Speaker 1: Hello everyone, and welcome back to Thrilling Threads.
Speaker 2: It's great to be here.
Speaker 1: I am so so hyped for today's session because we
are pulling on a thread that is, I mean, it's
literally weaving the fabric of our reality together or perhaps
unraveling it or yeah, or if some of these theories
are to be believed, might be tearing it apart.
Speaker 2: It's definitely one of the most provocative topics we've ever tackled. Yeah,
I mean, usually we're looking at history, maybe technology, right,
but today we're looking at the fundamental architecture of existence
itself exactly.
Speaker 1: And I want to start with a hook that when
I open our research packet, it just grabbed me by
the throat. Okay, it sounds like something from a I
don't know, a sci fi horror movie, but it's a
legitimate question being asked in you know, high level physics corridors.
What if the universe has a reflection.
Speaker 2: It's a chilling concept, isn't it. We're so used to
reflections being passive.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they look at a mirror, you see an image.
It's it's not real.
Speaker 2: It has no substance. But the question we're digging into
today is what if that reflection is physical, what if
it's just as real as we are?
Speaker 1: And what if while we're searching for the origins of
reality with these enormous machines, humanity isn't just looking at
the universe, but tearing a hole straight through to that
other side.
Speaker 2: And that's the part that really gets you, the idea
that we're not just observing, we're interacting. We're knocking on
a door we maybe shouldn't be.
Speaker 1: And the part that actually kept me up last night
reading this stuff, what if something is watching from that
other side.
Speaker 2: See, that's where the hard science starts to bleed into
what I would call existential dread.
Speaker 1: One hundred percent. It's a perfect term for it. So
let's set the scene for you listening. Okay, we aren't
in some sterile lab coat in a white room. We
are deep beneath the rolling green fields of Swisserland.
Speaker 2: And France, a beautiful, serene landscape.
Speaker 1: Completely and buried right under your feet is this machine
of metal and fire.
Speaker 2: It's seventeen miles wide and unimaginable scale.
Speaker 1: It just sleeps there, silent until a team of the
world's smartest scientists press a button to make the universe.
Speaker 2: Remember how it began, A very poetic but accurate description
of the large Hadron collider.
Speaker 1: At CERN it is. And look, we have a massive
stack of sources today. We've got technical transcripts, we have
pure reviewed papers on something called CPT symmetry, and even
some comparative.
Speaker 2: Mythology, really broad spectrum.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and the mission for today is to explore that
hidden ninety five percent of reality that we cannot see,
dark matter, dark energy, and to really entertain the possibility
that CERN isn't just discovering the unknown, but is actually
awakening a mirror world.
Speaker 2: Or to use the term from our outline, we're investigating
the shadow realm.
Speaker 1: A shadow realm. I love that it sets the tone perfectly,
you know it does. We're not just talking about tiny
sub atomic particles here. We are talking about antimatter. We're
talking about backward flowing time and the legitimate question of
whether we are all living in a sci fi movie
or a ghost story or a ghost story maybe both.
Speaker 2: It's possible.
Speaker 1: So to you listening right now, buckle up seriously. We're
going to take you on a journey that connects quantum
physics to ancient Egyptian myths and even Carl Jung's psychology.
Speaker 2: By the end of this, you really might not look
at a mirror the same way. Again, not at all.
So let's start with the machine itself. To understand the shadow,
I think we have to first understand the light that's casting.
Speaker 1: It right section one, the hidden ninety five percent, and
the machine. Let's really unpack the Large Hadron Collider, because
seventeen mile ring is easy to say, but I feel
like we just glaze over what that actually means. Engineering wise.
Speaker 2: It's a valid point. The scale is it's difficult for
the human mind to really grass I can even picture it.
The LHC is the largest and most powerful particle accelerator
in the world, full stop. It's a twenty seven kilometer
ring that's seventeen miles of superconducting back superconducting, with a
number of accelerating structures along the way to just keep
boosting the energy of the particles.
Speaker 1: And when you say boost the energy, we're really just
talking about speed, right, making them go faster and faster.
Speaker 2: We're talking about flinging protons, you know, the hearts of
atoms around this massive track. At ninety nine point nine
nine nine nine one one percent the speed of light.
Speaker 1: That number just doesn't seem real. What does that even
look like?
Speaker 2: Well, at that speed, a single proton will travel the
entire seventeen mile ring about eleven thousand times every.
Speaker 1: Second, eleven thousand laps in one.
Speaker 2: Second, in one second. Yeah. And to guide these particles,
to keep them on that perfect circular path, they use
thousands of incredibly powerful magnets.
Speaker 1: Okay, and this is where the superconducting part comes in.
Speaker 2: I assume exactly, because here's the engineering novel of it all.
To make those magnets superconducting, which means they have zero
electrical resistance, no energy loss, you have to cool.
Speaker 1: Them cool to what like a deep freeze, much much colder.
Speaker 2: They use superfluid helium to cool the magnets down to
minus two hundred seventy one point three degrees.
Speaker 1: Celsius heay, minus two seventy one isn't.
Speaker 2: That it is? That's colder than outer space. So you
have inside this machine just a few hundred feet beneath
the Swiss countryside, one of the coldest places in the
entire universe.
Speaker 1: And right next to it, you're conducting these beams of
wall fire particles moving at the speed of light.
Speaker 2: It's a place of unbelievable extremes.
Speaker 1: And the whole point of all this effort, the billions
of dollars, the freezing temperatures, is just to smash them together.
Speaker 2: It is a demolition derby, yes, a very very expensive one,
But the goal isn't destruction. It's recreation. Recreation of what
when two of these proton beams collide head on for
a tiny fraction of a second, the energy density is
so incredibly high that we are recreating the conditions that
existed mere moments after the Big Bang.
Speaker 1: So they're literally hitting the rewind button on the universe precisely.
Speaker 2: They're smashing matter down to its most fundamental components, just
to see what falls out. Yeah, and the primary goal,
the Big prize is to find the invisible.
Speaker 1: Which brings us to this cosmic couch analogy. I found
this in the source material and it completely blew my mind.
Speaker 2: It's a very helpful way to visualize our own cosmic
insignificance in a way.
Speaker 1: So, okay, imagine your living room. You see the couch,
the TV, the rug, maybe your dog, a lamp. That's
all normal.
Speaker 2: Matter, buryonic matter, technically protons, neutrons, electrons, everything we can
touch and see and interact.
Speaker 1: With, right, all of that stuff, It only makes up
five percent of the entire universe. Five percent, So if
the entire universe is a house, we can basically only
see the door.
Speaker 2: Knob and maybe you welcome Matt. The rest the ninety
five percent is effectively invisible. The source material calls it
playing hide and seek. We call it dark matter and
dark energy.
Speaker 1: But wait, hold on, if it's ninety five percent of
the universe, if it's the walls and the floor and
the ceiling of the house, why am I not bumping
into it? Why can't I see it or feel it?
Speaker 2: And that is the ghost problem, that's the of the mystery.
Dark matter doesn't seem to interact with the electromagnetic force,
which means which means it doesn't absorb light, it doesn't
reflect light, it doesn't emit light. It would pass right
through your hand. It's passing through us, through this entire
planet right now.
Speaker 1: So then how in the world do we know it's
even there? Is this just you know, physicists making up
a number to make their math work out.
Speaker 2: No, No, it's not a fudge factor. Yeah, we know
it's there because the one thing it does interact with gravity.
Speaker 1: Ah.
Speaker 2: Gravity is the tell and the classic proof is the rotation.
Speaker 1: Of galaxies, right, the merry go round thing. I remember
reading about that exactly.
Speaker 2: Imagine a merry go round spinning incredibly fast. If you're
on the edge and you don't hold on tight, what happens?
Speaker 1: You fly off centrifugal force throws you into the bushes.
Speaker 2: Right now, look at a galaxy. It's a spinning disc
of billions of stars. Yeah, we can estimate the mass
of all the stars and gas. We can see when
we calculate the gravity that all that visible mass creates,
it's not nearly enough to hold the stars on the
outer edge.
Speaker 1: They should be flying off into the void.
Speaker 2: The galaxies should be tearing themselves apart. But they don't.
They hold together. They spin much much faster than they
should be able to without exploding. And that implies there's
something else there, something heavy, something massive and heavy and
invisible that's holding it all together.
Speaker 1: Gravity from a ghost.
Speaker 2: That's a perfect way to put it. Dark matter outweighs
normal matter by about five to one. It is the
invisible scaffolding of the universe.
Speaker 1: So orre does the Christmas lights hanging on an invisible tree.
Speaker 2: That's a fantastic analogy.
Speaker 1: Yes, okay, that's a humbling image. So CERN's whole job
then is to try and find this ghost stuff.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, the huge detectors like Atlas and CMS, which
are basically cathedral sized digital cameras buried underground. They're watching
every single collision for ghostly fingerprints.
Speaker 1: What does a fingerprint of a ghost look like?
Speaker 2: It could be missing energy? You know, the energy after
a collision doesn't add up to the energy before. It's
because that something invisible carried it away. They're smashing protons
hoping that if they hit them hard enough, they might
knock a piece of dark matter loose or create a
disturbance that points to it.
Speaker 1: And this is where the whole mirror idea really starts
to creep in. The source material suggests that maybe this
dark matter isn't just random and visible dust, maybe had
a structure.
Speaker 2: This is the insight that really transitions us to our
next section. Some theoretical physicists argue that dark matter isn't simple,
that it might be a mirror world with its own
complex particles, its own forces, maybe even its own mirror
stars and mirror planets all overlapping with our own.
Speaker 1: Which brings us directly to Section two. Antimatter and the
evil twin, The evil twin. I love that the source
material actually uses that term. It says antimatter is the
universe's evil twin, just without the goatee chuckles.
Speaker 2: It's memorable.
Speaker 1: But let's define it properly, because I think people hear
antimatter and they just think of Star Trek fuel.
Speaker 2: What is it? Antimatter is the perfect mirror twin of
normal matter. For every particle of matter that exists, there
is a corresponding antiparticle. They're identical in mass, identical in.
Speaker 1: Spin, but there's always a butt.
Speaker 2: But they have the opposite electric charge. So electron has
a negative charge. It's anti twin, which we call a
positron has a positive charge.
Speaker 1: Okay, that seems simple enough. So if I had a
twin made of antimatter, he would look like me, he'd
talk like more.
Speaker 2: But if you tried to shake his hand, you would
both explode.
Speaker 1: Right, the handshake of doom.
Speaker 2: When matter and antimatter meet, they annihilate instantly, and they
convert one hundred percent of their mass into pure energy.
Speaker 1: One hundred percent. That's that's not normal.
Speaker 2: No, it's not. For context, a nuclear bomb is less
than one percent efficient. To give you a sense of scale,
a paper clip made of antimatter meeting a regular paper
clip would create an explosion roughly the size of the
bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Speaker 1: That is terrifyingly efficient.
Speaker 2: It's Einstein's EMC in its purest, most violent form.
Speaker 1: So here's the huge mystery that the source highlights, the
Big Bang asymmetry. If the Big Bang created everything, it
should have created a balance, shouldn't it.
Speaker 2: Yes, Physics at its core demand symmetry. It's one of
its guiding principles. So the Big Bang should have produced
equal amounts of matter and antimatter fifty fifty.
Speaker 1: But if that happened, then what well they would.
Speaker 2: Have found each other almost instantly in that hot, dense
early universe, and they would have annihilated each other.
Speaker 1: So the baby universe would have been just a flash
of light and then nothing.
Speaker 2: No stars, no galaxies, no planets, no us.
Speaker 1: But we are here, I'm touching this table. I exist.
So something's wrong exactly.
Speaker 2: We exist because of a broken balance for some reason.
We still don't understand. One twin vanished matter one antimatter disappeared.
We were literally living in the leftovers of a cosmic accident.
Speaker 1: Or are we Maybe it didn't disappear.
Speaker 2: That is the question, isn't it. Current experiments at CERN,
like the LF experiment or LHCb, are actually creating and
trapping anti hydrogen atoms. They're holding antimatter, how in powerful
magnetic traps. They hold it in a vacuum so it
can't touch anything, and they're studying it, measuring it, poking it.
They're looking for a flaw, a difference.
Speaker 1: They want to find out why our twin died and
we survived.
Speaker 2: They are hunting for even the slightest difference in mass
or charge or its reaction to gravity to explain this asymmetry.
But here's the catch. What's up so far? They look
absolutely perfectly identical, perfect mirrors.
Speaker 1: Which implies the symmetry didn't actually break.
Speaker 2: It implies the symmetry is incredibly robust. And if the
symmetry didn't break, and all that antimatter isn't here with us,
where is it?
Speaker 1: Enter the shadow realm hypothesis.
Speaker 2: Indeed, the speculation, and we should be clear this is speculation,
but it's grounded in some very serious mathematics. Is that
the missing antimatter didn't vanish. Yeah, it just.
Speaker 1: Separated, like twins separated at birth. The two universes concept exactly.
Speaker 2: Imagine two universes splitting apart at the moment of creation.
Ours made of matter, and a shadow roam, a mirror
universe made entirely of anti.
Speaker 1: Matter, and they're just out there somewhere.
Speaker 2: Perhaps not out there, perhaps they're linked by gravity by
these invisible quantum threads, but separated physically in some way
we can't perceive.
Speaker 1: And the LHC connection. This is the part that genuinely freaks.
Speaker 2: Me out, the idea that we're knocking on the door.
Speaker 1: The fear is that every time the LHC fires, every
single time it creates these high energy collisions, it might
be briefly reconnecting these two severed halves, like building.
Speaker 2: A temporary microscopic bridge across the divide.
Speaker 1: The source material uses the image of tiny bridges or
quantum whispers. We might be knocking on the door of
the neighbors who moved out thirteen point eight billion years ago.
Speaker 2: And neighbors who were made of stuff that would instantly
destroy us. If we invited them in.
Speaker 1: For tea exactly. But there's a theory that takes this
whole mirror idea even further. It's not just about what
it's made of, it's about time itself.
Speaker 2: Ah.
Speaker 1: Yes, let's go to section three. The CPT symmetric universe,
the backward time theory.
Speaker 2: This is a really fascinating one. It gains significant traction
around twenty eighteen, and it was proposed largely by two physicists,
Latham Boil and Neil Tarock.
Speaker 1: Boil and tar Rock. They sound like they should be
a detective duo in nineteenth century London.
Speaker 2: Chuckles. They do. But their proposal is elegant, simple and
completely mind bending.
Speaker 1: So what is it?
Speaker 2: They proposed that the Big Bang didn't just create one universe,
it created two hours. Yeah, and a mirror twin.
Speaker 1: Okay, we've established the twin. But you said there was
a twist. What's the twist.
Speaker 2: The twist is that in the mere universe time flows backward.
Speaker 1: Stop time flowing backward.
Speaker 2: From the Big Bang. Yes, our timeline flows forward away
from the Big Bang. Theirs flows in the opposite temporal direction.
Speaker 1: My brain hurts trying to picture that. Does that mean
like they're born old and they die young. Is it
like Benjamin Button.
Speaker 2: It's very hard to visualize from our perspective. It's better
to think about it in terms of entropy. The arrow
of time. Okay, in our universe, if you drop an egg,
it breaks, disorder increases. That's the arrow of time pointing forward.
In the universe where time is reversed, the arrow points
the other way.
Speaker 1: Egg puts itself back together and flies back up into
your hand.
Speaker 2: From our perspective, yes, but from their perspective, their time
is moving forward just as normally as ours does. For us,
they would see us as the ones moving backward.
Speaker 1: Why would scientists propose something so trippy? Is it just
to mess with us?
Speaker 2: No, it's because of something called CPT symmetry. It's a
really fundamental principle.
Speaker 1: Okay, break that down for me cept physics.
Speaker 2: As we said, love symmetry. SEE stands for a charge,
so positive versus negative.
Speaker 1: Got it, matter versus antimatter.
Speaker 2: P stands for parity. You can think of it as
left first right, or a mirror image of spatial coordinates
no reflection, and T obviously stands for time forward versus backward.
Speaker 1: Okay, So charge parity time CPT.
Speaker 2: Now here's the thing. We found in experiments that if
you just flip charge, the laws of physics aren't perfectly symmetrical.
If you just flip parity a mirror image, they don't
work perfectly either. But if you flip all three at once, charge, parity, A,
and D time, the equations balance perfectly. It seems to
be the one true, unbreakable symmetry of the universe. So
Boyle and Turok argued that if the universe is truly
CPT symmetric, then the Big Bang must have created a
CPT inverted twin to maintain that balance.
Speaker 1: And the kicker the part that makes this not just
a cool idea is that it explains dark matter.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's the beauty of It's so elegant. If this
mirror universe exists, we don't need to invent new ghost
particles to explain all that missing gravity. Why not, because
the gravity we feel the invisible stuff holding our galaxies together,
is just the gravity from the mirror universe, full of
antimatter pulling on ours across that dimensional divide.
Speaker 1: So the missing stuff isn't lost, it's just on the
other side of.
Speaker 2: The a mirror world operating in perfect reverse, a quantum
hair's breadth away from us.
Speaker 1: I have to bring up the movie Tenant, the Christopher
Nolan movie.
Speaker 2: I was wondering when you're gonna mention that.
Speaker 1: It's literally this right, I mean, people and objects moving
backwards through time inverted entropy.
Speaker 2: It's very similar conceptually. The movie uses the idea of
inverted entropy, which is a perfect cinematic representation of what
CBT symmetry would feel like.
Speaker 1: It creates this profound philosophical dread. Though. If there is
a mirror world, are we the original or are we
the reflections?
Speaker 2: Who's to say our arrow of time is the correct
one exactly?
Speaker 1: And if time runs backward there does that mean for
them the effect happens before the cause. It just it
completely breaks my brain.
Speaker 2: It challenges our most fundamental narrative of existence, cause and effect.
But here's where we have to leave the chalkboard and
start looking at the instruments, because the source material says
this isn't just a wild theory anymore. The deity itself
is starting to whisper.
Speaker 1: Section four anomalies and the head in sector when data whispers.
Speaker 2: I like that phrasing a lot.
Speaker 1: We usually think of science as a yes or no,
a discovery or a failure, but the source talks about
the gray area between noise and discovery.
Speaker 2: Right In high energy physics, the gold standard is a
five sigma result Phi sigma.
Speaker 1: What does that mean?
Speaker 2: It means there's a one in three point five million
chance that your result is just a random fluke. At
that point you can pop the champagne and call it
a discovery.
Speaker 1: So it's about certainty, yes.
Speaker 2: But lately we've been seeing a lot of three sigma
or four sigma events, things that are probably real, that
have a very low chance of being a fluke, but
they haven't quite crossed that finish line into certainty. The
data is whispering, not shouting.
Speaker 1: And one of the biggest whispers was the Muon anomaly.
This was huge news in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 2: The Muon G two experiment at Fermilab. Yes, it was
a massive deal in the physics community.
Speaker 1: So first, what exactly is a muon?
Speaker 2: You can think of a muon as a heavy electron.
It's about two hundred times more massive than an electron,
but otherwise very similar. It's also unstable and decays very quickly.
Speaker 1: And the experiment found that they were wobbling exactly.
Speaker 2: When you put a spinning particle like a muon into
a powerful magnetic field, it processes, it wobbles, just like
a spinning tok that's starting to slow down.
Speaker 1: Okay, I can picture that.
Speaker 2: Now. The standard model, our current rule book of reality,
predicts exactly how fast that muon top should wobble, and
it's one of the most precise calculations in all of
human history, down to an incredible number of decimal places.
But when they measured the muons at firm a lab
and remeasured them, they were wobbling just a little bit
too fast.
Speaker 1: They were offbeat.
Speaker 2: They were. The difference was minuscule, but it was statistically significant.
It strongly suggests that something invisible, something not in our
rule book, was pushing on them or pulling.
Speaker 1: On them, tugging at them from somewhere else.
Speaker 2: Like a magnetic ghost in the room that we can't see,
but we can see its effect.
Speaker 1: And the source connects us to another weird thing, neutrinos.
Speaker 2: Another potential ghost particle. Now, neutrinos themselves are already incredibly
hard to detect. They call them ghost particles because they
can pass through light years of lead without hitting anything.
Speaker 1: But we can detect them sometimes.
Speaker 2: We can because they interact via one of the four
fundamental forces, the weak force. But a sterile neutrino, the
theory is that it wouldn't even feel the weak force.
It would interact only with gravity.
Speaker 1: So it would be totally completely invisible to all of
our machines.
Speaker 2: Except for its gravity its mass, which again brings us
back to dark matter. The Source calls this whole theoretical
realm the hidden sector.
Speaker 1: A secret room in the house of physics.
Speaker 2: The great analogy. We've mapped the living room, the kitchen,
the bedroom, that's the standard model, but there's a door
we can't seem to open, and every now and then
we can hear movement on the other side.
Speaker 1: And the speculation is that these anomalies the muons wobble.
These hints of sterile neutrinos might be cosmic.
Speaker 2: Bleed through interactions with mirror matter from that hit sector.
The expert insight here is really fascinating. The more precise
are measurements become, the less complete our own universe seems.
The glitches are the fingerprints of the other side.
Speaker 1: It's like the sharper the image gets the more you
realize something is standing in front of the lens, or that.
Speaker 2: The view is doubled and slightly out of focus.
Speaker 1: Now, this is where the thread takes a turn that
I honestly did not expect. We've been talking heavy math, muons, sigmas,
but the source material makes a bold argument that humanity
might have actually known about this for thousands of years.
Speaker 2: Section five, Ancient Myths Versus Modern Physics.
Speaker 1: I have to admit I was skeptical when I first
read this part. I was like, Okay, here comes the
ancient alien stuff. But the parallels are actually.
Speaker 2: While they're spooky, they are and we should be very
clear here we aren't saying ancient Egyptians were quantum physicists
doing equations, right.
Speaker 1: They didn't have a seventeen mile long collider under the pyramids.
Speaker 2: No, but they were profound observers of the human condition
and the natural world, and they described a dual reality
with a striking consistency across cultures.
Speaker 1: Let's take Egypt. They had the duant, the do it,
and it.
Speaker 2: Wasn't just the underworld or hell. It was a shadow
world that existed beneath our reality. It was a mirror
of the living world, with its own rivers and fields.
The sun god Rah had to travel through it every
single night to be reborn in the morning.
Speaker 1: So it wasn't evil. It was a necessary counterpart to existence,
a perfect mirror.
Speaker 2: Then you have Hermetic philosophy, the famous axiom as above
so below.
Speaker 1: I've heard that everywhere.
Speaker 2: It describes the entire cosmos as a system of correspondences,
the idea that the material world the below is a
reflection of a higher, invisible, spiritual reality the above.
Speaker 1: It sounds a lot like the visible universe is a
reflection of the dark sector.
Speaker 2: The language is different, but the core concept is eerily similar.
Then you have the Gnostics. They talked about the Pleroma,
the divine fullness versus our material world, which they considered
a flawed, shadow like reflection of that perfect realm.
Speaker 1: And what about the Kabbala the cliffoth.
Speaker 2: In Jewish mysticism, it's described as the dark inversion of
the tree of life, the shadow side of divinity, made
of the shells or husks of creation.
Speaker 1: It's weird, right, The pattern is undeniable. Science talks about
dark matter and antimatter and mirror worlds. The ancients talked
about the duat and the shadow and the cliff ofth
Are we just rediscovering the same fundamental idea with new tools.
Speaker 2: It's possible that the veil between worlds wasn't just a
metaphor maybe it was humanity's early intuitive attempt to describe
a physical reality that they could feel but couldn't.
Speaker 1: Measure, science rediscovering the language of its own mythology. That
quote from the source really really stuck with me.
Speaker 2: Concern itself seems to almost lean into this symbolism, whether
intentionally or not.
Speaker 1: Oh totally. We absolutely have to talk about the statue, the.
Speaker 2: Statue of the Hindu deity Shiva that stands at the
entrance of cern.
Speaker 1: Shiva the god of destruction, which on its face seems
like a terrible pr move for a place smashing atoms.
Speaker 2: But Shiva is the god of destruction and creation. He's
the Nataraja, the lord of the dance. He performs the
cosmic dance that destroys a weary universe so that it
can be recreated.
Speaker 1: That is literally what they do in the collider. They
destroy particles to see the new ones that are created
in the debris.
Speaker 2: It is the perfect metaphor for their work, and the
shape of the collider itself, that giant ring ay circle.
It's the erboros, the ancient symbol of the snake eating
its own tail. It represents the cyclical nature of the universe,
the unity of beginning an and the creation and destruction.
Speaker 1: In alchemy, the source springs up alchemy. I thought that
was just about turning lead into gold.
Speaker 2: That was the exoteric goal. But the esoteric goal, the
true search, was for the prima materia, the first matter.
Alchemists spent centuries trying to break down substances to find
the single base essence from which all the matter is made.
Speaker 1: And that's exactly what particle physicists they're doing.
Speaker 2: They are smashing atoms apart to find quarks and gluons
and the Higgs boson. They're hunting for the prima materia.
Speaker 1: We just changed the costumes. We just swapped the pointy
wizard robes for white lab coats, and.
Speaker 2: The bubbling cauldrons for seventeen mile long superconducting magnets. The
quest is the same.
Speaker 1: Speaking of things hidden inside, let's talk about the curtain
inside our own heads. Because the source material takes a
hard left. Turn here right into psychology section six.
Speaker 2: The inner mirror, consciousness and psychology.
Speaker 1: You've spent all this time talking about the universe's shadow,
but what about our own?
Speaker 2: Carl Jung is the key figure here, of course. He
proposed the concept of the shadow self.
Speaker 1: The part of us we don't want to look.
Speaker 2: At, the unseen mirror of our own consciousness. It holds
everything we suppress, our fears, our desires, our traumas, our
dark Twin and Young argue that you cannot become a
whole person until you confront and integrate your shadow, and the.
Speaker 1: Source draws a direct parallel from that to modern neuroscience.
Speaker 2: Right. Yes, we have this illusion of control. We like
to think we are the rational captains of our own ship,
but neuroscience shows that the vast majority of our brain activity,
our decisions, our emotional reactions are patterns. It all happens
below the level of conscious awareness.
Speaker 1: In the dark matter of the brain.
Speaker 2: Exactly, we are driven by forces we cannot see within
our own minds, in the sib.
Speaker 1: Conscious as within so without.
Speaker 2: It's a striking symmetry, isn't it. If the universe has
a huge invisible component called dark matter, that dictates its
structure and form, and the human mind has a huge
invisible component called the unconscious that dictates its behavior and choices.
Is that just a coincidence or is it a structural
symmetry of reality at all scales?
Speaker 1: That leads to a pretty trippy question. Is CERN's entire
multi billion dollar search for a hidden matter just a
grand projection of humanity's search for its own subconscious It's.
Speaker 2: A valid philosophical inquiry. Are we building these massive, complex
machines to understand the universe or are we externalizing our
own internal struggle? Are we trying to find the shadow
out there because we're too afraid to look at the
shadow in here?
Speaker 1: The expert taking the source is so poetic, it just
says reality dreams too.
Speaker 2: If consciousness is a fundamental aspect of the universe, which
is a theory called panpsychism, then maybe the mirror world
isn't just dead antimatter. Maybe it's the universe is subconscious.
Speaker 1: Okay, now we are absolutely getting into the Watcher territory.
For me, this is the climax of the whole episode.
Section seven Quantum Portals and the Watcher.
Speaker 2: The physics of the Veil.
Speaker 1: We talked about the veil as a myth, but modern
physics has actual, testable mechanisms that sound a lot like
a veil being lifted.
Speaker 2: Entanglement is the classic example. It's the one that even
freaked Einstein out. He called it spooky action at a distance.
Speaker 1: Okay, explain that simply for me again.
Speaker 2: You can have two particles that become entangled. They share
a single quantum state. If you measure one particle and
find its spin is up, instantly that the other one's
spin is down.
Speaker 1: Even if they're on opposite sides of the universe.
Speaker 2: Instantly faster than the speed of light. It seems to
defy our common sense of space and distance. It suggests
that at some fundamental level, everything is connected.
Speaker 1: And string theory takes us even further with the idea of.
Speaker 2: Brains br inees. It's short form membranes.
Speaker 1: Not brains like zombies.
Speaker 2: E got it, chuckles? No, I imagine our entire three
dimensional universe is just a sheet of paper a brain.
String theory suggests there could be other sheets. Other universe
is stacked right next to ours, parallel to it in
a higher dimension, like pages in a book exactly, or
sheets on a clothesline.
Speaker 1: So the mirror world isn't a billion light years away.
It could be a millimeter away from me right now,
in a.
Speaker 2: Fourth or fifth spatial dimension that we simply cannot perceive. Yes,
and if.
Speaker 1: They're that close, can we touch them? Can we open
a door?
Speaker 2: This is where the idea of resonance comes in. The
source doesn't talk about a physical doorway. It talks about
tuning the dial.
Speaker 1: The LHC creates these in saying energy densities and the collisions.
Speaker 2: The idea is that we're not creating a portal you
can walk through. It's not stargate, but we might be
creating a breefrequency overlap, a resonance, like.
Speaker 1: When you're tuning an old analog radio and for a
second you can hear two stations at once bleeding into
each other.
Speaker 2: That is the perfect analogy. If CERN hits just the
right energy level, the right frequency, we might tune the
dial to the neighboring universe for a split second.
Speaker 1: And that's where all these glitches in reality come in.
Speaker 2: We see things our instruments can't explain. Cosmic reobservatories detecting
particles with impossibly high energy they shouldn't exist new Trina
detectors catching phantom bursts that have no identifiable source.
Speaker 1: And the source even brings up the Mandela effect it.
Speaker 2: Does, which is that strange collective false memory phenomenon, the
feeling that the world is out of sync or that
history has changed.
Speaker 1: I usually write that off as just you know, bad memory,
but the source speculates, It speculates.
Speaker 2: That these could be physiological echoes of those cous collisions.
If our consciousness is fundamentally quantum in nature, which is
a serious theory proposed by people like Sir Roger Penrose,
then maybe we feel the resonance before our machines can
definitively detect it, like a tremmor in the force, a
tremor in the brain.
Speaker 1: But the most provocative, the most chilling thought in all
of this is the idea of the universe.
Speaker 2: Staring back, tapping the glass.
Speaker 1: That's the phrase they used. Cern isn't breaking reality, it's
tapping the glass of the fish bowl.
Speaker 2: And the ultimate concern is what happens if the other
side taps back.
Speaker 1: It implies a conscious universe. It implies that the darkness
the ninety five percent might not be empty, It might
be alive. Aware, moving in counterpoint to us.
Speaker 2: It completely reframes the entire experiment, doesn't it. We think
we are explorers charting an empty land. But what if
we're actually just uninvited visitors knocking on a stranger's door
in the middle of the night.
Speaker 1: It's like we're the fish in the tank, and for
the first time, we've built a little submarine to swim
up to the glass, and I realize there's a face
on the other side.
Speaker 2: That face looks suspiciously like our own, just inverted.
Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? We've gone from a
seventeen mile machine all the way to antimatter twins, backward
flowing time, ancient alchemy, and the human shadow self.
Speaker 2: I think it means that the story of reality, the
story we tell ourselves about what's real, is far from over.
We are likely only in the first chapter.
Speaker 1: And maybe the dark side isn't something to fear. The
source ends with this sentiment, and I really liked it.
Maybe it's just the rest of the story finally showing.
Speaker 2: Its face precisely, which leads to the final haunting question.
If the mere universe exists, and if it runs in
reverse or in parallel to ours, are we the ones
making the decisions, or are we just the reflection perfectly
mimicking the real actors on the other side.
Speaker 1: That is the thought I want to leave all of
you with tonight. It is a really haunting one.
Speaker 2: It is. It challenges the very idea of free will.
Speaker 1: So I have a direct question for you, the listener.
If you could look into that mirror universe, if you
could stand before that glass and see your other, your
shadow self, living your life, maybe backwards, maybe just slightly differently,
would you want to know?
Speaker 2: Or are some doors some reflections better left unseen, some
doors better left locked?
Speaker 1: Would you look or would you turn and run? I
think I think I'd have to look, But I have
a feeling I might regret it for the rest.
Speaker 2: Of my life. I'm not so sure. I think I
might leave that door closed. Some knowledge might be too
heavy to carry.
Speaker 1: Let us know your stance. Are you the type to
tap on the glass or are you backing away? Slowly?
Leave a comment and let's discuss it.
Speaker 2: We are genuinely eager to hear your theories on this.
Speaker 1: Until next time, keep pulling at the threads. You never
know what might unravel. Thanks for listening to thrilling threads.
Thank you, see you next time.