Metaphysics & Psychology

Physicists are nearing a breakthrough that could prove the existence of God, a study that might unsettle even the skeptics

You may have heard that our universe is not the only one; there are others. A recent scientific paper rigorously proves the existence of an infinite number of other universes. This is exciting news, as it suggests we won’t run out of worlds to explore. However, there’s a catch: our world, with its green grass and blue skies, seems to be missing. It appears that only a divine acknowledgment can rectify this, and physicists seem to be on the verge of such a discovery.

The article titled “Search for Classical Systems in Quantum Worlds” is authored by physicists from Caltech, Los Alamos, and the Swiss Institute of Technology. It seeks to address the profound question: why does our world exist?

From our perspective, the world simply exists. We perceive it through our eyes, but whether our vision conveys the full truth is debatable.

Our modern civilization, with its computers, cellular communications, and social media, relies heavily on the principles of quantum mechanics. This science is often considered strange, suggesting possibilities like walking through walls, the nonexistence of time, and the disappearance of nature when unobserved. Despite its oddities, quantum mechanics is far from being nonsensical, as evidenced by its application in countless devices. Yet, we remain unable to walk through walls or traverse time.

We inhabit a world termed “classical” by quantum mechanics, which does not emerge from its equations; there’s no room for it. Conversely, the classical world is precisely depicted by Einstein’s theory of relativity and Newton’s laws. However, the issue arises because the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics exclude each other. Could it be, perhaps, the theory of relativity? For instance, the GPS system would not be feasible without the relativistic, or Einsteinian, effects. Thus, a choice is necessitated.

There is no peace as long as we are not

Physicists made this choice. Indeed, these peculiarities were recognized as early as the 1930s, necessitating a response.

Thus, the notion of global collapse emerged. The world exists as probabilities rather than material objects. However, these probabilities eventually “collapse,” trimming the excess, leaving us with familiar entities like chairs, tables, the sun, and grass, rather than mere probabilities of their existence. An Observer is required for this “collapse” to happen. In the presence of an Observer, probabilities retreat, much like a turtle withdrawing into its shell, leaving behind a tangible reality for interaction.

The question then arises: Who is the Observer? It includes us, hence the adage “The moon does not exist unless someone observes it.” But it extends beyond humans to animals and, given that Mars exists without them, possibly inanimate objects as well. It seems that a stone can observe another stone, a grain of sand another grain.

Frankly, this seems like nonsense.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

The pinnacle of bewilderment occurred in 2019 when a team of earnest scientists experimentally demonstrated that individual photons can act as observers. This underscores the notion of “searching where the light is brightest,” implying that in darkness, nothing exists.

It is conceivable that if the Observer encompasses all that exists, then the origin of the Observer itself becomes a mystery. Presumably, there must be another entity observing it. Higher-order observers, perhaps? The 2019 article posited that there is no underlying reality and no “global collapse”—our experiences are merely perceptions. In essence, a Matrix-2 scenario.

Should we posit the existence of an Absolute Observer, identified as God, the enigma resolves itself. However, scientists will persist in their inquiries, avoiding this hypothesis at all costs.

Related Post

The Andromeda Nebula hypothesis

The recent article presents a fresh perspective on the weighty concept, offering a different viewpoint. In the 1950s, physicist Hugh Everett proposed that the universe is not singular, suggesting a way out of a theoretical deadlock. According to him, multiple parallel universes exist. David Deutsch, known for his work on quantum computers, expanded on this idea, suggesting that our decisions cause us to shift between these parallel worlds. For instance, deciding whether to purchase ice cream on the way to work results in different outcomes in different universes, based on the choice made. Recently, it has been established that the brain functions similarly to a quantum computer, which aligns well with these theories.

The multiverse theory, or the concept of multiple universes, has gained popularity partly because it addresses the free will paradox. Even Isaac Newton recognized that his laws seemed to negate free will, implying predestination. However, the multiverse theory suggests that free will exists and that our choices matter, resolving a longstanding philosophical dilemma for the first time in centuries.

Yet the sums still do not reconcile. In a recent study, physicists posed a provocative question: If an observer sits in New York, can he conjure the Andromeda Nebula merely by contemplating it? Surprisingly, quantum mechanics equations suggest it’s possible. Just a thought might be enough to manifest it. This leads to the nebula, and beyond, to the very brink of existence.

The researchers arrived at two conclusions, one indisputable, the other contentious.

Firstly, the number of universes equals the number of observers; essentially, an infinite count. This concept has unanimous support among physicists.

Secondly, the notion of a “one for all” world, a “real reality,” is nonexistent. Instead, there’s a boundless collection of individual universes. Not only Uncle Borya, but every Earth inhabitant, every animal, down to the insects, and even photons—which are also considered observers—play a part in this. With each light bulb emitting billions of photons every second, the numbers are truly infinite. This point, however, is up for debate.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

In essence, Caltech and Los Alamos experts sought a foothold in reality, a way to derive the “classical” from the quantum. And it appears they have found such a place.

Nothing New?

This may appear to be a modern absurdity, but if it is absurd, it has ancient roots. Indeed, the concept of multiple realities began to take shape among scientists in the latter half of the 19th century, long before the advent of relativity theory or quantum mechanics. Leading this exploration were psychologists who recognized that each person has their own unique experience. We cannot transplant our experiences into someone else. We concur that an apple is red, yet it’s conceivable that what we perceive as red could be blue to others.

These inquiries all converged on an amateur scientist and military pilot, John Dunn, who significantly influenced twentieth-century art (though, regrettably, not science—where the “self-taught” individual’s constructions were not immediately recognized). Having empirically established that our dreams intertwine past and future, Dunn proposed that consciousness moves freely through time, akin to a ruler. It is observed by a higher-order consciousness (the fifth dimension), then by a consciousness from the sixth dimension, and so on, culminating in infinity, as discussed in the new article, right?

Not exactly. Rather, it culminates in God, who is the absolute Observer and the embodiment of absolute time. Dunn was a believer in God, unlike many physicists today. However, physicists now, more than ever, have the opportunity to prove His existence. After all, in mathematical terms, God is the limit of an infinite function—a concept familiar to mathematicians from their first year of study.

One must concede that introducing the Initial or Absolute Observer alters the scenario, rendering it far from mundane. Perhaps our world is an illusion, yet one woven into a larger system whose inception is marked by the Creator. It’s a captivating notion. Whether it’s scientific depends on the author of the subsequent article. Indeed, among researchers, there are numerous believers.

Share

Recent Posts

“Manhattan Project”-2: A new “atomic bomb” with artificial intelligence is being assembled in the USA

Traditionalists might hesitate to adopt the term "Artificial Intelligence," questioning the need for a computer…

22 mins ago

“Altered carbon”, the price of immortality?

In the series "Altered Carbon," there is a scene in the very first episode that…

24 hours ago

An intelligent being from the ocean’s depths. With whom did the patrol vessel collide off Alaska’s coast in the 1980s?

In the early 1980s, an amateur radio operator inadvertently intercepted a conversation between the commander…

2 days ago

Faustian bargain: What a pact with the devil possibly looks like

In 1634, Catholic priest Urbain Grandier was executed by burning at the stake, accused of…

3 days ago

Vucic stated, “We are three to four months away from World War III – the West has not informed its citizens of the price they will all pay

Serbian President A. Vucic delivered a startling interview to the Swiss magazine "Weltwoche," expressing his…

4 days ago

“Mother of all bubbles” will burst: Why the biggest crash since the Great Depression is coming – Stocks are predicted to plummet by up to 90%

Harry Dent, the renowned author, financier, and economist, remains steadfast, reiterating his audacious claim from…

4 days ago