The Quantum Nature of Truth

Things are not what they seem…but they also are.

I’m reading a book about behavioral profiling and the author mentioned how eye blink rate is in an indicator for lawyers profiling prospective jurors to understand which jurors they may be able to persuade and which jurors they will need to ‘work on’.

This last sentence sent my mind on a whole tangent about the nature of reality and what a criminal trial indicates about the nature of reality.

Because distilled down—what is a criminal trial after all?

A criminal trial is a proceeding in which a group of people with opposing interests (prosecution and defense) fight to establish their version of the truth into a form that they believe 12 random people will agree upon.

It’s literally a game of adversarial beliefs to determine ‘the truth’ where the first to 12 wins.

And therein lies the interesting part and the main idea behind my tangent:

Isn’t it crazy that the truth is so subjective and elusive that a court of law requires 12 people to agree on it?

Not one…not two…not four…not even ten…but 12 people!

And this lead me down another rabbit hole thought about the nature of reality which is that if 12 people are required in a legal setting to decide on the truth about something, is there really such a thing as objective truth in the classical sense with anything?

The obvious answer to that question is ‘No.’

So if there’s no such thing as an objective truth…then what are 12 jurors actually agreeing upon in a court of law?

In order to answer this, I realized that we cannot look at truth from a classical standpoint anymore, we have to look at it from a quantum standpoint.

The Quantum Nature of Reality

You cannot look at truth without considering probabilities, because everything is something until it’s not and the only constant in the universe is change.

• Relationships are great, until they are not.
• It is daytime outside, until it becomes night time.
• The economy is booming, until it starts to falter and vice versa.

The state of everything is a quantum pendulum that is in constant motion and unknown until the exact point of measurement.

• The economy is officially in a recession after two declining quarters of real GDP.
• It become nighttime tonight at 6:10PM EST.
• Your relationship was perfect, up until someone cheated on the other person.

The point I am making is that every ‘fact’ is a pendulum in motion, and at any given moment, the value of that pendulum is an unknown value until it is directly and consciously observed.

This is the nature of reality at the quantum level as well, where a particle’s position is not truly known until it directly scrutinized.

Which is what I’m starting to realize about all truths…

Truth is not a constant ‘thing’ or fact, it is something that upon observation and scrutinization, begins to collapse into an observable and measurable belief much like a quantum wave function collapses into a measurable particle position.

A truth is based on facts, but facts are debatable things because they are all pendulums in motion.

A fact by itself in a vacuum doesn’t tell us much. It is only when stable facts chained together in a logical chain reveal a stable and measurable form of reality that we call ‘truth.’

This is much like how transistors in a classical computer work as well, a transistor by itself can only provide so much logic:

• 0 or 1.
• Yes or No.
• True or False.

But transistors taken in groups of 0’s or 1’s can encode more logic.

• 01000001 is the letter “A”
• 00111111 is a question mark.

The truth about anything works pretty much the same way. It is only when we string together multiple observed facts into a chain of ‘factual binary’ that a truth can be ‘encoded’ onto reality.

Let’s observe this phenomenon from the perspective of a criminal court case.

Let’s pretend we have a murder trial in New York and we have the following evidence being presented to the court.

• The defendant was videotaped by a security camera entering and leaving the scene of the crime between 7AM and 9AM.
• The coroner’s report showed the time of death of the victim to be between 7AM and 9AM on the same date.
• A receipt for the purchase of the murder weapon by the defendant was presented.
• DNA of the defendant was found on the victim’s body at the scene.
• The defendant and the victim had an argument in which the defendant discovered that the victim was in possession of information that would put the defendant into serious financial difficulties.

So here we have:

• Evidence of the suspect at the scene of the crime during the time it occurred.
• The DNA of the defendant on the victim.
• A direct link to the murder weapon.
• A clear and distinct motive.

Based on these facts, would you convict this suspect?

Shifting the ‘QuBits’ of a Murder Trial

Now using the same example, let’s read the same ‘QuBits’ of information above in way that will show us the quantum nature of even something as seemingly definitive and objective like a murder.

• The defense presents information that the clock on the security camera was actually in UTC time, while the coroner’s report on the time of death was in Eastern Standard Time, a 5-hour timezone difference.
• This means that the security camera’s footage timestamp of the defendant entering the scene of the crime at 7AM and 9AM in UTC was really at 2AM-4AM EST.
• The suspect and the victim were married.

So using the same QuBits of information, we have a vastly different story of truth:

• The defendant and victim being lovers explains the potential for DNA evidence already being on the victim at the scene of the crime.
• The camera footage time conversion shows the defendant had already left the scene of the crime 5 hours before the coroner’s estimated time of death.
• The defendant and the victim being married weakens the motive as the defendant and victim’s financial scenarios were aligned together, and couples fighting over finances is common.

So here we have basically the same QuBits of information from above, but their observed values have changed.

Do you think the defendant is guilty now?

Better question…does this mean the defendant is innocent?

Not necessarily!

All we have now is a vector of ‘truth’ that gives plausible deniability for a conviction by 12 jurors.

All Truths Are Quantum Truths

The murder trial example above and the nature of the 12-man jury in the legal system show us that the ‘truth’ about anything is dependent upon the vector of facts you directly observe to get there—some vectors are inherently stronger or more efficient than others.

This has a very profound implication and conclusion:

You can literally ‘think’ anything into existence if your thought vector is strong enough.