Text Size


Jan 16

Our Destiny Matrix Hologram Universe

Posted by: JackSarfatti
Tagged in: Untagged 
1) Our 2D future event horizon is a hologram screen computer as shown by Seth Lloyd


2) The ~ 10^123 BITS on our once and future event horizon is precisely David Bohm's IMPLICATE ORDER and Wheeler's BIT.


3) We are Wheeler's Delayed Choice Post-Selected IT Back From the Future 3D hologram images - all the material world hidden variables are that. This is Bohm's EXPLICATE ORDER.



4) Now Nick Herbert has a point that gets us to Leibniz's monads


"The monads
Leibniz's best known contribution to metaphysics is his theory of monads, as exposited in Monadologie. Monads are to the metaphysical realm what atoms are to the physical/phenomenal.[citation needed] They can also be compared to the corpuscles of the Mechanical Philosophy of René Descartes and others. Monads are the ultimate elements of the universe. The monads are "substantial forms of being" with the following properties: they are eternal, indecomposable, individual, subject to their own laws, un-interacting, and each reflecting the entire universe in a pre-established harmony (a historically important example of panpsychism). Monads are centers of force; substance is force, while space, matter, andmotion are merely phenomenal.

The ontological essence of a monad is its irreducible simplicity. Unlike atoms, monads possess no material or spatial character. They also differ from atoms by their complete mutual independence, so that interactions among monads are only apparent. Instead, by virtue of the principle of pre-established harmony, each monad follows a preprogrammed set of "instructions" peculiar to itself, so that a monad "knows" what to do at each moment. (These "instructions" may be seen as analogs of the scientific laws governing subatomic particles.) By virtue of these intrinsic instructions, each monad is like a little mirror of the universe. Monads need not be "small"; e.g., each human being constitutes a monad, in which case free will is problematic. God, too, is a monad, and the existence of God can be inferred from the harmony prevailing among all other monads; God wills the pre-established harmony.

Monads are purported to having gotten rid of the problematic:
Interaction between mind and matter arising in the system of Descartes;
Lack of individuation inherent to the system of Spinoza, which represents individual creatures as merely accidental."

Here is a post-modern monad (loosely speaking) an entire observer-centered observable universe in the multiverse limited by the finite speed of light.

From Tamara Davis http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/download/tamarad/  hopefully the floods down under have not knocked out her web-server.

Tamara's server is down! (New South Wales)

5) The proper time of a photon is always TAU ZERO!


The future and past horizons are always connected by Tau Zero world lines into a Bohmian holographic implicate-explicate UNDIVIDED WHOLE so to speak.

This is why we can use the Bekenstein-Unruh-Hawking mechanisms on our observer-dependent horizons that are NOT optical horizons.

I will clarify this in future epistles - but the Bell is ringing and I am beginning to salivate - dear I hope it's not the full moon. ;-)

5.5 - Merrily Rings the Luncheon Bell
John Shea: One more oar to put in about Ida: I used to think "Merrily Rings the Luncheon Bell" a rather clunky bore, until I sat in on a rehearsal for our Savoy-aires' performance 15 years ago, and I finally heard what Sullivan was doing. This is a group of girls on an outing, and the music has an unmistakable sound of breaking free of the classroom, rejoicing in the great outdoors, but treating the experience with pedantic schoolgirl earnestness ("feast we body and mind as well"). I think it is quite perfect!

Harriet Meyer: Tennyson has "But hark the bell/For dinner, let us go!" and I suppose Gilbert changed it to "luncheon" to be funny. The song has always reminded me (in the wrong order chronologically) of Virginia Woolf's description of a meal at a university where she has wandered the grounds in her feminist essay "A Room of One's Own."


Begin forwarded message:

From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
Date: January 15, 2011 12:32:09 PM PST
To: Nick Herbert <quanta@cruzio.com>

Subject: Nick has confused past optical horizons with our future dark energy event horizon.

Nick you are confused about the meaning of "event horizon" - that is not our future event horizon.

Nick your argument is not even wrong because you are confounding past OPTICAL horizons with our FUTURE event horizon.

"event horizon" means gtt = 0

the past optical horizon you confound that with has nothing to do with gtt = 0 - the past optical horizon is only due to the finite speed of light not a property of the representation of the ds^2 metric field relative to a class of arbitrarily chosen detectors.

In a contemplative fashion ...