Why conspiracy theories are important

People often ask my why I got involved in researching conspiracy theories, and for quite a long time I struggled to answer in any sensible way beyond the rather obvious fact that I found them interesting. Why that was, I wasn't so sure. I rationalised it to myself that they tended to touch on subject areas that I was already interested in, history, politics, ethics, biology and physics, and it was more fun to spend a Saturday night reading through research papers and news articles than it was watching whatever light entertainment the television could offer. As time went by, and the research took up an increasing amount of time I began to think more seriously about what I was doing and why and I came to some conclusions that I think may be quite interesting. I treated the project as I would any other research project, trawling the journals and forums for existing research and hypothesis, and looking for evidence of the possible options presented. I have secretly held an opinion that many conspiracy theories are in large part highly questionable for two reasons, firstly that one of the things mankind is very good at, at a genetic level, is pattern recognition. If we watch a flock of starlings preparing to roost, wheeling across the sky in a great ball we almost automatically see patterns in the shape of the flock. As it might be, “look at those birds making the shape of a number 2” rather than “isn't it interesting that when I see a flock of birds that I know can not have any understanding of numerical symbols, I still see them as creating a number 2”. In a similar vein we create patterns in clouds and see faces in the fire. Does this same effect have an influence on how we view the actions of others, seeing patterns where non exist?

The second reason is that based on the evidence of thought experiments, particularly in the subjects of Physics and Statistics we consistently see that people are very often wrong when they rely on their intuition. We tend to find it very difficult to analyse accurately, and are prone to being fooled by our senses. Our perception tends to be a very long way from our reality. These two reasons combined for me to make it difficult to accept other peoples theories at face value. So, if I consider the theories themselves to be suspect, why do I engage with them? It made no logical sense until I added in a couple of other factors. The first of these is that however you look at it there is absolutely no doubt that on occasion our political leader lie to us. This may be for the best of reasons, national security or to protect domestic interest or whatever, but the fact that politicians and leaders lie is just that, a fact. This leaves open the possibility that if they can lie about one thing, they can lie about others, so it is at least possible that some conspiracy theories have at least a germ of truth and are therefore worth investigating. I know several conspiracy researchers in the field of aviation black projects who have no intention of ever publishing their work because they feel that to do so would jeopardise national security. They research simply for their own curiosity. A similar charge was laid at the door of the Wikileaks website, many people suggesting that the release of some sensitive documents put the lives of security and intelligence personnel at risk. Certainly, for my own part, if I feel that there is a possibility that information I come into contact with has current and ongoing security implications I make an informed decision whether to publish or not. That is just common sense. Another factor to add in is that conspiracy theories cover a vast array of subject areas, and as such investigating them leads a person to explore areas that they might not otherwise have done, and if for no other reason than the principle that research and education and in general, good things, that gives at least a possibility that studying this area has some logical merit.

Whatever your opinion of conspiracy theories, whatever you opinions of our political leaders and industrialist and the military, engaging with an area that will increase your exposure to debate, research techniques, argument, logic, psychology and international politics and economics has to be a better and more productive use of time than sitting on the sofa watching the latest reality TV offering, doesn't it?

The implications of teleportation for non-linear time

Teleportationprogress

Time is a dimension, in the same way that height, length and breadth are dimensions. If you consider the traditional three dimensions you find that they appear, from your perspective to be linear, that is in order to move from point A to point B along a plane you have to pass through the intervening space, you travel along a line in the direction of travel. In science fiction there has long been a dream of moving from point A to point B without crossing the intervening space, of moving instantaneously from one point to another. This is the dream of teleportation. In order for this to be possible it is necessary to suppose that rather than being linear, rather than having to move between points, dimensions are non-linear, that is to say that all points in a given dimension exist simultaneously and travel between them can occur without movement along a line.

If this is the case, and if time is simply another dimension that operates in the same way as the other dimensions this gives rise to an interesting proposition. It allows for the possibility that all points in time exist as discrete points and that there is the possibility of travel between them. This non-linear image of time suggests that there is no past, present or future in reality, that these are merely functions of our perception of the time dimension, in the same way that we perceive a distance between two points in physical space. The distance is in essence created by our perception of it, rather than being reality per se. The article linked at the top of this post demonstrates the progress being made in transmitting information between two points instantaneously, through quantum entanglement, providing evidence that reality and perception are incongruous.

The idea that our perceptions are at odds with physical reality is one that has been around for many years and is generally accepted by mainstream science, but what is less accepted is the question of whether, under certain conditions, it is possible to modify, or completely change our perceptions. This stems from a question over whether our perceptions of our conscious mind in isolation or whether we are fundamentally unable to experience the World in any way other that that predicated by our senses. There is a suggestion that our subconscious mind may be capable of perception independent of our mundane senses and may allow us access to non-linear perception. This supposes that the currently model of mind and the separation of conscious and subconscious is correct, a supposition that is as yet unproven. If, however, as some suggest this model is correct, and further that the subconscious is capable of non-linear perception it would go some way to explaining events such as deja-vu, remote viewing, psychic phenomena and more.

If this is the case it raises another question. If we suppose that the subconscious mind operates in this way, is it possible to close down the perception of the conscious mind and engage actively with the subconscious? If this was possible, the most likely current method would be utilising meditation and there is some evidence that prolonged and deep meditation techniques can significantly alter the way in which the practitioner views the World. There are anecdotal reports of Buddhist monks who are able to appear in two places at once, or who are considered to be able to accurately predict the future. These would be precisely the experiences that one would expect if the theories of the difference between perception and reality were correct.

So, the question is, is it possible to predict the future, read minds, teleport and so on? It seems that, in theory at least, the answer may well be yes.