Or to put it another way, to by-pass the fundamental issue of conscious experience. To claim that the multiverse "solves" this problem is to go outside of science. Sure, the multiverse may indeed be a reality. But that should come out of fundamental physics AND be a falsifiable assertion, not to solve qualia, the hard problem or whether consciousness is the fundamental reality in the universe or not.

I disagree

Yes to clarify I don't rule out that there could be legitimate pre-cognitive experiences. The question is what can be inferred from those. Having well-documented cases of correct predictions does not automatically imply that the future consists of actualized specific events. 

---

From: beowulfr@interlog.com
To: iksnileiz@gmail.com

Subject: RE: From deadhead to think-outside-the-block head? DR. QUANTUM
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 21:35:31 -0400

Yes Z, but Ruth doesn’t seem to have a problem with discussing the implications of precognition as a possibly real phenomenon.  Like me she seems to be willing to discuss it, but not to go out on a limb and wholeheartedly agree with Jack.  So, we were discussing whether precognition would definitely favor Jack’s theory, or whether it could be explained in her theory as well.  She and I both seemed to make the point that viewing of future events doesn’t necessarily mean that someone is viewing the only possible future – there could be a number of possible futures.

 

Actually, on this point I remember reading some books by Lyall Watson back in the 1980s or early 1990s.  Watson had various of these sorts of psychic precognition examples listed.  I remember that he specifically claimed that aircraft, trains or other vehicles that are going to crash statistically have fewer people on them – that there is a rash of last-minute cancellations before the trip.  I don’t know how rigorous his statistics were and whether this is really true.  However, just assuming for a moment that it is, and that people do have an innate precognitive sense, what does Watson’s argument imply about the future?

 

As I remember Watson’s argument, he is not saying that people have a specific vision of dying in a fiery crash (although IIRC he claims that sometimes that does happen) but just that people get a bad feeling about the trip and come up with some excuse to cancel and do something else.  The precognition in his argument therefore happens at a sort of half-conscious level.

 

Either the people who last minute cancel are never going to die/are not “supposed” to die (whatever that means; maybe Jack’s future cosmological horizon quantum computer is post-determining that they live longer), and the precognition happens in order to actualize the future that is there all along.  Or, the cancellations are simply weird effects at a classical level, kind of like a Novikov self-consistency principle that would cause odd coincidences to happen to prevent you from changing history if you travelled to the past through a wormhole.

 

Alternatively, a future existed in which those people did die, and they precognitively sensed it, and so actualized a different future where they avoided death.  This would mean that the future is changeable through precognition, so multiple possible futures must exist.

 

From: Paul Zielinski [mailto:iksnileiz@gmail.com] 
Sent: April-07-14 9:08 PM
To: Robert Addinall

Subject: Re: From deadhead to think-outside-the-block head? DR. QUANTUM

 

Except that we were also talking about Ruth Kastner's alternative model for "retro-causality". Which
doesn't agree with Jack's.

Remember?

On 4/7/2014 5:39 PM, Robert Addinall wrote:

 

Anyway, this is exactly what I was saying the other day – for the purposes of this conversation accepting Jack’s concept of precognition as a proven reality is fine.

 

On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Ruth Kastner wrote:

 

Yes to clarify I don't rule out that there could be legitimate pre-cognitive experiences. The question is what can be inferred from those. Having

well-documented cases of correct predictions does not automatically imply that the future consists of actualized specific events.

_____________________________________________________________

 

 

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:18 PM, JACK SARFATTI <jacksarfatti@gmail.com> wrote:

Every really wealthy person I know well personally has an uncanny talent to make good decisions financially.

I am not talking only about stock market.

For example, the Marshall Naify had extraordinary powers akin to Uri Geller’s and Ingo Swann. I personally experienced “mental time travel” with him (shared telepathic experience) to past events (Ancient Egypt, Middle Ages). He saw the potential of cable TV early and was one of the creators of what led to Comcast.

I have also noticed other evidence in them of paranormal talent.

I am not saying this as a scientific fact - only a subjective observation - folklore.

I am not saying that 100% of the 1% are precognitive but that a significant fraction are.

Even successful criminals and evil leaders are.

 

On Apr 9, 2014, at 12:59 PM, CloudRider@aol.com wrote:

 

Question, for Jack, et al...

Is it possible... or have you considered (seriously, with respect)... that what's in play here is a form of human perception perhaps located somewhere on the autism spectrum, even higher-functioning than Asperger's?

 

I am not a brain neuroscientist. I do not know.

 

If such a condition were to allow "tuning" to different signals from what "typical" receivers (people, brains) are capable of picking up. Not to imply "disability" or abnormality, per se, but a "stretch" in what most people are able to perceive... or perceive and retain in consciousness. Also, Jack's signal had to have a 'sender,' who quite likely would know about the "tuning" aspect of human perception, in the 1950s quite new to us.

 

Exactly my point! HIGH STRANGENESS - REALITY OF THE UNCANNY THAT MANY STRAIGHT SCIENTISTS OUT OF FEAR SUPPRESS.

 

Vallee and Davis Physics of High Strangeness ... - skinwalker ranch

www.skinwalkerranch.org/images/Vallee-Davis-model.pdf‎

by JF Vallee - ‎Cited by 6 - ‎Related articles

Oct 24, 2003 - clarify the issues surrounding “high strangeness” observations by ... Jacques Vallée has a Ph.D. in computer science; Eric Davis holds a Ph.D.

You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 3/1/14

High Strangeness by Laura Knight-Jadczyk and Arkadiusz Jadczyk

www.cassiopaea.org/cass/high_strangeness.htm‎

The term "high strangeness" is attributed to Dr. J. Allen Hynek who addressed the ... French scientist, Jacques Vallee writes in a paper about High Strangeness:.

High strangeness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_strangeness‎

Wikipedia

Within the domain of Ufology, high-strangeness is a term used to denote a ... It is perhaps of interest that Jacques Vallee, a close colleague of Hynek, has in a ...

 

 

This doesn't explain "contacts" by some kind of external source using conventional physical means (i.e., the telephone); could these have been an effort to "simulate extraordinary stimulation" by scientists studying such phenomena. I.e., if selected for programming, how to reach Jack (others?) without alarming them?

 

Well, the phone calls were real. Who made them is still a mystery.

 

Conversely, "extraordinary" ET or UT entities intending to contact and influence (this young scientist, retrocausally identified from the future) could have used the telephone because "supernatural" modalities of such "contact" might have triggered a psychotic break or other rejection reaction, by Jack's mother or any subsequently engaged psychiatrists brought in to "help" normalize their target, getting him locked away or chemically restrained, as quite obviously has happened to many other such "revelatees" over millennia?

 

That did not happen to me. But remember I was part of the USG superkids project out of Columbia University AFTER the phone calls throughout high-school with early admission into Ivy League Cornell with full scholarship for four years.

 

This project (also associated with Ayn Rand) was funded by born in Brooklyn (where I lived):

 

The Eugene McDermott Scholars Program - The University of Texas ...

www.utdallas.edu/mcdermott/‎

University of Texas at Dallas

Feb 25, 2014 - Established by Mrs. Eugene McDermott in support of her husband's dream, the McDermott Scholars program provides select UT Dallas ...

‎Application Information - ‎The McDermott Award - ‎Meet the Scholars - ‎Contact Us

Eugene McDermott Library - The University of Texas at Dallas

www.utdallas.edu/library/‎

University of Texas at Dallas

Online catalog, list of newly acquired titles, and general information for the lecture series and the McDermott and Callier Libraries.

‎Databases - ‎Library Hours - ‎Journals - ‎eBooks Collections

Eugene McDermott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_McDermott‎

Wikipedia

Eugene McDermott (1899-1973) was a geophysicist and co-founder first of Geophysical Service and later of Texas Instruments. Born in Brooklyn, New York, on ...

‎Early career - ‎Geophysical Service - ‎Texas Instruments - ‎Philanthropy

You've visited this page 4 times. Last visit: 11/25/13

 

"IT" used the phone because that approach would not necessarily provoke a panicked response the way a "Biblical" manifestion of revelatory experience likely would have, i.e., "messianic" distortion or psychic break.

 

Either way, the net effect was to recontextualize Jack's personality and "genius," providing direction (both overt and subliminally, likely) and opening his mind to a stream of ongoing but more subtle signals later on.

 

Credulity, post-exposure, would be interesting to some scientists contemporaneous to the experience?

 

http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/cacheof-summary-paper-the-invasion-from-mars-readings-in-social-psychology-1947-hadley-cantril.pdf

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_Cantril

 

 

On Apr 9, 2014, at 12:08 PM, Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com> wrote:

 

So Jack is not going to be satisfied with retro-causal connections between mere possibilities.

 

For him the future is fully actualized and physically influences the present through CTCs in an

eternal block universe.

 

For him, that is what "precognition" means.

 

On 4/9/2014 11:51 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

I disagree

When the events are complex and significant they are not statistical

New rules apply Vallee's high strangeness

When an alleged computer from the future tells me in 1953 of what will happen to me in 1973,which happens in fact and which is the cosmic trigger for the narrative in david kaisers MIT book etc that's a real time loop in a block universe in my opinion.

Remember CIA tape recording of my 1953 memory made in 1973 during SRI visit ties in with uri Geller narrative.

The rules of the game are more like a homicide police investigation rather than statistical analysis of unitary S matrix measurements.

More is different

Emergence of new rules with increasing complexity uniqueness of historical events.

 

Sent from my iPad

 

On Apr 7, 2014, at 7:44 PM, Ruth Kastner <rekastner@hotmail.com> wrote:

 

Yes to clarify I don't rule out that there could be legitimate pre-cognitive experiences. The question is what can be inferred from those. Having well-documented cases of correct predictions does not automatically imply that the future consists of actualized specific events.

 

From: beowulfr@interlog.com

To: iksnileiz@gmail.com

 

Subject: RE: From deadhead to think-outside-the-block head? DR. QUANTUM

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 21:35:31 -0400

 

Yes Z, but Ruth doesn’t seem to have a problem with discussing the implications of precognition as a possibly real phenomenon. Like me she seems to be willing to discuss it, but not to go out on a limb and wholeheartedly agree with Jack. So, we were discussing whether precognition would definitely favor Jack’s theory, or whether it could be explained in her theory as well. She and I both seemed to make the point that viewing of future events doesn’t necessarily mean that someone is viewing the only possible future – there could be a number of possible futures.

 

 

Actually, on this point I remember reading some books by Lyall Watson back in the 1980s or early 1990s. Watson had various of these sorts of psychic precognition examples listed. I remember that he specifically claimed that aircraft, trains or other vehicles that are going to crash statistically have fewer people on them – that there is a rash of last-minute cancellations before the trip. I don’t know how rigorous his statistics were and whether this is really true. However, just assuming for a moment that it is, and that people do have an innate precognitive sense, what does Watson’s argument imply about the future?

 

 

As I remember Watson’s argument, he is not saying that people have a specific vision of dying in a fiery crash (although IIRC he claims that sometimes that does happen) but just that people get a bad feeling about the trip and come up with some excuse to cancel and do something else. The precognition in his argument therefore happens at a sort of half-conscious level.

 

 

Either the people who last minute cancel are never going to die/are not “supposed” to die (whatever that means; maybe Jack’s future cosmological horizon quantum computer is post-determining that they live longer), and the precognition happens in order to actualize the future that is there all along. Or, the cancellations are simply weird effects at a classical level, kind of like a Novikov self-consistency principle that would cause odd coincidences to happen to prevent you from changing history if you travelled to the past through a wormhole.

 

 

Alternatively, a future existed in which those people did die, and they precognitively sensed it, and so actualized a different future where they avoided death. This would mean that the future is changeable through precognition, so multiple possible futures must exist.

 

 

From: Paul Zielinski [mailto:iksnileiz@gmail.com]

Sent: April-07-14 9:08 PM

To: Robert Addinall

 

Subject: Re: From deadhead to think-outside-the-block head? DR. QUANTUM

 

 

Except that we were also talking about Ruth Kastner's alternative model for "retro-causality". Which

doesn't agree with Jack's.

 

Remember?

 

On 4/7/2014 5:39 PM, Robert Addinall wrote:

 

 

Anyway, this is exactly what I was saying the other day – for the purposes of this conversation accepting Jack’s concept of precognition as a proven reality is fine.

 

 

 

 

From my Stargate book (still not finished)

1974: Hawking shows that all black-holes radiate black body radiation[i] whose peak wavelength l_max is roughly the square root of the area-entropy of the black-hole’s horizon, i.e., l_max ~ A1/2 where the entropy S ~ k_BA/4.

Kip Thorne’s book “Black Holes and Time Warps” (1994) gives the best popular explanation of Hawking’s horizon evaporation radiation and the history of its discovery including the role of Zeldovitch in the Soviet Union some forty years ago. Zeldovitch arguing by analogy to the electrodynamics of a rotating neutral conducting sphere said that the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum fluctuations would “tickle” the metal like spontaneous emission of light triggered by virtual photons interacting with real electrons in excited atoms, the rotational energy of the sphere then converting to real photons. Hawking was with Zeldovitch at Les Houches in France. Some time later Hawking, using Bekenstein’s thermodynamics of horizons where the temperature is proportional to the inverse square root of the horizon’s area-entropy A. That is T_cold ~ A^-1/2. I realized in 2013 that this is only half the story, and that there is a second higher temperature T_hot ~ (LA^1/2)^-1/2, which is the proper quantum thickness of the horizon. For example, when L = Planck length we have gravity wave Hawking horizon thickness radiation, when L = Compton wavelength we have electromagnetic radiation from properly accelerating real electrons and positrons. There will also be a sharp gamma ray signal from electron-positron annihilations outside the black-hole horizon. Indeed, the horizon, in the stretched membrane description, is a heat engine of high maximal efficiency ~ 1 – (L/A^1/2)^1/2. Returning to Kip Thorne’s narrative, Zeldovich was convinced the mostly gravity wave rotation radiation would stop when the black-hole stopped rotating from Kerr metric to Schwarzschild metric. However, Hawking did rough calculations suggesting that even stationary black-holes would evaporate mostly by gravity wave emission, although all kinds of thermal emission of every type would also occur. Kip Thorne wrote:

There are several different ways to picture black-hole evaporation … However, all the ways acknowledge vacuum fluctuations as the ultimate source of the outflowing radiation … The waves fluctuate randomly and unpredictably, with positive energy momentarily here, negative energy momentarily there, and zero energy on average. The particle aspect is embodied in the concept of virtual particles, that is particles that flash into existence in pairs (two particles at a time) …

And they are quantum entangled as in the EPR effect.[ii]

… living momentarily on fluctuational energy borrowed from neighboring regions of space, and that then annihilate and disappear, giving their energy back to the neighboring regions. For electromagnetic vacuum fluctuations, the virtual particles are virtual photons; for gravitational vacuum fluctuations, they are virtual gravitons.  … a virtual electron and a virtual positron are likely to flash into existence as an [entangled] pair … the photon is its own antiparticle, so virtual photons flash in and out of existence in [entangled] pairs, and similarly for gravitons. …

The way the phenomenon appears depends on the local frame of the observer. First for the LIF non-rotating timelike geodesic observer in weightless free float:

A black-hole’s tidal gravity pulls an [entangled] pair of virtual photons apart, thereby feeding energy into them … The virtual photons can separate from each other easily, so long as they both remain in a region where the electromagnetic field has momentarily acquired positive energy … the region’s size will always be about the same as the wavelength of the fluctuating electromagnetic field … If the wavelength happens to be about the same as the hole’s circumference [~ A1/2], then the virtual photons can easily separate from eac

Jack Sarfatti Subject: ER = EPR

Susskind & Maldecena here show that traversable wormholes and entanglement signal nonlocality are two sides of the same coin. I anticipated all this in 1973-4.
"Spacetime locality is one of the cornerstones in our present understanding of physics. By locality we mean the impossibility of sending signals faster than the speed of light. Locality appears to be challenged both by quantum mechanics and by general relativity. Quantum mechanics gives rise to Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) correlations [1], while general relativity allows solutions to the equations of motion that connect far away regions through relatively short “wormholes” or Einstein Rosen bridges [2]. It has long been understood that these two effects do not give rise to real violations of locality. One cannot use EPR correlations to send information faster than the speed of light. Similarly, Einstein Rosen bridges do not allow us to send a signal from one asymptotic region to the other, at least when suitable positive energy conditions are obeyed [3, 4, 5]. This is sometimes stated as saying that Lorentzian wormholes are not traversable1.

Here we will note that these two effects are actually connected. We argue that the Einstein Rosen bridge between two black holes is created by EPR-like correlations between the microstates of the two black holes. This is based on previous observations in [6, 10]. We call this the ER = EPR relation. In other words, the ER bridge is a special kind of EPR correlation in which the EPR correlated quantum systems have a weakly coupled Einstein gravity description. It is also special because the combined state is just one particular entangled state out of many possibilities. We note that black hole pair creation in a magnetic field “naturally” produces a pair of black holes in this state. It is very tempting to think that any EPR correlated system is connected by some sort of ER bridge, although in general the bridge may be a highly quantum object that is yet to be independently defined. Indeed, we speculate that even the simple singlet state of two spins is connected by a (very quantum) bridge of this type.

In this article we explain the reasons for expecting such a connection. We also explore some of the implications of this point of view for the black hole information problem, in its AMPS(S)[11, 12] form. See [13, 14, 15] for some earlier work and [12] for a more complete set of references. See [16] for a proposal to describe interiors that is similar to what we are saying here2."

Cool horizons for entangled black holes 

Juan Maldacena1 and Leonard Susskind2

1 Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA
2 Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics and Department of Physics,

Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4060, USA 

1)   . I intuited the connection between the Einstein-Rosen (ER) wormhole and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) quantum entanglement back in 1973 when I was with Abdus Salam at the International Centre of Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy. This idea was published in the wacky book “Space-Time and Beyond” (Dutton, 1975) described by MIT physics historian David Kaiser in his book “How the Hippies Saved Physics.” Lenny Susskind, who I worked with at Cornell 1963-4, rediscovered this ER = EPR connection in the black hole “firewall” paradox. Lenny envisions a multi-mouthed wormhole network connecting the Hawking radiation particles their entangled twins behind the evaporating event horizon. “each escaping particle remains connected to the black hole through a wormhole” Dennis Overbye, Einstein and the Black Hole, New York Times August 13, 2013.  The no-signaling theorem corresponds to the wormhole pinching off before a light speed limited signal can pass through one mouth to the other. Now we know that traversable wormhole stargates are possible using amplified anti-gravity dark energy. This corresponds to signal-nonlocality in post-quantum theory violating orthodox quantum theory. 

1)      Localizing global symmetries requires the addition of compensating gauge connections in a fiber bundle picture of the universe. Indeed, the original global symmetry group is a smaller subgroup of the local symmetry group. The gauge connections define parallel transport of tensor/spinor fields. They correspond to the interactions between the several kinds of charges of the above symmetries. I shall go into more details of this elsewhere. Indeed localizing the above spacetime symmetries corresponds to generalizations of Einstein’s General Relativity as a local gauge theory.[i] For example, localizing the space and time global translational symmetries means that the Lie group transformations at different events (places and times) in the universe are independent of each other. If one believes in the classical special relativity postulate of locality that there are no faster-than-light actions at a distance, then the transformations must certainly be independent of each other between pairs of spacelike separated events that cannot be connected by a light signal. However, the local gauge principle is much stronger, because it applies to pairs of events that can be connected not only by a light signal, but also by slower-than-light timelike signals. This poses a paradox when we add quantum entanglement.  Aspect’s experiment and others since then, show that faster-than-light influences do in fact exist in the conditional probabilities (aka correlations) connecting observed eigenvalues of quantum observable operators independently chosen by Alice and Bob when spacelike separated. I shall return to this in more detail elsewhere. However, the no entanglement-signaling postulate is thought by many mainstream theoretical physicists to define orthodox quantum theory. It’s believed that its violation would also violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Note that the entanglement signal need not be faster-than-light over a spacelike separation between sender and receiver. It could be lightlike or timelike separated as well. Indeed it can even be retrocausal with the message sent back-from-the-future. John Archibald Wheeler’s “delayed choice experiment” is actually consistent with orthodox quantum theory’s no-signaling premise. The point is, that one cannot decode the message encoded in the pattern of entanglement until one has a classical signal key that only propagates forward in time. What one sees before the classical key arrives and a correlation analysis is computed is only local random white noise. However, data on precognitive remote viewing as well as brain presponse data suggests that no-entanglement signaling is only true for dead matter. Nobel Prize physicist, Brian Josephson first published on this. I have also suggested it using Bohm’s ontological interpretation (Lecture 8 of Michael Towler’s Cambridge University Lectures on Bohm’s Pilot Wave). Antony Valentini has further developed this idea in several papers. Post-quantum “signal nonlocality” dispenses with the need to wait for the light-speed limited retarded signal key propagating from past to future. Local non-random noise will be seen in violation of the S-Matrix unitarity “conservation of information” postulate of G. ‘t Hooft, L. Susskind et-al.  Indeed the distinguishable non-orthogonality of entangled Glauber macro-quantum coherent states seems to be the way to get signal nonlocality. This gets us to the “Black Hole War” between Susskind and Hawking about information loss down evaporating black holes. It seems that Hawking caved in too fast to Susskind back in Dublin in 2004. I intuited the connection between the Einstein-Rosen (ER) wormhole and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) quantum entanglement back in 1973 when I was with Abdus Salam at the International Centre of Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy. This idea was published in the wacky book “Space-Time and Beyond” (Dutton, 1975) described by MIT physics historian David Kaiser in his book “How the Hippies Saved Physics.” Lenny Susskind, who I worked with at Cornell 1963-4, rediscovered this ER = EPR connection in the black hole “firewall” paradox.

Jack Sarfatti

August 11 near San Francisco

My review of Jim Woodward's Making Starships book - V1 under construction

• JackSarfatti's comment on A Black Hole Mystery Wrapped in a Firewall Paradox via @nytimes http://t.co/I671P9aoP3 1 of 2

  

  A Black Hole Mystery Wrapped in a Firewall Paradox

  nyti.ms

  A paradox around matter leaking from black holes puts into question various scientific axioms: Either information can be lost; Einstein’s principle of equivalence is wrong; or quantum field theory needs fixing.

• 

  Jack SarfattiActually I was the first to propose a connection between gravity wormholes and quantum entanglement back in the early 1970's when I was at Abdus Salam's Institute in Trieste, Italy. The idea is explicit in the zany book Space-Time and Beyond (Dutton, 1975) that I co-authored with New Age artist Bob Toben and physicist Fred Alan Wolf. MIT Professor David Kaiser describes this history in his award winning book "How the Hippies Saved Physics." Curious that this article thinks that traversable wormholes are impossible. Many physicists think otherwise. Traversable wormholes held open by gravitationally repulsive exotic dark energy without horizons would of course permit faster-than-light communication via entanglement in violation of orthodox quantum theory. Indeed, Antony Valentini has written papers on such signal nonlocality using David Bohm's interpretation of quantum theory when the "beables" are not in thermal equilibirium.

  a few seconds ago · Like
• 

  Jack SarfattiThe black hole horizon is already quite physical without violating Einstein's equivalence principle for the hovering observer who must have an increasingly large proper acceleration the closer he gets to the horizon. By the Unruh effect, the hovering observer Bob sees a large temperature of real thermal photons. If Bob burns up from hovering too close to the horizon, and if Alice free falls into the black hole in close contact with Bob, then it seems plausible that Alice will feel Bob's heat and indeed catch fire herself. Furthermore, the virtual electron-positron pairs stuck to the horizon in Hawking's radiation mechanism will also feel the photon heat high temperature and will get enough energy from the gravity field to excite into a real electron positron plasma within a Compton wavelength thickness, so that free-falling Alice should see that as a quantum firewall. The equivalence principle is a classical physics idea prior to quantum corrections. Hence, I see no real paradox if looked at from this perspective.

  a few seconds ago · Like

1. • Status
   • Photo
   • Place
   • Life Event

   What's on your mind?
2. 

   Jack Sarfatti shared a link.

   a few seconds ago near San Francisco

   It seems to me that Bohmian beables are obviously required.
   1) fact is that we live in a classical macroscopic world where the fundamental observable is Maxwell's local classical electromagnetic field tensor F
   obeying in Cartan form notation
   F = dA
   dF = 0
   d*F = *J
   * = Hodge dual
   All our information about other fermion matter fields comes indirectly via F and also A if you include the Bohm-Aharonov quantum effect.
   Therefore, the basic classical observable is the F electromagnetic field.
   As Basil Hiley explains this beable F is an infinite-dimensional field configuration on a spacelike or lightlike surface in which each spacetime event is a "dimension". It has a super Q and photons are not localized like massive fermions are. If, instead of the continuum, we use a voxelated 3D + 1 world crystal lattice (Kleinert) then the hologram principle tells us that the lattice spacing is not the Planck length Lp, but rather it is L where
   L^3 = Lp^2A^1/2
   A = area - entropy of the horizon screen Seth pixelated computer
   The number of BITs in J. A. Wheeler's
   IT FROM BIT
   is N = A/4Lp^2 = A^3/2/L^3 ~ 10^52/10^-70 ~ 10^122 in our actual causal diamond pictured here
   Showing Apast and A future with 3D volumes of both retarded history and advanced destiny influence on the 3D lightlike slices. I think Susskind's student Raphael Buosso at UC Berkeley has worked this all out mathematically though perhaps not with the advanced Wheeler-Feynman -Cramer-Aharonov effect?
   Note the change in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which according to Susskind et-al is
   &x ~ h/&p + Lp^2&p/h
   However, I think it may really be
   &x ~ h/&p + L^2&p/h
   Note that
   Lp = 10^-35 meters
   A^1/2 = 10^26 meters
   L^3 ~ 10^-7010^26 = 10^-44 meters^3
   L ~ 10^-15 meter ~ 1 fermi ~ 1 Gev
   for the voxel unit cell of the hologram image world crystal lattice
   Hawking's black body radiation is a horizon surface effect
   T ~ A^-1/2
   I predict a second high temperature horizon thickness Hawking radiation of temperature
   T' ~ (LcA^1/2)^-1/2
   (LcA^1/2) is the proper length quantum thickness of the Horizon as a "stretched membrane" (Kip Thorne)
   Therefore, the stretched membrane is a very efficient Carnot limited heat engine with
   (Work outpu/Heat input ) < 1 - (Lc/A^1'2)^1/2 ---> 0 as A^1/2 ---> Lp (Planck black hole)
   Lc is the formal UV cutoff
   Now there may be a spectrum of such cutoff's. Sinziana Paduroiu's astrophysicist colleagues in Paris suggest that Susskind's cut off of Lp corresponds to Hawking gravity wave black body radiation.
   Note that for precision cosmology (LpA^1/2)^1/2 ~ (10^-3510^26)^1/2 ~ (10^-9)^1/2 ~ 10^-3 meters ~ 10^11 Hz corresponding to the observed dark energy density. However, it is easily shown that this must come from our future horizon as a retro-causal back-from-the-future "destiny" (Aharonov) effect.
   Search Results
   Back From the Future | DiscoverMagazine.com
   discovermagazine.com/2010/apr/01-back-from-the-future
   Aug 26, 2010 – A series of quantum experiments shows that measurements performed in the future can influence the present. Does that mean the universe has ...
   On Jun 26, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Ruth Kastner <rekastner@hotmail.com> wrote:
   Thanks Jack, I'll look at these. But to the extent that you have to adduce a Bohmian picture to support your claim, I can't buy it, because I don't think the 'beable' approach is correct. I don't agree that there are 'beables'. RK

   

   Back From the Future | DiscoverMagazine.com

   discovermagazine.com

   A series of quantum experiments shows that measurements performed in the future can influence the present. Does that mean the universe has a destiny—and the laws of physics pull us inexorably toward our prewritten fate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?edit=vd&v=7V4LVxue0FY