APPENDIX II: THE QUANTUM & RELATIVITY
Every material object appears to us - and presumably to all sentient creatures - to have three space dimensions. It would seem then that we, the sentient observers, must be outside those 3 dimensions and must therefore be 4-dimensional. But we have the firm impression that ordinary 3-dimensional objects do endure with us in our time, a 4th dimension. But are we right? Perhaps they are in a Toody-Threedy relationship to us. Perhaps atoms or molecules are 'really' Toodies whose third dimension is time. But to us higher dimensional observers, their 3rd dimension is not time, it's another space dimension. So to us they appear solid, with the 3 space dimensions of all material objects.
This would mean that on its own a material object comprises 2-dimensional energy travelling in its Time, its 3rd dimension. And it is only when it is observed by a higher dimension sentient observer that it materialises as a 3-dimensional solid, liquid or gas.
The great physicist Erwin Schrodinger derived a formula, the so-called 'wave function', by which one can work out the various probabilities as to the state of a particle at a given moment of time. Observation, or measurement, then converts one of those probabilities into a certainty, while the other probabilities are rendered void. But Schrodinger showed that the quantum probabilities derived from his equations are not the same as 'real' probabilities. To obtain a 'real' probability, you have to square a quantum probability. For example, if a 'wave function' calculates the probability of a quantum particle, such as a photon, being at a certain point as 40% i.e. .4, then the 'real' probability will be .4x.4 = .16 i.e. 16%.
This could be relevant to our proposition that a photon has fewer dimensions than, say, an atom. To see what I am driving at, imagine that you knew that a photon was somewhere on a 1-dimension line 10 cm long. Then if all probabilities were equal, there would be a 10% chance that the photon was on any one of the 10 cm. Suppose now that the line has a dimension added to it, changing it into a 10 cm square surface. There are now one hundred cm squares and the probability that our photon is in any one of them is now clearly only 1%.
I suggest that this is evidence in favour of the proposition that quantum weirdness may well arise from the fact that we are dealing with entities which have less dimensions than we have.
In the Fifth Proposition of my Hypothesis, the Proposition of Composition, I propose that Materiality comprises Energy Vibrations plus Aether. I am also proposing that it is Aether that introduces the time dimension into space-time.
We will now explore how far the proposition that the non-material is an essential ingredient of the material universe, squares with Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
What I am suggesting is that when energy acquires 3rd Level Aether and the extra time dimension that goes with it, it is transformed into matter. Conversely, if Aether is withdrawn from a particle of matter, then that particle is transformed into energy, into photons which are 2-dimensional.
If you lifted up a bucket of water and you had the opportunity to empty it onto a handy water-wheel, this would then rotate, expending energy by doing work. Where did that energy come from? Clearly, it came from the effort you put into lifting the bucket against the force of gravity. Yet, however closely you were to examine the water in the bucket, it would look exactly the same after you had lifted it up as before you had done so. Where did that energy go to, after you had lifted the bucket? The answer is that it was stored as potential energy: energy, that is to say, which is quite undetectable unless or until it gets the chance to make its presence felt and appear in some other form such as heat or (as in the case of the water-wheel) as motion.
This non-material hidden energy arises from position in a force field: the gravitational force field in the case of the bucket of water.
We are proposing that it is Aether that introduces the time dimension into space, that converts space into space-time. To see how this might occur, let's consider one little individual spark of the most primitive one dimensional Aether, which we shall call 'Aether-One'. Since it has no space dimensions, its entry will have to be at a point, since only a point has location in space but no extension in it.
Its arrival has now endowed the point with an additional dimension, a time dimension, which we can show as a little hump in space-time
This little hump not only has a time dimension, it is also travelling in time. So the effect of Aether's arrival in space has been to create a tiny little bit of moving space-time in an ocean of timeless and unmoving space.
We might guess that this little bit of moving space-time would be different from the surrounding space: it would be a local distortion of space.
Now imagine that a group of these Aether-Ones are joined by an Aether-Two. This adds the Time-2 dimension to the group and converts its lower order Aether-Ones into a tiny one-dimensioned loop. I suggest that this 2-dimension packet is what we call the photon, the energy packet. Its arrival would cause further local distortion of space.
And what was the central tenet of Einstein's Theory? It was that gravitational force arises from a distortion or 'warp' in space.
We have seen that position in a force field gives rise to potential energy. But energy, so far as we know, cannot be created. But it can be transformed, as in our example of the bucket and the water-wheel. So it seems that the arrival of Aether-Two gives rise to a photon of energy and a unit of potential energy, a unit of gravitation. Since the total energy content is unchanged, the positive energy of the photon is exactly balanced by the negative potential energy of gravitation.
The logical next step would be the arrival of Aether-3 to harness a group of photons into a particle of matter, giving rise to a stronger distortion of space and a stronger gravitational force.
So what I am suggesting is that matter is simply energy moving in Time-Three.
Since this proposition is quite contrary to our normal assumptions, I shall have to explore its implications thoroughly to justify it. But perhaps the most important thing we have to bear in mind is that all the observations our scientists make are perforce from the human level of Aether.
The Meaning of the Speed Of Light
Suppose that a packet of energy, a photon, is emitted by a particle of matter. Remember, we are postulating a photon as being a 2-dimensional entity.
Before the emission, the photon is part of the particle of matter and the particle, like all matter, is 3-dimensional and free to travel in each of its dimensions, including its time dimension (time-3). You see, once we have concluded that time is a dimension, we have to conclude that matter can travel along it, just as it travels along the space dimensions. And if matter can travel along time, it must travel at a certain speed - a speed which cannot be infinitely fast, for then it would be changing infinitely rapidly, nor can the speed be zero, for then nothing could change at all. No, it must travel along time at some intermediate speed, so that events will appear to succeed one another in an orderly manner - after all, if they did not, there could be no such thing as cause and effect. Later, I shall be discussing the question of the direction of movement.
Returning to our particle of matter, then, not only does it have a velocity in space, it has one in time as well. So its combined velocity in 3-dimensional space-time has two components, a space component and a time component.
Let's now see what the event of emission would look like to the two participants, the emitted photon and the emitting particle of matter, and to any higher Aether.
So far as the photon is concerned, it has stopped moving in time-3, but it can still move in one space dimension and its lower order time dimension (time-2), while its parent particle, which has continued to move in time-3, has disappeared along the 3rd dimension.
So far as the emitting 3-dimensional particle is concerned, the emitted photon has simply disappeared.
But the bystanders, the higher dimensional observers of this parting of the energy packet from its parent particle, will have quite a different tale to tell. They too noted its disappearance, but they will insist that they observed the photon reappear as it reacted with another 3-dimensional particle. Consulting their stop-watches, they will pronounce that the speed it appeared to have been travelling at was always 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometres) per second.
The unique importance of 'c', the speed of light, then, must be that it is the 'equivalence coefficient' linking the space and time dimensions. Thus, when our emitted photon and its emitting particle of matter seem to have moved one second apart and when a higher dimension observer says that they have moved 186,000 miles apart, both statements are saying the same thing: 186,000 miles in the space dimensions must be equivalent to one second in the time dimension.
(This conclusion, incidentally, is very much in harmony with Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, where mathematically it is customary to convert the time dimension of an event into a 4th space dimension by multiplying it by 'c'.)
Energy is conserved. So the emitted photon cannot disappear. But its velocity in time-3 is zero, so if it is not to disappear into the past of time-3, it must remain in the present somewhere. So it must be velocity 'c', which enables it to stay in the present of time-3. Since observation can only occur 'here and now', we can readily deduce that after a photon has been emitted from matter, when it has lost its time-3 dimension and is racing off into space to preserve its 'elsewhere and now' existence, it will only be able to reappear in detectable form after it has met with and reacted with some other particle of matter. This is of course a scientific commonplace: radio waves, for example, which are photons, are undetected until they have reacted with the matter of your radio receiver.
We have just seen that my hypothesis has now brought us to the conclusion that 'c' is the real unchanging velocity of each and every object in space-time, the combination of its velocity in space and its velocity in time. Speed up the one component and you will slow down the other.
So, one of the things I must now predict is that as a material body or particle approaches the speed of light in space, its speed through time will slow down: and this is what Einstein showed to be the case.
The energy of a moving body can be calculated by multiplying its mass by the square of its speed (velocity). So, since this velocity in space - time is always 'c', the real intrinsic energy of a body, the energy into which it could be converted, must remain the same, regardless of its velocity in space. That is, its energy (E) is proportional to its mass (M) and the square of its velocity in space-time (c2). This formula E=Mc2 is Einstein's famous equation for the equivalence of mass and energy.
The Zero Time Condition and the Speed Of Light Barrier
I now turn to two more of Einstein's conclusions. First, he showed that if the speed of any material object in space approaches the speed of light, its time will slow down, to the point that if it could reach the speed of light, time for it would stop altogether.
But a 3-dimensional material object whose progress along Time-3 has stopped would be an object which has lost its time dimension and therefore, I suggest, become 2-dimensional. And an object which is 2-dimensional is no longer material: it is nothing but energy - and that energy must travel at the speed of light!
So I can claim that in this respect my hypothesis is entirely in harmony with Relativity. Relativity asserts that no material entity can travel through space at the speed of light, because this would mean that its passage through time would have slowed to zero. In fact, Einstein's Theory holds that this is an impossible condition. There is no such thing as an infinite force which could accelerate a body to the speed of light and thus force its time to stop. But the Uncertainty Principle blurs the edges of any quantity, including force and time. This means that if a force gets near to infinity, then quantum fluctuations could allow it to jump to infinity and back. Einstein has nothing to say about such a situation, but our hypothesis is clear on what would happen. If a particle's time were slowed down to zero, then it would lose its Aether and its time-3 dimension and it would be transformed into energy.
Another of Einstein's conclusions was that putting an object into a gravitational field was the same as applying an accelerating force to it. So if a material object were to be placed in an infinitely powerful gravitational field, the equivalent accelerating force on it would be infinitely great and its condition would be exactly the same as that of an object travelling at the speed of light: that is, its time would stop. And for my hypothesis, this is the point at which third dimension Aether departs and matter becomes energy.
Since matter can go up as well as down, backwards as well as forwards, right as well as left, can it similarly go backwards as well as forwards in time?
Before I discuss this question, I must point out that my hypothesis postulates several 'Time's. There is Time-1, the time of a string Aether. There is Time-2, the time of a photon Aether, there is Time-3 the time of a material entity's Aether and there is Time-4 the time of a living entity's Aether. Let me hasten to say that there is nothing mysterious about these 'Times': Times -1, -2 and -3 are simply what we see as the three space dimensions, while Time-4 is our 'ordinary Time'. This is because I am proposing that to a higher dimension observer, the time of a lower dimension observer appears as a space dimension. Thus to a photon observer, a string is a line in space. To a material observer, a photon is a plane surface in space. To a sentient observer, a material object is a 3-dimensional gas, liquid or solid.
First, let's consider a sentient observer, say a human Aether. To such an observer the key difference between the future and the past is that the future has not yet been observed and is therefore unknown. The past, however, has been observed at the instant we call 'the present' and is known. To travel backwards in time would be to convert the past into the future, to convert the known into the unknown. To somehow "de-observe", to "de-know". It is the inherent Aether, or knower, that makes this impossible.
And, you know, it is only because we think of space as being 3-dimensional that we talk of 'up' and 'down', of 'forwards' and 'backwards'. If we include a sentient observer, we can forget about 3 dimensions and just think of space as one of the two dimensions of space-time. This is because an observer can travel in space in only one direction and that direction is always from 'here' to 'elsewhere'. An observer can never travel from 'elsewhere' to 'here', because the moment he/she/it gets to 'elsewhere' it has become 'here' and its former 'here' has now become elsewhere. In space-time, a sentient observer (Aether) is always 'here' and 'now' travelling in one direction at one speed, from 'here-and-now' to 'there-and-then', to elsewhere in the future, at combined speed 'c'. No, the presence of the observer rules out travelling 'backwards' in space, just as it rules out travelling backwards in time.
This seems clear enough for sentient observers like ourselves. But the fact is that modern science has discovered that photons and the most elementary particles of matter can and do travel backwards as well as forwards in time. Indeed one of the great unsolved mysteries of modern physics is why at the microscopic level time is reversible while at the macroscopic level it is irreversible.
I suggest that the answer to this conundrum lies in a difference in the number of dimensions. Take an Aether-2, for example. Its time dimension is Time-2 and, applying the same reasoning as for an Aether-4, so far as it is concerned, its motion through time is always from 'now' to 'then' in its future. But to an Aether-3, Aether-2's motion is a spatial one which can just as well be backwards as forwards. This is because the time dimension of a lower dimension individual is a space dimension to a higher dimension observer.
[Incidentally, time reversibility implies that as many particles are travelling backwards in time as are travelling forwards, so the net effect at the macroscopic level, where the collective behaviour of trillions of particles is involved, would be that a material object is stationery in our time, which is what I have suggested might be the case.]
Janus the Photon
You may remember we were discussing photons, which are energy particles. When they are emitted by an atom of matter, they appear to behave almost exactly as if they were themselves particles of matter: for all the world like bullets travelling at the speed of light in a straight line until they hit some other bit of matter with which they can react by knocking off a piece of it, by becoming incorporated into it, or by bouncing off it.
But these same photons also behave for all the world as if they were trains of electromagnetic waves, showing all the characteristics of waves, such as diffraction, refraction, spreading and interference.
The battle as to whether a photon was really a particle or really a wave-train was fought for a hundred years with never a clear victory to either side. Scientists have now come to terms and say that a photon is a 'wavicle', whose nature, looked at from one aspect is wave-like and, looked at from another, is particle-like: both being different aspects of the same reality.
Let us now see what light our hypothesis can shed on the wave/particle contradiction.
It proposes that photons are 2-dimensional entities. Thus, when a photon is emittted by an atom, it is parted from the atom's level-3 Aether and ceases to have 3-dimensional material existence.
It is thus a packet of 2-dimensional energy which speeds away from the atom which has emitted it - a photon which will remain non-material until it can become actualised in the 3rd dimension by becoming part of another bit of matter.
And now we come to the paradox: this photon, which speeds away like a particle, also demonstrates its wave nature by spreading out in all directions, located on the surface of a sphere which is expanding at the speed of light and is centred on the photon's point of origin, on the atom which originally emitted it. But speed is measured as distance in space travelled per unit of time. So how can we say that a photon speeds away at 'c', at 186,000 miles per second, when, since it is stationery in time-3, hours, minutes or seconds do not exist for it? The answer is that it is its Now that travels in space at 'c'. This indeed was one of Einstein's greatest discoveries.
To explain what I am driving at, consider the case of Supernova 1987A, the star which exploded in 1987. We say that it exploded in 1987, because that was when our astronomers saw it do so. But the star is 170,000 light years away from us. (A light year is the distance travelled by light in one year i.e. 186,000 x 60 x 60 x 24 x 365 = nearly 6 thousand billion miles). So what our astronomers were seeing 'now' was an event which happened 170,000 years ago. Put another way, the 'now' of star 1987A became our 'now' 170,000 years later. Similarly, an observer about, say, 1980 light years away from earth with a sufficiently powerful telescope could be saying 'I can see Jesus walking in Jerusalem, right now!' his 'now' corresponding to our 'now' of AD 24.
This, then, is what is happening to our photon after it is emitted. Since it is stopped in time-3, its 'now' in time-3 is frozen at the moment of its emission. This means that if it is ever to reappear in time-3, it will only be able to do so at a point where its 'now' is preserved. For example, suppose that it has been emitted from a particle 186,000 miles away from your eye. Then you will see it, (i.e. it will reach the retina of your eye and react with it) exactly one second later. We think of it as having travelled that distance, but this is not really true. It is simply that its possibility of reappearing in the third dimension has travelled that distance.
Now let us go back to our examination of the life-styles of our friends Messers Threedy and Toody: we found that what appeared to Threedy to be a space dimension appeared to Toody to be the time dimension. In other words, Toody will appear to Threedy to behave exactly like a photon!
In general then, if a 3-dimensional object in space-time is deprived of its time dimension, becoming a 2-dimensional object in space time, it will appear to a 3-dimensional observer to be a "something" travelling at the speed of light.
But this is just what we should observe when a photon is emitted by matter: a "something" which acts like a particle travelling at the speed of light. But I know that particles cannot travel at the speed of light, so I must deny that this "something" is a particle.
And in this denial I should be both right and wrong: I should be right that it cannot be an ordinary 3-dimensional particle of matter, but I should be wrong in believing that it cannot exist at all. For what I am proposing is that the photon is two faced: from its own 2-d point of view it's a 1-dimensional string, with one space dimension and one time, or quasi time, dimension.
But from a higher 3-d point of view it's a 2-dimensional particle which has no time dimension and therefore appears non-material.
But this is not the whole story. It is all very well to say that a photon is a 2-d entity obliged to travel at the speed of light, but speed is a measure of distance travelled per unit of time (feet per second, for example, or miles per hour). But for a photon, which is an unactualised ghost, time-3 does not exist, its time is time-2. So its speed of movement in 3-dimensional space must be 'x' miles per zero seconds. But to travel any distance in zero time is to travel infinitely fast and in effect to be omnipresent, to be everywhere at once. Yet whenever we put an instrument in a photon's path to detect it, we always find that it has apparently been travelling at the speed of light.
How can we square this contradiction?
You see, to a higher dimension observer, a photon is unreal and potential. What is omnipresent on its locus is not a real particle but the possibility that the photon can be actualised.
Perhaps the most famous example of this spookiness is the 'Two Slit' experiment.
If you direct a light source to shine on a screen with two slits in it, with a second screen behind it, photons will stream through both slits in the first screen and create an image of dark and light bands on the second screen. This is quite understandable, as photons passing through one slit interfere with photons going through the other. It simply demonstrates the wave character of photons.
Now say you reduce the number of photons to one: that single photon will still create interference bands on the second screen, indicating that it has apparently passed through both slits at once. If the photon in transit was 'real'(i.e. 3-d material), this would be a baffling impossibility. But, as I've explained, the photon in transit is not real. It is a probability and since the path through each slit is equally probable, it goes through both. Now say you were to try to catch it doing this double route act, by concealing a detector at each slit. Bad luck! It will now behave quite normally, only going through one slit and appearing on the screen as a single dot. By detecting it, you have converted what was a 50-50 probability into a certainty.
Again, if the energy emission consisted of two photons, then both would be simultaneous probabilities everywhere on the same expanding spherical surface and effectively a single unity. This would mean that we could not affect one of the two probabilities without instantaneously affecting the other. This also is a prediction of the Quantum Theory and a fairly recent experiment has now demonstrated its truth. Photons connected like this are said to be 'entangled'.
'Entanglement' has caused a major stir in scientific circles, because it has been taken to mean that if one photon is sending a message to the other at a speed which is faster than the speed of light, then this disproves the Theory of Relativity.
But, as we have just seen, our hypothesis predicts this phenomenon. It predicts that while the locus of a photon moves away from its point of emission at the speed of light, just as the Theory of Relativity insists, the fact that the photon, having no Observer-3 Aether, does not move in time-3 means that its speed within that moving locus must be infinite.
The paradoxes we are describing led the great physicist Niels Bohr to a rather similar conclusion and one, incidentally, with which the majority of modern physicists would agree. Bohr proposed that a photon remained 'unreal' until it was observed - or rather that all possible states of the photon were equally 'real' until observation wiped out all but the one observed. Since the electron and larger particles comprise waves like the photon, and since all matter is made up of such particles, Bohr was led to the conclusion that anything which is not observed remains 'unreal' and, in effect, does not exist. But observation requires an observer to do the observing, and a human observer at that. So Bohr deduced that the universe only exists when it is observed by man. Einstein could not accept this. He insisted that the universe had a real existence which was independant of any human observer.
You can see how the hypothesis of the immanence of Spirit, of Aether, in all matter reconciles Einstein with Bohr, reconciles Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. For it proposes that the photon is made 'real' not by a human observer but by the intrinsic observer or Aether of the atom with which it reacts. The proposition that a higher order Aether has an extra dimension explains the two aspects of the photon. A photon which is observed is a photon which has reacted with an electron, with an atom. The observation is thus of the photon's immediate past, when it looks like a particle. It cannot be observed in its undetermined present, when it comprises a packet of probability waves.
My hypothesis agrees with Bohr that material existence demands an observer and it agrees with Einstein that material existence has enduring reality apart from a human observer. It proposes that this is because everything that has material existence comprises Aether (i.e. observer) plus energy vibrations.
This dual aspect of an individual entity will always be true when it is more 'elementary' (i.e. when it has an Aether with a shorter Now) than the Aether observing it.
The hypothesis of the existence of Aether as an integral part of the material universe also accommodates another central tenet of Relativity: that no material particle or object could ever reach the speed of light.
The hypothesis also implies that if an object was to become motionless in space, it would lose its space dimensions and cease to exist. I must therefore propose that in the 'real' material world, absolute immobility, absolute stillness, is an unreal abstraction. Absolute immobility is not just a practical impossibility, it is a theoretical one as well.
This may sound a strange idea, contrary to everyday observation and common-sense. 'Look at that table', you might say, 'I'm observing it, I'm motionless and so is the table'.
Ah, but you're wrong - doubly wrong, in fact. Firstly, there's the motion of you and the table as a whole. You are on planet Earth. Planet Earth is spinning on its axis (anything near the equator is travelling at about 1000 miles per hour). Planet Earth is moving round the Sun at about 65,000 miles per hour. Our galaxy with its billion stars (including our Sun) is wheeling round etc etc. Secondly there's the intrinsic motion of the table (and of you!). The table and you are made up of molecules which are vibrating and spinning. The molecules are made up of atoms, which consist of swarms of protons and neutrons, surrounded by whirling electrons, all in violent motion. Nothing is stationery. Nothing is motionless. Put another way, we could say that there is only one thing that is motionless and that is Nothing!
The Electron is of course one of the main building blocks of matter. Moreover, since electrons surround all matter, they dictate its outward appearance and chemical behaviour. Electrons have a definite, albeit tiny, mass and cannot therefore travel as fast as the speed of light. They can be bound to atoms and form an integral part of them, or they can be free. They share so many of the characteristics of a photon that it seems probable that, when free, they too have only two dimensions. This double aspect of electrons is why they form the connecting link between 2-d photons and 3-d material atoms.
One millionth part of an electron's energy is in the form we call electric charge. It is of course the movement of vast numbers of free electrons carrying these electric charges which constitute an electric current.
Electric charge can be converted into photons, and vice versa. It was the discovery and exploitation of this fact that led to the invention of radio and later television: a transmitter converts charge into photons and your radio and TV sets convert them back again.
So far as an electron is concerned, electric charge and photons, though both pure energy, play very different roles. Whereas a fixed amount of charge is integral to each and every electron, this is not true of photons. If a photon is absorbed by one of the bound electrons surrounding an atom, for example, this does not alter the electron's structure. It simply accommodates the additional energy by jumping further away from the atom's nucleus to a higher energy orbit. That is to say, it increases its potential energy within the atom's force-field. If the electron jumps back down to a lower energy orbit, it will shed energy by emitting a photon. Note that these jumps appear to be instantaneous: the electron disappears from one orbit and reappears in another. Now a bound electron's locus is its circular path round the atom's nucleus, to which it is held by a force generated by constant swapping of photons with the atom's nucleus. This is the familiar electromagnetic force.
If an electron is 2-dimensional, as I am suggesting, then it would be a Janus-like wavicle propagating waves along its locus, its circular orbit round the nucleus. Having no time-3 dimension, it would traverse its locus at infinite speed, so that it would be simultaneously everywhere at once in its orbit. This would represent standing waves and their orbit would have to be of such a length as to accommodate an exact number of wavelengths, which would otherwise interfere with one another! Experiments have shown that this is indeed why a bound electron is confined to those orbits whose length accommodates an exact number of its waves.
While the exchange of photons between an electron and a proton generates an attractive force between them, the electron's negative charge is repelled by the negative charges on other electrons. Thus a prime function of the electron's charge is to maintain the individuality of its own electron. Imagine what would happen if there were such a thing as a positively charged electron. If it met with a normal negatively charged electron, the two would not be repelled from one another, but attracted to each other. They would fuse into one. Then what would happen? My hypothesis suggests that such a union would be impossible. Why? Because it would violate the Law of Individuality, which I am proposing. Two individuals cannot become one. To avoid such violation, the 2nd-level Aethers of the two fusing particles would have to dissociate, leaving behind energy. In fact, the positive electron, the positron, was discovered in 1932. And guess what! When a positron meets an electron, the two appear to annihilate one another, since both disappear, converted into energy, into photons!
So far, I have considered how my hypothesis copes with the strange quantum behaviour of photons and electrons, which it deduces to be 2-dimensional entities. However, modern experiments have shown that larger particles, which are 3-dimensional, such as the atom, can also show this quantum behaviour.
But this is not surprising if you remember my little diagram, showing how the short Now of L, a lower-order particle, would appear to H, a higher-order observer with a longer Now. H could not observe L's immediate future, since this is still an undetermined probability. But L's immediate past, also included within H's Now, will be determined and appear as a material particle.
Note that this proposition holds true whether the higher-order observer has an equal or greater number of dimensions.
It follows from this proposition that the higher the level of Aether of L, the individual being observed - and the longer its Now - the less likely it is to display quantum effects. This is a prediction which seems to be confirmed by observation.
I hope this brief survey has indicated that some of the mysterious aspects of relativity and quantum theories can be illumined by our theory of the existence of hierarchical levels of spirit as essential ingredients of materiality.