It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


TIME as a function of Quantic Subservation

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:13 AM

i propose a significant re-rendering of the theoretical mechanics of time and matter/energy quantum foam.

i have been working for quite some time now on a radical new perspective of quantum mechanics. many people reading this thread will probably think me unqualified to do such a thing. but, if i may be so bold, i feel very much that i am standing firmly on the shoulders of what has come before. i am exploring the headspace of many great masters, so to speak.

in december i posted a paper that i authored, HERE. in this paper i am exploring the relationships of the authors of several different versions of existence; namely: Ken Wilber's spiral dynamics, Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenetic field, L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics; and finally, the Eden narritive in Genesis 1-3.

i am beginning to make a final synthesis of these varying "theories of everything" with modern physical theory. this is not a random mashing of ideas, on the contrary, these models of reality seem to amplify one another. some of my conclusions might seem bold. but it is my hope that the reader will be able to validate this model against their own experience.


posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:15 AM
in my meditation today i had a vision of the particle/wave duality, from the level of the quantum foam. to clarify, i became as small as the "quantum superposition", and attempted to grasp the view of reality from down there.

what i found interesting is that it seemed very much to me like being on our own relative level of the macrocosm here on earth.

most profoundly, i recognized the fact that the same "uncertainty", the indeterminate state that is most fameously associated with the observation of quantum particles, is also observed when looking in the UPward direction from the quantum level.

when WE observe DOWNWARD upon the quantum framework, we are looking DOWNWARD through a veil of uncertainty.

when the quanta observe UPWARD from their own level, UPWARD to the atomic level, they too are observing UPWARD through that same veil of indeterminacy.

in light of this similar but oppositely polarized viewpoint, a similar but oppositely polarized term must be introduced. i propose the new term to be:

the quantic subservation (or subserver). i propose this term based on the algebraic coordinate relationship of these two perspectives, which is explained later in this thread; and also as a word play of object/subject. if you think it sounds dumb, feel free to recommend an alternative.

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:18 AM
from this new perspective of quantic subservation, we can quite easily see that we already have a name for the framework that exists above us, in this direction of higher-level uncertainty. we call this "time".

in other words, TIME is the indeterminate form of the Atom, looking upward from the lower-level perspective of the quanta.

once again: the uncertainty....the indeterminacy of the system can be viewed from an up->downward perspective, and it also can be viewed from the down->upward perspective.

up->downward = quantum foam

down->upward = time.

in each case, you are looking through the veil of uncertainty. the veil can be viewed by looking up, or looking down.

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:20 AM
you dont need to be an expert i mean einstein wasnt when he did his greatest work. Came off wrong. This is good work your following in the footsteps of great men is the point i wanted to stress.

but the theories your building on have no validity. so if this is just a hobby then its healthy but dont rely on those sources you cited like dianetics to be facts or a premise that is a solid foundation to build from.

I wouldnt claim the bible, the koran, or any other religious text to be a foundation for scientific principals. I would allow them to be what they are a testament to faith and leave it at that. Hence why i said i would leave out using dianetics or other sources that are not validated or peer reviewed. I enjoy the thread and otherwise I am monitoring for updates. Not being dismissive trying to offer constructive criticism.

[edit on 18-3-2010 by tigpoppa]

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:20 AM
Well, i found your thread really fascinating as i started to read, but then, when the introduction was over, it stopped !?

Please, i would like to hear more about your idea, this only felt like a scratch on the surface. Nevertheless, an intriguing scratch.

edit: you typed your 3rd post while i was typing my original first response. Now i get what you are hinting at. But still, could you elaborate further?

Quantum uncertainty (the act of observing changes the outcome) and flow of time (infinite amount of possibilities that become manifested only when we act) could indeed be related.

[edit on 3/18/2010 by above]

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:30 AM
the veil of uncertainty is part of a nested system. the nested system is continuous all the way up and all the way down. (you can read more about the nested system in my paper, HERE.) each level of the system may assume the "normal" position. the lens up and the lens down are moveable from this normal position. each level of the system can be normalized and reality can thus be described from each level's relative position.

this moveable nested system and the renormalization at each level is layed out in the drawing in the OP. of particular note: as the systems are normalized into higher nested levels, the total motion of uncertainty through the system is backward and downward.

within the relative stillness of any given normalized level, this backward motion of uncertainty gives the apparent forward motion of time.

in summary, this model of reality can be represented by two intersecting 2-dimensional planes which can move relative to one another and also to a point of relative stillness at their intersection. one plane describes all possible states of the quanta, and the other plane describes all possible states of time.

if we then hold the planes still and allow the "point of relative stillness" to become movable, we will see that the point of stillness traces a path through 3-dimensions. the path that is thus traced represents the state of the total system in terms of matter-energy-space-time.


thanks for reading and for your feedback. this model is, as always, a work in progress. ultimately, it is my aim to more clearly and accurately define our experience of reality in order to one day build a true science of consciousness.

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 05:35 AM
reply to post by tigpoppa

i beg of you to not dismiss the work of hubbard so least, not any more easily than you would dismiss the bible.

each of the philosophies represented are coherent and valid in their own right. unless you can directly argue against Dianetics, it should be respected.

thanks for your post.

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 06:09 AM
OP is there similiar scientist that you know of with your concept in mind?

posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 03:50 PM
reply to post by togetherwestand

i know of no established scientist that is working on this particular angle. i am attempting to push the theoretical framework into new areas.

thanks for your input!

posted on Mar, 19 2010 @ 04:15 PM
i have made some final tweaks to the paper that i wrote in december, the final PDF is available below.

i would love some feedback on it, and also on this thread in general. but it is becoming clearer to me, the more i post on this topic here on ATS, that people are not interested in legitimate speculation. unless we can somehow tie quantum mechanics with magical powers, ATS is not interested.

that's okay. i am using ATS as a publishing testing ground for my hare-brained ideas. i am okay being the only one that "gets it".

PDF: Topography of Eden: a map of conscious creation

posted on Mar, 19 2010 @ 07:09 PM
I write some papers and I am reading yours

First get rid of the slamming of scientists, its unneeded. Doesnt contribute to your point. Keep the whole part about cause but remove the anti science references they only detract from your point. I mean your writing a paper with a point about cause or about hating science make it about cause remove the hate part.

Dont use jedi and sith for comparisons unless you ONLY want people who know who the jedi and sith are to understand that analogy. Try to use something that is more widely known. the hot and cold is a good analogy!

also i feel like i learned more in the thread about your idea then in the paper.
Maybe add more stuff about the idea in its own section, and use the works of hubbard and the biblical references in the body to build a foundation to the idea.

looking forward to more!

posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 12:57 PM
reply to post by tigpoppa

thanks so much for lending me some credibility! it really means a lot.

top topics


log in