Morales Studio web site TEAM USA Olympic Baseball prints

NY Giants SB XXI
NY Giants SB XXV


The Science

International Journal of Fundamental Physical Sciences

Tempt Destiny findings have recently been applied to the field of elementary particle physics:

Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right



Tempt Destiny Initial Findings Presentation


Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System

Tempt Destiny Experiment Timeline:

Evidence of Origin Variables Means Energy is Not Conserved: The unambiguous empirical evidence shows that there are two origin variables in nature which determine if the effectual states of existence are deterministic/certain or non-deterministic/uncertain which means that both states are determined in order to exist as such. The findings show that absolute determinism is not about effectual states being certain or uncertain. It is about how the origin of existence is predetermined. This, among other things, is what the research from the 12 year Tempt Destiny experiment has shown. The manuscript of the initial findings was published online on January 14, 2011, at the General Science Journal:

Physics of Predetermined Events Complementarity States of Choice-Chance Mechanics

Then the findings were presented at an American Physical Society (APS) meeting on April 30, 2011. During the presentation, I invited members of the audience to repeat/confirm the findings via the "coin-in-cup" experiment:

Session E13: Energy Research and Applications

Then later, the manuscript was included into the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System:

PHYSICS OF PREDETERMINED EVENTS: Complementarity States of Choice-Chance Mechanics

The following year, I applied these findings to particle physics where it was discovered that the scientific method used in particle physics is based on a fundamental omission error. The peer-reviewed article was published in the International Journal of Fundamental Physical Sciences (IJFPS) on 12-24-12:

Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right

Then later, the manuscript was included into the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System:

Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right

In the following paper, I applied the First Cause model of Choice/Chance Mechanics to the Standard Model and found that both models reflect each other to some degree. By accounting for gravitational forces as the effects of the origin variables of selection (which physics does not), I was able to show how gravity gives rise to spin by placing cause before their effects. I submitted the article in the 2013 FQXi essay competition which consisted of 182 entries. I found it an honor to have my work be compared with those from the international science community, some of which are in the top of their fields. My article was ranked 3rd by the peer group and 1st with the public:

Spin States of Selection: Predetermined Variables of ‘bit’ (community/public rating)
Spin States of Selection: Predetermined Variables of ‘bit’ (manuscript)

Since then, I have written a layman's summary of the evidence for public review:

IN SEARCH OF FIRST CAUSE - How art, football fans, and the big game led to First Cause and the Theory of Everything

What I have found curious in this process is how difficult it was to perceive reality as causal, instead of effectual, in order to understand what Nature has been telling us all along. Fundamentally, it is our hysteron proteron (cart before the horse) perception of causality as being effectual which has prevented us from seeing the forest for the trees. The findings show that absolute determinism is not about effects being casual. It is about cause and effect as the coin-in-cup experiment demonstrates.

Coin-in-Cup Experiment:

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

direct selection


Figure 2. Indirect Selection of more-than-one Potential

indirect selection



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.

Energy equals gravity squared

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 acts of selection 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 origin variables involved, the paradox science has been struggling with of the existence of two contrasting physical behaviors is resolved. Nature consists of two distinct origin dichotomies of selection which in turn give rise to two effectual dichotomies. All four dichotomies combine to form a symmetrical system of cause and effect, nonexistence and existence, space and time... a phenomenon we call reality.

By understanding that we are physical systems governed by the laws of this system, it is logical to understand that we cannot act in violation of these laws. Indeed, without these predetermined laws we could not even exist much less practice science. What has been revealed by the Tempt Destiny experiment is that nature restricts us to only two types of selection, not by accident or free will, but as a matter of necessity.

Home I Legacy I Program I Science I Stats I Store I Contact

New Orleans Saints
Pittsburg Steelers
Missing Billboard image