Rich Buckley
07-10-2008, 07:47 PM
PART 1How Dark Matter and Dark Energy
Might Lead to New Cosmological Perspectives
(and information time travel)
Speculation on the Physics of Remote Viewing
reductio ad adsurdum
Eventually some scientist with highly regarded theoretical mathematical, computational physics credentials is also going to say something like...... “and then there is all that remote viewing evidence of remote viewers accurately reporting detailed future events significantly above the probability of random chance stuff. Maybe we better look in to it....”
Then finally! Ta-Da-a-a-a-a-ah! It starts being talked about and then becomes all the rage. Endowed chairs spring up in all the right universities, open to brilliant talent that dares to also include "that remote viewing stuff-research" in their resume.
" What's your degree cover exactly Professor Jones?" asks the Harvard Physics Chairing Committee Evaluation Team leader with a sniff, followed impatiently with yet another question before any answer can be given.
"Where is your remote viewing stuff? Surely Jones, you have devoted some portion of your research to this emerging augmentation to cosmological reality? How can you purport to build an accurate model of the universe without remote viewing stuff?"
All eyes of the committee now stare disdainfully at the drop of sweat splating noticeably on the high gloss polish of the Harvard Physics Faculty Board Room conference table.
"Pray Jones, do tell us; we await your answer," the silence broken with rhythmic finger drumming from deep within the row of judging eyes, which now appear to Jones to be strangely receding as though the very space separating them is warping.
by Peace and Conflict Resolution.Org
This paper suggests ideas for astronomical observations, measurements and calculations we can undertake right now to test the stability of the amount of Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) presence nearby and near remote galaxies. We must measure DMDE because we can. We must measure to determine if DMDE accretion exists and we must attempt to measure and calculate accumulation-repulsive force of DMDE and why it lumps where it lumps (if it does) outside our galaxies. These ideas are independently arrived at by me as a layman reading numerous state-of-the-sciences layman language books on particle physics, string theory, and cosmology. If there is original thought present others will recognize it. This paper is prepared by Rich Buckley, President, Peace and Conflict Resolution.Org (P&CR), (http://www.PeaceandConflictResolution.Org ) a 501(c) 3 tax exempt corporation. Our mission is in our name and our goal in preparing this paper is to seek intellectual assistance from the scientific community to help explain the physics of remote viewing. Why? Because diverse groups, nonreligious and religious, regardless of their faith system, beliefs, or practices have statistically significant portions of their followers experience events like or very similar to remote viewing (anomalous cognition, AC). Such common experiences make powerful bridge builders among diverse groups, which we believe is a good thing. Additionally, science eventually needs to explain all phenomena to accurately explain cosmology. The physics of remote viewing is part of that cosmology.
While watching “The Universe” series on The History Channel, the evidence for Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) existence was described in the series as outlined in Sections 1 and 2 below. I believe I have some recall issues with implications received which need to be double checked. The issue of "lumping or apparent accretion of dark matter and dark energy" is not found in any of my state-of-the-sciences readings: (1) The Trouble with Phyics by Professor Lee Smolin, (2) Warped Passages by Professor Lisa Randall, and (3) Endless Universe by Professors Paul J Steinhardt and Neil Turok, each of whom assess Dark Matter and Dark Energy as permeating throughout spacetime evenly distributed. The only perception or recall I have of lumped Dark Matter Dark Energy was a one time watching of The Universe and observing the narrator's comments and artistic renderings illustrating lumped, accredted deposits of DMDE outside various galaxies. The the production values of The Universe were set at high standards and the production dates after the publicaiton dates of my reading list, I give some weight to the likelihood that additional research into DMDE may have occured after the publication of the books. Here breifly is the summary of points on DMDE by The Universe production team:
1. The shapes and sizes of visible galaxies can not be accounted for without the presence of additional mass and energy than is visible through astronomical observations. Observed lensing effects allowed astronomers to validate the presence of additional nonluminous mass and energy near galaxies. This nonluminous mass and energy is called Dark Mass and Dark Energy (hereafter “DMDE”).
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/Galaxy-fullinit_.jpg
(Click to View Image)
2. “Gravitational lensing effect” (bending of light and by inference bending of other energy waves) does occur and has now been verified by observations of the bending of light around remote galaxies indicating that Dark Matter (The nonluminous matter that carries about 26% of the energy in the universe) and/or Dark Energy (The measured vacuum energy in the universe that constitutes about 70% of the universe’s energy but is not carried by any form of matter) must therefore be present:
A. 94% +- of all energy and/or matter in our visible universe is reported to be nonluminous Dark Matter and/or Dark Energy (or just “DMDE”).
B. The DMDE density yields a net positive expansion upon the observable universe at an accelerating rate of expansion. The galaxies are moving apart from each other at an accelerating rate. This of course was first reported by Dr. Hubble.
C. Observations indicate the accumulation pattern for DMDE appears to either excrete itself to surround existing visible matter of each galaxy as depicted in the diagram (See Schematic Disk Galaxy), according to the lensing effects observed, or the DMDE finds a favorable dimensional bulk region mostly outside visible galaxies with conditions for its formation.
The story board writers for The Universe production company, tip-toed around DMDE. The migration pattern (in red, see insert above) of the DMDE seems plausible with what we could expect to see if there is a repulsive field force of some sort between DMDE our 4-Dimensional Universe (4DU) of observable matter. Equally noteworthy is that the repulsive force appears to balance with gravity just outside and surrounding our galaxies thus allowing us to compute force field strengths. Knowing the force field strength should tell us a lot.
The History Channel depicts the migration of DMDE to what appears to be the extremities of the galaxy, and they artistically bulked up the accumulated dark mass to appear as though there might be a north pole and south pole although the existence of “polarities” were never stated. Very little regarding details of DMDE was actually discussed in the series, and my quick read of artistic schematics may be off base as to the notion of polarities. It was mentioned that the DMDE tended to accumulate “around” the galaxy but then depicted in lumps on two extremes of a sample galaxy. This migration of DMDE to the extremities of the galaxy would seem to indicate repulsive field forces exist between DMDE and 4DU observable matter.
Although the History Channel did not discuss the possibility, it occurs the DMDE information we receive in our 4DU-universe may actually be gravity effects we see and experience in our dimension from matter and energy and associated gravity in a separate dimension, gravity being a theorized bulk traveler among dimensions. Gravity waves impact other gravity waves, therefore gravity waves exiting our dimension and altered in another dimension, would re-enter our dimension and impact gravity in our dimension, as one explanation.
One of the apparently unsettled theories of String Theory is that while gravity is a bulk dimensional traveler, it nonetheless obeys the rules of the dimension in which we see it. Thus in our universe, the 4DU-universe, gravity should obey space-time E = mc². However a contending string theory rule posits that a dimension may contain energy levels that create dimensional charges effecting alternate dimensions. These contending rules raises the question, are we seeing the effects of a cross dimensional charge effecting gravity, or are we seeing gravity re-entering our dimension altered in its travels into a DMDE dimension and thus bending or lensing visible light around galaxies.
D. Other possibilities for the apparent repulsive forces between DMDE and 4DU might also include:
(1) The presence of dimensional plates or membranes referred to as “branes”. The so called brane would contain higher dimensional particles with mass “sequestered” on the brane. The branes themselves may therefore share a repulsive force with our own 4DU mass. The repulsive force would need to be a bulk traveler sort of a positive gravity. Is there a new bulk traveler in play we did not consider? The problem here is gravity in our dimension is supposed to obey our rules of space-time E = mc².
(2) It was noted also that the DMDE was not dominate prior to about 9-billion± years ago. The term “not dominant” was enlarged upon to imply “non-existant”.
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/TIMEDMDE-fullinit_.jpg
(Click To View Image)
(3) MEASURE LENSING EFFECTS TO SEE IF DMDE IS CHANGING OVER TIME. We must measure because we can. Find a series of equal size galaxies each separated and leap-froging back in time about 1-billion years per galaxy. Measure the lensing effects around each galaxy to determine the rate of increase of the DMDE to measure whether or not there exists a rate of increase in DMDE. There are four possibilities: (a) Straight line increase over time. (b) Greater than straight line. (c) Flat line (zero slope),Flat line would indicate DMDE just popped into existence about 9-billion years ago and has not increased since. (d) repeating variable cycling from positive increase to negative decrease over time (this latter one is not considered since reported observational evidence over time does not support variable cycling.
Determining the accretion rate of DMDE will give even more clues to forces at play between branes, which in turn may help isolate and identify the likely number of dimensions and open creative thinking of a unifying string theory with elements we can test.
(4) ASTRONOMICAL READINGS TO LOOK FOR AND WHY. Particle physicists subscribing to string theory should, I would think, want to find a flat-line graph (slope of zero) over time with no apparent increase in DMDE since it popped into being some 9-billion years ago. Why? Because any DMDE growth rate other than a flat line break 9-billion years ago, a period when DMDE seems to have popped into existence in our 4DU universe would imply that we may not correctly understand symmetry breaking, which in turn compels us to rethink, yet again, some parts of string theory at the very minimum.
Under current string theory with the exception of gravity, (a) dimensional membranes, i.e., “branes” and, (b) sequestered dimensional brane-bound energies and particles either remain on the brane or they travel the bulk on strings (meaning they travel throughout space time among the various branes, such as gravity is believed to travel). Flat line DMDE graph 9-billion years ago should be the only kind of breaking, a string theory advocate would want to find, i.e., a clean and identifiable break. Just as particles are believed to not be gradually formed a piece at a time but in group-step joinings at any given level of energy-density, so are the theorized sequestering properties of dimensional space.
An emergence of DMDE 9-billion years ago (Ref. “3 Possibilities Map” above) would have a specifically known energy density. We could then compute that energy density accurately that existed 9 billion years ago and theorize that level of energy is where at least one major breaking point among dimensions exists. We would not want to see nor expect to find a process of slow accretion of DMDE building in our 4DU-universe. Slow, sliding scales are totally different than predicable stepped-jumps, and would appear intuitively counter to most parts of string theory. Once we compute the level of energy-density at which a dimension break occurred (9-Billion years ago), we can link dimensional breaking points to field energies and particle energies. String theory physicists should expect to find everything in good order with a flat line (zero slope) graph supporting what we already think we know about dimensions.
(5) IF WE FIND ANYTHING OTHER THAN A FLAT LINE MEASURE OF DMDE AS WE OBSERVE BACK IN TIME THAT WILL BE OF CONCERN! Why? Because all our most popular current theories of dimensions 5-brane, 10-brane, 11-brane, M-String Theory and of course The Standard Model particles are built upon characteristics of bundled units of energies, and/or Higgs Field particles and symmetry breaking characteristics that only interact in stepped transactions that tend to hold stable until a major break occurs (or a different energy level is induced by a particle accelerator for example). Inferentially as energy-density levels decrease (or increase) changes are theorized to occur in steps with clean breaks. We can infer energy-density triggers break points going both up in energy-density levels and going down in energy-density levels. Going down in energy-density scales according to observations had tentatively revealed a break point 9-billion years ago when dark mass and dark energy is first reported.
In current string theory, there is no mechanism to account for a slow accretion of energy from one dimension to another with continuous sliding scales of accretion. All our dimensions are supposed to hold until it reaches a unification point (or merging point) or break point and then things change in predicable stepped-jumps.
DOCUMENTED CASES HAVE REMOTE VIEWERS SEEING FUTURE EVENTS TOO. According to what we think we know about time and space, we believe there is a forward direction to time in our 4DU-universe, yet good remote viewers to see future events.
I believe I live a 4-dimensional life and I remain physically sequestered in forward moving time, nothing new there. But yet I too have seen future events that go beyond knowledge and logic.
Please remember my goal is to encourage you to help explain the physics of remote viewing, so I am taking pains to try and understand current state of scientific thinking, hoping for reasons already set forth, that you might help us understand the physics of remote viewing. My personal experiences of seeing future events were not controlled, double-blind events under acceptable remote viewing protocols.
There are many documented cases of remote viewers seeing current, past and future events. What possible physics can explain it?
If I drop a drop of Red die food coloring in a glass of warm water, I expect 100.000000000…∞ % to see the water turn red and I have zero expectation to see the red water recede back to clear water with my original drop of Red food coloring returning into a tight puddle of its original undiluted red die state no matter how much time elapses until the end of time. For me time moves in one direction. There are remote viewers that in fact do see future events and past events in addition to current events. How is that possible?
3. What could it mean if DMDE is found through astronomical observations to be accreting into our 4DU universe? While the plotted rate of accretion would give us clues to the functions of accretion (if DMDE-accretion in any form other than flat-line stepped jumps exists) the existence of any gradual accretion with time, requires us to recalculate the notions of sequestering, boundary conditions between dimensions, and all that flows from that.
One of the things it might mean if DMDE is found through observation to be accreting into our 4DU-universe is outlined in the body of my main web page called “A Layman’s Speculation on the Physics of Remote Viewing,” a website in constant change and updating (one would hope).
If DMDE accretion is plotted through real astronomical observations to not be flat lined, but instead accreting gradually into our 4DU-observable universe, one idea stimulated by the research team at UC-Berkeley Lab, headed by Dr. Fleming, an idea I refer to as “Super-Quantum-Mechanical Vibrations,” is outlined in this link (http://peaceandconflictresolution.googlepages.com/Alayman-5.pdf). Fleming was researching photosynthesis efficiencies and discovered unique quantum mechanical vibrations in carbon atoms where carbon atoms vibrate in all possible vibration rates of allowed and known rates (superposition states) “Oscillations meeting and interfering constructively, forming wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can explore all potential energy pathways simultaneously and reversibly, meaning they can retreat from wrong pathways with no penalty.” His team’s discoveries in turn lead me to wonder about the composition of some dimensional boundary conditions in general.
· What if the Big Bang did happen and inflation theory is spot on and still underway (see footnote 2), yet dimensional branes and bulk space nonetheless also exist? These are not mutually exclusive concepts.
· What if one component of some dimensional boundaries is quantum mechanical (at super high levels of vibrating strings or energy waves)?
· What if brane-boundary information of our 4DU-universe contained information of both our 4DU dimension and information from a communicating 5th dimension?
· What is a brane, and what is bulk? It’s been described as electric-magnetic flux force field. I realize brane is defined as a membrane-like force field object in higher-dimensional space that can carry energy and confine particles and forces. While bulk is described as full higher-dimensional space. But, what are they? When I look at a star, I’m told that I look on a brane at the star but the star’s gravity travels both on and off the brane and into a 5-th dimension staying within 10ֿ³³ cm (a Planck length) away from our 4DU-universe. But what are brane and bulk?
How can remote viewers experience future events with probabilities far greater than random chance? Could brane or membrane be a quantum mechanical vibration or wave? How do I arrive at a quantum mechanical state for brane in the first place? A long string of infinite length (or at least very long length say for discussion sake a very long string is the Observable Universe in Light Years (OU) times 10¹°°° Light Years[1-Bottom of This Page] (hereinafter " OU x 10¹°°° ") could have great numbers of vibration frequencies overlaid on top of each other and could have very high energy-tension with extremely low probability of splitting; in essense it would become a physical dimensional barrier.
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/Frontier2.jpg
(Click on Picture to Enlarge)
Next: faster than lightspeed.
Part II to follow
Might Lead to New Cosmological Perspectives
(and information time travel)
Speculation on the Physics of Remote Viewing
reductio ad adsurdum
Eventually some scientist with highly regarded theoretical mathematical, computational physics credentials is also going to say something like...... “and then there is all that remote viewing evidence of remote viewers accurately reporting detailed future events significantly above the probability of random chance stuff. Maybe we better look in to it....”
Then finally! Ta-Da-a-a-a-a-ah! It starts being talked about and then becomes all the rage. Endowed chairs spring up in all the right universities, open to brilliant talent that dares to also include "that remote viewing stuff-research" in their resume.
" What's your degree cover exactly Professor Jones?" asks the Harvard Physics Chairing Committee Evaluation Team leader with a sniff, followed impatiently with yet another question before any answer can be given.
"Where is your remote viewing stuff? Surely Jones, you have devoted some portion of your research to this emerging augmentation to cosmological reality? How can you purport to build an accurate model of the universe without remote viewing stuff?"
All eyes of the committee now stare disdainfully at the drop of sweat splating noticeably on the high gloss polish of the Harvard Physics Faculty Board Room conference table.
"Pray Jones, do tell us; we await your answer," the silence broken with rhythmic finger drumming from deep within the row of judging eyes, which now appear to Jones to be strangely receding as though the very space separating them is warping.
by Peace and Conflict Resolution.Org
This paper suggests ideas for astronomical observations, measurements and calculations we can undertake right now to test the stability of the amount of Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) presence nearby and near remote galaxies. We must measure DMDE because we can. We must measure to determine if DMDE accretion exists and we must attempt to measure and calculate accumulation-repulsive force of DMDE and why it lumps where it lumps (if it does) outside our galaxies. These ideas are independently arrived at by me as a layman reading numerous state-of-the-sciences layman language books on particle physics, string theory, and cosmology. If there is original thought present others will recognize it. This paper is prepared by Rich Buckley, President, Peace and Conflict Resolution.Org (P&CR), (http://www.PeaceandConflictResolution.Org ) a 501(c) 3 tax exempt corporation. Our mission is in our name and our goal in preparing this paper is to seek intellectual assistance from the scientific community to help explain the physics of remote viewing. Why? Because diverse groups, nonreligious and religious, regardless of their faith system, beliefs, or practices have statistically significant portions of their followers experience events like or very similar to remote viewing (anomalous cognition, AC). Such common experiences make powerful bridge builders among diverse groups, which we believe is a good thing. Additionally, science eventually needs to explain all phenomena to accurately explain cosmology. The physics of remote viewing is part of that cosmology.
While watching “The Universe” series on The History Channel, the evidence for Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) existence was described in the series as outlined in Sections 1 and 2 below. I believe I have some recall issues with implications received which need to be double checked. The issue of "lumping or apparent accretion of dark matter and dark energy" is not found in any of my state-of-the-sciences readings: (1) The Trouble with Phyics by Professor Lee Smolin, (2) Warped Passages by Professor Lisa Randall, and (3) Endless Universe by Professors Paul J Steinhardt and Neil Turok, each of whom assess Dark Matter and Dark Energy as permeating throughout spacetime evenly distributed. The only perception or recall I have of lumped Dark Matter Dark Energy was a one time watching of The Universe and observing the narrator's comments and artistic renderings illustrating lumped, accredted deposits of DMDE outside various galaxies. The the production values of The Universe were set at high standards and the production dates after the publicaiton dates of my reading list, I give some weight to the likelihood that additional research into DMDE may have occured after the publication of the books. Here breifly is the summary of points on DMDE by The Universe production team:
1. The shapes and sizes of visible galaxies can not be accounted for without the presence of additional mass and energy than is visible through astronomical observations. Observed lensing effects allowed astronomers to validate the presence of additional nonluminous mass and energy near galaxies. This nonluminous mass and energy is called Dark Mass and Dark Energy (hereafter “DMDE”).
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/Galaxy-fullinit_.jpg
(Click to View Image)
2. “Gravitational lensing effect” (bending of light and by inference bending of other energy waves) does occur and has now been verified by observations of the bending of light around remote galaxies indicating that Dark Matter (The nonluminous matter that carries about 26% of the energy in the universe) and/or Dark Energy (The measured vacuum energy in the universe that constitutes about 70% of the universe’s energy but is not carried by any form of matter) must therefore be present:
A. 94% +- of all energy and/or matter in our visible universe is reported to be nonluminous Dark Matter and/or Dark Energy (or just “DMDE”).
B. The DMDE density yields a net positive expansion upon the observable universe at an accelerating rate of expansion. The galaxies are moving apart from each other at an accelerating rate. This of course was first reported by Dr. Hubble.
C. Observations indicate the accumulation pattern for DMDE appears to either excrete itself to surround existing visible matter of each galaxy as depicted in the diagram (See Schematic Disk Galaxy), according to the lensing effects observed, or the DMDE finds a favorable dimensional bulk region mostly outside visible galaxies with conditions for its formation.
The story board writers for The Universe production company, tip-toed around DMDE. The migration pattern (in red, see insert above) of the DMDE seems plausible with what we could expect to see if there is a repulsive field force of some sort between DMDE our 4-Dimensional Universe (4DU) of observable matter. Equally noteworthy is that the repulsive force appears to balance with gravity just outside and surrounding our galaxies thus allowing us to compute force field strengths. Knowing the force field strength should tell us a lot.
The History Channel depicts the migration of DMDE to what appears to be the extremities of the galaxy, and they artistically bulked up the accumulated dark mass to appear as though there might be a north pole and south pole although the existence of “polarities” were never stated. Very little regarding details of DMDE was actually discussed in the series, and my quick read of artistic schematics may be off base as to the notion of polarities. It was mentioned that the DMDE tended to accumulate “around” the galaxy but then depicted in lumps on two extremes of a sample galaxy. This migration of DMDE to the extremities of the galaxy would seem to indicate repulsive field forces exist between DMDE and 4DU observable matter.
Although the History Channel did not discuss the possibility, it occurs the DMDE information we receive in our 4DU-universe may actually be gravity effects we see and experience in our dimension from matter and energy and associated gravity in a separate dimension, gravity being a theorized bulk traveler among dimensions. Gravity waves impact other gravity waves, therefore gravity waves exiting our dimension and altered in another dimension, would re-enter our dimension and impact gravity in our dimension, as one explanation.
One of the apparently unsettled theories of String Theory is that while gravity is a bulk dimensional traveler, it nonetheless obeys the rules of the dimension in which we see it. Thus in our universe, the 4DU-universe, gravity should obey space-time E = mc². However a contending string theory rule posits that a dimension may contain energy levels that create dimensional charges effecting alternate dimensions. These contending rules raises the question, are we seeing the effects of a cross dimensional charge effecting gravity, or are we seeing gravity re-entering our dimension altered in its travels into a DMDE dimension and thus bending or lensing visible light around galaxies.
D. Other possibilities for the apparent repulsive forces between DMDE and 4DU might also include:
(1) The presence of dimensional plates or membranes referred to as “branes”. The so called brane would contain higher dimensional particles with mass “sequestered” on the brane. The branes themselves may therefore share a repulsive force with our own 4DU mass. The repulsive force would need to be a bulk traveler sort of a positive gravity. Is there a new bulk traveler in play we did not consider? The problem here is gravity in our dimension is supposed to obey our rules of space-time E = mc².
(2) It was noted also that the DMDE was not dominate prior to about 9-billion± years ago. The term “not dominant” was enlarged upon to imply “non-existant”.
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/TIMEDMDE-fullinit_.jpg
(Click To View Image)
(3) MEASURE LENSING EFFECTS TO SEE IF DMDE IS CHANGING OVER TIME. We must measure because we can. Find a series of equal size galaxies each separated and leap-froging back in time about 1-billion years per galaxy. Measure the lensing effects around each galaxy to determine the rate of increase of the DMDE to measure whether or not there exists a rate of increase in DMDE. There are four possibilities: (a) Straight line increase over time. (b) Greater than straight line. (c) Flat line (zero slope),Flat line would indicate DMDE just popped into existence about 9-billion years ago and has not increased since. (d) repeating variable cycling from positive increase to negative decrease over time (this latter one is not considered since reported observational evidence over time does not support variable cycling.
Determining the accretion rate of DMDE will give even more clues to forces at play between branes, which in turn may help isolate and identify the likely number of dimensions and open creative thinking of a unifying string theory with elements we can test.
(4) ASTRONOMICAL READINGS TO LOOK FOR AND WHY. Particle physicists subscribing to string theory should, I would think, want to find a flat-line graph (slope of zero) over time with no apparent increase in DMDE since it popped into being some 9-billion years ago. Why? Because any DMDE growth rate other than a flat line break 9-billion years ago, a period when DMDE seems to have popped into existence in our 4DU universe would imply that we may not correctly understand symmetry breaking, which in turn compels us to rethink, yet again, some parts of string theory at the very minimum.
Under current string theory with the exception of gravity, (a) dimensional membranes, i.e., “branes” and, (b) sequestered dimensional brane-bound energies and particles either remain on the brane or they travel the bulk on strings (meaning they travel throughout space time among the various branes, such as gravity is believed to travel). Flat line DMDE graph 9-billion years ago should be the only kind of breaking, a string theory advocate would want to find, i.e., a clean and identifiable break. Just as particles are believed to not be gradually formed a piece at a time but in group-step joinings at any given level of energy-density, so are the theorized sequestering properties of dimensional space.
An emergence of DMDE 9-billion years ago (Ref. “3 Possibilities Map” above) would have a specifically known energy density. We could then compute that energy density accurately that existed 9 billion years ago and theorize that level of energy is where at least one major breaking point among dimensions exists. We would not want to see nor expect to find a process of slow accretion of DMDE building in our 4DU-universe. Slow, sliding scales are totally different than predicable stepped-jumps, and would appear intuitively counter to most parts of string theory. Once we compute the level of energy-density at which a dimension break occurred (9-Billion years ago), we can link dimensional breaking points to field energies and particle energies. String theory physicists should expect to find everything in good order with a flat line (zero slope) graph supporting what we already think we know about dimensions.
(5) IF WE FIND ANYTHING OTHER THAN A FLAT LINE MEASURE OF DMDE AS WE OBSERVE BACK IN TIME THAT WILL BE OF CONCERN! Why? Because all our most popular current theories of dimensions 5-brane, 10-brane, 11-brane, M-String Theory and of course The Standard Model particles are built upon characteristics of bundled units of energies, and/or Higgs Field particles and symmetry breaking characteristics that only interact in stepped transactions that tend to hold stable until a major break occurs (or a different energy level is induced by a particle accelerator for example). Inferentially as energy-density levels decrease (or increase) changes are theorized to occur in steps with clean breaks. We can infer energy-density triggers break points going both up in energy-density levels and going down in energy-density levels. Going down in energy-density scales according to observations had tentatively revealed a break point 9-billion years ago when dark mass and dark energy is first reported.
In current string theory, there is no mechanism to account for a slow accretion of energy from one dimension to another with continuous sliding scales of accretion. All our dimensions are supposed to hold until it reaches a unification point (or merging point) or break point and then things change in predicable stepped-jumps.
DOCUMENTED CASES HAVE REMOTE VIEWERS SEEING FUTURE EVENTS TOO. According to what we think we know about time and space, we believe there is a forward direction to time in our 4DU-universe, yet good remote viewers to see future events.
I believe I live a 4-dimensional life and I remain physically sequestered in forward moving time, nothing new there. But yet I too have seen future events that go beyond knowledge and logic.
Please remember my goal is to encourage you to help explain the physics of remote viewing, so I am taking pains to try and understand current state of scientific thinking, hoping for reasons already set forth, that you might help us understand the physics of remote viewing. My personal experiences of seeing future events were not controlled, double-blind events under acceptable remote viewing protocols.
There are many documented cases of remote viewers seeing current, past and future events. What possible physics can explain it?
If I drop a drop of Red die food coloring in a glass of warm water, I expect 100.000000000…∞ % to see the water turn red and I have zero expectation to see the red water recede back to clear water with my original drop of Red food coloring returning into a tight puddle of its original undiluted red die state no matter how much time elapses until the end of time. For me time moves in one direction. There are remote viewers that in fact do see future events and past events in addition to current events. How is that possible?
3. What could it mean if DMDE is found through astronomical observations to be accreting into our 4DU universe? While the plotted rate of accretion would give us clues to the functions of accretion (if DMDE-accretion in any form other than flat-line stepped jumps exists) the existence of any gradual accretion with time, requires us to recalculate the notions of sequestering, boundary conditions between dimensions, and all that flows from that.
One of the things it might mean if DMDE is found through observation to be accreting into our 4DU-universe is outlined in the body of my main web page called “A Layman’s Speculation on the Physics of Remote Viewing,” a website in constant change and updating (one would hope).
If DMDE accretion is plotted through real astronomical observations to not be flat lined, but instead accreting gradually into our 4DU-observable universe, one idea stimulated by the research team at UC-Berkeley Lab, headed by Dr. Fleming, an idea I refer to as “Super-Quantum-Mechanical Vibrations,” is outlined in this link (http://peaceandconflictresolution.googlepages.com/Alayman-5.pdf). Fleming was researching photosynthesis efficiencies and discovered unique quantum mechanical vibrations in carbon atoms where carbon atoms vibrate in all possible vibration rates of allowed and known rates (superposition states) “Oscillations meeting and interfering constructively, forming wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can explore all potential energy pathways simultaneously and reversibly, meaning they can retreat from wrong pathways with no penalty.” His team’s discoveries in turn lead me to wonder about the composition of some dimensional boundary conditions in general.
· What if the Big Bang did happen and inflation theory is spot on and still underway (see footnote 2), yet dimensional branes and bulk space nonetheless also exist? These are not mutually exclusive concepts.
· What if one component of some dimensional boundaries is quantum mechanical (at super high levels of vibrating strings or energy waves)?
· What if brane-boundary information of our 4DU-universe contained information of both our 4DU dimension and information from a communicating 5th dimension?
· What is a brane, and what is bulk? It’s been described as electric-magnetic flux force field. I realize brane is defined as a membrane-like force field object in higher-dimensional space that can carry energy and confine particles and forces. While bulk is described as full higher-dimensional space. But, what are they? When I look at a star, I’m told that I look on a brane at the star but the star’s gravity travels both on and off the brane and into a 5-th dimension staying within 10ֿ³³ cm (a Planck length) away from our 4DU-universe. But what are brane and bulk?
How can remote viewers experience future events with probabilities far greater than random chance? Could brane or membrane be a quantum mechanical vibration or wave? How do I arrive at a quantum mechanical state for brane in the first place? A long string of infinite length (or at least very long length say for discussion sake a very long string is the Observable Universe in Light Years (OU) times 10¹°°° Light Years[1-Bottom of This Page] (hereinafter " OU x 10¹°°° ") could have great numbers of vibration frequencies overlaid on top of each other and could have very high energy-tension with extremely low probability of splitting; in essense it would become a physical dimensional barrier.
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff24/BayProductions/Frontier2.jpg
(Click on Picture to Enlarge)
Next: faster than lightspeed.
Part II to follow