Transreality Ideas

Transreality IdeasAn exploration of the many worlds

Dylan Walsh2014

Disclaimer

By no accounts is this a fully fledged thesis piece. This is merely a paper, written for the sole purpose of explaining concepts and presenting new ideas for the wider audience's consumption. All pictures, aside from the those directly affiliated with the Steins;Gate anime and the Inception movie, are my own. Views within this paper may change with respect to time.

Acknowledgements

Through the many years of collating and connecting information about how realities tick, I have the following sources to thank:

Hugh Everett and Max Planck, the inspirational scientists who changed my perception of the universe.

Taking the Quantum Leap, a book by Fred Alan Wolf, the manual that provided an in- depth scaffolding towards my understanding of the quantum world (and the writing style for this paper).

The University of Adelaide, for facilitating my learning in physics. Goshua Tugai and Andrew Hartman, for providing the listening, patient ears for those

lengthy discussions. The Future Gadget Laboratory of the Steins;Gate anime, for providing valuable

reinforcement and new directions to previously conceived ideas. Youtube’s VSauce and minutephysics, for their quirky but helpful explanations. Professor Michio Kaku, for providing helpful explanations relating to String Theory (on

youtube). Wikipedia, for the widespread access of information.

Introduction

The observable universe as we know it is 13.77 billion years old, with a diameter of approximately 93 billion light years. It obeys many constants and laws, and it knows little, next to almost no exceptions towards the functionality of such constants and laws. However, we can say the observable universe knows almost no exceptions, because of the limitations our vantage point holds, even across a vast region of space that we can presently observe. We cannot confirm with absolute certainty that everything is as we know it, just as much as we cannot confirm the absolute non-existence of god. In saying that, we can always continue in our attempts to adapt newer models towards the universe, with increasing degrees of accuracy.

But consider how the observable universe propagated from a single point during its genesis (from what we commonly refer to as the Big Bang).This would imply the existence of an “edge” to the universe’s physical size, the boundary of the universe which remains expanded, and perhaps, still expanding. This then would implicate the existence of a finite amount of “stuff” inside our observable universe, which ranges through all forms of matter and energy across the fabric of space-time. Does this mean that within such a finite existence, there would only be so many formulas and models we can derive, before we literally ran out things to derive? Would there come a point where we would know everything there is to know?

The answer lies within humanity’s scientific history. Just when we thought we had successfully explored the entirety of a forest (that of our universe), we only ended up falling down another rabbit hole to land in a new wonderland, a new reality that would expand on our previous horizons. Such that this was the case, back in the Newtonian Era.

Rising from Ashes of the Ultraviolet Catastrophe

As the book, Taking the Quantum Leap goes on to talk about, a certain problem arose back in the early 1900’s that would ultimately lead to the birth of quantum physics as we know it today. Physicists were strongly opted towards the Newtonian framework, as a result of how commonly known and grounded physics had become within such a framework at the time. They had built a substantial repository of knowledge, which nearly explained how all known things worked under the Newtonian workings. But two areas however, would remain to stump physicists; the aspects of how light and heat were generated. Such stumping was all due to the experimental data (and common sense) that was obtained from the Black Box experiments, which conflicted with initial predictions about how this particular black body box was predicted to emit light and heat when energy was put in, in the form of electromagnetic waves.

Comparatively, if you had a finite amount of normal matter (eg, wood), transforming all of it would give you a finite amount of energy. But on the other hand with electromagnetic waves, you could supposedly work with an infinite amount of waves, by shrinking their wavelength to allow more room for more waves. Having shorter and shorter wavelengths would then mean you having more and more energy. So hypothetically, you could keep this process of wave cramming going, to produce an infinite amount of energy, passing through continuous wavelengths of gamma rays to cosmic rays and beyond (which probably wouldn’t leave much of anything for quite a distance around that little black box), for the black box to reradiate. This in all practical and intuitive senses just didn’t add up.

In reality, the box would reach a sensible point where no matter how many waves you were to put in, there would only be a specific amount of energy reradiated out, a specific limit to the rate of energy emissions. Such a limiting factor would later be discovered to be Planck’s constant, named after its discoverer who today is considered to be the father of quantum physics, Max Planck. What this new constant now proposed, was that instead of energy within electromagnetic waves being emitted as a continuous wavelength, it was in fact emitted in discontinuous pieces of energy, called quanta (a quantum being singular). So within the Black Box experiment, there would only be quantum amounts of energy emitted from the black box instead of a single, insanely large, energy emitting wavelength. This effectively substitutes a high energy cosmic ray, for many smaller, lower energy waves.

The conundrum had been solved. However, the solution wouldn’t continue to remain with

explaining just one experiment. The significance of this discovery would lead to further derivations of more constants to do with space and time (the indivisible Planck length and the Planck time respectively).These were further implications that would continue to nurture a discontinuous view of our universe, that reality as we knew it, had many limitations, and that it wasn’t a singular continuous space of mystery, but more of a finite vessel. It is these facts, which spearhead the Everett’s Many World Interpretation (EMWI for short).

The Discontinuous Universe and Everett’s Many Worlds

In short, the EMWI proposes the existence of an infinite number of separated realities (the existence of such extra realities is predicted in String Theory). Of these realities we experience only a set few. This is dependent on the choices made by, for example, a person or by the tiniest shift of a subatomic particle, each choice dictating a different reality within an infinite set of all realities (more on how the mechanics behind the decision making process work, in the “Permeable Particles: Mechanisms of the Consciousness” section). The word infinity by now has been thrown around a few times, but let us stop to imagine what this means in the wondrous context of having multiple realities. There would be an infinite probability associated with the likelihood for certain realities to exist out of an infinite set. In other words, there would be a 100% chance for any reality to exist (which includes your favourite movie[s], imaginary world[s], and imaginary friend[s]), any and all things can exist! It is difficult to comprehend why at first, but it is part of this paper’s aim is to explain how this can be possible, starting off with the EMWI connections with the discontinuous observable universe.

Consider the supposed scenario of a continuous universe, going back to the Newtonian world once more. In mathematics in all its hypothetical applications, it can agree with operating within the realms of continuity no problem. If a person were to try and count every single number between 0 and 1, it would take an infinite amount of time given the continuous range of numbers, which can range from 0 to 1, such as 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, etc. In other words, an infinite set of numbers would be comprised within 0 to 1.

But shifting away from the hypothetical side of numbers to the practical world, consider a runner who’s participating in a foot race, who will be covering a finite distance from start to finish. Let the distance from start to finish be 100m, this is where we start to unfortunately see mathematics break down in the face of real world practicality.

Applying the continuous notion of numbers to our race distance, our runner would be disgusted to realise that he/she would have to run through an infinite number of points at every part of the race track, in order to complete the race. This would mean the runner never reaches the finish line in a finite space of time, which obviously doesn’t conform to real world observations of races typically having a reasonable end. Such a scenario was first determined by a Greek philosopher named Zeno, of which, it was called the Dichotomy Paradox (or Zeno’s Paradox, which originally took the runner constantly halving the distance to try to reach the finish line).

So how can the racer finish the race in reality? The answer is to do with the space between the start and the finish line having to be indeed finite in its distance, in that there are only a finite number of points to cover from start to finish. This is in fact the sum of a finite number of Planck distances, which make up the overall distance of the race (as suggested by the black box experiment). Hence this implies that a finite amount of time, through the sum of a finite number of Planck times, is what transpires to allow the racer to complete the race (hooray)!

So thanks to the discontinuous scenario, this potentially highlights some interesting properties for such a discontinuous race hence universe, precluding back to the EMWI. Planck time could be defined (literally) as the frame rate for the set of realities we perceive, within the infinite set of all realities of the universe. It is here we have to be careful with the use words like “reality” and “universe”, in the context of frames (realities) of a greater, infinite collection of frames (the universe), some of which perceivable by an observer (the observable universe). The space between realities operates at higher dimensions, acting as a medium for realities to more or less coexist.

By now as we head back to the EMWI again, you probably may have thought up of some counter notions in relation to the existence of an infinite number of realities, such as the following:

1. If any reality is possible, surely there is in fact one reality which counters the existence of the EMWI in the first place?

2. Could there only be an infinite number of realities that comprise of only the physical constants and laws we know (like looking only between the infinite set of numbers from 0 and 1) and not the more “zany” realities?

3. If there really are zany realities in existence, why can’t we see them despite the infinite number of such realities?

The answer to question 1 is that out of the infinite set of realities, there can also be another reality which counters the existence of the EMWI-countering reality. But then you could argue there is another counter against my counter, but then I can say there’s an even newer counter to your next previous counter, and so on. It would be a perpetual and seemingly chaotic picture to imagine with how such realities would interact. It wouldn’t be something anyone could pin down and describe to its truest extent with how far these realities extend (having infinite quantities [of anything for that matter] is what makes this problematic in itself).

As for the answer to question 2, if there are an infinite number of realities in existence which follow the same physical constants and laws we’re familiar with, then there’s the allowed probability of one of those realities (out of infinity), to harbour the ability to diverge gradually into a zany-type reality. Such a diverging process may arise from what may have happened during the Big Bang, under the correct conditions (potentially related to Sakharov’s Conditions and/or Chaotic Inflation Theory) for changes to occur for the constants and laws of physics (see also the section “Curious Considerations within Infinity” for more).

Origins of the Big Bang

As mentioned before, the observable universe is approximately 13.77 billion years old, precluding to a discernible beginning of sorts. Very close to this time, there were relatively equal parts of regular matter, and its opposite counterpart, antimatter. On their own they don’t add up to much, with their differences being that antimatter possesses negatively charged nuclei and positively charged positron(s), unlike normal matter which possesses positively charged nuclei and negatively charged electron(s). However place these two different forms of matter together, and their differences in charge will cause the matter and antimatter to annihilate in equal quantities, releasing tremendous amounts of energy, 100% of all their stored energy in fact! Comparing an annihilation of matter and antimatter, with their collective mass equal to the payload of a nuclear bomb detonated, the nuclear bomb figuratively speaking, would simply be a water balloon in contrast.

So no doubt, it would’ve been a tumultuous period of time to have the annihilation of matter and antimatter right after the Big Bang. However the big question is, how did large quantities of conflicting forms of matter arrive there in the first place? It’s considered rare if not alien to have antimatter in existence today, given the overwhelming amounts of regular matter the observable universe has been accustomed too for billions of years, with regular matter being the victor from the matter versus antimatter conflict. Why indeed did regular matter win?

The answer may lie in what happened before the Big Bang, within existent mechanisms which satisfy the conditions of having existent matter and antimatter present in large quantities initially, and having regular matter win out. Introducing the EMWI yet again, it could’ve been the “convergence” of two or more realities of unequal “volume” that led to the unequal and overall contribution of matter and antimatter, as a part of the Big Bang. This implies the existence of initially stable antimatter realities which could exist from an infinite set of all realities.

As an analogy, you could consider the genesis of this observable universe from its respective parent realities, to be akin to the existence of the various generations of humans. Just like with considering the sequence of human parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, one could consider within the EMWI, the existence of parent realities, grandparent realties, great-grandparent realities, and so on. Tracing down the lines of realities which converged, you would likely run into a set of realities where things were vastly different from what we’d commonly know. And yet, it would be through the shaping and evolution of these different realities, which would eventually land us with the genesis of the observable universe we know today. But unlike the many human generations which have a traceable beginning (and parents left over) for the start of humanity, in the context of an infinite number of realities, there wouldn’t be a discernible beginning, a means of pinning down a definite event in a finite context. Again, infinity isn’t something that can necessarily be tamed as pointed out from question 1.

So as

pointed out in question 3, how do we fit into all of this? Where does something like “consciousness” potentially sit within such a system?

Permeable Particles: Mechanisms of the Consciousness

The consciousness, the amalgamation of matter which makes up who we are, could be best described as the collection of information contained, self-sustained, and yet, ever changing within a vessel of sorts. Such a vessel would of cause be the intricate instrument, known as the brain, capable of registering and interpreting a finite set of information from our surrounding environment (ie, visible light, frequencies of sound from 20Hz to 20,000Hz). What’s important to note with such an instrument, is that it’s inextricable from a greater system; the universe. So what’s noted by an observer as their real and perceivable reality, is one where a finite set of information which exists in the infinite universe, reaches this particular observer’s finite brain and is interpreted. This interpretation is than what leads the observer to perceive the next reality in a seemingly recursive cycle, as newer information is constantly being received. As Leonardo Dicaprio’s character Cobb in the movie Inception mentions, “we create and perceive our world simultaneously”.

But how does this recursive loop work, in cycling an observer through (for all intents and purposes) a normal set of realities? As mentioned in question 3, why don’t we typically perceive zany realities? And for that matter, how is it that an observer can slip between realities at all? As the title suggests, it could be all to do with gravitons and their “slippery” properties that allow these particles to slip through the fabric of space-time that comprises our observable universe. The massless gravitons (as also another hypothetical prediction by String Theory) with their property of being able to mediate space-time to reflect the familiar force of gravity, by default have the ability to slip through space-time, following a disappearing and reappearing act of the sort, spontaneously.

Going back to the human consciousness, at a fundamental enough level of how it’s made up, it could indeed consist of these gravitons which can slip between realities. In short, this would imply that the consciousness for a given observer is following a slipping action between realities. Given that this consciousness is made up of slipping permeable particles, there would be limitations towards its “trajectory”, from how these permeable particles can move.

Like the trajectory of a ball, when thrown forwards and upwards into the air, it will follow a certain parabolic motion and not spontaneously deviate from that path on its own. The ball has only the energy and momentum to move in such a particular trajectory, subject to the laws of physics. The same principle could apply towards the way these permeable particles behave when slipping between realities. Permeable particles would always attempt to occupy a new position in another reality which requires the least amount of work. Such positions are determined by how each permeable particle interacts with its environment (ie the brain structure in a reality), to travel to where it’s newly located. This is what would give conformity to the consciousness of an observer, even whilst drifting between realities, in a linearly perceivable fashion which avoids running into the zany type realities.

What the idea of a consciousness following a certain trajectory may suggest to you as the reader, are words like “fate” and/or “predeterminism”. Are we indeed confined to lead lives which are predetermined, set in motion by fixed parameters? Or are we allowed to move with free will? The answer is actually a combination of both.

Cause and Effect of Fate

Imagine you are perceiving yourself alone on the ground floor of a building, with the unfortunate luck of standing right next to a bomb with 3 seconds left on the clock. Very much, your future is looking pretty grim over the next few seconds. With zero chance of survival, there really isn’t much you can do about it. But regardless of the situation at hand, you still are presented with choices, even if it still inevitably results in your demise. You can choose to run away, carry the bomb and throw it away, call for help, etc. The reason for the seemingly inevitable outcome is merely due to the parameters which have been set, prior to the 3 seconds before the detonation of the bomb. And this is exactly what’s happening between perceiving realities, in terms of the parameters towards how the consciousness can shift.

As stated previously, the collection of gravitons which compose the consciousness, are confined to the brain, and can only move between realities which allows them to occupy the next most ideal position (i.e. a position where the brain has shifted by only a little bit). This is one prominent parameter. Then there are the parameters of the environment to consider by default, with how other gravitons are interacting with the brain and body. As hinted towards in the bomb scenario, within such interactions, you still will have choices that can be made, so long as the parameters which have been already set in motion are followed (this can be characterised as the “Attractor Effect”). However as per the bomb scenario, you may not necessarily have a flexible range of choices available. But fortunately, a way of expanding the number of choices that can be made, is to simply make the choices before the parameters arrive which narrow down the options. This would effectively put forward new parameters through which the consciousness can follow.

Going back to the bomb scenario, suppose that you now have 30 seconds to avoid getting blown up by the bomb. There no longer is the parameter of the bomb having only 3 seconds left which considerably narrowed down your options for survival. This time now, you heroically throw the bomb out of a window and make your running escape out of the building in the opposite direction, surviving the blast to come with the building to shield you. What previously was an inevitable, fate driven scenario of not being able to survive; the scenario has now become survivable.

But going again, if you had 300 seconds, even more time to make more different choices; a larger impact can be made towards the survivability of the bomb, with you of course having a lot more time to flee. This larger impact can be characterised as the set of alternate realities leading up to the bomb’s detonation, having diverged at an earlier relative time. The earlier the divergence, the greater the overall change (this can be characterised as the “Butterfly Effect”).The only problem associated with attempting invoke such a change, would be to know how far you would’ve needed to go to successfully make the change through acquiring the necessary time to make more useful choices. Again, this is parameter dependent, which given the number of possible parameters that may exist within any given scenario; it’d be extremely difficult to accurately predict how all these parameters may add up, in order to determine the minimum threshold to enact a discernable change.

{Spoiler Warning beyond this point!!} As illustrated within the anime series called “Steins;Gate”, fellow protagonist Okabe Rintarou is eventually burdened with the task of having to constantly travel back to a relative point in time, to prevent the death of a close friend, Mayuri Shiina. Unfortunately his attempts constantly are in vain, as Mayuri still inevitably dies, always at a similar time under varying conditions (being shot, run over by a train, etc), as a result of some of the changes Okabe had been able to enact (though not to a significant extent to ultimately save Mayuri). The problem comes from the limitations of how far back Okabe can travel, with travel only possible within the first 48 hours of the traveller’s relative past. Had Okabe been allowed more time by travelling back further, Okabe perhaps would’ve been able to make more useful choices to ultimately prevent Mayuri’s death.

So

with the establishment of the mechanics of travel between the infinite number of realities in place, this by now brings up plenty of curious considerations as to how we, as human beings, would be able to cope with the many worlds that we could come to love and/or fear, especially if we did arrive at being able to travel between realities more freely.

Curious Considerations within Infinity

What could it mean for each and every human with their own unique consciousness, each with their own unique view of a world only they will ever know? For two people and their respective consciousnesses to constantly be drifting between realities, they would never be able to hold the same course of travel together, because consciousness is inherently always changing. You as the reader, are not the same person you were, relative to the 10 seconds ago you perceived. Between two initial observers A and B, over a given period of time, A would perceive a changed B’ from themself A’, but from B’s alternate perspective, he/she would perceive a changed A’’ from themself B’’. We would be all truly alone within our little worlds, with our own perceptions of other people’s perceptions. In saying that, each of us would be the arbiter of our own unique world. You could say that the universe does revolve around us as individuals.

If we were the pass away, which would be the state in which our brain is no longer able to sustain the collection of permeable particles that compose the consciousness, our perceivable reality would vanish from our view. Though of course, the very same reality in question would still continue to exist physically speaking. So too would the scattered permeable particles, which after passing through a countless number of realities, could possibly gather and form into the beginnings of a new consciousness altogether; a form of quantum immortality. If it were ever possible to trace the origins of certain permeable particles which are drifting through your mind as the reader at this very moment, maybe some of those particles could’ve come and went from the minds of scientific geniuses like Kurisu Makise.

Taking the considerations of perception between realities even further, what if some observers from time to time, do perceive the zany type realities, if only for a moment? The most common example of such scenarios may simply come from when we dream. As stated two chapters back, the instrument known as the brain, is inextricable from the finite amounts of information it can receive from the infinite set of information available in the universe. Such information received in conjunction with the brain, hence forms the basis of a perceivable reality for an observer. So in terms of the perceivable dream (which by the defined criteria for perception, is therefore “real”), this would require “tuning” the brain to receive information that would be indicative of a zany type reality; a dream (eg, dreams where you’re flying, defying the laws of known physics). Such tuning would appear to occur during the process of sleeping, where the brain is in a more unconscious state (sleeping) to allow for the permeable particles of the consciousness to assume the ideal configurations, needed to move to a zany type reality. Naturally, this appears to only work to a certain extent before we usually wake up; when the brain eventually reverts back to its normal, more conscious state. Such a process could also be related to the way people hallucinate and/or cope with hallucinogenic drugs.

But now consider what could be deemed as the most thrilling and yet the most terrifying venture feasible for the conscious mind. What if a consciousness didn’t return back to its original conscious state? What if the dream an observer was initially enveloped in, became the newer, more conscious state for the brain to function in? Quite possibly, this could have already happened to many individuals without the rest of us knowing. For such individuals with their own unique perception of zany-type realities being real and comprehendible, to the outside observer, we would only see our own unique perception off that individual, in the context of non-zany-type realities. As neatly quoted by Okabe from Steins;Gate, "When you get right down to it, their authenticity is a question of perspective and semantics. Having never truly taken place on this world line (ie in the present observable universe), a dream is an appropriate term as any."

Yet again, all this highlights the extreme extents to how we are all truly alone in the worlds we perceive alone. Insanity can truly be a matter of perspective. Morally speaking, if there was a person who possessed a consciousness that was far freer to move between realities then the average human, it would seem rather sad and selfish, in that you could leave behind your immediate world with your immediate relations and ties to it. For all intents and purposes, the diseased Mayuris’ that Okabe leaves behind for whenever he tries to head to another reality to save another version of Mayuri, they are all well and truly dead for the people still alive to witness, left within those realities to have to live with. In general, our finitely defined morals and ethics would not be able to stand up in the context of an infinite number of realities. An infinite number of human lives would be lost every moment, even as you the reader are reading this text. But conversely you could easily say that an infinite number of human lives are born for every moment that passes by. It is truly an inexplicable existence to try to finitely define.

Conclusion

So for the all the work that’s been put into this paper, the work still continues onwards to further unravel the mysteries that lay beyond our observable universe. Work still continues around the clock for theoretical and experimental physicists alike, as they attempt to formulate a grand unified theory of everything. Will we ever reach it? Perhaps not in the context of the infinite, but science more importantly is always about drawing new theories that better our best understandings of our surroundings. Even if everything isn’t solved, such a prospect is actually even better. Simply put, it means that there’s more awesome stuff out there for humanity to discover. I, as the writer of this paper, hope that the ideas and concepts I’ve compiled over the many years (since early high school) have inspired you as the reader, towards the prospect of such exciting adventures that maybe (just maybe) are to come. As a certain Okabe Rintarou (or Hououin Kyouma) would say, El Psy Congroo.

Thank you for reading!

Written by Dylan Walshof The University of AdelaideEmail: [email protected]: 12/03/2014