Q basic realities of living in the multiverse or Minkowski space we are in

This week, I was stunned to see how little kids watching comic movies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v1BpX4Awxk get to see a better image of reality which we now have from mainstream physics than do most professional physicists or mystics or philosophers! EVEN YESHUA may benefit from reading this one closely.... in a way, I am writing this for him. There is a huge explanation gap here. But please forgive me if once again I start from some claims which some of you on these lists would want to debate. I will be happy to explain a big, but FIRST THE BASICS. The most basic, solid, well-tested theory of charged particles and electromagnetic forces (just PART of physics, of course) is the version of Quantum Electrodynamics based on the Everett/Wheeler/ Deutsch theory of physics. I already gave lots of explanation of that AND MY VIEWS OF OTHER THINGS in links on my web page ========================================================= Is it possible to reconcile (1) the hardest core realism in physics, versus (2) the modern best quantum field theories, versus (3) our new mathematical understanding of brains and minds and the evolution of life; versus (4) the most powerful first person experience of soul and spirit, and of our connections to a serious and real higher level of intelligence? In truth, it took me more than 50 years to see a solid mathematical way to reconcile all this. But now – after exploring thousands of other views and cultures, I now see no credible evidence against the new unification I posted on youtube this year (see the slide below). For a more intuitive picture of what this means, see this recent interview discussion in Canada. ================================================================= The EWD theory says that we live in a specific type of "multiverse" called a "Fock space." It says that the state of the cosmos we live in, at any time t, is simply the state or value of a function psi(t,X), where X is a point in Fock space and t is time. WE KNOW from extensive experiments in many areas that our cosmos is EITHER: (1) A multiverse, like what EWD assumes (And like what the Spiderman trailer discusses!!!) (2) A 3+1-D curved space, like what Einstein assumed (I call this "HCER") . This SOUNDS simpler than EWD, BUT IN PRACTICE THOSE FEW OF US WHO DEEPLY UNDERSTAND the mathematics of that possibility (See https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Werbos/publication/327164414_WerbosFleury_v2/links/5b7de4bea6fdcc5f8b5de239/WerbosFleury-v2 or just use scholar.google.com to find the paper by Werbos and Fleury) understand that it yields a picture of our life whihc is actually WEIRDER than what EWD seems to depict. (3) WEIRDER even than either of those, as in concepts which have yet to be translated into real mathematics, or into clear images of how life actually works for us. (This huge collection ranges from "digital universe" to ultrafuzzy versions both of idealism and of solipsism." SO IF YOU WANT TO MINIMIZE CRAZINESS AND WEIRDNESS IN YOUR VIEW OF LIFE, (1) IS THE SIMPLEST, LEAST CRAZY OPTION YOU HAVE! Anyone who thinks that EWD multiverse is "too weird to believe" is simply out of touch with hard core experience, with first person reality and objective reality both! And so, when the kiddies ask how spiderman will survive in the multiverse, THEY are in touch with reality a lot more than the ignorant flat earth adults!! ======================== ============================== But now let me go to MORE ADVANCED QUESTIONS, building on that foundation. Questions like what the kiddies were asking, like what I have asked at times about President Trump 2021 and King Charles 1970-1990. And like some new quantum technologies which might just show up working on this planet, beyond even David Deutsch's Quantum Turing Machine. (But not yet the true time stuff, buried in the experiment+theory paper Werbos and Fleury if anyone understood it.) Kiddies first: IS IT POSSIBLE that Spiderman or some other human really could be put into a mixed state, where they exist in TWO "universes" (clusters of threads of the multiverse) at the same time, causing enormous problems for the entire space-time continuum? Please forgive me if I first review a major part of modern empirical physics which most people do not know about. =============================================== CAn ANY macroscopic object (let alone a person) enter into a mixed state, a quantum superposition? Because I am a hard core Einsteinian realist, I was once very skeptical of the idea that this could be possible. So was the famous Tony Leggett and many other physicists. I am very grateful to Menas Kafatos for inviting me to give a paper at his great symposium in 1988 where all the skeptics came to present their ALTERNATIVES to the Deutschian view: https://www.amazon.com/Theorem-Conceptions-Universe-Fundamental-Theories/dp/0792304969/ But real physicists do not just argue; they look for empirical evidence. Many did, starting from ideas at that conference. Due to them, and to work by followers of Deutsch, a huge literature has grown up (and keeps growing) showing that YES MACROSCOPIC SCHRODINGER CATS DO EXIST, AND YES EWD MAKES CORRECT PREDICTIONS ABOUT THEM. I have previously posted general literature reviews, but since I don't want to spend so much time on that today, let me just note that I went to scholar.google.com this morning and searched on: macroscopic schrodinger cats kilometers which gave 931 hits. One of the hits near the top which might be intelligible to nonspecialists: http://quanta.ws/ojs/index.php/quanta/article/viewFile/68/99 SO YES THEY ARE POSSIBLE AND REAL. ====================================== BUT HOW REAL COULD THEY BE THEY IN REAL HUMAN LIFE? ACCORDING TO PHYSICS? In the Spiderman trailer, a specific event occurs which "splits the multiverse" into two tracks, which stay apart but interact for as long as the trailer lasts. (I did not see the full movie. I saw the trailer because my family brought me to see Dune.) THESE lists might even discuss what kind of events would do that, but not in this post, which already is too large. In truth, I have often wondered whether our multiverse might have been split, to a macroscopic degree, one on the day after election day 2020 in the US and another in the UK . IS IT POSSIBLE that Trump really is occupying the White House right now, in an Alternate Reality which really DOES exist? This is a very tricky question, and I did not really understand the key principles until THIS YEAR -- the year when I more fully understood the full implications of the paper by Werbos and Fleury. (This is not trivial math!) ============================================= I BEGAN WITH A MORE ORTHODOX VIEWPOINT, LIKE WHAT MOST EWD PEOPLE TACITLY ASSUME. (And like what my latest next generation quantum computing ideas assume.) I pictured the "splits" as the kinds of flows one would expect by understanding pis-dot=iHpsi. One imagines parallel "universes" as states S(t) of the multiverse, with probabilities attached. The PRACTICAL QUESTION is what the probability distribution (S(t)) looks like. Many good, serious physicists assume that macroscopic schrodinger cats are still quite rare, and that Pr(S(t)) usually looks like a narrow normal distribution centered around a normal base case reality. Even solid EWD physicists were surprised when QED engineers learned how to create such states, but it took special efforts. ANY solid EWD physicist would agree that the Pr(S(t)) which emerges with time is exactly what the generalized Boltzmann distribution specifies. (https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Condensed-Matter-Physics-Chaikin/dp/0521794501/). The shape of the probability surface is basically the same as the energy surface, for states of relatively separated macroscopic objects, like people or cars, etc. A SPOTTY probability distribution, with LOTS of states well represented, is only possible if the energy surface is spotty. But in fact, we know how to do that. Is the internet itself starting to do that? MORE IMPORTANT IN THE DYNAMICS: those who do real QED dynamic calculations know that VIRTUAL states are also important, states with a kind of imbalance such that their probability DECAYS WITH TIME. I have generally assumed that the Trump2020 "universe", if it existed, has been decahing in probability ... a very serious MACROSCOPIC virtual state. (Hey, has anyone studied macroscopic virtual cats? I don't know how hard it would be, but if anyone could, it would be a great PhD topic under an advisor capable of such things!! The math is almost certainly right, but that doesn't tell you how easy it is to DO.) ==================================== ========================================= BUT BEYOND THAT: Long ago, I (and no one else?) understood how the MRF models necessary to explain CHSH experiments under HCER, OR under a version of EWD modified to be mathematically consistent (https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10773-008-9719-9.pdf) tell us that WE are actually just POSSIBLE STATES, not "the only real" or "chosen" states! (Yes, Pr(S) for states over 3D space can have that property!) In a way, we are like the "shadows on the wall" of Plato's cave. Tricky, splitting kinds of environments (like the 2020 elections?) can induce a LATTICE of possibilities, which branch out from ONE START, but then later RECOMBINE to one final state. When we experience life IN THE MIDDLE of that lattice, there are parallel copies of us out there just as real as we are! There is both recombination, and evaporation, in the statistics of Pr(S) under HCER, just as there are in EWD. So in the end, HCER is not REALLY weirder than EWD! Through the mathematical equivalence (at the level of QED) they predict precisely the SAME degree of weirdness. HCER does make more interesting predictions at a later stage, but even the most advanced possible quantum technology on the table NOW does not yet rise to that later stage. I allows it, but not yet. Time, better models of nuclear force and solitons are key parts of the difference which we will someday see (if we ever get that far on this planet at risk). ============= Let me pull out a fine poing sme folks may have missed: The experiments in Werbos and Fleuery were NOT to test EWD versus HCER. Those experiments were designed to test a few variants of EWD slightly altered (NOT by altering psi-dot=iHpsi but by altering practical models of macroscopic objects interacting with psi) VERSUS the ancient Cartesian dualisms which many philosophers are enamored of , "seeking God (a path to heaven)" in a pair of polarized sunglasses). Consistent versions won over Cartesian versions, hands down. But THAT needs to be more widely understood and replicated. From the viewpoint of believing in psi-dot=iHpsi, it is about MACROSCOPIC MODELS of MACROSCOPIC objects, and how they ingteract over time, which is absolutely central to reality (and even to spiderman). to be mathemafically consistent