1

Want to jump to another reality? Maybe you already have!

Have you ever wished you could jump into another world–another reality?  Maybe you already have!

There is an unspoken assumption that we all agree that there exists one consistent set of true historical events–and therefore can expect that all our individual memories ought to correspond to this singular, objective reality.  That’s an unspoken assumption, and it’s not really questioned.  We tend to expect that all of our individual experiences and memories map onto that one, singular, objective reality.  But what if that assumption is not true?

What if we exist within a holographic multiverse of ever-shifting realities, in which we sometimes find that rather than one fixed set of historical facts, we can find ourselves remembering something different from what official historical–culturally correct–records suggest?

If we do exist within something like a holographic multiverse of ever-shifting realities, we could expect to witness what we now know as the Mandela Effect.  The Mandela Effect is the phenomenon where we actually do remember foods such as Haas avocados, and Stouffer’s Stovetop stuffing, for example. I live in California, and I always pronounced the name of these California avocados as “haaas” and I would have pronounced the word “hass” if that was how it was spelled, but I didn’t do that because it wasn’t spelled that way.  And now, it’s supposedly always been spelled “Hass” avocados.  With Stovetop stuffing, that’s a case where I clearly remember the TV commercials that very clearly stated this popular product was Stouffer’s stovetop stuffing, but now supposedly it’s always only and ever been Kraft stovetop stuffing.

And, it’s important to point out that if we are living in a holographic multiverse, as I suggest in my book, Quantum Jumps, we could occasionally expect to witness dramatic changes–such as witnessing ourselves or others undergo spontaneous remissions from injuries and illnesses.

For those of us witnessing reality shifts, quantum jumps, and the Mandela Effect, there is no need to provide “extraordinary evidence,” since those of us who are experiencers are not simply making “extraordinary claims,” but rather are simply sharing the facts of our personal experiences.  Thousands of first-hand case studies of these observations have been documented with dates, geographic locations, first-hand reports, and commentary since 1999 on the RealityShifters website.  Our ‘evidence’ exists in our awareness–in the form of qualia, which is associated with the so-called “hard problem” of consciousness.  How can you prove the concept of our unique, subjective experiences of consciousness–and reality–that we see in qualia?  This is called a hard problem, because it is not a matter that can be easily translated to materialistic form.  Similarly, we cannot prove the concept of the Mandela Effect, since it is a similarly hard problem.

As widespread as the assumption of a singular objective reality is, it directly conflicts with the idea from quantum physics that “quantum physics prohibits a single history,” as well as some recent quantum physics experimental findings that two observational devices at the same place and time can literally observe two different subjective realities.  Also, experience of the Mandela Effect is gaining traction and gaining ground.

Quantum Physics Prohibits a Single History

The purpose of the science of physics is to understand how the universe behaves by studying the behaviors of matter and energy through space and time.  Through such scientific study, physics has found some truly paradigm-shifting principles in quantum physics.

Physicists Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog ca-authored a paper in 2006, claiming that the Universe has no singular or unique beginning.  Hertog states, “Quantum mechanics forbids a single history.”  Hawking and Hertog referred to their theory ‘top-down’ cosmology, because instead of focusing primarily on seeking a fundamental set of initial physical laws under which the cosmos unfolded, it starts ‘at the top,’ with what we see today, and then works backwards to see what the initial conditions must have been.

The Observer’s Perspective Effect

C. Brukner’s 2019 paper described recent physics research experiments showing that two observational devices set up at the same place and set to make and record observations at the same time can–and sometimes do–make very different observations.  When we see how this physics experiment challenges objective reality, we see experimental results providing validation that we can expect to sometimes witness alternate histories from what others observe.  And this is exactly what we are observing when we notice reality shifts, quantum jumps, and the Mandela Effect.

The ‘Hard Problem’ of Consciousness

The hard problem of memory has a precedent in the so-called ‘hard problem of consciousness,’ because it delves into areas that materialist science based on material realism cannot adequately address or describe.  This hard problem has to do with why and how we have qualia, or first-person experiences that feel like something.  This is referred to as a ‘hard problem’ in contrast to such ‘easier’ matters of explaining various cognitive functions including:  learning, memory, verbal communication, and perceptual integration.

What I love about the so-called ‘hard problem’ is that it reminds me of the philosophical question, “Why is there anything at all?”  By going directly to contemplate the idea of nothingness–and somethingness–we find ourselves contemplating a cosmos outside Time and Space.  What might exist in such imagined realms?  When I imagine what lies outside of time and space, I get a sense that there exists a sense of existence in the form of wisdom of being–the inspiration behind knowledge and meaning.  We gain a sense of our true selves in the form of pure consciousness.

How can we Recognize Adjacent Realities?

Returning to the original question:  What if you want to jump into another world?  Maybe you already have!  Once we recognize that we indeed likely have jumped into other worlds, other realities–how can we learn to recognize when we are next to these adjacent realities?  We can be quite close to other possible realities in every moment.

You can ask yourself how you would feel when you are adjacent to another reality?  What are the kinds of qualia–the internal consciousness, “hard problem” stuff that can’t yet be fully recorded in accordance with methods and practices that are part of materialistic science.  There is no way to objectively document or measure such experiences, because they are so uniquely individual to each of our experiences.

But the good news is that you can tell when you are adjacent to another possible reality.  Just as you can tell when something good is cooking in the other room, because you can smell it–similarly, you can feel and sense when there is a good reality adjacent to your own.

And if you sense that there isn’t yet any such good reality, then you can change your internal emotions and energies to make yourself much more positive.  You can feel gratitude, and feel grateful.  You can feel reverence, and choose to experience Revhumanism (rather than Transhumanism).  You can become aware of the amazing opportunities in every moment, as you keep asking, “How good can it get?” and you can keep finding out.  This works even when life is as chaotic as it sometimes gets, such as during this pandemic year of 2020 going into 2021.

Acknowledging our ability to make different observations from different perspectives, we do well to remember to keep asking, “How good can it get?”  Let’s find out together!

.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

And I invite you to watch the companion video to this blog at:

___________________________

QuantumJumps300x150adCynthia Sue Larson is the best-selling author of six books, including Quantum Jumps.  Cynthia has a degree in physics from UC Berkeley, an MBA degree, a Doctor of Divinity, and a second degree black belt in Kuk Sool Won. Cynthia is the founder of RealityShifters, and is president of the International Mandela Effect Conference. Cynthia hosts “Living the Quantum Dream” on the DreamVisions7 radio network, and has been featured in numerous shows including Gaia, the History Channel, Coast to Coast AM, One World with Deepak Chopra, and BBC. Cynthia reminds us to ask in every situation, “How good can it get?” Subscribe to her free monthly ezine at:
RealityShifters®



A Quantum Experiment Suggests There’s No Such Thing As Objective Reality

| MIT Technology Review

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 make 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

By Emerging Technology from the arXiv

Emerging Technology from the arXiv covers the latest ideas and technologies that appear on the Physics arXiv preprint server. It is part of the Physics arXiv Blog. Email: KentuckyFC@arxivblog.com




Quantum Physics: Our Study Suggests Objective Reality Doesn’t Exist

Credit: Gearoid Hayes/Flickr, CC BY-SA

By Alessandro Fedrizzi and Massimiliano Proietti | Phys.org

Alternative facts are spreading like a virus across society. Now it seems they have even infected science—at least the quantum realm. This may seem counter-intuitive. The scientific method is after all founded on reliable notions of observation, measurement, and repeatability. A fact, as established by a measurement, should be objective, such that all observers can agree with it.

But in a paper recently published in Science Advances, we show that in the micro-world of atoms and particles that are governed by the strange rules of quantum mechanics, two different observers are entitled to their own facts. In other words, according to our best theory of the building blocks of nature itself, facts can actually be subjective.

Observers are powerful players in the . According to the theory, particles can be in several places or states at once—this is called a superposition. But oddly, this is only the case when they aren’t observed. The second you observe a quantum system, it picks a specific location or state—breaking the superposition. The fact that nature behaves this way has been proven multiple times in the lab—for example, in the famous double-slit experiment (see video).

In 1961, physicist Eugene Wigner proposed a provocative thought experiment. He questioned what would happen when applying quantum mechanics to an observer that is themselves being observed. Imagine that a friend of Wigner tosses a quantum coin—which is in a superposition of both heads and tails—inside a closed laboratory. Every time the friend tosses the coin, they observe a definite outcome. We can say that Wigner’s friend establishes a fact: the result of the coin toss is definitely head or tail.

Wigner doesn’t have access to this fact from the outside, and according to quantum mechanics, must describe the friend and the coin to be in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment. That’s because they are “entangled”—spookily connected so that if you manipulate one you also manipulate the other. Wigner can now in principle verify this superposition using a so-called “interference experiment“—a type of quantum measurement that allows you to unravel the superposition of an entire system, confirming that two objects are entangled.

When Wigner and the friend compare notes later on, the friend will insist they saw definite outcomes for each coin toss. Wigner, however, will disagree whenever he observed friend and coin in a superposition.

This presents a conundrum. The reality perceived by the friend cannot be reconciled with the reality on the outside. Wigner originally didn’t consider this much of a paradox, he argued it would be absurd to describe a conscious observer as a quantum object. However, he later departed from this view, and according to formal textbooks on quantum mechanics, the description is perfectly valid.

The experiment

The scenario has long remained an interesting thought experiment. But does it reflect reality? Scientifically, there has been little progress on this until very recently, when Časlav Brukner at the University of Vienna showed that, under certain assumptions, Wigner’s idea can be used to formally prove that measurements in quantum mechanics are subjective to observers.

Brukner proposed a way of testing this notion by translating the Wigner’s  scenario into a framework first established by the physicist John Bell in 1964. Brukner considered two pairs of Winners and friends, in two separate boxes, conducting measurements on a shared state—inside and outside their respective box. The results can be summed up to ultimately be used to evaluate a so-called “Bell inequality”. If this inequality is violated, observers could have alternative facts.

We have now for the first time performed this test experimentally at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh on a small-scale quantum computer made up of three pairs of entangled photons. The first photon pair represents the coins, and the other two are used to perform the coin toss—measuring the polarization of the photons—inside their respective box. Outside the two boxes, two photons remain on each side that can also be measured.

Despite using state-of-the-art quantum technology, it took weeks to collect sufficient data from just six photons to generate enough statistics. But eventually, we succeeded in showing that quantum mechanics might indeed be incompatible with the assumption of objective facts—we violated the inequality!

The theory, however, is based on a few assumptions. These include that the measurement outcomes are not influenced by signals traveling above light speed and that observers are free to choose what measurements to make. That may or may not be the case.

Quantum physics: our study suggests objective reality doesn't exist

Researchers with the experiment. Author provided 

Another important question is whether single photons can be considered to be observers. In Brukner’s theory proposal, observers do not need to be conscious, they must merely be able to establish facts in the form of a measurement outcome. An inanimate detector would, therefore, be a valid observer. And textbook quantum mechanics gives us no reason to believe that a detector, which can be made as small as a few atoms, should not be described as a quantum object just like a photon. It may also be possible that standard quantum mechanics does not apply at large length scales, but testing that is a separate problem.

This experiment, therefore, shows that, at least for local models of quantum mechanics, we need to rethink our notion of objectivity. The facts we experience in our macroscopic world appear to remain safe, but a major question arises over how existing interpretations of quantum mechanics can accommodate subjective facts.

Some physicists see these new developments as bolstering interpretations that allow more than one outcome to occur for observation, for example, the existence of parallel universes in which each outcome happens. Others see it as compelling evidence for intrinsically observer-dependent theories such as Quantum Bayesianism, in which an agent’s actions and experiences are central concerns of the theory. But yet others take this as a strong pointer that perhaps  will break down above certain complexity scales.

Clearly these are all deeply philosophical questions about the fundamental nature of reality. Whatever the answer, an interesting future awaits.

Read more great articles at Phys.org




Quantum Supremecy, Quantum Time, and Quantum Rules

Quantum Supremacy

What does quantum supremacy mean to you? Some of the world’s leading experts in the field of quantum computing, such as Scott Aaronson, sound quite enthusiastic regarding the imminent arrival of quantum supremacy.  “Quantum supremacy,” is meant in this context to suggest that quantum computing is expected at some point to be able to out-perform classical computing by a significant margin under verifiable (reproducible) conditions.  There has been a great deal of buzz and excitement over an anticipated announcement by Google sometime soon that they have achieved such quantum supremacy.

Having said all that, when I think of the phrase ‘quantum supremacy,’ the first thing that comes to my mind is the title of a wonderful paper published in 2015 in Contemporary Physics by physicists David Jennings and Matthew Leifer, No Return to Classical Reality.  Jennings and Leifer audaciously start their paper with the fighting words,

“At a fundamental level, the classical picture of the world is dead, and has been dead now for almost a century.”

This seemingly brash statement is fully backed by demonstrating that there exist fundamental phenomena of quantum theory that cannot be understood in classical terms.  And as the authors state, “We now have a range of precise statements showing that whatever the ultimate laws of Nature are, they cannot be classical.” 

I’ve touched on this topic before, and written about it in my 2015 paper, Primacy of Quantum Logic in the Natural World.  Support can be found for the primacy of quantum logic in the natural world in the cognitive sciences, where recent research studies recognize quantum logic in studies of: the subconscious, decisions involving unknown interconnected variables, memory, and question sequencing.

From my perspective as a reality shifts and Mandela Effect researcher since 1998 (more than 20 years)–I’m absolutely thrilled by the prospect of considering classical reality to be a special case and subset of the greater and all encompassing quantum reality.  And I’m thrilled that recently, we’re seeing ever-increasing evidence from scientific researchers that Jennings and Leifer’s bold assertion is quite likely true.  We are unquestionably now in the Quantum Age, and reaching a point where many of us can see that there indeed is no return to classical reality.

 

Quantum Time

One mind-boggling recent discovery indicating true quantum supremacy along the lines of “no return to classical reality,” is that time has been found to demonstrate truly quantum behavior.  Physicists at the Stevens Institute of Technology, University of Vienna, and University of Queensland announced this year that particles aren’t the only ones capable of existing in a state of superposition–time is also capable of existing as if it’s in two or more states simultaneously.  The international group of scientists looked at quantum temporal order, where no distinction exists as to whether one event caused another, or the other way around.  They reported in the August 22, 2019 issue of Nature Communications that quantum properties of time exist such that cause and effect can exist in both a forward and backward direction.  Specifically, they considered a thought experiment in which they considered the question, In a Quantum Future, Which Starship Destroys the Other?

 

Quantum Rules

Another exciting recent announcement came from physicist Markus Arndt and his team at the University of Vienna in Austria, as they announced in a paper published in September 2019 that Even Huge Molecules Follow the Quantum World’s Bizarre Rules.  This finding challenges the long-standing assumption that there will always be one set of physics rules to follow for larger objects, and the wild, wacky, weird rules of quantum physics only need be considered for those tinier things ‘confined’ to the Planck scale.

Arndt and colleagues appear to be upsetting that old apple-cart, and beginning to topple long-standing assumptions, as his team have observed quantum-like properties in rather enormous molecules composed of 2,000 atoms, which is comparable in size to some proteins.  These results immediately lend credence to the possibility that quantum mechanics might in fact be applicable at all sizes and scales.

The quest to find where, exactly, a ‘seam’ or boundary line of demarcation might exist between classical, relativistic and quantum ‘realms’ meet is exciting, since as quantum logic and rules keep being verified at ever-more-massive scales, there is a distinct possibility that there is no seam–there is no dividing line.

Those of us experiencing reality shifts, quantum jumps, and Mandela Effects will be glad to hear that we may be well on the way to developing a recognized, respectable scientific explanation that these types of phenomena (1) can be expected to naturally occur, (2) are a integral part of a recognized scientific model, and (3) are absolutely necessary in order for life and reality as we know it to even exist at all.

 

I invite you to watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

QuantumJumps300x150adCynthia Sue Larson is the best-selling author of six books, including Quantum Jumps. Cynthia has a degree in Physics from UC Berkeley, and discusses consciousness and quantum physics on numerous shows including the History Channel, Gaia TV, Coast to Coast AM, the BBC and One World with Deepak Chopra and on the Living the Quantum Dream show she hosts. You can subscribe to Cynthia’s free monthly ezine at: http://www.RealityShifters.com
RealityShifters®



Scientists Prove People Experience Different Realities

I’m fascinated by news this past month of exciting results from a quantum physics experiment that according to the MIT Technology Review appears to provide evidence that two people can observe the exact same event, see two different things happen, and both be correct.

Observers Witness the Same Event Differently

Physicists at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh succeeded in bringing a classic Gedankenexperiment (thought experiment) out of the realm of pure conjecture and into the real, physical world of a physics laboratory.  The thought experiment requires two people to observe one single photon–which is a quantum, or indivisible, unit of light.  Quantum particles can behave as either particles, or as waves, settling into one state or the other (particle or wave) at the precise moment it is observed.  All the rest of the time when the particle is not being observed by someone, it exists in a ‘superposition of states’ in which it can be considered to be simultaneously both ‘particle’ and ‘wave.’  When a second person is unaware of the first person’s observational measurement, this thought experiment proposes that the second person who is unaware of the first person’s measurement might be able to to confirm that the photon still exists in a quantum superposition (undecided) state.

Scientists including Caslav Brukner at University of Vienna in Austria and Massimiliano Proietti at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh took this experimental concept and created an experimental apparatus involving lasers, beam splitters, and six photons to be measured by various equipment representing the role of the two observers.  Preliminary results appear to provide real evidence that within quantum physics, our assumption of shared objective reality may be inaccurate.

How Nature Operates

Welcome to the new Quantum Age, featuring quantum logic!  With this new physics experiment supporting the idea that two people can observe the same event, see two different things happen, and both be correct, we are catching glimpses of the way Nature operates.  In Nature, we witness such things as:  instantaneous species mutation to the most advantageous possible adaptation, and plants routinely performing photosynthesis at more than 90% efficiency.  Lactose-intolerant organisms have been observed to adapt to a new lactose-based food source when it was the only one available, by making an evolutionary leap in one generation.  All photosynthesizing plants are performing miraculously efficient feats of storing energy from incoming photons, far beyond any human photovoltaic technologies.

When viewing the way so many natural systems seem able to ‘jump to the best reality,’ I can’t help feeling that we’re witnessing nothing less than some kind of deeper, hidden underlying awareness at work–far beyond what materialists might claim to be in charge.  Philosophers who share my sense that we are witnessing some kind of optimalism at work include Nicholas Rescher, author of a book on this topic called Axiogenesis.  I enjoy taking conscious part in this evolution by consistently asking, “How good can it get?”

The Second Quantum Revolution

I predict that we are now at the dawn of witnessing so-called ‘quantum phenomena’ moving out of the so-called ‘quantum realm’ ever increasingly in view in our everyday macroscopic lives.

When I gave a talk for Marin Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) this past month before having seen news of this experiment, I mentioned the famous EPR paper, as well as Wigner’s Friend, Quantum Zeno Effect and EPR steering–but where all of this gains traction and significance is in the context that we are now officially entering the “second quantum revolution” in which macro-scale quantum technology is being created now.  This new quantum technological race will feature engineering devices bringing ‘quantum scale’ phenomena into the macroscopic realm for applications in computing, communication, encryption and more. Macroscopic quantum systems have been developed recently in laboratories around the world, and with such fierce competition, we’ll soon be seeing astonishing breakthroughs, such as entangled diamonds.

Mandela Effect, Reality Shifts, and No Objective Reality

Physicists involved with this recent experiment, Massimiliano Proietti and his colleagues, state that, “The scientific method relies on facts, established through repeated measurements and agreed upon universally, independently of who observed them.”  Yet we are now glimpsing some of the first clear evidence that such assumptions can be proven false.  We are starting to see that the physicist Eugene Wigner’s idea that two scientists might have two different experiences while witnessing the same event appears to be proving to be true.

News of these experimental results is validating for the work I’ve been doing these past 20 years… and very exciting in terms of the implications for how humans can truly address all seemingly ‘impossible’ problems and situations–of every size, shape, and variety!  After 20 years of waiting for such an announcement, I’m pleased to see these experimental results that provide validation that we can expect to sometimes witness alternate histories from what others observe.  When we recognize that such subjective observation of ‘facts’ is constantly taking place, and that this can help provide a foundation by which we can better understand what is going on with the Mandela Effect and reality shifts, we can gain renewed confidence that humanity can address all seemingly ‘impossible’ problems and situations.

Welcome to the Quantum Age!

 

I invite you to watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

QuantumJumps300x150adCynthia Sue Larson is the best-selling author of six books, including Quantum Jumps. Cynthia has a degree in Physics from UC Berkeley, and discusses consciousness and quantum physics on numerous shows including the History Channel, Gaia TV, Coast to Coast AM, the BBC and One World with Deepak Chopra and on the Living the Quantum Dream show she hosts. You can subscribe to Cynthia’s free monthly ezine at: https://www.RealityShifters.com
RealityShifters®