Do We Live In A Simulation? Chances Are About 50–50

By Anil Ananthaswamy | Nexus Newsfeed

It is not often that a comedian gives an astrophysicist goosebumps when discussing the laws of physics. But comic Chuck Nice managed to do just that in a recent episode of the podcast StarTalk. The show’s host Neil deGrasse Tyson had just explained the simulation argument—the idea that we could be virtual beings living in a computer simulation. If so, the simulation would most likely create perceptions of reality on demand rather than simulate all of the reality all the time—much like a video game optimized to render only the parts of a scene visible to a player. “Maybe that’s why we can’t travel faster than the speed of light because if we could, we’d be able to get to another galaxy,” said Nice, the show’s co-host, prompting Tyson to gleefully interrupt. “Before they can program it,” the astrophysicist said, delighting at the thought. “So the programmer put in that limit.”

Such conversations may seem flippant. But ever since Nick Bostrom of the University of Oxford wrote a seminal paper about the simulation argument in 2003, philosophers, physicists, technologists, and, yes, comedians have been grappling with the idea of our reality being a simulacrum. Some have tried to identify ways in which we can discern if we are simulated beings. Others have attempted to calculate the chance of us being virtual entities. Now a new analysis shows that the odds that we are living in base reality—meaning an existence that is not simulated—are pretty much even. But the study also demonstrates that if humans were to ever develop the ability to simulate conscious beings, the chances would overwhelmingly tilt in favor of us, too, being virtual denizens inside someone else’s computer. (A caveat to that conclusion is that there is little agreement about what the term “consciousness” means, let alone how one might go about simulating it.)

In 2003 Bostrom imagined a technologically adept civilization that possesses immense computing power and needs a fraction of that power to simulate new realities with conscious beings in them. Given this scenario, his simulation argument showed that at least one proposition in the following trilemma must be true: First, humans almost always go extinct before reaching the simulation-savvy stage. Second, even if humans make it to that stage, they are unlikely to be interested in simulating their own ancestral past. And third, the probability that we are living in a simulation is close to one.

Before Bostrom, the movie The Matrix had already done its part to popularize the notion of simulated realities. And the idea has deep roots in Western and Eastern philosophical traditions, from Plato’s cave allegory to Zhuang Zhou’s butterfly dream. More recently, Elon Musk gave further fuel to the concept that our reality is a simulation: “The odds that we are in base reality is one in billions,” he said at a 2016 conference.

“Musk is right if you assume [propositions] one and two of the trilemma are false,” says astronomer David Kipping of Columbia University. “How can you assume that?”

To get a better handle on Bostrom’s simulation argument, Kipping decided to resort to Bayesian reasoning. This type of analysis uses Bayes’s theorem,  named after Thomas Bayes, an 18th-century English statistician, and minister. The Bayesian analysis allows one to calculate the odds of something happening (called the “posterior” probability) by first making assumptions about the thing being analyzed (assigning it a “prior” probability).

Kipping began by turning the trilemma into a dilemma. He collapsed propositions one and two into a single statement because in both cases, the final outcome is that there are no simulations. Thus, the dilemma pits a physical hypothesis (there are no simulations) against the simulation hypothesis (there is a base reality—and there are simulations, too). “You just assign a prior probability to each of these models,” Kipping says. “We just assume the principle of indifference, which is the default assumption when you don’t have any data or leanings either way.”

So each hypothesis gets a prior probability of one half, much as if one were to flip a coin to decide a wager.

The next stage of the analysis required thinking about “parous” realities—those that can generate other realities—and “nulliparous” realities—those that cannot simulate offspring realities. If the physical hypothesis was true, then the probability that we were living in a nulliparous universe would be easy to calculate: it would be 100 percent. Kipping then showed that even in the simulation hypothesis, most of the simulated realities would be nulliparous. That is because as simulations spawn more simulations, the computing resources available to each subsequent generation dwindles to the point where the vast majority of realities will be those that do not have the computing power necessary to simulate offspring realities that are capable of hosting conscious beings.

Plug all these into a Bayesian formula, and out comes the answer: the posterior probability that we are living in base reality is almost the same as the posterior probability that we are a simulation—with the odds tilting in favor of base reality by just a smidgen.

These probabilities would change dramatically if humans created a simulation with conscious beings inside it because such an event would change the chances that we previously assigned to the physical hypothesis. “You can just exclude that [hypothesis] right off the bat. Then you are only left with the simulation hypothesis,” Kipping says. “The day we invent that technology, it flips the odds from a little bit better than 50–50 that we are real to almost certainly we are not real, according to these calculations. It’d be a very strange celebration of our genius that day.”

The upshot of Kipping’s analysis is that, given current evidence, Musk is wrong about the one-in-billions odds that he ascribes to us living in base reality. Bostrom agrees with the result—with some caveats. “This does not conflict with the simulation argument, which only asserts something about the disjunction,” the idea that one of the three propositions of the trilemma is true, he says.

But Bostrom takes issue with Kipping’s choice to assign equal prior probabilities to the physical and simulation hypothesis at the start of the analysis. “The invocation of the principle of indifference here is rather shaky,” he says. “One could equally well invoke it over my original three alternatives, which would then give them one-third chance each. Or one could carve up the possibility of space in some other manner and get any result one wishes.”

Such quibbles are valid because there is no evidence to back one claim over the others. That situation would change if we can find evidence of a simulation. So could you detect a glitch in the Matrix?

Houman Owhadi, an expert on computational mathematics at the California Institute of Technology, has thought about the question. “If the simulation has infinite computing power, there is no way you’re going to see that you’re living in virtual reality because it could compute whatever you want to the degree of realism you want,” he says. “If this thing can be detected, you have to start from the principle that [it has] limited computational resources.” Think again of video games, many of which rely on clever programming to minimize the computation required to construct a virtual world.

For Owhadi, the most promising way to look for potential paradoxes created by such computing shortcuts is through quantum physics experiments. Quantum systems can exist in a superposition of states, and this superposition is described by a mathematical abstraction called the wave function. In standard quantum mechanics, the act of observation causes this wave function to randomly collapse to one of many possible states. Physicists are divided over whether the process of collapse is something real or just reflects a change in our knowledge about the system. “If it is just a pure simulation, there is no collapse,” Owhadi says. “Everything is decided when you look at it. The rest is just simulation, like when you’re playing these video games.”

To this end, Owhadi and his colleagues have worked on five conceptual variations of the double-slit experiment, each designed to trip up a simulation. But he acknowledges that it is impossible to know, at this stage, if such experiments could work. “Those five experiments are just conjectures,” Owhadi says.

Zohreh Davoudi, a physicist at the University of Maryland, College Park, has also entertained the idea that a simulation with finite computing resources could reveal itself. Her work focuses on strong interactions, or the strong nuclear force—one of nature’s four fundamental forces. The equations describing strong interactions, which hold together quarks to form protons and neutrons, are so complex that they cannot be solved analytically. To understand strong interactions, physicists are forced to do numerical simulations. And unlike any putative super civilizations possessing limitless computing power, they must rely on shortcuts to make those simulations computationally viable—usually by considering spacetime to be discrete rather than continuous. The most advanced result researchers have managed to coax from this approach so far is the simulation of a single nucleus of helium that is composed of two protons and two neutrons.

“Naturally, you start to ask, if you simulated an atomic nucleus today, maybe in 10 years, we could do a larger nucleus; maybe in 20 or 30 years, we could do a molecule,” Davoudi says. “In 50 years, who knows, maybe you can do something the size of a few inches of matter. Maybe in 100 years or so, we can do the [human] brain.”

Davoudi thinks that classical computers will soon hit a wall, however. “In the next maybe 10 to 20 years, we will actually see the limits of our classical simulations of the physical systems,” she says. Thus, she is turning her sights to quantum computation, which relies on superpositions and other quantum effects to make tractable certain computational problems that would be impossible through classical approaches. “If quantum computing actually materializes, in the sense that it’s a large scale, reliable computing option for us, then we’re going to enter a completely different era of simulation,” Davoudi says. “I am starting to think about how to perform my simulations of strong interaction physics and atomic nuclei if I had a quantum computer that was viable.”

All of these factors have led Davoudi to speculate about the simulation hypothesis. If our reality is a simulation, then the simulator is likely also discretizing spacetime to save on computing resources (assuming, of course, that it is using the same mechanisms as our physicists for that simulation). Signatures of such discrete spacetime could potentially be seen in the directions high-energy cosmic rays arrive from: they would have a preferred direction in the sky because of the breaking of so-called rotational symmetry.

Telescopes “haven’t observed any deviation from that rotational invariance yet,” Davoudi says. And even if such an effect were to be seen, it would not constitute unequivocal evidence that we live in a simulation. Base reality itself could have similar properties.

Kipping, despite his own study, worries that further work on the simulation hypothesis is on thin ice. “It’s arguably not testable as to whether we live in a simulation or not,” he says. “If it’s not falsifiable, then how can you claim it’s really science?”

For him, there is a more obvious answer: Occam’s razor, which says that in the absence of other evidence, the simplest explanation is more likely to be correct. The simulation hypothesis is elaborate, presuming realities nested upon realities, as well as simulated entities that can never tell that they are inside a simulation. “Because it is such an overly complicated, elaborate model in the first place, by Occam’s razor, it really should be disfavored, compared to the simple natural explanation,” Kipping says.

Maybe we are living in base reality after all — The Matrix, Musk, and weird quantum physics notwithstanding.

Video can be accessed at the source link below

This article was first published at ScientificAmerican.com. ©ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.

Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs. Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health, and technology news.

By Anil Ananthaswamy

I’m a consultant for the New Scientist magazine and author of The Man Who Wasn’t There (Dutton, Penguin Random House, USA) and The Edge of Physics (Houghton Mifflin-Harcourt, 2010). I’m also a guest editor at the University of Santa Cruz at California’s science writing program and organizer of the annual science journalism workshop at the National Centre for Biological Sciences in Bangalore, India.




(Source: livescience.com; October 14, 2020; https://tinyurl.com/yy6bupfg)

Hyper-Realistic Robot Dolphins May Soon End Captivity at Theme Parks and Aquariums For Good

By | TheMindUnleashed.com

A life-sized robotic dolphin could help finally put an end to animal captivity in marine parks and aquariums for good by replacing real-life animals.

U.S.-based animatronics company Edge Innovations has designed a revolutionary mechanical mammal that appears nearly as playful as the real thing, and the company hopes that the robot will soon be used in aquatic theme parks and Hollywood films in place of actual living animals.

So far, the robot can nod, swim in aquariums, and interact closely with humans. Developers claim that the mechanical creature is nearly identical to the cetacean, and could even coexist with robotic versions of predators like great white sharks or even the massive reptiles that Jurassic-era seas teemed with millions of years ago.

However, the huge difference here is that despite the large price tag of $26 million, this robotic dolphin is a truly cruelty-free alternative to the capture and confinement of live animals for the sake of entertainment at amusement parks and aquatic zoos – and it will likely prove cheaper than the real thing, too.

The robot dolphin weighs in at 550 pounds and has medical-grade silicone skin, and offers a viable alternative to the once-profitable industry of capturing, breeding, and training live animals.

“It’s surprising there are 3,000 dolphins currently in captivity to generate several billion dollars just for dolphin experiences,” Edge Industry CEO and founder Walt Conti told Reuters.

“There’s obviously an appetite to love and learn about dolphins and so we want to use that appetite and offer different ways to fall in love with the dolphin.”

In recent decades, animal rights activists and casual animal lovers alike have turned their back on marine parks that are seen as subjecting dolphins and other intelligent, self-aware creatures to inhumane acts just for the sake of human amusement.

Feature films like Free Willy (1993) and the documentary Blackfish (2013) have helped educate viewers about the miserable living conditions faced by orcas and other cetaceans that have been deprived of their natural life and thrust into small enclosures at amusement parks like SeaWorld.

Increased outrage over the plight of cetaceans, or aquatic mammals, have led to countries like Canada and around 20 European countries to effectively placing a ban on whales, dolphins, and porpoises being bred, imported and exported, captured, or held in captivity for entertainment purposes.

Edge Industry hopes that with its extensive experience developing animatronics for major Hollywood features – including Free Willy, Deep Blue Sea, The Abyss, and other films – the robotic replacement can soon win over those who prefer a humane alternative to view creatures who naturally belong in the wild.

The company has worked closely with marine biologists to replicate the physiology of dolphins and nail their natural movements.

“Everyone wants to know if using an animatronic dolphin is different from using a real dolphin. The truth is in many ways they’re the same,” Holzberg said.

“If you want to design a show that uses real dolphins you have to capture real dolphins, train them and get them to do that show,” he continued. “With creating robots you have to do exactly the same thing. The difference is you don’t have to have breeding programs worry about safety with human beings.”

Edge Industry has seen demand for its creations decrease as major film studios opted for computer-generated images rather than practical effects and animatronics. However, the company is now focusing on developing attractions for theme parks, and its robot dolphins will soon roll out at marine parks being built in China.

“The idea of this pilot is really to create a Sesame Street underwater,” Holzberg said. “Those characters taught a generation how to feel about different kinds of aspects of humankind in ways that hadn’t been imagined before. And that’s what we dream of with this project.”

Animal rights activists have greeted this new development that could spell an end to animal captivity at marine theme parks.

“There is an end in sight to cruel ‘swim with dolphins’ programs, for which young dolphins are traumatically abducted from their ocean homes and frantic mothers, sometimes illegally,” said Katherine Sullivan of PETA.

Engineer Creates Fully Functional ‘Star Wars’ Lightsaber That Cuts Through Steel

By | TheMindUnleashed.com 

An engineer and YouTuber based in Canada has created a fully functional – and likely very deadly – lightsaber, turning the concept introduced over four decades ago by the first Star Wars film into a reality.

While numerous Star Wars fanatics have tried their hand at creating an actual working version of the Jedi weapon, these “weapons” have largely been combinations of non-retractable metal tubing and light or glorified versions of the retractable plastic toy lightsabers.

However, for James Hobson – known to his YouTube fans as “The Hacksmith” – such prop-like devices ignore the essential nature of the lightsaber as a fixed-length laser that both glows and can melt through metal.

And because Hobson understands the basic principles of laser engineering, he was able to create his own version of the glowing blade wielded by the Jedi and described in the 1977 film as “An elegant weapon – for a more civilized age.”

In a new video for Hacksmith Industries’ “Make It Real” series, Hobson demonstrates how he managed to transform a concept previously depicted through Hollywood special effects and CGI into a working device.

The video, which dropped on Thursday, has since gone viral and racked up over 12 million views.

The replica lightsaber relies on a portable backpack connected to a hilt designed to appear similar to those in the films.

The hilt pumps out a constant stream of propane gas which, when mixed with oxygen, creates a beam-like blast of plasma flame that looks similar to the light from the sabers and burns at over 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit – meaning that it can make short work of thick pieces of metal and can even slice through steel.

Hobson also showed how a range of different salts can be placed into the plasma stream to alter the color of the beam. For example, boric acid can make the beaming green, while sodium chloride (table salt) can turn it yellow. Calcium chloride will produce an amber color, while strontium chloride will turn the beam red.

“Even with all of our new equipment and capabilities, we’re still bound by the laws of thermodynamics,” the Hacksmith explains in the video.

“Well, theories say that plasma is best held in a beam by a magnetic field, which, scientifically, checks out,” he continues. “The issue is producing a strong enough electromagnetic field to contain a blade, well the lightsaber would have to be quite literally built inside a box coated in electromagnets, which turns it into a kind of useless science project.”

The outcome of Hobson’s project is a retractable lightsaber replica that glows “so bright … this actually hurts to look at,” Hobson said.

If you can’t resist owning the epic armament of Jedi knights and Sith lords who engaged in bitter struggles “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away,” the price tag also matches its intense heat: The laminar nozzle alone cost about $4,000.

“What we’ve made so far are some of the closest representations of lightsabers using real-life technologies,” Hobson said.

“They look like a lightsaber, they sound like a lightsaber, and at temperatures of over 3000F, they actually cut stuff like a lightsaber.”

The US Army Is Trialing Augmented Reality Goggles For Combat Dogs

dog goggles augmented reality

By Mayukh Saha | Truth Theory

Command Sight is working with the US Army to create custom made augmented reality goggles for combat dogs. These goggles will come in handy to send orders to the dogs from a distance. Command Sight is managed by the US Army Research Laboratory.

Combat dogs are trained to scout for hazardous devices and explosives. But they need instructions to get started. With the AR goggles for combat dogs, their handlers can give them instructions from a distance. Currently, hand gestures and laser pointers are used by soldiers to guide the combat dogs. Both these techniques require the handler to be near the dogs. The Army said if augmented reality goggles for combat dogs are widely used, it would reduce the risks of soldiers going near explosives.

goggles for combat dogs

READ ABOUT THE FUTURE OF AR: Witness The Potentially Nightmarish Future of Augmented Reality


The goggles for combat dogs have a visual indicator that the dogs need to be trained to follow. The indicator will guide them to the specific spot. The dog’s vision will be visible to the handler via remote video feed.

Dr. Stephen Lee said: “AR will be used to provide dogs with commands and cues; it’s not for the dog to interact with it like a human does.” The senior scientist with the Army Research Laboratory further explained how the military working dog community is rather happy and excited about these AR goggles.


Each of the goggles will be custom made for each service dog. The indicator within the goggles will guide them and allow them to react to the visual cues.

Military dogs are used to wearing goggles as protection against bad weather or for aerial drops. Now the augmented reality system will be brand new for them.

goggles for combat dogs

READ ABOUT REAL-LIFE AR: Real Life Experiences In The Age Of Virtual Reality

Dr. AJ Peper, the founder of Command Sight said that the project was in its beginning stages, but the initial results are “extremely promising.” His own Rottweiler, Mater, has been helping out a lot with the research.

Command Sight has received extra funding after the initial testing to make the goggles for combat dogs wireless. The current ones are leashed, and that might become a problem in certain situations.

Images in Article: COMMAND SIGHT / US ARMY

Despite Increasing Risks and Opposition, SpaceX Launched 60 More Satellites – Enough to Offer Broadband

earth satellites

By B.N. Frank | Activist Post

SpaceX satellite and rocket explosions can and have happened. Last month, the company delayed a satellite fleet launch due to rocket “recovery issue” without explaining what that meant. Regardless, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continues to approve tens of thousands of satellites and similar vehicles from SpaceX and other companies to provide internet coverage – including unsafe 5G – from space (see 123456789, 10, 111213) DESPITE increasing warnings, opposition, accidents and almost accidents.

The White House recently issued a directive that requires manufacturers to better monitor and safeguard satellites and similar vehicles. Will it make much difference? Who knows! What we do know is that SpaceX has launched 60 additional satellites even though internet coverage CAN be provided in ways that are less dangerous – like hardwired connections – and Americans HAVE ALREADY PAID to have it installed more safely anyway (see 12).

From ArsTechnica:

SpaceX has launched enough satellites for Starlink’s upcoming public beta

“Fairly wide public beta” to come after latest satellites reach target position.

SpaceX’s Starlink broadband has been available in a limited beta for the past few months, and SpaceX has now launched enough satellites for a public beta that will be available to more customers. However, the newly launched satellites aren’t in position yet, and SpaceX hasn’t revealed an exact availability date.

After yesterday’s launch of 60 Starlink satellites, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk wrote on Twitter that “[o]nce these satellites reach their target position, we will be able to roll out a fairly wide public beta in northern US & hopefully southern Canada. Other countries to follow as soon as we receive regulatory approval.”

Musk did not say when the satellites will reach their target position. SpaceX has over 700 satellites in orbit after yesterday’s launch.

Read full article

The FCC is supposed to protect the public from the telecom industry. Their failure to do so pre-dates the Trump administration. Lawsuits have been filed against the agency for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation as well as 5G deployment on the ground (see 123456) and in space.

Last year, the World Health Organization predicted that high levels of Electromagnetic Radiation exposure (aka “Electrosmog”) could lead to health issues in a significant percentage of the population. A few months ago people worldwide reported experiencing health issues after new satellites were launched. Of course, their health issues may not be from these additional satellites. Since 2018, there have also been reports of people and animals have been experiencing symptoms and illnesses after 5G was installed (see 1234). Then again, other installed sources of wireless – not just 5G – are emitting harmful radiation as well.

Some people, animals, and plants will obviously tolerate exposure to Electrosmog better than others. The same can be said of all toxins. This still doesn’t make any of this okay. It’s also happening on Trump’s watch. Tick tock.

Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology. For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:


ESO Telescope Spots Galaxies Trapped In The Web of a Supermassive Black Hole

Source: ESO | ScienceDaily

With the help of ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT), astronomers have found six galaxies lying around a supermassive black hole when the Universe was less than a billion years old. This is the first time such a close grouping has been seen so soon after the Big Bang and the finding helps us better understand how supermassive black holes, one of which exists at the center of our Milky Way, formed and grew to their enormous sizes so quickly. It supports the theory that black holes can grow rapidly within large, web-like structures that contain plenty of gas to fuel them.

“This research was mainly driven by the desire to understand some of the most challenging astronomical objects — supermassive black holes in the early Universe. These are extreme systems and to date, we have had no good explanation for their existence,” said Marco Mignoli, an astronomer at the National Institute for Astrophysics (INAF) in Bologna, Italy, and lead author of the new research published today in Astronomy & Astrophysics.

The new observations with ESO’s VLT revealed several galaxies surrounding a supermassive black hole, all lying in a cosmic “spider’s web” of gas extending to over 300 times the size of the Milky Way. “The cosmic web filaments are like spider’s web threads,” explains Mignoli. “The galaxies stand and grow where the filaments cross, and streams of gas — available to fuel both the galaxies and the central supermassive black hole — can flow along the filaments.”

The light from this large web-like structure, with its black hole of one billion solar masses, has traveled to us from a time when the Universe was only 0.9 billion years old. “Our work has placed an important piece in the largely incomplete puzzle that is the formation and growth of such extreme, yet relatively abundant, objects so quickly after the Big Bang,” says co-author Roberto Gilli, also an astronomer at INAF in Bologna, referring to supermassive black holes.

The very first black holes, thought to have formed from the collapse of the first stars, must have grown very fast to reach masses of a billion suns within the first 0.9 billion years of the Universe’s life. But astronomers have struggled to explain how sufficiently large amounts of “black hole fuel” could have been available to enable these objects to grow to such enormous sizes in such a short time. The new-found structure offers a likely explanation: the “spider’s web” and the galaxies within it contain enough gas to provide the fuel that the central black hole needs to quickly become a supermassive giant.

But how did such large web-like structures form in the first place? Astronomers think giant halos of mysterious dark matter are key. These large regions of invisible matter are thought to attract huge amounts of gas in the early Universe; together, the gas and the invisible dark matter form the web-like structures where galaxies and black holes can evolve.

“Our finding lends support to the idea that the most distant and massive black holes form and grow within massive dark matter halos in large-scale structures, and that the absence of earlier detections of such structures was likely due to observational limitations,” says Colin Norman of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, US, also a co-author on the study.

The galaxies now detected are some of the faintest that current telescopes can observe. This discovery required observations over several hours using the largest optical telescopes available, including ESO’s VLT. Using the MUSE and FORS2 instruments on the VLT at ESO’s Paranal Observatory in the Chilean Atacama Desert, the team confirmed the link between four of the six galaxies and the black hole. “We believe we have just seen the tip of the iceberg, and that the few galaxies discovered so far around this supermassive black hole are only the brightest ones,” said co-author Barbara Balmaverde, an astronomer at INAF in Torino, Italy.

These results contribute to our understanding of how supermassive black holes and large cosmic structures formed and evolved. ESO’s Extremely Large Telescope, currently under construction in Chile, will be able to build on this research by observing many fainter galaxies around massive black holes in the early Universe using its powerful instruments.

More information

This research was presented in the paper “Web of the giant: Spectroscopic confirmation of a large-scale structure around the z = 6.31 quasar SDSS J1030+0524” to appear in Astronomy & Astrophysics.

The team is composed of M. Mignoli (INAF, Bologna, Italy), R. Gilli (INAF, Bologna, Italy), R. Decarli (INAF, Bologna, Italy), E. Vanzella (INAF, Bologna, Italy), B. Balmaverde (INAF, Pino Torinese, Italy), N. Cappelluti (Department of Physics, University of Miami, Florida, USA), L. Cassarà (INAF, Milano, Italy), A. Comastri (INAF, Bologna, Italy), F. Cusano (INAF, Bologna, Italy), K. Iwasawa (ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona & ICREA, Barcelona, Spain), S. Marchesi (INAF, Bologna, Italy), I. Prandoni (INAF, Istituto di Radioastronomia, Bologna, Italy), C. Vignali (Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Italy & INAF, Bologna, Italy), F. Vito (Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy), G. Zamorani (INAF, Bologna, Italy), M. Chiaberge (Space Telescope Science Institute, Maryland, USA), C. Norman (Space Telescope Science Institute & Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, USA).

Story Source:

Materials provided by ESONote: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:

  1. Marco Mignoli, Roberto Gilli, Roberto Decarli, Eros Vanzella, Barbara Balmaverde, Nico Cappelluti, Letizia P. Cassarà, Andrea Comastri, Felice Cusano, Kazushi Iwasawa, Stefano Marchesi, Isabella Prandoni, Cristian Vignali, Fabio Vito, Giovanni Zamorani, Marco Chiaberge, Colin Norman. Web of the giant: Spectroscopic confirmation of a large-scale structure around the z = 6.31 quasar SDSS J1030+0524Astronomy & Astrophysics, 2020; 642: L1 DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039045

Physicists Prove Time Travel Is Theoretically ‘Possible,’ But Changing the Past Is Not

By Elias Marat | TheMindUnleashed.com

(TMU) – Researchers at the University of Queensland, Australia, claim to have proven that time travel is theoretically possible according to the laws of physics.

However, we needn’t fear that time-travelers would somehow travel to the past and alter the present-day, as is the case in myriad science fiction scenarios – instead, the future would remain the same, according to the researchers’ calculations.

“Events readjust around anything that could cause a paradox, so the paradox does not happen,” study author Germain Tobar told IFLScience.

His study, which was published in the journal Classical and Quantum Gravity, details how according to the rules laid down by theoretical physics, any changes impacting the past would be subsequently corrected by the events that followed. So don’t expect to succeed in drastically altering history, even if you do go back in time on a mission to kill Hitler in his crib.

Physicists used mathematical modeling to reconcile classic dynamics with Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The contradiction between the two systems is a longtime flaw in time travel concepts, known as the grandfather paradox.

“As physicists, we want to understand the universe’s most basic, underlying laws and for years I’ve puzzled on how the science of dynamics can square with Einstein’s predictions,” said Tobar. “Is time travel mathematically possible?”

According to classical dynamics, any attempt by a time traveler to go back in time and, say, kill their grandfather, would result in the time traveler never coming into existence in the first place.

Within Einstein’s theoretical framework, however, a person could go back in time to kill their grandfather. This is because he calculated that an object in our universe could travel through both time and space in a circular direction before ultimately ending up where it had been before – a path known as the closed time-like curve.

Tobar and his colleagues used the ongoing coronavirus pandemic as their basis for the study and imagined if a time traveler had gone back to prevent “patient zero” from being infected.

“In the coronavirus patient zero examples, you might try and stop patient zero from becoming infected, but in doing so you would catch the virus and become patient zero, or someone else would,” Tobar explained.

“No matter what you did, the salient events would just recalibrate around you,” he continued. “This would mean that – no matter your actions – the pandemic would occur, giving your younger self the motivation to go back and stop it. Try as you might create a paradox, the events will always adjust themselves to avoid any inconsistency.”

“The range of mathematical processes we discovered show that time travel with free will is logically possible in our universe without any paradox,” Tobar added.

In other words, any attempt to kill your grandfather would mean that something or someone would intervene to prevent this from happening – or, at the very least, your mother would already be a fetus in your grandmother’s womb by the time he did perish.

Dr. Fabio Costa, the University of Queensland physicist who supervised the project, noted: “The math checks out – and the results are the stuff of science fiction.”

Extraordinary Children Who Can Do ‘Impossible’ Things: A Documented Reality

By Arjun Walia | Nexus Newsfeed

In Brief

  • The Facts:A document archived in the CIA’s electronic reading room written by a University Professor details the reality of children, and adults, who have gifted abilities in the area of parapsychology.
  • Reflect On:Why has this kind of phenomena been ridiculed in the mainstream, yet vigorously and secretively studied at the highest levels of government?

Cassandra Vieten, Ph.D. and current President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), which was founded by astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, could not have put it any better. She said, “There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field (science) will be tarnished by studying the phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism, and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seems more important than encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing.”

The statement above is true, for years discoveries have been rejected simply because they are big-time paradigm busters. No matter how much truth, validity, and scientific backing they have, the simple fact that they conflict with long-held belief systems is enough to brush them off. It’s great to see this changing because it’s important to expand human consciousness, which is done so by pushing the boundaries of what we think we know and discovering new concepts of our reality that we once thought held no validity, but actually do.

How much scientific validity do topics like psychokinesis, clairvoyance, telepathy, and remote viewing (all fit under the umbrella of parapsychology) have? Here is a great quote from Dr. Jessica Utts, the Chair of the Department of Statistics at the University of California, Irvine, and a professor there since 2008.

“What convinced me was just the evidence, the accumulating evidence as I worked in this field and I got to see more and more of the evidence. I visited the laboratories, even beyond where I was working to see what they were doing and I could see that they had really tight controls…And so I got convinced by the good science that I saw being done. And in fact, I will say as a statistician I’ve consulted in a lot of different areas of science; the methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked.”  (source)

China’s Psychic Children

Are there psychic children in China? It’s hard to believe that there are not after one dive into the documentation that’s been made available through the long process of declassification, or by Freedom of Information Act (FIOA) requests. One can simply examine the science of parapsychology alone and come to the conclusion that yes, something significant is going on here when it comes to the phenomena within the realm of parapsychology.

Not only is this type of phenomenon being reported today, but it’s been throughout history and across many cultures, this is evident in ancient literature, from the Vedic texts and the yoga sutras to Jesus, Moses, Milarepa, Mohammed, and more. Again, modern-day evidence is suggesting that these abilities are much more than folklore.

One interesting article/document I came across is titled “China’s Psychic Savants.” I accessed it from the CIA’s electronic reading room. It’s a document that was written by Marcel Truzzi, a former professor at Eastern Michigan University and founding co-chairman of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), and a founder of the Society for Scientific Exploration.

The introduction provides a good background of the lore from China regarding this phenomenon,

Eleven-year-old Tang Yu and his friend Chen Xioming were on their way home from school in the remote mountain village of Dazhu County when they began to wrestle. Tang brushed against Chen’s coat pocket, the story goes and had the sudden vision of two Chinese symbols. He described the vivid symbols to Chen, who pulled a package of Flying Wild Goose cigarettes from his pocket. The label on the side of the package, the boys reported, consisted of the two symbols Tan Yu had “seen.”

Tang Yu was reluctant to share his discovery with Tang Keming, his fifty-year-old peasant father. He knew his claim would sound like a lie. Instead, he began to play guessing games with the villagers. He asked them to write random characters on pieces of paper, crumple the paper into balls, and let him hold each ball in turn next to his ear. Tang then guessed the message within, his guesses, it was said, always proved right. Word of the boy spread beyond his small town to all the Sichuan province in central China.

Soon the region’s science commission and its bureau of education and culture had asked to examine Tang, and researchers there confirmed his ability to identify words and colors on small wads of paper held to his ear. News reporters and awe-struck officials of the Sichuan Provincial Party Committee quickly backed those results, and on March 11, 1979, this remarkable tale was published in Sichuan Daily.

Truzzi goes on,

Reports began coming in about children with powers of telepathy, clairvoyance, X-ray vision, and psychokinesis. The typical child was between the ages of nine and fourteen, but a few were as young as four or as old as twenty-five; and it was estimated by Feng Hua, a traditional Chinese physician, that there were about 2,000 such gifted children within the Chinese population of 1 billion.

By early 1980 these remarkable children had made their way to the pages of China’s prestigious Nature Journal. And that February the surge of interest prompted Nature Journal to sponsor a huge conference – the First Science Symposium on the Extraordinary Function of the Human Body – for participants from more than 20 colleges and medical schools. The proceedings were filmed by the Shanghai Science and Education Studio, and the film, called Do You Believe It? was shown over national television to millions of Chinese.

He then goes on to describe a number of cases and examples, it’s quite interesting, but there are many to choose from beyond this specific document that provides great examples. The facts Truzzi write about here were also outlined in a declassified US Air Force report on teleportation, which was made available through the Federation of American Scientists. That document also touches upon China’s psychic children, mentioning, in this case, the ones that were able to teleport full objects from one location to another without touching them.

Another one, titled “Research into Paranormal Ability To Break Through Spatial Barriers”  touches upon the same thing, and also provides multiple examples of children and people being video tapped and documented, under double-blind conditions, being able to do the same thing. This particular document, which was declassified through a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA), outlines specific people with very special abilities and how they’ve been studied by thousands of scientists and governments around the world for a very long time.

Pretty intriguing, isn’t it?

The Takeaway

It’s very interesting that studies regarding parapsychological phenomenon have been conducted at the highest levels of government, particularly within the defense department of multiple countries, with successful results. A great example from the United States was the remote viewing program, remote viewing refers to the ability to perceive a remote location other than the one the individual is located in, regardless of distance.

The success of this program is  outlined in a statement made by Dr. Hal Puthoff from a paper published after the program’s declassification in 1995:

“To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods, and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the [remote viewing] phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise. . . . The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions.” (source)(source)

Parapsychology is truly a consciousness-expanding field that can really open up our minds to aspects of our reality that have, and continue to go largely ignored. There is much more to us as human beings than we’ve been made to believe, and if we stop, think, and do some research, it’s not hard to see how something significant has been overlooked.

A Study Shows That Older People Became Younger, With ‘Meaningful’ Mental and Physical Improvement Since 1990

Finnish research has discovered the functional ability of older people is much better today, compared to people of the same age three decades ago.

This finding was observed in a study conducted at the Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences at the University of Jyväskylä.

The study compared the physical and cognitive performance of Finnish people between the ages of 75 and 80 nowadays with those of people the same age in the 1990s.

“Performance-based measurements describe how older people manage in their daily life, and at the same time, the measurements reflect one’s functional age,” says the principal investigator of the study, Professor Taina Rantanen, in a statement.

Among men and women between the ages of 75 and 80, muscle strength, walking speed, reaction speed, verbal fluency, reasoning, and working memory are nowadays significantly better than they were in people of the same age born earlier. In lung function tests, however, differences between cohorts were not observed.

“Higher physical activity and increased body size explained the better walking speed and muscle strength among the later-born cohort,” says doctoral student Kaisa Koivunen, “whereas the most important underlying factor behind the cohort differences in cognitive performance was longer education.”

Postdoctoral researcher Matti Munukka continues, “The cohort of 75- and 80-year-olds born later have grown up and lived in a different world than did their counterparts born three decades ago. There have been many favorable changes.


Dark Matter Is Even Stranger Than We Thought | SciShow News

Video Source: SciShow Space

Scientists can see how dark matter is distributed based on how its gravity affects light, but when astronomers compared recent data from the Hubble Space Telescope and the Very Large Telescope to current models, something didn’t add up. Does this mean our current assumptions about dark matter physics are wrong?

The Real Star Trek Technology of Today… (from Science Fiction to Fact)


By UAMN TV | Nexus Newsfeed

Many of us would have grown up watching science fiction TV shows like Star Trek, or even the Star Wars movies. Often dreaming about the incredible technology and what it would be like to live in a time of such creation. Well… look no further.. As we go about our daily lives, scientists from around the world are building, manufacturing and creating things that we would consider science fiction. The reality of Star Trek and Star Wars is now upon us as found in super technology.

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

This Physicist Is Arguing the Entire Universe May Be One Giant Neural Network

By Jake Anderson | TheMindUnleashed.com

(TMU) – Physics professor Vitaly Vanchurin has an idea that he openly admits is “crazy.” But, crazy or not, he thinks it just might be true.

His new paper posits an incredible and controversial hypothesis: “the entire universe on its most fundamental level is a neural network.”

Fundamentally, he argues, the idea can be considered a “theory of everything,” a way to reconcile the two most successful models of the physical universe – general relativity (the big stuff) and quantum mechanics (the small stuff) – into a unified framework.

Up until this point, this elusive theory of quantum gravity has eluded cosmologists and physicists.

Along with the conundrums of dark energy and dark matter, the friction between the relativistic and quantum worlds of science has contributed a steadily rising anxiety to what some scientists believe is a full-blown crisis in cosmology.

How can there be one theory that works perfectly for the macroscopic world and one theory that works perfectly for the microscopic world and yet the two theories contradict each other and cannot both be true as currently constructed?

This is where Professor Vanchurin, who teaches physics at the University of Minnesota Duluth, says his idea of the universe as a neural network may be able to better explain a more fundamental reality from which other properties and forces emerge.

In an interview with Futurism, Vanchurin discusses the crisis in cosmology and then describes how his idea contributes to a resolution:

“One might argue that there are not two, but three phenomena that need to be unified: quantum mechanics, general relativity, and observers. 99% of physicists would tell you that quantum mechanics is the main one and everything else should somehow emerge from it, but nobody knows exactly how that can be done. In this paper, I consider another possibility that a microscopic neural network is a fundamental structure and everything else, i.e. quantum mechanics, general relativity, and macroscopic observers, emerges from it.”

Many scientists dismiss the idea on its face, claiming it smacks too much of biocentrism and theories like John Wheeler’s “participatory universe,” in which consciousness establishes the physical reality of the universe.

But Vanchurin says his theory should be easy to disprove and thus has value as an experimental model.

“We are not just saying that the artificial neural networks can be useful for analyzing physical systems or for discovering physical laws, we are saying that this is how the world around us actually works,” he writes in a section of his paper. “With this respect, it could be considered as a proposal for the theory of everything, and as such, it should be easy to prove it wrong.”

His interviewer point blank asks him if this means we are living in a simulation and Vanchurin offers an interesting answer:

“No, we live in a neural network, but we might never know the difference.”

Scientists have been marveling over the similarities between the cosmic web and neurons in the brain for years. Some argue there’s an eeriness in how the self-similar structure of the universe is so similar to the brain’s neural networks.

In 2017, an astrophysicist and neuroscientist teamed up to write a paper about this phenomenon, which essentially argues that careful, comprehensive analysis seems to suggest that galaxy clusters do mirror the structure and behavior of neuron networks.

Our “Reality” Isn’t “Physical.” It’s “Spiritual, Mental & Immaterial” Says Renowned Physicist

By | Collective Evolution

In Brief

  • The Facts:Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University Richard Conn Henry published a paper in the journal Nature titled “The Mental Universe” emphasizing how metaphysics plays a central role in understanding the nature of our reality.
  • Reflect On:Are we metaphysical beings? What impact does our collective consciousness have on our physical material reality and the overall human experience? Is our consciousness manipulated in any way today?

What Happened: In 2005, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University Richard Conn Henry published a paper in the journal Nature titled “The Mental Universe.” In it, he writes the following:

A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction.

Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote: “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter… The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.

The underlying idea he’s getting across with this statement is that in some way shape or form, consciousness is directly intertwined with what we perceive to be our physical material world and that the nature of reality is made up of non-physical “stuff.”

He goes on to emphasize how, in the modern-day scientific world, “there have been serious attempts to preserve a material world – but they produce no new physics, and serve only to preserve an illusion.” This illusion he refers to again is the idea that the makeup of our reality is strictly and fundamental physics.”

Physicists shy from the truth because the truth is so alien to everyday physics. A common way to evade the mental Universe is to invoke ‘decoherence’ — the notion that ‘the physical environment’ is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind.

Nikola Tesla is often attributed with saying, “The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” Many scientists, I would say the majority of scientists in this field all feel the same way, yet there is still a tremendous lack of attention paid to immaterial science in the mainstream academic world. This is odd given the fact that at the highest levels of government, usually with the Department of Defense, a non-physical phenomenon like telepathy, clairvoyance, remote viewing, precognition, and more are all and have been heavily studied and verified for a very long time. These phenomena are within the realm of parapsychology, which is directly intertwined with quantum physics.

What convinced me was just the evidence, the accumulating evidence as I worked in this field and I got to see more and more of the evidence. I visited the laboratories, even beyond where I was working to see what they were doing and I could see that they had really tight controls…and so I got convinced by the good science that I saw being done. And in fact I will say as a statistician I’ve consulted in a lot of different areas of science; the methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked. – Dr. Jessica Utts, the Chair of the Department of Statistics at the University of California, Irvine and a professor there since 2008. (source)

A paper published in Frontiers of Neuroscience Emphasizes:

Research on parapsychological phenomena (psi) is being carried out in various accredited universities and research centers throughout the world by academics in different disciplines trained in the scientific method (e.g., circa 80 Ph.D.s have been awarded in psi-related topics in the UK in recent years). This research has continued for over a century despite the taboo against investigating the topic, almost complete lack of funding, and professional and personal attacks (Cardeña, ). The Parapsychological Association has been an affiliate of the AAAS since 1969, and more than 20 Nobel prizewinners and many other eminent scientists have supported the study of psi or even conducted research themselves (Cardeña, ).

So why is there such strong resistance? Could it simply be the implications with regards to the findings within these realms are too great? When physics changes, so do global paradigms and the perceptions people have of our world. Some discoveries literally have the ability to shatter the way we perceive our modern-day world, and perhaps change the way we live and even have us question the way we live.

Cassandra Vieten, Ph.D. and President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, an organization founded by Apollo 14’s Dr. Edgar Mitchell to study consciousness and its relationship with the nature of our reality, offers a thoughtful explanation:

There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field will be tarnished by studying a phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seem more important that encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing. (source)

Take, for example, prominent physicist Lord Kelvin, who stated in the year 1900 that, “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.” It wasn’t long after this statement when Einstein published his paper on special relativity. Einstein’s theories challenged the accepted framework of knowledge at the time and forced the scientific community to open up to an alternate view of reality.


New Quantum Paradox Throws The Foundations of Observed Reality Into Question

By | Live Science

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Perhaps not, some say.

And if someone is there to hear it? If you think that means it obviously did make a sound, you might need to revise that opinion.

We have found a new paradox in quantum mechanics — one of our two most fundamental scientific theories, together with Einstein’s theory of relativity — that throws doubt on some common-sense ideas about physical reality.

Quantum mechanics vs. common sense

Take a look at these three statements:

  • When someone observes an event happening, it really happened.
  • It is possible to make free choices, or at least, statistically random choices.
  • A choice made in one place can’t instantly affect a distant event. (Physicists call this “locality”.)

These are all intuitive ideas and widely believed even by physicists. But our research, published in Nature Physics, shows they cannot all be true — or quantum mechanics itself must break down at some level.

This is the strongest result yet in a long series of discoveries in quantum mechanics that have upended our ideas about reality. To understand why it’s so important, let’s look at this history.

The battle for reality

Quantum mechanics works extremely well to describe the behavior of tiny objects, such as atoms or particles of light (photons). But that behavior is … very odd.

In many cases, quantum theory doesn’t give definite answers to questions such as “where is this particle right now?” Instead, it only provides probabilities for where the particle might be found when it is observed.

For Niels Bohr, one of the founders of the theory a century ago, that’s not because we lack information, but because physical properties like “position” don’t actually exist until they are measured.

And what’s more, because some properties of a particle can’t be perfectly observed simultaneously — such as position and velocity — they can’t be real simultaneously.

No less a figure than Albert Einstein found this idea untenable. In a 1935 article with fellow theorists Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen, he argued there must be more to reality than what quantum mechanics could describe.

The article considered a pair of distant particles in a special state now known as an “entangled” state. When the same property (say, position or velocity) is measured on both entangled particles, the result will be random — but there will be a correlation between the results from each particle.

For example, an observer measuring the position of the first particle could perfectly predict the result of measuring the position of the distant one, without even touching it. Or the observer could choose to predict the velocity instead. This had a natural explanation, they argued, if both properties existed before being measured, contrary to Bohr’s interpretation.

However, in 1964 Northern Irish physicist John Bell found Einstein’s argument broke down if you carried out a more complicated combination of different measurements on the two particles.

Bell showed that if the two observers randomly and independently choose between measuring one or another property of their particles, like position or velocity, the average results cannot be explained in any theory where both position and velocity were pre-existing local properties.

That sounds incredible, but experiments have now conclusively demonstrated Bell’s correlations do occur. For many physicists, this is evidence that Bohr was right: physical properties don’t exist until they are measured.

But that raises the crucial question: what is so special about a “measurement”?

The observer observed

In 1961, the Hungarian-American theoretical physicist Eugene Wigner devised a thought experiment to show what’s so tricky about the idea of measurement.

He considered a situation in which his friend goes into a tightly sealed lab and performs a measurement on a quantum particle — its position, say.

However, Wigner noticed that if he applied the equations of quantum mechanics to describe this situation from the outside, the result was quite different. Instead of the friend’s measurement making the particle’s position real, from Wigner’s perspective the friend becomes entangled with the particle and infected with the uncertainty that surrounds it.

This is similar to Schrödinger’s famous cat, a thought experiment in which the fate of a cat in a box becomes entangled with a random quantum event.

For Wigner, this was an absurd conclusion. Instead, he believed that once the consciousness of an observer becomes involved, the entanglement would “collapse” to make the friend’s observation definite.


Real Star Wars Technology | Tesla’s Secret Experiments


Video Source: Matrix Wisdom Reloaded

Strange and exotic experiments have been going on for much longer than you might think. Secret technology and tests have been taking place since the 1800s. Tesla himself had managed to not only construct technology that looked to be straight out of a modern-day sci-fi movie, but they actually worked as well. Nikola Tesla’s machines were highly guarded and could have changed the face of the Earth as we know it.