Transreality Ideas

An exploration of the many worlds

Working closely with the Everetts Many Worlds
Interpretation, this paper aims to branch and extend
the ideas of how a discontinuous observable universe
and perception work, via a general overview.
Dylan Walsh
2014

Disclaimer
By no accounts is this a fully fledged thesis piece. This is merely a paper, written for the sole
purpose of explaining concepts and presenting new ideas for the wider audience's
consumption. All pictures, aside from the those directly affiliated with the Steins;Gate anime and
the Inception movie, are my own. Views within this paper may change with respect to time.
Acknowledgements
Through the many years of collating and connecting information about how realities tick, I have
the following sources to thank:

Hugh Everett and Max Planck, the inspirational scientists who changed my perception of
the universe.
Taking the Quantum Leap, a book by Fred Alan Wolf, the manual that provided an indepth scaffolding towards my understanding of the quantum world (and the writing style
for this paper).
The University of Adelaide, for facilitating my learning in physics.
Goshua Tugai and Andrew Hartman, for providing the listening, patient ears for those
lengthy discussions.
The Future Gadget Laboratory of the Steins;Gate anime, for providing valuable
reinforcement and new directions to previously conceived ideas.
Youtubes VSauce and minutephysics, for their quirky but helpful explanations.
Professor Michio Kaku, for providing helpful explanations relating to String Theory (on
youtube).
Wikipedia, for the widespread access of information.

Introduction
The observable universe as we know it is 13.77 billion years old, with a diameter of
approximately 93 billion light years. It obeys many constants and laws, and it knows little, next
to almost no exceptions towards the functionality of such constants and laws. However, we can
say the observable universe knows almost no exceptions, because of the limitations our
vantage point holds, even across a vast region of space that we can presently observe. We
cannot confirm with absolute certainty that everything is as we know it, just as much as we
cannot confirm the absolute non-existence of god. In saying that, we can always continue in our
attempts to adapt newer models towards the universe, with increasing degrees of accuracy.
But consider how the observable universe propagated from a single point during its genesis
(from what we commonly refer to as the Big Bang).This would imply the existence of an edge
to the universes physical size, the boundary of the universe which remains expanded, and
perhaps, still expanding. This then would implicate the existence of a finite amount of stuff
inside our observable universe, which ranges through all forms of matter and energy across the
fabric of space-time. Does this mean that within such a finite existence, there would only be so
many formulas and models we can derive, before we literally ran out things to derive? Would
there come a point where we would know everything there is to know?
The answer lies within humanitys scientific history. Just when we thought we had successfully
explored the entirety of a forest (that of our universe), we only ended up falling down another
rabbit hole to land in a new wonderland, a new reality that would expand on our previous
horizons. Such that this was the case, back in the Newtonian Era.

Rising from Ashes of the Ultraviolet Catastrophe

As the book, Taking the Quantum Leap goes on to talk about, a certain problem arose back in
the early 1900s that would ultimately lead to the birth of quantum physics as we know it today.
Physicists were strongly opted towards the Newtonian framework, as a result of how commonly
known and grounded physics had become within such a framework at the time. They had built a
substantial repository of knowledge, which nearly explained how all known things worked under
the Newtonian workings. But two areas however, would remain to stump physicists; the aspects
of how light and heat were generated. Such stumping was all due to the experimental data (and
common sense) that was obtained from the Black Box experiments, which conflicted with initial
predictions about how this particular black body box was predicted to emit light and heat when
energy was put in, in the form of electromagnetic waves.
Comparatively, if you had a finite amount of normal matter (eg, wood), transforming all of it
would give you a finite amount of energy. But on the other hand with electromagnetic waves,
you could supposedly work with an infinite amount of waves, by shrinking their wavelength to
allow more room for more waves. Having shorter and shorter wavelengths would then mean
you having more and more energy. So hypothetically, you could keep this process of wave
cramming going, to produce an infinite amount of energy, passing through continuous
wavelengths of gamma rays to cosmic rays and beyond (which probably wouldnt leave much of
anything for quite a distance around that little black box), for the black box to reradiate. This in
all practical and intuitive senses just didnt add up.
In reality, the box would reach a sensible point where no matter how many waves you were to
put in, there would only be a specific amount of energy reradiated out, a specific limit to the rate
of energy emissions. Such a limiting factor would later be discovered to be Plancks constant,
named after its discoverer who today is considered to be the father of quantum physics, Max
Planck. What this new constant now proposed, was that instead of energy within
electromagnetic waves being emitted as a continuous wavelength, it was in fact emitted in
discontinuous pieces of energy, called quanta (a quantum being singular). So within the Black
Box experiment, there would only be quantum amounts of energy emitted from the black box
instead of a single, insanely large, energy emitting wavelength. This effectively substitutes a
high energy cosmic ray, for many smaller, lower energy waves.

The conundrum had been solved. However, the solution wouldnt continue to remain with

explaining just one experiment. The significance of this discovery would lead to further
derivations of more constants to do with space and time (the indivisible Planck length and the
Planck time respectively).These were further implications that would continue to nurture a
discontinuous view of our universe, that reality as we knew it, had many limitations, and that it
wasnt a singular continuous space of mystery, but more of a finite vessel. It is these facts,
which spearhead the Everetts Many World Interpretation (EMWI for short).

The Discontinuous Universe and Everetts Many Worlds

In short, the EMWI proposes the existence of an infinite number of separated realities (the
existence of such extra realities is predicted in String Theory). Of these realities we experience
only a set few. This is dependent on the choices made by, for example, a person or by the
tiniest shift of a subatomic particle, each choice dictating a different reality within an infinite set
of all realities (more on how the mechanics behind the decision making process work, in the
Permeable Particles: Mechanisms of the Consciousness section). The word infinity by now
has been thrown around a few times, but let us stop to imagine what this means in the
wondrous context of having multiple realities. There would be an infinite probability associated
with the likelihood for certain realities to exist out of an infinite set. In other words, there would
be a 100% chance for any reality to exist (which includes your favourite movie[s], imaginary
world[s], and imaginary friend[s]), any and all things can exist! It is difficult to comprehend why
at first, but it is part of this papers aim is to explain how this can be possible, starting off with
the EMWI connections with the discontinuous observable universe.
Consider the supposed scenario of a continuous universe, going back to the Newtonian world
once more. In mathematics in all its hypothetical applications, it can agree with operating within
the realms of continuity no problem. If a person were to try and count every single number
between 0 and 1, it would take an infinite amount of time given the continuous range of
numbers, which can range from 0 to 1, such as 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, etc. In other words, an infinite
set of numbers would be comprised within 0 to 1.
But shifting away from the hypothetical side of numbers to the practical world, consider a runner
whos participating in a foot race, who will be covering a finite distance from start to finish. Let
the distance from start to finish be 100m, this is where we start to unfortunately see
mathematics break down in the face of real world practicality.

Applying the continuous notion of numbers to our race distance, our runner would be disgusted
to realise that he/she would have to run through an infinite number of points at every part of the
race track, in order to complete the race. This would mean the runner never reaches the finish
line in a finite space of time, which obviously doesnt conform to real world observations of
races typically having a reasonable end. Such a scenario was first determined by a Greek
philosopher named Zeno, of which, it was called the Dichotomy Paradox (or Zenos Paradox,
which originally took the runner constantly halving the distance to try to reach the finish line).

So how can the racer finish the race in reality? The answer is to do with the space between the
start and the finish line having to be indeed finite in its distance, in that there are only a finite
number of points to cover from start to finish. This is in fact the sum of a finite number of Planck
distances, which make up the overall distance of the race (as suggested by the black box
experiment). Hence this implies that a finite amount of time, through the sum of a finite number
of Planck times, is what transpires to allow the racer to complete the race (hooray)!

So

thanks to the discontinuous scenario, this potentially highlights some interesting properties for
such a discontinuous race hence universe, precluding back to the EMWI. Planck time could be
defined (literally) as the frame rate for the set of realities we perceive, within the infinite set of all
realities of the universe. It is here we have to be careful with the use words like reality and
universe, in the context of frames (realities) of a greater, infinite collection of frames (the
universe), some of which perceivable by an observer (the observable universe). The space
between realities operates at higher dimensions, acting as a medium for realities to more or
less coexist.

By now as we head back to the EMWI again, you probably may have thought up of some
counter notions in relation to the existence of an infinite number of realities, such as the
following:
1. If any reality is possible, surely there is in fact one reality which counters the existence of the
EMWI in the first place?
2. Could there only be an infinite number of realities that comprise of only the physical
constants and laws we know (like looking only between the infinite set of numbers from 0 and 1)
and not the more zany realities?
3. If there really are zany realities in existence, why cant we see them despite the infinite
number of such realities?
The answer to question 1 is that out of the infinite set of realities, there can also be another
reality which counters the existence of the EMWI-countering reality. But then you could argue
there is another counter against my counter, but then I can say theres an even newer counter

to your next previous counter, and so on. It would be a perpetual and seemingly chaotic picture
to imagine with how such realities would interact. It wouldnt be something anyone could pin
down and describe to its truest extent with how far these realities extend (having infinite
quantities [of anything for that matter] is what makes this problematic in itself).
As for the answer to question 2, if there are an infinite number of realities in existence which
follow the same physical constants and laws were familiar with, then theres the allowed
probability of one of those realities (out of infinity), to harbour the ability to diverge gradually into
a zany-type reality. Such a diverging process may arise from what may have happened during
the Big Bang, under the correct conditions (potentially related to Sakharovs Conditions and/or
Chaotic Inflation Theory) for changes to occur for the constants and laws of physics (see also
the section Curious Considerations within Infinity for more).
Origins of the Big Bang
As mentioned before, the observable universe is approximately 13.77 billion years old,
precluding to a discernible beginning of sorts. Very close to this time, there were relatively equal
parts of regular matter, and its opposite counterpart, antimatter. On their own they dont add up
to much, with their differences being that antimatter possesses negatively charged nuclei and
positively charged positron(s), unlike normal matter which possesses positively charged nuclei
and negatively charged electron(s). However place these two different forms of matter together,
and their differences in charge will cause the matter and antimatter to annihilate in equal
quantities, releasing tremendous amounts of energy, 100% of all their stored energy in fact!
Comparing an annihilation of matter and antimatter, with their collective mass equal to the
payload of a nuclear bomb detonated, the nuclear bomb figuratively speaking, would simply be
a water balloon in contrast.
So no doubt, it wouldve been a tumultuous period of time to have the annihilation of matter and
antimatter right after the Big Bang. However the big question is, how did large quantities of
conflicting forms of matter arrive there in the first place? Its considered rare if not alien to have
antimatter in existence today, given the overwhelming amounts of regular matter the observable
universe has been accustomed too for billions of years, with regular matter being the victor from
the matter versus antimatter conflict. Why indeed did regular matter win?

The answer may lie in what happened before the Big Bang, within existent mechanisms which
satisfy the conditions of having existent matter and antimatter present in large quantities initially,
and having regular matter win out. Introducing the EMWI yet again, it couldve been the
convergence of two or more realities of unequal volume that led to the unequal and overall
contribution of matter and antimatter, as a part of the Big Bang. This implies the existence of
initially stable antimatter realities which could exist from an infinite set of all realities.
As an analogy, you could consider the genesis of this observable universe from its respective
parent realities, to be akin to the existence of the various generations of humans. Just like with
considering the sequence of human parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, one could
consider within the EMWI, the existence of parent realities, grandparent realties, greatgrandparent realities, and so on. Tracing down the lines of realities which converged, you would
likely run into a set of realities where things were vastly different from what wed commonly
know. And yet, it would be through the shaping and evolution of these different realities, which
would eventually land us with the genesis of the observable universe we know today. But unlike
the many human generations which have a traceable beginning (and parents left over) for the
start of humanity, in the context of an infinite number of realities, there wouldnt be a discernible

beginning, a means of pinning down a definite event in a finite context. Again, infinity isnt
something that can necessarily be tamed as pointed out from question 1.

So

as

pointed out in question 3, how do we fit into all of this? Where does something like
consciousness potentially sit within such a system?
Permeable Particles: Mechanisms of the Consciousness
The consciousness, the amalgamation of matter which makes up who we are, could be best
described as the collection of information contained, self-sustained, and yet, ever changing
within a vessel of sorts. Such a vessel would of cause be the intricate instrument, known as the
brain, capable of registering and interpreting a finite set of information from our surrounding
environment (ie, visible light, frequencies of sound from 20Hz to 20,000Hz). Whats important to
note with such an instrument, is that its inextricable from a greater system; the universe. So
whats noted by an observer as their real and perceivable reality, is one where a finite set of
information which exists in the infinite universe, reaches this particular observers finite brain
and is interpreted. This interpretation is than what leads the observer to perceive the next reality

in a seemingly recursive
cycle, as newer
information is constantly
being received. As
Leonardo Dicaprios
character Cobb in the
movie Inception mentions,
we create and perceive
our world simultaneously.

But how does this recursive loop work, in

cycling an observer through (for all intents and
purposes) a normal set of realities? As
mentioned in question 3, why dont we typically
perceive zany realities? And for that matter,
how is it that an observer can slip between
realities at all? As the title suggests, it could be all to do with gravitons and their slippery
properties that allow these particles to slip through the fabric of space-time that comprises our
observable universe. The massless gravitons (as also another hypothetical prediction by String
Theory) with their property of being able to mediate space-time to reflect the familiar force of
gravity, by default have the ability to slip through space-time, following a disappearing and
reappearing act of the sort, spontaneously.

Going back to the human consciousness, at a fundamental enough level of how its made up, it
could indeed consist of these gravitons which can slip between realities. In short, this would
imply that the consciousness for a given observer is following a slipping action between
realities. Given that this consciousness is made up of slipping permeable particles, there would
be limitations towards its trajectory, from how these permeable particles can move.

Like the trajectory of a ball, when thrown forwards and upwards into the air, it will follow a
certain parabolic motion and not spontaneously deviate from that path on its own. The ball has
only the energy and momentum to move in such a particular trajectory, subject to the laws of
physics. The same principle could apply towards the way these permeable particles behave
when slipping between realities. Permeable particles would always attempt to occupy a new
position in another reality which requires the least amount of work. Such positions are
determined by how each permeable particle interacts with its environment (ie the brain structure
in a reality), to travel to where its newly located. This is what would give conformity to the
consciousness of an observer, even whilst drifting between realities, in a linearly perceivable
fashion which avoids running into the zany type realities.
What the idea of a consciousness following a certain trajectory may suggest to you as the
reader, are words like fate and/or predeterminism. Are we indeed confined to lead lives
which are predetermined, set in motion by fixed parameters? Or are we allowed to move with
free will? The answer is actually a combination of both.

Cause and Effect of Fate

Imagine you are perceiving yourself alone on the ground floor of a building, with the unfortunate
luck of standing right next to a bomb with 3 seconds left on the clock. Very much, your future is
looking pretty grim over the next few seconds. With zero chance of survival, there really isnt
much you can do about it. But regardless of the situation at hand, you still are presented with

choices, even if it still inevitably results in your demise. You can choose to run away, carry the
bomb and throw it away, call for help, etc. The reason for the seemingly inevitable outcome is
merely due to the parameters which have been set, prior to the 3 seconds before the detonation
of the bomb. And this is exactly whats happening between perceiving realities, in terms of the
parameters towards how the consciousness can shift.
As stated previously, the collection of gravitons which compose the consciousness, are
confined to the brain, and can only move between realities which allows them to occupy the
next most ideal position (i.e. a position where the brain has shifted by only a little bit). This is
one prominent parameter. Then there are the parameters of the environment to consider by
default, with how other gravitons are interacting with the brain and body. As hinted towards in
the bomb scenario, within such interactions, you still will have choices that can be made, so
long as the parameters which have been already set in motion are followed (this can be
characterised as the Attractor Effect). However as per the bomb scenario, you may not
necessarily have a flexible range of choices available. But fortunately, a way of expanding the
number of choices that can be made, is to simply make the choices before the parameters
arrive which narrow down the options. This would effectively put forward new parameters
through which the consciousness can follow.
Going back to the bomb scenario, suppose that you now have 30 seconds to avoid getting
blown up by the bomb. There no longer is the parameter of the bomb having only 3 seconds left
which considerably narrowed down your options for survival. This time now, you heroically
throw the bomb out of a window and make your running escape out of the building in the
opposite direction, surviving the blast to come with the building to shield you. What previously
was an inevitable, fate driven scenario of not being able to survive; the scenario has now
become survivable.

But

going again, if you had 300 seconds, even more time to make more different choices; a larger
impact can be made towards the survivability of the bomb, with you of course having a lot more
time to flee. This larger impact can be characterised as the set of alternate realities leading up
to the bombs detonation, having diverged at an earlier relative time. The earlier the divergence,
the greater the overall change (this can be characterised as the Butterfly Effect).The only
problem associated with attempting invoke such a change, would be to know how far you
wouldve needed to go to successfully make the change through acquiring the necessary time

to make more useful choices. Again, this is parameter dependent, which given the number of
possible parameters that may exist within any given scenario; itd be extremely difficult to
accurately predict how all these parameters may add up, in order to determine the minimum
threshold to enact a discernable change.
{Spoiler Warning beyond this point!!} As illustrated within the anime series called Steins;Gate,
fellow protagonist Okabe Rintarou is eventually burdened with the task of having to constantly
travel back to a relative point in time, to prevent the death of a close friend, Mayuri Shiina.
Unfortunately his attempts constantly are in vain, as Mayuri still inevitably dies, always at a
similar time under varying conditions (being shot, run over by a train, etc), as a result of some of
the changes Okabe had been able to enact (though not to a significant extent to ultimately save
Mayuri). The problem comes from the limitations of how far back Okabe can travel, with travel
only possible within the first 48 hours of the travellers relative past. Had Okabe been allowed
more time by travelling back further, Okabe perhaps wouldve been able to make more useful
choices to ultimately prevent Mayuris death.

So

with the establishment of the mechanics of travel between the infinite number of realities in
place, this by now brings up plenty of curious considerations as to how we, as human beings,
would be able to cope with the many worlds that we could come to love and/or fear, especially if
we did arrive at being able to travel between realities more freely.

Curious Considerations within Infinity

What could it mean for each and every human with their own unique consciousness, each with
their own unique view of a world only they will ever know? For two people and their respective
consciousnesses to constantly be drifting between realities, they would never be able to hold
the same course of travel together, because consciousness is inherently always changing. You
as the reader, are not the same person you were, relative to the 10 seconds ago you perceived.
Between two initial observers A and B, over a given period of time, A would perceive a changed
B from themself A, but from Bs alternate perspective, he/she would perceive a changed A

from themself B. We would be all truly alone within our little worlds, with our own perceptions
of other peoples perceptions. In saying that, each of us would be the arbiter of our own unique
world. You could say that the universe does revolve around us as individuals.
If we were the pass away, which would
be the state in which our brain is no
longer able to sustain the collection of
permeable particles that compose the
consciousness, our perceivable reality
would vanish from our view. Though of
course, the very same reality in
question would still continue to exist
physically speaking. So too would the
scattered permeable particles, which
after passing through a countless
number of realities, could possibly
gather and form into the beginnings of
a new consciousness altogether; a
form of quantum immortality. If it were
ever possible to trace the origins of certain permeable particles which are drifting through your
mind as the reader at this very moment, maybe some of those particles couldve come and
went from the minds of scientific geniuses like Kurisu Makise.

Taking the considerations of perception between realities even further, what if some observers
from time to time, do perceive the zany type realities, if only for a moment? The most common
example of such scenarios may simply come from when we dream. As stated two chapters
back, the instrument known as the brain, is inextricable from the finite amounts of information it
can receive from the infinite set of information available in the universe. Such information
received in conjunction with the brain, hence forms the basis of a perceivable reality for an
observer. So in terms of the perceivable dream (which by the defined criteria for perception, is
therefore real), this would require tuning the brain to receive information that would be
indicative of a zany type reality; a dream (eg, dreams where youre flying, defying the laws of
known physics). Such tuning would appear to occur during the process of sleeping, where the
brain is in a more unconscious state (sleeping) to allow for the permeable particles of the
consciousness to assume the ideal configurations, needed to move to a zany type reality.
Naturally, this appears to only work to a certain extent before we usually wake up; when the
brain eventually reverts back to its normal, more conscious state. Such a process could also be
related to the way people hallucinate and/or cope with hallucinogenic drugs.

But now consider what could be deemed as the most thrilling and yet the most terrifying venture
feasible for the conscious mind. What if a consciousness didnt return back to its original
conscious state? What if the dream an observer was initially enveloped in, became the newer,
more conscious state for the brain to function in? Quite possibly, this could have already
happened to many individuals without the rest of us knowing. For such individuals with their
own unique perception of zany-type realities being real and comprehendible, to the outside
observer, we would only see our own unique perception off that individual, in the context of nonzany-type realities. As neatly quoted by Okabe from Steins;Gate, "When you get right down to
it, their authenticity is a question of perspective and semantics. Having never truly taken place
on this world line (ie in the present observable universe), a dream is an appropriate term as
any."

Yet again, all this highlights the extreme extents to how we are all truly alone in the worlds we
perceive alone. Insanity can truly be a matter of perspective. Morally speaking, if there was a
person who possessed a consciousness that was far freer to move between realities then the
average human, it would seem rather sad and selfish, in that you could leave behind your
immediate world with your immediate relations and ties to it. For all intents and purposes, the
diseased Mayuris that Okabe leaves behind for whenever he tries to head to another reality to
save another version of Mayuri, they are all well and truly dead for the people still alive to
witness, left within those realities to have to live with. In general, our finitely defined morals and
ethics would not be able to stand up in the context of an infinite number of realities. An infinite
number of human lives would be lost every moment, even as you the reader are reading this
text. But conversely you could easily say that an infinite number of human lives are born for
every moment that passes by. It is truly an inexplicable existence to try to finitely define.

Conclusion
So for the all the work thats been put into this paper, the work still continues onwards to further
unravel the mysteries that lay beyond our observable universe. Work still continues around the
clock for theoretical and experimental physicists alike, as they attempt to formulate a grand
unified theory of everything. Will we ever reach it? Perhaps not in the context of the infinite, but
science more importantly is always about drawing new theories that better our best
understandings of our surroundings. Even if everything isnt solved, such a prospect is actually
even better. Simply put, it means that theres more awesome stuff out there for humanity to
discover. I, as the writer of this paper, hope that the ideas and concepts Ive compiled over the
many years (since early high school) have inspired you as the reader, towards the prospect of
such exciting adventures that maybe (just maybe) are to come. As a certain Okabe Rintarou (or
Hououin Kyouma) would say, El Psy Congroo.
Thank you for reading!
Written by Dylan Walsh
of The University of Adelaide
Email: dilwalshy@gmail.com
Created: 12/03/2014