We all remember the line, “Life is like a box of chocolates” from the movie, Forrest
Gump. Or Darth Vadar saying, “Luke, I am your father” from Star Wars, Empire strikes
back. Or the line, “Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all” from
the movie Snow White
Some of remember eating Jiffy peanut butter, or reading the Barenstein bears children’s
books.
Don’t we?
Scientists will tell you that none of what I said is true, that these are false memories.
And here’s the proof.
But others say, no this is not correct. It can’t be correct.
The things I mentioned are actually true, and that somehow we have been thrust into
a different parallel world where these things only appear to not be true, but that our memories
serve as links to a past universe where all these things WERE true.
Is it possible that these people could be right? For example, could this be evidence
that the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is actually correct? What does science have
to say about this phenomenon. That’s coming up right now…
The term, “Mandela effect” was coined in 2009 by Fiona Broome, who describes herself
as a “paranormal consultant.” She published a website where she described
remembering Nelson Mandela, who had been an imprisoned leader of the anti-apartheid movement
in South Africa, dying in prison in the 1980s. Broome could describe details like news coverage
of his death and even a eulogy from his widow.
Of course, in reality Nelson Mandela had not died. He was released in 1990, and went on
to become president of South Africa. He died relatively recently in 2013.
But interestingly, Broome learned that many people shared the same memory, and other people
remembered seeing news coverage of his death too.
How is it possible that so many people could share the same false memory?
Broome has several theories. One, that it could be due to the many worlds interpretation
of quantum mechanics. If a near infinite number of parallel universes exist, then there could
be a world where these false memories are correct, and that our memories are crossing
paths with memories from these parallel universes. Broome’s second theory is that this could
be a sign that our world is a simulation in some computer, in other words, there’s some
type of glitch in the matrix, where history was rewritten.
Other theories propose that the Mandela Effect
could be caused by changes in our history due to time travelers trying to prevent paradoxes.
There are also claims having to do with attacks by Satan, black magic or witchcraft. But none
of these are testable.
Let’s look the possibility of the multiple universes and glitches in the matrix may be
causing this. I made a video on the many world interpretation
including an interview with Sean Carroll, who is the leading authority on it. The link above if you want to check
it out. Essentially, it is the concept that the universe splits every time a quantum outcome
occurs. This can lead to a near infinite number of universes where anything that is not forbidden
by the laws of physics can potentially occur, including a universe where Nelson Mandela
may very well have died in prison in the 1980’s. These universes could very well exist, and
indeed many physicists, particularly Sean Carroll believe they do exist.
But here’s the part where I’m afraid I’m going to burst some people’s bubbles. Just
because they do exist does not mean that somehow we can communicate with them, or transfer
our consciousness from one world to another. In fact, the theory absolutely forbids any
communication or information transfer between universes. This would violate not only the
laws of quantum mechanics, but also basic conservation laws like conservation of energy
and information. The way the branching works is that when an
observer, such as yourself, becomes entangled with a quantum event such as measuring the
spin of an electron, a process called decoherence immediately forces a split such that there
are now two versions of you. Think of this as your identical twin. One of you sees a
spin up. And ther other one sees a spin down. These are two separate universes, which are
closed systems. This means that all the energy and information must be conserved in each universe. No information
can leak from one closed system to another. Absolutely, positively no consciousness or
information or energy transfer between worlds can occur at any time.
This is not only true for the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, but also
the theoretical multiverses of string theory, if string theory is true.
What about the idea of a glitch in the matrix? This is like the holodeck on Star Trek. The
idea is that maybe our reality is a computer simulation on a cosmological scale. And what
if we are remembering something that actually happened but because of either a program error,
or the masters of this simulation want to play tricks on us - that could be the cause of our false memory?
This is actually more plausible than the parallel worlds idea because theoretically, we could
be living in a simulation. I talked about this in a prior interview that you can check
out above. But if we are living in a simulation, then
this means that the simulation controls absolutely everything, including every thought and every
possible memory you could possibly have, because you yourself would be a simulation.
Potentially, if there is a glitch in the simulation, the programmers could simply restart the program
from a point prior to the glitch. You would not have any memory of this because the program
that runs your brain would also restart from that same point. Your memories of future events
would not have formed yet. This is like taking a backup of your computer. If your computer
had some glitch, you would use a back up copy of your hard drive. And whatever was the date
of the backup, that’s what the files would contain. It would be like going back to a
prior copy. In a simulation it would be like going back in time.
So the idea that the simulators or the matrix is playing trick on us, is unlikely, unless
of course they were trying to simulate this exact Mandela effect. The bottom line is that
this scenario is not testable. So we can speculate all we want about it.
You really have to consider, what is the most likely reason this occurs? And is there a
simpler explanation?
And I think science quite clearly seems to indicates that there is.
This has something to do with not only how our brains are wired to store memory, but also
the psychology of our thought processes.
Memories are organized in the brain so that similar memories are stored in nearby neurons.
This framework of the brain is called schema. This was reinforced by a 2016 study that used
MRI to take a glimpse inside the brain on how memories are formed. And it showed that
similar words are stored in adjacent areas of the brain.
So for example, Mandela didn’t die in prison, however, Steve Biko was also a South African
anti-apartheid activist, imprisoned during the same time as Mandela. He was arguably
as famous as Mandela at the time. The only difference is that that Biko died in prison.
Maybe his was the death many people recalled. And because of these two people’s similarities,
the memories may have been stored in the same part of the brain, and got jumbled during
recall. A leading psychological theory says that memory
is constructed, not reproduced, that is to say the brain does not replay a recording,
but builds memories from lots of little bits of information on the fly and spits it out.
So what happens is that when you recall memories, this can trigger other related memories in
the brain. This could explain the memory that people
have about “Jiffy” vs “Jif” peanut butter. There is a similar sounding brand
called “Skippy” peanut butter. And when recalling the name, the brain may be combining
two different bits of information and causing the recall of a fictitious Jiffy brand, instead
of Jif. Combine this with the fact that there is a Jiffy brand in the automotive repair
market, having nothing to do with peanut butter, and it is easy to see why our memories may
be playing tricks on us. Research shows that memories are not permanent,
but fluid and subject to change. And they can be influenced by our expectations and
associations with other memories. So one explanation for the Barenstain vs.
Barenstein memory is that names ending in “Stein” are far more common than names
ending in “Stain.” People’s expectation is that it was Barenstein not Barenstain,
so that’s what they recall. These days, technology and social media is
making it harder to acknowledge instances of false memories. We live in an era in which
it is easy to form misconceived memories based on false information in various electronic
echo chambers.
There are websites and facebook groups for example, that create communities based around
misinformation. This selective exposure has been studied, and has shown that we are more
likely to remember false events when they fit into our pre-existing beliefs and opinions.
Sara Palin never said, “I can see Russia from my house” - In the context of an interview,
she said there are parts of Alaska where you can see Russia, which is perfectly correct.
Similarly, Al Gore never said he invented the internet. In the context of an interview,
he said he created the infrastructure for the internet by pushing legislation in the
early 90’s, which is also perfectly correct.
Facts don’t seem to change people’s memories or opinions. Frequently reported misinformation
can become reality. And the viral power of the internet can magnify these false narratives,
particularly when such false information confirms people’s preexisting opinions.
This is one of the reasons good lawyers don’t allow leading questions in a court of law
that suggest a specific answer. So a leading question like, do you remember the line, “Mirror,
Mirror on the wall…” from Snow White would be a leading question, because it would suggest
the line is true, and could create a false memory.
The upshot is that our memories are notoriously unreliable. They are vulnerable to false narratives,
suggestions and a kind of group-think mentality. If other like-minded people believe it to
be true, then we also think it to be true.
In fact, in a sobering 2020 study, published in Sciencemag, of over 100,000 news stories
discussed across Twitter over a period of 10 years, it was shown that hoaxes and rumors
won out over the truth about 70 percent of the time. This wasn't the result of manipulation
or bots either—real verified accounts of real people were responsible for spreading
false information.
So while the idea of the Mandela Effect is mostly fun to think about, and harmless, there
can be real harm in holding false beliefs that are reinforced with misinformation. This
is where we have to be careful to not only not let it harm us as individuals, but not
let it harm society either.
I know you’re here to learn about science. Watching and reading is a good start, but
if you want to take your learning to the next level, then you have to DO science – by
solving problems and working on puzzles.
This is where Brilliant, today’s sponsor, can be a great compliment to your educational
journey.
It’s a problem solving website and app that allows you to go deeper and further into the
world of physics, and science in general, than any video or article ever could…by
allowing you to view problems, often from the perspective of a pioneering scientist
trying to solve them.
But it’s not all about trying to stump you, they give you hints if you’re stuck. It’s
about learning, not feeling silly.
I was blown away by how well thought-out and curated their content is.
They have a very special offer for Arvin Ash viewers right now. Head over to brilliant.org/ArvinAsh
to sign up for free. Not only will you get a free trial, but the first 200 visitors will
get 20% off their subscription. Check it out, I think you’ll be really impressed.