Does Quantum Uncertainty Drive the Truth Wars?

A friend of mine recently wrote, “Never has it become more apparent that you can be standing next to another person and be existing in two completely alternate realities.” 

Those of us nodding our heads in recognition of the reality of this statement may wonder whether we might be literally living in different worlds.  Are some groups of people seeing completely different facts and information?  How can we best navigate this time when facts and scientific studies can often be found to support opposing sides of various issues?  Sometimes, the facts and data can appear to be 100% contradictory, with one person saying yes, something is absolutely good, and another person saying no. 

Why are We so Divided in our Beliefs?

Ross Pittman, founder and editor in chief of Conscious Life News recently wrote to me:

I’m hoping you can answer a question that has been bugging me for the longest time regarding our “fractured times.” Why are we so divided on our beliefs?  …  You’ve written and made a video about (there being) NO OBJECTIVE REALITY.  Is it possible that both sides experience the reality they believe is true?  That is, their truth is THE truth for them.  I would love your thoughts on this. 

This topic runs far deeper than meets the eye, and deserves closer examination.  From my more than twenty years researching and reporting on reality shifts, quantum jumps, and the Mandela Effect, I naturally recognize the possibility that just as we might remember past events differently from friends or family members who were standing right next to us at those times, we also might literally be seeking–and finding–completely different, yet equally scientifically valid facts.  

Certainty is a False Friend

Peter Lee opens his book, “Truth Wars” with the statement: “Certainty is a false friend in the quest for truth.” [1] While we often unconsciously associate the concept of truth with certainty, this statement makes sense from a quantum physics perspective (such as Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle).  And even before this new Quantum Age began, the western concept of the scientific method incorporates the concept of constantly seeking truth via ever-evolving scientific models.  Ideally, scientists do not ever rest on laurels of success, but rather engage in the higher calling and pursuit of genuine knowledge, based on reproducible scientific studies.  

Disinformation in the Post-Truth Era

The idea of disinformation has been around for quite a long time–so the observation of seemingly huge dichotomies between ideas of truth is nothing new.  Typically, when the topic of disinformation comes up, it’s associated with terms like ‘alternate facts,’ denial, and post-truth.  Author Lee McIntyre invites us to ponder how we’ve ended up in a “post-truth era, where ‘alternative facts’ replace actual facts, and feelings have more weight than evidence.”  McIntyre points out that the term “post-truth” can be traced back to the 1990s, when it first appeared in a political story in a magazine. Peter Lee states toward the beginning of his book, “Truth Wars”:

We live in an age of crisis.  There are many types of crisis, of course, but the three that serve as the focus for this book–climate change, military intervention and financial crisis–are widely claimed to be global in scale and potentially apocalyptic in severity.  These crises all have one thing in common: they each provide political leaders with the incentive and justification to increasingly govern the lives of millions, even billions, of people through the enactment of policy and the allocation, or withdrawal, of resources.  They add a new dimension to Harold Lasswell’s famous aphorism that politics is about who gets what, when, and how, because such decisions are based on specific truth claims and the policy priorities that emerge from them. [2]

Lee McIntyre, author of “Post Truth” provides us with further insights into these classical views of this topic, in his description of some fundamental roots of post-truth:

“I think that the main root of post-truth is science denial. This started in the 1950s with cigarette companies going into panic mode when scientists were about to publish a study that showed a link between cigarette smoking and cancer. They decided to “fight the science.” They hired their own experts, did bogus studies, bought full-page ads in newspapers, and got the word out that “no conclusive link between cigarette smoking and cancer has been established.” Well that’s actually true because—due to the problems with inductive reasoning—no conclusive causal relationship has ever been shown between ANY two things. What this did, though, was create doubt in the mind of the general public, and that was the point. The cigarette companies rode this wave of doubt for the next 40 years as they sold cigarettes. And the blueprint for this sort of science denial was then used for other science denial campaigns against acid rain, the ozone hole, evolution by natural selection, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and climate change. Without all that, I don’t think post-truth would have been successful. People learned to doubt facts and truth in general because they started with doubting scientific facts and truth about science. Add to this cognitive bias, the decline of traditional media, the rise of social media, and a dash of postmodernism, and you had a perfect environment for post-truth.” [3]

These factors are certainly concerning on a number of levels, yet we still haven’t gotten to the true core of the way we might sometimes be witnessing parallel realities right in front of us, in this environment where some groups are operating with completely different values, perspectives, and agendas. 

What if there is no such thing as Objective Reality?

There is something going on with respect to news that a recent Physics Experiment Challenges Objective Reality–which I feel deserved to be the biggest news story of 2019.  These scientific experimental results suggest there may be no such thing as objective reality, at least in the way that western collective consciousness typically presumes this foundational idea.  Yes we can (and do) find what we are seeking.  And yes, this does mean that we sometimes seem to be living in different worlds.

When I think of the way quantum physics disrupts many common assumptions–including scientific assumptions–the first thing that comes to my mind is the title of a wonderful paper published in 2015 in Contemporary Physics by physicists David Jennings and Matthew Leifer, No Return to Classical Reality.  Jennings and Leifer audaciously start their paper with the fighting words,

“At a fundamental level, the classical picture of the world is dead, and has been dead now for almost a century.”  [4]

This seemingly brash statement is fully backed by demonstrating that there exist fundamental phenomena of quantum theory that cannot be understood in classical terms.  And as the authors state,

“We now have a range of precise statements showing that whatever the ultimate laws of Nature are, they cannot be classical.” 

I’ve touched on this topic before, and written about it in my 2015 paper, Primacy of Quantum Logic in the Natural World. [5]  Support can be found for the primacy of quantum logic in the natural world in the cognitive sciences, where recent research studies recognize quantum logic in studies of: the subconscious, decisions involving unknown interconnected variables, memory, and question sequencing. 

So if Nature follows quantum, not classical, laws–what are the implications for us in daily life? 

The Wigner’s Friend Paradox

One of the many perplexing aspects of quantum physics is something known as the “Wigner’s Friend” idea, in which one person conducts an experiment, and a second person observes the first person.  While it may seem clear from contemplating this thought experiment that we may not be able to adopt other peoples’ observations as being equally valid to our own, what’s recently rocked the quantum physics research world is that scientists in Austria and Canada have proved that not only can we not expect our observations to match someone else’s–we can’t even trust our own observations from the past. 

This recent Popular Mechanics article demonstrates that news of the published quantum physics experimental results by Proietti and team in 2019 is a story that is not going away anytime soon: It’s impossible to tell if this story exists, according to quantum physics.  If anything, this is one of those experiments that will more likely continue to grow in significance, as scientists grasp the full implication of what has been demonstrated. 

New Thinking Required in this new Quantum Age

We tend to see what we were looking for–even what we were unconsciously seeking.  The so-called “confirmation bias” can be seen to have its roots at the core of quantum physics, where it is better known as the Observer Effect.  If we take the ideas from quantum physics seriously as impacting every level of reality, and not purely “the quantum realm,” then we should expect to witness even the most bizarre quantum behaviors in our daily lives.  These would include quantum entanglement, which Albert Einstein referred to as “spooky action at a distance;” as well as quantum tunneling; superposition of states; delayed choice (where future decisions influence the past); and quantum teleportation. 

Now that we see there may be fundamental underlying qualities to the Cosmos by which elements of quantum physics could be driving the Truth Wars, most of us at this point are saying, “But we don’t want Truth Wars! What can we do to create a stable sense of peace?  The key to finding optimal outcomes and ‘end games’ lies in envisioning and focusing our attention and energy on potential possibilities that have more to do with what we are grateful for, rather than what we are anxious, angry, or despairing about.  If we insist on focusing our attention on those who disagree with our views of historical facts and scientific findings, or on proving that we can find better facts and findings than those we disagree with, there is high likelihood that Truth Wars will persist.  Now that we are entering this new Quantum Age, we’ll thrive best when adopting a Quantum Age mindset, as described in my book, Quantum Jumps:

What’s most amazing to me about the Quantum Age isn’t so much about the quantum computers as how radically our concept of rational thinking is about to change. The seemingly simple transition from bits to qubits takes us from our westernized binary view of True-False logic into a wild and woolly realm of True, True-and-False, Not-True-Not-False, and False. We’re entering a weird, wonderful world of possibilities in which we’ll discover that just because we think something is a certain way doesn’t mean it will stay that way, or that others will experience it that way. Our legal systems will be transformed, and historians, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists and biologists will recognize alternate histories as being a natural part of existence. Medical professionals will learn to view spontaneous remission as a naturally occurring process, and will encourage people to adopt states of mind that facilitate quantum jumps in healing. Our views of unbiased observers and impartial judges will be forever changed as we appreciate how information can travel anywhere instantaneously, and how everyone and everything is interconnected. The Quantum Age invites us to radically transform our view of who we are and how we work, play, love, and heal in our everyday lives. [6]

Tired of the Truth Wars?
Let’s Thrive in Uncertain Times
with Gratitude and Kindness

At this time, humanity needs to care more for one another, regardless of seeming divisions, remembering that each of us can shift to a positive perspective.  We need to care more for others than we have before.  We need to step up to the challenges of living through uncertain times with kindness and love, as we’ve been taught by perennial wisdom teachings across all continents and in all religious.   We can rise above most any circumstances, through the power of observation.  We can choose Revhumanism in apocalyptic times.  And of course one of my favorite ways to get and stay focused on optimal outcomes, is to ask my favorite question: 

“How good can it get?”

 

[1] Lee, Peter. Truth wars: the politics of climate change, military intervention and financial crisis. Springer, 2016.

[2] “The Uncertainty Principle,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  12 Jul 2016 revision.  https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/

[3] McIntyre, Lee. Post-truth. MIt Press, 2018.

[4] Jennings, David, and Matthew Leifer. “No return to classical reality.” Contemporary Physics 57, no. 1 (2016): 60-82.

[5] Larson, Cynthia Sue. “Primacy of quantum logic in the natural world.” Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 11, no. 2 (2015): 326-340.

[6] Larson, Cynthia.  Quantum Jumps:  An Extraordinary Science of Happiness and Prosperity.  2013.

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

You can watch the companion video to this blog here:

___________________________

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

http://www.RealityShifters.com

 

RealityShifters

 

My Conversation with FutureMe

I received a surprising email message this week, from myself, exactly one year ago.  The message read:

“Dear FutureMe, I’ve been sheltering in place for more than five months, and all travel plans have canceled. It’s hard for me to imagine what you’re going through now, but whatever it is, please trust that all is well, and you have a great deal of love and support! And always remember to let God do the ‘heavy lifting.’ It’s enough each day just to show up, and do what you are able to do, and care for who and what you are able to care for.”

Feeling Connected through Time

I had forgotten I’d sent myself this message, and in the moment of reading it, felt myself connected through time and space to what I was going through and how I was feeling at the time I wrote it.  The day I sent this message to FutureMe, was the same day I recorded my video, Nature’s Message Now on August 28, 2020.   There was much going on that I made no mention of, including a variety of challenges–including the realization that I was experiencing dozens of symptoms that were a match for longhaul covid.  I can hear the shortness of breath I was dealing with in the videos I created every month in 2020, providing auditory proof that there was something different going on that year.  That was a time of great uncertainty, and yet I drew strength even as I sent love and blessings forward in time. 

 

On the 2021 receiving side of reading this message sent to me by my 2020 self, I felt a bit of something akin to time-travel jet-lag.  The jarring juxtaposition between my emotional states in 2020 and 2021 felt very intense, as I felt both loved by and loving toward my 2020 self. 

What a Difference a Year Makes

Here is a photo of me taken on August 25, 2021, prior to a live-stream broadcast of IMEC’s Open Tables for the International Mandela Effect Conference, What the Mandela Effect Means to Me.  I noticed after finding this photo taken closest to the date when I received the email from FutureMe that I did NOT plan this–but it looks like I chose to wear the same outfit both days, one year apart!  I had chosen to wear exactly the same outfit I was wearing on the date I sent the message one year forward.  This kind of coincidence seems divinely guided, as if a higher level of self realized what fun it would be to see how I was looking on both the day I sent the message, and the day I received it. 

We can rise above most any circumstances, through the power of observation–through choosing which aspects of life we are viewing, and from which point of view and sense of self.  And of course one of my favorite ways to experience the power of observation, is to keep asking my favorite question, “how good can it get?”

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

You can watch the companion video to this blog here:

___________________________

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

http://www.RealityShifters.com

 

RealityShifters

 

The Power of Observation

How might your life change if you recognized that observing might be the most powerful thing you could do?  We acknowledge experts based on what and how they observe, yet we seldom recognize the full power of observation.

Much like breathing, observing is something we often take for granted, yet cannot live without.  We can only live for a matter of minutes without breathing–and in certain situations, the same can be said of observation.  We depend on observation in order to make choices about the food we eat as well as every choice we make. 

How we do this deceptively simple thing has everything to do with the level of consciousness we experience.

Role of the Observer

 

Tremendous significance has been ascribed to the act of observation and the role of the Observer, in the realm of quantum physics.  The definition of “observation” within quantum physics is:

“an act by which one finds some information–the value of a physical observable (quantity).” 

This very specific definition is focused on the relationship between observation and information, with awareness that the choice of how and where and what is being chosen for observation. 

The presence or absence of Observers, as well as the nature of what is being observed have an impact on the observations being made. This has been experimentally demonstrated in the double slit experiment, which is recognized as the most elegant scientific experiment.  Observation in quantum physics experiments has been associated with such ideas as “the observer effect,” whereby what is observed in a quantum double slit experiment appears to be influenced by the type and location of an observer or observational device.  

While it may seem obvious that observation involves some form of consciousness, there is a surprising lack of consensus agreement about what that entails.  

Observation and Consciousness

One of my favorite ways to contemplate the connection between observation and consciousness is by considering some of the insights of Wilhelm Gottfried Leibniz, a great philosopher and one of the inventors of Calculus. 

Leibniz pointed out that a key quality of consciousness is that it necessarily involves both a first-order primary perception, and a second-order awareness of the first level perception.  Our ability to recognize, for example, that when we feel something touch our nose, and we open our eyes to see what it is, we can realize that the sensations we perceive and the visual input can provide us with information regarding what is currently happening.  If we feel a sense of being threatened, we can respond protectively; if we feel a sense of curiosity, we can respond inquisitively. 

Leibniz recognized the importance of being an observer of one’s own first-order perceptions–with awareness that this very ability to acknowledge something we so often take for granted can actually be viewed as the foundation of consciousness itself.  We begin to wonder if artificial intelligence asks questions, will nature answer?   with hopefully an emphasis on how good it can get when we begin collaborations with A.I.

The Power of Observation

Most of us are familiar with the expression, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” with awareness that each person’s aesthetics can be quite individual and unique.  What is not so well known is that almost all desirable qualities can be said to be “in the eye of the beholder,” and we tend to see much more of whatever we focus our attention upon.  We can become inadvertent experts on what we focus our attention on, regardless whether it’s something we’d actually enjoy experiencing, so we would be well advised to focus our attention on sustainable positive values such as:  peace, balance, harmony, joy, and love. 

Alignment of our own levels of observation is an inside job, meaning it starts by recognizing areas of ideological inflammation, where we cannot tolerate certain ‘triggers’ or stimulation–yet thrives by focusing primarily on our overall health as incorporating a much larger sense of self than we typically claim.  When each of us is bigger than any personal or environmental insult, we need not fall into knee-jerk reactionary and possibly overly dramatic responses, but rather can relax into knowing we are intrinsically safe, loved, and accepted with love and kindness just as we are.  This kind of re-centering is an inside job, and must start by loving all parts of ourselves.  We thus can rise above old patterns and tendencies to fall into victim consciousness, patterns of us-and-them thinking, or chronic anxiety regarding some large problem that we must help resolve.  All such drama can truly be risen above, when we claim a sense of higher self awareness that is our true birthright. 

We can rise above most any circumstances, through the power of observation.  And of course one of my favorite ways to experience the power of observation, is to feel how much we truly need to know how good can it get?

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

You can watch the companion video to this blog here:

___________________________

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

http://www.RealityShifters.com

 

RealityShifters

 

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:

 

___________________________

Cynthia 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®