This month, several slightly geeky articles raise interesting points related to quantum studies. I think those points are worth considering, in light of the Mandela Effect.
The first appeared at ComputerWeekly. I’m intrigued by the idea of consciously making business choices in the context of MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation). Author Brian McKenna has taken quantum science in a surprising direction, with applications in the business world.
However, I’m not sure we’re actually “navigating” parallel universes via those decisions. (If you can explain that to me, please do.)
The following are some key excerpts from the article.
By Brian McKenna on January 20, 2016
This a guest blogpost by James Richardson, business analytics strategist, Qlik
I find solace in the many worlds interpretation (MWI) of reality. In layman’s terms, the idea, first proposed by physicist Hugh Everett in 1957, means that ‘every possible outcome of every event defines or exists in its own “history” or “world”‘. In other words, every time an event happens the universe splits. …
So how does this relate to business intelligence (BI)? …
Here’s my logic:
1. People use BI as a driver for decisions.
2. Decision events split universes.
3. Therefore BI is a tool for switching between parallel universes.
To push the logic further, if the likely decision outcome is known, BI is a tool for consciously navigating parallel universes.
Do you think that your decisions — daily, unconscious ones, or even deliberate choices — affect whether or not you experience the Mandela Effect? Do those of us with alternate memories have them because we’re decision-makers… and we tend to make choices that take us outside the lock-step conformity of society and some pop culture?
Next, I’d like to talk about Chad Orzel’s explanation in a Forbes.com article, What The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Physics Really Means (Jan 5, 2016)
Early in the article, he says:
The explanation here is really that we’re constrained to only perceive a single reality at a time, and that perception is entangled with the outcome we’re seeing. [Emphasis added]
I like the emphasis on perception. It’s a little challenging to think we’re in all realities at one time, but aren’t consciously aware of it. However, I can’t rule that out as a possibility… or even a strong likelihood.
But then he says,
There’s a ‘world’ for every possible sequence of events, and these are completely separate and inaccessible to one another. [Emphasis added.]
I’m uneasy with the assumption that multiple realities are “inaccessible to one another,” unless he’s talking about a merge (or partial merge) between realities.
The Mandela Effect suggests that we can access different worlds or realities. (Of course, that’s only if you like the concept that we’re sliding between realities, as opposed to being in a holodeck or simulator.)
And then there’s the NPR article, How Real Is Reality?, posted January 5, 2016, by Adam Frank. I’m including this excerpt because it amuses me, and — of course — he’s at least partly correct. It’s why — at this point — no one can say exactly what’s causing the Mandela Effect.
“Quantum mechanics (or ‘quantum physics’) is the body of knowledge related to the nanoworld of molecules, atoms and the component parts. It’s the most powerful and accurate theory human beings have ever, ever, ever developed. The computer you’re reading these words on now wouldn’t be possible without quantum physics. But beneath all that power is a remarkable paradox that should never be forgotten: No one knows what quantum mechanics is talking about.” [Emphasis added.]
Read more of Mr. Frank’s article at: http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2016/01/05/462010293/how-real-is-reality
If you have any thoughts about these articles, or you’ve found something interesting in the news — related to the Mandela Effect — I hope you’ll leave a comment, below.