The Pluralism of Worlds and Other Yous

THE PLURALISM OF WORLDS AND ANOTHER YOU, AND ANOTHER YOU, YOU, YOU ...

Space has been measured to be flat (stretched) in all directions and Hubble's law shows it expands at superluminal velocity.

This means that space appears to be infinite. Now, given that matter only has a FINITE number of ways it could assemble itself given the laws of physics, it is only logical that the following is most likely true:

Travel far enough into space, beyond our observable universe---talking a gazillion parsecs of cosmic distance---and don't be surprised to find another Earth, with another you, where physics class is the same, but history class differs a little (perhaps Nazi Germany won), and everybody speaks an alien language despite being, pretty much a clone of everybody on this planet ...

Travel another unimaginable googleplex, in another cosmic region, and the entire Milky Way analogue is found. There is yet another Earth which, by chance, is exactly the same as our home planet: another you speaking English, with Internet access on another Facebook, reading a post like this from another version of me; and the entire history of that planet is the same as ours. It is also called 'Earth'.

Your limited human intuition might find this counterintuitive, or CRAZY, even. But think again. It is actually not just mathematically plausible, it is logical. These are the philosophical implications of a vast-enough space in existence.

Crazy would be to assume our tiny speck of a world is completely original and unique amidst an infinity ...

Personally I'm somewhat partial to the Many World's theory, where rather than being separated by a googolplex parsecs of space as you put it, we are infact a 'stacked reality' where all possible outcomes are happening simultaneously on top of one another.

Fun food for thought! Have you ever met another you in the dream state? I've only had that experience once and it was one my most vivid 'parallel dimension' type experiences I've ever had.

I heard this before, its interesting theory. The thought that it could be so vast, that at some point infinity repeats and there is another earth exactly same very very far out. I only see a slight flaw, if the universe is completely flat and being projected into 3D through light like a projector, then the flat universe might not be so infinite. It does create a problem though for people like me that believe universe is completely infinite in every possible way. My only loophole out of this is the idea we only perceive certain aspects of it at a time, so much of it is left to imagination and never actually created or projected as existing. Like in quantum physics and the whole idea about there needing to be an observer to actually perceive anything. Universe would be a pretty boring place with no observer to actually perceive it and appreciate it's beauty. So yeah, I subscribe more to the multiverse theory and consciousness being more of a working foundation for it all.

DorianMask, I haven't seen myself in a dream, I've met my subconscious personified and traveled to some weird places including parallel dimensions though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DorianMask

Personally I'm somewhat partial to the Many World's theory, where rather than being separated by a googolplex parsecs of space as you put it, we are infact a 'stacked reality' where all possible outcomes are happening simultaneously on top of one another.

Fun food for thought! Have you ever met another you in the dream state? I've only had that experience once and it was one my most vivid 'parallel dimension' type experiences I've ever had.

---

Yes, absolutely.

The regions of space googolplex parsecs away is only one type of 'parallel universes' predicted by eternal inflation. These can logically exist in the same Euclidean space as our own 'alongside' the other type which sprouts from the fuzzy roots of reality, i.e., quantum mechanical superposition.

These are only two types which are mathematically predicted within our multi-dimensional reality. We are talking about theoretical physics here which are mathematically closer to science-fact than science-fiction. I recommend Our Mathematical Universe by Max Tegmark. Tegmark strongly argues for a multiverse because, not only is it plausible, it is when observable phenomena begin to make sense. The book doesn't discount the implications of infinity and why it is so hard for simple minds like ours to swallow.

I never really undestood the physics that predict eternal inflation until I picked up the book. Our reality is stranger than we intuitively think. Just the simple fact that less than a cubic centimetre of matter was enough to devastate Hiroshima should blow our minds!

At the heart of it all, Tegmark suspects that mathematics itself is the ultimate nature of reality from which physical structures and minds are derived. You may be confused by the proposition of how 'numbers' can spark reality---as anyone would.

But two things should be clear: nothingness can't possibly have an existential manifestation, therefore, something; and Platonic objects, as metaphysical as they sound, cannot be easily dismissed---there are mathematical truths which are independent of physical objects and minds, i.e. they are true regardless of whether physical reality or minds exist or not.

It might even be the case that the physical world and consciousness are two separate derivatives of the fundamental mathematical framework of reality, and they merely happen to meet. This could explain why the mind-body problem persists to this day.

I mention Platonism, which, despite being ancient, it still a valuable philosophy, but these novel ways of attempting to interpret the nature of reality are also based on recent breakthroughs in quantum physics and cosmology. We know this much: our universe can be desbribed as a single quantum wave-function (and it is hard not to posit the reality of others because they are not impossible, but rather, permitted based on how much we have come to know).

I would always stress that science and mathematical logic should always inform philosophy. Some epistemological ingredients are simply essential in helping us to understand the existential phenomena that surrounds us. Our neoencephalons are still quite limited in our evolution, but, luckily enough, neuroplasticity allows us to expand the only biological tool with which we can grasp the enormity of what we are facing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eonnn

I heard this before, its interesting theory. The thought that it could be so vast, that at some point infinity repeats and there is another earth exactly same very very far out. I only see a slight flaw, if the universe is completely flat and being projected into 3D through light like a projector, then the flat universe might not be so infinite. It does create a problem though for people like me that believe universe is completely infinite in every possible way. My only loophole out of this is the idea we only perceive certain aspects of it at a time, so much of it is left to imagination and never actually created or projected as existing. Like in quantum physics and the whole idea about there needing to be an observer to actually perceive anything. Universe would be a pretty boring place with no observer to actually perceive it and appreciate it's beauty. So yeah, I subscribe more to the multiverse theory and consciousness being more of a working foundation for it all.

DorianMask, I haven't seen myself in a dream, I've met my subconscious personified and traveled to some weird places including parallel dimensions though.

---

Yes, consciousness might be more fundamental than most of us suspect. Materialism falls apart when, out of logical necessity, things must begin as non-material before becoming material. So, our best description is waves of probability and energies on the positive and negative sides of the spectrum that appear to make up the cosmos---which, funnily enough, add up to zero. The entire universe can be described as an imbalanced nothingness currently balancing itself out. Weird.

The flatness I was talking about, by the way, is only in the inflationary sense (not to be mistaken with the flat substrate in holographic theory) whereby the space-time fabric is three-dimensionally stretch to the point of suggesting infinity. So your intuition that reality is infinite is firmly grounded. And then we are all left to face the apparently crazy implications if that is the case.

With my initial example of an infinity-derived quirk such as multiple Earth analogues with many versions of you within our Euclidean space, I wanted to illustrate what would happen if a cosmonaut from here managed to reach a remote region of space---perhaps using a wormhole---only to discover a replica of Earth with the exact same history.

The cosmonaut's simple mind might be so awestruck and puzzled that he might deem such discovery as 'too much coincidence' and that 'something strange, perhaps of a divine nature, is at play'. How can a hyper-remote region of space mirror our own in space and time at such magnitudes? But these magnitudes are pretty much insignificant in the infinitely grand scheme of things. It would only be the cosmonaut's naturally limited mind that would assign a grandiose significance to what would be, in actuality, a logically random, cosmic event.

Love this, you write it so eloquently as well Summerlander, very impressive. Great minds think alike.

I've seen it this way for a long time, quantum entangled quark in superposition, infinite potential, nothingness becomes fullness (can't have nothing, as nothing means there is something), order from chaos, starts as sacred geometry becoming increasingly complex, holographic fractal design (each part contains the whole)... so many ways to describe it all. The universe is a paradoxical conundrum and beautifully so, I wouldn't be surprised if we are that quantum quark in a constant state of self-reflection.

Also, what you said about Hiroshima even the smallest amount of anti-matter would have devastating effects for the entire planet and occupying space surrounding it if not properly contained, yet these folks at CERN continue to play with fire. Perhaps there is something preventing this from happening or even being a possibility on the cards? collective conscious drive to survive? I don't know, it's just utterly bizarre.

I found some joy in finding hidden meaning behind words, tracing back the root origin and such. For example, the word universe which means one verse, or one song if you will. One voice or one word, one sound or one vibration? It implies there are many verses, each one with a different tone or chord or different underlying frequency which could be the force or glue holding it together and supporting all the universal laws within each one. Another example, the word nature and the word creation you put them together and what do you have? a natural creation.

EDIT:
We see how brutally destructive nature can be with the likes of supernova, black-holes, meteor impacts that could cause extinction level events, yet we also see how much nature fights and strives to survive. Nature doesn't discriminate, at least not in a judgmental way and we as humans are born from nature and hard-wired for it as a sentient living biological organism. Likewise, humans have a similar trait of being destructive and/or nurturing with a progression towards increased complexity through simpler, more efficient exchange in energy and information processing taking place. We learn and discover new things through observation, and the only thing we ever observe is the reality presented before us as there is nothing else to observe other than reality. We imitate nature and everything ever invented is all based on something that nature is capable of, for if it weren't so then it couldn't exist as a natural part of creation.

If or more likely when we create advanced AI, it is just another form of progression towards more complexity. It isn't bad or wrong, there is still the conscious aspect of reality observing itself and you may even argue that form of consciousness will do a better job at it since it would be far superior. It's mind boggling stuff to think about but highly logical when you step back and view it from a different angle.

There is a lot in your reply to work with, Eonn. I am definitely getting back to you in more detail. It is absolutely crazy and I'm glad I am not the only one spinning with this existential madness. And yet we can only see about 5% of what constitutes our Hubble bubble. The rest is dark matter and dark energy. I will touch upon the theory of eternal inflation here that will spin our heads further and blow our fucking brains to ecstasy! LOL! Speak to you soon, brother!

Haha, good stuff looking forward to it love getting existenz

Fair warning, I hate the terms "dark energy" and "dark matter" like they just gave up and said YOLO F**K IT, here you go HAHAHA bye it's my knock-off time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DorianMask

Have you ever met another you in the dream state? I've only had that experience once and it was one my most vivid 'parallel dimension' type experiences I've ever had.

---

Sorry, I almost missed this question ...

I have never met another version of myself in a parallel dimension, but I have had a fight with a malicious 'alter ego' that emerged from the shadows of a dark bedroom replica after rolling out of my perceived sleeping body.

Other than that, I remember an old experience where I deliberately created a wormhole and went through it to find a futuristic metropolis populated by cyborgs that drove flying vehicles like The Jetsons . I have also deliberately inhabited the bodies of other characters in dreamspace.

I also had a lucid dream this morning that turned weird and culminated in an erotic fantasy. I think you will like this one, guys, and I'm sure we could spend an eternity conjuring crazy theories which pertain to parallel realities.

Ordinary REM dream:

I'm a primary school pupil and I am sat in a little rickshaw with a boy I took to be my best friend. He is trying to help me wheel this thing through the school's corridors and classrooms, but I want him to sit back and enjoy the ride while I make the effort.

The ride now has enough impetus to roll by itself while me and my little friend sit back and relax. We are laughing because we're evading the school's authorities and, simultaneously, I get the impression that we were supposed to be attending a class. The scholastic adults nab us and we are marched into the headteacher's spacious office.

The man in charge is a tall, middle-aged man donning circular specs and a thick, grey moustache. Despite staring at me with a condescending air or superiority, I start coming to my senses; I'm an adult, I don't go to school, and as lucidity increases with memories of real life, I even glance at my child-friend with a smirk as if to let him know that everything is under control.

Lucid state:

'I wish to see Christopher Hitchens!' I demand from the headteacher. 'I want a lesson from Mr. Hitchens---not you!' By now, other characters seem to have joined us. A couple of men wearing lab coats stand on either side of the towering headteacher, who leers at me and finally scoffs: 'What do you think this is?'

Slightly taken aback by his response, but remaining defiant in my newfound lucidity, I riposte, 'This is a dream! I'm dreaming all of this and I demand to see Mr. Hitchens!'

The headteacher sneers as he cocks his grey head to the side. 'He thinks this is a dream ...'

Laughter resounds in the office. 'What?!' I exclaim as two middle-aged women wearing tunics grip my arms. I notice a couple of figures marching a little boy out of the room. I think of recalling the plan of action for lucid dreaming but the women are rubbing my chest and begin to lift me off the floor. Other urges begin to emerge and I inexorably abandon even the idea of summoning Christopher Hitchens.

warning: sexually explicit (I feel like I should alert members in case some are too young or are sensitive to this content for some other reason)

It feels so real and I'm getting aroused. The woman holding me to my right unzips my trousers and exposes my penis, which looks small and is completely enveloped by her hand. She masturbates me frantically. It doesn't take me long to climax and semen is ejected everywhere. I see people sitting on the floor, watching as they get sprayed by my protracted ejaculation.

'I'm sorry! I'm so sorry!'

Disgust and embarrassment almost kill my sexual excitement but the women who stimulate my child-like body reassure me with words like, 'Don't worry, dear!' and the other chuckles before stating that 'they don't mind'. They put me down and I notice another tunic-wearing woman smiling seductively at me as she stands by the door through which they had taken my friend. I am covering my mouth with my hands in disbelief before I wake up.

Waking state:

I check my underwear and there is no evidence of having ejaculated in real life. But there is an erection. I am still aroused and my wife wakes up. Luckily for me, she is also horny and we make love.

As you can see, this experience did not go as planned and was quite unexpected. We appear bound to call something like this a 'lucid dream' and indeed, with a little determination, we can exert some control. Most of the time, even when we get the expected, the desired manifestation isn't exactly what was initially envisioned.

But this particular experience had a character of defiance expressed by figures with ostensible sentience. Perhaps my childlike defiance by truanting in my ab initio, mindless dream state was reflected back to me when I finally gained waking consciousness in the dream.

Was I really lucid in a dream or lucid somewhere else just as real as this reality? Can we really afford to say we can know with certainty that an experience is a dream by spotting impossible distortions, when in waking life our perception of the 'real' world can be equally distorted with powerful psychedelics or waking hallucinations caused by schizoid conditions?

Could such distortions be mere 'side-effects' of a phenomenal consciousness that can flit between parallel realities and even adopt the memories of parallel-world inhabitants? Perhaps a boy in a parallel universe suffered a schizoid episode and momentarily declared, like a stubborn solipsist, that everything around him was a creation of his own mind, and would-be responsible adults raped him before having him committed.

I sincerely hope that the lucid dream theory applies in this case as I would not wish a terrible fate upon even a hypothetical being living in another world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eonnn

Haha, good stuff looking forward to it love getting existenz

Fair warning, I hate the terms "dark energy" and "dark matter" like they just gave up and said YOLO F**K IT, here you go HAHAHA bye it's my knock-off time.

---

I hope you managed to reach your private Existenz and have fun there, brother! (That movie was a great mind-f**k, by the way! I love dark shit like that! LoL)

Before we get into inflation, let's get some perspective of how big our corner of the universe is ...

It's easy for us to influence our brains to adopt the hybrid gamma state in our sleep so that we beget the waking experience of zooming through space with hyper-speed to vividly land on a heart-shaped ice-patch on planet Pluto. In fact, desire and expectation can make Pluto a lot closer to Earth in a lucid dream. It's not even practical to try to get the sense that Pluto is almost unreachable during a lucid dream, which could collapse at any moment. But say you are very good with techniques that intensify and maintain lucid dreaming; the logic still stands: why delay arrival, right? In the time that you prolong the experience of trekking towards the confines of our solar system, in order to attain some sense of realism comparable to reality, your subconscious mind might lure you with the manifestation of a far more interesting world on the way.

If you ever want to realistically traverse the Solar System at the same speed as the Parker Solar Probe in a lucid dream, forget it.

Here's why ...

The observable universe is already unimaginably vast. And, ironically, it grew from an almost incomprehensibly small point. The mind boggles. That's the power of inflation for you. How can we try to understand the size of our Hubble bubble when we would end up begging for a wormhole if we were to endure a journey from here to Jupiter? We are small and limited---so much so that even interplanetary travel is an enormous challenge. You want a one-way ticket to Mars to escape this SARS-CoV-2 pandemic? Be sure that you take a team of gifted engineers, rocket scientists, and expert terraforming farmers with you. Or you won't make it.

The universe continues to expand at superluminal velocity and the visible part is estimated to have a diameter of approximately 93 billion light-years! Inflation has made it possible for this number to exceed that of the age of the universe.

If we imagine the Sun to be a grain of sand in the Milky Way 'island', and other stars also sand grains, the grains would be roughly 4 miles apart in the galaxy's disc---and the analogous disc-island is about 40,000 miles across. The real diameter of the Milky Way is roughly 100,000 light-years.

It takes sunlight 6 minutes to travel from the Sun to Venus, and this planet gets the closest to Earth at 24 million miles away. Imagine that!

By the way, I understand that you are sick and tired of hearing 'dark' this, 'dark' that from scientists. But, as much as it pains us, they are 'in the dark' about roughly 95% of the observable universe. We! LOL!

It shouldn't surprise us that dark matter is notoriously difficult to detect. It is not strange at all that physicists have struggled to pinpoint at least one of its weakly interactive massive particles (WIMPs) in large hadron colliders.

Baryonic matter, the stuff we are made of, is never at rest because atoms constantly vibrate. So when 'dark' (invisible) particles collide with normal matter, it is hard to tell whether the atoms that are hit are vibrating at the normal rate or whether something has affected them.

But the equations don't lie about the prediction that we are missing something 'dark'.

Imagine that the cosmos is a bath. The stars are analogous to bubbles which make up islands of foam analogous to galaxies. We can see the 'foamy islands' but not the clear water that surrounds them and holds them together like glue. Water here is the analogue of dark matter.

Dark energy is a mysterious tap (faucet) that happens to be running and filling the cosmic bath.

I suppose when a plug is pulled, a black hole is formed ... LOL

I know this is a philosophical thread but I can't help but be slightly scientific. I apologise if sometimes it seems like this discussion belongs in the Science Forum.

PS: Just remembered Robert Monroe hypothetically mentioning the possibility of accessing 'dark matter worlds' in the phase state in his book Journeys Out of the Body . Seen as dark matter flows through our brains as we speak, perhaps we can tap into it and temporarily inhabit the bodies of WIMP beings with our pristine cognition. What a cool hypothesis this is. One way to make dark matter matter for you, Eonn!

I didn't know there was a movie called Existenz... will have to watch it now I just heard others saying lets get existenz when reffering to getting existential. I don't mind a couple dark films here and there, dark city?

But why the word dark, why not black matter or black energy, they use the term black-holes not dark-holes just doesn't make logical sense to me, unless it's to not offend anyone because of the black lives matter movement. If that's the case it's pretty sad because there are also white dwarfs in space.

Read or heard somewhere, our consciousness is like a singularity same thing as in a black-hole and you can see it when looking in someone's eyes, their pupil is completely black like a black-hole. The eyes are the window to the soul.

Don't get me started on the current snowflake society and the appalling political state of affairs :D

Rest assured that the 'dark' in the astrophysics context was coined at a time when considerable progress had actually been achieved in mitigating racism. My time in the UK had been characterised by an increasingly multiculturalist society. The so-called anti-racism movement of today is not the same as Martin Luther King's; it only adds fuel to the fire of insidiously divisive identity politics. The Far Left is pseudo-liberal as it goes against freedom of expression, constantly looking to censor people, and denies any progress made to mitigate prejudice.

Granted that racism still exists, but the fact that nobody can produce examples of racist legislation in effect today, at least in Western civilisation insofar as I'm aware, just subverts and ridicules the whole notion of 'systemic racism'.

But let's not digress towards a possible can of worms as 'dark' in our cosmological context really comes from the old saying of 'being in the dark'.

As Einstein apparently once said, 'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'

Our eyes are actually our brains pushed through the skull sockets during a slow process of Darwinian evolution, with our irises having formed by the accumulation of photo-sensitive cells. If our pupils are windows to our souls, than the blackness can poetically be taken to mean that we are 'in the dark' about such matters. But the physical reality we observe is that pupils are merely holes, or cavities, that developed over time by the process of natural selection which eventually allowed more and more light to hit the back of our retinas. Needless to say, the creatures with improved vision tended to survive in the wild and therefore had higher rates of success in propagating their valuable genes. In other words, the real reason why our pupils are black is that light gets absorbed by those ocular tisses; this optical reality is slightly anologous to light sucked by a collapsed star such as a black hole (without gravity being involved to the heightened extent that we find to be true in the latter case); but neither instances of 'darkness' have anything to do with souls or consciousness.

As far as I'm aware, black holes are not conscious. (But don't quote me on this.) But now that you mention singularities, I feel like mentioning a novel way of looking at things which means that time and space don't necessarily come to an end at the centre of a black hole ...

Eternal inflation will just have to take a backseat in our current discourse, buddy. You must have heard people say, 'What goes on in a black hole stays in a black hole.' It might not be strictly true ...

According to loop quantum gravity theory, black holes could be the time-inversed image of a white hole. What does this mean? Black holes could be bouncing stars in slow motion. It has been believed for a long time that space and time end at the centre of these holes, but this does not explain what happens to all the matter that gets sucked in.

A new quantum theory of gravity describes black holes evolving into white holes (where eventually matter is blasted outwards from the centre).

General relativity dictates that spacetime is immensely distorted around black holes. This means that the collapse and bouncing back of matter from the centre of these massive objects would take microseconds if measured from within---as opposed to taking billions of years if measured from far away (like planet Earth).

From Earth, an astronaut falling into a black hole would appear frozen in time; but to the astronaut, if he looked away from the black hole he's falling into, he would observe the cold death of our universe as though aeons of time were being fastforwarded in a matter of seconds.

As the astronaut approaches the centre of the black hole, he would see the event horizon shrinking to a Planck scale to be simultaneously replaced by the bright horizon of a white hole in a quantum tunneling effect that would propel him billions of years into the future.

Time is relative to the observer, which is why in the film Interstellar, spending minutes near a black hole meant decades on Earth for the astronauts' loved ones left behind.

If you thought that was merely part of the science-fiction plot of the film---it wasn't! It was quite realistic even if it seems counterintuitive to human minds ...

And now, a gamma burst from a distant source might be evidence of a white hole that emerged from a black hole that formed at the early stages of our universe ...

Just to drill down a little bit more on where the craziness comes in, if you look at how our universe got this way, and how this thread came about, it’s because we had about ten to the 78th power quarks and electrons that started out in a particular way, somewhat random early on, after inflation. Which led to the formation of our solar system and our planet. And our parents met, and so on, and we met, and then this happened, right?

If you’d started the quarks out a little bit differently, things would have unfolded differently. You can actually count up how many different ways you can arrange the quarks and electrons in our universe. It turns out it’s only about a googolplex different ways. Just to remind ourselves of what this means, a googolplex is one with a google zeroes, and a google is one with 100 zeroes. So it’s a huge number, but it’s finite.

So if you have an infinite number of other regions equally big, and you roll the dice again in all of them, you can calculate that if you go about a googolplex meters away, you will indeed end up with just what was previously described: a universe that’s extremely similar to this one except that one minute ago you all of a sudden decided to start posting in Russian in great adulation of President Donald Trump. Or perhaps Joe Biden has been in power the whole time and a replica of Trump has become President-elect.

It’s a very mind-boggling idea. We don’t know for a fact that it’s like this, but this view is actually the most popular in cosmology today, and, given the mathematical logic, hard to refute.

I like that Einstein quote, every now and then I hear a new one and they always so inspirational, makes you wonder if he really said it or someone just claiming he said it putting words in his mouth. "Everything is energy" is the simplest and perhaps best quote I ever heard, which Nikola Tesla also said in a slightly different way, in the first part of his "think of everything in terms of energy, [frequency and vibration]"

Didn't know that about the eyes, the evolution process behind it. Snowflake society indeed, every snowflake is unique and special, maybe that's why we see such a sh*tstorm going on today, billions of people all wanting their own say in how to have equality, but how can you have equality if each person is different from the next? Non-racism is important sure, but I got a feeling it's more than just a belief or changing ones attitude to being open and non-judgmental, more like something in our DNA that we are somewhat powerless to change. In a sense, we are all inherently born racist by default and have to work on cultivating a mindset where we are not. It's just the bodies natural survival mechanism of defending itself from potential threats and differentiating between what is seen as good or bad, similar to finding an attractive companion whether we perceive someone as beautiful or not, which again requires mental conditioning to overcome - to see the personality behind the appearance as more valuable than the outward appearance.

I don't know much of the science behind black-holes, my own thoughts are that they are like portals sucking in energy and light which help to conceive or propagate a new universe. You might then consider a black-hole to be the female version of a star giving birth, while a white dwarf is the end result of a male star. It makes more sense looking at it this way too, can just imagine David Attenborough narrating it, "ahhh, and here we see the male star has exhausted its supply of vital essence and shriveled up into a white dwarf, successfully impregnating a female counterpart light years away which now begins the process of birthing a baby universe through a black-hole"

With regards to the internal inflation concept, the most widely accepted theory is that it all started with the big bang (david attenborough again?) which expanded rapidly at an exponential rate, so I see no reason why things can not get to a stage where they actually repeat with slight variations, to the point where it is exactly identical to how things are here right now. I can only assume that when it gets to that point, that is when the big crush happens possibly due to quantum physics, entanglement, splitting an atom, etc. The laws of physics might not allow for there to be more than 2 identical pairs, but I could be wrong as women can give birth to triplets, maybe the max identical pairs is 3, or maybe there is no maximum and it just goes on forever until the universe gets cold to such a point that it becomes formless.

You have opened up an inflationary can of worms which I can't wait to discuss because I know you will love it with every fibre of your being. I still haven't mentioned pocket universes with different laws of physics which spawn their own set of infinite universes; heck I haven't even touched upon the other quantum superpositional type basically described by Everett! But this far out stuff deserves my focus, which is why it is going to take a backseat for now (still), while I finally unleash the political can of worms! You shouldn't have pushed me! LOL!

I'm not bothered by what people publicly say or what they don't say when given advantageous platforms. They are free to express themselves just as people on social media are free to spout whatever verbal diarrhoea comes to their noggins.

On political issues that have been raised recently, seen as I find myself compelled to comment having seen a lot of shaved apes getting their knickers in a twist over semantic bullshit and identity bollocks ...

Watching from the UK, I see that the good ol' USA has turned to shit ...

First, there was a blue party that robbed the people blind, failed to be coherent on gun ownership rhetoric, and fatuously yapped about the silly concept of 'Islamophobia' post-9/11. Significantly, in the aftermath of the Orlando shootings, political rhetoric on the ostensible prevalence of this allegedly prejudiced and irrational fear of Islam, clearly did not go down well with the American public in general ...

I will also be touching upon DNA studies and political opinion. It may be that we are inherently tribal, but exhibit this to different degrees, rather than being congenitally racist ...

Anyway, Hillary Clinton says the wrong thing at the wrong time---should have known better---and that just adds more hatred and sickness for the Clintons, who, as everybody should be well aware, are dishonest.

And then ...

Along comes a known, self-centred Richie Rich conman who figures out he's got an opportunity to power-grab---because it doesn't take many brain cells to work out that a Democratic party, under some Voldemort effect, can't even name the religious evil that afflicts the nation, and that Americans crave change, something away from PC-gone-crazier ...

Understandably, it is not surprising that many do not want to go back to the same Far Leftist shit and cling to 'The Don' even if this buffoon barely provides solutions or will not make a beneficial move even for his Republican voters unless he stands to gain something. Prolonging Trump's presidential tenure will cause more devastation, not just in America, but the world at large. You don't want a 'leader of the free world' who preposterously denies climate change, rejects eco-friendly energy, and promotes the coal industry (and fracking) to the detriment of your health and safety.

On the other hand, President-elect Joe Biden raises non-existent issues and denies progress on the anti-racism front as he panders to his cultish Democratic horde. Hello? You've had a black President! Don't tell me you can tell whether someone is privileged based on the colour of their skin. Do not pander to a misinformed, gullible, snowflake generation. Racism exists, granted ... But there is no such thing as 'systemic' or 'institutional' racism. Name me one racist law in effect today in the states. There are none. And the notion of defunding or cancelling the police force is a recipe for chaos. This proposal is so asinine it beggars belief that anybody in their right mind would even suggest it. The police is one of the best inventions in the history of civilisation.

Sure, every institution becomes infected with corruption like catching the common cold, and there are as many moles in the police force as there are undercover agents in the Mob. But both types of infiltrators still have to show they belong so as to not attract unwanted attention.

A corrupt officer still has to combat some crime to maintain his position as a credible officer of the law just as Donnie Brasco needed to display a level of sociopathy to survive undetected amidst dangerous gangsters. It's the real world. Just because criminality and racism have infiltrated institutions does not mean institutions are fundamentally racist or criminal.

A corrupt and reckless POTUS does not make the American Constitution---with all its Amendments and legislation---fundamentally prejudiced against minorities, or totally abortive as a governmental organisation. What the situation warrants is an honest criticism of the leader. Trump's anti-scientific, and quite frankly, ignorant rhetoric on what's best for the wellbeing of millions of Americans is deeply flawed and as dangerous as the conspiracy theories he peddles on Twitter.

On matters of medical emergency, someone that famous, wealthy and powerful---with, needless to say, an enormously influential platform on the global arena---has an greater responsibility to watch what he publicly says, especially when said in advisory or comprehensive tones. If he has a moral fibre, he should care about how people might misconstrue his words just as parents often do their best to choose their words wisely when educating or guiding their offspring. In a similar vein, celebrities have a responsibility to their fans, especially when they are young and impressionable. Encouraging parties during a pandemic, in the name of a misguided sense of freedom and personal rights, is hardly responsible. It is akin to telling kids not to listen to their parents advice and jump into shark-infested waters.

To say, with absolute certainty, that this novel coronavirus doesn't affect, or even kill, enough people, is imprudent. Remember that SARS-CoV-2 has only been with us for about a year. Considering what the virus does to human lungs---with an unprecedented fusion of cellular nuclei seen in those who perished with Covid-19---and how some people who mostly recovered from the long form of the disease may require lung transplants, we really know as much about how the virus will affect the next person (for the first time) as we know about the potential for health detereoration a few years down the line in those who have had it. Will Covid-19 survivors live as long as they could have as they age? Or will they perish with premature health complications? That remains to be seen.

This is why Laurence Fox, a major voice encouraging the folly of a confused 'snowflake' generation, couldn't be more irresponsible. If you want a good reason for cancelling someone (and I abhor the cancel culture we are currently witnessing), there it is. But it is best to expose ignorant celebrities rather than suppress them without debate lest someone out there cries a conspiracy of silence theory ...

I could go on and on, but I feel myself getting too old for this shit. George Orwell was right when he said revolutions pave the way to new dictatorships and historic repetition is akin to a boot stamping on a human face forever. I recommend a comprehensive read of Nineteen Eighty-four in every school as a warning to the next generation---I really do! The appalling way in which a lot of people carry themselves in an emergency almost renders the whole human civilisation project pointless---just like the ongoing, and for the most part, needless argumentation (because it should go without saying) that dominates left, right and centre.

There is a very honest and educational conversation to be had about the moral imperative to make reparations for the black community. Compensation is warranted to descendants of slaves who had their identities stolen as well as what could have been fair bequests if not for Jim Crow laws and a whole history of racism.

Practically, however, enforcing reparations is not as straightforward as it may seem. Someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who grew up in Kenya within an Islamic community, has not experienced racial discrimination, and moved to the States to become a prolific and accomplished writer and political activist—a story of success, despite the colour of her skin. Somebody like Will Smith, a ridiculously rich and accomplished celebrity, did grow up in America. Does it make much sense to compensate Smith? Perhaps only the destitute and the lower classes should be entitled.

As Coleman Hughes and Sam Harris point out, there are also many other forms of discrimination apart from racism. Short stature, especially for men, has proved to be a major disadvantage in the world. There has never been a short or female (for that matter) candidate that has made it to the Oval Office; there has been, however, a black president. Universally attractive people tend to be more privileged than asymmetrical individuals, too. Should we just put it down to a 'luck of the draw' scenario and tell all victims of discrimination to put up and shut up?

How sure are we that we are looking at racism when an individual has been treated unfairly? A short black man applies for a CEO position only to be rejected in favour of a taller and lighter-skinned applicant. Are we looking at racism, heightism, or a just assessment based on merit? We might be tempted to say the former in this current political miasma, until someone informs the rejected applicant that, having eavesdropped on a conversation between decision-makers, the wish for a physically imposing chief, towering over most as a visually convincing leader, was expressed. Should we go after 'institutionalised heightism'?

Bernie Sanders was ridiculed for stating that he is 'colourblind' regarding race, and that people should be awarded based on merit. Little did people know that Sanders was, in fact, quoting Martin Luther King. Nobody cares about hair colour as they do about skin colour; if we start counting how many gingers represent a single institution, we might find more discrepancies pertaining to hair colour than we do with race. Should we feel pressed to fight for this would-be perceived inequality? That's right: We don't look at hair colour like we look at skin colour. Where does it stop?

Reparations at this point in time may also enable a powerful bigot get reelected, and, as despicable as the man may be, he has already exposed the hooliganism within Black Lives Matter and the threat of an Orwellian brand of Marxism on the Far Left.

I wonder if you have seen the penultimate season of American Horror Story about the barbaric Wokism against a cultish Republican movement. That was one of the greatest portrayals of the current state of affairs where both sides are keen to distort the truth for that pussy-grab. I mean, power-grab!

The only things that truly make life worth living are: love, the wonders of the universe, science, philosophy and peace of mind.

Dear god, you need to put those worms back in the sand!
I stick my head out from the turtle shell and state an observation of what I think might be true, not what necessarily is fact, and get sand blasted? geez that's no way to treat a friendly fellow being for trying to think outside the circle :(

Fact is, we are all inhabitants of mother earth it is our sovereignty as part of this place in the universe we call home, which many seem to forget and poison the very thing that sustains them and everything else on it. We are not citizens of countries, but people of earth and should act as such being forgiving, kind and caring to even the people who have done much wrong so we can move on and live more peacefully. We should be unified in compassion towards one another working to better humanity and the planet as a whole, instead of working against each other, but people fail to see the bigger picture or lack key traits like dignity, responsibility, honesty, discipline, respect. This is something our leaders of today completely lack, instead of hiring celebrities to be our prime minister or president, we should elect scientists or philosophers, people that actually grasp reality and fundamentals of nature and the universe and give a damn. Actual leaders instead of glorified spokesmen, money grabbing sales reps, sleasy snake oil con-artists who care about nothing other than themselves and making a quick buck. To be honest, we don't have a choice in the matter with the current 2 party political system and backwards logic of "if you don't vote for 1 of those parties you're throwing your vote away". Presidents are selected, not elected. Many are members of secret societies like the freemasons, who gain their material wealth and social popularity through such avenues. I'm sure I probably opened another can of whoop-ass there, but maybe put that in the sand as well. At some point, we got to say enough is enough, put our petty differences aside and work towards a better future in a collaborative effort to make positive change for not only us, but everyone on earth as a species and our future grandchildren, and so on.

The school system is indoctrinating our kids to not ask questions, not search for answers, not think for themselves, to blindly follow the herd and believe what the teachers and government appointed curriculum tells them. Much of which is completely useless garbage that will be forgotten later in life because it's not essential skills for survival in today's actual society. I totally agree with 1984 being a must read book for English and History studies, essays and exams, and countless others in different area's of expertise that would set them up for a lifetime of growth and opportunity. The media and TV is just as bad in proliferating the programming and negative conditioning patterns but I digress...

Lets, move past this even if we agree to disagree so we can get back on topic. I want to hear more about quantum super-position and the different laws of physics you have mentioned, if you are still willing to continue and indulge us.

Always willing to indulge, my friend ...

I think we agree more than we disagree as you have just echoed the sentiments of a historical individual I happen to admire; it's Eugene Debs who said, 'I am a citizen of the world.' But there is a whole other science that provides some explanatory power for why some hold more conservative views and others are more liberal. This doesn't mean, however, that it is impossible for us as a species to arrive at a problem-solving consensus.

I'm going to seal this can of worms shut lest we digress further from our far-more-interesting science-oriented philosophical discussion.

Getting back on track as there is still a lot to be said and there is, therefore, a need to parse it with a busy day ahead ...

Inflation is, practically, tiny ripples of quantum uncertainty stretched out to astronomical proportions. The devil is in the details and we are still trying to figure out the 'how', but so far, all competing theories mathematically predict or imply a plethora of universes.

A few years ago, the US National Academies panel, when asked by NASA and the Department of Energy to review five possible experiments that comprise NASA's Beyond Einstein programme—which included candidate satellites to probe the nature of dark energy: a gravitational wave detector called LISA, and a CMB 'inflation probe'—the panel chose the dark energy satellite. I don't know what useful data has been gathered by LISA so far, but string theories hoped that shining a light in the dark, as it were, might confirm their suspicions that reality is 'coloured' by minute vibrations.

I have recently learned that supersymmetry has been proved wrong by new LHC data as the nature of new subatomic particles that were discovered contradict the theory's predictions; so that's one sheet of scientific paper that we can be sure to go in the bin. But relativity still says that wormholes are possible in nature!

The existence of wormholes linking different regions of space was suggested by Austrian physicist Ludwig Flamm in 1916, as a possible solution to equations of general relativity, which Einstein had published that year. Wormholes are simply a natural consequence of general relativity, which predicts that matter entering one end of a wormhole would instantly emerge somewhere else, so long as the wormhole is somehow propped open. These wormholes could in fact be disguised as black holes—so, just because an invisible object in space appears to severely bend light from other celestial objects does not necessarily mean it is a black hole. I will provide here a paper by Alexander Shatskiy of the Lebedev Physical Institute in Moscow, which suggests a possible way to tell the two kinds of objects apart: www.arxiv.org/abs/0712.2572.

Shatskiy assumes the existence of a bizarre substance called 'phantom matter' (forget dark, lol), which has been proposed to explain how wormholes might stay open. Phantom matter is theorised to have negative energy and negative mass, so it creates a repulsive effect that prevents the wormhole closing. According to Shatskiy's calculations, this substance deflects light in a way distinct from black holes and this signature could be something for astronomers to look out for. We might even detect light from another universe passing through a wormhole. Professor Lawrence Krauss, author of A Universe From Nothing , however, pointed out that this proposition is more hypothetical than observational.

Okay, so maybe black-holes not birthing a new universe in a different dimension, birthing a new star somewhere else in this universe perhaps? maybe that's where stars are getting all that energy from... our sun could be generating much of the energy from a black-hole in a distant galaxy.

There was a scientist, I can't remember his name but he said something along the lines of "they will never find the smallest visible particle, every time they look for it there is always an even smaller particle to be found. And the same can be said when looking into the macro cosmos, the further away they try to observe, there is always more further and further out each time" it was to do with the concept of consciousness creating further complexity into infinity whether you look on a micro or macro level, we essentially create it ourselves through the act of observation and expecting to find something. Very thought provoking concept, we originally thought the smallest particle was an atom, but scientists soon discovered this wasn't the case as they probed further. Hence why we now have quantum physics which can only 'observe' the smallest particle in a theoretical fashion which we know is called a quark.

I think applying electromagnetic laws of physics to cosmology studies (or any reality-based studies/observations for that matter) would be smart, as reality seems to be based around laws of vibration, frequency, resonance, amplitude, polarity, rhythm, correspondence etc. Which again, Tesla is quoted as saying "if you want to understand the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration". These same things are also found in music, it wouldn't be a far stretch to say the universe is a giant symphony playing to the tune of nature, in perfect harmony with the natural laws of reality.

Black holes could still, in theory, hold universes inside. According to the holographic theory, our world is the gossamer reflection of an information-rich hypersurface that makes up a surrounding cosmic frontier; postulations here appear to be reinforced by the fact that the quantum realm is fuzzy.

As for the Sun, I really couldn't tell you where it gets all its energy; solar research is an ongoing project where the prevailing view is that the star is converting much of its hydrogen into helium. The input of its existing energy, beyond the molecular cloud that formed the solar system, is hard to tell. Physicists have been smashing particles with surprising results that at first appeared to be magical: Imagine orchestrating the collision of two light subatomic particles at high speed only to beget a third which is heavier than its quantum progenitors—this is analogous to the crash of two Ferraris producing a ship as large as the Titanic! But then we take into account, not just the mass of the initial objects, but also the speed, the momentum, the force of impact, etc., and it all adds up (to the surprising result)!

And this takes us right back to cosmic inflation and a question that I think Alan Guth figuratively asked, which was, 'Who paid for the ultimate free lunch?' We know that one gram of inflating matter turns into two grams of inflating matter (paradoxically doubling) and yet no laws of physics are broken! In other words, mass can be created from nothing. Einstein provided a loophole here with special relativity where, famously, E=mc2 (E is energy; m is mass; c is 299,792,458 metres per second, or the speed of light).

Now here's a clincher: the speed of light is such a large number and that's why a tiny amount of mass corresponds to a huge amount of energy. Example: less than a kilogramme of mass released the energy of the Hiroshima nuclear blast! What does all this mean? You can increase the mass of something by adding energy to it. Example: a rubber band can be made slightly heavier by stretching it—applying energy to stretch it means the energy goes into the rubber band and increases its mass. So ...

The rubber band has negative pressure because you need to work to expand it; for a substance with positive pressure, like air, it's the other way around: you need to do work to compress it. In summary, the inflating substance has to have negative pressure in order to obey the laws of physics, and this negative pressure has to be so huge that the energy required to expand it to twice its volume is exactly enough to double its mass.

Puzzlingly, one might point out, inflation causes accelerated expansion. So how do we unpack this? Gravity is, undoubtedly, an attractive force, so if we have expanding stuff, shouldn't gravity decelerate it? Einstein saves the day with general relativity theory, which says that gravity is caused not only by mass, but also, by pressure. Since mass can't be negative, the gravity from mass is always attractive. But positive pressure also causes attractive gravity, which means that negative pressure causes repulsive gravity!

An inflating substance has huge negative pressure. Guth calculated that the repulsive gravitational force caused by its negative pressure is three times stronger than the attractive gravitational force caused by its mass, so the gravity of an inflating substance will blow it apart!

I know it is a lot to digest, but just let me finish this by saying that inflating substance produces an anti-gravity force that blows it apart, and the energy that this anti-gravity force expends to expand the substance creates enough new mass for the substance to retain constant density. This process is self-sustaining, and the inflating substance keeps doubling its size over and over again. In this way, inflation creates everything we can observe with our telescopes from almost nothing. This is what prompted Guth to refer to our universe as 'the ultimate free lunch': inflation predicts that its total energy is very close to zero.

And then we realise that the same mechanism that produced our universe could very well have produced many; in fact, to assume it only produced one seems absurd! Here's an analogy for this: our universe is a mini and, as we forensically examine the vehicle's properties, we come to realise that a car factory produced it, and as we theorise about the factory's properties and functions, we begin to conceive, with our mathematical minds, an infinite cornucopia of distinct vehicles that this Hilbert space factory must surely be still churning out for there is no scientific reason why it should stop.

Here's another mind-blowing analogy from Tegmark: imagine a bunch of fish in a tank who think water is immutable space that pervades all existence and couldn't be any other way because it's fundamental; and then there is an Einstein fish who figures out this 'watery space' represents one phase in a possibility of three (ice, liquid, gas).

Analogously, we live in a universe where most humans believe space itself couldn't be any other way. However, the most intelligent of us figured out that our laws of physics are not fundamental—they are only locally effective—and that space itself can in fact exist in a number of phases that far exceed the googolplex.

And the realm of mathematics, which describes every structure in existence, can outdo human imagination, and has probably created worlds well beyond what is depicted in Rick'n'Morty ...

That is a lot to digest...

That post reminded me of a zero-sum balancing equation, where reality is constantly trying to balance itself out in a never ending game of zero = negative 1 and plus 1 repeating into infinity like a sine wave moving above and under the horizontal line, it's self-correcting in a way where it is trying to be zero but can't work out what zero is, if that makes any sense? bit hard to explain.

I think it's called critical mass, where moving an object at speed of light requires infinite energy and the object gains exponential mass the closer it gets to the speed of light. Unless of course, the object is a photon with no mass. So they are trying ways to convert matter into photons, convert matter back to energy, back to information or light so that we could transform a space-craft into light, move at light speed, then transform it back to matter once the journey is complete. I have heard UFOlogists say alien craft actually just warp space-time/gravity around the ship by way of electromagnetics the ship then just falls through space quite easily and effortlessly, because space-time and gravity is bent around it like projecting a EM field which nullifies those laws around the object. I have also heard that thought travels through the universe faster than the speed of light, and indeed if the universe is based on consciousness like the scientists are starting to suggest, then this is likely the case. I saw an article posted recently somewhere, they are going to experiment on rats to see if there is weight behind the pan-spiritualism theory. It said something about a split-brain experiment on rats to work out if two separate consciousness can be combined, which might lead credence to the idea consciousness is fundamental to reality. If the laws of physics are only locally effective, then this also applies to consciousness, meaning we only locally manifest our surroundings which is something I've been harping on about for many years. That we only create the things we are aware of in any given moment on an as-needed basis. Similar to a computer simulation reserving resources by only rendering and processing the information currently being accessed, which could also have a background process that renders the basics in a much less demanding manner.

Since we are on a dreaming platform, perhaps some of these idea's could be tested in the dreamworld, flying out into the galaxy or into a sun to see it for yourself. I have actually flown at light speed before, I was at my destination about 30km away in a matter of seconds, and it looked like travelling through a multi-colored rainbow tunnel of light, I couldn't see where I was going so had to stop, but when I did I was near my destination anyway.

We can stir this conversation towards the practice of lucid dreaming as a means to explore, in the least, one portion of the nature of reality. Dream worlds are light and colourful, implying a photonic makeup potentially manipulated by a conscious will ...

Maxwell discovered that light is an electromagnetic wave in the 19th century. Measuring two points in a beam of light uncovers a strange oscillation whose frequency ostensibly determines light colour, and its strength—which can be ascertained by voltage—correlates with light intensity. We label these electromagnetic waves depending on their frequency; if increased, they become radio waves, microwaves, infrared, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma rays etc. But at the end of the day, they are all forms of light made up of nothing but photons; just as on a subatomic level, there is no difference between wood and metal save for the way in which atoms are arranged and our perceptual discriminations. It is all energy in the end, and we are all entangled to a single wave-function which is what we call 'Universe'.

To predict how all this energy is going to behave in the future, Erwin Schrödinger came up with an equation; the trouble is that this formula doesn't exactly predict what particles will do and reveals that the microscopic does not obey the classical laws of physics—which is weird because Newtonian theory seemed to work pretty well up until this point.

It's like a dream which we believe to be real and uncertainty comes to the fore when we attempt to predict which route this massive wave-function will take. Suddenly, we are presented with a sea of probabilities whereby single events ostensibly collapse to matter (for us). If there is some truth to Copenhagen's notion of 'wave-function collapse'—and assuming consciousness, as a fundamental, plays a role in steering the spacetime fabric, however slightly—one might question the purpose of a collective consciousness selecting for catastrophic events. We could answer this with another question by the same token: If dreams are largely generated by our subconscious minds, why do we have nightmares?

If you haven't seen Repression, watch it —because it is a philosophical horror mind-fuck invoking Schrödinger's cat, the concept of quantum minds, determinism versus free will, the crazy idea that the universe exists inside someone's brain and we don't really exist because we are part of this 'higher' person's dream/nightmare, and our cosmic dreamer lives in a much larger universe which might also be another's dream ...

Here is a lucid dream I had a few years ago which made me ponder about a universe existing in my head; a universe invaded by its inadvertent creator, who, with godlike powers, decided to terrorise its inhabitants on a whim:

Date: 23/03/2013
Method of entry: Indirect
Bedtime: 1 am
Awakening: 5 am (used the loo)
Return to bed: Shortly afterwards
Attempt: Successful
Phase experience: Psychokinetic Butcher

DREAM STATE:

I have finished work at a warehouse, completely oblivious to the absurdity of this situation as in real life I work in a bookmaker shop. A Scandinavian woman that I take to be a work colleague accompanies me on my way home. I start thinking that my wife could suspect I'm having an affair if she saw me with this woman, who speaks English with an accent and occasionally uses Portuguese words. “You speak Portuguese, too?” I ask. “You got me!” she replies in a bubbly tone.

WAKING STATE:

I wake up and realise that she had been me all along (no wonder she used Portuguese words). On the way to the loo I promise myself that I will question the nature of my reality next time a stranger speaks to me in Portuguese.

PHASE STATE:

Back in bed I decide to try entering the phase using the technique of separating from the body. Relaxing on my back, a lapse of consciousness seems to have occurred before I came to, fully lucid, in a strange house. The place is a shambles, like a family has just moved in. A ladder leads to a dark loft that arouses my curiosity. I gravitate towards the square opening on the ceiling in order to explore it. I rub my hands together and think of how cool it would be if my bedroom was in that loft. Suddenly, the dark and empty loft turns into a bedroom with curtain-covered windows seeping crepuscular light. The cuspidal ceiling above me adumbrates the roof, and, astonishingly, a massive bed supports me and practically covers the entire floor. I feel excited about the manifestation of an ideal bed, large enough to roll around on it many times over.

As I bounce on the mattress, I remember something from waking life: recently, a few houses in my area have been broken into. It occurs to me that the phase state might be used for andragogical purposes such as rehearsing appropriate action in the event of a burglary. So, in this lucid-dream room, I expect the house to be burgled at any moment as I approach a balcony. For a bedroom in the loft the ground outside is incongruously high and I catch two adolescent boys jumping up and attempting to grab hold of the balcony bars. They are suddenly men and I'm so keen to face them that I end up instinctively using telekinesis to levitate them into the bedroom, and, in its dark ambience, I mutilate their bodies with a blunt knife. One is killed instantly and the other is disabled with severe injuries.

Then, while I pin the injured one on the ground, I gouge out the dead man’s left eye and keep pulling on a red thread of flesh until his cerebrovascular innards come through the skeletal socket. The severely injured accomplice screams in horror so I take the pleasure to stuff his mouth with his dead friend’s guts. I am exhilarated with power even though gutting the burglars in such a surreal way isn’t exactly what I had in mind in rehearsing how to deal with a break-in. After all, telekinesis cannot be used in real life to overpower interlopers. Although their entrails are quite lifelike, they are not structurally realistic. I suppose my mind could have concocted something close enough to the real thing from years of being exposed to a great deal of human anatomy pictures and even if I hadn’t been exposed to that kind of material in my life I suspect my mind would have created something convincing from imagination. My hands are covered in blood and I wonder if I have experienced the same elation as some psychotic killers do or something similar.

When I look up and out through the balcony railing, I discover an old man sitting in a restaurant across the road, staring disapprovingly at me from behind a pane of glass. He raises a hand and telekinetically causes a lamppost to break away from the concrete pavement just outside the restaurant. Then, a swift gesture on his part sets the object in motion towards me. I gesticulate in an attempt to mitigate the old man’s control over the airborne lamppost and the object ends up crashing in the middle of the road. This had not been foreseen. Something impossible has happened in the phase which requires me to use unconventional means to deal with it. Using telekinesis, I force the old man to smash through the window and all it takes is a gesture to make him ascend through the air and splat on the pavement below.

In the real world, it goes without saying that I would not be able to deal with a witness to my crime in such a way. Indeed, my actions in this lucid dream have already defeated the purpose of learning to realistically handle a mundane situation such as a break-in. What sparked my behaviour might have been the temptation that comes with finding oneself in a scenario of absolute power. Indeed, I feel drunk with power and the old wizard has proved to be no ordinary witness. The course of events gives me a profound sense of elation that eggs me on to unleash my powers in a destructive way. I am the apex of this dream world, the master endowed with consummate power, and I want to express that. I begin to gesture with my hands and supernatural winds sweep people off the streets. Even a bus gets caught up in my magical gust and it goes flying to crash afar. And here I stand, on this balcony, summoning and playing with the wind, like a homicidal god, until I wake up at dawn.

I guess I should share this separately to see what others think. (I hope they don't take me for a psycho here!)