After this work immediately began the search for such signals with the help of large radio telescopes that already existed by that time. The search was based on the assumption that there could be a civilization with a sufficiently large age in the technological phase, which began to send signals into space earlier than we did.
And now about why I consider the unrecognized mutual influence of electron pairs in different worlds to be natural. Note: not only should they naturally and mutually influence each other, but they should find these very worlds. Yes, I realize this is unbelievable and amazing. But weren't the statements about the magnetic poles of the planet and the invention of the compass amazing? It seems like a simple device, but it gave so much to our world. It could be the same in this case. We search, we guess, and everything is elementary, as the famous character Conan Doyle said.
My hypothesis is that we can't get to the wrong place. The entangled pair… that is, the second part of that pair is already there, so the path is already there. Some kind of route line. So the change signals sent from here will be reflected there. Don't you get my idea? Or you, if it's easier for you to understand your interlocutor… The system works like a flashlight and the area it illuminates. The flashlight sends out a beam and it's there in a flash. We generate these particles here, and their entangled pairs are already there. They're not wandering around somewhere. These worlds are really interconnected. Like the waters of the world's oceans, like the ecosystem of the world.
However, even if the worlds are the same – that doesn't mean there isn't a variant of reflection warp… It's all god knows where. Across the universe, stars, nebulae, and more. You know what I mean? The signal will get into the field of influence of radiation, and quasars, and black holes, and gravity of galaxies… and if the influence is mutual, then the minimum change there – and here will be not a slap, but a shot from a cannon. A kiss there and a carnival there, a quarrel there and an international scandal there. After all, let's say that the same statement can be transmitted to another person, for example, with a changed intonation, and the perception, and consequently the emotional state, will be different. Correspondingly, the action from the received signal may be different as well.
Chapter 8: A World with Opposite Indicators
And now let's look from the point of view of science, whether there is any hint of the real existence of the opposite… or, let's say, with opposite indicators… world. Turns out there is. And with great precision. Meet His Majesty the antiproton. Let's get acquainted with it, see, so to speak, who it is, where it comes from and how we should live with it.
Antiproton is an antiparticle with respect to the proton. It has a negative electric charge and negative baryonic number, other properties coincide with those of the proton. It's very important, all these coincidences. First discovered in 1955 at the proton gas pedal at the University of California, Berkeley. Antiprotons are born, with a fairly high probability, in high-energy collisions of nucleons. This is the common name for the protons and neutrons that make up the atomic nucleus. Antiprotons are observed in cosmic rays coming to Earth.
О! Doesn't that give you something to think about? You might even say, "aliens are among us." What did you think? Imagine, there are more living things inside our bodies than there are people on Earth. And now think, if we want to establish a connection with them, to what level we need to "descend" and in the way of thinking and size? Don't hurry to laugh, we have already connected with them as soon as we discovered them… and even before that, without knowing them. Since they affect us, some positively, others negatively, and we use them or "fight" them, we are in contact. At least our brain and nervous system do. That's the paradox. However, let's return to the main topic.
As for the antiproton – this is very important. If there is an antiproton, why shouldn't there be an "anti" of all elements? Now we ask ourselves: what kind of world would they then put together? Or – what kind of world are they stable in? Like all the other elements in ours? An anti-world? An opposite one? Parallel? Since all the other qualities are the same. Does that make sense? We don't know what worlds are out there. If we have found here with the help of science what was thought to be magic, i.e. substance with opposite qualities, the same antiproton, why not assume that everything is the same there, but at the same time a little different. For example, other understandings of the sensible. Like in a mirror: you see yourself – and everything seems to be normal. Or as with a thought and its illiterate translation into a text: everything is clear in your head, but in writing – only you alone understand what you wanted to say, while for others it is just mistakes and a set of words. Participants of the first flights, flights of consciousness, will have to know science. They must understand where they are going to end up. This will shape their thoughts – and consciousness will be different, that is, the influence of consciousness on the particles will be kind of intellectual. Consequently, the probability that they will end up in a similarly intelligent world will be high. Well, imagine if they end up in a wild bandit world. Can you imagine how that would affect us?
Chapter 9. Cloning is no longer a secret
It is no secret that throughout human history, information and knowledge have been the most important weapon and value. They have been killed for them, hidden, paid for, organized alliances and waged wars.
Believe me, the level of science that you know, even though it is overwhelming for some, is already yesterday's day for secret groups (and these can be outwardly official associations), and sometimes the Stone Age. Or almost. For example, what would you say if I told you about the possibility of creating a copy of a living being at a time when only such developments were carried out in closed laboratories?
It all started when Theodore Schwann formulated the cell theory. And it was as early as 1838-1839. Then Rudolf Virchow, in 1855, supplemented it with the crucial statement: "every cell is derived from another cell." Hans Dreischau in 1892 divided a four-cell sea urchin embryo into separate cells. Each of the divided cells grew into a normal larva. In 1901, Hans Spiman successfully performed similar experiments on frog embryos consisting of 16 blastomeres cells. In the 40s of the XX century, cloning experiments began in the USSR. In 1943, the first successful fertilization of an egg cell in a test tube was reported in the journal Science. In 1944, John Rocke and Miriam Menkin (USA) performed the first in vitro fertilization of human oocytes.
And then the pace didn't slow down.
In 1977, scientists at Oxford University became interested in cloning organisms, and under the guidance of Professor of Zoology J. Gerdon, more than 50 frogs were produced by cloning. In 1984, the whole world was shocked by the news that a cloned lamb was born in the laboratory of Steen Willadsen from the embryonic cells of an immature sheep.
I won't go on, you will find a lot of information on this topic yourself and even that secret laboratories are training armies of cloned soldiers. Of course we will smile, but it's not really funny.
Cloning is no longer a secret. If it is classified, and logically it is, all secret things are revealed; information is already being revealed about how to download your digital copy through your brain and put your image into a clone. You will say: nonsense and fantasy. And I will answer you: you will live and work in this system. If even a hundred years ago you were explained the possibilities of your smartphone, you would not only be shocked, no, you wouldn't even be able to understand what they are talking about.
