This is something which I am almost convinced exists. Or I've been up too late one too many nights, and delusional from that instead.

In essence, the recipe for this is 1 part the Law of Personal Universes plus 1 part the Law of Infinite Universes plus a serving of the Truman Show delusion and a dash of paranoia.

This is my belief that the world, as it were, is not what it appears. I am not referring to the sense of the same idea in the Matrix, 1984, Brave New World, or other works along those lines. Rather, there is no one world, or one universe for that matter. According to quantum theory, all possible resultant universes following any given decision exist until one is selected and the others are destroyed. I question whether they are truly destroyed, or rather they are merely partitioned off from each of the other choices, like NTFS from ext2 on a single hard drive.

If they are partitioned off, not destroyed, is it possible to jump from one to the other, and if so, is it possible to jump an arbitrary distance across the infinite plane of possible universes, with the differences dating back to the Big Bang? I argue, not only that it is, but also that it happens outside of its subject's control.

As for support for this idea, I can think back and almost find support as far back as 6 years ago (mind you, I'm in high school). It seems to be forcibly eliminated after a sufficient amount of time. Also, none of it seems all that significant on its own, but it adds up. Examples:

  • Palmetto or Sunset?
    I recently went to the wrong school for a math competition. Normally, I would blame such an error on myself, were it not for my certainty that my Mu Alpha Theta sponsor, as well as several other members had said throughout the previous two weeks, including the evening before, that it was at the school I apparently mistakenly went to.
  • Document-Based Questions.
    In my IB Contemporary World History class, I have yet to turn in the right DBQ at the right time. I turn a DBQ in at the right time, but it has failed thusfar to be the correct DBQ for that time. This is despite having recorded in my Palm which DBQ was due when, and checking with other students in the days preceding the due date.
  • New math?
    I vaguely recall at some point during Algebra I that the teacher was reviewing something and, it was in some minor way the exact opposite of how she had taught it previously. This contradiction would not have stuck out in my mind if it were not for my conviction that it was indeed the exact opposite of how she had taught it not three weeks prior and for the rest of the class to seemingly take the contradiction as if it had never occurred. IIRC, this is when I first realized the subject of this node, and found evidence that could support it in the previous couple of years.

I admit that my support is sketchy and perhaps coincidental at best. I am by no means trying to prove the existence of these alternate universes and these jumps between them; I am merely putting forth a draft theory that may or may not have any validity, and, at the moment, seems rather impossible to test. This theory/delusion is certainly open to input.

KMQ: I was actually referring to the classical quantum mechanical interpretation of spacetime as branching out infinitely like a fractal without any two branches ever meeting again, but your interpretation sounds good too, and has the benefit of plausible reasoning, as opposed to my arbitrary jumps. I like the node surfing analogy too:)

As for the different infinities, regular calculus deals with these as indeterminate forms. Of course, most decisions do not have truly infinite choices, and rarely have more than a handful, so it's more like 5 than ∞. However, the rate of decisions is astronomically large, so it looks like ∞.
And yes, this theory was quite a mindfuck on first enlightenment....

Consider for a moment if you will, an inverse perspective on multiple universes. For any given condition there are not only an infinite set of conceivable outcomes, but also an infinite set of possible causes, making every point in time a node.

If human perception were to slightly transcend this crossing of states, one could inadvertently get 'knocked' on a tangent which was not the line you were previously on (we all know how node surfing is now don't we?), and into a world that while instantaneously identical bares a different past and future. Such a shift might be of a few degrees of range of events, but could have profoundly troubling "what the heck?" implications that you could never solve (and leave that eternal feeling you just fell down the rabbit hole).

This idea implies that the relative "distance" of different realties is based not upon when they branched, but what they resulted in, meaning the closest state(s) will always be 'closest,' even if they are the farthest removed in past and future.

Given that all things are relative, and as far as we know deep down the universe really ISN'T as it seems...the sane are of course only those people who are of acceptable delusional state. I can only hope this is deemed acceptably delusional...

Diagram time boys and girls:
<- Reality Shift ->
  C     B     A
 ...   .D.   ...
 D..   ...   ..D      Future
 @..   @..   @..
    \   |   /
       ...              ^
       .D.  Present     |
       @..              |
     / ABC \       Time's Arrow
 ...   ...   ...
 D..   ...   ..D       Past
 @..   @D.   @..
  A     B     C
Single Present Node
For those who don't know roguelike:
@ = you the observer
. = empty space
D = Ancient Dragon in Flight

The casual observer (or adventurer) who accidentally steps from shadow B to shadow C, observes a dragon move around them. They might simply assume that the dragon banked to achieve such a maneuver, but on closer inspection they might notice that in fact no, it had not banked but simply suddenly was moving in another direction.

Of course if one is in such a circumstances as to have a dragon, especially of the ancient verity, pass so close to ones person, as to be able to observe closely enough to know that it did not in fact turn, but rather seemed to 'magically' leap from traveling in one direction to traveling in another. One is unlikely to take the time to make this observation, and live so long as to report the phenomena, as they really would better be spending their time running, or fighting.

Sorry for any confusion that might have occurred. While yes this could apply to a fatalist reality it was intended to represent the basic node structure. As I said every point in time is supposed to be a node in this model, but only one node is actually visible in totality. And if one could perceive the node structure of reality the farther one got the more complicated the paths become, one step infinity*2, two steps (infinity*2)^2, three steps (infinity*2)^3. Now while we can argue the question of multiple infinities another time, think of it like this. If E2 had softlinks that face forward and back, where people came from, where people went too, and you are at the present, you can see the possible pasts, and the possible futures of the node, but you are not aware of parallel nodes, only intersections. (further addendum...this isn't a suggestion...well not intentionally...Hell this model is also simplified in that it occupies an "instant" model rather than a gradient model, but do you want to really think about another factor of infinity? And no the human mind is definitely not meant to absorb E2 in a fractal format, now there is the one true mind fuck if you dare consider it. *dies*)
Also this would in 'reality' not apply so dramatically to something on the scale of a dragon suddenly facing one way and then facing another. In this diagram our model of time is highly segmented, for an object to appear to make a quantum leap in its motion in gradated time, one would have to jump over several realities making a quantum leap of their own. In a more practical sense this would actually explain rather shifts in the direction of motion an object has without it changing its state, for instance as though it bounced off something that isn't there. More curiously on the atomic and subatomic level things do shift suddenly in new directions, which is normally explained simply by excessively bumpy space at that scale...

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.