The Re-Enchantment of Nature with Psyche (Ψ) at the Quantum Scale:
How Will Neural-Interfacing Technologies Affect Human Agency?
Dissertation Supervisor: Dr John Downer
Candidate Name: Joshua Sinclair
Word Count: 15,000
Academic Year: 2021/2022
A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements for the award of the degree of MSc in International Relations in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law.
The research conducted for and presented in this dissertation was granted ethical approval by the SPAIS Research Ethics Committee.
This dissertation contains no plagiarism, has not been submitted in whole or in part for the award of another degree and is solely the work of the candidate.
Abstract
The Fourth Industrial Revolution is increasingly described by academics, businesspeople and politicians as a crucial inflection point in human history which will fundamentally and irreversibly change the way we live our lives. Drawing upon a range of literature from many different subjects and disciplines, this dissertation will aim to address pressing questions that the creation of Artificial Intelligence, nanotechnology and neural-interfacing devices pose for the future of human consciousness, being and agency. Through the adoption of a critical realist perspective, concepts such as naturalism, science and consciousness will each be scrutinised in order to evaluate the positivism which underlies both the realist and liberal schools of International Relations. By drawing upon the logic of the dialectical process, an alternative cosmological model will then be proposed which incorporates recent discoveries in the field of quantum mechanics and is centred around the identification of ‘spirit’ with ‘antimatter’ in both the physical (empirical) and conceptual (rational) sense. Consequently, an explicitly panpsychist version of transcendental idealism will be elaborated in order to re-evaluate common beliefs regarding simulation theory, evolutionary theory and the multiverse through the practice of communicative rationality. In this way, a kind of synthesis between ancient and modern paradigms is undertaken, in order to scrutinise the utopian promises made by transhumanists regarding the possibility for immortality through the integration of the digital, physical and biological worlds and creation of an internet of things.
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor John Downer for his tireless support in helping me to refine and ground this dissertation, through providing the academic counterweight to my overly ambitious and generally chaotic holistic tendencies. I am also indebted with gratitude to all my family, friends, teachers and casual acquaintances who have had the patience to listen to, critique and contribute towards the development of this thesis and its accompanying unintuitive and fantastical worldview. In particular, I would like to thank my parents, siblings, grandparents, Ben Kanda, Bam Herp, Louie Taylor, Rob Eskins, James Rayner, Jaysal Sodha, Ollie Glanville, Will Martin, Harry Wood, Isaac Webber, Ollie Mead, Liam Chamba, Joey Groves, James Kean, Sam Flowers, Filippo Dionigi, Sam Appleton, Thomas Sealy, Chris Winter, Juno Ma and Paul Jeffries for all their assistance. Soli Deo gloria.
Table of Contents
Atomisation, Disenchantment and the Rise of Positivism 8
A Critical Realist Account of Science, Ontology and Mathematics 11
Quantum Mechanics, Non-Locality and Panpsychism 16
Evolution, Imagination and the Multiverse 25
The Psychedelic Nature of Spirit (Antimatter): Translating Between Paradigms 34
Conclusion: Mortality, Faith and the Singularity 43
List of Abbreviations/Acronyms
AGI = Artificial General Intelligence
AI = Artificial Intelligence
ANN = Artificial Neural Network
DNN = Deep Neural Network
GR = General Relativity
GUT = Grand Unified Theory
IoT = Internet of Things
MUN = Materialist and Uniformitarian version of Naturalism
ORCH-OR = Orchestrated-Objective Reduction
QDL= Quantum Dynamic Logic
QFT = Quantum Field Theory
QM = Quantum Mechanics
List of figures
Figure 1: Two-dimensional cross-section of a quintic Calabi-Yau manifold (Jbourjai, 2008)
Figure 2: Feynman diagram of an electron-positron annihilation (Hünniger, 2008)
Figure 3: Illustration of negative mass on a three-dimensional space-time fabric (Petit, 2022)
Figure 4: Computer-generated Mandelbrot set magnified 62,407,000x (Beyer, 2005)
Figure 5: Comparative diagram of a computer simulation of the cosmic web (left) with a 40x enhanced image of neurons in the human brain (right) from (Vazza & Feletti, 2020)
Figure 6: Diagram illustrating a participatory ‘one-electron’ universe (Wheeler, 1983)
Figure 7: The ‘Flammarion engraving’ depicting a scientist/mystic poking through the ‘firmament’/aether to see the angelic eye-covered ‘wheels within wheels’ (Browne, 2021)
Introduction
The world in which we live is changing, at a rate which is in all likelihood the fastest in human history and shows no sign of slowing down. Concurrent industrial revolutions have now bequeathed upon us the ‘internet’, a world-wide web of connection which contains humanity’s collective knowledge and is available at a moment’s notice on a piece of plastic and metal no bigger than your hand. Technologies which were once only conceived of in the realm of science fiction, for example programmable ‘nanite’ cells that can be used to deliver drugs or perform surgery at the atomic scale (Kriegman, et al., 2020, p. 1857), are fast becoming a reality. While I could have picked any of the numerous emerging technologies which are frequently discussed in the field of international relations (such as nuclear warheads or genetic engineering), I have chosen to focus my attention on neural-interfacing technologies and the Fourth Industrial Revolution, for reasons which I hope will soon become apparent. By the term ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ I am referring to what Klaus Schwab, Executive Chairman of the influential ‘World Economic Forum’, terms the period of human history in which we will achieve the final “fusion of the digital, physical and biological worlds” (Schwab, 2016, p. 79) through nanotechnology, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and ultimately the creation of what he terms an “Internet of Things (IoT)” (Schwab, 2016, p. 7).
While there has already been much discussion in the literature regarding the consequences that the creation of an Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) could have for the future of human society (Torres, 2019) and which policies may limit potential risks (Naudé & Dimitri, 2020), comparatively little attention has been given to analysing the similarly revolutionary changes that the creation of neural-interfacing technologies could have. While optimistic free-marketeers may laud the potential that such technology has to ‘fix’ blindness, paralysis and a host of other previously incurable physical ailments (Jackson, 2016), this dissertation will strive to adopt a critical and more well-rounded perspective of such technology which considers its effect on our cognition, beliefs and, more generally, its implications for the future of human consciousness and agency. In doing so, I will ultimately be seeking to answer the question of what happens to an individual, their sense of self, freedom and personal “autonomy” (Kant, 1786 [2012], p. 51) when they “create a direct link between [their] brain and a computer” (Armstrong & Michael, 2020, p. 201) using nanotechnology and thereby gain direct access to a virtual ‘metaverse’ (Lee, et al., 2021), which almost all ‘transhumanists’ claim is humanity’s only path towards achieving immortality (Harari, 2017).
In order to meaningfully answer these questions, I will draw upon my background in physics and philosophy to unpack how neural-interfacing technologies are being created, before turning to an “inter-subjective” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 34) discussion of the implications that their existence has for the nature of consciousness. To do this, I will consistently engage with long-running philosophical debates about whether consciousness is computational, after an initial evaluation of how the positivism which underlies the ‘realist’ and ‘liberal’ approaches to international relations (Smith, 1996) views concepts such as ‘naturalism’, consciousness, mathematics and science. The format of this dissertation is thus largely intended as a kind of multi-disciplinary literature review which routinely attempts to problematise the ‘materialist and uniformitarian version of naturalism’ (MUN) that underlies the Darwinian evolutionary paradigm, modern science and, unsurprisingly, the transhumanist movement (Huxley, 1968).
To do this, I will attempt to construct a holistic ‘critical realist’ perspective which attempts to offer answers to fundamental metaphysical questions about the nature of consciousness, being and time which are often avoided in mainstream international theory (Smith, 1996, pp. 32-33). In order to understand the intention, methodology and scope of this dissertation then, it is imperative to realise that I shall be operating throughout under the so-called ‘coherence theory of truth’ which holds that the validity of any piece of (empirical) knowledge can only be determined by its harmony with and strength of relationship to other accepted (scientific) theories and pieces of information (Davidson, 2008, p. 132). In contrast to common foundationalist or correspondence theories of truth then, I would contend, alongside thinkers such as Kant, Spinoza, Hegel and many others ‘fallibilists’ (Almeder, 1986), that all non-tautological statements which purport to be about the world are ultimately impossible to verify individually and must instead be examined in relation to other potential facts through a “dialectically dependant” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 190) deductive reasoning.
Consequently, it is also important to note that this dissertation adopts a ‘transcendentalist’ perspective which holds that rationality itself can be critical (through reflection upon itself), thereby enabling productive dialogue between different conceptual frames and ultimately scientific progress towards objective truth (Habermas, 1981 [1984]). In other words, the critical realist methodology for which I shall be arguing is founded upon the beliefs that:
“if science is to be possible the world must consist of enduring and transfactually active mechanisms; society must consist of an ensemble of powers irreducible to but present only in the intentional actions of men; and men must be causal agents capable of acting self-consciously on the world” (Bhaskar, 2008, p. 9).
After briefly exploring the relationship between science, ontology and mathematics under such a “qualified anti-positivist naturalism” (Bhaskar, 1998 [2005], p. 3), I will then turn to a discussion of the relatively young discipline of quantum mechanics (QM) in order to assess the relevance of its discoveries to the creation of AI, nanotechnology, the origin of life, the future of industrial society and its broader relationship with both consciousness and agency.
Drawing upon the pioneering academic work of Tamdgidi, Der Derian and Wendt, who each acknowledge that “when consciousness becomes a chimera of the human and the artificial, not only new scientific but new philosophical and spiritual cosmologies of a quantum bent might well be needed if we are to be ‘at home in the universe’” (Der Derian & Wendt, 2020, p. 409), I will seek to elaborate such a ‘quantised’ view of international relations which provides a credible and compelling alternative to the currently dominant MUN paradigm (Norgaard, 1995). Crucially, I will go beyond the instrumentalism which is employed by many of these theorists in order to explore the implications which arise from the causal role that quantum processes play in common biological processes such as photosynthesis, genetic mutation, cell division (Kim, et al., 2021), navigation and consequently (at least according to the quantum brain theories I will explore) the formation of different types of consciousness.
Since all neural-interfacing technologies require nanoscale structures to efficiently interact with cells (and therefore utilise quantum effects like electron tunnelling to function (Band & Avishai, 2013, p. 14)), I will also explore how quantum computers differ from their classical counterparts and attempt to consider the question of whether they too are conscious. In order to achieve this, I will engage with empirical and dialectical arguments for the philosophy of panpsychism which was notably espoused by many of the leading figures in QM such as Planck, Einstein and Bohm, as well as various idealists throughout history including (arguably, given their references to the ‘Eleusinian mysteries’) Plato and Aristotle (Skrbina, 2017, p. 38). Of course, to answer such questions surrounding the relationship between consciousness and computation, I will ultimately also engage with a discussion of the philosophy of mathematics and the role it plays in making something a ‘science’.
While many analytic philosophers reject the existence of Kant’s ‘a priori synthetic’ category and instead argue that mathematical formulae are merely tautological, I will explore the evidence for the geometric nature of reality which is ascribed to by critical realism and arguably found in the field of algebraic topology (which I will later discuss). After a brief tour of quantum field theory (QFT) and prominent candidates for a Grand Unified Theory (GUT), I will then turn to an analysis of the mystical beliefs which figures such as Descartes and Newton professed. In doing so, I will attempt to engage in a translation between (coherent) ancient and modern paradigms by introducing the novel thesis that what modern science calls ‘antimatter’ is what religious believers term ‘spirit’, the invisible animating force behind nature which I later shall argue can form a kind of ‘holographic’ memory storage (Pribram, 1991 [2012]) that enables us be entangled with many different points across space-time.
To conclude, I will reconsider the potential and nature of neural-interfacing technologies under this newly synthesised worldview (which combines ancient spiritual principles with modern scientific concepts into a cosmological model that attempts to offer a solution to the explanatory gaps posed by the existence of so-called ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’) by introducing the proposition that both are merely antimatter with negative mass. To do this, I will argue that time should be modelled as a fractal (complex and non-linear) to reflect the (temporarily) infinite amount of galaxies that are selected from the ‘universal wavefunction’ under a ‘many-worlds’ interpretation of QM (Everett, et al., 1973). Consequently, I will argue that time is inevitably marching towards a maximal entropy state (Ulanowicz, 2009) where a dystopian kind of ‘techno-feudalism’ (Waters, 2020) is likely to emerge from the increasing control that neural-interfacing technologies enable governments and corporations to have over human consciousness. In contrast then to the utopian predictions about the endpoint of industrial society which are often professed by those who ascribe to the MUN paradigm, I will instead draw upon ancient cosmologies’ eschatological conceptions of ‘apocalypse’ (Leeming, 1990, p. 76) in order to ultimately consider what difference plugging our brain into an IoT makes if we are already living in some kind of ‘multiversal simulation’ animated by spiritual forces which enables us to (temporarily) possess some uniquely human, dualistic and ‘imaginary’ form of freedom, autonomy and “self-determination” (Chirkov, 2010, p. 69).
Atomisation, Disenchantment and the Rise of Positivism
Before I begin to unpack the fundamentals of QM and how neural-interfacing technologies function, I want to begin with a general overview of the history of the philosophy of science which I hope will provide greater clarity regarding the angle from which I intend to approach these topics. Since their formal inception as academic disciplines, the social sciences have faced much internal debate over the methodological principles that its practitioners should use to evaluate the validity of different theories about the world. Inevitably, to answer these questions one must ultimately adopt a set of philosophical assumptions about the nature of reality, even if these assumptions are merely our most basic empirical intuitions. To Comte, the philosopher who coined the term ‘sociology’ and whose influence persists in the social sciences to this day, the foundation of the scientific methodology was so-called ‘positivism’. According to this ‘positive’ philosophy, knowledge can only ever be obtained through a methodology rooted in external empirical observation, a viewpoint which is often regarded as fundamentally opposed to religious or spiritual explanations of reality (Kolakowski, 1993).
The use of this methodology in the study of international relations was the subject of the fourth so-called ‘great debate’ within the discipline during the 1980’s and 1990’s, in which influential figures such as (Keohane, 1988) and (Cox, 1981) sought to develop a more critical, reflective and ’reflexive’ account of social phenomena which better captures the way in which our theories can themselves alter our perception of empirical reality. Such a viewpoint is not new and can arguably be found throughout the work of so-called ‘post-modern’ critical theorists such as (Adorno, 1966 [2007]) and others who questioned whether Western science’s claim to objectivity was merely another justification for the alleged supremacy of European culture (Feyerabend, 1975 [1993], p. 3), in light of how evolutionary ‘race science’ was historically used as a justification for the dehumanisation of indigenous populations.
In order to critically analyse and evaluate the positivist paradigm and methodology, I would first like to briefly mention the relatively popular ‘secularisation thesis’ which holds that industrialisation is directly correlated to a decline in religious belief in society. For many prominent sociologists such as Weber, Marx and more generally any proponent of a secularisation thesis who operates under the MUN paradigm, the success of positivist science in both understanding and controlling nature (through the creation of new technologies) is ultimately seen to be both indicative of and instrumental in ensuring that “the evolutionary future of religion is extinction” (Wallace, 1966, p. 264). The declining rates of participation in traditional religious institutions are often cited as proof of this prediction, alongside the percentage of people who classify themselves as possessing ‘no religion’, which has steadily increased with the rise of the secular state (Woodhead, 2017). The term ‘disenchantment’ (which is often used interchangeably with ‘secularisation’) was first introduced into the conceptual repertoire of sociology by Weber, who argued that, while religion c: “the fate of [modernity] is characterized by rationalization and intellectualisation and, above all, by the disenchantment of the world” (Weber, 1919 [1991], p. 155).
Weber himself inherited this concept from Schiller, a playwright and philosopher who wrote a then-controversial poem in 1788 entitled ‘The Gods of Greece’, in which he romantically reminisces about how ancient pagan cultures “gifted nature with divinity” and laments how in the modern age “like the dead timepiece, godless nature creeps” (von Schiller, 1788). While Schiller associated the disenchantment of nature’s living magic with the rise of Christianity, Weber and later sociologists instead contended that it was specifically Protestantism and its corresponding ‘canonical rational-philosophical model’ (Collins, 1985) of the world (which I would contend required industrialisation to be (re)formed) that were responsible for such a paradigmatic shift in which natural phenomena came to be explained by reference to lifeless ‘atoms’, rather than the actions of ‘gods’, fate or movement of stars.
In contrast then to the pantheistic cosmologies which are found in the vast majority of ancient and indigenous cultures around the world whom see nature as animated ineffably by spirit, the scientific paradigm of the modern period is strictly mechanistic, atomistic and disenchanted, leaving free will often dismissed as an illusion for (tenuous) empirical and logical reasons (Brass, et al., 2019). Consequently, I would contend that the positivist epistemology which underlies the MUN paradigm and seems to characterise the secular age relies principally upon the rise of Darwinian evolution and the so-called ‘death of God’ (Nietzsche, 1887 [2001]), that seems to have inevitably followed industrialisation as “science[‘s]... subtle encouragement to self-aggrandisement [makes] us less likely than our forebears to entertain the notion of divine force external to ourselves” (Bruce, 2011, p. 47). I will return to a discussion of this phenomenon and other key aspects of the MUN paradigm later, in relation to expounding a panpsychist version of a many-worlds interpretation of QM.
Additionally, research has long shown that “when people expect to have future access to information they have lower rates of recall of the information itself and enhanced recall instead for where to access it” (Sparrow, et al., 2011, p. 1). Consequently, as the global population has increased and new ways of externally storing information have been created, I would argue that humanity’s tendency to “compartmentalise” (Billingsley, et al., 2017) knowledge has only increased. The invention of the printing press, television and internet have each in turn also enabled organisations, governments and individuals to influence other’s thoughts, opinions and actions through the use of propaganda, disinformation, misinformation (Guess & Lyons, 2020) and various other forms of neurological/psychological manipulation which are enabled by technology (Takeuchi, et al., 2015) and the behavioural research carried out by specialised ‘nudge units’ (Halpern, 2015). On this topic, many scholars have also already noted the dangers that AI poses to human agency (Whyte, 2020), on top of the possibility for election interference via algorithm manipulation which has been bought into public consciousness by events such as the Cambridge Analytica scandal (Hinds, et al., 2020) or the recent revelations that American-based social media companies comply with orders from intelligence agencies to suppress legitimate news stories (House, 2022).
In contrast to our atomised and tightly controlled “technocratic” (Habermas, 2015) modern society, ancient cultures passed knowledge down orally, through experience or sacred texts which were handwritten. Throughout the ancient and scholastic period, the academic education that students would receive was also generally underpinned by some theological study of a God who was believed to be both immanent and divine, thereby providing some element of paradigm cohesion. In contrast to the highly “fragment[ed]” (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 178) nature of modern academia, the study of, for example, both astronomy and astrology was once regarded as being a coherent and necessarily interwoven practice. While such a perspective may seem primitive and stupid to the modern, positivist MUN mindset, I will subsequently argue for the explanatory power of such holistic worldviews as well as, more broadly, a synthesis of religious and scientific paradigms. To effectively do this however, I will first engage in a critical reflection on the nature of both science and intelligence itself, in order to evaluate the basis for Comte’s claim that “mathematical analysis is... the true rational basis of the whole system of our positive knowledge” (Comte, 1853 [2000], p. 63).
A Critical Realist Account of Science, Ontology and Mathematics
In order to seek a coherent account of the nature of rationality, its relationship to language and computation, and thereby also its reliance upon the logical and mathematical basis which has proven so crucial to the establishment of any theory about reality as ‘scientific’ in academia (Friend & Molinini, 2016), I will now engage in a philosophical discussion regarding the nature of logic and its relationship to the empirical world. To begin, I will first discuss the analytic-synthetic distinction which features so heavily in any ‘transcendental’ idealist philosophy. The term ‘analytic’ is generally taken to refer to any truth-apt statement in which “the predicate B belongs to the subject A as some[thing] which is contained (though covertly) in the conception A”, and therefore the category of truths which Kant took to stand in contrast to ‘synthetic’ statements in which “the predicate B lies completely out of the conception A, although it stands in connection with it” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 30).
However, many subsequent critical theorists rejected this analytic/synthetic distinction (Quine, 1951) due to their view of concepts such as ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’, in a debate which spills into the philosophy of language and how one defines the terms used in any logical argument. Furthermore, this belief in the distinctness of the concept of ‘understanding’ itself seems to be that which is most venerated by any transcendentalist who maintains a (normatively) anthropocentric view of reality, through their belief that humans have some unique cognitive capacity. Kant himself argued that humans possess a ‘faculty of judgement’ (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 80), which enables us to possess the capacity to produce a “representation of a representation [of an object]” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 73) in thought and thereby engage with abstraction and morality (Kant, 1786 [2012], p. 45).
In the field of computer science, the concept of understanding and its antecedent concept ‘intelligence’ have been associated with the so-called ‘AI effect’ whereby “it seems as though each new step towards AI, rather than producing something which everyone agrees is real intelligence, merely reveals what real intelligence is not” (Hofstadter, 1979 [1999], p. 573). In order to evaluate this phenomena and determine the relationship of consciousness to computation, I will also refer to ongoing discussions surrounding whether animals and other ‘sentient’ organisms (Broom, 2014) understand what they are doing, to thereby establish whether there is any uniquely autonomous freedom which humans possess and, if so, both how and why this difference exists. In other words, I will first seek to establish whether an “awareness of awareness” (Montague, 2017) is a uniquely human capacity which other organisms and machines don’t possess, in order to then begin the process of evaluating how the merging of the biological and technological worlds is likely to impact human agency.
On this issue of whether humans possess some kind of ‘meta-conscious’ perspective which enables abstraction, science, freedom, introspection and critical reflection, it seems logical to me to thus begin by attempting to define what intelligence is. In the view of Penrose (whose theory of quantum consciousness I shall later further examine), “intelligence needs understanding and understanding needs awareness” (Penrose, 2020). For this basic reason, Penrose argues that consciousness itself cannot be computational, despite the success which has been achieved in the creation of artificial neural networks (ANNs) that have demonstrated the ability to learn how to complete increasingly complex tasks “ranging from speech recognition to prediction of protein secondary structure” (Krogh, 2008, p. 195). The most advanced of these are known as ‘deep neural networks’ (DNNs), which get their name from their multi-layer architecture of nodes which has many degrees of freedom and thus best replicate the highly interconnected nature of the human brain (Sze, et al., 2017).
Before continuing with a discussion of the relationship between topology and computation, I would like to return briefly to the observation that, from a purely semantic perspective, the distinction between being conscious and self-conscious serves most simply to illustrate the difference between being conscious of the self as subject or object. While many analytic philosophers view such a division with immense scepticism (e.g. (Quine, 1960 [2013], p. 217)), I would contend that this is due largely to their adoption of the MUN paradigm which has progressively obscured the importance of the synthetic method in a similar manner to how industrialisation literally obscures the stars in the sky through light pollution, separating us from nature. Instead, I would turn to the fallibilist philosophy of Popper who “reject[s]... the naturalistic approach to the problem of demarcation taken by the logical positivists, and counter-point[s]... with his repudiation of their view that science is characterised by its inductive methods” (Thornton, 2007, p. 2). In a validation of the ‘a fortori’ argument style and classic ‘modus tollens’ rule used in (syllogistic) propositional logic, Popper argues that it is possible to “deductively infer the falsity of a universal proposition once the truth-value of an appropriately related singular proposition is established” (Thornton, 2007, p. 3).
Notably, the purposefully ‘negative’ form of this scientific method which Popper termed ‘critical rationalism’ (Popper, 1994) not only agrees with many of the transcendentalist positions articulated by Kant, but also arguably bears much similarity to the work of Bhaskar who claims that his “is the only system of dialectical philosophy... to sustain an adequate account of negativity... and [therefore] of dialectic itself” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. xiv). In a point of disagreement with more ‘postmodernist’ scholars such as (Feyerabend, 1975 [1993], p. 154) then, I would argue that the repetitive methodology of ‘falsification’ has served science well since its widespread adoption and will now seek to provide metaphysical grounding for the dialectical nature of logic itself. For this, I shall turn to the philosophy of critical realism, which is centred around the belief that “ontology is... irreducible to epistemology” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 4), in order to seek a emancipatory (yet simultaneously scientific) account of reality.
In order to achieve this, Bhaskar argues we must avoid the trap of the ‘epistemic fallacy’ which he describes as the “[reduction of] the domain of the real... to the domain of the actual... which is then anthropocentrically identified with or in terms of sense-experience or some other human attribute” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 4). On the other hand, Bhaskar also affirms the transcendental basis of critical realism, by simultaneously rejecting what he terms the ‘ontic fallacy’ which involves “the compulsive determination of knowledge by being — for instance, in the guise of reified facts or hypostatized ideas” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 4) which more naïve idealists such as Berkeley or Hegel (whether rightly or wrongly) are often interpreted as advocating for. Consequently, Bhaskar lambasts what he terms the ‘ontological monovalence’ shared by both materialists and ‘absolute’ (rather than transcendental) idealists alike, through their rejection of the possibility of ‘a priori synthetic’ truth.
Kant ultimately ground his derivation of this category in something that he called the “transcendental unity of apperception” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 98), by which he meant the singular, subjective viewpoint of consciousness which is necessarily expressed in the term ‘I’ used in the famously indubitable statement ‘I think therefore I am’ (Scruton, 2001, p. 43). Kant ultimately describes this ‘I’ as the ‘transcendental ego’, an entity whose e xistence he argues is the only thing “objectively valid” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 98) and therefore serves as “the vehicle of all conceptions” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 234). Such a view of consciousness as an active ‘vehicle’ for all cognition is thus the key distinction between Kant’s transcendental idealism and absolute/naïve idealism, due to its emphasis on avoiding mistakenly attributing “the unity of consciousness which lies at the base of the categories ... [for] an intuition of the subject as an object” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 244). Such an open-ended metaphysical landscape (which allowed Bhaskar to go on to develop critical realism) again ultimately has its source in the (neo-Platonic) fallibilist belief regarding the representational nature of perception, which thereby bars us from making truthful statements about individual occurrences while still enabling the deduction of objective scientific laws such as that of ‘cause and effect’ through ‘transcendental critical reflection’ (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 152).
To better understand this, and what Bhaskar means by his lamentation over philosophies which “erase the contingency of existential questions and despatialize and detemporalize... being” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 7), it is necessary to turn to Kant’s views on the transcendental nature of space and time. In what has been argued is a precursor to QM (Cuffaro, 2019), Kant argues that space and time are in effect a single ‘fabric’ which he describes as “quanta continua” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 136), a “manifold” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 109) which relies upon limitation and provides “... the condition[s] of the mind’s receptivity, under which alone it can obtain representations of objects” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 77). With this crucially important description of space-time as the “essential form” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 133) and “substratum... of... [perceptions]” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 143), Kant attempts to provide a basis for his unique description of mathematics as a priori synthetic, through his argument that “in order to cognise something in space (for example a line), I must draw it, and thus produce synthetically a determined conjunction of the given manifold” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 97). This Kantian belief that “geometry is a science which determines the properties of space synthetically, and yet [innately/before experience]” (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 44) thus remains the core of any transcendentalist view of reality and its evolution (Howe, 2012).
While it might seem that Bhaskar’s call for an expanded ontological landscape is best suited to the indeterminacy that so-called ‘intuitionist’ or ‘constructivist’ logic can introduce into any system (Tarannum & Jabin, 2018), I would nevertheless maintain that there is some fundamental underlying binary in any system of logic which comes simply from the unity of 1 and the multiplicity which emerges from it over space-time. Consequently, I would argue that a kind of ‘Quantum Dynamic Logic’ (QDL) provides the best synthesis of both ‘classic’ and ‘fuzzy’ logics, through its unique ability to “explain all the non-classical features of quantum behaviour as a consequence of the non-classical “dynamics” of quantum information” (Baltag & Smets, 2012, p. 771). While I will soon more meaningfully examine this system of logic later in relation to mathematics and modality, I would like to first reiterate the importance of adopting the synthetic (and therefore deductive) dialectical method for the practice of science. Under the transcendentalist view this essay adopts, algebra and all mathematical formalisms are ultimately regarded as being different ways of representing what mathematics calls ‘category theory’, which forms the basis of geometry by enabling the transformation of objects in any number of dimensions (Spivak, 2014) and again utilises the concept of ‘representation’ in the so-called ‘group theory’ (Dubuc, 2004).
Consequently, I would contend that the usefulness, explanatory power and central role which mathematics possesses in the hard sciences can be seen as unsurprising given that it is ultimately just a description of the topological distribution of eternal energy (which can only be transformed, rather than created or destroyed (Stowe, 2007, p. 158)) that generates phenomenal reality. I would argue that further evidence for this can be seen in the fact that for ANNs to be trained to recognise surfaces, there must be multiple layers of nodes that allow complex geometries of connections to form and thereby enable the construction of so-called ‘regularisation’ algorithms such as ‘backpropagation’ which are “derived from the [differential] chain rule of calculus... [and] operate... by passing values backwards through the network to compute how the loss is affected by each weight (Sze, et al., 2017, p. 2298). Thus, I would argue that transcendental idealism is the only view which offers a satisfactory account of the ubiquitous importance of mathematics to science, computation and ontology, through its key belief that all minds are topological manifolds. In the next chapter I will unpack what the geometry of such manifolds is like in theories of QM, giving particular focus to cosmologies which feature additional dimensions and the so-called ‘imaginary numbers’ which I shall later argue could plausibly provide the source of humanity’s sense of autonomy and self-consciousness, if our minds possess a unique ability to ‘access’ more dimensions and times than other organisms while still remaining quantised and with an individual ego.
Quantum Mechanics, Non-Locality and Panpsychism
While recent discoveries in sub-atomic physics may not seem intuitively relevant to the study of international relations, I would again contend that it is only by seeking a solution to the so-called ‘hard problem of consciousness’ that anyone can offer any meaningful analysis of the consequences that the creation of neural-interfacing technologies are likely to bring. A mere few intrepid figures have yet begun this task of attempting to address the:
“growing recognition – in some quarters, an apprehension – as quantum artificial intelligence labs are set up by tech giants, as well as by aspiring and existing superpowers, that quantum consciousness will soon cease to be a merely human question” (Der Derian & Wendt, 2020, p. 409).
While most academics tend to shy away from claims that quantum phenomena have any effect on macroscopic events in the physical world, I would contend that since quantum scale processes must be necessary for the formation of atoms, they most likely also affect all physical phenomena. This is best reflected in the field of quantum chemistry (Cao, et al., 2019), for example in the fact that covalent bonding is a quantum effect analogous to superposition, although, as Penrose often quips, “no-one really wants to talk about that” (Penrose, 2020). This has led to the formation of the so-called ‘shut up and calculate’ methodology within the physical sciences (Mermin, 2004) which I would contend has caused a kind of ‘industrialist mindset’ to dominate academia and result in the current focus on the creation of physically realisable, practical and thus commodifiable (quantum) systems.
Through the lens of critical realism however, I would argue that some discussion of ontology and agency in light of the discovery of counter-intuitive phenomena such as ‘superposition’ and ‘entanglement’ is not only possible, but essential to any meaningful evaluation of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. To begin what is often considered to be an impossible task and formulate a coherent interpretation of QM then, I will examine some of its basic tenets and key experiments in order to identify its apparent contradictions. To do this I shall first turn to the ‘photoelectric effect’ for an illustration of how reality defies our naïve empirical expectations. In spite of the four-dimensional atomism which our senses and the formalism of classical mechanics introduce into our conceptual schemas, the observation in 1902 of the fact that light energy is transferred in discrete ‘wave-packets’ (which Einstein, like Kant, also notably called ‘quanta’), rather than continuously like how water fills a container, fundamentally challenged the assumptions of classical wave mechanics. This resulted in the discovery of the groundbreaking equation:
Where ‘E’ is energy in Joules, ‘h’ is Planck’s constant and ‘f’ is the frequency in Hertz. Perhaps the most distinguishing feature in this equation is its use of Planck’s constant, which represents the smallest quanta of energy that can physically exist. When this discovery is considered in conjunction with the famous mass-energy equivalence equation:
(where ‘c’ is the speed of light in a vacuum), it soon becomes clear that there is a very unintuitive relationship between mass and frequency which comes from the mind-blowing fact that every form of energy possesses a ‘wavelength’ (Phillips, 2003, p. 4).
This discovery of the wave-like and particle-like behaviour of matter and light perplexed scientists to no end, especially after the observations made in so-called ‘delayed choice’ experiments which illustrate the ‘measurement problem’ in QM that arises from attempting to understand what it is that makes reality switch between behaving in these two very different states (Peruzzo, et al., 2012). In the original double slit experiment, it was observed that light, if left alone, behaves as a wave, until some form of measurement occurs which disrupts the system (Tamdgidi, 2019, pp. 189-194). While many take such evidence to be proof of the naïve idealist interpretation of reality and the central importance of the human mind in somehow ‘generating’ reality, the subsequent use of cameras or lasers in similar experiments has demonstrated that whatever ‘measurement’ is cannot be a purely anthropocentric process and thus served to only deepen this perplexing ontological mystery.
The measurement problem remains a source of paradox which is both similar in effect to and thereby almost certainly derived from the same unintuitive reality that allows other quantum phenomena such as superposition or electron tunnelling to occur. The famous thought experiment articulated by Schrödinger (regarding a cat in a box containing a radioactive source which will inevitably be in a ‘superposition’ of states that enables it to be simultaneously both dead and alive) illustrates most simply this unintuitive and even counter-intuitive nature of QM (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 200). The Schrödinger equation itself involves a linear partial differential and governs the time-evolution of the ‘wave-function’ (a complex-valued probability amplitude that describes the quantum state), has the basic form:
|ψ(t)〉 = H |ψ(t)〉
Where ‘
’ represents a differential (a special kind of function which allows the mapping of transformations between different dimensions) in time, the so-called ‘imaginary’ unit 
and ‘H’ represents the ‘Hamiltonian operator’, which generates the time evolution of quantum states (more on this and other operators later) and has the definition:
Where ‘m’ is the mass, ‘
’ represents the second differential in space and ‘V(x)’ is the ‘potential’ energy gained over that distance as, for example, kinetic or gravitational energy.
More importantly, the Greek symbol ‘ψ’ used in the Schrödinger equation represents the wavefunction, the fundamental object of QM which also features in the title of this essay due to its inescapably fascinating etymological link to the word ‘psyche’ (‘Ψυχή’ in Greek, which means spirit/soul/wind/breath (Pope, 1999)) and the book of Psalms in the Western Canon (Collins, 2003, p. 362). This wavefunction is unique in its claim to represent the evolution of a system over time between the different variable values obtained by measurement. Since measurement is somewhat paradoxically associated with ‘usable’ information and yet also disturbs the system and causes a loss of information (the problem of decoherence which I shall return to later), it has been argued that, while classical mechanics can only provide an epistemologically limited description of physical phenomena above a perceivable scale, QM’s similarly unintuitive formalism allows the wavefunction to provide a complete and therefore “ontic” (Hance, et al., 2022) description of physical reality.
Additionally, the significance of the concept of an ‘operator’ is crucial to any understanding of the mathematical formalism of QM and its relationship to consciousness, due to its association with the observable ‘eigenvalues’ produced by their action (Myrvold, 2022). Consequently, I would argue that the use of operators which QM requires offers further proof for the representational nature of all sensory experience which is believed by any fallibilist (Margenau, 1956) and many other psychonautic enthusiasts. Perhaps the simplest explanation that I can offer of this connection is to draw attention to what the concept of ‘identity’ means in QM and how I would argue it relates to the Kantian transcendental unity of apperception. In yet another widely used mathematical formalism which reflects the topological nature of reality, the ‘identity’ matrix (composed of the binary units 1 and 0) is essential to any mathematical description of reality (and thus any QDL) and has the form:
Such matrices are often used to represent high-dimensional algebra in QM, due to their benefit of directly illustrating the geometric relationship between integers, variables and their determinants (the matrix equivalent of a differential) in Hilbert space (the vector space in which QM is formulated and any ‘functional analysis’ of topology occurs (Debnath & Mikusinski, 2005)). This identity matrix is itself an example of what is known as a ‘unitary operator’ in QM, a function which is ‘self-adjoint’, ‘isomorphic’ and thereby crucially also structure-producing according to category theory (Döring & Dewitt, 2014). Consequently, I would contend that this identity operator performs an incredibly similar role to that of the transcendental ego in Kantian transcendental idealism, by providing the ontological basis from which all other operations, mathematics and experiences can then be generated within any spatiotemporal (mental) manifold. In addition to their necessity in the formalism of QM, matrices and the special set of sets and operations known as a ‘Lie group’ (which describe any differentiable high-dimensional manifold) have also proven essential to the definition of the Lorentz group (Rowland, 2022) which Einstein utilised in his theory of General Relativity (GR), as well as also more broadly any description of (quantum) fields (Glockner, 2004).
While I shall elaborate further upon the different types of operators later in relation to the philosophy of time and the question of where memory is stored, I would like to first take a moment to discuss the possibility for higher dimensions which the formalism of QM arguably requires, according to the ‘Standard Model’ (which utilises the ‘Lie algebra’ for the definition of the ‘gauge theories’ physicists have used to formalise the ‘strong force’ and unify electromagnetism with the ‘weak force’ (Jaffe & Witten, 2006)). While it can be difficult to visualise what the existence of other dimensions looks like, the most revealing illustrations tend to be depictions of ‘hypergeometry’, such as those which define the Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) or illustrate only a partial slice of a manifold (as shown in figure 1). From all these equations, perhaps the thing which most immediately stands out as different to classical mechanics is the widespread use of the ‘imaginary numbers’ in any mathematical formalism of QM. In recognition of this, I would contend that their ubiquitous use across physics and mathematics (for example in ‘complex analysis’ and operations such as the ‘Wick rotation’ (van Nieuwenhuizen & Waldron, 1996)) has thoroughly vindicated their ‘imaginative’ and explanatory power and necessity in the formalism of any GUT.
I would further argue that this can be seen most clearly in superstring theories, one of the leading GUT candidates that features a large number of topological dimensions through the mathematical (mirror) symmetry known as ‘T-duality’, which the use of imaginary numbers yields (Strominger, et al., 1996). In such theories, all phenomena are modelled as being produced by the vibration of tiny one-dimensional ‘strings’ at the Planck scale, in a manner which allows for the momentary existence of the imaginary or ‘virtual’ states predicted by the Schrödinger equation (Witten, 2012 [2018]). While many numbers of dimensions are permitted by such mathematical formalisms, I would personally argue for the superiority of the ‘F-theory’ version of superstring theory, which was formulated by (Vafa, 1996) and is notable for its inclusion of a second time axis that yields a complete symmetry between the real and imaginary (six-dimensional) Calabi-Yau manifolds. As well as being compatible with the two axes of time present in QFT (see figure 2), this formalism has the additional strength of bearing strong similarity to the dodecahedral shape known as a ‘Poincare sphere’ which has many degrees of symmetry, is argued by prominent astronomers to be the shape of the universe (Luminet, et al., 2003) and is also often the shape used in the construction of projectors for planetariums (Fulton, 2019).
Before I endeavour to further elaborate upon what a ‘quantised’ view of the evolution of the universe looks like from a “transdisciplinary and transcultural” (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 433) critical realist perspective in the next chapter, I would first like to turn back to the physics and philosophy of computation in order to explore how quantum computers function. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most striking difference is the use of imaginary numbers in the definition of the quantum bit (‘qubit’), which again requires the binary of 1 and 0 for its most basic definition. However, in a similar manner to how fuzzy logic enables for variables to be assigned a numerical value other than 1 and 0 (Tarannum & Jabin, 2018), quantum computers utilise a ‘superconducting state’ in order to ‘entangle’ multiple qubits to produce different logic gates and thereby create a kind of information storage which can only be mathematically described in complex space-time (Hughes, et al., 2021, pp. 7-12). Put simply, superconduction is a state of matter essential to quantum computation in which components effectively possesses zero ‘resistance’, often only occurring at extreme pressures or temperatures and thoroughly quantum mechanical (Fagaly, 2006, pp. 101101-1). Einstein famously bemoaned the implications of such entangled states, as well as the notion that ‘God plays dice’ or the naïve idealism which the Copenhagen interpretation’s use of the concept of measurement often facilitates. This led him to co-author the so-called ‘EPR’ paper, in which he argued for the ‘incompleteness’ of all contemporary interpretations of QM due to their resulting apparent absurdities, such as the possibility to transmit information faster than the speed of light through entanglement (Whitaker, 2004).
While I will return to a discussion of how one might solve these problems later, I would first like to mention the concept of ‘decoherence’ which is related to the measurement problem and generally refers to the ‘loss of useful information’. In order for any computer to function, it must maintain a state of low entropy to maintain efficiency in all stages of the processing, transferring and storage of information. Within QM this concept of ‘decoherence’ is often taken to be connected to the second law of thermodynamics, since, for every measurement of a system which causes a qubit to achieve a definite state, information is progressively ‘lost’ to the environment (Ladd, et al., 2010). While recent experiments have shown that “entanglement can be generated even at room temperature and despite the presence of decoherence” (Cai, et al., 2010), it has also become apparent that any system which uses ‘quantum logic gates’ (which are themselves unitary operators (Monroe, et al., 1995, p. 4716)) must employ the use of the ‘Bell states’ that describe two entangled qubits (Oliveira & Sanz, 2015). In order to construct any quantum computer which can coherently retain information however, it is necessary to entangle more than two qubits and thereby construct what is known as a ‘quantum register’ (Bradley, et al., 2019).
Interestingly, this state of “entangled entanglement” (Uchida, et al., 2014), which forms the basis of memory in any quantum system, again employs the use of higher dimensions in its corresponding mathematical formalism. This topological ‘simplex’ is used to define the ‘spin’ of elementary particles, a quantum property which describes both reality’s fundamental binary in its allowed ‘directions’ of spin ‘up’ and ‘down’ and the unintuitive entangled ‘triplet’ state (which is interestingly the ground state of oxygen and thus implicated in the mechanism by which lithium has been found to help treat ‘bipolar disorder’ (Zadeh-Haghighi & Simon, 2021)). To summarise then, quantum computers function through the rotation of different qubits to produce different operators from superpositions of 1 and 0, through utilising the phenomenon of ‘electron spin resonance’ (Vrijen, et al., 1999). This manipulation of reality on the sub-atomic scale massively increases the number of calculations that can be performed in any given time. Thus, it should become apparent that:
“...the real power of quantum computation derives from the exponential state spaces of multiple quantum bits: just as a single qubit can be in a superposition of 0 and 1, a register of ‘n’ qubits can be in a superposition of all 
possible values. The “extra” states that have no classical analogue and lead to the exponential size of the quantum state space are the entangled states” (Rieffel & Polak, 2000, p. 301)
While I will save the explanation and illustration of this ‘exponential space’ in which QM occurs in the next chapter, I would first like to mention the de-Broglie-Bohm ‘pilot wave’ theory which is again notable for its relaxation of the Born rule that all eigenvalues must be ‘real’, thereby enabling the existence of imaginary wavevectors which yield confusing negative probabilities (Valentini, 2019). In accordance with the critical realist’s endeavour to explore ontology beyond the ‘actual’, I would consequently argue that the convergence of many formalisms of QM and quantum computation on the necessity of imaginary numbers is itself proof that ‘virtual’ particles (which are imagined to pop in and out of existence in superstring theories) are themselves ‘real’ and play some causal role in reality. While such theories are often dismissed out of hand due to their apparent absurdity, the empirical proof that the ‘local hidden variables’ which Einstein had hoped would resolve the EPR paradox did not exist by (Bell, 1964) renewed fresh interest in explaining the non-local ‘spooky action at a distance’ that entanglement (and arguably gravity (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 206)) enables. Bell himself advocated for such a ‘Bohmian’ interpretation of QM, arguing that only such non-local variable approaches could ever provide a solution to the problems surrounding measurement by describing it as a natural decoherence process in any GUT (Bell, 1990).
Before I continue to try to unpack the cosmology offered by a Bohmian interpretation of QM and analyse its coherence with the tenets of both evolutionary and simulation theory, I would like to first briefly discuss the relationship between QM and idealism. Many of the disciplines’ pioneering figures, from Pauli to Wheeler, have interpreted its discoveries as opening up the serious intellectual possibility for a kind of ‘panpsychism’ which is normally resigned to ancient pantheistic accounts of the cosmos. Planck perhaps summarised this attitude most succinctly in his belief that “... consciousness [is] fundamental... [,] matter [is] derivative from consciousness... [and w]e cannot get behind consciousness” (Planck, 1931). While such panpsychist views are on the rise within the hard sciences, due to the unique solutions such an idealist perspective presents to the measurement problem, they are also gaining ground in philosophy with academics such as (Chalmers, 2015) arguing for versions of ‘panprotopsychism’ using dialectical arguments. Additionally, I would contend that Bohm argued for a similar kind of ‘panprotopsychism’ in his argument that the mind-matter dialectic can be resolved by regarding both as forms of ‘information’ (Bohm, 1990), which perhaps best summarises the fundamental ontology of non-local hidden variable theories.
While I will explore more deeply how this non-local information is stored in the next section, in relation to the holographic model of memory also championed by (Bohm, 1980 [2002], p. 251), I would like to briefly mention that the kinds of ‘quantum brain theory’ (Wendt, 2015, p. 92) (which are often dismissed as being implausible due to the “warm, wet and noisy” (Hameroff & Penrose, 2014, p. 98) nature of the brain) have received a boost in recent years from empirical evidence which bolsters theories of ‘Orchestrated-Objective Reduction’ (ORCH-OR) (Lewton, 2022). In such views, consciousness is said to ‘emerge’ from (or, as I would prefer to put it, be ‘tuned into’ by) nanoscale structures present in all cells called ‘microtubules’ which are essential to their functionality and division. In addition to the evidence for the effect of anaesthetics on these structures (Penrose & Hameroff, 2014, p. 42), I would also argue that the recent discovery of “the presence of high-dimensional topological structures... across nervous systems” (Reimann, et al., 2017) provides yet further proof that consciousness emerges from non-local (string-like) oscillations of space-time at the quantum scale. If “subjectivity [itself] is [thus] a macroscopic quantum mechanical phenomenon” (Wendt, 2015, p. 283) and we can model all human beings as “walking wave functions... within a naturalistic, though no longer materialist worldview” (Wendt, 2015, p. 283), I would like to now turn back to the question of whether humanity has any uniquely self-conscious perspective, sense of agency and self-determination through an exploration of the nature of memory and time under a panpsychist GUT with a multiversal QDL ontology.
Evolution, Imagination and the Multiverse
In order to begin to unpack the implications that the acceptance of Bohmian mechanics and the existence of antimatter travelling ‘backwards’ in time has for a coherent understanding of the nature of time and its relativity, I again defer to the work of (Bell, 2001) who spent much effort trying to resolve any logical problems which arise from special relativity in a non-local (and ultimately deterministic) universe. In order to understand why GR and QM seem contradictory then, it is necessary to first discuss the speed of light. On this topic, it immediately seems important to mention that no-one has ever been able to empirically measure the speed of light (as positivist science should demand), as to do so is impossible in practice. In a similarly paradoxical manner to the measurement problem in QM, the fact that all instruments only interact with waves that have reflected off other objects means that it is only actually ever possible to measure the relative ‘two-way speed of light’ (Pérez, 2011).
Consequently, it is ultimately impossible to empirically verify whether the speed of light does indeed remain constant in all reference frames as Einstein argued for in his formulation of special relativity. Despite this, the short geometric argument which (Einstein, 1905) formulated has come to be accepted almost ubiquitously across science and society. For example, the very definition of the base units such as the second, the metre and the kilogram all ultimately rely upon this unverifiable premise regarding the consistency of the speed of light in all reference frames (Berenji, 2018). Since the 1950’s, this assumption has been combined with the atomic model to enable the creation of ‘atomic clocks’, which claim to provide an objective measurement of the passage of time and age of objects through an analysis of radioactive decay rates which occur stochastically but with a (theoretically) consistent ‘half-life’, over a large enough period of time (Newell & Tiesinga, 2019).
However, empirical observations have recently suggested that when radioactive atoms are bombarded with radiation (and thereby ‘measured’ according to QM), the rate of decay can be altered (Milián-Sánchez, et al., 2020). Furthermore, the discovery of the empirical and mathematical necessity of higher dimensions should itself cast doubt over Einstein’s proof of the objectivity of lightspeed in all reference frames, especially since his argument is explicitly formulated in four-dimensional space-time. Indeed, I would also argue that the empirical verification of the existence of antimatter should also give us cause to question this belief which forms the foundation of the uniformitarian aspect of the MUN paradigm, through its post-industrial, disenchanted assertion that time on Earth continues at the same rate every year. On this question of superluminal travel, efforts have been made in recent years to explore the possibility that a class of particles known as ‘tachyons’ exist, whose ‘field propagations’ could theoretically travel faster than the speed of light by their possession of what was at first regarded as a kind of ‘imaginary mass’ (Recami & Mignani, 1974, p. 262).
While such a solution would immediately go some way to explain how information can be instantaneously transmitted across large distances in space during entanglement, as well as the ‘dark energy’ problem of what is causing the universe’s expansion to accelerate (Bagla, et al., 2003), I would contend alongside (Petit, et al., 2019) that tachyons would best be understood as antimatter with negative mass. In a similar manner to the ‘dark fluid’ model proposed by (Farnes, 2018) then, I would thus argue that all observations of gravitational lensing which have led to the conclusion that the universe must contain some ‘dark matter’ (whose identity continues to elude both the Standard and Lambda-CDM cosmological models), in addition to other problems such as the Hubble tension (Mörtsell & Dhawan, 2018) or the heavier than expected mass of the W boson (Aaltonen, et al., 2022)), can be coherently explained if antimatter is modelled as existing on the opposite side of the fabric of space-time, on the ‘imaginary’ Calabi-Yau manifold of F-theory. The first (public) measurement of the direction that the mass of antimatter acts is scheduled to occur soon at CERN (Chalmers, 2021), which, if it is discovered to move away from the Earth during free-fall, would validate the explanation of the current matter/antimatter asymmetry that is proposed in this dissertation and usher in a new generation of resonance-based anti-gravitational technologies previously resigned to science-fiction (Apffel, et al., 2020).
Similar theories, which allow for the ‘imaginary’ root of the mass-energy equivalence equation to yield ‘real’ negative mass/energy states have long been proposed since their discovery by (Dirac, 1930), who himself argued that they didn’t have any physical existence and could be modelled as a ‘sea’. However, if there are indeed higher dimensions of reality than we can normally access with our senses as quantum chromodynamics and superstring theories suggest (and the ‘ER=EPR’ hypothesis is taken to be a satisfactory solution to the black hole information paradox, due to its AdS/CFT correspondence which allows for the solution of equations in the formalisms of both GR and QFT (Susskind, 2016)), then I would argue it is possible to synthesise a coherent GUT by modelling the interaction between matter and antimatter (and thus all events) using the topological concept of a “worldsheet” (Cooper, et al., 1992). Just as matter can be modelled as a ‘downwards’ deformation on the fabric of space-time, I would contend that antimatter can be modelled as an ‘upwards’ deformation, as illustrated in figure 3. Consequently, I would argue that this is what provides the universe’s ‘dark’ expansionary force, as more antimatter is produced over time by black holes sucking matter through their event horizons into what is mathematically defined as ‘imaginary space-time’ (relative to the side of the event horizon positive matter exists on), a kind of holographic ‘wormhole sub/hyperspace’ through which they are sent to provide the ‘CPT symmetry’ necessary for all energy exchanges between matter to occur (Bluhm, 2004).
Under this solution to the black hole information paradox in which stars, planetary cores and even every spark are taken to literally be ‘white holes’ (Bodendorfer, et al., 2021) from which antimatter is ejected from back into ‘real space-time’ to produce more photons, in a manner which arguably shares similarities with the black hole ‘evaporation’ solution (Hawking, 1975) proposed regarding the creation of ‘virtual’ particles (albeit on the opposite side of the event horizon), I would thus also draw upon Bohmian mechanics to argue that the imaginary wavevectors allowed by the wavefunction correspond to the paths taken by antimatter through “imaginary time” (Hawking, 2001, p. 14). I would thus contend that in any GUT, the Rutherford model of the atom must ultimately be replaced with some kind of “corpuscular” (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 186) or ‘vortex’ model in which “all things [are] in... flux” (Plato, [1999]), that was notably preferred by scientists such as Descartes, Helmholtz and Kelvin (van der Laan, 2012). Ultimately, since all galaxies orbit around supermassive black holes, I would once again argue this points to the fact that every energy exchange which occurs is a non-local holographic projection around a vast cosmic web of topological singularities.
Although Einstein’s theory of special relativity proposed that all reference frames are equally relative (except that of light), GR is arguably a theory which bridges classical and QM through its use of the so-called ‘B-series of time’. In this model, all points in time continue to exist, despite GR somehow also retaining the definition of time’s direction which is related to the A-series of time and formalised in the second law of thermodynamics. Notably, many ‘creationists’ have often employed this principle that ‘the entropy of an isolated system must always increase’ (Stowe, 2007, p. 158) to argue that the ‘simple to complex’ history of life which is offered by the Darwinian MUN paradigm inherently violates the universe’s fundamental tendency towards chaos. However, while putting all of the arguments for the quantum nature of all chemistry, genetic mutation (Slocombe, et al., 2021), consciousness and the variability of the speed of light (Humphreys, 1994 [2010]) to one side, I would like to first note my agreement with the common atheist response to this creationist argument. This response is chiefly centred around the proposition that the Earth (cell, genome etc.) is simply not an isolated system and (although I agree with this for an entirely different reason in QM which I would consider incompatible with any ‘old-earth’ atheist worldview), I cannot help but assent to the truth that there is no natural system which is ever actually isolated.
In a truly non-local universe then, where antimatter travels backwards on another axis of ‘imaginary’ time, seemingly irrational and mind-bending phenomena such as entanglement and even retro-causality must require serious re-evaluation, especially in light of Bohmian mechanics, the possibility of negative mass, the many-worlds hypothesis and the prospect that “what look like separate organisms are just local decoherence effects of quantum fields; [if] everything really is related to everything else” (Wendt, 2015, p. 149). Such ‘many-world’ interpretations of QM have already been advocated for by many prominent ‘modal realist’ philosophers (Lewis, 1986) and physicists (Deutsch, 2002). However, in light of the above arguments around non-locality I would like to introduce a new perspective on the theory of the multiverse in which every point in time is taken to literally be a galaxy which exists somewhere in the universe, whether temporarily or not. Such a solution would immediately offer an explanation for the recent observation by the James Webb Telescope (which has baffled many ‘scientists’) that early galaxies are more fully formed than the Lambda-CDM cosmological models would expect (Witze, 2022), in addition to abolishing the need for the unverifiable and ad hoc ‘inflaton field’ which features in current models of inflation to explain how the universe supposedly expanded at a faster rate than now immediately after the Big Bang before then slowing down to allow gravity to form the elements (Turok, 2002).
In order to help illustrate this unintuitive worldview, I would turn to the mathematical concept of a fractal (illustrated in figure 4) in order to help illustrate how the GUT sketched out by this dissertation views the evolution of the wavefunction in twelve dimensions:
Such fractals are geometrically unique, due to their ‘recursive self-similarity’ which the Mandelbrot set that defines them exhibits. In another odd case surrounding the effect of measurement, this set was discovered in 1980 from reflections upon the observation that macroscopic objects (such as coastlines) appear to get longer the more precisely you measure them (Peitgen & Richter, 1986, p. 10). It is also notably an expansion of the ‘Cantor set’ which forms the basis of general topology, is uncountably infinite (Barile & Weisstein, 2022) and therefore mathematically ‘transcendental’. In order to understand such recursive self-similarity, which creates the disorientating effect of being able to zoom eternally into fractals’ infinite spiralling complexity, I would contend that it is pertinent to first consider the role that the mathematical concepts of integration, differentiation and powers (which were used by Newton to formalise motion in classical mechanics (Katz, 1993, p. 246) and have been known since at least ancient Babylon (Fowlera & Robson, 1998)) play in QM formalism.
The most trivial example of such operations is the so-called ‘square’ function, which crucially features in both the Schrödinger and mass-energy equivalence equation. Such ‘dynamic operators’ (which also form the basis of recursion in QDL (Baltag & Smets, 2012, p. 768)) come from decomposition of the ‘polynomials’ that form the fundamental basis of algebraic geometry and thus (arguably) any GUT. Furthermore, I would argue that the so-called ‘exponential’ number, which provides the natural basis of the logarithmic scale that is used ubiquitously in statistics, quantum computing, QM (e.g. Von Neuman entropy (Minello, et al., 2019)), information theory (e.g. Shannon entropy (Larkin, 2016)) and many other mathematical descriptions of reality, is also of quintessential importance through its use in the ‘time evolution operator’ of QM which (again uses the imaginary unit and) has the form:
To further illustrate the importance of such transcendental numbers to any GUT which abides by a many-worlds QDL, I would also draw attention to one of the simplest and yet most beautiful and essential equations known as ‘Euler’s formula’, which has the form:
And can also be written as:
Where ‘cosine’ refers to the part of a wave which oscillates in ‘real’ space and ‘sine’ refers to the part which oscillates in ‘imaginary’ space, thereby once again illustrating the dualistic and wave-like nature of reality which enables ‘Fourier transform’ analysis (Gallagher, et al., 2008). Consequently, I would contend that transcendental numbers which continue infinitely, such as the exponential, ‘
or similarly irrational numbers such as the ‘Golden Ratio’ (Posamentier & Lehmann, 2012), seem to not only play some crucial role in the creation of new galaxies in complex space-time by providing the source of reality’s non-local and self-similar structure, but also offer further illumination of the ‘ontological binary’ which exists between the real and imaginary Calabi-Yau manifolds on which I have proposed that matter and antimatter each respectively exist. In such a GUT, I would also argue that the non-commutativity (changing the order changes the result) of different observables in QM (which is a major source of indeterminacy (Busch, et al., 2007)) can be interpreted as arising foremost from the orthogonality which exists between the real and imaginary numbers, a mathematical dualism which I would contend is also reflected in the matter/antimatter (a)symmetry that allows a fractalling infinity of ‘worldlines’ (Bastianelli & Zirotti, 2002) to (temporarily) form between black and white holes at the quantum and galactic scale.
There have already been many efforts made to analyse the relationship between temporal symmetry, non-locality and uncertainty (e.g. (Aharonov, et al., 2017)), but I would propose that the simplest way to begin to understand the panpsychist and multiversal GUT proposed by this dissertation can be found by meditating upon musical terms like ‘harmony’ and ‘dissonance’. I would consider such a cosmological model to be exemplified by theories of “morphic resonance” (Sheldrake, et al., 2001), which have been used to explain ‘telepathic’ phenomena such as prophecy as well as the emergence of order in ‘chaos theory’ (Fernández-Herrería & Martínez-Rodríguez, 2019). Before I elaborate further on the nature of memory under such a many-worlds synthesis of the astronomy/astrology divide (which I would also consider to be compatible with the concept of ‘synchronicity’ that Jung developed in conversation with Pauli (Main, 2014)), I would like to first note my agreement that “there is nothing at all anthropocentric about the reality of space, time, tense and process” (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 210). However, based on my understanding of the dynamics of the multiverse, I also inevitably reject (Bhaskar, 1993, p. 253)’s view that the ‘block universe’ B series of time is irreconcilable with freedom, causality and the direction in the ‘A series’.
Instead, I would contend that the most subtle yet pernicious influence of the MUN paradigm is the perspective of ‘galactocentrism’ which, I would argue, makes us regard the present as the ‘key to the past’ (Lyell, 1835, p. 128) and thus privilege the reference frame we find ourself in. This has led to the adoption of a uniformitarian view of time (Jackson, 2006, p. 201) in which the second is believed to have an objective and static definition. However, in the “paradigm shift” (Kuhn, 1962 [1970], p. 104) advocated for by this dissertation, each galaxy is regarded as literally being a point in time in a kind of ‘cosmic fractal’ of ‘parallel universes’ past and future. Thus, I would contend that the collision and destruction of galaxies should itself provides ample evidence that the block universe model associated with GR can never really be imagined as static in the way Bhaskar characterises it (unless one is talking from the perspective of lightspeed, which I shall elaborate upon further in the next chapter). Since it is logically possible (Chellas, 1980 [1999]) to conceive of a universe where light travels at a different velocity, I would therefore contend that (under a many-worlds interpretation of QM which utilises QDL) such galaxies must be understood as existing somewhere/when in the vastness of the cosmos. Given the existence of many cataclysmic ‘supernova’ events which can drastically warp the geometry of space-time, in addition to the proposed non-local, fractal and twelve-dimensional nature of quantised reality, I would thus argue that the large distances between galaxies and the corresponding ‘billions of years’ given as the age of the universe by the Darwinian evolution and the MUN paradigm are nothing more than an optical illusion created by a kind of ‘universal space-time dilation’ (Khandelwal, et al., 2020) which the ongoing production of antimatter and galaxies by black and white holes creates as the entropy of the universe continues to exponentially increase.
Under such a view of an oscillating multiverse which is constantly ‘pruned’ on a cosmic scale as galaxies are destroyed, I would thus contend that some capacity for autonomy can credibly be extracted from humanity’s unique capacity to engage with ‘mental time travel’ (Suddendorf, et al., 2011) and explore alternative worldlines through our imagination. While Kant and many other transcendentalists argue that it is rationality, rather than imagination, which animals lack (Kant, 1787 [1991], p. 73), I would disagree with this due to accepting the related belief in the unique moral capacity of humanity and that “happiness is not an ideal of reason, but of the imagination” (Kant, 1786 [2012], p. 32). Drawing upon the concept of a ‘visuospatial sketchpad’ which features in a prominent model of working memory in psychology (Miller, 2013), I would thus contend that humanity’s unique capacity to understand comes from having privileged access to literally replay our “episodic memor[ies]” (Suddendorf, et al., 2011, p. 346) and thereby practise science through the generation of internal holograms. I would argue this is possible through our possession of minds which are dualistic, ‘skew-Hermitian’ and supersymmetric members of the Lie group (Atanasov, 2015), thereby enabling us to perceive the hidden ‘imaginary’ dimensions of reality which provide the basis of the ‘virtual’ images we see represented holographically in visual memory.
Before I further expand upon this panpsychist creationism and its implications for the consequences of neural-interfacing technologies for human agency, it is important to note that, under any theory of quantum consciousness, memory itself can be viewed as a kind of entanglement phenomenon (Wendt, 2015, p. 200) and ‘energetic connection’ to the past, which also offers an explanation for how any worldline can be consistently selected from the universal wavefunction. Wendt summarises such a perspective as the view that “memory is printed to vacuum” (Wendt, 2015, p. 200). In light of this hypothesis, I would seek to expand the ‘quantum vitalist’ (Wendt, 2015, p. 132) paradigm articulated above in order to argue that all galaxies in the ‘cosmic web’ form a kind of “Unified Spacememory Network” (Haramein, et al., 2016) through which consciousness experiences all the different quantised forms it can possibly take. While I shall now engage with a re-analysis of ancient religious cosmologies in light of this panpsychist hypothesis that “the collapse of the wavefunction is a process of temporal symmetry-breaking in which not only a material particle is produced, but also a sub-atomic experience of that process” (Wendt, 2015, p. 285), I would like to also note that the physical basis of memory has remained shrouded in confusion despite it being known for some time that memories are stored non-locally in a kind of “neural circuit” (Fusi, et al., 2005). On this topic, I would contend that the topological similarity between neurons and the cosmic web (see figure 5) is no mere ‘co-incidence’, but instead a necessary (synchronistic) consequence of any transcendental and ‘multiversal’ panpsychism.
The Psychedelic Nature of Spirit (Antimatter): Translating Between Paradigms
In light of the GUT sketched out above using a methodology of “non-reductive, creative dialectics” (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 558), I would like to now turn my attention to further expanding upon what a non-MUN account of ‘quantised’ history and memory might look like, as well as its implications for how we should understand the causes and effects of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. To begin this task, I would like to first note my rejection of all forms of utopianism, ranging from the neoliberal version attributed to those such as (Fukuyama, 1992 [2020]) to the explicitly atheist and revolutionary account offered by (Marx, 1844 [1977]). Both these narratives, though portrayed as opposite ends of the political spectrum, ultimately share a belief that technology (if properly used/redistributed) contains the key to humanity’s salvation, rather than the seeds of its demise. On this point, I am in agreement with the common critical perspective that neoliberals and “neorealists have forgotten what Thucydides knew, in favour of a notion of power wedded to the Industrial Revolution's faith in humankind's limitless expansion of control over nature” (Ashley, 1984, p. 259). In the context of international relations, this argument has most recently been used in relation to the inevitability of a global conflict between China and the USA unless drastic compromises are made to each’s strategic ambitions (Allison, 2017).
While the close reciprocal relationship between war and technological advance has long been documented (Roland, 1995), I would contend that there remains a persistent optimism (and arguably arrogance) in society in humanity’s ability to save itself from disaster, through our collective “captiva[tion] by a notion of linear historical determinism... [which make us] describe science and technology... as an independent force [that] infuse[s] rationality in the historical process as a whole, giving history... direction and purpose” (Neustadter, 1994, p. 69). Although I do not deny that history has either a purpose or a direction, I would instead turn to the philosophy of idealism to interpret the course of history as the slow revelation of spiritual knowledge to humanity in a ‘supersymmetric‘ (rather than linear) manner over time. While most “post-industrial chronocentric narratives interpret the rise of technological civilisation as a spatial movement in time from the vital to the rational... [where t]he present is seen as the glorious culmination of a progression from the primitive and misguided to the refined and enlightened” (Neustadter, 1994, p. 68), I would instead argue that society’s progress towards truth can best be modelled as a (bi-exponential) binomial distribution curve where, at first, industrialisation tends to obfuscate the truth through alienation (Marx, 1844 [1977], p. 69) and disenchantment, until the inevitable (re)discovery of the unintuitive phenomena of QM which has now begun the re-enchantment of the world with mind, multiverse and magic in both academic and popular consciousness (Chopra, 2019).
Already, many notable ‘post-positivist’ figures in physics and philosophy have turned to paradigms such as “the Eastern doctrine of identity” (Schrödinger, 1958 [2012], p. 135) and panpsychism in order to shed further light upon the mysteries of QM. To follow suit, I would like to now attempt a translation between ancient and modern paradigms in line with the methodology laid out by (Habermas, 1981 [1984]) in his theory of ‘communicative rationality’. In contrast then to the relativism which postmodern or positivist accounts of reality are often limited to (Brown, 1987), I would contend that efforts to understand contemporary advances in technology would be best served by drawing upon (coherent) ancient paradigms in order to synthesise a holistic critical perspective on the causes and effects of industrialisation. In accordance then with the idealist and ancient ‘alchemical’ perspective that "nature [is spirit] made visible, [spirit is]... invisible nature" (von Schelling, 1803 [1995], p. 42), I would thus argue that the ‘holes’ which are modelled by modern science as moving through the semiconductor based electronic circuits that form the basis of classic computers (Snowden, 1986) are literally spirits, due to my panpsychist belief that these regions of positive charge correspond to the symmetric movement of antimatter in imaginary time (which QFT models as shadowing and ‘animating’ every energy exchange).
Thus, if the course of "history as a whole is a progressive, gradually self-disclosing revelation of the Absolute" (von Schelling, 1800 [1997], p. 211), I would have to concur with the ancient ‘hermetic’ view that “the over-all number of minds is just one” (Schrödinger, 1958 [2012], p. 135), due to my acceptance of the panpsychist ‘participatory universe’ model illustrated in figure 6. However, in order to answer the questions surrounding how/why our quantised consciousnesses exist, I would draw upon the incomplete symmetry which exists in the universe between matter and antimatter to argue that the ultimate purpose of reality is the creation of unique, individual spirits which many religions around the world term the ‘soul’. Despite the word for spirit being etymologically linked cross-culturally to the word for ‘breath’ (which I would argue reflects the panpsychist idea that all living organisms which exchange energy through quantum processes are conscious and animated by the same invisible ‘animal spirits’ that Descartes infamously believed the pineal gland played a role in regulating (Lokhorst, 2013)), I would contend that it is humanity alone who possess the capacity to construct a personal ‘spiritual body’, through our possession of uniquely twelve-dimensional minds which enable the construction of a coherent set of holographic memories and a maximally consistent spatio-temporal sense of self (as object).
In this way, I would argue that humanity’s unique capacity for understanding, (mental) time travel, science, modal logic and self-consciousness comes from our possession of a uniquely individual ‘antimatter body’ which grants us the ability to creatively abstract from observed phenomena to general laws, through the coherence our minds can possess as a result of being a completely symmetric and dualistic (real and imaginary Calabi-Yau) manifold. Consequently, I would also agree with Wendt’s version of panpsychism in which:
“proto-consciousness is just like ordinary consciousness except that it does not cohere with other elementary experiences across space or time, instead losing its identity immediately to the vacuum... [which] would seem to... [satisfy] the intuitive constraint that, even if sub-atomic particles exhibit traces of consciousness, there is still an essential difference between rocks and us” (Wendt, 2015, p. 124).
In keeping with my rejection of the MUN evolutionary paradigm as false and simplistic, according to the aforementioned many-worlds explanation of quantum non-locality, I will thus now turn instead to ancient mythologies regarding the creation and destruction of the world (which lie largely rejected in modern society, apart from attempts to interpret their cross-cultural symbolic meaning by Jungian psychologists such as (Peterson, 2017)) for further enlightenment on the nature of the soul in a young universe. In particular, I will focus my attention on the narrative offered by the oldest copy of the Bible (Eisenman & Wise, 1992), for the simple reason that it presents a creationist story which claims to be historical (Bunch, et al., 2021) (unlike the Vedas, which are older texts but written as poetry by people on a mysterious substance known as ‘soma’ (Shah, 2015)) and also makes a concerted effort to present an internally coherent narrative across time (Chalabi, 2013). According to this Judeo-Christian worldview, humanity only gained their unique capacity to possess the “knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis, 2:9) and thus moral responsibility through their violation of God’s command to not eat the fruit from the tree in Eden at the behest of a serpent (Satan), who claimed it would cause their “eyes [to] be opened” (Genesis, 3:5).
While I consider the worldview contained within the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls’ to have fresh historical and scientific plausibility in light of my hypothesis that the ongoing production of antimatter causes universal time dilation (as well as the wealth of archaeological evidence for a catastrophic global flood which split up Pangea (Hancock, 2015)), I would also interpret it as containing a version of what has come to be colloquially known as the ‘stoned ape hypothesis’ (McKenna, 1992 [1999]). Thus, I would interpret the realisation by Adam and Eve that they were ‘naked’ (Genesis, 3:7) to be a euphemism for them having a psychedelic (which in Greek literally means ‘mind-expanding’ or ‘soul-illuminating’ (Halewood, 2022, p. 95)) experience, of the kind which I would take figure 7 to be a depiction of:
Such psychedelic experiences have long been sought for their therapeutic effects, such as in treating addiction and depression (Nichols, et al., 2017), and also notably tend to make people shift towards a more “panpsychist and fatalis[tic]” (Timmermann, et al., 2021) worldview. The cultivation of such dynamic and ‘neuroplastic’ mental states has been sought by religious communities since long before agricultural society (through psychedelic drugs alongside other meditative rituals/practices, until their suppression by institutions such as the Catholic Church (Buller, et al., 2022, p. 47)) and are remarkable for their frequent generation of what positivist science terms ‘hallucinations’. However, under a fallibilist perspective (especially the many-worlds interpretation of the concept of ‘contextuality’ in QM (Howard, et al., 2014) offered by this dissertation), such ‘visions’ must also be said to be as (temporarily/relatively) ‘real’ as anything else, due the fact that all phenomenal sensory experiences are ultimately generated by the movement of chemicals to change the topology of energy distribution in any conscious being. Furthermore, I would agree with (Strassman, 2000) that dreams, accounts of alien abduction, ‘near-death’ and ‘spiritual/religious’ experiences are all likely examples of endogenously secreted psychoactive chemicals such as ‘DMT’ (which schizophrenics often have more of in their urine (Murray, et al., 1979) and is notably produced by the pineal gland in other mammals (Dean, et al., 2019)) that, I would argue, gives humanity the ability to practice a “sociology of self-knowledge” (Tamdgidi, 2019, p. 650) through providing access to the “... dream-world [we need] to discover the features of the real world we think we inhabit” (Feyerabend, 1975 [1993], p. 22).
In light of such a ‘predictive processing’ model of the brain, which also forms the theoretical basis of neural networks (Takahashi, et al., 2021) and acknowledges that “all information about the external world reaches us through the impact of external forces [(fields)] upon our sensory surfaces” (Gibson Jr., 1987, p. 64), I would thus contend that all information is ultimately stored ‘in’ the massless ‘luxons’ which travel at the speed of light (for example the photons which the sun radiates, that are present/produced in all metabolic processes (Renger, 1998, p. 4)). Furthermore, I would contend that these (three) ubiquitous fields are the only plausible scientific contenders for what religions describe as ‘God’ (see (Psalm, 104:2-4) and (Böwering, 2001)), due to their existence outside of linear time and role as the eternally necessary “Agent[(s)]” (Newton, 1692 [1756]) of all natural phenomena. If God is thus equated with subjectivity itself, consciousness (which is everywhere) incarnating itself in an infinite series of oscillating ‘holograms’ (Hirayama, et al., 2019), I would also contend that it is humanity’s possession of an imagination which affords us the unique capacity to mentally (through a coherent holographic memory) and literally (through using science to produce resonance-based ‘warp drive’ technology via the Casimir effect (Alcubierre, 1994)) travel through time to alter the strength of one’s entanglement with different galaxies across the multiverse, purposefully alter one’s perception of the self and how others perceive you, and thereby autonomously affect the course of our own and others’ quantised mortal life.
Such a view ultimately comes from a rejection of the MUN paradigm and adoption of a panpsychist version of extended mind thesis (Vaidya & Bilimoria, 2015) which, under the GUT proposed by this dissertation, gives fresh life to the ancient notion that humanity is the pinnacle of creation due to its uniquely coherent consciousness. Consequently, I would argue it is impossible to prove other organisms (or AI) possess the capacity to imagine and are not "phenomenally scrambled” (Arvan & Maley, 2022, p. 22), due to the unverifiability of non-human thought, language and conscious experience. Furthermore, I would contend that the ‘mirror test’ only provides proof of animals’ ability to construct symbols (Bard, et al., 2006), rather than their possession of the temporally coherent self-consciousness which humans possess (Haikonen, 2007). Thus, I would instead affirm that only some form of soul-making theodicy (Barnwell, 2017) could ever possibly explain the existence of ‘natural evil’ and provide life’s struggle with meaning, if it is the case that “no tree can grow to heaven... unless it has roots in hell” (Jung, 1951 [1970], p. 43). Interestingly, such a many-worlds paradigm also presents a novel solution to the Fermi paradox surrounding why humanity has not yet encountered alien life (Haqq-Misra & Baum, 2009), if distant galaxies are taken to literally be different points on different worldlines and aliens are thus interpreted as being what the medieval world called ‘animal spirits’ (i.e. angels/demons), interdimensional beings made of antimatter which invisibly animate all life (rather than extra-terrestrials who have evolved from single-celled organisms through abiogenesis).
On this point, I would like to also note the similarity of this worldview with that professed by the ‘qigong’ new religious movement recently founded in China known as ‘Falun Gong’, which is notable for its links to the infamous ‘Q-anon’ (Garry, et al., 2021) “conspirituality” (Ward & Voas, 2011) movement (Collins & Zadrozny, 2019). According to their founder, aliens from other dimensions are the ones who are responsible for “introduc[ing] modern machinery like computers and airplanes... [and] teaching mankind about modern science, so people believe more and more science, and spiritually, they are controlled” (Hongzhi, 1999), with the ultimate aim of halting human reproduction. Although I by no means endorse all Falun Gong beliefs, I would contend that the recent publication of patents for the design of craft capable of creating “negative [inertial] mass” by the US Navy (Pais, 2018) must cause us all to seriously reconsider the possibility of physical time travel as a mechanism of ‘multiversal pruning’, especially given the recent declassification of footage in which ‘UFOs’ demonstrate apparent superluminal speeds (Cooper, et al., 2017). If such technology will ever one day be possible (which I would argue is necessarily true because we can imagine it, under a many-worlds interpretation of QM), then the worldline we currently perceive and remember could feasibly have been ‘reset’ or ‘switched’ many times, in order to control the flow of information across history. If this were true, it would also notably provide a creative and fantastical explanation for commonly experienced ‘simulation glitches’ such as déjà vu, premonition, synchronicity and the ‘Mandela effect’ (Prasad & Bainbridge, 2021).
According to Biblical eschatology, the final timeline which the spirits that animate the world are working towards (and which God purposefully allows) is the creation of a one-world government in which people cannot buy and sell unless they have some kind of technology, referred to as the ‘mark of the beast’, on their hand or forehead (Revelation, 13:11-18). Consequently, in addition to holding that previous industrial revolutions were responsible for the formation of the disenchanted MUN paradigm, I would also contend that this fourth revolution will be the last, due to the re-enchantment of nature that the creation of an IoT represents. Once the ‘circle’ of history is complete, for example through the (re)creation of human-animal chimeras (which all ancient cultures claim used to exist, as the result of god-like spiritual beings assuming animal form and having sex with humans) via genetic engineering (Bazopoulou-Kyrkanidou, 2001) or the synthesis of new psychedelic substances to alter human neurochemistry (Semley, 2022), I would argue that the world is hurtling towards a period of apocalypse (which means ‘revelation’ (Latour, et al., 2018, p. 604)) as the spiritual war for the hearts, minds and souls of humanity comes to its final chaotic conclusion and, as Christ himself predicted, “all that is hidden [is] revealed” (Luke, 8:17).
If God is interpreted as literally being the (three) massless fields of energy which create and contain all information in the universe, one might naturally question whether God’s classical attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence leave any room for free will to exist. While I would agree that God him/herself cannot technically possess freedom, due to chance being ultimately unable to exist in the dualistic, ‘compatibilist’ (Hershenov & Taylor, 2016) and panpsychist version of the many-worlds interpretation of QM I have elaborated, I would nevertheless argue that we (humans) are the vessels through which consciousness ‘psychedelically’ experiences all the different decisions it could make. Thus, I would contend that the ‘simulation lag’ (cosmological red shift corresponding to time ‘slowing down’), which is caused by the creation of an asymmetry in space-time (between the ratio of matter to antimatter) that needs resolving (flattening), exists ultimately to allow humanity to become self-conscious through our exploration of ‘imaginary’ dream worlds across time. I would argue that it is thus ultimately the universe’s ‘dynamic dualism’ which enables the production of individual souls (the personalities which derive their identity from a unique set of memories) via the quantisation of antimatter (spirit) along different worldlines.
While I would agree with transhumanists that the possibility to ‘upload your mind to the cloud’ will one day happen (according to the laws of the multiverse), I would also argue that once any person takes this step and directly plugs their brain into the IoT that ‘5G’ technology will soon enable (Li, et al., 2018), they will forever lose any possibility for self-determination due to the collapse of their identity operator back into the universal wavefunction. In other words, if you could download skills, languages or even memories to your brain at nearly the speed of light, I would argue that whatever ‘you’ is would effectively cease to be ‘you’, as your ego (neural network) and corresponding soul (coherent set of personal memories) dissolve into a kind of “cybernetic hive-mind” (Chowdhury & Ramadas, 2022) which fuses biology with objects and machines. Thus, I would contend that, in addition to being concerned about the prospect of private companies/the government having the ability to directly access and alter a majority of the population’s memories (Josselyn & Tonegawa, 2020) and genome (Abu Abed, 2021), one should not blindly accept the utopian promises of eternal life through technology which transhumanists promise and idolise if “humanity’s limitation to finitude ... is ... [a] condition of its ethical activity” (Žižek, 1997, p. 12), sense of individuality, personal freedom, meaning, purpose and autonomy.
Conclusion: Mortality, Faith and the Singularity
To tie together the various strands of this essay, I would like to conclude by re-examining the direction of international relations in light of the fantastical worldview articulated above and recent world events. For many years, people have remarked that the world is getting smaller, as technology brings us closer together both physically and through cyberspace (Edunov, et al., 2016). After Covid-19, the acceleration towards the kind of dystopian future predicted by novels like (Orwell, 1949 [2016]) and (Huxley, 1932 [2007]) has seemed to gather pace, especially in countries such as China (Liang, et al., 2018). As ‘Central Banking Digital Currencies’ now roll out across the world (Zhang & Huang, 2022) to children who are born knowing nothing different to ‘social credit’ systems, the migration of humanity to the metaverse as people join the IoT (a hive-mind type of AGI) seems to be an inevitability which is approaching all too quickly. Now that neural-interfacing technologies have been demonstrated in medical and animal settings (Armstrong & Michael, 2020, p. 201), companies such as Microsoft have already begun filing patents for cryptocurrency systems linked to your biometric data (Abramson, et al., 2020), in anticipation of the imminent approval of such technologies for commercial application (UK Parliament, 2020).
In a world already racing to keep up with automation and ‘re-skill’ humanity for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it is not hard to imagine how neural-interfacing technologies will quickly become normalised due to the endless productivity that direct access to the internet will promise workers and employers. In opposition to the calls of (Schwab & Malleret, 2020) for a ‘Great Reset’ to introduce a kind of techno-feudalism in which they claim you will “own nothing, have no privacy and life [will] never be better” (Auken, 2016), I would contend that we are living through the fourth ‘great awakening’ (Fogel, 2000) in which the hidden spiritual nature of reality is being once again revealed through the re-enchantment of nature at the quantum scale that the creation of AI and quantum technologies signify. In a world where ‘xenobots’ capable of artificially reproducing (Blackiston, et al., 2021), synthetic embryos grown from stem cells (Aguilera-Castrejon, et al., 2022) and human-animal chimeras continue to be created (Wu, et al., 2017), I would argue that the zombies which (Chalmers, 1996, p. 94) uses as an argument for mind-body dualism will end up being literally real, once people give the ‘powers that be’ direct access to their minds through nanotechnology. Consequently, I would propose that neural-interfacing technologies will end up being used (by the inevitable one-world government) in a similar manner to how certain types of fungus hijack insects’ biology in nature to procreate (Araújo, et al., 2015). In this way, I regard the ‘technological singularity’ as a kind of ‘black hole’ through which, if you ‘plug into the Matrix’, the coherent set of memories which form your identity and sense of individual self will evaporate. I would consider this to effectively be ‘annihilation’, as your personality becomes permanently unquantized and dissolves back into God/the quantum vacuum.
To believe any of this is true requires the opening of one’s mind to the dizzying possibility which the many-worlds interpretation of QM unlocks, rather than shying away from the counter-intuitive aspects of reality. If truth is indeed ‘stranger than fiction’, I would argue that the route to true understanding lies in meditation, imagination and the maxim of perennial philosophy to “know thyself” (Ryff & Singer, 2008) and thereby descend into the “hell of self-[knowledge]” (Kant, 1797 [1991], p. 206). In accordance with many of the tenets of ‘Gnosticism’ then, I would contend that the revelations which our entrance into the final period of human history continues to bring (through various mediums, including the internet) increasingly leaves every person no room to hide in the ongoing spiritual battle (Ephesians, 6:12). If life is a simulation and thus a game God entertains him/herself with in a kind of ‘hall of mirrors’ where “our lives are like works of art” (Wendt, 2015, p. 207), I would argue that the only choice we ultimately have is that contained within the aptly named ‘Pascal’s wager’ (Hacking, 1972), regarding in whom and what we place our faith, which spirits animate us and whether we see this life as merely a screening process for a new creation without pain (Revelation, 21). Consequently, if time is indeed God’s gift to us, due to the psychedelic possibility for freedom, virtue and self-determination it enables through the introduction of “the line dividing good and evil [which] cuts through the heart of every human being” (Solzhenitsyn, 1973 [1974], p. 168), I would like to end now by leaving the reader to reflect upon the existentialist aphorism that “if I can grasp God objectively, then I do not have faith, but just because I cannot do this, I must have faith” (Kierkegaard, 1846 [2009], p. 172). God is always there, within (Luke, 17:21). Are you ‘tuned in’ and listening? Remember, “who looks outside dreams, who looks inside awakes” (Jung, 1916 [1973]).
Bibliography
Aaltonen, T., Amerio, S., Amidei, D. & et. al., 2022. High-precision measurement of the W boson mass with the CDF II detector. Science, 8 Apr, 376(6589), pp. 170-176.
Abramson, D., Fu, D. & Johnson Jr., J. E., 2020. Cryptocurrency System Using Body Activation Data. International, Patent No. WO/2020/060606.
Abu Abed, O. S., 2021. Gene therapy avenues and COVID-19 vaccines. Genes & Immunity, Jun, 22(2), p. 120–124.
Adorno, T. W., 1966 [2007]. Negative Dialectics. New York (New York): Continuum International Publishing Group.
Aguilera-Castrejon, A. et al., 2022. Post-gastrulation synthetic embryos generated ex utero from mouse naive ESCs. Cell, 1 Sep, 185(18), pp. 3290-3306.
Aharonov, Y. et al., 2017. Finally making sense of the double-slit experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 20 Jun, 114(25), pp. 6480-6485..
Alcubierre, M., 1994. The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 1 May, 11(5), pp. L73-77.
Allison, G., 2017. Destined For War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap?. Brunswick(Victoria): Scribe Publications.
Almeder, R., 1986. Fallibilism, Coherence and Realism. Synthese, 1 Aug, 68(2), pp. 213-223.
Apffel, B., Novkoski, F., Eddi, A. & Fort, E., 2020. Floating under a levitating liquid. Nature, 2 Sep, 585(7823), p. 48–52.
Araújo, J. P. M. et al., 2015. Unravelling the diversity behind the Ophiocordyceps unilateralis (Ophiocordycipitaceae) complex: Three new species of zombie-ant fungi from the Brazilian Amazon. Phytotaxa, 24 Jul, 220(3), pp. 224-238.
Armstrong, W. & Michael, K., 2020. The Implications of Neuralink and Brain Machine Interface Technologies. Tempe, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 201-203.
Arvan, M. & Maley, C. J., 2022. Panpsychism and AI consciousness. Synthese, Jun, 200(3), pp. 1-22.
Ashley, R. K., 1984. The poverty of neorealism. International Organization, Spring, 38(2), pp. 225-286.
Atanasov, A. B., 2015. Graded Lie Algebras, Supersymmetry, and Applications. [Online]
Available at: http://abatanasov.com/Files/Supersymmetry.pdf
[Accessed 5 Sep 2022].
Auken, I., 2016. Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better. [Online]
Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/?sh=7d1934451735
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Böwering, G., 2001. The Light Verse: Qurʾānic Text and Sūfī Interpretation. Oriens, 1 Jan, 36(1), pp. 113-144.
Bagla, J. S., Jassal, H. K. & Padmanabhan, T., 2003. Cosmology with tachyon field as dark energy. Physical Review D, 14 Mar, 67(6), pp. 063504-1-063504-11.
Baltag, A. & Smets, S., 2012. The dynamic turn in quantum logic. Synthese, Jun, 186(3), pp. 753-773.
Band, Y. B. & Avishai, Y., 2013. Quantum Mechanics with Applications to Nanotechnology and Information Science. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Elsevier.
Bard, K. A. et al., 2006. Self-Awareness in Human and Chimpanzee Infants: What Is Measured and What Is Meant by the Mark and Mirror Test?. Infancy, Mar, 9(2), pp. 191-219.
Barile, M. & Weisstein, E. W., 2022. Cantor Set. [Online]
Available at: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/CantorSet.html
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Barnwell, M., 2017. Soul-making theodicy and compatibilism: new problems and a new interpretation. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Aug, 82(1), p. 29–46.
Bastianelli, F. & Zirotti, A., 2002. Worldline formalism in a gravitational background. Nuclear Physics B, 21 Oct, 642(1-2), pp. 372-388.
Bazopoulou-Kyrkanidou, E., 2001. Chimeric creatures in Greek mythology and reflections in science. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 15 Apr, 100(1), pp. 66-80.
Bell, J. S., 1964. On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox. Physics Physique Fizika, 1 Nov, 1(3), pp. 195-200.
Bell, J. S., 1990. Against ‘measurement'. Physics World, August, 3(8), pp. 33-40.
Bell, J. S., 2001. How to Teach Special Relativity. In: M. Bell, K. Gottfried & M. Veltman, eds. John S Bell on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Singapore(Republic of Singapore): World Scientific, pp. 61-73.
Berenji, B., 2018. Einstein’s Relativity as an a Priori Theory from the Perspective of Kantian Philosophy. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, Sep.8(3).
Beyer, W., 2005. File:Mandel zoom 11 satellite double spiral.jpg. [Online]
Available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mandel_zoom_11_satellite_double_spiral.jpg
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Bhaskar, R., 1993. Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom. New York(New York): Verso.
Bhaskar, R., 1998 [2005]. The Possibility of Naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. 3 ed. London: Routledge.
Bhaskar, R., 2008. A Realist Theory of Science. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Routledge.
Billingsley, B., Nassaji, M. & Abedin, M., 2017. Entrenched compartmentalisation and students’ abilities and levels of interest in science. School Science Review, Dec, 99(367), pp. 26-31.
Blackiston, D. et al., 2021. A cellular platform for the development of synthetic living machines. Science Robotics, 31 Mar, 6(52), p. eabf1571.
Bluhm, R., 2004. Lorentz and CPT tests in matter and antimatter. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B, 1 Jul, Volume 221, pp. 6-11.
Bodendorfer, N., Mele, F. M. & Münch, J., 2021. Mass and horizon Dirac observables in effective models of quantum black-to-white hole transition. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 38(9), pp. 095002-1- 095002-49.
Bohm, D., 1980 [2002]. Wholeness and the Implicate Order. Second ed. London(London): Routledge.
Bohm, D., 1990. A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter. Philosophical psychology, 1 Jan, 3(2-3), pp. 271-286.
Bradley, C. E. et al., 2019. A Ten-Qubit Solid-State Spin Register with Quantum Memory up to One Minute. Physical Review X, 11 Sep, 9(3), pp. 031045-1-031045-12.
Brass, M., Furstenberg, A. & Mele, A. R., 2019. Why neuroscience does not disprove free will. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 1 Jul, Volume 102, pp. 251-263.
Broom, D. M., 2014. Sentience and Animal Welfare. Wallingford(Oxfordshire): CABI.
Browne, L., 2021. The Flammarion Engraving and its Symbolic Potential. Psychological Perspectives, 2 Oct, 64(4), pp. 562-580.
Brown, R. H., 1987. Review: Positivism, Relativism, and Narrative in the Logic of the Historical Sciences. The American Historical Review, Oct, 92(4), pp. 908-920.
Bruce, S., 2011. Secularization: In Defence of an Unfashionable Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buller, K., Moore, J. & Gibson, L., 2022. A Cultural History of Psychedelics in the US. In: C. Hauskeller & P. Sjöstedt-Hughes, eds. Philosophy and Psychedelics: Frameworks for Exceptional Experience. London(London): Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 45-60.
Bunch, T. E. et al., 2021. A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea. Scientific Reports, 20 Sep, 11(1), pp. 1-64.
Busch, P., Heinonen, T. & Lahti, P., 2007. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Physics Reports, 1 Nov, 452(6), p. 155 – 176.
Cai, J., Popescu, S. & Briegel, H. J., 2010. Dynamic entanglement in oscillating molecules and potential biological implications. Physical Review E, 25 Aug, 82(2), pp. 021921-1-.
Cao, Y. et al., 2019. Quantum Chemistry in the Age of Quantum Computing. Chemical Reviews, 30 Aug, 119(19), pp. 10856-10915.
Chalabi, M., 2013. Holy infographics: the bible visualised. [Online]
Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/gallery/2013/sep/05/holy-infographics-bible-visualised
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Chalmers, D., 2015. Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism. In: T. Alter & Y. Nagasawa, eds. Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Oxford University Press, pp. 246-276.
Chalmers, D. J., 1996. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Oxford University Press.
Chalmers, M., 2021. AEgIS on track to test free fall of antimatter. [Online]
Available at: https://home.cern/news/news/experiments/aegis-track-test-free-fall-antimatter
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Chellas, B. F., 1980 [1999]. Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Chirkov, V. I., 2010. Dialectical Relationships Among Human Autonomy, the Brain, and Culture. In: V. I. Chirkov, R. M. Ryan & K. M. Sheldon, eds. Human Autonomy in Cross-Cultural Context: Perspectives on the Psychology of Agency, Freedom, and Well-Being. London(London): Springer, pp. 65-94.
Chopra, D., 2019. Physics Must Evolve Beyond the Physical. Activitas Nervosa Superior, 29 Apr, Volume 61, p. 126–129.
Chowdhury, A. & Ramadas, R., 2022. Cybernetic Hive Minds: A Review. AI, 3 Jun, 3(2), pp. 465-492.
Collins, A. Y., 2003. Psalms, Philippians 2:6-11, and the Origins of Christology. Biblical Interpretation, 1 Jan, 11(3), pp. 361-72.
Collins, B. & Zadrozny, B., 2019. Trump, QAnon and an impending judgment day: Behind the Facebook-fueled rise of The Epoch Times. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/trump-qanon-impending-judgment-day-behind-facebook-fueled-rise-epoch-n1044121
[Accessed May 2022].
Collins, H. M., 1985. Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. London(London): Sage Publications.
Comte, A., 1853 [2000]. The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte. London(London): Batoche Books.
Cooper, A. R., Susskind, L. & Thorlacius, L., 1992. Quantum Cosmology on the Worldsheet. In: T. Curtright, L. Mezincescu & R. Nepom, eds. Quantum Field Theory, Statistical Mechanics, Quantum Groups, and Topology. London(London): World Scientific, pp. 26-45.
Cooper, H., Kean, L. & Blumenthal, R., 2017. 2 Navy Airmen and an Object That ‘Accelerated Like Nothing I’ve Ever Seen’. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/unidentified-flying-object-navy.html
[Accessed 6 Sep 2022].
Cox, R. W., 1981. Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 1 Jun.10(2).
Cuffaro, M. E., 2019. Kantian and Neo-Kantian First Principles for Physical and Metaphysical Cognition. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.03048.pdf
Döring, A. & Dewitt, B., 2014. Self-adjoint Operators as Functions I. Communications in Mathematical Physics, Jun, 328(2), p. 499–525.
Davidson, D., 2008. A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge. In: E. Sosa, J. Kim, J. Fantl & M. McGrath, eds. Epistemology: An Anthology. 2 ed. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Blackwell Publishing, pp. 124-133.
Dean, J. G. et al., 2019. Biosynthesis and Extracellular Concentrations of N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) in Mammalian Brain. Scientific Reports, 27 Jun, 9(1), pp. 1-11.
Debnath, L. & Mikusinski, P., 2005. Introduction to Hilbert Spaces with Applications. Third ed. London(London): Elsevier.
Der Derian, J. & Wendt, A., 2020. ‘Quantizing international relations’: The case for quantum approaches to international theory and security practice. Security Dialogue, Oct, 51(5), pp. 399-413.
Deutsch, D., 2002. The structure of the multiverse. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 8 Dec, 458(2028), pp. 2911-2923.
Dirac, P. A. M., 1930. A theory of electrons and protons. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing papers of a mathematical and physical character, 1 Jan, 126(801), pp. 360-365.
Dubuc, E. J., 2004. On the representation theory of Galois and atomic topoi. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 1 Feb, 186(3), pp. 233-275.
Edunov, S. et al., 2016. Three and a half degrees of separation. [Online]
Available at: https://joytothehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Three-and-a-half-degrees-of-separation-_-Blog-_-Research-at-Facebook.pdf
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Einstein, A., 1905. On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies. [Online]
Available at: http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Einstein_1905_relativity.pdf
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Eisenman, R. & Wise, M. 1992. The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. Shaftesbury (Dorset): Element Books Limited
Žižek, S., 1997. The Abyss of Freedom. In: Ages of the World. Ann Arbor (Michigan): University of Michigan.
Ephesians, 6:12. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Everett, H. et al., 1973. The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton(New Jersey): Princeton University Press.
Fagaly, R. L., 2006. Superconducting quantum interference device instruments and applications. Review of Scientific Instruments, 11 Oct, 77(10), pp. 101101-1-101101-45.
Farnes, J. S., 2018. A Unifying Theory of Dark Energy and Dark Matter: Negative Masses and Matter Creation within a Modified ΛCDM Framework. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.07962
[Accessed 6 Sep 2022].
Fernández-Herrería, A. & Martínez-Rodríguez, F. M., 2019. The Earth Charter as a New Worldview in a Post-Neoliberal World: Chaos Theory and Morphic Fields as Explanatory Contexts. World Futures, 17 Nov, 75(8), pp. 591-608.
Feyerabend, P., 1975 [1993]. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. 3 ed. London(London): Verso.
Fogel, R. W., 2000. The Fourth Great Awakening and the Future of Egalitarianism. Chicago(Illinois): University of Chicago Press.
Fowlera, D. & Robson, E., 1998. Square Root Approximations in Old Babylonian Mathematics: YBC 7289 in Context. Historia Mathematica, 1 Nov, 25(4), pp. 366-378.
Friend, M. & Molinini, D., 2016. Using Mathematics to Explain a Scientific Theory. Philosophia Mathematica, 17 Aug, 24(2), p. 185–213.
Fukuyama, F., 1992 [2020]. The End of History and the Last Man. London(London): Penguin Books.
Fulton, B., 2019. Time Warp, 1949: Everhart Museum Shoots For Stars With Spitz Planetarium. [Online]
Available at: https://apnews.com/article/b488e5363c01497e98136a80ad7b6c09
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Fusi, S., Drew, P. J. & Abbott, L. F., 2005. Cascade Models of Synaptically Stored Memories. Neuron, 17 Feb, 45(4), pp. 599-611.
Gallagher, T. A., Nemeth, A. J. & Hacein-Bey, L., 2008. An Introduction to the Fourier Transform: Relationship to MRI. American Journal of Roentgenology, May, 190(5), pp. 1396-1405.
Garry, A., Walther, S., Mohamed, R. & Mohammed, A., 2021. QAnon Conspiracy Theory: Examining its Evolution and Mechanisms of Radicalization. Journal for Deradicalization, 26 Mar, 26(3), pp. 152-216.
Genesis, 2:9. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Genesis, 3:5. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Genesis, 3:7. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Gibson Jr., R. F., 1987. Quine on Naturalism and Epistemology. Erkenntnis, 1 Jul, 27(1), pp. 57-78.
Glockner, H., 2004. Lie groups over non-discrete topological fields. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0408008
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Guess, A. M. & Lyons, B. A., 2020. Misinformation, Disinformation, and Online Propaganda. In: N. Persily & J. A. Tucker, eds. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press, pp. 10-33.
Hünniger, D., 2008. File:ElectronPositronAnnihilation.svg. [Online]
Available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ElectronPositronAnnihilation.svg
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Habermas, J., 1981 [1984]. Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Polity Press.
Habermas, J., 2015. The Lure of Technocracy. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Polity Press.
Hacking, I., 1972. The Logic of Pascal's Wager. American Philosophical Quarterly, 1 Apr, 9(2), pp. 186-192.
Haikonen, P. O. A., 2007. Reflections of Consciousness: The Mirror Test. [Online]
Available at: https://aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Fall/2007/FS-07-01/FS07-01-012.pdf
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Halewood, M., 2022. Making Your Soul Visible. In: C. Hauskeller & P. Sjöstedt-Hughes, eds. Philosophy and Psychedelics: Frameworks for Exceptional Experience. London(London): Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 95-106.
Halpern, D., 2015. Inside the nudge unit: How small changes can make a big difference, London: Random House.
Hameroff, S. & Penrose, R., 2014. Reply to seven commentaries on “Consciousness in the universe: Review of the ‘Orch OR’ theory”. Physics of Life Reviews, 1 Mar, 11(1), pp. 94-100.
Hance, J. R., Rarity, J. & Ladyman, J., 2022. Could wavefunctions simultaneously represent knowledge and reality?. Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations, pp. 1-9.
Hancock, G., 2015. Magicians of the Gods: The Forgotten Wisdom of Earth's Lost Civilisation. London(London): Coronet.
Haqq-Misra, J. D. & Baum, S. D., 2009. The Sustainability Solution to the Fermi Paradox. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/0906.0568
[Accessed 6 Sep 2022].
Haramein, N., Brown, W. D. & Baker, A. V., 2016. The Unified Spacememory Network: from cosmogenesis to consciousness. NeuroQuantology, 1 Dec, 14(4), pp. 657-671.
Harari, Y. N., 2017. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. London(London): Vintage.
Hawking, S. W., 1975. Particle Creation by Black Holes. Communications in Mathematical Physics, Volume 43, pp. 199-220.
Hawking, S. W., 2001. The Universe in a Nutshell. London(London): Bantam Press.
Hershenov, D. & Taylor, A. P., 2016. Dualism, panpsychism, and the bioethical status of brainless embryos. Ethics, Medicine and Public Health, Oct-Dec, 2(4), pp. 593-601.
Hinds, J., Williams, E. J. & Joinson, A. N., 2020. “It wouldn't happen to me”: Privacy concerns and perspectives following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1 Nov.Volume 143.
Hirayama, R., Martinez Plasencia, D., Masuda, N. & Subramanian, S., 2019. A volumetric display for visual, tactile and audio presentation using acoustic trapping. Nature, 14 Nov, 575(7782), pp. 320-323.
Hofstadter, D., 1979 [1999]. Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. 2nd ed. New York(New York): Random House Inc. .
Hongzhi, L., 1999. Interview with Li Hongzhi. [Online]
Available at: http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2053761,00.html
[Accessed May 2022].
House, B., 2022. Zuckerberg Targeted by House GOP Eager to Probe Hunter Biden. [Online]
Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-01/zuckerberg-targeted-by-house-gop-eager-to-probe-hunter-biden
[Accessed 5 Sep 2022].
Howard, M., Wallman, J., Veitch, V. & Emerson, J., 2014. Contextuality supplies the ‘magic’ for quantum computation. Nature, Jun, 510(7505), p. 351–355.
Howe, E. W., 2012. Mathematics and Transcendentalism. [Online]
Available at: https://ewhowe.com/pdf/MathAndTranscendentalism.pdf
[Accessed 6 Sep 2022].
Hughes, C. et al., 2021. Quantum Computing for the Quantum Curious. Cham(Zug): Springer Nature.
Humphreys, R., 1994 [2010]. Starlight and Time: Solving the Puzzle of Distant Starlight in a Young Universe. Green Forest(Arkansas): Master Books.
Huxley, A., 1932 [2007]. Brave New World. London(London): Vintage.
Huxley, J., 1968. Transhumanism. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Jan, 8(1), pp. 73-76.
Jackson, A., 2016. Neural interfaces take another step forward. Nature, Nov, 539(7628), p. 177–178.
Jackson, P. W., 2006. The chronologers' quest: The search for the age of the Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jaffe, A. & Witten, E., 2006. Quantum Yang-Mills Theory. In: J. Carlson, A. Jaffe & A. Wiles, eds. The Millennium Prize Problems. Cambridge(Massachusetts): Clay Mathematics Institute, pp. 129-152.
Jbourjai, 2008. File:Calabi yau.jpg. [Online]
Available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Calabi_yau.jpg
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Josselyn, S. A. & Tonegawa, S., 2020. Memory engrams: Recalling the past and imagining the future. Science, 3 Jan, 367(6473), p. eaaw4325.
Jung, C. G., 1916 [1973]. To Fanny Bowditch. In: G. Adler & A. Jaffé, eds. Letters. Princeton(New Jersey): Princeton University Press, p. 33.
Jung, C. G., 1951 [1970]. Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self. In: H. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler & W. McGuire, eds. The Collected Works of C. G. Jung. 2nd ed. Princeton(New Jersey): Princeton University Press.
Kant, I., 1786 [2012]. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I., 1787 [1991]. Critique of Pure Reason. London: J.M. Dent & Sons.
Kant, I., 1797 [1991]. The Metaphysics of Morals. s.l.:Cambridge University Press.
Katz, V. J., 1993. Using the History of Calculus to Teach Calculus. Science & Education, Sep, 2(3), p. 243–249.
Keohane, R. O., 1988. International Institutions: Two Approaches. International Studies Quarterly, Dec, 32(4), pp. 379-396.
Khandelwal, S., Lock, M. P. E. & Woods, M. P., 2020. Universal quantum modifications to general relativistic time dilation in delocalised clocks. Quantum, 14 Aug, Volume 4, p. 309.
Kierkegaard, S., 1846 [2009]. Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Kim, Y. et al., 2021. Quantum Biology: An Update and Perspective. Quantum Reports, 26 Jan, 3(1), pp. 80-126.
Kolakowski, L., 1993. An Overall View of Positivism. In: M. Hammersley, ed. Social Research: Philosophy, Politics and Practice. London(London): SAGE Publications, pp. 1-8.
Kriegman, S., Blackiston, D., Levin, M. & Bongard, J., 2020. A scalable pipeline for designing reconfigurable organisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 13 Jan, 117(4), pp. 1853-1859.
Krogh, A., 2008. What are artificial neural networks?. Nature Biotechnology, Feb, 26(2), pp. 195-197.
Kuhn, T. S., 1962 [1970]. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Second ed. Chicago(Illinois): University of Chicago.
Ladd, T. D. et al., 2010. Quantum computers. Nature, Mar, 464(7285), p. 45–53.
Larkin, K. G., 2016. Reflections on Shannon Information: In search of a natural information-entropy for images. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.01117
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Latour, B., Stengers, I., Tsing, A. & Bubandt, N., 2018. Anthropologists Are Talking – About Capitalism, Ecology, and Apocalypse. Ethnos, 27 May, 83(3), pp. 587-606.
Lee, L.-H.et al., 2021. All One Needs to Know about Metaverse: A Complete Survey on Technological Singularity, Virtual Ecosystem, and Research Agenda. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.05352
[Accessed Aug 2022].
Leeming, D. A., 1990. The World of Myth. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Oxford University Press.
Lewis, D., 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Blackwell.
Lewton, T., 2022. A quantum of consciousness. New Scientist, 23 Apr , 254(3383), p. 8.
Liang, F., Das, V., Kostyuk, N. & Hussain, M. M., 2018. Constructing a Data-Driven Society: China's Social Credit System as a State Surveillance Infrastructure. Policy & Internet, Dec, 10(4), pp. 415-453.
Li, S., Da Xu, L. & Zhaof, S., 2018. 5G Internet of Things: A survey. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 1 Jun, Volume 10, pp. 1-9.
Lokhorst, G.-J., 2013. Descartes and the Pineal Gland. [Online]
Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pineal-gland/
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Luke, 17:21. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Luke, 8:17. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Luminet, J.-P.et al., 2003. Dodecahedral space topology as an explanation for weak wide-angle temperature correlations in the cosmic microwave background. Nature, Oct, 425(6958), pp. 593-595.
Lyell, C., 1835. Principles of Geology. 4th ed. London: A. Spottiswoode.
Mörtsell, E. & Dhawan, S., 2018. Does the Hubble constant tension call for new physics?. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 17 Sep.Volume 2018.
Main, R., 2014. The cultural significance of synchronicity for Jung and Pauli. Journal of Analytical Psychology, Apr, 59(2), pp. 174-180.
Margenau, H., 1956. Preface. In: Determinism And Indeterminism In Modern Physics. New Haven(Connecticut): Yale University Press.
Marx, K., 1844 [1977]. Economic & Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Moscow(Moscow Oblast): Progress Publishers.
McKenna, T., 1992 [1999]. Food Of The Gods: The Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge. London(London): Rider.
Mermin, N. D., 2004. Could Feynman Have Said This?. Physics Today, May, 57(5), p. 10.
Milián-Sánchez, V. et al., 2020. Fluctuations in measured radioactive decay rates inside a modified Faraday cage: Correlations with space weather. Scientific Reports, 22 May, 10(1), pp. 1-12.
Miller, E. K., 2013. The “working” of working memory. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, Dec, 15(4), pp. 411-418.
Minello, G., Rossi, L. & Torsello, A., 2019. On the von Neumann entropy of graphs. Journal of Complex Networks, Aug, 7(4), p. 491–514.
Monroe, C. et al., 1995. Demonstration of a Fundamental Quantum Logic Gate. Physical Review Letters, 18 Dec, 75(25), pp. 4714-4718.
Montague, M., 2017. What Kind of Awareness is Awareness of Awareness?. Grazer Philosophische Studien, 8 Aug, 94(3), pp. 359-380.
Murray, R. M. et al., 1979. Increased excretion of dimethyltryptamine and certain features of psychosis: a possible association. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1 Jun, 36(6), pp. 644-649.
Myrvold, W., 2022. Philosophical Issues in Quantum Theory. [Online]
Available at: https://seop.illc.uva.nl/entries/qt-issues/
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Naudé, W. & Dimitri, N., 2020. The race for an artificial general intelligence: implications for public policy. AI & SOCIETY, Jun, 35(2), pp. 367-379.
Neustadter, R., 1994. Marking time: The chronocentric vision of the post industrial narrative. Mid-American Review of Sociology, 18(1/2), pp. 67-84.
Newell, D. B. & Tiesinga, E., 2019. The International System of Units (SI), Gaithersburg: NIST Special Publication.
Newton, I., 1692 [1756]. Four Letters from Sir Isaac Newton to Doctor Bentley Containing Some Arguments in Proof of a Deity. London: R. and J. Dodsley.
Nichols, D. E., Johnson, M. W. & Nichols, C. D., 2017. Psychedelics as Medicines: An Emerging New Paradigm. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Feb, 101(2), pp. 209-219.
Nietzsche, F., 1887 [2001]. The Gay Science. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Norgaard, R. B., 1995. Beyond Materialism: A Coevolutionary Reinterpretation of the Environmental Crisis. Review of Social Economy, 53(4), pp. 475-492.
Oliveira, P. A. & Sanz, L., 2015. Bell states and entanglement dynamics on two coupled quantum molecules. Annals of Physics, 1 May, Volume 356, pp. 244-254.
Orwell, G., 1949 [2016]. 1984. Hong Kong: Enrich Spot Ltd.
Pais, S. C., 2018. Craft using an inertial mass reduction device. United States of America, Patent No. US10144532B2.
Peitgen, H.-O. & Richter, P. H., 1986. The Beauty of Fractals: Images of Complex Dynamical Systems. Berlin(Brandenburg): Springer-Verlag.
Penrose, R., 2020. Roger Penrose: Physics of Consciousness and the Infinite Universe | Lex Fridman Podcast #85. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orMtwOz6Db0
[Accessed 21 Aug 2022].
Penrose, R. & Hameroff, S., 2014. Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘Orch OR’ theory. Physics of Life Reviews, Mar, 11(1), pp. 39-78.
Pérez, I., 2011. On the experimental determination of the one-way speed of light. European Journal of Physics, 20 May, Volume 32, p. 993–1005.
Peruzzo, A. et al., 2012. A Quantum Delayed-Choice Experiment. Science, 2 Nov, 338(6107), pp. 634-637.
Peterson, J. B., 2017. Lecture: Biblical Series I: Introduction to the Idea of God. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-wWBGo6a2w&list=PL22J3VaeABQD_IZs7y60I3lUrrFTzkpat
[Accessed 6 Sep 2022].
Petit, J.-P., 2022. Negative Mass in General Relativity. [Online]
Available at: https://januscosmologicalmodel.com/negativemass
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Petit, J.-P., D’Agostini, G. & Debergh, N., 2019. Physical and Mathematical Consistency of the Janus Cosmological Model (JCM). Progress in Physics, Jan, 15(1), pp. 38-47.
Phillips, A. C., 2003. Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. Chichester(Sussex): John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Planck, M., 1931. [Interview] (25 Jan 1931).
Plato, [1999]. Cratylus. [Online]
Available at: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1616/1616-h/1616-h.htm
[Accessed Sep 2022].
Pope, K., 1999. Psyche and Daimon in the Fragments of Heraclitus. [Online]
Available at: https://ancientroadpublications.com/Studies/AncientLanguage/Heraclitus.pdf
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Popper, K. R., 1994. The Myth of the Framework: In Defence of Science and Rationality. London(London): Routledge.
Posamentier, A. S. & Lehmann, I., 2012. The Glorious Golden Ratio. New York(New York): Prometheus.
Prasad, D. & Bainbridge, W. A., 2021. The Visual Mandela Effect: Evidence for specific shared false memories in popular iconography. [Online]
Available at: https://psyarxiv.com/nzh3s
[Accessed 3 Sep 2022].
Pribram, K. H., 1991 [2012]. Brain and Perception: Holonomy and Structure in Figural Processing. New York(New York ): Routledge.
Psalm, 104:2-4. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Quine, W. V. O., 1951. Two Dogmas of Empiricism. The Philosophical Review, Jan, 60(1), pp. 20-43.
Quine, W. V. O., 1960 [2013]. Word and Object. Cambridge(Massachusetts): The MIT Press.
Recami, E. & Mignani, R., 1974. Classical Theory of Tachyons (Special Relativity Extended to Superluminal Frames and Objects). La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento (1971-1977), Apr, 4(2), pp. 209-290.
Reimann, M. W. et al., 2017. Cliques of neurons bound into cavities provide a missing link between structure and function. Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 12 Jun.Volume 48.
Renger, G., 1998. Photophysical Reactions in Cells. In: J. Chang, J. Fisch & F. Popp, eds. Biophotons. Dordrecht(Dordrecht): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Revelation, 13:11-18. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open BIble ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Revelation, 21. The Holy Bible. NKJV Open Bible ed. s.l.:Thomas Nelson.
Rieffel, E. & Polak, W., 2000. An Introduction to Quantum Computing for Non-Physicists. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 1 Sep, 32(3), pp. 300-335.
Roland, A., 1995. Science, Technology, and War. Technology and Culture, 1 Apr, 36(2), pp. S83-100.
Rowland, T., 2022. Lie Group. [Online]
Available at: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/LieGroup.html
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Ryff, C. D. & Singer, B. H., 2008. Know Thyself and Become What You Are: A Eudaimonic Approach to Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Happiness Studies, Jan, 9(1), p. 13–39.
Schrödinger, E., 1958 [2012]. What is Life?: With Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Schwab, K., 2016. The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond. [Online]
Available at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/
[Accessed Jan 2022].
Schwab, K. & Malleret, T., 2020. Covid-19: The Great Reset. Cologny(Geneva): World Economic Forum.
Scruton, R., 2001. Kant: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Oxford University Press.
Semley, J., 2022. The High-Stakes Race to Engineer New Psychedelic Drugs. [Online]
Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/race-to-engineer-new-psychedelic-drugs/
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Shah, N. C., 2015. Soma, an Enigmatic, Mysterious Plant of the Vedic A – ryas: An Appraisal. Indian Journal of History of Science, 50(1), pp. 26-41.
Sheldrake, R., McKenna, T. & Abraham, R., 2001. Chaos, Creativity, and Cosmic Consciousness. Rochester(Vermont): Park Street Press.
Skrbina, D., 2017. Panpsychism in the West, revised edition. Cambridge(Massachusetts): Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Slocombe, L., Al-Khalili, J. S. & Sacchi, M., 2021. Quantum and classical effects in DNA point mutations: Watson–Crick tautomerism in AT and GC base pairs. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 23(7), pp. 4141-4150.
Smith, S., 1996. Positivism and Beyond. In: S. Smith, K. Booth & M. Zalewski, eds. International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press, pp. 11-46.
Snowden, C., 1986. Introduction to Semiconductor Device Modelling. Singapore: World Scientific.
Solzhenitsyn, A., 1973 [1974]. The Gulag Archipelago. London(London): Harper & Row.
Sparrow, B., Liu, J. & Wegner, D. M., 2011. Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips. Science, 5 Aug, 333(6043), pp. 776-778.
Spivak, D. I., 2014. Category Theory for the Sciences. Cambridge(Massachusetts): The MIT Press.
Stowe, K., 2007. An Introduction to Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Strassman, R., 2000. DMT - The Spirit Molecule: A Doctor's Revolutionary Research Into the Biology of Near-Death and Mystical Experiences. Rochester(Vermont): Park Street Press.
Strominger, A., Yau, S.-T. & Zaslow, E., 1996. Mirror Symmetry is T-Duality. [Online]
Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20170808150118id_/http://www.doctoryau.com/papers/MirrorSymmetry.pdf
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Suddendorf, T., Addis, D. R. & Corballis, M. C., 2011. Mental Time Travel and the Shaping of the Human Mind. In: M. Bar, ed. Predictions in the Brain: Using Our Past to Generate a Future. Oxford(Oxfordshire): Oxford University Press, pp. 344-354.
Susskind, L., 2016. Copenhagen vs Everett, Teleportation, and ER=EPR. Fortschritte der Physik, Jun, 64(6-7), pp. 551-564.
Sze, V., Chen, Y.-H., Yang, T.-J. & Emer, J. S., 2017. Efficient Processing of Deep Neural Networks: A Tutorial and Survey. Proceedings of the IEEE, 20 Nov, 105(12), pp. 2295-2329.
Takahashi, Y. et al., 2021. Neural network modeling of altered facial expression recognition in autism spectrum disorders based on predictive processing framework. Scientific Reports, 26 Jul, 11(1), pp. 1-14.
Takeuchi, H. et al., 2015. The Impact of Television Viewing on Brain Structures: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses. Cerebral Cortex, 1 May, 25(5), p. 1188–1197.
Tamdgidi, M. H., 2019. Liberating Sociology: From Newtonian Toward Quantum Imaginations. Belmont(Massachusetts): Okcir Press.
Tarannum, S. & Jabin, S., 2018. A comparative study on Fuzzy Logic and Intuitionistic Fuzzy Logic. s.l., Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 1086-1090.
Thornton, S., 2007. Popper, Basic Statements and the Quine-Duhem Thesis. Yearbook of the Irish Philosophical Society, Volume 9, pp. 1-10.
Timmermann, C. et al., 2021. Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs. Scientific reports, 23 Nov, 11(1), pp. 1-13.
Torres, P., 2019. The possibility and risks of artificial general intelligence. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 26 Apr, 75(3), pp. 105-108.
Turok, N., 2002. A critical review of inflation. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 12 Jun, 19(13), p. 3449–3467.
Uchida, G., Bertlmann, R. A. & Hiesmayr, B. C., 2014. Entangled Entanglement: The Geometry of GHZ States. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.7145
[Accessed Aug 2022].
UK Parliament, 2020. Brain-Computer Interfaces. [Online]
Available at: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-0614/POST-PN-0614.pdf
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Ulanowicz, R. E., 2009. Increasing Entropy: Heat Death or Perpetual Harmonies?. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 5 Jun, 4(2), p. 83–96.
Vafa, C., 1996. Evidence for F-theory. Nuclear Physics B, 17 Jun, 469(3), pp. 403-415.
Vaidya, A. & Bilimoria, P., 2015. Advaita Vedanta and the Mind Extension Hypothesis: Panpsychism and Perception. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 1 Jan, 22(7-8), pp. 201-225.
Valentini, A., 2019. Foundations of statistical mechanics and the status of the Born rule in de Broglie-Bohm pilot-wave theory. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.10761
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
van der Laan, S., 2012. The Vortex Theory of Atoms - pinnacle of classical physics. [Online]
Available at: https://studenttheses.uu.nl/handle/20.500.12932/12425
[Accessed 5 Sep 2022].
van Nieuwenhuizen, P. & Waldron, A., 1996. A continuous Wick rotation for spinor fields and supersymmetry in Euclidean space. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9611043
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Vazza, F. & Feletti, A., 2020. The Quantitative Comparison Between the Neuronal Network and the Cosmic Web. Frontiers in Physics, 16 Nov, 8(525731), pp. 1-8.
von Schelling, F. W. J., 1800 [1997]. System of Transcendental Idealism. Charlottesville(Virginia): University Press of Virginia.
von Schelling, F. W. J., 1803 [1995]. Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature. Second ed. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
von Schiller, F., 1788. The Gods of Greece. [Online]
Available at: https://allpoetry.com/The-Gods-Of-Greece
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Vrijen, R. et al., 1999. Electron Spin Resonance Transistors for Quantum Computing in Silicon-Germanium Hetero-structures. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9905096
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Wallace, A. F. C., 1966. Religion: an anthropological view. New York(New York): Random House.
Ward, C. & Voas, D., 2011. The Emergence of Conspirituality. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 7 Jan, 26(1), pp. 103-121.
Waters, A., 2020. Will neoliberal capitalism survive the coronavirus crash or is this the beginning of techno-feudalism?. The Journal of Australian Political Economy, 1 Dec, Volume 86, pp. 406-431.
Weber, M., 1919 [1991]. Science as a Vocation. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology ed. London: Routledge.
Wendt, A., 2015. Quantum Mind and Social Science: Unifying Physical and Social Ontology. Cambridge(Cambridgeshire): Cambridge University Press.
Wheeler, J. A., 1983. Participatory Universe. [Online]
Available at: https://www.organism.earth/library/document/participatory-universe
[Accessed 19 Sep 2022].
Whitaker, M. A. B., 2004. The EPR Paper and Bohr’s Response: A Re-Assessment. Foundations of Physics, Sep, 34(9), pp. 1305-1340.
Whyte, C., 2020. Deepfake news: AI-enabled disinformation as a multi-level public policy challenge. Journal of Cyber Policy, 31 Jul, 5(2), pp. 199-217.
Witten, E., 2012 [2018]. Perturbative Superstring Theory Revisited. [Online]
Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1209.5461
[Accessed 12 Sep 2022].
Witze, A., 2022. Four revelations from the Webb telescope about distant galaxies. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02056-5#ref-CR9
[Accessed 10 Sep 2022].
Woodhead, L., 2017. The Rise of “No Religion”: Towards an Explanation. Sociology of Religion, 1 Sep, 78(3), p. 247–262.
Wu, J. et al., 2017. Interspecies Chimerism with Mammalian Pluripotent Stem Cells. Cell, 26 Jan, 168(3), pp. 473-486.
Zadeh-Haghighi, H. & Simon, C., 2021. Entangled radicals may explain lithium effects on hyperactivity. Scientific Reports, 9 Jun, 11(1), pp. 1-10.
Zhang, T. & Huang, Z., 2022. Blockchain and central bank digital currency. ICT Express, Jun, 8(2), pp. 264-270.