Hey, I wrote this tonight. Does any of it mesh with what you've
written?
Quantum Field Effects, The Flat Universe and Gravity
This article covers how human thought affects reality through
interaction with the quantum field. I also go into gravity in the
last couple of paragraphs.
More and more I wonder how much of reality is based on cumulative
effects of incorrect ancestral assumptions that have had a continuing
interplay with how the quantum field affects our reality today.
Remember how everyone used to think the earth was flat? When I was a
kid -- before my mind was "taught" the ways of science, I imagined the
earth as a vast, endless landscape going on forever in every
direction. Under the land would be dirt for infinity. Above the land
would be space for infinity, along with planets, stars and galaxies.
In my child-like, uneducated view of the universe, reality was
actually three times better than science would have us believe. In my
child-like version, you have three infinities: space, landscape, and
underground. Science only gives us one infinity: space.
Now how does earth fit into all this? It gets into wormholes and the
quantum field. We are actually on that vast, flat (but mountainous)
landscape. The problem is that when we were "cast out of the Garden
of Eden," so to speak, a section of the infinite landscape was made
recursive. That turns this landscape into an escape-proof prison
until someone can come along and unwrap the world back into the flat
landscape and merge it once again with the whole.
This also gets into what happened to Atlantis. The reason we can't
find Atlantis isn't because it sank. It's because Atlantis is outside
the recursive landscape. We can't get to it because we're trapped in
a circular route that has no path to the outside. This why Einstein
and scientists have spoken of a curved space-time. It's why some of
these laws don't hold up once you get to the quantum level. It's
because this world is all wrapped up in itself, and so are its objects
and people. People are throwing thoughts out, and those thoughts are
spinning around and coming right back in their faces because of the
immediacy of the response of the quantum field to human thought.
I think the paragraphs following this one are beginning to describe
something scientists would just have absolutely no reason to consider
as a possible outcome since they've seen too many satellite photos of
the earth as a planet, and they trust their eyeballs too much. This
planet is actually not a ball of mud floating in space. That is all
an illusion propagated by cumulative ancestral consensus beliefs and
the interaction of those consensus beliefs with the quantum field.
This belief system creates the information field known as dark energy.
Dark energy interacts with dark matter in a similar way that the
information going through your laser printer interacts with the toner
in the printer cartridge. In effect, dark matter is the "toner" of
the quantum field -- a replicator, and whatever dark energy (thought)
is injected into dark matter will be manifested (or taken away) in
physical reality. This is how Jesus multiplied his loaves and fish.
He injected everything he knew about the loaves and fish as a
thoughtform into the quantum field. Wormholes spread out like
tentacles over the hungry people. Information flowed through the
wormholes into the dark matter at the other end. This turned the dark
matter at the other ends of all the wormholes into replicated loaves
and fish which rained down on the people, all based on the information
provided from Jesus' brainwaves. Have I done this? No, of course
not. At the same time, I can tell you how to play a guitar. I just
can't do it, myself.
Anyway, this also is how our illusion of being on a planet was
created...a demonstration of the power of consensus belief. The space
around this landscape has been made invisible by our own beliefs about
what we expect to see when we look at the sky and when we look at the
earth from afar. We don't see the landscape. For us, it isn't there.
But it is there.
Here are the paragraphs which I think detail that in a rather obscure
way. I'll quote it and add my comments.
Source:
http://www.superstringtheory.com/blackh/blackh4.html
(Last Section)
Is spacetime fundamental?
Note that there is a complication in the
relationship between strings and spacetime.
String theory does not predict that the Einstein
equations are obeyed exactly. String theory adds
an infinite series of corrections to the theory of
gravity. Under normal circumstances, if we only
look at distance scales much larger than a string,
then these corrections are not measurable. But as
the distance scale gets smaller, these corrections
become larger until the Einstein equation no
longer adequately describes the result.
What this says to me is that with a recursive landscape, with one trip
around this landscape, those corrections from string theory hold up
under Einstein's equation. But once you start another trip around the
planet, you get an overlapping feedback from the previous trip around
that distorts the results of the corrections, and Einstein's equation
falls apart. This is an example of the "intelligent force" in the
quantum field, sending us messages that there is an intelligence in
the universe running the show, and giving us clues as to what reality
REALLY is, not just what it appears to be on this thing that *appears*
to be a planet.
The distortions are meant to be a signal that there's more to this
planet than just going in circles. If you had gone *another way* just
before the distortions, you would find something quite extraordinary.
But it turns out to be a very intelligent riddle of reality, and it
turns out to be the same kind of riddle Jesus was using when he said
that the Kingdom is all around us. He didn't mean all around our
bodies. He meant all around this landscape called Earth. Jesus knew
the way out of the landscape, but nobody else did, and there was no
way for him to show them, I don't think. So he said that where he was
going, you can't follow. To see the world unwrapped and part of the
landscape, you have to first know that the landscape is there, then
find evidence of it to build your belief in it, then discover it as it
unfolds.
In fact, when these correction terms become large,
there is no spacetime geometry that is guaranteed
to describe the result. The equations for
determining the spacetime geometry become
impossible to solve except under very strict
symmetry conditions, such as unbroken
supersymmetry, where the large correction terms
can be made to vanish or cancel each other out.
It turns out that the mind loves symmetry, but we happen to live in a
very assymetrical world. It's full of things that are lopsided,
warped, damaged and just plain unpleasant to look at, but we've gotten
used to it, in a way. It results in a brain so starved to see
symmetry that it spends a lot of extra time processing information it
could generate synthetically if everything were symmetrical. Under
the above unbroken supersymmetry, those large corrections cancel each
other out because the clue from the quantum field is that the
canceling of the corrections is better than a distortion of them. So
the difference between the two approaches is that one has distortion,
and which violates Einstein, and the other doesn't. The one without
distortion, and with strict symmetry requirements, I'd say, is more
than likely more correct. And that's my connection to the idea that
this globe is not a globe, but a flat piece of recursive land cut off
from the Garden of Eden, Atlantis, Lemuria, and all the other
advanced, ancient cultures, which still exist today outside the
"prison planet" we're living on.
This is a hint that perhaps spacetime geometry is
not something fundamental in string theory, but
something that emerges in the theory at large
distance scales or weak coupling. This is an idea
with enormous philosophical implications.
Large distance scales...weak couplings. Yes, if you consider that the
boudaries of this earth are a weak coupling to a larger distance scale
-- an infinite landscape. That would, most definitely, have enormous
philosophical implications.
Here's another paragraph from the
superstringtheory.com website which
could be solved if you consider the universe as a flat landscape of
earth, not a "ball" of space:
The Universe as observed today seems to enough
energy density in the form of matter and
cosmological constant to provide critical density
and hence zero spatial curvature. The Einstein
equation predicts that any deviation from flatness
in an expanding Universe filled with matter or
radiation only gets bigger as the Universe
expands. So any tiny deviation from flatness at a
much earlier time would have grown very large by
now. If the deviation from flatness is very small
now, it must have been immeasurably small at the
start of the part of Big Bang we understand.
So why did the Big Bang start off with the
deviations from flat spatial geometry being
immeasurably small? This is called the flatness
problem of Big Bang cosmology.
Whatever physics preceded the Big Bang left the
Universe in this state. So the physics
description of whatever happened before the Big
Bang has to address the flatness problem.
When you read the description of the creation in Genesis, it just says
that light was separated from darkness. It didn't say it was just a
globe with black on one side and white on the other. That's just the
way modern man envisions it. The areas of darkness on an eternal
landscale could be caused by anything -- even quantum effects. These
pockets of darkness may move around, grow and shrink, making
unpredictable patterns of day and night in various areas, while some
areas may never have darkness, and still other areas may be dark all
the time. This landscape is lighted by numerous, distant stars and
nearby planets taking up huge spaces in the sky that glow gently from
within to illuminate the landscape with soft light instead of harsh,
burning sunlight. Plus, in some areas, everything glows from within
with its own light.
Want more? How were the pyramids built? How did Edward Leedskalnin
build the coral castle by himself with those huge stones? He knew
that gravity was an illusion, and unlike me, he also knew how to take
advantage of that knowledge. It's proof that we can still do today
the things that the ancients did. We just have to remember how. The
illusion of gravity was created at The Fall of Adam, when the whole
sweat-of-the-brow thing started and humans lost the ability to fly
(not with wings, but with thoughts of levitation). As is stated on
this page, "Particle theory only works when we pretend gravity doesn't
exist."
http://www.superstringtheory.com/basics/basic3.html
Well, if particle theory only works under that condition, then that
means it actually works all the time. We just have to pretend gravity
doesn't exist to understand it. Therefore gravity is an force created
by our belief in it, which also explains why it is the weakest force
measured.
Damaeus
