Tempt Destiny findings have recently been applied to the field of elementary particle physics:
Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System
You can easily conduct the TD experiment for yourself with a coin and a cup to verify the findings for yourself. Let's say that you drop a coin ‘directly’ into a cup; the outcome is certain, for there is only one potential selected - coin-in-cup. Conversely, you drop a coin ‘indirectly’ into the cup by dropping the coin onto the rim of the cup; the outcome is uncertain, for there are more than one potential outcomes selected- coin-in-cup/coin-not-in-cup. By obtaining certain effects from a direct selection and by obtaining uncertain effects from an indirect selection, everything has been accounted for, including the non-causal possibilities of having no pairing events take place if the coin landed and remained on the cup's edge or if the cup was removed from being directly selected; therefore, we have addressed all causal and non-causal possibilities. But, what if the coin bounced out of the cup? Then we would be talking about second cause; the coin-in-cup (effect of first cause) bouncing directly or indirectly (cause) out of the cup (effect), i.e., effectual causality (effects causing effects).
Cartesian Coordinates: In order to understand the mechanics involved with this machine we call choice, I used analytical geometry, i.e., the Cartesian product, to map the variables of selection via the X axes, whereas X denotes a direct selection, and -X denotes an indirect selection. I used the Y axes for the existence of potentials, whereas Y denotes the existence of potential, and -Y denotes the absence of potential.
Figure 1. Direct Selection of one Potential
Figure 2. Indirect Selection of more-than-one Potential
HOW NATURE FOOLED US
You now observe two cups, each with a coin in them - one effect for each mutually exclusive selection event. Can you tell which coin-in-cup effect was generated by a direct or indirect selection?
Without knowledge of which mutually exclusive selection caused the two coin-in-cup effects, it is impossible to have empirical knowledge/evidence. As demonstrated, if you know what type of selection occurred, you will know in advance if the state of that selection is certain or uncertain, for the two acts of selection predetermine both effectual states of existence. This means that all knowledge based on effectual causality (effects causing effects) is suspect and, thus, will need to be reevaluated.
SUMMARY - As you can see, the results are absolute. Either a selection exists when it does or it does not exist at all. This evidence challenges the law of conservation of energy for selection and energy are one and the same. When we take for granted the simple fundamental physical acts of choice as something we do in order to observe or measure the physical world around us, we perceive reality as effects causing effects, i.e., effectual causality. In other words, we understand the physical world only "after" the physical act of selection, not by the selection process that first occurs. Effectual causality confines our understanding of the microscopic world to non-deterministic behavior and confines our understanding of the macroscopic world to deterministic behavior because; mathematically speaking, effectual causality is commutative.
As is evident by the graphs above, nature is mathematically speaking, non-commutative and symmetrical. When we understand the proper order of physical events and the variables involved, the paradox science has been struggling with of the existence of two contrasting physical behaviors is resolved. Nature consists of two distinct dichotomies. Together, they form one perfect symmetrical quadchotomy of physical acts which predetermines the second quadchotomy of physical behavior states of certainty and probability ... a phenomenon we call reality.
By understanding that we are physical systems governed by the laws of this system, it can be understood that we cannot act in violation of our own physical existence. What has been revealed by the Tempt Destiny experiment is that nature restricts us to only two types of physical acts of selection, not by accident, but as a matter of necessity.
On April 30, 2011, at the American Physical Society (APS) convention, I presented my research findings of the Tempt Destiny experiment embodied in my manuscript entitled: "Physics of Predetermined Events". During the presentation, I invited members of the audience to repeat/confirm the findings via the "coin-in-cup" experiment as illustrated above.
Astrophysics Data System
The quest for the next Tempt Destiny™ billboard is provided as a means for fans
to support their team and is not affiliated with the National Football League or NFL teams.
All Rights reserved. Designed and hosted by Morales Studio LLC Copyright © 2013