The Future Past

Our post on Dec. 6 began with the question of whether or not the present could affect the past. Peter Levenda presented an astonishing example that related directly to Barack Obama and the bogus controversy about his place of birth.

Now here is a higher order of speculation on a similar question: What do you get when the past crystallizes out of the future? According to a new model of the universe that combines relativity and quantum mechanics, the answer is: the present. It’s presented in Technology Review, published by MIT.  Take a look here.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to The Future Past

  1. s. simon says:

    Yeah Rob guess it is a bit foolish for me to play coo with the words "Won" instead of "1",, but I am confused, but truth is had the book for a few years and just picked up earlier this month, great read,,, bit have a bunch of coincidences in it on specfic pages (three digit pages), mentioned Denzel and also used the line, "What's wrong with this Bozo",,. Deano does happen to mention Area 51, wonder what chapter, heck look at the top of the page and the page before… I know this does not have much to do with the topic here,,, but that terripatrick makes a number of good points himself,,, humanity is trying to peel an onion and they may whined up finding out the deeper we get the harder it is for us to find happiness…but as for BOZO's synchros (the guy does mention Freud on the same page as Denzel), but what I be thinking is the book may be a good interpratation of reality,, just guessing just using this as E—-L

  2. terripatrick says:

    I guess this post was too scientifically involved for me. The devil is in the details and I wasn't able to care enough about the scientific process. Which is wild because I am totally into the scientific process. But anything about TIME just sort of makes me go – ahem – duh – we're already there.

    Personally, I have experienced and understand this concept of future events having merit and impact on past events. For me, I know this and own this truth. I have memories of past events that were awesome with a spiritual connection and have tripped the "light fantastic" in recent years and time traveled to be the awesome I experienced in the past.

    So for me, the science is cool but also too involved in the details.

    We need to stop looking at TIME as a straight line and start considering it spirals back and what we see in the moment is only the straight part of the spiral. Wherever we are on the loop.

    It's a big loop.

  3. Trish and Rob MacGregor says:

    I assume that's a book about a door prize, and poor pop, no John Q this year. – R

  4. simple simon says:

    It's always the same time,, time is heat,, without it everything would be frozen,,,, heat is energy,,, energy is matter,,, matter is the universe,,, that why it's called a space time continuim,,,,Bozo just sent his Pop a long letter along without the movie "John Q." 3 weeks ago began reading great one,, first one "bozo's" every read from the author "Won Door Away From Heaven" synchros
    w.v. tunlen

  5. Aleksandar Malecic says:

    There are many names for this phenomenon: rerocausality, backward causation… There is a significant number of scientists who support this approach but generally on the quantum, microscopic level (such as the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics). There is one more similar (not necessarily the same) phenomenon – anticipation (Robert Rosen). Anticipation is an ability to make plans or to leave causal chains inside and outside one's head (something that machines can't do). It seems this can be (it does need some practice) a powerful tool to invite weird events into one's life.

  6. Trish and Rob MacGregor says:

    If this new take on time is true, here's why I think it matters: it means that our point of power as human beings is always in the present. It means that what you think and feel in this instant has the power to not only create your future, but to alter your past.

  7. terripatrick says:

    The article didn't compute with me, but the comments were a kick to skim. The premise, science and discovery – I didn't get the thrill. But the comments and passion of debate about time, dimensions, quantum… How fun. I may only understand some of the words but loved being inside this banter of "what it means" until I suddenly thought, none of the commenters were concerned with why this new take on time – matters.

    How fun, thanks for sharing.

  8. Nancy says:

    It was discussed in The Holographic Universe as well. I'm off to read about this model from MIT. Very interesting.

  9. Trish and Rob MacGregor says:

    Autumn – I don't think that kind of time is ever wasted!

  10. Autumnforest says:

    Interesting stuff. I have to admit, the other day I was considered time and I wondered–does time even exist? I mean, as humans we feel the need to note the passage of events…I brushed my teeth, dressed, went to work…But, that's just events. We age and so we consider a measurement of our period while on the earth as time. But, does time actually exist? Are we confused about counting down events and passage of lives and history with some kind of measurement? If we count time by how many seconds clicking on a click, aren't we in fact just counting click events and not time? Does time exist??? See the kinds of musings that go on in my noggin? It wastes all my non-existent time.

Leave a Reply