' . . . could
well be programmes developed by a post-human society living in what
we think of as the future.'
'At some point, probably in this century computers will become capable
of mimicking what we call consciousness. The rest follows logically.
Once there's enough computing power to simulate consciousness, creating
an environment for it to interact with would be easy. Simulating
an entire universe down to the minutest level would be a waste of
resources; you would only need to simulate to a degree where the
inhabitants didn't notice any irregularities. There would be no
point filling in every microscopic detail, or the minutiae of distant
astronomical objects, unless someone decided to look at them. Then
the creators could fill in the necessary details on an ad-hoc basis.
This recalls whether a tree exists when no one is looking at it;
and it might explain why "reality" at the quantum level
appears so strange.'
Really? - You mean 'strange,' as in how energy takes small, quantum
steps; fixed at certain values, as if all things are "snapped"
to different frequency-energy grids, just as pixels and rendered
objects are "snapped to grid" in computer art programmes?
However, if we are living in a virtual simulation, why is it that
I have to continuously endure such trivial discomforts as a virtual
itchy nose for instance? - And why do I have to suffer virtual sinus
headaches, virtual asthma, virtual hay fever and other virtual allergies?
Are these things really necessary?
I remember in
1993, my brother saying that the sun, the moon, the planets, the
stars and the infinite space of the universe might not really exist
- that it might all be an illusion; an appropriate "backdrop"
or a "stage-setting" for our particular virtual-construct
here in this particular dimension.
He added: "We
create it all: the complex nature of these things and their history,
by our constant observation and focus upon them: the results of
our observations adapting themselves to our expectations - which
in turn have adapted themselves to the historical mythic reality
of the consensus."
If this is so, then these heavenly bodies would follow the natural,
subtle and hidden, archetypal forces of our own consciousness, which
is likely to hide the truth behind all the increasingly complex
illusory patterns we see and which become more complex as we observe
them further - and all according to our beliefs and expectations.
As Paul said - predating the above statement by Nick Bostrom:
"If we think of the repetitive 'blank space' of our universe
as a 'back-drop' or 'stage-setting,' then what immediately comes
to mind are those simple background scenes we see in Hannah-Barbera
cartoons. The background is usually repetitive and simple compared
to the intricate movements of the cartoon characters . . . until
we come across a scene which requires us to take a closer look,
and then the background becomes a little more colourful, detailed
I remember turning to look at him with my mouth open.
thought" he said smiling and shrugging his shoulders.
I have wondered
about the so-called "Dark Matter" which makes up 90% of
the universe, and which seems to be potential energy/information
that hasn't been activated as yet. This 90% seems to be linked to
the 90-odd percent of "Junk DNA" - again potential information
that hasn't yet been activated - maybe the reason why most of us
only use 10% of our potential brainpower?
As we will see,
if today's theoretical physicists are correct, then we are creating
our own reality as we go along . . . and we are also creating our
I can't help
thinking that when the first large bone was dug out of the ground,
that this was the moment when the story of the dinosaurs and all
their history began. The thought that we have created and elaborated
on the history of the dinosaurs by our constant search for more
bones, which we then create by our expectations of finding them
- seems absurd, I know . . . but try proving me wrong.
All kinds of exotic species of dinosaur now exist - but not in our
own time frame - Oh-oh no . . . that would be too dangerous from
our point of view. But saying this, some people have pondered over
the thought that man could have been around when the dinosaurs were
around and its no surprise to find reports of people finding 60,000,000-year-old
footprints found in rock.
The history of
civilisations are not exempt from this creativity of ours: If we
believe that we have evolved from primates and that the evolution
of man has been a 'gradual process' then we are going to find proof
of this; we will then uncover all kinds of primitive paraphernalia
associated with the gradual rise of civilisations - i.e., an embryonic
ascent from simple to more complex forms of development in which
the earliest form of writing was found to be simple pictographs
known as hieroglyphs which gradually developed into cuneiform script
and then to the modern style of writing we know today.
However, if we
get bored with the above, and want to "boldly go where no man
has gone before" by believing that the ancients possessed an
advanced technology handed down to them from the time of "Atlantis,"
or maybe given to them from "Pleiadian extraterrestrials",
then we will also begin to find evidence for this as if the energy/information
in our surrounding reality morphs itself to suit our beliefs. When
discovering this new evidence we are often confounded as to why
we never noticed it before.
To support what
I am saying, I am amused by the fact that I may have actually discovered
an example of something that has been caught in the act of 'morphing'
- and I report this with "tongue firmly in cheek."
The photo below is of a bas-relief from inside the temple of Osiris
built by Seti I at Abydos, Egypt. So many different photographs
of the cartouche exist that the possibility that this image comes
from a photograph that has been digitally touched up is nonexistent.
Now who can fail to notice a figure that looks like a "helicopter;"
something next to it that some say is a "submarine," -
really a hieroglyph in the form of a hand - and below that something
that looks like a spaceship drawn by my five year-old nephew? Well
it's not surprising that this particular relief has sparked off
another minor controversy between Egyptologists and UFO enthusiasts.
Egyptologists are saying that it is a 're-carving:' that someone
filled in the stone to replace some of the hieroglyphs. The technical
term is 'palimpsest' - the explanation being, that when the filling
falls out, bits of the old and new glyphs overlap and form strange
glyphs or figures.
Mmm, it's possible
I suppose, because if you look closely you can see the outline of
a previously-carved falcon-like figure just below and in front of
the "helicopter" - so yeah, maybe. But doesn't this just
show that there is enough potential information here to suit both
camps? As always someone will come along to explain it - and then
again, the explanation will be based on the person's beliefs and
will become an "undeniable truth" as more people see it
and believe it.
But who can really
dispute the possibility that the reality we are living in is made-up
of information that conforms to our beliefs, and that the information
in and on the relief is in fact morphing itself to suit the new
believers who are growing in number all the time and who believe
that an ancient technology once existed that may have been far in
advance of our own?
As far as I know,
no one has come up with this explanation. And although some would
say that to some extent I am "playing with the reader's mind",
what I am saying is 'thought provoking' all the same because it
cannot be determined one way or another - and this my friends is
the 'uncertainty principle' in action - something which is thought
to only exist at the quantum level.
As we will go
on, we will find that the so-called "truth" only exists
in 'uncertainty.' The moment when we feel "certain" that
we have discovered the "truth" - then that's the time
when the truth moves into uncertainty again. If we are intelligent
enough, then we will find that we were merely playing with the "shed
skin" of the truth, and in the place where the truth once was
or might have been.
If we really
are creating our reality as we go along and if all the information
of the universe is within us and also spread out around us, then
we contain all the ingredients we need to construct any scenario
we like. All the seeds or 'information strands' are there for us
to use, manipulate and exploit in any way we choose. We can "cut,"
"paste," connect, disconnect, and reconnect together all
kinds of information to create all and any scenario or "theatrical
production" that agrees with our 'internal dialogue' and the
way that we perceive the world.
If we believe
that there is a conspiracy, then the information, which validates
our belief will then "pop-up" everywhere and it will then
weave itself together to create a scenario in which we will then
find ourselves playing a key part.
In truth there
is only the 'Eternal Now' or 'Present.' From this point we can create
the future and we can also create or 'recreate' the past - as shown
in the example of the Abydos bass relief and the so-called "Face"
I remember my brother and I having a conversation about how we seem
to be creating reality every moment from the point of 'Now!' However,
like 'Truth,' the point of 'Now' is a paradox, because while in
our normal everyday consciousness, we cannot really capture the
'Now' - it has passed before we can ever know it or feel it as something
in itself - although a 'peak experience', a 'flash of insight' or
a 'synchronicity experience' is evidence of our being somewhere
closer to capturing it - even though we don't remember the actual
moment when we did this.
Paul and I chatted about how we can also alter the past, as new
evidence will suddenly appear that will reflect these alterations.
can change dramatically according to our beliefs about it - especially
if a large percentage of the collective are expressing these beliefs.
The more people
who believe that a certain 'alternative' scenario once happened
as regards a specific 'key point' in history, then the evidence
for that particular scenario will begin to show up everywhere. At
first, this evidence will be subtle inasmuch that the evidence seems
not to violate the initial events and will always agree with them.
But after a while all these subtle changes to the old pattern will
coalesce together to drastically transform the version of events
that was once believed - even transforming the evidence relating
to the former version of events.
If needed, and just in case we notice it, the new version will always
have enough room to contain the old version within it so as not
to contradict it - bringing it to a new level of understanding that
will help transform the present paradigm. Therefore the past affects
the present and the present affects the past and all from the 'Eternal
Now' - which always seems to be just out of our grasp - most of
us being unconscious of it. (This will be explained later.)
My brother brought up the "Jack the Ripper" case as an
example of the 'uncertainty principle' working within certain events
in our so-called "history."
Because the murderer
was never caught and has not been properly identified, the 'uncertainty
principle,' that has been brought to this brief but highly dramatic
period in our history, turns these events into a creative medium
for the collective; a testing-ground for our creativity, which of
course can be moulded to fit any pattern we choose. The uncertainty
surrounding the murderer - which is our 'focal point' - creates
all the ever-changing theoretical scenarios based around the initial
events - all of which seem quite valid in their own way.
One could say
that the collective consciousness seems to have some influence over
reality - even over what has happened in the past, especially in
regard to the smallest details. These alterations or changes to
the old pattern of events which show up right now or very recently
in new research as if the space-time continuum had been disturbed
"way back then", are due to the power of the Collective
Just like the
'Rosenthal Effect' (which we will be looking at in the next chapter)
evidence keeps cropping up, which seems to fit any and all suppositions.
Again this shows evidence that we can also create the "past,"
and it would seem that the intensity regarding the 'transforming
evidence' which seems to morph or 'shapeshift' itself to agree with
all and any theory, depends on the 'strength of numbers' regarding
those of us who are focusing on a particular theory about the said
The J.F. Kennedy
assassination - something else we will be looking at later - is
another case in point . . . a brief but highly dramatic event in
our history which expresses this 'uncertainty principle.' For example,
many of us ask who was behind the assassination? Again all scenarios
and theories tend to agree with the initial events and each to a
All the phenomena
associated with the paranormal or the mystical is the greatest area
of debate this is because certain elements of 'paranormal phenomena'
express the 'uncertainty principle' - i.e., does the paranormal
exist or not? . . Meaning that all the phenomena associated with
the paranormal and the mystical is the 'uncertainty principle' at
work. This 'Uncertainty Principle' - also expressed in physics to
indicate the paradox that exists in 'particle/wave duality,' is
one of the key attributes of the very Centre from which we are creating
our binary-processed, dual reality in the first place.
The Source or
Centre is neither 'This' nor 'That' . . . and neither is it wave
or particle, but both. It is what that great artist-mystic, Austin
Osman Spare termed the "Neither-Neither."
In the same way,
it's possible that our own minds are also creating the existence
of UFOs, visiting ETs and what some people call the "alien
abduction" syndrome. It would certainly tie in with all the
many different kinds of "alien" that were reported to
have been seen since the late '50s. From the limited media attention
given to the UFO subject in the last two decades, it's not surprising
that we now identify only one kind, the so-called "Greys"
- as if people's minds are now tuned-in to expect this one species
of "alien" which has now become an archetype.
It gives a whole
new meaning to the old saying "Ah . . . it's all in your mind"
- but this doesn't mean that the latest mythic reality of "ETs,"
"aliens" and so-called "alien abductions" is
any less real - and especially if the truth be, that everything
is all in our mind. I'm certain that we create everything in our
reality - all of us being unconscious "co-producers,"
directors, "actors" and "extras."
However, if we
do create our own reality, then why is it that most of the time
we are working against ourselves? - As in the irony of someone going
to the cashpoint to draw out £30 and then going back to the
car to find a parking fine for £30. This kind of absurdity
is called "Sod's Law" - but it smacks of some kind of
'perverse precognition' working behind the scenes. Does this mean
that by going to draw out £30 the person already knew deep
down that he would need that £30 to pay the parking fine?
. . And before you ask . . . yeah, that person was me - someone
who has had more than his fair share of sad situations in a 'virtual
reality' that has 'parking attendants' programmed within it.
about the above, I began looking back through the notes I made during
my research on the link between the uncertainty principle in quantum
theory and the dual nature of human perception . . .
1. Taken from New Scientist, magazine, 27th July 2002