Big Bang Endless Inflation & Speculation on the Physics of Remote Viewing

A Sidebar To Peace And Conflict Resolution.Org

This paper suggests ideas for astronomical observations, measurements and calculations we can undertake right now to test the stability of the amount of Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) presence nearby and near remote galaxies. We must measure DMDE because we can. We must measure to determine if DMDE accretion exists and we must attempt to measure and calculate accumulation-repulsive force of DMDE and why it lumps where it lumps (if it does) outside our galaxies. These ideas are independently arrived at by me as a layman reading numerous state-of-the-sciences layman language books on particle physics, string theory, and cosmology. If there is original thought present others will recognize it. This paper is prepared by Rich Buckley, President, Peace and Conflict Resolution.Org (P&CR), (http://www.PeaceandConflictResolution.Org ) a 501(c) 3 tax exempt corporation. Our mission is in our name and our goal in preparing this paper is to seek intellectual assistance from the scientific community to help explain the physics of remote viewing. Why? Because diverse groups, nonreligious and religious, regardless of their faith system, beliefs, or practices have statistically significant portions of their followers experience events like or very similar to remote viewing (anomalous cognition, AC). Such common experiences make powerful bridge builders among diverse groups, which we believe is a good thing. Additionally, science eventually needs to explain all phenomena to accurately explain cosmology. The physics of remote viewing is part of that cosmology. [4]

While watching “The Universe” series on The History Channel, the evidence for Dark Matter and Dark Energy (DMDE) existence was described in the series as outlined in Sections 1 and 2 below. I believe I have some recall issues with implications received which need to be double checked. The issue of "lumping or apparent accretion of dark matter and dark energy" is not found in any of my state-of-the-sciences readings except Dr. Lee Smolin[3- "dark-matter halos"]: (1) The Trouble with Phyics by Professor Lee Smolin, (2) Warped Passages by Professor Lisa Randall, and (3) Endless Universe by Professors Paul J Steinhardt and Neil Turok, each of whom assess Dark Matter and Dark Energy as permeating throughout spacetime evenly distributed. The only perception or recall I have of lumped Dark Matter Dark Energy was a one time watching of The Universe and observing the narrator's comments and artistic renderings illustrating lumped, accredted deposits of DMDE outside various galaxies. The the production values of The Universe were set at high standards and the production dates after the publicaiton dates of my reading list, I give some weight to the likelihood that additional research into DMDE may have occured after the publication of the books. Here breifly is the summary of points on DMDE by The Universe production team:

1.      The shapes and sizes of visible galaxies can not be accounted for without the presence of additional mass and energy than is visible through astronomical observations. Observed lensing effects allowed astronomers to validate the presence of additional nonluminous mass and energy near galaxies. This nonluminous mass and energy is called Dark Mass and Dark Energy (hereafter “DMDE”).

 (Dark-Matter[3] Halos Fig. 1)

2.      “Gravitational lensing effect” (bending of light and by inference bending of other energy waves) does occur and has now been verified by observations of the bending of light around remote galaxies indicating that Dark Matter (The nonluminous matter that carries about 26% of the energy in the universe) and/or Dark Energy (The measured vacuum energy in the universe that constitutes about 70% of the universe’s energy but is not carried by any form of matter) must therefore be present:

A.     94% +- of all energy and/or matter in our visible universe is reported to be nonluminous Dark Matter and/or Dark Energy (or just “DMDE”).

B.     The DMDE density yields a net positive expansion upon the observable universe at an accelerating rate of expansion. The galaxies are moving apart from each other at an accelerating rate. This of course was first reported by Dr. Hubble.

C.    Observations indicate the accumulation pattern for DMDE appears to either excrete itself to surround existing visible matter of each galaxy as depicted in the diagram (See Schematic Disk Galaxy), according to the lensing effects observed, or the DMDE finds a favorable dimensional bulk region mostly outside visible galaxies with conditions for its formation.

The story board writers for The Universe production company, tip-toed around DMDE. The migration pattern (in red, see insert above) of the DMDE seems plausible with what we could expect to see if there is a repulsive field force of some sort between DMDE our 4-Dimensional Universe (4DU) of observable matter. Equally noteworthy is that the repulsive force appears to balance with gravity just outside and surrounding our galaxies thus allowing us to compute force field strengths. Knowing the force field strength should tell us a lot.

The History Channel depicts the migration of DMDE to what appears to be the extremities of the galaxy, and they artistically bulked up the accumulated dark mass to appear as though there might be a north pole and south pole although the existence of “polarities” were never stated. Very little regarding details of DMDE was actually discussed in the series, and my quick read of artistic schematics may be off base as to the notion of polarities. It was mentioned that the DMDE tended to accumulate “around” the galaxy but then depicted in lumps on two extremes of a sample galaxy. This migration of DMDE to the extremities of the galaxy would seem to indicate repulsive field forces exist between DMDE and 4DU observable matter.

Although the History Channel did not discuss the possibility, it occurs the DMDE information we receive in our 4DU-universe may actually be gravity effects we see and experience in our dimension from matter and energy and associated gravity in a separate dimension, gravity being a theorized bulk traveler among dimensions. Gravity waves impact other gravity waves, therefore gravity waves exiting our dimension and altered in another dimension, would re-enter our dimension and impact gravity in our dimension, as one explanation.

One of the apparently unsettled theories of String Theory is that while gravity is a bulk dimensional traveler, it nonetheless obeys the rules of the dimension in which we see it. Thus in our universe, the 4DU-universe, gravity should obey space-time E = mc². However a contending string theory rule posits that a dimension may contain energy levels that create dimensional charges effecting alternate dimensions. These contending rules raises the question, are we seeing the effects of a cross dimensional charge effecting gravity, or are we seeing gravity re-entering our dimension altered in its travels into a DMDE dimension and thus bending or lensing visible light around galaxies.

D.    Other possibilities for the apparent repulsive forces between DMDE and 4DU might also include:

(1)   The presence of dimensional plates or membranes referred to as “branes”. The so called brane would contain higher dimensional particles with mass “sequestered” on the brane. The branes themselves may therefore share a repulsive force with our own 4DU mass. The repulsive force would need to be a bulk traveler sort of a positive gravity. Is there a new bulk traveler in play we did not consider? The problem here is gravity in our dimension is supposed to obey our rules of space-time E = mc².   

(2)   It was noted also that the DMDE was not dominate prior to about 9-billion± years ago. The term “not dominant” was enlarged upon to imply “non-existant”.

(Fig. 2)            

(3)   MEASURE LENSING EFFECTS TO SEE IF DMDE IS CHANGING OVER TIME. We must measure because we can. Find a series of equal size galaxies each separated and leap-froging back in time about 1-billion years per galaxy. Measure the lensing effects around each galaxy to determine the rate of increase of the DMDE to measure whether or not there exists a rate of increase in DMDE. There are four possibilities: (a) Straight line increase over time. (b) Greater than straight line. (c)  Flat line (zero slope),Flat line would indicate DMDE just popped into existence about 9-billion years ago and has not increased since.  (d) repeating variable cycling from positive increase to negative decrease over time (this latter one is not considered since reported observational evidence over time does not support variable cycling). 

Determining the accretion rate of DMDE will give even more clues to forces at play between branes, which in turn may help isolate and identify the likely number of dimensions and open creative thinking of a unifying string theory with elements we can test.

(4)   ASTRONOMICAL READINGS TO LOOK FOR AND WHY.  Particle physicists subscribing to string theory should, I would think, want to find a flat-line graph (slope of zero) over time with no apparent increase in DMDE since it popped into being some 9-billion years ago. Why? Because any DMDE growth rate other than a flat line break 9-billion years ago, a period when DMDE seems to have popped into existence in our 4DU universe would imply that we may not correctly understand symmetry breaking, which in turn compels us to rethink, yet again, some parts of string theory at the very minimum. 

    Under current string theory with the exception of gravity, (a) dimensional membranes, i.e., “branes” and, (b) sequestered dimensional brane-bound energies and particles either remain on the brane or they travel the bulk on strings (meaning they travel throughout space time among the various branes, such as gravity is believed to travel). Flat line DMDE graph 9-billion years ago should be the only kind of breaking, a string theory advocate would want to find, i.e., a clean and identifiable break. Just as particles are believed to not be gradually formed a piece at a time but in group-step joinings at any given level of energy-density, so are the theorized sequestering properties of dimensional space.

An emergence of DMDE 9-billion years ago (Ref. “3 Possibilities Map” above) would have a specifically known energy density. We could then compute that energy density accurately that existed 9 billion years ago and theorize that level of energy is where at least one major breaking point among dimensions exists. We would not want to see nor expect to find a process of slow accretion of DMDE building in our 4DU-universe. Slow, sliding scales are totally different than predicable stepped-jumps, and would appear intuitively counter to most parts of string theory. Once we compute the level of energy-density at which a dimension break occurred (9-Billion years ago), we can link dimensional breaking points to field energies and particle energies. String theory physicists should expect to find everything in good order with a flat line (zero slope) graph supporting what we already think we know about dimensions.

(5)    IF WE FIND ANYTHING OTHER THAN A FLAT LINE MEASURE OF DMDE AS WE OBSERVE BACK IN TIME THAT WILL BE OF CONCERN! Why? Because all our most popular current theories of dimensions 6-brane, 10-brane, 11-brane, M-String Theory and of course The Standard Model particles are built upon characteristics of bundled units of energies, and/or Higgs Field particles and symmetry breaking characteristics that only interact in stepped transactions that tend to hold stable until a major break occurs (or a different energy level is induced by a particle accelerator for example). Inferentially as energy-density levels decrease (or increase) changes are theorized to occur in steps with clean breaks. We can infer energy-density triggers break points going both up in energy-density levels and going down in energy-density levels. Going down in energy-density scales according to observations had tentatively revealed a break point 9-billion years ago when dark mass and dark energy is first reported.

In current string theory, there is no mechanism to account for a slow accretion of energy from one dimension to another with continuous sliding scales of accretion. All our dimensions are supposed to hold until it reaches a unification point (or merging point) or break point and then things change in predicable stepped-jumps.

DOCUMENTED CASES HAVE REMOTE VIEWERS SEEING FUTURE EVENTS TOO. According to what we think we know about time and space, we believe there is a forward direction to time in our 4DU-universe, yet good remote viewers to see future events.

I believe I live a 4-dimensional life and I remain physically sequestered in forward moving time, nothing new there (holographic 2-D universal illusions of my brain notwithstanding). But yet I too have seen future events that go beyond knowledge and logic.

Please remember my goal is to encourage scientists to help explain the physics of remote viewing, so I am taking pains to try and understand current state of scientific thinking, hoping for reasons already set forth, that you might help us understand the physics of remote viewing. My personal experiences of seeing future events were not controlled, double-blind events under acceptable remote viewing protocols, yet I stongly believe that Dr. Victor J. Stenger's, "Physics and Psychics" formula: Ψ = 0, observed psychic energy = zero, is wrong through my own personal observations.

There are many documented cases of remote viewers seeing current, past and future events. What possible physics can explain it? Let's continue to apply the scientific method of conjecture, observation and proof.

If I drop a drop of Red die food coloring in a glass of warm water, I expect 100.000000000…∞ % to see the water turn red and I have zero expectation to see the red water recede back to clear water with my original drop of Red food coloring returning into a tight puddle of its original undiluted red die state no matter how much time elapses until the end of time. For me time moves in one direction. There are remote viewers that in fact do see future events and past events in addition to current events. How is that possible?

3.      What could it mean if DMDE is found through astronomical observations to be accreting into our 4DU universe? While the plotted rate of accretion would give us clues to the functions of accretion (if DMDE-accretion in any form other than flat-line stepped jumps exists) the existence of any gradual accretion with time, requires us to recalculate the notions of sequestering, boundary conditions between dimensions, and all that flows from that.

If DMDE accretion is plotted through real astronomical observations to not be flat lined, but instead accreting gradually into our 4DU-observable universe, one idea stimulated by the research team at UC-Berkeley Lab, headed by Dr. Fleming, an idea I refer to as “Super-Quantum-Mechanical Vibrations." Fleming was researching photosynthesis efficiencies and discovered unique quantum mechanical vibrations in carbon atoms where carbon atoms vibrate in all possible vibration rates of allowed and known rates (superposition states) “Oscillations meeting and interfering constructively, forming wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can explore all potential energy pathways simultaneously and reversibly, meaning they can retreat from wrong pathways with no penalty.”  His team’s discoveries in turn lead me to wonder about the composition of some dimensional boundary conditions in general.  

·        What if the Big Bang did happen and inflation theory is spot on and still underway[2], yet dimensional branes and bulk space nonetheless also exist? These are not mutually exclusive concepts.

·        What if one component of some dimensional boundaries is quantum mechanical (at super high levels of vibrating strings or energy waves)?

·        What if brane-boundary information of our 4DU-universe contained information of both our 4DU dimension and information from a communicating 5th dimension?

·        What is a brane, and what is bulk? It’s been described as electric-magnetic flux force field. I realize brane is defined as a membrane-like force field object in higher-dimensional space that can carry energy and confine particles and forces. While bulk is described as full higher-dimensional space. But, what are they? When I look at a star, I’m told that I look on a brane at the star but the star’s gravity travels both on and off the brane and into a 5-th dimension staying within 10ֿ³³ cm (a Planck length) away from our 4DU-universe. But what are brane and bulk?

How can remote viewers experience future events with probabilities far greater than random chance? Could brane or membrane be a quantum mechanical vibration or wave? How do I arrive at a quantum mechanical state for brane in the first place? A long string of infinite length (or at least very long length say for discussion sake a very long string is  the Observable Universe in Light Years (OU) times 10¹°°° Light Years[1] (hereinafter  " OU x 10¹°°° " or more properly 1 OU = 1 Hubble Universe or 1 Hubble abbreviated 1H, thus                 H x 10¹°°°, could have great numbers of vibration frequencies overlaid on top of each other and could have very high energy-tension with extremely low probability of splitting; in essense it would become a physical dimensional barrier. Throughout these paragraph OU and 1H are used interchangably.

(Fig. 3)         

If it can happen it will happen. Why would their necessarily be a limit on the energy of a string vibration wave length set by Planck Energy of 10ֿ³³ cm? It seems as an enormous intellectual cheat to construct the notion of Big Bang Inflation and then tell me it magically stops after a few brief moments. You base that assumption that the power to inflate and expand is inside the explosion pressing outward, which is logically partly true. But it could just as well be true that virgin space accelerates and sucks string/brane energy to expand. Big Bang Inflationists offer me the notion of a power of unimaginable magnitude that makes a supernova appear as a 4^th of July Lady Finger fire cracker compared to an H-Bomb originating in virgin space with zero energy density (reference needed here - Check with God). 

If the Big Bang occurred (as opposed to The Big Crunch of some cosmologists), it would seem that the “great inflation of the Big Bang” would be driven by energy of such magnitude that we might expect to find residual vibration frequencies permanently fixed into strings of infinite (or very long OU x 10¹°°° - Light Years) still expanding on the frontier of our universe far beyond anything we can observe or ever will observe, making our universe many orders of magnitude greater than its 13.7-Billion light years we can observe.

 (Fig. 4)            

Why settle and expect 10ֿ³³ cm to be the ultimate limits on wave lengths and Planck Time to set ultimate wave frequency rates if we do not understand what a brane energy field is truly made of?

We define branes by the fewest mathematical rule sets (for good reasons) in discussing theories. But the devil’s always in the details. Just because we can only see out about 13.7-billion light-years, why must we assume that inflation on the frontiers of our universe ended mere moments after the Big Bang? Maybe frontier inflation is still under way. Every time we make a better telescope we see further out, but not nearly far enough. Residual back ground energy measurements showing 2.73°-Kelvin average residual energy might be the same everywhere near the anomalous core of a much greater size universe. The exciting mapping imagery, WMAP, mapping of cosmic background radiation across the sky just completed  does not have the resolution nor time to see OU x 10¹°°° - light years.

We do not understand Big Bang Inflation and we over look possibilities in string theory and brane details because we think we can not measure and test. So we close down creative thinking and ignore real world remote viewer experiences, which in some cases see future events at higher frequency and accuracy than random probability would account. If anything at all seems logical about Big Bang Inflation, its inertia to continue on its wave front endlessly, seems logical. Shutting down just moments after Inflation begins on the other hand, does not.

Measured Residual Energy of the Big Bang may be 2.73°-Kelvin with cosmic radiation maps, WMAP, appearing as they do in our neck of the woods and much different further out on remote frontiers 260 -Tillion Light Years out all as a result of anomalies in entropy or even energy migration from one dimension to the other, robbing us or recording observations.

We can do some testing, at least on the DMDE and this might open doors to new ideas. We must measure DMDE because we can. We must measure to determine if accretion exists and we must attempt to measure and calculate accumulation-repulsive force of DMDE and why it lumps where it lumps outside our galaxies, if the preliminary evidence indicates that it lumps at all just as Dr. Lee Smolin observed with his Halo of Dark Energy [3] being a function of the radius of the observable universe.

Also consider that on the other side of the Big Bang Inflation energy wave front/brane on the hypothetical frontier of our 4DU-expansion we are not certain how time works, if time exists, and the attractive or repulsive forces that would be in play at the very boundary of universal expansion. It seems intuitively reasonable that classic inflation and my so-called Endless Inflation could be a by-product of favorable boundary conditions. As far as empty virgin space is concerned (i.e. the other side of the cutting forward edge of the endless expanding inflationary boundary frontier) time is still less than Planck time with unknownable rules.

DIMENSIONAL MEMBRANES AND INFORMATION TRANSFER THROUGH TIME (INFORMATION TIME TRAVEL)

 (Using Super Quantum Mechanical Strings to Surpass the Speed of Light)

The string theorist would say, the brane is a very thin layer where rules are set by higher dimensional breaking and symmetries all of which balance out mathematically in 11-dimensions.

One additional alternative string theory that actually accepts and uses real world observations accounting for remote viewers' accurately seeing and describing future events, might be that some dimensional membranes are imposed by super quantum-mechanical force field vibrations (brane stuff, or the stuff branes are composed of, force field vibrations). Let's try and create some answers to fit the problem, sort of reverse engine my question: How can we explain remote viewers seeing past, present and future events? A Super Quantum Mechanical Vibration (or wave) could have such power as to also have a wave pattern in the forward direction of travel allowing it to travel faster than light with its paired twin string in reverse (See Insert Below). In other words, if Big Bang Inflation expanded faster than the speed of light, the same forces that set Inflation in motion, set brane waves in motion in an infinite brane on infinite strings that allow faster than speed of light information that moves both forward and backwards through time and with current time information traveling at the speed of light. Under the anthropic principle we really have to also account for all observations. Remote viewers are documented significantly greater than random probability, as seeing past, present, and future events. How might physics explain these cases? When you tackle the Anomolous Cognition (remote viewing) issue, you probably also advance physics.

What string theory sees as a membrane created by sequestering rules and symmetry breaking, might instead be an energy wall formed by super quantum mechanical string forces on a super quantum-mechanical level, at least on large dimensions (OU x 10¹°°°).

One particular vision that comes to mind is a Super Quantum Mechanical Wave in pairs that both create its strength and tension where each paired string slowly wraps around an axis to form a rope like combination while (and this is the important element) each string within the rope specializes in moving data in opposite directions.

                          (Fig. 5)                                                                                                                   

The entwining process or rope forming processes of these sub-Planck length waves creates a string with zero attractive-replusive energy. Perhaps we go further and say other strings and things are not compelled to be attracted to this barrier or repulsed by the barrier. But strings and things of greater than Planck size may be enfluenced by the barrier, or if not enfluenced by the barrier, by default, somehow carried by the SQMW barrier through harmonics that first read the approaching wave, pick up the information in the wave, transmit the information in harmonics at super quantum faster than light speed, then continuously feed out the information back into greater than Planck-size field forces. This notion exceeds my original notion of just picking up through enduction information off the barrier SQMW-string. Originally I created an answer to fit the problem by saying when a bulk traveler string or dimensional brane (all of larger wave cycles of greater than Planck length) contacts the string, it can not join with the string. It can collect energy off the string however through harmonic induction, which does not diminish the 2-way information in the rope-string, nor its strength because the rope-string itself is infinite and thus carries an endless source of renewal (or, when the inflation frontier brane can no longer continue to feed energy to the Super-strings, we start collapsing). Now through default I am suggesting that the harmonics of the SQMW's actually read the energy fields of the approaching energy, and transmit the information two opposite directions, releasing the infomration back out into the surrounding dimensional strings of greater than Planck length size and greater than Planck time frequencies.  However it would be worth considering that if endless inflation is also a continuing result of favorable interaction at the cutting edge boundary frontier of inflation, optimistically our universe keeps impregnating endless virgin space. We need a name for this theory, maybe should refer to it as the " Andre Linde Eternal Inflation[2] Model."  Linde offers a mathematical proof in his 2003 lecture on line at Standford University at the link just shown that once inflation starts the wave of its frontier does not repeat but instead continues infinitely, under conditions observed in our universe.

This infinite greater dimension described above could be one of the 11 dimensions of M Theory.  My infinite dimension can hold any number of subuniverses as long as their rules do not conflict with the unbreakable boundary rules inside the frontier boundary.

 (Fig. 6)          

HOW INFORMATION TRAVELS FASTER THAN LIGHT FROM POINT A TO POINT B.  Think of two 13 year old hitch-hikers on roller boards grabing a free ride on the back of a delivery truck. When the kids each grab the opposite side of what appears to be one truck, the truck splits and takes off in two opposite directions taking each kid in opposite directions. The kids have water pistols and as they move in opposite directions they are squirting water in every direction. The water represents the inforamtion of concern moving from Point A to Point B. They started with water obtained at point A and keep squirting as the hold on to the grab-bar on the backs of the split delievery trucks roaring along the city streets. They let go of one truck and hitch a ride on the next, and next, and next until they squirt water at Point B. Some of the water hits point B, and it gets there from the water guns of both kids, although I just show it getting there from the water gun of the short route to Point B (see Fig 7).

(Fig. 7)          

PART II

While the early parts of this page present attempts to stick with existing observations voted upon by scientific consensus as popularly accepted, the latter part include real observations of remote viewing to which the same scientific community remains unnecessarily pretentiously oblivious, refusing to consider the evidence.  There has to be a real world explanation for the physics of remote viewing. Dr. Spenger says the explanition is simple, “Ψ = 0,” observed psychic energy = zero. My suggestion of the Super Quantum Mechanical Wave (SQMW of sub-Planck size, i.e., smaller than Planck length and faster than Planck time) in its two way specialization for moving data and unbreakable strength, I realize has to fall into science conjecture realm, not science of proven fact. Super Quantum Mechancial Waves are one explanation of the observations that remote viewing appears real in seeing future events. Dr. Lee Smolin in his book The Trouble with Physics states it this way (pg 189 of Paper Back) ..."in any hard-nosed accounting, we have to distinguish between conjecture, evidence, and proof." SQMW is conjecture, with elements of evidence (remote viewing files), but it needs proof eventually, mathematical proof. P&CR.Org will continue to pursue the conjecture and evidence hoping as these two bodies of the three part body of the holy trinity of science (conjecture, evidence, and proof) build, computational mathematics, cosmology, and daring physicists will integrate the three. Ultimately this endeavor would seem to serve science as well as our mission here at P&CR.org.

If I had the money to assemble an elite team to help solve the great mystery of the physics of remote viewing I would first attempt to acquire the considerable services of Dr. Victor J. Stenger, PhD, professor of physics and astronomy formerly teaching at University of Hawaii, now living in Colorado. I think Stenger would make the perfect team leader. He knows more about what doesn’t work than probably any person. I enjoyed Victor Stenger’s well documented book, Physics and Psychics, published 1990. Stenger commences his book with one of the few formulas found in the book summarizing his conclusion in his opening statement: “Ψ = 0,” observed psychic energy = zero.

“The conclusion of this book,” he states, “can be summarized by a simple equation: Ψ = 0.” He goes on to explain, “Phenomena  thought to be associated with the nonmaterial world are called 'psychic' (sometimes 'psychical'), often abbreviated by the Greek letter psi (Ψ).” Stenger waxes vitriolic in some passages as he rightfully and justifiably must, holding firmly to the integrity of the holy trinity of the scientific process of conjecture, observation, and proof. If his work has a bias against finding connections, it is not evident in the breath of his topic coverage but seems evident in the depth of his coverage on each topic, especially on the subject of remote viewing where so much laboratory evidence which does exist, is never mentioned.

His work has nonetheless saved me a lot of false starts on ideas that have already been pursued in areas I thought we should research. I presume by the absence of any mention in the book, Stenger does not believe he has ever had a precognitive experience or participated in the protocols of remote viewing. He excells in knowledge of what does not work, yet apparently remains outside the realm of a personal experience. I would respectfully invite Dr. Stenger to consider the evidence of the labs of Dr. Edwin C. May, PhD from which I believe I can bring some of the best tallent in the field to bear.

Yet I know by the shear probability of likely distribution among the population of our top computational and theoretical physicists there has to be some physicist(s) out there that have experienced precognitive states and remain understandably reluctant to write publically on the subject.

I see a different reality from Dr. Stenger. It was only after reading  several books by Joseph McMoneagle’s (Remote Viewer #001 of the US Army Star Gate program), and the recent passing of my uncle, my own advancing years, coupled with a life filed with various events, the first three of which occurred while flying over seas for the US Marines as a fighter pilot in Vietnam, Japan, and Southeast Asia. It was the realization of Josephy McMoneagle’s closing words that then brought me into this effort, that remote viewing could be one of the world’s greatest assets that needs to be publicly explored and science needs to take a serious look at all the evidence.

A few years ago I formed a nonprofit corporation dedicated to peace and conflict resolution. We promote a number of frontier issues from reorganizing the United Nations to better serve us in a changing world, to assisting in the processes of interreligious dialogue, and fostering the courage of our scientific community to help explain the physics of remote viewing in this website, and a site dedicated to peer review and the application of the scientific method of conjecture, observation, and proof so missing in the Politics of Climate Change. Each of these missions can be used to serve the interests of the peace building process.

I am not a physicist. I am a salesman. I believe in remote viewing as a real phenomenon. I am not a remote viewer (or maybe I am, I don't know).... in any event, I am reading all the layman physics books (i.e., books written without the math) on state-of-the-sciences, written for people like you and me from really stunningly brilliant minds such as: (1) "The Trouble with Physics" by Dr. Lee Smolin, (2) "Warped Passages" by Dr. Lisa Randall, (3) "Endless Universe - Beyond the Big Bang" by Dr. Paul J. Steinhardt and Dr. Neil Turok." (4) most all the books of Joseph McMoneagle, including "The Stargate Chronicles, Memoirs of a Psychic Spy", "Memoirs of a Psychic Spy" - yes I bought the same book twice because the titles were different... Doh!..., "Remote Viewing Secrets" (5) "Advanced Lucid Dreaming" by Dr. Thomas Yuschak, (6) "Between the Gates - Lucid Dreaming, Astral Projection, and the Body of Light in Western Esotericism" by Mark Stavish, (7) Spirits of the Earth, A Guide to Native American Natural Symbols, Stories, and Ceremonies, by Bobby Lake - Thom (8) My Stroke of Insight by Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, Ph.D. - A Brain Scientist's Personal Journey, (8) Quatnum Physics, The Quantum World For Everyone by Prof. Kenneth W. Ford, PhD,... I wish I had him for a physics teacher! (9) Physics and Psychics by Victor J. Stenger, (10) Holgraphic Universe, by Michael Talbot, plus (11) some miscellaneous materials in Scientific American.

These readings all come down to my one point which most all the literature in science says I am absolutely, probably, most likely, wrong: My Conjecture -- The speed of light is not the speed limit of our universe. I just make the answer fit my problem. This answer solves my problem.  

This contrarian notion is not a very original or profound thought. Most of science says I am wrong. Although a few years ago at our local lab at LLNL in Livermore, CA, there was a report from the lab in our local papers that in a material laser test their measurements indicated the light was traveling through a test material faster than the speed of light emerging on one side of the material before it was sent into the other side. I have been looking for that public link on the LLNL site. If you find it please send it to me at this email. I too would expect that the measurment was faulty but to release the information early before double checking their clocks would be to no political benefit to a very political organization and could lead to much embarrassment for no apparent gain.

All mainstream theoretical science disagrees with what I am writing so far as I can tell. Ultimately therefore, my writings will likely be relegated to the trash bin of history, if they have not already been so relegated in a process referred to by the older, wiser, scientists, as "the sociological problem" with science, otherwise viewed as a dimension of arrogance, ego, condensention, contempt, and outward hostility of vested interests especially towards an unskilled layman. The problem of "Group Think" kicks in and closes off discussion.

My focus through all this is to look for common patterns among several disciplines without being proficient in any one discipline among remote viewing, fields of spiritualities and religions, particle physics, cosmology, string theory, other theories of physics. I try to challenge science to the task of including real explanations of documented real world observations of future events by remote viewers, part of a concept of the anthropic principle, that we must account for real observations such as remote viewing. I do this in the interests of world peace and conflict resolution as introduced near the top of this page. I try to provoke, encourage, challenge, and plead with science into the task by offering what I see as how the physical realm actually functions to enable remote viewers to see future events.

So in my mind’s eye, which I call “a vision,” I create what I see as an one possible answer of how information can move faster than light. The lynch pin to this process is simply to break with safe harbor rules of science. Safe harbor rules are rules broadly accepted by the three functions of real science: conjecture, evidence and proof.
I bring conjecture and evidence: my devised theory and remote viewing observations. Proof is missing. My seeing something as "a vision" is hardly acceptable proof. That’s the rub which taunts us all including, hopefully, scientists seeking similar goals as my own who will step forward and participate.

The simple basis of my conjecture is: The speed of light is not the speed limit. Even worse, Planck time is not the briefest time. Planck length is not the shortest length. Other stuff is faster and shorter! Science considers these ramblings as totally heretical (for the most part)!

I postulate that the observations we see in remote viewing predicting future events, occur because there are sub-Planck energies and frequencies (meaning energy strings that vibrate faster than Planck time and with wave lengths shorter than Planck Length. Science disclaims these two notions.) I call these strings “Super” quantum mechanical waves or SQMW-strings.

I say these SQMW-strings can not be broken because (a) there is no wave length small enough to break them, (b) there is no power level strong enough to break them. Strings that are infinite in length that can not be broken, that permeate spacetime is another way of saying SQMW-strings creates the ultimate in dimensional barrier.

So now we’ve created the ultimate infinite dimensional barrier.

We still haven’t explained how at least some forms of information travel faster than light. How does a remote viewer see future events?

So now we create even more characteristics about our SQMW-strings. We again make the answer fit the problem, based on “a vision.” Science hates this approach, even as they use it all the time themselves. In fairness however, when science uses a vision, it's modestly labeled "a hunch" and they attempt to back it up with math. I of course do not. I could cite the same multiverse quantum probability outlined by Max Tegmark in Scientific American, Issue SCA45026, "Parallel Universes," but since I'm not a mathematician, why cite a math concept I can not fully reconstruct from scratch for myself. Instead, I do back-up my conjecture-theory with real world observations science still fails to consider. 2 outa 3 ain't bad for a layman, but I agree that can not be acceptable standard in science. I'm not trying to win a Nobel, I'm trying to pull in real scientists to help develop the physics of remote viewing in the interest of bridge building among diverse groups.

SQMW-strings are stronger than everything else not only because they are faster than Planck Time, with wave lengths shorter than Planck Lengths, but low and behold, when we look really close at these infinitely long stings, they look like ropes, each one entwining along some center line which I draw in violet (see figures 5 through 7 above).

Looking still closer at this super quantum mechanical wave string (SQMW-string) we discover still yet another characteristic: they form in pairs! This theory of stuff forming in pairs is a natural phenomenon that nearly every scientific theory, natural force, and spiritual precept seems to encapsulate. Yin and Yang, symmetry breaking, Higgs fields and their components, positive and negative, good and evil, all the above reading materials leads to this point: in nature pairs are important. So our little SQMW-strings, drawn in color violet have their own pairs. These pairs form on the scientific theory of symmetry breaking, which according to physics Professor Lisa Randall, PhD, author of Warped Passages, if one thing randomly goes or “breaks” this way, the other thing then is compelled to go “the other way.” That’s one definition of symmetry breaking. So now we have really strong, rope like, super quantum mechanical wave strings that break into information carriers where each side of the rope specializes in transmitting information in opposite directions, all of which I depict in schematic Fig 5 above.

Now we have SQMW-strings that can’t be broken, that form an ultimate dimensional barrier in spacetime, that specialize in information transfer in opposite directions through the respected scientific notion of symmetry breaking, but how does this go faster than light?

Another article of faith is created in my theory to make the answer fit the problem. It turns out that scientists agree that as we work our way up the energy levels we create wave energies in the electromagnetic fields where shorter and shorter wave lengths require higher and higher energy levels. String theorists agree and observations continue to validate that higher and higher energies also create greater and greater string tensions, i.e. the power needed to break a string. Furthermore, when strings break they sometimes, often, attach to other strings and all these combinations create in string theory a perfectly, mathematically balanced energy quantity where there are no infinities, an unobserved but theorised, string theory, article of faith. 

What’s an infinity and why are they bad? An infinity is a theory run amuck. Infinities occur when a theory and the math associated with the theory yields an answer for example, that under these conditions gravity becomes infinitely strong and the entire universe collapses in upon itself and can not therefore exist. And there are other infinities, from Scientific American a paragraph used to explain quantum probability and multiverse reality and anthropic principle also explains infinities,"Parallel Universe", "If protons were 0.2 percent heavier, they could decay into neutrons, destabilizing atoms. If the electromagnetic force were 4 percent weaker, there would be no hydrogen and no normal stars. If the weak interaction were much weaker, hydrogen would not exist; if it were much stronger, supernova would fail to seed interstellar space with heavy elements. If the cosmological contant where much larger, the universe would have blown itself apart before galaxies could form." So we do not want to create infinities with our little Super Quantum Mechanical Wave-string theory. Not if it is intended to apply in our visible universe, which of course is where we actually observe the phenomena of remote viewing (Anomolous Cognition). So we make the SQMW answer fit the problem. Wait! We already made the answer fit the problem to avoid infinities. How cool is that? Hey, get this, our little two-way transmission of data on each side of the string-rope cancels each other out to an outside observer. Our vision of the way things work, unwittingly created a self-correcting theory with no infinities (so far, except for the growing list of whoops-stuff at the end of this page). The only way to observe our system is to measure it. I am trying to devise a list of ways we might measure SQMW effect. Don't assume we can not measure SQMW. But all the measuring techniques use larger than Planck scale measuring devices. We can not see nor measure directly the two sides of the ropes. We can only see one rope (if at all), and because it is entwined with information specialized running in opposite directions, to the outside observer it is a neutrally charged boundary. So what? The fact that it is neutral is really important, otherwise all strings might be compelled to move towards it, and connect to it, and be broken by it, any one or more of which characteristics would cause infinities to occur, as I understand the concept of infinities.  So we accidentally created a no-infinity concept. One point for The Street People.[5]