Jack Sarfatti - The Post-Quantum Mechanics of Conscious Artificial Intelligence

[@JackSarfatti]

Jacques Vallee mentions my local retrocausal post-quantum physics explanation of remote viewing now on George Knapp July 16, 2017.

[@RickDelmonico]

That is very cool.

[@MrYerathrall]

😮To my thinking that makes it practically true!🎉

[@Badaboombata]

You're nuts. That's great. The American Penrose.

[@bat78827]

I'm an engineer, though sometimes I wish I had studied physics seriously in order to really understand this topic. The people that understand this are the ones that can expand our horizon of knowledge, and maybe in the process make us a space traveler species.

[@dmh724]

You look young. You still have 40+ years to do whatever you want.

[@JackSarfatti]

110 like, 16 dislike, gives me a score 87% B+ ;-)

[@e-Multiverse]

This was great fun to watch. Thank you.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

pure genius lecture - you explain things in very straight direct language! thanks. I have corresponded with Professor Hiley also.

[@synx6988]

it is impossible to get any of the physics professors onboard with any of this. Allthough they can't point to any mistakes. They are all trapped in the many worlds interpretation

[@Brainbuster]

1:00:40 Wow, I was going to comment that this guy reminds me of Doc from Back to the Future. He was actually the guy Doc was based on.

[@FrancisGoForever]

That's awesome. It's totally rational, and yet a synchronicity nonetheless.

[@r417-n7y]

Syrreal ay xD

[@seouliteusexpat1424]

Oh? That is very cool. I didn't know that.

[@bettyeldridge2084]

One of the strangest experiences I'm having is dealing with an unsuspected attribute of gravity, as best I can understand it anyway. I have some symptoms of Parkinsons, I can't walk as easily, sometimes my right,left, right, left walking pattern becomes right, left, left, left, right, which is a kind of thing I did when I was clogging, tap dancing in my younger days. I'm in my 86th year now. Its unpredictable and I've fallen when it happens, its a bit scary. But the first symptoms I had was loss of 'slipperyness', ie. I couldn't get up from a chair, sliding forwards is difficult, it seems I'm heavier somehow, gripped by something that I didn't used to experience and I weigh less now than I did in 2009. There are times when I feel stuck, I can't roll over in bed without a lot of effort, pushing like an infant does when its first learning to roll over. I noticed that when I saw an infant do exactly what I have to do, kind of push with my foot. This condition developed slowly, began with a hesitance in walking about 5 years ago. The sense I have of being somehow gripped more by some kind of gravity has puzzled me, when it first began to seem like my body is less 'free' to move when I'm in contact with the floor, furniture, etc. I don't have tremors, its mostly the loss of balance and body heaviness that I have to live with. I'm trying to understand but its hard to describe. I hope this is not too far off topic. Delete if it is. I became interested in quantum physics in the late 1980s' when a peculiar kind of event began to happen, which I found out is what some people call synchronicity and others call delusional thinking. Anyway I went to a library to see what the news of the day I was born was, 01-02-32. I found the news was a day later, on the 01-03-32 and it was a long article Science Finds Cosmic Clew to Human Destiny. It's about Arthur H. Compton's gamma ray work and a 'Flaw Found in Material Formula', which I assumed was about Einstein's monumental equation. I had read Bohm's book and Paul Davies, as well as most of Swedenborg, Gurdjieff and Ouspensky I do a lot of reality checking, or try to. Consciousness is information received, in my humble opinion. Its everywhere apparently.

[@yardvark100]

Jack - at 41:56 you say " - - - - explains this beautifully". Who ? and where do I find this explanation. Regards.

[@QuantumGravityResearch]

If you've watched this video and still need more science, check out our new film Hacking Reality! kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHvMZJKwo9JqkKc Is there an 8-dimensional "engine" behind our universe? Join Marion Kerr on a fun, visually exciting journey as she explores a mysterious, highly complex structure known simply as 'E8'--a weird, 8-dimensional object that for some, strange reason, appears to encode within it all of the particles and forces of our 3-dimensional universe.

[@mercurusblastomus879]

What i got most from Jack was his ability to go on and on about his relationships with other physicists , but i do not really find much in the way of reality physics.

[@JackSarfatti]

Jacques Vallee on George Knapp Coast to Coast July 16, 2017 endorse's SRI remote viewing. Vallee is very solid honest competent scientist. The PQM I talk about here in this video explains remote viewing.

[@RickDelmonico]

Are we alone in the universe? drive.google.com/file/d/0B1t3dP66nJluZVVqWXZTV05RSFU/view?usp=sharing

[@RickDelmonico]

We live in the shadows of perception. Our dull awareness gives us no useful clues as to why we are here. There is something we are supposed to be doing, an incessant narrative of convoluted purposeful activity that leads to nowhere. What are we to think of all this? How are we to live? We live as we understand, no understanding, no life. If we had unfiltered awareness, a belief system would be unnecessary. This seems to me to be the true definition of innocence, "unfiltered perception." This is why small children and their imaginations are so precious. Are they seeing something the average adult fails to perceive? We are in Plato's cave and if you try to wake up the person next to you, they will hate you for this. You have not done them any favors. They will say "just plug me back into the Matrix, I don't want to remember anything." What is the meaning of life? I will take a shot at trying to answer this. Truth is branching out into the nothingness as possibilities. Any attempt to explain the idea of truth will result in an explanation that requires an explanation. This continues to infinity as a logical monster. We are in the middle of a story that is still being written. But who's story is it? It is History. Perhaps for some, the way of escape is simply, too difficult to comprehend and too wonderful to imagine.

[@dragonsmith9462]

​@@RickDelmonico 🤔

[@QuantumGravityResearch]

Keep your eyes peeled for our new E8 documentary - coming soon! Catch our last doc, What is Reality? here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rWHdpZ9_dr6Hebc

[@e-Multiverse]

Thank you Quantum Gravity Research, Klee for filming this presentation. Jack's presentation was lots of fun to watch. I am sharing this.

[@krool1648]

I am drunk on science, literally, I am watching this video drunk.

[@benshapiro8506]

if u watch this without b ing drunk u will hurt ourself.

[@shengll]

Thanks!

[@JackSarfatti]

use dimensionless P(f)c^2/h when P(f) is part of the stress-energy tensor spectral density of the pump field with dimensions ergs/cm^2 (e.g. Poynting vector EM field spectral density ).

[@hynekchalus1]

I had an expirience on psychedelics when my thoughts were creating new universes. that explicit knowledge gives you feeling of god being.

[@metaRising]

Put the vimeo link in description!!

[@sashas3362]

Is there a webpage or book which explains these ideas of sarfatti's to a novice or layman?

[@QuantumGravityResearch]

You can check out Jack's research papers here: cornell.academia.edu/JackSarfatti

[@sashas3362]

@@QuantumGravityResearch Thanks. Is there an explanation of his ideas for a novice or layman in there somewhere?

[@sashas3362]

@@QuantumGravityResearch I'm familliar with his(?) "space, time, and beyond" book but I don't recall that discussing his retrocausal pilot wave theory. Something like that for his newer theories would be great. I know there is some recent book about UFO's which claims to have an explanation of some of his ideas in an easy to understand form for novices or laymen. But I'm not sure that includes an explanation of his retrocausal pilot wave theory (of consciousness). I believe it only covers his "warp drive" physics ideas. I could be wrong. That book is not at the local bookstores so I can't be sure.

[@brian.josephson]

Contrary to what is stated following 4:10, the τ-θ paradox does not violate relativity but instead parity, as was pointed out by Yang and Lee some years earlier. Where was this claim made exactly?

[@JackSarfatti]

Yes, but that was not what i was referring to. EPR entanglement in Copenhagen interpretation demands faster-than-light influence (not signaling) if you do not allow future causes of present effects. Many papers on this e.g. Henry Stapp, Huw Price, Rod Sutherland - go to arXiv search

[@brian.josephson]

Thanks for the clarification; I did figure that out eventually. Relativity notwithstanding, I am pretty certain that faster-than-light signalling will prove to be the physically correct answer, future causation being reinterpreted , in accord with the principles of semiotics, as final causation. A good discussion of this can be found in a paper by Claus Emmeche entitled 'causal processes, semiosis and consciousness'.

[@JackSarfatti]

I never made such a claim. What I asked Schweber and Deser in 1960 was how to reconcile the apparent nonlocality of entanglement as discussed in that paper with relativity. Almost every paper on entanglement mentions that apparent conflict - see recent papers by Huw Price and Rod Sutherland for example.

[@8664205420]

'Conscious Artificial Intelligence' describes the behavior of those TIC TAC objects precisely ..

[@RickDelmonico]

I personally feel that the universe behaves more like a song than an equation because math is about static law and music is about dynamic expression. Life is a principle of organization that is particularly concerned with value creation. Value is the perceived benefit in the process of choosing. Freewill is a branching out of choosers into a system of networked associations. Love is a dance of mutual expression. The core is harmonic regularity, the outer darkness is random noise, we are in the space between them. Every engine takes advantage of a difference. These two extremes are woven into each other. The eternal now is the processing of meaning. There is an energy contained in meaning, a dynamic tension. Our focus flows like a piece of music between tension and release. It travels across the fitness landscape, driven by our beliefs and values. There is a dimensionality to this landscape, a multidimensional polarity that does not necessarily favor good outcomes. Reaching a fitness peak requires more effort than rolling into an attractor basin. Symmetry, dynamics, and perpetual motion: Information is a difference that makes a difference. Understanding is life, islands of order in a sea of chaos. Perception creates division. The engine is imagination and the fuel is novelty. Innocence is unfiltered perception. We live in the shadows of perception where all belief systems are filters. Meaning is created through this process. In order to create meaning something must be consumed. Light pierces the darkness and is consumed, truth pierces the chaos and is consumed. The universe behaves more like a song than an equation. How can location exist in a song? We can give behaviors location, beyond that we cannot say. The three body problem and levels of descriptions; how can we measure a deeply nuanced behavior. The lawful regularities of our physical reality are emergent. Truth exist in the echoes of creation and there is no way back to the place where it came from. There are no perfect symmetries, there is no pure randomness. Therefore, Robert B. Laughlin's definition of emergence, "a collective principle of organization that gives rise to a law, a relationship of measured things that is always true but the law vanishes away into nothingness when you examine little parts to see where it came from" requires a slight alteration, because the relationship of measured things is always true to some degree of resolution beyond which, the truthfulness begins to fluctuate and then vanish. When we measure the coastline of England, the answer will depend on the length of the ruler we use. As we move towards smaller and smaller rulers or finer and finer scales, we are moving through the fractal iterations. At some point, the length of the coastline will begin to fluctuate. This is an emergent property and it is caused by the wind and the waves, time and tide. If we imagine that the coastline of England is the hidden structure of reality, and the length of the coastline is a physical law, such as the fine-structure constant, when we take a measurement at very large scales (increments of 20 miles) the answer will not fluctuate but as we move to finer and finer scales something magical happens, the answer begins to fluctuate. This is the uncertainty that physicist are up against. The fluctuation, or lack thereof is an emergent property. Also, as we move to finer and finer scales, the concentration of energy increases. The fractal nesting of ever increasing cycles of time are related to scale. Truth as a logic structure is closer to simple and the further away from simple you get, the deeper and more nuanced an explanation will become until you reach a point where the energy is so high that no explanation is possible.

[@JackSarfatti]

Never have so many words been written with so little meaning. ;-) joking

[@herosmantle]

Thanks for making this kind of content available to the general public

[@JackSarfatti]

interesting approval ratio above 127 yea 18 nay remains steady at 87% 133 to 18 ~ 88%

[@azsx299]

It's improved slightly in 2 years.

[@krool1648]

I am more interested in practical uses of quantum physics, than quantum physics itself. For example, how can we use quantum physics to create new technologies?

[@JackSarfatti]

Conscious AI. Uploading human minds to the Cloud, then downloading to a clone --> personal immortality for the few who can afford it, room temperature superconductors, anti-gravity materials for warp drive star ships.

[@krool1648]

Have you ever smoked DMT?

[@JackSarfatti]

No and I would never abuse my body in that way. I am not a druggie only weak minds use drugs like that. They do not live long either- natural selection.

[@krool1648]

There is no scientific evidence that psychedelics are harmful, in fact, they have therapeutic benefits. Read this: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150526215030.htm

[@RickDelmonico]

When Darwin promoted his theory, no-one had any idea how complex life was. Evolution does not begin to explain any of the big questions. Altered states of consciousness are far denser in terms of information content. Everything is fields, the brain is reading fields we haven't been able to describe properly.

[@junak777]

Is there difference between self-interacting photon and self-interacting phonon? Voyager 2 reaches interstellar space: Scientists detect plasma density jump (article) Hyperbolic helicoid as swastika spRing

[@RickDelmonico]

Could any particular bit of information on a dynamic holographic surface be everywhere all the time? The surface of this hologram would have some form of fractal feature, and could be infinitely fine with no digital horizon. The surface could generate extra dimensions as we move to fine and finer scales.

[@JackSarfatti]

There you go again babbling.

[@RickDelmonico]

Looking for the questions.

[@OscillationOverdrive]

This guy says nothing while constantly talking. Absolutely amazing.

[@StarTigerJLN]

around 52:30 when he starts talking about open dissipative systems and the laser and what drives the coherence -- that is truly interesting to me. Sarfatti worked with Prigogine for a while (surprised no Prigogone name drop heh) so he should have some grasp on dissipative systems. Jack's style is inarguably quite self promoting and enthusiastic and sometimes sensationalistic, but he has a history of edgewalking ahead of the crowd (see Kaiser's book) and his stuff is worth examining in detail.

[@StarTigerJLN]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_inversion

[@StarTigerJLN]

tf.boulder.nist.gov/general/pdf/1082.pdf (coherence in lasers possible without pop inversion but pop inversion still important )

[@JackSarfatti]

good point

[@wbeaty]

For me, lasers became far more fascinating when I started getting insights into the various non-QM explanations. I assumed I was alone in this, but Lamb turned out to be another fan of semiclassical laser. E.g. coherence is trivial: note the immense coherence-lengths of radio transmitters, of starlight, of white light through a quarterwave pinhole. Laser chaos oscillations!? And there's a classical version of stimulated emission: forcing capacitors to dump their energy at any rate desired, by driving them backwards with a power supply. AC version of stimulated emission is similar, where a passive oscillator will ringdown at immense rates if driven with 180deg signal. Even photoelectric effect appears very classical when we illuminate a passive RF oscillator with EM waves (exhibiting absorption, fluorescence, stim emission.) What I really want to see is classical analog of population inversions, and of Rabi oscillations. Everyone insists it's gotta be pure QM, that no classical analogs can possibly exist. (But then, everyone also insists that stimulated emission must be exclusively QM. Not so.) Perhaps whip up a lecture demo using a WiFi beam and a group of microwave resonant cavities? Can the cavities have linear response? Give them RF pulses, look for a sort of "Rabi overshoot" based on classical coupled pendulum-group effect.

[@JackSarfatti]

Fine, but this has nothing to do with what my talk is about.

[@JackSarfatti]

Sarfatti Note: More generally if the system is pumped out of thermodynamic equilibrium with the external pump’s stress-energy tensor Fourier transform Tuv(k), then I conjecture that beta(k)’ = beta(environment) + (sigma(k)inelastic/sigma(0)total)( Tuv(k)(kukv/hk2) Scattering off the pump quanta with cross sections sigma and 4-momentum transfer k = (k,f), beta = 1/kBT. k2 --> 0 gives absolute zero effective temperature. k2 < 0 gives negative effective temperature above a critical threshold. Therefore, the effective non-equilibrium “temperature” is lower than the ambient environment temperature when positive, so that a quantum phase transition to a macro-quantum coherent Bose-Einstein-like condensate of boson quasiparticles of the pumped many-particle system may occur. This conjecture is motivated by H. Frohlich’s “biological coherence” mechanism.

[@nathansmith5373]

Wow. Whats the ghost of Edger Cayce doing asking questions?

[@rupertblitherington-smythe6809]

Interesting but we will all be dead soon so why not spend time and energy on life extension?

[@corazonperformingarts3513]

I love hearing about all these amazing minds Jack was intertwining with...he mentions Abdus Salam who I think was extraordinary. Klee Irwin, the founder of Quantum Gravity Research just wrote a short blog on Abdus Salam. kleeirwindeepthoughts.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-preon-model-dynamical-composite-of.html

[@Brainbuster]

Please include the date of his talk in the description.

[@QuantumGravityResearch]

Done :)

[@JackSarfatti]

JUNE 27, 2017

[@JackSarfatti]

On some of the applications of Post-Quantum Mechanics (PQM) to psychic warfare kzbin.info/www/bejne/l6iXmKx6o6l_Y5Y

[@appenzeller1]

1) If there are many possible histories (multiple possible paths becoming real upon observation) or multiple histories (multiverse) then we could it be that our decisions (if we can decide) in the present and/or future jump us to new world/time lines with the history congruent with said decisions (with the memories to go along). I'm wondering if a unity future consciousness could be running some kind of optimization over histories and possibly sorting beings around like chess pieces, but that's a separate metaphysical thought. 2) The fact that we can take different "angles" of slices of our presumed 4D block universe to create any number of different timelines relative to two distant observers has been used to say the past, present, and future are all "real" (I've always imagined this is what Einstein meant by his quote about the illusion of past, present, and future). Does this relate to the anecdote about taking a wormhole to an exoplanet and figuring out if you have moved to the past or future based on temperature? I'm struggling what that concept, a layman explanation or link to supporting theories/concepts would be appreciated.

[@JackSarfatti]

The many possible histories are the intrinsically mental pilot quantum information advanced destiny and retarded history (Yakir Aharonov) fields. They are "real" and they are "fibers" whose base space is 4D space-time, which is a classical "beable" in the 1952 Bohm interpretation now updated in 2015 by Roderick Sutherland.

[@JackSarfatti]

We do live in a block universe yes. Global special relativity is false in general relativity. It's only true locally. By measuring the CMB temperature locally we know the time from the Big Bang. We can also locally measure how fast we are going relative to the Hubble flow.

[@StarTigerJLN]

At 22:40 (approx). His domain assumption / orthonormal completeness assumption is not unusual, although he gets jumped about that.

[@StarTigerJLN]

www.physics.sdsu.edu/~johnson/phys410/lecture9of410.pdf pretty basic assumption.

[@JackSarfatti]

yes

[@RickDelmonico]

Syntactic-formal rules. Semantic-deeply nuanced understanding. Observer relative-conscious of some event. Consciousness is intrinsic-belonging naturally; essential. Epistemic-having to do with knowledge. Ontological-having to do with existence. Epistemically objective-facts. Epistemically subjective-opinion. Ontologically objective-the actual, mode of existence. Ontologically subjective-experienced by a subject. Simulation is not duplication. Being a computer in the observer relative sense is not an intrinsic feature of an object but is a feature of our interpretation of the physics of the phenomena. Computation is not a fact of nature, it is a fact of our interpretation. Turing machines are not found in nature they are found in our interpretation of nature. The brain is a Causal mechanism that produces consciousness by precise neurobiological processes, using specific biochemical principles.

[@dwightmarcus9295]

Conjecture delights the mind, as sparks of insight fuse remote stores of knowledge, and our private consciousness warps pleasantly under the weight of so much connection, of such bursts of recognition that even the remotest constructs find resonance with one another. Jack Sarfatti clearly is a surfer of waves cresting from distant confluence, crouched in an eager lean into the looming break. One ride complete, it's time for another - and all this without the benefit of the comforting natural pattern and rhythm of the swells and surf. Now what?

[@JackSarfatti]

:-)

[@RickDelmonico]

Two drops of water that could be considered in all regards as identical, separated in space, have separate identities however, two drops of water that could be considered in all regards as identical, separated in time are considered to have the same identity. In this, we see that time is not just another dimension of space/time, there must be a distinction and if the math says there is no distinction then, the math is wrong. It is our actions that define us. In an infinite probability space our action encodes meaningful information into an intentional field of implicate order. This is the manifestation of events from some degree of possibility, depending on your position in the fractal structure. There is variation in probabilities because the interconnectedness of the fractal structure has variation. This is like saying the computation is dependent upon the position in the computational geometry, or in human terms it describes a range of behaviors, reinforced by repeated actions, (variation in the density of a probability wave). The more an action is repeated the greater the density. Intent, process and perception as a key principle of reality. All particles have a form of awareness, an exchange of information. In the hierarchy of this process, consciousness emerges. Living systems concentrate order from their environment leaving a ripple of disorder in their wake. As order emerges in the living system, a proportional amount of disorder is also created. This has something to do with meaning. When we attend a moment, we give it value as a consequence of memory and when we place intention upon it, the value fluctuates as it branches out into the future as possibilities. The value or quality of information has everything to do with meaning.

[@JackSarfatti]

off-topic to what I am talking about in the video. "The parable of the blind men and an elephant originated in ancient Indian subcontinent, from where it has widely diffused. It is a story of a group of blind men who have never come across an elephant before, learn and conceptualize what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the elephant based on their partial experience and their descriptions are in complete disagreement on what an elephant is. In some versions they come to suspect that the other person is dishonest and they come to blows. The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to project their partial experiences as the whole truth, ignore other people's partial experiences, and one should consider that one may be partially right and may have partial information.[1][2]" Wikipedia

[@RickDelmonico]

Six blind men of Indostan.

[@cybervigilante]

New experiments have created matter that shows reverse acceleration. I wonder how this relates to Jack's action-reaction.

[@JackSarfatti]

What is "reverse acceleration"? You mean negative mass m? F = -|m|a ?

[@JackSarfatti]

"Free Will and Retrocausality in the Quantum World A conference held under the auspices of the JTF-funded project, New Agendas for the Study of Time Venue: Winstanley Lecture Theatre, Trinity College, Cambridge Dates: 1-4 July 2014 Programme [with links to videos of talks and discussion sessions] Why retrocausality - and why free will? The 'classic' motivation for retrocausal models in QM stems from Bell's Theorem, and the nonlocality it seems to entail. Nonlocality is often felt to be counterintuitive in itself, and the source of an unresolved tension between quantum theory and special relativity. As Bell himself described the implications of his famous result: “[I]t's a deep dilemma, and the resolution of it will not be trivial ... [T]he cheapest resolution is something like going back to relativity as it was before Einstein, when people like Lorentz and Poincaré thought that there was an aether - a preferred frame of reference - but that our measuring instruments were distorted by motion in such a way that we could not detect motion through the aether.'' As Bell was well aware, the dilemma can be avoided if the properties of quantum systems are allowed to depend on what happens to them in the future, as well as in the past. Like most researchers interested in these issues, however, Bell felt that the cure would be worse than the disease - he thought that this kind of “retrocausality” would conflict with free will, and with assumptions fundamental to the practice of science. (He said that when he tried to think about retrocausality, he “lapsed into fatalism”.) If this objection to retrocausality in QM is well-founded, it raises interesting issues about the nature and origins of this "free will", that turns out to play such a surprising role in the foundations of physics. If the objection is not well-founded, then it is high time it is moved aside, so that the retrocausal approach can be given the attention it otherwise seems to deserve. Moreover, there are other motivations for exploring retrocausal models in QM, some the focus of considerable current research. Examples include: The proposed retrocausal explanation of the results of 'weak measurements' by Aharonov, Vaidman and others. The relevance of retrocausality to the issue of the viability of an 'epistemic' interpretation of the quantum state, especially in the light of recent results such as the PBR Theorem. Recent work throwing new light on the relation between retrocausality in QM, on the one hand, and time-symmetry and other symmetries, on the other. For these reasons, too, there is a pressing need for a better understanding of notions of free will and causality, and of their relevance to the retrocausal approach to the quantum world. This conference brought together many of the leading writers and researchers on these topics, to discuss these issues." prce.hu/centre_for_time/jtf/retro.html

[@kevineckelkampe2r]

Cool synchronicity, he brought up fred wolf and i had a torn book cover of his next to my phone

[@dobysaurus]

Magic is just just science that hasn't been explained yet.

[@RickDelmonico]

Let's start with the assumption that space/time is emergent and that entanglement is somehow responsible. This brings up the question of "why is every electron exactly the same. As a general rule we could say that two objects that are in every sense identical, separated in space, have separate identities but two objects that are in every sense identical, separated in time, are usually considered to have the same identity. It should be obvious to anyone paying attention that information and meaning are not exactly the same thing. Information may appear in a digital form but meaning never does.

[@RickDelmonico]

It is one thing to construct a model of the universe that describes it as a four dimensional continuum where nothing moves. It is quite another thing to stand in the midst of this great wonder we call universe and loudly proclaim "nothing moves." The universe was set into motion, no question. There is some kind of prime mover and some kind of organizing principle involved. "Is the moon there when I'm not looking at it?" Einstein We live in the shadows of perception. Our dull awareness gives us no useful clues as to why we are here. There is something we are supposed to be doing, an incessant narrative of convoluted purposeful activity that leads to nowhere. What are we to think of all this? How are we to live? We live as we understand, no understanding, no life. If we had unfiltered awareness, a belief system would be unnecessary. This seems to me to be the true definition of innocence, "unfiltered perception." This is why small children and their imaginations are so precious. Are they seeing something the average adult fails to perceive? We are in Plato's cave and if you try to wake up the person next to you, they will hate you for this. You have not done them any favors. They will say "just plug me back into the Matrix, I don't want to remember anything." What is the meaning of life? I will take a shot at trying to answer this. Truth is branching out into the nothingness as possibilities. Any attempt to explain the idea of truth will result in an explanation that requires an explanation. This continues to infinity as a logical monster. We are in the middle of a story that is still being written. But who's story is it? It is History. Perhaps for some, the way of escape is simply, too difficult to comprehend and too wonderful to imagine.

[@philsweeney81]

He's quite the name dropper but Wow!

[@StarTigerJLN]

I think he's less a name dropper than just in a big social hub of interesting people. He is definitely proud of that though ;)

[@JackSarfatti]

The book How the Hippies Saved Physics is the history of these ideas. My name is in that book about 600 times (according to Kindle) and I am filling in details that Kaiser left out. It's important to record who influenced the development of Post-Quantum Mechanics and in fact I have been at the Center of the Cyclone so to speak.

[@philsweeney81]

I meant it in a friendly way! :) I could only understand about 20% of this lecture but what I could understand was Mind Blowing! I really enjoy thinking about Quantum Physics and it's implications and I am very glad to see that things are progressing in this direction, I must learn more! Thank you!

[@JackSarfatti]

:-)

[@Brainbuster]

I could understand only 2% of this lecture.

[@dahawk8574]

15:44 - vimeo.com/171013596 For those who'd rather click than type. THANKS Jack!

[@kingpossie]

If these guys read the sarmails - you would fly through this talk in 3 minutes. Glad you’re still among the living, Jack.

[@ZeroG]

What are the sarmails? I would like to read them.

[@JackSarfatti]

advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/3/2/e1601540.full.pdf large-scale quantum computer blueprint using trapped ions - this will not be conscious unless it is pumped off thermodynamic equilibrium and made macro-quantum coherent (see below)

[@tastyfrzz1]

The equations behind him show that in one case God plays dice and in the other it does not. The equations appear simple but I have no clue what is going on. Obviously my 1982 DEQ course and control theory with Laplace transfirms are not adequate to comprehend this stuff.

[@StarTigerJLN]

Why would feedback loops mean "not deterministic"? Puzzled. Not deterministic in linear time but wouldn't it be superdeterministic at some level in a block universe? I want to bring up sum over histories but that's still going in just one time direction so not same... erghhg hmmm

[@JackSarfatti]

I explained this in the video. Determinism depends retarded past causes of present effects. Think of a classical Turing machine. As soon as you introduce future causes of present effects it is equivalent to Seth Lloyd's CTC computing.

[@StarTigerJLN]

Yeah I got to this later I was commenting as I watched. Enjoyed your talk. Will check out the Sutherland papers and Lloyd's work.

[@StarTigerJLN]

yeah it would definitely no longer be functioning like a Turing machine

[@StarTigerJLN]

For references: arxiv.org/abs/1007.2615 (CTC / Lloyd)

[@JackSarfatti]

Exactly

[@krool1648]

What is the relationship between religion and quantum physics? does it prove the existence of God?

[@JackSarfatti]

Depends what you mean by "God" - generally speaking it shows the strong likelihood that we live in a conscious super-intelligent universe with Hawking's "Mind of God" located on our dark energy future de Sitter cosmological horizon (hologram screen).

[@StarTigerJLN]

My opinion is that it says nothing at all about God and certainly does not prove or disprove God's existence. God by definition almost is supernatural, and physics deals with the natural. If we found "God" and could measure God we'd just come up with some natural term for it. God is immeasurable or he's not God. Just different arenas of thought.

[@StarTigerJLN]

Quantum implies a possibility for a certain level at which everything is entangled / coherent in a big superposition with everything else. So there is a potential for drawing parallels with mystical oneness and so on. However it's all kind of speculative at this point in terms of the metaphysics. Jack is working on what he calls "post-quantum mechanics" and has developed metaphysics to accompany the physics. Which is part of why he's "fringey" but he's very intelligent and worth listening to. Most scientists have a different perspective. A great book on this is "Quantum Questions". Covers mystical thoughts of great quantum theorists, and clears up some misconceptions (like that physics and Eastern thought are the same thing--they're not).

[@johngonsowski2230]

At the very least I think God would require a Planck scale physics model. You could get interesting ideas for alien/angel abilities/technology from the physics of QFTs including massless particle lifeforms and conformal symmetry (conformal symmetry could handle dark energy/de Sitter structures).

[@JackSarfatti]

I do give a strong argument for a conscious universe - that would be God in Hawking's sense at least.

[@unigalactic]

So was Ingo Swann on to something?

[@JackSarfatti]

yes

[@scotthaney4995]

Cia declassified documents proving his remote viewing of Saturn's rings, before the satellite got there. Uri gellar correctly identified all hidden objects in a Faraday cage. Cia crest website.

[@JackSarfatti]

sure

[@scotthaney4995]

How can you use consciousness as a vehicle to travel around the holographic universe? The seed of life, and blue Pearl look like the e8 crystal. How can you strengthen the retro causality feedback loop. During meditation the seed of life is seen quite a lot when those gamma brain waves strengthen. It's like the system is trying to push us towards discovery, but we're too slow to figure it out. Sacred geometry, seed of life, being able to visualise these shapes during meditation are all leading us to something. Just gotta keep on figuring out the puzzle.

[@tomz4332]

He knew quite impressive bunch

[@newforestpixie5297]

I used to enjoy Quantum Jump back in the 90s ( tv series shown in England- guy in big coat c/w an Orb which enabled his travels ) It may have been Quantum Leap . I’m perhaps confused with a music band called Quantum Jump behind an interesting hit single called The Lone Ranger from about 1979.

[@RickDelmonico]

The structure of the universe is a computational geometry that is fractal in nature. The incessant scrambling to find a geometric description of reality fails to define the fluidity of subjective reasoning that colors our filtered perception. All of the meaning is stored in the relationships. The "stuff" of reality is created by the relationships. Nothing is absolute or discrete, the variation is scale dependent. The tower of Babel is the human imagination in full bloom. Tower of Babel 2.0 has begun, it is a comedy of errors that will unleash the monsters from the Id. The four stages of representation "it is the reflection of a profound reality; it masks and denatures a profound reality; it masks the absence a profound reality; it has no relation to any reality whatsoever; it is its own pure simulacrum" Baudrillard This one thing that includes everything, we call universe, is by definition undifferentiated. Every emergent behavior requires a principle of organization, it is in this space that consciousness lives.

[@aclearlight]

Bravo! A wonderful romp in post-quantum realm.

[@RickDelmonico]

The law that entropy always increases holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation - well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World (1915), chapter 4

[@JackSarfatti]

true, but irrelevant. PQM is consistent with 2nd Law of thermodynamics

[@RickDelmonico]

In what sense? A causal loop? Does entanglement create space/time?

[@RickDelmonico]

Please, do not spend another 100 years looking for a physical description of reality. The computational arrangement of our physical reality is a tree like structure growing in a probability space that is layered like an onion except, the layers get thinner with each iteration so that it never becomes infinite. In computing this holofractal structure the first iteration is very course grained with few degrees of freedom, with each iteration creating exponentially more degrees of freedom. Over time, this highly nuanced structure creates many levels of description. We live in the shadows of perception, we are made of stuff but this stuff is something that cannot be regarded as real. Truth is the highest energy state of the system. Truth has the most potential and chaos has the most variation. There is more than one way to remove infinity, one way would be a digital horizon and another way would be as a fractal, with the fractal being more consistent with the "nature is lazy" axiom. Zeno's paradox and ratio; the turtle can only take a small step each unit of time but Achilles is able to take a much larger step in the same unit of time. Given sufficient time, no matter how much lead the turtle has, Achilles will always overtake the turtle. Instead of a digital horizon, we may have to think in terms of ratios of nested fractals. Gödel’s theorem says: “Any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. In particular, for any consistent, effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable in the theory.” The universe is irreducibly complex and has a complete awareness of itself. Perception divides process, process creates expression, expression creates experience, experience creates sensation, sensation creates perception, it is here that awareness lives. Everything is linked to value creation with varying degrees of freedom. All material expressions rely on action, all actions rely on intent, all intents rely on desire, all desires rely on values, all values are tied to belief systems and all belief systems are filters. Truth is outside of time and innocence is unfiltered perception.

[@RickDelmonico]

Starting with the assumption that ordinary matter when constrained inside of any sufficient energy flow will spontaneously arrange itself into the most efficient arrangement (nature is lazy), whereby future states contain more order than past states as a definition of a time or entropy reversal (relative to some other part of the system). The mechanism could be God, consciousness or something like a random walk that includes all future states that we would normally ascribe to a single unit of time or process, we are still left with the question of how the universe wound itself up in the first place. This is computation in some form and would suggest that the most fundamental thing is information, with space/time being emergent, whether by entanglement or any other physical process. www.iflscience.com/physics/life-inevitable-consequence-physics/all/

[@JackSarfatti]

excess verbal baggage - try to understand Rod Sutherland's papers.

[@corazonperformingarts3513]

JACK! A LITTLE FUN VIDEO on THE 20 GROUP--4-Dimensional Creatures Visit the Big Apple: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJu3iat_pp2trpI The 20-Group is a fundamental object in the quasicrystalline spin network (QSN), the fundamental substructure of spacetime at the tiniest scale, according to emergence theory

[@johngonsowski2230]

My two favorite physicists are lesser known physicist friends of Jack's (Tony Smith and Arkadiusz Jadczyk). Here's a paper of Tony's citing Jack that's very related to this video: vixra.org/pdf/1602.0056v1.pdf

[@johngonsowski2230]

Some quotes from Tony's paper: "...the Bohm Quantum Potential of E8 AQFT acts as curvature of E8 in terms of those structures. Jack Sarfatti has noticed that General Relativistic Gravity not only has an action by Curvature of Spacetime that guides particles but also has a back-reaction of particles by their mass distribution on Curvature of Spacetime so he has generalized the Bohm Quantum Potential to form the Sarfatti-Bohm Quantum Potential that also acts as back-reaction of particle / force distribution to modify curvature of E8 structures..." "...Roderick Sutherland (arXiv 1509.02442) gave a Lagrangian for the Bohm Potential saying: “... This paper focuses on interpretations of QM in which the underlying reality is taken to consist of particles have definite trajectories at all times ... An example ... is the Bohm model ... This paper ... provid[es]... a Lagrangian ...[for]... the unfolding events ... ... describing more than one particle while maintaining a relativistic description requires the introduction of final boundary conditions as well as initial, thereby entailing retrocausality ... Jack Sarfatti extended the Sutherland Lagrangian to include Back-Reaction..."

[@JackSarfatti]

yes

[@sashas3362]

A non-deterministic universe means u have no control over your fate because the future is impossible to predict. You can only have control over your fate in a deterministic universe.

[@sashas3362]

On second thought, if you can send (and receive) information from the future to the past then it MAY be possible to control your fate (in a non-deterministic universe). Such an ability to send info from the future to the past is what distinguishes standard physics from sarfatti's post-quantum physics. So I may have been mistaken when saying you have no control over your fate if the universe is non-deterministic as claimed in this video. It depends on whether we can change the future or not.

[@shengll]

I thought, great talk, took me by suprise,,, but connected lots of dots ...

[@RickDelmonico]

It should be obvious to anyone paying attention, that we are dealing with information. There is no physical geometry, the geometry is computational. You can think of two entangled photons as being on the surface of an expanding sphere where the photon isn't what is spinning it is the entire sphere, some form of two dimensional phenomena expanding into a third dimension but probably it is all computational just like the CGI we use in the movie industry.

[@jasparevarhart1332]

Serious question: How would interfacing Alfred North Whitehead's cyclic epoch ontology, w/ Mckenna's time wave zero mesh w/ Dirac's source term and the quasicrystalline syntax--represented as novelty--in Klee's Code Theoretic..?

[@jackvalentine7403]

R\Imatellectual

[@allowambeBOWWAMB]

So basically you can play games with sub ms latency? :)

[@Anders01]

Interesting that particles are affected both by the past and the future. That may explain emergent properties and the increase of complexity in the universe, like in the Omega Point idea by that Jesuit guy. I still think it can be deterministic though although determined both by the past and the future. Free will still exists in the sense of Stephen Wolfram's computational irreducibility which means that not even the universe itself can fully predict the future.

[@JackSarfatti]

Yes, that's approximately correct.

[@StarTigerJLN]

Tipler has a few interesting physics ideas but he sort of ruins them with his religious theologizing.

[@JackSarfatti]

Tipler is a great visionary physicist. I have not seen anything from him recently. Have you?

[@StarTigerJLN]

oh gotta love Frank J but the last thing I read from him was Physics of Christianity. I think he's brilliant but... you know.

[@JackSarfatti]

I was on the radio with him about 20 years ago.

[@kanzazhiphop]

Thank you Jack for the lecture.

[@junak777]

For 1 visible photon from the Sun Earth blow off 20 in IR spectre.

[@RickDelmonico]

There are no perfect symmetries, there is no pure randomness. the mechanics are not random, they're fractal. Think of a tree growing in a box with the inside surface of the box as the place where we will register the probability of the tree eventually touching after growing for a period of time. Roughly speaking any portion of the surface has an equal chance of the tree touching it but only some portion of the surface will ever include the tree. Now replace the box with an onion type, container, where each cycle of time includes both a portion of growth for the tree and another layer for the onion. The inside surface of this onion now includes a new probability distribution where each new layer is dependent on the previous layer and each new layer you has a finer resolution with more degrees of freedom but not infinite degrees of freedom. The center of this structure had few degrees of freedom and the final layer has the most degrees of freedom. The outer layer of the onion would not be a perfect sphere, it would be more like a fractal surface such that the surface area would increase with the resolution. Our universe, the universe we can see is the tree like structure.

[@JackSarfatti]

so what?

[@RickDelmonico]

I find the idea of a block universe to be very unsatisfying. The reason science can't describe the universe is the same reason they cant describe a tree. No matter how much information you use in your description, it will always be incomplete. The only complete description is the tree itself. It is amazing to me that people will argue over who is smarter and has the best explanation of the tree. Are you kidding me? The tree is meant to be experienced not explained just like life itself.

[@JackSarfatti]

As you like it.

[@hindsight2022]

I am the one who is I am ... The quantum fluctuations that created the universe are the original thought of God the 8D crystal is his mind . We are all projections I side .the firmament divides the subconscious from the sub- consciousness. The 4D projection is your soul and the quasi matrix is reality . Amazing revalation ..

[@RickDelmonico]

Is “information is physical” contentful?“Information is physical.” www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3327 Firstly, we pretty much needed the whole kitchen sink of basic physical principles: special relativity (both the equivalence of inertial frames and the finiteness of the speed of light), quantum mechanics (in the form of the universal relation between energy and frequency), and finally general relativity and gravity. All three of the fundamental constants G, c, and h made appearances, which is why all three show up in the detailed statement of the holographic bound. But secondly, gravity only appeared from step 8 onwards. Up till then, everything could be said solely in the language of quantum field theory: that is, quantum mechanics plus special relativity. The result would be the so-called Bekenstein bound, which upper-bounds the number of bits in any spatial region by the product of the region’s radius and its energy content. I learned that there’s an interesting history here: Bekenstein originally deduced this bound using ingenious thought experiments involving black holes. Only later did people realize that the Bekenstein bound can be derived purely within QFT (see here and here for example)-in contrast to the holographic bound, which really is a statement about quantum gravity. (An early hint of this was that, while the holographic bound involves Newton’s gravitational constant G, the Bekenstein bound doesn’t.) Thirdly, speaking of QFT, some readers might be struck by the fact that at no point in our 12-step program did we ever seem to need QFT machinery. Which is fortunate, because if we had needed it, I wouldn’t have been able to explain any of this! But here I have to confess that I cheated slightly. Recall step 4, which said that “if you know the rate at which a field varies across space, you can calculate the rate at which it varies across time.” It turns out that, in order to give that sentence a definite meaning, one uses the fact that in QFT, space and time derivatives in the Hamiltonian need to be related by a factor of c, since otherwise the Hamiltonian wouldn’t be Lorentz-invariant. Fourthly, eagle-eyed readers might notice a loophole in the argument. Namely, we never upper-bounded how much information God could add to the world, via fields that are constant across all of spacetime. For example, there’s nothing to stop Her from creating a new scalar field that takes the same value everywhere in the universe-with that value, in suitable units, encoding 1050000 separate divine thoughts in its binary expansion. But OK, being constant, such a field would interact with nothing and affect no observations-so Occam’s Razor itches to slice it off, by rewriting the laws of physics in a simpler form where that field is absent. If you like, such a field would at most be a comment in the source code of the universe: it could be as long as the Great Programmer wanted it to be, but would have no observable effect on those of us living inside the program’s execution.

[@jasonveritas9441]

Big picture, one thing I KNOW? Is I know little........how long we been around?

[@brandneu6439]

Wikipedia schreibt: "Sarfatti war von [Uri] Geller überaus beeindruckt und kommentierte die Ereignisse wie folgt: „Mein persönliches berufliches Urteil, als Physiker und Doktor der Philosophie ist, dass Geller tatsächlich, reproduzierbar, psychoenergetische Fähigkeiten unter relativ gut kontrollierten Bedingungen vorgeführt hat, welche über jeden Zweifel erhaben sind.“"

[@RickDelmonico]

The inverse relationship of space and time. Everything is fields and the structure of reality is a computational geometry that is fractal in nature. Gravity is a geometry of motion in time. Time has a quality that must extend beyond one dimension and a fractal nesting of energy that increases as the scale becomes finer, the reason is levels of description. It is all information. Ratio may turn out to be the only constant. Time is the most dense when the influence of acceleration and gravity are zero. As space is bent, time is unbent. If time and space are inversely proportional then, we are not talking about a four dimensional continuum. Time has a quality that cannot be described by the block universe model. According to Einstein, if you accelerate a clock to the speed of light, it's mass becomes infinite and it's time stops. A clock behind me stops when I accelerate to light speed but this says nothing about it's mass. If I were a photon does the electron that will eventually absorb me become infinitely massive, if this is the case then the photon can't miss an infinitely massive object. drive.google.com/file/d/0B1t3dP66nJlubFJVbFJDbXZOTzQ/view?usp=sharing

[@JackSarfatti]

muddled ranting - not even wrong - really crackpot

[@RickDelmonico]

They said you would say that. :)

[@JackSarfatti]

That's because I speak the truth. A truly stupid man does not realize when he is being stupid. One must develop a sense of when one reaches the limits of his own understanding.

[@RickDelmonico]

Your insults solve nothing. How will we flesh out any possible inconsistency in your logic. It is certain to be there, you just haven't seen it yet. All of Einsteins work is incomplete. You do not realize that you are trying to square the circle.

[@RickDelmonico]

In music, you have frequency, amplitude and timbre. The increasing dimensionality of space occurs in this thing we call timbre. The fractal "echoes of echoes" is a deeply nuanced structure of nested scale and the curvature of space creates extra dimensions. When one degree becomes ninety one degrees, you get an extra dimension from the curvature of space. If you are inside this space you don't see the curvature. The direction of time's arrow is the breaking of the symmetry of the "potential" of the boundary condition. If it is relational, there's a geometry involved. Information is stored in the relationships. Meaning is a dance of mutual expression. Expression and experience are two sides of the same coin. Perception differentiates information, information is given value, value creates desire, desire creates intention, intention becomes expression, an echoing of possibilities. The holomovement and process; the undivided whole is differentiated by perception, this creates a disturbance in the field. The disturbance is information but it is different, new or novel because of imprecise perception and intention. Perceptions are always a best guess or controlled hallucination. From this information, intention is formed in the form of an echo from a previous intent but again this is an approximation to some degree of resolution. Expression and experience move together in and out of these nested hierarchies, creating new or novel information. The geometry involved is a novelty or imagination engine. Intent, process and perception as a key principle of reality. All particles have a form of awareness, an exchange of information. In the hierarchy of this process, consciousness emerges. Living systems concentrate order from their environment leaving a ripple of disorder in their wake. As order emerges in the living system, a proportional amount of disorder is also created. This has something to do with meaning. When we attend a moment, we give it value as a consequence of memory and when we place intention upon it, the value fluctuates as it branches out into the future as possibilities (quantum random walks in state space). The value or quality of information has everything to do with meaning. The exchange rate of ideas is infinite. Flourishing has a rhythm. Knowledge dilutes imagination. If you are waiting for something to happen, it is happening. You're just standing in the wrong place. The world has become a much smaller place, there is no longer room for hatred. Great souls have always stood at the crossroads pointing the way, but it is the folly of men that they love the sound of their own voice. The surest cure for selfishness is to continually practice random acts of kindness.

[@JackSarfatti]

off-topic ramble " but it is the folly of men that they love the sound of their own voice" indeed you do. Physician heal thyself. ;-)

[@JackSarfatti]

"All particles have a form of awareness," FALSE you have not understood a key idea in PQM.

[@JackSarfatti]

"Living systems concentrate order from their environment leaving a ripple of disorder in their wake. As order emerges in the living system, a proportional amount of disorder is also created." At least you got that part right.

[@JackSarfatti]

"Knowledge dilutes imagination." Knowledge without imagination is dull, stale, unprofitable. Imagination without knowledge is just plain stupid.

[@JackSarfatti]

"From this information, intention is formed in the form of an echo from a previous intent but again this is an approximation to some degree of resolution." WRONG! Intention is formed in the self-organizing adaptive feedback-control loop of both destiny back from the future and history from the past quantum information fields acting on the many-particle system in the present moment.

[@AlinNemet]

really great stuff! I am a software engineer and work mostly on kind of interesting/boring everyday corporative stuff, know mostly nothing about quantum reality/physics, but would love to work and learn with these guys...though it would take me decades to actually understand what they are talking about :))

[@StarTigerJLN]

Hi Alin, I think that "Quantum Mechanics and Experience" by David Z. Albert isn't a completely horrible place to start. If you have taken physics courses before, you could probably work your way up to a basic understanding of the math via the "Demystified" series. (The Physics, Calculus, Differential Equations, and Quantum Mechanics Demystified books would be relevant here--it's a series.)

[@StarTigerJLN]

I started out reading Fred Alan Wolf's "Taking the Quantum Leap" and John Gribbin's "Schrodinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality."

[@JackSarfatti]

No, Albert is a waste of time. Read Bohm and Hiley's Undivided Universe. Albert does not understand quantum theory - I mean he is a Bohrian. ;-) Hardly any mainstream physicists today understand the meaning of quantum theory even if they can do correct computations using the theory.

[@StarTigerJLN]

Undivided Universe was good when I read it but it was aeons ago. Will check out again.

[@JackSarfatti]

Read it again but only after you have understood Sutherland's more recent improvement on what Bohm & Hiley did 25 years ago.

[@Josbi]

of course david wilcock is sitting front row

[@kevineckelkampe2r]

That is him!? I thought maybe but then kinda dismissed it. I don't like wilcock either, but this video is pretty good.

[@realcygnus]

interesting cat

[@n.lightnin8298]

Did he just prove the kaballian? 🤔 “the universe is mind”

[@gariusjarfar1341]

All of these sums have no origin, no background. They float in a non origin. Describe the background.

[@chrisfrench7979]

We simulate predetermined dice roles in which we can inhabit all the parts so we don't have to spend eternity alone.

[@JackSarfatti]

word salad noun a confused or unintelligible mixture of seemingly random words and phrases, specifically (in psychiatry) as a form of speech indicative of advanced schizophrenia.

[@JackSarfatti]

POST-UN-determined, NOT PRE-determined

[@MyTBrain]

Jack Sarfatti: few publications, fewer experimental results. Fun to listen to, though.

[@JackSarfatti]

aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.4982779 THEORY tinyurl.com/y72o4lt8 EXPERIMENTS IN WEAK MEASUREMENTS

[@JackSarfatti]

re: "few publications" Selected worksBooks[edit] Toben, Bob (1975). Space-Time and Beyond: Toward an Explanation of the Unexplainable. E.P. Dutton (Toben in conversation with Fred Alan Wolf and Jack Sarfatti). ISBN 978-0-525-47399-2 (2005). Super Cosmos: Through Struggles to the Stars. AuthorHouse. ISBN 978-1-4184-7662-5 (2002). Space-Time and Beyond II. AuthorHouse. ISBN 978-1-4033-9022-6 (2002). Destiny Matrix. AuthorHouse. ISBN 978-0-7596-9689-1 Papers (2017) "Progress in Post-Quantum Mechanics" AIP Conference Proceedings 1841, 040003 (2012). "Is Entanglement Signaling Really Impossible?", Bulletin of the American Physical Society, 57(1), APS March Meeting 2012. (2011). "Retrocausality and Signal Nonlocality in Consciousness and Cosmology", Journal of Cosmology, 14. (2011). "Dark Energy and Dark Matter as w = -1 Virtual Particles and the World Hologram Model", Bulletin of the American Physical Society, 56(4), April 2011 meeting. with Creon Levit (2009). "The emergence of gravity as a retro-causal post-inflation macro-quantum-coherent holographic vacuum "Higgs-Goldstone field", ArXiv.org, January 2009. (2006). "Emergent Gravity: String Theory Without String Theory", ArXiv.org. (2004). "Einstein Gravity with Dark Energy and Dark Matter as Sakharov Metric Elasticity", GR17 Dublin 2004: 17th International Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation: Book of Abstracts, p. 181. (2004). "Wheeler's World", Developments in Quantum Physics, NOVA Scientific Publishers, pp. 41-84. (2003). "Macro-Quantum Origin of Gravity and Quintessence", Bulletin of the American Physical Society, 48(1), p. 832. (2002). "Progress in Post-Quantum Physics and Unified Field Theory", in Richard L. Amoroso, et al. (eds.), Gravitation and Cosmology: From the Hubble Radius to the Planck Scale, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 419-430. (1998). "Beyond Bohm-Vigier Quantum Mechanics", Causality & Locality in Modern Physics and Astronomy, symposium, August 1997, pp. 403-410. (1997) with M. C. Levit. "Are the Bader Laplacian and the Bohm Quantum Potential Equivalent?", Chemical Physics Letters, 281(1-3), 19 December 1997, pp. 157-160. (1996). "Is Consciousness a Violation of Quantum Mechanics?", in Stuart R. Hameroff, et al., Toward a Science of Consciousness: The First Tucson Discussions and Debates, MIT Press. (1991). "Design for a Superluminal Signaling Device,", Physics Essays, 4(3), September 1991, pp. 315-336. Now full paper cited by Kaiser is online here (1977). "The Case for Superluminal Information Transfer," MIT Technology Review, 79(5), p. 3ff. (1977). "Higher Intelligence is Us in the Future," in Timothy Leary (ed.), Spit in the Ocean, Ken Kesey, Fall 1977, No. 3. (1976). "Reply to Bohm-Hiley," Psychoenergetic Systems, Gordon & Breach, 2, 1976, pp. 1-8. (1975). "Toward a Unified Field Theory of Gravitation and Strong Interactions", Foundations of Physics, 5(2). (1975). "The Physical Roots of Consciousness" in Jeffrey Mishlove (ed.), The Roots of Consciousness, Random House, pp. 279-290. (1974). "The primordial proton", Physics Today, letters, 27(5), May 1974. (1974). "Eightfold way as a consequence of the general theory of relativity", Collective Phenomena, 1(3), pp. 169-172. (1974). "Off the Beat: Geller Performs for Physicists," Science News. (1974). "The Dirac Equation and General Relativity," Foundations of Physics. (1974). "Implications of meta-physics for psychoenergetic systems," Psychoenergetic Systems, 1(1), pp.;3-10. (1974). "Speculations on the effects of gravitation and cosmology in hadron physics", Collective Phenomena, 1(3), January 1, 1974, pp. 163-167. 1973). "Explanation for the Asymmetry Between Matter and Antimatter in the Visible Universe", International Centre for Theoretical Physics, November 1973. (1973). "Regge Trajectories as Rotation Black Holes in Strong Gravity", in H. Frohlich & F.W. Cummings (eds.). Collective Phenomena. (1972). "Gravitation, Strong Interactions, and the Creation of the Universe", Nature, letter to the editor, December 4, 1972, pp. 101-102. (1971). "On mini black holes," short note in Nature Physical Science. (1970) with Fred Cummings and J. S. Herold. "Beyond the Hartree-Fock Theory in Superfluid Bosons," in Physica Scripta, 50(1), November 23, 1970. (1969). "Destruction of Superflow in Unsaturated 4He Films and the Prediction of a New Crystalline Phase of 4He with Bose-Einstein Condensation", Physics Letters, 30(5), November 3, 1969, pp. 300-301. (1969). "Gauge Invariance in the Theory of Superfluidity", University of California, Riverside, Dissertation Abstracts International, 31-01, Section B, p. 0320. (1967). "On the 'type II superconductor' model of self-trapped laser filaments," Physics Letters A, 26(2), pp. 88-89. (1967). "A new theory of the superfluid vortex phenomenon", Physics Letters A, 24(7), March 27, 1967, pp. 399-400. (1967). "On the nature of the superfluid critical velocity", Physics Letters A, 24(5), February 27, 1967, pp. 287-288. (1967). "Laser Self-Focusing Analogue to the Landau-Ginzburg Equation of Type II Superconductivity", Physics Letters. with Marshall Stoneham (1967). "The Goldstone Theorem in the Jahn-Teller Effect", Proceedings of the Physical Society of London, 91(1), cited in American Institute of Physics Resource Letter on Symmetry in Physics, 1980 (at Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Harwell, Didcot, Berks). (1965). "Atomic relaxation and fluctuations of laser photons", Optical Society of America, 55, April 1965, pp. 455-456. (1963). "Quantum-Mechanical Correlation Theory of Electromagnetic Fields," Il Nuovo Cimento, 27(5).

[@JackSarfatti]

Notes[edit] Jump up ^ David Kaiser, 2011: "From [Eugene] Wigner and [John] Wheeler, Sarfatti took the point that everyone's consciousness participates in shaping quantum processes, both by deciding which observations to make and by collapsing the multiplying possibilities into definite outcomes. Sarfatti recast Wigner's main argument in terms of action and reaction. Surely matter can affect consciousness ... so why not posit an equal and opposite reaction of consciousness on matter?"[2] David Hodgson, 2005: "[P]hysicist Jack Sarfatti has devised a theory of consciousness and free will based upon Bohm's version of QM [quantum mechanics], or post-QM. Sarfatti's unorthodox work does not yet appear in any book or published article, but it can be found on the internet ..."[3] Jump up ^ Paavo T. I. Pylkkänen, 2006: "The physicist Jack Sarfatti, in particular, has emphasized the need for an explanation of how the individual particle influences its own field and has proposed mechanisms for such 'back-action,' also emphasizing, in a very interesting way, its importance in understanding the mind-matter relationship and how consciousness arises (see, for example, Sarfatti (1997)."[4] Steven M. Rosen, 1994: "A major theme of Tobin, Sarfatti, and Wolf's exposition is that 'all is consciousness.' At every level of organization in the hierarchy of space-time domains, singularities or holes develop at the fringes, destroying the continuity that prevailed in the middle regions. Consciousness is identified as the 'hidden variable' that creates the holes and then fills them, restoring continuity. In the process, the next level of hierarchy is produced. Thus the secret thread with which plural realities are sewn together is consciousness. ... Therefore, in his opening statement, Sarfatti offers 'the idea that consciousness is at the root of the material universe' (Toben, Sarfatti, and Wolf 1975, p. 126) ..."[5] Jump up ^ David Kaiser 2011: "The hippie physicists' concerted push on Bell's theorem and quantum entanglement instigated major breakthroughs ... The most important became known as the "no-cloning theorem," a new insight into quantum theory that emerged from spirited efforts to wrestle with hypothetical machines dreamed up by members of the Fundamental Fysiks Group."[25] Jump up ^ Robert P. Crease, Alfred Scharff Goldhaber, 2014: "The textbook that briefly mentioned Bell's theorem was Kurt Gottfried, Quantum Mechanics: Fundamentals (W. A. Benjamin, 1966). The first quantum mechanics textbook that Kaiser has found that devotes any attention to Bell's theorem was Sakurai's 1985 textbook Modern Quantum Mechanics, i.e. Bell's theorem did not enter mainstream physics textbooks until after the Fundamental Fysiks Group had left its impact."[26] Jump up ^ Malcolm W. Browne, New York Times, 1986: "The overwhelming majority of physicists deny the possibility that any form of communication could travel faster than the speed of light. But one physicist at the New York meeting, Dr. Jack Sarfatti of San Francisco, said that he not only believes that faster-than-light communication is possible by means of time loops, but that he is trying to attract backing from the Defense Department in developing a practical faster-than-light system."[56] References[edit] ^ Jump up to: a b c Stephen Schwartz, "The Universe, As Seen From North Beach", San Francisco Chronicle, August 17, 1997, p. 5. Jump up ^ David Kaiser, How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival. W. W. Norton & Company Inc, 2011, p. 65. Jump up ^ David Hodgson, "Quantum Physics, Consciousness and Free Will," in Robert Kane (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, Oxford University Press, 2005, p. 110, n. 4. Jump up ^ Paavo T. I. Pylkkänen, Mind, Matter and the Implicate Order, Springer Science & Business Media, 2006, p. 37. Jump up ^ Steven M. Rosen, Science, Paradox, and the Moebius Principle, State University of New York Press, 1994, p. 143. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. 65; Michael Talbot, Mysticism and the New Physics, Penguin, 1993, pp. 2, 65. Jack Sarfatti, "Retrocausality and Signal Nonlocality in Consciousness and Cosmology", Journal of Cosmology, 14, 2011. For "Conceptual Art," Alex Burns, "Jack Sarfatti: Weird Science", 21C magazine, 1996. For physics replacing philosophy, Schwartz 1997, p. 1.

[@JackSarfatti]

Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. xxiiiff; David Kaiser, "Lecture: How the Hippies Saved Physics", WGBH PBS, April 28, 2010 (hereafter Kaiser 2010), from 04:00 mins, particularly from 11:00 mins. Hugh Gusterson, "Physics: Quantum outsiders", Nature, 476, 278-279, August 18, 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b George Johnson, "What Physics Owes the Counterculture", The New York Times, June 17, 2011. Jump up ^ For Sarfatti's authorship of Space-Time and Beyond, Kaiser 2011, p. 136; Rosen 1994, p. 141; also see Kaiser 2010, from 23:22 mins. Jump up ^ Technology Review, Association of Alumni and Alumnae of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1976, p. 1; Jack Sarfatti, Destiny Matrix. AuthorHouse, 2002, p. 93. Jump up ^ Hyman Sarfatti, "My Story: Cosmic Consciousness & Me", Scientific GOD Journal, 5(8), October 2014 (pp. 660-682), pp. 660, 664. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Alex Burns, "Jack Sarfatti: Weird Science", 21C magazine, 1996. Jump up ^ Sarfatti, Destiny Matrix, pp. 24-27, 95; Kaiser 2011, p. 71. ^ Jump up to: a b Sharon Weinberger, "100 Year Starship: An interstellar leap for mankind?", BBC, March 22, 2012. Jump up ^ For the MS, Schwartz 1997, p. 5; for the PhD, Jack Sarfatt[i], "Gauge Invariance in the Theory of Superfluidity", The Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System. Jump up ^ "If the beer don't get you, then the black holes must," New Scientist, October 18, 1973, p. 165. For a paper he wrote in Trieste, Jack Sarfatti, "Toward a Unified Field Theory of Gravitation and Strong Interactions", Foundations of Physics, 5(2), 1975. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. 63. Jump up ^ H. M. Collins and T. J. Pinch, Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science, Routledge, 2013, p. 189, n. 4. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, from 24:00 mins. Jump up ^ "25th reunion of the Fundamental Physics Group", quantumtantra.com. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, from 23:22 mins; for Capra's membership, from 45:00 mins, and Kaiser 2011, p. 139. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. xv-xvi. Jump up ^ Max Heirich, "Cultural Breakthroughs", "American Behavioral Scientist", 19(6), July/August 1976 (pp. 685-702), pp. 696-699. ^ Jump up to: a b Kaiser 2010, from 23:22 mins. Gary Zukav, The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics, HarperOne, 2001 (first published 1979), p. x. Martin Gardner and John Archibald Wheeler, "Quantum Theory and Quack Theory", New York Review of Books, 17 May 1979. Jack Sarfatti, "The Superluminal", The New York Review of Books, 27 September 1979. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. xiii-xxxv. Jump up ^ Robert P. Crease, Alfred Scharff Goldhaber, The Quantum Moment: How Planck, Bohr, Einstein, and Heisenberg Taught Us to Love Uncertainty, W. W. Norton & Company, 2014, pp. 263-264, 304, n. 9. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, around 28 mins. For Stanford Research Institute, "The Magician And the Think Tank", Time magazine, March 12, 1973. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. xvii. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. xviii. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. xviii; Sarfatti, Destiny Matrix, p. 117. Jump up ^ *[1] Sarfatti with Russell Targ on CIA experiments in remote viewing ^ Jump up to: a b Kaiser 2011, pp. 71-72; Kaiser 2010: Geller from 21:00 mins, Sarfatti's involvement from 23:22 mins. ^ Jump up to: a b c Joseph Hanlon, "Uri Geller and Science," New Scientist, October 17, 1974, pp. 170-185: pp. 178-183 for Stanford Research Institute; p. 180 for "circus atmosphere" and Geller being in control; p. 184 for Birkbeck and Sarfatti. Jump up ^ "Investigating the paranormal", Nature, editorial, October 18, 1974; Russell Targ, Harold Puthoff, "Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding", Nature, 251, October 17, 1974, pp. 602-607. doi:10.1038/251602a0 Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, from c. 23:44 mins. Jump up ^ Hanlon's view is, however, contradicted here: www.remoteviewed.com/remote_viewing_history_military.htm Jump up ^ J. B. Hasted, The metal-benders, Routledge, 1981, p. 18. Boyce Rensberger, "Physicists Test Telepathy In a 'Cheat-Proof' Setting; Random Selection", The New York Times, October 22, 1974. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. 72. Sarfatti wrote: "My personal professional judgment as a PhD physicist is that Geller demonstrated genuine psycho-energetic ability at Birkbeck, which is beyond the doubt of any reasonable man, under relatively well controlled and repeatable experimental conditions." Also see Kaiser 2010, from 23:22 mins. Jump up ^ J. B. Hasted, et al., News, Nature, 254, April 10, 1975, pp. 470-471. doi:10.1038/254470a0 Jump up ^ Jack Sarfatti, "Retraction on Geller", Science News, 108(23), December 6, 1975, p. 355; Boyce Rensberger, "Magicians term Israeli 'psychic' a fraud", The New York Times, December 13, 1975. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. 15, 298, n. 18. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, from 28:00 mins. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. 114; Kaiser 2010, from 33:00 mins. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2010, from 38:00 mins. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. 131-138; Kaiser 2010, from 40:00 mins. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, p. 145. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. 136-137. Jump up ^ Kaiser 2011, pp. 197-202. Jump up ^ ricochet.com/saturday-night-science-flying-saucers-explained/ Jump up ^ arxiv.org/abs/1509.02442 Jump up ^ prce.hu/centre_for_time/jtf/retro.html Jump up ^ arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049 Jump up ^ Appendix Seven, REPORT ON THE BOHR-TERELETSKY MEETINGS, DOCUMENTS FROM THE RUSSIAN STATE ARCHIVE, SPECIAL TASKS THE MEMOIRS OF AN UNWANTED WITNESS - A SOVIET SPYMASTER, Pavel and Anatoli Sudoplatov with Jerold L and Leona P. Schecter, New Foreword by Robert Conquest (Hoover Institute, Stanford) Updated Edition, pp.483-4, Back Bay Books, Little, Brown and Company 1994 ISBN 0-316-82115-2 (pb). Jump up ^ Schecter, Schechter, and Powers. "‘Were the Atom Scientists Spies?’: An Exchange". www.nybooks.com. New York Review of Books. Retrieved 11 November 2016. Jump up ^ Herbert Gold, Bohemia: Where Art, Angst, Love, and Strong Coffee Meet, Simon & Schuster, 1993, p. 15. Jump up ^ Malcolm W. Browne, "Quantum Theory: Disturbing Questions Remain Unsolved", The New York Times, February 11, 1986, p. 2: Jump up ^ Jack Sarfatti, "Progress in Post-Quantum Theory", International Space Sciences Organization, undated. Jump up ^ Stephen Schwartz, "Volunteers needed. Brothers help organizations get on information superhighway for free", San Francisco Chronicle, November 20, 1995. Jump up ^ Marilee Enge, "Physicist's 'Bohemian' Ways," San Jose Mercury News, August 7, 2000. Jack Sarfatti, "Progress in post-quantum physics and unified field theory", in Richard L. Amoroso, et al. (eds.), Gravitation and Cosmology: From the Hubble Radius to the Planck Scale, Proceedings of a Symposium in Honour of the 80th Birthday of Jean-Pierre Vigier, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, pp. 419-430. Jump up ^ Matthew Reisz, "He didn't see that coming, or did he?", Times Higher Education, April 29, 2010, archive copy. Jump up ^ "About", "100 Year Starship Study™ Public Symposium", 100yearstarshipstudy.com. Further reading[edit] Stardrive.org, Sarfatti's website. Jack Sarfatti, academia.edu. Bell, John S. Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics: Collected Papers on Quantum Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, 2004. Bohm, David; Hiley, Basil. The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory, Routledge Chapman & Hall, 1993. Capra, Fritjof. The Tao of Physics, Shambhala Publications, 1975. Carr, Bernard. "Can Psychical Research Bridge the Gap Between Mind and Matter?", Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 59(221), June 2008. Chalmers, David. "The Puzzle of Conscious Experience", Scientific American, December 1995, updated 2002. CBC. "Hippie Physics", The Current, August 9, 2011 (interview with David Kaiser on Sarfatti and others). Davies, Paul. God and the New Physics. Simon & Schuster, 1984. Du Tertre, Nancy, How to Talk to An Alien pp 103 - 106, 114 on Jack Sarfatti, Career Press 2016 Kaiser David, Patrick McCray Groovy Science Levenda Peter, Sinister Forces-The Manson Secret: A Grimoire of American Political Witchcraft , * Merali, Zeeya. "Back From the Future", Discover magazine, April 2010. Omnès, Roland, Sangalli, Arturo. Quantum Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 2002. Picknett, Lynn; Prince, Clive. The Stargate Conspiracy, Berkley, 2001. [4] excerpt from book Stargate Conspiracy about Sarfatti Sarfatti, Jack. Time Travel: The Art of the Possible, interview with Sarfatti about time travel, 1999. The Loungs. "Jack Sarfatti" (song), July 2008. Towler, Michael. "Pilot-wave theory, Bohmian metaphysics, and the foundations of quantum mechanics", lectures on David Bohm's Quantum Pilot Wave Theory, University of Cambridge. Walker, John Update on Sarfatti's work on post-quantum superluminal/retrocausal communication 2016 Wisnioski, Matthew. "Let's Be Fysiksists Again", Science, 332(6037), June 24, 2011, pp. 1504-1505.

[@nicomodesto4368]

Hi jack, do you remember of F.Battiato in Milo Sicily? He’s gone, I am gonna read your stuffs, regards.

[@SilverStarGazer]

I’m disappointed David Wilcock isn’t wearing one of his snazzy suits 🙄

[@awsomenesscaleb]

Eureka!

[@hippo-potamus]

Its All the Limitless One.

[@JackSarfatti]

sounds like Deepak Chopra ;-)

[@RickDelmonico]

Deepak is the jin to Dawkin's yang.

[@HighSpeedNoDrag]

But one must Admire Jack's Modesty.........................not.

[@JackSarfatti]

False modesty is not one of my vices.

[@hawkkim1974]

holy cow they are talking about time machine too. anyway I can see he loves what he's doing

[@Chesterton7]

Thanks JS and Klee

[@janetmcarthur5257]

He was on Coast To Coast AM recently, and he had to be kicked off the show. He couldn't even wait for the questions. "Shut up and listen to me!" He's an idiot.

[@Chesterton7]

@@janetmcarthur5257 Disappointing to hear. I didn't know he was like that now.

[@jasparevarhart1332]

Soooooo.... I guess my dream, the other night, means I'm NOT a goddam nut...

[@jackpullen3820]

No results for www.vimeo.com/171013596 - I hate it when that happens! Made it! Thanks Jack ! This video got so good, i think i time traveled towards it's end.

[@clairew4288]

He can seem very arrogant in manner..and sound immediately dismissive of others hoping to get a word in. No issues with entitled confidence and dominating the spotlight there? He comes off sounding somewhat 'high functioning ADHD'.

[@mariankupczynski5886]

Dear Dr Sarfatti you are using handwaving arguments and very imprecise terminology therefore your video explains nothing and unfortunately contributes only to the general confusion about the interpretation of quantum theory. It is not serving the audience you address. You mix physics with a science fiction. There is no reason to believe into retro-causation etc. So called weak measurements are not the measurements in the usual sense etc. You observe a single photon only when there is a click on the detector etc. Nevertheless you know many things and people so the particpants seemed to like your talk.

[@johngonsowski2230]

Retrocausation is really just probabilities in the present based on worldline interference in the future. It certainly works math-wise. You would have to read the papers from Sutherland and Sarfatti and others who reference them and apply them to Bohm-like models in order to get precise details like the Lagrangian. Videos tend to be more general and can be more entertaining as well.

[@JackSarfatti]

To Marian: Hogwash. I have given the exact equations. Clearly you are way out of your depth of understanding. What you say above about retrocausality and weak measurements is completely confused. I gave the detailed math references for what I say in the first comment on this thread. Here again are key references. Essential References Progress in post-quantum mechanics Jack Sarfatti AIP Conference Proceedings 1841, 040003 (2017); doi.org/10.1063/1.4982779 aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.4982779 1. arXiv:1706.02290 [pdf] How Retrocausality Helps Roderick Sutherland Comments: AIP Conference Proceedings 2016 Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) 2. arXiv:1509.07380 [pdf] Interpretation of the Klein-Gordon Probability Density Roderick Sutherland Comments: 6 pages Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) 3. arXiv:1509.02442 [pdf] Lagrangian Description for Particle Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics -- Entangled Many-Particle Case Roderick Sutherland Comments: 37 pages Journal-ref: Foundations of Physics, Vol.47, pp. 174-207 (2017) Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) 4. arXiv:1509.00001 [pdf] Energy-momentum tensor for a field and particle in interaction Roderick Sutherland Comments: 9 pages Subjects: Classical Physics (physics.class-ph) 5. arXiv:1502.02058 [pdf] Naive Quantum Gravity Roderick I. Sutherland Subjects: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); Quantum Physics (quant-ph) 6. arXiv:1411.3762 [pdf] Lagrangian Formulation for Particle Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics: Single-Particle Case Roderick I. Sutherland Comments: 12 pages Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) 7. arXiv:quant-ph/0601095 [pdf] Causally Symmetric Bohm Model Rod Sutherland Comments: 35 pages, 5 figures, new sections 12 and 13 added Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) Lenny Susskind ER = EPR AdS/CFT Tensor Networks kzbin.info/www/bejne/b5TVmJqlrZqlmMU Show less Reply 3 View all 8 replies Jack Sarfatti Jack Sarfatti4 days ago Naive Quantum Gravity Roderick I. Sutherland (Submitted on 6 Feb 2015 (v1), last revised 6 Jan 2016 (this version, v2)) A possible alternative route to a quantum theory of gravity is presented. The usual path is to quantize the gravitational field in order to introduce the statistical structure characteristic of quantum mechanics. The procedure followed here instead is to remove the statistical element of quantum theory by introducing final boundary conditions as well as initial. The relevant quantum formalism then becomes compatible with the non-statistical nature of general relativity and a viable theory can be constructed without difficulty. This approach also provides a simple method of avoiding the configuration space description of quantum mechanics and allows the formulation to be carried out entirely within the four dimensions of spacetime. These advantages are made possible by the inherent retrocausal nature of the final boundary conditions. Subjects: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); Quantum Physics (quant-ph) Cite as: arXiv:1502.02058 [gr-qc] (or arXiv:1502.02058v2 [gr-qc] for this version) Submission history From: Roderick Sutherland [view email] [v1] Fri, 6 Feb 2015 21:45:11 GMT (204kb) Show less Reply 1 Jenny L. Nielsen Jenny L. Nielsen1 day ago (All these papers are relevant to talk) Reply

[@JackSarfatti]

Marian is a typical old sclerotic fuddy duddy academic who basically has been brainwashed into Bohr's Copenhagen Ideology. He obviously has not yet understood Costa de Beauregard, Fred Hoyle, I. J. Good, Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer, Huw Price, Ken Wharton, Roderick Sutherland, Aephraim Steinberg and others who have peer-reviewed papers on retrocausality and weak measurements that show how false and clueless his above opinions are.

[@JackSarfatti]

"Free Will and Retrocausality in the Quantum World A conference held under the auspices of the JTF-funded project, New Agendas for the Study of Time Venue: Winstanley Lecture Theatre, Trinity College, Cambridge Dates: 1-4 July 2014 Programme [with links to videos of talks and discussion sessions] Why retrocausality - and why free will? The 'classic' motivation for retrocausal models in QM stems from Bell's Theorem, and the nonlocality it seems to entail. Nonlocality is often felt to be counterintuitive in itself, and the source of an unresolved tension between quantum theory and special relativity. As Bell himself described the implications of his famous result: “[I]t's a deep dilemma, and the resolution of it will not be trivial ... [T]he cheapest resolution is something like going back to relativity as it was before Einstein, when people like Lorentz and Poincaré thought that there was an aether - a preferred frame of reference - but that our measuring instruments were distorted by motion in such a way that we could not detect motion through the aether.'' As Bell was well aware, the dilemma can be avoided if the properties of quantum systems are allowed to depend on what happens to them in the future, as well as in the past. Like most researchers interested in these issues, however, Bell felt that the cure would be worse than the disease - he thought that this kind of “retrocausality” would conflict with free will, and with assumptions fundamental to the practice of science. (He said that when he tried to think about retrocausality, he “lapsed into fatalism”.) If this objection to retrocausality in QM is well-founded, it raises interesting issues about the nature and origins of this "free will", that turns out to play such a surprising role in the foundations of physics. If the objection is not well-founded, then it is high time it is moved aside, so that the retrocausal approach can be given the attention it otherwise seems to deserve. Moreover, there are other motivations for exploring retrocausal models in QM, some the focus of considerable current research. Examples include: The proposed retrocausal explanation of the results of 'weak measurements' by Aharonov, Vaidman and others. The relevance of retrocausality to the issue of the viability of an 'epistemic' interpretation of the quantum state, especially in the light of recent results such as the PBR Theorem. Recent work throwing new light on the relation between retrocausality in QM, on the one hand, and time-symmetry and other symmetries, on the other. For these reasons, too, there is a pressing need for a better understanding of notions of free will and causality, and of their relevance to the retrocausal approach to the quantum world. This conference brought together many of the leading writers and researchers on these topics, to discuss these issues." prce.hu/centre_for_time/jtf/retro.html

[@mariankupczynski5886]

Bravo as the only argument you have personal unjustified insults . I do not respect people behaving like this. Therefore I will not answer to any your further comments. Shame to you. Good advice: You should learn more on quantum electrodynamics and a standard model and incorporate your retrocausation. explainthe Standard model using your ideas. Good luck!

[@nyttag7830]

Awesome i always had the same idea.

[@RickDelmonico]

Pure quantum interpretations are not viable... arxiv.org/pdf/0903.4657.pdf Pilot-wave theories are parallel-universe theories in a state of chronic denial.” D. Deutsch Pilot wave theory does not predict the fine structure constant.

[@JackSarfatti]

Deutsch is mistaken. The pilot waves are physically real of course even when they are empty of classical beables. Traditional parallel universe theories are incomplete. They lack beables that become unhidden in the PQM regime.

[@JackSarfatti]

Look "Genius" no theory predicts the fine structure constant.

[@RickDelmonico]

The law that entropy always increases holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation - well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World (1915), chapter 4

[@RickDelmonico]

I might be going out on a limb here Jack but you don't seem like a happy camper. Jack Sarfatti files.acrobat.com/a/preview/49586ca3-b051-41ac-9e71-97ea41be095b www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~mdt26/PWT/lectures/bohm8.pdf

[@sashas3362]

@@RickDelmonico The law that entropy is increasing implies that the universe is heating up rather than cooling down (unless you regard the flow of energy as the transfer of coldness rather than the transfer of heat, although that alternate pov is actually equivalent to the pov of heat transfer). If the universe is heating up (with no new energy being added to the universe) then that means time is actually going backwards (from our pov). In other words, our consciousness is actually going backward through time. A retrocausal pilot wave would then be coming from the past not the future because what we call the future is actually the past and what we call the past is actually the future (when using entropy as a reference point).

[@WhiskeyThieves]

Now explain that all again like how you would to a 6 year old

[@TokyoTraveller]

I'm not saying this guy isn't smart and all, but to infer consciousness as a FACT as an interpretation to theory sounds like pseudoscience to me.

[@StarTigerJLN]

I feel it's safe to assume consciousness, or at least observation, as part of a theory (it's hard not to in some cases) but to drop a definition of consciousness out of a pure physics theory is problematic at best. I'm agnostic on whether it is possible but it is definitely problematic/complex.

[@TokyoTraveller]

It's not science, I'm sure of it. I can prove it with one question. Ask them this: Define consciousness, in a scientific manner. It's a bullsh1t pseudo science-religion, I'm telling you. I'm just saying, if they offer you anything that looks like kool-aid, DON'T DRINK IT!

[@JackSarfatti]

The fault dear Traveller lies within your lack of understanding and not within my lecture.

[@JackSarfatti]

I have given the only Popper falsifiable definition of consciousness in terms of physics that is in the literature. Testing with nano-electronic machines will eventually settle this issue.

[@JackSarfatti]

I did define it, but it's obviously beyond your ability to understand the definition.