Déjà VooDoo 

Instance A: (Recognition Before Announcement): From outside us, on a TV commercial about St. Jude’s Hospital, Danny Thomas is about to be identified. We recognize his identity—Danny Thomas—from memory before the commercial identifies him.

 

Instance B: (Precognition) A ball moves through a randomizing maze toward its final resting place. We have never learned, have never been taught, what its final station will be (how could we?), but, somehow, we’re aware of its final landing place before the ball actually arrives there.

 

What is the difference between Instance A and Instance B?

 

We think—Well, Danny Thomas is already identified in the outside world, we already know who he is, but we don’t know where the ball lands before it lands.

 

But if our world of reality only exists in a virtual form, if memory is only virtual (symbolic, a model our minds make of the physical universe) then we need to explore a whole new way of understanding precognition.

 

In some cases, we may have problems remembering, have poor access to our memories even if we’d learned Danny’s identity beforehand.

So, with the recognition of Danny, we may be guessing, trying to identify someone we think we know.

 

There are many final resting places, positions, stations, the ball in the maze may stop at, each with a different color. As far as the ball landing at the red station: We don’t think we should be able to guess that, because we’d never known the ball’s final station or resting place. We think the ball only assumes its identity (for example, the ball that lands at the red station) when it actually lands there.

 

How might degraded-identity recognition, precognition, and déjà vu resemble one another?

 

We assume time is linear, that is, things happen in succession one after the other. So guessing the location of the ball before it hits assumes it does not gain an identity until it hits.

 

What if the pattern in space/time into the future is set (has already happened, at least fairly close in time to the HERE AND NOW) and the ball, in the same instance through the maze, will most probably land at the red station, though we are unaware of it and have difficulty retrieving that memory (or statistical probability) because the farther we are from the event, the lower its probability of being retrieved in the HERE AND NOW.

 

If space/time were continuous and set for any future time, then we should be able to pick up signals from the future (no matter how far into the future they’re generated) at close to 100% accuracy.

 

 

Now statistics comes into play. How might we guess accurately at the identity or outcome of an event? Might we guess more accurately the closer we are to the event?

 

If distance in time is comparable to distance in space, then the size of the signal we can pick up would be directly related to that distance (the farther into the future an event, the less information may arrive to us, the place we are sampling, in the HERE AND NOW).

 

So, if identity is set in shape/position for all time (it’s a puzzle piece locked into the universal puzzle) then precognition (the ability to receive information from the future) may be possible.

 

Might this phenomenon be similar to the perspective we discussed in the post on the Union of Opposites website called Size. The closer the object or relationship or interaction, the higher the probability we can identify it accurately because we have more information, information that is less degraded.

 

So, perhaps the déjà vu event is out there, somewhere in our future. Then through some sort of voodoo, we experience the idea of it in the present just before we sample it close to the HERE and NOW.

 

Are we sampling “What Is Behind What Is” of the physical universe, or is our future a symbolic virtual reality our mind has created, a reality that has already been set?