Why Quantum Gravity

There is not yet a quantum gravity that is consistent with the gravity of general relativity (GR) and this is fundamentally because the determinate GR has perfectly defined geodesic paths for all sources. In our quantum universe, however, there are no absolutely determinate paths and it turns out that GR says nothing about the paths of objects at very small Planck scale and GR says nothing about the paths of objects inside of the event horizon of a black hole. Quantum gravity simply does not have completely determinate futures and yet GR provides absolutely determinate paths with well-defined distortions of space and time.

In contrast to GR, discrete aether is a quantum gravity (QG) that is completely consistent with GR within its limits and QG further defines object futures at both the Planck scale as well as at the black hole scale.

The deflection of starlight by the sun, d, occurs at about twice the value expected by classical Newton's gravity and the mass-equivalent energy of light. Science has known this for many decades. Einstein's general relativity explained this extra deflection in the figure below as a first order expansion of the GR equation that shows how gravity distorts space and time. That is, given the equivalent mass of light, GR predicts twice the deflection of Newton’s classical gravity and numerous measurements validate that fact.

Discrete aether and its QG provide a different explanation for starlight deflection by the sun, but that prediction also agrees with measurements since quantum effects show a factor of two doubling for both charge and gravity. For the quantum spin of an electron the gyromagnetic ratio, g, also has about twice the classical spin of a charged sphere. For an electron, the gyromagnetic ratio is how it oscillates in a magnetic field as 

where e is electron charge, m_e electron mass, and the g-factor comes from quantum spin along with a perturbation series due to quantum field self energy as

In quantum gravity (QG), starlight photon deflection is how the spin of light oscillates in a gravity field and so starlight QG deflection conforms to the same g-factor as charge force as

So quantum gravity and its self energy actually have the same g value for light deflection as that of quantum spin. The quantum g-factor of about two comes from the complementary phases of quantum spin states  of a photon and the photon self-energy means that the effect is not exactly two. In effect, an electron spin can be up or down in a magnetic field and that difference corresponds to the frequency or energy of the quantum transition from spin up to down.

The up or down duality of quantum phase has no classical meaning in GR and in effect quantum spin doubles the frequency or energy of a quantum action from the action of a classical spinning charge. The distortion of space and time embodied within GR emulates the factor of two that fundamentally derives from the nature of QG.

A classical spinning charge will only orient itself up as a precession along a magnetic field and there is no meaning for up versus down in the absence of a magnetic field since the spinning charge would have opposite phase from up and down. A rotating classical charge in a magnetic field radiates with a classical frequency or energy that is one-half of the quantum frequency and a classical spinning charge then slows down as it radiates and loses energy. A quantum spin reorients when it radiates, but since a quantum spin exists in a superposition state of both discrete spin states, a quantum spin cannot radiate without some kind of electric or magnetic field. The meaning for a classical transition to a down spin is to spin in the opposite phase, changing the phase of its radiation by p. But a classical spinning charge always precesses along the magnetic field lines for both spin phases.

The rotation of a quantum charge as spin results in a quantum precession frequency that is twice the classical precession frequency of a classical rotating charge in a magnetic field. The quantum precession frequency is defined by g ~ 2, and is consistent with measurements while the classical precession frequency is likewise consistent with radiation of macroscopic charge rotation in a magnetic field. This factor of two turns out to be the key for both quantum gravity as well as quantum spin and g ~ 2 ends up predicting all of the same effects as are observed and predicted by the spacetime distortions of GR.

In effect, the classical radiation of opposite phase would slow the rotation down and eventually reverse it and that total energy would be twice the inertial energy of the original spin. The classical object would not change direction up or down, but the sense of its spin. It would now radiate just as the first spin but with a different phase. Therefore a quantum spin is like a classical spin the is in resonance with an external field oscillation.

There is a very fundamental reason for the correspondence between quantum spin and quantum gravity; a distorted spacetime emerges from QG just as GR distorts spacetime to first order. However, QG and its biphotonic exchange particle, the graviton, have quantum exchange and phase coherence just like quantum charge.

Einstein showed that gravity distorts the space and time around bodies and that distortion determines the paths or geodesics of those bodies as just straight lines in the distorted spacetime. Therefore there is no such thing as a gravity self energy since that gravity self energy is really just stored in the spacetime distortion, but there is still a g = 2 deflection.

In QG, the quadrupole of a gravity biphoton also shows quantum spin states, but now with S = 2 instead of S = ½ and the quantum gravity self energy further alters a body’s gravity field with the rotating quadrupole biphotons of a matter body by a factor of two. In effect, the biphoton quadrupole also oscillates up or down in a gravity field and so the photon deflection is twice the classical expectation based on mass energy equivalence. In addition, there is a gravity self energy of a photon that further increases the effect of starlight deflection from the expectations of Newton’s classical gravity and the mass equivalence of light.

The notions of continuous space and time emerge as dimensionless scalings; time from an electron orbit period and space from the electron charge diameter. Distortions of space and time simply emerge from the measurements of light pulse time delays and color shifts from objects and action. Every object has the properties of light pulse time delay and color shift and it is from those measurements of objects with light that both Newton and GR notions of continuous space and time emerge. Thus spacetime appears naturally distorted by GR since the object time delay and color shift by quantum gravity show the same effects as classical time delay and color shift.


The figure below shows how gravity biphotons relate to the photon exchange bonds of charge for atoms and molecules. The hydrogen charge bond is an exchange particle of Rydberg energy at 3.3 fs period, and that exchange particle is in resonance with the electron in hydrogen with a period t_B of 1.1e-21 s, the ratio of which what eventually defines c as 3e8 m/s along with a charge radius. The orbital period of the electron relative to the period of the universe is the scaling that defines gravity as proportional to charge force.

The bonding state of gravity is between the source and the universe and so in a sense, all reality is real because of gravity. The effects of a biphoton are in effect due to the symmetry of the wrapped universe and not really due to the time or space between the CMB and matter. The bonding states of charge are between a source and observer and so without an observer, the universe is the ultimate observer, wrapped by symmetry back onto itself. An observer absorbs a photon and that measurement represents a bonding state that makes the source real. A photon released to the universe represents the same reality for the same source, but at a much greater time scale wrapped onto the present time and space.

Proton Diameter

The proton diameter is a fundamental constant that describes a very slight shift in the energy of two states of hydrogen. An S state shows non-zero electron density at the proton in hydrogen and therefore shifts in energy while a P state has a near zero electron density at the proton. This energy shift defines the radius of the proton.

If the proton radius is truly fundamental, S and P states of hydrogen should show the same kind of shifts for hydrogen that has the muon instead of the electron. A very interesting experiment measures the diameter of the proton by means of the spectroscopy of the muon form of hydrogen and finds a much different shift in the frequency of muon hydrogen lines due to the finite diameter of the proton. The electron in the hydrogen S ground state has a certain probability of being at the proton surface but not inside the proton diameter and so the S state frequency shifts very slightly as a result. The electron in a P excited state on the other hand has no probability for being at the proton center and a very low probability of being at the proton surface as well.

The muon form of hydrogen is a hydrogen with a muon instead of an electron in orbit around the proton. The muon charge is the same as the electron, but the muon mass is 207 times that of hydrogen but decays very quickly with a lifetime of 2 microseconds. Even with a short lifetime, the quantum correction should yield the same proton radius for both electron as well as muon hydrogen. Instead, the proton radius is much different for muonic hydrogen as the figure shows.

There are other calculations that show the proton radius, but neither of them seems very realistic since they do not depend on the progressive perturbation of approximations that help define reality.

Each of the electron and muonic spectroscopy results are valid by mainsteam science and are determined within mutually exclusive uncertainties. There is therefore not a single proton radius and neither explanation is more valid than the other.

Thus, there is a dilemma. What is the real proton radius...0.8758 or 0.84087 fm? Both measurements of atomic hydrogen and muonic hydrogen appear to have sufficient precision to preclude each other.

One alternative explanation is in aethertime, where energy states also depend on lifetimes. In aethertime, incorporation of the muon lifetime shifts the observed of the muonic hydrogen to now agree with that of atomic hydrogen. The shift is

which the figure above shows as 0.075 THz versus the observed 0.072 THz, now well within the precision of both measurements.

While in mainstream science, the lifetime of a muon state does not affect its energy, in aethertime, the lifetime of a state does indeed affect its energy if only very slightly.

Note that Gary Simpson has reported a quaternion calculation that shows a similar radius to muonic hydrogen, but far different from atomic hydrogen as the figure shows. Since no error measure was cited, it is not clear what this calculation means.

Note that Haramein has used microscopic black holes to predict the charge radius of the proton that agrees with the muon result, but there is no correct result and both results of electron and muon hydrogen are equally valid. The charge radius of the proton and electron are the same and are very different from the "hard" 1/e radius of the proton. The electron, you see, has no radius other than its charge radius.

Black Holes Are Not Aethertime Singularties

Black holes represent singularities in space and time for body-centered force since the accretion of mass eventually results in the complete absorption of light and so black holes do not shine. But in aethertime, black holes are not singularities of matter and action since black holes still have both matter and action. Because continuous space and time emerge from matter and action of spin in aethertime, it is the spin of a black hole that retains the information of the light and matter the black hole absorbs. There are lots of difficulties with the notions of continuous space and time and the black holes of mainstream science are simply a result of the limitations of these notions.

Continuous space and time are both infinite divisible, which is a consequence that dates back to the Greek philosopher Zeno as well as to many of the other ancients. The Chinese Dao presumes the infinite divisibility of space and time is in the qi or flow of energy among objects from yin to yang, earth to space. The Indian Vedas detail this infinite divisibility with the notion of Vishnu, who connects objects created by Brahma to those destroyed by Shiva in a perpetual cycle of reincarnation. The Buddhist dharma or teaching is that the infinitely divisible connects nirvana or heaven to the sangha or believers. And Christians teach that the holy spirit is an infinitely divisible connection between a father in heaven to a son on earth.

The ancient Greek philosopher Democritus declared that objects are not after all infinitely divisible but rather objects are made up of finite atoms. Today science instead concludes that quark pairs are the finite particles that make up all matter, but this is consistent with the notion of finite and not infinite divisibility. Presuming that the universe is likewise not infinitely divisible means that the universe is made up of some kind of finite aether particles.

As a result, the universe is not therefore made up of empty space that is filled with a finite aether, rather the universe is made up of a finite aether from which emerges the notions of continuous space and time. A black hole is an object of matter that exists within continuous space and time and the logic of general relativity works only up until the space and time of the event horizon of a black hole, which is its spatial surface. As a result, the inside of a black hole does not make any sense in general relativity.

In the logic of aethertime, a black hole exists with a mass, a time delay, and an action or motion relative to an observer. Motion in this sense is the matter equivalent change and motion through space as velocity emerges from the matter equivalent change of objects. Without an empty space to fill with objects, there is no sense to an inside versus an outside since the entire black hole simply has the single property of one time delay, one mass relative to an observer, and one matter change, its spin.

There is a further information paradox for a black hole that supposes that the information of the objects that accreted into the black hole cannot simply disappear from the universe. In aethertime, it is the further property of quantum phase and spin that holds this information and yet quantum phase and spin have no meaning in general relativity. The black hole has the quantum property of phase coherence and it is the phase coherence of a black hole spin that preserves all of the information from all of the objects that accreted to form the black hole.

Given the limited notions of continuous space and time, it is the way that a black hole spins that captures all of the information of objects that accrete along with black hole mass, time delay, and matter equivalent velocity. But in aethertime, all black holes have angular momentum and therefore exist as a centered torus as the figure shows. Similar to the electron spin that represents all of its fundamental properties, black hole spin represents all of its properties as well.

Notions of continuous volume in space and continuous time come from the different time delays that we measure from different parts of an object. Although all objects invariably do spin, spin in general relativity is a simple manifestation of the conservation of the angular momentum of the objects that it accretes.

However, the quantum spin of every atom of an object contributes to the total quantum spin of the accreted object and so accretion changes an object's quantum spin as well as its classical spin. Although there is a large literature on the effects of angular momentum for a black hole, there does not seem to be much about the effects of the quantum spin of a black hole.

Since a black hole is fundamentally a pure quantum object in aethertime, the phase coherences of the black hole's precursor's electrons, nuclei, and quark pairs represent all of the rest of the information that made up those precursor objects along with mass, time delay, and matter equivalent velocity.

The Cost of Happiness and the Human Development Index (HDI)

People all have the selfish pleasure of discovering people and things in the world necessary for a desirable future. Among the many things for a desirable future are education, income, and healthcare, but living longer is not really the only desirable future. Living well necessarily includes the selfish pleasure of discovery as well as compassion for others and the skills and competence necessary to live a desirable life.

The human development index (HDI) was created by the UN to rank the desirability of countries and social systems. Basically the HDI factors in per capita GDP, per capita education, and life expectancy along with a bunch of other factors to get an HDI. The means to live a desirable life is provided by a per capita GDP and a compliant political system, the selfish pleasure of discovery, the compassion of others, a valuable skill set and political system that per capita education provides, and of course, a life expectancy that means living long enough to then have that desirable life.

As a result, the HDI represents a kind of happiness for each country. While the U.S. has an index of 91.5 and ranks about 8th, Norway leads all with 94.4 even as Sweden lags with 90.7. The HDI shows the overwhelming success of capital free markets in buying HDI points and the indisputable failure of social big government to even acquire a reasonable HDI.

However, HDI happiness is not cheap and the graph below shows the how much 100 HDI points cost in terms of tax as %GDP. The U.S. pays about one third as much as Norway for the same happiness, 11.5 versus 28.9 taxes%GDP per 100 HDI's. The U.S. pays a much lower %GDP for its HDI than many less efficient countries that overpay for their happiness. The U.S. along with Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and Japan pay for happiness with much more efficient economies than Norway, France, or UK.

Happiness and its cost.

Thus the U.S. could choose to buy another 3 HDI points to equal Norway for just one third of the cost that Norway buys its HDI. That is, instead of adopting the very inefficient big government approach of Norway, the U.S. could choose to simply invest more of its own capital free market enterprise and accomplish the same HDI value far more effectively than Norway and certainly also Sweden, France, and the UK.

China and Russia, for example, are at HDI's of 72.7 and 79.8, respectively, and while China pays 14.6% GDP as taxes per 100 HDI points, Russia pays 18.9% GDP as taxes per 100 HDI of happiness. The higher costs of happiness are very apparent as the inefficiencies of socialist tyranny versus the individual freedom of capitalist free market economies.

A desirable life is much more than just living longer and necessarily includes the pleasure of discovery as well as a compassion for others. It is clear that knowledge about the world and the competence to contribute to civilization both allow each of us to truly discover a desirable future.

Google's AlphaGo Wins with Value and Policy

AlphaGo is a deep-learning bilateral neural network, which is a computer program that has two main personalities; Value and Policy. AlphaGo Value and Policy in effect talk with each other but have fundamentally different feelings about how to win the game of Go.

theverge AlphaGo

Value loves to win more than he hates to lose, but Policy hates to lose more than she loves to win. In other words, AlphaGo Value and Policy represent the basic nature of feeling and choice that people recognize as consciousness. The basic definition of consciousness is a recursion of action and sensation; a conscious person acts just like they see (or sense) other conscious people act.

AlphaGo Value corresponds to the human emotion of pleasure while Policy corresponds to the human emotion of anxiety. People make choices based on a singular feeling that involves the processing of many pairs of complementary emotions and not just pleasure and anxiety. Compassion and selfishness, for example, is how people bond or conflict with others, joy and misery, anger and serenity, and pride and shame complete a basic set of complementary emotions that approximate human feeling.

AlphaGo Value gets great pleasure in winning as many stones as possible and Value is willing to take risk while AlphaGo Policy is anxious about losing only one stone...the one stone that wins the game, and plays very cautiously and avoids risk. While Value takes risk and goes for as many stones as possible to win, Policy avoids risk and settles for the one stone that wins the game.

We journey in our lives desiring the same bilateral futures as AlphaGo; a part of us wants the pleasure of winning big and taking risks and a complementary part of us is forever anxious about simply getting by and surviving by avoiding risk. People have more complex emotions than just pleasure and anxiety and so we have more complex and cooperative relationships with other people and the environment.

What AlphaGo's two personalities represent is a fundamental part of the recursion of consciousness and therefore what it is that we mean when we say that someone is conscious. Lee Sedol is the Go world champion who played against Value and Policy, who had been playing each other for four months prior and had therefore both won and lost literally millions of games with each other prior to the match with Sedol.

Sedol has played many hundreds of thousands of games during his life but is simply not able to play the many millions of games that taught Value and Policy how to beat him. While Sedol will improve his skill by playing Value and Policy together, he might do much better playing Value and Policy separately.

Also, to be fair, AlphaGo should also have additional human personalities like anger and shame, for example. That way Sedol could gain advantage in ways that better represent the complexity of human consciousness. The question is...how do you make an AlphaGo angry at a opponent's board position or ashamed of a its own board position. And of course, AlphaGo must show some compassion in not crushing its opponent and allowing some victories while still being selfish enough to win the tournament.

The Pleasure and Anxiety of Discovery

The emotions of pleasure and anxiety are what kick start purpose and without some kind of purpose, consciousness is simply not possible. So it is the pleasure of discovery that allows us to survive as well as allows us to thrive when we discover futures beyond those we need for bare survival. When we discover something about the universe that seems like no one else yet knows, the pleasure of that discovery is especially intense.

And yet anxiety about the unknown tempers that pleasure and makes me wonder if I am right. Aethertime is a discovery that defines a universe with the simple axioms of matter, time, and action. The actions of two complementary electron spins complements the actions of discrete aether with the universe and its decoherence time that is what drives both gravity and charge forces. The axioms of matter, time, and action close aethertime and with the constants of matter, time, and action form an anti+universe pulse and our present epoch is just 82% decay from that pulse center.

Figure 1. Aethertime boson pulse that describes the anti+universe where the current epoch lies.

Just like the universe is a matter pulse in time, the universe is also a spectrum of objects of matter like people and neurons. In fact, just as people interact and bond, so do neural packets of aware matter as the figure shows. The neural impulses from excitation and inhibition of action potentials form EEG spectra that represent consciousness as objects of aware matter particles. Just as aware matter particles bond into objects of thought, people interact and bond as a result of those same objects of thought.

Mainstream science supposes that time is a continuous displacement in a continuous 4D spacetime and that is motion in space. While it is certainly true that atomic clocks have continuous pulses, atomic clocks therefore tick with a stream of discrete atomic events. So the atomic time that we sense is really not a continuous displacement on an infinitely divisible timeline of past, present, and future. Atomic time is instead average discrete frequency periods along with the deoherence for those periods. 

Objects that we sense have just one time delay, which is only one of the two time dimensions of a clock needed to tell time in the present moment. All objects including atomic clocks have both atomic frequency periods along with a decoherence rate for those periods and so there are two dimensions for time. Mainstream science imagines atomic time as a constant that does not run down or decay even though all working clocks including atomic clocks actually do run down as well as tick at regular intervals. 

Normally people view a clock running down as an artifact and for an electronic or any clock, the lost energy of decoherence or entropy is simply replaced with more coherent power from a battery or power plant. Since the tick frequency defines the duration of a moment for that clock and the tick frequency does not seem to change, it seems like clocks simply need energy to operate. But how fast a clock runs down also tells an absolute time for the clock in how often the clock needs to be charged or wound. In aethertime, there is a very small an intrinsic and universal decoherence rate not only for clocks, but also for all objects and that decoherence tells a universe time.

The aethertime universe clock is the decoherence decay of the universe matter pulse as 0.255 ppb/yr in the present epoch.

Decoherence time is provides a quasi-continuous time from the edge of the universe just beyond the CMB. Unlike atomic time, which depends on the frame of reference, decoherence time represents the absolute frame of the boundaries of a closed universe. Just like the thousands of millisecond pulsars that keep time for the cosmos, time has both a dimension of tick frequency as well as a dimension of tick frequency decay as shown in Fig. 2 below. Although millisecond pulsars decay due mostly to light and gravity radiation, there is also an average decay rate that coincides with many other measurements of matter decoherence.

Figure 2. Shows the many measurements that are consistent with the universal decoherence decay of the universe.

Along with atomic time in this epoch, this universal decoherence is very simply a dimensionless ratio of gravity and charge force and that ratio unifies these two forces by a scaling of the time period of the universe over that of the hydrogen atom. While charge acts at the microscopic scale of an atomic clock pulse, gravity emerges along with space from the cosmic scale of the universe pulse, a wrapping of charge force by the time scale of the universe.

Quantum Fine-Structure Constant

One of the more pervasive and mysterious nonmysteries of science has to do with the fine-structure constant, α. The fine structure constant shows up whenever there is moving charge since moving charges have both magnetization as well as charge forces. Of course, quantum particles are in perpetual charge motion of quantum phase and so the only real mystery of the fine-structure constant is that it does not seem to have a role in relativity gravity. Because classical particles do no have the perpetual motion of quantum phase, classical particles do not show the fine-structure constant.

In other words, there is no vector force for gravity like the vector force of magnetization for moving charge. In the collapsing universe, gravity is a result of photon exchange bonds and therefore, collapsing universe gravity does show a vector force.

The fine structure constant first showed up as the Lamb shift of some hydrogen spectral features. The spinning electron has its own magnetism called spin and in certain hydrogen orbits, that electron also generates  orbital magnetism. The Lyman, Balmer, Paschen, etc., spectral series are light emissions that show the main energy levels of the hydrogen atom that converge on the hydrogen ionization energy at 13.6 eV as the Rydberg energy. (see figure)

The coupling between electron spin and orbital spin magnetism, spin-orbit coupling, has no classical analog and results in a splitting proportional to α². However, the collapsing universe does couple star motions in a galaxy and therefore also star motion with star rotation as well.

The quantum mystery of the fine structure constant deepened when increasing measurement precision of the electron magnetism found that the electron spin magnetism affected its charge. The anomalous electron magnetic moment is due to a quantum self energy that does not have a classical meaning and there is no such gravitization self energy for classical gravity force. It was then discovered by Feynman and Schwinger that the fine structure constant nicely predicted that a spinning electron created a counterspinning vacuum electric field with its own magnetism and the fine structure constant defined that coupling.

With higher resolution spectrographs, spectroscopists in the 1800's came to realize that spectral lines showed even further splitting and that spectral splitting came to be known as fine structure. Although not completely understood until Dirac in 1928, electrons can orbit in either spherical or donut-shaped ellipsoid orbits with different orbital angular momentum and phase or orbital magnetism. In fact, electrons exist in superposition states that involve some of all possible states and the interaction  of those states splits their degeneracy into what was termed the fine-structure constant by Sommerfeld in 1916, actually the square of the fine-structure constant α².

An electron in the perfect symmetry of a spherical orbit does not have any average orbital magnetism, but an electron in various donut orbits does have magnetism due to the reduced symmetry of such orbits and the orbital magnetism of donut orbits then couples with the electron spin magnetism. In addition, the intrinsic spins of the electron and proton are also interact and cause the hyperfine splitting observed at even higher resolution as the figure below represents. The quantum underpinnings for the fine-structure constant would have to wait until Dirac in 1928 and by that time, the hyperfine spectral splittings were also discovered.

The key to all of these quantum magnetic interactions turned out to be the fine-structure constant quantum quantum phase, but there is no classical analog to spin orbit coupling and so the fine-structure constant is not part of a classical reality. Indeed, Feynman developed his quantum field theory in 1958 that conveniently used α to represent a perturbation expansion to account for the effect of quantum electron charge on itself.

In fact, there is another common dimensionless constant called the gyromagnetic ratio, g, which is around two and expresses the frequency differences between classical and quantum rotating charges. The gyromagnetic ratio turns out to be completely determined by a series expansion of α, which then reveals the mystery of the quantum spinning charge with g = 2 reality versus the classical spinning charge with a g = 1 reality.

Somehow the gyromagnetic ratio all by itself embodies the difference between quantum and classical charge motion and there is a similar factor of two that shows up with gravity deflection of light. The equivalent mass from light's momentum deflects light passing near a gravity body like the sun. The gravity deflection of quantum light has twice the angle of an equivalent classical body like a comet or asteroid.

Just like the interaction of photon magnetism with quantum spin in a magnetic field is the result of many exchanges among virtual states, the interaction of photon momentum with gravity is also the result of many photon exchanges among virtual states. It is likely that a similar correspondence with α and gravity occurs for quantum gravity, but a quantum gravity is not yet in common use.

The figure above shows the gravity fine structure expected for the hydrogen atom that is many orders of magnitude less, 1e39, than current science can measure for a single atom in the present epoch. However, in the CMB creation is a gravity object that releases light and shows the quantum gravity resonances as fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background.

While the CMB emission at 2.7 K represents the hydrogen ionization energy in the early universe, the gravity modes oscillate with a fundamental at around 5e-5 K or 50 ppm of the 2.7 K CMB emission. The CMB gravity modes represent the multipole peaks in the CMB spectrum below.

There are any number of papers that show that α² varies on the order of 3e-15/yr for astrophysical spectra and 6e-17 for terrestrial atomic clocks and not the 0.26 ppb/yr decoherence rate predicted by quantum aether. Actually the standard cosmology of mainstream science does not recognize any variation in α and the measured variations have not yet been widely accepted. With quantum aether, there is a phase factor for α that is consistent with a variation in α² that is as reported. Thus the variations of α² with both astrophysical and high precision atomic time are consistent with the aether decoherence rate of 0.26 ppb/yr.

The key turns out to be a complementary α phase factor that accompanies each oscillating charge dipole that generates a photon of light. Although mainstream science approximates a hydrogen atom with the motion of an electron in orbit around a proton and that motion shows an average velocity of αc, the product of α and the speed of light, c.

This means that the dipole average kinetic energy of the photon from the oscillation is proportional to α²c². However, there is a neglected phase factor associated with charge motion that is why distant galaxies show the same α² as we experience in our epoch even though both α and c actually increase at 0.26 ppb/yr. In quantum aether, it is the ratio of c/α that is constant and h becomes the matter scaled Planck's constant h/c² is the Planck constant in quantum aether.

A basic premise of quantum aether interaction with matter is that the constants h, c, and α all expand over time and actually begin at zero at the aether pulse peak of the CMB that is the transition of our universe from the its precursor antiverse expansion. Thus it is important to understand why the relative splitting of the hydrogen atom spectrum that is α does not seem to vary in early galaxies back in time.

Although it seems a bit incredible that mainstream science has long misinterpreted the meaning of spectral splittings in distant galaxies, there are many measurements that validate the ongoing decay of matter at 0.26 ppb/yr (8.1e-18s^-1) along with the increase in both gravity and charge forces that complements the decay of matter. Moreover, it is the decoherence of quantum aether that determines and unites the two forces of matter that mainstream science calls gravity and charge.

Finally, with the quantum gravity of quantum aether comes the gravitization of moving matter like stars that complements gravity force. Matter gravitization is most obvious in the coupled motions of stars in galaxies due to star radiation and motion. Mainstream science now attributes galaxy star motions to an as yet unmeasured cold dark matter but the simple star to star coupling of gravitization makes galaxy star motion explicable without any need for the unseen mystery of dark matter.

Why Does the World Exist?

Questions about the infinity of nothing that is empty space date to ancient Greece and Zeno. How can we get anywhere in space, the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno asked, when we need to take an infinity of steps just to span the infinity of infinitely divisible space. More contemporary philosophers often simply accept the infinite divisibility of nothing without any objection and do not bother with the infinite discourse about nothing.

The recent book by Jim Holt Why Does the World Exist interviews a number of philosophers, religious scholars, and scientists and provides a wide litany of the standard answers to this infinite philosophical discourse. Somehow Holt felt that he could write a whole book about the dark nothing of empty space and people would actually buy it and read it...and I did...

Holt supposes that nothing would be a much simpler reality than the world that exists but he somehow does not really explore the inherent paradoxes of the infinities of nothing. As a result, infinity does not seem to bother Holt and he seems quite comfortable with the simplicity of infinity.

A statement that nothing could exist seems to contradict itself. Much like the square circles or married bachelors that Holt twice mentions, supposing nothing as something is a similar foil of words. Simply asking a question with words does not mean that the question has any meaning or any answer either.

The finite universe exists and is what existence means. Existence is simply a belief that we acquire as young children around two years of age as we learn consciousness. We simply learn to accept the belief about the universe of existence consisting of sources and observers of sources that undergo action and therefore change with time. The dark lonely nothing of empty space is a convenient object that we use to represent the universe itself and therefore empty space helps us keep track of the objects of matter within an otherwise empty universe.

The shrinking decoherence of aethertime defines both the gravity and charge of our quantum universe. In a universe of matter and time, space and momentum are just convenient representations that are consistent with sensation and neural thought. Each of general relativity and quantum charge exist as overlapping regimes of quantum aethertime.

Asking why the universe exists is then the same as asking why existence exists; the question's answer is a circular identity. Such identities are useful in that they allow us to know the boundaries of what we can know. There is no empty universe devoid of sources because the only universe that we can know and that can exist is one that is full of sources and observers all changing in time. The notion of a mostly empty universe filled with just a few sources is a useful one just like the number zero is useful for describing the absence of having something like an apple, but the notion of empty space is fundamentally limited and flawed and does not describe all changes in the universe.

Instead of a mostly empty universe filled with just a few observers and sources, the universe of discrete aether is made up of variations of matter and action. Aether is the matter that is the universe and the action of discrete aether is what clumps aether into sources and observers. Discrete action is the exchange of discrete aether particles between observers and sources and action describes how aether clumps into discrete matter spectra.

On the Need for Compassionate Free Choice

Humanity uses good and evil as notions of what is right and wrong behavior, but compassion and free choice are much more useful notions for actually predicting how people act. While compassion is what tends to bond people together into cooperative families, clans, villages, cities, and countries, free choice is more often what conflicts people with each other or groups of people with other groups of people. With compassion, people cooperatively share the wealth they have acquired and with free choice, people put their own survival first and acquire wealth more for themselves.

There is a strong association between the notion of evil and the emotion of free choice, but that is a very limited useful association. People must have some free choice in order to survive and likewise, people must also have some compassion in order to bond with other people. If a people only have free choice, they accumulate wealth and may actually take wealth from other people, including the lives of other people. But people must have some free choice, a compassionate free choice, and so the absolute notions of good and evil and the emotions of love and hate are much more limited. Instead, it is the free choice of compassion and compassionate free choice that better predict how people feel about each other.

There is a long history of the emotions of love and hate and many religions tout love as the most important emotion for bonding people together. Hate as the complement to love engenders the conflicts that people have with each other and there is an ultimate evil in hate. Since hate is always undesirable, the emotions of love and hate are more limited compared to compassion and free choice for predicting how people act.

Religions usually promote various transcendent agents for good compassion and other evil agents for  free choice, but really compassion and free choice are both part of the dual representations for how the universe works; relational and Cartesian. A relational person is compassionate and relates better with and cares more about others and is therefore a person who is on a common journey with many others. A Cartesian person has more free choice and cares more about themselves than other people and free choice people are therefore more separate and alone on their own objective Cartesian journeys. Just as a relational person subjectively bonds with many other people in a common journey of compassion, Cartesian people are largely on their own objective free choice journeys and only weakly interact with other people.

The complements of each emotion form five emotion pairs that represent the basic duality of matter and action. While compassion represents the matter and bonding of feeling, free choice represents the action and conflict of the inhibition of compassion. Compassion is then the inhibition of free choice and compassion bonds people together while the excitation of free choice is action where people conflict.

In our brains, excitations and inhibitions of neural action potentials represent how we feel and form the EEG spectra of brain waves as the figure below shows.  In the spectral reality of the universe, free choices are discrete particles of neural action called aware matter that bond into larger aware matter objects called thoughts as neural packets in the brain. Thoughts resonate as the EEG spectra of the brain and are the matter or feelings that bond two people and that bonding likewise results in further matter spectra that show those relationships.

Science does not yet understand how neural action results in the EEG spectra of free choice, but sleep is a very important part of neural action. In fact, there are two primitive neural matter packets during sleep that appear in sleeping EEG called K complexes and sleep spindles. Both K complexes and sleep spindles are made of delta mode packets and the delta mode is the fundamental mode of neural action. The EEG K complex seems to be the simple delta dimer while a sleep spindle seems to be a delta dimer with an alpha mode carrier and both are the basic primitive neural packets that appear during deep sleep. These primitive neural packets appear to be what keep our mind asleep and yet they also represent the basic neural aware matter that binds or conflicts us with others as well with compassion and free choice.

Compassion and free choice are therefore the two most important emotions for bonding and conflict and people actually have both compassion and free choice in all journeys in life. Compassion and free choice are much more useful than love and hate for describing the complexity of relationships. Bonding relationships come about from pleasurable neural excitations and results in delta dimer bonds that inhibit anxiety. Conflicts among people inhibit pleasure and excite anxiety, which is the alpha carrier mode.

People always need free, a compassionate free choice, in order to survive and so there are no journeys with only free choice just as there are no journeys with only compassion. There are no people in life that are only Cartesian or only relational, there is likewise neither complete free choice nor complete compassionate…all people must act both with compassionate free choice as well as free choice compassion in order to survive. This is why love and hate are more limited complements of bonding emotions.

A Cartesian person journeys on a path that is more isolated from other people and so a Cartesian generally represents free choice that cares more about their own needs than the needs of others. In contrast, a relational person journeys as a superposition of many possible outcomes that are more bonded with others by compassion. A relational has more compassion for other people and a relational inhibits free choice. A relational person has more compassion for others that inhibits free choice for their own needs and therefore relationals are more open about the many possible outcomes with other people.

By extension of compassion and free choice to the governments of clans, villages, and states, the notions of compassion and free choice represent the cooperation and conflicts that bond and conflict people into a community with many largely anonymous people living together in large cities and countries. The constitution of a balanced government incorporates the notions of a balance of compassion and free choice to assure survival just as people freely choose assure their own survivals.

Religions have sometimes very strict guidelines for compassion and free choice and such guidelines provide religious people with purpose and meaning. States provide less rigid guidelines for compassion and free choice as compared with religion and governments therefore States often tolerate a much wider range of behavior and therefore purpose and meaning. A government ideology balances compassion and free choice and governments can show compassion as well as free choice just as people do.

Governments balance compassion, sharing, and cooperation with free choice and that balance allows competition to promote commerce and innovation. The markets of commerce permit free choice and trade for goods and services that not only meet the needs of survival, but also provide goods and services for others as well in a form of compassion. The government builds roads, transportation, buildings, parks, and social welfare represent the compassion of public resources shared for all.

What Is Nothing Like?

When we as young children begin our journey of consciousness, we discover by about age two the belief that the lonely dark nothing of empty space is something after all. That belief in the nothing of empty space anchors further discovery and helps us discover the way the world of objects works. The discovery that the nothing of space is really something not only anchors further discovery for survival, but provides purpose and meaning far beyond survival.

But we begin life by sensing objects and light, not space, and objects and light are actually what reality is all about, not really space. When we no longer sense an object, we come to believe that an empty space now exists where that object was. This belief in empty space allows us to know that the object still exists and is simply now hidden by other objects or by some distance away from us and that is why we no longer sense the object. We come to believe that space exists even though we never sense space directly and even though empty space is simply the lack of an object that is now hidden from view or sensation.

We sense objects and learn their objective properties like color, texture, mass, time delay, and so on and can agree with others about those objective properties. Each object in the universe exists with a well-defined and measurable time delay from us and various time delays from other objects. These time delays are all equivalent to spatial distances from us and other objects and that is how we keep track of objects. We use particular objects called landmarks to provide reference frames for locating other objects, but there is really never any lack of objects in our perception or even anywhere in the universe. In other words, the notions that we have about continuous empty space and time are just that...convenient notions that help us to keep track of objects.

There is a long history of discourse in philosophy about the nature of the nothing of empty space. Why is there something rather than nothing? is a question in a recent book by philosopher Jim Holt, "Why Does the World Exist?" The history of nothing ranges from Zeno in ancient Greece up through modern times with Nietzsche and Wittgenstein. Since we neither sense nor measure the nothing of empty space, there is actually no way to answer such an inexplicable question and this book simply continues the endless discourse about the nature of nothing. The world is existence and so the question reduces to the identity of existence existing and the nature of this identity is obvious.

Philosophy, after all, is an endless discourse about the nature of the universe. Philosophy asks and attempts to answer many inexplicable questions since it is not always clear which questions we can answer. Why there is something rather than nothing is an existential question that has no answer other than the identity; the universe exists because it exists. There is no sense to a discourse about nothing except that nothing is a convenient way to keep track of a lack of objects. Just like the zero of our number system, the notion of the nothing of empty space provides a way of keeping track of a lack of objects of certain kinds. However, there is simply no sense to the absolute lack of all objects including a universe since the universe is what defines what exists and we are an inextricable part of the existence of that universe.

Reality exists as objects, light, and time and with discrete matter, time delay, and action; from just these three axioms all reality emerges. When we sense a red object, in addition to its red color that many others agree is red, we have feelings about that red object that are unique to us. Our unique lifetime of experience with red objects and unique development mean that the red object results in a feeling about the object that is unique for each person. It could be that the red color is an illusion, for example, or that we may see all objects as red because we happen to lack other pigments in our retina.

So it is very important for consciousness to have some kind of anchor as a belief in nothing, which is simply the belief that objects continue to exist even when we no longer see or sense them. After all, when an object hides other objects or when objects are simply out of our immediate perspective or simply be too far away to sense, we say then that there is empty space between us and some background behind where the object was. However, objects simply do not disappear and reappear according to common classical reality.

In our quantum reality, though, objects as matter waves always exist in superposition states and there is a coherent phase that somehow links their futures together. It is quantum phase coherence that provides a kind of glue that binds the universe of both charge and gravity together. Knowing the state of a matter wave provides information on the complementary coherent states of that matter wave everywhere else in the universe as well.

Although instantaneous information transfer cannot occur, quantum entanglement does make it seem like matter-wave information transfers instantaneously across the universe. However, the information about a matter wave state is simply received or felt by each of two quantum observers across the universe and those quantum observers do not transfer or communicate that information across the universe in a classical and deterministic sense of cause and effect.

If two quantum observers know about each other's complementary matter wave phase coherence, they will feel and come to know the complementary events even across the universe. However, the observers do need to know before hand about the common source that created those two events and have discovered the way the universe really works. In other words, there is a quantum bond between the two observers across the universe as a result of the coherence of a common matter wave. These two observers will then have complementary feelings about those two events that they will simply not be able to understand without a lot of prior knowledge.

Quantum Feeling

Even though we as observers might look at and objectively agree with other observers about the sources in the world, how observers subjectively feel about sources is unique to our each lifetime of experience and development. Observers look at and otherwise sense sources and have learned about the objective properties of color, size, mass, etc. and are confident that other observers will agree with the same objective properties. This objective reality of sources is a very common intuition that observers share with each other and observers typically share that objective reality as part of a classical reality.

Sharing stories about the objective properties of sources helps observers survive because they can then depend on other observers as a source of experience to better predict the action of sources and people. Observers do not need to experience the red color of an apple to know that an apple can be red. They can simply look it up on the internet. In principle, all objective reality is knowable and so observers can discover everything about their objective reality. However, there are limitations to what observers can discover about their own subjective reality.

How observers subjectively feel about a source like a red apple is very different from how the apple objectively appears to other observers . This is because even though observers can agree with other observers that an apple is red, the subjective feeling that observers have about a red apple comes from their own unique lifetime of experience with red sources and their unique development of retinal pigments and sensitivity to the light that they see as red. The subjective feeling that observers have about the red color of a source is a fundamental limitation. An observer of themselves as a source is unique to each observer and those immediate subjective sensations can actually be any number of illusions and perception mistakes and therefore not objective at all.

An observer's objective reality discovers sources with properties that conform to classical and realist notions of space and time with largely separate Cartesian sources that only occasionally interact. This is the world of gravity and of Einstein's relativity and is an observer's outer life. In contrast, the subjective reality of observer unique feelings is a source of inner life that is a quantum reality that incorporates phase coherence. Quantum phase coherence relates sources to each other in ways that sometimes seem to violate the classical and realist notions of discrete Cartesian sources. However, it is the inner reality of quantum phase coherence that augments and completes the limitations of an outer reality of the purely classical realism of gravity and relativity.

Although there has been many discussions about what a neural packet of brain matter might be like [see Tegmark 2014, Tononi 2004, Hopfield 1982], there has also been suggestion that quantum uncertainty and entanglement cannot play any role in the neural packets of our brains. [Tegmark 2000] This latter conclusion is based on the the very short dephasing times that occur for neural spikes of action potentials, whose dephasing times on the order of several milliseconds are many orders of magnitude shorter than the dephasing time of a moment of thought, which is around one second.

Of course, there are others who have ventured into the ring of quantum consciousness [Penrose 1989, Stapp 1984, Hameroff 2004] and who have proposed various quantum schemes for the neural matter of our brains. Unfortunately, no one seems to have yet resolved the matter with any kind of measurement like an EEG spectrum.

Given the spectral nature of EEG brain waves, it would seem reasonable to associate the measured EEG mode line widths with the dephasing time of thought. Quantum aware matter packets will dephase with the EEG dephasing time and therefore are the modes of quantum aware matter packets. Spectral line widths of light and acoustics represent both the presence of chaos as well as the dephasing times for the spectral modes of the science of spectroscopy. Associating EEG spectral widths to neural packets dephasing instead of action potential dephasing now means that the mind, despite some chaos, does indeed function as a quantum computer.

Linewidths for the quantum states of spectroscopy are functions of both homogeneous as well as heterogeneous dephasing and dephasing times reflect the lifetime and linewidth of a quantum resonance. Assuming EEG spectral linewidths are truly representative of the homogeneous dephasing times of neural packets means that brain aware matter does indeed represent quantum superposition states. Aware matter particles are not electrons or ions but are rather fermion aware matter particles of bilateral entangled neurons.

In order to qualify as a quantum computer, the brain must show the superposition logic of qubits, which include quantum phase. In digital logic, a bit of information is either 0 or 1 and all computers are based on just such a digital logic as well as internet data packets. In contrast to digital logic, neural logic involves a qubit as a superposition of two states [||, | ] that are like the polarization of light, parallel and perpendicular. Although single qubits will also only be either || or  | , qubits entangle other qubits and that entanglement transmits twice the information of just two digital bits.

This is because two entangled qubits not only carry the numbers 0 to 3 as [||,||], [||, | ],[ | ,||],[ | , | ], the two qubits also carry a binary phase factor that transmits 4 to 7 as [||,||+ | ], [||,||- | ],[ | ,||+ | ],[ | ,||- | ]. Just like light polarized at 45 degree is a superposition of 0 and 90, a qubit can exist as a coherent superposition of states and that superposition doubles its information content.

Moreover, the superposition of qubits in neural packets means that neural matter exists as high order states of coupled neural pairs as aware matter. That is, we can entangle the coherency of our neural packets with those of other people and sources and that coherency is part of our feeling. When I imagine going for a walk in the park, I form a superposition of many possible futures for that walk and yet I only realize a particular future when I actually am walking. Each of the other possible futures is also a part of my reality as memory but those other futures become decoherent with a rate of the aware matter lifetime of about 1 s.

Aware matter as a Quantum Material

The quantum wave equation for aware matter is particularly simple and so the wavefunction is simple as well. The EEG spectrum will be sinc functions (sin x / x), which is the Fourier transform of the aware matter wavefunction.

m_a = aware matter particle mass, ~3.2e-30 kg (matter equivalent energy of two synaptic impulses)

Ñ_a = aware matter action constant, m_a / 2π / f

n = order of mode for aware matter source, 1 to 64

t = time, s

f_a = aware matter source frequency, ~0.5 Hz

y_a = aware matter wavefunction

y_a with dot = time derivative of y_a

This simplicity comes from the fact that aware matter binding energy is equivalent to its resonance energy and when that happens for a quantum matter, the quantum wave functions, y_a, are mathematically very simple superpositions of electrical impulse frequencies. Therefore the proportionality is related to the mode frequency as shown and there is a reaction time, t_a, which should be around 0.5 s and is the linewidth of the mode. Thus, we do not expect the EEG modes to be transform limited but rather EEG modes will have the linewidth of a single human thought.

There are many obvious ways to test the aware matter hypothesis and indeed, there may already be information out there that shows that aware matter could not exist. However, it is really fun to imagine how such a simple quantum material as aware matter becomes not only a part of our lives, but a part of every neural life. The existence of aware matter would be the unifying force behind all sentient life.

Although observers can in principle know everything about the objective properties of sources, much of knowledge also comes from observer subjective feelings about themselves as a source. Although observers can understand many of their subjective feelings with rational thought, observers do have feelings that are beyond rational thought. Such feelings are a part of observer quantum aware matter and are subject to quantum uncertainty and therefore are quantum feelings.

Quantum Phase and Reality

Quantum phase coherence between an observer and a source is a critical concept that differentiates quantum charge from classical gravity. Quantum phase coherence makes no classical sense in general relativity and so quantum gravity cannot ever exist within the classical confines of GR. There are three different action equations possible for reality, but the choice really just reduces to either quantum charge or classical gravity.

Of the three possible action equations, quantum, classical, and hyperbolic, the  action equation of quantum charge is the Schrödinger equation as

[1]

which says that an observer is always related to its own outcome by some kind of interaction with a itself. Seems pretty simple, but the funny i factor means that the future is never absolutely certain since an observer can act on itself.

The classic gravity Hamilton-Jacobi equation in units of time delay and matter change is

[2]

and says that an source follows a determinate path, S, unless acted on by another source by the action dm/dt that changes the source orbital period, t_p. Even though gravity exists in the same quantum root reality as charge, the gravity of a GR observer does not act on itself. This means that the geodesics of general relativity are not subject to the uncertainty of quantum futures.

In a quantum reality, even gravity matter has phase coherence and shows interference effects and uncertainty since it is light that is the quantum glue that holds both charge and gravity matter together. The symmetry of the gravity biphoton simply means that quantum phase coherence exists for gravity as well as charge. However, the exchange of two gravity biphotons always results in complementary phases and so the resonances between gravity bodies always exchange complementary phase.

A classical photon only transfers intensity from a classical source to a classical observer and does not transfer quantum phase coherence. A quantum photon represents a resonance between an observer and an excited source that transfers both amplitude and phase coherence. A gravity resonance between an observer and a source also represents both amplitude and phase coherence, but a gravity biphoton resonance involves excited states of both observer and source.

The classical Hamilton-Jacobi equation is the beginning of the geodesics of general relativity and it is the quantum Hamilton-Jacobi equation that shows the time derivative of relativity's action geodesic as a matter wave, S_ae, as

[3]

The matter-scaled Schrödinger equation Eq. 1 with m_R as the Rydberg mass equivalent energy of the hydrogen atom bond provides the matter wave psi_ae. The strange  i = e^π/2 Euler phase factor simply represents a phase shift of pi/2 or 90° between a matter wave and its time derivative, which is the observer and a source. It is just this phase coherence that is what makes the quantum matter waves of Eq. 3 much different from classical matter waves of Eq. 2.

It is ironic that time and space both emerge from the Schrödinger equation and the actual primitives are that of discrete aether, psi_ae and discrete action, Sdot_ae. That is, time and space actually emerge as the discrete dimensionless notions of tau/tau_p or q/q_p from the action derivative of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Schrödinger equation [3].

The classical gravity waves of Eq. 2 also have phase coherence, but classical waves have classical coherence with determinate futures and follow the geodesics of relativity. The quantum path derivative is negative, which points both the arrow of quantum time as well as the phase shift between matter and its derivative of action. The norms or products of complementary quantum matter waves of Eq. 3 result in the classical waves of Eq. 2, but lack quantum phase coherence and uncertainty.

Biphoton exchange applies the same quantum glue of coherent photon phase to gravity.  Bonding an electron and proton is due to the exchange of a photon particle of the Rydberg mass, m_R, which is the hydrogen bond. That binding photon today has a complementary and entangled photon emitted at the CMB that together form a biphoton quadrupole. Instead of a single photon, gravity is this irreducible coupling of bond and emitted photons as a biphoton quadrupole. Biphotons are the phase coherent quantum glue that bonds neutral particles to the universe with the quadrupole biphoton force scaled from a photon as t_B / T_u x e.

The Schrödinger equation shows that a differential change in an object is orthogonal to itself for both charge and gravity. A differential change in a gravity wave biphoton will also be proportional to itself, but since the biphoton has dipoles with entangled phase, the resulting product wavefunction now commutes and satisfies both quantum Eq. 1 and classical Eqn. 2.

The classical action integral of general relativity, S, has a matter-scaled time derivative related to the Lagrangian that is simply equal to the kinetic minus the Hamiltonian interaction energy. Typical objects have very large numbers of such quantum gravity states along with many fewer quantum charge states. Quantum gravity states tend to be incoherent sums of matter wave norms that represent classical gravity and relativity. Unlike the relatively high energy of atomic bonds, quantum gravity bonds are very much weaker and so involve very much lower frequency biphotons. Any phase coherence of a quantum gravity is typically dominated by the phase coherence of quantum charge and so gravity mass exists largely as matter wave norms without coherent phase.

The hyperbolic wave equation is simply the dS_ae/dt action wave with a change in sign. The hyperbolic equation describes antimatter with a simple change in sign and antimatter is inherently unstable in the matter universe since antimatter's time arrow is opposit and yet antimatter is stable in the antiverse precursor to the matter universe.

These hyperbolic matter waves still show quantum superposition and interference effects but represent unstable antimatter particles in the matter universe.

Classical Observers See and Quantum Observers Feel Sources

There are both observers and sources in the world in which we live; objective observers who see the world as others see it and subjective sources who feel about the world as it feels only to themselves. While an objective observer can in principle know everything about the way other observers know the world, a subjective source cannot know everything about how other sources feel about the world or how the world feels to other sources as well.

Objective observers get pleasure discovering the world with senses in contact with sources and those sensations are both how observers discover knowledge and feeling about the world as well. There are no limits to what an objective observer can know besides the complexity of that knowledge, but there are limits to what a subjective source can observe about their own feelings about the world. There are even very simple things like observer feelings about the world that a subjective source can never know.

In particular, there is a property of people and matter called quantum phase coherence that entangles an observer with a source and so subjective observers are quantum observers. Although objective or classical observers can know and agree with others about the objective properties of a source, a quantum observer can only ever know the phase coherence of a source relative to their own phase coherence. Therefore quantum observer feelings about source phase is subjective since it is the observer's feeling alone and no other observer will have the same lifetime of experience and development from which their phase derives.

Classical observers suppose that the world as it really is has classical observers and sources pretty much running around on their own in a vast void of empty space and time. Classical observers do not bump into or affect each other very much and when there are couplings, those perturbations are all completely knowable in a classical determinate and causal universe. There is no self energy in a classical universe.

Continuous space and time are the cornerstones for classical observers and they can pretty much agree with other Cartesians about this Cartesian view, which is what makes a classical reality objective and why the world seems so classical. Cartesian action seems rather more like fate or karma than chance and the initial conditions of the CMB creation seem to determine all of what happens; classical action simply happens without any meaning or intent since classical action is determinate.

How a subjective quantum observer actually feels about the world is a subjective relational view that first of all supposes there is a purpose and meaning for everything that happens and there are no completely determinate futures. Quantum observers depend more on what other quantum observers and sources intend to do instead of what the observers and sources happen to be doing at any moment. A subjective quantum observer depends more on their feelings about sources as well as themselves instead of just on source properties at that moment.

A quantum universe cornerstone is with the exchange of energy and matter that are the actions between quantum observers and sources and quantum observers often feel very differently about the world as compared with classical observers. Since quantum feelings result from each of their own unique histories, quantum actions that result from quantum feelings are therefore not fated or determinate and there are instead many possible futures for both quantum observer and source.

There is a long history of discovery about the dual nature of the world of the body and the world of the mind. This is the duality of classical observers and subjective sources; how classical observers see the world really is versus how quantum observers and sources feel together about the world. Quantum observers feel that there is an inner life made up of souls and minds that coexists with an outer life of classical observers in the physical part of the world made up of bodies and brains.

Classical observers believe that since there is no objective evidence for an inner life of sources made up of souls, the actions of the mind are instead simply very complex and yet completely knowable as the brain matter of the same the outer life. Classical observers therefore believe there is really only one material world composed only of completely knowable observers and sources. An objective classical observer can know everything about the world and there is no meaning to any kind of inner life of quantum sources made up of just souls and minds.

However, there are things about a quantum source's inner life that a classical observer can never know. The subjective world that quantum observers discover by feeling and relationships with sources is different from the objective and material world that classical observers discover along with other Cartesians. The classical Cartesian observer can in principle know all objective properties about an object, and yet complex actions of other observers and objects also make up our material world and that complexity therefore limits what classical observers can know. The noise of chaos often confuses and confounds quantum phase noise, but quantum phase noise is different from the noise of chaos.

The quantum observer has feelings about the aether exchanges among people and sources of an inner life as opposed to the classical observer of people and sources of the outer life of things in and of themselves. In the quantum world of feeling based on aether exchange, while most relationships and feelings are objective and therefore knowable, there are many relationships and feelings that are fundamentally unknowable and yet are still a part of our quantum world.

Therefore discourse about the dual natures of objective and subjective reality are often confused by what a classical observer can know about the complexity of  sources as people and relationships of their outer lives and what a quantum observer can never know about their own inner life. Although there are many things about their outer life that classical observers do not yet know, all of these things are still knowable albeit somewhat obscured by complexity and chaos. Yet there are some things about a quantum observer's inner life that are fundamentally unknowable and yet are still a part of the real world.

Although a classical observer can know everything about the path of a person or source in space and time, a quantum observer cannot know everything about the relationships of that person or source with other people or sources over time. Ironically, the things that a quantum observer can never really know are a part of uncertain futures of quantum relationships with other sources.