You are entangled in infinite multiverses. Updated for 2024

Updated: May 16, 2024

Hello, my friends. So as I continue
to share insights with you
on my new book, Quantum Body
with Jack Tuszynski and Brian Fertig, I will also be
sharing deeper insights
into the nature of reality. And I just wanted
to say as a preface that what I say is an opinion, and I hope an educated
opinion sometimes not
an educated opinion.

And also what I say is not necessarily
always an educated opinion
or an uneducated opinion. Sometimes it seems to be coming from
direct experience in expanded states
of consciousness. I'll be totally
honest about it, I spend a lot of time in the expanded states
of consciousness every day if I can. I meditate on the mystery of death
every day, the mystery of the universe,
the mystery of our own
existence. And sometimes I get
direct revelation, the equivalent
of what you might call
Shruti and Smriti. And I share it
with you. And, you know,
you might disagree, you might agree,
doesn't matter. You might snigger,
you might raise your eyebrows, you might get
enraged, you might actually agree so much that you become part of another system
of thought.

All that is how we operate
as humans. So I am shooting
the breeze and if you like
it, good. If you don't, you can,
you know, delete. So there we go. Today,
I wanted to talk about how I believe that the non-local consciousness that we are part of or the non-local
consciousness that we are
an activity of including our body
mind, that non-local consciousness is capable
of projecting infinite universes. And all
these universes exist right now as entangled
possibilities in that non-local domain singularity, non-local reality,
entangled reality, superposition
of possibilities, and all of that. That there is
no single universe but infinite
universes. And as body minds,
we are entangled in one of them
right now, the one we are experiencing. But as consciousness,
we are actually have access
to all of them. So today I want to share
with you and insight that has been coming to me for
some time, but also has been bugging me until
I fully express it. And that is the unreasonable
effectiveness of mathematics in predicting
natural laws. There was an essay
written long time ago
by the physicist Eugene Wigner, which was just
about this, but this effective
of effectiveness of mathematics in predicting
natural laws is a question
that has been pondered
by philosophers and scientists
for centuries.

And many possible
explanations for this phenomenon
have been given over decades
and centuries. One possible
explanation is that mathematics is
simply a language. Remember, language
is what we're using right now
to communicate it. So symbolic language, in
my opinion, is the symbolic
representation of some kind
of perceptual or cognitive
experience. So mathematics
is a language that you use to describe
the natural world, just as we use
language to describe thoughts, feelings, emotions,
sensations, perceptions,
experiences. We use mathematics
to describe the patterns
and relationships that we observe
in nature. But remember,
the reader, in this case,
is observing or using mathematics is part of the mystery that we call nature.

We are not separate
from nature. But if we are part
of the mystery and mathematics is expressing
our experiences in some way, cognitive
or perceptual, then mathematics
is very effective in predicting
natural laws. It is simply a way
of formalizing the regularities that we experience
in nature. So what are those regularities?
They are a biological
phenomenon. They are biological
regularities, you know,
we call them regularities out
there. The sun is rising, the sun is in
the zenith, the sun is setting
or we know that's a perceptual artifact
anyway, because there is
no sun rising. The earth is moving on its axis, rotating
on its axis, and then of course,
the earth is going around the sun
and many other things
are happening.

But we see the sun
rising and setting, whatever that is, that's the perceptual
phenomenon, because the earth is moving on its axis, but our body is
part of that. So we experience those regularities
as our own biological
phenomenon and we call them
natural laws, which is fine
because biology is part of nature. And another
possibility is that mathematics
is not a language that it's actually
a fundamental property
of the universe. Okay, Now you might
think that's crazy, but that's
a platonic ideal. In this view,
the laws of nature are not just
descriptions of how nature or the
universe behaves. Remember
our biology, which includes
our body-mind, is part of the what we call
the laws of nature. So mathematics is a fundamental property
of the universe, including our

In fact, we can map
every activity in the body,
now, mathematically. So in this view,
the laws of nature are not just
descriptions of how the universe behaves, but are actually mathematical
equations that govern
its behavior. This is a very
radical view, by the way,
but it is one that is getting
increasing support among physicists and mathematicians. It's also possible that the
effectiveness of mathematics
in predicting natural laws is a combination of
both these factors. So mathematics
may be a language that we use to describe
the natural world, but it is also
a fundamental property
of the universe, because that
which is describing the universe is also
an activity of the universe. This is what
we forget. We always think in terms
of subject-object split. Whether or not natural laws
of mental regularities
of existence ultimately becomes a philosophical

And current
scientific models do not support
or refute any of these claims. However,
if we assume that mathematics is a
fundamental property of the universe,
then it is possible that natural laws
are simply the way our minds perceive mathematical
regularities. So here is a bit of
a summary. Mathematics
is a language of patterns
and relationships. The natural world is full of patterns
and relationships, as is our body,
as is our mind. And so it is natural
that mathematics would be useful
in describing the universe. Mathematics is also
very precise, and this means
that it can be used to make
very accurate descriptions about
the natural world and even predict the future
evolution of the natural world. But now leave
all that aside, because I think
all these ideas may be wrong. There's no universe,
there's no body. These
are projections of a non-local consciousness
which is infinite, and these projections are always through a conditioned mind.

In human beings, the conditioned mind is cultural, is religious,
is philosophical, is scientific,
is mathematic. Each one is
the combination of all these, an alchemy of all
these conditionings and those
conditionings project the body,
mind and universe as a unified phenomenon,
as the alchemy, as I've said,
of sensations, images, feelings
and thoughts, which is just
consciousness curving back
within itself and experiencing
itself as that. So in my opinion, there are infinite universes
each of them have body-mind suited
to that universe. The natural laws
fit that universe, and each of
those body-minds is entangled
potentiality in the world of infinite possibilities, which
is the singularity from where all these universes
emerge. This would be consistent
with string theory multiverses
and all of that.

But the
bottom line is that as you
transcend your local mind and
actually experience and become one
with the universe in mind, you may have access as another body-mind
which is entangled with this body-mind
to experience that particular
universe. Multiverses
come and go in the vast expanse
of consciousness, like motes of dust in a beam,
that's dancing in a beam of light
that's shining through a hole
in my cave. That's a quote
from yoga vashitha. So you, as singularity, you
as the transcendent non-local being are in fact, the multiverse. And many
multiverses. Now, of course, this might sound freaky,
crazy nonsense, all of that, depending
on your worldview. Atheist, religious,
philosophical, spiritual, cultural does not matter. The fact is, whatever you and I
see is still an expression of our
conditioned minds. Give me your
feedback on this. I'm very curious..

As found on YouTube

For more articles click here