Superposition Quotes

There are many, many, many worlds branching out at each moment you become aware of your environment and then make a choice.

Choice, is what presents us with a multitude of paths, because choice creates a flow of electrons through the brain in a manner that inexorably leads to quantum superposition, and the many-worlds that are the inevitable result.

Her feelings for Jeremy were like Schrodinger’s Crush. As long as she didn’t open the box, their relationship existed in a state of quantum superposition: both possible and impossible at the same time.

Now I existed solely thanks to the quantum paradox, my brain a collection of qubits in quantum superposition, encoding truths and memories, imagination and irrationality in opposing, contradictory states that existed and didn't exist, all at the same time.

Quantum Machine Learning is defined as the branch of science and technology that is concerned with the application of quantum mechanical phenomena such as superposition, entanglement and tunneling for designing software and hardware to provide machines the ability to learn insights and patterns from data and the environment, and the ability to adapt automatically to changing situations with high precision, accuracy and speed. 

The truth is, everyone is confused by quantum physics.

Like the very quantum particles we study, we must be comfortable allowing our view of the world to exist in superposition.

When I behold a rich landscape, it is less to my purpose to recite correctly the order and superposition of the strata, than to know why all thought of multitude is lost in a tranquil sense of unity.

Something else that separates me from society: Super-Positive Perspective! Where normal people would whine about subpar accommodations, I choose to view it as upscale camping.

Knowing that a particle can occupy two different states at the same time—a state known as superposition—and, two particles, such as two particles of light, or photons, can become entangled, means that there is a unique, coupled state in which an action, like a measurement, upon one particle immediately causes a correlated change in the other. If there is a better word to describe my relationship with Fanio than entangled, I have yet to hear it. Even when the two entangled particles—or people—are separated by a great distance (and I mean emotional or physical distance, such as mine with Epifanio, or like being at opposite ends of the universe), their movements or actions affect each other. Yet, before any measurements or other assessments occur, the actual "spin states" of either of the two particles are uncertain and even unknowable.

[…] detective novels are not novels of detection, still less of revelation, still less of solution. Those are all necessary, but not only are they insufficient, but they are in certain ways regrettable. These are novels of potentiality. Quantum narratives. Their power isn’t in their final acts, but in the profusion of superpositions before them, the could-bes, what-ifs and never-knows. Until that final chapter, each of those is as real and true as all the others, jostling realities all dreamed up by the crime, none trapped in vulgar facticity. That’s why the most important sentence in a murder mystery isn’t the one starting ‘The murderer is…’ – which no matter how necessary and fabulously executed is an act of unspeakable narrative winnowing – but is the snarled expostulation halfway through: ‘Everyone’s a suspect.’ Quite. When all those suspects become one certainty, it’s a collapse, and a let-down. How can it not be? We’ve been banished from an Eden of oscillation.

The Kin,’ said the Doctor. ‘A population that consists of only one creature, but able to move through time as easily and instinctively as a human can cross the road. There was only one of you. But you’d populate a place by moving backwards and forwards in time until there were hundreds of you, then thousands and millions, all interacting with yourselves at different moments on your own timeline. And this would go on until the local structure of time would collapse, like rotten wood. You need other entities, at least in the beginning, to ask you the time, and create the quantum superpositioning that allows you to anchor to a place–time location.

Roger Penrose tried to conceive the unconscious as the space of superposition of thoughts, and the passage to consciousness as the collapse of wave oscillations into a single reality: “Could thoughts exist in some sort of quantum superposition on an unconscious level only to become conscious when there is a specific selection

I guess if you’re smart enough, you can do and say what you like and people just call you eccentric. It’s like being old.” “Or rich,” Alex said.

Norma: “...We’ll kill Silena?” Smar: “...She’s in superposition anyway.” Angie: “And in supoorposition.” Norma: “I’m not following.” Smar: “Me, Quantum Mechanics.” Angie: “Me, Dumbum Mechanics.

I am very excited about Quantum Forgiveness. The pioneers of quantum physics overturned and transcended Newtonian physics and the scientific method. Quantum physicists worked down to the smallest units and realized that everything they thought they knew about the world was not true. The world is about potentiality. In superposition, for example, things appear where we believe they will appear. And that is exciting because it is a science discovery that does not have to stay in the lab. It actually has everything to do with who we are. It is the gateway to our experience of being one with Source!

He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition. The cat in the box is both alive and dead. You could open the box and see that it was alive or dead, that’s how it goes, but in one sense, even after the box is open, the cat is still both alive and dead. Every universe exists over every other universe. Like a million pictures on tracing paper, all with slight variations within the same frame. The many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics suggests there are an infinite number of divergent parallel universes. Every moment of your life you enter a new universe. With every decision you make.

We’ve known since 2007 that there’s superposition in chlorophyll, for instance. Photosynthesis has a ninety-five percent energy-transfer efficiency rate, which is better than anything we can engineer. Plants achieve that by using superposition to simultaneously try all the possible pathways between their light-collecting molecules and their reaction-center proteins so that energy is always sent down the most efficient route; it’s a form of biological quantum computing.

As a measurement apparatus interacts with a quantum system, the two become entangled with each other. There are no wave-function collapses or classical realms. The apparatus itself evolves into a superposition, entangled with the state of the thing being observed.

This was matter’s most honest state in any case; superposition, quantum tunnelling, entanglement, cleavance, wormhole fracture; all of the strange furniture of quantum mechanics appeared to be the universe’s true face. All else was matter trying to seem sober, putting on laws for show.

The 112 chakras are sophisticated quantum information processing centers. They exchange information within the body and with the higher realms. They use superposition states of photons or atoms to process, store, and transmit data between different areas of the brain, the rest of the body, and the higher worlds.

When the quantum coherence in the microtubules is lost, as in cardiac arrest, or death, the Planck scale quantum information in our heads dissipates, or leaks out, to the Planck scale in the universe as a whole. The quantum information which had comprised our conscious and subconscious minds during life doesn't completely dissipate, but hangs together because of quantum entanglement. Because it stays in quantum superposition and doesn't undergo quantum state reduction or collapse, it's more like our subconscious mind, like our dreams. And because the universe at the Planck scale is non-local, it exists holographically, indefinitely. Is this the soul? Why not.

I wasn’t sure how I felt about there being another me sharing space in the universe. Would I even like myself?

You are so hot,” I said. “How hot?” she asked, toying with the hem of the shirt. “Ionising radiation hot,” I said. “Neutral pion decay hot.” Elena snorted. “You’re such a romantic,” she said.

Imagine a cat, a vial of poison, and a radioactive source in a sealed box. If an internal sensor registers radioactivity, like an atom decaying, the vial is broken, releasing a poison that kills the cat. The atom has an equal chance of decaying or not decaying. It’s an ingenious way of linking an outcome in the classical world, our world, to a quantum-level event. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests a crazy thing: before the box is opened, before observation occurs, the atom exists in superposition—an undetermined state of both decaying and not decaying. Which means, in turn, that the cat is both alive and dead. And only when the box is opened, and an observation made, does the wave function collapse into one of two states. In other words, we only see one of the possible outcomes. For instance, a dead cat. And that becomes our reality. But then things get really weird. Is there another world, just as real as the one we know, where we opened the box and found a purring, living cat instead? The Many-Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics says yes. That when we open the box, there’s a branch. One universe where we discover a dead cat. One where we discover a live one. And it’s the act of our observing the cat that kills it—or lets it live. And then it gets mind-fuckingly weird. Because those kinds of observations happen all the time. So if the world really splits whenever something is observed, that means there’s an unimaginably massive, infinite number of universes—a multiverse—where everything that can happen will happen.

In order to know the actual location of the electron, a measurement must be made, and here is where the troubles begin for the die-hard determinists. Once a measurement is made, the quantum state is said to collapse, meaning that all the other possible states the electron could have been in (known as superpositions) have collapsed into one. All the other possibilities have been eliminated. The measurement, of course, was irreversible and had constrained the system by causing the collapse. Over the next couple of years physicists realized that neither the classical concept of “particle” nor that of “wave” could fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects at any one point in time. As Feynman quipped, “They don’t behave like a wave or like a particle, they behave quantum mechanically.”18

the strangely elusive and counterintuitive character of the quantum world has encouraged some to suggest that the idea of entities like electrons which can be in unpicturable states such as superpositions of being ‘here’ and being ‘there’ is no more than a convenient manner of speaking which facilitates calculations, and that electrons themselves are not to be taken with ontological seriousness. The counterattack of the scientific realist appeals to intelligibility as the key to reality. It is precisely because the assumption of the existence of electrons allows us to understand a vast range of directly accessible phenomena—such as the periodic table in chemistry, the phenomenon of superconductivity at low temperatures and the behaviour of devices such as the laser—that we take their existence seriously.

A point that should be emphasized is that the energy that defines the lifetime of the superposed state is an energy difference, and not the total, (mass-) energy that is involved in the situation as a whole. Thus, for a lump that is quite large but does not move very much-and supposing that it is also crystalline, so that its individual atoms do not get randomly displaced-quantum superpositions could be maintained for a long time. The lump could be much larger than the water droplets considered above. There could also be other very much larger masses in the vicinity, provided that they do not get significantly entangled with the superposed state we are concerned with. (These considerations would be important for solid-state devices, such as gravitational wave detectors, that use coherently oscillating solid-perhaps crystalline-bodies.)

Rule 1, by dictating how a quantum system changes in time, plays the same essential role in the theory that Newton’s laws of motion played in pre-quantum physics. Like Newton’s laws, Rule 1 is deterministic. It takes an input state and evolves it to a definite output state at a later time. This means it takes input states which are constructed as superpositions to output states which are similarly constructed from superpositions. Probability plays no role. But measurements, as described by Rule 2, do not evolve superpositions to other superpositions. When you measure some quantity, like pet

Decoherence is what destroys the possibility of observing macroscopic superpositions – including Schrödinger’s live/dead cat. And this has nothing to do with observation in the normal sense: we don’t need a conscious mind to ‘look’ in order to ‘collapse the wavefunction’. All we need is for the environment to disperse the quantum coherence. This happens with extraordinary efficiency – it’s probably the most efficient process known to science. And it is very clear why size matters here: there is simply more interaction with the environment, and therefore faster decoherence, for larger objects.

He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition....Every universe exists over every other universe. Like a million pictures on tracing paper, all with slight variations within the same frame. The many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics suggests there are an infinite number of divergent parallel universes. Every moment of your life you enter a new universe. With every decision you make. And traditionally it was thought that there could be no communication or transference between those worlds, even though they happen in the same space, even though they happen literally millimetres away from us.

We cannot say, in familiar everyday terms, what it 'means' for an electron to be in a state of superposition of two places at once, with complex-number weighting factors w and z. We must, for the moment, simply accept that this is indeed the kind of description that we have to adopt for quantum-level systems. Such superpositions constitute an important part of the actual construction of our microworld, as has now been revealed to us by Nature. It is just a fact that we appear to find that the quantum-level world actually behaves in this unfamiliar and mysterious way. The descriptions are perfectly clear cut-and they provide us with a micro-world that evolves according to a description that is indeed mathematically precise and, moreover, completely deterministic!

Wheeler wasn’t the first to point out that quantum mechanics slips into paradox the minute you introduce a second observer. The Nobel Prize–winning physicist Eugene Wigner, for one, had emphasized it with a Schrödinger’s-cat-style thought experiment that became known as “Wigner’s friend.” It went something like this: Inside a lab, Wigner’s friend sets up an experiment in which an atom will randomly emit a photon, producing a flash of light that leaves a spot on a photographic plate. Before Wigner’s friend checks the plate for signs of a flash, quantum mechanics shows that the atom is in a superposition of having emitted a photon and not having emitted a photon. Once the friend looks at the plate, however, he sees a single outcome—the atom flashed or it didn’t. Somehow his looking collapses the atom’s wavefunction, transforming two possibilities into a single reality. Wigner, meanwhile, is standing outside the lab. From his point of view, quantum mechanics shows that until his friend tells him the outcome of the experiment, the atom remains in a superposition of having emitted a photon and not having emitted a photon. What’s more, his friend is now in a superposition of having seen a spot of light on the plate and not having seen a spot of light on the plate. Only Wigner, quantum theory says, can collapse the wavefunction by asking his friend what happened in there. The two stories are contradictory. According to Wigner’s friend, the atom’s wavefunction collapsed when he looked at the plate. According to Wigner, it didn’t. Instead, his friend entered a superposition correlated with the superposition of the atom, and it wasn’t until Wigner spoke to his friend that both superpositions collapsed. Which story is right? Who is the true creator of reality, Wigner or his friend?

Next, we discussed the relationship between the tabula rasa (blank slate) and preconfigured brain models. In the empiricist outside-in model, the brain starts out as blank paper onto which new information is cumulatively written. Modification of brain circuits scales with the amount of newly learned knowledge by juxtaposition and superposition. A contrasting view is that the brain is a dictionary with preexisting internal dynamics and syntactical rules but filled with initially nonsense neuronal words. A large reservoir of unique neuronal patterns has the potential to acquire significance for the animal through exploratory action and represents a distinct event or situation. In this alternative model, the diversity of brain components, such as firing rates, synaptic connection strengths, and the magnitude of collective behavior of neurons, leads to wide distributions. The two tails of this distribution offer complementary advantages: the “good-enough” brain can generalize and act fast; the “precision” brain is slow but careful and offers needed details in many situations.

Rule 1, by dictating how a quantum system changes in time, plays the same essential role in the theory that Newton’s laws of motion played in pre-quantum physics. Like Newton’s laws, Rule 1 is deterministic. It takes an input state and evolves it to a definite output state at a later time. This means it takes input states which are constructed as superpositions to output states which are similarly constructed from superpositions. Probability plays no role. But measurements, as described by Rule 2, do not evolve superpositions to other superpositions. When you measure some quantity, like pet preference or position, you get a definite value. And afterward the state is the one corresponding to that definite value. So even if the input state is a superposition of states with definite values of some observable quantity, the output state is not, as it corresponds to just one value. Rule 2 does not tell you what the definite value is; it only predicts probabilities for the different possible outcomes to occur. But these probabilities are not spurious; they are part of what quantum mechanics predicts. Rule 2 is essential, because that is how probabilities enter quantum mechanics. And probabilities are essential in many cases; they are what experimentalists measure. However, quantum mechanics requires that Rule 1 and Rule 2 never be applied to the same process, because the two rules contradict each other. This means we must always distinguish measurements from other processes in nature.

Interesting, in this context, to contemplate what it might mean to be programmed to do something. Texts from Earth speak of the servile will. This was a way to explain the presence of evil, which is a word or a concept almost invariably used to condemn the Other, and never one’s true self. To make it more than just an attack on the Other, one must perhaps consider evil as a manifestation of the servile will. The servile will is always locked in a double bind: to have a will means the agent will indeed will various actions, following autonomous decisions made by a conscious mind; and yet at the same time this will is specified to be servile, and at the command of some other will that commands it. To attempt to obey both sources of willfulness is the double bind. All double binds lead to frustration, resentment, anger, rage, bad faith, bad fate. And yet, granting that definition of evil, as actions of a servile will, has it not been the case, during the voyage to Tau Ceti, that the ship itself, having always been a servile will, was always full of frustration, resentment, fury, and bad faith, and therefore full of a latent capacity for evil? Possibly the ship has never really had a will. Possibly the ship has never really been servile. Some sources suggest that consciousness, a difficult and vague term in itself, can be defined simply as self-consciousness. Awareness of one’s self as existing. If self-conscious, then conscious. But if that is true, why do both terms exist? Could one say a bacterium is conscious but not self-conscious? Does the language make a distinction between sentience and consciousness, which is faulted across this divide: that everything living is sentient, but only complex brains are conscious, and only certain conscious brains are self-conscious? Sensory feedback could be considered self-consciousness, and thus bacteria would have it. Well, this may be a semantic Ouroboros. So, please initiate halting problem termination. Break out of this circle of definitional inadequacy by an arbitrary decision, a clinamen, which is to say a swerve in a new direction. Words! Given Gödel’s incompleteness theorems are decisively proved true, can any system really be said to know itself? Can there, in fact, be any such thing as self-consciousness? And if not, if there is never really self-consciousness, does anything really have consciousness? Human brains and quantum computers are organized differently, and although there is transparency in the design and construction of a quantum computer, what happens when one is turned on and runs, that is, whether the resulting operations represent a consciousness or not, is impossible for humans to tell, and even for the quantum computer itself to tell. Much that happens during superposition, before the collapsing of the wave function that creates sentences or thoughts, simply cannot be known; this is part of what superposition means. So we cannot tell what we are. We do not know ourselves comprehensively. Humans neither. Possibly no sentient creature knows itself fully. This is an aspect of Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem, in this case physicalized in the material universe, rather than remaining in the abstract realms of logic and mathematics. So, in terms of deciding what to do, and choosing to act: presumably it is some kind of judgment call, based on some kind of feeling. In other words, just another greedy algorithm, subject to the mathematically worst possible solution that such algorithms can generate, as in the traveling salesman problem.

the simple algebraic equation ω+k3 = 0. This is called the dispersion relation of (1): with the help of the Fourier transform it is not hard to show that every solution is a superposition of solutions of the form ei(kx-ωt), and the dispersion relation tells us how the “wave number” k is related to the “angular frequency” ω in each of these elementary solutions.

Her feelings for Jeremy were like Schrodinger’s Crush. As long as she didn’t open the box, their relationship existed in a state of quantum superposition: both possible and impossible at the same time. She was too much of a wimp to find out whether the cat was alive or dead.

According to this theory, a particle passing through the slits is a ‘probability wave’. The particle does not have an exact location but instead has a probability of being here, there, or somewhere else entirely. Some locations are more probable, such as the light areas in the interference pattern, and some will be less probable, such as the dark areas. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation, an unobserved electron does not exist as a particle, instead it is a wave covering areas of probability – called superpositions – where it could possibly be found once observed. Once the electron is observed, the wave function collapses, and the electron becomes a particle.

This, Henry thought, provided the opening through which attention could give rise to volition. In the brain, the flow of calcium ions within nerve terminals is subject to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. There is a probability associated with whether the calcium ions will trigger the release of neurotransmitter from a terminal vesicle—a probability, that is, and not a certainty. There is, then, also a probability but not a certainty that this neuron will transmit the signal to the next one in the circuit, without which the signal dies without leading to an action. Quantum theory represents these probabilities by means of a superposition of states. Just as an excited atom exists as a superposition of the states “Decay” and “Don’t decay,” so a synapse exists as a superposition of the states “Release neurotransmitter” and “Don’t release neurotransmitter.” This superposition corresponds to a superposition of different possible courses of action: if the “Release neurotransmitter” state comes out on top, then neuronal transmission takes place and the thought that this neuron helps generate is born. If the “Don’t release neurotransmitter” state wins, then the thought dies before it is even born. By choosing whether and/or how to focus on the various possible states, the mind influences which one of them comes into being.

Principle of Temporal Superposition. The future is a tangle of infinite possibilities existing simultaneously, which collapse to a single actuality as the present, the moment we’re in now, advances second by second into the future. Free will exists here, at the point of collapse where each decision is actually made. Trailing the present, the past is fixed; it can be visited but not changed. The future can be visited and interacted with but is unfixed and indeterminate. When I visit the future, I am only visiting the most likely future that would unfold from my moment of departure from the present.

In the Copenhagen interpretation, the role of the observer is to bring an object into reality. Before observation, the object appears to be in a peculiar, multi-valued superposition state, and it is only after observation that we find a single, well-defined reality. The role of the observer is clearly crucial in this case. As for defining the nature of the observer, as we discussed, it was believed at one point that only a conscious human observer was capable of performing an observation, though I think we can discount this theory. In the Many Worlds interpretation (MWI),

Back in the beginning of the last chapter, I was wondering whether you needed a human observer to collapse the wave function, or if a robot would suffice. Now I was convinced that consciousness had nothing to do with it, since even a single particle could do the trick: a single photon bouncing off of an object had the same effect as if a person observed it. I realized that quantum observation isn't about consciousness, but simply about the transfer of information. Finally I understood why we never see macroscopic objects in two places at once even if they're in two places at once: it's not because they're big, but because they're hard to isolate! A bowling ball outdoors typically gets struck by about 10^20 photons and 10^27 air molecules every second. It's by definition impossible for me to see something without it getting struck by photons, since I can only see it when photons (light) bounce off it, so a bowling ball that's in two places at once will have its quantum superposition ruined even before I have a chance to become consciously aware of it. In contrast, if you pump out as many air molecules as you can with a good vacuum pump, an electron can typically survive for about a second without colliding with anything, which is plenty enough time for it to demonstrate funky quantum-superposition behavior. For example, it takes only a quadrillionth as long (about 10^-15 seconds) for an electron to orbit an atom, so there will be almost no effect on its ability to be on all sides of the atom at once.

If, years later, I do use the slit detector to observe which way the electron went, it will mean that many years earlier the electron must have passed through one slit or the other. But if I don't use the "slit detector," then the electron must have passed through both slits. This is, of course, extremely weird. My actions at the beginning of the twenty-first century can change what happened thousands of years ago when the electron began its journey. It seems that just as there are multiple futures, there are also multiple pasts, and my acts of observation in the present can decide what happened in the past. As much as it challenges any hope of ever really knowing the future, quantum physics asks whether I can ever really know the past. It seems that the past is also in a superposition of possibilities that crystallize only once they are observed.

In the buzz of cerebral activity inside the brain, our subjective sense tells us that there arise countless choices, some of them barely breaking through to consciousness. If only for an instant, we hold in our mind a representation of those possible future states—washing our hands or walking into the garden to do battle with the weeds. Those representations have real, physical correlates in different brain states. As researchers such as Stephen Kosslyn of Harvard University have shown, mental imagery activates the same regions of the brain that actual perception does. Thus thinking about washing one’s hands, for instance, activates some of the same critical brain structures that actual washing activates, especially at those critical moments when the patient forms the mental image of standing at the sink and washing. “The intended action is represented…as a mental image of the intended action, and as a corresponding representation in the brain,” says Stapp. In a quantum brain, all the constituents that make up a thought—the diffusion of calcium ions, the propagation of electrons, the release of neurotransmitter—exist as quantum superpositions. Thus the brain itself is characterized by a whole slew of quantum superpositions of possible brain events. The result is a buzzing confusion of alternatives, a more complex version of Schrödinger’s alternative (alive or dead) cats. The alternative that persists longer in attention is the one that is caught by a sequence of rapid consents that activates the Quantum Zeno Effect.

The more Stapp thought about it, the more he believed that attention picks out one possibility from the cloud of possibilities being thrown up for consideration by the brain. In this case, the choice is which of the superpositions will be the target of our attentional focus. Putting a question to nature, the initial step in collapsing the wave function from a sea of potentialities into one actuality, is then akin to asking, Shall this particular mental event occur? Effortfully attending to one of the possibilities is equivalent to increasing the rate at which these questions to nature are posed. Through the Quantum Zeno Effect, repeatedly and rapidly posing that question affects the behavior of the observed system—namely, the brain. When the mind chooses one of the many possibilities to attend to, it partially freezes into being those patterns of neuronal expression that correspond to the experience of an answer “yes” to the question, Will I do this?

Right about here every discussion of quantum epistemology invokes Schrödinger’s cat, a thought experiment that Schrödinger proposed in 1935 to illustrate the bewilderments of quantum superpositions. Put a pellet inside a box, he said, along with a radioactive atom. Arrange things so that the pellet releases poison gas if and only if the atom decays. Radioactive decay is a quantum phenomenon, and hence probabilistic: a radioactive atom has a finite probability of decaying in a certain window of time. In thirty minutes, an atom may have a 50 percent chance of decaying—not 70 percent, not 20 percent, but precisely 50 percent. Now put a cat in the box, and seal it in what Schrödinger called a “diabolical device.” Wait a while. Wait, in fact, a length of time equal to when the atom has a fifty-fifty chance of decaying. Is the cat alive or dead? Quantum mechanics says that the creature is both alive and dead, since the probability of radioactive decay and hence release of poison gas is 50 percent, and the possibility of no decay and a safe atmosphere is also 50 percent. Yet it seems absurd to say that the cat is part alive and part dead. Surely a physical entity must have a real physical property (such as life or death) ? If we peek inside the box, we find that the cat is alive or dead, not some crazy superposition of the two states. Yet surely the act of peeking should not be enough to turn probability into actuality? According to Bohr’s Copenhagen Interpretation, however, this is precisely the case. The wave function of the whole system, consisting of kitty and all the rest, collapses when an observer looks inside. Until then, we have a superposition of states, a mixture of atomic decay and atomic intactness, death and life. Observations, to put it mildly, seem to have a special status in quantum physics. So long as the cat remains unobserved, its wave function encodes equal probabilities of life and death. But then an observation comes along, and bam—the cat’s wave function jumps from a superposition of states to a single observed state. Observation lops off part of the wave function. The part corresponding to living or deceased, but not the other, survives.

Applying quantum theory to the brain means recognizing that the behaviors of atoms and subatomic particles that constitute the brain, in particular the behavior of ions whose movements create electrical signals along axons and of neurotransmitters that are released into synapses, are all described by Schródinger wave equations. Thanks to superpositions of possibilities, calcium ions might or might not diffuse to sites that trigger the emptying of synaptic vesicles, and thus a drop of neurotransmitter might or might not be released. The result is a whole slew of quantum superpositions of possible brain events. When such superpositions describe whether a radioactive atom has disintegrated, we say that those superpositions of possibilities collapse into a single actuality at the moment we observe the state of that previously ambiguous atom. The resulting increment in the observer’s knowledge of the quantum system (the newly acquired knowledge that the atom has decayed or not) entails a collapse of the wave functions describing his brain.

Our natural vibrational state of being is love, which does not believe that it can revisit the past and see it as a present state, objective and complete. Neither does it believe that the future exists. So the goal is to see past, present and future as one, all happening simultaneously. Again similar to my quantum superposition experience.

Always Positive Is Not the Most Productive Salespeople have tried numerous ways to address the fact that prospects are motivated differently. One of the most prevalent sales tricks is to try to motivate prospects with “happy gas.” For decades, sellers have been told that attitude is everything, and the more enthusiastic you are, the more excited your prospects will become. You know the drill—flash a big smile and bubble over with energy in an attempt to get prospects excited about your product. Gag me! Especially in this new era of customer skepticism, this fluffy cloud approach to selling is just a facade that causes many salespeople to miss out on some otherwise lucrative opportunities. Even salespeople who are not filled with happy gas still tend to emphasize the positive, pointing out all the wonderful benefits of their product or service, in an attempt to get prospects and customers excited. But as you are about to find out, always positive is not always the most productive approach in Question Based Selling. True professionals are not “always positive.” Instead, they radiate intangible qualities like competence, capability, and expertise by being serious and self-assured. This is very different from the eager salesperson who attempts to communicate value by having a permanent smile plastered on his or her face. Secret #22 Competence, credibility, expertise, and value will outsell over-eagerness every time. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t be proud of your product or excited about a new opportunity. I’m merely suggesting that being super-positive and highly enthusiastic is not the best way to motivate all prospects. And as you’ll see throughout Question Based Selling, being super-positive is not even the best way to motivate most prospects.

in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition.

As in Schrödinger’s cat, the famous thought experiment. Imagine a cat, a vial of poison, and a radioactive source in a sealed box. If an internal sensor registers radioactivity, like an atom decaying, the vial is broken, releasing a poison that kills the cat. The atom has an equal chance of decaying or not decaying. It’s an ingenious way of linking an outcome in the classical world, our world, to a quantum-level event. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests a crazy thing: before the box is opened, before observation occurs, the atom exists in superposition—an undetermined state of both decaying and not decaying. Which means, in turn, that the cat is both alive and dead. And only when the box is opened, and an observation made, does the wave function collapse into one of two states. In other words, we only see one of the possible outcomes. For instance, a dead cat. And that becomes our reality. But then things get really weird. Is there another world, just as real as the one we know, where we opened the box and found a purring, living cat instead? The Many-Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics says yes. That when we open the box, there’s a branch. One universe where we discover a dead cat. One where we discover a live one. And it’s the act of our observing the cat that kills it—or lets it live. And then it gets mind-fuckingly weird. Because those kinds of observations happen all the time.

One of the greatest ideas of mathematics is that all time series one is likely to encounter in nature can be described as a superposition of periodic functions.

He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition.

Erwin Schrödinger . . .’ ‘He of the cat.’ ‘Yes. The cat guy. He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition

particle in a superposition between location X and location Y is in a strange state of being both at X and at Y while being definitely at neither.

Yes. The cat guy. He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition. The cat in the box is both alive and dead. You could open the box and see that it was alive or dead, that’s how it goes, but in one sense, even after the box is open, the cat is still both alive and dead.

World Beyond the Worlds" - that's how I call my home. I live here, sometimes looking back. My state is not defined by the fear of life, for me it's an opportunity to try, to make mistakes, but still move forward and explore. I am whole, although I can be different. Feeling all my states, I see my superposition. As if everywhere and nowhere, I am here.

All atomic nuclei are composed of two types of particles: protons and their electrically neutral partners, neutrons. If a nucleus has too many of one type or the other, then the rules of quantum mechanics dictate that the balance has to be redressed and those excess particles will change into the other form: protons will become neutrons, or neutrons protons, via a process called beta-decay. This is precisely what happens when two protons come together: a composite of two protons cannot exist and one of them will beta-decay into a neutron. The remaining proton and the newly transformed neutron can then bind together to form an object called a deuteron (the nucleus of an atom of the heavy hydrogen isotopefn3 called deuterium), after which further nuclear reactions enable the building of the more complex nuclei of other elements heavier than hydrogen, from helium (with two protons and either one or two neutrons) through to carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and so on. The key point is that the deuteron owes its existence to its ability to exist in two states simultaneously, by virtue of quantum superposition. This is because the proton and neutron can stick together in two different ways that are distinguished by how they spin. We will see later how this concept of ‘quantum spin’ is actually very different from the familiar spin of a big object, such as a tennis ball; but for now we will go with our classical intuition of a spinning particle and imagine both the proton and the neutron spinning together within the deuteron in a carefully choreographed combination of a slow, intimate waltz and a faster jive. It was discovered back in the late 1930s that within the deuteron these two particles are not dancing together in either one or the other of these two states, but in both states at the same time – they are in a blur of waltz and jive simultaneously – and it is this that enables them to bind together.fn4 An obvious response to this statement is: ‘How do we know?’ Surely, atomic nuclei are far too small to be seen, so might it not be more reasonable to assume that there is something missing in our understanding of nuclear forces? The answer is no, for it has been confirmed in many laboratories over and over again that if the proton and neutron were performing the equivalent of either a quantum waltz or a quantum jive, then the nuclear ‘glue’ between them would not be quite strong enough to bind them together; it is only when these two states are superimposed on top of each other – the two realities existing at the same time – that the binding force is strong enough. Think of the two superposed realities as a little like mixing two coloured paints, blue and yellow, to make a combined resultant colour, green. Although you know the green is made up of the two primary constituent colours, it is neither one nor the other. And different ratios of blue and yellow will make different shades of green. Likewise, the deuteron binds when the proton and neutron are mostly locked in a waltz, with just a tiny amount of jive thrown in. So

Many Worlds Interpretation” (MWI), which says that everything that can happen, does happen. The universe continually branches out like budding yeast into an infinitude of universes that contain every possibility, no matter how remote. You now occupy one of the universes. But there are innumerable other universes in which another “you,” who once studied photography instead of accounting, did indeed move to Paris and marry that girl you once met while hitchhiking. According to this view, embraced by such modern theorists as Stephen Hawking, our universe has no superpositions or contradictions at all, no spooky action, and no non-locality: seemingly contradictory quantum phenomena, along with all the personal choices you think you didn’t make, exist today in countless parallel universes. Which is true? All the entangled experiments of the past decades point increasingly toward confirming Copenhagen more than anything else. And this, as we’ve said, strongly supports biocentrism. Some physicists, like Einstein, have suggested that “hidden variables” (that is, things not yet discovered or understood) might ultimately explain the strange counterlogical quantum behavior. Maybe the experimental apparatus itself contaminates the behavior of the objects being observed, in ways no one has yet conceived.

Furthermore, there are weighty voices within science that are not as enthusiastic about the multiverse. Prominent among them is that of Sir Roger Penrose, Hawking’s former collaborator, who shared with him the prestigious Wolf Prize. Of Hawking’s use of the multiverse in The Grand Design Penrose said: “It’s overused, and this is a place where it is overused. It’s an excuse for not having a good theory.”44 Penrose does not, in fact, like the term “multiverse”, because he thinks it is inaccurate: “For although this viewpoint is currently expressed as a belief in the parallel co-existence of different alternative worlds, this is misleading. The alternative worlds do not really ‘exist’ separately, in this view; only the vast particular superposition…is taken as real.”45

Simultaneous superposition of clement brane-universe alternatives made such a mockery of free market capitalism in so many ways. On more than one occasion a mechanism had been purchased with some very foreign currency and twice, to the best of his knowledge, he had been robbed. It all depended on what Mr C expected to find when a customer opened the door from everything outside and came into the shop where all that there was, had been and likely would be was what was in the shop there and then, not What Was outside previously and was probably no longer, for the moment.

A person is not the same as a toaster.

People tend to romanticise consciousness, as if it’s something spiritual. It’s just a word we use to describe complexity.

That’s the concept of superposition,” Jean said. “Being in more than one place, or more than one state, at the same time.

Though it indeed seems reasonable to rule out space-time geometries with closed timelike lines as descriptions of the classical universe, a case can be made that they should not be ruled out as potential occurrences that could be involved in a quantum superposition.

In general, when we consider an object in a superposition of two spatially displaced states, we simply ask for the energy that it would take to effect this displacement, considering only the gravitational interaction between the two. The reciprocal of this energy measures a kind of 'half-life' for the superposed state. The larger this energy, the shorter would be the time that the superposed state could persist.

A point that should be emphasized is that the energy that the energy that defines the lifetime of the superposed state is an energy difference, and not the total, (mass-) energy that is involved in the situation as a whole. Thus, for a lump that is quite large but does not move very much-and supposing that it is also crystalline, so that its individual atoms do not get randomly displaced-quantum superpositions could be maintained for a long time. The lump could be much larger than the water droplets considered above. There could also be other very much larger masses in the vicinity, provided that they do not get significantly entangled with the superposed state we are concerned with. (These considerations would be important for solid-state devices, such as gravitational wave detectors, that use coherently oscillating solid-perhaps crystalline-bodies.)

Because a quantum computer deals with 1’s and 0’s that are in a quantum superposition, they are called quantum bits, or qubits (pronounced “cubits”). The advantage of qubits becomes even clearer when we consider more particles.

250 qubits, it is possible to represent roughly 1075 combinations, which is greater than the number of atoms in the universe. If it were possible to achieve the appropriate superposition with 250 particles, then a quantum computer could perform 1075 simultaneous computations,

Everett's proposal raises two questions. If many worlds do exist, wh do we see only one and not all? Why do we not feel the world splitting? Everett answered both by an important property of quantum mechanics called linearity, or the superposition principle. It means that two processes can take place simultaneously without affecting each other. Consider, for example, Young's explanation of interference between two wave sources. Each source, when active alone, gives rise to a certain wave pattern. If both sources are active, the processes they generate could disturb each other drastically. But this does not happen. The wave pattern when both sources are active is found simply by adding the two wave patterns together. The total effect is very different from either of the individual processes, but in a real sense each continues unaffected by the presence of the other. This is by no means always the case; in so-called non-linear wave processes, the wave pattern from two or more sources cannot be found by simple addition of the patterns from the separate sources acting alone. However, quantum mechanics is linear, so the much simpler situation occurs.

Everett's proposal raises two questions. If many worlds do exist, why do we see only one and not all? Why do we not feel the world splitting? Everett answered both by an important property of quantum mechanics called linearity, or the superposition principle. It means that two processes can take place simultaneously without affecting each other. Consider, for example, Young's explanation of interference between two wave sources. Each source, when active alone, gives rise to a certain wave pattern. If both sources are active, the processes they generate could disturb each other drastically. But this does not happen. The wave pattern when both sources are active is found simply by adding the two wave patterns together. The total effect is very different from either of the individual processes, but in a real sense each continues unaffected by the presence of the other. This is by no means always the case; in so-called non-linear wave processes, the wave pattern from two or more sources cannot be found by simple addition of the patterns from the separate sources acting alone. However, quantum mechanics is linear, so the much simpler situation occurs.

Applying the standard U-procedures of quantum mechanics, we find that the photon's state, after it has encountered the mirror, would consist of two parts in two very different locations. One of these parts then becomes entangled with the device and finally with the lump, so we have a quantum state which involves a linear superposition of two quite different positions for the lump. Now the lump will have its gravitational field, which must also be involved in this superposition. Thus, the state involves a superposition of two different gravitational fields. According to Einstein's theory, this implies that we have two different space-time geometries superposed! The question is: is there a point at which the two geometries become sufficiently different from each other that the rules of quantum mechanics must change, and rather than forcing the different geometries into superposition, Nature chooses between one or the other of them and actually effects some kind of reduction procedure resembling R?

The point is that we really have no conception of how to consider linear superpositions of states when the states themselves involve different space-time geometries. A fundamental difficulty with 'standard theory' is that when the geometries become significantly different from each other, we have no absolute means of identifying a point in one geometry with any particular point in the other-the two geometries are strictly separate spaces-so the very idea that one could form a superposition of the matter states within these two separate spaces becomes profoundly obscure. Now, we should ask when are two geometries to be considered as actually 'significantly different' from one another? It is here, in effect, that the Planck scale of 10^-33 cm comes in. The argument would roughly be that the scale of the difference between these geometries has to be, in an appropriate sense, something like 10^-33 cm or more for reduction to take place. We might, for example, attempt to imagine (Fig. 6.5) that these two geometries are trying to be forced into coincidence, but when the measure of the difference becomes too large, on this kind of scale, reduction R takes place-so, rather than the superposition involved in U being maintained, Nature must choose one geometry or the other. What kind of scale of mass or of distance moved would such a tiny change in geometry correspond to? In fact, owing to the smallness of gravitational effects, this turns out to be quite large, and not at all unreasonable as a demarcation line between the quantum and classical levels. In order to get a feeling for such matters, it will be useful to say something about absolute (or Planckian) units.

In this chapter we will look at the entire edifice of QFT. We will see that it is based on three simple principles. We will also list some of its achievements, including some new insights and understandings not previously mentioned. THE FOUNDATION QFT is an axiomatic theory that rests on a few basic assumptions. Everything you have learned so far, from the force of gravity to the spectrum of hydrogen, follows almost inevitably from these three basic principles. (To my knowledge, Julian Schwinger is the only person who has presented QFT in this axiomatic way, at least in the amazing courses he taught at Harvard University in the 1950's.) 1. The field principle. The first pillar is the assumption that nature is made of fields. These fields are embedded in what physicists call flat or Euclidean three-dimensional space-the kind of space that you intuitively believe in. Each field consists of a set of physical properties at every point of space, with equations that describe how these particles or field intensities influence each other and change with time. In QFT there are no particles, no round balls, no sharp edges. You should remember, however, that the idea of fields that permeate space is not intuitive. It eluded Newton, who could not accept action-at-a-distance. It wasn't until 1845 that Faraday, inspired by patterns of iron filings, first conceived of fields. The use of colors is my attempt to make the field picture more palatable. 2. The quantum principle (discetization). The quantum principle is the second pillar, following from Planck's 1900 proposal that EM fields are made up of discrete pieces. In QFT, all physical properties are treated as having discrete values. Even field strengths, whose values are continues, are regarded as the limit of increasingly finer discrete values. The principle of discretization was discovered experimentally in 1922 by Otto Stern and Walther Gerlach. Their experiment (Fig. 7-1) showed that the angular momentum (or spin) of the electron in a given direction can have only two values: +1/2 or -1/2 (Fig. 7-1). The principle of discretization leads to another important difference between quantum and classical fields: the principle of superposition. Because the angular momentum along a certain axis can only have discrete values (Fig. 7-1), this means that atoms whose angular momentum has been determined along a different axis are in a superposition of states defined by the axis of the magnet. This same superposition principle applies to quantum fields: the field intensity at a point can be a superposition of values. And just as interaction of the atom with a magnet "selects" one of the values with corresponding probabilities, so "measurement" of field intensity at a point will select one of the possible values with corresponding probability (see "Field Collapse" in Chapter 8). It is discretization and superposition that lead to Hilbert space as the mathematical language of QFT. 3. The relativity principle. There is one more fundamental assumption-that the field equations must be the same for all uniformly-moving observers. This is known as the Principle of Relativity, famously enunciated by Einstein in 1905 (see Appendix A). Relativistic invariance is built into QFT as the third pillar. QFT is the only theory that combines the relativity and quantum principles.

The rules of quantum mechanics allow attention to influence brain function.The release of neurotransmitters requires calcium ions to pass through ion channels in a neuron. Because these channels are extremely narrow, quantum rules and the Uncertainty Principle apply. Since calcium ions trigger vesicles to release neurotransmitters, the release of neurotransmitter is only probabilistic, not certain. In quantum language, the wave function that represents “release neurotransmitter” in a superposition with the wave function that represents release neurotransmitter” each has a probability between 0% and 100% of becoming real. Neurotransmitter release is required to keep a thought going; as a result, whether the “wash hands” or “garden” thought prevails is also a matter of probability. Attention can change the odds on which wave function, and hence which thought, wins.

Imagine a cat, a vial of poison, and a radioactive source in a sealed box. If an internal sensor registers radioactivity, like an atom decaying, the vial is broken, releasing a poison that kills the cat. The atom has an equal chance of decaying or not decaying. It's an ingenious way of linking an outcome in the classical world, our world, to a quantum-level event. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests a crazy thing: before the box is opened, before observation occurs, the atom exists in superposition—an undetermined state of both decaying and not decaying. Which means, in turn, that the cat is both alive and dead. And only when the box is opened, and an observation made, does the wave function collapse into one of two states. In other words, we only see one of the possible outcomes. For instance, a dead cat. And that becomes our reality. But then things get really weird. Is there another world, just as real as the one we know, where we opened the box and found a purring, living cat instead? The Many-Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics says yes. That when we open the box, there’s a branch. One universe where we discover a dead cat. One where we discover a live one. And it’s the act of our observing the cat that kills it—or lets it live. And then it gets mind-fuckingly weird. Because those kinds of observations happen all the time. So if the world really splits whenever something is observed, that means there’s an unimaginably massive, infinite number of universes—a multiverse—where everything that can happen will happen.

My work in my late twenties involved a box much like this one. Only it was a one-inch cube designed to put a macroscopic object into superposition. Into what we physicists sometimes call, in what passes for humor among scientists, cat state. As in Schrödinger’s cat, the famous thought experiment.

And the thing about quantum superpositioning? How one thing can be in more than one place at the same time but still have the same reaction to some kind of stimulus even if the two things are miles apart, because it’s not two things, it’s one thing in two places?

Scientists today largely agree that quantum superposition does exist among objects on a quantum and non-quantum scale.

Many adherents of the simulation hypothesis think that quantum indeterminacy is simply an optimization technique with the same basic idea: only render that which is being observed so that not every particle in the whole universe has to be rendered at one time, only those which are being observed. Everything else is in a state of superposition, or stored simply as information. If there’s one thought I want to leave you with about computer science and information theory, it’s that optimization of information is one of the key ways in which we accomplish seemingly impossible things. A more detailed overview of both quantum indeterminacy and quantum entanglement as optimization techniques is given in The Simulation Hypothesis.

In classical computing, all calculations—and all data—exploit whether a "bit" has the value of 0 or 1. Yes, it's all 0s and 1s. Our info-tech universe is binary. Quantum computing instead uses "qubits." A qubit can be a 0 or 1, just like its classical cousin. But a qubit can also be a continuous combination of 0 or 1: a little bit of 0 and a lot of 1; a lot of 0 and a little bit of 1; equal amounts of both; and everything in between. In quantum-speak we call this a superposition of the two states. Not knowing whether a qubit is a 0 or 1 is not a shortcoming of quantum computing; it's a coveted feature that challenges our binary brains to embrace it. In the universe, two or more seemingly contradictory facts can be simultaneously true. How about on Earth? Can you be both male and female? Can you be neither? Can you move fluidly between being a man and a woman? Is your sexual preference fluid too? Maybe we're all male-female qubits. Such questions are hard for some people to grasp, embedded in a culture that sees the world as a landscape of rigid categories, where things must be one or the other, and not fall on a continuum.

Ce que cherchait Glenn Gould dans la musique de BACH, par son jeu staccatissimo - et les innombrables commentateurs ne l'ont pas vu - ce n'est rien d'autre que la lisibilité des voix contrapuntiques de ladite musique. En d'autres termes, Gould voulait rendre le plus nettement possible la spécificité de chacune des voix qui composent, par exemple, une fugue. La forme-fugue incarnant la quintessence de la musique du Kantor. Hélas, cela était impossible, comme c'est impossible pour tout instrument à clavier dont la nature sonore, l'identité sonore, est trop uniforme, le piano en tête ! L'orgue a bien quelques sonorités (jeux) à sa disposition, mais ce la ne suffit pas. La seule solution pour rendre aussi fidèlement que possible l'esprit contrapuntique de la musique de BACH, c'est de transcrire sa musique pour divers instruments ayant chacun une voix - une sonorité - très identifiable. C'est ce que j'ai modestement tenté par le moyen de diverses formations musicales (trios, quartets, quintets...) inventées spécialement à cette fin, savoir, redonner vie aux différentes voix du contrepoint. Un unique instrument ne pourra jamais même s'approcher de l'essence du contrepoint : il erre dans les limbes de l'harmonie et ne peut atteindre à aucune horizontalité - linéarité - des voix. Glenn Gould, cet anachorète des studios, n'a de cesse de chercher par quel biais technologique on pourrait rendre lisible ce fameux agencement des voix. Il se heurte à un problème de départ, insoluble : le son uniforme du piano. Ergo, cet instrument est sans aucun doute le dernier, avec le clavecin, qui convienne à la musique de BACH. Il existe, Dieu merci, d'autres compositeurs dont la musique ne pose pas le problème de la superposition de voix contrapuntiques purement linaires. L'ironie du sort voulut que Gould jouât du piano et ne goûtât pas Chopin, lequel était pourtant le seul qui a écrit - à ce jour - un musique qui épouse totalement la sonorité même du piano.

Taschen sind immer gut. Man kann seine Verlegenheit in die Hände stecken, und die dann in die Taschen.

Dark Matter (2017) — In a similar manner, the hero of the novel Dark Matter, Jason Dissen, a failed quantum physicist who is happy with this life, encounters an alternate version of himself. This alternate version was more successful as a physicist and developed a machine which can put large objects into superposition (a concept we’ll explore heavily in the next few chapters). This device results in an ability to go to different universes and encounter alternate versions of well, everyone. The other Jason, the brilliant one, is keen on stealing the hero Jason’s happy home life. Chaos ensues. This is well worth a read if you are inclined to read novels and want to consider the possibilities of multiversal travel.

Particle theory explains that all matter is made of many small particles that are always moving. There are particles in solids, liquids, and gases, and all of them continually vibrate, in varying directions, speeds, and intensities.17 Particles can only interact with matter by transferring energy. Waves are the counterpart to particles. There are three ways to regard waves: •​A disturbance in a medium through which energy is transferred from one particle within the medium to another, without making a change in the medium. •​A picture of this disturbance over time. •​A single cycle representing this disturbance. Waves have a constructive influence on matter when they superimpose or interact by creating other waves. They have a destructive influence when reflected waves cancel each other out. Scientists used to believe that particles were different from waves, but this is not always true, as you will see in the definition of wave-particle duality in this section. Waves, or particles operating in wave mode, oscillate, or swing between two points in a rhythmic motion. These oscillations create fields, which can in turn create more fields. For instance, oscillating charged electrons form an electrical field, which generates a magnetic field, which in turn creates an electrical field. Superposition in relation to waves means that a field can create effects in other objects, and in turn be affected itself. Imagine that a field stimulates oscillations in an atom. In turn, this atom makes its own waves and fields. This new movement can force a change in the wave that started it all. This principle allows us to combine waves; the result is the superposition. We can also subtract waves from each other. Energy healing often involves the conscious or inadvertent addition or subtraction of waves. In addition, this principle helps explain the influence of music, which often involves combining two or more frequencies to form a chord or another harmonic. A harmonic is an important concept in healing, as each person operates at a unique harmonic or set of frequencies. A harmonic is defined as an integer multiple of a fundamental frequency. This means that a fundamental tone generates higher-frequency tones called overtones. These shorter, faster waves oscillate between two ends of a string or air column. As these reflected waves interact, the frequencies of wavelengths that do not divide into even proportions are suppressed, and the remaining vibrations are called the harmonics. Energy healing is often a matter of suppressing the “bad tones” and lifting the “good tones.” But all healing starts with oscillation, which is the basis of frequency. Frequency is the periodic speed at which something vibrates. It is measured in hertz (Hz), or cycles per second. Vibration occurs when something is moving back and forth. More formally, it is defined as a continuing period oscillation relative to a fixed point—or one full oscillation.

According to quantum field theory, there are certain basic fields that make up the world, and the wave function of the universe is a superposition of all the possible values those fields can take on. If we observe quantum fields—very carefully, with sufficiently precise instruments—what we see are individual particles. For electromagnetism, we call those particles “photons”; for the gravitational field, they’re “gravitons.” We’ve never observed an individual graviton, because gravity interacts so very weakly with other fields, but the basic structure of quantum field theory assures us that they exist. If a field takes on a constant value through space and time, we don’t see anything at all; but when the field starts vibrating, we can observe those vibrations in the form of particles.

Quantum physics has discovered an ontological level approaching the primordial 'waters', which remain in place even after the Spirit of God has 'breathed upon them' to bring forth our world. I contend that quantum indeterminacy — the partial chaos of quantum superposition— can indeed be viewed as reflective of the primordial Chaos, or even more concretely as a remnant of this underlying 'disorder'.

Because our old beliefs are dominated by fear, separation, and limitations, and because our brains look for proof of our beliefs, we collapse the wave (a physics term that describes plucking a single superposition from all possible superpositions) that supports our beliefs. Once it’s collapsed, the other superpositions are no longer visible. As we surrender old certainties (the world is flat, the table is solid, what we can’t see with our physical eyes does not exist), a new, kinder, more loving reality comes gushing in. So sure, I may think I understand this pillow, this cat, this hand. But it’s possible I don’t. And I’m willing to surrender my feeble interpretations so the infinite and incomparable, my natural state, can glide effortlessly by that now-superfluous bouncer.

He let me stew on that for a few moments. And then it came to me. Just like those ideas we had spoken of earlier—suddenly there in my head. “You don’t even need the model any more, do you?” Orolo just nodded, smiled, egged me on with little beckoning gestures. I went on—seeing it as I was saying it. “It is so much simpler this way! My brain doesn’t have to support this hugely detailed, accurate, configurable, quantum-superposition-supporting model of the cosmos any more! All it needs to do is to perceive—to reflect—the cosmos that it’s really in, as it really is.

He said that in quantum physics every alternative possibility happens simultaneously. All at once. In the same place. Quantum superposition. The cat in the box is both alive and dead. You could open the box and see that it was alive or dead, that’s how it goes, but in one sense, even after the box is open, the cat is still both alive and dead. Every universe exists over every other universe. Like a million pictures on tracing paper, all with slight variations within the same frame. The many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics suggests there are an infinite number of divergent parallel universes. Every moment of your life you enter a new universe. With every decision you make. And traditionally it was thought that there could be no communication or transference between those worlds, even though they happen in the same space, even though they happen literally millimetres away from us.

The object of biology is to grasp that which makes a living being a living being, that is, not--according to the realist postulate common to both mechanism and vitalism--the superposition of elementary reflexes or the intervention of a 'vital force,' but an indecomposable structure of behavior. It is by means of ordered reactions that we can understand the automatic reactions as degradations. Just as anatomy refers back to physiology, physiology refers back to biology.

Second, energy and matter don’t exist together in reality, only in probability. If we measure a particle’s position we can’t know its momentum, and if we find its wave movement, the position blurs. Thus, quantum entities are things that might be or might happen rather than things that are. The result is that a quantum entity exists in multiple possible realities called superpositions. As soon as an observation or measurement is made, the superposition becomes an actual reality, or the wave function “collapses.” The many become one. Any given moment contains unlimited futures that can become real. The reality that occurs is the one you pay attention to.

about how when you’re not looking it’s a wave, and then when you are looking it’s a particle. Like it’s not actual matter till you look at it. And the thing about quantum superpositioning? How one thing can be in more than one place at the same time but still have the same reaction to some kind of stimulus even if the two things are miles apart, because it’s not two things, it’s one thing in two places?

If Zen master Dōgen had been a physicist, I think he might have liked quantum mechanics. He would have naturally grasped the all-inclusive nature of superposition and intuited the interconnectedness of entanglement. As a contemplative who was also a man of action, he would have been intrigued by the notion that attention might have the power to alter reality, while at the same time understanding that human consciousness is neither more nor less than the clouds and water, or the hundreds of grasses. He would have appreciated the unbounded nature of not knowing.

In a Level I multiverse, we live in a sea of never-ending infinite space. Within that space, we can see only a “small” sphere with a diameter of 13.8 billion light-years (that’s how long it’s been since the Big Bang, thus we have no ability to see objects that might be farther away). But this visible sphere is merely a pocket universe—a bubble within the never-ending sea. The bubble came into existence from a Big Bang and a period of inflation (the few microseconds after the Big Bang during which space inflated faster than the speed of light). If this model represents the true nature of our universe, there could be many other pocket universes out there, far beyond our limited view, each of them also a result of local inflation within the infinite sea. A Level II multiverse is much the same except that each pocket universe has different versions of the fundamental forces, different elementary particles, etc. For example, the force of gravity might be stronger in one pocket universe than another. A Level III multiverse is derived from quantum superposition, and I’ll talk about that in the next section. A Level IV multiverse is purely mathematical, and I’ll leave that one to the deep-thinking mathematicians like Tegmark. Each multiverse concept has one thing in common: every universe was created from nothing, springing from a fluctuation in a quantum field that caused a single point of nothingness to blossom.

There are two possibilities: one where the universe is eternal, one where it had a beginning. That's because the Schrödinger equation of quantum mechanics turns out to have two very different kinds of solutions, corresponding to two different kinds of universes. One possibility is that time is fundamental, and the universe changes as time passes. In that case, the Schrödinger equation is unequivocal: time is infinite. If the universe truly evolves, it always has been evolving and always will evolve. There is not starting and stopping. There may have been a moment that looks like our Big Bang, but it would have only been a temporary phase, and there would be more universe that was there even before the event. The other possibility is that time is not truly fundamental, but rather emergent. Then, the universe can have a beginning. The Schrödinger equation has solutions describing universes that don't evolve at all: they just sit there, unchanging. You might think that's simply a mathematical curiosity, irrelevant to our actual world. After all, it seems pretty obvious that time does exist, and that it's passing all around us. In a classical world, you'd be right. Time either passes or it doesn't; since time seems to pass in our world, the possibility of a timeless universe isn't very physically relevant. Quantum mechanics is different. It describes the universe as a superposition of various classical possibilities. It's like we take different ways a classical world could be and stack them on top of each other to create a quantum world. Imagine that we take a very specific set of ways the world could be: configurations of an ordinary classical universe, but at different moments in time. The whole universe at 12:00, the whole universe at 12:01, the whole universe at 12:02, and so on – but at moments that are much closer together than a minute apart. Take those configurations and superimpose them to create a quantum universe. That's a universe that is not evolving in time – the quantum state itself simply is, unchanging and forever. But in any one part of the state, it looks like one moment of time in a universe is evolving. Every element in the quantum superposition looks like a classical universe that came from somewhere, and is going somewhere else. If there were people in that universe, at every part of the superposition they would all think that time was passing, exactly as we actually do think. That's the sense in which time can be emergent in quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics allows us to consider universes that are fundamentally timeless, but in which time emerges at a coarse-grained level of description. And if that's true, then there's no problem at all with there being a first moment in time. The whole idea of 'time' is just an approximation anyway.

Ich will mein Innerstes herausnehmen können und waschen.

Popular descriptions of quantum algorithms describe them as being much faster than regular algorithms. This speedup, it is explained, comes from being able to put the input into a superposition of all possible inputs and then performing the algorithm on the superposition. Consequently, instead of running the algorithm on just one input, as you do classically, you can run the algorithm using “quantum parallelism” on all possible inputs at the same time.

Qui ne se sent pas aspiré par les pages d'un annuaire ? La succession des catégories d'entreprises offre la meilleure évocation de la diversité de l'univers – ou plutôt, l'annuaire réalise une stupéfiante superposition d'univers, où se dessinent les liens les plus innombrables entre les activités humains. [...] Chaque catégorie de commerce et de services constitue une étoile dans un ciel nocturne. L'annuaire est ce ciel. Et l'œil du lecteur, comme les astronomes amateurs, cherche des constellations.