A Simple Explanation of the Multiverse--"What is possible is actual"

My brother, Bill, and I have been kicking around the implications of an infinite set of multiple universes. The discussion began with his discomfort over the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics--that infinite multiple parallel universes branch off from every random quantum outcome of our universe. 

My reply was that it didn't bother me to think of infinite dimensions branching off of what we call reality, because the metaverse is infinite, and we rest inside of it, so there's plenty of room, so to speak. Also, since there are infinite dimensions wrapped around us, any point in our universe can map outward wherever it wants to go.

After a couple of days and a couple of phone calls, Bill called me all excited after experiencing an Insight. "Modal logic!" he declared. Then he proceeded to tell me many things about modal logic that I barely followed, because I majored in Rhetoric rather than Philosophy. (I manipulate words and diagrams as symbols, while he is comfortable manipulating logic and math symbols.) 

Once he started speaking English again, Bill said, "Modal logic talks about possibility and necessity. I realized this morning a new proposition that answers our inquiry! It's: 'What is possible is necessarily actual under an infinitely many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics!'"

We humans say it all the time: "What can be done will be done." As if it were a universal law. And of course it would be a universal law, because it's a fractal meme, isn't it? After all, if it can be said, it has been said--again a universal fractal meme.

If the universal consciousness thought up the algorithm that became our bounded universe, and that originating consciousness is infinite and illimitable, then there is a necessity for the infinities of consciousness, time, and space to be expressed in infinitely branching possibilities. 

This interpretation fits nicely with the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics and complements string-theory notions of Hilbert space.

Read the Simple Explanation of the Fractal, Conscious Universe here.

Simplicity is not Reductionism, repost from 2015

This article was originally posted in August of 2015, but I think maybe it was left off of the Topical Index, so you may not have read it. I've slightly updated it today by adding a couple of sentences.

****************

Every once in a while, someone I'm talking with reacts poorly to the very notion that complex concepts should or could be simplified--as if this Simple Explanation blog contributes to "dumbing down" science, philosophy, religion, and metaphysics. "Your theory is nothing but pure fantasy and speculation," I hear them say.

Well, I've got news for them-- All axioms are fundamentally unprovable. This is true in science, in logic, and in math. Fundamental propositions are assumed to be true. All of these axioms are in fact intuitive. So the criticism that the Simple Explanation is intuitive is a false criticism, as the same can be said of all science, logic, and math. According to U.C. Berkeley's Understanding Science website: 

"All of science is based on a few fundamental assumptions that transcend any individual experiment or study."

Understanding Science goes on to explain that, while the fundamental propositions may be assumptions, they generate testable hypotheses that can verify the assumptions. The Simple Explanation is not unscientific--it verifies its hypotheses through observation and by mining other people's research findings, amply demonstrating its theoretical robustness.

I talked this over with my brother, Bill, the philosopher, and he felt it was very important to explain the difference between "simplicity" and "reductionism." So here goes.

Simplicity is not reductionism. 

Simplicity as I use the term involves stripping away layers of linguistic and cultural particulars to reveal underlying universal patterns. According to the Simple Explanation, once memes are lifted out of their familiar linguistic and cultural expressions, their universal applicability can be readily discerned.

I have found that limiting the specificity of nouns raises the applicability of the concept. For example, I could say, "All people reach out to others to work together on projects they could not accomplish alone." But when I word it as "All units of consciousness reach out to others to work together to build the next level up," suddenly the Simple Golden Rule applies to atoms and cells as easily as it does to people.

Reductionism, on the other hand, narrows the focus of exploration by pursuing information from smaller and smaller objects, as in the way physicists look for ever smaller particles and wave forms to explain the composition of our universe. Hand in hand with this pursuit is the assumption that an object can be reduced to its tiniest components and that this will reveal its underlying nature.

I'm happy to see that according to wikipedia, Bill and I are not alone in our distrust of reductionism. Apparently reductionism doesn't go over so well with ecologists or systems theorists, because interactive systems can't be described by their smallest objects but must be described in terms of relationships and interactions. From the wiki article on reductionism: "Disciplines such as cybernetics and systems theory embrace a non-reductionist view of science, sometimes going as far as explaining phenomena at a given level of hierarchy in terms of phenomena at a higher level, in a sense, the opposite of a reductionist approach.^[24]"

So, while conventional science believes itself to be thoroughly pursuing truth through reductionism, the Simple Explanation would say it is more like they are trying to describe the haystack by counting the number of its molecules. Yes, it is a measurable result, but meaningless.

Again, from wikipedia: "Methodological reductionism is the position that the best scientific strategy is to attempt to reduce explanations to the smallest possible entities. Methodological reductionism would thus hold that the atomic explanation of a substance's boiling point is preferable to the chemical explanation, and that an explanation based on even smaller particles (quarks and leptons, perhaps) would be even better. Methodological reductionism, therefore, is the position that all scientific theories either can or should be reduced to a single super~theory through the process of theoretical reduction.

Here at the Simple Explanation, simplicity means "elegance"--the simplest theory that explains the most evidence. But unlike methodological reductionism, the Simple Explanation does not restrict truth to the tiny.The simplicity pursued by the Simple Explanation is of an entirely different kind--a true theory of everything looks for the underlying reality of our cosmos, irregardless of where it is to be found. 

Critical Thinking: Dr. Puett's Classroom Blessing

My brother, Dr. Bill Puett, retired from teaching philosophy a few years ago. This is the handout he gave to every student who passed through his classrooms over the years. I hope they remember the lesson and are practicing it. This is what an enlightened electorate would look like:

"Other than your living a loving and compassionate life, I wish for you more than anything that you become autonomous. Be fully informed on all important matters and apply critical thinking before making choices. Regard no one as an authority, challenge all beliefs, but listen to others before reaching decisions. Before offering criticism, know an opposing position so well that you can argue it better than the opponent proposing it. In so doing, you may risk your own position. Challenge even well founded beliefs. Reject indoctrination, even from the sciences. Theories never become facts. Not even the earth can be shown to orbit the sun! Once in a while, give Santa's beard a tug."

Cyd's brother, Bill Puett, Ph.D.

Dad's 1939 Vacation Pith Helmet

In 1939, when my dad was 20 years old, he took a road trip with his family from Colorado to Tijuana and back, stopping at many sights along the way. As it says on the top of the helmet: "A grand trip through 11 states, 2 national parks, 1 national monument, 1 outside nation, 1 Pacific Island playground, and a movie studio."

Dad recorded his trip on a pith helmet he took along. The pith helmet serves as both a map and an autograph book. I imagine that everyone who signed this helmet has long since passed over to the great beyond. I am very happy to still possess that souvenir.

(You can click on any picture to see it bigger--please do!"

This part of the pith helmet map shows the trip winding through Yellowstone National Park, where he meets up with the Morgans. There's a cartoon of two stick figures = martini glass which reads: "Hi, Morg." "Hi George," (equals) "Hi Ball." That joke has always cracked me up.

Dad's trip began on August 7, 1939 and ended August 31, 1939. The drawings on the hat begin at the START point and wind all over the pith helmet until the END. A caption reads, "Length of trip 5081 miles. Approximately as far as from Home to New York City and back to Los Angeles."

"A week's stay in Los Angeles--Mausoleum, Catalina, Auto Races, Warner Brothers Movie Studio, Santa Monica Beach, Venice--Fun House, Tijuana"

Here's the Oregon coast, where he stopped at Reedsport--"more curves than between Durango and Mancos." In Northern California he visited the "Italian Swiss Colony and Winery," then stopped at the "World's Largest and Oldest Living Things--the Redwoods." There's a cartoon of a giant redwood tree with a tiny stick figure underneath it which reads, "Us. Small, like little white lice." A little farther on there's a drawing of the Golden Gate Bridge and "Treasure Island--Isle of Sore Feet." 

The brim reads: "The Five Forgotten Footworn Followers of Fame and Fortune Who Forged Forward Furiously to Frisco and Back to the Foothills of Home."  There were five signatures, now faded by time, but you can still make out my father's name, "Bill Puett" and "Dill," dad's step-dad--Dillworth Halls. Frances, his mother, would have been on that brim, too.

There are more cartoons, more signatures, more little jokes, more sights described.  I'll post more of them if anyone's interested. Just let me know...

Simplicity Is Not Reductionism

Every once in a while, someone I'm talking with reacts poorly to the very notion that complex concepts should or could be simplified--as if this Simple Explanation blog contributes to "dumbing down" science, philosophy, religion, and metaphysics. "Your theory is nothing but pure fantasy and speculation," I hear them say.

Well, I've got news for them-- All axioms are fundamentally unprovable. This is true in science, in logic, and in math. Fundamental propositions are assumed to be true. All of these axioms are in fact intuitive. So the criticism that the Simple Explanation is intuitive is a false criticism, as the same can be said of all science, logic, and math. According to U.C. Berkeley's Understanding Science website: 

"All of science is based on a few fundamental assumptions that transcend any individual experiment or study."

Understanding Science goes on to explain that, while the fundamental propositions may be assumptions, they generate testable hypotheses that can verify the assumptions. The Simple Explanation is not unscientific--it verifies its hypotheses through observation and by mining other people's research findings, amply demonstrating its theoretical robustness.

I talked this over with my brother, Bill, the philosopher, and he felt it was very important to explain the difference between "simplicity" and "reductionism." So here goes.

Simplicity is not reductionism. 

Simplicity as I use the term involves stripping away layers of linguistic and cultural particulars to reveal underlying universal patterns. According to the Simple Explanation, once memes are lifted out of their familiar linguistic and cultural expressions, their universal applicability can be readily discerned.

Reductionism, on the other hand, narrows the focus of exploration by pursuing information from smaller and smaller objects, as in the way physicists look for ever smaller particles and wave forms to explain the composition of our universe. Hand in hand with this pursuit is the assumption that an object can be reduced to its tiniest components and that this will reveal its underlying nature.

I'm happy to see that according to wikipedia, Bill and I are not alone in our distrust of reductionism. Apparently reductionism doesn't go over so well with ecologists or systems theorists, because interactive systems can't be described by their smallest objects but must be described in terms of relationships and interactions. From the wiki article on reductionism: "Disciplines such as cybernetics and systems theory embrace a non-reductionist view of science, sometimes going as far as explaining phenomena at a given level of hierarchy in terms of phenomena at a higher level, in a sense, the opposite of a reductionist approach.^[24]"

So, while conventional science believes itself to be thoroughly pursuing truth through reductionism, the Simple Explanation would say it is more like they are trying to describe the haystack by counting the number of its molecules. Yes, it is a measurable result, but meaningless.

Again, from wikipedia: "Methodological reductionism is the position that the best scientific strategy is to attempt to reduce explanations to the smallest possible entities. Methodological reductionism would thus hold that the atomic explanation of a substance's boiling point is preferable to the chemical explanation, and that an explanation based on even smaller particles (quarks and leptons, perhaps) would be even better. Methodological reductionism, therefore, is the position that all scientific theories either can or should be reduced to a single super~theory through the process of theoretical reduction.

Here at the Simple Explanation, simplicity means "elegance"--the simplest theory that explains the most evidence. But unlike methodological reductionism, the Simple Explanation does not restrict truth to the tiny.The simplicity pursued by the Simple Explanation is of an entirely different kind--a true theory of everything looks for the underlying reality of our cosmos, irregardless of where it is to be found. 

Simple Explanation Videos -- 40 minutes sure to shift your paradigm

The talk at Kindred Journeys went very well. The little room was full. The energy was high. My friends brought friends and there were people there who came because of an online events posting in The Reader. Karyl videotaped the talk, and here are the links below. Sold a couple of books and a couple of the new audio books, too. I had been wondering whether or not people would understand what I was saying, but they all tracked very well. There were many props used as illustrations--broccoli for fractals; a mandarin orange, a little pumpkin, and the slinky for toroids; and too many posters with too much writing on them for the other concepts. My brother, Billy, introduced me, and then he came away with several new hypnosis clients afterwards, on top of it. The amazing thing is that I was able to explain the entire Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything in about 50 minutes. Talk about a challenge!
Here's the first 44 minutes of footage from the talk, before the video cut out. This is raw footage, unedited. We'll do a better job next time. Meanwhile, enjoy the videos! Please pass this along to your friends, too.

Below you can see the posters in close-up; be sure to watch the videos for a detailed explanation.

The Simple Explanation philosophy can be boiled down to four basic concepts. These concepts are fully explained in the book, "A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything," by Cyd Ropp, Ph.D.

This Simple Golden Rule sums up all world religions and ethical systems. It applies equally to all units of consciousness throughout the universe, from sub-atomic particles up through "sentient" creatures and beyond. Whether you are a human, a skin cell, or a solar system, it is your job to reach out to others with love, aid, and information for the betterment of all. This makes all units of consciousness "happy." Joining with others in a common goal also happens to fractally level up to the next hierarchical jump. (atoms to molecules, cells to organs, people to society, etc,)

The Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything identifies this torus as the primordial fractal of our universe.

Zero-point emitter at the center of our universe, pushing out space, matter, and time into this dimension. The inward-poking pressure wraps over the lip and falls into the vortex leading to the singularity, compressing potential that inverses and explodes outward into our 3-D universe as manifestation.

The arrow of time flows from uncollapsed potential, through here and now, and emerges as history. i.e. "karma"

There are countless units of consciousness inside this skin of mine, making up "me."

Nested Hierarchies--the bottom triangle represents a single organism; the top triangle shows how it fractally nests into the hierarchy above.

A Simple Explanation of Past Life Hypnotherapy

My brother, Dr. Bill Puett, has developed a thriving hypnotherapy practice in San Diego, California, since retiring as a Professor of Philosophy.

Bill and I have philosophized together all of our lives, since we were small children.
Bill's wife, Kathy, Bill Puett, and sister Cyd Ropp



Bill has been employing the Simple Explanation as part of his therapeutic technique for a few years now. We thought you would like to see how. Here is one of his case studies utilizing past life regression.

CASE STUDY: Jane -- burned as a witch

Jane was a 22 year old client who saw me because of a bothersome issue she'd had for as long as she could remember.  No one was allowed to touch her neck.   She was engaged to be married; and even her fiancé, John, was not allowed to touch her neck.  Jane also made it clear to John that she did not want to have a child, especially not a daughter.  Because he wanted to have children, a major problem in their relationship arose.

 

In my hypnotherapy practice, I do not lead or make suggestions based on what I think is the cause of my client's issues. I listen to what their subconscious reveals and facilitate with that information my client's recovery. I use past life and parallel life therapy to facilitate transformation. In Jane's case, I did not anticipate what her subconscious was to reveal when she was in deep hypnosis.

In a past life, she recalled being burned at the stake as an alleged witch.  Her first recollection was being in the fire.  I asked her to move out from the fire and to see herself at a distance.  She saw that she had a brace of some kind around her neck that kept her in place.  She asked to go back into the fire whereby I took her quickly through her death and into the “interim” between lives.  She was immediately relieved. 

 

While she was in the interim, I asked her if there was anyone she wanted to see again from that past life.  She said “yes,” and I asked her to call that person into the interim.  A little girl came to her who had been her daughter in that past life and had died before her mother had been killed.  They had a deeply moving reunion.  (I regularly do grief work for past life persons who have lost loved ones.) 

 

I then asked Jane to go back into that past life in order to create a “new” past life.  In the new past life she was not brought before the inquisition and her daughter did not die as a child.  I then brought Jane back to the present with full recall of the old and new past life experiences.  The original past life was now presented as merely a story with no future implications while the new past life was carried forward for positive future implications.

The results were wonderful and transformative.  The day of the past life regression was the last day of Jane’s neck issue.  She had removed the meme of being held on the stake with a neck brace.  She had also removed the meme of not wanting a child.  Within a year, she and her husband had a baby daughter.  Both Jane and John were thrilled with the pregnancy and the birth of a child.

**************

Here is what Bill and I think is going on with this sort of therapy--

The Simple Explanation suggests that each living person is comprised of their Unit of Consciousness (aka "soul") enshrouded by a bundle of memes considered important to that person, glued there, in a manner of speaking, by their personal karma. (you can read all about this Simple Explanation of souls and karma in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Simple Explanation book or in this little article, "Who Am I?".)

When a client is hypnotically regressed out of this life and experiences a past life, the memes important to that life are once again attracted to their UC. This is why clients under hypnosis may look and speak differently than they normally do, because the old meme bundle is again active.

In Jane's case, the experience of being locked in stocks and burned to death as a witch made such a karmic impression upon her UC that it clung to her new life, causing a neurotic fear of being touched on her neck. She also carried a meme of disappointment and longing over the early death of her daughter in that life that created such fear in this life that she was unwilling to risk having another.

In the safety and comfort of the therapeutic session, Jane was able to move beyond her traumatic death and discover the peace of the interim period following death.

In Simple Explanation terms, we would say this peace comes as the soul's meme bundle is cut loose at death. In the period between lives we are freed from earthly memes, cares, and concerns. The meme bundle later reattaches, according to one's karma, after a newly formed life enters the world.

In Jane's case, it was the newly imagined "alternate ending" of the past life that finally released all of her fears. Jane found actual peace and satisfaction with the rewritten history, and she carried that peace forward into this life. It was as though Jane's karma had been rewritten, and the memes associated with her previously unhappy life and death no longer clung to her current meme bundle. She was now able to view those memes from a distance, as if they were attached to someone else.

*************

Immediate resolution of clients' presenting problems is really unheard of in therapy. Usually, clients wrestle with their meme bundles for years, in and out of therapy. With Dr. Puett's past-life hypnotherapy, clients are released that very day. We believe the therapy is so effective because not only are the original incidents identified (whether in this life or a past life), but a new history is written that gives resolution retroactively to the time of the inciting incident. Rather than carrying the mourning for her lost daughter forward from one lifetime into the next, Jane's joyous reunion with her daughter plucked the loss meme right out of her bundle. When she awoke from hypnosis she felt joy rather than fear, and the fear never returned. The fear meme was replaced by a joyous meme, allowing her present life to go forward.

As for her gruesome death, under hypnosis Jane discovered she felt no pain or fear on "the other side" of death, once she had been taken consciously through. Therefore that meme was no longer a source of pain and fear. Once again, it was as if the karma associated with dying at the stake was rewritten as it was reimagined. Bill and I propose that immediate resolution of a client's problems and the transformation of a client's life is accomplished through karmic cleansing as old memes are dropped and not reattached to the present life.

Bill's therapeutic technique is a novel approach that utilizes concepts of personhood out of the Simple Explanation. Hypnotic regression, coupled with rewriting history, is an extremely effective way to drop burdensome memes.

*******************

You need not believe in reincarnation to benefit from this technique. I personally held the position for several years that these past life sessions of Bill's were "merely" therapeutic metaphors. Useful stories expressing fears and mysteries in a neat, narrative package. Not unlike dream imagery. Since writing the Simple Explanation I have come to take these stories as something different.

Does this mean that everyone who holds that burned-at-the-stake meme was actually burned at the stake themselves, personally? Not necessarily. In the Simple Explanation, the memes in our bundles are not only held by you, they are held in common by everyone who resonates with that meme. You can come to hold onto a meme because of past life issues, but you could also be holding a meme because you picked it up in this life. It may be that you are a midwife who is currently under some sort of prosecution or review board over your midwifery practices. Considering that tens of thousands of midwives were burned at the stake during the witch trials of the Early Modern Period, it's little wonder your current situation would attract that particular meme to your personal bundle. The meme actually "lives" in the transpersonal field we all share--it's been out there all along, you just didn't resonate to it before it applied to you.