Relating to Reality, and Why Relationships go Wrong

“There is no observer effect. We measure different aspects of an ‘event’ with our limited means. There are no potentialities. All ‘events’ are fixed states – it is our ability to estimate measurements that cause aspects of an event to be recorded in physical reality. An event means something only in relation to how we relate to it, and our position relative to it.”

I’m really having a difficult time with the above paragraph in this article! I read and reread it about ten times but the meaning escapes me. Would you kindly explain when you have the time? Thanks!

Jeff 

Hi Jeff, and thank you for your question.

In many metaphysical circles and New Thought teaching, it is widely believed that in order for something to exist, it must be first observed – without conscious awareness directed at a ‘thing’, that ‘thing’ cannot ‘be’.

In an attempt to offer scientific evidence of this theory, many point to the famous ‘double-slit’ experiment.

The basic idea of the double-slit experiment is that when a photon of light is shot at two slits in a barrier with a board behind it – and we don’t look to see which slit the photon travels through – the photon will travel through both slits at the same time. However, when we look closer and measure (or observer) which slit the photon travels through, our conscious focus and observation causes the photon to travel through the slit we are observing.

The photon is thought to exist in both places at once, but once we consciously observe it, the photon ‘collapses’ down into a single definite state and position.

This idea, which also forms the basis of Law of Attraction teaching, is false.

What we are in fact witnessing via the double-slit experiment is our inability to measure a multidimensional event that has been individualised into potentially infinite aspects of itself, coupled with something called wave-particle duality. For instance, a photon of light can behave both as a wave, and also as a single particle defined in time and space. In fact, the photon is neither a wave or a particle – it is both.

It will appear as a wave or a particle depending upon how you measure it. If you look for a wave, you will see the waveform aspect. If you look for a particle, you will measure the particle aspect.

The other thing to remember is that the particle we are measuring is in fact the same particle that exists everywhere else in our reality. It’s just that we can only measure that one particle as an individualised aspect, and thus it appears that there are an infinite number of particles in existence.

To break it down further, what we are seeing is a bubble of force emanating from a nonlocal dimension/reality interacting with (pushing through into) the fabric of our local space-time reality.

Think of throwing a stone into a calm body of water. When the stone hits the water, a wave is formed. The stone is separate, and yet linked to the wave it produces.

In quantum terms, the wave produced by the ‘bubbles’ of force we call quantum events is also known as a pilot wave – and it is these pilot waves that interact with and influence other pilot waves in order to draw quantum events together and thus form the structure of our reality.

It is thought that a quantum event, or particle, exists in all places at all times, and further, as already stated, conscious observation can ‘collapse’ that ‘potential’ particle existing everywhere into one solid and defined object in space-time.

This is the theory of quantum non-locality – and again, the idea behind it is only half correct.

Quantum particles always have a defined position in our space-time reality, and yet they are also multidimensional in essence because they originate in a multidimensional, nonlocal reality which we human beings can’t interact with or exist in.

Quantum theory attempts to measure the unmeasurable – QT attempts to measure the multidimensional aspects of quantum events as they are in a nonlocal reality. However, this is impossible because all we can do is measure the one quantum event as it appears to us in our local reality of three dimensions restricted by space and time, individualised into separate aspects of itself.

When I talk of an event meaning something only in relation to how it relates to us and our position relative to that event, I refer to our restricted ability to measure things from where we are here in our local space-time reality of three dimensions.

We can’t hope to measure the multidimensional aspects of something that is nonlocal in origin because we are not multidimensional and we don’t have the tools or means to measure something multidimensional.

All we can do is measure the interaction of that multidimensional event as it appears to us in our three-dimensional reality of space and time.

Our local reality is relative to us because we exist within it. A nonlocal reality is not relative to us and so we can’t measure it.

To put this concept of relating to something being tide to our position relative to that something, if you were unfortunate enough to experience a death in your immediate family, the event would have profound meaning for you because of your position to it.

However, if someone you have never met or knew, living on the other side of the world experienced a death in his or her family, the event would mean nothing to you because of your far away position and relation to that event.

The same principle applies on a quantum scale, except we are dealing with the measurement of quantum events instead of the measurement of events linked to the situations and circumstances of our lives.

***********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Hi Steve, why do relationships go wrong, and how does one maintain a healthy relationship? 

MT

Hello, and thank you for your question.

Relationships can go wrong for a number of reasons, but here are some things to keep in mind.

Firstly, before even embarking upon a relationship, make sure you’re looking for one for all the right reasons. It’s imperative that you never enter into a relationship because you are looking for a ‘significant other’ to give you what you can’t give yourself.

To look to another to give you relevance, importance, confidence, and anything else is to ensure that any budding romance is destined to fail.

Looking to another to give you a sense of purpose robs you of your ability to define yourself, and thus you are giving your power away to someone else. This is dangerous. What happens of that person leaves you? What happens if the person passes away?

You must approach any potential relationship from the position of stability, inner confidence, high levels of self-love, and independence. You go into a relationship always to share who you are, never to take what you might need from another.

The problem is that we are all individualised aspects of a whole. We all have an inherent yearning to become one again, and it is through our close physical relationships that we seek to feed our inner hunger for unity.

This reunion of the whole can only ever been accomplished once we have left our current local reality and rejoined the multidimensional, nonlocal reality of our origin.

Because we are all individualised and possess multiple different aspects from each other, our differences and individualised natures often stand in the way of our pull to be one unified whole.

It’s the curse of love – to be individualised beings inherently separate and yet constantly having to deal with this urge to once again be one unified whole.

This is why it’s always a good idea to make sure that you have as many things in common with a perspective mate as possible. Having things in common ensures that you will stay together longer, as will sharing similar attitudes and an outlook on life.

What normally happens is that someone is desperate to find a ‘soul mate’, and is unwilling to wait in order to find a perfect match. In their desperation to find someone who will give them what is missing in themselves, they reach for a partner who is actually less than ideal, and they attempt to match that person.

False fields of resonance and influence are generated, fields generated because the one generating them is attempting to be what they think they should be or what they think other people want.

Once the relationship is established, the true being inside eventually resumes dominance and ultimately, the incompatibility of the couple comes to light. This causes problems, and then arguments, and the relationship ultimately breaks down.

To sum up: when thinking of entering a relationship, make sure you are strong to begin with and are giving yourself everything you need. Remember that relationships are for sharing who you are, not taking what you might need. Be true to yourself, even if it means that you have to wait for an ideal match. Lastly, make sure you have as much in common with a perspective mate as possible.