In their recently published work, Kristan Jensen of the University of Victoria, Canada, Andreas
Karch of the University of Washington, Seattle and, Julian Sonner of MIT,
Cambridge have been offering theoretical models regarding the nature of quantum
entanglement of quarks “separated” by considerable distances. Describing the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR)
pair dynamic in which the measurement of one particle simultaneously imparts an
effect on the other in the pair, they applied two different mathematical models
to ‘measure’ entanglement. Using
different approaches, Jensen & Karch’s model of quarks accelerating through
oppositional distance and Sonner’s model of the Schwinger effect of quark/antiquark
creation, both suggest that wormholes (in which space, time and other
dimensions are extremely contorted) may be capable of facilitating transfer
dynamics between black holes. The
theoretical framework suggesting that black holes (massive matter and energy dynamos)
and quarks (infinitesimally minute subatomic particles) traffic in
wormhole-laced interactions is a delightful reprise of millennia’s past wisdom
stating that things are more connected than they seem.
Now
before you get concerned that you are reading the wrong blog here, rest easy. There’s a wormhole between this preamble and
the economics to which you’ve become accustomed. And I’m being a bit more literal here than you
might first expect. The Einstein-Rosen
(ER) Bridge that theoretically links two (or more) points in space for
simultaneity of existence is thought to be devoid of information transfer potential. In other words, while parallel universe
expressions are certain, progressive or simultaneous sentience is theoretically
implausible.
This
week, WikiLeaks released information from Stratfor, a strategic advisory
consultancy serving government, energy, and industrial clients. Their threat anticipation advice regarding environmental
groups’ opposition to fracking and other North American fossil fuel ventures
failed to anticipate their own ‘black swan’ event of being hacked and having
their advice made public. Apparently,
they also failed to anticipate being stiffed $14,890 for work that they had
done for Suncor. They correctly
estimated that energy firms should pay limited attention to most environmental
activist efforts because many of these groups have “too little political
influence” to rise to the level of concern.
They bet on the quantum entanglement between fuel ventures and
politicians (near infinite mass and energy condensing in infinitely dense
space) and won. But they seemed to
overlook that what’s good for the black hole is also good for the quark.
It
was amusing to see that the purported clients sponsoring the presentations that were
leaked deny having seen them. The hubris
(the idea that information cannot be deciphered through wormholes) of giving
misleading or false responses when ‘caught’ or ‘found out’ is a malignancy that
seems to be metastasizing throughout the political and corporate
ecosystem. Sociopathic self-preservation
at all costs seems to be the default mode rather than the nostalgic Watergate
extravagance it once was. Extractive
industries lie about environments and profits, Apple lies about innovation,
Government Sponsored Enterprises lie about fiduciary liquidity, and We the
People are simply supposed to accept this fare of deceit as the status quo.
But
here’s the problem that strikes me as the evident conclusion from the work of
Jensen, Karch, and Sonner; what if events are connected? What if a $4 trillion Federal Reserve balance
sheet actually has to be monetized? What
if tens of millions of permanently discouraged workers get tired of being told
that unemployment is stabilizing or improving because they’re no longer being
counted in any statistic? What if the
apparent ineffectiveness of intervention is actually building an amazing amount
of energy in a system we’re not perceiving nor measuring?
These
are theoretical and rhetorical questions on one level but they’re quite
tangible on another. In 2008-2009, the
public was awestruck with the notional value of credit default swaps (CDS)
which exceeded the world’s GDP by a considerable margin. Now, if you go back to 2006, you’ll see that
the public was in love with CDS – they just didn’t know it by its name. Back then it was called mortgage refinancing
and it was all the rage. I heard
numerous friends and colleagues celebrating massive ‘interest only’ loans,
super jumbos, and other irrationally labeled products. They were building black holes in one
dimension without discerning the worm holes connecting excesses of the
mid-2000s to 2008. When was the
crisis? Spoiler alert – it’s not when
you are paying for the consequences of bad behavior; rather, it’s during the mindless
preamble during which care and attention is neglected.
In
the dimension in which Stratfor operated – a dimension in which their own
self-importance is a reflection of the arrogance and confidence of their
clients – their assessment was correctly focused on the risk of getting caught
by someone who could have sufficient influence to alter behavior they and their
clients knew had damaging consequences.
Like last week’s post reflecting on the Union Carbide environmental
liabilities, it was not about whether behavior should or should not be
engaged. Their focus was on getting
caught and the associated risk to self-interest.
But
we’re not better for WikiLeaks. We didn’t
find out anything that we didn’t already know.
And now that we know that a few oil companies didn’t give any mind to a
few environmental groups, is there anything about our behavior that we’ll
change? Is there any action that will be
altered? The same protestors will
protest. The same condescending business
executives will hold humanity in disdain while cashing the funds flowing out of
the self-righteous wallets of fuel-addicted protestors. And neither will be paying attention to the
point in space across the wormhole – that space where consequence and consciousness
actually cohabitate.
The
Stratfor-gate (doesn’t have the same ring to it, does it?) is another example
of irrelevant vigilante fuel on both sides of the fracking battleground. The likelihood that any part of North Dakota
or Canada will be undrilled because of this week’s revelations is measured in
single digits, … to the right of the decimal point. The likelihood that consumers will pay more
for their fuel addiction is certain.
Like the patent litigation, agriculture subsidies, and trade wars that
tack immoral tariffs on our various addictions, we mysteriously pay more for behavior
that we appreciate less and less. We are
entangled particles in an entangled ecosystem.
The more you defend yourself in ‘not knowing’ or ‘not caring’, the more
you’re fueling the problem – and giving Stratfor more reason to hold you and
your world in contempt.
.
FROM CATHERINE ANSBORO:
ReplyDelete1) “What if the apparent ineffectiveness of intervention is actually building an amazing amount of energy in a system we’re not perceiving nor measuring?”
Thank you for helping me understand the tremendous constructive potential of this kind of energy build-up during our recent visit to M-CAM. Now I understand that with the right understanding and preparation, a build-up of “negative energy” can be flipped and used to generate tremendous constructive movement—without the effort or struggle that we often assume is necessary. Rather, the energy itself can do the work for us, once the understanding is in place to enable the various elements to be appropriately aligned.
2) “. . . that space where consequence and consciousness actually cohabitate”
What an elegant, effective, profound and inspiring expression. Someone should make a piece of artwork, or compose a piece of music, or post a blog comment (that's me!) to develop this further.
When I first read this phrase when you posted it in December it reminded me immediately of the thoughts you expressed passionately in your talk at the 2013 Breakthrough Energy Movement conference in Boulder. You were explaining to a roomful of innovators that one’s mindset cannot be separated from the results of actions undertaken from that mindset. (You were referring specifically to the connection between innovators’ perceived lack of funding being given as an explanation for lack of progress, and their lack of success in obtaining the desired resources.)
I am glad your 2013 BEM talk is now online. It’s on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfrl0DnWtII (2013 Global BEM Day 2 Tent 1 Livestream). Your talk starts at 4:05:22.
3) It seems that the shift in one’s mindset to “that space where consequence and consciousness actually cohabitate” may be the crucial ingredient that allows the eventual “flipping” of a buildup of static energy towards a constructive purpose.
Alchemy, indeed.
I am grateful for the work you are doing.