Tuesday, December 23, 2008
House = Earth
Neighborhood = Solar System
Community/Suburb = Galaxy Spiral Arm
City = Galaxy
County = Galaxy Cluster
State = Galaxy Supercluster
Nation = Universe
Continent = Multiverse
Planet = Omniverse
Monday, December 15, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
Again here are the BIG questions we all need to re-ask:
1.) What makes up the universe we live in?
2.) How was our universe created/born?
3.) When was our universe born?
4.) Was our universe and all others always in existence?
5.) How large is our universe? Is it finite or infinite?
We need to keep nature in perspective when we ask these questions, what do we see in smaller systems, like eco-spheres?
"...As above, so below..." -Annonymous
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
"This is the work for those who are skilled and peaceful, who seek the good:
May they be able and upright, straightforward, of gentle speech and not proud.
May they be content and easily supported, unburdened with their senses calmed.
May they be wise, not arrogant and without desire for the possessions of others.
May they do nothing mean or that the wise would reprove.
May all beings be happy.
May they live in safety and joy.
All living beings, whether weak or strong, tall, stout, medium or short, seen or unseen,
near or distant, born or to be born, may they all be happy.
Let no one deceive another or despise any being in any state,
let none by anger or hatred wish harm to another.
As a mother watches over her child, willing to risk her own life to protect her only child,
so with a boundless heart should one cherish all living beings,
suffusing the whole world with unobstructed loving-kindness.
Standing or walking, sitting or lying down, during all one's waking hours,
may one remain mindful of this heart and this way of living that is the best in the world.
Unattached to speculations, views and sense desires, with clear vision,
such a person will never be reborn in the cycles of suffering."
I belong to a local meditation group, at the close of every session the following passage is read:
"May the merit of our practice be shared with all beings, in all worlds, in all directions,
May all beings be at peace,
May all beings be free from suffering,
May all beings be free from harm,
May all beings be free from fear,
May all beings be happy,
And may all beings awaken."
(This a great little prayer or mantra, taken largely from the Metta Sutra above.)
If you will notice that the second passage in blue makes no specific designations as to who the prayer is directed to, or from. This is done to bring one a sense of unity with all beings that exist, will exist or have existed in the past, it is all-inclusive, excluding none. There is a great amount of wisdom to be gained from this perspective, and if applied, it slowly but steadily begins to change one's behavior toward both oneself and all others. If one is to evolve into the kind of being by which that greatest possible perspective and life is gained, a new and radical form of ethics must be practiced, if not perfected.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
I would like to introduce a odd little quote from quasi-occult literature attributed to Al Hazred "The Mad Arab." "Nothing is real, and everything is permissible." (It is likely that the quote actually originated from the works of H.P. Lovecraft or even Robert Howard or Robert Bloch, all three are writers that delved into the Cthulhu Mythos and its related legends. As for Al Hazred, he probably never existed.) The quote is quite profound! Think about its first half: "Nothing is real..." This section strikes a chord in both Sufi scripture and Zen literature. The second half alludes to the paradox of existence, everything is real and everything is an illusion. "...Everything is permissible." This paradoxical quote asks us to view the very construct of our reality with the element of illusion as a central theme. It also inadvertently mentions a concept I mentioned earlier, that being the loss of the traditional "free-will" as one takes in the MWI concept. [If everything is permissible and everything that can happen will happen, and everything can happen, then one is forced to play out all possible actions and all possible sets of corresponding conditions.] Free will is then a concept that is just as real as one's perspective, as soon as one's perspective grows beyond the individual observer, the illusion is gone. From the perspective a completely integrated self (one could call this a soul, universal mind...etc) free will might mean very little, to an individual self, it would be a key element in their life, providing them with the construct to understand their own decisions. So does this mean that the epicureans had it right? Do whatever feels good? Or maybe La Vey had it right with his infamous "And if it harm none, do as thou wilt." I would have to say that I disagree with all of these slogans. It is my belief that we have an obligation to uphold the higher "good," whatever that may be. I feel that it is even more important to consider the concept of "others" other people, other things, other systems, other worlds, other consciousnesses and to include this larger spectrum of being into our personal concept of morality. As the song says, "It's not enough just to stand and stare..." ('On The Turning Away'-Pink Floyd.) Where this path leads is closer to Jainism, Buddhist or even the Hindu; Ahimsa, than the carefree viewpoints so common and popular today. It is easy to overlook that which you do not understand, and even easier to overlook that which you do not believe exists. The key is expanding your perspective! That is the primary goal of this blog, to expand my own and other's perspectives. I feel it especially relevant in the age we currently live, for we are standing on the absolute edge of the Quantum Age. This coming age will make the massive progress of the Industrial Revolution pale in comparison. In fact by all estimates, the Quantum age will be the single largest progressive era mankind has ever or will ever see. A new paradigm is desperately needed, if we are to remain productive and viable in such a new and brave frontier.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Now here's were MMT comes in. Imagine that each one of these versions of yourself has there own finite body, and brain as well as a life that is similar but not the same as your own. Indeed their thought patterns and behaviors would most likely resemble your own, with the occasional variation. If you could meet with anyone in the Omniverse, you would find these people to be the closest match to an exact duplicate of yourself. Talking with a version of yourself would seem effortless, most likely enjoyable, and yet thought provoking. Each version would be able to share unique events, ideas, lessons and perspectives, in such a way that the other would instinctively understand and relate to. These versions could provide each other with an almost limitless flow of advice for self-improvement and life enriching knowledge, as well as unique memories the other had never experienced. Imagine finding out how going to a different university turned out, taking that other path, marrying a different spouse, having kids, not having kids, having grandkids, choosing a different religion, lifestyle, an the list goes on... there would be many things similar, some exactly the same, many different about your "other-self." Some people would choose to identify with their counterparts directly as "them self" others would feel insecure and have to put some space between them and their "other-self" perhaps identifying them as a brother/sister, twin or some other label.
For myself the choice would be clear, I would have to identify directly with the "others" as myself, other versions of myself, at least mentally. Behavior would most likely be something similar to standing in front of an identical twin you never met before, and finding that they share your thoughts , feelings, and behavior patterns far more than they probably should. It might seem a bit scary at first, especially if they are very close to your same world-line (say... only < 2% different, overall.)
Is it possible that these versions could converse, meet, and share (on some level) while completely unaware? I believe that this is a distinct possibility. The validity of MMT is its connection to everyday reality as we experience it right now. I believe that dreaming and certain cognitive functions and features provide us with clues as to how MWI and MMT affect us all, every single day. I have mentioned previously that human cognition is a strange and wonderful phenomenon. I believe that the reason why human cognition is as complex and chaotic as it is, is because it not only involves a complex, yet finite physical element (the brain), but also an infinite element. This infinite element is (I believe) a conglomerate of consciousness, a society of mind, produced by all the versions of yourself within the Omniverse. What better explanation do we have for the endless creativity, the boundless capacity of random, chaotic thoughts and the strange "other worldly" images/scenes that we all experience while dreaming? I will elaborate much more on dreaming in my next post... there is SO much more I have to say about it.
So my big tie in to "On The Turning Away" -Read or better yet Listen to sections 1 and 3. Communication is taking place between ourselves and so many others, how can we turn away from so many others? How can we turn away from ourselves? (Okay, thats my deep creepy thought for today)
From the pale and downtrodden
And the words they say
Which we won't understand
"Don't accept that what's happening
Is just a case of others' suffering
Or you'll find that you're joining in
The turning away"
It's a sin that somehow
Light is changing to shadow
And casting it's shroud
Over all we have known
Unaware how the ranks have grown
Driven on by a heart of stone
We could find that we're all alone
In the dream of the proud
On the wings of the night
As the daytime is stirring
Where the speechless unite
In a silent accord
Using words you will find are strange
And mesmerized as they light the flame
Feel the new wind of change
On the wings of the night
No more turning away
From the weak and the weary
No more turning away
From the coldness inside
Just a world that we all must share
It's not enough just to stand and stare
Is it only a dream that there'll be
No more turning away?
Monday, November 17, 2008
You may recall that the "Omniverse" is the term given to the largest concept in MWI Cosmology. It is an all encompassing place, containing all possible multiverses, universes, galaxy clusters, galaxies, solar systems, worlds (planets, planetoids, plutoids, asteroids, comets, space-stations, space ships and ring-worlds.) The term "world" is really an over-used word, but it holds significance with most readers (myself included.) The Omniverse is infinite in space, stretching out into infinity in all directions and times. It contains all that exists and all that does not exist, simultaneously. There is however only ONE Omniverse! how can there be more than one "all encompassing" everything? The colored portions of the diagram represent those portions which are limited in size but not in number. There should be an infinite number of multiverses, universes, etc... on down to worlds, beings, events, thoughts... you get the picture. Each portion contains one side of the same coin, so to speak. One is infinite in size, but finite in number, the other is just the complimentary, infinite in number, but finite in size. One might imagine that the colored portion is a single drop of water, and the black portion is an endless sea.
Given this diagram, or any other cosmological diagram:
1. Where are we located?
2. When are we located?
3. What are we?
4. Why are we?
Just some fun questions to play with (especially as they relate to MWI, the above diagram)
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
"In another world,
Under another sky,
I see another story waiting to be told,
And another you,
Wakes up with another me,
For that's the way we've come to be,
In another world.
In a different place,
Way across time and space,
A door is open wide,
Drawn to a different light,
Maybe we'll step inside.
In another world,
We can show we care,
You can be sure I'm waiting there,
In another world.
When the dies were cast,
They laid a crazy path,
We follow to our graves,
But I know in a different world,
We journey a different way.
So we live,
But life isn't what it seems,
We're only living in our dreams,
In another world.
You can believe I'll meet you here
In another world."
- Brian May
I heard this song back in '98 when it was released, just didn't know what to call the whole "another world" concept yet. It has helped inspire me to further explore MWI and Parallel Universe theory. Brian, (or should I say Dr. May) as always, you are way ahead of the times!
<--The Flammerion Woodcut
As posted in Wikipedia and other online blogs, I have noticed a disturbing trend. This trend is to re-impose a finite nature upon an infinite cosmos (or rather omniverse.) SO, you might say that this is my opinion, and you would be right, to some degree. It has been the wisdom of the ages that has taught us that the world is finite, but the heavens are infinite. Ancient Greek astronomers theorized that the heavens had no bounds, the Egyptians and Sumerians concurred. Anaxagorus an early Greek cosmologist believed in a universe without end, filled with all manner of strange and wonderful objects. Logic dictates that there cannot be an "End" to that which exists. Today physicists point to a finite, (possibly expanding) universe but a they are quick to point out that it may exist within a sea of other universes (what we now refer to as the "omniverse.") Like the ancient question of the spear thrower, where would the end fall, that there would not be some other outside point, reachable just beyond that space?
"And so I'll follow on, and whereso'er thou set the extreme coasts, I'll query, "what becomes thereafter of thy spear?" 'Twill come to pass that nowhere can a world's-end be, and that the chance for further ight prolongs forever the flight itself." Lucretius (98?-55? BC), De Rerum Natura
"There are innumerable worlds of different sizes. In some there is neither sun nor moon, in others they are larger than in ours and others have more than one. These worlds are at irregular distances, more in one direction and less in another, and some are flourishing, others declining. Here they come into being, there they die, and they are destroyed by collision with one another. Some of the worlds have no animal or vegetable life nor any water." Democritus according to Hippolytus, Refutation of the Heresies I 13 2, in Diels and Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, vol. 2, section 68 A 40, p. 94. Translation from Guthrie, A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, p. 405.
I would challenge anyone of sufficient mind, put yourself to the task, where is the logic (given the universe and the world around us) for a finite bubble of a universe floating in absolutely nothing in all directions, ad infinitum? Do we not see that this kind of thinking has no more value than a flat earth with its orbiting sun and stars? Everywhere and every time that we search (what appears to be an empty-space in our sky,) we find staring back an endless sea of stars, teeming no doubt with all manner of strange entities and objects.
"To consider the Earth as the only populated world in infinite space is as absurd as to assert that in an entire field of millet, only one grain will grow." -Metrodorus of Chios
Well, maybe after all the space outside of the universe is filled with Wal-Mart bags, chunks of loose Styrofoam and packing peanuts, courtesy of FedEx.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Sunday, November 9, 2008
I would like to discuss a related hypothesis. I must first draw a picture for you, a picture to be found within the realm of the very small. Imagine if you will the life of a single cell within your body. Where the cell is located and its function is not important (at least not for the sake of our picture.) What is of most concern to us at this time is the cell's perception, its world view so to speak. As a tiny conscious being, the cell can offer us some very odd observations.
1.) It would be most aware of the cells surrounding it.
2.) It might view itself as a vital member of a close-knit family, where it works together to produce effects shared by itself and its family. There is no reason to believe that this cell or any other cell would understand its orientation or location within the whole body, in fact, it should not know that such a thing as a
3.) A group of like-minded or like-functioning cells would probably understand themselves in terms of their shared function.
4.)As an observer, the cell should have no idea that it is part of a larger whole, the human body. In fact, it should have no idea that the "body" exists at all!
As "human beings" we frequently ask the question, "Who am I?" Rarely do we ask "What am I?" -C. Klinert Do we even consider the possibility that "we" exist as a part of a larger whole, that which is inescapable and yet virtually unknowable?
Let us propose for a moment that "we" are part of a larger whole, and that that larger whole is what we would traditionally call the "soul." The soul could also be called the mind. The mind is that unnamed observer, sitting hidden in dark. Try as we might, we cannot find them, we cannot dissect them to figure out how they work. This larger "mind" would be infinite, composed of every mind-version of oneself (that is to say a whole, composed of an infinite number of parts which are drops of consciousness, and inseparable from the whole) as a conglomerate of consciousness and being. Each "mind-unit" would be one with all the other mind-units, but partitioned off in such a way as to produce a workable individual consciousness. This "collective" mind would account for the random and chaotic nature of human behavior as well as the limitless potential of the human mind. How else can a finite being produce infinite possibilities? Every other finite thing we have encountered, has produced finite effects and possibilities, (even if the number of possibilities seems countless, it is not.) Their are very few people who would be naive enough to suggest that the human mind is finite, especially when they have seen the kinds of functions it can perform while dreaming.
Dreaming leads us to the concept that each mind could communicate on some level with the others. The random nature of dreams can haunt us, fill us with curiosity or even elate or frighten us to the point of tears.
It is time to consider the quantum nature of dreaming, as a real and tangible means of self communication, from one version of yourself to another version. If there are an infinite number of "you," or even a large number, how many of "you" are dreaming at the same time? How many are deep in thought? Would not these versions influence each other in unique and unpredictable ways? Lets us say that what ties them all together is a sense of focus, that which aims the collective power of consciousness into one particular world at a time. We could call this a lensing effect of sorts. If you focus on one world, you would experience that world. The mind has already been established to have certain cohesive and alterative properties, such that events and experiences which do not seem to make sense easily shift out and are replaced and repainted by new ones which more closely fit one's schema (or world view.)
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
To Be Continued...
Friday, October 17, 2008
If we are completely honest with ourselves, we will have to admit that not all the memories that we have are accurate. Processing errors do happen. Some events actually took place in a different set of conditions, time, weather, colors, people and participants might have been different. Some psychologists have theorized that people "paint" their memory into existence.
I would like to set up a scenario for you:
Imagine that a man named Joe is trying to remember his childhood. He has never had any problems with mental illness or mind-altering drug use, and he is healthy in every way. Joe is 27 years old, so his childhood is not too distant from his vantage point. Now imagine that in a parallel universe there exists another Joe, with slightly different memories (again this Joe has no mental illness, history of drug use and is perfectly healthy in every way.) We will call the first Joe [Joe 1] the second [Joe 2.]
At the precise time that Joe 1 tries to recall his childhood an event occurs, (we will just call it a quantum event or quantum shift.) This event causes Joe 2 to be swapped with Joe 1. (or possibly Joe 1's mind with that of Joe 2. The memories of Joe 1 transferred into Joe 2 and vice versa.)
A few questions:
1.) Does Joe 1 or 2 know that the switch has occured? If so, how?
2.) Does anoyone else notice? If so, how?
In all actuallity this event could happen to any one of us, and if it did, by some querk of physics, how would we know it? Would not our only measure of the shift be lost by the act of shifting? Memories might linger, thoughts might haunt the Joes for some time, but which would ever be able to truly discern what had happened?
I order to further explore this paradox one must have an understanding of the Multiple Worlds Interpretation of Quantum mechanics. The Everett/Wheeler model.
My point is this... How sure are you that the world you lived in today was that same world [or world-line] you lived in yesterday? How sure are you of the accuracy of your memories? And if we travle between similar but different worlds, how can any of us really know where we started?
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
So what are these other laws? Quantum Physics offers us a unique view of the human brain and its function, it may indicate that the human mind actually works by using quantum functions to process stimuli and produce behavior. Quantum functions would give us the ability to work with data and produce unique and possibly random results. In order for human beings to behave in a civilized or even functional manner, the use of linear logic would also be needed. Linear logic is the kind most closely associated with classical or Newtonian physics, the natural laws which appear to govern our world. Non-linear logic appears to be more random and chaotic and is associated with quantum physics and chaos theory. Both Linear and non-linear logic would then play a part in how the human mind functions on a day to day basis. Without linear logic we would be a very short-lived species, without non-linear logic, we would be a very boring one.
If we can build a quantum computer, that works like our own brain does, we will begin a new era of technology and dreams of artificial intelligence will become a living breathing reality. Quantum computing has actually already begun (on an atomic scale.) Researchers have devised a system for computing based on the manipulation of atoms, seven to be exact. Tests using this tiny computer have yielded some interesting results, the quantum computer indicated that [2 + 2 = 4.] This might sound like a waste of time, buts its really the first step in manipulating larger more complex groups of atoms, which will eventually surpass traditional computers. Once this occurs the development of a large scale quantum computer will be just a few steps away.
Scientists are eager to develop a quantum computer (QC) for many reasons. QC's will use what is called qubits to process information much like modern computers use bits and bytes. Qubits have essentially two different states (up or down.) It depends on the observer present as to which state the qubit will be found in. QC's will be able to outperform traditional computers (exponentially.) This means that today's most advanced supercomputers or even "clusters" will look like the ENIAC of the 1960's when compared to QC! You may recall that early computers were large and heavy, requiring lots of electricity and operators to use them. NASA estimates that the computing power (at the time of the moon landing) was roughly the equivalent of a scientific calculator such as a TI-83. According to nanotechnology experts, computers utilizing nanocircuitry and quantum technology will be extremely small, (on the molecular scale) and will be infinitely more complex than the computers of today. A leading researcher from Oklahoma State University once remarked, "A nano-scale computer the size of a human fist could one day run the entire electrical grid for New York City."
Current advances in existing computer processors have now produced devices like the "SEAforth 40C18" processor made by Intellasys International Corp. This chip has 40 cores, each runs like a separate but equal CPU with its own ROM and RAM, operates up to 240 times faster and uses 28 times less electricity than its competitors. This example helps to illustrate how quickly technology is approaching the point by which Moore's Law will no longer be a valid predictor of technological progress. (Moore's Law says that technology 'primarily computing technology' will continue to double in processing capability, speed and complexity, roughly every two years.) It has been estimated that 2010 will be the hallmark year where Moore's Law becomes temporarily inaccurate. We do not yet know the rate of technological advancement a society could expect to see, when fully implementing nanotechnology. [One night draw a correlation to the advancements of the modern era upon preindustrial people of island origin.]
For more information about Quantum Mind Theory read the following books:
The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics (1991)
Author: Roger Penrose
Society Of Mind
Author: Marvin Minsky
Digital People: From Bionic Humans To Androids
Author: Sidney Perkowitz
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
So lately I've been toying around with the idea of different initial conditions and their outcomes. Initial conditions are those conditions that existed just prior to and during the formation of a universe. The laws which will govern physics, chemistry and all motion are written based on these initial conditions. Here's the interesting part: if quantum theory is correct, then initial conditions should vary greatly, in fact infinitely! This should be the mechanism for the manifestation of a never ending set of different universes., each following its own rules and each bound by its (possibly random) set of initial conditions. All possible initial conditions are played out into manifestation, and nothing is without possibility. [These two last items are part of how quantum theory works. "Every possible action event or thing is manifest, and everything is possible."]
That means that different initial conditions would produce different math, logic and science. Consider the almost absurd proposition that there exists a world were [1+1 does not =2,] in fact there is no "1" and there is no "2." It's not that the linguistic representation for the universal concept "1 or 2," would be missing, but that the actual universal concept for those numbers would simply not exist. This seems very counter intuitive but again, quantum theory is very explicit about this, "There is only one rule. There are no rules!" So if that seems preposterous, consider our very own concept of the number zero (0). The following logic may help us to understand what that "zero" may be hinting at. [0 + 0 = 0, 0 - 0 = 0, 0 / 0 = 0, 0 x 0 = 0] Perhaps an oversimplification, but with a touch of madness, we may begin to see the possibility that other math systems could actually exist if the rules for that universe were not the same as our own. Some systems should inherently be highly chaotic and short-lived. Some would never even possess the potential for matter to manifest (at least in a similar way as it does in our own universe.) Other universes could be vastly more organized, with laws that make our own seem rudimentary and primitive. To such complex beings we might be the analogue of Edwin Abbott's flatlanders. (Flatland, 1884) It has been postulated that super-strings or perhaps other even more mysterious objects vibrating in the 10th dimension (see Rob Bryanton's film "Imagining the Tenth Dimension" for further information on this concept) could be the cause of the formation of these initial conditions. Some might say that a pan-dimensional being (similar to the God of Kabbalists, Christians or other religious groups) uttered them into being, as is the theme for Genesis 1:1. The Hindu's believe that Brahma in the form of Spanda Shakti radiates all manifestations within our cosmos, effortlessly by her very nature. Whatever the cause(s) may be, it remains a fascinating idea that these initial conditions can have such a permanent and profound affect upon the universe that they become a part of. The film "Stardust" does an excellent job illustrating just a few of the above points. Its setting is (at least partially) influenced by contemporary quantum physics and the concept of different initial conditions. In this film we see some different laws at play and there is most certainly the concept that this world is contained not within another dimension, realm or faraway planet but within a parallel universe, linked to our own and hidden within plain sight. The works of C.L. Dodgson (Lewis Carroll) "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland " (1865) and "Through the Looking-Glass," (1871) provide us with a view into a world were our laws are curiously twisted or altogether backward. A further look will reveal Carroll's near obsession with strange mathematics and non-linear logic. The short-story "Mimsy were the Borogoves," (1943) by Lewis Padgett (husband and wife sci- fi writing team Henry Kuttner and C.L. Moore,) further expounds Carroll's strange logic into a bizarre sci-fi legend, filled with "X-logic" and odd beings from another world. This was recently made into a children's film "The Last Mimzy."
If we are to dismiss the idea of the existence of such strange places , we might consider the possibility that others may just as easily dismiss the existence of our own world. Remember this is all about possibility, and possibility (quite logically) has no bounds!
Illustration by: John Tenniel, (1863.)
Monday, September 15, 2008
Sunday, September 7, 2008
-This is a great, older video, narrated by the late great Carl Sagan!
- Please feel free to comment on the video or about cosmology (Hindu or otherwise.)
Unfortunatly you have to type or paste the above link directly into your web browser, haven't quite got this blog linking down just yet.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Please read the Blog entitled, "The Measurement Problem" for more details for how this set of theories were formed.
This model assumes that the universe is either infinite or part of an infinite number of other universes (like a sea of bubbles.)
This model accurately accounts for the laws of quantum mechanics and presents a cohesive vision for us to grasp.
I find this model offers so many questions to ponder, (once of course it beins to truly "sink in.")
-"What is the true nature of the individual?" ("Is it a world-line version?" "Is it a selectivly conscious collective?)
-"What can be said about the ultimate nature of the universe we live in?" "Is it infinite? Does it exist with other infinite universes in a some kind of superverse, multiverse or megaverse? Is it all simply a matter of semantics? (I doubt it is.)
-"What is our role as individuals?" "Is it to play our role here in this particular 'world-line' to the best of our ability? "Ultimatly, what matters more, the entire sum of versions of self, or the individual self?"
-"Does this mean that evil and good have just become even more relative?" "Do 'good' acts here balance 'evil' acts elsewhere and elsewhen?" "What is the kharma of a being that is manifest in an infinite number of interconected systems, interacting in an infinite number of ways with other beings and itself?"
-"When does death really occur?" "Is it when all worldline versions of yourself die?" "Do you transfer your consciousness directly to another version of yourself upon death in any one world-line?" "Is death even possible in the MWI?"
-"What would be the net gain, loss from any one action in such a system?"
-One must also realize that "you" are simply one version of "yourself." All the other versions' lives are just as REAL and just as noteworthy.
- One definition of 'Quantum Perspective' : (means to me) viewing oneself as an "other" version of oneself. -We are just one version of an endless stream of versions.
For more reading: