The destiny theory is that all events or series of events are predetermined. Therefore, the act of choice or the notion of free will or luck is nothing more than a mirage. For if all events are predetermined, then all events that have taken place or will take place, have been, and are "assumed" to be ... certain. This certainty assumption permeates the general understanding of predetermined events as exemplified by comments from John S. Bell, the originator of Bell's theorem, a significant theorem in quantum physics regarding Einstein's hidden variable theory:

John S. Bell, BBC Radio interview with Paul Davies, 1985

There is a way to escape the inference of superluminal speeds and
spooky action at a distance. But it involves absolute determinism in
the universe, the complete absence of free will. Suppose the world
is super-deterministic, with not just inanimate nature running on
behind-the-scenes clockwork, but with our behavior, including our
belief that we are free to choose to do one experiment rather than
another, absolutely predetermined, including the "decision" by the
experimenter to carry out one set of measurements rather than
another, the difficulty disappears. There is no need for a faster than
light signal to tell particle A what measurement has been carried
out on particle B, because the universe, including particle A, already
"knows" what that measurement, and its outcome, will be.

The only alternative to quantum probabilities, superpositions of
states, collapse of the wave function, and spooky action at a
distance, is that everything is superdetermined. For me it is a
dilemma. I think it is a deep dilemma, and the resolution of it will
not be trivial; it will require a substantial change in the way we
look at things.

This assumption of predetermined events being exclusively certain has been debunked by the results of the Tempt Destiny experiment (see home page for more details). After mapping the results of the Tempt Destiny experiment, the empirical evidence infers that destiny consists of two selection dichotomies which in turn predetermines the dichotomies of physical existence as either certain or uncertain.

Coin-in-Cup Experiment:
With a coin in hand, position your hand approximately a half inch over the center of a cup and ask the question - is it certain or probable that when you let go of the coin, will it go into the cup? The answer is self evident. The outcome of choosing to drop a coin "directly" into the cup is a certainty (+, +). But what if at the last microsecond the cup is blown away ... then you have no selection at all (+, -), i.e., non-existence, because selection cannot take place without the potential of having something to select.

With a coin in hand, position your hand approximately a half inch over the rim of the cup and ask the question - is it certain or probable that when you let go of the coin, will it go into the cup? Here again, the answer is self evident. The outcome of choosing to drop a coin "indirectly" into the cup is a probability (-, +). But what if the coin lands on the edge of the cup ... then you have no selection at all (-, -), i.e., non-existence, because selection cannot take place without the potential of having something to select.

SUMMARY - 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 focus on effects and how these effects cause other effects, otherwise known as hysteron proteron. An example of effectual methodology is what is practice at CERN by ignoring the selection process that takes place from the collisions between protons smashing into each other. Instead, the CERN program focuses on the physical effects that occur after these collisions. In other words, we understand the physical world only "after" the physical act of selection, not by the selection process that first occurs. Effectual methodology 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 methodology 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 govern 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.

Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System

Home I Legacy I Program I Science I Stats I Store I Contacts

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 © 2012