Alternate Realities/Alternate Universes

[Susma Rio Sep]

To WHKeith: I am trying to get your points in the following paragraph from you. Tell me if I get you correctly:

____________________________________________

In some previous posts, I’ve alluded to hypnotic regressive sessions that took the subject back, not to a previous life, but to the between-life, a mode of existence that definitely appears to exist—if that’s the word—outside of space-time. Some thousands of subjects have reported being able to revisit and relive past lives, being able to observe past lives as they would have unfolded had different choices been made (which strongly supports the quantum many-universe notion), and to observe possible future lives, including important crises and decision points. This appears to dovetail nicely with some NDE memories and the dogma of spiritualist churches as well.
_____________________________________________

Here is my rewriting, for my own comprehension:

1. Reports are that hypnotists have succeeded in putting a subject to become aware in his brain-mind of a state of existing outside time and space.

2. Thousands of subjects have reported on their capacity to experience the living of past lives and future ones, making crucial choices on critical passes in these lives.

3. Their experiences from the prompting of hypnotists and by themselves provide support for the quantum many universe notion.

4. All these reports appear to dovetail nicely with some NDE memories and the dogma of spiritualist churches as well.


Do you think, WHKeith, that I have somehow made your cited paragraph more easy to grasp for myself, or have awfully missed you in trying to understand the paragraph?

Susma Rio Sep

[WHKeith]

Looks pretty good with a couple of caveats and elaborations.

1. I'd treat the line about existing outside of time and space with care. The reports I've read indicated that the subjects certainly experienced at least a subjective passage of time and an existence in a "place" that certainly had the attributes of space. The point was that they seemed to exist in a dimension or milieu independent of what we call on this side "the real world." So, perhaps I should have said "outside of space/time as we know it." A discussion of what we mean by being "outside of space/time" depends first on agreeing about what that phrase means to each of us.

2. In that spirit-world milieu, the subjects consistently reported being able to review past lives and see aspects of future lives as well. In some cases they relived at least parts of those lives, often with important differences. One case, I recall, involved a man seeing a past life where he was a terrible schoolyard bully; he relived a particular scene where, instead of being the bully, he was the little kid being terrorized by a whole gang of bullies. The incident appeared to be not punishment, but instructional.

The one report that particularly affected me was of a woman [undergoing therapy after several suicide attempts] who, regressed to the between-life period, recalled watching a past life where she'd been a teenager made pregnant by a young man who fell from a roof and was killed before they were married. The stigma of being an unwed mother in that society drove her to drown herself. While reviewing this past life, she found herself reliving aspects of that life with the opportunity to make different choices and see alternate outcomes. She'd thought she'd had no choice; in fact, she was presented with several, including moving to another town where she was accepted as a young widow, had her child, and eventually married.

These alternative timelines appear to be abbreviated, and presented for purposes of teaching.

3. I personally don't agree with the phrase "prompting from hypnotists." The principle argument against hypnotherapy seems to be the assumption that the therapist somehow guides the subject, or plants false memories in their minds. While this is certainly possible with clumsy (or willfully self-serving) technique, all reputable hypnotherapists are well aware of this possibility and take care NOT to ask leading questions or to steer the patient. [i.e., they might say "What do you see now?" rather than "Do you see any angels?"]

I acknowledge that hypnotism is still controversial as a tool for uncovering memories of past lives/childhood abuse/alien abductions/what-have-you. One of the outstanding aspects of hypnotic trance includes a desire to please the therapist. Too, we do not yet understand how the subconscious might alter or create memories for purposes of its own, in order to communicate symbolically with the therapist, and for this reason no reputable researcher will use hypnotic-regressive evidence as "proof" of past lives, aliens, or anything else of like controversial nature.

Still, the evidence garnered to date for past lives is extraordinary and impressive. I recall a case--I believe this was presented on a Discovery Channel program--where a number of people living in a small town in California were found to have lived past lives together in a small town in Virginia during the Civil War. Enough evidence was given in the regressive sessions to allow researchers to find the town in Virginia, and to corroborate independently a number of key points. Most impressive was finding a particular house that hypnotic subjects claimed had a secret basement used as a stop on the Underground Railway. The house was there, but no such basement was found . . . until the researchers got permission to dig on the property, and uncovered a cellar that had been sealed off for a century and forgotten. Samples of wallpaper found in that lost basement in Virginia matched that described by the hypnotic subjects in California.

Not proof, certainly . . . but extremely compelling.

4. The experiences of NDEs and spiritualist channelings seem to support the idea that:

a. Death is not an ending, but a transition from one state to another.

b. After death we retain memory, personality, and a sense of self.

c. After death we transit to another world or realm, where we see friends and family who've gone over before us.

d. There is often a momentary review of the just-departed life--the famous sense of "having my life flash before my eyes." This is a common thread in both NDEs and in messages imparted by spirits through mediums.

If you're interested in the between-life idea, I highly recommend two books--Journey of Souls and Destiny of Souls, by Michael Newton. He's a long-time therapist who claims to have a uncovered between-life existence in some thousands of his clients.

Does this help, I hope?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by WHKeith

I’ve heard it said that time is just what keeps everything from happening at once.

Quahom1, with respect, I’d like to see a cite on that statement about nuclear chain reactions exceeding the speed of light. I’ve heard of no such observation...

Ok, I'll see if I can dig it up again. It was something about the affects of cyclotrons. I'll find it for you. Ah, here is a link to one version to ponder http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/A...usha-final.pdf

Originally Posted by WHKeith

When you say that “inside the explosion it takes forever,” though . . . that has echoes of black hole physics. Gravity slows the passage of time the same way motion does; as you approach the event horizon of a black hole, the point at which the escape velocity of the singularity is the speed of light, the passage of time in the rest of the universe, as experienced by the unfortunate astronaut who’s fallen in, appears tremendously accelerated, while, to an observer outside, the astronaut appears frozen in time.

Ah, but the "Quantum singularity" with its electromagnetic fields (which are always at the speed of light), and its single focal point may have just given the astronaut a way out of his dilema, by diving in. Just add the thrust from his craft (Newton's second law of inertia).

"The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object."

Though we are talking quantum physics here, it seems to me that stepping beyond the realm of the singularity, an outside observer notices that the black hole is actually creating a vortex effect, like a drain in a tub of water. Everthing appears to move slowly, however the center of the vortex is moving much faster as the water passes the focal point of the drain. And since neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed...only changed, it is possible that the astronaut deliberately driving for the singularity's focal point, can't help but exceed the speed of light (due to the suspension of certain physical laws in a quantum environment...or are they?). If I free fall toward earth at terminal velocity, I fall at a set speed - 32 ft per second, per second. If I have a rocket pack on my back and I use it, I exceed terminal velocity...something to chew on.

Nuclear explosions aside, along with the attendent problems of measuring the passage of time inside a nuclear fireball, I will say that recent experiments in quantum dynamics have demonstrated that nonlocality is fact—meaning that some phenomenon, notably the transmission of information telepathically or through remote viewing and certain instances of remote healing, appear to bypass space-time rather than move through it. That doesn’t say that faster-than-light travel is possible, but does suggest an underlying unity to all subatomic particles independent of what we see as space and time.

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Yeah! A favorite musing of mine. Brian can tell you I’ve been pestering him for months with that notion . . . the idea that we create our own pocket realities by interacting with Heisenbergian probability on a quantum level, that those realities overlap and create a consensual reality that we only THINK is “real.” I just finished writing a book [he says modestly] discussing that very idea, and suggesting that magic involves deliberately shifting one’s self from one universe to another within the multiverse. [Ah! THAT’S why I can’t find my socks! Left ‘em in the next universe over!]

But isn't the Heisenberg principle, the "uncertainty principle"?

Originally Posted by WHKeith

All of this is anecdotal, of course, but it seems to support the intriguing idea that our REAL life is within a God’s-eye milieu outside of space and time, and that we enter this space-time continuum at intervals—if THAT means anything!—in order to learn and grow...

The shortest distance between two points, is a straight line...the one that does not follow the gravametric curve of real space. That is how we will create the illusion of traveling faster than light speed, we will figure out how to take the short cut.

my two cents.

[Quahom1]

If I create a Mobius strip (take a strip of paper, twist it in on itself, and tape the ends together), I have an infinite "one dimensional" loop. To prove this, take a pencil, start a line on any part of the Mobius strip, and continuously draw the line. The result is a two dimensional object, with only one dimension (one apparent side). Now, if I punch a hole in this Mobius strip, where does the other end of the hole exit? think wormhole?...

Ok, that is a child's toy, but the thinking behind it is not.

In Sweden, they have a cyclotron...(oh I know here we go again), only this time it is in Popular Science Magazine, and American Scientific Journal. They may have the ability to create a quantum singularity (a black hole). If gravitational laws are not as we understand them in general physics, then their ability to create a singularity will be proven, albeit short lived (the Heisenberg principle will also be proven beyond theorem). Even so, the Sweden facility does not have the engery to maintain a black hole, so it would evaporate immediately.

But, to create one...

God said, as you believe, so it shall be...hmmm, interesting fodder for another post.

[littlemissattitude]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

God said, as you believe, so it shall be...hmmm, interesting fodder for another post.

Ah....this brings up another can of worms (to go along with your wormhole in the Mobius strip, Quahom1?). Is there a way of looking at the universe in which everything is true?

Now, of course, under the conditions which we were disucssing before, with many alternate universes or realities, this could easily be possible when you take into consideration all the universes together - different things would be true in each universe or reality, creating the possibility that within the conglomerate that everything (or all things) are true. But, can any of you see any way that all things could be true - brought about by the diverse beliefs of the sentient beings within that one universe or reality, referencing the quote Quahom1 left us, above?

Have fun kids. This is one of my favorite thought exercises. (There really should be an evil smilie here, you know, as this exercise might make you a little crazy if you think about it enough.)

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

Now, of course, under the conditions which we were disucssing before, with many alternate universes or realities, this could easily be possible when you take into consideration all the universes together - different things would be true in each universe or reality, creating the possibility that within the conglomerate that everything (or all things) are true. But, can any of you see any way that all things could be true - brought about by the diverse beliefs of the sentient beings within that one universe or reality...?

Hmm, of course all things can be true symultaneously, they just can't be true in the same space. For example, if I were to step back to yesterday (remember time travel is considered feasable, just not probable), I could exist well enough, just as long as I did not meet my past version of self, that is as long as I did not touch my former self. No two identical objects can exist in the same space, and the same time (but then, that would be no problem, because we are different physically from day to day, with cells replacing cells). Another thought, If there is an identical universe to ours, only this one is a mirror image of the other. My heart is on the left side of my chest, however my counterpart's heart is on the left side of his chest (from his perspective). From my point of view, his heart would be on the right side of his chest...which perspective would be correct?

And what about the elusive "anti-matter" concept? Identical universes, only everything about the sub-atomic level is reversed. Electrons have postivie charges, and protons have negative charges. If the barrier between the two universes were to be breached, and an identical hydrogen atom collided with its counterpart...total annihilation results.

Then there is the deja-vu theory. Universes on the same planes of existence, except for one variation...time. One universe is out of phase from the other by an infintesmally small amount of time, but it is enough to have an infinite numbr of universes right here, and none of us are aware of the others.

What about universes that only have two dimensions? What about one dimensional universes? What about five, six, 10 dimensional universes?

Each universe would hold absolute physical truthes, but not all laws of physics would apply in all universes, because not all physical laws would be neccessary in each version.

Why are most dreams we have disjointed, but every so often we have dreams so lucid, we swear it was real, only it isn't any reality we deal with during our waking moments? Why is it we remember these "lucid" dreams much easier, and much longer than we do the "goofy" dreams? And why do they linger, and bother us for awhile? To dream of children we never had, but swear they were real, with a past, and a future. Lost loves, are not lost in the dreams. I'm not talking wishful thinking, I mean they felt so real, that we are frustrated when we wake up, and fight to keep the memory of the dream from disapating.

Why do we know a place we've never been to, or recognize a face we've never seen?

Why do we even ponder these concepts, unless there is a possibility that they are more than concepts?

In scripture, man began to build a tower to heaven. The collective God pondered this, and decreed that man would succeed if left alone (this was 4000 years ago). God said man wasn't ready, and his thinking was wrong, so God threw a wrench in the works, not to stop us, but to slow us down.

I look forward to your response.


v/r

Q

[littlemissattitude]

Wow. I'm going to have to think about all of this, digest it a little, before I can make any kind of intelligent response. However, I can comment on one of your questions. You wrote:

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Why do we even ponder these concepts, unless there is a possibility that they are more than concepts?

People sometimes tell me that the reason I think about things like this, and then talk about them or write about them, is just because I am a *^$& troublemaker. Isn't it funny how some people seem to feel so threatened by anyone who thinks or talks about anything out of the mainstream of orthodox thought (and by orthodox, I mean both in religion and in science)? Personally, I think stretching our "brain muscles" in this way is good for the soul.

I'll give the rest of what you said some thought. If it doesn't sprain my synapses, which is always possible, I'll comment later.

One further comment, as it occurs to me. You wrote:

In scripture, man began to build a tower to heaven. The collective God pondered this, and decreed that man would succeed if left alone (this was 4000 years ago). God said man wasn't ready, and his thinking was wrong, so God threw a wrench in the works, not to stop us, but to slow us down.

Are you really sure it was humankind that wasn't ready? Maybe it was God who wasn't ready. See? I can't help it. I'm just a troublemaker, although I assure you that I'm completely serious about my question and conclusion here.

I'll go for now, before I get myself in any more trouble.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

...People sometimes tell me that the reason I think about things like this, and then talk about them or write about them, is just because I am a *^$& troublemaker. Isn't it funny how some people seem to feel so threatened by anyone who thinks or talks about anything out of the mainstream of orthodox thought (and by orthodox, I mean both in religion and in science)? Personally, I think stretching our "brain muscles" in this way is good for the soul...Are you really sure it was humankind that wasn't ready? Maybe it was God who wasn't ready. See? I can't help it. I'm just a troublemaker, although I assure you that I'm completely serious about my question and conclusion here...

Well the status quo gaurantees one thing, eventual complacency. Man does not appear to do well as a tree sloth. And as far as man being ready and God not...well when my ten year old told me he met the girl of his dreams and was ready to go out into the world, raise a family and make his mark...I would be remiss if I did not weigh his "absolute determination and will" against his experience and strength...would I not? Not that he would not be capable one day, he just wasn't ready at the moment of his declaration. So, I as a good parent provide distraction by bringing about the realities of living, and growing towards meeting the task he set before himself.

Just like math, life cannot work well by skipping steps, in solving the equation.

[littlemissattitude]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Well the status quo gaurantees one thing, eventual complacency. Man does not appear to do well as a tree sloth. And as far as man being ready and God not...well when my ten year old told me he met the girl of his dreams and was ready to go out into the world, raise a family and make his mark...I would be remiss if I did not weigh his "absolute determination and will" against his experience and strength...would I not? Not that he would not be capable one day, he just wasn't ready at the moment of his declaration. So, I as a good parent provide distraction by bringing about the realities of living, and growing towards meeting the task he set before himself.

Just like math, life cannot work well by skipping steps, in solving the equation.

Point taken.

On the other hand, there are all those fathers who don't want their daughters dating until they are thirty-five. Just something to think about.

Then there is the deja-vu theory. Universes on the same planes of existence, except for one variation...time. One universe is out of phase from the other by an infintesmally small amount of time, but it is enough to have an infinite numbr of universes right here, and none of us are aware of the others.

I'm good with that possible explanation for deja-vu. Makes as much sense as anything else. I never really understood the theory that deja-vu is a memory of a past life, considering that most of the deja-vu experiences I've ever had (and I tend to have them fairly frequently for some reason) have to do with thinking I remember doing specific things or having specific conversations based on very contemporary events - not something that could be a memory of a life lived before 1956 (when I was born). Although, I have to say that I find such experiences to be extremely unnerving, maybe because I've always had them so often.

Still thinking on the other topics - this cold weather must slow down my snapses or something.

[DrChaos]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

Ah....this brings up another can of worms (to go along with your wormhole in the Mobius strip, Quahom1?). Is there a way of looking at the universe in which everything is true?

Now, of course, under the conditions which we were disucssing before, with many alternate universes or realities, this could easily be possible when you take into consideration all the universes together - different things would be true in each universe or reality, creating the possibility that within the conglomerate that everything (or all things) are true. But, can any of you see any way that all things could be true - brought about by the diverse beliefs of the sentient beings within that one universe or reality, referencing the quote Quahom1 left us, above?

Have fun kids. This is one of my favorite thought exercises. (There really should be an evil smilie here, you know, as this exercise might make you a little crazy if you think about it enough.)

This question will be my demise. If everything exists, then in essence nothing exists. I think that when God destroyed the Tower of Babylon, he destroyed the use of most of our brains, thus not allowing us to realize or contemplate things that God himself can. This being said, Quahom1 also stated, "God said man wasn't ready, and his thinking was wrong, so God threw a wrench in the works, not to stop us, but to slow us down. " Does that mean that we are slowly preparring ourselves? And if so, does that mean that we use more of our brrains with every generation, and what happens when we finally realize everything? Do we just become in a way "God" ourselves, or return to Him, and then do the process all over. And if so, does that mean that this all has happened before?

[JJM]

Originally Posted by DrChaos

This question will be my demise. If everything exists, then in essence nothing exists. I think that when God destroyed the Tower of Babylon, he destroyed the use of most of our brains, thus not allowing us to realize or contemplate things that God himself can. This being said, Quahom1 also stated, "God said man wasn't ready, and his thinking was wrong, so God threw a wrench in the works, not to stop us, but to slow us down. " Does that mean that we are slowly preparring ourselves? And if so, does that mean that we use more of our brrains with every generation, and what happens when we finally realize everything? Do we just become in a way "God" ourselves, or return to Him, and then do the process all over. And if so, does that mean that this all has happened before?

Is it my imagination or does this sound slightly like the Hindu take on things? I know that they don't think we get generally smarter then make it to gods. but rather be born over and over again until we are perfect and thus join the gods. or am I wrong in thinking this?




Regardless of this It is possible that if your correct that we would never reach God’s intelligence. Our knowledge could go up by a certain percent ever generation. It would probably be something along the lines of .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000001%
but for an example lets use 50%. if we are at 10%`of all intelligence then the next generation we would be around 55% and the year after that the next 77.5% then 88.25% and so on each generation getting half way to perfect but never quite getting there. So while I don't think that this theory is probable it is possible for it to take place without us ever reaching 100% of all intelligence.



__________________________________________________ __
I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.
Socrates

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by JJM

Is it my imagination or does this sound slightly like the Hindu take on things? I know that they don't think we get generally smarter then make it to gods. but rather be born over and over again until we are perfect and thus join the gods. or am I wrong in thinking this?

Namaste JJM,

thank you for the post.

hmm... sort of according to the main Hindu understanding (it should be pointed out here that "Hinduism" is a term coined by the west to describe a large variety of religious and spiritual practices) we are born over and over, either in higher or lower states, depending on our karma. this will continue until Brahma wakes from His dream, which comprises the totality of everything. When He wakes, this universe will cease to be and thus no more rounds of rebirth. In the Hindu understanding, there is no escape from the wheel.

remember, in the Hindu understanding, it's not that God or Brahma is in everything, rather, God IS everything. you and i and everyone and everything are simply dreams of the Dreaming God.

[JJM]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste JJM,

thank you for the post.

hmm... sort of according to the main Hindu understanding (it should be pointed out here that "Hinduism" is a term coined by the west to describe a large variety of religious and spiritual practices) we are born over and over, either in higher or lower states, depending on our karma. this will continue until Brahma wakes from His dream, which comprises the totality of everything. When He wakes, this universe will cease to be and thus no more rounds of rebirth. In the Hindu understanding, there is no escape from the wheel.

remember, in the Hindu understanding, it's not that God or Brahma is in everything, rather, God IS everything. you and i and everyone and everything are simply dreams of the Dreaming God.

Hmm. That is very interesting. I've never thought about it like that.

__________________________________________________ __________
I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.
Socrates

[Susma Rio Sep]

About alternate universes, my own experiences and encounters with alternate universes are my dreams. I have had all kinds of dreams and all degrees of control save complete control -- usually very little control; but in some dreams where the going can be risky or too tough I have luckily always managed to force myself to wake up. Should I ever fail to force myself to wake up, then it's all over for me in my normal waking universe.

Words and words have been written about alternate universes. There is always the fallacy of dwelling in words, which is very common among religious writers or writers of mystical matters, among themselves.

I can tell you one day about the court's jester who was the ghost writer for the king on religious matters, so that the king would appear to be profoundly mystical like the monks in his realm claiming to know things profound and transcendental.

Beware then, alternate universe enthusiasts you don't have a jester in your midst who has mastered your language.

If you can consult a good mathematician, ask him to use the language of mathematics to put in a system your alternate universes, then you might discover something really mathematically objective, and practically relevant to human life at some time in the future.

In the meantime, if anyone can teach me to cultivate dreams and to dream at will, I am ready to pay good money for such a skill.

Susma Rio Sep

[JJM]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Example: I am a twin and am placed on a vessel headed for oh, say Alpha Centauri (about 28 light years from Earth), at birth, while my twin remains on the planet. All physical obstructions aside about matter obtaining light speed, let's say I do, and I arrive at Alpha Centauri 28 years later. I am a young man just getting into the prime of my life, and my twin? He's been dust for 1500 years.

Q

As I was reading this I realized that your example (above) was wrong. While I don't truly think that time would change if it did you would not be twenty eight. 28 light years is referring to how much time it seems to take for the light to travel from someone on earth traveling at earths speed. so in fact if this scenario to place and time would seem to change then your twin would be the one who was 28 and you’d still be in the first months of you infancy.

Further more if this theory is correct while time may change in comparison between to objects but to those object if they don't interact wouldn't notice a change in time. so if you did travel for 28 light years it would seem like 28 year to your twin but it would seem like roughly 181 days (that is assuming that you brother lived to be 80 and you didn't pull the 1500 number out of you butt. then every earth year you seem like .018401237 years to some one traveling at the speed of light.) so while in relation to each other the time may change but to the actual person they don't.

I'd also like to pose a question because all movement supposedly effects our rate of time then if I'm walking north on earth which is traveling around the sun and rotating in a circle then aren't I not moving in 3 directions at once. How would that affect time? Would they add together, cancel each other out, or would the faster on just take affect? Further more if that is true then because earth and mars are traveling at different speed then would the rate of time seem to change for the two in comparison to each other. Also if I'm driving at 60mph in my car and my grandmother is traveling the same direction. Then would what seems like 1 minutes to me, seem like 1.00000000000000000000000000001 minutes to her?(note: I just made that number up.)

Finally I’d like to say that if this is the case could it not be that heaven is in this universe but is moving so slow that in comparison to us time seems to stand still thus the thought that there is no time in heaven.

Just thought I'd share.
____________________________________________
I am the wisest man alive for I know one thing, that is I know nothing
Socrates