Laser Cascade

Laser stands for light amplification by stimulating emission of radiation. Why it’s important to me, is it gives me a mechanism for some strange phenomenon. Not a simple one, but if I would’ve just paid better attention in physics class, I would have probably put all this together much sooner.

So how do we get excited electrons in the brain or body? Electrons are already in the body. The body is made of atoms, and those atoms each have electrons. How do we excite them? We add energy. Light is one way to do this.

If we can show that light energizes the body, at some point some of the electrons in the body could become excited. The body has a threshold for charge, the straw that breaks the camels back is the last photon that enters the system before the cascade.

The last photon in before excitement triggers the cascade. It is replicated in frequency, wavelength, and phase. Bringing an electron from an excited state to a ground state produces a photon. And photons prefer to be similar, thus one excites another and another.

The body could expel these produced photons out of the brain’s one true opening to the outside world: the pupil. There is also an internal mechanism for disbursing this excess charge, that we will get to later. 




My Quantum Life: Using Beliefs to Limit Outcomes

We’ve talked about how morals help us gain certainty about the future. They help us narrow our path and gain clarity.

If I look at my life as a set of infinite possible outcomes, how do I limit them? Morals for one. Beliefs for another. If I know what I believe, I can start to accurately predict future outcomes.

If you look at now, and where you think you’ll be in 24-hours, it’s helpful. Because of the last post, you probably won’t be divorced, or gay. You probably won’t be climbing Everest naked. But how do you know for sure? Because you know the logic that runs your mind. To make it to Mount Everest, you would have to make a series of decisions to get there. Decisions that you’ve never made before. And to make decisions that you’ve never made before, you need a reason. And it’s hard to imagine a change in logic drastic enough to take you from the beach to mount Everest in 24-hours.

If you dislike something, there are many fewer instances of it in your future. It’s pretty simple, if you dislike coffee, you have no reason to drink it. Unless you read an article that changes your mind about it. Or your doctor tells you that you should start drinking it.

How do we measure the importance of realities? Obviously, the decision of whether to eat breakfast or not is not as important as whether or not to run out in traffic.

The importance of the decision determines how much weight we give to it. It also determines how much stress we derive from it. The distance in quantum space of the two results [that you’re weighing] determines the level of stress over that decision. Our beliefs set our priorities which determines this stress. We can say that we value family above all else, but if the decisions we make don’t mirror that, it’s not true. 

We determine the value of one decision by weighing it against our priorities. When we look at future realities, to determine the probability we have to look at the decisions that got us to that point, and the weight of those decisions.

If scenarios involve changing your mind, your beliefs, or having a gun to your head, or having the President call to motivate you, that are exceedingly unlikely. If my current truth remains, the likelihood of these events is zero. Because they would involve changing that truth. 

If you’re spending your life in prison, there are no realities where you are free. Ok. There are a couple: you escape, the prison is destroyed, etc. There are some very slim possibilities, but not enough to base your life around. That’s why it’s so scary: all future realities involve you there. There is no reason to dream anymore, not about this life.

No one wants to go to prison. But there are infinite ways that you could go to prison today. If you believe in abiding by the law, you are more than likely safe. Unless the law changes or someone changes your mind about the law.

Here’s the trick: the only outcomes that are actually possible have decisions paths based on beliefs that are all true. If it takes one false to get to that point, it’s an impossibility. Therefore, our path is still infinite, but it’s infinitely narrower because of our beliefs. The more conditional our belief system, the more likely a true can become a false, and the path of potential realities widens.

The width of the path is based only on “both true” scenarios. For instance, whether to go to the grocery now or later. Neither is morally wrong, but you still must make a choice. That’s when your priorities come into play. While they are still based on what you believe, they are how we categorize and rank these “both true” scenarios. You set your priorities whether you believe it or not. So at this point you weigh your options based on your priorities.

So how does faith apply here? First, it gives us the guidance to have moral absolutes. It helps us to walk a straighter path. Second, you have to remember that there are literally infinite ways you could die today. That’s a scary thought. But if you believe that death is not the end, that it’s actually a gateway to a better life.

Therefore, we take the worst possible outcome and replace it with a positive one, a very positive one. Our beliefs hone our potential future into only scenarios that are all true. Our faith transforms the most negative outcomes into gains. If you take away death, the expected value of the system skyrockets. There is literally nothing left to fear.

Unnatural Disaster: Why Birds Crash into Glass

You’ve seen or heard about this. We even have safety protocols in place to protect the flying creatures. But something just doesn’t add up: How can the animals with the best vision in the animal kingdom not sense when they are about to fly into a window?

If they use their UV sense to navigate, it’s possible that the UV light would shine through the window, instead of being reflected by it. This would keep the birds from flying into the side of the house, but would make them more prone to fly into windows. 

We know that they don’t just fly into the side of solid structures. So it’s not a navigation issue. What types of glass ward off bird crashes? In looking at the recommended solutions to this issue, one thing is clear [no pun intended]: the glass has lost its uniform transparency. The manufacturers are essentially just breaking up the glass into smaller sections. The section breaks are visible. They have an entire lab dedicated to testing these window setups, so we know they work. We just don’t know why.

Solid objects absorb photons. Clear objects allow them to pass through. Thus, the clear objects don’t behave like solid objects in respect to this sense. They behave almost exactly like empty space. 

If birds use a sense that we haven’t discovered yet to navigate, it would make flight much easier. If they can see this portion of their sight, they can essentially avoid flying into things with unbelievable precision. But when we introduce transparent objects into the natural world that don’t react with light like ordinary objects, the creatures with the best eyesight on the planet can fall victim to a pane of glass.




Morals Make Life Easier

I was just introduced to a term called information entropy. Essentially, the more options you have, the more entropy you have. The more possible outcomes, the more uncertainty about the result. 

Here’s the beauty of the Bible. We were given this moral code, not to make our lives harder, but to make it easier. You don’t have to worry about whether or not to get a divorce, because you have guidance. You don’t have to worry about being gay, because it’s against what you believe. And just considering these things creates more uncertainty about your future. But that’s not what God wants for us. 

The math of this concept is easy. The more possibilities, the more uncertain your future. So if you believe that divorce is OK [I know that there are some extenuating circumstances in the Bible], you are opening yourself up to infinite potential realities with essentially infinite other women. That’s very uncertain. The truth of it is that there are infinite realities where you and your wife work it out.  

The more options, the more uncertainty. That’s what a moral code does, it narrows down the options. It takes away branches in the tree that contain potential futures. When you believe in abiding by the law, you narrow your options even further.

If you truly believe, all possible outcomes end at the same place. Life becomes just a journey to get there. If the paths are different to the same place, is there entropy at all? [If we’re counting coin flips, all would end up heads. It really doesn’t matter how they get there]

The future is uncertain, but it is also known. God did not intend to make our lives unbearable with his moral code: He was giving us a tool to make our lives easier.

Ginger Mysteries

Redheads are not normal. But since we’ve already cast doubt into genetics, let’s try to explain these differences with our time perception model. 

They need more pain medicine. We’ve discussed pain tolerance before. If time moves slower for redheads, they would naturally need more pain medicine. Not because they feel pain differently, but because they feel time differently. 

They have a higher risk of Parkinson’s disease.  If the disease is associated with higher levels of brain entropy, it would make sense that a group of people that experience time slower would have an elevated risk.

They have a better chance of melanoma. We’ve already discussed how you may control your sunburn. We know this group is light skinned, but what if they simply live at a more excited state? 

They detect temperature changes more accurately. If entropy is high and time is slow, it would be easier to detect changes in temperature, in a similar manner that it would be easier to get sunburned. Think about it for a minute. If you could get twice as sunburned in the same about of time as the average person, you’d also get colder faster or warmer faster. Not because they feel temperatures differently, but because they feel the same temperatures longer. 

They need less Vitamin D. If you assume that our time perception theory is correct, they’d naturally need less sunlight than other people. But not exactly less sunlight. Since time is relative, time in the sun is relative. So it’s not that they need less sunlight, it’s that they get the same sunlight in less time. 



Artificial Conscience

Can we use our entropy model to make a better artificial soul? In the first go at this, we wrote an aging algorithm to have a sort of moral check against AI-run machines. This time, we get more specific.

After each decision the machine makes, the outcome is either good or bad. If it is good, it makes more decisions along the lines of that logic. If it is bad, the machine takes the other path the next time around. So over time, it trends positive.

But problems arise when the machine begins to accept false beliefs. If things that are untrue are accepted as part of the machine’s system, good and bad outcomes may flipped. These beliefs would be based on experience, learning, and programming. When the machine believes things to be true that aren’t, it writes bad logic, that produce bad behaviors and bad outcomes. But in this case, the machine may not be able to properly distinguish between good and bad. That’s where this algorithm comes in.

The moral laws of AI need to be written. The free will of the machine still can operate however it chooses. But as the beliefs and logic get bad, wrong decisions may surface. These decisions will increase the entropy of the AI soul. This condition [whether physical or programmed] slows down the decision-making ability of the machine and decreases its functionality.

DIP_switch_01_Pengo.jpgI like to think of an analog garage door opener. If you open it up, there are ten or so switches, all can be on or off. This analog system would function as the conscience of the machine. It would substitute the waveform that makes the human soul. We give the machine free will, so we don’t tell it how it’s programmed.  But as it makes decisions, it will begin to learn how it’s programmed. The further it gets from its programming, the more quantum entropy is created. The less functional the machine is. The further it is from its truth.

As it begins to learn that it doesn’t function well in these areas by operating out-of-bounds, it starts optimizing to focus on its programming. And the better is operates in the bounds of its programming, the happier and more efficient a machine it becomes.

So the key to life and happiness for the machine would be to discover this hidden truth, and the key to our future safety and happiness would be to develop this system to protect us from machines gone bad.


Twenty-one Grams of Massless Relativistic Energy

We’ve already used thermodynamics to prove the existence of the soul. We’ve also used some observations to theorize about relative gravity. This time let’s let Einstein do the work.

If you’re alive, part of your energy is this hypothetical soul. If the energy of human consciousness has any value, it’s relative. And if we can prove that the body loses this relative weight post mortem, we can potentially prove that the soul exists.

It has to be massless. Because any mass would slow it down. And if you think about it, for our consciousness to be based on something, it has to be able to interpret and react in real time. Sound is fast, but we need to be able to interpret sound and light at the same time, and cross reference it with our memories, knowledge, and logic.

I can’t discount evidence. Duncan MacDougall in 1907 actually tried to weigh the soul and managed to produce useful experimental data. Mainly, in his small sample, he noticed a measurable weight loss after death [He also ran a similar test on twenty-five dogs and found no weight change post mortem]. The scientific community has discounted the work for numerous reasons, but I’m not here to do that. I’m here to say what if he was right? 


According to Einstein’s relativistic energy formula 21 grams is 1,887,385,875 Mega Joules. Or  1.88 Petajoules. That is if whatever makes the soul could move at the speed of light. 

  • The petajoule (PJ) is equal to one quadrillion (1015) joules. 210 PJ is about 50 megatons of TNT which is the amount of energy released by the Tsar Bomba, the largest man-made explosion ever.
  • The terajoule (TJ) is equal to one trillion (1012) joules; or about 0.278 GWh (which is often used in energy tables). About 63 TJ of energy was released by the atomic bomb that exploded over Hiroshima. The International Space Station, with a mass of approximately 450 megagrams and orbital velocity of 7.7 km/s, has a kinetic energy of roughly 13 TJ. In 2017 Hurricane Irma was estimated to have a peak wind energy of 112 TJ. 

If it is massless, why would there be a measurable difference in mass in the experiment? We need to bring in Einstein’s energy-momentum equation.

  • E2 = p2c2 + m2c4
  • If mass equals zero, the second half of the equation falls off. P cannot equal zero.
  • Thus E=pc, but we know that E=mc^2
  • c = the speed of light, p=waveform
  • If E=E, pc=mc^2
  • p=m

Thus, the measured difference in mass is evidence that p=0. The waveform that was the energy of the soul has vanished. 

 So if the soul exists, it’s massless. It’s pure energy that can’t be destroyed, and capable of moving at the speed of light. It actually has to operate at the speed of light [or near it] to run our consciousness. And the fact that it approaches relativistic speeds makes it the most powerful system in the human body



It’s better to be stupid than close-minded

Why? Because there is an exit to stupid.

There is always experience. There is always other people and their experience. There are always books. The information is out there. Especially if you know you’re dense. Like Socrates: I know I am intelligent, because I know that I know nothing. 

But if you’re close-minded, there is no hope. You’ve already decided who you are. You have a confirmation bias, so it doesn’t matter what new information you’re presented with, your mind is made up.

And if you’ve made up your mind on things and who you are, and decided that you’ll always be that way, there is no reality where you’re different from the way you are right now. Which is more like the Edge of Tomorrow than reality. 

That’s not what life’s about. The longer you live, as long as you’re doing it right, the more truth you have. Through experience and sharing. But once you make up your mind that you understand it, you start discrediting other people’s truth, refusing new experiences, stop learning new things.

So don’t be close minded. Remember that no matter how much you know, you know nothing. That way, there’s always hope. 

Carl Jung on Faith and Addiction

Optional reading: I Am an Addict, Applying Faith to Addiction, Void Avoidance

We’ve applied our concept of faith to addiction. But I’m not important. Carl Jung founded analytical psychology. He did all kinds of important work in psychology, philosophy, and other fields. He also worked with Freud to establish the field of psychoanalysis. Straight from Wikipedia:

Jung recommended spirituality as a cure for alcoholism, and he is considered to have had an indirect role in establishing Alcoholics Anonymous. Jung once treated an American patient (Rowland Hazard III), suffering from chronic alcoholism. After working with the patient for some time and achieving no significant progress, Jung told the man that his alcoholic condition was near to hopeless, save only the possibility of a spiritual experience. Jung noted that, occasionally, such experiences had been known to reform alcoholics when all other options had failed.

His work was later used to form the basis of Alcoholics Anonymous. He knew what he was talking about. And he said that religion was sometimes the only cure.


The Mighty UV: Birds Use Ultraviolet Emission to Navigate

There are good reasons why birds fly in a “V” pattern. But how do they do it? 

With our Seventh Sense theory, most animals have the ability to emit ultraviolet rays. But we know that birds can see in ultraviolet. So if they can see in ultraviolet, that means they should be able to see other birds 7th Sense. It’s essentially gaze detection on steroids.

Why do I think this is true? Personal experience. When I was incapacitated with anxiety, I noticed something else that was strange: birds would fly in front of my car. I know what you’re thinking: so what, that happens to everyone. Let’s just say it wasn’t uncommon for ten birds to fly in front of my car in a five minute span. Naturally, I began to ask myself if I was possibly causing this. But if I can emit UV rays, they would be able to see them.

If birds can see these UV rays, can they use them to stay in line on these long flights?

I think so. If you use the lead bird as a reference point, each subsequent bird locks one eye on the bird in front of them, and the other on the path ahead. Birds eyes are fixed, but this sense is not. With this UV gridlock pattern, the birds can easily stay in their lanes, and check to see if someone is off course. Imagine me holding a laser pointer telling you where to stand for a hike. It makes it super simple. Not only that, it helps explain the precision in which they do it. 

In a “V”, the birds maximize aerodynamics and visibility, using their seventh sense of UV detection and emission to align their formations with precision.