I’ll go again with my ignorance.
Could we say that this cloud of probabilities exists in dimensions different from those perceived in our physical plane? In other words, the way these events are synthesized into our dimension is what gives them the physical characteristics we perceive.
1 Like
Yes @DavidMM he is talking about a quantum environment.
It is not of our physical realm in reality no one has seen the quantum universe … it is all visualized and modeled …
this is the experiment he is referring too.
.
His links in his post with his original math are also informative. 
1 Like
I hope I am not over stepping @RouseNexus , but this is it in a nut shell @DavidMM Alright, so basically, gravity’s like this “dent” in spacetime, but it needs something solid to cause it, like a stable mass-energy. When you’re dealing with a wavefunction, though, all that mass-energy is kinda spread out and chaotic, like a guitar string vibrating all over the place, so there’s no dent yet, it’s like gravity’s just waiting for the wavefunction to collapse when we measure it. Also, you can imagine the wavefunction as this blurry “cloud” that’s spread out across other dimensions, and when we observe it in our dimension, it’s like the cloud condenses into the particle we actually see, connecting higher-dimensional stuff to our physical world.
1 Like
Also @DavidMM your questions are wonderful. Even with AI this stuff is deep, there is a reason us humans had to use AI to map proteins 
Thank you, Mitchaell, this helps me understand a bit better; equations tend to lose me.
I have a logical doubt, and this happens on a quantum level, at an infinitesimal scale, but nothing is isolated. There must be enormous structures of these levels, so to speak. I’ll put it bluntly so we can understand each other.
I’ve always thought that the passage of time is nothing more than the sequential probabilistic dimensionality fixed by a specific observation—specifically at our scale, in our case, the three dimensions plus time (I think that when we are in a specific place, for example, sitting on the couch, other options coexist: where you’ve stood up, where you haven’t stood up, where you are not exactly you, etc.).
Would that be plausible? That multiversal structures could exist, so to speak, not only at the quantum scale but also on a macro scale?
1 Like
Put even more bluntly, when I physically go to the kitchen, the kitchen already existed before I arrived. I’ve merely transitioned from one state to another, from my living room to my kitchen. I believe something similar happens with existence: what we do in life is simply move from one preexisting state to another. It’s the act of choosing that determines which preexisting state we transition to.
1 Like
That’s interesting you should read pixelated universe or simulation theory. Some think much like the aboriginal dream state… kind of like in a mmo observer generates universe through observation…
1 Like
I have a hard enough time with the four and now maybe second time dimension thats linear as schroedinger describes… so Newtonian without any relativistic realization of the grav potential… head not fully around that “time” yet, but there is some literature out there about Nuclear force driven time… I suppose I’ll dig into what I call the pluralistic principle one day…. My head has a hard enough with the Classical stuff and GR… concepts of physicality and the divisions of 1 and real numbers. The quantum world is about forces and speeds unimaginable in a tiny little space of charge, angular momentum and some crazy stuff… the math of 0 and the imaginary. So four and maybe a second time we seem to have empirical evidence of is as many dimensions as I can fathom. I really don’t want to go in there as I have a broader framework beyond physics that needs attention.
2 Likes
Oh I love visual math, I picture it quite easy. Makes my brain vibrate
1 Like
For me time and cause are loops that depend on perspective not observation .
In Einstein’s general relativity, time is not absolute and depends on the observer’s frame of reference, supporting the idea of perspective-dependence is why I view it so.
David, consider Schrödinger’s cat as an example of time being shaped by perspective. If you were the cat, you’d simultaneously be the observer and the observed, experiencing the superposition from within while also influencing it. From this dual perspective, time and causality wouldn’t just unfold sequentially, they’d be relational, shaped by your role in the process. This demonstrates how time isn’t fixed but emerges through the interplay of observation and participation to me.
1 Like
I made a o1 “think” for 1 minute and 46 seconds 
This is the paper I wrote for it, please enjoy 
Weird Science: A Cosmic Card Trick
By Mitchell D. McPhetridge
Abstract
Quantum mechanics, with its uncanny ability to defy classical intuition, often feels more like a magician’s sleight of hand than a set of scientific principles. Bell’s Theorem, one of the most profound insights in modern physics, shows that the universe operates in ways fundamentally different from our classical expectations. In this paper, I present an analogy: quantum mechanics as a “cosmic card trick.” Using a stacked deck, rule changes, and emerging patterns as metaphors, I explore the nuances of entanglement, randomness, and non-locality. This approach provides an accessible yet rigorous framework for understanding the profound implications of quantum mechanics and Bell’s Theorem.
1. Introduction
Quantum mechanics has been called “weird” for over a century, and with good reason. Concepts like entanglement, superposition, and non-locality defy our everyday experiences. Bell’s Theorem quantifies this weirdness, proving that no classical theory based on local hidden variables can reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics. Yet, its implications remain difficult to grasp for non-specialists.
To bridge this gap, I propose an analogy: quantum mechanics as a cosmic card trick. By imagining entangled particles as a “stacked deck” and introducing rule changes during play, we can begin to appreciate why the quantum world behaves so differently from classical expectations.
2. The Setup: A Stacked Deck
In a classical world, every event can, in principle, be traced back to a deterministic cause. This worldview is akin to a card game where the deck is stacked, and the outcomes are predetermined before the cards are dealt. In this analogy:
- The deck represents a system governed by local hidden variables, with every outcome fixed by initial conditions.
- The players are observers performing measurements.
- The deal is the moment particles are created or emitted.
If the universe operated solely under classical rules, the correlations between cards dealt to players would reflect pre-existing conditions in the deck. This is the essence of a local hidden variable theory: no spooky action, just clever stacking.
3. The Twist: Changing the Rules Post-Dealing
Quantum mechanics disrupts this classical worldview by allowing the “rules of the game” to change after the cards are dealt. In quantum experiments, the settings of measurement devices (analogous to rule changes) determine the observed outcomes. Remarkably, these settings seem to influence results instantaneously, even if the measurements are performed light-years apart.
In the card analogy, this is like deciding mid-game that a spade no longer counts as a high card. Classical mechanics would struggle to account for this because the deck was stacked under the original rules. Quantum mechanics, however, adapts effortlessly, predicting correlations that no classical “stacking” could reproduce.
4. Patterns vs. True Randomness
Over many games, patterns emerge in the results. In the quantum world, these patterns are expressed as statistical correlations between measurements on entangled particles. Here, it’s crucial to distinguish between two types of randomness:
- Classical Randomness: Apparent unpredictability due to incomplete knowledge of a deterministic system.
- Quantum Randomness: Intrinsic unpredictability in individual events, governed by probabilities inherent to the quantum state.
While classical randomness can be likened to shuffling a deck, quantum randomness goes further: it’s as if each card decides its suit and value only when flipped, influenced by the observer’s choices.
5. The Illusion of Communication
One of the most perplexing aspects of quantum mechanics is the illusion of faster-than-light communication. When two entangled particles are measured, their outcomes are correlated in ways that defy classical explanation. In the card game analogy, it’s as if a card dealt to one player “knows” the rules chosen by the other player after the deal. This apparent communication, however, is not a violation of relativity; it’s a manifestation of quantum non-locality.
Bell’s Theorem formalizes this paradox, proving that no local hidden-variable theory can reproduce the observed correlations. The violation of Bell’s inequalities in experiments demonstrates that the universe doesn’t adhere to classical notions of locality and realism.
6. Bell’s Inequalities: The Mathematics of Weirdness
To ground this analogy in formalism, we consider the CHSH version of Bell’s Theorem. In this framework, two observers, Alice and Bob, choose between two measurement settings each. The correlation between their results is captured by an inequality:
∣S∣=∣E(a,b)−E(a,b′)+E(a′,b′)+E(a′,b)∣≤2.∣S∣=∣E(a,b)−E(a,b′)+E(a′,b′)+E(a′,b)∣≤2.
This inequality represents the maximum correlations achievable under any local hidden-variable theory. However, quantum mechanics predicts a violation of this bound, with:
∣S∣=22≈2.828.∣S∣=22≈2.828.
Experimental results consistently confirm this violation, proving that the quantum world operates beyond classical constraints.
7. Implications: Beyond the Stacked Deck
The cosmic card trick reveals the limits of classical intuition. No amount of clever rigging can reproduce the stronger-than-classical correlations observed in quantum mechanics. This has profound implications:
- Non-Locality: Quantum correlations transcend classical notions of space and time.
- Randomness: At its core, the universe is not deterministic but probabilistic.
- Reality: Observers play an active role in shaping the outcomes of measurements.
The stacked-deck analogy illustrates why classical systems fail to account for these phenomena, but it also highlights the need for new ways of thinking about reality.
8. Conclusion
Quantum mechanics is not just “weird”—it’s a revolution in our understanding of the universe. By framing its principles as a cosmic card trick, we can appreciate the elegance and strangeness of phenomena like entanglement and non-locality. Bell’s Theorem serves as a reminder that nature is far richer than our classical intuitions allow. The challenge is not to explain away the weirdness but to embrace it as a fundamental feature of reality.
In the end, the cards are not just stacked—they’re quantum. And in the game of the cosmos, it’s the rules themselves that keep us guessing.
By Mitchell D. McPhetridge
1 Like