Okay guys … Here is another unexploded bomb that I would like to fling at my critics. Precognition suggests that information from the future can be perceived in the past. By this I mean that somebody can “perceive” something that has not happened yet. Most materialist-reductionists and the followers of skeptical “scientism” will be adamant that such a scenario is absolutely impossible and to take at face-value reports of precognition is to show gullibility and a gross lack of “scientific” knowledge. Our intellectual betters will point out that as precognition cannot be accommodated within the present scientific paradigm it is therefore impossible. As such any reports, however convincing, are simply ignored and explained away by “powerful” mathematical arguments such as the “law of large numbers” or psychological concepts such as “confirmation bias”. Of course I am labelled by many as a new-age “woo-woo” who deliberately misrepresents “real” science to my readers and in doing so I am accused of being a “pseudo-scientist”.
Okay then, here is another piece of “misrepresentation”: there is strong evidence from quantum physics that the causality goes both forwards in time and backwards in time. In other words it has been shown that subatomic particles are precognitive … Yes, I will write that again … It has been shown that sub atomic particles are precognitive. I am referring to a little known (to the general public anyway) a phenomenon known as frustrated spontaneous emission. An atom that normally emits light will cease emitting when its surroundings become incapable of absorbing that light. Thus one event (emission) depends on something that does or doesn’t happen in the future (absorption). according to theoretical physicist Ken Wharton of San José State University this “one of the examples of a particle probing the future and seeing what’s there, and then making a decision based on it, and just not decaying.” Remember these are not my words … I am quoting a theoretical physicist who presumably knows what he is talking about and, as far as I am aware, is not a pseudo-scientist. This is a fantastic vindication of the wise words of Professor Herman Weyl when he wrote “the objective world simply is, it does not happen,” way back in 1949. Just a reminder, Weyl was one of the most respected mathematicians of the last century …. So I can only assume that this comment was based upon a deep understanding of mathematical physics. What we are discussing here is something called ‘retrocausality “, a subject I discuss in great detail in my famed discussion of “pseudoscience” entitled “The Labyrinth of Time” with regards to the work of quantum physicist John Cramer and his “transactional interpretation” which again suggests that particles can “travel” in both directions of the time flow.
But please do not take my word for this, check out what physics writer George Musser, author of “The Idiots Guide to String Theory” and an article writer for Scientific American for 14 years has to say on the subject ….