Hello! This is Cynthia Sue Larson with www.realityshifters.com, and I'm here today
talking about Kurt Gödel and his idea of incompleteness, reality shifts, and reality
residue. How does all this connect? Let's start with Albert Einstein and his
friendship--his very close friendship-- with Kurt Gödel. You may wonder why would
it be that Albert Einstein would have such an interest in Gödel? But actually,
Gödel is famous for many discoveries. I think top on that list would
be the time that he came up with a different category other than "right and
wrong" in the field of logic. For Western thinking, and mathematics, and logic--this
was huge. He came up with the idea of undecidable, and he proved it.
So having an idea is one thing in the field of mathematics; if you're able to prove
it, using mathematical proofs, this is extraordinary. And truly, Gödel's proof
was extraordinary. It was likened to an earthquake by Karl
Popper. John von Neumann commented, "Logic will never be the same again." So what was
it that Gödel actually said? Well, when Gödel first announced his finding, that was
in his paper. This was September of 1930, and he summed it up in a sentence that
went pretty much ignored at the conference where he presented it. He said,
"Given the consistency of classical mathematics, one can even give examples
of sentences, which although correct in content are unproveable in the formal
system of classical mathematics." Now that does seem to me a little bit benign, a
little bit innocuous. But then, when Gödel backed it up with a mathematical proof,
showing that even things--including the foundations of mathematics we assume to be
rock-solid, based on axioms that have unshakable foundations, as Karl
Popper said, this was an earthquake. because truly, Kurt Gödel was able to
shake this to the ground. Now actually, Gödel was a follower of
Leibniz, and he was really amazed and impressed by the ideas that Leibniz put
forth, having to do with the idea of principles
underlying what we would call "laws" of all of our sciences. And these fundamental
underlying principles--these foundational concepts, such as elegance, simplicity,
continuancy, constancy, and these sorts of things are the hallmark of
what we look for when we find our strongest possible theories--as well as
making sure that the data fits the theory itself. This is the basis of all
Science. I'm going to come back to that. First, I want to state a disclaimer,
which is to say, yes I already know that that Kurt Gödel did have some
emotional issues, and some psychological idiosyncrasies,
in which, for example, he would only eat food that had been tested by his
wife, Adele. And during a time that she was hospitalized for six months, he was
unable to eat, actually, and he basically starved to death. Which is a serious
tragedy. So obviously, he's not typical in any way, shape, or form. And so there is
that. But having said that, I'd like to go on, and talk about some of the ideas that
Leibniz had the Gödel was fascinated in. And this has to do with a
case of some missing documentation, which I find really interesting, because
now that I've mentioned the paradox, and I think you understand it--most of you, I think,
are getting it--that there exists a kind of "quasi-paradoxical self-negation"...
these are the words of John von Neumann, referring to the way the formal logic
system emerges out of itself, to make statements about itself. So this is what
science actually does when you get down to the core of it. Definitely it's true
of mathematics, and definitely it's true of anything that we study, including
something like consciousness, quantum physics, and so forth. So let's go back to
that mystery. Now the mystery is where it gets interesting to me, because Kurt
Gödel was really fascinated with Leibniz. In fact, he believed that Leibniz
had developed anticipations of Game Theory, the paradoxes of Set Theory,
cloaked in the language of concepts but exactly the same.
Helmholtz's resonance theory of hearing, and the conservation of energy
laws. Yet Gödel was unable to find this evidence that Leibniz had ever written
such things, despite numerous threads appearing to lead in those directions.
And so there was a friend--a mutual friend of Albert Einstein's, and also
Kurt Gödel--that's Oskar Morgenstern, at Princeton University. And he called
Gödel's beliefs about such things fantasies, because there was no evidence
to suggest that all of these these little trails that Gödel could find
actually went anywhere. But this sounds like something else to me, and that's
why I'm doing this video today, and this blog post. Basically, what it
sounds like when I start hearing about something
such as missing papers and writings--now especially when I heard that he'd noted
there have been specific places--now this is Kurt Gödel hearing that there had been
specific places where the writings of Leibniz ought to be, where he had
seen that they had been--but now they weren't. It's like everything would lead
right up to it, refer to something that wasn't there, and it was gone.
And right at that point I recognized a familiar pattern; something that I have
been documenting for 20 years now. And that is reality shifts--what's also
now called the 'Mandela Effect.' And what's happening is now, the official history
no longer matches what we know to be true, from our own personal experience. So
when I noticed writings that have changed or gone missing, then I realized
there's a possibility there may have been a reality shift at that point in
time, where things appear, disappear, transform, or transport. And what I've
presented in my books and my website and my newsletter every month is continuing
evidence to suggest that indeed, quantum phenomena occur not just at the
so-called 'quantum scale' below the Planck scale--but it's happening everywhere.
Occasionally, we witness these things. So one of the best ways to experience
reality shifts is to pay attention. I would now present that it makes sense
to me that knowing that some things can never be proved,
and that there will always be indeterminancy at the root of even our
hardest, most fact-based math and science, might just be enough to invite these
experiences into our life... as I believe may have been the case for Kurt Gödel.
Until next time, this is Cynthia Sue Larson with realityshifters.com and I'd
like to invite you to keep asking what I consider the most positive possible question:
"How good can it get?" Thank you so much!