Time and information of Guillemenant

[Janic]

Phew, I have finally reached the end.
It is rendered as is except the intonations. Happy reading!

Dr. Guillemant
Time and information.
Hello, I'm going to start by telling you about robots because we don't understand the difference between a robot and a human being, if we realize, for the moment robots don't know how to do much- thing, but the day that in just a few decades, maybe 10 years, maybe 50, robots will be able to do exactly the same things we do. : what's going to happen ? Well in fact, they will be much superior to us on the mental level, on the perceptual level, they will have much more faculties and let's say that in a perfectly materialistic framework, the human will have only one thing to do is to try to look like a robot, to become a robot itself so as to increase its intelligence capacities, its perceptual capacities, that's it!
-1'25- This is the very American transhumanist philosophy that really imposes itself today: I can say that I contributed to it in my professional career and then I gave up first because I am a physicist and I’ve been thinking all my life about whether we could make conscious robots. I have neuroscientist colleagues lately that I was trying to convince: " for such reasons,… I said to them, “give up, you will not succeed ". Finally what I mean by that is that the fundamental reasons that make a robot different from a living being are absolutely not known to science and so we go to it. In reality for a few years everything is changing, we have the confirmation of new concepts in modern physics which allow us to think that the living has nothing to do with a mechanical system.
I figure here, the 4 beliefs of this materialism that we can consider as a true religion because a religion is something that has a prophecy: " one day robots will have a conscience and overtake humans "It is a religion which also has a god, it is chance, all forms of chance, the chance which comes from our ignorance of the causes, the chance which would come from a god who would play the dice, and then all kinds of beliefs and the big difficulty we have in getting out of this materialist system, this materialist thought, comes from the fact that we understood that we had to profoundly change our conceptions of space, matter and time. We understood that we had to do it: why? Because we realize that there are intangible connections everywhere, that is to say that, for example, in matter we are able to separate by light years two elements of matter initially gathered and to keep connected without there being any causal relationship between them, without any signal being able to be transferred, they continue to have a connected behavior, it is totally implausible from the point of view of the notion of the material that we done, so this is the problem of non-locality. We also realized that this problem takes place in time, it is quite recent, we realized that two points with particles each time could be connected in a non-local way, that is to say -to say to have interactions each one on their side which are correlated whereas one of the events occurs in the present and the other in the future. We also realized that something that happens in the present can have an influence on the past.
4'40 So there you have two kinds of non-local connections of the time genre and of the space genre and we totally ignore what is at the origin of this connection. We also suspect that space has additional dimensions when we try to reconcile the two contradictory theories of modern physics: quantum mechanics and relativity, we are almost obliged to introduce additional dimensions to space if we wants to have a complete description and this introduces information that comes from who knows where and we have discovered for quite a long time that there exists a fundamental chance which cannot be explained by our ignorance of the causes ... so at the same time that we discovered non-locality we discovered the existence of true chance, of fundamental chance, that is to say that there would be like a god playing dice, but we realized that this interpretation, recently, of the things was false, and that it should not be interpreted in this way there.
5'57- That is to say that in reality, there is no chance, there is information, that is to say there is coordination coming from outside of space / time which introduces information into the universe. well these four properties of connection of I don't know what with matter, personally I am unable to program them inside a robot, I am unable to manufacture a robot that would have all the intelligence, finally all the capacities perceptual possible but which would be connected, that even the equations, even the algorithms do not provide it, it is impossible, we will never manage to build such a robot (and as I will show you later) and therefore these 4 connections which boil down to two or three, you will see that it has a very strong link with consciousness, this is the reason why: no, it is not humans that will seek to look like robots in the future , these are the robots that will seek to find what, in the human gives them what we could say, what we could call: immortality and which is linked to this famous field of connections that physicists find out today.
7'15- what doesn't tell you about it, why don't we tell you about it ?! we understood that space, time and matter had nothing to do with the idea of ​​what we learn in school, time does not exist, matter is more like vibrations and the space could not itself exist, in any case in three dimensions and therefore all this, for want of finding equations, we know that the system is bad but we do not find the equations which make it possible to pass to a system that would be fairer and so what do we do? We lock ourselves in what I called the park of thought, we try to maintain, by adding dogmas, science well in place and therefore we can say that the religion of materialism includes not only the dogmas of the time, space, matter, but we must add to it the dogmas of determinism and causality which are essential to continue to reason like everyone else. It is the stability of human thought that is at stake. Now we know in physics that all this is false! We know that determinism, which is the idea that all reality is mechanically determined in a unique way, we know that it is false, this has been clearly demonstrated through what I have called the quantum fault, the fault chaos! We know that the chance that we actually believed at the start was authentic, that is to say that it was demonstrated by quantum mechanics that Einstein was wrong when he said that god was playing dice, in fact we realizes that he was right finally because this chance in question is not a game of dice, but it is something which corresponds to information which is injected from outside space / time, I will come back to it.
9'24- So you have this park of thought which is surrounded by what I called the wall of materialism, the cliff of determinism, the ravine of creation or chance and the barbed wire of causality. (I'm not going to insist too much on this) but it is leaking everywhere, on the other hand there is no difficult path to take in order not to find yourself in a swamp, or a chasm, that is to say: not find there! Scientists do not give the keys to get out of this park of thought which we already know is false! So how do we get out of the false to go to the real? - knowing that it is very difficult to find the truth in all this complexity -
So I use a metaphor, I say that I found a small path that allows to go to the neck of the angel which is a place where we can have a vision of space-time finally correct. It consists in taking risks, therefore going down into the ravine of creation at the risk of falling into the abyss of illusion and going up on the other side; the side of the lookout, I'm going to show you what's on the other side ... in fact what's on the other side is what is necessary to understand that all these great men are right (Einstein, Nietzsche, Bergson, Heisenberg) and themselves could never have gotten along in their time, but in our time, we can reconcile them. So Einstein (letter to Bosso) said: " for us physicist at heart, the separation between past, present and future is that such a tenacious illusion is it " what does it mean ? It means that the future is already there, there is no separation which means that at a given moment there is what is created and after what is not created, everything is created simultaneously.
Nietzsche (Human, too human), a great intuitive, said: " Our destiny influences us, even when we don't know it yet, it's our future that determines our present "And elsewhere he says," the future influences the present as much as the past So this is entirely in Einstein's direction, that is to say that if the future is realized then it is completely normal for the future to have an influence on us in the present as much as the past. Suffice to say that we are completely prisoners? We already thought that we were prisoners of our conditioning, that is to say that everything we were going to do in the future depended exclusively on the past, that therefore our freedom is illusory! If in addition you add a conditioning which wants that all that we do depends on the future; it is hard to see how we could get out! And yet you have another couple of philosophers and physicist
Bregson (the possible and the real): " What is time for? .... Would it not be the vehicle of creation and choice? Doesn't the existence of time prove that there is indeterminacy in things? How do you want to introduce indeterminacy into the present when the future is already frozen: Where we come from is already frozen, where we are going it's already frozen, there is a problem! And so Heisenberg (nature ...): " the object of research is no longer nature in itself, but nature delivered to human interrogation and to this extent, man meets here only himself "Einstein is the father of the famous principle of uncertainty in physics which allows to give reason to Bergson, that is to say that there would be in the present a possibility of indeterminism therefore a priori of potential choice and therefore this seems forbidden by the vision of the other couple of physicist and philosopher.
12'23- How is it possible that all four are right at the same time? We could say that only Bergson and Heisenberg are right because we absolutely want to preserve our book referee, but at that time we are forced to drop the conception of Einstein and Nietzsche which is, at the present time the conception ( men Stream?) of physicists, the thing that has been best demonstrated in all of physics. So this is going to be an extremely difficult fight, this is a problem that quantum physicists currently have and it is also something which explains, when we drop Einstein's ideas, that quantum physics is a little bit adrift because nobody knows how to interpret it, nobody understands it and that's the reason why it was caught up in the new age movement and the problem is that when you don't understand, after this leads to simplifications, but I would talk about it again!
Let's do the opposite reasoning, suppose that Einstein and Nietzsche are right and that Bergson and Heisenberg are wrong, then at this point we arrive at pure and hard materialism, that is to say that our free will is an illusion and we have perfectly understood the functioning of nature and this can be symbolized like this (representation of the diagram of the cone of the big bang and the expansion of the universe) If we position our space time at, inside a large sphere, but to be able to represent on a sheet of paper we will replace this sphere with a disc, - we use two dimensions of the disc rather than the three dimensions of space - this allows us to represent the dimension of time on a sheet of paper and therefore at that moment, a disc on which you add time forms a cylinder. But the universe which is the space time which you build thus, it has a beginning which one calls the big bang and at the beginning the universe was very small thus at the beginning the growth of the universe that forms a cone. You have the cone which represents the beginning of the big bang, of the universe, and on a sheet of paper which represents in perspective by the drawing of the top space time as the physicists understand it clearly today. What is less clear is what is on the right, that is to say the future already formed but we dare not draw it, because there are still a few points of questions.
So the problem posed by this representation of the universe which is called the block universe, with 4 dimensions: space time is therefore frozen, we cannot have free will. So the problem is that this model is incompatible with quantum mechanics - since we took the other option - and above all that it is incompatible with the entropic principle which means that we discovered that this universe needed to 'an ultra fine setting with a tiny probability: 1 in billions of billions .. a tiny probability so that this universe can lead to the creation of human life. 17'08-So here is a universe was created and it ends up in the creation of the universe as if by chance, but why this one? This is not normal ! There is a purpose! Oh no !! The horror purpose! Horror! Physicists abhor finality! So, ah, we found the solution: all possible sorts of imaginable universes were created and at this point we arrive at the theory of parallel universes; but that means by varying the constants of physics, but also by varying all the choices you can make by chance every day, so we would have billions of lives every day on other universes where we would make exactly the same except that at some point we make one decision rather than another. Paf, that means that another universe has been created for trillards, trillards of light years where I make this other choice. It is completely delusional but it is something which is very seriously advanced by materialist physicists because it is their most logical conclusion.
18'13- So let's come back to the idea, maybe, well no! parallel universes is too much, we can't do it. Let's go back to the idea that there is only one! the French think there is only one and that poses another problem. So not only was this universe created and by chance for us? but in addition there is a concern, it is that it was created all at once. There is no time! That is to say that it is not the inhabitants of the universe who had to wait for its creation to say voila there is this universe according to mechanics, it was created all at once: time do not wait for us to create reality. The big bang was created at the same time as the end of time, it is we who, afterwards, arrive in this universe and wander around in it, each one has a timeline inside this universe, etc. Well, we can believe that, we can believe that,
19'13-but I say that it is a creationist vision which is even worse than the idea that god created the universe in 7 days, because it is not even in 7 days, it is instantaneous, here !
So this is where materialism ends!
19'40-THE FOUR FANTASTICS
So now we’ll move on .. so in France we have brilliant, illustrious researchers, who have thought about all these problems and each one approaches them differently and tries to solve it a little differently, I have relations with some of them and I'm starting to know more or less what they think and so this is what we can say about these 4 fantastic French guys from the beginning of the 20 °:
Thibault Damour " the future is already here… time is fundamentally reversible. " What does it mean ? It means that causality is independent of time, causality does not come from the fact that there is an after or a before or something else - I should also quote Marc Lachaise - who has the same position as Th.Damour which consists in say the universe is already realized and causation is independent of time, it is important!
Carlo Rovelli (time does not exist…) We must learn to think of the world not as something that evolves over time, but in another way. So for him it's a bit difficult to do that, he's a quantum physicist, you saw; quantum physicists have a hard time with the relativistic theory that sees the block universe, so C. Rovelli should learn to move the boc universe if he wants the universe not to evolve in the present since the present does not exist for him!
The most advanced concept which suggests to solve this case:
Etienne Klein " suggests the idea that the future already exists, that it is an authentic reality, but not completely configured, not fully defined, that there are still spaces for will, desire, invention ... no time to start colonizing the year 2050 intellectually? Which means in plain language, wouldn't it be time to influence 2050 now by thought, knowing that 2050 exists, okay !? He didn't say it like that because it's hard for a physicist like him to say things like that but I can guarantee that that's what he understood and that's what he got meant, but you have to be careful!
Alain Connes, himself, said something for which it is necessary to be even more careful - you have to realize that it is difficult for physicists, they have things to say, but these are things for which he you have to be very careful about the way they say it because they bet their credibility, then we're going to say: wow, but where are you going, huh! - so Alain Connes, he wrote it in a novel because that's a bit difficult, you take all the big guys, the famous ones, the man stream, there is none who have the same opinion as another so they must all be careful what they say. Finally there are a few groups therefore: Alain Connes in quantum theater, suggests the idea that the past could be uncertain, unstable, that it could still move or be altered… (fixed past = belief). That is to say, the idea that our past is fixed is a belief. What does it mean ? that's why I told you that we have 4 fantastic ones that we can be proud of because the Americans are left with materialism; they don't come out, they don't go that far! I'm talking about the USA, the Canadians are more ahead. So let's see what happens: we could add a fantastic fifth which is Antoine Suarez whom I know well, with whom I have a collaboration and who proposes that to have a material which functions in a sensible way, we need to a coordination which is not material, which is insensitive to space and time. In Suarez he is the one who repeated in a relativistic framework the most famous MQ experience of the 20th century, that of Aspect in 1982, he repeated it in 1998 and 2002 so I believe with the certainty that the non-locality is not an illusion that non-locality, whether it is temporal or of spatial origin, it is a phenomenon which does not come from the impossibility of transmitting a signal and therefore the idea which comes directly: from the moment when you have a space / time and this space / time is likely to receive information external to the space time, then it is obvious that this space time will be able to move, change the information of 'a space, you change it by definition and therefore this space time moves. Physicists today are confronted with 4 strong ideas: the first is that the creation of reality needs information outside of time. - you can trust, these are new habits of thought that we will have to acquire- then
2 ° reality is not created in the present, the future is already realized in the present and can still evolve and that is something very important in everyday life. We will see why!
3rd thing: the entry into the present of one of our future already created depends on our observations. You will see that the mind has different functions, there is not only the fact of creating the future, there is also the fact of knowing how to perceive the creation which is made for us.
And the 4th point which is perhaps the most contentious because there scientists can still say no, it's not possible, because we have to accept the idea that it's too much for them to accept that and yet it's logic, it's almost materialist logic, the evolution of our already created futures depends on our intentions or on chance, we concede it - we will concede it otherwise it is too heavy to digest - So we are going to ask the question: does evolution happen by chance or is there free will? Okay, we accept that space time moves. Okay because finally it reconciles 4 philosophers. Finally it's cooler, it's not creationist, but it really has to happen by chance because otherwise we go crazy! (to laugh)
In fact what happens with chance is that chance is really used by physicists like a trash can because as soon as we do not understand something, we will look for chance therefore in quantum mechanics it s 'called state reduction - I'm not going to give you a quantum mechanics course ... so what does that mean? When you make a measurement in quantum mechanics, this measurement depends on the way you observe it and it depends on the choices of the observer, it's still weird because it takes us out of the usual objective framework of physics. In statistical mechanics, we use probabilistic equations, these probabilistic equations are deterministic and therefore classical mechanics is considered deterministic because of that, it's completely delusional, they are probabilistic equations. If you take the basic equations and I have done the work you will realize that classical mechanics is not deterministic, it is my personal contribution, I will tell you about it quickly.
Cosmology I have already told you about it, this is the problem of the principle of anthropology. The creation of man! Why did the universe come to the emergence of man? well, uh, luckily! And the chance he had, we can calculate his probability which corresponds to the probability that an archer who shoots an arrow which travels 14 billion light years reaches a target of 1 cm. Here !
And in biology, I'm not in the life sciences, Darwinism, that is to say the chance of mutations plus natural selection is something that, for me, is completely out of place - I would explain a little to you why - but we know that Darwinism is very widely disputed. We introduce chance into physics every time we don't understand what's going on and each time it's something that is linked to the evolution of the universe, so it's a kind of recipe for kitchen to prevent seeing the creation otherwise than by chance.
So I begin to ask the question: chance or information?
Kurt Gödel is a great math genius
Gödel's theorem: " any system (logical and rational) contains at least one undecidable proposition. No coherent system can be complete (there are truths impossible to demonstrate) There is necessarily information that comes from outside the system. Well we can consider that our time space, if we consider our time space as coherent, in the materialistic rationalist philosophy of the world, our time space is necessarily coherent and mathematically well that means that it needs information external to the 'space-time. So we see, this time, that this information that we do not stop introducing by chance have a role to play, that is to say that we need to inform the universe in order to control it, in order to direct its evolution, because actually it will contribute to making undecidable choices from the inside which will decide and therefore that means that this chance here, this information there, has some thing to do with free will.
In my work as a mechanic, I did a lot of fluid mechanics, with my colleagues we highlighted at the level of the equations, that is to say when we try to predict fluid trajectories extremely precisely we ended up with paradoxical situations and a huge waste of information. I wanted to be clear about it and I made a billiard model
30'48 in which I put 100 balls, 10.000 balls…. And I deduced from this that the mechanics were powerless to calculate all the information that we asked him from the initial conditions that we gave him simply because the more we add balls, there comes a point in time a situation where, when we set the initial conditions with extremely precise information, all that we can calculate for sure, corresponds to information which in total is less than the information we need to make the calculations, this which is totally absurd, that means! so a physicist, a mechanic, using a model that gives him less information than the information he needed to make it work is something that makes him throw away this model, but this model is the model of mechanics in three dimensions so I made a publication on it .... it completely challenges the idea that in the universe entropy can only increase and therefore we do not see how living systems could exist . So we say: yes, living systems their entropy (anthropia?) Increases but elsewhere there is, the entropy decreases, so finally! this is a completely messed up system, it has never been explained, physicists have never explained the emergence of living systems and I, what I can guarantee you is that classical mechanics does not work in three dimensions. To make it work I need to add additional dimensions at each point in space and it turns out that with us we have a great mathematician Alain Connes, he offers nothing else than to add 6 additional dimensions in three points of space.-so I pass on the demon of Maxwell, it is a question a little complicated to explain- and therefore the question that we ask anyway, the question asked which is whether it is the chance or the information that brings information, quantum mechanics this time brings us answers, because quantum mechanics has exactly the same problem, so you see (the table presented indicates:
1 ° everything that is possible happens simultaneously
Particles take all paths:
superposition of states or paths
Indeterminism filled with observation. Observation consciousness =
Information outside of time space
3 ° quantum reality is timeless photons adjust their past according to a future choice: top-down cosmology
2 ° quantum reality is not local
Entanglement: Computer. quantum, teleportation
Consciousness creates reality by informing it
The source is timeless and a-spatial.

Classical mechanics has the same problem as quantum mechanics, that is to say that in quantum mechanics: what is happening? We observe that the particles take all the paths at once, they have superimposed states, nobody is able to understand that, but if you reason in term of information it is extremely simple, that means that classical mechanics does not have the information concerning the position and the speed of the particles, we wait, time does not exist, we wait to see what will happen the time that the causality sets up the chain of cause and effect. The observer informs reality so there is someone at the end of the chain who is obliged to read a result and this result will trigger all of the above. For example if you look at a photon which comes from the limits of the universe, which traversed billions of years, this photon is entangled with another photon where it is in a quantum state, you look at it and at the same time you build its past 3 billion years ago. Okay time does not exist, that is to say that the physical reality corresponding to this photon in the past until the present has been waiting for someone to observe what is happening and when someone observed what is happening, you have created the reality of this photon in the full extent of its past, which is to say that you have created part of the universe's past. You are beginning to understand why some physicists are considering the possibility that the past may change. So all the physicists that I quote there, who are quite recognized, they are either Nobel prizes, or academicians, there are two well known French, there is Bernard d'Espagnat (academician), Roger Penrose (academician) ) Eugène Wignes (Nobel Prize in Physics) Olivier Costa de Beauregard (Director of Research at the CNRS in theoretical physics) 35'11 they are all, there are many others, in favor of awareness of the creation of reality ; that is, it is consciousness that informs reality and ultimately informs the living. So I derived from it what I call the theory of double causality where you can consider the universe, the space time where you live each of you as a kind of cylinder where you can change the position in time according to your free will, your thoughts being material, they are well materialized by electrons in your brain within molecules and time not existing the consequence of all molecular interactions in your brain does not wait for unfold in your future, okay? and therefore you realize your future instantly and therefore all your intentions, from the moment you know that it will ensue, that will happen because it is really well written, you are determined it is realized at this moment, okay! and not only does it happen at that time, but since it does happen somewhere, but the bridges that connect the present to that are not yet done, it can happen independently: it is really a summary! I deduced from it the mechanism of synchronicities and deduced that one could provoke either synchronicities and especially coincidences, and especially synchronicities by virtue of the mechanism, coincidences are coincidences which have no a priori meaning or whose meaning we have not yet understood, what is not determined by the past is determined by the future, that is to say what you put there with your thoughts and our intentions cause effects in the future which become the future causes an effect in the present.
There I will pass on the people who are linked to my theory, we cannot not mention Jun and Pauli father of the theory of the collective unconscious, we will come back to this after
Table of coincidence and synchronicity mechanisms
Laws of series, the world is small, Murphy's Law, Pauli effect, demo effect, digital stunts, LUCK and improbable life-changing circumstances.
Mechanism of coincidences:
What is not determined by the past is determined by the future.
Synchronicities mechanism:
Our intentions cause effects in the future which become the future causes of an effect in the present.
Jun and Pauli (the theory of the collective unconscious), François Martin (the theory of the quantum psyche); Jacques Valée and PG (the theory of double causality and physical information)
The mechanism of the placebo effect :
You are healthy in your future at some point and then something makes you get sick, okay? So you have another future that is taking hold, you are really sick, not healed, well you can simply try to develop a future that is already present where you were healed, to revive it, the simple fact of saying: ah , well I’m healed, well it’s going to act like a mechanic that gets started and what amounts to saying that you get sick in the opposite direction of time, it is exactly the same thing when you are healed in the future like you should always have been and you get sick in the present because mechanics works in both directions of time, that quantum physicists keep repeating to us and the problem of irreversibility is a problem more or less obsolete, but I do not have time to speak to you about it, quite simply it is necessary in the process of cure to create an energy contribution by yourself or it can be it by the help of the imposition of hands of others, and c… let's say we live… I have to go very fast!
So clearly differentiate psychic energy from physical energy, we talk a lot about energy in these alternative environments while physicists make them flee, we must especially not talk about energies, they are not energies, they are information that surrounds the body and arriving in the body will catalyze the energy transformations that will allow it to go in the right direction, this is what will create the recovery of the organism, because it There is a finality, this finality is multiple but in the end it is the consciousness, the spirit, if the lifeline of the mind is well aligned with the lifeline of the mind which will allow the entry of information from way to achieve healing.
So how do you represent the future?
The future is not actually something linear, we can represent it as a tree of life with multiple possibilities, but the problem is that it changes all the time, there is a problem is that it which is created at a given moment it is not necessarily connected, it is as if the branches of your tree could float a little in space while waiting to hang on to branches which will connect them to the present. So I thought it was much more realistic to talk about a dynamic space-time which would be fluid by considering three cases: everything you think, all the intentions you have, in a very materialistic way, very rational, absolutely certain, I am ready to support this argument, create a field of information in which appears what I call an event bubble, but they have been given other names: morphic fields, quantum psyches , archetypes, and aggregators and that moves in a future time space in formation, that which is too far away moves, moves and then one day, paf, paf, as if by chance it ends up returning to the present. Everything we are certain to do and so we will do what is necessary to make it happen, it is in the center, that is to say that it is downright predictable, we know roughly how it is going to happen but there can be cases where it does not work and in this case the bubble arrives further, there are collisions, etc ... basically you only make with your intentions causal chains and it There is a dynamic of competition of bubbles in the space time of your future, but in any case all this dynamic makes that your future ends up returning to the origin at a given moment when at another.
41'-To control space time, consciousness clearly appears to be the field of information which will therefore create non-local connections which serve to interface the universe of your life with the outside and the outside. mind, consciousness, soul, it's the interface. To make it work it is very important to work on the mind and the mind - the mental and mind dissociation is something fundamental, we don't have time to talk about it - in order to create a demand, an authentic intention which will be made reliable with the universe. That is to say that you can ask for anything, it will not happen, but if you have an authentic and valid intention on your entire timeline, then you are working on mental dispositions: confidence , letting go, detachment which always involves making an effort on oneself of authenticity in letting go, and of authenticity in observation and in action. At that moment, you get to connect the mind outside of time space this type of connection that I call faith, love or joy. There are two time-space remote controls: pink for women where button 9 is for love or blue for men is button 9, joy (laughs) a way to summarize the question and I'm going a little too quickly on this, excuse me.
The mechanism that makes it all work and that you receive the gifts of life is that quite simply in the future time space that you create you decrease the causal pathways, these mental attitudes, and you increase the non-causal laws. having the presence of mind, that's it and I'll just give you an example:
the first time in my life where I had a car accident on the highway which caused me a lot of trouble, it was not serious but here it was, it was the day I was going to sign a decision very important that would change my life, and yet I was not stressed, my car had no problem, you could say: "what is it: clever little genius, "I have a perfect explanation: that is to say that the future that I had created for myself by habits, the future towards which I was going, if I had not made this decision, had a great force, and all of a sudden, we don't know why, without the universe knowing, I make another decision, I choose a new aggregate, a new bubble and so I go there and I cut the bridges between this future which is already there which is no longer connected to the present. What do you think is happening, well this future continues to exist there and before disappearing completely, it sends bridges, it is to to say that you have removed its causal connection to it, it is necessary to rebalance the energetic and probabilistic balance that chances intervene to send bridges. you also get things and that the new age does not teach you. The law of attraction from n ew age is an idea which is indeed very interesting, but which does not take into account the real dynamics of space-time. From the moment when physicists will seize on this matter, you will realize that it is much more complicated than what one can imagine.

Conclusion table : we are wired for creation.
Consciousness allows the temporal action of the spirit which punctures the living
Synchronicity awakens this connection
This connection is a source of healing
1 ° develop the dissociation Spirit-Ego to better control his mind (many techniques: mediates, etc.)
2 ° to develop spiritual values ​​as a result of a good understanding of the physical functioning of reality.
Love, self-giving, letting go, trust, faith, intuition and detachment. Find out more:

www.philippeguillemenant.com


I finished I end on two recommendations: develop the dissociation ego spirit to better control his mind
2 ° to develop spiritual values ​​as a result of a good understanding of the physical functioning of reality.
This famous remote control of space time and all this is something that is perfectly rational, I want to tell you that it is perfectly rational and therefore that this field which is part of psychology will soon be part of a field which will be attacked by physics, that's it! Thank you.

[sen-no-sen]

Is it transcribed by hand?

For the video: Conference by Philippe Guillemant at "Quantique planet":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KFlyh6hDnU

At the French Academy:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYdODEHpxl8

Its sites:
http://www.doublecause.net/


http://www.philippeguillemant.com/

[moinsdewatt]

Beautiful intellectual handjob this logorrhea.

And in practice what do we get out of it?

[sen-no-sen]

Beautiful intellectual handjob this logorrhea.

And in practice what do we get out of it?

A coherent theory on space time that could (r) evolve all physics, but other than that nothing!

[Remundo]

To make it work it is very important to work on the mind and the mind - the mental and mind dissociation is something fundamental, we don't have time to talk about it - in order to create a demand, an authentic intention which will be made reliable with the universe. That is to say that you can ask for anything, it will not happen, but if you have an authentic and valid intention on your entire timeline, then you are working on mental dispositions: confidence , letting go, detachment which always involves making an effort on oneself of authenticity in letting go, and of authenticity in observation and in action. At that moment, you get to connect the mind outside of time space this type of connection that I call faith, love or joy.

it reminds me of hollow texts used by sects ...

[Janic]

Sen no sen hello

Is it transcribed by hand?

Yes, three days of work!

Less dewatt hello

Beautiful intellectual handjob this logorrhea.

All that is intellectual is a handjob, see all the philosophers of all time

And in practice what do we get out of it?

As it is not necessary to know how and why his car works, the majority of people are content to turn the ignition key and drive hoping not to break down and then need those who have intellectually jerked off. developed this product which is the focus of our attention. It is also valid for medicine with its 10 years of handjob, engineers, etc.

remondo hello

it reminds me of hollow texts used by sects ...

This quoted passage corresponds to what in another, more condensed mode of expression, we call prayer.

[Janic]

Hello
I will not make any specific comments on the substance which, according to physicists, mechanists or quantum, can have their own coherence; nor on the construction of the discourse where the quotes and the personal point of view of the lecturer are easily mixed. But only on the last part, his theory. (My wife when I also indulge in this leucorrhea calls it cat porridge (origin of this formula?))
Only, therefore, the last part which he calls his theory bears his philosophical imprint and deserves an interested look.
So this formulation:
I deduced from it the mechanism of synchronicities and deduced that one could provoke either synchronicities and especially coincidences, and especially synchronicities by virtue of the mechanism, coincidences are coincidences which have no a priori meaning or whose meaning we have not yet understood, what is not determined by the past is determined by the future, that is to say what you put there with your thoughts and our intentions cause effects in the future which become the future causes an effect in the present. When you have a firm intention to achieve something, it happens now, well we will not go into details on the ways, and it continues to develop and it can send you bridges to the present and that's it which creates the extraordinary hazards of your existence.
I do not know if this speech may seem clear to someone, but after many readings, it remains, for me, "cat porridge" But with a little effort, without certainty, we would influence the past by our thoughts. (it would not be a coincidence, but would become a beautiful bazaar . It could be a problem if everyone living on this earth could do the same), " but also by varying all the choices you can make by chance every day, so we would have billions of trillions of lives in other universes every day or we would do the exact same thing except that at some point we take a decision rather than another. Paf, that means that another universe has been created for trillards, trillards of light years or I make this other choice. It is completely delusional but it is something which is very seriously advanced by materialist physicists because it is their most logical conclusionE.
Therefore we could change the past by knowing the past already realized and in this case it would no longer be the past. (Hence the possible hope that this would prevent everything in this human history that disturbs us as wars, epidemics, suffering, death of loved ones, etc ... but these wars would be replaced by others, other epidemics, etc ...) but at the same time all that currently exists would not exist ... and neither do we. It is therefore not a scientific discourse, but a philosophical and even theological discourse.

and that can send you bridges to the present and that is what creates the extraordinary chances of your existence

This formula is also interesting. Chances (which would not be because it is information) would be determined by our firm intentions.
From experience, everyone can weigh the meaning of this formula in relation to their experience. But it is a clever way to refute determinism, which is so disturbing for supporters of free will. Indeed in one case it is we who decide and thereby create the future; or it is fixed in advance, without our intervention, and in this case: what would remain of our possibility of choice? Our free will?
Thus his example of accident as extraordinary chance intended to change the course of its history.
« I have an explanation perfect : that is to say that the future that I had created for myself by habits, the future towards which I was going if I had not made this decision had great strength, and all of a sudden, we don't know why, without the universe being aware , I make another decision I choose a new egregore, a new bubble and therefore I go there and I cut the bridges between this future which is already there which is no longer connected to the present. What do you think is happening, well this future continues to exist there and before disappearing completely, it sends bridges, that is to say that you have removed its causal connection, it is necessary to rebalance the energetic and probabilistic balance that hazards intervene to send bridges »
Another cat porridge? Or a formulation which attributes the role of archer and arrow to the same subject.
We are approaching here, moreover, the philosophy which wants the individual to be the artisan of his future (which is far from being false) without external intervention (neither god nor devil). Hence this application of a philosophical approach to UNE physicist interpretation. (which is legitimate) but which proceeds, again, by eliminating what does not fit with the process. " Well, we can believe that, we can believe that, 19'13-but I say that it is a creationist vision which is even worse than the idea that god created the universe in 7 days, because it is not even in 7 days, it is instantaneous, that's it!
So this is where materialism ends ! »
This reproach can moreover be made against a conception which would take external intervention as a criterion (external information in unbelieving language) and would refute free will, here too by comparison with a creative philosophy. So physics cannot answer philosophical questions by its discipline alone. " there is none (physicist) who has the same opinion as another so they must all be careful what they say "

for the anecdote, there are 42 times in a row the reference to created ou creation (partly to a creationist vision, partly to his non-creationist discourse, in the religious sense of the term); 30 times the word chance; 30 times the word information; only 4 times the word evolution.

Definition of verb verb
1) Do nothing
2) Give existence to something that did not exist
3) Invent, imagine, produce, found

[Remundo]

all these complicated sentences ...

to say that fate is built from the will of the individual, from his abilities and also and from certain hazards of life ...

Too many words, too many obscure metaphors, repetitive intellectualizations ... it completely drowns the fish in my opinion.

Anyway, I'm not a fan, but some may like it.

[sen-no-sen]

To respond to what was mentioned above:
1) Phillipe Guillemant does not belong to any sect!
2) He is a physicist, radiation specialist, member of the CNRS (he has also received the Cristal Prize), a world-renowned specialist in the field of artificial vision.
3) He took over Wolfgang Pauli (Nobel Prize 1945) on the phenomenon called synchronicity.

Philippe Guillemant is somewhat of a poet, which has earned him the use of terms like love, angel, etc., but his work is all that is most rational!
So it would be interesting if the possible criticisms formulated to him are built around a solid argument rather than scathing remarks ...


Janic wrote:

I do not know if this speech may seem clear to someone, but after many readings, it remains, for me, "cat porridge" But with a little effort, without certainty, we would influence the past by our thoughts.

You elaborate a remark starting from a very limited comprehension of the works of P.Guillemant, besides beyond the video of 45min do you know the big ideas hidden behind the works of quantum mechanics?

Influencing the past may sound utterly absurd, indeed, but only from our "man in the street" perspective.
Some John.A. Wheeler (one of the most eminent physicists of the 20th century) had proposed the famous exercise of thought of quantum choice eraser cosmological.
Exercise based on verifiable and reproducible laboratory experiments:

See this futura-science article on the question:

Delayed choice: when quantum mechanics "acts" on the past.

The magic of quantum mechanics seems inexhaustible if we take it seriously. A recent experiment, carried out by Jean François Roch and his colleagues of the ENS Cachan, made it possible, much better than before, the experiment known as the delayed choice proposed less than 30 years ago by the great John Wheeler. While verifying the predictions of quantum mechanics, it shows that it is even crazier than its creators had imagined in 1927. (...)

http://www.futura-sciences.com/magazines/matiere/infos/actu/d/physique-choix-retarde-mecanique-quantique-agit-passe-10413/

[moinsdewatt]

Beautiful intellectual handjob this logorrhea.

And in practice what do we get out of it?

A coherent theory on space time that could (r) evolve all physics, but other than that nothing!

What slab.

It is a loghorse without interest that does not arouse the interest of those who do not understand anything.

A scientific theory must be predictive.
So when this gentleman predicts phenomena and we observe them in a quantified way, he will start to interest me.

He's the kind of guy who starts farting and lecturing because he's tired of being a researcher.
It interests the housewife of more than 50 years, some fans of esotericism and paranormal who will find the justification for preposterous things, some econologists and who will soon be noticed by this cloth that is the magazine NEXUS.

He will end up like Hubert Reeve, full of books and lectures, but will no longer produce anything interesting for science.