and many other open questions.”

CERN’s scientists will study the properties of matter under extreme temperature and density, and will also be searching for explanations for dark matter and for other new phenomena, either through direct searches or – indirectly – through precise measurements of the properties of known particles.

“While all the results obtained so far are consistent with the Standard Model, there is still plenty of room for new phenomena beyond what is predicted by this theory,” said CERN theorist Michelangelo Mangano in a news release.

Dark matter is thought to make up most of the matter in the universe and has previously been detected by its ability to create gravitational distortions in outer space. So, what is dark matter? Dark matter is thought to be nonluminous material that is postulated to exist in space and that could take any of several forms including weakly interacting particles (called - cold 'old' dark matter ) or high-energy randomly moving particles (called - hot 'new' dark matter).

“The Higgs boson itself may point to new phenomena, including some that could be responsible for the dark matter in the universe,” said Luca Malgeri, a spokesperson for CMS (Compact Muon Solenoid), one of the four big Large Hadron Collider experiments, which is built around a huge electromagnet[https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/05/europe/cern-hadron-collider-third-run-scn/index.html].

In light all of this new phenomenon and its research at CERN, many have inquired to the safety of such experiments.  In fact, on CERN'S own webpage you can read about the possibility of creating microscopic blackholes and strangelets. The first you are aware of I am sure... But, what is the other generated phenomenon? Strangelet is the term given to a hypothetical microscopic lump of ‘strange matter’ containing almost equal numbers of particles called up, down and strange quarks. 

According to most theoretical work, strangelets should change to ordinary matter within a thousand-millionth of a second. But could strangelets coalesce with ordinary matter and change it to strange matter? This question was first raised before the start up of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, RHIC, in 2000 in the United States. 

A study at the time showed that there was no cause for concern, and RHIC has now run for eight years, searching for strangelets without detecting any. At times, the LHC will run with beams of heavy nuclei, just as RHIC does. 

The LHC’s beams will have more energy than RHIC, but this makes it even less likely that strangelets could form. It is difficult for strange matter to stick together in the high temperatures produced by such colliders, rather as ice does not form in hot water. In addition, quarks will be more dilute at the LHC than at RHIC, making it more difficult to assemble strange matter. Strangelet production at the LHC is therefore less likely than at RHIC, and experience there has already validated the arguments that strangelets cannot be produced [https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadron-collider/safety-lhc].

Now, to the laymen, this sounds scientific and probably safe... but is it? We cannot really know the extent of entanglement that can be generated causing strange appearances in our given reality or if in fact, the very fabric of the universe could be cut wide open from such experiments as the strangelets move toward the center of the earth and back again and then back towards the center and back up again... Or if any microscopic blackhole could suddenly grow and swallow up all that we think we know. 

Now, you have to wonder if CERN scientists have taken into consideration the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is a physical law that forms part of quantum mechanics. It says that the more precisely you measure the position of a particle, the less precisely you can know its motion (momentum or velocity). 

And the more precisely you measure a particle's motion, the less precisely you can know its position. This is contrary to our everyday experience of life, where these measurements are independent of each other, and can be measured as precisely as we'd like... as we would like. That's hypothetical too. What does it mean... as we would like? It only means that and that's the measure used at CERN. 

Only time will tell ...and certainly over a four year period a lot could happen on the atomic level given the so called nature of dark matter that could change our given reality; and ironically, we may not even notice until its too late or even be able to notice if any changes happened at all. We might become aliens on our own planet and never wonder what was before us or if it was us.