Suddenly the landscape seemed somehow abnormal, lifeless and unreal. Two men in “long gray-green coats with small triangular hats” suddenly appeared and sent the women to the Petit Trianon. They walked past a remote house where a woman and a twelve or thirteen year old girl stood in the doorway, both wearing white headscarves under their bodies. Jourdain would later write that “both seemed to pause for a moment, like in a movie.”
The woman, strangely dressed for that time in a summer dress with a long bodice and a very full but short skirt, held a large sheet of paper or cardboard in her hand and appeared to be working on a drawing. She had a light green fichu, or headscarf, draped around her shoulders, and a large white hat covered her blond hair. As Moberly and Jourdain walked along, a young man, again strangely dressed, ran up to them and urgently offered them directions to the Petit Trianon, which they eventually found and entered, finding themselves in the middle of a wedding party in which the participants were dressed . the clothes of 1901, their time.
On subsequent trips to the Petit Trianon gardens, the women were dismayed to discover that a path they had walked on their first visit was now blocked by an old stone wall and had apparently been that way for some time. Others no longer existed at all. Overall, the layout and dimensions of the grounds and buildings were completely and yet inexplicably different. For example, the kiosk where the deformed man sat was no longer there.
String theorists
And cyberneticists
to be happy. Probably the most compelling element of this particular report is that people from the scene/period approached and specifically addressed the two women, demonstrating that they were not just invisible bystanders, but very real and observable. So the women were essentially transported back in time; they not only witnessed a scene as outside observers, they were there in the ‘past’.
In a 1957 article on how the focus of our consciousness creates our reality, Hugh Everett
described “simple moments in time when it becomes possible to jump from one reality to another by creating a quantum bridge between two pre-existing possibilities.” It makes you wonder if he had planned to include abilities like this time-warping ability. Everett called these opportunities “choice points.” He was apparently very aware of the pluralistic nature of ‘reality’.
are known even to government-employed remote viewers. As we have seen and will see, in quantum physics the past, present and future are not clearly distinguishable from each other and research is being conducted into the effects that the future has on the present (you read that correctly). In short, past, present and future – they all exist – now. In the words of the physicist and exponent of string theory Brian Greene:
“If you were having a good time at the stroke of midnight on New Year’s Eve 1999, you still are.”
From the perspective of the many worlds, there is nothing special about this event. The occultist might suggest that the women had actually stepped into an Akashic record of the past. Were these two 20th century women actually there in the 18th century? From the perspective of the many worlds interpretation, they were in at least one version (and still are), and perhaps somewhere in that “parallel reality” there exists an account in the tattered old diary of a long-dead soul of the two ‘strangely dressed’ women who seemed out of place that day in the garden of the Petit Trianon, while everyone walked around hurriedly and tensely. There is no ‘separate time period’, simply a larger hyperdimensional reality that:
“…always envelops itself. If we could step into a hyperframe and see all the moments in history frozen in time, we could choose another frame to step into and experience.”
Novikov applied the “principle of least action” to time travel, and in what Strieber calls a “brilliant achievement of mathematics”, he showed that the only movements through time that obey this principle must be those in which the grandfather paradox may not apply: ‘time travel will never create a situation where either of these paradoxes could occur.” If we could access a particle stream moving faster than light, we could theoretically travel in time. As Einstein’s theory of relativity showed, the faster something moves, the slower subjective time passes, and if it were to exceed the threshold of light speed, it would travel backward in time (time would “reverse”). Author Whitley Strieber wondered in 1997 whether the mind could somehow make time travel possible. Strieber has had his own Versailles-like experiences, so he already knew the answer. It’s yes. Government-backed research has validated this idea, as we will see.
Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek
says: “We are haunted by the realization that infinitely many slightly different copies of ourselves are living their parallel lives and that every moment more duplicates arise and occupy our many alternate futures.” Max Tegmark
from MIT has made an almost identical statement.
Kaku, in his description of reality, mentioned something called decoherence, a theory that states that while all these infinite parallel universes are possibilities, the wave function of our universe is decoherent from them: it no longer vibrates in harmony/in phase with them. So there is no more interaction with them. The result is that while we can co-exist with the wave function of inhabitants of other universes, we are no longer ‘in harmony’ with them.
Nobel laureate Steve Weinberg
also used the analogy of the radio station in the living room to describe our situation. This is a very appropriate analogy for the reality we find ourselves in. The decoherence interpretation of quantum mechanics leads to multiple universes/many worlds and avoids the postulation of wave function collapse. For now, we’ll note that these parallel worlds postulated by the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, or “decoherent universes,” on rare occasions actually spill over into this world, so to speak.