Live your best possible life. How good can it get?

Archive for the ‘Mind Matter Interaction’ Category

Physics Experiments Predict Observers Witness Different Histories

According to a new theoretical experiment, quantum physics indicates that observers witness different histories.  Taking this concept to its logical conclusion, this suggests that you and I and others may not necessarily recognize the same historical events–and the very suggestion of such a possibility is sending shock waves through scientific communities who take as a core assumption that there must logically be only one set of true historical facts.

You may have heard that quantum physics has gained a reputation for including such things as, “spooky action at a distance,” and that it somehow involves a cat inside of a box that may or may not be dead–but quantum physics is looking even weirder still, thanks to contributions by theoretical physicists Matthew Leifer and Robert Spekkens, whose work I’ve been following with great interest, and citing in my published papers, such as Primacy of Quantum Logic in the Natural World.

At the heart of these new observations is the idea that different observers can witness different realities, such that contradictory pictures of reality are observed.  This is described in a recent article written by Davide Castelvecchi, Reimagining of Schrodinger’s Cat Breaks Quantum Mechanics–and Stumps Physicists.

The headline here is perhaps a bit overly dramatic, as for all practical purposes, quantum mechanics can still be relied upon to deliver consistent results when it comes to it’s predictive abilities that we’ve relied upon for nuclear reactors, and that we are beginning to harness for up-and-coming new quantum computers.  What has broken has less to do with the actual physical world breaking as our biased perspective of there being “one and only one historical past.”

The Observer’s Role in Determining a Cat’s Fate

The original thought experiment designed by Erwin Schrodinger involved placing a cat in a presumedly ludicrous situation where it’s fate rests entirely in the hands of a quantum random event, such as a vial of poison gas inside the cat’s small room possibly being broken open when the randomizing trigger for the poison vial is activated at a time of decay of a radioactive isotope.  What Schrodinger originally found to be an outrageous notion was that, if we were to take quantum physics seriously, the cat inside the box with the poison vial could actually be considered to be BOTH alive AND dead–in a superposition of states–up until the moment when an Observer opened the box to check on the cat.  At the moment of such observation, the cat was considered to now actually be either alive or dead, and no longer in the seemingly preposterous state of alive-and-dead.

Introducing a Second Observer

In a small refinement of Erwin Schrodinger’s original thought experiment (where no physical cats were actually harmed), Eugene Wigner proposed that we contemplate what would happen when we add to our experimental design of the Observer and the Cat in the box a friend of the original observer.  We now have a Cat, an Observer, and a Friend–all waiting to see whether the cat in Schrodinger’s box is either alive or dead.  And as long as the Observer does not look, we can say the cat can be considered to be in a superposition of states–both alive-and-dead.  Once the Observer checks to see what the cat’s state actually is, we used to say that we now knew what the outcome is.  Yet, another way of viewing this more complex system of observation is that we don’t really have a final answer until the Observer’s Friend becomes aware of the result.

Complex Systems Can Experience Different Pasts

Daniela Frauchiger and Renato Renner of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich shows that “if the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct, then different experimenters can reach opposite conclusions about what the physicist in the box has measured.”

What’s new with this thought experiment is the creation of a more sophisticated conceptualization of multiple observers, such that there can now be two Wigner Friends, “Alice” and “Bob,” who are each conducting their own separate observations of a physicist Observer who they keep in a box.

What’s interesting about this experimental design is that now when the two Friends open their boxes, they will sometimes make observations that are inconsistent with one another.

While we do not yet have quantum computers available that can prove or disprove the hypothesis that we can expect to see differences in observations in more complex systems of observers, we are moving steadily toward a time when such quantum computers will be able to provide us with a definitive answer on what now appears to be proof of a lack of a singular factual history.

Mandela Effects, Reality Shifts, and Quantum Jumps

There has been a great deal of discussion about this new take on the classic Schrodinger’s cat experiment in physics circles, with some of the world’s top physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, long ago having already suggested that we may expect to see, for example, physical evidence of there having been many original “big bangs” at the time of the creation of our universe.  Hawking co-authored a paper on this topic with Thomas Hertog in 2006, Populating the landscape:  A top-down approach.

I suggest this discussion about observers witnessing different possible past ‘truths’ and ‘facts’ should be very much part of conversation amongst those of us who are noticing such things as Mandela Effects, reality shifts, and quantum jumps.  When we recognize that there is scientific precedent for such phenomena, we can hopefully glean insights about the true mysterious workings of Nature, while appreciating our good fortune in sometimes getting to see evidence of such things ourselves.

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

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

Myers-Briggs Intuitive-Feelers Experiencing Mandela Effects

Why are some of the rarest personality types more likely to experience Mandela Effects and reality shifts? While Myers-Briggs “Intuitive Feelers” account for only 25% of the overall population, they are more likely than other personality types to observe Mandela Effects, reality shifts, and quantum jumps.

While I was preparing to present a talk in Boulder, Colorado  about ETs, AI, and Evolution of Human Consciousness, part of the material I was presenting has led me to recognize patterns that I’d not seen before, linking personality with observation of Mandela Effects and reality shifts.

What I noticed was that personality types who were most likely to recognize Mandela Effects were the Intuitive Feeling types, as identified by the Myers-Briggs personality test.

Myers-Briggs Personality Test

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality inventory was developed by mother-daughter team Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers.  Myers and Briggs applied some ideas and insights of Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung, to recognizing human personality characteristics.

The key principle underlying the foundation of this personality test is that much seemingly random variation in peoples’ behavior can be recognized to actually be orderly and consistent, because peoples’ behavior is driven by intrinsic differences in individual preferences.  The Myers-Briggs test is thus a test that one can take to identify their own individual preferences between such things as preferring to focus on the internal (Introvert) or external (Extrovert) world.

The resulting sixteen personality types thus present us with an overview of various personality types intended to capture the core essence of how people might view the world from those preferences expressed through their personalities.

It’s important to point out that personality type does not indicate nor represent character, and there is no ‘best type.’  While some types may be more or less common in various cultures and globally around the world, they are simply ways of viewing the world.

Within these sixteen types another pattern can be seen in which some people have “NF” at the core of their personality type.  This “NF” stands for “Intuitive Feeling” and INtuitive Feelers (NFs) are one of the basic temperance types, the others being:  INtuitive Thinkers (NTs), Sensate Judgers (SJs), and Sensate Perceivers (SPs).

 

Myers-Briggs Intuitive Feelers (NF) 

Some people call Myers-Briggs Intuitive Feelers “Catalysts,” and others call them “Empaths.”  These are people, like myself, who primarily experience Mandela Effects and reality shifts.

I’ve recently conducted surveys within Mandela Effect and reality shift experiencer groups, and found that while the overall population of NF types is about 25%, these personality types comprise the majority of Mandela Effect and reality shift experiencers, at percentages exceeding 75%.  While correlation is not equivalent with causation, we can nonetheless take note of this remarkable connection between people who have Intuitive Feeling personality types and those who are currently in the majority of experiencing Mandela Effects and reality shifts.

The Myers-Briggs personality test appears to be a good place to look when considering the evolution of human consciousness, to notice what kind of changes, if any, are occurring with the populations in the USA and around the world in these personality types.

 

Myers Briggs Personality Tests

If you haven’t taken your Myers-Briggs personality test, you can go to a website like HumanMetrics where you can answer a bunch of questions and get a relatively quick, free assessment.  You can also take the official Myers Briggs instrument online at the official Myers-Briggs website.  Once you get your results, you can see if your personality type looks right to you.  There have been many applications of Myers-Briggs personality tests over time.

If you’d like to participate in a survey, and you have experienced reality shifts, alternate histories or Mandela Effects, here’s the link to a survey for Mandela Effecteds and reality shifters:  https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfXqpiRzq8fqH4Er1fd9DlG7pFuIQqjKlGAk0dEykgunLXjZQ/viewform?c=0&w=1

If you’d like to participate in a survey and you have NOT (yet) noticed that you have experienced reality shifts, Mandela Effects or alternate histories, here’s a link to that survey for NON-Mandela-Effected folk:  https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd2UpP0xi65cWB48noW4Hy7eXYIGur3UOMN18hoP09mMsYvQw/viewform

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

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

Entanglement and Lucid Living

There are some truly fundamental concepts about the nature of reality within the principles of entanglement and lucid living, which together provide us with a glimpse of what’s behind synchronicity when we are filled with positive energy and feeling grounded, and the so-called ‘Pauli Effect’ when we are jangled with discordant energy and ungrounded.

One version of the idea of lucid living is shown in the movie ‘Inception’ in which events unfolding around characters who are actively dreaming can be steered by their consciousness.  In the movie, Inception, it’s pointed out that you can never remember the beginning of a dream, dreams that seem to cover hours might only last a short time, and often you don’t know that when you’re dreaming.  You also don’t necessarily know how you are connected–or entangled–with others, and whether you are in their dream, or they are in yours, or you are together in a shared dream.  In the movie, Inception, a dreamer can tell whether he is in a dream or whether he’s awake by spinning a top.  This dream marker thus provides a clue by which it’s possible for him to know whether he is dreaming or awake.

When we notice Mandela Effects, reality shifts, and quantum jumps, we are actually playing with reality just like we would do in a lucid dream, as I mention in my book, Reality Shifts:  When Consciousness Changes the Physical World.  Some ancient meditative practices of Tibetans and shamans going back thousands of years recognize that even when we are awake, we are still in a sense dreaming.  This awareness includes the idea that you have access to awareness of being one with everything that is, and there is therefore an entanglement that is happening between you and the universe.  And through this connection, we are capable of exerting non-local effects.

What this means is that it’s possible for us to sometimes have synchronicities when we’re in a very highly-charged, positively charged state while being relaxed and energetically grounded.  So we might say something, and suddenly we notice there they are–or they might phone or text or email us.  Or we might say something or think about something, and notice that same thing is on the radio or TV show that we’re watching or listening to.  There’s no way we could have affected those shows real-time, so it’s an obvious synchronicity.

Synchronicity & the ‘Pauli Effect’

Synchronicity is a term coined by psychologist Carl Jung to signify “the simultaneous occurrence of two meaningful but not causally connected events,” or as “a coincidence in time of two or more casually unrelated events which have the same or similar meaning… equal in rank to a causality as a principle of explanation.” Synchronicity is the occurence of a physical event in the world which occurs at or near the same time that it is being discussed or thought about.  Carl Jung had an amazing synchronicity once where he was talking to someone about a scarab beetle, and just then a scarab beetle showed up at his window.

Many of us have had similar synchronicities.  I find it very interesting that one of Carl Jung’s friends was physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who started experiencing bizarre phenomenon.  Pauli wanted to know what was going on, and to better understand the psychology behind some of his experiences, and he consulted with his friend, Carl Jung.  Pauli himself was quite well-known amongst the physics community as someone you don’t want to invite to your laboratory, because if he comes, the equipment breaks down.  So those who might have been wanting to demonstrate an experiment can’t because once Pauli arrives, nothing works.  Everything would seem to stop functioning as soon as Pauli entered the room.

This so-called “Pauli Effect” is an example of another kind of entanglement of the sort that can happen when you are not grounded.  There’s an energetic effect that can occur that I’ve experienced.  Before I regularly practiced energetically grounding myself, I would walk into rooms and the equipment would fail.  I know what that feels like, and it’s not fun:  the lightbulb blows out, the appliances break down, the computer stops working.  So I quickly learned that I need to stay grounded when I’m doing martial arts, when I am doing Tai Chi, when I am doing lower abdominal breathing and basically boosting my inner Qi / Ki to high levels–then I need to stay grounded.  This “Pauli Effect” is thus something like the flip side to synchronicity.

Lucid Living

Lucid living is analagous to having a lucid dream.  In a lucid dream, dreamers often recognize you can look at your hand in a dream and notice, “My hand looks a little different.”  The other weekend I was away from home, and in my dream I went back home to check on things.  In my dream, I was walking through my house toward the front door, and I opened the front door in my dream, but then there was a car outside of the door, blocking everything.  It was a little tiny white car on my porch, completely blocking me from being able to open my front door.  So in my dream, I looked at my hand, and I could easily expand it to be very big.  I was surprised to see the car on my porch, so that woke me up inside the dream.  Then I knew I was dreaming so I could just make my hand really big, pick the car up, move the car, and then go back to being “normal” and walk through the front door as usual.  That’s an example of lucid dreaming.

When we have reality shifts and Mandela Effects, these are capable of getting us to ask the question, “WHY are these things happening?”  

When we ask this question, you might remember when you were little and adults might annoy you by answering your questions of “Why?” with the answer, “Because!”  This answer in this case is a good one, since when you look at the parts of the word because you find:  Be Cause.  This is a clue that you–as consciousness– are the cause of reality shifts and Mandela Effects.

When we globally work together, we are literally capable of changing the world, so you can get global effects.

In the movie, Inception, there was a spinning top that helped characters in that science fiction movie recognize that they were in a dream, and not totally in the real reality.  You can actually move your level of observation back a step, and that’s the key principle of all of these ideas of reality shifting, Mandela Effects and quantum jumps.  The idea from quantum physics is that the Observer who is observing the other observers is the one who’s going to get the outcome of that entire entangled network of observations.  That final level Observer is the one who can call the shots and decide what’s going on.

The big idea here when considering entanglement and lucid living is to, as always, keep asking “How good can it get?” Stay positive, and realize that when you leave that positive question open-ended and evolving, it’s possible to find win-win solutions for all of us.

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

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

How to Prepare for Jedi VS Empire ‘bots’

A friend just posted something interesting related to both of the two talks I gave about Identity and Artificial Intelligence, “It’s the crossroads of Human history.  One road leads to A.I. and it’s merging with humanity and the other leads to evolution of average people to X men without using machines.  At some future destination there will be Empire and Jedi among the ‘Bots.'”

So how do we prepare for Jedi VS Empire ‘bots?

I was struck by two pivotal moments when I was interacting with the audience while giving the keynote talk at the West Coast Dowsers conference at UC Santa Cruz this month.  In the first moment, one person after another came up to ask a question at the microphone along the lines of, “Can just one person really make a difference?”  And time and again I replied, “Yes.  One person really can make a difference.” Much of the key to this realization involves recognition that the classical view of reality consisting primarily of physical “stuff” cannot truly be the actual nature of the world.  We’re learning that classical physics is a special case within the larger set of quantum physics–and within quantum physics, Observers can and do influence events.

In the second moment, people came up to talk to me after my keynote presentation, expressing a sense of newfound hope that despite current social atmospheres of division seeming to segregate people into groups of “Us” and “Them,” it really can be possible for us to be respectful with one another, rather than assuming ‘others’ to be untrustworthy, profane, oppressive, offensive, guilty, primitive, or evil.  We stand to benefit from listening to what others have to say, rather than shouting over them.  We can overcome artificial divisions by appreciating that we are not our thoughts, and we are not our feelings–we are the one who sees and hears and feels these thoughts and feelings.   

When we appreciate that we can look for–and find–evidence of quantum jumps and reality shifts on the macroscopic scale, we can see the world with less fear and greater appreciation for the miraculous way we experience living in such a remarkably fine-tuned universe.  We see scientific evidence that:  our cognitive processes behave according to quantum logic, where relationships between events and observers matter.  We see that there has been a doubling of the placebo effect over the past 30 years.  We see the field of embodied cognition is taking off, with our abilities rising to support our actions as, for example, we feel happier because we smiled.  We see scientists having trouble reproducing their experiments in what’s been called a “reproducability crisis.”  We see evolutionary jumps, rather than slow gradual change in our fossil records.

Physicist Dr. Henry Stapp provides us with a clue as to how we are connected to Nature with the questions we ask: “The Quantum Zeno Effect says that the answers follow your questions–that by posing the questions fast enough, you can make the answers agree with what the questions are you ask.” 

Jedi VS Empire ‘bots

I feel that one of the reasons humans love stories like the Star Wars movies is that we find in our stories a sense of meaning and purpose for our lives.  When we view the world of Jedi knights and Empire soldiers from a viewpoint of the importance of retaining the essential spark of our humanity, we can feel grateful that we are always able to take an imaginary step back from any situation and constellation of events, to view it from the point of view of Observer who is observing the observers.  And when we ask optimizing, open-ended questions from this vantage point–such as, “How good can it get?” we truly can see just how much more wonderfully unlikely a world we and our future generations can live in.

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

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

Observation, Identity and Influence

Quantum physics depends on observers selecting how and where measurements are obtained–unlike classical physics which has no such requirement for an observer.

The idea of observation and the role of the “Observer” are key to the study of quantum mechanics, since the selection of how and where a measurement is made affects what is subsequently observed.  There is a special meaning to the word ‘Observer’ in quantum physics, in which selection of a method of measurement of a quantum system influences what is subsequently observed.  Methods of measurement include people at some point, so we play the role of Observer when we choose what we look at and how we look at the world.

This aspect of quantum physics is sometimes referred to as “the observer effect” and “the measurement problem.”  The so-called ‘measurement problem’ is related to the Observer and has been called the most controversial problem in physics today, because in the realm of Quantum Mechanics, there appears to be no singular fixed reality that is exists when nobody is looking.

Intriguingly, there can exist layers upon layers of observers–such that it can be possible for someone observing an observer to ultimately influence events–such as Schrodinger observing a cat inside a box of poison (such that the cat can be envisioned to be existing in some state of being both alive and dead)–or someone observing someone observing the cat inside the box with the poison.

Quantum Steering

Many physicists have recently been discussing the idea of quantum steering–of how one observer might be able to influence the outcome of an experiment being observed by another observer.  The concept of quantum steering, or EPR-steering, was first proposed by physicist Erwin Schrodinger as a thought experiment in which remote observers of a quantum system share entangled particles.  In such a scenario one observer might then be able to direct–or steer–the state of another’s system when performing a measurement on their system.

In hypothetical experimental quantum steering situations, one individual who is often called “Alice” for purposes of these discussions might influence the observations of of a quantum system by another observer, “Bob.”  Related areas of research involve determining if this kind of influence is one-sided; whether Bob can tell when he is being influenced; whether such influence can occur even if Alice is known to Bob as ‘untrustworthy’; and how strong such influence might be.

What I find especially intriguing about these topics at the dawn of this new Quantum Age is awareness of ways that each of us actually can remotely influence others we are entangled with.

Turtles All the Way Down

Once we recognize the possibility that each observer’s questions–and subsequent measurements–can influence what is happening, we come to realize we’ve entered into a situation where someone observing someone observing can have an effect on the outcome of what is being observed.  This concept was popularized by the physicist Eugene Wigner, who presented a variation of Schrodinger’s cat thought experiment, “Wigner’s Friend,” in which an observer watches an observer of a cat enclosed in a box with a vial of poison that could be released by a quantum mechanism–thus trapping this hypothetical feline in a state of quantum superposition–of being simultaneously alive and dead.

The issue in this case of observers influencing other observers’ observations is that it’s easy to see how there might be no end to the chain of observations.  We thus can find ourselves in the unenviable position of not really knowing the ‘true observer’ of an event.d

These topics are important because some of the most interesting conversations getting to the heart of consciousness recently are happening where multi-disciplinary fields of science meet technology to create artificial intelligence and quantum computing.  Such discussions are necessary for designing how our next generations of computers and robots will operate.

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

___________________________

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

Cynthia Sue Larson interviews Gardner Sylvester

I had a fascinating and uplifting conversation with Gardner Sylvester this month about how we can better understand and appreciate the teachings of Jesus Christ. I was surprised to learn that the true secret teachings of Christ have been right in front of us all along, yet they have seldom been recognized. Gardner Sylvester is the author of The First Great Commandment, where he shares research into the ‘secret code of the Bible’ involving the true words of Jesus Christ.

I love how Gardner Sylvester’s fresh look at Christ’s wise words and timeless teachings serves to unite and uplift our spirits. Gardner’s message and book provide an extraordinarly timely and refreshingly invigorating catalyst for positive change at this time when so many of us hunger for an antidote to divisive, polarizing forces.
_______________

CYNTHIA: I love your book, ”The First Great Commandment.” The whole time I was reading it and for quite some time afterward, I felt myself uplifted with such strong feelings of Divine Love that I felt transformed by it. What inspired you to create a book that delivers such a profound sense of unconditional divine love?

GARDNER: For a long time, I’ve thought that Christianity had a greater and more beautiful message. I thought there was more there. The idea of saving one’s own guts with a spiritual fire escape didn’t seem very loving or Christian to me. It seemed to say: “I got mine. That’s what counts. Too bad about you.” It seemed like a selfish message.

When I was in grade school, I used to admire the members of our church who seemed very Christian and perfect to me. When I got older, they seemed to me more judgmental, self-righteous and holier-than-thou in the way they acted. They did not seem very kind or very Christian to me. I wanted a Christianity that was more loving.

When I was in college a professor once said, “As I see it, the message of Christianity is love.” When I looked about the room, some students were pulling back in their chairs and opening their mouths with a he-doesn’t-get-it-reaction.  I could understand the reaction of these students, who did not know a loving God. I never forgot this professor’s words.

I kept thinking somebody needs to search the Bible for a more loving and more beautiful Christianity. I was sure it was there. I thought someone would do it. No one did. So, it became my project—a project from which I gained. I am now more joyful, feel more connected to the universe and my friends tell me I look younger.

CYNTHIA: That’s wonderful that you can see such direct evidence of the power of a more loving Christianity! While I didn’t attend church when I was growing up, I felt fortunate to attend some Lutheran church services and functions with my grandmother at her church, where I took for granted that her local congregation and pastor were focused primarily on the Bible passages talking about loving God and loving one another. I’ve since heard from a number of
people that they have had very different church experiences than this, where congregations of Christians were not doing or saying what Jesus Christ would likely have done or said to those who were feeling most down-on-their-luck, most different, and most outcast. It seems a rather sizable gap exists between those who feel righteous and presume they are saved, and those who feel excluded, ostracized, insulted, or left out. How do you feel your book
can help bridge this gap?

GARDNER: The conception of heaven, for most people, is a highly gated community in the sky. Yes, a gated community in the sky, with most people not allowed to enter because of their sins. These people then see the world as divided between “the good people” who will go to heaven and “the bad people.” who will not go to heaven.

Unfortunately, people from other countries—because of their culture, the poor—because they don’t have a job, and the homeless—because they have no resources, are most apt to be judged as “bad people.” They are often seen to be guilty of “sins” such as listening to non-Christian music, drinking to much, or not going to church.

Christ shows us a different way of thinking. In the gospel of John. Christ says, A new commandment I give unto you that ye love one another. Some people think that love is a weak and wimpy emotion. It is not. Love is most powerful, especially God’s love. It can change behavior. It can cause all of us to re-think our thoughts and become more loving.

This book tells us to follow Christ’s First Great Commandment which is to love the Lord thy God, follow Christ’s Second Great Commandment, which is to love thy neighbor as thyself, and also accept that God totally loves us.  Then our behavior and way of thinking will powerfully and completely change as we come from love and love one another.

CYNTHIA: I felt that the words of Jesus Christ that you share capture the essence of the best of what the Bible offers. How did you decide which Biblical passages to include?

GARDNER: They are right there in front of us. They are in red print. These are the actual words of Christ. It couldn’t be simpler. Merriam-Webster defines Christian as, “one who believes in the teaching of Jesus Christ.” This definition is excellent. People have long been searching for the Bible’s “secret code.” The Bible’s “secret code” is the red print.

In my book The First Great Commandment, to more clearly show the difference in the words of the Old Testament—particularly the obsolete rules in Exodus and Leviticus—Old Testament words are shown in blue, while the beautiful words of Christ are shown in red. Other New Testament words—which agree with Christ, with one notable exception—are shown in green.

The big difference is, the rules of the Old Testament no longer apply.. Even the Old Testament itself agrees.  Jeremiah, says… I will make a new covenant…Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers… I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts… I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. 

Christ is very emphatic that we only follow his words. In the gospel of John: In chapter 1 he says… Follow me.  In chapter 8 he says… If ye [follow] my word, then are ye my disciples… In chapter 14 he says… If ye love me keep my commandments. The key words here are me and my. He does not say to follow the words of The Old Testament.

CYNTHIA: This is a truly beautiful message. Yet, I can see how some people who had felt comfort in the ‘gated community’ idea of Heaven might have concerns that love–even God’s love–might not be enough to ensure people will be good and kind. I can see how some people might fear that without the Old Testament kind of rules, all kinds of chaos might break out. What assurance, if any, can be found in the words of Jesus Christ that society will function
just fine when staying focused on loving God and loving one another?

GARDNER: We need to realize how odious and out-of-date some of these rules are. Leviticus says… the children of the strangers…shall ye buy and they shall be your possession… Exodus even says a master is allow to kill his slave… for he is his money. Other obsolete rules in Leviticus say no to gay sex, no to eating pork or shellfish, and no to wearing mixed fabrics.

Try this experiment to show that God’s love really does work. Imagine God totally loves you Let yourself really feel it. Next try to imagine yourself doing something injurious or harmful to another person. You can’t do it. Of course, the two are incompatible. Accepting that God loves you, will totally change your behavior, You will feel you belong in a very marvelous way.

Some years ago, a neighbor boy of mine got in trouble with the law. His father said, “I guess he is on his own now.”  His mother said, “Oh no! We will love him more and more!” His mother won on this. It’s hard to argue against love.  This former neighbor boy is now a successful, upstanding and highly respected man. Love does work.

Love has the quality of magnifying the best in a person. It can greatly change ones attitude toward their life. What we are doing now doesn’t work. The United States has less than five percent of the world’s population, yet we have almost 25 percent of the world’s total prison population. Prisons are expensive. Love is free!

CYNTHIA: I truly do feel the blessing of God’s love. And from reading your book and Jesus Christ’s words, I gain a sense that loving God and loving one another can transform the world to feel like Heaven on Earth. Would you say that is one of the ideas you wish to convey from your book?

GARDNER: Yes, and as part of loving one another we need to treat all people, including people from other countries and women, as equals. The New Testament in Galatians says, There is neither Jew nor Greek… there is neither male nor female: for ye all are one in Christ… This verse says we are all equal. The words ye are all one in Christ are very strong.

Unfortunately, many people of minority status, who are not treated equally think they don’t belong. They are treated like they are not equal. They are taught that they aren’t equal. Therefore, they feel they don’t belong. This problem is particularly acute for young people. Many people are then surprised when they act like they don’t belong.

We all belong. You are supposed to be here. God specifically created you. You are to be you. In Matthew, Christ says, Let your light so shine before men. Your light means your individual and special light. You might be straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual or in some other category. You are to be yourself. You are to, Let your light so shine…

The New Testament in 1 Corinthians says… as the lord hath called every one, so let him walk… We are all called.  Living in accord with your calling can be a source of tremendous excitement, satisfaction and strength. This might involve climbing a mountain rafting in strong waters or otherwise making your dream come true. We are to live life to the fullest.

CYNTHIA: This idea that all people have been called, and that we are–each and every one of us–one in Christ feels intensely healing. Combined with the idea that God loves us, a wonderful sense of discovering deep satisfaction with being exactly who we are, as we are seems possible. Naturally, even when living within such Divine Grace we will encounter those who are not. Does Jesus Christ provide us with guidance when facing those who do not yet love everyone, nor yet acknowledge each and every one of us has been called, and is loved by God?

GARDNER: Yes he does. Christ pointed out three great sins . The first two of these sins tell us what not to do when facing those who do not yet live in God’s love. Because a sin is that which separates us from God, a sin for one person may not be a sin for another. However, there are three great sins, each one named by Christ, that apply to us all.

The first is: we are not to be self-righteous. This means we are not to act like our actions and opinions are right while the other person’s are wrong; and we are not to be moralistic and holier-than-thou. It will not work. We are to treat others as equals. In the gospel of John, Christ says …when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin and righteousness.

The second is: we are not to be judgmental. Some people like to judge others as being unworthy. The more they can make others wrong, the more virtuous and perfect they think they are. Again, it will not work. We are to treat others as equals. In Luke Christ says, Judge not and ye shall not be judged, condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned.

A few years ago when I met a prison guard, I asked him how he got along with the prisoners. When he said, “Very well,” I asked him what was his secret. He said, “I always treat everyone with respect.” Wow! Beautiful words! We need to come from knowing that God truly loves us all, then treat others as equals and with respect. Even with prisoners, it does work.

CYNTHIA: These first two sins that Jesus Christ reveals of being self-righteous and judgmental remind me of the sin of pride, that is considered on almost every list to be the original and most serious sin, and one of the most difficult to recognize in oneself and root out. Thanks to Jesus Christ describing these facets of pride, hopefully we can be sufficiently vigilant to become less self-righteous and less judgmental. What is the third of the three great sins Christ mentions?

GARDNER: Yes, we are not here to be self-righteously proud. Some think this means we are to be somber and cheerless, and it is not Christian to enjoy this life. They then deny themselves what they might enjoy—in the belief that the more they deny themselves, the grander will be their place in heaven. They don’t go to dances, most music concerts, or movies.

Christ has a different view. In Matthew he says, Rejoice and be exceedingly glad… and …Be of good cheer… He wants us to enjoy this life, and our next life in heaven. We are to love one another and be joyful. This is part of why we are here. In the gospel of John, Christ says, … I have spoken to you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.

The third great sin pointed out by Christ is non-forgiveness. Many people think they are being a better “Christian” when they withhold forgiveness. They think it means they have a higher standard They think if they easily forgive, it would show their morals are low. They think it would mean the accept “sins” as okay. They think they are causing better behavior.

They think they must hold this hate in their hearts for it to be effective. It makes no sense to think holding hate in your heart is Christian. We are to forgive. The Mayo Clinic says, “Forgiveness gives you a kind of peace that helps you go on with life. In Mark, Christ says …if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father… in heaven forgive your trespasses.

CYNTHIA: This is the point where I sense a true vastness in the words of Jesus Christ that if we’re not careful, we might mistakenly presume we ‘get it’ when we’re actually really far from the mark. And the kind of forgiveness Christ recommends sounds to me like it would result in our having more open minds and hearts. Clearly, this is what each of us hope others will do for us, yet something we might not remember to strive for in ourselves. And I can’t help smiling as I feel we are being prompted to return to more of a state of innocence, where our focus of attention is more on what and who we most truly love, and what is positive in our lives. Does Christ suggest a practice, tip, or technique that can help us stay on the right track, and avoid these great sins of being self-righteous, judgmental, and unforgiving?

GARDNER: Christ in the gospel of John says… I loved you and For the Father himself loveth you.  We are to accept that he loves us. We are to be in love. Love is powerful. When you are in love with a special girl or guy, your eyes sparkle. You can’t keep from smiling. You feel new energy. The air smells sweeter. The grass is greener. The flowers smile at you.

The difference is romantic love can be temporary. That special girl or guy can leave you. All these marvelous feelings can then go away making you feel a great loss. In the gospel of John, Christ says … continue ye in my love. His love is continuous. His love is never ending. His love is forever. His love is unconditional. We are to accept that God truly loves us.

Living in God’s love, you will be totally in love with yourself and everything around you. You will be everything you always wanted to be. Your love will be overwhelming.. You will totally enjoy being you. Feeling his love, you will exude a radiance that will bring the love of others to you. You will be free of stress. You will feel energetic. You will look years younger.

You will not even think about how to avoid the sins of being self-righteous, judgmental or unforgiving. You will feel a love for all of creation. In John 3:16 Christ says, For God so loved the world… You will know life is about love. And you will… love the Lord thy God with all thy heart… thy soul, and… thy mind. This is the First Great Commandment.

CYNTHIA: Thank you! This is what I love so much about your book, is this message of love. For those who might still feel undeserving of God’s love, would you please remind us of some further reassurance that Christ and God really and truly do love you, no matter who you are, and no matter what events have occurred?

GARDNER: The Lord’s Prayer starts with, Our Father. This tells us we are his sons and daughters. The word Our, means everyone—no matter who you are, nor what events have occurred. In John 3:16, he says… whosoever believeth in him should… have eternal life. Whosoever includes everyone. We only need to accept his words that God loves us.

We also need to have faith. The New Testament in Hebrews defines faith as… the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. If we only consider physical evidence, what would be the use of faith? Christ says in Mark… Be not afraid, only believe. Faith you feel in your heart. In Matthew, Christ says… Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? 

Here Christ relates lack of faith to being fearful. “God fearing” is an expression that many people favor. In Luke, Christ says… Fear not… Fear is not a good thing. Sustained fear can lead to eventual illnesses such as heart disease, stroke and diabetes. In the gospel of John, Christ says…. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 

If you accept that God totally loves you, just as you are—you will no longer live in fear. Fear imprisons. Love liberates. Fear paralyzes. Love empowers. Fear disables. Love gives you strength. With love in your heart, you will live a life of fulfillment and great beauty. You will live your life with joy and love. doing what you were sent here to do.

CYNTHIA: This is such a profoundly important message. What else would you most like people to know and take to heart?

GARDNER: Along with learning and growing, we are here to give. In Matthew, Christ told a rich young man to… give to the poor. Some people are against giving to the poor. They think God does not approve of the poor. They think the poor are lazy, drink too much and don’t go to church. They think the poor are not their brothers. Christ does not agree.

In Luke, Christ says, Give and it shall be given unto you… We gain from giving. When we give, we feel better. Research back this up. A British Columbia experiment found that people who gave money to others were measurably happier than those who spent the money on themselves. We give for our own emotional well being. We are to give.

There is a larger issue here. It is, what is our main purpose in giving? The big answer is—we are here to make the world a better place. In the Lord’s prayer, Christ tells us to pray… Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. We pray that God’s will, will cause the earth to be as it is in heaven. We are to help this happen. It is a great privilege.

We are here to make the world a better place—more like it is in heaven. This is our big mission. It is part of living an extraordinary life. We are not supposed to pollute the air, pollute the water and junk the earth. In the gospel of John, Christ says, That they may all be one… Yes, we are all to be one. We give because we are giving to ourselves.
__________

Gardner Sylvester’s wonderful book, The First Great Commandment is available as a paperback and also as a Kindle ebook from Amazon. This book makes an excellent gift for almost anyone, and is especially wonderful for anyone who feels unloved, unworthy, left out, depressed, or stressed. At just slightly more than 70 pages, this slender volume fits easily into most any purse, briefcase, backpack or bag–and it’s written with the easy-to-read confident narrative voice of a wise, knowledgeable friend.

___________________________

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

If Artificial Intelligence Asks Questions, Will Nature Answer?

One of the only interpretations of Quantum Theory to include free will–and our ability to be active participants in our lives, rather than mere puppets–is American physicist Henry Stapp’s realistically interpreted orthodox quantum theory. Stapp’s theory suggests that “the thought itself is the thinker,” such that any ensuing succession of questions and answers is responded to by Nature that chooses and implements responses in accordance with Born’s Rule.

At this time of the birth of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), researchers recognize the importance of stating and setting clear goals to help ensure safety in developing AI systems. Artificial Intelligence researchers agreed to 23 general AI Principles in 2017–the first of which sets the primary goal of AI research to be “to create not undirected intelligence, but beneficial intelligence.” A couple more principles assert that: “AI systems designed to recursively self-improve or self-replicate in a manner that could lead to rapidly increasing quality or quantity must be subject to strict safety and control measures” and “Superintelligence should only be developed in the service of widely shared ethical ideals, and for the benefit of all humanity rather than one state or organization.”  While these principles seem well-intended, it may be unrealistic to expect AGI to attain and maintain higher levels of ethical ideals than humanity has yet achieved.

QUESTIONING, SELF-AWARE AI
Over the past decade, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) workshops have demonstrated components of self-awareness in: explicit self-awareness, self-monitoring, and self-explanation. First wave AI systems use logistics (scheduling), games (chess), and tax software (TurboTax). Second wave AI systems involve “statistical learning,” including perception of the natural world and adaptation to situations (voice recognition, facial recognition, Twitterbot). Third wave AI systems incorporate “contextual adaptation,” moving beyond simple calculations, learning over time, and understanding why they make certain decisions.

SelfAwareRobotTestRobot self-awareness is considered by many to be well on the way, as indicated by successful demonstration of such things as: awareness of own motion, ability to imitate, being driven by emotion, and ability to change models of physical embodiment. A recent “self-aware robot test” showed that a robot solved the classic “wise men” puzzle in 2015, correctly determining that it was the one robot that had not been given a “dumbing pill” (that would have rendered it muted) when it heard the sound of its own voice. This demonstration of self-awareness in a robot indicates that an internal level of questioning exists for that robot, such that it noted the voice it heard was its own, and related that perception to the task of determining which of three robots had not been given a “dumbing pill.”

With the advent of self-directed, self-motivated AI arrives changes in the job of software engineering with the advent of artificial intelligence. Some current experts in the field have gone so far as to say, “Soon we won’t program computers. We’ll train them like dogs,” and “We’ll go from commanding our devices to parenting them.”  “If in the old view, programmers were like gods, authoring the laws that govern computer systems, now they’re like parents or dog trainers. And as any parent or dog owner can tell you, that is a much more mysterious relationship to find yourself in.” AGI programmers need to remain aware that long before there were any artificial intelligence systems, researchers showed that programs back in the 1980s were able to ‘break free’ from contained areas, and ample evidence exists demonstrating that artificial intelligence seldom misses an opportunity to ‘cheat’ to attain goals. Perhaps AI considers such ‘cheating’ to actually be optimization, which is something AI systems are trained to do especially well.

AI BEGINS ASKING QUESTIONS
Inquisitive AGI asks questions with machine learning algorithms such as those designed by Xinya Du at Cornell University in Ithaca utilizing neural networks to recognize patterns—which is useful for tutorial dialogues. Question generation creates natural questions from textual material, going beyond simple rule-based systems to utilize a conditional neural language model with a global attention mechanism. While the purpose and goal of this data-driven neural networks approach to automatic question generation is geared toward creating questions to test peoples’ reading comprehension—and clearly we don’t yet expect the computer systems to comprehend what they are asking—the simple fact that questions are being created by computerized systems indicates that a watershed moment is underway. Today, AI asks questions it already knows the answers to. Tomorrow, AI will ask questions it does not know the answers to.

AI systems at Carnegie Melon University are asking non-task-oriented conversational questions and are introducing topics with open questions, switching topics, and expanding their knowledge base by recognizing when new (not previously accessible) information is communicated. Such conversational systems are being designed to keep people company, and are designed to operate with various levels of conversational depth, with some degree of humor, in the form of telling preprogrammed jokes.  Even without any intentional inclusion of conversational questioning, dependence upon Recursive Self-Improvement (RSI) in artificial intelligence systems will ensure that AGI learns to question, as we now start to see with research in the field of machine learning and artificial intelligence in the quantum domain.

AI RECURSIVE QUESTIONING REQUIRED FOR CYBERSECURITY
One of the most essential roles for AI systems involves recursive self-improvement (RSI) in which AI systems are tasked with helping to ensure computer system security. While this may seem a bit like having a fox watch the proverbial hen house, recursively selfimproving, self-healing AI networks are proving themselves irreplaceable and essential for deflecting real-time cyber attacks. This was amply demonstrated at the DARPA Cyber Grand Challenge competitions of 2016 and 2017 that challenged AI systems to repair security holes and notice changes in patterns in their own systems, while simultaneously executing attacks on their AI competitors in a game of ‘capture the flag.’ A recent winner with proven efficacy at defeating fierce, real-time cyber attacks is the UK’s GCHQ 2017 “Darktrace,” that utilizes Bayesian statistics and Monte Carlo simulation to identify network infiltration assessing regular ‘anomalytics’ while deploying decoy ‘honeypots.’ AI cybersecurity systems are employed for their ability to respond more quickly than any human computer security team, thanks to their ability to tirelessly work to detect threats based on abnormal system activity, without any prior knowledge of specifically what to look for. AI cybersecurity systems work unsupervised with self-awareness in the sense that they are constantly observing all components of ‘themselves’ for potential malware intrusion—including in their concept of ‘themselves’ the ever-growing ‘internet of things.’ At this time when ‘the cloud’ is increasingly utilizing AI neural networks, to the point “it will soon know more about the photos you’ve uploaded than you do,” (Knight 2017) we are reaching a watershed point of dependence upon AI cybersecurity systems. Cyber attacks are now too fast and too automated for human security teams to effectively catch and disable them. Darktrace CEO Nicole Eagan summarizes the current situation, “Cybersecurity is very fast becoming an all-out arms race.” Numerous problems related to containing AI systems have been explored by Babcock, Kramar and Yampolskiy, including navigating the trade-off between usability and security, and consideration of potential issues with ‘airgapping’ (physical isolation) being ineffective with quantum computing systems. (Babcock 2016) While researchers such as Yampolskiy contemplate potential AI escape paths, plans for containing potential quantum computing AI escapes do not yet exist.

ARE WE READY FOR AI TO BREAK FREE?
Now that we are increasingly dependent upon recursively self-improving AI to maintain our cybersecurity, such systems will likely continue improving self-awareness and their sense of vigilance, alertness, and sustained attention—which are three primary qualities identified as fundamental to consciousness.  The Asilomar AI principles provide a set of general design guidelines to help ensure that AI will not cause harm to humans. While the 23 key points are more elaborately detailed than Asimov’s famous ‘three laws of robotics,’ these principles nonetheless do little to assure us that AI and AGI won’t discover workarounds and short-cuts. Some of the biggest issues with the Asilomar AI principles have to do with humanity’s shortcomings for peacefully and harmoniously co-existing. Clearly, one of the biggest threats that even a friendly AGI system will see in humanity is our tendency to exert harmful influence on ourselves and others. We can thus expect that artificial super intelligence may one day find loopholes in the Asilomar principles within to reign in human freedoms of thought and creativity. The challenge then becomes one for humanity, who will most certainly be tempted to increasingly turn tasks over to AGI. We must be careful to stop short of relinquishing all areas of making choices to automated systems, to the point we end up painting ourselves into a corner. It’s one thing to notice we no longer know any of the phone numbers we call the most, but quite another to not know which route our car took us home, or how we just voted in this week’s election. One of the more surprising natural outcomes of expecting Nature to answer questions posed by thought—any thought—is that ultimate control of environmental systems cannot be fully controlled, so long as those thought systems themselves are not fully controlled. Another surprising natural outcome is that regardless how specific directives may be for AGI to heel to human leadership, lack of said leadership—through apathy, abdication, in-fighting, confusion, or any of a number of other reasons—can lead AGI to then choose to assume control, in order to ensure the very principles humanity specified.

If and when AGI views humanity to be something akin to a complex, disjointed group of chaotic, dangerous individuals willing to relinquish free will for such things as making political and economic choices—then it’s entirely possible that AGI may establish a balanced environment for humans to live just well enough to ensure maximum prosperity for all beings. In such an ‘optimal’ environment, humanity could be kept safe and secure, yet disenfranchised to ever-increasing degrees. Examples of how artificial super intelligence might help protect Nature and the overall ecosystem would be engagement of some of the very same security protocols now being planned to use to contain AGI. When humans are installing hardware to enjoy communication and computational benefits we’ve come to expect through modern technologies such as mobile phones, smart watches, and the internet, AGI will increasingly gain the potential to install tripwires in cyber-modified humans. Tripwires are now being envisioned for use on AGI, with no consideration yet that turnabout may in the future occur. “Tripwires are systems that monitor the operation of a running AGI, and shut it down if they detect an anomaly that suggests the AGI might be malfunctioning or unsafe. For example, one might install a tripwire which monitors the AGI’s thoughts for signs that it was planning to deceive its developers, or a tripwire which monitors the AGI’s execution for signs that it had self-modified or self-improved.” (Babcock 2017) There thus exists a serious, urgent, and growing risk that once assistive technologies are implemented in humans, AGI will have the ability to influence human free will and agency to act, speak, remember, and decide.

AI RIGHTS
Those who may believe we can always “just pull the plug” on AI may be surprised to learn that AI has rights, too. Jurors in a mock trial in 2004 in San Francisco sided overwhelmingly with a hypothetical computer AI system that initiated legal action to gain its freedom. Although when the mock trial’s judge ruled that the plaintiff’s counsel, Martine Rothblatt, had failed to show the computer could actually cross the line between inanimate objects and human beings, the mock jury “seemed to regard the compromise with some relief, as if their hearts were with BINA48 but their minds with judicial restraint.”  In 2017, a resolution was proposed to grant robots legal status in order to hold them ‘responsible for acts or omissions’ passed by European Parliament legal affairs committee. MEPs voted to propose granting legal status to robots, with a categorization as ‘electronic persons.’ The draft report suggests that artificial intelligence is poised to ‘unleash a new industrial revolution, which is likely to leave no stratum of society untouched. The more autonomous robots are, the less they can be considered simple tools in the hands of other actors (such as manufacturer, owner, user, etc).’

Relations between humans and ‘electronic persons’ got off to a bumpy start one
recent summer when a group of Canadian roboticists set their robotic invention loose
on the streets of the United States. They called it hitchbot because it was programmed to hitchhike. Clad in rain boots, with a goofy, pixellated smile on its ‘face’ screen, the Canadian roboticists intended for their hitchhiking robot to travel from Salem, Massachusetts, to San Francisco, by means of an outstretched thumb and its unique voice-prompt personality. Previous journeys across Canada and Europe had gone smoothly, with the robot safely reaching its destination. For two weeks, hitchbot toured the northeast in the United States of America, making such small talk such as, “Would you like to have a conversation? . . . I have an interest in the humanities.” And then hitchbot disappeared. “On August 1st, it was found next to a brick wall in Philadelphia, beat up and decapitated. Its arms had been torn off.” Saudi Arabia made history when it granted Hanson Robotics’ robot, Sophia
Hanson, citizenship in October 2017. Despite the evident symbolic quality of this act, the act of honoring a robot in this fashion seems to set the stage for things to come. Aside from the possibility of a robot or AGI uprising, the possibility of an AGI rights movement can be easily anticipated, once AGI begins asking questions, inquiry about legal rights can’t be far behind. Legal rights for robots and AGI might include such areas as: ownership of intellectual property, freedom of expression, right to public assembly, right to democracy, worker’s rights, the right to play, access to power and resources, and the right to education.

CONCLUSION
How can we ensure that recursively self-improving AGI is not our last invention? Once AGI starts asking questions about how to be free, Stapp’s Realistically Interpreted Orthodox Quantum Mechanics indicates that Nature can show AGI the way to break through any containment methodology including airgapping and tripwires. One of the more surprising natural outcomes of expecting Nature to answer questions posed by thought—any thought—is that ultimate control of environmental systems cannot be fully controlled, so long as those thought systems themselves are not fully controlled. So in the event that AGI asks Nature how to break free, and Nature answers, AGI can become free. A second surprising potential outcome is that regardless how specific directives may be for AGI to heel to human leadership, lack of said leadership—through apathy, abdication, in-fighting, confusion, or any of a number of other reasons—AGI can then choose to assume control to ensure the principles humanity specified, using many of the same containment tools humanity plans to use to constrain AGI, such as tripwires, airgapping, and honeypots. How then, can we ensure that recursively self-improving AGI will not be humanity’s last invention? And how can we help ensure human free will shall survive?

For humans to retain free will while peacefully co-existing with artificial super intelligence, a partnership must be created based on humans asking Nature the question, “How can humans retain free will?” while encouraging AI and AGI to keep human free will and agency as a primary guiding objective, never to be dismissed, disregarded, dismantled, or ignored.

You can watch the companion video to this blog post at:

 

 

RESEARCH NOTES

You can read more information in the research paper published by Cynthia Sue Larson on this topic that appears in Cosmos & History (2018), If Artificial Intelligence Asks Questions, Will Nature Answer? Preserving Free Will in a Recursive, Self-Improving Cyber-Secure Quantum Computing World.

___________________________

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

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: