“no such thing as objective reality”

I look for proof that I may not be as insane as I sometimes believe. It becomes difficult to explain my experiences and even more difficult to find some sort of corroborating evidence, or at least some credible source that may also have similar experiences. What this article attempts to explain is that our shared reality is more of an individual experience and that not all of the characteristics of that experience can be experienced by others in a similar (possibly factual) manner.

There are the subjective filters of our frame of reference that plays a part in how we experience this so-called shared reality, but those filters are often difficult to discern. Ask 12 witnesses what they experienced during a particular shared event and they will describe the experience from 12 different perspectives. Video evidence often refutes what they claim and we often rely on some kind of technological method as empirical evidence. This new quantum experiment may begin to cast doubt on the veracity of technological records in the future.

The observer’s interpretation may very well be a key component to how the event is manifested. In other words, if the 12 witnesses that I mentioned above were not present and another twelve witnesses experienced the event instead, because the observers have changed (everything else remains the same) I would predict that there would be a different outcome regarding the event itself.

We exist on the leading edge of creation, and as observers, our presence (not merely observance) determines the outcome whether we are aware of it or not. The subjective nature of reality begins to bolster the notion that our reality is more of a dream than we care to believe.

 

Attention: This article was reformatted from its original post and location. No other changes to content were made. I do not have permission to reproduce this article and will remove it if asked to do so. The original article can be found here.

A quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality

Physicists have long suspected that quantum mechanics allows two observers to experience different, conflicting realities. Now they’ve performed the first experiment that proves it.

Back in 1961, the Nobel Prize–winning physicist Eugene Wigner outlined a thought experiment that demonstrated one of the lesser-known paradoxes of quantum mechanics. The experiment shows how the strange nature of the universe allows two observers—say, Wigner and Wigner’s friend—to experience different realities.

Since then, physicists have used the “Wigner’s Friend” thought experiment to explore the nature of measurement and to argue over whether objective facts can exist. That’s important because scientists carry out experiments to establish objective facts. But if they experience different realities, the argument goes, how can they agree on what these facts might be?

That’s provided some entertaining fodder for after-dinner conversation, but Wigner’s thought experiment has never been more than that—just a thought experiment.

Last year, however, physicists noticed that recent advances in quantum technologies have made it possible to reproduce the Wigner’s Friend test in a real experiment. In other words, it ought to be possible to create different realities and compare them in the lab to find out whether they can be reconciled.

And today, Massimiliano Proietti at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh and a few colleagues say they have performed this experiment for the first time: they have created different realities and compared them. Their conclusion is that Wigner was correct—these realities can be made irreconcilable so that it is impossible to agree on objective facts about an experiment.

Wigner’s original thought experiment is straightforward in principle. It begins with a single polarized photon that, when measured, can have either a horizontal polarization or a vertical polarization. But before the measurement, according to the laws of quantum mechanics, the photon exists in both polarization states at the same time—a so-called superposition.

Wigner imagined a friend in a different lab measuring the state of this photon and storing the result, while Wigner observed from afar. Wigner has no information about his friend’s measurement and so is forced to assume that the photon and the measurement of it are in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment.

Wigner can even perform an experiment to determine whether this superposition exists or not. This is a kind of interference experiment showing that the photon and the measurement are indeed in a superposition.

From Wigner’s point of view, this is a “fact”—the superposition exists. And this fact suggests that a measurement cannot have taken place.

But this is in stark contrast to the point of view of the friend, who has indeed measured the photon’s polarization and recorded it. The friend can even call Wigner and say the measurement has been done (provided the outcome is not revealed).

So the two realities are at odds with each other. “This calls into question the objective status of the facts established by the two observers,” say Proietti and co.

That’s the theory, but last year Caslav Brukner, at the University of Vienna in Austria, came up with a way to re-create the Wigner’s Friend experiment in the lab by means of techniques involving the entanglement of many particles at the same time.

The breakthrough that Proietti and co have made is to carry this out. “In a state-of-the-art 6-photon experiment, we realize this extended Wigner’s friend scenario,” they say.

They use these six entangled photons to create two alternate realities—one representing Wigner and one representing Wigner’s friend. Wigner’s friend measures the polarization of a photon and stores the result. Wigner then performs an interference measurement to determine if the measurement and the photon are in a superposition.

The experiment produces an unambiguous result. It turns out that both realities can coexist even though they produce irreconcilable outcomes, just as Wigner predicted.

That raises some fascinating questions that are forcing physicists to reconsider the nature of reality.

The idea that observers can ultimately reconcile their measurements of some kind of fundamental reality is based on several assumptions. The first is that universal facts actually exist and that observers can agree on them.

But there are other assumptions too. One is that observers have the freedom to make whatever observations they want. And another is that the choices one observer makes do not influence the choices other observers make—an assumption that physicists call locality.

If there is an objective reality that everyone can agree on, then these assumptions all hold.

But Proietti and co’s result suggests that objective reality does not exist. In other words, the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.

Of course, there is another way out for those hanging on to the conventional view of reality. This is that there is some other loophole that the experimenters have overlooked. Indeed, physicists have tried to close loopholes in similar experiments for years, although they concede that it may never be possible to close them all.

Nevertheless, the work has important implications for the work of scientists. “The scientific method relies on facts, established through repeated measurements and agreed upon universally, independently of who observed them,” say Proietti and co. And yet in the same paper, they undermine this idea, perhaps fatally.

The next step is to go further: to construct experiments creating increasingly bizarre alternate realities that cannot be reconciled. Where this will take us is anybody’s guess. But Wigner, and his friend, would surely not be surprised.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1902.05080 : Experimental Rejection of Observer-Independence in the Quantum World

Journal: What Matters?

Moon waxing gibbous 13.7 days, Sagittarius – Fire. Time 21:45, planet hours: Jupiter.

From  the perspective of conscious immortality, there are pitfalls. I know that I am an immortal conscious being, but in my current physical state there are perceived limitations prior to mastering consciousness. Time is not on my side within this conscious simulation. During the waxing and waning of the moon I cycle through similar emotional states.

I can see the infinite within the finite. There are no limits within the confines of consciousness. Abraham was right, there is so much in abundance and it is fitting because the unbridled expansion of consciousness requires it. My role is defined and as every bit in constant flux. It is all a fascinating bit of theater. Everything singing its own song, all in the same key, not always in my prefered pitch.

Acceptance is a wedge that pries at my attachments and well honed habits. I struggle to care. If it is all a dream then why should I care at all? Everything is temporary. It always has been and forever will be. The chaos is just a facade of what we are unable to understand, all while never knowing we sing the same song

What matters? Everything and nothing, soon to be replaced by some other thing even though they all now seem to be the same thing. Consciousness wastes nothing.

3 6 9

Where Is Here?

Nonlocality

I was walking on the strand in Venice Beach California one day and there was this group of guys walking together and a couple of guys were yelling at another guy saying “Get out of here”. The guy they were yelling at yelled back “Where is here?”. When I heard his response I laughed, but it hit me harder than it should have. I still think about that interaction when I tell myself that I need to get out of here. So to this day I still ask myself ‘where is ‘here?’

Philosophically materialism would make ‘here’ a place in space/time. Since we are spinning, orbiting and flying through space materialism’s reference to ‘here’ is constantly changing. When we talk about ‘here’ in the sense of locality we mostly infer that it is within our immediate environment. “The principal of locality states that an object is only directly influenced by its immediate surroundings” (straight out of wikipedia). Thus, locality is rooted in the philosophy of materialism.

Nonlocality is very different and there isn’t an easy way to explain it, so I’ll take the first paragraph from wikipedia and then describe what it means to me.

“In theoretical physics, quantum nonlocality is the phenomenon by which measurements made at a microscopic level contradict a collection of notions known as local realism that are regarded as intuitively true in classical mechanics. Rigorously, quantum nonlocality refers to quantum mechanical predictions of many-system measurement correlations that cannot be simulated by any local hidden variable theory. Many entangled quantum states exhibit such correlations, as demonstrated by Bell’s theorem, and as verified by experiment.”

Now lets throw in a little ‘action at a distance’, source Wikipedia.

“In physics, action at a distance is the concept that an object can be moved, changed, or otherwise affected without being physically touched (as in mechanical contact) by another object. That is, it is the nonlocal interaction of objects that are separated in space.”

Nonlocality is a principle of quantum mechanics that does not fit the materialism philosophy within classical mechanics. Nonlocality makes things a bit more difficult to conceive. In classical mechanics there is a ‘here’ and a ‘there’ that follows the principal of locality. Nonlocality of quantum mechanics would infer that there is only ‘here’, the notion of ‘there’ is an illusion. I say this due to the ability of objects to be connected or entangled regardless of the vast distances that we perceive to exist.

So there is no ‘there’. How can we be sure of this? We can by something called quantum entanglement.

“Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance – instead, a quantum state must be described for the system as a whole.”

“Measurements of physical properties such as position, momentum, spin, and polarization, performed on entangled particles are found to be appropriately correlated. For example, if a pair of particles are generated in such a way that their total spin is known to be zero, and one particle is found to have clockwise spin on a certain axis, the spin of the other particle, measured on the same axis, will be found to be counterclockwise, as to be expected due to their entanglement. However, this behavior gives rise to paradoxical effects: any measurement of a property of a particle can be seen as acting on that particle (e.g., by collapsing a number of superposed states) and will change the original quantum property by some unknown amount; and in the case of entangled particles, such a measurement will be on the entangled system as a whole. It thus appears that one particle of an entangled pair “knows” what measurement has been performed on the other, and with what outcome, even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances.”

When physicists talk about entanglement they state that there are “spooky actions at a distance” meaning that they can take microscopic particles (atomic particles) from the same source and separate them then change one of the particles and observe an identical change in the particle’s pair. The “knowing” aspect of the system that communicates with individuals implies a network of some kind or sharing of data, but this communication cannot be detected.

An enlightened being walks up to a food cart and orders a hotdog. The cook asks the enlightened one what he wants on the hotdog. The enlightened being says he will have ‘one with everything’… It’s an old joke, but I hope you get the point. As I have stated in other posts, I really did not know what the was meant by ‘one with everything’ or ‘everything is one’.  Nonlocality infers that everything exists within a single point within consciousness.

There is no ‘there’, there is only ‘here’. When we apply our known simulated or virtual reality concepts to our shared conscious reality we understand that when a simulated reality executes on a computer system the simulation simulates distance and it appears that there is a ‘here’ and a ‘there’, but in actuality there is only a single point where the simulation exists and that is within the CPU. No matter how vast the simulated reality seems it only actually exists in one single point.

Call of Doody

Now let’s take it a bit further. Call of Duty is a first person shooter video game (please substitute any single player or multiplayer action game if needed). The game simulates tactical war scenarios and the simulation is viewed through the eyes of the person playing the game (I am not too familiar with the game, I do not play video games, so I will speculate concerning single player and multi-player concepts). If the game is played in single player mode (player vs. computer) the simulated environment and characters exist on a single point on the game console or desktop computer. If the game is played in multi-player mode then where does the game execute? I will state (speculatively) that the game is probably still simulated on each of the payers desktop or console, but receives data from other connected devices to create a multi-player environment. So actions taken by one player effect other players as well concerning position, health, etc. And, instead of all players viewing the same scenes they are able to view the connected environment from their individual perspectives.

The environment of the game is vast. As a player you can get in a helicopter (maybe) and fly to another location. You can run from one location to the next and even climb or descend. You can talk to other players in multi-player mode opening a door for establishing relationships. You are capable of visually experiencing space. Aside from the physical sensations it is essentially very similar to this shared conscious dream of a reality we are now experiencing, but instead of the simulation (dream) executing on a console it executes in our brain via the conscious mind (subconscious and unconscious as well). What allows us to share the same experiences and environments (one of many levels and dimensions) is that we are connected to the whole of consciousness via our brain.

The brain is a transmitter and receiver much like a game console in a video game. We know this because electrical impulses within the brain can be measured and we can view regions of the brain with an MRI to see neurons firing. The brain transmitting information is easily measured and we can induce electrical signals to influence brain activity with CES (cranial electro stimulation) devices. I actually have a past post that shows how to construct a crude CES device using a home stereo amplifier (20-20kHz frequency response).

So we are all connected transmitting and receiving information at the macro level via our brainwaves and also connected at the micro level due to certain aspects of quantum entanglement. Currently we exist in a technologically diverse environment that allows us to share information. If we examine the past we can see that the sharing of information over vast distances has occurred without really knowing how this happened. I believe that common belief systems were created based upon information received from the whole of consciousness. The knowing that has always existed at all levels of consciousness as described by quantum entanglement facilitates the transfer of information. Please understand that all information is subject to interpretation. Just because the same information can be disseminated it does not mean that the information will be interpreted and manifested in the same manner by those that receive it.

You’re Living In A Dreamworld

We are born and become conscious of this reality (or another reality or level) and we have experiences within the reality that forms our frame of reference. When we are unconscious during rest we create and perceive a reality using the frame of reference from our conscious reality. Since we are social beings we have experiences with others that are stored in the memory that constructs our frame of reference. Every experience we have in our conscious reality affects us and others around us contained within a single point of consciousness interpreted and perceived in our mind.

Think of it as being born and having a virtual reality headset put on your head immediately after birth, sort of like the film “The Matrix”, but without all the other holes and pod. Your visual and audio experiences are all that you know and everything you experience through this virtual world contributes to building your frame of reference. Lets say that the virtual reality is from the late 80s so everything and everyone looks like Max Headroom or the Dire Straights music video “Money For Nothing”.

Max Headroom via Wikipedia…

Your reality will be based upon the memories within your frame of reference. But because you have a brain and that brain is transmitting and receiving information from the whole of consciousness, as well as the other senses that you experience from your body, you begin to sense that there maybe something amiss.

In the book Simulacra and Simulations Jean Baudrillard writes about a not so favorite place of mine called Disneyland. Disneyland is a hyper (pseudo, para or fake) reality that exists to give us a sense, or allows us to compare a hyper real environment to our everyday reality. So, when we visit Disneyland we can experience things that we cannot experience in our rather mundane everyday reality. Disneyland allows us to separate fantasy from reality. The same can be said about Las Vegas. People go to these hyper real environments so that there is an alternate reality that allows them to compare and substantiate their individual concept of what is reality.

Video games and virtual reality hardware and software fall under the same hyper real category as they allow us to experience a reality that would otherwise not exist in our conscious environment. We are capable of plugging into, traveling to other environments, but we cannot unplug from this one. Or can we?

One particular question I tend to ask myself on a daily basis is, why here? Or, why am I here? I’m not the only one asking this question, but right now I am not pondering purpose. I am pondering location within the dream. I think to some extent there are a lot of people doing the same. If that was not true then why do we have places like Disneyland and Las Vegas and video games like World of Warcraft, Call of Duty and others? Why do we have religion? I think they exist because we know that this shared reality is an illusion. If we do not know it outright it exists within the confines of our true self. Although we willingly participate and accept this reality, there is a degree of dissatisfaction and emptiness that cannot be fulfilled. So in the current construct of materialism we attempt to fill that void with materials, emotions, people, dogma, and anything else that may serve as a means of gaining satisfaction or fulfillment. We do so because we believe that there is nothing else. So, we do what we can ultimately ensuring that the illusion is maintained.

So let’s go back to the child with the virtual reality headset and because we are in a dream world governed by concepts of nonlocality 18 years have passed (not difficult to accept considering my long worded explanations). By this time the child has formed a visual and audio frame of reference based upon a virtual reality environment based upon 1980s concepts of artificial intelligence. The 18 year old has developed as any average 18 year old might without the VR headset. Now we are going to get a little mean and take the VR headset off. What does the person see? Can the brain of the person interpret the visual data collected by his/her eyes? It is safe to say that if the person could see the world it would be a very strange environment. The most important questions I have, is whether the person would be able to function psychologically as s/he attempts to adjust to this new reality? Would s/he accept the new reality?

Me, me, me…

Dreams are an important aspect of our human experience. Dreams are constantly trying to reveal to us the nature of our reality. The abilities we have during resting unconscious dream states are the same abilities we have in our conscious dream states. Nonlocality exists in our unconscious dreams because it exists as the foundation of our shard conscious reality. We do not have to worry about the psychological impact of awakening to our true self because we are being prepped for that awakening each time we sleep and dream.

I have awaken from a dream world and enter another when I returned from the void. I experienced periods of drifting into unconsciousness and returning to consciousness in my apartment. I now believe that this is what death is, or may be like. Moving from one dream world to the next, I may have unknowingly done this many times during my life because I have been somewhat reckless. My excursion into the void may have been the only time that I was able to remember most of the conscious parts of the journey. My struggle to reassemble my ability to speak and understand what words meant or how to form them remains the most significant experience after returning from an unconscious state.

The experiences that I have had after returning from the void and currently have continue to reinforce my belief that this reality is a dream. I am approaching my 18th year after exiting the void. It has taken this long for me to create and understanding of what had happened. I have survived those antagonists that participated in my re-indoctrination to this false reality and when I refused to accept it they attempted to place me in a permanent state of psychosis.

I now go out into the world and everything is viewed with a brand new perspective. Urban environments are an embodiment of the illusion of the dream world. The natural world reaches out and invites me take a closer look. Consciousness is constantly sending me information to aid in the expansion of my conscious interpretation. The progression has been slow, but now it is quickening its pace. Nothing can stop me now, not even death…

Next time, I’ll continue with the non-local aspects of this dream world and my experiences with those that have mastered consciousness within this dream realm called reality.

Want to support this crazy way of thinking? Buy my book, “The Prevention of Ascension” on Amazon, Smashwords, Apple and many other booksellers.