Retrocausality and the effects on a timeline

[AgiTitor]

From Wikipedia, that describes it so much better than I can;

 

Retrocausality (also called retro-causation, retro-chronal causation, backward causation, and similar terms) is any of several hypothetical phenomena or processes that reverse causality, allowing an effect to occur before its cause.

Now that this is out of the way, where does the community at large stand on the topic? Personally I'm gravitating towards it as a solid theory because there seems to be serious research going into it. There's a growing movement behind something known as the Mandela Effect, and retrocausality seems to be the best way to explain that. I would expect most of us here are aware of the Mandela Effect in some way, either by its namesake or the more culturally relevent and popular Berenstain Bears phenomenon.

I have to describe my personal theory about reality, before I can explain my thoughts on RC, but I'm not very good at explaining things, so bear with me. I believe there is one singular reality, but that it functions like a clock. I.E., it keeps ticking forwards and eventually will loop back on itself, but that it can be manipulated. The manipulations I can best explain using a metaphor - you can push the hands back, but the clock will keep ticking forwards anyways, once it can pick back up.

 

To me, retrocausality is a fascinating theory because it would be the means to push the hands back, change the perception of time. Since time is a linear, singular entity, the distortion will occur, but it will eventually right itself enough to keep going, nature balancing itself, what-have-you. The Mandela Effect comes in to play there, by having people who experience different timelines co-existing in one, because of a hiccup in time causing both to be temporarily true.

 

this is all my interpretation, nothing solid. I have no background in anything that might substantiate my theory, which is why I came here to ask others their opinions on it.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

I always remember the books being called the Berenstein Bears, never remember it being called Berenstain Bears.

 

I have read a couple of comments in this forum about an anime cartoon called Stein Gate. I wonder if the two are connected? Beren"stein" & Stein....lol.

 

 

[Gpa]

It's part of the processes collectively called cognition (or your brain's internal spell checker)

 

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.*

 

Stain and Stein are common surnames or part of the surname. That even 50% of people might remember the name one way and the other 50% the other way is no big deal, except to those that wish to make it so. It is simply a mistake; a misinterpretation, as is the whole Mandela Effect phenomenon. When people don't understand the reason for something, they tend to "make up" reasons they feel fit the situation.

 

*This text appeared on the internet in 2003 and is multi-sourced but, interestingly, denied by Cambridge University.

 

"This text circulated on the internet in September 2003. I first became aware of it when a journalist contacted a my colleague Sian Miller on 16th September, trying to track down the original source. It's been passed on many times, and in the way of most internet memes has mutated along the way. It struck me as interesting - especially when I received a version that mentioned Cambridge University! I work at Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, in Cambridge, UK, a Medical Research Council unit that includes a large group investigating how the brain processes language. If there's a new piece of research on reading that's been conducted in Cambridge, I thought I should have heard of it before..."

 

http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/personal/matt.davis/Cmabrigde/

 

More info if you want.

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20070307073659/http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~pjm21/papers/LCP.pdf

 

 

[AgiTitor]

Large Snip

That might explain one instance, but it doesn't explain the myriad of others, such as the aforementioned Nelson Mandela instance. Nelson Mandela died fairly recently, but this is clashing with a lot of people who seem to share a collective memory that Nelson Mandela died in prison, which had large effects on the Apartheid policy of the time. Even in America, this was a big deal and a lot of people sincerely believe that the died in the 80's.

Or the apparent split involved with Eddie Murphy no less - apparently, his death was just a hoax. Still, people remember seeing TV interviews about movies he was scheduled to be in being cancelled, even seeing news articles about his funeral.

 

I can understand the brain making one false connection, but these are happening on a wide scale and most people remember different events in astonishing and vivid detail that matches other individuals testimonies, even when the people involved have never had contact.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

Stain and Stein are common surnames or part of the surname. That even 50% of people might remember the name one way and the other 50% the other way is no big deal, except to those that wish to make it so. It is simply a mistake; a misinterpretation, as is the whole Mandela Effect phenomenon. When people don't understand the reason for something, they tend to "make up" reasons they feel fit the situation.

I hear what you're saying, but I personally do not even consider the Berenstein/Berenstain debate as being part of the "Mandela Effect" phenomenon.

 

 

[Gpa]

Many consider it a "changed" history. It's similar in that context. The Mandela Effect, its self, is simply misperception, misinterpretation, misinformation, and failure to follow up on a news story or rumor. It is not, proof of an alternate history, or a change made in the past by... ?? ... some unknown entity? It IS evidence of the fallibility of memory. This has been demonstrated, time after time, when comparing witness testimony to the same event at the same time, even two people standing right next to one another might not agree.

 

 

[seivtcho]

Has some one succeeded in making a retro-causality?

 

 

[Darby]

From Wikipedia, that describes it so much better than I can;Now that this is out of the way, where does the community at large stand on the topic?

If you're going to quote from a Wiki page marked as having multiple issues you could at least give a full quote. I'll do it for you:

 

Retrocausality (also called retro-causation, retro-chronal causation, backward causation, and similar terms) is any of several hypothetical phenomena or processes that reverse causality, allowing an effect to occur before its cause.

Retrocausality is primarily a thought experiment in philosophy of science based on elements of physics, addressing whether the future can affect the present and whether the present can affect the past.[1] Philosophical considerations of time travel often address the same issues as retrocausality, as do treatments of the subject in fiction, although the two terms are not universally synonymous.[2]

 

While some discussion of retrocausality is confined to fringe science or pseudoscience, a few physical theories with mainstream legitimacy have sometimes been interpreted as leading to retrocausality. This has been problematic in physics because the distinction between cause and effect is not made at the most fundamental level within the field of physics.

[seivtcho]

"hypothetical phenomena"

 

pitty

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

Many consider it a "changed" history. It's similar in that context. The Mandela Effect, its self, is simply misperception, misinterpretation, misinformation, and failure to follow up on a news story or rumor. It is not, proof of an alternate history, or a change made in the past by... ?? ... some unknown entity? It IS evidence of the fallibility of memory.

Can I ask, do you believe in alternate realities?

 

 

[Gpa]

Can I ask' date=' do you believe in alternate realities?[/quote']By definition, no. Alternate means to switch back and forth. Reality is what it is, it does not switch daily.

Different realities, absolutely. Everyone's interpretation is their own. I can not see through your eyes, therefore I can not see things exactly as you see them.There is a unanimity of a common prevalent reality on which things like the Laws of Physics and Nature are based. Individuals though, can see as many different realities as there are opinions, they are similar.

[Mylo.X.]

By definition, no. Alternate means to switch back and forth. Reality is what it is, it does not switch daily..

Yes, while alternate can mean to switch back and forth, it can also be another term for alternative or could mean replacement/substitute etc.

From your previous posts, I know of your faith. In the bible, God presented the prophet Amos with an alternative reality, a reality depicting the consequences that would affect Israel if they did not change their ways. Amos purportedly witnessed another reality. There are people today who purportedly witnessed another reality; a reality whereupon Nelson Mandela died in the 1980's. These folks have clear memories of the televised funeral, they have memories of Winnie Mandela's insincere tribute; they have clear memories of the oddly shaped headed body guard of Winnie Mandela etc. If God did present an alternative reality, and Amos did experience it, then is it beyond the realms of possibility that others have experienced an alternative reality?

 

Anyway, time for bed. Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

 

[Gpa]

A vision or prophecy is not an alternate reality in the sense it is usually presented. It is a future reality that may come to be, unless something in the present reality is changed or, regardless of change, it is coming. It is not a past, remembered differently.

 

I hope you slept well. :zzz:

 

 

[petesede]

The effects of false information or lies having an effect on the world is not related to time travel, if so, Shakespeare´s last scene of Romeo and Juliette would be in the fantasy and sci-fi section.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

A vision or prophecy is not an alternate reality in the sense it is usually presented. It is a future reality that may come to be, unless something in the present reality is changed or, regardless of change, it is coming. It is not a past, remembered differently.I hope you slept well. :zzz:

Yep, had a good night's sleep thanks. The kids are now at school, and my wife is at work and I have a bit of time to myself.

"It is not a past, remembered differently."

 

But who says the Mandela effect is a past, remembered differently? That seems to be the common assumption or concensus of opinion.

 

What I'm suggesting is this: What IF the people who experienced Mandela's death in the 80's had in fact experienced a similar experience to the prophet Amos? What if they somehow were presented with a future reality that may have come to be? Food for thought, don't you think?

 

 

[AgiTitor]

What I'm suggesting is this: What IF the people who experienced Mandela's death in the 80's had in fact experienced a similar experience to the prophet Amos? What if they somehow were presented with a future reality that may have come to be? Food for thought, don't you think?

It's possible, I imagine, but I imagine that many people having such an experience would be a bit unlikely but considering the subject I probably shouldn't throw stones. It does have a certain appeal to it, many people seeing the future of a world without Nelson Mandela. Kind of a Dickensian move, and would probably make one fine novel.

I don't know if it's people simultaneously living in multiple timelines, and that it's whichever one is dominant at any given second that's we're in. I could have crossed back and forth ten times in the few seconds it took me to write this sentence but that any differences are so distant or minute that I'll never notice. It's when people do notice that interests me, because now we live in a world with instant and permanent communication, and we'll report how bad our after-curry cramps are acting up on Twitter.

 

And for the record, I'm not backing the Berenstain VS Berenstein Bears as a theory, I just wanted to use it as an example because it's one the most easily understandable issues people report, and that people decide almost instantaneously whether or not they remember it one way or another. The Nelson Mandela incident isn't so obvious, but it's a much, much better example of the concept I was trying to discuss. I don't word gud sometimes.

 

 

[Gpa]

But who says the Mandela effect is a past,

In this case, because there is no reference to it until "after" his actual death in 2013.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

In this case, because there is no reference to it until "after" his actual death in 2013.

I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean. People have mentioned having "memories" of Mandela's death on Robben Island since early 2002 (that is the earliest reference I have come across).

My contention is that these alleged "memories" are not of an "alternate" past history. It is also my contention that a select few had not somehow transversed (temporarily) into a parallel earth. I'm suggesting that they could have experienced something similar to what the Prophets from the old days experienced, i.e. a glimpse into a "what-if" reality. I hope this make sense.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

It's possible, I imagine, but I imagine that many people having such an experience would be a bit unlikely but considering the subject I probably shouldn't throw stones. It does have a certain appeal to it, many people seeing the future of a world without Nelson Mandela. Kind of a Dickensian move, and would probably make one fine novel.I don't know if it's people simultaneously living in multiple timelines, and that it's whichever one is dominant at any given second that's we're in. I could have crossed back and forth ten times in the few seconds it took me to write this sentence but that any differences are so distant or minute that I'll never notice. It's when people do notice that interests me, because now we live in a world with instant and permanent communication, and we'll report how bad our after-curry cramps are acting up on Twitter.

And for the record, I'm not backing the Berenstain VS Berenstein Bears as a theory, I just wanted to use it as an example because it's one the most easily understandable issues people report, and that people decide almost instantaneously whether or not they remember it one way or another. The Nelson Mandela incident isn't so obvious, but it's a much, much better example of the concept I was trying to discuss. I don't word gud sometimes.

Yes, I do find the whole "Mandela Effect" quite fascinating. The sensible side of me is telling me that I should apply occams razor, but the curious side of me wonders if the phenomenon can be explained by unfounded, speculative theories such as mass hypnosis, a mass vision, parallel realities etc etc.

 

 

[Gpa]

I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean. People have mentioned having "memories" of Mandela's death on Robben Island since early 2002 (that is the earliest reference I have come across).

Can you direct me to that reference?

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

Can you direct me to that reference?

No, unfortunately I can't. I remember reading about it online in 2002, as that was the year I got married. I was talking to a friend about it, and he was joking with me saying that I was now a married man & should be spending time with my wife instead of talking non-sense with him, lol. I can't remember what site I read it on but have seen mention of it in recent years on forums such as GLP.

Here is reference to someone mentioning about an alternate memory of Mandela's death, that was posted in 2008, so is pre-2013 (which is the date you mentioned)

 

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread369370/pg1&mem=

 

 

[Darby]

No, unfortunately I can't. I remember reading about it online in 2002, as that was the year I got married. I was talking to a friend about it, and he was joking with me saying that I was now a married man & should be spending time with my wife instead of talking non-sense with him, lol. I can't remember what site I read it on but have seen mention of it in recent years on forums such as GLP.Here is reference to someone mentioning about an alternate memory of Mandela's death, that was posted in 2008, so is pre-2013 (which is the date you mentioned)

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread369370/pg1&mem=

Mylo,

Here's the problem with this sort of evidence. Dr. Mandela and his wife were constantly under death threats by a multitude of factions for alleged bonehead plays by both of them. This went on for decades. He was a major political player in an emerging country suffering civil war. He was most definitely not the only potential leader that the revolutionaries wanted to see in power, He had significant enemies within the revolutionary parties. Billions of people knew who he was and hundreds of millions were on the Internet. Should it surprise you to find dozens if not hundreds of such posts? Even if .001% posted similar thoughts you would have dozens of them. We're here on a funky forum and people post weirdness on a daily basis. That they post it doesn't make it true or even fodder for consideration.

 

You don't have to apply Occam's razor. Apply the scientific method. People post what some consider to be visions of the future. What's the null hypothesis (H_0)? The posts are normal random thoughts unrelated to predicting future events. Now look at the posts. Is there sufficient evidence in them to logically reject the null hypothesis? (The crux here is a proper experimental design.) If the evidence does not rise to a predetermined significance level you don't reject the hull hypothesis. Likewise you don't state that the posts are false simply because you don't reject H_0. To do that you posit an alternative hypothesis (H_1) and check the evidence against the alternative.

 

In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition. It remains in the realm of background noise.

 

 

[pinterest]

I was asked to answer this question as they're having trouble with the issue.

 

Retrocausality can happen one of two ways. One is by a large meteorite landing in a remote zone, such as The New Jersey Triangle. This area to where there is a paved road that goes through the area, occasionally makes traffic disappear never to be found. To date one very large bakery truck is unaccounted for and this reporting is in FATE Magazine archives under,(New Jersey Triangle).I believe the article which is a few years old will mention the bakery truck gobbled by this natural occurrence. *Magnetic rays sometimes come out of the central points over meteorites, due to Earth seismic below the meteor moments.

 

The second precedent of retrocausality can be made from a linear accelerator or a large nuclear accident, to where there is a considerable give-off in the electromagnetic range. Now what this action does is in similar fashion to someone taking a 33 1/3 vinyl record, putting it in an oven and then with heat protective gloves, when that record is taken out, waves are placed in the record disk, then this is your time platter model for the action of retrocausality.

 

If you look at the record on end, or from the side as a line a segment, you will see up and down waves. Now know close enough to reality, there are part of the record, to where the wave is close enough to where it was before it had been deformed in the oven. These areas if this record could be named time, be clear and placed over an area, would be recorded by the people in that near normal edge of the record, is regular time.

 

However' people in the areas to where the waves would peak, would automatically be shifted to another section of reality. Events might or might not seem to pass as they have been doing, however certain characters or known people in the altered zones of our time record, may or may not be there, or may have their fates changed.

 

This action reflects on how the news is reported from those altered sections surrounding your key generating phenomenon point.

 

What is thought, is that during the said Montauk experiments at the decommissioned Montauk Air Force base, as reported by a few authors that had worked there, is that a ray of altered time effects had branched out, so altering both time occurrence happenings, along with a projected sine or wave height of areas surrounding the central generating point.

 

Now as per your searches on retrocausality, you can see what if Mr. such and such was said to have died on a certain date and this was reported to the news, but in another section the passing of Mr. Such and Such did not occur and he may even still re-conflicting reports of that person being alive, or dead.

 

The last use of retrocausality has a death penalty added to it and this is the use of the distorting of time periods to politically affect the choices or opinions of people in a certain area. This is also known as time engineering. One of my instructors here once told me, that on some worlds or stars systems if they catch you doing this, that this is an automatic death penalty. You’re summarily executed on the spot. I know in the telling of large Drack time police, if they catch you doing time engineering, they may stun you, but if you persist, they may kill you.

 

Time engineering is used by the beings from Sirius Star System supposedly for this section of space. But this is performed from a group decision to be allowed to do so. Sirians are very nice. Look up (county sheriff is given tour of Sirian spaceship blocking road).That sheriff was told then, years back that the Sirians would try and help us.

 

Before I end here, I was to ask, was this disclosure clear enough to understand? Is my English okay in your understanding of how I am speaking to you all? Also' are the technical points all clear enough that most everyone does not have an undue degree of difficulty understanding what I am trying to explain to you in concepts? If not, then please let me know. Thank you so much, Pinter

 

 

[AgiTitor]

The second precedent of retrocausality can be made from a linear accelerator or a large nuclear accident, to where there is a considerable give-off in the electromagnetic range. Now what this action does is in similar fashion to someone taking a 33 1/3 vinyl record, putting it in an oven and then with heat protective gloves, when that record is taken out, waves are placed in the record disk, then this is your time platter model for the action of retrocausality.

If you look at the record on end, or from the side as a line a segment, you will see up and down waves. Now know close enough to reality, there are part of the record, to where the wave is close enough to where it was before it had been deformed in the oven. These areas if this record could be named time, be clear and placed over an area, would be recorded by the people in that near normal edge of the record, is regular time.

 

However' people in the areas to where the waves would peak, would automatically be shifted to another section of reality. Events might or might not seem to pass as they have been doing, however certain characters or known people in the altered zones of our time record, may or may not be there, or may have their fates changed.

I found this to be an easy to digest way of explaining it, thank you. The record being heated or shaped fits pretty well with my understanding of space and time, and I can definitely see how small cracks and bubbles in it would cause time to react in unpredictable ways, which was my original point in posting the topic.

It seems a bit less crazy to me now.

 

 

[Mylo.X.]

Mylo,Here's the problem with this sort of evidence. Dr. Mandela and his wife were constantly under death threats by a multitude of factions for alleged bonehead plays by both of them. This went on for decades. He was a major political player in an emerging country suffering civil war. He was most definitely not the only potential leader that the revolutionaries wanted to see in power, He had significant enemies within the revolutionary parties. Billions of people knew who he was and hundreds of millions were on the Internet. Should it surprise you to find dozens if not hundreds of such posts? Even if .001% posted similar thoughts you would have dozens of them. We're here on a funky forum and people post weirdness on a daily basis. That they post it doesn't make it true or even fodder for consideration.

You don't have to apply Occam's razor. Apply the scientific method. People post what some consider to be visions of the future. What's the null hypothesis (H_0)? The posts are normal random thoughts unrelated to predicting future events. Now look at the posts. Is there sufficient evidence in them to logically reject the null hypothesis? (The crux here is a proper experimental design.) If the evidence does not rise to a predetermined significance level you don't reject the hull hypothesis. Likewise you don't state that the posts are false simply because you don't reject H_0. To do that you posit an alternative hypothesis (H_1) and check the evidence against the alternative.

 

In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition. It remains in the realm of background noise.

Darby, very interesting response.

"Dr. Mandela."

 

Never heard him being referred to as Dr. Mandela before. I was aware that he had received a honorary doctorate, but you are the first to call him Dr Mandela (but I'm now straying off topic).

 

"In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition."

 

Yes, I agree. What you say makes logical sense. But I believe that there are some occurences in life that cannot be easily explained by science/scientific evaluation etc.

 

For example, a girl makes a post on a forum, stating that she has just heard an announcement on the radio that Prince William & Princess Kate have a baby daughter, and have named her Charlotte Elizabeth Diana. Others in the forum, inform the girl that she is wrong, and that Princess Kate has not yet had the baby. The girl is adamant she heard the news on the radio. 1 week later, the media announces the news that Princess Kate has had a baby girl and a few days later, announce that the new Princesses name is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana. How does science explain the accuracy of the unintentional prediction made in a forum?