Futurism logo

Why Those 2 Silicon Valley Billionaires Are Wasting Their Time & Money

While those unnamed rich guys are looking for a way out of the simulated universe, the smart money is on a time travel solution, expected by 2020 or sooner.

By Marshall BarnesPublished 6 years ago 11 min read

Beginning 'round the time that Tad Friend, over at The New Yorker, published his October 10, 2016 article on Y Combinator founder, Sam Altman, the rumors flew far and fast concerning an odd footnote he included concerning the whole simulation hypothesis myth, popular amongst Silicon Valley elites. According to Friend's account, two Silicon Valley billionaires were taking the idea so seriously, that they had begun to "secretly engage scientists to work on breaking us out of the simulation".

That was all it took. The headlines screamed - "Silicon Valley billionaires think we're living in The Matrix", "Tech Billionaires Want to Destroy the Universe", "Plan To Escape The Matrix: Billionaires Want To Help", "Take the red pill: Tech billionaires who think we're living in the Matrix are secretly funding a way out" and on and on. I was reading the headlines on my laptop as I streaked across the country from a successful business trip in a related research area, not all that familiar with the simulation hypothesis idea but astute enough to recognize that there may be a confluence between what the billionaires were looking for and what my work was focused on. But to make that determination, I was going to have to do a bit more research.

Flash forward to Thanksgiving, that same year. Using Eliott Edge's article, Breaking Into The Simulated Universe as a guide, I wrote the most authoritative article yet on the simulation hypothesis craze - A Participatory Universe Does Not Equal a Simulated One and Why We Live in the Former, proving why the entire idea is a house of cards. More than that, however, Edge gave me the perfect opening to introduce the link between the hypothesis and my new main area of research - temporal chronoportation - creating effects from within the normal, everyday experiential context of time, to then move outside that, via the large scale structure of time, to an earlier point in time. In other words - practical, human time travel.

"Why does our physics ruleset permit entanglement, or retrocausality, or wave-particle duality, or quantum erasure, or teleportation, or tunneling?...it is a waste to assume that some physical machine (one that’s in our simulation) is going to be developed that can rip a hole in spacetime (in the video game), and that will somehow lead us to the 'true' universe", he riffed all over the page - every paragraph seeming to beg for the exclusive information that only I could provide for a rebuttal. Though I disagreed with his positions, I loved where they took me. Full of insight and irony and the innovative thinking lacking in any other pro-simulation article I had ever seen - or have yet to see.

For example - he mentions retrocausality. It just so happens that earlier that year, the first series of experiments had taken place testing the idea that retrocausal experiments were actually causing into existence, new parallel universe copies of the present but with different or discontinuous pasts - instead of changing the past. I had predicted as much in my special report for select members of Congress on time travel (now the book Paradox Lost: The True Geometries of Time Travel). The results were all similar to those predicted by German astrophysicist Rainer Plaga in 1995 for his proposed test to detect parallel universes of the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis, AKA the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

It was determined that Wheeler's later idea of the Participatory Universe is actually behind most if not all of the weird quantum phenomena, in particular the causation of parallel universes. The experiments are all named after women, hence the moniker, the Gal's Club of the Heaven's Falling Project - Heaven's Falling because the experiments got so sophisticated that it was figured out how to even seemingly "fool the universe" in terms as where the detection area for the experiment really was. Simultaneously, they proved CERN's Mir Faizal wrong about parallel universes not being testable. He insisted he would find "real" universes in higher dimensions at CERN. He failed.

Eliott's protest, that it's a waste to assume some physical machine is going to be developed that can rip a hole in spacetime, was likewise almost synchronistic. I had already invented a small scale version of such a device that exhibits physical effects expected from Einstein's theory of teleparallelism in its presentation of a specially synthesized, electromagnetic field, with gravitic properties, once it's in motion. In 2013 it was found that it indeed appeared to be forcing to stay open longer and make larger, micro wormholes that allowed radio and infrared waves through to then disappear, from either direction. Micro wormholes are said to be present everywhere around us in the quantum foam of space-time - too small, and never open long enough (under normal circumstances), to allow even subatomic particles through.

I had successfully presented a paper on the physics behind it at the 2014 International Space Development Conference SpaceUp sessions, focusing on the simple proposition - if you apply gravitic torsion physics (rotation) to the quantum foam, micro wormholes will be affected and the results should be what has been documented. It was coincidently followed-up the next day with an article in New Scientist on Cambridge physicist Luke Butcher's theory of photons going into skinny micro wormholes and back in time - if the wormholes had their own Casimir effect, keeping them open a bit longer than expected.

It would turn out that Iranian physicist, Mohammad Mansouryar, predicted in 2006 that a (see illustration, page 19 of link) ring of micro wormholes could reach the point where the space in the center collapses and the result is one large traversable wormhole. I said as much at SpaceUp, without knowing at the time about Mansouryar's work. And so, at every turn, it was as if Eliott was giving me the cue to introduce another related breakthrough.

A series of video stills from a monitor showing the reception of an image of Stephen Hawking as it is transmitted through a region of electro-gravitic torsion (rotation). The horizontal distortions are caused by the rotating field and the increasing black static is loss of signal through micro wormholes being forced to stay open longer and larger, than ever thought possible. (Copyright 2013 All Rights Reserved)

At the crux of the situation is the fact that these unnamed billionaires want to escape the simulation - which simultaneously means avoiding the coming catastrophe that many, including myself, think is coming. It is, after all, why Elon Musk says he hopes that we are living in a simulation now - "Arguably we should hope that that's true, because otherwise if civilization stops advancing, that may be due to some calamitous event that erases civilization" as I quoted him saying at the 2016 Vox Media Conference for my paper.

So the anonymous billionaires and I share the same motivations, whether Elon is actually one of them, as has been speculated, or not. The question is - will either one of us be successful? Eliott doubts it.

"You very well might be able to perform experiments to detect whether or not the universe is one kind of simulation or another, but that’s a far cry from technology breaking us out of our universe."

And so, that is exactly what has happened. Everything else is now inconsequential. The initial experiments proving that we live in a participatory universe - simultaneously validating Plaga's 1995 hunch on detecting parallel universes, are now at the core of what could be the world's ultimate time machine architectures, a la National Science Medal award winner Yakir Aharonov's unrealized quantum balloon triggers, featured in David Feedman's April 1992 Discover article, Time Travel Redux. The devices aren't similar - just the approach to using quantum mechanical action to trigger a macroscopic event that, in this case, would trigger the causation of a new parallel universe copy of the past, into existence. As I wrote in my article, Tim Folger Discovers A Time Machine -

"The ultimate conclusion of all of this is that we are capable of altering the past because the universe is capable of creating multiple pasts and it does so to prevent paradoxes. As a result, it is time to build machines that can exploit the possibilities this suggests. It's hard for me to believe that Wheeler, having deduced the functions of this process, was unaware of their implicit meaning. Having been stung a bit, by the initial reviews of the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis, due to what he called the "metaphysical baggage", after he had already endorsed it, I believe it is possible that this time Wheeler deliberately refrained from stating the obvious, relying instead on someone else to put it all together."

And so it is obvious that a machine using the same approach that triggers into existence, new parallel universe copies of the present, need only be primed with the information based mechanism that would cause those new parallel universe copies to be those of the past. The result would be the instant translation from the present, into the new copy of the past, caused into existence.

This is no different than the view that parallel universe decoherence, resulting from an experimenter's measurement, contains the experimenter in the result - after all, he/she is part of the quantum system. As physicist Peter Byrne told NOVA in an interview in August of 2008, "So, in Everett's view, when the human correlates herself—that is, interacts, exchanging energy with the gram of carbon or a clock or whatever—she splits like an amoeba. She splits into copies of herself, one for each element in the superposition."

So, although a quantum superposition isn't really what's involved here, the Gal's Club experiments show that a superposition isn't required to get parallel universes - anything that would change the past will do. So, when working a time machine of any kind, utilizing this kind of trigger I'm describing, the result would be the instant translation into the causation of a new parallel universe copy of the past. The only question is determining how to get that past copy to appear. But there are ideas being considered which shall, as they say, remain confidential.

So where does this leave our anonymous, big dollar duo in Silicon Valley? S-O-O-L, is where, unless they figure out a way to contact me. Their efforts to devise an escape from the simulated universe will be futile - since we don't live in one. Eliott even wrote, "Although, I admit ignorance regarding what approach these rumored billionaire-encouraged researchers are taking, I will throw in my two cents anyway and claim that making a machine won’t work. At this point there are still too many assumptions in play to rely on technology to provide the key..."

Of course I have no clue, as the assumption that they're beginning with is wrong and leading them down some unmarked, blind alley with a likely dead end, instead of a flight out of town.

Meanwhile, a series of experiments has been identified that will enable us to reach the final stage of my process, while everything is being done to determine such details as luggage, things to take, identification issues, travel modes upon arrival, the best destinations to re-establish ourselves and who to immediately see. For me it's Anthony Zanetta and Tom Wilson. Zanetta I know now, but in 1971 he'll be still working with Andy Warhol - soon to be working with David Bowie at Main Man. Wilson would have already produced the Velvet Underground and Nico will be looking for the next big thing - which he believes will be multimedia in scope. It just so happens that before I got into advanced concept science and technology, I was into advanced concept music and video production. With the demos I'll show Wilson, I'm in, no problem. I can find him, if need be, through Zanetta.

Which is something that those two Silicon Valley technocrats should consider. Where will they be going, if they're right, which they're not. If they were working with me, I'd tell them to make a bee-line for the '80s where the home computer industry has already started, and apply what they know to get a leg up on everyone else. They can take all their 21st century toys with them to play with in their own private dens, though they'll miss not having their smart phones functional or the web yet, I'm sure. But hey, if they do their research in advance, they'll know how to speed all of that progress up and they'll be a part of it.

Knowing full well there are two approaches to time machines - the station (a la the '60s The Time Tunnel TV show or the device in the movie, Looper) and the vehicle (a la Dr. Who's TARDIS and the DeLorean in Back To The Future), it has been calculated, at this point, that the best approach would be to have a car, with the required luggage, and park it in the parking lot of a shopping mall - that also existed in the target time period in the past. Done late at night, when no one is around in either time period, the final step would be to trigger the translation to the new copy of the past, get out and call a cab from a pay phone to go to the airport and catch a flight to the final destination, the next morning. The car would have to be abandoned because there's no legal license plate for it there, or any other record, let alone the problematic make and model number. When it's found, it'll just be a bizarre curiosity for the local authorities to puzzle over. Of course, the technology that would have put it there, will have been removed.

So if you happen to know who these two tycoons are, you might let 'em know they're barking up the wrong tree, and that the train's leaving the station by 2020, with or without 'em. I don't need their cash to get this done, but it would help get it done a whole lot sooner.

After all, the clock is ticking down and no one knows when...


About the Creator

Marshall Barnes









Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights


There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2023 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.